For those who actually want fascism to mean something, Umberto Eco’s 14 key points of Ur-Fascism are handy:
-
“The cult of tradition”, characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.
-
“The rejection of modernism”, which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.
-
“The cult of action for action’s sake”, which dictates that action is of value in itself and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
-
“Disagreement is treason” – fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
-
“Fear of difference”, which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.
-
“Appeal to a frustrated middle class”, fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.
-
“Obsession with a plot” and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society. Eco also cites Pat Robertson’s book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.
-
Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as “at the same time too strong and too weak”. On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
-
“Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy” because “life is permanent warfare” – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.
-
“Contempt for the weak”, which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate leader, who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.
-
“Everybody is educated to become a hero”, which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, “[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.”
-
“Machismo”, which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold “both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality”.
-
“Selective populism” – the people, conceived monolithically, have a common will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he alone dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of “no longer represent[ing] the voice of the people”.
-
“Newspeak” – fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.
These kind of jokes worked better back before fascism saw a large resurgence worldwide.
Unfortunately, they remain very relevant, especially since fascists in particular like to abuse terms used against them in the hope of making the terms meaningless by overuse and misuse.
Example, Trump following text book definitions of fascism, while calling his opponents “fascist” with the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” technique he’s used for decades.
Although I guess this make him antifa now?
Don’t forget Schrödinger’s Immigrant: simultaneously lazy and stealing all our jobs.
“Biden’s a feeble, senile old man who has absolutely lost control of everything and he is the mastermind bringing to bear all of the levers of power against us!”
“Trump is a threat to democracy and he’s an orange ball of wax”
While I personally think Trump is surrounded by a bunch of dangerous people that see his dark triad characteristics as a vehicle that can carry them into wielding power (a point they’re not wrong about), thus making the point of his personal intelligence/executive function a null issue. For example , it’s objectively funny that someone is narcissistic enough to need to Sharpie a hurricane forecast, but completely useless to point out and laugh at when the person also represents a real threat to the world, and yet, there are there are definitely people in opposition to him that are guilty of doing the cognitive dissonance thing you point out and making it their entire focal point. I don’t think what amounts to neoliberalist head burying in verbal sand to make themselves feel better while refusing to look at Trump seriously is the same as what Trump and his followers are doing though. The difference being that third way cognitive dissonance is self-assuaging when the subject is threats to democracy (because on the individual level they can “got mine!” themselves into thinking they won’t be affected and still convince themselves that lame snark and “concerns” counts as doing something, that broadcasting a vibe of business as usual as an assured thing is the message we need) and the cognitive dissonance spewed by Trump is designed for consumption by others in order to short circuit any dependency they may have upon objective reality in favor of fear and the willingness to accept what he says over anything else. Neither thing is good, but one is way more nefarious. A masturbatory Jon Stewart rally is useless in preventing a fascist takeover, but a Trump rally is actively working towards a fascist takeover.
That said, the “Donald DRUMPF hurr hurr hurr!” crowd are more than useless - it’s bad enough that they’re getting high off of their own flatulence, everyone around to witness it has to smell it too. Some people might even decide they should do it too, since maybe they prefer their own stench to overwhelm what they’re smelling. It’s definitely not productive. Still, Trump is a guy smearing his excrement on his followers until they can barely see anymore and telling them it’s simultaneously a great thing and that the only way to get clean is to hold is to find anyone that didn’t line up to be covered willingly and shove the filth down their throats. Both behaviors are shitty, but one is objectively worse.
That’s contained within point number 8.
I mean, you can rationalize that as the immigrant stealing your job by accepting a lower wage, and then doing a worse job because they’re lazy
They can’t be motivated enough to come here and take your job then stick with it while also being too lazy to do it.
Even conservatives often say “they work so hard” usually as a combo of not sounding racist and so they can say “then they get hurt and use up our healthcare.”
Interestingly Michael Godwin, the creator of Godwin’s Law (which OP’s attached meme more or less references), had the following to say about Trump in 2023:
“Trump’s opening himself up to the Hitler comparison,” Godwin said in an interview. And in his view, Trump is actively seeking to evoke the parallel.
…
“You could say the ‘vermin’ remark or the ‘poisoning the blood’ remark, maybe one of them would be a coincidence,” Godwin said. “But both of them pretty much make it clear that there’s something thematic going on, and I can’t believe it’s accidental.”
I personally think Eco’s 14 points pretty perfectly align with Trump/Trumpism, though I imagine those around him would tell me I’m confusing their embrace of 14 words to mean they meet the criteria laid out in the aforementioned 14 points.
Yeah, Trump is pretty clearly fascist on all points.
If I’m not mistaken, I believe that Trump is known for having Mein Kampf by his bedside.
Which is confusing because I didn’t think he could read.
- Getting kicked off of a social media for saying the dumbest shit possible.
“THIS IS JUST LIKE THE FUCKING NAZIS! FACEBOOK JAIL IS THE WORST! YOU’D GIVE ME A GOLD STAR IF YOU COULD!”
