ellauri031.html on line 210: Drakasta näyttää säilyneen myös nivaska papereita nimeltä Fasismin tuntomerkkejä, muistiinpanoja kirjasta Edvard R. Gummerus: Fascismen och det moderna Italien, Söderströms 1930. Lainasin tän kirjan kai Drakan biblasta. Mixei tätä kirjaa julkastu Gummeruxella? Edvard näyttää kuuluneen toiseen Gummeruxen sukuhaaraan, isä oli joku jääkäriliikkeen aktivisti ja tää Edvard asui enimmäxeen Italiassa (pohjoismaisten kielten lehtorina) ja Ruozissa (kääntäjänä), kuoli Ludvikassa, av alla ställen. Me on käyty siellä, lähellä Barkmanien Nyckelbäckeniä. Gummerus julkasi paljon vasemmistokirjailijoita, tää heppu ei ehkä ois halunnutkaan siihen porukkaan. Vekkulisti lehtorimme heiluu fasismin ihailun ja epäilyxen välimailla, ihan siitä riippuen mitkä sen omat intressit itse kussakin asiassa on.
ellauri053.html on line 1197: It is worth noting that Eliot apparently paid no attention to Yeats’s later politics: he does not refer to Yeats’s engagement with the Fascism of Mussolini and Gentile.
ellauri067.html on line 502: Pynchon´s early story Low-lands contains general immaturity, and racist, sexist and proto-Fascist talk. It´s his own voice in Pig Bodine, a notoriously bigoted and asinine sailor who recurs in later novels. The claims of racism and proto-Fascism are hardly substantiated, while the misogyny is pervasive. Women are considered as semi-inanimate objects upon which men have a right (or even a duty) of possession, imposition or defilation.
ellauri074.html on line 321: Cioranin ja Mircea Eliaden yhteydet Romanian 1930- ja 1940-luvun äärioikeistolaisiin liikkeisiin ovat herättäneet paljon keskustelua, ja niistä kerrotaan seikkaperäisesti esimerkiksi Marta Petreun teoksessa An Infamous Past: E. M. Cioran and the Rise of Fascism in Romania.
ellauri077.html on line 806: Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable." The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides.
ellauri106.html on line 531: Confident from its victory over Fascism and emboldened by the subsequent economic boom, America jelled behind what social theorist Jeffrey Alexander has called modernization or romantic liberalism. As has been the case throughout much of Roth’s career, the socio-political touchstone of his American Trilogy is the “patriotic war years” and the consensus culture that blossomed immediately afterward. “Everything was in motion,” Zuckerman says in the opening pages of American Pastoral. “The lid was off. Americans were to start over again, en masse, everyone in it together”. Reagan-propagandaa.
ellauri236.html on line 202: In a book like No Orchids one is not, as in the old-style crime story, simply escaping from dull reality into an imaginary world of action. One's escape is essentially into cruelty and sexual perversion. No Orchids is aimed at the power-instinct, which Raffles or the Sherlock Holmes stories are not. At the same time the English attitude towards crime is not so superior to the American as I may have seemed to imply. It too is mixed up with power-worship, and has become more noticeably so in the last twenty years. A writer who is worth examining is Edgar Wallace, especially in such typical books as The Orator and the Mr. J. G. Reeder stories. Wallace was one of the first crime-story writers to break away from the old tradition of the private detective and make his central figure a Scotland Yard official. Sherlock Holmes is an amateur, solving his problems without the help and even, in the earlier stories, against the opposition of the police. Moreover, like Lupin, he is essentially an intellectual, even a scientist. He reasons logically from observed fact, and his intellectuality is constantly contrasted with the routine methods of the police. Wallace objected strongly to this slur, as he considered it, on Scotland Yard, and in several newspaper articles he went out of his way to denounce Holmes by name. His own ideal was the detective-inspector who catches criminals not because he is intellectually brilliant but because he is part of an all-powerful organization. Hence the curious fact that in Wallace's most characteristic stories the ‘clue’ and the ‘deduction’ play no part. The criminal is always defeated by an incredible coincidence, or because in some unexplained manner the police know all about the crime beforehand. The tone of the stories makes it quite clear that Wallace's admiration for the police is pure bully-worship. A Scotland Yard detective is the most powerful kind of being that he can imagine, while the criminal figures in his mind as an outlaw against whom anything is permissible, like the condemned slaves in the Roman arena. His policemen behave much more brutally than British policemen do in real life — they hit people with out provocation, fire revolvers past their ears to terrify them and so on — and some of the stories exhibit a fearful intellectual sadism. (For instance, Wallace likes to arrange things so that the villain is hanged on the same day as the heroine is married.) But it is sadism after the English fashion: that is to say, it is unconscious, there is not overtly any sex in it, and it keeps within the bounds of the law. The British public tolerates a harsh criminal law and gets a kick out of monstrously unfair murder trials: but still that is better, on any account, than tolerating or admiring crime. If one must worship a bully, it is better that he should be a policeman than a gangster. Wallace is still governed to some extent by the concept of ‘not done’. In No Orchids anything is ‘done’ so long as it leads on to power. All the barriers are down, all the motives are out in the open. Chase is a worse symptom than Wallace, to the extent that all-in wrestling is worse than boxing, or Fascism is worse than capitalist democracy.
