The term fascist, and the application of stupidity

[BobKKKindle$]

I'm not active in anti-fascist struggle in real life on account of the fact that my local area has no fascist activity whatsoever, but there are two points I'd like to make based on what I've read about the nature of fascism as a political phenomenon, as well as the impressions that this forum has given me when I've read what other people have to say about fascism and fascists.

(1) I think many people use the word "fascist" (in the sense of an individual who is a fascist, not as an adjective to describe something that is fascist in its political character - although these two meanings are obviously linked to each other) without thinking about what the term really means, and so there is an urgent need to deconstruct this term. I would argue that most of the people who are frequently described as fascists by those on the left do not deserve to be characterized as such, or should at least be differentiated from more committed and extreme far-right activists, because there is no reason to assume that those who read xenophobic publications and are discriminatory in the way they act towards and think about ethnic minorities and other oppressed groups hold strong ideological convictions (i.e. convinctions that they would continue to hold and promote if a more progressive and rational alternative existed) or a positive program (as distinct from a list of things they disagree with or hate) or would actually be willing to fight on behalf of a fascist organization in the event of a power struggle during a period of major revolutionary activity and political unrest.

I think that this category includes not just those who might be seen as sympathizers of fascist and fascist organizations (i.e. those who vote BNP, attend BNP meetings and so on) but also a significant proportion of those who are formal members of fascist organizations, and the reason I think this is that, historically, and currently, fascism appeals primarily to those who suffer acute social and economic deprivation, such as the long-term unemployed (as we can see from the characteristics of far-right voters in Saxony-Anhalt and several other Bundeslander in Germany) and is generally based on emotive attacks on what appear to be the most immediate and obvious sources of oppression and hardship (immigrants, homosexuals, etc) without any real positive content apart from brutal attacks directed against those who are seen as responsible for social problems. This means that so-called fascists should be seen as those who have been drawn into an irrational and incoherent movement due to the failure of the left to offer a credible solution. Simply using the term "fascist" to refer to anyone and everyone who supports or belongs to a party like the BNP without considering the reasons for their support or membership has nothing to do with Marxism or any kind of rational political analysis, and for that reason the meaning of the term "fascist" and when it is applicable needs to be discussed in a lot more detail than it is currently.

(2) In connection with the above, there is also a tendency amongst some on the left to characterize fascists as "boneheads" and as "stupid" etc., inferring that they are inherently less intelligent than those who hold progressive views, and that this relative lack of intelligent is part of the reason for their political orientation. I don't think that this is just true in the case of fascists, there is also a more general tendency to explain the behavior of reactionary political organizations as lacking any kind of rational direction - I've heard Hamas described as "insane" on several occasions, for example. I think this is, once again, fundamentally simplistic and short-sighted, because it ignores the fact that the leaders of fascist organizations as well as activists who lack any real authority within the organization frequently display highly intelligent and effective forms of political behavior, by knowing how to engage with issues of popular concern, and how to present themselves as being both respectable and different from the mainstream political establishment. In other words, fascists are not stupid at all, and, in the case of those who are of petty-bourgeois origin, their political orientation is rational in that it is an accurate representation of where their class interests lie. In this context, describing them as "stupid" poses the risk of anti-fascists not taking the fair-right seriously by underestimating their political ingenuity.

[Melbourne Lefty]

In connection with the above, there is also a tendency amongst some on the left to characterize fascists as "boneheads" and as "stupid" etc., inferring that they are inherently less intelligent than those who hold progressive views, and that this relative lack of intelligent is part of the reason for their political orientation. I don't think that this is just true in the case of fascists, there is also a more general tendency to explain the behavior of reactionary political organizations as lacking any kind of rational direction - I've heard Hamas described as "insane" on several occasions, for example. I think this is, once again, fundamentally simplistic and short-sighted, because it ignores the fact that the leaders of fascist organizations as well as activists who lack any real authority within the organization frequently display highly intelligent and effective forms of political behavior, by knowing how to engage with issues of popular concern, and how to present themselves as being both respectable and different from the mainstream political establishment. In other words, fascists are not stupid at all, and, in the case of those who are of petty-bourgeois origin, their political orientation is rational in that it is an accurate representation of where their class interests lie. In this context, describing them as "stupid" poses the risk of anti-fascists not taking the fair-right seriously by underestimating their political ingenuity.

