In 2003 historian Laurence W. Britt suggested that there were 14 characteristics to fascist regimes. They were:
- Powerful and continuing nationalism
- Disdain for human rights
- Identification of enemies as a unifying cause
- Supremacy of the military
- Rampant sexism
- Controlled mass media
- Obsession with national security
- Religion and government intertwined
- Corporate power protected
- Labour power suppressed
- Disdain for intellectuals & the arts
- Obsession with crime & punishment
- Rampant cronyism & corruption
- Fraudulent elections
Of these I used to say that only supremacy of the military and an intertwining with religion were absent from the UK, and I dismissed the latter as no longer being of any popular relevance.
Given recent announcements on defence spending and nuclear weapons I am not now sure that the supremacy of the military over other claims on the public purse can be dismissed any more.
If that is the case then thirteen out of the now thirteen relevant criteria are met by the current UK government.
I wonder if they care?
I wonder for how long I might say this?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
What you say is an insult to millions of people who fought fascism and millions who died because of fascism.
We are nowhere near a fascist state. The key element to fascism is intolerance and the only intolerance in the UK exists in those areas which suppress ideas and freedom of expression, such as the BNP, BLM and the SNP
That you include BLM and the SNP in your list proves that I am right
Your are creating the ‘others’ to hate
You say we are nowhere near a fascist state……. “Nowhere near Nazi Germany in 1939” – fair enough….. but “other fascist states are available” for comparison…… and this IS worrying.
Intolerance is certainly a key element of fascism – but the fact you omit our current government from your list of intolerant organisations is bizarre.
Dave ,
20 Million people died in a single country to defeat the Fascists you speak of.
‘Only’ 70,000 of our civilians were sacrificed by Winnie the Poo to impress the US populace.
Do you have any kind words for the majority of the dead and their nation who actually are the real and only defeaters of your historical allusion?
Russians and the Soviets?
I wonder for how long I might [be able to] say this?
Ok….
Why should the Tories care?
These tendencies have always been there in the party.
Clearly a decision has been taken to use fascist practices to hold the line after the busted flush that was 2008.
I think that they know what they are doing.
We live in an Orwellian sort of world now but instead of it being from the extremes of the Left, it is from the extremes of the Right.
Timothy Snyder in ‘The Road to Unfreedom’ (a book that is indispensable at the moment) highlights that fascism is to be found in the Left and Right as they tussle for supremacy – something I had suspected myself for sometime (honestly, I’m not bigging myself up, I’d noticed it for some time).
The trouble is, society has had it drilled into them that the return of some form of totalitarian/fascism would come from the Left or the Labour party in the UK. Not the libertarian Right.
So basically we’ve been blindsided right from when Lynton Crosby advised the Tory Party from/before 2010. What we know is that this Tory fascism is liberal only in terms of its attitude to the wealthy and money. Everything else has to be repressed so that the system can continue to award those with status power at the top of society – just as we were many moons ago in our history. Was the FTPA an aberration or all part of a fascist tendency? The first blow against our democracy? I think so.
Having said that, those with money power had no choice. 2008 was the final nail in the coffin for Neo-liberalism. So they had to fight back, because technically they could have lost everything. And so they stuck together and at it and even took on new technology to fight back and at the moment they are winning I’m afraid.
So most wealth will continue to accrue to the top percentiles whilst the rest of us will manipulated into falling out with each other for the spoils of what remains.
Events like Covid and the climate crisis might still unravel this ‘post modern fascism’ but these groups are so driven by money and its power I’m not so sure. But the end game will be very ugly and painful.
But the message is clear on another level: Progressives need to get their acts together as joining forces might be the only way forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections
https://www.compassonline.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/wedividetheyconquerv7-1.pdf
The Tories are certainly bending towards fascism on these criteria. Labour may not be so bad but is edging that way with the flags and pictures oftheQueem, choosing a missogiinst candidate for the Harltlepool bye election with no local constituency input, wars in Afghanistan, Iraq. supporting nuclear weapons programme, not reversing Thatcher’s anti-unionlegislation, promoting corporate interest through PFI ie Carrilion contracts for hospitals etc, Blair saying fighting crime and the causes of crime, allowing faith schools to becomedominant in education, for just a few examples.
Must have taken you ages googling to find a definition of fascism so vague and obtuse that it would cover the current government. You might have tried wikipedia first, where much more accepted definitions are found, but I suspect they wouldn’t have suited you purpose, so you didn’t.
Problem is, it is also so vague that you could apply it easily to the SNP for sure, let alone pretty much any government around the world.
