21st century fascism

[butchersapron]

Right - these are your points delroy?

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan

 

[Delroy Booth]

I knew what you'd posted before you did. I did. Someone had to post that stale leftist apologetic shit.

"Stale leftist apologetic shit" sounds great but means absolutely nothing, not in relation to me or my politics, or to the issues being discussed. It's an assumption you're making about a complete stranger based on your own prejudices, nothing more, and serves the purpose of making it so you can ignore many of the things I've said and avoid getting into a coherent debate about them.

 

[butchersapron]

"Stale leftist apologetic shit" sounds great but means absolutely nothing, not in relation to me or my politics, or to the issues being discussed. It's an assumption you're making about a complete stranger based on your own prejudices, nothing more, and serves the purpose of making it so you can ignore many of the things I've said and avoid getting into a coherent debate about them.

Good timing. Fill your boots. You just had a 1000 words and said nothing. Have a few less and say a bit more.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Good timing. Fill your boots. You just had a 1000 words and said nothing. Have a few less and say a bit more.

Lol maybe so, but you've had 93,562 posts, mostly glib one-liners laced with personal ad hominem insults that conveniently excuse you from discussing the issues themselves. If there's a particular aspect of what i've written that you dont' like I'd love to know what it is, because so far the best you've been able to come up with is that I'm calling the IWCA, and by extension myself and lots of others on the left, nazis. Which isn't quite nothing, is it?

No worries though, coz if all else fails you can call me a Fabian or summat no doubt that'll learn me

 

[elbows]

To what extent is it actually possible to discuss a strategy to counter the threat properly at this moment? Articles I read on the subject seem to fail to have much to say beyond asking the question and making gloomy comparisons between the good old days where the would-be barricade-manners were apparently obvious and now, where fragmentation offers fewer certainties, real or imagined.

If economic crisis leads to collapse thats dramatic and deep enough to eliminate many of the factors that make fascism unattractive to a big swathe of elites in practical economic terms, let alone what damage it will do to those further down the chain, then we may get some different answers to the question?

I can't say I've gleaned too many clues from whats happened so far since it mostly looks like even in the most interesting countries both the left and the right have so far managed to invigorate their base and make some gains at the expense of those who are currently busy having a crisis of confidence and floundering around trying to prop up a system that has numerous rot problems.

I would not like to stretch the point too far, but I am very interested in what extent diversity and the internet can compensate for some losses in terms of the organised left. The net is quite great for propaganda purposes, and perhaps more crucially for the deconstruction and subversion of propaganda. The extent to which it can puncture myths which fascists are attempting to inflate may count for something, and its international nature and ability to help organise is also of interest. I suppose it could also play a role in enabling us to get a more accurate sense of how much support different groups really have at certain key moments too, although such realities can still be overwhelmed if one side has managed to gain a massive amount of momentum.

 

[butchersapron]

Lol maybe so, but you've had 93,562 posts, mostly glib one-liners laced with personal ad hominem insults that conveniently excuse you from discussing the issues themselves. If there's a particular aspect of what i've written that you dont' like I'd love to know what it is, because so far the best you've been able to come up with is that I'm calling the IWCA, and by extension myself and lots of others on the left, nazis. Which isn't quite nothing, is it?

No worries though, coz if all else fails you can call me a Fabian or summat no doubt that'll learn me

Good thread to call me out on quantity.

I ask AGAIN:

Right - these are your points delroy?

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan

I've never once called you a fabian. I'm asking you to get to the point of what you've written - if you think that it's worthwhile you will. I've tried to. If you think you just have to do a long post to fulfil ego requirements then just melt away

 

[butchersapron]

To what extent is it actually possible to discuss a strategy to counter the threat properly at this moment? Articles I read on the subject seem to fail to have much to say beyond asking the question and making gloomy comparisons between the good old days where the would-be barricade-manners were apparently obvious and now, where fragmentation offers fewer certainties, real or imagined.

