It Can Happen Here

 “How Fascism Works – the Politics of Us and Them,” by Jason Stanley, 2018

This topic has been beaten to death on this blog, but every book, even the weakest, has some valuable points, and this does too.  Stanley is a philosophy professor at Yale, so the book is imbued with the kind of Democratic Party liberalism you’d expect written under the reign of a hard reactionary like Donald Trump. These are his points, perhaps for your next argument with a libertarian, ‘left’ or fascist clown.  Of course as he makes clear, the real argument is about power and emotions, not truth, facts or logic.

Stanley’s sub-title of ‘us and them’ reflects anxiety about the ‘center not holding,’ which implicitly rejects class struggle.  His focus is on ethnic, gender, national and religious ‘us versus them’ identity issues instead.  He claims his book is about fascist politics, not a fascist state. For the most part he omits the economic and class roots of fascism, actual social conditions, war or the huge initial role of thug violence, so this is only a partial analysis of ‘how fascism works.’ His main problem is disentangling standard conservative ideas from fascist ideas, as there is continuity.  What does he think is the moment of ideological quantity into quality then, of conservative to fascist?  After all this guy is a philosophy prof.

The Issues

Stanley addresses what he calls ‘fascist’ ideas:  Myths of the past; conspiracy theories and anti-intellectualism; nationalism and racism; sexism and sexual panics; hierarchy and strong leaders; law & order fears; rurality and anti-statism, anti-unionism.  If none of these look specifically ‘fascist’ alone, join the club, as they are standard conservative tropes. Stanley uses examples world-wide – Myanmar and the treatment of the Rohingya; India and their treatment of Muslims; Turkey and the Armenians; Israel and Palestinians; the U.S. and African-Americans; Nazi Germany and the Jews; Trump and Muslims and Mexicans.  He uses many quotes from Hitler, Mussolini and Orban to make his points. 

His definition of fascism:  “I have chosen the label ‘fascism’ for ultra-nationalism of some variety (ethnic, religious, cultural) with the nation represented in the person of an authoritarian leader…”  Notice that fascism is now defined as ultra-nationalism.  Even liberals play with words.

Hannah Arendt finally nails the ‘quantity into quality’ issue, as Stanley never quotes from Marxist sources.  It is when standard conservative ideas are amplified and become more openly vicious and right-wing (i.e. quantity increasing) - then become overall state policy (i.e. quality reached).  From ideas to full-fledged, consistent state practice. As she puts it:  “…fascist unreality is a promissory note on the way to a future reality.” He doesn’t look at the fascist state and compare it to partial conservative state policies, thus missing the concept of complete domination in a fascist state.  A Marxist might add that successful fascism is based on full support from all factions of the bourgeoisie, in conditions where the ‘left’ needs to be crushed, especially in a time of economic danger.  A conjuncture so to speak.  That is how fascism actually ‘works.’

Certainly we are in the phase of ‘quantity increasing.’  His phrase is “normalization of the previously unthinkable.”  This condition is reflected in certain governments that are fully authoritarian, like Hungary or Russia, yet have a voting fig-leaf so as to claim bourgeois ‘democracy.’  As an aside, he talks about colonialism but misses the relation of war to many of these concepts.  He mostly ignores Libertarian ideas about ‘the state’ shared by fascists because the fascists want it to be about the ‘nation.’

Stanley does mention standard Left understandings of fascism:  “We increasingly see connections between powerful business interests and the institutions of state terror.” Groups have been “empowered by the Administration that resemble fascist paramilitary organizations.”  “Behind this transnational ultranationalist movement are the forces of capital.” He’s completely aware that a ‘democratic society’ and dictatorial corporations are a contradiction; that legal equality and economic inequality are another contradiction. Yet the rest of the book is a look at ideas.  He defends ‘liberal democracy’ without any recognition of its actual democratic limitations.  He does know that it is a raft that fascists use to take power, after which they discard it. The fascists consider ‘liberal democracy’ a weakness. 

The List

To Stanley the first sign of fascist thinking is the adoption of fake myths about the past. In the U.S. context it’s wanting to bring back a sanitized version of 1776, the Founders, the frontier, guns, European settlers, dead Indians, women as mothers, the nuclear family, farmers, Confederates – and maybe even slavery!   It’s the originalist myth of someone’s Manifest Destiny.  The realities of the U.S. past, like native genocide, African slavery, labor exploitation and invasive wars have to be covered up, so you invent a past.  Mussolini said he created a myth for Italians to live by, not a reality.  Indian Hinduvata ‘indigenous’ origins and Germany’s medieval past were also celebrated, so this is not an isolated phenomenon.

