What is fascism?
-
- Posts: 948
- Joined: February 16th, 2018, 11:28 am
Re: What is fascism?
it seems like people mean
trying to extremely limit the behavior of others without good cause and willing to use force - physical, legislative or other forces - to exert that unnecessary or evil control.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: What is fascism?
But as a way of defining a class of objects - of going from the specific to the general - it's not a bad start. It seems not unreasonable to define the class of objects known as "fascists" by pointing to proposed instances. The same as I would do if I had to define the term "chair" or "clock" to someone who has never seen one before.Burning ghost wrote:Saying who you wish to call a “fascist” doesn’t really help narrow down a definition.
Once we've pointed to a few fascists, chairs and clocks we can ponder what each of the proposed instances of those classes have in common with the other proposed instances of the same class.
-
- Posts: 436
- Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm
This is off topic: response to fooloso4
Fooloso4 wrote:
' This may get lost in all the arguing about overzealous moderation, but in the hope that there is still enough tolerance and flexibility to allow it to stand as it is, against the risk of it being shunted elsewhere because it will be seen as off topic rather than expanding on issues and assumptions that are germane to any philosophical discussion, I will post it. But true to the theme of what follows, I will not spell out the connections.'
-----
What is seen and deleted as 'Off Topic' is very much on my mind right now.
If a certain moderator has a narrow view of what ought to constitute the right content of a thread and deletes posts without any explanation, then this can create more problems than it tries to solve.
I also think that some posters are more likely to be scrutinised and censored than others.
For example, another moderator such as yourself will be allowed to go off topic whereas someone else is jumped on for personal reasons or 'previous'.
I have taken my views to the Feedback forum. And will now desist.
Thanks for following up on Hobbes quote. Most valuable.
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: What is fascism?
But this work has already been done to some degree here and there. Like Karp mentions above, people start to use the term out of context - I remember some Israeli youths called the Israeli police “Nazis.” If the term is being misused then the meaning becomes diluted.Steve3007 wrote: ↑October 22nd, 2018, 7:30 amBut as a way of defining a class of objects - of going from the specific to the general - it's not a bad start. It seems not unreasonable to define the class of objects known as "fascists" by pointing to proposed instances. The same as I would do if I had to define the term "chair" or "clock" to someone who has never seen one before.Burning ghost wrote:Saying who you wish to call a “fascist” doesn’t really help narrow down a definition.
Once we've pointed to a few fascists, chairs and clocks we can ponder what each of the proposed instances of those classes have in common with the other proposed instances of the same class.
We all know what a chair is and we are not often in a position where we cannot decide if some give object is a chair or not. When it comes to recognising “fascism” we really should start out by saying what defines fascism not who we wish to apply the label to - if we don’t then we don’t really understand what we are labelling someone (that in itself is very likely the beginnings of someone becoming a fascist.)
The obvious, yet seemingly not obvious meaning judging by what people are saying here, is being ignored in order to push a personal agenda.
The title of the OP is “What is fasicsm?” not “who.” Even if it was “who” then what good is it to label people as this or that if you’ve not made explicit what you actually mean.
What is obvious enough to me is that it is fueled, as a political movement, by claims of groups of people being dispossessed by other groups of people. It takes up this attitude as motivation to treat other humans as unhuman. Does this mean if I happen to refer to someone as a “monster” or “vermin” that I am a fascist? Not really. It only matters if hold an opinion of someone based purely on their arbitrary circumstances and judge them as “other” compared to me without bothering to even engage with them (due to rage, hate, and/or some other form of deflected self-loathing - due to position or unfortunate circumstances befallen onto me.
So yeah, label people as a fascist and pick out several of them. No matter what you still have to say what you mean. If I call a woman a “bitch” or a man a “bastard” they are both insults aimed to hurt not technical definitions of what a bitch or a bastard is. You can call me all sorts of names and I may not like it. When you start to associate what someone says and does with their political stance without bothering to pay attention to the nuances of the terms being used then I’m done talking because the conversation has reduced to beyond the childish taunts into the realms of propaganda.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Fooloso4 wrote:
One of the keys for doing so is an art of writing that was all but forgotten by Nietzsche’s time, that is, esotericism. By this he meant the art of saying something while seeming to say something else.
Interesting. No doubt this is a silly question but, based on that shorthand definition, why wouldn't the doublespeak of politicians and salespeople be considered to be esoteric?
Actually, it is a very good question. All have in common an art of persuasion. It is possible to read between the lines of a salesperson’s pitch, but the salesperson does not intend to convey a message that does not promote the product. The politician might - saying one thing to the general public while signalling to those in power that there will be a different agenda. Trump is interesting in this regard, because some of his followers take the position that his words should be ignored, focus on what he actually does. There are two main reasons for this, he is a habitual liar and has no filter between whatever comes to mind and what he says.
