Comments on: It’s About Neo-Fascism Not Liberal Fascism http://donklephant.com/2008/01/22/its-about-neo-fascism-not-liberal-fascism/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:05:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Alan Stewart Carl http://donklephant.com/2008/01/22/its-about-neo-fascism-not-liberal-fascism/#comment-389466 Alan Stewart Carl Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:11:19 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2008/01/22/its-about-neo-fascism-not-liberal-fascism/#comment-389466 Dos, I'm not thinking of any specific group. Mostly I believe accusations of of "fascism" tend to be hyperbolic or grossly inaccurate. That's the whole idea behind creating the term neo-fascism. Fascism as action not ideology. To that extent, I think both liberals and conservatives have issues where they feel it's appropriate to use the power of the state (or other controlling institutions be they religious or educational) to supress individual liberty in order to promote some "higher" objective. While there were certainly liberals who supported fascism and there were elements of liberal thought that played within the WWII-era fascist regimes, I think Goldberg's point is more to attack leftist ideology than it is to truly illuminate the causes of historical fascism and how fascist acts may continue in the present. He wants to delegitimize the left rather than have a more comprehensive discussion. Or so it seems. I'm playing with linguistics and theories here. There's another post trying to get out. Dos, I’m not thinking of any specific group. Mostly I believe accusations of of “fascism” tend to be hyperbolic or grossly inaccurate. That’s the whole idea behind creating the term neo-fascism. Fascism as action not ideology. To that extent, I think both liberals and conservatives have issues where they feel it’s appropriate to use the power of the state (or other controlling institutions be they religious or educational) to supress individual liberty in order to promote some “higher” objective.

While there were certainly liberals who supported fascism and there were elements of liberal thought that played within the WWII-era fascist regimes, I think Goldberg’s point is more to attack leftist ideology than it is to truly illuminate the causes of historical fascism and how fascist acts may continue in the present. He wants to delegitimize the left rather than have a more comprehensive discussion. Or so it seems.

I’m playing with linguistics and theories here. There’s another post trying to get out.

]]> By: Dos http://donklephant.com/2008/01/22/its-about-neo-fascism-not-liberal-fascism/#comment-389431 Dos Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:19:16 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2008/01/22/its-about-neo-fascism-not-liberal-fascism/#comment-389431 Callimachus' point is well taken, but I think one should be careful. However you want to view the relative position of the ideological tentacles is fine with me in terms of pragmatic political effect. But one thing does lead to another and it is perfectly appropriate for Goldberg to point out that Nazism had a good dose of identity-politics and identity-politics is a good dose of modern liberalism. (Modern liberal identity politics have legalized racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action. Black women have per capita 3X the abortion rate of white women.) The modern liberal state is racists...with Nazi like effect. More clear - fascists view the state as the primary means/mechanism of societal transformation. To whatever exent this applies to the neo-conservatives --my feelings are hurt. I did find this interesting: <blockquote>A truly fascinating book might examine the historical context of fascism and then explore how the neo-fascist elements of our society are affecting our concepts and practice of freedom.</blockquote> I wonder what neo-fascist elements you find unworthy enough to "delegitimize"? It seems like you might have a particular group in mind. Callimachus’ point is well taken, but I think one should be careful. However you want to view the relative position of the ideological tentacles is fine with me in terms of pragmatic political effect. But one thing does lead to another and it is perfectly appropriate for Goldberg to point out that Nazism had a good dose of identity-politics and identity-politics is a good dose of modern liberalism. (Modern liberal identity politics have legalized racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action. Black women have per capita 3X the abortion rate of white women.) The modern liberal state is racists…with Nazi like effect.

More clear - fascists view the state as the primary means/mechanism of societal transformation. To whatever exent this applies to the neo-conservatives –my feelings are hurt. I did find this interesting:

A truly fascinating book might examine the historical context of fascism and then explore how the neo-fascist elements of our society are affecting our concepts and practice of freedom.

I wonder what neo-fascist elements you find unworthy enough to “delegitimize”? It seems like you might have a particular group in mind.

]]>