Fascism is a frequent topic of conversation; unfortunately, it is more often than not used simply as an epithet for any political system which people dislike. This is a problem because despite some difficulties in definition, fascism is a real political philosophy which poses real threats. Using the term as an epithet masks the real problems and real fascism.

In The Anatomy of Fascism, Robert O. Paxton provides his short definition of fascism:

Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.

This is the best description and explanation of fascism that I have seen in a space this small. There's obviously a lot more that can be said about fascism, both as a general political orientation and as it has appeared historically, but if you want a basic grasp of just what fascism is all about, the above will serve very nicely.

Now, taking the above into account, what can we conclude about how the term "fascism" tends to be used? There are many far-right writers in America who do fit the above description - or at least enough of it to qualify as proto-fascists in their thinking. I've written about two, Hans Zeiger and Adam Yoshida, several times.

The above description of fascism would not allow us to describe Islamic militants as being very fascist in their orientation, however. Many Muslim extremists do focus on community decline and humiliation, but they lack the nationalism, the desire to abandon democratic liberties, collaboration with traditional elites, the development of mass-based parties, etc. Muslim extremism is bad, but calling it a form of fascism in order to express that simply doesn't work.

Paxton also provides some common characteristics which appear in fascist movements:

• a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions;
• the primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether individual or universal, and the subordination of the individual to it;
• the belief that one's group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external;
• dread of the group's decline under the corrosive effects of individualistic liberalism, class conflict, and alien influences;
• the need for closer integration of a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary;
• the need for authority by natural chiefs (always male), culminating in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the group's historical destiny;
• the superiority of the leader's instincts over abstract and universal reason;
• the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group's success;
• the right of the chosen people to dominate others without restraint from any kind of human or divine law, right being decided by the sole criterion of the group's prowess within a Darwinian struggle.

In Germany, fascism was oriented towards mythical notions of the Volk. In Italy, it was oriented towards the glorious Roman past. In America... well, if fascism were to develop in America it would likely have a Christian character to it. Christianity would provide the central motivating force and would offer explanations about decline, purity, and cleansing that could create a mass movement just large and powerful enough to perhaps be able to aquire power. White supremacy couldn't do it — though they have been trying. No, it would be some sort of Protestant Christianity — and the sort promoted by people like Hans Zeiger.

Many of the above characteristics would not apply to Islamic extremism — Islamists, for example, exhibit little or not interest in "natural chiefs," a leader's instincts, or a "chosen people." Christian extremists in America, however, do often exhibit such characteristics. To take the last one, for example, we find many Christian extremists arguing that America is chosen by God to bring Christianity and liberty to the world; we don't see radical Muslims arguing that Afghanistan is chosen by God to bring Islam to the world.

 

Read More Book Notes from the Book Reviews on this site.