The rise of far-right ideas is a real problem, and we must react to
violent groups. However, we take a critical look at contemporaryantifascism. --- What is fascism? ---- The crisis stemming from the
First World War saw the emergence of fascism, a nationalist ideology
claiming to be revolutionary because it broke with capitalism (the
famous Third Way: neither capitalist nor communist). It advocates a
highly hierarchical, virile regime, founded on the nation as absolute
primacy and viewed as ethnically homogeneous.
The bourgeoisie may turn to fascism in times of profound crisis, despite
its program being inherently hostile to it. Fascist ideology then serves
only as the cement for mass mobilization, transforming despair into hope
for a new order centered on a unity of national interest placed above
class conflicts. This movement seeks to annihilate any challenge to this
national unity through terror, relying on both state and extra-state
forces. Mass militias drawn from radicalized segments of society are
mobilized to crush all dissent. The result is a militarized
dictatorship... serving the ruling class.
Fascism differs from a classic dictatorship in its legal conquest of
power and the use of militias to destroy unions and political parties,
imposing widespread conscription... for the benefit of the bourgeoisie.
An authoritarian, racist, or nationalist regime is therefore not
necessarily fascist. The National Rally (RN), for example, is not a
fascist party today: it does not have an organized militant base of
armed militias, only an electoral base. Only small fascist groups opt
for physical force (see CA 336, "The Far Right and Fascism Today").
Everything is becoming fascism.
Today, the word "fascist" is used apolitically. As soon as the state
becomes violent, it is labeled fascist, as if a bourgeois state weren't
structurally repressive as soon as any protest exceeds what it deems
acceptable. In France, the violent repression of labor and political
movements has intensified, but this doesn't make the state "fascist." It
simply resorts to authoritarian methods already in use (see the Paris
Commune, the Algerian War, etc.), some of which have always existed for
a segment of the population.
Furthermore, any opposition to left-wing values becomes "fascist" for
some. However, making racist or sexist remarks doesn't make someone a
fascist. This shift leads to labeling anarchist writings deemed
"transphobic" by certain postmodern circles as "fascist." Let's also
remember the Yellow Vests (GJ), labeled "fascists" in their early days
because their rhetoric didn't align with the sanitized thinking of
activist circles.
In short, current antifascism tends to be more moral than political,
based on humanist, antiracist, antisexist, and other values. Hence the
creation of broad, often apolitical, antifascist fronts.
The Political Impasse of Antifascism
By labeling the National Rally (RN) fascist, current antifascism limits
its strategy to elections: preventing an RN victory (voting for Chirac
against Le Pen, Macron against Le Pen, tomorrow
Retailleau/Darmanin...?). These fronts, primarily electoral or through
demonstrations, defend "representative democracy." Certainly, this
guarantees more individual freedoms than dictatorship, but the current
authoritarian tendencies are the bourgeoisie's response to the crisis.
If the crisis worsens, even so-called "democratic" parties could support
a dictatorial regime (let us remember the full powers granted to Pétain
in 1940 by the Chamber elected in 1936).
It is therefore essential to place criticism of the state at the heart
of the analysis of authoritarianism. Fascism or authoritarian tendencies
cannot be fought by defending current democracy. That would be asking
the bourgeoisie not to be authoritarian when it has chosen to be so.
Fighting the far right and its fascist leanings
We are not asking the state to dissolve far-right groups. Banning them
would not make them disappear, but would give the illusion that the
state is protecting us, whereas these measures would backfire as soon as
we become too troublesome. We also reject the "republican front," which
pushes us to ally ourselves with the representatives of the exploiters.
Combating the rise of the far right-and the potential rise of fascism if
the crisis worsens-does not involve resorting to the "democratic" state.
Faced with attacks by fascist groups in certain cities, we must stand
together physically, at the grassroots level, alongside other activists.
But confining ourselves to a power struggle within small groups is a
dead end; these groups already have ties to the police and the military,
and are likely to receive increasing support from the state apparatus in
the future.
To counter the far right, we must wrest from it the monopoly on
widespread discontent. Electoral "republican fronts" with bourgeois
parties will not achieve this. We need radical social movements that
attract the most exploited and oppressed populations. This presupposes
that there is no thought police excluding, in the name of "antifascism,"
those who do not share the verbal and political codes of the "radical left."
Conclusion
Like the Yellow Vests, only radical movements can pull us out of social
resignation and the drift toward nationalism and reaction. Unlike the
Yellow Vests, the objective should not be focused on confrontations with
law enforcement, but on confronting the capitalist class outside the
current institutional framework... and therefore outside the electoral
framework (including the National Rally).
RV
http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4570
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten