Fascist Us and Them


The roots of fascism

In times of crisis a fascist government invariably reserves support for those it knows to be loyal to its policies and creed. Who can forget Margaret Thatcher’s chilling question when presented with a new appointment, “Are they one of us”? On hearing that, I recognised a fascist attitude. I could not reconcile it with the United Kingdom, a land of four nations that had fought off the evils of Nazism, who, together with millions of Russians and Poles, gave up million of lives for freedom and democracy. Today I hear us using similar fascist language, and without a blush, instituting fascist policies.

To begin at the beginning

A recent essay, alarmed at a particular union’s aggression, attempted to define fascism and identify where it creeps into our society cloaked in neo-liberalism and wage parity.

I became unhappy at one particular union’s antics, a union resolutely against Scotland’s constitutional rights. Is it fair a union in the modern world employs neo-fascist tactics and language? Is it only unthinking, not realising the comparisons? Unions represent workers, charged with redistributing wealth. They are not government politicians, though some individuals leading them may seek that role one day.

When we look at the USA, for example, the undermining of union influence has been an on-going strategy of the right-wing for over thirty years. Republicans want union power stamped out. Democrats think some people power is unwanted, allowing Republicans to appropriate democratic territory. In that they aide Republicans. One governor actually boasted his state would be free of unions within a few years. What happens in the USA soon happens in the United Kingdom. The USA is a warning to the UK.

Contradictions everywhere

Unions are not above criticism. Recently, in Germany, they were fined for taking bribes, money and hookers from Volkswagen to give VW an easy time in wage negotiations. Is an individual free to explore how a union is operating if he thinks it works against the democracy of his country? Why separate the people from the people? Us and them.

Surely organising a costly strike and rally against a council wholly in sympathy with the union’s membership is massive contradiction? The only conclusion is, there exist union representatives consciously intent on removing the very political party voted to govern by the very people the union exhorts to strike. This is the madness of us and them.

Fascism permeates everything. Smearing an individual is one tactic. The individual targeted is named an alternative Scottish nationalist, an “alt-nat”, meaning he is not sticking to the party line. What is that if not another version of us and them?

What is fascist rhetoric?

Over the gates into the Nazi extermination camps of Auschwitz and of Buchenwald are written the words: ARBEIT MACHT FREI – work shall make you free.

‘They’ can be cured by hard work and the fear of destitution.

To go further with this premise and stick with Glasgow, a working class Labour politician (not Tory!) a Glaswegian, coined the phrase “the something for nothing society”. Coming from a socialist this was a shock. She was saying there are poor and vulnerable so work shy they will take social security and unemployment benefit rather than find work.

The original name of the Nazi Party was the ‘German Worker’s Party’. The party’s doctrine was seek out, beat up, and if there is no change in behaviour fine or jail the work shy. They loathed unions. That is why one has to be careful when criticising a union when it purports to be helping its members.

Fascist ideology abhors welfare. It hates anybody that does not create wealth. The fascist, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco – they and there adherents are all the same – they aver welfare robs the individual of the capacity to look after him or herself.

A fascist state announces it will not use the nations wealth to support welfare ‘scroungers’. The unemployed are too lazy to ‘get on a bicycle and look for work’.

The vulnerable who won’t stray far from their home in their wheelchair are not to be pitied. They should lose state benefits. That is the core of the fascist creed. Us and them.

Workers and slackers

Fascist ideology opines there are hard working citizens and there are undeserving minorities – they are always classed as a minority in fascist-speak. Such folk are not of the upright, good citizen whom those minorities take advantage. Us and them.

They makes racism a national virtue. They aver our nation will be a lot better off if we block entry to foreigners. We are told a lie, that foreign workers take our jobs. In reality they contribute to our economy, unlike the wealthy who squirrel their money away in tax havens. Jobs are for predominately white people. Immigrants, and refugees fleeing from wars we began, are predominately tanned various shades of brown or black.

We move from a dignified and beneficial policy of employment and cultural exchange to one of blatant racism. Racism is part and parcel of fascism.

Labour party and unions

Not only did the Labour Party separate itself from unions by dropping Clause 4, it adopted the extreme right-wing policy of severely limiting immigration. Scotland has the opposite policy although immigration is a reserved matter.

In France the neo-fascist party Le Front National is viciously anti-immigration. It is criminally anti-Jewish. I ask the question, is there a difference between UK Tory policy on immigration, Labour policy and Le Front National? Us and them.

So long as we absorb and believe a warped doctrine, so long will we be open to fascist ideals. We will accept all rich people are a nation’s friend, the poor and the immigrant and the refugee are a drain on our society.