Nobody in their right mind would call the government fascist.
Except you it seems. It’s just a lazy way for you to try and smear the Tories in a totally desperate manner. It’s intellectually weak, trying to equate people to the Nazis. The political equivalent of playground name calling.
I could have used Eco’s instead
That would also work
Probably means you haven’t read Eco’s definition then. There is no way you could call the government fascist if you had.
You spectacularly miss the point though.
Any rational person would not call the government fascist. They aren’t even comparable.
Which either means you are irrational, or more likely you can’t find good enough reasons to attack a relatively popular government which you dislike, so you have just gone out and tried to smear them in the most inane and childish manner.
Instead of looking at the government, maybe you should take a moment to see what your behaviour says about you.
I would refer you to Andrew’s answer to you using Eco’s definition.
It’s clear that you have not read his definition.
I used the version used by the Holocaust Museum.
But what is almost amusing is that you met two of the riles of trolling noted here yesterday. First, you claim your name begins with a J. I suspect it very likely that it does not. Second, you could not manage to use the same email address for two posts in a row. It’s a sure sign.
And I have to tell you that Andrew and I are the people offering rational analysis here.
Jane makes the mistake of assuming that fascism means the Nazis. Obviously it doesn’t. There are plenty of other examples of intolerant right wing nationalist populist authoritarian governments. The perhaps Jane might like to propose her own definition. Here are a few https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
Just adopting Eco’s, this present government meets an alarming number of the criteria. I very nearly posted something like the following the other day, but here we go:
1. Cult of tradition – a defining characteristic of Conservatism.
2. Rejection of modernism – that is, rejection of Enlightenment values. You see this in the scorn for a “woke” liberal metropolitan elite in favour of the earthy values of an intolerant silent majority.
3. Cult of action – in essence, anti-intellectualism. We have had enough of experts.
4. Disagreement is treason – dissent is unpatriotic.
5. Fear of difference – institutionalised racism, and hostility to foreigners (including our attitude to our former friends in the EU) and immigrants.
6. Appeal to a frustrated middle class – the fear that Middle Englanders could find themselves excluded from the any chance of joining the one percent but instead condemned to join the underclass they have demonised for so long.
7. Obsession with a plot – any number of threats, some real and some imagined. Russia, China, the EU, Islamic terrorism, BLM, women, “cultural Marxism”.
8. Enemies both too strong and too weak. Such as the EU, both abusing their power to make unfair impositions on the UK, but also too slow and inward looking, holding back buccaneering Britain from its rightful place of dominance on the world stage.
9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy – one we are not quite meeting yet perhaps, although you could see the military adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria in this light.
10. Contempt for the weak – in spades. The old, the disabled, the poor. Anyone from a marginalised minority.
11. Everybody is educated to become a hero – again, not quite there perhaps, although poppy worship and clapping but NHS has some of this flavour.
12. Machismo – disdain for women and LGBTIQ+ people.
13. Selective populism — “Will of the People”. As announced and interpreted by our glorious blond Leader and his acolytes.
14. Newspeak – lies and propaganda. Speeches in front of flags. Words losing their meaning. Brexit means Brexit. They need us more than we need them. Teething problems. World beating test and trace.
It is easy to shout “fascism” and often it is unjustified.
It in this case, the government’s disdain for checks and balances and usual conventions, assault on the rule of law, hostility towards the courts, corruption on procurement, restriction of legitimate protest, make such concerns very real indeed.
Fascism won’t arrive with blackshirts and jackboots and concentration camps, but with flags and flowers and cheers and clapping. Soon to be followed by tears and fears and oppression.
Thank you
I wondered which version to use
Now we have both
Just adopting Eco’s, Richard Murphy meets an alarming number of the criteria. I very nearly posted something like the following the other day, but here we go:
1. Cult of tradition — a defining characteristic of MMT
2. Rejection of modernism — that is, rejection of Enlightenment values. You see this in the scorn for a silent majority in favour of the “woke” liberal metropolitan elite.
3. Cult of action — in essence, anti-intellectualism. We have had enough of experts.
4. Disagreement is treason — dissent is not tolerated on his blog.
5. Fear of difference — hostility to conservatives and anyone who disagrees with him
6. Appeal to a frustrated middle class — the promises that the 1% are the only thing holding them back
7. Obsession with a plot — any number of conspiracy theories about academics, banks, the rich
8. Enemies both too strong and too weak. Such as the Bank of England, accounting bodies, anyone who votes conservative.
9. Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy — one we are not quite meeting yet perhaps, although you could see the military adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria in this light.
