Fascism (pronounced fash-iz-uhm)
(1) A system of government led by a dictator (nominally
with total power), forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting (to
various degrees) industry, commerce, the arts etc and emphasizing an aggressive
nationalism, often with an overtly racist emphasis (often used with an initial
capital letter).
(2) The philosophy, principles or methods of fascism.
(3) A political movement that employs the principles and
methods of fascism (based at least nominally on the model established in Italy in
1922 but the variations within implementations were numerous (often used with
an initial capital letter).
(4) A now generalized term used to describe certain regimes
based on their behavior rather that the labels formerly adopted.
(5) A general term of disparagement nominally based on
alleged political or other behavior but now very loosely applied.
(6) As a slang modifier, (grammar-fascism, eco-fascism,
fashion-fascism et al), a term of derision aimed at those thought excessively
focused on rules and regulations.
1915–1920: From the Italian fascismo, the construct being fasc(io) (bundle of sticks; political group)
+ -ismo (the noun-forming suffix (the
plural –ismi)) from the Latin -ismus.
The significance of the connection between what came to be known as
political fascism and fascio (bundle
of sticks) was the use of the symbol in ancient Rome where it was part of the
standard (flag) of the magistracy, symbolizing the authority of the state. Certain political organizations in modern Italy
thus came to be known as fasci and the fasces was adopted as the symbol of the
Italian Fascist party which took power in 1922). Fasces dates from 1590–1600 and was from the Latin
fasces (bundle of rods containing an
axe with the blade projecting), the plural of fascis (bundle or pack of wood), from the Proto-Italic faski- (bundle) possibly from the
primitive Indo-European bhasko- (band,
bundle), (the source also of the Middle Irish basc (neckband), the Welsh baich
(load, burden) and possibly the Old English bæst
(inner bark of the linden tree)). In
Ancient Rome, the bundle was carried by a functionary before a lictor (a senior Roman magistrate) as a
symbol of the judiciary’s power over life and limb (the sticks symbolized the
use of corporal punishment (by whipping or thrashing with sticks) while the axe-head
represented execution by beheading. From
this specific symbolism, in Latin the word came to be used figuratively of “high
office, supreme power”. Fasces is a noun
(usually used with a singular verb); the noun plural is fascis but fasces is used as both a singular & plural. For this reason, some in the field of
structural linguistics suggest fascis
remains Latin while fasces has been borrowed by English. Fascism is a noun, fascistic is an adjective
and fascist is a noun & adjective; the noun plural fascists is in much more
frequent use then fascisms.
Fascism as a label has been so over-used in casual
political discourse that it has become devalued. However forms like anti-fascism and pro-fascism
(with many variations) remain in use and the US left-wing collective “antifa” (pronounced
an-tee-fah) is a non-hyphenated
clipping of anti-fascism (or anti-fascist).
In some cases where actual fascism is in more recent living memory, the
word is more established in political “discussions” and in post-Franco Spain, some
such “debates” can probably be reduced to “You’re
a fascist!” vs “No, you’re a fascist!”. It can be quite entertaining.
Le Serment des Horaces (Oath of the Horatii (1784-1785)), oil on canvas by Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825), the Louvre, Paris. Le Serment des Horaces is a work often used as a case-study in the teaching of art theory because it so exemplifies the techniques of those painting in the Neoclassical style, both in the use of classical motifs and the way in which it represents the reaction against the Rococo. As a tool of academic study, it’s useful too because its large size (3298 mm × 4248 mm (129.8 in × 167.2 inches) permits close examination of detail.
The scene it depicts is based on the Roman legend of an
episode (dated usually to the reign of Tullus Hostilius (third King of Rome
between 672–642 BC) in the wars between the cities Rome and Alba Longa in which
the decision was taken to select three men from each to fight to the death, the
victorious survivor(s) determining which city would be declared the winner. The advantage was it was an alternative to
each sending their whole armies, thereby avoiding mass slaughter, the drawback
from a military point of view being the result would not necessarily reflect
how a full scale battle would have been resolved. The way the curious dual of the triumvirates unfolded
is of interest to students of battlefield tactics but the political implications
cast a longer shadow, providing some of the underpinnings of twentieth century
fascism will all of its bloody consequences. In Le Serment des Horaces, a father is shown offering three swords to
his sons who eagerly reach to take them, signifying their willingness to fight
and, if need be, die for their city. To
reinforce the message, at the conclusion of the battle, a sister of the sole
surviving victor (shown in the painting to the right), was killed by him for
the sin of mourning the death of one of the slain opponents to whom she’d been betrothed. Not only must one be loyal in body and ted to
the state but also in mind and soul and although pre-dating the French
Revolution (1789) by half a decade, such sentiments were common in many circles
at the time as the idea gaining currency that “being French” should mean being
loyal to the nation rather than the church or some sectional identification. It was this notion of the supremacy of the state
and the subordination of the individual to it that formed the basis of
twentieth century fascism.
