Tuesday, September 8, 2020

Fascism and authoritarianism, then and now

Because Donald Trump is such a clear and present danger to formal democracy and the rule of law, his time in office has produced even more scholarly and journalistic accounts of authoritarianism. Not that the theme was being ignored before that. A new German book on the contemporary far right and its narrative themes is titled Das Faschistische Jahrhundert: Neurechte Diskurse zu Abendland, Identität, Europa und Neoliberalismus (The Fascist Century: New Right Discourses on the West, Identity, Europe and Neoliberalism). The title is a reference to a statement of Mussolini, "We have every reason to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right', a fascist century." declaring the dawn of a "fascist century". He had founded his Fascist Movement in 1919.

The lead essay in that book is by Roger Griffin, author of A Fascist Century (2008). In that book, he argued that fascism "as a party-political force of any consequence, it effectively died in Hitler’s bunker, unable to operate as a ‘cultic’ or ‘ritual’ form of politics with a charismatic leader." But he also argued even in 2008 that there were discernable continuities between fascist nationalism and some prominent ideas in the European far right:
[There is a] strong element of continuity between interwar and post-war schemes of national regeneration, which sometimes nurtured a pan-European vision of rebirth. It also highlights the way an extreme right-wing form of ‘Europeanisation’ has become far more prominent since 1945 as a response to the Cold War, globalisation, and to the rise of a liberal-capitalist European Union fostering multi-culturalism.

Contemporary Eurofascism offers a motley group of ultra-nationalists, neo-Nazis, Third Positionists, New Rightists, and white-supremacists a way of dissociating themselves from the narrowly chauvinistic nationalisms of interwar Europe that were largely based on the nation-state – and hence from Nazi crimes against humanity – while smuggling nationalism into their policies in other guises, such as ‘ethno-regionalism’, or the war on ‘Americanisation’. [my emphasis]
As we know, far right politics can evolve fairly quickly. QAnon went within three years or so from being a demented fringe phenomenon on obscure online message boards to now being rapidly accepted by the Republican Party base in the US and even spreading to Europe. Just like the original fascism, even nationalistic ideologies can become an international trend. Yanis Varoufakis talks about the Nationalist International of far-right parties and movements in present-day Europe.

As always, defining fascism is a tricky business. Even people very familiar with the history wind up relying to some degree on a variation of Justice Potter Stewart's definition of pornography: I don't know how to define fascism, but I know it when I see it!

Historically speaking, since Mussolini called his movement and party Fascist, it would be difficult to argue that his politics were anything but fascist. And since Hitler saw himself as following Mussolini's model in his drive to take power in Germany, it's fairly obvious to see German National Socialism as a form of fascism. (Although among academics that has been seriously disputed!) The Dollfuss-Schuschnigg dictatorship of 1933-38 in Austria was even more explicitly modeled on Mussolini's regime.

Other far-right regimes of that period like those in Spain, Portugal, Hungary, Rumania, and Croatia were anti-democratic and authoritarian. But the definitional task is complicated by the fact that while explicitly ideological fascist parties may have supported or participated in those governments, the dominant leadership was not quite so explicitly aligned with a fascist ideology as were Mussolini, Hitler, and Dollfuss. Griffin notes that "Mussolini and Hitler recognised an affinity between their movements that they did not see, for example, in Salazar’s Portugal."

That's worth keeping in mind when looking at today's political situation. I'm inclined to an I-know-when-I-see-it approach when looking at Trump, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, or Narendra Modi in India. But as concepts like "red fascism" or "Islamofascism" remind us, a promiscuous use of the term may wind up obscuring more than it clarifies.

I've previously suggested that Hungary is a good example of how Trumpism could develop - with or without the Orange Clown in the White House. (Hungary as a model for American authoritarians 04/11/2020) The main far-right authoritarian party in Hungary had been Jobbik. The current Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán had been a liberal leader during the post-1989 transition, and his current party is Fidesz, which has been affiliated with the conservative European People's Party, though it is currently suspended (though not expelled). But since Orbán became Prime Minister in 2010, he has pushed Hungary in the direction of authoritarian "illiberal democracy." As Zoltan Simon reports (Orban Says He Seeks to End Liberal Democracy in Hungary Bloomberg 06/28/2014):
“I don’t think that our European Union membership precludes us from building an illiberal new state based on national foundations,” Orban said, according to the video of his speech on the government’s website. He listed Russia, Turkey and China as examples of “successful” nations, “none of which is liberal and some of which aren’t even democracies.”

Orban, who was re-elected in April for a second consecutive four-year term, has clashed with the EU as he amassed more power than any of his predecessors since the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, replacing the heads of independent institutions including the courts with allies, tightening control over media and changing election rules to help him retain a constitutional majority in Parliament.
Authoritarianism takes various forms. Despite his affinity for Putin's style of rule in Russia, Orbán is currently maintaining the outward forms of democratic institutions. We can and should expect authoritarian governments to become more so. But Orbán at this point is not arresting journalists or poisoning opposition leaders. He has established broad control over the press through oligarchs allied with him buying up media outlets, without resorting to formal censorship. Politicians and political parties can organize and campaign in regular elections, but through an extreme form of gerrymandering he has made it virtually impossible for opposition parties to gain a majority in Parliament to be able to form a new government.

All this is a way of saying what the famous apocryphal saying attributed to Mark Twain, that history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes. And the historical background and contemporary similarities can help us understand the very specific events and developments in the US or any other given country.

Radical Right in Real Time

There is a lot of coverage currently that looks at current developments among radical rights sects and the Republican Party in light of the current danger to democracy.

Dave Neiwert gives a detailed update on the Republican/far-right political narrative about "antifa§ in The right’s eliminationist narrative about antifa was borne of conspiracism and lives in it now Daily Kos 08/03/2020.

Mark Bray discusses the antifa-conspiracy narrative in Antifa: Terrorist Group or Trump Scapegoat? Amanpour and Company 06/04/2020:


Bray also writes about antifa in Antifa isn’t the problem. Trump’s bluster is a distraction from police violence. Washington Post 06/01/2020.

The historian Heather Cox Richardson has spent a lot of time this year on YouTube videos discussing her scholarly work and contemporary politics, and also posting political commentary on her Facebook page and at Bill Moyer's website. She has given particular history to American political parties in her professional work, including To Make Men Free: A History of the Republican Party (2014). She takes what I would call a realistic view of US political history that engages directly with how the longterm development and expansion of democracy has simultaneously been intimately connected with inequality and brutality. One of her recent essays is Democracy Under Attack 09/07/2020:
Democracy depends on the rule of law. Today, we learned that Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who rose to become a Cabinet official thanks to his prolific fundraising for the Republican Party, apparently managed to raise as much money as he did because he pressured employees at his business, New Breed Logistics, to make campaign contributions that he later reimbursed through bonuses. Such a scheme is illegal. ...

Democracy depends on equality before the law. But Black and brown people seem to receive summary justice at the hands of certain law enforcement officers, rather than being accorded the right to a trial before a jury of their peers. In a democracy, voters elect representatives who make laws that express the will of the community. “Law enforcement officers” stop people who are breaking those laws, and deliver them to our court system, where they can tell their side of the story and either be convicted of breaking the law, or acquitted. When police can kill people without that process, justice becomes arbitrary, depending on who holds power.

Democracy depends on reality-based policy. Increasingly it is clear that the Trump administration is more concerned about creating a narrative to hold power than it is in facts. [my emphasis]
Sarah Churchwell takes a look at the real existing American fascism during the days when Mussolini and Hitler were practicing their versions of it in American Fascism: It Has Happened Here NYB Blog 06/22/2020.

Fundamentalist Christianity and its institutions are still critical links in the US between the Republican Party and the most fanatical far-right attitudes and conspiracy theories. Here are a few recent pieces focusing on that aspect:

No comments:

Post a Comment