Throughout the last few decades, the dominant ideology in the “Western world” has been that of liberalism. It should be noted that when I say “liberalism” I do not exclusively mean the popular American definition of the word, describing the centrist politics of the Democratic Party. Rather, I am referring to an older definition, the political ideology agreed upon by both Republicans and Democrats, supporting a representative government, reformist legislation and a capitalist economy.
With the defeat of the Axis powers, Deng Xiaoping’s capitalist reformism and the fall of the Soviet Union, it appeared by the end of the twentieth century that liberalism was, as Francis Fukuyama put it, “the end of history” — the final stage in sociopolitical evolution.
Now, in the early years of the twenty-first century, the naiveté of this belief is obvious. Far right populism and outright fascism are on the rise throughout Europe and North America with the growth of the anti-immigrant movement, the emergence of the white nationalist “alt-right” and the election of Donald Trump. In the face of the resurgence of fascism, liberalism has been entirely powerless to stop it due to its inherent ideological nature, which accepts majority rule and submission to violence committed by the state.
The re-emergence of fascism reminds me of an old saying, often misattributed to late nineteenth century Social Democrat August Bebel: “Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools.” In reaction to the failures of capitalism, fascist movements gain supporters by blaming the system’s failures on already marginalized groups. The neo-fascism of the twenty-first century has chosen for its scapegoats Muslims, and in the United States, Latinos and other people of color. In doing so, fascism protects the dominance of the state and the capitalist class, which are the true causes of the problems faced by the working class.
There are, of course, alternatives to the liberalism that have failed us and the fascism that now threatens us. I refer, here, to communism.
Just as my use of the term “liberalism” differs from the common American definition, so does my use of the term “communism.” When I say communism, I mean a stateless society in which all of the products of labor are freely available, not the bureaucratic systems of the Soviet Union, China and the rest. To distinguish this from the latter, the former is often called “anarcho-communism.” I suggest to all of my readers that, should they have the time, they read The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin (which is not, as you might think, about the struggle to give up carbs). This 1906 work details how such a society would work and directly addresses many of the questions you likely would have about such a system (as this column is already long enough as is).
Liberalism has failed to oppose fascism. Our only chance to defeat this dangerous ideology is through direct action against capitalism, the state and systemic hegemony. We need to promote anti-racism, anti-sexism and general opposition to systemic oppression through education. We need to protest against this unfair system through strikes, occupation of workplaces and government buildings and other forms of direct action. We need to organize ourselves into unions, cooperatives and communities based around the free distribution of goods. Only in this way can we fight back against fascism and work to build a better world.
