I am indebted to this man. In the 90s I too studied crowds and trance and Techno music as a religious construct. My PhD was relatively simple. Now we're in a Post-islamic Era and just waiting for everyone to distruct on social media as an aesthecally pleasurable event. And I have no pity for them. Zero.
Honest question, not a challenge BUT why does it have to be secular? I mean, I recall Mussolini making Catholicism the religion of the state. Or take the Iron Guard for example. What am I missing here?
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302). "The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
"We need a generic term for what is a general phenomenon, indeed the most important political novelty of the twentieth century: a popular movement against the Left and against liberal individualism" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital loc. 415). "Dictatorship against the Left amidst popular enthusiasm- that was the unexpected combination that fascism would manage to put together one short generation later" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 76). “Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion” (Robert Paxton “What is Fascism?: From the Anatomy of Fascism” digital: p. 16).
No, Griffin defines fascism based on what the fascists themselves believe and what their goals are. The preconditions that Griffin describes is what leads people to joining fascist movements.
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302). "The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
“'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism' (Griffin 1991: 26)” (Roger Griffin “Fascism” 2018 digital: p. 45).
"According to Roger Griffin, fascism can be defined as a revolutionary species of political modernism originating in the early twentieth century whose mission is to combat the allegedly degenerative forces of contemporary history (decadence) by bringing about an alternative modernity and temporality (a ‘new order’ and a ‘new era’) based on the rebirth, or palingenesis, of the nation. Fascists conceive the nation as an organism shaped by historic, cultural, and in some cases, ethnic and hereditary factors, a mythic construct incompatible with liberal, conservative, and communist theories of society. The health of this organism they see undermined as much by the principles of institutional and cultural pluralism, individualism, and globalized consumerism promoted by liberalism as by the global regime of social justice and human equality identified by socialism in theory as the ultimate goal of history, or by the conservative defense of 'tradition' (Anton Shekhovtsov "Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir" ‘Fascism and the Far Right Series’ p. xxi-xxii).
"Roger Griffin sees fascism is a form of ‘populist ultranationalism’ which aims to reconstruct the nation following a period of perceived crisis and decline-he uses the Victorian term ‘palingenetic’, meaning ‘rebirth from the ashes’, to characterize fascism. This attempted national resurrection amounts to a revolution, in that fascism compensates for the destruction of tradition through the promotion of a modernizing, utopian ideology" (Kevin Passmore "Fascism: A Very Short Introduction" 'Oxford Press' (2014) p.16).
Best definition ever heard, should be supplemented using Stanford economy prof Robert Leeson analysis in order to conceive a bigger and more complete spectrum of what fascism was and where card-carrying fascists lied, specially considering membership 282632 Vaterländische Front
"This book is not concerned with the so-called 'mainstream right,' such as conservatives and liberals/libertarians, but only with those on the right who are 'anti-system,' defined here as hostile to liberal democracy. This is what I call the far right, which is itself divided into two broader subgroups. The extreme right rejects the essence of democracy, that is, popular sovereignty and majority rule. The most infamous example of the extreme right is fascism, which brought to power German Führer Adolf Hitler and Italian Duce Benito Mussolini, and was responsible for the most destructive war in world history. The radical right accepts the essence of democracy, but opposes fundamental elements of liberal democracy, most notably minority rights, rule of law, and separation of powers. Both subgroups oppose the postwar liberal democratic consensus, but in fundamentally different ways. While the extreme right is revolutionary, the radical right is more reformist. In essence, the radical right trusts the power of the people, the extreme right does not" (Cas Mudde "The Far Right Today" 2019 digital: p. 6). “As I finish this manuscript, in May 2019, three of the five most populous countries in the world have a far-right leader (Brazil, India, and the US) and the biggest political party in the world is the populist radical right Indian People’s Party (BJP). Within the European Union (EU), two governments are fully controlled by populist radical right parties (Hungary and Poland), another four include such parties (Bulgaria, Estonia, Italy, Slovakia), and two are held up with support of a populist radical right party (Denmark and the United Kingdom).” (Cass Mudde “The Far Right Today” 2019 digital: p. 1).
