Read on Twitter
Hey, yawl the folks at @JournalSpectre were nice enough to let me write an article to push back on Robin, Moyn, Maher & Khachaturian's assertions that the right is weak and beaten back. https://spectrejournal.com/snatching-victory/
Their main arguments for this are
The right (especially it's authoritarian & fascist forms) is weak, incoherent and so should not be called authoritarian or fascist
&
The seizing of the Capitol signal the beating back of the hard right from the GOP
The right (especially it's authoritarian & fascist forms) is weak, incoherent and so should not be called authoritarian or fascist
&
The seizing of the Capitol signal the beating back of the hard right from the GOP
Here is a brief thread of my pushback, but also please read the article for the full gist of my arguments, lol. https://spectrejournal.com/snatching-victory/
These are of course scholars' work I appreciate and read consistently. Still, I think they are wrong when it comes to understanding the political formation of conservatism, insurgent right politics, fascism and authoritarianism both currently and historically.
Such views fall into a form of American exceptionalism on two fronts.
First, they mis-assess how anti-black slavery; settler colonization and racial capitalism cultivated and continue to reproduce fascist and authoritarian political projects to the point of defining what we understand to be the insurgent right and conservatism in general.
Second, they decontextualize the rise of the insurgent right, fascism and authoritarianism in this country from its current global rise. As a result, these analysts miss a real victory for the right.
Why the Right is strong and coherent relative to liberal and left forces:
Underlying much of the left analysis which declares the right & authoritarian right weak at this moment is a common, yet false comparison between the right and the left path to power.
Underlying much of the left analysis which declares the right & authoritarian right weak at this moment is a common, yet false comparison between the right and the left path to power.
It assumes the right needs to be a majoritarian project in order to win state power and enact its agenda. This pov sees the rights inability to win voting majorities,”mainstream” media being critical, and courts ruling against some excesses as a sign of their weakness.
This assumes the right comes to and maintains power primary thru majoritarian means. The right enjoys asymmetric advantages that make such comparisons misleading and encourage underestimation of right-wing forces and salience.
Due to the undemocratic nature of government (due mainly to anti-Black slavery, settler colonialism, racial capitalism) the right needs fewer people to vote for it or participate in extra-parliamentary or insurgent politics in order to win power within the state
and enact its it agenda.
The measure of “mainstream” media being against the right is a bad measure in a media landscape that is fragmented. What is considered “mainstream” by left analysts are in fact liberal media projects just by virtue of how the right does not watch them.
These left analysts assume there is mainstream public that consumes similar media when there isn’t one. This fragmentation advantages the right, not liberals or the left due to the rights ideological and policy coherence.
This allows the right to be a powerful and coherent force with majorities in state legislatures, the federal courts and basically have gotten the Dems to a draw at the Federal executive and legislative branch though having millions less votes.
Agenda wise they have been successful & consistent with enacting voter suppression policies, gerrymandering (the ground upon which the idea of Dem voters (BIPOC folks) are stealing elections is built upon),
increasing the size and scope of the carceral & military apparatus (borders, policing, surveillance, incarceration, covert war), economic policy (tax breaks for the rich, massive reregulation), preventing federal public health response to COVID.
Electorally this agenda continues to work in driving & increasing GOP turnout.
Regarding the authoritarian/fascist/insurgent right:
The insurgent right is growing in power & is becoming increasingly mainstream after the attempt to seize the Capitol.
The insurgent right is growing in power & is becoming increasingly mainstream after the attempt to seize the Capitol.
What must be recognized and considered after this attempt is that the insurgent right has a credible base within the party and is mainstream.
A core tenant for the authoritarian, insurgent & fascist right is that elections in general, but this election in particular was stolen by people who shouldn’t have voted, usually BIPOC and immigrant voters.
A way to measure support for this core tenant is by the GOP officials who voted to overturn the elections, the voters who support the attack and/or overturning the election and the corporations who still give money to such GOP members.
147 GOP elected voted to overturn the election. Only around 25 of 144 corps that gave to those officials have committed to pulling funding. We still have to wait and see if they actually do it.
Majority or near majority of GOP voters feel the capital attack was justified at some level.
A super majority of GOP voters believe the core tenant of the authoritarian, insurgent GOP: that the election was stolen, also that Trump should not be impeached. This all reads to me as the insurgent, authoritarian and even fascist right has plenty of support among GOP voters.
We should caution ourselves when we see the GOP, corporation and capitalists decry the attack, but still vote or fund such tendencies in the GOP.
This type of analysis led to the thinking that Josh Hawley lost his book deal when in fact it just got switched around to another subsidy of Simon & Schuster.
GOP, corporations & capitalists condemning the attack but then still saying the election was stolen or funding those who say that should be understood as a dog whistle to the authoritarian, insurgent right, not as a repudiation of the hard right by the capitalist class.
Finally, is Fascism & authoritarianism on the rise?
Another issue with the “right is weak, so let’s just worry about neoliberalism” argument is that it assumes the right has to be “strong” in order to win the day.
Another issue with the “right is weak, so let’s just worry about neoliberalism” argument is that it assumes the right has to be “strong” in order to win the day.
Historical events such as the coup of Reconstruction & the rise of Jim Crow trouble these assumptions. The right wing south was far “weaker “than the right is today but still achieved its aim. Right-wing projects do not need to be majoritarian in order to win.
We can account for the authoritarian and fascist intensification we now see, especially as we move from its dog-whistle forms to its bull horn forms.
We can do that while not ignoring the authoritarian, fascist aspects of conservatives & liberals in the past which is so many liberals love to do.
it is helpful to understand fascism and authoritarianism as a project already latent in liberal democracy, especially in the carceral, military and security apparatus of the state: police, border security, surveillance and incarceration, this is what Robins and Moyn fail most at.
With this context we can see that fascism and authoritarianism within slaver-settler democracy & racial capitalism is a feature of US political life, not a bug.
This also allows us to better understand Trump’s rise, his push to overturn an election and the insurgent right-wing violence that came with as part of a hegemonic right wing political tradition instead of as a marginal one.
It also invites us to historicize BIPOC left organizing tradition within the United States as one that has always been paradigmatically anti-fascist.
The struggles to abolish slavery, end Jim Crow, and abolish settler society are all part of such a tradition and should inform how we go about contesting this moment of heighten insurgent right-wing politics.
I contend leftist anti-fascist and anti-insurgent right wing organizing as an organizing and political tradition has always been about defeating liberal capitalism and seen the defeat of neoliberalism as foundational to any effort to defeating the right and fascism.
An insurgent right wing is an accelerant to fascist and authoritarian tendencies. Our country’s history and other countries such as Brazil and Bolivia speak to this reality.
The rise of authoritarianism is a global phenomenon, the left in this country taking an American exceptionalist approach to it does us no favors in our quest to defeat neoliberalism, an insurgent right, fascism or authoritarianism.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk
