The Bush Administration continues its irrational endeavor into re-defining fascism, but does the disparaging label of 'Islamofacists' accurately depict the radical extremists that now occupy a portion of the Middle-East?
The term Fascism has been treated to quite a renaissance lately. Donald Rumsfeld's latest use of fascism in several slanderous speeches, in a decidedly hazy framework, forces us to take a look back into history and the birth of fascism. In doing so, we need to look at fascism the term, fascism as a philosophy and how the current re-working of this word into our language laboriously attempts, but fails to adequately convey, the essence of this early 20th Century governmental model.
The Bush Administration's effort at re-defining fascism by using polarizing propaganda slogans such as, "Islamofacists" and misleading claiming that Bush critics are trying to appease a "'New type of fascism" are contemporary examples of how an erstwhile ideology can be revitalized and used for coercion and extorting the masses. Hitler took fascism to new, dizzying heights using an amalgamation of a central authoritarianism influence and corporate monopolization of militaristic build-ups. This begets the question, "Does the pejorative label of 'Islamofacists' accurately depict the radical extremists that now occupy a portion of the Middle-East?"
To offset and explore these probable inaccuracies; we must first define fascism, using the classical characterization of the expression. By defining fascism, I refer to the literal translation of the word. Fascism, almost always identified with former Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, was in fact coined by Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile. The classical definition of fascism and the one Gentile had in mind when he conjured up the concept was this,
"A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
Fittingly, Gentile is credited with the 1928 Encyclopedia Italiana entry that states,
"Fascism should more appropriately be called 'corporatism' because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
By contrast, today's definition, found in the MS Encarta dictionary, paints a vague but distinguishably different idea,
"Any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism."
While the similarities between the two meanings cannot be overlooked, what often goes unnoticed is the watering-down and softening of the corporatism component. The stark contrast of these two spanning descriptions is the transit from a "system of government" to "any movement". Upon developing the idea of fascism, Giovanni Gentile place tremendous importance on the centralized control of monopolistic corporate entities and thusly it became the cornerstone of his fascist philosophy.
It is this centralization of corporate power, which today spans the gamut in the U.S. from news and media to banks and energy companies, and not the dictatorial element that is most often associated with the movement within today's United States. Gentile's fundamental belief was that once the corporate monopoly was complete that deception, and therefore control, would come naturally and with little resistance. This of course occurs under the ruse of extreme national arrogance and fittingly, an imaginary "enemy of the state" to create hysteria within the populous.
Using this new, looser interpretation of "any movement", the current administration has taken a leap of liberty to try and summon an image of a stateless, decentralized faction with little or no corporate component as the entity of the "face of new fascism." It is not difficult to see how this inaccurate portrayal of the Al Qaeda network lacks the fundamental elements, statehood and corporatism, to be a genuine working model of fascism. This fairytale fascism, purported by U.S. administration hacks, even lacks the modern euphemistic designation of "business leadership." Al Qaeda is not a business, but an example of religious zealousness run amuck among a narrow-band of extremists.
The irony of course, is that the very same U.S. leaders that cry out fascism has re-taken root -- in a new form in Al Qaeda and terrorists -- fail to see that they have become, by classical definition and actions, a very authentic model of Giovanni Gentile's fascism. "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right.... together with belligerent nationalism", pertinently paints a precise mural of the current U.S. administration that has nearly wrestled away almost all people-powered-politics.
Consequently, by reviewing the then and now definitions of fascism, it cannot be ignored that today's multinational corporations, predicated on predatory capitalism, bear far more a resemblance to Giovanni Gentile's original fascism. That Rumsfeld's vapid cataloging of "Islamofacists" as true fascists more than misses the mark. In fact, the amorphous and largely unstructured terrorists are the antithesis of fascism.
Al Qaeda is without question a real danger, but fascists they are not. To see true fascists, America's currently leaders need only to hold up a mirror and examine the faces reflecting back.
Frank J. Ranelli is an editorial writer, a research author and critic. He is also a senior editor for OpEdNews. His erudite and chic style of writing has been lauded and extensively published in a variety of news outlets and across the Internet. These include the Naples Daily News, The Online Journal, Information Clearing House, Alternet, The Smirking Chimp, and the former progressive journal of thought, Wicked Philosophy. Frank is currently working on his upcoming book, Rise of the Authoritarians, and has been invited to participate in prominent philosopher Russell Blackford's anthology project, Voices of Disbelief.
especially in a society in which all the people want is to have everything spelled out for them simply, to have someone else make all the decisions for them, to have access to cheap goods, manufactured abroad and be left alone to watch Monday Night Football.
While no reasonable person can accept the motives and methods of the so-called terrorists any reasoning person might attempt to understand what has created them and thus find the germ of the way to combat their unreasoning religious fervor and their murderous methodology.
Bush would have you believe that killing them is the only solution, though the real motivation there might be seen to be a permanent American military presence amidst the diminishing oil reserves and a way to cow the voter through fear.
Che Guevarra once noted that a movement (he said Guerillas we now say Terrorists) swims through the population as a fish swims through water. Remove the sympathy of that population for the aims and intent of the terrorist and they will have no safe havens. Continue policies that exploit them, keep them in dire poverty and the terrorist looks pretty good. Give them jobs, homes, hope and the terrorist has no attraction.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2386 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 7:13:53 AM
the one, which still has at least some crediblity( the Russian official media has no crediblity whatsoever) from year to year talks about Al- Qaeda being an invention of the US covert operations offices and also about how and why Bush and Co used it before and use it now. It continues to say that Bush and Co are below human and as such are capable of anything. I was always wondering why in our ' fascism' studies even on this site we never involve the powreful ally, the one and only source of information, that is the Russian opposition press an its interpretations. In fact, we do not involve other allies, like for instance, Serbian, Chinese, and even Arabic sources, all of which surely can and should provide a proper picture. Just a thought.
by
Mark Sashine (38 articles, 19 quicklinks, 221 diaries, 3074 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 8:09:51 AM
Mossolini and Hitler were both dictators, bottom line. Hitler copied Mossolini's rise to power.
Along the way Hitler needed money and the Thysen steel, and Krupps was there to help, and so were many other corporations that were going to benefit form war.
I think Ford and IBM, and General Motors were all involved in helping Hitler come to power.
Nazism and Fascism are the same only in that they run a dictatorship and police state to keep people in line.
The term Fascism comes from the term Fasime from the old Roman times when an ax in a bundle of sticks were used as a sign of the Senate. We even use this sign in our own Senate.
Hitler wanted to use the Roman Army as an example of Power and the Roman Empire was the 1st Reich.
It goes on and on and Himmler and Hitler used the Swastaka from early signs from Hindu and Buddhist and Scottish rites of power and growth and love making.
I know I am off the line of Fascism but it got very complicated setting up a dictatorship for the people to follow and even beleive. Hitler used the left handed swastaka even though right or left had the same meanings.
I think Mossolini was more indebeted to corporations then Hitler and so was hung out to dry when things went bad.
The thoughts that we are a Fascist State is more logical then Nazism, but who owns the press rules.
by
anthny (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 39 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 8:57:57 AM
Don't forget Sergei Dimitroff's definition: "Fascism is the open terroristic dictatorship of the most reactionary and chauvinistic sectors of finance capital."
by
gramps (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 109 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 9:13:20 AM
Like neo-cons who are NOT conservative,
neo-Christian facscists are also NOT Christian.
There is nothing Christian about capitalism or violence.
Those who choose violence in the name of God have always been with us, but the difference in the Crusades of today, is the claim that they are spreading Democracy: a political replacement of the warped religion of the original Crusaders.
Up until Augustine penned the heresy known as The Just War Theory, NO Christian ever served in the Military.
100 years after the reign of Emporer Constantine, all soldiers were required to be baptized Christians.
What was NOT required, was that they actually DO IT:
forgive and love, do not judge and be humble.
Imagine what a world it would be if everyone who claimed to be a Christian, actually did the philosophy:
Be just,
Treat people the way we want to be treated,
Always work for PEACEFUL resolutions, even to the point of returning violence with COMPASSION.
Consider valuable the things that have no material value.
Do not judge others.
Do not bear grudges.
Be modest and unpretentious.
Give out of true generosity, not because we expect to be repaid.
Being true to one's self is more important than being loyal to one's family...those who think they know the most are the most ignorant......
Rob, to quote what you wrote today:
'That's the refrain Bush keeps saying. What freedom? Freedom to send evangelists to destroy their culture? Freedom to expose their culture to western movies, TV, advertising-- another way to destroy their culture? Freedom to support the dictators and monarchs who prevent democracy in Arab lands? Freedom to foment hate of Muslims among misguided Christian fundamentalists?'
Rob,
You need to learn just a few basics about Christianity and Islam. For instance, the New Testament never coerces faith in Christ by force, the New Testament never permits the killing of another person by a Christian for any reason, the New Testament says, "Love your neighbor as yourself," the New Testament says, "Love your enemies and do good to those who despitefully use you," the New Testament commands believers to go into all the world to share their faith with no coercion. Compare this to Islam: both Koran and Hadith teach that if a Muslim converts to any religion that same Muslim is to be put to death; both Koran and Hadith teach that the person who attempts to encourage a Muslim to leave Islam is to be put to death. Why do you not point out the both Sunni and Shiite call their mosques in the United States missions? Do you not have a problem with that? Do you no have a problem that there are thousands of Muslim converts in Muslim states that live in daily fear for their lives because they have converted? Why do you not point out ever in any article that the trouble is Darfur is between Christians and Muslim? Guess who is murdering who by the millions in Africa and just not Darfur? Islam converts with the sword. Read a little, just a little about what is going on in Darfur, Nigeria, and other African countries. These are not tribal wars. Every single one is a religious war and without exception the Muslim are murdering hundreds of thousands of animists and Christians. Can you not be just a little fair about it? You are sounding like George Bush in reverse.
In your dislike or hate for Bush, you seem to hate all Christians just because Bush claims to be a Christian. Do you forget such groups as the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites, Swiss Brethren, Quakers (in spite of Richard Nixon) dozens of others groups? How very narrow minded and bigoted. Do you not know anything about such men as Tony Campolo who by the way is a white Baptist pastor in a Harlem with a congregation of two thousand? Have you never read any of the writings of such Christians as Roger Williams? I am an evangelical and I do the work of an evangelist as does Tony Campolo. There are hundred of thousands like me who hate the war in Iraq, believe that government should be of the people, by the people and FOR THE PEOPLE and that Bush is an aberration.
I vote for the party because the Party cannot lie about their platform. When a person belongs to a party, you know what he believes despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. If a person says is Democrat and is for Bush's social program, he is lying, pure and simple. I have never voted for a Republican in my life. My first vote was cast for JFK in 1960. There are so many areas on which to attack the religious right, but be very careful because not all evangelicals are like Jerry Fallwell, Ralph Reed, James Dobson and James Kennedy.
I enjoy 'oped..' but I do get tired of the 'Islam can do no wrong' and the 'Christians are the evil of the universe' articles. They are as ridiculous as GWB at the World Trade Center yesterday.
Reverend Phil Ratliff
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 907 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 11:25:36 AM
that a reverend, a man of God does not understand that Holy books cannot be interpeted literally as some kind of laws for people. It is also very strange that reverend and a man of God cannot go look back in history and see how much violence was performed by the so- called Christians, including but not limited to the genocide of Indians and slavery in this country. It is very strange that a person professionally connected with theology does not understand that there is a big difference between religion as teaching and cultural traditions. It is also very strange that reverend does not understand that no one in this site says ,'Islam can do no wrong'. We say the people of Islamic religion can do wrong the same way the people of the Christian religion can. Now I could give so many examples of the total and unequivocal carnage performed in the name of Christianity that good reverend can decide to worship Santeria ( sorry). But I also can give the same numerous examples on carnages performed in the name of any other religion. All of that is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that religion was, is and will be used by people for their purposes and only a very shallow mind can associate the actual teaching with the 'wrongdoings' of the constituents. We despise Bush for his total abuse of Christianity and we will despise any Islamic fanatic the same way. They are the same. They are as far from religion as possible. And the fact that they use it is sacreligious.
