The Fascist Voice
Fascism is first of all a nationalist movement, and therefore adopts a unique “profile,” so to speak, in each nation in which it takes root. It is therefore to be contrasted with Marxist/Communist ideology, which inherently always seeks to spread itself internationally, although from time to time it has opportunistically chosen to “take a break” from foreign export and to consolidate itself, temporarily, in “one nation” – as Stalin claimed he was doing in the USSR for most of WWII – later to “gobble-up” much of Eastern Europe at the first opportunity.
Fascism is falsely defined as “being on the right,” or as “capitalism with the gloves off.” It is a revolutionary and radical movement, which evolved in the minds of (initially) Leftist thinkers - as in the case of Mussolini himself, who started as a Socialist labor organizer and journalist, but who eventually parted ways with the Marxist Internationalist school over the patriotic question of whether Italy should remain neutral during WWI (among other differences of opinion). It is critical of capitalism’s valuing of people, resources, labor, production, etc. only as factors in formulae of Profit. Other Leftist strands of thought infuse Fascism’s DNA – such as national syndicalism, “producerism,” anarchism, Georges Sorel’s philosophy, and the like. Like the Constructivist aesthetic and literary movement of the early Soviet Union, Fascism aspired to create the “New Man” and a society to match.
Fascism, however, differs with Marxism’s first principle; that all human phenomena can be reduced to materialistic explanations. Fascism emphasizes the “spiritual” element of human existence, without necessarily identifying spirituality with religious doctrines. Rather, Fascism considers phenomena such as aspiration, inspiration, courage, will, perseverance, determination, heroism, honor, comradeship, loyalty, etc. as those factors which set the “human spirit” apart from mere materialistic, animal existence, and which make life meaningful.
Also, Fascism incorporates traditional, conservative, and “Rightist” elements, by emphasizing historical and cultural heroes, myths, forms, symbols, art, architecture, etc., motivating each people to express a unified sense of its continuity, identity and destiny. Fascism has therefore been variously described as “both Left and Right,” “neither Left nor Right,” and “beyond Left and Right.”
Fascism holds that a nation’s economic activity should reflect its spirituality no less than any other factor of the nation’s life. Profits, market concerns, interest rates, and private accumulation of wealth are disregarded; and the health, well being, and needs of the people, and the quality, greatness, and enhancement of the national life, are held to be of supreme importance. Industries vital to the national life, or of strategic importance, tend to be nationalized; otherwise, private ownership of the means of production is allowed, but usually with some State mediation of wages, benefits, and labor conditions (often referred to as “corporatism”), which is thought to be less disruptive to national production than collective bargaining and an assumed conflictive relationship between labor and management. Likewise, Fascist society is conceived as “organic,” with all citizens performing functions and contributing to the national “body,” rather than from the perspective of various “classes” in conflictive and/or exploitative relationships with one another, as conceived by both capitalism and Marxism.
Reference has been previously made to Fascism’s revolutionary and radical elements. It is also militant. It expects, from historical experience, to have to defend itself against existing, reactionary, vested interests, as well as Red resistance, to get its message directly to the masses during real-world, public events. Military discipline in the midst of hostile and violent environments, and a standardized uniform to encourage group cohesion and to assist in distinguishing comrades from enemies during chaotic fracas, have been found to be effective tools in the struggle to achieve victory.
How do I summarize all of America’s problems? My favorite word lately seems to have become “anomie,” a word coined by the French sociologist Emile Durkheim in the 1890s to describe the breakdown of social bonds between an individual and the community, resulting in fragmentation of social identity and rejection of self-regulatory values. He also described anomie as "derangement", and "an insatiable will,” and contrasted this condition with “organic solidarity,” in which anomie was thought by Durkheim to be impossible. In 1983, an American sociologist, Robert K. Merton, further defined anomie as the discontinuity between culture and structure - or the rejection of social goals and the institutionalized means of achieving them - which, he proposed, has the dysfunctional consequence of leading to deviance within society.
It is tempting to think that America’s decline is a relatively recent phenomenon – until one considers the following quotes about America (which he called the “Dollar Dynasty”) by Houston Stewart Chamberlain, back in the early 20th Century:
"From dollars only dollars can come, nothing else; spiritually America will live only so long as the stream of European spiritual power flows there, not a moment longer. That part of the world, it may be proven, creates sterility, it has as little of a future as it has a past".
