Are Neo-Cons just Neo-Fascist?
Are Neo-Cons just Neo-Fascist?
Wolfowitz in sheep’s clothing.
If we look at the definition of Fascism we can see that it is one of the most misused words in the centaury. Fascism is a type of dictatorship but it is not the only kind nor is it the appropriate to use with every tyrant on the planet. In fact fascism is an ideology that has specific parameters that define what it is and what it is not. Even if we accept that all Fascists are Tyrants it does not follow that all Tyrants are Fascists. So Fascism is a particular type of ideology that has a definition that does not include certain kinds of dictator. Macbeth is given the title of Tyrant in the play to describe his position as absolute ruler not to describe his behaviour. Stalin was a dictator and a tyrant but it would be extremely wrong to call him a Fascist. Moa was butcher, murder and absolute power but he was not a fascist. Even royal families would have to be called fascist if the definition was all embracing for any unelected ruler. Calling Communism Red Fascism may make great headlines but completely distorts the meaning. Also the term Islamic-Fascism is a meaningless political invention. They may be theocracies, dictatorships and even monarchies but to label them as fascist states is dead wrong.
So what is fascism and why make it different from other forms of dictatorships. Was it crueller or do we like the sound of the word because it makes us sound more educated? Calling something fascism is the same as calling them a Nazi in some minds and as such the mud does stick. We have a pre-made vision of jackboots, ethnic cleansing and gas chambers. The misuse of the term may be clumsy or it may be intentional, so we must be careful to be accurate.
Fascism is an ideology that believes in the supremacy of the nation; has an extreme rightwing view of many social issues. The concept of individualism is an anathema to the fascist, so too is liberalism. It concerns itself with fixing the decline of society and attaches to popularised movements and problems that plague society. A fascist is a person that is also trying to save society from descending into anarchy and uses a higher goal than ‘self interest’ to mobilize the masses. They worship of Nationalism and promote the notion that their own nation can do no wrong.
“Fascism, which was not afraid to call itself reactionary… does not hesitate to call itself illiberal and anti-liberal.”
The symptoms of fascism are the notions that war is a unifying force and that a common enemy is important to social stability. Internal enemies that betray society and external enemies that do are seeking to destroy society. Economic theories sit very well in a capitalist society that allows monopolies and social Darwinism. Trade Unions and civil rights are sneered at because they are seen as part of the problem. Individuals in elevated positions are rewarded but the masses are offered a chance to sacrifice themselves to a higher goal. Unlike Communism that tries to suppress religion Fascism would rather usurp religion to serve its nationalistic myths. Yet they are not above punishing any one who refuses to conform. We have a carrot and stick of fascism: conform and live free of freedom; resist and be crushed in its wake. The prospect of pre-emption was not only known to fascism but embraced as a necessary unifying goal. Hitler and Mussolini did not go to war just to own more land, but to focus the masses upon a common external enemy.
An alliance which is not for the purpose of waging war has no meaning and no value … — Mein Kampf,
Can these factors be attributed to the Neocons like Paul Wolfowitz, Cheney and Rumsfeld? The influence of this inner circle has been the driving force a George Bush’s presidency. Paul Wolfowitz is reputed to be the architect of the concept of pre-emption and Rumsfeld the architect of the war in Iraq. Yet every nation that has pre-emptively attacked another is not fascist. However Nationalism and finding of a common enemy in Islam would fit well within a fascist society. For a person wanting to take a nation down the path of fascism, 9-11 would have been a dream come true. It galvanized a nation and made it willing to do anything for its own protection. Legal rights for those accused of terrorism are sneered at and such people are moved to Cuba in the hope of being beyond the law. The sense of the good verses evil is reinforced through speeches that repeat terms with little meaning: Jihhadists and Islamo-fascists. The myth that America is the only nation to stand up against these evils is similar to the myths that were espoused by Hitler in his speeches about being provoked into a war he did not want.
This assessment of what the Neo-conservatives digs deep and some people would be horrified at the prospect of questioning the motives of leaders. However, rather than look at these people as an exclusive executive that is elevated above others, we must asses them as our equals doing a job. If that job has an agenda that includes perpetuating the myth of nationalism and perpetual warfare then we have good reason to believe that they are Fascists. No amount of saying the word ‘Democracy’ can change that fact, just as a rose by any other name…
The intelligence for the war in Iraq was completely wrong and we still have no proper explanation as to why. The dream of a thankful Iraq is going up in smoke as foreign companies control 60% of Iraq oil wealth. Could the WMD have been an excuse dreamed up as part of some black propaganda to justify invasion? Could the noise about Iran be the same thing? Is peace seen as an obstacle to uniting a nation to higher cause of nationalism?
“If you want to see the future Winston, imagine this. Imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.” George Orwell, 1984.
George W Bush is finished there still may be a backlash against everything that he stood for, whether it is good or bad. Unlike Reagan who can point to diplomacy as his redeeming feature, there will be little for other nations to regard in Bush. However if another plane crashes into another building we may an enraged and radicalised America to deal with. The push to Fascism under such conditions may be less than most people realise. It would not be a fascism that Mussolini or Hitler personified and would never use the term. Instead it would be a home grow patriotic version that includes fundamentalist Christian’s that supports the ‘Clash of Civilisations Objective’ and rejects those that oppose it. It would be trying to save the Nation and make it proud in the face of a hostile world, as it wraps itself in an American flag. Perpetual war is a tool of the fascist and war liberates only inhumanity to humanity. It is not about protecting people from anarchy but the reimposition of slavery.
To accuse anyone of being a fascist is a serious charge but in view of recent history it may be warranted.
What do others think?