ellauri236.html on line 204: In borrowing from William Faulkner's Sanctuary, Chase only took the plot; the mental atmosphere of the two books is not similar. Chase really derives from other sources, and this particular bit of borrowing is only symbolic. What it symbolizes is the vulgarization of ideas which is constantly happening, and which probably happens faster in an age of print. Chase has been described as ‘Faulkner for the masses’, but it would be more accurate to describe him as Carlyle for the masses. He is a popular writer — there are many such in America, but they are still rarities in England — who has caught up with what is now fashionable to call ‘realism’, meaning the doctrine that might is right. The growth of ‘realism’ has been the great feature of the intellectual history of our own age. Why this should be so is a complicated question. The interconnexion between sadism, masochism, success-worship, power-worship, nationalism, and totalitarianism is a huge subject whose edges have barely been scratched, and even to mention it is considered somewhat indelicate. To take merely the first example that comes to mind, I believe no one has ever pointed out the sadistic and masochistic element in Bernard Shaw's work, still less suggested that this probably has some connexion with Shaw's admiration for dictators. Fascism is often loosely equated with sadism, but nearly always by people who see nothing wrong in the most slavish worship of Stalin. The truth is, of course, that the countless English intellectuals who kiss the arse of Stalin are not different from the minority who give their allegiance to Hitler or Mussolini, nor from the efficiency experts who preached ‘punch’, ‘drive’, ‘personality’ and ‘learn to be a Tiger man’ in the nineteen-twenties, nor from that older generation of intellectuals, Carlyle, Creasey and the rest of them, who bowed down before German militarism. All of them are worshipping power and successful cruelty. It is important to notice that the cult of power tends to be mixed up with a love of cruelty and wickedness for their own sakes. A tyrant is all the more admired if he happens to be a bloodstained crook as well, and ‘the end justifies the means’ often becomes, in effect, ‘the means justify themselves provided they are dirty enough’. This idea colours the outlook of all sympathizers with totalitarianism, and accounts, for instance, for the positive delight with which many English intellectuals greeted the Nazi-Soviet pact. It was a step only doubtfully useful to the U.S.S.R., but it was entirely unmoral, and for that reason to be admired; the explanations of it, which were numerous and self-contradictory, could come afterwards.
ellauri236.html on line 208: Several people, after reading No Orchids, have remarked to me, ‘It's pure Fascism’. This is a correct description, although the book has not the smallest connexion with politics and very little with social or economic problems. It has merely the same relation to Fascism as, say Trollope's novels have to nineteenth-century capitalism. It is a daydream appropriate to a totalitarian age. In his imagined world of gangsters Chase is presenting, as it were, a distilled version of the modern political scene, in which such things as mass bombing of civilians, the use of hostages, torture to obtain confessions, secret prisons, execution without trial, floggings with rubber truncheons, drownings in cesspools, systematic falsification of records and statistics, treachery, bribery, and quislingism are normal and morally neutral, even admirable when they are done in a large and bold way. The average man is not directly interested in politics, and when he reads, he wants the current struggles of the world to be translated into a simple story about individuals. He can take an interest in Slim and Fenner as he could not in the G.P.U. and the Gestapo. People worship power in the form in which they are able to understand it. A twelve-year-old boy worships Jack Dempsey. An adolescent in a Glasgow slum worships Al Capone. An aspiring pupil at a business college worships Lord Nuffield. A New Statesman reader worships Stalin. There is a difference in intellectual maturity, but none in moral outlook. Thirty years ago the heroes of popular fiction had nothing in common with Mr. Chase's gangsters and detectives, and the idols of the English liberal intelligentsia were also comparatively sympathetic figures. Between Holmes and Fenner on the one hand, and between Abraham Lincoln and Stalin on the other, there is a similar gulf.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 99: If social claims appeal to the people's struggle with poverty and inequality, nationalism offers an encompassing narrative, an identity that blurs the lines of social classes and hides the social fractures that created this very problem. While Fascism promises to protect workers, studies show how Workers' conditions worsened severely during fascist times, something that can also be seen in the strong ultraliberal component most of the 'new far right', and of the dubious democratic credentials of of neoliberalism, devoid of the philosophical background of political liberalism. Nationalism gives the two great enemies behind the woes of people: foreigners, and immigrants. The external enemy, the internal enemy. Both combined ensure that no one is paying attention at inequality or working and living conditions.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 112: De flesta fascismteorier har fått sin inspiration från vänster. Fascismen framstod under mellankrigstiden som vänsterns stora fiende. Att fastställa fascismens funktion i det kapitalistiska systemet blev en central uppgift. Fascismen sågs av kommunisterna som ett desperat försök av reaktionära krafter att rädda det kapitalistiska systemet. Fascismen var kapitalismens sista kort och dess nederlag skulle öppna vägen för den socialistiska revolutionen. Fel, fel! kapitalismen hade flera mera kort upp i ärmen, som vi har sett.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 122: Under de senare årtiondena har flera forskare betonat de idealistiska och antimaterialistiska elementen i fascismen. I stället för att se denna som en reaktionär rörelse har flera forskare betonat dess revolutionära och visionära karaktär. Fascismen skall således närmast ses som en protest mot det sekulära samhällets symboliska ödslighet. Jimmie Åkessons smärta figur i kostym och slips ger oss hopp i de här svåra tiderna där Anders Tegner ses i ylletröja och andra partiers politiker går med kragarna vidöppna.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 126: Fascism: vänster eller höger eller ingetdera? Gammalt hat eller något helt nytt?
