
India is displaying classic signs that foreshadow fascism - M_Grey
http://qz.com/844672/along-with-narendra-modis-rise-india-has-displayed-classic-signs-that-foreshadow-fascism/
======
realrocker
I am not sure about this. India has never been good at conforming to a
particular point of view. Aurangzeb tried it. Indira tried it. I read an
article about traffic of a country implying how lawful it is. And just before
reading this, I almost got knocked down by a big car jumping a red light while
on a bike(In Bangalore too. We call ourselves civilized here). So whenever I
get worried, we are falling into absolutism, I then recall how chaotic our
streets and roads are. It's kind of a strength-is-weakness thing with India.
You can't enforce a law here, but also can't impose a fascist state. I guess
we are just destined to be the average guy of the world. Like the Big
Lebowski, we only want our own patch of carpet, everyone else can go fuck
themselves. Hail Tribalism :/

~~~
throwawayIndian
Oh man! The Big Lebowski reference is 200% accurate. On a serious note though,
it feels almost certain that the Modi Government is going to lead India into
another bloodshed, sooner or later. I hope not but that sinking feeling just
doesn't go away given his track record.

~~~
realrocker
It's already happened with the lynchings, killings and sporadic riots, but at
scale of India, it just doesn't leave a big enough mark. It's kind of sad
really. India rationalizes the most horrific acts of humanity, shrugs and
moves on.

~~~
sremani
Have you lived through 80s, and the constant riots in India during that time ?
India is a no where near being a fascist country, because for love of god, its
not ONE country.

Calling RSS alt-right, completely makes the whole article laughable. RSS was
the Right, BJP was the Right, Jan Sangh (BJP's predecessor) was the Right and
they were the only game in town, in a mostly Fabian socialist India.

Please go read some History.

Here is a nugget. In Hyderabad riots only happened in INC regime, when TDP was
in power no riots. Now both are Centre-Left populist parties.

Rejection of Neo-liberalism is not fascism and the Harvard-Soviet fragilistas
of the world, summoning ghosts of Hitler when a country like India is not ONE
race is amusing but also horrifying because these morons actually have a
platform for their "fake news".

~~~
throwawayIndian
> Calling RSS alt-right, completely makes the whole article laughable.

RSS _is_ alt-right of India even if you think it isn't. Anyone who claims
otherwise simply because INC or TDP jokers did something wrong elsewhere is
either stupid or simply insane. RSS is and always will be an alt-right outfit
even if every other political party like INC/TDP/BJP cease to exist.

Go read the some history yourself. I can meanwhile eat some beef nuggets on
the side. ;)

~~~
sremani
You can eat beef nuggets with bacon, for what I care. That does not change the
facts.

------
throwanem
Judging by this article and others, "alt-right" seems to be turning into
another way of saying "politics I don't like and wish weren't taken seriously"
\- not that it ever referred to any particularly coherent movement in the
first place, but those in the media can't seem to further dilute the label
quickly enough, and even those who formerly adopted it seem to be starting to
move away.

As for the actual subject matter, I don't know enough about India's domestic
politics to comment - it's about all I can do most days to keep up with those
of my own nation. But, as general bromides go, I think one might do worse than
the suggestion that labeling any political change or strain one finds
unsatisfactory as "fascist" does neither oneself nor anyone else any good - it
increases blood pressure and strains credibility.

~~~
yolesaber
>Judging by this article and others, "alt-right" seems to be turning into
another way of saying "politics I don't like and wish weren't taken seriously"
\- not that it ever referred to any particularly coherent movement in the
first place, but those in the media can't seem to further dilute the label
quickly enough, and even those who formerly adopted it seem to be starting to
move away.

