5 ms·

> fascism and fascist ideologies This is political dog-whistling. As Orwell pointed out almost eight decades ago: "The word Fascism has now no meaning except i

> fascism and fascist ideologies This is political dog-whistling. As Orwell pointed out almost eight decades ago: "The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’."[1] and is now obviously only a dog-whistle for fellow ideologues. This does not belong on HN. [1] https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...

Aeolun 2y ago
Even if you think it’s a dog whistle, Facism does mean something and it’s rather more accurate to use it now than say, 30 years ago.
- throw10920 2y ago
  No, it does not mean anything. Different people from the same side of the political spectrum define it differently, let alone different parts of the spectrum. If you don't define it before using it, it's a dog-whistle, full stop.
  - anamexis 2y ago
    Speaking of words having meanings, what exactly do you mean by dog-whistle here? I understand dog-whistle to mean coded language for a different concept.
  - wholinator2 2y ago
    Dog whistle for what? Please define what it is a dog whistle for. Maybe in that context you'll find the common definition understood by people using it
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    The word is starting to be used by the left in the same way the right uses "woke": It's become watered down and an over-used way to simply say "anything my side doesn't like". - Climate change is real: "woke" - Firing people in government: "fascist" - Compassion and fairness: "woke" - Cruelty toward political enemies: "fascist" - Expertise-driven and reason-driven policies: "woke" - Stacking government positions with loyal cronies: "fascist" - Rights for women, minorities, gay people, and so on: "woke" - Handouts to corporations: "fascist" They've become vague words that mean the same thing: "Politics I don't like"
    - moolcool 2y ago
      This reminds me of the joke about how republicans will defend criminal conspiracy by saying "Wow so it's illegal to make plans with friends now".
  - inejge 2y ago
    One could do worse than using Eco's Ur-Fascism[1] as the starting point. The man had personal experience and he could write (oh how he could write.) However, I'd expect that some would dismiss him as an inveterate lefty (he wasn't), so we're back on square one. [1] https://archive.org/details/umberto-eco-ur-fascism/umberto-eco-ur-fascism.lt/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/umberto-eco-ur-fascism/umberto-e...
  - soupfordummies 2y ago
    I've heard this dismissal a good bit often ("that's just a nothing word that means 'bad thing I don't like' ") but that's really just not true. It has been consistently defined through the decades, especially during the 20th century. Here's one common example you can find from the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary and it sounds pretty familiar: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
    - Aeolun 2y ago
      I kinda feel like that would work just as well with ‘right’ replaced by ‘left’. If anything, this definition is a better argument for the parents’s point. Dictatorship, belligerent (North Korea style) and nationalism seem much more important features than left or right.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wholinator2 2y ago
I agree the term is vague. But what then would you have us call it? The whole, constitutional crisis, outright flouting of the rule of law, suspension of due process/disappearing of political enemies in the streets type thing that is verifiably happening right now. Are you requesting that the word fascism be banned from HN? Have you seen the videos of legal college students being shoved into unmarked vans by unmarked and masked officers of the law? What do you call that? The talk of a third term? I'd love to say, "he's just blustering", it's what my father said but he's enacted just about every thing he said. Should he begin speaking about a third term i don't think we have the luxury to ignore that anymore. To annex our nearby "allies" who've now become a united front opposing any economic relationship. What is that called? What would you have us say?
- ablob 2y ago
  Why not give it a new name? We could do so with Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. There is no reason we have to stop giving these phenomena a new name. You can always talk about the similarities, but if you mix it carelessly you'll lose the differences.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
  >But what then would you have us call it? Most people say "fascist" when at most they mean "authoritarian". But maybe the latter's not scary enough for the boogeyman you want to evoke. Sometimes they say it when they should say demagoguery (which is, in my opinion, more than alarming enough of a word in ways that I can forgive people for feeling "populist" isn't). Quite often though, people merely mean "distasteful", but since tastes vary quite a bit, this might not alarm anyone at all. >suspension of due process/disappearing of political enemies You mean that when they send people back to their home countries because they're no longer welcome here? >The talk of a third term? From a man so old and in such ill health it seems quite likely he won't survive his second term? Mostly he's just trying to get a rise out of you. I don't like bullies, but when they do the "made you flinch" thing, part of me wants to smirk. Couldn't you just this once not flinch? >To annex our nearby "allies" He did it in the most asshole way possible, but offering them a proportionate number of votes in our Senate is hardly the insult they make it out to be. Especially when they're all dragged along by our policy already and just have no say in it whatsoever. "We want you to join the richest and most powerful nation on Earth and the benefits are truly too long to list" shouldn't send them running away screaming in terror.
treyd 2y ago
In the academic community the term still has a useful meaning and is often used appropriately in those circles. But you could substitute neoreactionary in GP and it would still be referring to real bloggers that are treated as if they're making legitimate and justifiable arguments. It's a serious concern, I think it's good to criticize this tendency.
pixl97 2y ago
Eh, I really do call BS on that. Umberto Eco's 14 tenants of fascism still stands strong and is highly visible in modern discourse.
- cuu508 2y ago
  *tenets
moolcool 2y ago
You do not have to look very far to find prominent voices on the right who are apologetically anti-democracy.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  Or even unapologetically.
- slt2021 2y ago
  if what you mean by anti-democracy, is government oppression, then the left and right both use this equally. there is only one continuum: liberty from government oppression, or lack thereof. I hope you don't seriously consider the oligopoly of two parties and small circle of connected elites, dependent on financial backing from ultra high net worth oligarchs, corporations, special lobbying groups - a democracy. This is not democracy, it is plutocracy (the power of capital/rich)
  - MrMcCall 2y ago
    There is bad, and there is worse, far worse. And, it's a kleptocracy, more and more, for a very long time now.
    - slt2021 2y ago
      US is not a democracy. Trump got like ~77 mln votes, which roughly compares to 23% of the population of 340 mln people. so Trump doesn't even represent the a quarter of US population. other countries are more democratic, in a sense that winning candidate represents larger share of people living there
laidoffamazon 2y ago
This is the opposite of a dog whistle it's entirely explicit. There are people being thrown into vans for speech right now. There are law firms that are negotiating to lift bills of attainder for their prior political litigation. They are _literally_ throwing people in El Salvadorean prisons without due process, including people that were in this country legally.

Aeolun 2y ago

Even if you think it’s a dog whistle, Facism does mean something and it’s rather more accurate to use it now than say, 30 years ago.

throw10920 2y ago
No, it does not mean anything. Different people from the same side of the political spectrum define it differently, let alone different parts of the spectrum. If you don't define it before using it, it's a dog-whistle, full stop.
- anamexis 2y ago
  Speaking of words having meanings, what exactly do you mean by dog-whistle here? I understand dog-whistle to mean coded language for a different concept.
- wholinator2 2y ago
  Dog whistle for what? Please define what it is a dog whistle for. Maybe in that context you'll find the common definition understood by people using it
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ryandrake 2y ago
  The word is starting to be used by the left in the same way the right uses "woke": It's become watered down and an over-used way to simply say "anything my side doesn't like". - Climate change is real: "woke" - Firing people in government: "fascist" - Compassion and fairness: "woke" - Cruelty toward political enemies: "fascist" - Expertise-driven and reason-driven policies: "woke" - Stacking government positions with loyal cronies: "fascist" - Rights for women, minorities, gay people, and so on: "woke" - Handouts to corporations: "fascist" They've become vague words that mean the same thing: "Politics I don't like"
  - moolcool 2y ago
    This reminds me of the joke about how republicans will defend criminal conspiracy by saying "Wow so it's illegal to make plans with friends now".
- inejge 2y ago
  One could do worse than using Eco's Ur-Fascism[1] as the starting point. The man had personal experience and he could write (oh how he could write.) However, I'd expect that some would dismiss him as an inveterate lefty (he wasn't), so we're back on square one. [1] https://archive.org/details/umberto-eco-ur-fascism/umberto-eco-ur-fascism.lt/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/umberto-eco-ur-fascism/umberto-e...
- soupfordummies 2y ago
  I've heard this dismissal a good bit often ("that's just a nothing word that means 'bad thing I don't like' ") but that's really just not true. It has been consistently defined through the decades, especially during the 20th century. Here's one common example you can find from the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary and it sounds pretty familiar: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    I kinda feel like that would work just as well with ‘right’ replaced by ‘left’. If anything, this definition is a better argument for the parents’s point. Dictatorship, belligerent (North Korea style) and nationalism seem much more important features than left or right.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

wholinator2 2y ago

I agree the term is vague. But what then would you have us call it? The whole, constitutional crisis, outright flouting of the rule of law, suspension of due process/disappearing of political enemies in the streets type thing that is verifiably happening right now. Are you requesting that the word fascism be banned from HN? Have you seen the videos of legal college students being shoved into unmarked vans by unmarked and masked officers of the law? What do you call that? The talk of a third term? I'd love to say, "he's just blustering", it's what my father said but he's enacted just about every thing he said. Should he begin speaking about a third term i don't think we have the luxury to ignore that anymore. To annex our nearby "allies" who've now become a united front opposing any economic relationship. What is that called? What would you have us say?

ablob 2y ago
Why not give it a new name? We could do so with Marxism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. There is no reason we have to stop giving these phenomena a new name. You can always talk about the similarities, but if you mix it carelessly you'll lose the differences.
NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
>But what then would you have us call it? Most people say "fascist" when at most they mean "authoritarian". But maybe the latter's not scary enough for the boogeyman you want to evoke. Sometimes they say it when they should say demagoguery (which is, in my opinion, more than alarming enough of a word in ways that I can forgive people for feeling "populist" isn't). Quite often though, people merely mean "distasteful", but since tastes vary quite a bit, this might not alarm anyone at all. >suspension of due process/disappearing of political enemies You mean that when they send people back to their home countries because they're no longer welcome here? >The talk of a third term? From a man so old and in such ill health it seems quite likely he won't survive his second term? Mostly he's just trying to get a rise out of you. I don't like bullies, but when they do the "made you flinch" thing, part of me wants to smirk. Couldn't you just this once not flinch? >To annex our nearby "allies" He did it in the most asshole way possible, but offering them a proportionate number of votes in our Senate is hardly the insult they make it out to be. Especially when they're all dragged along by our policy already and just have no say in it whatsoever. "We want you to join the richest and most powerful nation on Earth and the benefits are truly too long to list" shouldn't send them running away screaming in terror.

treyd 2y ago

In the academic community the term still has a useful meaning and is often used appropriately in those circles. But you could substitute neoreactionary in GP and it would still be referring to real bloggers that are treated as if they're making legitimate and justifiable arguments. It's a serious concern, I think it's good to criticize this tendency.

pixl97 2y ago

Eh, I really do call BS on that. Umberto Eco's 14 tenants of fascism still stands strong and is highly visible in modern discourse.

cuu508 2y ago
*tenets

moolcool 2y ago

You do not have to look very far to find prominent voices on the right who are apologetically anti-democracy.

dragonwriter 2y ago
Or even unapologetically.
slt2021 2y ago
if what you mean by anti-democracy, is government oppression, then the left and right both use this equally. there is only one continuum: liberty from government oppression, or lack thereof. I hope you don't seriously consider the oligopoly of two parties and small circle of connected elites, dependent on financial backing from ultra high net worth oligarchs, corporations, special lobbying groups - a democracy. This is not democracy, it is plutocracy (the power of capital/rich)
- MrMcCall 2y ago
  There is bad, and there is worse, far worse. And, it's a kleptocracy, more and more, for a very long time now.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    US is not a democracy. Trump got like ~77 mln votes, which roughly compares to 23% of the population of 340 mln people. so Trump doesn't even represent the a quarter of US population. other countries are more democratic, in a sense that winning candidate represents larger share of people living there

laidoffamazon 2y ago

This is the opposite of a dog whistle it's entirely explicit. There are people being thrown into vans for speech right now. There are law firms that are negotiating to lift bills of attainder for their prior political litigation. They are _literally_ throwing people in El Salvadorean prisons without due process, including people that were in this country legally.