Race- Privilege, Relations, Racism, etc.

How so?

For what it's worth, I don't read it as bashing the idea of syncretism in itself (in the normal sense) or even necessarily arguing that following weird combinations of thinkers means you are a Fascist.

Because I think it's more the combination of traditionalist/conservative thinkers and New Agey stuff that's symptomatic of Fascism. Like it kind of explains a lot to me thinking of internet alt-right types liking to quote say Plato or Burke and Nietzche, and are also "Weaboos".

One thing that does strike me as a bit of a flaw with the argument is that there's lots of people who are Buddhists and combine that with a monotheistic religion and are definitely not Fascists and instead are progressive/liberal types.

And the other issue I would note is that some of the thinkers Eco mentions (i.e. Evola and De Maistre) have pretty iffy views to begin with and so I'm not sure if believing in magic crystals and reading De Maistre makes you a likely Fascist any more than reading De Maistre does by itself.

edited 2nd Apr '18 3:23:11 PM by Hodor2

That is exactly my point. Heck, syncretists are actually LESS likely to be neo nazis (unless they do things such as taking WW 2 Buddhism and Shinto and mixing it with, dunno, La Veyan Satanism)

Yeah, I agree (edited my post on the last page). I think there's some issues of correlation not equally causation, especially when you're talking about a situation where one of the pre-requisites is buying into at least one conservative (if not far right) thinker.

At the same time though, I think it's hilariously/disturbingly prescient regarding the literary taste of every "Internet Nazi".

Edit- The other thing though is that I don't read it as talking about Syncretism generally. It's more like how Fascists embrace traditionalism in a different way than other conservative movements.

edited 2nd Apr '18 3:31:04 PM by Hodor2

Some brain bleach for the Alt-Right video.

When the family tree has no branches!

edited 2nd Apr '18 5:42:54 PM by AngelusNox

"Edit- The other thing though is that I don't read it as talking about Syncretism generally. It's more like how Fascists embrace traditionalism in a different way than other conservative movements."

You're forgetting this part: "...Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth."

The kind of general syncretism you are thinking of is tolerant of differeing interpretations and ways of life, even celebrates it. Ur-Fascism suppresses differences of interpretation by pretending that all previous cultures and ways of life (at least those admired by the ur-fascists) really agreed with each other (and, not cooincidently, with the political beliefs of the ur-fascist making the claim).

White colonials and Native Americans really believed the exact same things. So did Napoleon and Alexander the Great. Everyone, in fact, who was ever successful in history was really a fascist. What a coincidence.

They might have a point with the similarities between Alexander and Napoleon, not saying that they were fascist, but if you ask me if they were similar. I would say yes. And honestly, if you unironically idealize one of them, the chances of being a fascist are high.

They probably think that the Native Americans were a bunch of Pacifists hippies that deserved being anhilated for not being strong enough. And maybe some Worthy Opponent view of the Native War leaders that actually put a fight

edited 2nd Apr '18 6:05:40 PM by KazuyaProta

Historically, elected representatives was something unheard on the world until the US became a thing. Essentially before the representative democracy what was known, was the Greek model of democracy, which was a mess.

So when you have your Napoleons, Alexanders, Julius Caesars, Elizabeths and the such, it was pretty normal having autocrats, kings or emperors to rule.

Fascism on the other hand, as it is codified is a 20th century creation, so it is useless to apply that label to anyone who came before the 1930's.

I know that Democracy is fairly recent mind you, but I am saying that Neo Fascists are fanboys of Napoleon and Alexander for a reason.

England had a parliament long before it colonized Northern America.

"No taxation without representation." The fact that Great Britain had a representative government but didn't include a representative voted for by the colony is one of the specific reasons for the American Revolution.

I am fond of Eco’s piece on Ur-Fascism, here’s hoping I got some of it right.

Syncretism is not Fascism by any means, it is Fascism that has to be syncretistic.
It will have it all: Plato, sure, and Gnosis, and Tarot, and the Rig Veda, and Conan the Barbarian, and Jesus (as an orphaned Celtic druid left alone among the unwashed Levantines who definitely didn’t deserve him), and giants mechas dancing to the tune of teen idols, and dialectical phenomenology, and the kitchen sink whose proportions allude to deep secrets known only to the initiates, who remain silent.

