Fascism and populism

By Michael Bergmann

The fascists of the 20th century did not conceal the fact that, in order to reach their goal, they needed to destroy liberal democracy. They only had to hide the goal itself: providing their most loyal followers with some grand opportunity for heroic plunder.

Neo-fascists will, as the disasters their predecessors have caused are simply unforgettable, have to agitate somewhat more carefully.

From its very beginning however, fascism was post-democratic in the sense that its authoritarian agenda was pursued in the name of "the people." The obvious irony of its one-party system was justified claiming that pluralism had weakened "the nation." How a single ruling "party" could "impartially" represent the general will of the people is fascism's great mystery.

As there was no internet in the early 20th century, the "leader" spoke to his people "directly" at mass rallies. Collective acclamations could be propagated as the "unanimous voice of the people." Their will seemed to coincide with the will of the leader ― which would then be enforced as the "nation's law and order" against any opponent. Formal elections could so be declared as obsolete.

To openly seek to overthrow the democratic constitutional order in the name of the people is, for the historical reasons, a non-starter in the 21st century. Because populist movements do not equally dramatize their moment of "taking power," we cannot distinguish their methods before and after takeover as clearly as in the case of the fascists of the past.

So how can we recognize fascist tendencies in contemporary populism?

One characteristic is the populist bashing of "all established parties," except their own, as "arrogant and detached from the people." Only one step further goes then the denunciation of all political opponents as "unpatriotic," if not as "traitors" or "enemy agents."

When, on a pseudo-intellectual level, populist irrationalism is justified as a kind of "post-enlightenment postmodernism," we must keep in mind that the alternative to reason in the political sphere is nothing but violence in its various forms.

Most importantly, we have to recognize which "popular" political proposals are driven by honest intentions ― and which are designed for strategic confusion. Some right-wing populists in my home country, to give one example, care about the rights of the Palestinians as little as about those of many others. They just try to pour some new dose of anti-Semitism into German politics, then lash out at whatever reaction, claiming they "meant nothing but to criticize Israel." "Let's see what happens" is the kindler's logic.

Fake concern is one strategy, among others, to undermine a civilized democratic culture. We have to sense the dishonesty and irresponsibility ― but be aware that the purposes are provocation, confrontation and escalation.

The author (bergmann2473@yahoo.de) is a teacher in Seoul.