A Whiff? You Think?

I didn’t know whether to laugh or to cry in reaction to the slug at James Holmes’s post at The National Interest:

Bottom line, there’s a whiff of the 1930s in the air in East Asia today.

Of course there is. What you smell is fascism and it’s made a tremendous recovery.

Let me start by defining my terms. “Fascism” is tricky to define. People are inevitably moved to define it so as to exculpate themselves. If there is such a thing as generic fascism, I would say that it has the following characteristics:

• Although generally characterized as “authoritarian”, I would say it is not merely authoritarian but totalitarian, ultimately seeking state control over every aspect of life—politics, the economy, religion, you name it.
• Underscore: state control
• State socialism and state capitalism
• It tends to oppose both liberal democracy and conservatism.
• It is frequently accompanied by strong nationalism, even ultranationalism.
• It is also frequently accompanied by an appeal to modernism, science, etc.
• It is also frequently millennialist or apocalyptic.
• There is also frequently an emphasis on a charismatic leader.

I would also say that the expression of fascism varied from country to country, i.e. German fascism was not identical to Italian, Russian, American, or Japanese.

When I look at the 1930s what I see is that the dominant political thrust was fascistic, not just in Germany and Italy but in the Soviet Union and here in the United States as well. Naziism was the expression of fascism in Germany, Stalinism in the Soviet Union, but the New Deal was the expression of fascism in the United States.

I recognize that many if not most Americans would bitterly reject that characterization but I think they’re making distinctions without differences and looking at it backwards. That the expression of fascism in the United States would be the New Deal is not a condemnation of the U. S. or Roosevelt. It shows how much more benign our institutions are than Germany’s or Russia’s.

Now fast forward to the 21st century. It is patently obvious that what has materialized in China is fascism with Chinese characteristics: it is totalitarian, fosters both state socialism and state capitalism, opposes liberal democracy and conservatism, is nationalistic, and is increasingly focused on the person of its leader, President Xi.

That leads, naturally enough, to an examination of whether Trump is a fascist and whether Trumpism is fascism? The factors that say “yes” are the cult of personality surrounding him and nationalism. Maybe I’m seeing things through rose-colored glasses but I don’t think those are enough for fascism.

However, the likelihood of increasing fascism in East Asia is concerning and not limited to Xi and Kim. There’s also Duterte in the Philippines, Prayut Chan-o-cha in Thailand, even Modi in India.