Plato wrote a trilogy of connected dialogues - Theaetetus, Sophist, and Statesman. All three deal with the identity of the philosopher. There is, however, no dialogue Philosopher. Some have concluded that it forms the third of the trilogy but is missing. Others, however, read between the lines. Two books that deal with this are Jacob Klein’s “Plato's trilogy: Theaetetus, the Sophist, and the Statesman” and Seth Benardete’s “The Being of the Beautiful”.
Rather than provide answers in order to understand the esoteric writings of the philosophers we must think. In being led to think rather than being led to accept we are led to see how the philosopher differs from the sophist and statesman, and thus, how one is led to lead themselves rather than follow another. And in this way philosophy as opposed to "a philosophy" is anti-fascist.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: What is fascism?
The word "fascism" is more loosely applied today, and is largely subjective; one person's order is another's fascism.
Human beings form hierarchic societies and that requires some humans to control others. Those who see the control as heavy handed or performed with prejudice will claim it is "fascism". Due to the stigma left by Hitler's rampage, the term is now used in an attempt to shame or expose others, and it tends to say more about the utterer than the uttered.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Thanks Fooloso. You are always generous with your knowledge.Fooloso4 wrote: ↑October 22nd, 2018, 10:56 amRather than provide answers in order to understand the esoteric writings of the philosophers we must think. In being led to think rather than being led to accept we are led to see how the philosopher differs from the sophist and statesman, and thus, how one is led to lead themselves rather than follow another. And in this way philosophy as opposed to "a philosophy" is anti-fascist.
So basically the difference is a matter of what the speaker hopes to achieve, intent. As with artists, thinkers are at the mercy of the audience's interpretation, so it's quite possible that a politician's manipulation may spur a person to unexpected productive thought (perhaps about the nature of politicians) and meanwhile many a student will take home a teacher's words rather than the intent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QereR0CViMY.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Yes. Plato’s philosopher, like the sophist and statesman, deceives and dissembles, but the philosopher does not do so to gain something from others, but rather to be free from their interference (the Republic ironically defines justice as minding your own business). His or her (women could be philosopher-kings) concern, however, was not entirely selfish. Plato presents a salutary public teaching that shaped the history of the west for two thousand years - Christianity, Platonism for the masses.So basically the difference is a matter of what the speaker hopes to achieve, intent.
The relationship between an artist or thinker and their interpretation is an interesting one. Interpretation takes on a life of its own.As with artists, thinkers are at the mercy of the audience's interpretation …
As was the case with Plato in response to Socrates execution.… so it's quite possible that a politician's manipulation may spur a person to unexpected productive thought.
Sometimes there are ongoing disputes as to what that intent is and how the words are used as evidence to support different claims of intent. I am reminded here of the students of Leo Strauss. As some here may know, some of them because politically active and leaders of the “neo-cons” but others remain relatively apolitical, preferring to discuss political philosophy, eschewing politics. I do not think he intended for his students to become vocal supporters of Trump, and yet they did and are convinced he would have approved. Others see him as a demagogue, just the kind of person one should have learned from a study of political philosophy to oppose. As with many influential teachers, their students sooner or later develop factions. Questions of intent never to be resolved.… and meanwhile many a student will take home a teacher's words rather than the intent
And unless someone think we have gone too far off topic, the problem of demagogues points us back, as does the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QereR0CViMY.
Yes, repeat after me: “We are all individuals”. This is actually a wonderful example - telling people that they are individuals who think for themselves (exoteric message). The one guy who denies he is an individual shows that he alone (perhaps, but maybe he is just an idiot, see the Greek origin of the term which is retained in the term 'idiosyncratic') is what all, including him, are the opposite of what they claim to be (the not so hidden esoteric meaning).
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: What is fascism?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that philosophers threw the people red herrings to get them to leave them some space?Fooloso4 wrote: ↑October 22nd, 2018, 6:05 pm Greta:
Yes. Plato’s philosopher, like the sophist and statesman, deceives and dissembles, but the philosopher does not do so to gain something from others, but rather to be free from their interference (the Republic ironically defines justice as minding your own business). His or her (women could be philosopher-kings) concern, however, was not entirely selfish. Plato presents a salutary public teaching that shaped the history of the west for two thousand years - Christianity, Platonism for the masses.So basically the difference is a matter of what the speaker hopes to achieve, intent.
It's all learning for me here. I don't know political philosophy. I did some reading:Fooloso4 wrote:Sometimes there are ongoing disputes as to what that intent is and how the words are used as evidence to support different claims of intent. I am reminded here of the students of Leo Strauss. As some here may know, some of them because politically active and leaders of the “neo-cons” but others remain relatively apolitical, preferring to discuss political philosophy, eschewing politics. I do not think he intended for his students to become vocal supporters of Trump, and yet they did and are convinced he would have approved. Others see him as a demagogue, just the kind of person one should have learned from a study of political philosophy to oppose. As with many influential teachers, their students sooner or later develop factions. Questions of intent never to be resolved.… and meanwhile many a student will take home a teacher's words rather than the intent
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... icy-214424The West Coast belief that the American founding represented the Aristotelian ideal could be construed as a manifest belief in American Greatness, and therefore it might make some sense that the Trump slogan “Make America Great Again” might have resonance among West Coasters (though it must be noted that it was an East Coaster, Bill Kristol, who championed an “American Greatness Conservatism” in the 1990s). Another possible reason for the support of Trump may be that the West Coasters are more focused on the threat posed by the administrative state to self-governance, and yet are also more inclined to believe in the power of strong individual leaders in great moments of crisis to shape political life.
East Coast Straussians tend to be more protective of the institutional architecture of the Constitution, not only as a manifestation of the general principles of the Declaration of Independence but also as hard-headed constraints on political power and will, because they are more skeptical of the potential of individual statesmen and of the mass public to transform politics. For them, Trump is a manifestation of the democratic despotism Alexis de Tocqueville warned against.
I have felt for a while that America's issue is governance of a large population. Theirs is the only large population that's neither authoritarian (China, Russia) nor chaotic (India, Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Mexico). It appears there are natural limits involved. For me, it's reminiscent of how chimps tend not to aggregate in groups larger than one hundred. Most groups split when the populations exceed that number to some extent. The greater intensity of competition in large populations means more potential for division between interest groups, and these schisms are inevitably stoked by bad actors with agendas.
So a tendency towards division in large societies can be taken as a given. One solution, as spectacularly demonstrated in Iraq, is the "strongman", the authoritarian who forces citizens to work together by suppressing dissidents. As soon as Saddam was toppled Iraq's factions were again free to resume what must have been continually-simmering and suppressed conflicts. Ditto Libya. Enter the trolley problem: is it better to harm a select few to create a more cohesive society for the many?
US can reasonably be expected to lean towards either authoritarianism or divided chaos as the pressures of population build ever greater schisms in its society. There will no doubt be some elements of fascism, but I like to think the lessons of WWII will temper potential society-wide mania and extremism at least to some extent.
-
- Posts: 436
- Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm
Re: What is fascism?
I sometimes fear that
people think that fascism arrives in fancy dress
worn by grotesques and monsters
as played out in endless re-runs of the Nazis.
Fascism arrives as your friend.
It will restore your honour,
make you feel proud,
protect your house,
give you a job,
clean up the neighbourhood,
remind you of how great you once were,
clear out the venal and the corrupt,
remove anything you feel is unlike you...
It doesn't walk in saying,
"Our programme means militias, mass imprisonments, transportations, war and persecution."
Posted by MichaelRosen at 07:56
http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/20 ... -fear.html
-
- Posts: 436
- Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm
Re: What is fascism?
We need rigour when situations are unfolding before our very eyes. And yet do not see.
The lessons of history and philosophy are not boring; they are about the human condition and what we are capable of. Still.
------
Extracts from: https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opini ... 14174.html
'' The question that we still grapple with:
Why do warning signs that are so easily identified in hindsight elide recognition contemporaneously?
Historians have been divided over whether to describe Trumpism as fascism. As Gavriel Rosenfeld, professor of history at Fairfield University, told me by phone a few weeks ago, this is a good thing: a rigour in the face of an unfolding situation. It's also true that overuse of the term "fascism" undermines its effect. In understanding "never again" as a statement of fact, rather than as an instruction to remain on guard, it is possible we may have grown complacent and perhaps opened the door to misuse: these days, everyone is a fascist.
Rosenfeld, whose book Hi Hitler! explores the trivialisation of Nazism, says the internet has played a role in this sort of neutering effect by turning Hitler into a meme, a punchline, or a series of cats-that-look-like-Hitler pics.
Leaders with tendencies that can credibly be defined as fascistic may now, for some people at least, elude such description because the term has been defanged.
So we are caught somewhere between not wanting to belittle history, nor make inaccurate comparisons - but also not wanting to underplay current realities either. We struggle to find a useful space between normalisation and alarmism.