It was fashionable for much of the late twentieth century
to dismiss the idea that Fascism had no intellectual or philosophical
underpinnings and it was a thing based wholly on personalities and spectacle
which captured the imagination of political scientists and others only because
it genuinely did seem new, something of a novelty in a field where everything else
had a literature dating back hundreds or thousands of years. However, even if there was nothing like the
wealth of work associated with doctrines like liberalism, conservatism or
Marxism and while attempts to construct something like a “theory of fascism”
have never been wholly convincing, much work has been done distilling the
experience of fascism to a list or recognizable characteristics. Independent commentator Laurence Britt
published a number of pieces exploring the nature of the experience of fascism
in power and provided one widely shared list of 14 fundamental characteristics:
Powerful and Continuing
Nationalism: Fascist regimes tend to
make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other
paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and
in public displays.
Disdain for the Recognition
of Human Rights: Because of fear of enemies
and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that
human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The
people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary
executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Identification of Enemies
& Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy
over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or
religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of the Military: Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the
military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic
agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Rampant Sexism: The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost
exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are
made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay
legislation and national policy.
Controlled Mass Media: Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the
government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by
government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives.
Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Obsession with National
Security: Fear is used as a
motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Government are
Intertwined: Governments in fascist
nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to
manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from
government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are
diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected: The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist
nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a
mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Labor Power is Suppressed: Because the organizing power of labor is the only real
threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely or severely
suppressed .
Disdain for Intellectuals
and the Arts: Fascist nations tend to
promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is
not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even
arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often
refuse to fund the arts.
Obsession with Crime and
Punishment: Under fascist regimes, the
police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often
willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name
of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited
power in fascist nations.
Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of
friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use
governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.
It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures
to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Fraudulent Elections: Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete
sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even
assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting
numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media.
Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control
elections.
It’s a helpful list and what many noted was the extend of
the overlap of those characteristics into countries in which the governments
are inclined to self identify as “liberal” or “democratic” but then the prime
imperative in politics is always regime survival so some duplication of tactics
should not be unexpected. That does
emphasize how the labels of political science are useful only to an
extent. World War II (1939-1945) has often
been called the great conflict between democracy and fascism but its bloodiest
theatre was Europe’s eastern front where in what Moscow styled the “Great
Patriotic War” (1941-1945), the battle was between communism and fascism yet
even if one finds Laurence Britt’s list of 14 in some way flawed, there’s an extraordinary
degree to which it can be mapped onto both comrade Stalin’s (1878-1953; Soviet
leader 1924-1953) “communist” system and Adolf Hitler’s (1889-1945; Führer
(leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945)
fascist regime. To synthesize the
factors for the list, assessed not on the constructs of Hitler and Benito
Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943)
but also those built by General "Muhammad" Suharto (or Soeharto)
(1921-2008; president of Indonesia 1967-1998), Generalissimo Francisco Franco
(1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975) and General Augusto Pinochet
(1915-2006; dictator of Chile 1973-1990).
Another obvious mapping now is probably the People’s
Republic of China (PRC), run since 1949 by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Early in September 2023, it was reported the
CCP intended to ban clothes which “hurt national feelings” and a draft law
outlawing speech and dressing “detrimental to the spirit of Chinese people” is
already under consideration. It has been
confirmed that under the proposed statute, people found guilty could be fined
or jailed and the move to crack down on subversive clothing is one of a number
of proposed changes to public security laws, the first substantive reform in
decades. No details have yet been
released beyond it being said those who wear or force others to wear clothing
and symbols which “undermine the spirit or hurt the feelings of the Chinese
nation” could be detained for up to 15 days and fined up to 5,000 yuan (US$680). In parallel, anyone who creates or
disseminate articles or speech with the same effect would face the same
punishment and in that aspect the CCP was more specific, indicating the proposed
laws will prohibit “insulting, slandering or otherwise infringing upon the names
of local heroes and martyrs” as well as vandalism of the memorials of their
lives.
On the vibrant, if by Western standards still respectful, Chinese social media, concerns were expressed that the notion of “detrimental to the spirit of Chinese people” was so vague and allow police officers and others a broad scope of personal interpretation about what the words meant that it would be impossible for people to be certain if they were complying. One commentator cited the example of a Chinese woman who had been detained (even before any such law was passed) at a music concert because she was wearing a kimono, a classic style of Japanese attire. Given that, it was asked whether wearing a suit & tie, a style which originated in the capitalist West would on the same basis be thought likely to “hurt national feelings”. Given it’s the apparently compulsory uniform for the upper echelons of the CCP (including the Central Committee), that seems unlikely but does indicate how difficult it would be to codify such a rule. One UK cartoonist once invented the imaginary offence “Being dressed in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace” to illustrate how UK police might take advantage of such a law. The woman in the kimono has actually been told exactly that she was dressed in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace, the authorities in Suzhou accusing her of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. Good, hard crackdowns of displays of individuality are a hallmark of fascist regimes and of late there’s been much attention paid to those wear rainbow colors and other symbols of “Western decadence and depravity” and in his decade at the top, Xi Jinping (b 1953; general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and paramount leader of the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 2013) has paid much attention to social engineering, re-defining what makes the model Chinese citizen and sartorial matters are the latest to be added to the “morality guidelines” the CCP issued in 2019 which included making compulsory “politeness”, “lowering one’s carbon footprint” and “having faith in Mr Xi and the CCP”.