Taking on RATs

Lets understand U.S. 'Postfacism' and Rightwing Authoritarian Tendencies

By Bill Fletcher, Jr.

There is a largely academic debate as to whether MAGA constitutes an explicitly fascist force and, if so, the implications. There are several conclusions that we can draw about MAGA that go beyond the question of the personality and mental health of Donald Trump.

First, MAGA is a movement that has its roots in the history of the USA as a racial settler-state, though more recently, in the evolution of the movement that surrounded the Barry Goldwater 1964 Presidential campaign. Despite the campaign being unsuccessful, it served as a training ground and nest for key far Right individuals and forces, such as Richard Viguerie and Paul Weyrich. This element chose to operate within the Republican Party and push the party to the Right, eliminating its liberal wing. They constructed a multi-decade’s strategy that aimed to overthrow the “20^th century,” i.e., to reverse the progressive gains of the century and return the USA to a pre-1900 era. Their efforts included the development of political candidates, litigation, and broad mass movements (e.g., anti-busing, anti-abortion).

Second, this movement was not built as a result of the slow shift to the right of the Democratic Party. It really caught fire in the aftermath of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. White Democrats, beginning in the South and Southwest, started shifting to the Republican Party. In the words of one commentator, the Republican Party positioned itself to become the ‘non-black party.’ To put this another way, race was essential in the building and cohering of the New Right.

Third, the New Right was a 20^th century frame for US rightwing populism. It defined a clash between “the people” and “the elite” as a clash largely between white non-Jews (“the people”) against the growing barbarian hordes from the global South, African Americans, and Jews (“the elite,” and the alleged lackies of the elite). This clash threw everything up in the air, most especially patriarchy and all forms of gender oppression. Rightwing populism appealed to fear and irrationality and has thrived on conspiracy theories. In the USA, it is rooted mainly among whites, but specifically whites in the middle strata, a phenomenon one can see evidenced in the Tea Party movement and within MAGA as a whole. That does not mean that other sectors are not in evidence, but it does mean that its character is largely shaped by the concerns, fears, and objectives of that strata.

Grant, Spencer, “Anti-busing rally at Thomas Park, South Boston,” Digital Public Library of America, https://dp.la/item/8132ead3367a1a264f6040f978981e41.

Fourth, within MAGA there are fascist forces. These are not all of one stripe. But they are at the vanguard of a radical effort to reshape US capitalism through the ending of constitutional rule. 

Fifth, MAGA has moved continuously to the Right and seeks to undermine constitutional democracy, but they are doing this in the way that one can see played out by other far Right forces in other parts of the world. Let’s first understand their objective. US rightwing populism has a nationally specific form that can be summarized as “neo-Confederate.” Their critical image is found in both the Confederate States of America and in apartheid South Africa. It is within the model from apartheid South Africa, however, that one can better understand how any people of color can gravitate towards MAGA. Apartheid South Africa was a thoroughly racist system, but its support did not rest on whites alone. It was able to develop bases among indigenous Africans as well as so-called “Coloreds”, as long as those segments of the population were prepared to swear allegiance to the white apartheid state.

Sixth, understanding 21^st century fascism—and the evolution of MAGA towards it—necessitates looking beyond literal comparisons with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. 20^th century fascism, from the interwar period, developed in a very specific context and, to borrow from Nicos Poulantzas, was rooted in a particular struggle between emerging sectors of capital and traditional elements. It took place within countries that—and this includes Japan—had either lost in World War I or believed they had not received sufficient spoils as alleged victors.

It is for this reason that the notion of “postfascism” has begun to be used, although mainly in academic and some Left circles. The form of fascism we have been witnessing emerging is something of a collection of rightwing authoritarian trends that are largely attempting to use the democratic capitalist state in order to ultimately destroy it. It is not—mainly—relying on militias, though it is engaging in thuggish activity, turning a blind eye towards rightwing militias, and works to obstruct government (much as the Nazis did in the Reichstag in the early 1930s).

This postfascism—or RATs—does not have one set of beliefs, though there are certain elements these movements, at least in the global North, appear to have in common: irrationalism, racism, sexism, homophobia, authoritarianism, rightwing religious views, xenophobia, and extreme nationalism. Rightwing populism shares most of this, which is why, as a movement, rightwing populism became an incubation chamber for something worse in the form of postfascism or, if one prefers, neo-fascism.

One of the “selling points” for postfascism/RATs is the notion of security in an insecure world, and, related, a return to the alleged stability of prior eras. The instability and destruction brought on by neo-liberal globalization, coupled with the environmental catastrophe, has resulted in a situation of profound popular anxiety. In the absence of a strong, energized, and visionary Left, it is the far Right that often appears to have all the answers.

To stop the RATs, an appeal to the status quo is worse than silence. The anxiety which results from economic and environmental crises, along with massive migrations, in addition to the challenging of old, deeply held beliefs by progressive social movements, necessitates a politics that seeks to upend the system by, at least in the beginning, introducing major structural reforms, but also holds out hope for the future coupled with a reassertion of the importance of science and facts, rather than general beliefs and myths. While the Left should be about defending constitutional democracy, we should take the advice of a long-gone revolutionary who insisted the Left needed to be those who advanced the struggle for consistent democracy. This is the only way to defeat the RATs and to save the planet.

---

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is a longtime socialist, trade unionist and international solidarity activist. He is also the author of nonfiction and fiction works.