[America] "is a hellish whirlpool, in which all the contradictions of the world, all the greed, envy and lust brew and simmer; a wild struggle of millions of ignorant egotists, men without ideas, ideals, or traditions, without shared values, without any capacity for sacrifice, an atomic chaos endowed with no true power of nature".
If Chamberlain’s observations of his time were accurate to any degree, perhaps the explanation lies in the fact that the U.S. was founded at the height of Enlightenment thought, from a group of “atomic” colonies (to use Chamberlain’s language) with no shared raison d’être. Many of the colonies were literally settled and run by private business firms, commanded by “egotists,” and with the expectation of producing profit for their investors. Others were settlements of religious refugees; still others were literal penal colonies. The early U.S. was not a united people, with a common culture and history, arising organically from a historical homeland. Chamberlain was correct when he said that the only “spirit” dwelling in America has been the “stream of European spiritual power,” which has been the closest thing America has had to a common culture. Yet, the foundation documents of the Republic, and the mainstream American political or public discourse, as never explicitly or formally affirmed this at any time in history. Oh, there have been preferential immigration quotas for Northern Europeans from time to time, short-lived movements to make English the official U.S. language (which have never resulted in legislation), and anomalous Eurocentric focus groups (usually pale shadows of nationalistic or racially conscious movements in Europe) – but no consistent assertion of European cultural dominance in the U.S. for any length of time. Instead, historically, there has been a bias towards fabricating a distinctive “American” cultural identity. One term which has kept popping-up has been “melting pot.” The current consensus has been to abandon this term, and to replace it with “salad bowl” – which is equally a failure. Hence the impossibility of nailing-down firm boundaries for the term “American culture.” Such a term produces only a vague reverie in the human mind, consisting of loosely-associated sensory data: a miasma of consumerist, advertisement jingles and commercial,brand-name logos; Hollywood images; clothing and musical styles correlated with historical eras; unthinking, parroted words such as “rights,” “freedom” and“liberty;” and dates, places and personages enshrined in history texts.
So, it can be argued that underlying the concrete problems facing our nation today(and they are manifold; to be further elucidated below), there is a spiritual crisis:the lack of a common culture and common identity for the American people – and that if that crisis is not resolved, our nation will not survive – no matter what materialistic solutions are successfully carried-out.
Turning now to the plight of the average American citizen: what we do seem to have in common, if we admit our deepest feelings to each other, is anxiety. Most of us feel that we have very little control to effect positive change in our lives,either personally or collectively. We also fear the future. We have grown cynical that those who “win” in the regularly-scheduled, mass-media-marketed,meaningless “rituals” we call “elections” have our best interests at heart. And, we feel that we have no power to restrain those interests which seem to always get their way in our national life.
We feel that we are powerless victims of the U.S.military/industrial/government/media complex, which in reality is daily committing crimes against humanity – against us. The below-listed complaints against our oppressors are paraphrased from the Declaration of Revolution (Seth Tyrssen, 2008, private communication), and are well-worth a review:
a. The cynical use of succeeding generations as cannon-fodder in wars that are never in the national interest, but serve only to enrich the manipulators who profit from such wars;
b. The betrayal of a natural, sustainable, and self-sufficient “economy” capable of meeting the needs of our people, by the perpetuation of the outmoded monetary market,subject to the fractional reserve system, in which money in fact equals debt, hence making all people the slaves of multinational bankers and speculators;
c. In addition to the above, deliberately allowing, permitting, and encouraging illegal immigration across national borders, solely to secure the lowest possible labor costs, and therefore the maximum profits, for multinational corporations;
d. The illegal surveillance of peaceful citizens for the purpose of mass control, and suppression of dissent against the monetary-market system, or any of its crimes;
e. In the U.S., the destruction of individual freedom via the so-called “Patriot Acts,” which do nothing to combat hostility from abroad, but do a great deal to curtail the rights of citizens here at home;
f. Involvement of the U.S. in foreign wars without writ or consent of Congress, as specified by the original Constitution, for the sole purpose of conquest and thievery of other nations’ natural resources, all under the pretense of staving off foreign hostiles;
g. Further encouraging exploitation by the approval and enforcement of “free” trade agreements, which allow Western finance to seek the cheapest labor expense, with no accountability or loyalty except to fast profits, at the expense of human and environmental well-being;
h. The deliberate fostering of hostility and perceived and real inequality between various self-interest and demographic groups, including races, ethnicities, religions, professions, geographic regions, levels of education, levels of income, and all other conceivable cliques, in order to keep opposition to tyranny divided and ineffective;
i. The deliberate destruction of environmental natural resources for the purpose of short-term profit for those in power - and the failure to develop, in renewable, nondestructive, and sustainable ways, certain of those natural resources – the result of which deliberately fosters a climate of scarcity;
j. Disproportionate taxation without popular representation, both overtly and covertly, to the point that, for example, in the U.S., the average worker must now work four months of the year just to pay his or her taxes;
k. Destruction of the organic family system, upon which all nature is based, by forcing an economic climate hostile to the survival of that system.
Indeed, the power elite of our current System is myopic, unimaginative, materialistic, and power-greedy. It will not give up its monopoly on power – caring not if the lives of every human being on Earth hung in the balance - unless forced to by the collapse of the System, and/or by mass revolt.
From the existing condition of our nation, blighted by chronically impoverished geographic locations in our land, and sectors of our economy; a decaying infrastructure; increasing rates of crime, physical and mental illness, and addictions; a regressing middle-class; declining hopes for educational and career options; national deficit spending to fund countless foreign wars – we wonder: what would result if our national assets of people and resources were freed from exclusively capitalist criteria for what constitutes an “economy” –married with the advances which unfettered science and technology make possible? We can imagine, in the near future, that if the means of production is operating at maximum load factor, and is as automated as possible; if the sources of energy are environmentally benign; if resources, population and energy are all sustainable; if abundance, not scarcity, is the premise of production and distribution; if “energy accounting” (a concept in which the physical Laws of Thermodynamics, not fictional specters from economics textbooks, are applied to production and consumption), not the Price System, is the method by which good sand services are distributed to citizens; and if top-down design of integrated transportation, utilities distribution, waste management, housing, distribution of goods and services, etc. is accomplished – a way of life can be provided for the citizens of this nation unimaginable by previous generations.
How, then, can such standard of living be achieved in our nation? Do we vote a“Technocratic Party” (to coin an arbitrary name – but not that arbitrary!) into local,state or federal governments, which would then introduce the appropriate legislation? No; the underlying assumption of many futurists is that the people will not change the current System unless they are desperate, unless it becomes all too obvious, through social and economic instability; that the old System does notwork anymore. The climate will then be ripe for those proposing new ideas to be given a fair hearing; the majority of people will be convinced by the rationality and logic of these ideas, and will want that system to be set up by consensus.
Even a cursory study of human history, unfortunately, reveals the improbability of such a peaceful scenario coming to pass. As Georges Sorel observed over a century ago, human beings are primarily motivated by irrational means, not primarily by rational, logical, “cost-benefit analyses.”
Three organizations - Technocracy, Inc. (“TI”), in the United States, and “The Zeitgeist Movement” (“TZM”) and “The Venus Project” worldwide - popularize the possibilities of the application of science and technology to human concern,unfettered by the capitalist, globalist, “monetary-market system.” They refer to such a post-capitalist economy as a “Resource-Based Economy” (“RBE”). The issue of a transitional phase, between the monetary-market system and the RBE, is acknowledged as probable by these organizations, but not comprehensively addressed,apparently because it is assumed that the exact nature of post-collapse conditions cannot be predicted.
Vladimir Lenin thought of the Communist State as a transitional condition between capitalism and Socialism; in the latter condition, the “State would fade away.” Similarly, TI and TZM assume that a State will not exist in a RBE; that the masses will voluntarily give authority to the technicians, workers, scientists, etc. who are already in charge of raw materials, production, energy, and distribution, thus taking authority away from the government, which is considered to be parasitical. In the case of TI, the masses would, in a referendum, approve the Technocratic design for a “functional society” on the North American continent, which would necessitate the proposed changes in population distribution, residential arrangements, transportation, hydrology, energy production and distribution, replacing the Price System with the Energy Accounting system for distribution of goods and services, etc. Again, it doesn’t seem possible that such massive projects of construction and demolition, changes in infrastructure, relocation of populations, creation of new systems of coordination, and so on could occur as the results of a mere referendum, especially if the power elite would be resistant to giving up the reins of control (as one would expect), and during a period of social turmoil, economic collapse, and environmental disaster.
