Fascism ~~ Anaxarchos

Fascism ~~ Written by Anaxarchos (Marxist, labor organizer, writer, researcher) 

Fascism is a real ideology and an all too real political movement. It was born fairly recently, in the right-wing literature of now faded pre-Fascist Portuguese, Italian and Spanish writers toward the end of the 19th century. Their common threads were both a lament for the failed Imperial ambitions of their respective states - losers in the competition for Empire waged against far stronger nations - and a program to focus the power of the "nation" to renew that competition on a more even footing. 

Sitting behind this theory is the ever-present fear that failure to renew that competition will inevitably result in the decomposition of the current society, internally through class struggle, and externally through an ever less favorable balance of forces which will "enslave" the nation. Thus the common form of the initial political program of Fascism is to sound the alarm and arouse the nation - Arise Spain! ("Arriba Espagna!"), etc. 

Often, this is practically reinforced by the identification of internal enemies whose isolation presents a convenient rallying cry (Jews, Reds, Moskals). 

Underpinning the whole is the Fascist Theory of the State, borrowed from the bourgeois theories of the state but significantly elaborated. According to this theory, the State exists above class society as does a "national interest". The realization of that interest requires the mobilization of the entire society and its corollary, the suppression of the "petty squabbles" between classes, the elimination of the decrepit institutions which undermine the unity of the Nation (such as political parties, law, elections, etc.) and whatever decadent forms may weigh on that unity (in its populist form, this often includes a criticism of the bourgeoisie but from a national standpoint). 

Whatever its local variations, the Fascist program always ends in the militarization of society. This however is a two-edged sword. While mobilization focuses national resources, it also freezes them and starts a stopwatch on the resolution of the national issues which brought Fascism to power. Almost always, this means war - the resolution of the class contradictions of the Nation at the expense of the classes of surrounding Nations. 

In the 1930s, the Comintern described the whole as, "Fascism, Militarism and War". The slogan sounds vague but instead it is a very precise definition of the Nazi Trinity which is inevitably woven together. 

The Comintern also added one other criteria required for Fascist regimes. 

The appeal of the Fascists for certain segments of the society - the petite bourgeoisie, endangered shop keepers, expropriated smallholders, petty officials, the lumpenproletariat, demobilized soldiers etc. is obvious, even if it requires an abnormal degree of desperation. Stronger or weaker concentrations of these form the foot soldiers of Fascism in every country. 

But, none of these strata "owns" the State. To take state power requires the support and active participation of a significant part of the most reactionary section of finance capital. Without this, the Fascist State is impossible (and this also renders moot any populist slogans which the Fascists may entertain). 

The question then is, why would the capitalists entertain the inefficiency, the riskiness, the ticking time bomb, and the reduction of personal prerogatives accompanying their association with the Fascists? The fact is that in normal conditions, the capitalists wouldn't. They need no partners to run the State. What is implied here is an abnormal desperation among the capitalists who have already exhausted all other means to resolve their competitive battles in the ordinary way. 

Finally, there is an international aspect to all this. Historically, since finance capital is international, the creation of Fascist regimes as clients of external capitalists has always been a feature of Fascism. Thus, Franco's Spain became a client of NATO after WW2, Metaxas' Greece was a British client and several, mostly Latin American Fascist regimes were clients of the US. 

Thus we get to my favorite quote of the Indian Congress Party that the political policy of the Imperialists was "Democracy at home; Fascism abroad". It's a great quote, but it isn't quite true. The decaying element of Fascism is not eliminated by the existence of foreign patrons, the transformation of local capitalists into compradors actually undermines the Fascist state and creates a potential opposition and, in the end, a new contradiction is introduced between the Ultra-nationalist program and the reality of the client state. Thus, even here, a certain degree of desperation and a plan for quick resolution are preconditions. 

It is a mistake to see liberalism and Fascism as alternate "policies" for the bourgeoisie (and this is also central to the "radical's" narrative). 

Militarism is a policy. War is a policy. Fascism ain't a policy. It is an alliance between the most reactionary portion of Capital and the rabid storm troopers of the Right. As such it is a means to an end - a political coalition - which only exists after all other means are exhausted. It requires the suspension of the political institutions of the bourgeois state with no obvious path by which they are recreated. The national bourgeoisie bets the whole bundle on lucky-seven and rolls... 

Obviously, the agreement of a significant portion of the bourgeoisie is required in the end.