Antifascism as an Ideology in Its Own Right - Essay Example

Introduction 'Antifascism has too many contradictions as an ideology' Fascism when defined in a broad sense is the opposition to ideologies held byfascists or organizations, people and governing bodies. Generally speaking, it encompasses those who have engaged in direct action or those who simply disagree with the fascist ideology. Political parties in the past and in modern days have been associated with political movements. Most of these latter mentioned groups are synonymous with certain ideologies that include socialism, communism and anarchism. During the early twentieth Century, antifascism was manifested in several events. One such occurrence was in Spain. At that time, there were strong clerical fascist forces that were introduced by Francisco Franco. Consequently, antifascist movements were formed to oppose Franco's ideologies. These latter movements were characterised by anarchist militias. Antifascism was also visible in Italy; antifascist's uprisings in the early twentieth century were responsible for freedom from fascists. Mason D ed, (2003) Perhaps the most outstanding depiction of antifascism was witnessed in Germany. This was during the Nazi era in the 1920s. Antifascists in this era took up a militant stand point. Antifascists at that time argued that it was necessary for them to defend themselves against those who supported Nazism. This was because they felt susceptible to their actions and could not be protected by another external force like the State. However that aggressive standpoint has been criticised by another version of antifascists who believe that violence should not be part of the principle. They argue that this shifts blame form the real perpetrators to the antifascists themselves. (Banton, 1998) In light of the above facts, some contradictions arise both in the definition and in the practice of Antifascism. These latter facts will be examined below with the purpose of showing that antifascism should not be considered as an ideology on its own right. Antifascism may cause capitalist dictatorships Antifascism posses the danger of changing capitalists governments into dictatorships Antifascism as an ideology supports the working class (bourgeoisie). This means that antifascists more often than not engage in causes that are intended on changing political ideologies of the day. Such drastic political changes cannot come without a price. Most of the time, the government of the day will rise up in opposition to these movements and consequently defeat the very purpose of the antifascists. This was especially visible during Hitler's time; it was realised that the only way the government could have power over its people was through repressive orders that overruled antifascists. With this in mind, antifascism beats the very purpose for which it was created and therefore cannot stand alone as an independent ideology. Contradictions in 'revolutionary antifascism' Antifascism per say arises out of the need to eliminate dictatorship ideologies. In that context, it cannot apply those same ideologies that it is trying to eliminate during achievement of its objectives; instead it must use other avenues that are less oppressive. Therefore antifascism goes hand in hand with democracy as opposed to dictatorships. This is a fact that is synonymous with the very nature and logic of antifascism. (Gray, 2007) However, there are instances when a support of antifascism changes to a political embodiment. It is possible to be against fascism and not be an antifascist. The former signifies an individual who opposes ideas/ ideologies brought forward by fascists. Such people regard acts committed by people such as Hitler and Franco as appalling. However, an antifascist is one who takes up a political standpoint against a threat or a fascist state and they regard that party as an enemy that must be eliminated at all costs. This therefore means that the aspect of 'revolutionary antifascism' inevitably becomes a contradiction since it embraces a communist element. The problem with communist ideas is that they eventually clash with the original principles of antifascism. There is a very thin diving line between revolutionaries and antifascists. This is because antifascists are supposed to use only democracy to enforce change while revolutionaries are supposed to use communism to enforce change. But sometimes, these tactics may be employed by antifascists thus distorting the clear distinction between revolutionaries and antifascists and undermining the ideology. (Duave, 1997) An example in history occurred in the year 1936 when there were some Spanish workers that were against fascism. They did this by fighting against the State i.e. they wanted to restore democracy and they were also acting against fascists. But with time, the Spanish workers succumbed to institutionalisation. They began treating fascists as their ultimate enemies and those who allied with them became their supporters. In this sense, they became antifascists. There is therefore a fine line between those who oppose fascism and antifascists. The latter have political connotations and may even be considered as less effective. They are less effective because antifascism should not adopt anticapitalist measures to deal with fascism. This was seen in France where there were people trying to fight against the French National Front. However the women at that time did not turn up for demonstrations because they realised that they would have to abide by a social order which they condemned deeply. In relation to the above facts, antifascism is a concept that may be easily blurred or misjudged, therefore it does not deserve to be considered as an ideology on its own. Antifascism as a tool to further divide members of society Some critics of antifascism have claimed that the ideology serves to divide the working class into further categories. The only difference between fascism and antifascism is that one uses a the concept of ethnicity, race, culture etc to divide the members of society while the latter uses the concept of democracy but the end result remains relatively the same; creation of separate groups. Antifascism will differentiate between classes. (International Communist Current, 2007) Taking an example of a Company that pays all its labourers the same amount regardless of their race, therefore they depict the fact that all people are the same. But when the Company decides to grant union workers a different amount from non union workers as a result of antifascism efforts then there will be a sort of division within that organisation. Yet antifascism very essence is to serve as a unifying force; they stress the fact that all people are the same regardless of their backgrounds or other reasons. In this context, antifascists promote solidarity through the emphasis on humanity, but in the process of doing so they create another division made up of conformists and non conformists. In light of these contradictions, antifascism is not a concept that can stand firm as an independent ideology. Similarities between fascism and antifascism If antifascism was to be considered as an ideology on its own right then it has to stand out from fascism completely. However, this is not case; although the two ideologies have different motives initially; their end results are the same. Both fascism and antifascism bring about totalitarianism. This means unification and inclusion of members of the working class. The two ideas encourage participation in society. Fascism achieves totalitarianism through the idea of eliminating a certain 'enemy' which they have identified. This then becomes a common goal among members of the nation and consequently enforces totalitarianism. Antifascism achieves totalitarianism as matter of principle. It is usually characterised by movement or unions whose main agenda is to include all members of society. (Barrot, 1982) During the early twentieth Century the Nazis expressed their wish for more land by using the expression' better living space', this was one of the promises that attracted people to fascist' causes. It had the ability to offer them resources that they needed urgently. However, there was a similar desire in the minds of antifascists too. Most antifascist's movements have been known to fight for better distribution of resources especially towards the working class. In the end, the two ideologies both want the same thing. In addition fascism and antifascism use the same methods to promote participation of the working class. This was seen in Germany. Before 1929, the State utilised a number of worker's union to monitor the activities of the proletariat and to keep revolutionaries under check. But after that fateful year, the same unions were destroyed in order to keep the workers under control. Similarly antifascism is also characterised by the use of worker's unions. This is because these unions serve to protect the interests of the working class and to defend them against political pluralism. Such similarities between the two counter principles show that antifascism cannot be considered as an independent ideology because it is so similar to fascism in a number of ways. (Gray, 2007) Blurred definitions of fascism Because the very concept of antifascism is based on the opposition to fascism then the latter concept should have very clear definitions. This means that any lack of clarity in the definition of fascism means that there will also be a lot of discrepancies in the definition of antifascism. Consequently undermining antifascism as an ideology on is own. Fascism has started being misused in modern day parliaments especially in regard to opposing members. It is common for one party to label another fascist. It is also common to find other countries calling others the same. This usually occurs when a certain country seems to be a strong capitalist State. (Diner, 1945) Fascism has lost its relevance in modern day society especially developed capitalist states. This is because of the fact that there are no real parties and States that can be seen to adhere to the main principles in Fascism. These are; unifying Capital and also strengthening the state. A real fascist state has those two main objectives but they usually fail in the achievement of those two objectives because fascism mostly serves to divide the State rather than unify it. Since most fascist activities are related to history rather than modern day then antifascism as a counter ideology to fascism will also not be valid today. Antifascism fails to achieve revolutions Besides this, antifascism employs the use of labour unions. This is because these unions perpetuate the idea