Mailwatch(ed) Forum

I put this here for your views.
This is a description of fascism by Umberto Eco.


The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”

The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense, Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture, the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”

Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

Appeal to social frustration. “[…] one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.

The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”

The enemy is both weak and strong. “[…] the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”

Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”
Everybody is educated to become a hero. “in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”

Machismo and Weaponry. “This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.”

Selective Populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.

Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”


I was prompted to this by reading that some Tory MPs are calling for those who climb on statues (patriotic ones, natch) get imprisoned, whilst the gaols are full and rapists are given non-custodial sentences despite the nature of the crime so often being serial...

Will they imprison the persons unknown who replace the Duke or Wellington's traffic cone nightly?

They're forever telling us they're a broad church which is true . The nutter wing of the party has always been bit fash, kept in check by the moderates but I still can't get my head around the fact that the fash reckon that as the country is possibly about to vote in a left of centre government the way to overcome that is to move even further to the right. It makes absolutely no sense.

To move back toward the centre would be to admit they were wrong.

Also, I can assure you that MPs live very much in the bubble. Even your average backbencher will be accompanied in public by researchers whose main job is to limit access to them, and to make sure those who do get access are as un-troublesome as possible. The researchers rely directly on the MP for patronage, so aren't going to upset that applecart any time soon. They go to local party associations which by definition are the hard core membership, and again hear what they want to hear.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 2:57 pm To move back toward the centre would be to admit they were wrong.

Also, I can assure you that MPs live very much in the bubble. Even your average backbencher will be accompanied in public by researchers whose main job is to limit access to them, and to make sure those who do get access are as un-troublesome as possible. The researchers rely directly on the MP for patronage, so aren't going to upset that applecart any time soon. They go to local party associations which by definition are the hard core membership, and again hear what they want to hear.

So how come they keep getting death threats then?

But are they flirting with fascism? A few thoughts.

The cult of tradition - nowhere better shown than in the National Trust astroturfing, statues and the 'anti-woke' agenda, especially in schools.

The rejection of modernism - everything from banning mobile phones in schools to refusing to takje the knee. And again the anti-woke bullshit.

The cult of action for action’s sake - stop the boats...

Disagreement is treason - seen often, heard many times in the HoC - if you oppose us it is destroying the nation etc. etc. Also the assault on judicial independence.

Fear of difference - many, many examples, especially regarding so-called 'illegal asylum seekers'. Anti-Muslim sentiments expressed so often by Tory supporters.

Appeal to social frustration - the Red Wall is the most obvious example.

The obsession with a plot = the references to 'the woke brigade', existing in government, education, the NHS, all working together to frustrate the willadapeeple.

The enemy is both weak and strong - Schroedinger's immigrant? Strikers?

Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy - any attempt to mediate, find common ground, negotiate a solution is a betrayal.

Contempt for the weak - look at how they treat the poor, the homeless, the old... Care homes in Covid, anybody?

Machismo and Weaponry - Fetishisation of the military (Poppies) whilst at the same time cutting support and funding.

Selective Populism - again, the Red Wall, and the work of Gullis and Anderson. The output of the right-wing press, especially the Sun.

Fascism speaks Newspeak - not quite, but there are so many coded messages in the right-wing press that we are almost there. Instead of Newspeak we have dogwhistles.

From this I would judge that we are close to having an elected fascist government (not all fascist regimes are unelected dictatorships, the Nazis were elected after all).

This is often referred to as 'authoritarian' - weasel words. Of course, those using the term are often those promoting Ur-Fascism in the press and commentariat.

We are seeing the appeal to a 'strong man' government - even in the work of Littlejohn, despite the more blatant efforts of Hitchins or Letts.

One of the key effects has been to weaken the strength of democracy - almost to the extent that a dictatorship may be put forward as the answer to our problems. Also seen in the 'they're all the same' narrative promised by some right-wing sources.

Remember DORA (1914)?
A collection of reactionary and repressive measures longed for by Conservatives, kept in waiting until the crisis occurred that allowed them to be enacted. I think we are there again.

A few years ago I would have said that a lot of what you cite as fascistic tendencies were true only of wider UK conservatism and that the Conservative Party itself was immune to some of them. But not now, particularly since Johnson threw so many normals out. That was the tipping point for me. That was when the Conservative Party decided to abandon any pretensions of being centre-right.

