CA: Yanis, this is at best a strawman, based on a false analogy, or a case of gaslighting about motives. Fascism today is more like mandatory vaccinations in Italy with huge financial penalties for non-compliance (now repelled by a ‘nationalist’ newcomer), like Bayer, Facebook, Google and the banking cartel, like identity politics of the social justice ‘movement’, like explicit misandry and professional victimhood of the feminists, like suppression of free speech by ‘Fact-Checkers’ and the political censorship by the Social media capitalists, and finally, it is more like forced mass immigration into Europe from medieval, theocratic cultures by faceless beaurocrats of the EU and the UN. It is more like perpetual war against secular democratic tendencies in the Middle East (from Libya to Syria) under the guise of liberation, but really only to ensure that those weaponised migrants keep moving West. It is more like ideological homogenisation of the masses by systematic and forceful normalisation of abnormalities under the guise of ‘diverstity’ (but not ideological diversity, of course). In a nutshell, fascism nowadays entails democracy for the the biggest companies in the world, and socialism, surveillance and total suppression of dissent for the masses by whatever means, striped of their unifying culture for the sake of atomistic ‘humanity’, which is actually a form of anti-humanism.
You had your chance to resist the global banking cartel, but you blinked and ran, and now you whinge from the sidelines about ‘fascism’ of those who are willing to oppose forced globalisation. The real fascism is already global and globalist in its essence.
Me: Seems to me that the thing both the culture of finance capitalism and anti-cultural marxism have in common is their arrogance, intolerance and intellectual rigidity. And of course the solution to their mutual character would be an economy, money system and culture based on the various aspects of the natural philosophical concept and self actualized experience of grace.
CA: I take you mean Grace in the sense formulated by Simone Weil. In that case it is indeed not something that can be generated through gaining rights, political movement; it cannot be given, it is not a right, but can only be earned precisely by rejecting the kind of high moral ground, ideological conviction and self importance of cultural Marxists. Being subjected to Injustice is in fact a way to test your grace, to endure it without resentment. This also reminds me of Nietzsche and his criticism of the culture of ‘resentiment’. Funny how those who self-identify as progressives (overlooking the presumption that their particular ideologies are indeed ‘progressive’, is more akin to Weil’s/Nietzchean idea of ‘gravity’, while ‘grace’ is way too fascist for them primarily because of its demand for individual respinsibility and moral burden. A Socialised burden is so much easier to bear.
Me: My point was that they are both riven with arrogance and victimhood. Grace as in the complete integration of opposites to the point of thirdness greater oneness is an ultimate ethical strength not the mere reactionary nonsense that permeates both of those ideologies.
As I advocate Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Grace as in Gifting which is a thirdness of Distributism hence I’m free to objectively examine both the RE-distributism of socialism and the problematic monopoly monetary paradigm of Finance Capitalism, namely Debt/Burden/Cost Only….and both of their ethical failings as well.
Socialism IS more humane than Finance capitalism. The problem is it (socialism) is a palliative. And when an actual solution to the deeper problem at the base of both is available, namely the new economic and monetary paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting….a palliative cannot be viewed as an ethical choice.