This is how the alt-rightsters can claim both the Holy Mother Church of Rome, Catholic and Apostolic, and Odin, Thor, Freya, Loki and the rest of the gang in Asgard, as their own.
Contradictions don’t matter as they are supposed to be transcended by an all-encompassing subterranean Truth which only the true initiates can fathom (but won’t tell about).

Said Truth cannot be discovered, only revealed; and once revealed it remains hidden for true enlightenment is aristocratic, reserved to the few deserving ones. The rest of you can be faithful followers but only if you were born of the good stock and endowed with the right stuff.

Moreover, according to that line of thought, I guess that when two groups (or even individuals) possessing shards of that same Timeless Truth meet, their disagreements can only be solved through a trial of violence at the issue of which the victor shall appropriate the shards of the vanquished and achieve greater Greatness, zere kan bee onlee ouane.

Damn, Fascists know how to look cool as fuck.

(I'm a Fan of Syncretism in general)

BBC reports that Latvia is phasing in Latvian language education for Latvian-Russians, who learn in Russian or bilingually in secondary school.

The Duma wants to launch sanctions against them and call it human rights violations.

Some scholars have contended—and I would concur—that the Klan and the Young Turks were the first actual fascist movements, having almost all the features that Mussolini would later dub fascism in the 1920s.

I guess that'd make them proto-fascist?

Basically - I mean, Sparta is often called proto-fascist as well.

I wonder if Qin China also qualifies. You've got a personality cult in Shi Huangdi, an ingrained policy of anti-intellectualism where scholars and their books were killed and destroyed, but otherwise have efforts to build a strong centralized state, which some here claim to be un-fascist.

Didn't Qin China collapse right after Shi Huangdi died?

edited 3rd Apr '18 10:19:12 AM by M84

I remember Hero was basically a treatise on apologetics for authoritarianism and asskissing the current regime using Qin China as a standin, so perhaps.

Yup. The First Emporer died while traveling in the countryside, so his most trusted minister attempted to seize power by pretending he was still alive and somehow "persuaded" his only son to commit suicide as the records show. Eventually some of the Qin generals discovered the ruse and a full civil war ensued, coupled along with some peasant revolts which took advantage of all the chaos.

Interestingly for a civil war, the government institutions and bureaucracy of the Qin survived to be used by every other dynasty that would follow, presumably because all of the warring factions agreed that if it wasn't broken and just had a dead emperor, there was no need to fix it.

Thanks very much for sharing the video, it was both very informative and has the potential to be a great resource to refute people who want to apologize for the Alt-Reich online or say "Oh, they're not so bad, it's all media bias" and the like.

While I could see the Klan or Young Turks as qualifying I think Qin China is way too ancient to call Fascist or proto-Fascist. Some possible similarities aside.

edited 3rd Apr '18 10:44:28 AM by Fourthspartan56

It's definitely highly authoritarian even if it may not necessarily exemplify the modern forms of nationalism fascism centers itself around.

Certainly, but Authoritarianism=/=Fascism. All Fascists are authoritarian but most authoritarians have not been Fascist.

edited 3rd Apr '18 12:19:24 PM by Fourthspartan56

I do find him interesting as an example though about the misuse of tradition/history. Because while I don't think I'd consider the PRC to be fascists (certainly repressive and fairly totalitarian though), it is interesting how a ruler who I'd think would be a better illustration of the problems of authoritarianism is being used by a modern government as an illustration of Repressive, but Efficient, coupled with this idea of him (and by extension the PRC) being invincible and if replaced, can only be followed by chaos.

Which is pretty ahistorical since Huangdi was arguably The Caligula, his son/successor is actually used metaphorically in China to mean Royal Brat, and the Han dynasty which replaced him was actually a pretty good/stable rule that implemented a lot of the Confucian/bureaucracy elements and improved on the earlier version of them in a Fair for Its Day kind of way.

Part of the reason I found this of interest is from the whiplash of reading The Grace of Kings, closely based on the founding of the Han dynasty and then going to a China-sponsored exhibit on the Terra Cotta warriors where they really tried to sell the idea of Huangdi as Our Founder (which granted, is kind of true) and really, really downplayed both his cruelty and the fact that his dynasty didn't last beyond his death.