If economic crisis leads to collapse thats dramatic and deep enough to eliminate many of the factors that make fascism unattractive to a big swathe of elites in practical economic terms, let alone what damage it will do to those further down the chain, then we may get some different answers to the question?

I can't say I've gleaned too many clues from whats happened so far since it mostly looks like even in the most interesting countries both the left and the right have so far managed to invigorate their base and make some gains at the expense of those who are currently busy having a crisis of confidence and floundering around trying to prop up a system that has numerous rot problems.

I would not like to stretch the point too far, but I am very interested in what extent diversity and the internet can compensate for some losses in terms of the organised left. The net is quite great for propaganda purposes, and perhaps more crucially for the deconstruction and subversion of propaganda. The extent to which it can puncture myths which fascists are attempting to inflate may count for something, and its international nature and ability to help organise is also of interest. I suppose it could also play a role in enabling us to get a more accurate sense of how much support different groups really have at certain key moments too, although such realities can still be overwhelmed if one side has managed to gain a massive amount of momentum.

There is no strategy possible that's not connected to how people view and live their life. There are tactics to try and develop a way to put them forward in an aggressive way. Which brings us back to 21st century fascism.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Good thread to call me out on quantity.

I ask AGAIN:

Right - these are your points delroy?

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan

Whilst I stand in awe at your talents for concision butchers, brevity is the soul of wit after all, I wouldn't say that those were my points and I'd suggest re-reading what I put. If you want to discuss some of the politics I'd be more than happy to you're a bright person, and you may be a pretty good crank but I do reckon you can do better than this.

And quantity is fine, I'm only bringing it up because if you're gonna throw shit at me for writing long-winded posts then surely it's only fair I can have another dig at you for living vicariously through a message board? If I hurt your feelings I apologise, it was meant in jest. Get a thicker skin.

It's the quality of what you write that's really the issue, is it? Suggesting that I'm calling anyone who opposes multiculturalism a nazi is nothing more than a lie, because I've said nothing of the sort. It's a lie you're peddling because you are incredibly defensive about this topic, even though what I've said is pretty tame.

Then apparently it's more a case of you being the english teacher I never had, giving me tips on writing, which is very kind of you but I'm perfectly happy with what I've written. Then apparently I've written nothing, I've just done the equivalent of banging my head on the keyboard and hoping something coherent emerges when I click post. But then I'm also a "stale apologetic leftist" which is kind of cool btw I take some sort of perverse pride in being called that these days.

Now that's all good fun and livens up a boring sunday night quite nicely, but it doesn't really do anything to progress the discussion, does it?

 

[butchersapron]

So yeah:

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan





Only 750 self obsessed words this time.

 

[butchersapron]

And quantity is fine, I'm only bringing it up because if you're gonna throw shit at me for writing long-winded posts then surely it's only fair I can have another dig at you for living vicariously through a message board? If I hurt your feelings I apologise, it was meant in jest. Get a thicker skin.

Weeping till christmas. wtf has anything you've posted got to do with 21st century fascism? A few words on that if you can tear yourself away from, the mirror.

 

[Delroy Booth]

So yeah:

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan





Only 750 self obsessed words this time.

I mean this with the best of intentions but no, sorry, those 2 points aren't what I was getting at, and I won't answer them in the way you want me to, it'd be fucking stupid too. If there's too many words for you to read then just skip it on and move on to someone elses posts, you're under no obligation to either understand or reply to things I've written.

 

[butchersapron]

Maybe i missed the content i'm sorry if i did - what was it?

I didn't ask you to answer any thing btw. Are you ok?

 

[butchersapron]

wtf has anything you've posted got to do with 21st century fascism? A few words on that if you can tear yourself away from, the mirror.

Anyone?

 

[Delroy Booth]

Maybe i missed the content i'm sorry if i did - what was it?

I didn't ask you to answer any thing btw. Are you ok?

Yeah I'm totally sound, but just out of curiosity what are you asking me to do again? Re-write the posts for your convenience?

 

[butchersapron]

Just the points.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Just the points.

Right well here's the tricky bit, and maybe you should take more time to explain yourself and what you want from me. Coz here you said

I ask AGAIN:

Right - these are your points delroy?