that all are equal regardless of their differences and that they should be treated equally. However, these unions mostly focus on interests of the working class at that moment. In the early twentieth Century, it meant that they could not focus on general problems in the State like reorganising Capital. It eventually became an obstacle towards revolution. The unions were supporters of Capitalism but they got derailed from their main objective by trying to serve their own interests or trying to ensure their survival. This was mostly emphasised between 1918 to1921 where there was an attempt at a revolution in Germany but it failed totally (Duave, 1997) Antifascism is a disguise of capitalist reforms Antifascism is not an independent ideology because there are some hidden ideas that can be revealed after critically examining the principle. Antifascism asserts that it is protecting the bourgeois by fighting for democracy that was let down by Capital. In so doing, the principle serves to unite two varying concepts; that is, capitalist reform and the working class. Antifascists aim at achieving more and more democracy for the working class in the context of Capitalism. In the process of doing so, there is gradual change in democracy. (Key, 2006) Consequently, what antifascism achieves is the acquisition of power by Capital. If antifascism is continuously applied within a given State then it serves to partition the State even further. Antifascism takes up an illusionary stand point; it tries to unify society through democracy. But this is never an effective way to solve the problem of a separated society. What antifascism achieves is simply to strengthen the State instead of enforcing a democratic State. In light of the above facts, antifascism is illusionary and achieves separate results from what it had initially intended. It should therefore not be considered as an ideology on its own right. Antifascism as a rigid principle There are a number of contradictions that arise in the process of understanding antifascism. This arises from the fact that antifascism sometimes has idealists' views. The principle has demonstrated throughout history that it does not adjust to change. This implies that there have been some struggles witnessed before in history but these class struggles have not served to change antifascism for the better. Sometimes the idea can be considered as an attempt to preach a set of what it considers as truth to a world that is either ignorant to those so called truths or they simply make the choice of not listening. However, it must be remembered that such a revelation as stated above does not imply a support of fascism. There is a tendency of classifying people who point out some weaknesses in antifascism as supporters of fascism but this is not necessarily true. It simply demonstrates that there some weaknesses in the idea of antifascism and it should therefore not be considered as an ideology on its own. (Gray, 2007) Can antifascism solve the problem of racism No For antifascism to be consider as an ideology on its own, then it should at least have the capability of solving one of the worst problems that afflict society and divide it; racism. Antifascism tends to miss out the true causes of racism. This is mostly because there are a number of underlying issues that are not highlighted by the principle. Antifascism treats racism as a separate issue that can be included in the main agenda of anti capitalism. To effectively manage racism, one ought to bring about a principle that enforces ideas that are exactly opposite racism. (Camatte, 1988) The major cause of racism is the fact that some people consider others as different from them. (Lentin, 2004) Therefore an ideology that can effectively fight racism is one that holds the views that all people are the same. That all people in society have a common aspect; that is their humanity. However, what antifascism focuses on is class struggles. It is not a common thing to hear an antifascist saying that a 'white' worker should be paid the same as a 'black' worker, but you may hear them complaining about the differences between what a 'boss' earns and what a 'normal' worker earns. This means that their focus is different; they tend to emphasis on similarities between people of the same working class and differences between those in different classes. It is very common to see various class movements that unify the proletariat but cannot combat racism. This nullifies the validity of considering antifascism as an ideology on its own right since it cannot fully address the major problem in a separated society. (Barrot, 1982) Antifascism as an exercise in futility Antifascism has been criticised by some as an exercise that will continue with time and may never achieve its long term goal. This implies that it may be an exercise in futility. In the Book 'fascism antifascism' Jean Barrot (1982) asserts that 'The struggle for democracy is not a short cut allowing workers to make the revolution without realising it. The proletariat will destroy totalitarianism only by destroying democracy and all political forms at the same time. Until then there will be a succession of 'fascist' and 'democratic systems in time and space...' There is therefore no need to concretise an ideology that s based on a struggle that is continuous with time. Differences