Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:Italios wrote:Zizek basically had a similar albeit more, well,
politically correct critique of fascism - basically that in order to properly form a class collaborationist state, you must assign all collective blame to a specific group, whether it be racial, ethnic, etc.
Everything Zizek writes is (obviously) tinged with Marxism, so exactly as you said, Marxists must find a politically-correct (in the Marxian sense) way of analysing fascism. And the reason I didnt want to push too far on the other points was that I was mostly thinking about fascists in the Anglo world rather than the fascist countries of the 1930s, but I think the ideas are more or less broadly the same
Fascism presented an enemy to unite behind (actually multiple) but it's curious how they presented the enemy, as something that was inferior and in need of punishment, rather than just an Anglo-French sense of "civilising mission." It wasn't - we're better than them because we made civilisation, it was - they're weak, dirty, brown, they need to be punished by our superior jackboots.
And ofc Fascism widely used sex and rape as an explicit political weapon as well. What a surprise.
well, Zizek is a (schniff) funny guy. of course he's a marxist, but he goes against the grain a few ways. he could definitely be construed as a post marxist. I mean it's well known that the decolonization fellas - the Fannonists basically - really hate him, and related to that is his very outspoken on his critique of identity politics, which has wormed its way into popular marxism.
on your second part, I think a lot the reasoning the political enemy was viewed as something that needed to be crushed as opposed to colonized is because the conventional fascist threads - broadly liberalism, but specifically Jews - is because they actually lived in the western countries and had politically and financially active roles. brown savage living in Botswana or the great planes does not serve in parliament, control the treasury, etc. so the fascist would argue a very different kind of solution, however barbaric, is necessitated for a success class collaborationist nation.
again, this rolls right into Marxist narrative about diamet and the distractions the bourgeois provides the alienate the worker, but whatever.