So, I would advise all the parties to stop looking upwards and start to look around. I assure you, folks that Allah, Jehova and Jesus would have much less problems with each other than their stupid constituents down below. And if we continue ' throwing books' and trying to find which religion is ' wrong', they will ask The Devil to take care of us. Maybe they have already done so.
by
Mark Sashine (38 articles, 19 quicklinks, 221 diaries, 3074 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 12:50:58 PM
While Panurg has answered the Reverend with literacy, clarity and truth I just cannot help but remind this preacher of hatred and divisiveness about the numerous attempts to convert or kill in the name of Christ.
Tarring over one billion followers of Islam with those innacuracies and basically prejudicial statements that Islam preaches hatred and murder while Christianity is all about love negates history itself.
The Inquisition, the numerous historical records showing christians slaughtering 'pagans' in the name of their god, the cases in which abortion clinics have been bombed and doctors wounded or killed scream out to us all that this reverend is distorting truth for his own prejudicial reasons.
All reasonable folks know that one does not blame christianity for the actions of those christians cited above, just as all reasonable folks understand that one does not villify all moslems forthe actions of the few extreme radicals among them. Reverend, I urge you to join with the reasonable folks. I believe that Christ would urge the same.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2386 comments)
on Thursday, September 14, 2006 at 7:14:49 AM
Fascism as practiced in Italy, under il Duche, & Germany, under Hitler, was a cult of personality 1st & foremost; as religous leaders & believers who were co-opted into supporting a Fascist government found the leader's will, not any religious beliefs, was supreme in the Fascist state. The fate of any religion or individual who opposed the will of the Fascist leader in an way was to be marginalised, expelled from the Fasciast movement, then exterminated.
Pseudo-intellectuals may choose to quibble about Fascism being imoral or amoral but it's certain that there was no place for religion or believers in religion in Fascist states. Any quasi-religious ceremonies or attempts to revive pseudo-pagan religions in Fascist Italy or Germany were cynical acts of pagentry. The Fascist leader was the de facto god & was deified by the media of the state.
It's probable that the neo-con movement in the USA with W as its front man & the psedo-Islamist movements who are the de-facto adversaries of W, et al will stop paying lip service to an religion if they continue to be an effective force in the affairs of their region & the world. W, the god, is no more absurd than Rome's Claudius, Nero, et al, the gods of the Roman Empire. Emir bin Laden could easily become the Madhi or a successor to the Prophet, Muhammed to pseudo-Islamists.
Religious opponents of W, et al & Emir bin Laden might resort to calling W the anti-Christ, Satan, etc & Emir bin Laden the great Satan, a false prophet, etc if both men remain forces in their regions & the world for a few more years.
The irony of a failed MBA opposing a civil engineer who abanoned engineering to study Islam & fight infidels is an insipid gruel, not the cement which holds empires together. It has the possibility of making the 21st century as absurd as the 20th century was. Different Century, Same Stuff.
by
larry278 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 47 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 1:00:14 PM
Fascism these days is the immoral coupling of rich corrupt corporations with rich corrupt politicians while manipulating a fuzzy headed incompetent bureaucrat and, at the same time, using the painted whore called Media to spread tell their unadulterated lies to Everyman who is too busy consuming everything in sight to take notice while these three use the newly refined weapon of corrupt religion to destroy all his rights and destroy his country right under his nose while at the same time oppressing, killing or imprisoning all those who might have come to Everyman's defense and told him the truth about the "Unholy Trio." This is the New World Order.
by
Devon Greene (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 5:42:29 PM
Fascism these days is the immoral coupling of rich corrupt corporations with rich corrupt politicians while manipulating a fuzzy headed incompetent bureaucrat and, at the same time, using the painted whore called Media to spread tell their unadulterated lies to Everyman who is too busy consuming everything in sight to take notice while these three use the newly refined weapon of corrupt religion to destroy all his rights and destroy his country right under his nose while at the same time oppressing, killing or imprisoning all those who might have come to Everyman's defense and told him the truth about the "Unholy Trio." This is the New World Order.
by
Devon Greene (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 5:44:04 PM
