Fascism the Dirty Word Hiding under the Ashes
description
Transcript of Fascism the Dirty Word Hiding under the Ashes
Fascism the Dirty Word Hiding under the Ashes
I like dictionary definitions. At the letter F, under „fascism‟, you find:
“(1) Doctrine, nationalist and totalitarian political system Mussolini
established in Italy in 1922.
(2) Doctrine or political system tending to establish the same type of
totalitarian regime in a State. “
One note that the semantic drift in which, from “Italian fascism”
one arrives at “totalitarianism” is already contained in the
definition.
That drift in itself would deserve an entire article, which
exists elsewhere. (In French).
But I won’t go looking any further before using the
word when applied to what we are collectively
experiencing nowadays, in terms of searches for
political exits to the crises caused by a bloated
economic system, victim of its own obesity, a
destructive predator of life, of planetary ecology, of
human relationships in general and of the societies
they generate.
Because this is not about history repeating itself, but rather about an
ever-deepening crisis, one whose jolts over the last century have
given rise to such responses as fascism and all of its singular
variants, leading to their ultimate expressions, Nazism and
Stalinism, at both ends of the spectrum.
Mentioning both of those in the same sentence does not mean
placing them at equality or in competition; it is simply a way of
mentioning their world-wide influences in the spectrum of
fascisms.
A closer look is warranted at those regimes in the second half of
the 20th century that were defined as “totalitarian” or as
“dictatorships” based on a neo-liberal doctrine, and which served
as the alpha and omega of policies in the last forty years, crowned
by financial capitalist globalization.
A recall of both Pinochet and Thatcher (who were close friends)
and of their enthusiastic support for the “market” would be useful.
In 1917, a certain Lenin, published a work titled “Imperialism, Ultimate
phase of capitalism”; needless to say, the work has acquired more
than a few wrinkles, but it analysed how a world war, exacerbated
nationalisms and economic wars were attempts at non-negotiated
solutions to the crises in a system already ill from its own
contradictions.
Borrowing an analytical key from him does not mean approval of
what followed in the uses made of it by the October Revolution.
However Italian fascism, which serves as the yardstick for the
concept, matched up well with his anticipated analysis, one he, was
not alone in expressing.
We might then draw a few lessons from history.
Not in order maintain a permanent stance of denunciation of
resurgent Nazism, but as a reminder that the underlying trends for
a crisis are still there, and that responses analogous to previous
ones , even if widely adapted and grounded in other national
myths, could rise from the shadows surrounding chaos.
Fascism has yet to speak its final word.
But should this serve as an excuse for cramming under the same
heading every anti-humanistic political demonstration or belief with a
totalitarian vocation, preaching a war of civilizations and national in
drawing?
Bluntly stated, is political Islamism such as that found in the most
developed forms of ISIS, on the one hand, and a Trumpian populist
fascism destined to serve as models.
For my part, I would answer in the negative.
Precisely because they do not answer, either in a durable or in a
momentary way, capitalism’s need for economic survival.
In that sense, they are less “durable” than are China or Russia, to
mention only those two.
These casual and internationally “tolerated” fascisms are part of the
global market, not in order to disrupt it, but so as to find in it their
nationalist interest through the widening of capitalist globalization,
and using it to enrich their financers and their oligarchies.
Each in its own way, we have here fascism using the capitalist motor
and which have established internal totalitarianisms they have made
the whole world accept.
The Putin model is a good export product. The Chinese model is still
too “exotic” to tempt Westerners, but we only need observe the
gesticulations around questions
of “human rights” to understand the majority of Western States have
already drawn their balances and gone to market. And here’s to the
velvet hand in the silken glove.
I do not mean to suggest that the occult hand of a grand capitalist plot
rules the world.
What we see are only convergences in interests, in order to defend the
survival of a system presented everywhere as the only alternative to
poverty, so-called “human misery”, violence and…anarchy. And these
converging interests are not only a concept.
They are structured in G8s, G20s as well as at the WTO or NATO, along with the
multiple subdivisions where one finds the cream of the “investors”.