1.use of term multi-culturalism.

2. Something about the new plan

Where you're asking me a question. Now point 1 yeah the use of the term multi-culturalism is a big part of it, and how left-wing critics of multi-culturalism should frame their arguments to make it distinctive from the far-rights appropriation of the term multi-culturalism as a euphemism, and point 2 I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Really, none. Couldn't answer that even if I wanted to.

But then you come out with....

I didn't ask you to answer any thing btw. Are you ok?

... which is a little bit confusing coz I could've sworn you just did. And yes I'm fine by the way.

And don't get so tetchy about me ripping you a bit about your post count, there's nowt worse than someone who's big enough to dish it out but not big enough to take it in return

So if you really want to me go over point 1 again, I will, but I'd be interested to hear something from you besides personal insults and trolling.

 

[butchersapron]

Jesus. 'the question' is does your long waffle boil down the two issues i suggested? That's it. It appears that it only boils down to one now as you don't seem to remember making what i thought would be the more substantive one about how the right has shifted tactics over the last decades. The one wherein you undermine the first point by suggesting that " Perhaps the far-right has been so deeply influenced by neo-liberalism that they've abandoned racial politics and reduced themselves to being an identity politics advocacy group..." (without of course expanding on why or how neo-liberalism might have done this - beyond a bizzare suggestion of 'political correctness). Never mind.

Tetchy? I didn't mention it - i ignored it. Hence you needing to repeat it. Still not bothered.

 

[articul8]

And what is your response/justification to the point about insisting on using a term in a sense that is different from how most people outside academic sociology use it? Or to Delroy's analysis of the French election results for the FN?

 

[butchersapron]

Same as it was when you tried the same attack with less waffle and more wanky words. Response to his analysis of the french elections? The one that says the historically unprecedented FN vote was actually a vote for the left? That people were shifting right because they thought they were really voting left? I wonder how that plays in the old red-belts where communist influence is now gone, replaced by the FN. Next time, us! You can use words to critically look at a situation, you can also use them to justify how everything is really a secret victory.

Where was this btw delroy?

"forced Le Pen to shift quite dramatically to the left "

Did you spot this happening articul8?

What about my look at the growth and changing internal composition of the french right-bloc which you wafted away with oh i'm sure it'll be different next time? (and that you're relying on the french tories to sort out the far-right says it all) Politics eh?

 

[Delroy Booth]

Jesus. 'the question' is does your long waffle boil down the two issues i suggested? That's it.

No I don't it doesn't really boil down to those two points at all, there was way more stuff in it than that. That's the danger of skim-reading a long post I reckon. The first point, about the use of the term multiculturalism on the left, is there ok, the second point was so vague and imprecise "Something about the new plan" that I literally had no idea what you were talking about. If you want a conversation you'll have to go at least some effort in reading what the other person's written.

It appears that it only boils down to one now as you don't seem to remember making what i thought would be the more substantive one about how the right has shifted tactics over the last decades. The one wherein you undermine the first point by suggesting that " Perhaps the far-right has been so deeply influenced by neo-liberalism that they've abandoned racial politics and reduced themselves to being an identity politics advocacy group..." (without of course expanding on why or how neo-liberalism might have done this - beyond a bizzare suggestion of 'political correctness). Never mind.

Well expanding upon "why neo-liberalism has done this" is a pointless waste of time, it presupposes that neo-liberalism is some specific external agency or organization that's consciously directing the way in which those parties develop, when it isn't like that. It's the other way round, the far-right has chosen to embrace the political consensus, they haven't been compelled to by a shady gang of neo-liberals sat in some tower somewhere for some nefarious purposes, they've deliberately bought into it.

Neo-liberal capital doesn't need the far-right really, I know this is stock trotskyite stuff but historically capitalism has only resorted to fascism when it's believed to be under threat from the left, which it certainly isn't at the moment. Obviously they can be useful, in pursuit of foreign wars against muslim countries for example, but it's not necessary for capital to bargain with them at all.

