When I was young, people on the left used to refer to right wing authoritarian governments in places such as Latin America as “fascist”. Scholars would occasionally point out that the term “fascism” has historically meant something more than just right wing authoritarian, citing specific examples such as Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s Germany.
Timothy Snyder is one of the world’s leading experts on fascism. He suggests that today’s Russia meets the standard definition of the term:
As a cult of irrationality and violence, it could not be vanquished as an argument: So long as Nazi Germany seemed strong, Europeans and others were tempted. It was only on the battlefields of World War II that fascism was defeated. Now it’s back — and this time, the country fighting a fascist war of destruction is Russia. Should Russia win, fascists around the world will be comforted.
We err in limiting our fears of fascism to a certain image of Hitler and the Holocaust. Fascism was Italian in origin, popular in Romania — where fascists were Orthodox Christians who dreamed of cleansing violence — and had adherents throughout Europe (and America). In all its varieties, it was about the triumph of will over reason.
Because of that, it’s impossible to define satisfactorily. People disagree, often vehemently, over what constitutes fascism. But today’s Russia meets most of the criteria that scholars tend to apply. It has a cult around a single leader, Vladimir Putin. It has a cult of the dead, organized around World War II. It has a myth of a past golden age of imperial greatness, to be restored by a war of healing violence — the murderous war on Ukraine.
Fascist governments also tend to favor a mixed economy, with a nationalistic attitude toward foreign trade and investment. The interests of the state take precedence over the human rights of individuals or even entire minority groups.
No country fits perfectly into any single category. Thus while Cuba and North Korea are generally regarded as “communist”, neither country is exactly what Karl Marx had in mind when he wrote the Communist Manifesto.
In my view, today’s China is better described as fascist rather than communist, despite the fact that the country is ruled by the Chinese Communist Party. Like Russia, China has a mixed economy with both the state and the private sector playing a major role in many sectors. China is a bit less militaristic than Russia, but shares many of the other traits of fascist governments, including a personality cult around its leader and an obsession with an historical narrative where China is a once great nation victimized by outsiders. On domestic human rights, China is arguably even more repressive in some respects, especially in the Uyghur region. (I say “domestic human rights”, because Putin obviously places little value on the rights of Ukrainians.)
I still don’t believe it makes sense to use the term “fascism” to describe every right wing authoritarian government. But in the case of Russia and China, the label is increasingly apt—much more so than 20 years ago.
READER COMMENTS
Mark Z
Jun 4 2022 at 8:07pm
The first paragraph you quote from Snyder seems closer to the opposite of the truth, both then and now. Hitler and Mussolini enjoyed some popularity in other countries when people thought they were at least somewhat peaceful, but their acts of war discredited their sympathizers abroad (the BNP in Britain, Charles Coughlin in the US) rather than comforting them. Russia’s invasion and its initial successes caused erstwhile sympathizers like the leaders of Poland and the Czech Republic to distance themselves from him. Because fascism isn’t an ecumenical worldview (the way communism or Christianity, in theory, are), fascists in neighboring countries’ interests are usually mutually exclusive. The idea of a ‘global fascist movement,’ is incoherent. Successful fascism in Russia could, perhaps, induce Poland to become more fascist if Poles think Polish fascism is necessary to combat Russian fascism, but so far that doesn’t seem to be happening; Russia’s neighbors are, in fact, doing the opposite and fleeing into the arms of international alliances and federations.
Scott Sumner
Jun 4 2022 at 9:20pm
Mark, You said:
“Because fascism isn’t an ecumenical worldview (the way communism or Christianity, in theory, are), fascists in neighboring countries’ interests are usually mutually exclusive. The idea of a ‘global fascist movement,’ is incoherent.”
I agree. But it is not incoherent to talk about a global rise of fascism, even if each case is unlinked to the others. And as long as the West is non-fascist, countries like Russia and China have some incentive to ally with each other in opposition to the (liberal) West, even if it’s just a alliance of convenience, not shared goals.
TGGP
Jun 7 2022 at 3:50pm
As an example of that, the Danish Lutheran pastor Kaj Munk was worried about Hitler and thought a dictator might be necessary to keep the Nazis out of Denmark. He was eventually killed by the invaders.
I don’t think the term “fascism” is helpful in understanding contemporary Russia or China, even if the term “communism” seems misleading for the latter.
Jose Pablo
Jun 4 2022 at 10:22pm
“an historical narrative where China is once great nation victimized by outsiders.”
“Let’s make Russia (or China) great again!” is not a slogan unfamiliar to other “great powers” … it must be something in the water great nations leaders’ drink …
Makes me think that the way you get to the top is not that different after all: you just have to feed the same message to voters, party bureaucrats or semi-medieval subjects, depending on the case.
Jon
Jun 4 2022 at 11:44pm
Scott,
I agree. China is fascist. But Synder’s as you list them criteria are not what I remember from my school days. Rather what I recall is that…
0. Early 20th century fascists splintered off from communists
1. Rejecting the worldwide workers movement, in favor of national interests.
2. Rather than the state owning all capital, tolerating private firms iif those are subservient to the state.
China and Russia both meet points #1 and #2.
Paul Sand
Jun 5 2022 at 6:02am
From George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language“:
But it’s nice that someone’s trying to reattach meaning to the word, even though Orwell thought it a lost cause over 75 years ago.
Michael Rulle
Jun 5 2022 at 9:51am
Excluding your writings on monetary policy, this essay might be your most creative/insightful one that I can recall. It is excellent.
MarkW
Jun 5 2022 at 11:09am
Does it really matter what label we attach? It seems to me that the argument about whether something is Communist or Fascist or whether Fascism belongs on the left or right has to do with who’s trying to discredit who by association. Or is there value in the Fascist label such that we’ll make better predictions about what Putin and Russia will do next or how best to deal with them?
And is there anything to distinguish authoritarians like Putin and Xi from various Kings and Emperors throughout history? Aren’t the way that the seize, maintain, and project power similar? Or are there key differences?
Scott Sumner
Jun 5 2022 at 3:07pm
“And is there anything to distinguish authoritarians like Putin and Xi from various Kings and Emperors throughout history?”
Yes, fascists have certain common traits that many other authoritarian leaders lack.
MarkW
Jun 5 2022 at 4:27pm
And which of those would you consider the most salient?
Scott Sumner
Jun 5 2022 at 6:38pm
In no particular order I’d include totalitarian control of the media, control of the educational system, nationalism, militarism, authoritarianism, xenophobia and bigotry, fake history, misogyny, personality cults, etc.
MarkW
Jun 6 2022 at 6:49am
But aren’t we trying to distinguish Fascism from other forms of Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism? All of these elements appear to some degree — various ‘supreme’ rulers have had more or less tolerance for dissent and ideological & religious diversity. Greater or lesser control over the economy (whether by state ownership or intimidation of business owners or licensing schemes that permit only the connected to engage in certain activities). They’ve had varying levels of secret police / domestic spying (which, of course, is a greater risk now due to surveillance technology), and varying willingness to imprison or assassinate political opponents. Sadly, xenophobia, bigotry, a focus on fake (or even real) history of a glorious past, revanchism, militarism, personality cults, etc, seem to have very long histories — even more sadly because they resonate with a substantial portion of the human race.
So I’m not opposed to applying the ‘fascism’ label to Putin and Xi — I’m just not sure that really gets us anywhere. Does it suggest a particular way of dealing with them?
Scott Sumner
Jun 6 2022 at 12:34pm
I strongly disagree. Most African dictators are not fascist. When Lee led Singapore it was not a fascist country.
Robert Schadler
Jun 5 2022 at 5:46pm
“a fascist war of destruction” … as distinguished from a “non-fascist war of destruction”?? Think all wars, to date, have been about killing people and destroying things valued by others. There was a brief period, a few decades back, when there was some thought of a war that would just kill people (via radiation) w/o destruction.
Maybe “defensive wars” such as Ukraine is fighting are less “destructive” since fighting is on their own territory. Seems West, not Ukraine, is preventing Ukraine from trying to destroy stuff in Russia.
Cult of personality fit Mussolini and Hitler. Maybe Putin and Xi would want such a cult, but evidence for it is thin. Sinatra and the Beatles, in their day, had more than Putin in Russia or Xi in China.
There might be some merit in discerning a revolt against reason and universalism. See solutions to real issues via willfulness and particularism (nation, race, class, etc)
Otherwise Orwell still holds up.
Scott Sumner
Jun 5 2022 at 6:32pm
“Maybe Putin and Xi would want such a cult, but evidence for it is thin.”
I strongly disagree. The evidence is overwhelming.
Phil H
Jun 6 2022 at 12:12am
I don’t know about overwhelming, but there are certainly moves in that direction. Xi’s decision to remove term limits, and the establishment of a political philosophy with his name attached are bad signs.
Xi remains less invested in his personal image than Putin: no bare-chested photos or filmed sparring. His public appearances still follow the bland, robotic look of previous Chinese presidents. Long may that continue.
Scott Sumner
Jun 6 2022 at 12:36pm
It’s worse than you think:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbfI09-wSmo
Zeke5123
Jun 6 2022 at 9:06am
The PRC elimination of one state two systems re HK was arguably an invasion not quite on par with Ukraine but closer than many would admit.
With that said, I think the desire to term “XYZ bad thing” fascist is generally not useful principally because it produces more heat than light. Does it improve our prediction of say Chinese actions? I doubt very much. But now it is used to tar the American right as being politically aligned with China (hence the heat). And really my complaint here is that right or left — at least in America — don’t always correspond to international right or left.
Scott Sumner
Jun 6 2022 at 12:39pm
“The PRC elimination of one state two systems re HK was arguably an invasion not quite on par with Ukraine but closer than many would admit.”
Sorry, but that’s just absurd.
And the big problem with the American right is their association with people like Putin and Orban, not their association with China.
bb
Jun 7 2022 at 3:36pm
Scott,
I think both Xi and Putin are fascists. I also think the definition you point to is correct but missing two key characteristics:
A cult of victimhood – Xi and Putin both promote the idea that the entire world is conspiring against their nations
vilifying internal enemies, usually minorities, outgroups, the free press, and the opposition – Russian state media routinely places blame for the Ukraine war and all other problems on homosexuals.
It’s also hard to picture a fascist regime that isn’t highly nationalistic.
Most importantly, these qualities are deployed for the purpose of establishing an authoritarian government. That’s the best definition that I’ve heard at least.
I agree that not all right-wing authoritarian governments are fascist, but fascism is a proven and effective tool for creating a right-wing authoritarian government. So it’s not surprising that many of those governments have fascist tendencies. Orban does a lot of fascist stuff. So does Trump.
Comments are closed.