James Patterson, politics professor at Ave Maria University, discusses whether the New Right is fascist. They explore the definition of fascism and its characteristics, controversies surrounding the Iraq war, manipulation and exploitation of fascist movements, rising political revolutionaries, tactics of the New Right, and learning ideologies through video games.
American conservatism, particularly the new right, is not fascist and should not be labeled as such, as it lacks the specific criteria associated with fascism like a cult of unity and purity, a rejection of liberty, and collaboration with traditional elites.
The new right's lack of a limiting principle and its state of emergency mentality can lead to the abandonment of constitutional orders and the embrace of coercion or violence, posing a potential danger to democratic ideals.
Understanding the historical context of fascism and engaging with the new right's ideas while remaining aware of the potential dangers can foster productive conversations about politics.
Deep dives
Understanding Fascism and its Misuse
In this podcast episode, James Patterson discusses the misapplication of the term fascism and its association with conservatism in the United States. He explains that fascism is a specific type of badness characterized by an obsessive preoccupation with decline, a cult of unity and purity, collaboration with traditional elites, and a rejection of liberty in favor of violence or coercion by the state. However, American conservatism, particularly the new right, has little overlap with these criteria. Patterson argues that labeling all conservatism as fascist is an attempt to associate it with something bad, but it fails to recognize the unique aspects of American conservatism focused on free markets, self-government, and opposition to totalitarianism. He cautions against the lack of a limiting principle within the new right, as it often embraces a state of emergency mentality and is willing to abandon constitutional orders. Patterson highlights the importance of understanding the historical context and nuances of fascism when engaging in conversations about politics.
The New Right and the Fascism Debate
The discussion in this podcast centers around the question of whether the new right can be considered fascist. Patterson approaches this topic with an open mind, acknowledging that he is not a fan of the new right but attempts to understand their perspective. He mentions figures like Yoram Hazony and their positive visions for the movement. However, Patterson highlights the concern of the new right lacking a limiting factor in their arguments and their focus on a state of emergency and decline. He warns against the potential danger of embracing reactionary ideologies and the abandonment of constitutional principles. Patterson points out that the new right's opposition to liberal ideas often leads to a rejection of the constitutional order and a desire for strong leadership that may resort to coercion or violence. He suggests that the new right's lack of a principled strategic vision for America's position abroad raises questions about the consistency of their anti-interventionist stance and their potential accommodationism with other global powers.
Historical Context and the American Strain of Fascism
The podcast delves into the historical context of American fascism and its resonance with the current new right movement. Patterson explains that historically, America had a complex relationship with fascism, with some influential figures supporting or defending fascist regimes while opposing communism. He highlights the role of anti-interventionism in shaping American conservative traditions, particularly the opposition to getting involved in European conflicts. Patterson draws parallels between the anti-interventionist sentiment in the early American republic and the present-day new right's skepticism towards overseas military engagements. He also discusses the resurgence of corporatist economic policies and the desire to rig the system to favor conservative interests, which echoes the historical presence of fascist ideologies in America. Patterson concludes by reflecting on the need to engage with these ideas while remaining aware of the potential dangers and offering hope to those who may feel disillusioned by the system.
The rise of the new right: No enemies to the right and owning the libs
The podcast explores the rise of the new right, specifically focusing on the younger generation's inclination towards radical solutions and the use of explicit Nazi imagery. It discusses the shift from the traditional conservative approach of excluding extremist elements to the current trend of refraining from criticizing anyone on the right, regardless of their extreme views. The concept of 'owning the libs' is highlighted as a motive for young people to provoke outrage and gain online engagement. The podcast also touches on the role of religion and the syncretic cult of tradition within the new right, along with the influence of online platforms and games in shaping their ideologies.
The significance of religious syncretism and the addictive nature of owning the libs
The podcast delves into the emergence of religious syncretism within the new right, where young people attempt to reclaim traditions that are often unconnected to their own lives. It emphasizes the influence of online platforms, such as Reddit and gaming communities, in shaping their ideologies, including the adoption of extremist views and the fascination with figures like Franco and Catholic integralism. The addictive nature of 'owning the libs' is also highlighted, as young people seek validation and a sense of belonging through provocative online behavior, leading to the normalization of extremist imagery and ideas.
This week, Eric, Dan, and Dylan are joined by James M. Patterson, associate professor of politics and chair of the politics department at Ave Maria University, to discuss his essay from the Summer 2023 issue of RELIGION & LIBERTY, “Is the New Right Fascist?” What is fascism, beyond the most common Orwellian definition “that which is not desirable”? How much of the radicalism of the New Right is driven by a lot of young members who are “very online”? How seriously should we take the arguments of these people, and how much should we engage with them?