Re: RES: [Marxism] (no subject)Chinese/US fascism

[John Crocitti <jcrocitti@xxxxxxx>]

Bravo, Companheiro Renato,
I agree with what you indirectly have said: The label "fascist" is overused
and misused.  Pinochet is not a fascist, neither were the Brazilian generals
between 1964 and 1985.  They were authoritarian dictators, of course.  But,
there is a huge difference between fascism and authoritarian military
dictatorship.  Fascism might be described as a secular religion based on
nationalism, or a mythical common heritage for a nation.  Authoritarian
dictatorships range from conservative (for example promoting the Roman
Catholic Church hierarchy and the landed elite) to technocratic (for example
pursuing economic policies based on neo-liberal theories associated with
research centers such as the U. of Chicago).  Fascist dictators tend to set
goals that combine an idealized belief in the nation, or the people, with
futuristic material goals.  Neither fascist nor authoritarian dictators
promote political liberalism, but I would say that fascists are also less
amenable to economic liberalism.  Historically, fascism is also a reaction
against modernity.

One of your points that I disagree with is the assertion that fascist states
rely on excluding whole groups from sharing national income.  I think that
perhaps we mistakenly use the Nazis as models for all fascist states.  For
example, Mussolini did not promote anti-Semitism until the mid-1930s.  In
Brazil, the Integralists of the 1930s glorified the country's multiracial
heritage.  For example, in one text Plinio Salgado touted the caboclo as the
future leader of the world.  Integralists also had close ties with the
Afro-Brazilian movement of the 1930s.  Like the Nazis, the Integralists were
anti-Semitic, but I don't think that excluding Jews from economic
opportunity would have released the wealth necessary to elevate the
Brazilian masses of the 1930s.  Rather, I see Brazilian anti-Semitism a
means to rally people against a scapegoat.

Like you, I also caution against lumping all Brazilian workers into the same
category.  Metallurgical workers in the automotive factories live in much
different conditions then the "marginals" who live in the streets and on the
"morros."  Both are working class, but I don't perceive the metalúrgicos as
pursuing the same goals as the marginais.  As a matter of fact, I don't even
think that the metalúrgicos consider the marginais as bona fide workers.  If
we look at people in the sertão and in the frontier areas, we see even
different working conditions that are often simple rural bossism, much of it
more closely related to foreign imperialists than to the Brazilian
government since the latter is weak in those regions.  In general, I would
say that a strong oppressive Brazilian state is not the problem.  Quite the
opposite, I would say that, largely because of imperialist neo-liberalism,
the Brazilian state is too weak to enforce social laws that are on the books
and too weak to provide the security that people need.  Under such
conditions, those metalúrgicos might very well accept a return to
authoritarian rule as a means to reinvigorate the state.  As a matter of
fact, recent polls confirm Latin Americans would accept a return to military
dictatorship were it to restore economic growth and provide law and order.
I am sure that many on this list will dismiss those polls as imperialist
misinformation, but I believe that those polls do point to an important
reality in Latin America.
Abraços,
John C.

on 11/13/04 5:46 AM, Renato Pompeu at renatopompeu@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> 
> 
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: marxism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:marxism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Em nome de John Rosso
> Enviada em: sexta-feira, 12 de novembro de 2004 23:56
> Para: marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Assunto: [Marxism] (no subject)Chinese/US fascism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And in Brazil - the benefits are written on paper - in practice it's a
> joke.
> 
> /
> Sir, in Brazil benefits are not a joke, at least not for half the labour
> force, in the formal sector. Even in the informal sector, certain
> aspects of the law are applied, such as paid weekly rest, paid 30 days
> vacations a year, 13 monthly wages a year, instead of 12; though
> informal workers do not pay Security, they have a right to free health
> care in State institutions. I myself have just won a fat compensation
> for having been fired.
> Do not forget that Mussolini was a factory worker that became first a
> Marxist activist and then a revolutionary trade-unionist in the
> tradition of French Marxist philosopher Georges Sorel, which went to
> Rome to salute Mussolini's triumph as "the victory of Marx's ideas".
> Do not forget that Hitler was a wall painter and that his party was
> called German Workers' National Socialist Party. Both Mussolini and
> Hitler were leaders of unemployed masses. Just like Saddam Hussein, they
> imposed a code of labour and good free health care.
> The problem is that all Fascisms insured whole employment by a monstrous
> war economy and that they attacked income concentration by excluding
> whole groups of people from society, such as Jews, Communists,
> Democrats, Roma, Homosexuals, and by confiscating and redistributing
> their properties. They did not permit also independent mobilizations by
> the workers, not even strikes - but workers, if they revolted in Italy
> when it was being defeated in the war, never revolted in Germany.
> And then, in Brazil, leftist groups are allied to fascist groups in the
> fight against privatization, in the fight for nationalism and in the
> fight in defence of labour rights, and even in anti-semitism.
> I do not say all this because I like it, but because it is true.
> Pinochet and the Guatemalan rulers never were factory workers or wall
> painters, they never were leaders of unemployed masses - they never were
> fascists.
> By the way, do not forget that the sectors of the French Communist Party
> did welcome Nazi invasion, for the Hitler-Stalin Pact was in vigour, and
> only began Resistance when Germany invaded the Soviet Union.
> Renato Pompeu
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism