One thing about the alt right is that they have a very hard time hiding their racism. Siding with Russia is one thing but you would never see them defending and advocating for solidarity with Muslims for instance. Not only that but communism and communist language are not exactly popular in the US so there is little tactically to gain from fascists pretending to be communists. Because of this, the argument that fascists are somehow trying to gain acceptance by masquerading as communists for me doesn’t really hold water, at least not in the circumstances of the present day US.
We always have to look at things in their historical context, and while this tactic made sense in the context of the interwar period when socialism was ascendant and popular in Europe and fascists had much to gain from appropriating (some of) the language of socialism, the same does not generally hold true in the US now. Though of course pro-working class rhetoric will naturally appeal to workers in today’s US as well, i would say it’s only when it’s not explicitly being associated with communism. Fascist and reactionary language on the other hand is already well accepted and embedded in the US’ settler-colonial culture.
So for me the way i see it it’s more a case of confusion, reactionary inclinations that were always there and are hard to shake because they are so ingrained in the culture that Americans grow up in, and/or a genuine but misguided belief that by capitulating to reactionary stances which are perceived as being popular with the masses (whether or not that is actually the case is a different question) or by appropriating the language of American patriotism, the masses can be swayed over to socialism without first having to deconstruct all of their chauvinistic indoctrination (opportunism would be the best term for this).
Patsocs are certainly opportunists. There is nothing about their principles that have them standing with Palestine. They’re doing it because it’s popular and they want to “win.” The justification of many of them for maintaining chauvinistic views is that they are trying to reach out to the “average” Amerikan; not sound “too radical.”
while this tactic made sense in the context of the interwar period
One thing about the alt right is that they have a very hard time hiding their racism. Siding with Russia is one thing but you would never see them defending and advocating for solidarity with Muslims for instance. Not only that but communism and communist language are not exactly popular in the US so there is little tactically to gain from fascists pretending to be communists. Because of this, the argument that fascists are somehow trying to gain acceptance by masquerading as communists for me doesn’t really hold water, at least not in the circumstances of the present day US.
We always have to look at things in their historical context, and while this tactic made sense in the context of the interwar period when socialism was ascendant and popular in Europe and fascists had much to gain from appropriating (some of) the language of socialism, the same does not generally hold true in the US now. Though of course pro-working class rhetoric will naturally appeal to workers in today’s US as well, i would say it’s only when it’s not explicitly being associated with communism. Fascist and reactionary language on the other hand is already well accepted and embedded in the US’ settler-colonial culture.
So for me the way i see it it’s more a case of confusion, reactionary inclinations that were always there and are hard to shake because they are so ingrained in the culture that Americans grow up in, and/or a genuine but misguided belief that by capitulating to reactionary stances which are perceived as being popular with the masses (whether or not that is actually the case is a different question) or by appropriating the language of American patriotism, the masses can be swayed over to socialism without first having to deconstruct all of their chauvinistic indoctrination (opportunism would be the best term for this).
Patsocs are certainly opportunists. There is nothing about their principles that have them standing with Palestine. They’re doing it because it’s popular and they want to “win.” The justification of many of them for maintaining chauvinistic views is that they are trying to reach out to the “average” Amerikan; not sound “too radical.”
No.