The term "alt-right" was coined by Richard Spencer and initially referred
specifically to his paleoconservative brand of ethno-nationalism. Now it is a
broader term, yes, but it's meaning is generally intact.

~~~
sremani
No Hindu is not an ethnicity, and RSS has more in common with say, Ayatollahs
or Erdogan than with Hitler or Stalin. Every strain of populism even the
religious kind is not fascism. Before declaring India a fascist state you have
50 some "Islamic Republics" that fit the bill of your definition of fascism.

edit: India is some how a fascist country for having a democratically elected
right-wing party, but countries with Official state religions are not. I will
drink your down votes, please keep them coming.

------
sfifs
Most external people forget that India is closer to the model of Europe with a
united monetary policy than a US or China or any individual countries it is
compared to. Each province is big enough to be a country in itself, has
significant power and provincial politics are as diverse as the spectrum of
governments across Europe (there's actually an _elected_ communist government
in a province). The ruling coalition nationally doesn't enjoy rule in majority
of the provinces and indeed has little line sight to it.

Therefore, sitting inside India, it's really funny to see outside columnists
trying to paint broad generalizations of Indian politics.

~~~
throwawayIndian
> it's really funny to see outside columnists trying to paint broad
> generalizations of Indian politics.

It is anything but funny. In ways similar to the rhetoric "Should everyone
else go to Pakistan?".

~~~
jangid
Funny. Rhetorics are being referred to call a state "fascist".

~~~
throwawayIndian
Yeah similar to how columnists with alternative views are called "outside
columnists" \-- us and them -- or sometimes _deshdrohis_. Many Indians fail to
see the reality in chasm of words.

------
flawedluck
Modi isn't inspired by Nazis, neither is he an anti-Muslim. The author is just
making a big deal of small things and quoting things out of context.

"Protesting students?- Anti-nationalist". Yeah except the student was
protesting against the hanging of a cruel terrorist. "Appeal to social
frustration" \- makes no sense. India is special in this case in no way.
"Craves heroic death" \- We do make a big deal when someone dies doing a
heroic action. This is fascism?

The whole article is just pointless rant. I think Modi is one of the most
smart and active Prime Ministers that India has had and I'm in no way a
supporter of BJP (his political party)

~~~
pksadiq
> neither is he an anti-Muslim.

[citation needed] (considering his involvement in Gujrat riots and Babari
Masjid issues.).

~~~
NotACongitard
@pksadiq,

 _> > [citation needed] (considering his involvement in Gujrat riots and
Babari Masjid issues.)._

What about those Hindus burnt alive in a train by muslim terrorists? Do you
support them?

------
snrplfth
“These features cannot be organised into a system; many of them contradict
each other and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But
it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around
it.”

Umberto Eco is a smart guy but that essay is pretty silly. Fascism: anywhere,
everywhere, and you can tell it's coming by any number of contradictory and
non-definite phenomena.

~~~
danharaj
It is a feature, not a bug, of fascism that it tolerates contradiction and
does not care about constructing a coherent picture of the world. Truth is
irrelevant and aesthetics are fungible. Fascism is unlike more sophisticated
totalitarian ideologies like Marxism-Leninism. Umberto Eco's points are a
summary of nucleation points for fascism: tendencies in society that can be
the starting point for the process of fascist development. I think this is the
best you can do in such a short essay. Eco's comparison to Wittgenstein's game
is apt. "You know it when you see it".

If I were to try to grasp fascism from a different angle and how it relates to
other totalitarian tendencies I would characterize it by the social class that
puts it into power. The middle class has been the historical base of power for
fascism. The points Eco makes are quite resonant amongst middle class people
in many countries in particular the downwardly mobile middle class who feel
like they are being cheated out of something they are entitled to. That is the
mechanism by which fascism takes hold.

In contrast, Marxism-Leninism is primarily concerned with the proletariat and
intelligentsia. Maoism is primarily concerned with the peasantry. Really, you
can identify a political ideology without looking too closely at its details
by examining how it goes about class struggle: its implementation as an actual
political movement and not an abstract set of ideas.

~~~
snrplfth
Well, I take issue with the "know it when you see it" characteristic of the
piece. Eco accuses fascists, rightly I think, of making no clear distinctions,
of thinking in impressions. That's why I'm annoyed that he seems to give up on
distinctions himself in characterizing fascism.

