- Capitalism and Alternatives -

What? Frenchy's Not a Fascist?

Posted by: Porgie Tirebiter on December 09, 1999 at 10:57:37:

This post deals with and issue in two parts: 1) Is Frenchy a fascist? and 2) Is this important?

In my opinion the answer to question 1 is No, and the answer to question 2 is Yes.

Is Frenchy a fascist? We can answer Yes, if we are to take the definition of fascist as ""politically disgusting" and "If I were ever in a room with him I'd spit in his face." But then the term fascist becomes a meaningless term of abuse, not too far above 'asshole' and 'douchebag.' If we want the term fascist to have meaning, then in my view Frenchy shouldn't be called one.

Fascism has several characteristics which distinguish it from the liberal democratic capitalism in which Frenchy is quite well situated. Fascism is:

1) Anti-capitalist, but also anti-communist (i.e. against unions, workers' power)

2) Characterized by a charismatic leader or person of worship (Hitler, Mussolini, Japan's Emperor Hirohito)

3) Animated by a reverence for a nation's past glory which it seeks to restore (Hitler and the Master Race, Mussolini and the Roman Empire)

4) Notoriously xenophobic

5) Hostile to the rights of the individual in favor of a shared destiny.

Now, Frenchy fits some of these quite well, but Frenchy is says he's French-Canadian American, which situates him in the culture of U.S. liberal capitalism. I'm guessing this just makes him a typical Yankee asshole, but not a fascist. While the American humor writer Mencken said that "If Fascism ever comes to the United States, it will be called Americanism," it is my view that the United States will probably never become a fascist nation--though the United States is in many ways already a police state.

I say the United States will probably never become fascist because to become such a nation would represent, for the American bourgeoisie, a political (but not social or economic) SACRIFICE. That is, a fascist regime would, by definition, strip away America's abstract liberties (and I insist that they are abstractions, for they immediately vanish, as anyone who has ever been in practical need of them can attest.) A fascist regime would have to strip away these liberties in fabor of a rhetoric which would go against the individualistic and ethos America has so carefully cultivated for itself and ingrained in its people.

Frenchy, being a product of this milieu, is probably equipped with an anti-fascist reflex. Indeed, if one looks at his postings, one can see how he is a striking example of the success of the propaganda system which wants its people to equate freedom with capitalism and democracy with electoral circuses put on every four years.

As I've mentioned before, Frenchy and his type just suck up to power. He would be a product of whatever system he found himself, and lacks the character to listen to any deeper voice within him. If he had lived in Nazi Germany, he would have been a Brownshirt; if he had been a Jew in a concentration camp, he would have been one of those barracks monitors; if he had been a Soviet citizen in the 1930's, he'd be and enthusiastic supporter of Stalin.

America gives guys like Frenchy a choice between two pro-business camps--the two fists of capitalism--and he chooses the one on the right. But this doesn't make him a fascist.

Frenchy is just a sideshow, sort of a freak. He's an idealogue whose antics are probably embarrassing to the people who are really running the show. He's the uncivilized little brother, not fascist, perhaps, but INCIPIENTLY so, and he's an embarrassment to civilized folk.

In my opinion, our struggle is not against a rising tide of fascism (i.e., in America the Religious Right) but against bourgeois liberals who sap our politcal energies under the guise of "centrists" and "moderates" only to create and environment and enact legislation which responds to corporate dictates. With their false promises and bromides, they brainwash many into thinking their on our side. The message that accompanies guys like Clinton, Bradley and even Jesse Jackson (whom I voted for once, a long time ago) is: "Hey, we're not raving lunatics like Frenchy or Rush Limbaugh! We're sane! We're pragmatic! We're on YOUR side!"

So, as most people on this site realize, it's not just idiots like Frenchy, but more the ones in the middle who are our problem. Frenchy is just a distraction. He's a pathetic creature, really, in need of attention from those in power. And what better way to demonstrate one's loyalty to the system than to pick fights with the stupid commies on THEIR OWN website?

I consider Frenchy a laughable creature, completely at the mercy of the social winds which blow him, so much so that he's all but lost touch with his human side. He's like a Sonny Bono with a mean streak, singing protest songs in the 60's, sitting as a conservative legislature in the 90's.

But, our real struggle is not with Frenchy, who (in my opinion) is not fascist. In the future, we may have to deal with Fascism, as history shows that when the Left gains power and influence, the bourgeosie actively fund fascist elements of society (Germany, Italy and Spain are all examples of this) . For now though, our real struggle is against the corporations and their waterboys in Washington, Berlin, London and Tokyo. Our struggle is against capitalism itself, which is not now and never has been fascist.

And I feel sorry for him

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup