Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

So what do you think of this 'liberalism is dead' article?

J Ed

Follow Back Pro Expropriation
Liberalism is Dead

As liberalism collapses, so too does the left-right divide that has marked the past century of domestic politics in the capitalist world. The political conflict of the future will not be between liberalism (or its friendlier European cousin, social democracy) and a conservatism that basically agrees with the principles of liberal democracy but wishes the police would swing their billy clubs a lot harder. Instead, the political dichotomy going forward will be between a “left” and “right” fascism. One is already ascendant, and the other is new but quickly growing.

Jürgen Habermas and various other 20th century Marxists used “left fascism” as a generic slander against their ideological opponents, but I am using it to refer to something more specific: the corporatocratic libertarianism that is the counterpart of right fascism’s authoritarian ethnonationalism, forming the two sides of the same coin. When, in the wake of the imminent economic downturn, Mark Zuckerberg runs for president on the promise of universal basic income and a more “global citizen”-style American identity in 2020, he will represent this new “left” fascism: one that, unlike Trump’s, sheds the nation-state as a central concept. A truly innovative and disruptive fascism for the 21st century.

Rather than invoke Herrenvolk principles and citizenship based on blood and soil, these left fascists will build nations of “choice” built around brand loyalty and service use. Rather than citizens, there will be customers and consumers, CEOs and boards instead of presidents and congresses, terms of service instead of social contracts. Workers will be policed by privatized paramilitaries and live in company towns. This is, in fact, how much of early colonialism worked, with its chartered joint-stock companies running plantation microstates on opposite sides of the world. Instead of the crown, however, there will be the global market: no empire, just capital.

I don't think that 'left fascism' is a good term for it but the ideology which has coalesced around neoliberalism married with social liberalism, techno-futurism and an aggressive foreign policy does need a name and the direction of travel he is describing does not seem entirely implausible to me.
 
When, in the wake of the imminent economic downturn, Mark Zuckerberg runs for president on the promise of universal basic income and a more “global citizen”-style American identity in 2020, he will represent this new “left” fascism: one that, unlike Trump’s, sheds the nation-state as a central concept. A truly innovative and disruptive fascism for the 21st century.

Rather than invoke Herrenvolk principles and citizenship based on blood and soil, these left fascists will build nations of “choice” built around brand loyalty and service use. Rather than citizens, there will be customers and consumers, CEOs and boards instead of presidents and congresses, terms of service instead of social contracts. Workers will be policed by privatized paramilitaries and live in company towns. This is, in fact, how much of early colonialism worked, with its chartered joint-stock companies running plantation microstates on opposite sides of the world. Instead of the crown, however, there will be the global market: no empire, just capital.

That sounds like it was written by someone who subscribes to shit like the FEMA camps conspiracy theory
 
It's a hugely us-centric analysis, so much so that it makes bad errors, such as identifying in the ethnonationalists a desire to return power to the 'straight white male'. This kind of analysis is pretty much useless - it simply isn't what is happening with the rise of the populist right in Europe.
 
Liberalism is Dead



I don't think that 'left fascism' is a good term for it but the ideology which has coalesced around neoliberalism married with social liberalism, techno-futurism and an aggressive foreign policy does need a name and the direction of travel he is describing does not seem entirely implausible to me.
The author clearly knows fuck all about Habermas. He didn't use 'left fascism' as a generic slander, but very specifically about the RAF types and their use of political violence. There is nothing in what he describes that if left wing at all. It seems to me to be a fairly bog standard techno capitalism.
 
Back
Top Bottom