I’ve been getting rather more political than economical lately, but maybe just one more, to complete the set? Because I thought this week I’d say a few words about “fascism,” and what it means, to me, at least. What piqued my interest is the degree to which fascists in the USA seem to consider identification of their position as “fascism” empty name calling. One wonders if they’re just playing their usual rhetorical games, or if they really have a different understanding of fascism. Indeed, one right wing wag, apparently accustomed to calling pro-democracy liberals “fascists” when they support policies he or she doesn’t like, complained plaintively to me recently “everyone can’t be a fascist.” No, indeed. Let’s discuss who is, shall we?
To understand fascism, one must first understand social power, in any lawful society at least, comes in two separable but related forms: political power, voting, etc., and economic power, the ability to resolve interpersonal conflicts over resources in one’s favor in markets. In terms of political power in isolation, one may contrast democratic government with non-democratic authoritarian government of whatever sort one wants to think about, monarchism, right wing fascism, left wing communism, etc. However, to understand the difference between types of authoritarian government, communism versus fascism in particular, one must move on to the views expressed on the definition, distribution, use of economic power (or alternatives) to resolve interpersonal conflict. Right wing fascism involves particular views on those issues, exogenous to neoclassical welfare economics. Similarly, left wing communism involves particular views on those issues, which differ from those of fascists. The main point here is just distinctive ethical positions on economic issue differing from those of fascists. Fascism and communism are just different forms of authoritarian government expressing different and conflicting views about the definition, distribution, use of economic power. Of course, everyone has views on those issues, even those who support democratic government. What moves one from being a valued citizen of a democracy expressing one’s views on the definition, distribution, use of economic power, to being a fascist or communist, is the determination one’s ethical views must prevail and democracy opposed if it suggests otherwise. Fascism has its Leader, Party, shadowy cabal of plutocrats, financiers, industrialists, etc. Communism has its Vanguard of Know It Alls, committees of local toughs, etc. They both have in mind that the people don’t really know what they’re doing, must be kept in check.
Historically, fascism was the response of certain people to a fear not just of authoritarian communism but the possibility voters in a democracy might deliver unwelcome verdicts on normative economic issues. It was both anti-communism and anti-democracy. Fascism in the past was associated with many peripheral side hustles designed to prop up and defend the fascist regime. These, I would suggest, do not speak to the essence of fascism, but are merely accidental adjuncts based in local conditions and expedience. The Nazis famously played the race card for everything it was worth, not only as a way to make money, but to appeal to the particular prejudices of a good part of the German population at that time. Italian fascists famously found it all rather odd, but went along, eventually. Fascists used a very deliberate policy of aggressive warfare as a sort of economic stimulus, a way to make a buck, for both the economic elite and the people, that didn’t involve re-distributing existing resources, which as right wingers they considered anathema. Fascists were forever concerned they might lose popular support, so they engaged in various sorts of social control, banned and burned books, interfered with public education and universities, restricted free speech, lied, controlled media, issued propaganda relentlessly. One important element of social control in fascist society was the secret police, the Gestapo, famously known in parts of the benighted American south as the “gazpacho police,” who didn’t just threaten political opponents with violence and murder but carried it out, and how. On the carrot side, fascists tried to maintain the conceit their regime was a welfare state, concerned with the welfare of the people, not just economically powerful fat cats, generals, political leaders, etc., so they embarked on social programs and policies of various sorts. The most prominent and famous fascist jobs and social program was, of course, the German military, where cannon fodder were assured a paying job until their number came up, and a hearty round of thoughts and prayers afterward, to the apparent satisfaction of all concerned. Again, these various add-ons do not speak to the essence of fascism, nor are they peculiar to it. What defines fascism is a rejection of democratic input into the definition, distribution, use of economic power, and the use of authoritarian government to enforce certain views.
Anti-democracy conservatives and Republicans in the USA, particularly when lambasting support for democracy as communism, leftism, etc., are classic fascists, and would be so even without the associated attraction to street thuggery, political violence, lying, racism, etc. Anti-democracy bad economics in the conservative style is an important rhetorical tool for fascists in the USA because it suppresses awareness and understanding of economic power as such, and the role of democracy, political power, in defining and enforcing economic power. To appreciate democracy in an economic context, one must understand the limited, ethical half-theory structure of neoclassical welfare economics, the need for exogenous normative inputs, the modern secular understanding of ethics as based in the moral senses of individuals. Academic economists, by being soft on anti-democracy bad economics in the conservative style, failing to forcefully repudiate it, have been the de facto primary advocates for fascism in the USA for many decades. They should be ashamed of themselves and change their ways.
When will I ever talk stop talking about it? I sound like a broken record? Sure, I’ll stop. Some old day. Not any day soon, if fate allows. Get used to it. Or learn to use mute. I’m happy in my mountain home, shouting into the void. I could do it all day long.
