Post Fascism

November 2021 Forums General discussion Post Fascism

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
  • Author
  • #224521

    I posted this message under Comments

    The leftwing have abandoned the old term Neo Fascism, the new one is Post fascism claiming that it is different to the classic German fascism, the problem is that they do not want to accept that the right wings are becoming popular within the working due to the failures of the left and the social democrats, and they have made promises that they can not carry over and the workers have rejected them. They also call it Libertarian Fascism. This is pure nonsense


    He seems to want to keep the word “fascism” because if its negative connotations. Those he criticises

    “have little or nothing to do with the legacy of Nazism. They are not totalitarian; not at all revolutionary; not based on violent mass movements or irrationalist, voluntarist philosophies. Nor are they toying, even in jest, with anti-capitalism”

    In other words, not fascist but something else. He seems to be talking about so-called “ethno-nationalism”, the only thing those he criticises share with fascism.


    A new direction for the hard right? I’ve noticed that some nationalist organisations are trying to project their views through the lens of climate concern, both to latch onto the current crisis and to detoxify their ideas in the eyes of the general public. I wonder if that will be a key part of any resurgent right?


    Thanks – some interesting reading there


    The problem is to associate right wings with fascism I like the analysis made by Adam Buick on his article fascism and anti fascism I do not know why the soymb block is using the term fascism are we falling in the same trap of the fanatic left wingers ?


    There can be the formal technical and academic application of words or their more popular common day usage.

    Today, fascism is no longer associated with the archetypical state-corporatism signifying the classical depiction of 1920s 1930s fascism but now simply expresses the representation of extreme right-wing (and at times left) nationalism and racism.

    Eco-fascism is another description of Malthusian influence within the environmental movement. Calling such proponents out for what they are, in reality

    I think we can express the adoption of populist xenophobic anti-immigration views by the far-right as fascist, without any qualifying additions of neo-, post-, or quasi-fascism. It conveys the risk of a potential threat that is developing within the ecological movement.

    Our objective is to communicate in terms that are understandable to our fellow workers.

    We already do our utmost to preserve the authentic meaning of the words socialism and communism and capitalism, but our task will be impossible if we take upon ourselves the duty to preserve the origins of every political term which evolves into meaning something else.


    I am reluctant to say so because I wrote the article he refers to but I agree with Marcos. We shouldn’t bandy about the term “fascism” like left wingers do completely out of context and giving the impression that fascism is worse than capitalism. With the danger of implying that the priority should be anti-fascism rather than socialism. Best to see “fascism” that has been and gone.


    I’m restricting the argument to the term “eco-fascism”, not a blanket epithet for very conservative.

    (we have a similar issue with “imperialism”, not all capitalist countries have a imperialist foreign policy but for capitalism itself the tendency is inherent for the most powerful economies to be imperialist)

    Is Malthusian a sufficient condemnatory description for what we witness in the politics of many ecology activists?

    Does it adequately express the effect of their ideology?

    How do we equate the abuse of environmentalist concern with rabid nationalism and racism unless we use words that already are associated with these?

    Can we talk of eco-white supremacism? Eco-far-rightism? Eco-nationalism? Do these make the tendency within ecologists any clearer?

    When the concept is of “blood and soil” reflected is eco-nazism appropriate?

    Anyways here is Wiki on its meaning

    Take your pick


    Of course there are a few real “fascists” about — people who see themselves in a direct line of descent from the Nazis and advocate the same policies and political regime, swastikas and all — but there’s not many of them and they are not a threat. I dare say some “eco-fascists” fit into that category. But the far-right parties with some electoral following do not. I don’t know what to call them. Nativists? Extreme nationalists? Eco-nativists?


    I can think of many things to call them, but I probably shouldn’t write them in a public forum!

    Genuinely though, I’m not sure what the harm is in calling today’s hard right fascists. It might not be strictly accurate in terms of summarising their views, but it conveys sufficient meaning in a concise phrase.


    The trouble is the word “fascism” has a history as a political term as has the term “anti-fascism”. It has been used as the ultimate “evil”, so evil that all non-fascists are duty-bound to unite against it. This was the line of the old CP in the 1930s and has been inherited by the SWP. It leads to the struggle against those designated “fascist” being considered more important than the struggle for socialism; to “popular fronts” and the like with openly pro-capitalist parties.

    Capitalism, not fascism, is the enemy. In fact it was capitalist conditions in the 1930s that gave rise to fascism as a mass movement as a reaction to the inevitable failure of democratic reformism.


    Boris quotes Lenin to the CBI

    “Lenin once said that the Communist Revolution was Soviet power plus the electrification of the whole country,” he told the crowd.
    “Well, I hesitate to quote Lenin before the Confederation of British Industry, but the coming industrial revolution is green power plus the electrification of the whole country.”

    We can agree with today’s Socialist Courier blog-post that “We should be more demanding on labels we ascribe to people.”

    But we use words in a context, not necessarily as the dictionary would define them.

    As an aside, do I protest that the Socialist Standard too often applies Americanised spelling with the Z instead of the S in its articles 😉


    The problem is that the left continue using wrong terminologies and in others forum I am fighting against those conceptions, including the term fascism and anti fascism and post fascism

    I am not going to involve myself into their own world, and I might look ambivalent and I can not act like the chameleon to adapt myself to every color.

    I am not going to accept the concept of corporate socialism used by the left,eco fascisn, or cultural marxism, that they are using too, the concept of post fascism came from an anticommunist and a seudo Italian marxists turned it into a leftwing conception,( and I read one of his book and it is totally wrong and I going into the second one ) and it is another old religion repacked

    it is the new Neo liberalism of the left, even more they are calling it libertarian fascism and it is also wrong. My point in all those forums is that capitalism is our problem, it is no left or right, they are irrelevant, as well we can not confuse nationalism with fascism, it is extreme nationalism, as well, we can not associate right wings with fascism when they can use the electoral system to be eletected

    Even more, I do not think that the peoples who attacked the US Congress are fascists or Nazis, they are extreme right winger similar to the extreme left wingers, and both are as violent as the fascists. I like Adam approach who wrote that Fascism must be face with socialist argumentations and publicly show their wrong conceptions as we did during 1930 and 1942

    I think we must keep our personal view from the socialist party view

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 49 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.