The new fascism

[rodbarnett]

The Madrid bombings are a monstrous assault on European democracy. The time has come to unite against the totalitarianism of terror, writes Denis MacShane

"No pasaran" was the message of those defending ballot-box democracy during the Spanish civil war. As the full horror of the Madrid atrocity unfolds, surely the time has come to unite against terrorism - the new fascism of the 21st century, wherever it takes place. On Sunday, millions of Spaniards will vote freely to chose a government. Today we see a monstrous assault on European democracy and all of Europe must stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Spain as they find themselves in the front line against the evil of world terrorism.

I learnt my Spanish in San Sebastian - Donastia in the Basque language - and ETA and their political front party have only marginal support. The PNV Basque party gathers in Basque support, and the Basque country has more autonomy and more support for the Basque language, culture and identity than any comparative region in Europe. At time of writing we do not know who is responsible. But the culture of terrorism, whether in Europe, in the Middle East, in Iraq and Kashmir, in Colombia or Russia is now a common threat to any notion of democracy and progress. Those who find ways of justifying terrorism, who can talk of understanding the motives of terrorist actions, need to think hard and think differently. No progress in human affairs will ever be built on the blood of innocent people. Today, we are all Spanish.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,7369,1167196,00.html

[JNelson6563]

1. Today I am Irish and will forever be

And I do not try to justify terrorism but it does exist for a reason and I think we need to examine that. To do otherwise simply escalates the violence.

Interesting to see such an emotional piece from the Guardian.

Julie

[LagaLover]

3. Yes, it exists

because the few, either on the right or the left, who can not get their way through normal democratic processes resort to violence to extort the populace.

[keithyboy]

5. Seems to me that western powers have built plenty of progress on the blood

of innocent people. It's called "imperialism" "conquest" "invasion" "occupation" "coup de tat" "exploration" "civilization" "pioneering" in the history books. But oh, I forgot, most people can't read and those who can do not read history books.

[The Stranger]

10. Very, very well said.

This point needs to be hammered home. It forces them to come out of their denial as to what has happened and what is happening in the rest of the world.

[LagaLover]

11. And none of that may really explain this bombing

after all, Spain was once "invaded," "conquered," "occupied," and "civilized" by Muslims. And if it was ETA, none of the words you used really apply to their situation.

[JNelson6563]

31. exactly

But we're not s'pose to talk about that.

Julie

[Nlighten1]

6. Indeed it does...

Economic and social injustice breeds terrorists. If we want to declare war on terrorism this is where we should start. Enlisting the war machine to "stamp out" terrorism is just pouring gasoline on the fire.

[LagaLover]

9. Really?

Tell that to the Ulster Defense Force.

[Nlighten1]

12. Explain?

Link?

[LagaLover]

13. Link for what?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LagaLover]

15. Why would you say that?

What do I need to provide a link for? I merely stated that the UDF doesn't commit it's terrorist acts because of "economic" and "social injustice" reasons.

Don't call me a troll just because you don't agree with me.

[Nlighten1]

16. No...

I asked you to provide a link to prove your statement and then you played the ignorance card...

[LagaLover]

17. Prove WHAT statement?

What do I need to prove to you? I'm not playing ignorant; I'm asking you what it is you want proven to you?

[Nlighten1]

18. You made this statement...

"Tell that to the Ulster Defense Force"

I asked you to back it up with some information.

Well?

[LagaLover]

19. What do you want me to back up?

That there is a UDF?
That the UDF is a terrorist organization?
That the UDF does not conduct terrorist activities because of economic or social justice issues?

What are you asking for a link FOR?

[Nlighten1]

25. Never mind...

I stand by my earlier deleted statement.

[LagaLover]

26. All you have to do is tell

me what you require a link for...I'll be happy to provide it.

[markses]

27. But the UDF DOES conduct its operations because of economic and social

factors. That they do so to perpetuate injustice does not erase the social and economic factors involved. For that matter, Tim McVeigh can be seen as analagous to the UDF, as can any right wing terrorist group (or individuals like Eric Rudolph). The point is that terrorism isn't an activity people undertake for-itself, as it were, but rather an activity that emerges in a network of social and economic conflict. NOBODY escapes that network, neither the rulers nor the ruled. The point is to identify the various operations of that network and ameliorate conditions that cause its worst pathologies.