The key point there is also the fact it's only if they perceive it to be a threat, not if objectively counts as one, for example in the early 30's the massive anti-communist hysteria whipped up by the German press and the right-wing parties massively overstated the extent of the power of the left in a time of recession, it was the public scapegoat in a lot of cases, though the german socialists and workers movements power was actually quite weak due to massive divisions in tactics and philosophy.

Economically most fascists in the 20th century have been third position, and hostile to both marxist socialism and capitalism. I know that's also a massive oversimplification but on the whole it's right enough. However in the last 20 years, as part of the modernisation process this article refers too, they've reconciled themselves to the neo-liberal consensus, not out of any love for capitalism but out of a shrewd political calculation that rebelling against this will cost them support, leave them isolated and marginalized. It's the same calculation New Labour and the Social Democratic european left made after the fall of communism, which led to the gradual abandonment of class politics and the embrace of populist identity politics in it's place. This is the same historical process that's led to the left losing much of the support of it's "core constituent" as this article puts it.

They accepted the centrality of the free market, changed their rhetoric so that it became non-racialised and instead framed in cultural language, and made loads of other changes that makes them a more mainstream, appealing prospect than a load of nazi's goose-stepping down the street with armbands on. There's nowt new or shocking about any of this I mean it's been going on for 20 years now, at least, and has it's roots way back in the 60's and 70's with a whole host of different thinkers.

Look there's a 101 different issues and tangents I could go on from this point, even though it's only a really minor throwaway point I was making, but I'll leave it there coz it's a bit tiresome all this butchers, you could've spared all the sneering and just asked those questions in a direct way.

 

[butchersapron]

Absolutely mental - fascism's contemporary support comes from challenging neo-liberalism not embracing it. How have you managed to get it so upside down? And no, this not a minor point - it's the key point, the central point. If you get this wrong everything that follows is wrong. It's not 'a waste of time' - it's the key thing that you need to do before anything else.

I mean, can you point to a far-right group with any current success or influence that openly had adopted neo-liberalism? Can you point to a trend of this happening? Can you articul8? I can point you to a whole host of them who have based their approach on rejecting neo-liberalism.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Same as it was when you tried the same attack with less waffle and more wanky words. Response to his analysis of the french elections? The one that says the historically unprecedented FN vote was actually a vote for the left? That people were shifting right because they thought they were really voting left? I wonder how that plays in the old red-belts where communist influence is now gone, replaced by the FN. Next time, us! You can use words to critically look at a situation, you can also use them to justify how everything is really a secret victory.

Attack? What attack? Paranoid bastard there's not a single word of attack in it. Defensive or what!

Firstly it's not a historically unprecident vote for the Front National, there is a historical precident, 2002, where a cranky old holocaust denier beat the socialists to the 2nd round of the primaries with something like 16.3% of the vote. This time round his attractive female daughter, with the same surname but all round a more sellable political product than her dad, managed 17.9% I think. If I'm out my a tenth of a percent here or there then I'm sorry. Either way it's not unprecidented at all, it's not exactly staggering growth, is it?

Secondly, unlike the 2002 example, there was a pretty convicing socialist party victory and the most successful far-left populist candidate for a generation running too, who for several weeks prior to the election was polling 15-16% and running a serious risk of winning support in the "red-belts" that in the last few decades has drifted over the Front National. There's a thread on the french presidential election on here somewhere, there might be links to some of the newspaper and website articles about this, but there definitely was an attempt to appropriate some left-wing rhetoric into what was otherwise an anti-UMP campaign, I remember reading at translation from a speech giving by Le Pen where she was talking about how "we need to stand up for ordinary people against vested financial interests" and so on, just as the polls were showing her neck and neck with Melanchon. I haven't got the heart to search for them butchers but I haven't just made it up to annoy you I can promise you that.

I certainly didn't call it a victory for the left, despite the victory of Hollande and the unexpected popularity of the Melanchon campaign, but I do think it counts as a missed opportunity for the right. I think part of it is to do with the way the Front National really aggressive campaigned against UMP for a long period of time, trying to displace them from their position as the dominant centre-right party, neglecting some of the working class base that the front national built up.