I find the "social class" analysis just as unsatisfactory. You might usefully
characterze these different tendencies by their _rhetoric_ , but if you insist
on looking at them as an "actual implementation", I tend to find that they're
just the same side of the same coin - a small state political class enormously
empowered, and all other "classes" being simply categories measuring the
loyalty and proximity to the state class.

------
kranner
> This could easily be mistaken for one of Hinduism’s most cited and profound
> tenets: Karmanye vadhikaraste, ma phaleshou kada chana, which translates to
> “You have the right to act but do not expect the fruits of your action.”
> What Eco implies is the lack of reflection before acting and a “distrust of
> the intellectual world.”

This is a bit of a red herring. The way that verse is explained is not "doing
for the sake of doing" but "doing GOOD for the sake of doing GOOD". In no way
does it imply not choosing the right action before performing it. It is about
not getting attached to a particular expected outcome.

------
pavanky
I am not too sure about the points made in the article.

I take a bit of comfort in the fact that India is diverse beyond imagination
(languages, religion, caste, states, political leanings, geography etc).
Trying to impose any single point of view on such chaos is practically
impossible.

------
amriksohata
What a load of bollocks this is exactly why the right has triumphed in America
and Europe, the dumbass left continue their pursuit of identity politics which
will wipe them out.

~~~
Latty
I've seen this a lot recently. 'identity politics' is an odd thing to accuse
the left of. While the right continually fights to disadvantage groups of
people (or keep them disadvantaged), they claim the left is focusing too much
on those groups when they fight back.

I'm sure that if they had not been trying to hard to paint slaves not as
people, but as chattel, the slave owners in the past would have called
abolition 'identity politics' too - why focus so much on one group?!

The reality is the progress from the left benefits us all. These are never
policies that specifically benefit one group, they just end up benefiting
groups more because they are so disadvantaged right now.

Again, it feels like another way in which the right seems to believe that
freedom and rights for others come at their expense.

~~~
Shivetya
you really need to study up on it. It is not about trying to disadvantage
groups, it is all about using the identity of a group to defend any actions or
positions they take. Worse is when it is applied to candidates for office
because every disagreement with that candidate is taken instead as an attack
on them because of their race, religion, sex, and orientation.

It is a shameless exploitation that the left has championed for many decades.
Pitting one group against another and laying the bigot/racist card on anyone
who suggest special rights for a particular class/identity are not warranted.

~~~
kem
I agree that the left has its own form of bigotry that goes underchallenged
for the most part, but the argument you're referring to is one of the most
insidious and disingenuous the right espouses.

For the most part, the identity politics of the right have evolved from an
explicit racism and sexism to an implicit one. The argument goes "as long as
we don't explicitly mention race, sex, or ethnicity, we're ok," which isn't
true. Voter ID laws are perfect example of this: they deny citizens of their
constitutional right to vote without due process, in the absence of evidence
for any systematic problems, and disenfranchise people based on socioeconomic
status, and implicitly by race, but then complain when they're called on it,
whining that the left has somehow shifted the goalposts. It's a sort of Bart
Simpson defense ("I'm just walking around swinging my arms and if anyone
happens to be in my way, it's their fault").

The essence of the Trump phenomenon to me seems to be the right getting tired
of playing this game, of hiding the racism and identity politics they play.
Trump just came out with it unapologetically, "saying it like it is" according
to some of his supporters. I'm not saying everyone who voted for Trump did it
for those reasons, but it was certainly a big part of it, especially during
the primaries. I believe much of the mainstream right was not truly appalled
by what he said, just the fact that he was so open about it. They distanced
themselves from him when they believed it was politically harmful, and now are
cozying up to him again when they realized it wasn't.

Who's playing identity politics again?

------
Zpalmtree
Why is there such a circle jerk around fascism? Some people are commies, some
people are fascists, what's the big deal?

Just because you support fascism doesn't mean you want to genocide people.
Yes, it's happened in the past, but so has it happened with democracy,
communism, and any other political ideology you can think of.

Fascism in some places has been very effective, for example Park Chung-hee.
You might disagree with some of the things he did, but he made South Korea
very prosperous.

------
pkd
Yeah, no. I guess yes, if you consider any implementation of a far reaching
policy in a democracy to be fascist.

I have thought a lot about this. And I think that the western media seems have
a genetic dislike for popular leaders. I guess the UK/US media expects their
country's leaders to be Eton/Harvard boys who maintain an air of separation
from the common population. Anytime a leader tries to get close to the public
opinion, they are roasted for being populist/jingoistic etc.

Narendra Modi has been an extremely popular leader, even before he became the
Prime Minister. He was re-elected twice for the post of the Chief Minister of
the state of Gujarat (and this was after the opposition tried to brand him as
the key perpetrator in the 2002 riots.). Under him Gujarat became the fastest
growing state of the country, and a lucrative destination for industries. His
inclination towards industrialization was later used against him as an
argument for his collusion with the "crony capitalists".

But Modi has ignored all the rubbish against him and carried on working. He
works 18 hours every day. The greatest change in his rule has been the focus
on making the bureaucracy to work instead of sleep, as it has been doing for
the last 40 years.

I am not a huge supporter of his party, and I hate fascists with all my heart,
and I can say that Modi has been good for the country. His policies have
broken through a lot of bad fungus that had settled on the country in the
multiple decades of INC lead rule. And it is refreshing to witness.

Western media can go court their Trumps and Farages. We are fine here.

