Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
We are all fascists now. No, you say? Prove it. Show me in the definition of fascism where that’s not us. Or me. Or you.
We observe that the word “fascism” has become shorthand for “thing I do not like”, and “fascist” for a similarly disliked person or idea. True, but there’s more to the story. Fascism is a notoriously difficult word to define, and your defensive definition will be challenged by the same people who accused you to begin with. There is no defense in definitions.
But why should you have to defend at all? The onus is upon the accuser to prove an accusation. Yet this is not true in the arena where this accusation is hurled. We do not elect the better man — we elect the one who is better at getting elected. This is supposed to be a proxy for a definition of the word “better”, what with the invisible hand making better decisions in the aggregate than the wizards of smart. Defining objective good is a fool’s errand, and the comparative or superlative of that word would make you either more foolish or the most foolish. Quality (in the sense of goodness) is suitability for a given purpose — giving the purpose makes the whole exercise subjective. This does not mean that it is meaningless, but that using the word in isolation can convey only vague things, the same way that “fascist” does.
“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.
— Saul Alinsky
Implied here is the real goal — pain. The reason he advises his co-minions to go after people is that they “hurt faster”. Thus the purpose behind all of this is to maximize pain in the short term. Expanding scope we see that everything the Democrats are up to is connected by this thread — to cause pain throughout society, for it is not Republicans that they wish to change, but society, and as Hitler observed, you cannot motivate a satisfied people.
What they want from Republicans is silence or entertainment. We can die quietly or die in their Colosseum. Most should die quietly, but enough should die loudly that the masses are placated. Inflation? Trannies grooming children in the library and teaching school? Stolen elections? Die. Die, fascist, die.
Triumphal Marx/Lenin/Gramsci/Alinsky-ism is not about to slow down and reflect upon the validity of accusations, or the burden of proof. Its purpose is pain and if it cannot kill you yet, it must have your complicity. After all, it has the complicity of huge swathes of the population — why do you think they joined? Most of these people do not even know the master they serve, but will defend to their dying breath its right to deprive you of your rights. You are not a citizen, and you do not have rights to be weighed in balance with the rights of others. You are an obstacle, mere trash to be spotted, spiked, and binned. A fascist.
Perhaps we should each go about with our trousers about our ankles, hopping and holding on, struggling to preserve a little dignity and a little more life. Orwell said that he could not shoot a fascist in such a condition, as a man hopping about trying to hold his pants up is not a fascist but a man. For me, one of the pivotal scenes in the movie Doctor Zhivago was when a Bolshevik simply shot a Russian officer standing atop a barrel, exhorting the deserters to re-group. The thing was at a decision point, and once the man was shot, the rest was accomplished. As goes a scene, so goes the movie. Unfortunately, we are not up against Orwell who held his fire. We are provoked and confronted by the grim Bolshevik. We are not arguing a point — we are fighting for our lives and the life of the Republic.
With the ritual desecration of Trump (and by extension, the very real desecration of the Republic) now well underway, the officer has been shot. Laws? Standards of proof? Argument? Just so much standing on a barrel.
The war is upon us, and the epithet “fascist” is used by the left to freeze us in fear (who wants to be called a fascist?) and indecision (what can I do about this accusation?), to personalize resistance to the death of the Republic as a character flaw (racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe — deplorable!), to polarize our stance (you are either with the woke crowd, or you are beneath response, beneath contempt, beneath human). This is done even as the big-state machinery increasingly displays (unashamedly) the traits commonly or formally associated with fascism. Ask why we are “fascists”, and that just proves our fascism. Only a fascist would ask such a question, and dishonestly.
So get used to it. There is no arguing when you are accused of fascism. You must understand what the accusation really means: “I care neither for your words, nor your life. I will kill you and enslave your children, who will revile your memory first for your weakness, then for your fascism, and then when it is too late and they finally understand, once more for your weakness.” Currently, the death and enslavement are mostly metaphorical, but not always — increasingly not so.
When the power structure calls you a fascist, that’s not an argument. That’s a threat. So far, it works well. What do you do when you see something that you like, and then notice that the author of the remark is pilloried as a fascist? Do you jump up in defense? No, of course you do not. Neither do I. What good would it do? Why would you stand athwart the tracks yelling anything? There’s a train coming.
The best you can do is reject, revile, refuse those who accuse you. You will not change any minds save perhaps through your example, which at any rate will not be observed in the midst of an argument, least of all by the person who has accused you. In my own experience, make a stone of your heart, and a fortress of your mind. Ignore the derogatory claims that you are in a bubble, or have created a comfortable region of epistemological closure. That’s just the fury of ineffective losers who cannot conquer your mind. You need not (and can not anyway) justify your ideas, your thought processes, your conclusions, or your decisions to a post-logic hostile mob — not even to one of them. In this time of “division”, we have become people from very different, and hostile tribes. It is inertia and ignorance to try to remain somehow neutral. Make your choice, cast your vote, put on your armor, and be prepared to exercise your chosen metaphor.
You fascist.Published in