CreÂative ComÂmons image by Rob Bogaerts, via the NationÂal Archives in HolÂland
One of the key quesÂtions facÂing both jourÂnalÂists and loyÂal oppoÂsiÂtions these days is how do we stay honÂest as euphemisms and trivÂiÂalÂizaÂtions take over the disÂcourse? Can we use words like “fasÂcism,” for examÂple, with fideliÂty to the meanÂing of that word in world hisÂtoÂry? The term, after all, devolved decades after World War II into the trite expresÂsion fasÂcist pig, writes UmberÂto Eco in his 1995 essay “Ur-FasÂcism,” “used by AmerÂiÂcan radÂiÂcals thirÂty years latÂer to refer to a cop who did not approve of their smokÂing habits.” In the forÂties, on the othÂer hand, the fight against fasÂcism was a “moral duty for every good AmerÂiÂcan.” (And every good EngÂlishÂman and French parÂtiÂsan, he might have added.)
Eco grew up under Mussolini’s fasÂcist regime, which “was cerÂtainÂly a dicÂtaÂtorÂship, but it was not totalÂly totalÂiÂtarÂiÂan, not because of its mildÂness but rather because of the philoÂsophÂiÂcal weakÂness of its ideÂolÂoÂgy. ConÂtrary to comÂmon opinÂion, fasÂcism in Italy had no speÂcial phiÂlosÂoÂphy.” It did, howÂevÂer, have style, “a way of dressing—far more influÂenÂtial, with its black shirts, than Armani, BenetÂton, or VerÂsace would ever be.” The dark humor of the comÂment indiÂcates a critÂiÂcal conÂsenÂsus about fasÂcism. As a form of extreme nationÂalÂism, it ultiÂmateÂly takes on the conÂtours of whatÂevÂer nationÂal culÂture proÂduces it.
It may seem to tax one word to make it account for so many difÂferÂent culÂturÂal manÂiÂfesÂtaÂtions of authorÂiÂtarÂiÂanÂism, across Europe and even South AmerÂiÂca. Italy may have been “the first right-wing dicÂtaÂtorÂship that took over a EuroÂpean counÂtry,” and got to name the politÂiÂcal sysÂtem. But Eco is perÂplexed “why the word fasÂcism became a synecÂdoche, that is, a word that could be used for difÂferÂent totalÂiÂtarÂiÂan moveÂments.” For one thing, he writes, fasÂcism was “a fuzzy totalÂiÂtarÂiÂanÂism, a colÂlage of difÂferÂent philoÂsophÂiÂcal and politÂiÂcal ideas, a beeÂhive of conÂtraÂdicÂtions.”
While Eco is firm in claimÂing “There was only one Nazism,” he says, “the fasÂcist game can be played in many forms, and the name of the game does not change.” Eco reduces the qualÂiÂties of what he calls “Ur-FasÂcism, or EterÂnal FasÂcism” down to 14 “typÂiÂcal” feaÂtures. “These feaÂtures,” writes the novÂelÂist and semiÂotiÂcian, “canÂnot be orgaÂnized into a sysÂtem; many of them conÂtraÂdict each othÂer, and are also typÂiÂcal of othÂer kinds of despoÂtism or fanatiÂcism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fasÂcism to coagÂuÂlate around it.”
- The cult of traÂdiÂtion. “One has only to look at the sylÂlabus of every fasÂcist moveÂment to find the major traÂdiÂtionÂalÂist thinkers. The Nazi gnoÂsis was nourÂished by traÂdiÂtionÂalÂist, synÂcretisÂtic, occult eleÂments.”
- The rejecÂtion of modÂernism. “The EnlightÂenÂment, the Age of ReaÂson, is seen as the beginÂning of modÂern depravÂiÂty. In this sense Ur-FasÂcism can be defined as irraÂtionalÂism.”
- The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beauÂtiÂful in itself, it must be takÂen before, or withÂout, any preÂviÂous reflecÂtion. ThinkÂing is a form of emasÂcuÂlaÂtion.”