~~~
legolas2412
"and this was after the opposition tried to brand him as the key perpetrator
in the 2002 riots."

TRIED? He may not have started it, but he let riots run for three days.

"Under him Gujarat became the fastest growing state of the country," Any facts
here? I keep hearing this "Gujarat Model", but statistics put it in the same
range as Haryana, Punjab, Delhi, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu etc.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_unio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_union_territories_by_GDP_per_capita)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_unio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_union_territories_by_GDP#Nominal_GSDP_growth_rate)

"He works 18 hours every day." please recognize propoganda when you see one.

"The greatest change in his rule has been the focus on making the bureaucracy
to work instead of sleep, as it has been doing for the last 40 years." We'll
talk when we see actual results.

"and I can say that Modi has been good for the country". To some extent, I'd
agree, atleast it has spirited people up.

------
negamax
Narendra Modi and his party are not alt-right. That's really sad conclusion to
draw.

------
vamsi360
Is there any fact behind saying that Modi is inspired by Nazis?

------
photonwins
Is it possible that the quoted news site has its own agenda? India as a
country is so diverse, within each state we have different dialects/languages,
food habits. <s>If someone can pull off a fascist stunt in a country like
India, he must be really good </s>

I am actually laughing at the article and many of the comments here.

------
sandGorgon
mildly true.

However, as compared to Trump ? jeez not even the leader of India's right wing
quasi-religious party could ever say "ban muslims" in India.

I have a feeling that we are going to see a lot more of these articles... the
liberal media in the US is trying to make sense of what just happened. And the
closest available model is the Indian democracy.

~~~
dominotw
> jeez not even the leader of India's right wing quasi-religious party could
> ever say "ban muslims" in India.

Modi was held directly held responsible for 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom, though he
was later cleared of all wrongdoing( politicians almost never get convicted of
any crime in India, they are noble class that hovers over the democracy but
never directly participates in it.)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_riots)

------
dublinclontarf
The collective left are losing their minds, seeing fascism around every
corner.

------
known
How can Govt fight Corruption when the Govt aka Lawmakers/Judges/Officials are
Corrupt?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_India)

------
Analemma_
How many democracies aren't, these days? It's gonna be a grim decade, you can
be sure of it.

------
dogma1138
So does Turkey and many other countries.

------
diogenescynic
So is America.

------
NotACongitard
This article a load of crap. Modi is the best thing to happen for India after
decades and decades of ultra-corrupt and insanely criminal Congress rule.
Congress ministers/MPs never actually did any work and were involved in few of
the greatest scams in the history of India.

------
jangid
This article is completely biased.

------
magentaexists
This is total bull. Just because the us and the UK are screwing themselves
over, doesn't mean that the rest of the world is too. BJP is inspired by Nazis
and fascists... Do some research first. Jeez !