But maybe we should just accept that even an accurate invocation of fascism will sound exaggerated, in a world that doesn't believe it possible for there to be a modern-day, Western application.
Reaching for the term "fascist" isn't about applying the ultimate insult, so much as preparing for the right response. It would mean not taking a government or leadership as normal.
And, in broader terms this would be the anti-fascist argument: that fascism, once identified as a political and social force, requires an altogether different form of opposition.
If that's the case, judicious caution in using the term may be keeping us locked into ineffective responses. We remain in the realm of rational debate - itself essential, itself in need of robust defence in a post-truth world.
And yet, hate and bigotry can overwhelm societies when the reasonable are tied up in knots worrying about displaying intolerance or denying extremist haters a megaphone.
Time and focus is exhausted in trying to debate a tide of violent racial superiority, while it is only ever amplified and legitimised by such encounters.
It has potential to overwhelm, this urge to habituate, to be measured in the face of current reality. But sometimes this reasonable, polite response won't cut it.
Sometimes the most effective tool we have is a forceful humanity - one that draws a line, resists the tide to normalise and ensures that far-right hatreds do not find any space to breathe in our societies.''
- Rachel Shabi.
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: What is fascism?
I do agree with this:
Probably one of the most obtuse sentences I’ve read today (and I’ve been reading some of my own notes today!)The question that we still grapple with:
Why do warning signs that are so easily identified in hindsight elide recognition contemporaneously?
Given that she’s won an “Orwell Award” one would’ve assumed she’d bothered to read his essay “Politics and the English Language,” but I guess she hasn’t, or has simply elided, the recourse he espoused contextually within his segmented critique of barbarity of the English language within journalism and among academia.
Seriously, there are faults in teh article, double standards espoused, and a generalized stating of the obvious dressed up to look like it has intellectual weight. No mention of the “far left” contingent? A vague insinuation that religious affiliation is akin to ethnicity (or what is colloquially known as “race”) likely due to the problem of demarcating between Judaism and being a Jewish.
There was a mention of anti-fascists but little depth given from that position - remember both the anti-fascists and the fascists wanted to “cleanse” the Jewish community.
I wouldn’t waste time trying to make out Trump to be this or that and to try and pin labels on him. Let him speak and simply print what he says. If people cannot see a problem then they are the problem. No need to conflate terms and throw fuel on the fire - Hitchens was a great one for open debate with far right types and far left types. He gave them a platform to speak openly about their views.
AN EXERCISE -
What is “fascism”? Simply ask yourself what you would do if you were a fascist, how you’d get into a position of authority, and then see first hand what “fascism” means to you.
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Do you even know the content of the posts that your dogs deleted?Greta wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 6:27 pmStuff happens, Hobbesy. I lost good posts too in the early days and whined at the mods just like you. It took years for the penny to drop.ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 4:30 pm
You asked me for a thoughtful post of fascism. I made that post. It was deleted.So **** off.
I would not confuse fascism with mods strictly enforcing forum rules. I'm not so strict these days personally. Over time you find that if there are no especially bad actors then threads sometimes will flare up but people generally seem work things out one way or another without mods being involved. It's a balancing act. You don't want people coming to the forum and finding a load of flame wars when they are hoping for material of possible interest.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Que sera sera.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: What is fascism?
Because philosophy, the unflinching inquiry into the truth of all things, was a threat to the city, the city became a threat to philosophy. The poets who were wise provided the founding mythologies by which the people lived. The philosopher, the lover of wisdom, undermined the authority of the poets and their mythologies, but had nothing to replace those mythologies with that would guide the people. Plato created a philosophical mythology, a mythology of truth and beauty and justice and above all the good. The philosopher took on the appearance of being wise - those who have escaped the cave and know things as they are in themselves. Rather than being a threat to the city they became its saviors. The only problem is that the philosopher did not actually possess this knowledge. Under it all, Plato and Aristotle remained, like Socrates, skeptics, knowing that they did not know.I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that philosophers threw the people red herrings to get them to leave them some space?
It is, however, not just a matter of the philosophers protecting themselves from the city. They protect the city from the truth, the truth that no one is wise, no one knows the truth regarding what is just and noble/beautiful and good. The danger is that if no one knows then all claims of what today are called ‘values’ may be given equal weight and or no claims given any weight.
The Socratic solution employed by both Plato and Aristotle was reasoned inquiry and deliberation. An attempt to determine what is best without knowledge of what is best. It is fundamentally tenuous and ungrounded, but reason itself became the ground. A ground that went unquestioned until recent times when philosophers overtly questioned the whole picture of grounds.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023