The potential is still there for them though, I remember reading a study (might have been in guardian) that said amongst 18-25 year olds Le Pen polled first, and Melanchon came 2nd. So there's definitely still potential for them to develop into the replacement for the UMP and centre-right, which would be very significant, because it'd be the first time the far-right has replaced a party of the centre right rather than become subsumed by it.

 

[Delroy Booth]

I mean, can you point to a far-right group with any current success or influence that openly had adopted neo-liberalism?

Yeah I could name a few infact if I had the time, effort or inclination, but Vlaams Belang in the Belgium is the best example of that, which broke away from the national-socialist Vlaams Blok. Wilders is another one, but he's quite pragmatic on this even by fascists stands. The Danish People's party also has shifted towards neo-liberalism, infact there's quite a lot when you sit down for a moment and think about it

 

[butchersapron]

Attack? What attack? Paranoid bastard there's not a single word of attack in it. Defensive or what!

Firstly it's not a historically unprecident vote for the Front National, there is a historical precident, 2002, where a cranky old holocaust denier beat the socialists to the 2nd round of the primaries with something like 16.3% of the vote. This time round his attractive female daughter, with the same surname but all round a more sellable political product than her dad, managed 17.9% I think. If I'm out my a tenth of a percent here or there then I'm sorry. Either way it's not unprecidented at all, it's not exactly staggering growth, is it?

Secondly, unlike the 2002 example, there was a pretty convicing socialist party victory and the most successful far-left populist candidate for a generation running too, who for several weeks prior to the election was polling 15-16% and running a serious risk of winning support in the "red-belts" that in the last few decades has drifted over the Front National. There's a thread on the french presidential election on here somewhere, there might be links to some of the newspaper and website articles about this, but there definitely was an attempt to appropriate some left-wing rhetoric into what was otherwise an anti-UMP campaign, I remember reading at translation from a speech giving by Le Pen where she was talking about how "we need to stand up for ordinary people against vested financial interests" and so on, just as the polls were showing her neck and neck with Melanchon. I haven't got the heart to search for them butchers but I haven't just made it up to annoy you I can promise you that.

I certainly didn't call it a victory for the left, despite the victory of Hollande and the unexpected popularity of the Melanchon campaign, but I do think it counts as a missed opportunity for the right. I think part of it is to do with the way the Front National really aggressive campaigned against UMP for a long period of time, trying to displace them from their position as the dominant centre-right party, neglecting some of the working class base that the front national built up.

The potential is still there for them though, I remember reading a study (might have been in guardian) that said amongst 18-25 year olds Le Pen polled first, and Melanchon came 2nd. So there's definitely still potential for them to develop into the replacement for the UMP and centre-right, which would be very significant, because it'd be the first time the far-right has replaced a party of the centre right rather than become subsumed by it.

For fucks sake, i was talking to articul8 not you.

It doesn't need to be staggering growth, no one claimed that it was so dump that in the bin for starters. That was the whole point of my posts to articul8 about the growth of influence without formal power. And no, you compare it with 2007 not 2002 - 2007 the FN got 3,834,530 (10%) in pre-crisis conditions. 5 years later when the crisis is starting to hit the french w/c they got 6 500 000 (18%), And this is really a secret vote for the left?

It doesn't matter what the lon-term socialist party member was doing in the polls the week before. The FN took what 'should' have been his vote. That's what happened.

Hang on, is this really your evidence for a dramatic left-wing turn by le Pen? Some vaguely remembered thing from maybe somewhere or other? And the bog-standard rhetoric of the any-neo-liberal far-right (knocking out your other madness of the far-right embracing neo-liberalism on the way).

I think you need to re-read what your original post actually said.

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah I could name a few infact if I had the time, effort or inclination, but Vlaams Belang in the Belgium is the best example of that, which broke away from the national-socialist Vlaams Blok. Wilders is another one, but he's quite pragmatic on this even by fascists stands. The Danish People's party also has shifted towards neo-liberalism, infact there's quite a lot when you sit down for a moment and think about it

I suggest you do that then.