States even serve as their backbone, for “the good of the nations”.
I forgot the EU, free-trade agreements as well as “common sanctions” imposed
against unruly or quarrelsome countries.
All this is a reality, and humanism is not a topic in these gatherings.
The climate and the ecological crisis add to the inherent crises in a system
that has not taken into account the fact the planet’s resources are not
inexhaustible, or at a minimum, has pushed off the reckoning into the
future, and has not taken the full measure in the daily growth of its
predatory and destructive power through industrial efficiency, including in
the area of the “production” of waste and their effects on the living.
Interestingly enough, up until now, only literary or cinematographic
anticipations provided all this a fascist end point – and not only since
yesterday. Science-fiction is a treasure trove in this regard. Let’s close the
brackets here, but the books exist, and among them, the very best.
All the media, politicians, official “philosophers”, a number of
“cultured” people providing opinions, have thrown the word fascism
to the dunghill of history and only pull it out as an insult, when
required for this purpose, if given a prefix such as islamo, or crypto,
as the case may be. These same ones do everything they can to
“demonize” the term, the better to de-demonize the germ carriers.
Since Prevent, we know that intellectuals love playing with matches.
And even when speaking of the political tandem dominating Turkey, the
term barely comes to their lips. Turkey, fascist?
On occasion in a headline, but only because it is “islamist”.
And yet, if ever there was one, there stands a “republic” for appearances
only, one that composed with and continues to compose with fascism, while
slowly working its way into neo-liberalism.
As a regional power, it is now courted economically as well as for it
capacity in holding back the migratory consequences of wars, of
climate change and of the jolts and rumblings of world crises.
We have here a useful fascism, one not attempting to create
geopolitical crises for its own sake.
The solution found by the EU therefore consists of financing it in
order to have some influence on the excesses. Its durability is
uncertain.
A longer bracket, since we are on Kedistan.
“The army won‟t let it happen”
This sentence was emblematic at the end of political discussions in
the early 2000s in Turkey.
It could just as well be completed by an “inchallah”. But it was mainly
heard in families said to be secular, in the upper middle classes of
large cities, such as Istanbul and Ankara.
The Turkish army was venerated in those communities as protectors
of a Kemalist nation, one and indivisible, against a red enemy or an
islamist one. Yes, on can consider one’s self secular, and be a fascist
too.
The second half of the 20th century had seen deep inequities
aggravated in Turkey between what was known as deep Anatolia, the
East with a Kurdish majority, certain regions on the Black Sea and the
expanding metropolis.
This also led to accelerating rural exodus of populations moving to
large towns as labourers, in order to serve those fully benefiting from
the social elevator of the said Kemalist republic, an elevator coupled
with the country’s capitalist development, already advantageous for
European delocalizations for production of common consumer goods,
one where divisions in labour are important such as with textile, for
example. Cars followed as did “domestic” consumer goods.
At first, this period was one of economic conglomerates taking
advantage of a regulated domestic market, then of privatizations, all
the way to open liberalism, then neo-liberalism in keeping with the
rise of capitalist globalization.
These developments had important social consequences, in terms of
enrichment for some and growing social and territorial inequalities,
especially since Turkish demography was on the rise.
These periods were also marked by “military coups” from the 1960s
to the 1990s, justified each time in the name of “order and civil peace”
and “in defence of the Republic”.
Each of these coups, although occurring in a different context each
time, ended up impressing the minds of those who were not directly
affected by their consequences, since they were “on the right side of
the fence”, that of growth, or members of the State’s plethoric
administration, in the best Kemalist tradition.
And even though one President considered a liberal (Menderes) and
two of his ministers were sentenced to death and executed in 1961,
this did not stop this saying from being popular all the way till 2010.
The army, coming to the rescue of order and security, especially that
of goods. Today, fascists and islamists share power and corruption,
while on the best of terms with the EU.
Militarization remains pervasive but the reins are in the hands of one
man only. Kemalism can be part of the equation when it is in power
and ostracizes sections of the people on ehtnic and religious grounds.
Were I to work my way across a world map and point how who in
Asia, in the Midle-East, in Africa or in South America could easily be
known under this name, this article would not suffice, the same being
true within the EU itself, where some States are seriously thinking of
donning the uniform.
Attempting to define a pure fascism would be perfectly idiotic and a
stupid approach.
These fascisms are products of history and even of crossings within
history. Nazism was one, borrowing from an arsenal of ideological
racism, clearly personalized.
Wars and genocides mark their passage. On the European continent,
since 1915 in Turkey until the 1990s in ex-Yugoslavia, including the
Shoah, these genocides are a reminder that if the victims of fascism
are different each time, nothing can challenge this word as the perfect
expression of a political threat, still available to ‘solve” crises.
On this topic, the competition between “memorials” on these matters
of genocide only becomes the more ignoble and even worse when
it serves as a screen to justify a colonization in Palestine, for example,
or for setting up back-to-back the Gulag and the Nazi camps, as being
two abominations belonging to the past, on the right and on the left –
the better to have us forget that the embers of fascism still glower
under the ashes.
Getting back to the second part of the definition, I keep in mind again
the terms of “political doctrine or system”. I understand the word
doctrine as meaning ideology.
And this is where there begins a perverse dialectic between this
economic system in crisis and the rise of ideological solutions with
wide rallying appeal as an exit strategy.
Fascism is one of them, and populism walks alongside in those liberal
democracies no longer able to respond with successful decisions. And
please don’t mention leftist populism in my presence. As soon as
nationalism is involved, it turns to the beast’s advantage.
This fascist idoelogy regarding the need for a strong power, a
providential personality on the Bonapartist model to insure
“security”, the defense of private property, of the “dominant values”
secreted by the capitalist market, spreads like gazoline on the social
body, with the help of the media who obtain large audiences from it.
Add to this racism which divides and opposes, identitarian
nationalism as a galvanizer, the designation of migrations as scape-
goats, and you have the picture of the current situation in France,
among other countries.
Coming fascism?
I do not wish to paraphrase a well-known title that spoke of
insurrection, but I do believe their authors should think on it. What
emerges from chaos is not always revolutionary, even if it gives itself
the title. Under its outward appearances, fascism is conservative. And
feeding the premises, by accentuating chaos, is deadly, when the roles
are reversed. We’re not about to ressuscitate Gramci.
Which brings us to the question “must we defend the democratic and
liberal status quo in order to escape from it?
This is the matter for another article.
Getting back to Kedistan, it is our job to see what answers provide
those subjected to it, as in Turkey. An analysis of the Kurdish
movement’s dissensions on the matter of armed struggle, depending
on the contexts, along with analyzes on various conceptions of the
State, and thus of nationalism, would help in formulating an answer.
But chaos is not a choice. It asserts itself when we look away. And
fascism is quick to show up, superimposed on our shadow.
The illustration to this article is by Nour Mabkhout, borrowed from
the Montreal student newspaper “Le Délit”, with thanks.
Translation by Renée Lucie Bourges
You may use and share Kedistan’s articles and translations, specifying
the source and adding a link in order to respect the writer(s) and
translator(s) work. Thank you.
In Rojava, think of a literature of the revolution
With its benches in the shade of large lime or mulberry trees and
blooming roses, the readers' garden in the city of Qamishlo, in Rojava,
northern Syria, offers a pleasant oasis of freshness in the dust and the
heat of the city. In one corner, a glazed building serves as a place to
organize literary discussions or presentations of books. Adjoining, a
small bookstore-library offers a choice of locally published books,
which enthusiasts can read on site or buy. The reflection on the place
of the Arts in society, and in particular literature, does not escape the
political process underway in the areas under the control of the
Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. Thus, a
literature committee was created, backed by a publishing house, Şiler,
at the Amara bookstore,
“Before the revolution writers could not speak, had no voice.” explains
heval Berxwedan, poet and coordinator of the literature committee. Under
the Baathist regime, censorship was rife.
