• Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    I need to make a bot to post this any time fascism gets mentioned.


    The western left’s use of the term fascism, is borderline white-supremacist at this point. Fascism was a form of colonialism that died by the 1940s, and is only allowed to be demonized in public discourse, because it was a form of colonialism directed also against white europeans. It was defeated, and Germany / Italy / Japan reverted to the more stable form of government for colonialism (practiced by the US, UK, France, the Netherlands, Australia, etc): bourgeois parliamentarism.

    British, european, and now US colonizers were doing the exact same thing, and killing far more people for hundreds of years in the global south, yet you don’t hear ppl scared of their countries potentially "adopting parliamentary democracy”. They haven’t changed, and their wealth is still propped up by surplus value theft from the super-exploitation of hundreds of millions of low-paid global south proletarians.

    This is why you have new leftists terrified that the UK or US or europe “might turn fascist!!”, betraying that the atrocities propagated by those empires against the global south was and is completely acceptable.

    Make no mistake about it: parliamentary / bourgeois democracy is not only a more stable form of government, it’s also far more effective at carrying out colonialism, and killing millions of innocent people.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Fascism is a pretty specific ideology. If you want to learn more, Umberto Eco made a list.

      I get where you’re getting at: the role of past and ongoing colonialism is still being downplayed. But you’re wrong. There are very good reasons why we should fear fascism in particular.

      • TheDoctor [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Umberto Eco completely ignores the material basis for fascism, which is usually the downwardly mobile petit bourgeoisie. Fascism takes advantage of superstructural elements, which is why Eco’s list contains the elements it does in a kind of grab bag fashion. But it still has a material basis, itself being a response to a crisis within capitalism. Would highly recommend The Jakarta Method for further reading on what people are discussing in your replies and in this thread.

        • davel@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Umberto Eco completely ignores the material basis for fascism, which is usually the downwardly mobile petit bourgeoisie.

          The Nation, 2017: Trumpism: It’s Coming From the Suburbs

          But scapegoating poor whites keeps the conversation away from fascism’s real base: the petite bourgeoisie. This is a piece of jargon used mostly by Marxists to denote small-property owners, whose nearest equivalents these days may be the “upper middle class” or “small-business owners.” FiveThirtyEight reported last May that “the median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000,” or roughly 130 percent of the national median. Trump’s real base, the actual backbone of fascism, isn’t poor and working-class voters, but middle-class and affluent whites. Often self-employed, possessed of a retirement account and a home as a nest egg, this is the stratum taken in by Horatio Alger stories. They can envision playing the market well enough to become the next Trump. They haven’t won “big-league,” but they’ve won enough to be invested in the hierarchy they aspire to climb. If only America were made great again, they could become the haute 
bourgeoisie—the storied “1 percent.”

      • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The USA genocided an entire continent under it’s current form of government, and committed and is still committing countless other atrocities. Look at what Europe did to Africa and Asia under that same form.

        Bourgeois parliamentarism is a much more stable shell for colonialism than any other form of government has proven to be. Demonizing a dead form of colonialism (fascism) lets them off the hook, and never forces them to look at what their own governments are currently doing. They get to keep their chauvinist / supremacist myth about “liberal democracy” being the superior form of government, without challenging it.

      • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’d also like to add that hitler was very specific about his desire to emulate the US model of colonialism: and do to eastern europe, what the US had already done to its native peoples.

        The only difference between lebensraum and manifest destiny, is that bourgeois democracy was far more effective at indigenous genocide than fascism was.

        https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/03/nazi-germanys-american-dream-hitler-modeled-his-concept-of-racial-struggle-and-global-campaign-after-americas-conquest-of-native-americans.html