The weekend’s Guardian (Saturday 19th September) contains a review by Daniel Trilling of a book by Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor called “End Times Fascism.” According to Trilling the purpose of the book is to warn us of a convergence of three interests which are in effect encouraging the climate crisis rather than working to prevent it.
The book focusses chiefly on the United States and identifies the three interest as the “Religious Fanatics” ( the Christian Right who look forward to the Rapture and the end of the World, when the righteous will be "caught up to meet the Lord in the air,") the “Tech Barons,” expecting to exploit AI and the “Political Entrepreneurs” who are anxious to “turn their nations into bunkered garrison states . . . in an increasingly aggressive scramble for natural resources.”
These three groups together are working towards what the book defines as “End Times Fascism.”
If climate change is the biggest danger to our way of life (or even human life itself) then the second most serious danger we face is surely to Liberal Democracy, which I believe to be threatened by the same or similar forces.
Google defines fascism as “a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology that places the perceived interest of the nation or race above individual rights.”
It describes Fascism’s features as:
1 Dictatorial Leadership
2 Extreme Nationalism
3 Suppression of Opposition
4 Militarism and Regimentalism;
. . . and finally
5 Rejection of Liberal Democracy: Opposes pluralism, individual liberties, equality, communism, and socialism.
The first four features are very much in evidence in British Politics today, fuelled and encouraged by wealthy sources, some of them foreign.
If our political class is alert to the danger there is as yet not much sign of it.
The Conservatives, probably in cohorts with Reform and Respect, seem likely to go along with it. Labour alone lacks the backbone to fight it (no cap on donations to parties, restriction on the right to protest, further drilling in the North Sea still on the cards, BBC fighting desperately for funding.)
The principal raison d’être of the Greens is to halt and even reverse climate change, the principle raison d’être of the Liberal Democrats is to preserve, improve and extend Liberal Democracy.
Both are desperately needed, in alliance with “one nation Tories, (of which there are, apparently , a number recently converted and attending the Liberal Democrat conference,) in government with Labour to preserve and improve and spread our way of life.
Peter,
ReplyDeletesounds like the 3 horsemen of the apocalypse!
It might be funny if it wasn't so serious. I'm reminded of Robert Paxton's 5 stages of fascism:
1. Gaining publicity through emerging widespread disillusionment
2. Establishing legitimacy as a political party
3. Gaining power through right wing coalitions
4. Consolidating monopoly political power
5. Implementing radical change to embed power and control
Farage & Reform have probably read the playbook and are trying hard at stage 2 with the support of the populist media. Stage 3's timing is clearly linked to the next general election but is already being discussed in the media.
The catalyst has been the “widespread disillusionment” that has been coming for a while and largely ignored by successive governments and the main parties over the last few decades and I see no real attempt to counter this.
We've only ourselves to blame for what is to come
Thanks Mik W for Paxton's Five Stages: we're certainly well on the way, and not just in this country.
DeleteI agree with you about the "widespread disillusionment," and wonder why, since we are enjoying the highest and most comfortable and exciting standard of living any generation has ever enjoyed on these islands. among the reasons are:
1. We spend too much time hankering after our allegedly glorious past, rather than aiming for modest competence in the future.
2. The astonishing growth and prosperity of the post-war years has not been shared evenly. Our government and systems are much too centralised. In too many areas people have found that their boat has not been lifted.
3. Too much of our politics remains based on the archaic distinction between capital and labour. The increasing prominence of the Liberals, and the Greens (bless them) should help remedy this, along with the political reforms you enumerate in a later comment.
4. Our biassed press finds it too easy to exploit grievances in order to increase the influence of their owners. We need more media studies on the Finnish lines, as discussed in an earlier post.
I agree with you about the "widespread disillusionment," and wonder why, since we are enjoying the highest and most comfortable and exciting standard of living any generation has ever enjoyed on these islands.
DeleteThe blindness is almost wilfull…
It’s because people have seen the country change a lot in the past quarter-century, mostly because of unprecedented levels of migration; people, quite reasonably, don’t like seeing the country they grew up in change (and like even less being told that it’s good that it changed, and if they don’t like it they are racists); do they have consistently voted for politicians who have told them that they will reduce migration and the pace of change, but when in office those same politicians have done nothing to reduce immigration or the pace of change; so they have, again quite reasonably, come to the conclusion that the politicians were either lying to them, or lack the powers to do what they promised.
Disillusionment is therefore a perfectly rational response. The illusion was that politicians had the ability to set the course of the country, and that they would use that to give effect to the wishes of the voters. That illusion has been rudely sundered.
Rejection of Liberal Democracy
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting, because you reject liberal democracy.
You reject liberalism because you push illiberal things like restrictions on political action (like donations to political parties), wealth redistribution, and restrictions on press freedom (very fascist, that one).
And you reject democracy because you don't respect results that you disagree with, instead claiming that people could only have voted in ways you disagree with because they were misled, so their obviously-compromised votes should be ignored.
So are you a fascist?
The fact that there's widespread disillusionment in the UK seems to be acknowledged but ignored by the main parties. Polls suggest that around 2/3rds of Brits believe the country is in decline, and even more lacking faith in the political system. This seems to be driven by the impact of economic austerity and stagnation (spread unevenly around the country and the population) together with perceived elitism and a belief that politicians are out of touch, untrustworthy and interchangeable.
ReplyDeleteThere are large groups of people who feel neglected, abandoned and powerless and who feel they're facing a future without prospects or hope. A fertile breeding ground for the right-wing and wannabe fascists so no wonder reform has been doing so well lately
Unless these issues are addressed directly, right wing support will continue to grow (even though the right wing and Farage have no solutions that will make much difference) but the main parties appear blind to this
There are no easy answers but ….
Electoral & Democratic Reform
Introducing proportional representation; increased voter registration and expanded franchise for young people; citizens' assemblies across the country to give people a more direct voice
Money in Politics
Capping private donations and closing loopholes; (one survey found that over 90% of voters would favour this as one of their top priorities to rebuild trust); increasing public funding of parties to reduce dependence on wealthy donors; stricter lobbying transparency; increased transparency of MPs personal finances and interests
Ethics & Accountability
Tighter regulation of post-government employment (the "revolving door" between Westminster and business ); replace the House of Lords with a directly elected assembly; ending PM patronage of the honours system; total ban on second jobs for MPs
How could anyone object?
This seems to be driven by the impact of economic austerity and stagnation (spread unevenly around the country and the population) together with perceived elitism and a belief that politicians are out of touch, untrustworthy and interchangeable.
DeleteAnd uneasiness at rapid social change due to mass migration, which politicians seem unwilling or unable to stop. Don’t forget that one.
How could anyone object?
DeleteWell, I could object, based on the fact that you seem to think the problem is that voters don’t agree with you and all your ‘solutions’ are based on trying to either force the voters to agree with you, or bypass them if you can’t get their agreement.
Perhaps in fact the solution should be to listen to the voters and do what they want?
The "solutions" posted earlier are based on published market research with voters - maybe you should listen to them more. Which do you disagree with as a voter?
DeleteWhich do you disagree with as a voter?
DeleteAll of them! Every one! Would you like me to go through the reasons for every one?
(Except perhaps ‘Tighter regulation of post-government employment (the "revolving door" between Westminster and business’ — I could get behind that, but only as long as it applies equally to trades unions, charities and NGOs as to business)
But these are what the voters want.
DeleteBut these are what the voters want.
DeleteNo, they aren't. The voters have said what they want, and it's less immigration.
It's quite funny actually.
Voters: We want less immigration.
You: Ah, I hear you. You want proportional representation.
Voters: No, that's not it.
You: Oh, okay. What then?
Voters: The immigrants. We want less of them.
You: Ah, I see! You want citizens assemblies!
Voters: No, we want there to not be as many immigrants.
You: Right. Got you. House of Lords reform. Coming right up!
Voters: Are you deaf or something?
You: And votes at sixteen! Yes, of course we can do that. Anything else?
[Voters head off to the ballot box and vote for Reform]
Oh dear ranting again
DeleteAs usual my posts are evidence based. The suggestions I posted are not mine but those of the electorate from published market research.
Voters were asked what actions would help restore their trust in politics and politicians. You've seen their ideas.
But of course you know better than they do although you never seem to have any evidence to back up your rants
The funny thing is that exactly the same thing is happening in many countries, and the same people who refuse to acknowledge what's going on the Britain stick their heads in the sand about every one.
DeleteTake Germany, for example. Germans don't want to vote for the AfD. Up until 2015, Germany politics was, by British standards, incredibly boring. The AfD was a fringe party, even less consequential than the Liberal Democrats, and the two main parties were basically different varieties of fashionable progressivism.
But then what happened? Frau Merkel made one of her top three most colossal mistakes (for any other politician it would be by a long way the most colossal, but she was special): she said 'Wir schaffen das' and opened the borders. Immigration to Germany shot up, and German chaos was plunged into chaos, and now the AfD is winning federal elections left right and centre, and poised to win the next national election. And that's with voters having real, and quite reasonable, reservation about the rest of the AfD policy platform, especially things like their pro-Russian stance. But that single issue, of immigration, is so important to voters that they are willing to hold their noses and vote for a party that they normally would dismiss out of hand, just because every single other party has failed on that one issue.
And at any point in the last ten years, the previously-established parties could have killed the AfD stone dead, easily. Because, as I say, Germans don't want to vote for the AfD. They don't like most of what the AfD stands for. The only thing they like about the AfD is its stance on immigration. If any mainstream party had just stolen the AfD's immigration policies, and kept everything else the same, the AfD would be dead and that party would not be running Germany. Bout for some reason I still can't understand, they didn't.
And we know this is true because the even funnier thing is not only can we see the same dynamic playing out in country after country (I haven't even had space to mention France), but we have an example of a country where the exact opposite has happened: Denmark. In Denmark the mushy centrist parties of exactly the kind that are being forced out of contention and, in some cases, existence in places like Britain, France and Germany are still forming the government and look undislodgeable, and why? Because they adopted the hardline anti-immigration policies demanded by their voters. As a result the Danish centre-left and progressive SDP (they're in the same EU group that Labour used to be) won the recent election and managed to form a government (though thanks to the terrible PR system, it took over two months, so let's hope we never get PR here).
When politicians either refuse to listen to the voters or say they will listen but then fail to do anything about it, such as in Britain, France, Germany and so on, then you get disillusionment and chaos. When politicians listen to the voters and enact their desired policies, as in Denmark, they retain the support of undisillusioned voters.
So the solution to disillusionment is clear: don't try to work out what the voters 'really want', as if you think you are smarter than them. Just listen to what they say they want and do that.
as usual irrelevant and off the point
Delete"Just listen to what they say they want and do that"
Do you not bother reading carefully or do you just not understand
The solutions listed earlier - that you disagree with - are what voters have said they want to help restore trust
But you continue to deny their voice by disagreeing with what they've said