- Slow removal of civil liberties with bipartisan support, scapegoating queers, making anti-fascists equal to Al-Queda as a threat to the federal government, police shooting innocent civilians and getting away with it, removal of immigration and enabling easier deportation, removal of public ownership to privatized control, less and less ownership of material goods…
“This is normal, anyone would want this, commie! Sorry you hate FREEDOM.”
Fucking conservatives.
My favorite is the “BLUE LINE BLUE LIVES MATTER” types also having a tacky “COME BACK WITH A WARRANT” doormat and constantly fantasize about taking out “government thugs” who come to “take their guns”.
- Police are more important than anything, you should always comply and obey
- I don’t want the government to tell me what to do
PICK ONE DIPSHITS
This makes more sense in the context that they believe that they’re in the in group that the law should protect yet not bind, and everyone else that the cops are for are in the out-group that the law should bind and not protect. That’s why there’s this breathless disbelief that the J6ers and Trump have been prosecuted, and further disbelief that it’s in any way legitimate.
I pick the line about dipshits.
Sequel to “Everyone I don’t like is an antisemite”
There is a lot of antisemitism going on these days. A lot of people are characterizing blatant antisemitism as support the Palestinians. Which actually hurts the Palestinian cause, but since everyone is afraid to say anything about it, antisemitism is tolerated.
Here excerpt from a mostly overlooked 20 Feb, 2016 piece that chronicled his death the night before (Harper Lee’s passing, also on the 19th, received more coverage by most English news orgs that day):
It was a solemn scene in Umberto Eco’s Milan home the night of 19 February, 2016 as the renowned philosopher and novelist lay gasping on his deathbed. His family surrounded him, grasping the elderly intellectual’s withered hands.
Lying mostly comatose for the better part of the past day, the renowned professor, philosopher, and novelist’s eyes suddenly fluttered open. In a hoarse, rattling whisper, he addressed those around him. “Devo… avvertirvi tutti…”
They all leaned in closer, tears welling up in their eyes. “Sí?.”
Mustering his last ounce of strength, Eco raised a trembling finger skyward. “MA LE SUE EMAIL!!!” he suddenly boomed with surprising force. “Ho scritto Ur-Fascismo per mettervi in guardia da tutto questo! State attenti!!!”
Everyone recoiled in shock and confusion as Eco’s arm went limp, crashing back onto the bed. The brilliant mind had left this world with one final proclamation.
The room fell into a bewildered silence, the haunting words still hanging in the air. “Papà?” one of his children finally uttered meekly. But Umberto Eco had already passed, leaving his dumbfounded family to grapple with those jarring final words (roughly translating to): “BUT HER EMAILS!!! I wrote Ur-Fascism to warn you all of this! Beware!!!”
One by one the confused members of the family said their goodbyes and opened the door, got on the floor, everybody walk the dinosaur! open the door, get on the floor, everbody walk the dinosaur!^^^^/s ^^^^I’m ^^^^sorrrry
Fascism is named after the Italian word “fascis” - or “fasces” in Latin. It means "bundle’ and symbolizes strength through unity - which is the number one core value of fascism in all its forms. That’s the best way to recognize fascism - that the regime does everything in its power, whatever the cost, to force unity on its people.
Interesting fact I heard that the Italian fascists deliberately set up regional pasta factories in an effort to make it the national dish.
Well… that worked.
Other way around, I think. Mussolini tried to replace pasta.
Ok. I heard it on a podcast about Italian food traditions.
Maybe they got it wrong.
I think recently it has been replaced with Zionist. For instance, barely any criticism of something like Hamas will give you an instant “genocide loving Zionist” label.
In the past there was a political movement that came up with the term “Cosmopolitan Jew” because most people wouldn’t go along with hating all Jews. But if you can make people hate a subset of Jews, then they will tend not to speak up about someone attacking all Jews. Someone that hates all Jews is a useful ally to someone that hates a subset of the Jews.
I think you can guess which political movement operated this way in the past. And when the long knives came out, it turned out it was the people that hated a subset of Jews that were being useful to those that hated all Jews.
Today the angry people that are part of a violent political movement are now expanding who they are labeling as their enemies. Same shit, different century.
deleted by creator
you can also read mussolini. he says explicitly what fascism is and why. eco is not singularly authoritative on fascism, and his definition gives liberal democracies far too much leeway. modern america, and much of the rest of the developed world, is doing exactly what mussolini would have had us do.
democrats and republicans are both fascist. they don’t need to be hitler to be protecting the interest and primacy of the state at the expense of the interests and power of all other institutions. in fact, having hitler as a foil serves well to protect them from accusations of fascism.
you can also read mussolini. he says explicitly what fascism is and why.
Cool, I actually have. Have you actually read the Doctrine of Fascism?
eco is not singularly authoritative on fascism, and his definition gives liberal democracies far too much leeway.
Yes, how horrible that a definition of fascism might have traits that exclude one of the primary ideological foes of fascism even according to fascism itself?
democrats and republicans are both fascist. they don’t need to be hitler to be protecting the interest and privacy of the state at the expense of the interests and power of all other institutions.
How positively unhinged.
in fact, having hitler as a foil serves well to protect them from accusations of fascism.