TZM has produced three independent films. In the closing scenes of the third film, “Zeitgeist: Moving Forward,” the masses of every major city on the planet are depicted flooding the streets, protesting and shutting-down the global economy, and dumping trillions of notes of currency in front of the central banks. Simultaneously, in their penthouse conference rooms, the “suits” read the screaming headlines in newspapers strewn across their conference tables, take their last draw from Cuban cigars, and call-off the planned charge of the riot police, who throw down their helmets in surrender. Fast-forward to a classroom of the future, in which children pass around a 100 dollar bill laminated in plastic, exchanging puzzled looks; then the camera zooms out from their futuristic city (or “arcology,” or “technate” – whichever term you prefer). As the landscape recedes, hints of other cities, linked together by hyper sonic maglev railways, peek out occasionally from the largely virgin wilderness-state to which the planet has been returned. We end up in orbit, gazing upon a pollution-less, dazzlingly-blue-and-white Mother Earth. I must admit: it never fails to give me goose-bumps whenever I watch it. But I can’t help but wonder what it was like for the human race during that intermediary period.
It seems far more likely that a transitional authority would need to forcibly remove the parasites from power; take emergency measures to provide the life necessities of the people, and to protect them from lawlessness and disorder; take the initial steps to building the new “cities,” “archologies,” infrastructure, etc. (probably from “mining” obsolete civic designs) and meeting the needs of the population until they can be settled in same; and on and on. Then, there would have to be re-education of the masses, who, having spent their whole lives in a monetary-market system,will mostly be unable to imagine their lives without the old “values,” hence may very well be extremely anxious, depressed or angry about needed social change.
Just as Bolshevism, and (inspired by Sorel’s thought) syndicalism were considered as “heresies” to Marxist purists (but as “revisionist” by syndicalists and Bolsheviks), any deviation from the policies of public education and influence,distribution of media, and non-violent protest would be seen by members of TI,TVP, and TZM as heretical. It remains to be seen whether these organizations would seize a Fabian moment with more aggressive action. A Fascist movement,on the other hand, would not rule-out any freedom of action, and could well aim to be ubiquitous at every potential level of operations, from easy public access online,to underground cells.
Would it be possible, or desirable, for a Fascist movement to make common-cause with organizations which advocate similar goals, but with the agenda of influencing them to adopt the ideology of Fascism, rather than simply engaging in some “reformist” change? Fascism has never been content to reform the existing system, but see the only solution as replacing same. Fascism can never be a movement led by the whims of the masses, for the reasons enumerated below:
1. The masses are not driven to action by logic and reason, but rather by myth. For change to occur, the masses must be engaged by the passions (love and rage, hope and hate, compassion and angst, courage and fear, etc.) and by unconscious, a priori, archetypal/mythological motifs: e.g., belonging, ritual,justice, a higher calling, destiny, transformation, transcendence, sacrifice,salvation, etc.
2. The masses are resistant to systemic change; always and everywhere, all they want is reform, a “fair shake.” In addition, just like the professional politicians they elect, the average citizen has no special expertise in the technical knowledge relevant to the solutions of complex problems such as, for example,global climate change, the inefficiency of the Grid, pollution, transportation,energy production, production of durable goods, agriculture, bioethics,universal healthcare, etc.
3. Accordingly, the Leaders of the Fascist movement must set the agenda for the action, overt and covert, of the movement.
4. Social systems do not transform through gradual evolution; there is always a revolution. There is always resistance to the new order, both from the holders of power in the old order, and from the masses who cannot imagine a new system, thus fear its emergence. There is always conflict, either through words, ideas, and values; or, regrettably, through violent actions. Accordingly, a Fascist movement must subscribe to methods of public education, effective propaganda, flexible tactics – and in conditions of public/media hostility and Systemic repression, militant discipline, and acts of self-defense. This makes the power of myth even more necessary. People instinctively find conflict painful. They fear the possibility of disapproval by others, and they certainly shy away from the possibility of physical harm. The comrades of the Fascist movement must offer their own blood to be shed. They must be the bringers of the new myth to the masses. Only such a new myth can inspire beautiful acts of courage and self-sacrifice on the altar of hope, hope in a better future for humankind, all in the service of the following objectives: to get the Fascist revolutionary and radical message to the masses, and to recruit and organize same as a mass-movement; to overturn the old Order, and to impose the Will of the Fascist movement, enshrined in the State, onto the American nation; to create a unified Culture, a unified People, and a New Society, aspiring to higher heights of Civilization than ever known hitherto.
5. There will have to be a transitional period, and authority, before the New Society is realized. The Leaders of the American Fascist movement must pledge to never abandon the following agenda: to pounce on opportunities to wrest power from our oppressors, and to use that power to public ally agitate for the transition from liberal democracy and super capitalism, to an American techno-progressive, independent, sustainable, and impregnable culture of justice, fairness, organic solidarity, and abundance, for the benefit of all citizens of a self-sufficient American autarky.