Another is false propaganda to muddy the waters about everything.  This is where many conspiracy theories play a role. They are not intended to be true, they are intended to be fear-noise with which to block an opponent.  It’s the ideological version of trolling and is defended by free speech absolutism. They are examples of pretending to know something.  Lying, outrageous claims and nonsense become standard.  Stanley cites the birther allegation against Obama; the Pizzagate QAnon absurdity; Greg Abbot’s claim that Muslims were introducing Sharia Law into Texas or the exclusive targeting of Jewish billionaire George Soros.  The forged Protocols of Zion were introduced after the 1905 Russian revolution so there is a pattern here. Attacking corruption while being extremely corrupt is also standard.  The capitalist concept of the ‘marketplace of ideas’ is based on a “utopian conception of consumers” – as if they will all see through bullshit.  They don’t. 

Another is twisting language into a topsy-turvy muck, in the Orwellian sense. As a consequence being a bigot, sexist or asshole in a “political culture that seems dominated by real and imagined hypocrisy” seems like heroic truth-telling!  The follow-up is attacking education, knowledge, science and expertise and then attempting to purge universities of leftish professors and programs.  

Another is the familiar love of hierarchy and ‘a strong leader.’ This is part of the logic of Social Darwinism.  Stanley believes in the “human tendency to organize society hierarchically.”  So the Right takes advantage of this supposed automatic hierarchy as a ‘natural law of nature.’  This flows into the role of women, which in conservative ideology is only being a mother and homemaker.  It is their ‘biological destiny.’  Women who get out of place like feminists or working women threaten male hierarchy and also limit themselves. Equality, whether legal or economic, becomes the enemy, as it allows the ‘weak, lazy, unnatural or unfit’ to share with their betters. If the underclass gets treated better, this means the over-class is being victimized! In the U.S. men are oppressed by women!  White are irritated!  Christians are persecuted by atheists! Stanley advocates everyone ‘check their privilege’ - even if poor whites are living in the same run-down trailer park as African Americans and Latinos.  What was that about class unity? Stanley actually believes that ‘working-class whites” are the main base for Trump, buying the propaganda.

Stanley goes after law and order politics, starting with Nixon, which led to the drug war and the present racist incarceration state.  Stanley thinks “Norms of law and order in a liberal democratic state are fundamentally fair.” These kind of generic statements miss any factual content – they are a corresponding liberal myth.  The Right feels blacks, Latinos, immigrants, Muslims and others are, under the surface, criminals.  Liberals are 'communists' and are now also criminals.  He notes that incarceration actually increases crime, as our prisons are not centers of rehabilitation but of thug life.  In this context he never mentions poverty. 

Rape of white women becomes the ‘ur’ crime.  In that context, sexual anxiety about non-whites is rampant.  Rape allegations have motivated lynchings, pogroms, acts of war, immigration detention camps and harsh laws.  This moral panic has now extended beyond gays and lesbians, the right of abortion and to people who call themselves transgender. “Polluting” the gene pool through rape is part of this for racists. The odd part here is that the police ignore most rapes, rape kits are not processed and rapists are rarely convicted.  Many claims of rape are not presented to ‘law enforcement’ because of this situation.  Most conservatives actually don’t believe rape allegations, or blame the female victim, so another contradiction for reactionaries.  They think there are ‘good’ and bad rapes.

The love of rural areas is counter-posed to the cesspools that cities supposedly are.  Cosmopolitan, diverse, educated, cultured - the false idea of an elite - and full of crime, dependent, sexually deviant, lazy and arrogant – that is the city to the conservative imagination.  Hitler grew up in a small town in Germany and hated Vienna. This outlook maps the political rural / urban divide in many countries. Reactionaries believe that the rural areas ‘support’ the cities when, except for food, it is the exact reverse.  Poverty in rural areas is increasing and obvious.  Rural areas and exurbs are where small businessman and large farmers rule, who are the typical conservative base - unless it is a company town.  This is the disappearing economic location of right-wing voters. 

Lastly is a hostile attitude towards labor unions, which usually protect and improve the conditions of the working-class. Conservatives think unions defend lazy, drunk workers, exploit them with dues and ruin capitalism. Being ‘lazy’ is the key insult.  Of course nearly all these people have never been in a factory, union or part of a large workforce, so the myth suffices. It is a profitable myth after all. 

The book is a very common and incomplete argument regarding the nature of fascism, but from a liberal anti-fascist whose own grandmother worked underground against the Nazis in Berlin before escaping Germany in 1939. 

Prior blog reviews on this subject, us blog search box, upper left, to investigate our 16 year archive, using these terms:  “Anti-fascist series,” “Trump,” “rape,” “libertarian,” “unions,” “rural,” “incarceration state,” “conspiracy theories,”     

And I bought it at May Day Books!

Red Frog

November 1, 2023