- DisÂagreeÂment is treaÂson. “The critÂiÂcal spirÂit makes disÂtincÂtions, and to disÂtinÂguish is a sign of modÂernism. In modÂern culÂture the sciÂenÂtifÂic comÂmuÂniÂty praisÂes disÂagreeÂment as a way to improve knowlÂedge.”
- Fear of difÂferÂence. “The first appeal of a fasÂcist or preÂmaÂtureÂly fasÂcist moveÂment is an appeal against the intrudÂers. Thus Ur-FasÂcism is racist by defÂiÂnÂiÂtion.”
- Appeal to social frusÂtraÂtion. “One of the most typÂiÂcal feaÂtures of the hisÂtorÂiÂcal fasÂcism was the appeal to a frusÂtratÂed midÂdle class, a class sufÂferÂing from an ecoÂnomÂic criÂsis or feelÂings of politÂiÂcal humilÂiÂaÂtion, and frightÂened by the presÂsure of lowÂer social groups.”
- The obsesÂsion with a plot. “Thus at the root of the Ur-FasÂcist psyÂcholÂoÂgy there is the obsesÂsion with a plot, posÂsiÂbly an interÂnaÂtionÂal one. The folÂlowÂers must feel besieged.”
- The eneÂmy is both strong and weak. “By a conÂtinÂuÂous shiftÂing of rhetorÂiÂcal focus, the eneÂmies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”
- PaciÂfism is trafÂfickÂing with the eneÂmy. “For Ur-FasÂcism there is no strugÂgle for life but, rather, life is lived for strugÂgle.”
- ConÂtempt for the weak. “ElitÂism is a typÂiÂcal aspect of any reacÂtionary ideÂolÂoÂgy.”
- EveryÂbody is eduÂcatÂed to become a hero. “In Ur-FasÂcist ideÂolÂoÂgy, heroÂism is the norm. This cult of heroÂism is strictÂly linked with the cult of death.”
- MachisÂmo and weaponÂry. “MachisÂmo implies both disÂdain for women and intolÂerÂance and conÂdemÂnaÂtion of nonÂstanÂdard sexÂuÂal habits, from chastiÂty to homoÂsexÂuÂalÂiÂty.”
- SelecÂtive popÂulism. “There is in our future a TV or InterÂnet popÂulism, in which the emoÂtionÂal response of a selectÂed group of citÂiÂzens can be preÂsentÂed and acceptÂed as the Voice of the PeoÂple.”
- Ur-FasÂcism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or FasÂcist schoolÂbooks made use of an impovÂerÂished vocabÂuÂlary, and an eleÂmenÂtary synÂtax, in order to limÂit the instruÂments for comÂplex and critÂiÂcal reaÂsonÂing.”
One detail of Eco’s essay that often goes unreÂmarked is his charÂacÂterÂiÂzaÂtion of the ItalÂian oppoÂsiÂtion moveÂmenÂt’s unlikeÂly coaliÂtions. The ResisÂtance includÂed ComÂmuÂnists who “exploitÂed the ResisÂtance as if it were their perÂsonÂal propÂerÂty,” and leadÂers like Eco’s childÂhood hero Franchi, “so strongÂly anti-ComÂmuÂnist that after the war he joined very right-wing groups.” This itself may be a speÂcifÂic feaÂture of an ItalÂian resisÂtance, one not observÂable across the numÂber of nations that have resistÂed totalÂiÂtarÂiÂan govÂernÂments. As for the seemÂing total lack of comÂmon interÂest between these parÂties, Eco simÂply says, “Who cares?… LibÂerÂaÂtion was a comÂmon deed for peoÂple of difÂferÂent colÂors.”
Read Eco’s essay at The New York Review of Books. There he elabÂoÂrates on each eleÂment of fasÂcism at greater length. And supÂport NYRB by becomÂing a subÂscriber.
Note: This post origÂiÂnalÂly appeared on our site in 2014.
RelatÂed ConÂtent:
George Orwell Reviews Mein Kampf: “He EnvisÂages a HorÂriÂble BrainÂless Empire” (1940)