To claim that simply because a group is in (declining) power, that they are not caught in and produced by a social and economic network is ridiculous. The very fact that the UDF is called a "Defense Forse" indicates that they at the very least imagine themselves to be under attack, in a social or economic conflict - and indeed they are!

[Aidoneus]

22. I would say that it does, in a way

the acts it commits for the benefit of the English state, to assist in ensuring that the status of economic & social injustice is maintained.

[LagaLover]

23. That would be a twisted way of looking at it, I suppose

BTW, it's not the English state; the state is the British state.

[markses]

28. Why is it twisted?

To say that social conflict or injustice causes terorism is not to say that only those who are oppressed become terrorists. That's your basic error throughout this thread. Terrorism is a method, and can be picked up by anybody.

In fact, I'd argue that the US state apparatus operated as a terrorist organization in its activities in the so-called Republic of Vietnam.

[LagaLover]

29. And here's where you are wrong

If the US acted as a terrorist organization in RVN, they (we) did NOT do so because of economic reasons or social injustice. We used it as a way of "winning" an "unwinable" war. It was just another tactic in a war.

[markses]

30. Huh?

I think your definitions of "economic reasons and social injustice" are so narrow as to cut out everything but a poor peasant setting off a grenade. The US state apparatus was clearly acting according to economic and social interest, even when the war became an economic deficit. Even this "winning an unwinnable war" stuff has economic and social vectors, namely maintaining the stability of the US position in global markets/relations. One does not need to enter into complex hermeneutical operations to come to this conclusion. The key players themselves admit as much openly!

[ixion]

2. this is the key line....

No progress in human affairs will ever be built on the blood of innocent people.

Of course, the irony here is stunning. For every 10 people killed in 'terrorist', the US and EU kill 1000 in response, which does nothing more than deepen the wound. How about the thousands of innocent civillians killed when the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? The killing of innocents goes on to this day. And yet for some reason, those lives don't count. Is it because they're from poor and impovershed nations? Is is because they don't dress like we do?

And again, the line...

No progress in human affairs will ever be built on the blood of innocent people.

This is so true, and it means that we really have to start at square one, becacue EVERYTHING today is built on the blood of innocents, to some extent or another. Everything. Civil liberties, society, the modern world... it exists because hundreds of millions of people have given their lives to making it so, whether by choice or by force or by consequence.

No progress in human affairs will ever be built on the blood of innocent people.

Ghandi couldn't have said it better.

So when will it stop? The violence we commit, the violence committed upon us. None of it leads to anything good. It leads only to misery and sorrow.

The big question is now, are we advanced enough as a species to move beyond violence and hatred.

The answer to that question remains to be seen, but we know for sure that:

No progress in human affairs will ever be built on the blood of innocent people.

[Just Me]

7. Excellent post,...

Excellent point!!!

[tlcandie]

8. Thank you!!!!

That is the mantra we all need to keep repeating....! I can't thank you enough for stating it so clearly!

Unfortunately, most people do not step back and look at THEIR responsibility or how they may have contributed to a situation when something happens...it's all about someone else :(

[ludwigb]

21. I'm going to have to disagree with you

I know our society is built upon violence. But can't we make a distinction between legitimate and illegitimate violence? If these people had attacked the army barracks, or even a police station, it would carry far more legitimacy.

But this was a horrific attack on innocent people. If we negotiate with these people, we verify the success of their tactics. And how do you negotiate with someone insane enough to pull off a stunt like this, anyway? There's obviously a certain lack of common values there.

This is war. I hope Aznar hunts these people down as soon as possible.

As a liberal, I was hoping the Socialists would make gains in the elections coming up. Paradoxically, this bombing is going to make Aznar look good (although it shouldn't--Aznar's boneheaded policies helped bring this on). But the fight against these sorts of terrorists really is more important than one election.

