On the Fourteen Attributes of Fascism-3

February 12, 2006

[ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 ]

Continuing our assessment of Prof. Lawrence Britt's list of 14 attributes of fascism:

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together: this requires additional attention because it is surprisingly controversial. The current pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church, Benedict XVI, has devoted his life to rehabilitating the conservative side of the clergy from the shame of its unabashedly pro-fascist stance during World War II, while concurrently liquidating the non-conservative side. He has been amazingly successful, so that the equation of totalitarianism with "trendy" attitudes of morality have percolated through much of the world.

   The core of this argument is that liberal ideas, by challenging conservative morality, open the door to unintended consequences, viz., society becomes susceptible to "fascist ethics" [*]. Hence, the argument goes, the problem is not that the state is too cozy to the clergy, but too hostile. Unfortunately for this argument, fascist ethics is entirely unyielding and appeals to an idealized past. It usually professes a false "balance" between loathing of cosmopolitan capitalism and cosmopolitan socialism, the objection to both based on the instability of cosmopolitan loyalities. In other words, the whole object of fascism is not to utilize fractured social norms, but slam the door on any application of morality to those social norms. And hence, Britt's argument is entirely true.

   Finally, the eagerness of the clergy of all religions to win the open sponsorship of the state (e.g., IHT, FBW) illustrates that such moral automony, or "check" on moral trends, is pure moonshine. In reality, the merger of church and state was rarer in the Middle Ages than usually imagined, and its successful conclusion in fact allows the complete silencing of voices other than that of the state.

9. Power of corporations protected: another bit of historical revisionism about fascism is the allegation that fascist states, being command economies, are hostile to capitalism or business. In fact, there are cases where business interests clashed with the interests of the Japanese militarists or the German Nazis, leading to violence against the latter; however, in the first case (the assassination of industrialists by the doomed "Imperial Way" Faction of young soldiers), the ideology was delusional—that Japanese industrialists were enemies of Japanese expansionism—and the motives were tactical—to terrorize liberal holdouts in the Japanese bourgeoisie. In Germany, Dr. Karl Blessing was dismissed as governor of the Reichsbank because he warned that military spending was risking inflation. But Blessing was retired with a comfortable pension, not sent to Dachau.

   The point of these examples is that industrial managers, like labor, benefit from solidarity even if sometimes that solidarity is coerced. If labor unions had the power to jail strikebreakers or mandate membership, then presumably they would have awesome power (until the imbalance of power wrecked the economy). Likewise, industrialists seldom complained of Nazi domination, until after the War. Then, they were eager to complain of how oppressive fascism had been to them. The power of corporations was far more than "protected"; any potential challenge to it was liquidated. The command economy was applied through cartels, guaranteed profits, and state contracts to private enterprise, not through nationalization and political officers in the boardrooms.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated: as mentioned above [* & *], the power of corporations under fascism is officially equated with national security. Labor as a class becomes, to all intents and purposes, an objective enemy; it is stripped of any form of expressing itself. Typically, historical revisionists like to claim that labor unions are somehow fascist because they politicize industry; Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged) made this claim, in the face of all historical evidence, and it appears to have stuck through constant, unattributed repetition. In reality, labor unions and their management are, like democracy generally, prone to bumbling, selfishness and disregard of the public interest, paralysis, and subversion; but the alternative is to directly enthrone the consequences of these vices. Societies where labor unions are liquidated are invariably dictatorships, whether fascist or falangist.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts: "Architecture of Doom," one of the best documentaries on Naziism ever, begins with the startling argument that the Nazis were obsessed with beauty. The Nazi leadership were dominated by failed artists and writers. Hitler was obsessed with art and collected it avidly; his vision of fate and heroism was supposed to have been inspired by the Wagner opera Rienzi. Yet the Nazis, and other fascist movements (including that of Japan and Iraq) hated art. They hated the uncertainty and shock of genuine art. Illustration merely requires skills that can be applied reliably; art requires a sense of drama, irony, and ambiguity. In the art of Éduard Manet, for example, the art was shocking in its time because of the psychological candor, the cartoonish vividness, and deconstruction of bourgeoisie "ownership" of artistic elements. In contrast, fascist "art" is really just illustration. There is so little thought given to the actual element of "discovery" that the art is often risible. For example, the image above of "Readiness" is clearly intended to imitate classical models, yet the sensibilities of non-artistic visitors trump those of Classical Greece: the man is far more heavily muscled than is the case in Classical sculture. The result is garish and silly, or creepy, not timeless. This reflects not ineptitude (the sculptor was obviously quite proficient), but indifference to art. Instead, we see a vacuous succession of meaningless depictions of nude musclemen and icy machden. This is "art" stripped of surprise.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment: under fascist regimes of the "pure" variety, a large number of people were incarcerated; but execution and homicidal forced labor was such a common feature that the prison population was not especially large. In part this reflected two competing systems of "justice": the state, and the party, with the latter more prone to violence, death squads, and punishment without trial, and the former stuck with enforcing some semblence of legal order. In falangist states, such as military juntas, incarceration sharply increases; however, international comparisons of incarceration are often clouded by such matters as preference for incarceration as a corrections strategy, the existence of racial exclusion, and so on, so absolute numbers reveal little (the USA leads the world in documented incarceration rates; however discouraging this is, the USA is a long ways from being a fascist state).

    Generally speaking, obsession with crime and punishment is an enduring feature of socials with weak civil institution; unsurprisingly, crime rates are traditionally higher, although nations like the UK or Belgium may experience waves of high crime thanks to a lapse between criminality and enhanced domestic security. In the USA, reported crime rates have declined in part due to increased security in thwarting criminal acts; however, the sense of insecurity and the seemingly obvious recourse to draconian legal measures, are more an aspect of weak civil societies than of fascism.

    In some cases, such as Saudi Arabia—a much-overlooked example of a fascist state—draconian measures against crime are used simply because they are "easy": first, there is a widespread fear of lawbreakers that is propitiated by public revenge, and second, it constantly reminds the public of the state's power to kill.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption: novices in historical research are often surprised to learn that fascist states are highly corrupt; a common perception is that, because of item 12 above, the corrupt officials are going to be all sent pacing to concentration camps or sawed in half. Nothing could be further from the truth. While democratic societies are often corrupt, fascist societies always are. That's because the judiciary is entirely under the thumb of the party, and in the cases where even a subservient judicuary is unable to endorce state criminality, there is always the Party. The Party's premier mastery of violence, surpassing that even of the fascist state, is entirely without legalism and entirely indifferent to the interests of the nation. In the words of Hannah Arendt,

    Like a foreign conqueror, the totalitarian dictator regards the natural and industrial riches of each country, including his own, as a source of loot and a means of preparing the next step of aggressive expansion. Since this economy of systematic spoliation is carried out for the sake of the movement and not of the nation, no people and no territory, as the potential beneficiary, can possibly set a saturation point to the process. The totalitarian dictator is like a foreign conqueror who comes from nowhere, and his looting is likely to benefit nobody. Distribution of the spoils is calculated not to strengthen the economy of the home country but only as a temporal tactical maneuver. For economic purposes, the totalitarian regimes are as much at home in their countries as the proverbial swarms of locusts.
    [The Origins of Totalitarianism, "Totalitarianism in Power," p.416]

    Falangist regimes are no different.
14. Fraudulent elections: it's an inaccurate platitude that fascist leaders are elected democratically. Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC) famously denounced Haitian Pres. Jean-Bertrand Aristide as "hitlerian" (and therefore worthy of being ousted in a coup he had helped orchestrate); it was a classic case of a person who really is like Hitler (Helms) accusing his victim of being so. Hitler came to power as Chancellor; in the 7th German federal election of July 1932, the Nazis became the largest single party, but did not win a majority of votes; as no party could form a coalition, the 8th federal elections were held 4 months later, and the Nazi share of the vote fell from 37% to 33%. However, even with a smaller number of seats (-34), the Nazi Party was able to form a coalition two months later. This followed two months of violence by rival paramilitary groups. Even in the 9th federal election, the Nazis carried only 44% of the vote and required intimidation of coalition partners to pass the "enabling act" that gave the Chancellor dictatorial powers.

    Elections confirming Hitler as Führer and Reich Chancellor occurred after he had merged the offices of President (with Hindenberg's death) and Chancellor. This plebescite is normally regarded as a pure joke, since the entire political opposition was now in concentration camps. Likewise, Mussolini was called on by Victor Emmanuel III to form a government (1922) because of a prolonged constitutional crisis; the Fascists were actually a paramilitary group with little in the way of a political wing (in the last elections before WW2, the fascists won 35 seats out of 355). In Militarist Japan, of course, there was never anything like an electoral victory for anything like a military party (for one thing, there were two and they were franctically trying to eliminate each other). No one has ever accused Saddam Hussein or Abdul Aziz ibn Saud of being duly elected leader of Iraq or Arabia. Abdul Aziz would have been insulted at the mere suggestion.

    Fraudulent elections are, definitionally, a sign that democracy is dead; however, it must be pointed out that election fraud is a lot more common than fraudulent elections and both are a lot more common than fascism. Fascist regimes do sometimes engage in charade elections, but not always. In many cases, even when the regime's popularity was obvious, not even the slightest pretension of a free election was permitted. After 1937, for example, it is reasonable to suspect Hitler could have won a slightly rigged election, or even a perfectly open one. But the concept that even 5% of the population opposed Hitler was intolerable. The famed 100% margins of victory in North Korea, in which every single person casts a vote for the Dear Leader, are awesome for their displays of intensive state coercion, not Kim Jong-il's popularity. There aren't fraudulent; they're mass calisthenics, wrongly called "elections."

[Fascism] [Totalitarianism]