Yup.

One of the reasons why in recent years I think that the "far right is stupid" arguments have gotten stronger is that more and more people on the "Left" are university educated. And I have a sneaking suspicion that the far right still gains the same chunk of its support from poorly educated working class males as it always has.

This doesnt make fascists "stupid". Simply more working class than the organisations put in place to represent the TRUE interests of the working class, which is worrying.

The middle class educated members of fascist/neo-fascist/right-populist groups often have highly evolved reasons for their political choices, its simply difficult for us to understand because these choices often have NOTHING to do with class based analysis.

As I have said before, the Neo-fascist "trend" is working off a different analysis, one older than the enlightenment and fundamentally opposed to it and the political trends that came out of it [marxism, rationality, liberalism, even modern Burkean conservatism].

Simply calling them "stupid" makes left wingers look like snobs, an opinion that seems worryingly widespread.

[Holden Caulfield]

As for the Boneheads comments:
We do call Boneheads 'stupid' and such names (Bonehead hardly being flattering) but this is not to say we thing them to be people of less intelligence and we do not look down on them from our ivory towers sneering at their lack of education. However when dealing with the likes of right-wing skinheads, as opposed to the likes of the BNP, then making them look 'silly', mocking them and discredititng their 'scene' is an important tactic. This is because those who join B&H groups and their ilk are doing it because they are reeling against a system, accepting racism as part of a 'skinhead culture' and trying to look cool like Ed Norton in American History X.

To make the scene look as stupid as possible will mean people will avoid it in greater numbers, these people will then not be assimilated into a fascist group just because they are young, angry and wear boots. It is also important to build a left wing scene so that these young (predominantly) men will be shown real skinhead culture, listen to Trojan records not Skrewdriver, and will not assume racism/fascism as their ideology or as the ideology of their subculture.

I remember the Dutch comrades saying things along these lines a while ago and it is true.

Instead of thinking that going to a B&H gig will be a great way to rebel and a great way to meet older boneheads with stories to tell, they will think they will be in a tiny room, right arming a flag while over weight men talk to them about how bad multiculturalism is while wearing outfits inspired by Jamacian music, and that they will probably get a kicking on the way their as well.

As for the BNP type of Fash:
You are exactly right, but then again you are pretty hypocritical considering your membership of the SWP and the actions and words of UAF.
I remember a while back somebody was saying something along the lines of "3000 people were stupid enough to vote BNP" whereas Organize! told them "No. 3000 mainly working class people have decided that the BNP is the best party to represent their needs". He is bang on.

Why do people vote BNP? Not because they are stupid. If you want to see a counter productive approach to dealing with the BNP check out UAF, to call them Nazis, to go along to their demos and stalls and call them Nazis, to offer no alternatives and to tell them to vote for somebody else instead. To your average working class person this seems like an ivory tower approach, to the average working class person this discredits the left, and to the BNP it is a propaganda victory.

They call you agents of the Labour party, middle class marxists, and all the rest of it. That is because it is the BNP who are arranging these meetings with the working classes, they are the ones engaging them, and you, or your organisation, are just shouting from the sidelines.

LZ posted a while ago about never say 'you are a racist' always say 'what you just said is racist'. Its the same thing, you call the BNP nazi, they say no we are not, if you explain why they are in the fascistic trend, explain why their policy will not work for the working class and work this angle you will get alot further in the struggle.

This is why i always criticise UAF, because if it had class based politics, a clear left wing agenda, and if they tried to engage the working class on issues they care about then they would make progress in leaps and bounds.