10. Contempt for the weak — in spades. The old, the disabled, the poor. Anyone with a pension that he wants to take from them.
11. Everybody is educated to become a hero — again, not quite there perhaps, although MMT worship has some of this flavour.
12. Machismo — disdain for women when they take his place in TV interviews.
13. Selective populism — “Will of the People”. As announced and interpreted by our glorious Leader, the Professor three times over and his acolytes.
14. Newspeak — lies and propaganda. Words losing their meaning. Making things up as he goes along. Lies about vaccine rollouts.
Very neat Ian. Pity it is palpable nonsense. I’m afraid only seven out of ten for trolling, as in your haste to cut and paste you forgot to turn around 3, 9 and 10. But for bonus marks, can you demonstrate when Richard supported military action in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, or showed contempt for the old, the disabled, or the poor?
Even if you were right to cast Richard as a fascist – the idea is laughable, but neatly demonstrates my point that it is easy to shout “fascism” but often unjustified – fortunately he is not the government so we can all sleep easy in our beds, knowing he won’t be in a position to illegally prorogue parliament, rule by decree for a year, corruptly award contracts to friends and family, lie to parliament, have the police arrest women at a vigil for a woman murdered by a serving policeman, prohibit protest, and otherwise force his arbitrary policies on an fearful nation.
Another “J”!
Jane, I don’t know how you get to your conclusion that the list is vague.
I recently read Robert O Paxton’s book on Fascism. He is a leading historian in this field. He makes the point that there is no neat definition and it is closely related to nationalism and varies according to the national culture. But it can be defined by a list of characteristics. He goes on to point out that it emerges from a non socialist, working class movement with a sense of grievance and supposed national humiliation e g the Ku Klux Klan which arise after the American civil war, or in Italy, a sense that the country had gained little from the war, in Germany defeat in WW1, the treaty of Versailles, the raparations and the inflation caused by that, plus the unemployment of the 1930s. His other point is that to get into power (most don’t – I would instance the AfD, the French National Rally etc) they will do a deal with ‘big business’.
He differentiates between those regimes and conservative, authoritarian regimes.
What I observe is that Brexit arose out of a constant campaign of anti EU and anti immigrant propaganda, and the austerity was deftly utilised by the Conservative right wing to focus that resentment. It has spilled over into our social life where disability groups report more negative discrimination against people with even obvious physical disabilities, let alone invisible or mental health difficulties. To me the aim of Brexit is to impose an American ‘free narket’ economy with decisions made by ministers, not The House of Commons, without having to out the program in front of the electorate in a general election.
Xenophobia and racism have become more explicit. While it is not as bad as the USA, where religion is much more of a feature, we seem to be going the same way. The Murdoch influence being one of the pipers. Fascism doesn’t arrive ready formed. It infiltrates its way in.
@Jane. We are trying to understand – How to measure the roots of oppression (and evil) in society? There are characteristics and, of course, we need to judge how prevalent and intense these are in regimes of government.
It might be easier to ask – which of these characteristics have increased over the last 10 years and which have decreased? Try that. We could ask that same questions using other descriptions, Eco’s are good.
And Richard does not equate to “Nazis”, he does not use that term. That would be intellectually weak and sloppy. The origins of fascism (the roots of evil) in Germany is another story. Note in England there were fascist movements, backed by royalty and big business, between 1932 and 1940.
It might seem an oxymoron to describe Britain as a – fascist democracy, but what’s this Govt’s game. Is that, however a good description of their methodology.
Agreed
The crucial question surely is not a subjective checklist, but what is lost over the past decades. Each individual will provide different answers but mine are:
Centralisation and the loss of local autonomy,
Steadily reducing press and media freedom,
Brexit delivered by a minority of the electorate,
Vilification of foreigners,
More anger and less tolerance,
Recently proposed reduction in freedom of assembly,
Cancellation of freedom of movement (the exit permit),
A steadily worsening social safety net,
Increasing costs of access to higher education,
Poorer and poorer government transparency,
Rising political corruption.
So.
I totally agree with the likes of Andrew and Richard Jane – we are seeing fascistic tendencies in this Tory Government – but its is a ‘very British coup’ type of fascism – it’s quite subtle, originates from the higher levels of the class system (where deference will give it credence) , and is the product of wealth retention and enhancement and is promoted by the media and internet.
Yes – it all looks very respectable doesn’t it but it is absolutely disreputable in every way.
The most telling points for me are what they have been doing to the legal system and the law. They are making changes that will only help them to become less and less accountable and more autocratic plus making justice almost impossible for those ‘who are not one of us’. This is also because as the ‘natural party of power’ and being totally Thatcherite, the Tories never forgave Labour for winning in 1997.
