Friedman:
The claims of an increase in fascism in Europe and the U.S. derive from a misunderstanding of the term.
Recently,
there have been a number of articles and statements asserting that fascism is
rising in Europe, and that Donald Trump is an American example of fascism. This is a misrepresentation of a
very real phenomenon. The nation-state is reasserting itself as the primary
vehicle of political life. Multinational institutions like the European Union
and multilateral trade treaties are being challenged because they are seen by
some as not being in the national interest. The charge of a rise in fascism
derives from a profound misunderstanding of what fascism is. It is also an
attempt to discredit the resurgence of nationalism and to defend the
multinational systems that have dominated the West since World War II.
Nationalism
is the core of the Enlightenment’s notion of liberal democracy. It asserts that
the multinational dynasties that ruled autocratically denied basic human
rights. Among these was the right to national self-determination and the right
of citizens to decide what was in the national interest. The Enlightenment
feared tyranny and saw the multinational empires dominating Europe as the
essence of tyranny. Destroying them meant replacing them with nation-states.
The American and French revolutions were both nationalist risings, as were the
nationalist risings that swept Europe in 1848. Liberal revolutions were by
definitions nationalist because they were risings against multinational
empires.
Fascism
differs from nationalism in two profound ways. First, self-determination was
not considered a universal right by fascists. Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini
and Francisco Franco, to mention three obvious fascists, only endorsed nationalism
for Germany, Italy and Spain. The rights of other nations to a nation-state of
their own was at best unclear to the fascists. In a very real sense, Hitler and
Mussolini believed in multinationalism, albeit with other nations submitting to
their will. Fascism in its historical form was an assault on the right of
nations to pursue their self-interest, and an elevation of the fascists’ right
to pursue it based on an assertion of their nations’ inherent superiority and
right to rule.
But the
more profound difference was the conception of internal governance. Liberal
nationalism accepted that the right to hold power was subject to explicit and
periodic selection of the leaders by the people. How this was done varied. The
American system is very different from the British, but the core principles
remain the same. It also requires that opponents of the elected have the right
to speak out against them, and to organize parties to challenge them in the
future. Most important, it affirms that the people have the right to govern
themselves through these mechanisms and that those elected to lead must govern
in the people’s name. Leaders must also be permitted to govern and extra-legal
means cannot be used to paralyze the government, any more than the government has
the right to suppress dissent.
Fascism
asserts that a Hitler or Mussolini represent the people but are not answerable
to them. The core of fascism is the idea of the dictator, who emerges through
his own will. He cannot be challenged without betraying the people. Therefore,
free speech and opposition parties are banned and those who attempt to oppose
the regime are treated as criminals. Fascism without the dictator, without the
elimination of elections, without suppression of free speech and the right to
assemble, isn’t fascism.
Arguing
that being part of the European Union is not in the British interest, that NATO has outlived its usefulness, that protectionist policies or anti-immigration policies are
desirable is not fascist. These ideas have no connection to fascism whatsoever.
They are far more closely linked to traditional liberal democracy. They
represent the reassertion of the foundation of liberal democracy, which is the
self-governing nation-state. It is the foundation of the United Nations, whose
members are nation-states, and where the right to national self-determination
is fundamental.
Liberal
democracy does not dictate whether a nation should be a member in a
multinational organization, adopt free trade policies or protectionism, or welcome
or exclude immigrants. These are decisions to be made by the people – or more
precisely, by the representatives they select. The choices may be wise, unwise
or even unjust. However, the power to make these choices rests, in a liberal
democracy, in the hands of the citizens.
What we
are seeing is the rise of the nation-state against the will of multinational
organizations and agreements. There are serious questions about membership in
the EU, NATO and trade agreements, and equally about the right to control
borders. Reasonable people can disagree, and it is the political process of
each nation that retains the power to determine shifts in policy. There is no
guarantee that the citizenry will be wise, but that cuts both ways and in every
direction.
The
current rise of nationalism in Europe is the result of European institutions’
failure to function effectively. Eight years after 2008, Europe still has not
solved its economic problems. A year after the massive influx of refugees in
Europe, there is still no coherent and effective policy to address the issue.
Given this, it would be irresponsible for citizens and leaders not to raise
questions as to whether they should remain in the EU or follow its dictates.
Similarly, there is no reason for Donald Trump not to challenge the idea that
free trade is always advantageous, or to question NATO. However obnoxious his
style and however confusing his presentation, he is asking questions that must
be asked.
In the
1950s, the McCarthyites charged anyone they didn’t like with being communists.
Today, those who disapprove of the challengers of the current system call them
fascists. Now, some of the opponents of the EU or immigration may really be
fascists. But the hurdle for being a fascist is quite high. Fascism is far more
than racism, tinkering with the judiciary, or staging a violent demonstration.
Real fascism is Nazi Germany’s “leader principle” – which dictated absolute
obedience to the Führer, whose authority was understood to be above the law.
We are
seeing a return to nationalism in Europe and the United States because it is
not clear to many that internationalism, as followed since World War II,
benefits them any longer. They may be right or wrong, but to claim that fascism
is sweeping Europe and the United States raises the question of whether those
who say this understand the principles of fascism or the intimate connection
between nationalism and liberal democracy.