between root causes of fascism and antifascism Antifascism tends to lack a depth necessary to tackle the problems of fascism. Antifascism fails to understand the root cause of fascism. There is a certain level that the ideology of fascism reached people's minds that antifascists do not understand or if they do, then they do not portray it very well. Fascism managed to capture the appeal of the masses by its ability to have relevance in the day to day endeavours of members of society. The driving force behind fascism is its ability to offer solutions that can be applied directly to people's lives. The genocides that come with it are not the main reason why people are attracted to fascist causes, according to these people; the genocides are simply a means of achieving an end. This end happens to be an enrichment of their daily lives. It should be noted that the solutions that fascism claims to offer to members of society are of course false. They end up exposing contradictions that have been brought about by capitalism. (Gray, 2007) Aside from that, fascism tends to go back to the past. It is somehow able to mask the idea that mass murder is contradictory to capitalism; a stand point which they strongly support and assert. So in this sense, fascism is a state of false consciousness. For example if a swastika reactionary started making life very difficult to his 'enemies' or even killing them horrendously, then it can be very difficult for such reactionaries to pull mass support. But if they demonstrated that those atrocities would one way or another solve someone's problems then maybe their support would differ. Fascism is a deep ideology because of its ability to use liberal rhetoric; since antifascism is itself a form of capitalism. But the main difference between antifascism and fascism is the fact that fascism can be able to use violence in the process of imposing commodity relations to the proletariat. Besides this, fascism has the ability to mutate with time while still holding on to its fundamental principles. Therefore antifascists should understand the deeper truths. In this case, the one thing that remains constant even as fascism mutates is the fact that the latter clearly opposes internationalism and brings out nationalism as a by product. (Stewart, 1995) The above issues highlight the fact that there are some inadequacies in the way antifascism tackles fascism. The very nature of antifascism is negative i.e. it takes that standpoint; therefore there is high chance that adherents who feel that they lack a material stake in society may very quickly change to become fascists. This idea reinforces the fact that antifascism should not be considered as an ideology on its own. Conclusion Antifascism should be considered as an ideology on its own right because there are several contradictions in principle. First of all, there is lack of clarity in defining revolutionaries and antifascists and these latter terms may be misapplied. Besides that, there is the possibility of antifascism still dividing society but on a different basis from fascism; that of working classes. In addition antifascism is not too different from fascism. This is because of the tactics it uses to achieve its goals and also the end results i.e. unions and totalitarianism respectively. The latter elements are also present in fascism thus presenting a contradiction. Another contradiction can be seen in the fact that Antifascism is illusionary; it tries to solve problems through democracy and instead increases more Capitalist power. Antifascism faces the danger of being a continuous struggle that never achieves its end goals since democracy has to be destroyed before fascism is eliminated and this cannot be achieved. (Gray, 2007) Antifascism as an ideology is also not viable because most of initial intentions are hardly achieved, for example, antifascism may cause dictatorships through attempts at changing political ideologies. The ideology is unable to achieve revolutions as has been shown by many instances in history. Antifascism has also been unable to tackle the issue of racism by deemphasising issues of humanity and focusing on class movements. Lastly, antifascism fails to understand the root causes of fascism and may therefore not be effective as an ideology that can stand on its own. (Diner, 1945) Reference Gray, J. (2007): Antifascism; the worst product of fascism; retrieved from http://www.geocites.com/ accessed on 18th January 2008 Diner, D. (1945): on the ideology of Antifascism; a journal by Diner Duave, G. (1997): The eclipse and re-emergence of the communist movement; Antagonism Press Barrot, J (1982): Fascism/Antifascism; Black Cat Press ICC (1962): the Italian Communist left; a contribution to the History of Revolution Movement; a journal by the ICC Camatte (1988): The Echo of Time; Unpopular Books Publishers Stewart H. (1995): Green Anarchism exposed; a report by the Neoist Alliance Key, A. (2006); Beating Fascism Anarchist Antifascism in theory and Practise, Kate Sharpely library International Communist Current (2007): Antifascism justifies Barbarity; a report by the International Review Banton M. (1998): Racial therioes;Cambridge , CUP Lentin A, (2004): Racism and Anti Racism in Europe: Pluto Press, London Mason, D. Ed, (2003): explaining racial differences, Bristol; Policy Press Read More

 

Read More