~~~
cstross
You missed the just-aborted far right coup in Montenegro, or the way France is
looking to see a run-off presidential election between a hard-right candidate
and Marine Le Pen (who is a court-certified fascist -- as in, she sued an
opponent who called her a fascist for libel _and the court found that she was,
indeed, a fascist_ )? Or the rise of the AfD in Germany? Golden Dawn in
Greece? Vladimir Putin's adherence to the Dugin Doctrine expounded in
"Foundations of Geopolitics"?

Trump and Brexit aren't isolated symptoms: it really _does_ seem to be
Springtime for Hitler wannabes this year.

~~~
gaius
Fascist is the most overused word of recent years. The original fascists in
Italy were WW1 veterans who had read Marx and observed that being put in a
uniform and militarized erased distinction between classes, and sought to
replicate that at a societal level to end class conflict. The patriotism, the
strong hierarchical government, the diversion of industry towards armaments
production, were all parts of this, but they weren't the end in and of itself.
And the Italian fascists didn't really have any sort of racial agenda. They
worshipped technology, industrial progress, youth, futurist artists, and so
on.

People called Farage a fascist, but there was very little overlap if any at
all between what he believes and advocates, and what fascists do. Farage
doesn't want a strong government, it's questionable if he wants any sort of
functioning government _at all_ , he's closer to an anarchist than a fascist.
Same with Trump, he doesn't believe what fascists believe or want what
fascists want. Now a lot of people don't like them, and fair enough - but if
words are to mean anything at all let's retire "fascist" as a general purpose
pejorative for any badman...

~~~
cstross
Your definition of fascism is totally inadequate. Here, try reading Umberto
Eco on the subject: he grew up under Italian fascism, and has some insights:
[http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-
fascism/](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/)

~~~
gaius
I see your Eco and raise you Orwell
[http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc](http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc)

 _It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely
meaningless... almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for
‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has
come_

~~~
EthanHeilman
I like Orwell, but you can't see an Eco with an Orwell. For a raise you'd need
at least an Orwell, Russel and Huxley.

The fact that people abuse the word fascist, especially its use by the Soviets
who used it describe anything Anti-Soviet when they grew bored of calling
things imperialist, does not mean that no coherent phenomena exists which has
been consistently described as fascist.

A closer reading of your Orwell essay shows that Orwell does believe that
fascism is meaningful, mostly he is just complaining that people often abuse
the word:

>But still, when we apply the term ‘Fascism’ to Germany or Japan or
Mussolini's Italy, we know broadly what we mean. It is in internal politics
that this word has lost the last vestige of meaning. For if you examine the
press you will find that there is almost no set of people — certainly no
political party or organized body of any kind — which has not been denounced
as Fascist during the past ten years. Here I am not speaking of the verbal use
of the term ‘Fascist’. I am speaking of what I have seen in print. - George
Orwell, What is Fascism (1944) [0]

Furthermore note that Orwell wrote this in 1944, the world war hasn't even
ended, the histories and analysis we now have access to haven't yet been
written. The perspective Orwell has when writing this is fairly limited, as
Orwell himself says it is too early to say what fascism is (while admitting it
is a political system):

>But Fascism is also a political and economic system. Why, then, cannot we
have a clear and generally accepted definition of it? Alas! we shall not get
one — not yet, anyway. To say why would take too long, but basically it is
because it is impossible to define Fascism satisfactorily without making
admissions which neither the Fascists themselves, nor the Conservatives, nor
Socialists of any colour, are willing to make. All one can do for the moment
is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is
usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword. - George Orwell, What is
Fascism (1944) [0]

Eco on the other hand grew up in Fascist and post-Fascist Italy and then
studied it for many years. With the distance of time, personal experience and
access to the work of historians, it is not surprising Eco has more to say
about fascism that Orwell.

[0]:
[http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc](http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc)

