• Anarcho-Bolshevik
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    So what’s the difference between ideological European racialized capitalism, as a historical phenomenon, and European fascism?

    Fascism was the predominantly petty bourgeois and militant movement that the haute bourgeoisie promoted to institutional power to secure capitalism. If there were no meaningful differences between European racialized capitalism and European fascism, that would logically imply that the Kingdom of Italy was already fascist in the 1910s and earlier, making the March of Rome redundant.

    From a propaganda standpoint, it’s that the violence of capitalism is turned towards Europeans.

    Umm… the Fascists were very violent against North and East Africans. I feel like you must already know this since you’ve clearly read some history, but to be honest it almost upsets me to see somebody overlook this.

    I know that this is only part of your post, but I feel too uncomfortable to address anything else right now.

    • I don’t think they were overlooking the violence against non-European peoples; “from a propaganda standpoint” is the key phrase, i.e. the Europeans who didn’t care about violence against non-Europeans only started caring once other Europeans became targets as well, and this is used as propaganda to suggest that Hitler and his ilk were “worse” than European settlers who murdered non-European indigenous people