These Tories – like Thatcher before them therefore – are nothing but Right-wing reactionaries who are susceptible to fascistic thinking and behaviour.
And as to how long dissent will be allowed is only a matter of time. Especially if the opposition to it doesn’t get its arse into gear.
I think Jane should read ‘Britannia Unchained’ by Priti Patel and Dominic Rabb.
Basically this book makes out that Thatcherism has made the UK a free utopia where anyone can be anything and where if you have problems it can only be your own fault.
And that is what the rest of the book does – it slags off those who apparently haven’t take the opportunities Maggie gave them!
So now the Tory party has gone from philosophy to compulsion and will become more authoritarian as it makes us bend to their will.
For example to make people look for work to get benefits makes it look as though there is enough work out there when there isn’t. So job seekers are caught in a bind and their failure to get work or the right work is placed on their shoulders.
This is a truly fascistic way of thinking – to blame any failure on the people or other sections of the population – not the policies or decisions of the those in charge – it’s blame transference, buck passing.
The only flaws these Thatcherites see in their plans and philosophy is us.
Ahem…. Pilgrim! It creeps up doesn’t it. Just, for example, by making its language acceptable.
Like getting habituated to the labelling of people who have no job as – “job seekers” – instead of the honest “unemployed”!
I’m always reminded of Jeremy Hardy – back when the term was newish – quipping that the OAP was about to be renamed ‘The Death Seekers Allowance”. Sssh… some hayseed ‘J’ might get the idea.
Undermining the funding of and political independence of the law courts too.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/12/protection-law-politicians-judges-courts
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/19/the-guardian-view-on-judicial-review-its-politics-that-needs-fixing-not-the-courts
I see the site has nearly gone “full troll” now….a sure sign that someone doesn’t like what is being said.
I suppose you could point to the lack of violent suppression of opposition as being a sign that we are not yet in a fascist state, but then you could always point to the complete domination of the media and to the problem that the state broadcaster is now commanded by a person who makes the Prime Monster look left-leaning.
In this modern [fascist-leaning] country, if you don’t attract factory-trolls, you are not annoying the right people!
And you’re really arrived if they spell “centre” as “center” !
What’s extraordinary about our world bearing version of a fascist state is the freedom that we enjoy to debate just how fascist it is…
That will last until it doesn’t
You seem unfamiliar with how these things work
Erm………no actually – what’s extraordinary is that too many people don’t seem to have a clue as what is happening and how they are being manipulated.
The mistake of those who say we are not in a fascist state is in thinking that only if all 14 characteristics are present can it be said that the conditions for a State to be labelled Fascist are both necessary and sufficient.
Fascism, like any political settlement is a continuum. Any one of the above 14 would be enough to raise modest alarm bells and as each further condition is met those alarms become increasingly worrying.
And clearly there are further features that go beyond the erosion and denial of civil liberties to something much more extreme, and we should be worried that our government having ticked most, perhaps all of the boxes, may find it easier to go on to the next stage.
More to the point we could keep the freedom to debate these issues but not get any coverage in the mainstream media, or just get slagged off.
Also if we dont get the opportunity to put these ideas into action then we might ending up not bothering discussing them.
Look at what has happened to economics teaching.
Remember what happened to Winston Smith at the end of 1984, some sort of ‘tolerated’ dissident
Re Winston Smith
Until he was shot of course
Much talk of Fascism but none of communism, an equally odious totalitarian blot on history.
I think what we can gather from all this is that the more power granted to a government the worse things seem to get for its citizens.
Richard, you’re always calling for more power to be given to government. Have you learnt nothing from history about where this leads? It seems incredibly naive to assume that all the power you want to bestow upon government will always rest in benign hands.
With respect David, there is no communist ‘threat’ now and you will never have seen a hint of support for communism here. So very politely, stop being really stupid. Do you really think the NHS and free education a threat? Or supporting people some limitation on you? If you do my simple suggestion is that you seek help for your paranoia.
Mr Davison
Communism and Fascism are basically the same.
They both negate the personal in favour of the masses, and bend the personal to the will of the state. They both use propaganda.
They both use populist ’emotion politics’ and seek out and identify enemies within and without They both nurture greed for power at the top – a tendency to over centralise. Power – control – is what they were about.
One happens to emerge from the Left – the other from the Right. But they are both as odious as each other.
