[Marxism] Re: The Anatomy of Fascism
edgeorge at usuarios.retecal.es
Tue May 4 05:56:29 MDT 2004
Snip: 'Baathist regimes also spring to mind, but so does Hindu
nationalism and Peronist Argentina, among others.'
It is necessary to nail this one. My original point was that according
to the definition of fascism offered in the article, it was curious that
Franco's Spain could not be included as fascist since the definition was
a good description (but not analysis) of how it functioned. But this is
not to say that I endorse the definition. In fact, I think that abstract
definitions of concrete political and social phenomena ('fascism',
'stalinism', 'centrism', and the like) are inherently problematic
because they tend to abstract the object of the definition out of its
context, thus 'deconctretising' it (making, in the course of this, a
definition of little real use).
The specific difficulty that has now arisen as a consequence of this
ahistoric and deconcretised way of looking at things is the abstract
view of 'nationalism' on which it is based. For the nationalism of
Perón, for example, and the nationalism of Franco, are not the same.
Argentina was, and is, in the imperialist system, an oppressed country.
Spain, wasn't, and isn't. The distinction between the nationalism of an
oppressed nation and the nationalism of an oppressor nation is so
fundamental that it is embarrassing to have to point it out.
More information about the Marxism