Jim Devine wrote: > > I'm afraid that the rich countries are in the process of downward > harmonization with the standards of the poor countries, an end to the > long period of global uneven development that divided the rich from > poor countries. The rich _people_ of course won't suffer much from > this, but the rich countries are suffering and will so. Socialism -- > if it comes -- will likely be a global matter. > > It's quite possible that we'll have a fascistic interlude in the rich > countries, as people fight to preserve national privileges. (Yeah, I > know. Some pen-pals see us as already having fascism. You ain't seen > nothing yet?)
That the core bourgeois democracies are moving (rather steadily) towards more authoritarian forms, and that this move will continue, isn't just possible but (a) it's happening and (b) will probably intensify unless new left forces mobilize (which seems unlikely). But only if new left forces not only DO emerge but become a real threat will that movement towards authoritarianism take a form even remotely analogous to the fascist movements of the inter-war period. From the capitalist point of view fascism is a recourse of desperation, a last-ditch effort through naked repression to fend off revolution. As a left slogan at this time (and at any time since 1945) the cry of "Fascism" (to use an old-fashion term) is pure opportunism, a foolish hunt for a political shortcut. It serves primarily as a way of justifying an abject tailing of the DP. And theoretically the slogan reveals a real poverty of imagination, a serious inability to understand that tyranny can come and usually does come in constantly changing forms -- it is another version of the military error of preparing to fight the last war and thus being blinded to the dangers of the next war. It is as foolish a slogan as (say) the slogan, "Beware Divine-Right Monarchy," would be. Carrol