The mark of a nation’s humanity is how it looks after the poor and the vulnerable.

In their image

Fascism wants to dismantle the state to recreate it in its own eyes and for the benefit of the few. The Labour Party adopted the slogan, ‘For the many, not the few’. Labour does not include Scotland among the many. Scotland must remain the vassal province of English nationalism. Hence, if a Labour affiliated union can progress that ideal, that is seen by Labour as a good thing. Us and them.

That is the clash of ideologies that I question.

Scotland wishes to make its own decisions once more, its own choices, to stand by its own foreign policy, without gross interference from a neighbour state, and to do that while remaining interdependent with England.

No nation is fully autonomous, maybe Iceland

Most countries are interdependent in trade and culture with one nation or another, usually their nearest neighbours. In the UK Scotland’s ambitions of exercising free will – the very meaning of democracy – are traduced before they become popular. Scottish political aspiration is described as ‘grievance politics’ and ‘separatism’. Us and them.

We live in a society where thieving big business bosses are to be admired, called captains of industry, a military or naval allusion. Now and then, one crosses a line and steals too much. The establishment that once encouraged and protected him will make an example of him if his nefarious activities are made public. They wish to mollify the rest of us, to give us the impression democracy’s justice triumphs, when, in fact, democracy has long been erodedThe boss pays back some of the money, loses his knighthood, and lives a fat and glorious life. He is one of them. The fascist doctrine of wealth in the hands of an elite creates more wealth and stability is drummed into us every day. Us and them.

Survival of the fittest

Fascism can only survive if it controls all aspects of human activity. That includes the writing of books. The first thing Rupert Murdoch did when he bought Scotland’s most successful publisher, Collins, was to shred a critical biography of his business ethics. Is he a fascist? Not a card carry one. In mentality? Probably. He ostracises unions.

Fascism can and does impose itself on what an individual writes and publishes. Criticism, polemic, even satire is forbidden. Questioning decisions of the state is a crime.

Governments the world over are desperately keen to constrain and suppress internet activity, one of the great liberating forces of the 21st century.

To know fascism you have to be able to identify it.

In summary

My essays are not an end in themselves. They are a journey, an exploration, and attempt to discover knowledge, and in political terms, where my nation stands at a momentous time in its history. I ask what direction it should take to create the new society we talk of.

When writing essays highly critical of English colonialism or the English class system it does not mean I dislike English, in the same way when I say I dislike sprouts it does not mean I dislike vegetables.  (And no, I am not comparing an Englishman to a turnip!)

I suggest we refuse to be hoodwinked by fascist myths, that we are free to engage with others on any topic we care to discuss or feel strongly about, and to be flawed or partial or in error when we write or speak. How else do we learn?

The dichotomy between what is acceptable and what is unacceptable is at the very heart of fascist ideology. It demands there is a law-abiding citizen and there is the criminal.

That is the essence of ‘us and them’.



This entry was posted in Scottish Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Fascist Us and Them

  1. Tony L says:

    Another great piece. And I hope people take time to read it, and reread it, to understand the depth of the article and its relevance, not only to the last few days of over-reaction, but to how we conduct meaningful debate in the future.

    Thank you GB

  2. Pete Barton says:

    Same sentiments as above, GB.

    Wealth of Nations declared it, that the wealth of a nation is measured by how it treats it’s less well off.

    Yet there are many among us who feel the wind of fascism upon our faces.

    You seem to have asked questions that the wrong people dislike.

  3. Grouse Beater says:

    Thank you, Tony. My wife instructed I discuss others things this this weekend, but she’s not here to scold me for disobeying. The shrill denunciations need kicked out of the pitch, don’t you think?

  4. Grouse Beater says:

    I fear you’re right, Pete. Goodness knows what happens next. Keep in touch.

  5. Brilliant as always Grouse Beater.

  6. Grouse Beater says:

    Well, you have to show your mettle. I have no idea who the sods think they’re dealing with. Anyhow, I am grateful for all good wishes.

  7. Hugh Wallace says:

    Great stuff GB!

    Two good things have come out of this recent storm in a tea cup: first, your profile as a writer has increased significantly & I hope this means that more thinking people will join your regular readership. Second, I’ve finally been able to satisfy my curiosity (aka nosiness) & discover your name!

  8. Grouse Beater says:

    The only reason for the moniker was to protect family, high profile in their own creative line – but as you can see they are under scrutiny too. I’m angry about that. As for me, ‘hiding behind’ a moniker, I’ve actually published photos at various times, one is even on a car essay!

  9. Hugh Wallace says:

    I can only imagine how furious you must be. I used to be anonymous online as well & probably should be now but that would be bolting the stable door at this stage.

  10. grumpydubai says:

    Not only the ‘select few’ (please note we are neither select nor few) need to read these and your other words.

    Our fellow Country women and men need to see and understand what is going on beneath their noses before it is too late and we have a predicament we all must dread before we can all exert our freedom and independence. Thanks again GB.

  11. angusskye says:

    Excellent stuff, GB. I enjoyed that on several levels – for its actual intellectual content and for your refusal to back off from treading on ground that certain people believe you should not tread upon (only they can!).

  12. Grouse Beater says:

    Thank you, GD.

  13. Grouse Beater says:

    They underestimate my resolve. If only they had ignored the critique., especially the Daily Record.

  14. What an excellent piece. It describes exactly what is happening in the UK. What “they” don’t understand is that we are the “us” in this equation and there’s nothing “they” can do to stop us from the goal of self government. They can join us in building a fairer society, or become one with their inner fascist. If it’s the latter we will at least have the satisfaction of knowing that they are in the minority in Scotland.

  15. Justin Fayre says:

    Please be very careful
    From my own personal experience you can’t take on the establishment any more. The old rules no longer apply.
    Actions that would have been criminal a few short years ago now are applauded
    It is now a crime to write and say things that “any respectable person would find offensive whether or not the intent was there”
    Who is this respectable person?

  16. Grouse Beater says:

    A welcome endorsement from IndyScot. Thank you sir or madam!

  17. Thank you for another great piece- nailing a point which is so hard to deal with when we are in the middle of it. But this is an example of the quality of ideas and debate within the movement for Scotland’s Independence. We are leaving the old politics and establishment behind. They can’t keep up with it. Their shrieks are coming from fear of losing control: rightly so.
    We have to keep going. Well said, Grouse Beater- brave stuff.

  18. The Dutch philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd (1894-1977) endured the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. The family sheltered a Jewish woman.

    In his magnum opus “A New Critique of Theoretical Thought”, written in the decades after WW2, Dooyeweerd makes some distinctions between German and Italian fascism. Here for those interested are a few quotes:

    “Italian fascism was State-minded, whereas German national-socialism was folk-minded, an ideological difference on which the German nazis laid strong emphasis.”

    “Compare Mussolini’s statement in the article quoted from the Enciclopedia ltaliana: ‘It is not the nation that creates the State, as was asserted in the naturalistic doctrine of the 19th century. But the nation is created by the State which only gives the people the consciousness of its own moral unity, a will, and therefore its real existence’. The German national-socialist doctrine of the nation as ‘a community of blood’, as a ‘racial community’, was unconditionally rejected by Mussolini.”

    “There was a reminiscense of irrationalistic Romanticism in the German national-socialist ideology of the ‘pure racial community of blood of the German people’, though it was deprived of any Romantic idealism. It was connected with the old Germanic myth of a common descent claimed for all Germanic peoples. The mythology of Italian fascism, on the other hand, consciously fell back on the old idea of the eternal Roman empire.”

    “Cf. Mussolini’s pronouncement at Naples in October 1922: ‘We have created a myth; a myth is a belief, a noble enthusiasm; it need not be a reality; it is an impulse and a hope, faith and courage. Our myth is the nation, the great nation, which we want to make into a concrete reality.”

    “Their [ie such myths] essential aim was to elevate the historically developed nationality (the ‘cultural race’, or the ‘national State’ respectively) to a ‘spiritual power’. This power should be actual and always again be actualized and assume all-absorbing validity in the conviction of the people. […] The political myths also aimed at exorcizing powers that were alleged to be a menace to the deified nationality.”

    “Cf. Mussolini’s statement in his quoted article on the Dottrina Fascista II,13: ‘The fascist State is a will to power and dominion’ (‘una voluntà di potenza e d’emperio’). It is the tradition of ancient Rome which is appealed to here.”

    “Cf. the Duce’s essay: My Thought on Militarism (1934): ‘The doom of a nation lacking a military spirit is sealed. For in the last instance it is war that is decisive in the relations between States. In my definition war is the supreme court of justice of the nations’.”

  19. Grouse Beater says:

    Honestly, Mullwharcharcom, I can’t claim to be brave, but as one guy said when I refused to delete the essay, “You’re bloody stubborn”. maybe in this case that is a good thing. I’d be ashamed to have wiped the article to appease the fearful.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s