[Dogmudgeon]

4. The scary thing about the bombings and ETA

ETA has recently been decimated by its bombers blowing themselves up. The Basque people are none too fond of the practice of political violence, having been victims of it themselves (notably in Gernika/Guernica), and have been more vocal against ETA. Juan Jose Ibarretxe, the Basque lehendakari (president) has been widely quoted as saying "When ETA attacks, the Basque heart breaks into a thousand pieces."

Ibarretxe recently led the Basque parliament to take the first steps in declaring independence; although staunchly anti-violence, the Spanish government (from at least one faction, if not all of them) is going to tie the attacks to him and his party.

These new bombings indicate that one or more very competent munitions experts have possibly joined ETA. They also work entirely differently than ETA used to. For one thing, the bombs seem to have been enormous, and ETA bombers preferred bombs they could build in on their kitchen tables. ETA used to announce its bombings an hour in advance -- the bombs in Madrid went off unnanounced. Here's a quote from the leader of Basque Unity:

Arnold Otegi, leader of Batasuna, an outlawed Basque party linked to the armed separatist group, denied it was behind the blasts and suggested "Arab resistance" elements were responsible, suggesting al-Qaida.

Otegi told Radio Popular in San Sebastian that ETA always phones in warnings before it attacks. The interior minister said there was no warning before Thursday's attack.

"The modus operandi, the high number of victims and the way it was carried out make me think, and I have a hypothesis in mind, that yes it may have been an operative cell from the Arab resistance," Otegi said. Otegi noted that Spain's government backed the Iraq war.

(Source)

A new generation of bomb-makers, or "Islamic" militants? Either choice is as bad as the other.

And the Spanish government has already organized anti-Basque political rallies; this is not going to be a very pleasant week anywhere in Spain. Denis MacShane's article should be read by everyone interested in the future of European democracy.

--bkl

[Barrett808]

20. This opinion seems to seriously misappropriate the meaning of "fascism"

And it assumes the most facile meaning of "terrorism."

[Chicago Democrat]

24. Terrorism- Basque or Al Quaeda is NOT Fascism

Fascism is the linking of corporate and government power in a police state like structure which relies on fear and intimidation to maintain power.

Terrorism or simply military actions against unarmed civilians is ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE. Expect more of it. It works great for them; it sucks for us.

Terrorism illicits reactions in the West like the Afghan and the Iraq War in which tens of THOUSANDS of innocent civilians are killed and the ACTUAL terrorists are completely ignored. This foments more hatred and provides more recruits for the terrorists.

So terrorism works for them as long as the West is stupid enough to start whole new wars and perpetuate the cycle of violence.

Either catch the terrorists! Or DO NO MORE HARM!!

[teryang]

32. Insightful comments

I don't see any relationship of terrorism to fascism in general. Terrorism might or might not be fascist in nature. Considering the form of terror in the Balkans that separatist ethnic groups inflicted upon each other, I would consider an argument that such is fascist. The notion that there is an ethnic qualifier to citizenship is an inherently flawed concept that leads to some fascist traits. On the other hand, the society targeted might be or becoming fascist as well.

Of course, if a terrorist (or guerilla fighter) is victim or resentful of an imperial hegemony over their country, he or she will perceive victims as fascists because they are imposing their rule by force with supreme indifference to human rights and national sovereignty. As Hannah Arendt has pointed out, imperialism is a proto-fascist phenomenon in its reliance upon dominance by force and its indifference to sovereignty and human rights.

Separatist groups are generally susceptible to the ethnic state conumdrum. They are typically manipulated by outside powers to achieve foreign state objectives against the dominant group in the host state. Separatists generally don't foster much outside moral appeal, unless they are being discriminated against and you happen to be one of the discriminated class. It is politically expedient for outside powers to propagandize the cause of either the separatists or the dominant group. The unfavored group is regarded as fascist or having fascist traits. It is not unusual for hierarchical groups killing to achieve political goals to have an inherently fascist culture but they may not meet the political definition of fascism without the corporate state interface. In some cases this is a status that they aspire to.