Hi Tom,
I just want to repeat something I said earlier. Maybe you missed it, it is easy to do that on this prolific list. Fascism is a concept as well as a word with historical-polical meaning. You can take the overall intent and structure of fascism and abstract it from its historical context to come up with a concept of "fascism" which can then be used to describe other historical phenomena with the same overall structure and intent. This is done all of the time both in ordinary and theoretical discourse. I don't understand what the problem is unless someone simply is afraid that the word is too controversial. In that case we are arguing about the connotation rather than the applicability of the descriptor. There are a few ways to go with that. You can either change your word, as in communist who might call herself a socialist to distance herself from association with the CP and the USSR, or you can use the word so as to take it back, as t! he anarchists have begun to do with the term "libertarian" which has traditionally been a word used by anarchists until the right wing libertarians lifted in for their own purposes in the US. I have already argued against the first course of measure and for the second. We might want to qualify this unique-to-our-historical-moment brand of fascism with another descriptor, but we should recognize the difference between fascism the concept and fascism the historical phenomenon so that we don't keep calling a concept anachronistic, which it really can't be. That would be like saying every contemporary expose on virtue ethics is anachronistic since Aristotle wrote about virtue ethics 2500 years ago. Virtue ethics has an overall structure which can have many variants, not just the one Aristotle constructed. And though virtue ethics is an old concept popularized by Aristotle, it is not anachronistic to expound today upon the overall structure of the concept.!
I have not read the numerous comments in this thread so I apologize if I have duplicated someone else's point. I am reading them backwards to the last time I posted. The email is so busy I drown in it sometimes.
Sorry to split hairs, Tom, but it is important for us to be able to agree upon the language we will use to discuss this very heavy shxt. As far as qualifying the term for our historical moment, I don't think "Jim Crow Fascism" has staying power. How about "Corporate Totalitarianism," or "Corporate Fascism?"
Lisa S.
P.S. Courtesy of the American Heritage Dictionary, Third Edition:
fascism (noun) 1. Often Fascism. a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive dictatorial control.
fascist (noun) 1. Often Fascist. An advocate or adherent of fascism. 2. A reactionary or dictatorial person. [my italics].
fascist (adj) 1. Often Fascist. Of, advocating or practicing fascism. 2. Fascist. Of or relating to the regime of the Fascisti.
Fascisti (noun, plural) 1. The members of an Italian political organization that controlled Italy under the fascist dictatorship of Benito Mussolini from 1922 to 1943.
Tom's suggestion of the words "Jim Crow Fascism" are not offense to me, although I have an analysis of the entire period in question. This of course meant the political and economic content of the Civil War and its aftermath called Reconstruction and the counterrevolution.
American history is profoundly economic and all of our questions can be answered. Race theory is part of our heritage and will not go away because I think it wrong. Race theoy blinds us but not like it did in the past.
I like the term "Jim Crow Fascism" for the period involved. I read Tom's presentation of material concerning the 1903 gathering of the NAM. It is worth reading again to discern the differences in sentiment of sectors of the ruling class.
Hey . . .
"A political force, constructed and funded by finance capital, which overthrows a legal bourgeois democratic government and substitutes as a state form the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic elements of finance capital is called fascist. Such a political state we call fascism. "
This definition is not in the dictionary. The definitions sited above do not define fascism as a totality and my definition did not either. The difference is that I choice to speak to the term "Jim Crow Fascism."
You are in the right place at the right time. Actually I love splitting hairs.
Melvin P.