 

[Delroy Booth]

Absolutely mental - fascism's contemporary support comes from challenging neo-liberalism not embracing it. How have you managed to get it so upside down? And no, this not a minor point - it's the key point, the central point. If you get this wrong everything that follows is wrong. It's not 'a waste of time' - it's the key thing that you need to do before anything else.

And I think the onus is now on you to demonstrate how these far-right anti-muslim cultural nationalist parties pose any kind of a threat to neo-liberalism. Traditional fascism does have the potential to cause damage to neo-liberalism, any sort of pragmatic populist who's prepared to put popular issues above the demends of the market poses a degree of threat to neo-liberalism, and neo-nazism blatantly does, but I don't see any massive, existential threat that neo-liberalism as an economic system coming from the "new right" if that's what it should be called. The worst they could do to it is mildly inconvenience them by putting hugely draconian immigration reforms in place, but that alone isn't going to be enough to really challenge the way the system currently works. Might make it slightly less efficient from a capitalist point of view, but it's largely nulllified by the fact that in modern societies capital is so mobile it can move to where it needs to be in a lot of cases.

But I'll be open minded of this idea, there may be some scope for it. What am I missing out on here?

 

[butchersapron]

Who on earth said that they pose a threat to neo-liberalism? Where are you getting this stuff from? I've said that the attractions of the modern day far-right are born out of a rejection of neo-liberalism, not the embrace of it. This is madness.

(i'm off out for day very soon)

 

[Blagsta]

Surely Le Pen talking about "vested financial interests" is standard fascist talk? Fascism has always positioned itself as opposed to finance capitalism, which is often code for "Jews". You see the same sort of rhetoric in conspiraloon stuff and some parts of the Occupy movement.

 

[Delroy Booth]

It doesn't need to be staggering growth

Which is a good job because if you were looking for staggering growth for Front National you won't find it.

the growth of influence without formal power

Now this is an interesting area of debate, this is where I've been saying all along the Front Nationals real strength lies. But it's between you and aritcul8

And no, you compare it with 2007 not 2002 - 2007 the FN got 3,834,530 (10%) in pre-crisis conditions. 5 years later when the crisis is starting to hit the french w/c they got 6 500 000 (18%),

And what good reason can you give me for ignoring 2002? It's hardly ancient history. Jean Marie Le Pen managed to get a very similar number of people to vote for him, in pre-crisis conditions too. You said that Marine Le Pen's vote was unprecident, when it observably isn't. You're just plain wrong there, sorry.

And this is really a secret vote for the left?

No blatantly it isn't and I never said that it was. I said that Le Pen reacted to the rise of Melanchon by ramping up her left-wing rhetoric. There were numerous articles in the papers about it at the time, I remember coz I was paying attention to it. Dont' believe me? That's fine, clearly i'm just making it up to annoy you.

It doesn't matter what the lon-term socialist party member was doing in the polls the week before. The FN took what 'should' have been his vote. That's what happened.

Indeed it did, but whereas the last time the Front National managed that kind of support the left was utterly demolished, whereas this time they've managed 18% but mainly at the expense of the centre-right, not the left. It's still a shocking result mind you, I suppose that's to be taken for granted.

Hang on, is this really your evidence for a dramatic left-wing turn by le Pen? Some vaguely remembered thing from maybe somewhere or other? And the bog-standard rhetoric of the any-neo-liberal far-right (knocking out your other madness of the far-right embracing neo-liberalism on the way).

Haha butchers if you think I'm making it up then fair enough, and "dramatic left-wing turn" is perhaps OTT I concede that, but in the final stages of the french election campaign she most definitely did start to use distinctively left-wing populist anti-banker rhetoric, which I think is down to the comparative success the left was having in that election compared to previous ones.[/quote]

 

[Blagsta]

DB - anti-banker rhetoric is not unheard of from fascists!