[Marxism] Re: The Anatomy of Fascism
DLVinvest at cs.com
DLVinvest at cs.com
Wed May 5 13:09:59 MDT 2004
In a message dated 5/5/04 9:09:44 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
edgeorge at usuarios.retecal.es writes:
> Insofar as I follow your argument, I don't agree. You raise, for
> example, the idea of 'corporatist regimes', without qualifications; this
> is the problem.
The term "corporatist" was raised by you (or someone you quoted) in trying to
sort out the differences between "nationalist" movements and among variants
of regimes too loosely described as "fascist". I only repeated the terms with
reference to Argentina, Spain and Italy ironically to suggest precisely the
point that the mechanical application of labels is often an evasion of analysis
and argument. It's a polemical technique that dictates a pre-determined
political course according to the syllogistic formula you recount. Perhaps had I put
the labels between commas my point would have been clearer: a compilation of
the specific attributes of a political movement or regime -- say the movement
led by or embodied in Peron in the 40s, with all its contradictory elements --
and a comparison of similarties and differences (vis a vis Italian "fascism"
under Mussolini or Franco's Spain or even Hitler and the Nazis) -- is
necessary but not sufficient, and no subsitute for an analysis of its class
composition and content. And we also agree that the superficial similarities that
allowed Arendt to label very different societies with the shared epithet
"totalitarian" masks essential differences. Unfortunately, you turned this into a
polemical cocked hat with your own labelling and formula at the end, roughly:
Argentine nationalism = progressive=means for developing revolutionary
class-conscious movement.... rather than the formula you impute (incorrectly) to me:
Argentine nationalism = fascism, etc.
But I think we agree that there is no substitute for "concrete analysis of
concrete conditions" in order to develop a political strategy, anywhere anytime.
And we agree that that's what was lacking on the Argentine left (and
elsewhere), as was dramatically illustrated when Peron returned, and the right-wing
Peronists attacked the left at the airport, triggering a conflict within
"Peronism" and between political formations claiming as well as rejecting that label.
Instead, the debate on the left, broadly speaking, reduced to simplistic and
mechanical application of formulae and polemics derived from the 30s in
Europe, none of which was sufficient to prevent a defeat.
I will consult Proyect's work, thanks.
Douglas L. Vaughan, Jr.
for Print, Film & Electronic Media
3140 W. 32nd Ave.
Denver CO 80211
More information about the Marxism