Oh yes, how horrible would it be if non-fascists used fascists as a point of comparison to prove that they aren’t fascists.
liberal democracies are breeding grounds for fascism. every fascist regime has emerged from them.
liberal democracies are breeding grounds for fascism. every fascist regime has emerged from them.
How would you characterize the right-wing of the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek?
it’s not mussolini’s fascism, where the state brings all other institutions in line with its interests. fascism is a specific thing. that’s what the meme is about.
it’s not mussolini’s fascism, where the state brings all other institutions in line with its interests.
Oh? In what way was the right-Kuomintang NOT seeking to bring all other institutions in line with its interests?
fascism is a specific thing. that’s what the meme is about.
Yes, and you seem to be confused about the definition of fascism, since, in the short time we’ve been talking, you’ve labeled Republicans and Democrats as fascists, but not the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek.
mussolini specifically wanted to shift away from individualism, whereas (at least in lip service) chiangs plan was to teach democracy to the Chinese. a military dictatorship does have a lot of similarity to fascism, though. I suppose I can see where, in this one case, an agrarian societies emergence from warlordism may have been fascist.
mussolini specifically wanted to shift away from individualism, whereas (at least in lip service) chiangs plan was to teach democracy to the Chinese.
Oh, in that case I suppose we can take Mussolini’s lip service about fascism actually being the purest form of democracy at its face value as well.
a military dictatorship does have a lot of similarity to fascism, though. I suppose I can see where, in this one case, an agrarian societies emergence from warlordism may have been fascist.
In which case the question arises - what kind of government is the cure for fascism, since liberal democracy is apparently right out?
lmao either say what you’re trying to say or shut the fuck up. Stop trying to cryptically flex historical knowledge when you clearly are just trying to simp for Democrats who, by the way, are very clearly fascist in actions, words, style. The Dems play just as much into military machismo culture as the Republicans, they just want gay soldiers to die in war, too.
lmao either say what you’re trying to say or shut the fuck up.
“I don’t think you know what you’re talking about and a simple historical example will show as much”?
Stop trying to cryptically flex historical knowledge when you clearly are just trying to simp for Democrats who, by the way, are very clearly fascist in actions, words, style.
Yow.
Yes exactly, your point is “I think I’m smarter than you.” That’s a shitty point. People can be educated on fascism and not know about the history of fascism in every country 🙄
If someone claims “Every fascist regime emerges from liberal democracy”, and I contradict them with an example of fascism emerging from a non-liberal origin, I guess that’s… what, a red card? Orange? I don’t know sports very well. What kind of foul am I looking at here for “Showing a point is blatantly and factually wrong”?
there is a cure for political illiteracy.
this guy is a grade-A brainwashee
LMAO democrats being the primary foe of fascism. Have you never heard of… any left wing theory? 😂😂😂
The Clinton campaign’s strategy was literally promoting Trump. They want to promote the most extreme, overtly bigoted Republicans so that they seem like a good deal in comparison. This isn’t something I made up, it was their actual campaign strategy.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/
They prop up extremists to try to get people to vote for their LGBT-friendly center-right party instead of voting left. All the policies that impact fascist imperial power [war-mongering, healthcare (not having access to healthcare outside of work weakens the labor movement/left wing organizing), immigration etc] stay largely the same.
Stop trying to be a pompous ass about what you have and haven’t read and pay attention.
LMAO democrats being the primary foe of fascism.
Liberal democracies was the point of contention. And the Doctrine of Fascism literally goes over this point.
The Clinton campaign’s strategy was literally promoting Trump. They want to promote the most extreme, overtly bigoted Republicans so that they seem like a good deal in comparison.
“We gambled that the American people would soundly reject fascism, and we lost that gamble. Therefore, we are now fascists”?
Stop trying to be a pompous ass about what you have and haven’t read and pay attention.
I didn’t realize that when someone says “You can read Mussolini to see what fascism is” I’m not allowed to say “I have” without being a pompous ass.
Yeah, you know damn well that Democrats are one of the major parties in the US liberal Democracy, and you know damn well you are trying to defend them.
They gambled fascism because their policy is not far enough away from the Republican ideology for it to have been a serious existential concern. You’re almost there…
And yes, the way you said " Actually, I have read it" and immediately was like “ohhh but have you read this??” was extremely pompous and gross lol
They gambled fascism because their policy is not far enough away from the Republican ideology for it to have been a serious existential concern.
Oh? Is that why?
And yes, the way you said " Actually, I have read it" and immediately was like “ohhh but have you read this??” was extremely pompous and gross lol
Well, I’m sorry for being a pompous intellectual who ‘reads things’ and ‘responds when told to read something he has already read and in fact contradicts the point being made’.
Dude is really upset you read more than him. Lmaoo
in fact contradicts the point being made
it doesn’t
If you just name titles of books and concepts, you’re not contradicting any points you’re leaving the contradiction as an exercise to the reader and like, bragging about reading which is obnoxious and which you’re doing again here 😂
I apologize for being literate and being able to respond when someone asks me “Have you read X?”
BoTh sIdEs
Two of the approximately 13,567 sides, actually
Fascism does have a definition, but normally it’s just used to label those who disagree with one’s own views.
