Pages

Tuesday, 25 August 2020

Deniable Fascism



It is surely curious that much of the modern world is teaching itself to deny almost any aspect of reality. Originally built on pragmatic assessments of what works and what doesn’t, what has worked before and what has not, we seem intent on denying even our own history, achievements, arts, sciences and engineering capabilities.

One consequence of denying our own history is that the Chinese model of forcing its population to trade economic growth and consumer goodies for personal freedom is becoming a political model to be admired. Admired covertly perhaps, but nonetheless admired and seen to be worth emulating while denying that we are emulating it.

This much has been obvious for some time, but a fascist regime that is admired? They always were until they fell over. We know that free enterprise delivers the goods and communism delivers absolute political control so with hindsight it seems almost inevitable that we end up with a mix. Goodies in return for souls. Old Nick would have been pleased with that one.

It leads us into a kind of deniable fascism where the totalitarian aspect is far easier to deny than the old fashioned militaristic version because consumer goodies and intrusive welfare sweeten the pill. The goodies/welfare pill is offered as a compelling reason not to notice a wholly controlled lifestyle slipped into the deal. Numerous voters seem willing to swallow that without reading the ingredients and without noticing that it will certainly rot their democratic teeth. False ones are freely available though – all part of the service.

Deniable fascism has also been made much easier by discarding a few superficial trappings of old style fascism epitomised by Mussolini, while retaining his totalitarian enthusiasm. Fewer flags, no ranting leader in uniform, more inconspicuous security and a more restrained elite. Understated luxury, quiet privilege and discreet international socialising rather than gaudy palaces, acres of gold leaf and thuggish armed guards.

There are numerous familiar clues to the rise of deniable fascism, the latest being the coronavirus debacle. To a good approximation the coronavirus epidemic in the UK subsided as an epidemic round about the middle of June. That is not to claim that cases and deaths disappeared, merely that normal life could have resumed – not that it should ever have been suspended.

However it is obvious enough that the coronavirus epidemic was always going to be used as a lever to take the developed world further down the path of deniable fascism. Even a mild pandemic is grist to this particular mill. Moves such as enforced lockdown, social distancing and incessant propaganda were a suspicious over-reaction – almost a mass training session for something else.

Continued restrictions and propaganda long after the epidemic disappeared reinforce the obvious - the pandemic has been used as an opportunity. With even the most bleary hindsight that much is just too obvious.

Deniable fascism suits political parties of the traditional left, centre and to an increasing extent those on the traditional right. Green parties have been there since the beginning. It also suits the establishment and civil service. They are all attracted to deniable fascism because it offers numerous opportunities to expand remits, climb the greasy pole without talent and generally be seen doing something. Not only that, but a principal downside of deniable fascism is loss of voter freedom, an abstract loss which provides alluring opportunities for elites and can be denied anyway – that’s the point.

A second downside of deniable fascism is the shallowness it induces but with unlimited entertainment on tap, that too is deniable. In any event, entertainment appears to be an accepted substitute for political freedom and political maturity.

5 comments:

Sam Vega said...

They are certainly increasing their control, and you are right of course to say that the covid nonsense is a wonderful opportunity for another turn of the ratchet. But I'm wondering what the payoff is for them. Do they actually need any more control? How do they benefit? Are they worried that we will turn nasty once we realise what the larger plans for us are?

Fascism normally has a great sense of style and spectacle. Think Hugo Boss and big rallies. Do you think someone needs to have a word with Boris?

wiggiatlarge said...

It is interesting to see places one would not associate with this form of control for controls sake emerge,NZ with it's 'rock star' female Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who has never worked outside of politics and even on a gap year or two came here and worked with Tony Blair, came to power not by winning but by a coalition that promoted her, evidently charmed the voters...
https://nationbuilder.com/jacinda_ardern yet looks like a cross between Rory Stewart and AOC, has failed on nearly all her objectives but has screwed down the freedoms of the populace under the guise of terrorism and the virus.
Victoria in Aus has the lunatic Dan Andrews locking down the state with draconian laws for a further twelve months, with the state suffering just 19 deaths.
Who would have believed lunatics like this would get a toe hold in these countries.

Although I see Boris is about once again going to do a u turn on masks in schools, he really is a gutless waste of space, so we get the control through a third party not the government.
Though as Sam has said what really is in it for them other than their ideology?

A K Haart said...

Sam - I think the payoff is security, people in the public sector making business for themselves and creating a sense that those who use their services are more supplicants than service users. Boris and co appear to know this and be comfortable with the direction it is taking us, but maybe we'll know more about that when the coronavirus nonsense has dissipated.

Wiggia - I haven't paid much attention to NZ, but no doubt it justifies its approach by the very low death rate. I've not yet seen that explained in a satisfactory way.

Blissex said...

«the Chinese model of forcing its population to trade economic growth and consumer goodies for personal freedom is becoming a political model to be admired.»

That was actually the south korean, taiwanese (and to a lesser extent singaporean and indonesian and malay) model of authoritarian development (and it was the japanese one in earlier times), and the mainland chinese elites have often explicitly stated that they were inspired by the "asian tiger" model. Where are the complaints about that model when the corrupt dictators of south Korea and Taiwan (etc.) implemented it in their countries? №owhere, just endless admiration for how efficient was authoritarianism in developing a capitalist economy.

It is also the model currently used by the Communist Party of Vietnam, yet I have yet to see widespread attacks on that. Instead the Communist Party of Vietnam is a valued partner of the USA, as a replacement of China for offshoring or an anti-chinese ally, even if they are trying to dominate the South China Sea even more than China.

What is tiring about the b0ll0cks about China is the smell of silly hypocrisy; every intelligent observer understands that the USA elites now see China as a rival and are trying to push it down with however silly excuses, it is just entirely legitimate geopolitics.

A K Haart said...

Blissex - I'm not sure what your point is in relation to the post, which doesn't mention the USA.