Anarcho-Fascism?
If you read any libertoid weblogs, sooner or later you'll run into references to the totally ficticious political philosophy called "Transnational Progressivism", sometimes abbreviated to "Tranzi". Sometimes I wonder if the right wing of the blogosphere believes in an equally ficticious ideology I like to call "Anarcho-Fascism". While I recognise that Libertarianism and Fascism are totally opposite ideologies, at least in theory, when you boil both down to their basest instincts, they have quite a lot in common: worship of brute power, contempt for the poor and/or weak, fetishisation of violence, and a belief that some sections of society have so little value their lives are expendable.
Every so often, somebody reads Robert Heinlein's ugly "Starship Troopers" one time too many, and vomits up an anarcho-fascist manfesto. Read the whole thing if you've got the stomach for it, but these quotes give you the flavour.
However, while education was generally a for-profit business (some institutions, mostly religious, political, or military in character were charities) no student was denied an education based on their parent�s inability to pay. However, the names of any parent forced to rely upon the public treasury to school their children were published in newspapers and online.Naturally, many of those known to be living off of the taxpayers were prone to be challenged in duels. Dueling, a practice almost forgotten, was reintroduced in the third decade of the 21st Century, initially in inner-cities.
If you didn't think that was fascist enough, then:
One could be challenged to a duel for any reason- and could refuse a challenge. However, a general prejudice had developed that any man who refused a duel was a probable homosexual and, therefore, refusals were generally rare and those who refused often fled. As a result people in the 22nd Century had generally learned not to insult hot-headed individuals
One hopes that America doesn't harbour that many people that hold such beliefs. In the nightmare scenario when such people gain control of the USA, we'd better hope that those Transnational Progressives of France have enough nuclear warheads to take them out in a surprise first strike.
(Link from Atrios)
Posted by TimHall at December 31, 2003 02:44 PM | TrackBackanarcho-fascism is the way of the future. it is the only way for humanity to assure themselves of the freedom they deserve, while protecting all of the citizenry, fauna, flora and mother earth.
Posted by: julie on February 25, 2004 05:01 AManarcho-fascism is the future and the future is here. we will all still have our freedom, but we will also be safe as will mother earth.
Posted by: julie on February 25, 2004 05:03 AMIt's also worth noting that a popular Libertarian slogan - "free men are not equal, equal men are not free" - has been adopted by the neo-Nazis of the National Alliance.
Posted by: james on June 25, 2004 02:00 PMTim Hall had better go and find out what a "straw man" argument is before he flaps his gums in public about what libertarianism is and isn't.
Until then, I suggest he shuts the fuck up.
Posted by: ArthurSock on August 5, 2004 01:14 PMThank you for succinctly proving my point.
Have a nice day, twit...
Posted by: Tim Hall on August 5, 2004 01:31 PMAnarcho-fascism?
Mmmm, fascism was born from an amalgamation of disgruntled marxists, syndicalists and overt patriots angry and dissapointed with their nations outcome in the Great War.
Syndicalism is the ideal that connects fascism with anarchism, two of the warring factions in the Spanish Civil War were both Syndicalist yet fought against each other, (Anarcho-Syndicalists and National Syndicalists)...
National Anarchism is interesting tho...
Posted by: NatRev on October 17, 2004 11:22 AMFascism originated from Marxists and syndicalists? What kind of revised history are you reading? Fascism is dinstinctly right wing and was born from private capitalists who desired greater control over the economy and society as well. Fascism was decidedly anti-socialist, anti-communist and anti-labor. It was created out of desperation to keep the interests of the ruling capitalist elites in place admist the growing working class discontent and labor movements.
Even American capitalists such as Henry Ford applauded Fascism and even gave it private funding. A Repubican sentaor called it "the wave of the future" and supported encouraging it. It had many of the structures of modern day Neoliberal capitalism with strict moral conservatism and ultranationalism.
But anyway, to the OP, I think "anarco"-fascism is an oxymoron just like "anarcho"-capitalism. A system is not anarchy when it seeks to maintain structural hierarchy and inequality. Fascism relies on totaltarian private owners which cannot be maintained with the existence of a state.
You're all wrong. Fascism was not right wing nor was it any wing. Fascism and Anarchism are both from the same mind, they seek the same things: evolution and progress within preservation, only they seek them within different mediums, one via the State and the other within the State of Nature. Fascims was never truly political, it was more of a way of life, just as Anarchy is.
Posted by: piecraft on October 1, 2006 03:57 PM