As for that other failed model – so-called ‘western liberalist capitalism’ – that goes too far in asserting individualism and self-realisation despite the cost to others and the planet and defers to and worships money. In fact its only value is money and the power that grants them. So western liberalist capitalism is also motivated/governed by greed. So much for western values!
Those Russian communists soon saw though all of this when The Wall came down. That’s why we’ve ended up with one Vladimir Putin. Having failed to live up to its supposed values and not setting an example, I can’t say I blame Mr Putin for the way he is.
And Western liberal capitalism it is not beyond using communist and fascist techniques to keep things that way. Propaganda is propaganda after all David!
All three – communism, fascism and ‘western liberal capitalism’ are all undemocratic forces.
I have to say though that China is a hard one to call. It has many faces at the moment. And this is why I can understand why the Chinese Government reacts against those who naively insist on Western style democracy.
Communism and fascism are wrong David. But there is something honest about their awfulness. But Western style liberal capitalism hasn’t been honest for some time and has been making life worse for a great many people for much of my life and no doubt my children’s too.
We deserve and can have better. But at the moment let me assure you we have a western liberal capitalism suffused with fascism,
I think this says where we are as a country
I think that fascism is here and now and the government knows it and nurtures it
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ew9TFnvWEAUwWnF?format=jpg&name=360×360
https://twitter.com/darrenrichman/status/1373407771534753800
Don’t care if we carve up our union.
Don’t care if Scotland wants out.
Don’t care if we trash our economy and bin entire industries.
Don’t care if we lose our own rights.
Don’t care if we lose our most basic human freedoms.
Don’t care if we break international law.
Don’t care if our government is institutionally racist.
Don’t care if we sell off our NHS.
Don’t care about food banks.
But don’t you fucking dare laugh at us about flags.
Interesting that Priti Patel is happy with an anti lockdown protest but not with women having a vigil with floral tributes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56469687
https://news.sky.com/story/lockdown-restrictions-should-be-eased-to-allow-protests-mps-urge-home-secretary-12251311
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-20/covid-several-arrested-as-hundreds-of-anti-coronavirus-lockdown-protesters-march-through-london
While fascists governments defend corporate interests against workers, corporations have to pay a price for this, namely they have to defer to the government when it comes to ideological matters. Boris Johnson’s infamous “f**k business” shows that he is scoring points also on this measure.
The Police Bill going through parliament says everything about how our country is being led in a neo fascist in a direction where the police and not the courts can decide on laws relating to protest.
If people feel oppressed or unrepresented they resort to protest as a means of raising the profile of a cause and in seeking solidarity as a group.
Most protesters do not seek to cause civil disorder though you would believe from the media that the reporting of some violent acts by a relative few protesters were more important than the detailing the legitimate grievances people might have.
It is believed if fake statements are repeated long enough a myth becomes a reality and informs our decision making.
The most striking example is the myth that labour could not be trusted with the economy as it was responsible for the financial collapse in 2008 and therefore can not be trusted.
If more people were aware that the Tories have consistently left the economy in more debt than Labour some people would not believe you even when confronted with the facts.
This relates to neo fascism by generating a politics of fear to any opposition and protest by marginalizing the electorate and minority groups through untruths and selective reporting.
The Government wants more control and influence over the media in influencing what we should hear and read enabling the media to set the news agenda rather than report on a wider sphere of important newsworthy stories that often do not get mentioned.
They offer platitudes and disingenuous empathy that are often devoid of action to address the impact of distress or grievances people might be experiencing. NHS Nurses pay comes to mind amongst many others
The Tories want to weaken the judiciary giving the Government more power to do what they want with less scrutiny and reduction in checks and balances. They want to gerrymander the voting system and may revisit their intention to reduce the number of parliamentary seats in the knowledge they will benefit electorally as a means of maintaining power.
The Tories ultimately seem to want to do anything to ensure the interests of large corporate business ( who are there paymasters) are maintained.
The wealthy may feel they have a vested interest in supporting a government who represents their vested interests as a means of maintaining their wealth and influence. A staggering 1% hold nearly 25% of the UK wealth.
I would suggest that Government policies may largely reflect the need to maintain the interests of the relative few.
The Government and its allies appear to be seeking to undertake more extreme measures to weaken the effect of protest whilst undermining protesters and marginalised groups,
Democratic structures, freedom of speech, the judiciary, wide reporting of political issues seems to be under threat.
I feel this is leading to less scrutiny, less accountability, less transparency, more accurate narratives and mistruths.
I feel all these factors constitutes a step closer to neo fascism and abuse of power.
Yesterday’s events in Bristol highlight why the accurate and responsible use of language/ terminology is so important – now as always.