LIBERAL FASCISM?

Posted at 7:54 a.m. ET:

For those of us brought up on George Orwell, the idea of liberal fascism isn't new.  But some still don't take it very seriously.

Jonah Goldberg, who wrote a book called "Liberal Fascism," takes it very seriously indeed.  Here, in London's Daily Mail, he explains his thesis.  This is a cautionary tale.  You don't have to buy it all to realize that Goldberg gives us some worrisome signposts to watch for. 

For more than 70 years the Left has hurled the F-word at anyone who gets in its way - Stalin invented this tactic to de-legitimise socialist opponents, including Leon Trotsky, assassinated for leading a 'fascist coup'.

As early as 1946, George Orwell wrote that: "The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable.'"

Today, a better working definition of a fascist might simply be a conservative who's winning an argument. But what if fascism means something more than 'bad'. What if fascism was not, and is not, a Right-wing phenomenon at all?

Hmm.  This idea is surfacing.  Some believe that Hitler could more properly be called a leftist, in that "Nazi" was short for national socialism.

For instance, what were the motivating passions of fascism? For starters, there was the cult of unity. The Nazis mastered the spectacle of the crowd to project an aura of unity, equality and common purpose...

...Such spectacles were made possible by the cult of personality, the faith that a great leader would rise from among 'us' and bring everyone together.

And...

According to The New York Times, Barack Obama's own recruiters were trained not to talk about issues, but to 'testify' about how they 'came to Obama' the way one might normally talk about coming to Jesus.

But isn't unity good?  Shouldn't we all be singing from the same hymnal?

It's worth noting that in the Anglo-American tradition, unity is not, in fact, the highest political value. That's why we have constitutions, separation of powers and independent courts. The hero in the Anglo-American tradition is not the mob, but the man who stands up to it.

In other words, the individual - that accursed fellow who thinks for himself.

It's ironic how the Left is always ready to brand a conservative who steps off the politically correct reservation as a fascist, but sees nothing wrong with embracing concepts that fit neatly within the fascist wheelhouse.

And...

Italian Fascism and German National Socialism were both sold as a Third Way that would bypass all hard choices. 'Neither Right nor Left!' was a central fascist slogan...

...Economic growth and environmental regulations, socialised medicine and medical innovation, none of these things is at odds with one another so long as the right enlightened geniuses are in power.

And...

Nonetheless, it's also important to remember that fascist isn't necessarily synonymous with 'evil'. Militarism during the first third of the 20th Century was seen as the best means of organising society. Since then, liberals have been searching for a moral equivalent of war..

...But today, the desire to find a moral equivalent of war that will bind the individual to the State manifests itself in unlikely places. Consider the ever-increasing emphasis on 'the children.'

Ever since Plato, the idea of capturing the hearts and minds of children has fascinated social planners. Mussolini cast himself as a 'schoolmaster' to the nation, while in the Soviet Union a prize was given by the State in honour of a boy who informed against his mother and father. Late last year, a British energy company created a website to teach children how to become 'climate cops' and turn in their own parents.

Pretty chilling.  Coming soon to a university near you.

Even though we are greeted every day with countless stories of 'political correctness gone mad' we tend to dismiss them as solitary or silly.

But the reality is that they fit into a bigger picture, a coherent Left-wing agenda. The idea is that there can be no safe harbours from politics. If 'you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem'.

And it's up to the State and the social engineers to solve problems - whether you like it or not.

You have to be very careful with a thesis like that, but it is, as I've noted, a cautionary tale.  I'm always a little concerned when writers compare things to Nazism and Communism.  After all, even the despicable Nazi and Communist regimes did some things that, when correctly done in a democratic society, could contribute.  But Goldberg is right in warning us about the cult of "unity" or about those who believe that, if we surrender to the state, wonderful things will automatically happen. 

I'm particularly concerned about a forced intellectual conformity, often pushed along by simply ridiculing anyone who doesn't agree.  The global-warming "debate" is a clear example, where dissenters are simply laughed at rather than engaged.  Indeed, ridicule has become a powerful tool of the political left, and many people genuinely fear it.  Social ostracism is not fun.

Goldberg must be read carefully, but he's worth reading.

January 4, 2009.