Yes - for me it has been the recent development of opinions approving a 'strong man (other genders are available)' to solve all the problems that democracy hasn't, and the poll a few days back which showed that support for democracy was weakening amongst millennials.

An important thing to remember there is that under most other circumstances, the likes of Winston Churchill (junior) or Dominic Grieve would not have been considered on the left or centre wing of the party. They are/were simply better behaved and had more dignity than Johnson and co. Then again, we're in a place where Theresa May is held up as not that bad really because she's criticised her party recently, and Jeremy Hunt - a guy once best known for shilling for Rupert Murdoch, hiding behind a shrub, and being shown up by Stephen Hawking - is reinvented as a grand old Tory sage simply because he's not a permanently idiotic man-child. Noah Cross* had it right, it seems.

PS - yes, MPs get death threats and in the last 10 years we've had 2 sitting MPs killed in office. But there's a difference between MPs taking security precautions and them making every effort to avoid contact with reality.

*Character from the film Chinatown, played by John Huston. Made comments on the way age bestows respectability regardless of merit.

Disagreement is treason - seen often, heard many times in the HoC - if you oppose us it is destroying the nation etc. etc. Also the assault on judicial independence.

See also: the “Enemies of the people” front page in the Mail, the characterisation of the narrow 2016 referendum result as “the will of the people”.

I still nurse a very real and burning grievance at the way that that whole referendum was set up precisely to enable such claptrap, and as part of what I regard as the biggest and most egregious political con-trick ever perpetrated on the British people. The quite deliberately limited franchise, designed to exclude those with a direct and critically important interest in the UK remaining in the EU - younger people aged 16-18, expatriat Brits living abroad for longer than a defined period, and citizens of other EU states living, working, and paying taxes in the UK. The quite deliberate setting up of the referendum as advisory only and non-binding (and therefore not legally challengeable subsequently) and requiring only a simple majority, and of course, the entirely dishonest approach of Cameron, treating the referendum result as if it were legally binding. Basically, the decision to implement Brexit was entirely a political choice made by the Tories, not the result of any legally binding obligation, and certainly not the “will of the people”. And that’s before you even get to the the disgraceful barrage of outright lies that made up the Leave campaign, upon which the worst PM this country has ever known surfed to power.

The first thing that springs to mind; the Tories do not have a strong leader/figurehead, no way could any Tory leader since Thatcher be seen as strong. The perception of strong leader is more from an unidentifiable group eg Tufton Street, who make all the running. Whereas in the States they run everything through Trump

Tufton Street is merely the latest incarnation of the Economic League, which in various guises has done all manner of horrible shit over the years.

Watchman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 4:48 pm The first thing that springs to mind; the Tories do not have a strong leader/figurehead, no way could any Tory leader since Thatcher be seen as strong. The perception of strong leader is more from an unidentifiable group eg Tufton Street, who make all the running. Whereas in the States they run everything through Trump

Farage? Is that the plan?
(With the Tufton Street eminences grises pulling the strings...)

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 5:14 pm Tufton Street is merely the latest incarnation of the Economic League, which in various guises has done all manner of horrible shit over the years.

Yes, if ever we were to look for the real Deep State or hidden conspiracies...

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 5:25 pm

Watchman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 4:48 pm The first thing that springs to mind; the Tories do not have a strong leader/figurehead, no way could any Tory leader since Thatcher be seen as strong. The perception of strong leader is more from an unidentifiable group eg Tufton Street, who make all the running. Whereas in the States they run everything through Trump

Farage? Is that the plan?
(With the Tufton Street eminences grises pulling the strings...)

My gut feel on that is that despite the ease with which they could manipulate him they would really want someone with a bit more “strong man presence” when fronting up

One thing missing from Malcolm's list has been the lawful reduction in a citizen's ability to peacefully protest in public (introduced when Pattell was in the HO IIRC) which can be definitely described as the actions of either a wanabee fascist or one whom is already a parafascist.

Sadly, I don't hold much hope for Labour to repeal this, should they get into office - even if only because promising to do so right now would not be "good optics".

They're gone beyond flirting - they're as Facebook would put it "in a relationship".

Not sure Farage is a particularly strong man anyhow.

Then again

mattomac wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2024 1:46 am Not sure Farage is a particularly strong man anyhow.

Then again

You only have to project an image stronger than the man-children who follow you.

Fascism does expect capitalism to function in the interest of the nation and is contemptuous of free market globalist financiers of the Tory party. Especially if they’re Jews or Indians.