Kurdish literature was prohibited, as was the expression of any dissenting
voice. “After the revolution, there were more readers, and the creation of a
union of writers. Now we have the freedom to write, we can even be
critical. ” The committee seeks to encourage writing by as many people as
possible.
“At the beginning, even if the quality was sometimes insufficient, we still
published the works. Today we are more demanding. The committee reads
the works proposed to it and writes a report to suggest improvements to
the author if necessary. For the reading committee, the important thing is
that we can understand the work. They try to put the authors at ease and
not be too demanding on the level of grammar.
The Kurdish language is rich, it takes time to reach a standard. ” However,
it is not a censorship body. Its members assert that an author can
completely decide to publish independently.
“We are independent of the Autonomous
Administration” insists Nariman Evdikê, Botan, Zara,
all three members of the literature committee,
created in 2016. Nariman and Botan are authors, Zara
literary critic.
They studied literature, and taught at Qamishlo
University, in the literature, Kurdish language or
Jineolojî department.
All writers who request it can join the committee. In
Qamishlo, the committee has four to ten members,
but others are present in the various towns of the
areas under the control of the Autonomous
Administration.
The structure works with several publishing houses,
such as Şiler.
One commission is responsible for studying books
written in Kurdish and another in Arabic.“If there
were books in Syriac there would also be one for that
language.” specifies Botan.
Six or seven people read the book, write down its
positive and negative points, and write a report for
the author who can then improve his writing. If the
book is not high enough to be published, they
encourage the writer to rewrite it. And if they're not
comfortable with a book, they don't publish it to Siler
Publishing. When a book is published by Siler, all
costs are covered.
The committee is predominantly female, and tries to
promote the work of the authors, who represent
around 40% of the books that pass through our
hands.” Nariman explains. Women writers are under a
lot of pressure. As a result, the committee members
try to support them more in their writing process. A
writer herself since she was fourteen, Nariman knows
these difficulties well.
The young woman, who returned to her hometown
of Sere Kaniye in 2016 after studying literature in
Diyarbakır, explains:“All women involved in
literary activity have a lot to talk about and write
about, but they need time for it. »She explains.
“They are afraid because of the pressure of society,
of criticism from others, especially men who may try
to discourage them, to belittle them. So they take
their time to write solid things.
There are also subjects that are difficult to write
about for women: love and sex; certain political
subjects; religion. A man on the other hand will have
an easier time writing on these subjects and this will
be more tolerated. ". Zara specifies: “This is also
true for women artists in general. For example, a
woman painter could not paint a mother who is
breastfeeding her child, whereas a man could.
”Nariman adds: “Here there are ten stories to write
about every day. What you want to get hold of as a
writer is up to you. ” Her latest work, “Berberoj” is
a collection of words from young fighters from her
hometown, mutilated during the battles against the
jihadists in 2013. She lets them tell their stories,
their dreams, and why they decided. to fight in
Rojava in a war for which no one was really ready.
For the committee, the important thing is that
literature is in touch with society. “The language
reflects the beauty of the people. Literature is a
way to make society more advanced and is at the
service of the people, language is just a vector. ”
says Berxwedan. To explain the criteria under
which a book can be refused, he gives the
controversial example of a book that would
attack God or religion directly, with harsh words.
For him, society at its current stage would not be
ready to accept such literature, and therefore the
committee would not support its publication. On
the other hand, a surrealist writer like Helim
Yusef receives a good reception from the
population, and therefore his books are
published.
“In Rojava, we are in a revolution, we need
revolutionary literature.” explains
Berxwedan.“It doesn't matter the language.
Cultures, languages, history are the basis of the
existence of a society. In a democratic nation
everyone must find their place. Everyone must
be able to live their culture. We do not want a
mold, everyone can write what they want but
respecting the values of the company. The
revolution is built by the people and it has given
space to express themselves, including on
religion to some extent. We try to make writers
feel part of society, to express the voices of the
people.
Because if there is a gap between the population
and the intellectuals, the latter can become
selfish, distant.
The possibilities of our writers are sometimes
limited but we try to help them, because
literature helps the people. We want to raise the
level, that people read more and get educated.
We want to make them free. ”