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 127: I större historiska arbeten som exempelvis Noltes bok och Stanley Paynes A History of Fascism 1919-1945 (1995) finns uppräkningar av element som måste ingå i en minimidefinition av fascism. Nolte nämner antimarxism, antiliberalism, antikonservatism, ledarskapsprincipen, paramilitär organisation och totalitarism. Payne lyfter fram inte mindre än tjugo faktorer som förutsättning för en framgångsrik fascistisk rörelse.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 129: Som motsats hör på britten Griffins definitionsförsök. Han hävdar i sin bok The Nature of Fascism (1991) att fascismen var en särskild ideologi vars ”mytiska kärna” var ”en nyfödd form av populistisk ultranationalism”. Amerikanske Payne från Texas ger det ett hånskratt.
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 131: Payne is a specialist in the Spanish fascist movement and has also produced comparative analyses of Western European fascism. He asserts that there were some specific ways in which kraut National Socialism paralleled Russian communism to a much greater degree than latino Fascism was capable of doing. Why, just look at their flags. Payne does not propound the theory of "red fascism" or the notion that communism and National Socialism are essentially the same. He states that National Socialism more nearly paralleled Russian communism than any other noncommunist system has. Payne uses a lengthy itemized list of characteristics to identify fascism, including the creation of an authoritarian state; a regulated, state-integrated economic sector; fascist symbolism; anti-liberalism; anti-communism, and anti-conservatism. He sees elimination of the autonomy or, in some cases, complete existence of large-scale capitalism as the common aim of all fascist movements. (??? WTF?)
xxx/ellauri232.html on line 133: Payne menar att Griffins definition saknar centrala element som måste ingå i en fascismdefinition, exempelvis våldsanvändningen och den paramilitära organisationsformen. Griffins definition av fascismen är närmast godmodig, ja oförarglig. Den är heller inte konsensuell i vetenskapen. Det är bara något han påstår. Att han tas upp i detta sammanhang beror på att han i Sverige fått en särskilt aktualitet genom sin lärjunge Henrik Arnstad, som under hänvisning till Griffin hävdat att Sverigedemokraterna är ett fascistiskt parti. Genom att statsminister Stefan Löfven i ett pressat ögonblick påstod att Sverigedemokraterna var ett fascistiskt parti och hänvisade till Arnstad, har denna tolkning fått ett slags officiell sanktion. Fascismen i Sverige som under mellankrigstiden inte lyckades komma över 1 procent-nivån i valet 1936 skulle nu samla nära 13 procent av den svenska valmanskåren? Well NSDAP got 1/3 of the vote on 1932. In 1933 they got 9/10, being the only option left.
xxx/ellauri298.html on line 349: Wilhelm Reich ( / r aɪ x / RYKHE, saksa: [ˈvɪlhɛlm ˈʁaɪç] ; 24. maaliskuuta 1897 – 3. marraskuuta 1957) oli itävaltalainen lääketieteen tohtori ja psykoanalyytikko, Sigmund Freudin jälkeisen toisen analyytikkopolven jäsen. Useiden vaikutusvaltaisten kirjojen kirjoittaja, The Impulsive Character (1925), The Function of the Orgasm (1927), Character Analysis (1933) ja The Mass Psychology of Fascism (1933), hänestä tuli yksi radikaaleimmista hahmoista. psykiatrian historiassa.
18