“'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism' (Griffin 1991: 26)” (Roger Griffin “Fascism” 2018 digital: p. 45).
It would be nice to cut a video in a way that lets the voice of the speaker breathe, thank you. Especially if someone is trying to formulate something substantial, endangered to drift off into the routine of their lifelong main topic. - Jumpcuts are for idiots.
“Ian Kershaw, a major expert on Nazism” (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 11). "[Read] Ian Kershaw's chapter 'The essence of Nazism: form of fascism, brand of totalitarianism, or unique phenomenon?' in his seminal work The Nazi Dictatorship (third edition: London, Edward Arnold, 1993)" (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 325). "[A] world expert on the Third Reich [...] Ian Kershaw was now prepared not only to classify Nazism as a form of fascism but to assert that ‘The quest for national rebirth lay, of course, at the heart of all fascist movements’" (Roger Griffin "Fascism" 2018 digital: p. 54). "The preeminent biography of Hitler is now Ian Kershaw, Hitler, 1889-1936: Hubris (New York: Norton, 1999), and Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis (New York: Norton, 2000). Kershaw relates the dictator to the society that imagined him, and that 'worked toward' its leader without needing to be forced" (Robert O. Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" 2004 digital, loc. 4,302). (‘Remember This’ “The Most Compelling Biography of the German Dictator Yet Written (1999)” video [lecture by Ian Kershaw] ‘UA-cam’ 03/30/2016). m.ua-cam.com/video/udJZogklcZI/v-deo.html
"According to Roger Griffin, fascism can be defined as a revolutionary species of political modernism originating in the early twentieth century whose mission is to combat the allegedly degenerative forces of contemporary history (decadence) by bringing about an alternative modernity and temporality (a ‘new order’ and a ‘new era’) based on the rebirth, or palingenesis, of the nation. Fascists conceive the nation as an organism shaped by historic, cultural, and in some cases, ethnic and hereditary factors, a mythic construct incompatible with liberal, conservative, and communist theories of society. The health of this organism they see undermined as much by the principles of institutional and cultural pluralism, individualism, and globalized consumerism promoted by liberalism as by the global regime of social justice and human equality identified by socialism in theory as the ultimate goal of history, or by the conservative defense of 'tradition' (Anton Shekhovtsov "Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir" ‘Fascism and the Far Right Series’ p. xxi-xxii).
"Perhaps the best definition [of fascism] comes from Robert Paxton professor emeritus at Columbia University and holder of the Legion d’Honneur, despite all the books he has written on wartime France’s pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism analyzes the stages by which 20th century fascisms rose and fell. It should be essential reading for any student of fascist movements, and especially for anyone thinking of founding one. Fascism, Paxton says, is a dynamic process, rather than a fixed ideology like socialism or communism. There are five steps on Paxton’s road to hell, and not all fascist parties made it past the second step" (Dominic Green "The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'" ‘The Atlantic’ 2016 web). m.ua-cam.com/video/eB07s3PGG5I/v-deo.html
Roger Griffin has given us an indispensable definition of fascism: palingenetic ultranationalism. But listening to him speak, I think there are some gaps in his theory and some biases in his understanding. Failing to take in the Marxist conception of fascism, in which the decline of liberal democracy and capitalism cause the ruling class to appropriate popular sentiment, leads him to an incomplete understanding.
It is my understanding that the Griffin and Marxist conceptions are incompatible because Griffin understands it as a distinctive separate system which is it’s own revolutionary mass movement and Marxist theory does not allow for this because follows the strict progressional system which moves from feudalism, capitalism, socialism, stateless communism and therefore fascism must be an extension of the Capitalist phase therefore it stresses the economic factors such as the economic crisis that states were in that became fascist which was the sole reason for it’s development; how fascism was a tool of the ruling class to suppress the working class; and it can’t have it’s own ideology of it’s own because it is still a part of the capitalist phase.
I disagree with the comment about secularism being a necessary component of pre-fascist conditions. In the US those who are moving toward fascist mentalities have weaponized Christianity and this is playing a critical role in the movement toward fascism, as you've defined it, in the US.
Extreme religious fundamentalists within a States population or a States government can and have been drawn towards fascist movements. With that being said, many other historians that also specialize in the study of fascism agree with Griffin. Fascist movements can & have only grown to governing a State within secularized countries (for the very reason that Griffin lays out).
"Perhaps the best definition [of fascism] comes from Robert Paxton professor emeritus at Columbia University and holder of the Legion d’Honneur, despite all the books he has written on wartime France’s pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism analyzes the stages by which 20th century fascisms rose and fell. It should be essential reading for any student of fascist movements, and especially for anyone thinking of founding one. Fascism, Paxton says, is a dynamic process, rather than a fixed ideology like socialism or communism. There are five steps on Paxton’s road to hell, and not all fascist parties made it past the second step" (Dominic Green "The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'" ‘The Atlantic’ 2016 web). m.ua-cam.com/video/eB07s3PGG5I/v-deo.html
Robert Paxton is one of the world's leading scholars on the study of fascism. In this excerpt Hull correctly points out that Paxton believes a fascist movement can come from the extreme Christian-Right, but Paxton also describes in his book ("The Anatomy of Fascism") that fascist movements can only grow to a governing power within a secularized society (read Paxton's & Griffin's book for greater detail & explanation): "Eco's seven signposts of fascism are an OK start, but Eco wasn't an historian, and most historians would be more specific than that. [Political scientist and fascism historian] Robert Paxton once made the excellent point that fascism in the US would doubtless come from the Christian fundamentalist right-and I [Hull--political scientist & historian] think he's correct about that" (Mike Pearl "We Asked a Fascism Expert if Donald Trump is a Fascist" 'Vice' 12/04/16).
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302). "The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
Roger Griffin has the most objective definition of Fascism.
I am indebted to this man. In the 90s I too studied crowds and trance and Techno music as a religious construct. My PhD was relatively simple. Now we're in a Post-islamic Era and just waiting for everyone to distruct on social media as an aesthecally pleasurable event. And I have no pity for them. Zero.
Honest question, not a challenge BUT why does it have to be secular? I mean, I recall Mussolini making Catholicism the religion of the state. Or take the Iron Guard for example. What am I missing here?
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302).
"The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
"We need a generic term for what is a general phenomenon, indeed the most important political novelty of the twentieth century: a popular movement against the Left and against liberal individualism" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital loc. 415).
"Dictatorship against the Left amidst popular enthusiasm- that was the unexpected combination that fascism would manage to put together one short generation later" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 76).
“Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion” (Robert Paxton “What is Fascism?: From the Anatomy of Fascism” digital: p. 16).
This guy seems to be defining fascism by its preconditions as opposed to its actual philosophy.
No, Griffin defines fascism based on what the fascists themselves believe and what their goals are. The preconditions that Griffin describes is what leads people to joining fascist movements.
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302).
"The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
“'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism' (Griffin 1991: 26)” (Roger Griffin “Fascism” 2018 digital: p. 45).
"According to Roger Griffin, fascism can be defined as a revolutionary species of political modernism originating in the early twentieth century whose mission is to combat the allegedly degenerative forces of contemporary history (decadence) by bringing about an alternative modernity and temporality (a ‘new order’ and a ‘new era’) based on the rebirth, or palingenesis, of the nation. Fascists conceive the nation as an organism shaped by historic, cultural, and in some cases, ethnic and hereditary factors, a mythic construct incompatible with liberal, conservative, and communist theories of society. The health of this organism they see undermined as much by the principles of institutional and cultural pluralism, individualism, and globalized consumerism promoted by liberalism as by the global regime of social justice and human equality identified by socialism in theory as the ultimate goal of history, or by the conservative defense of 'tradition' (Anton Shekhovtsov "Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir" ‘Fascism and the Far Right Series’ p. xxi-xxii).
"Roger Griffin sees fascism is a form of ‘populist ultranationalism’ which aims to reconstruct the nation following a period of perceived crisis and decline-he uses the Victorian term ‘palingenetic’, meaning ‘rebirth from the ashes’, to characterize fascism. This attempted national resurrection amounts to a revolution, in that fascism compensates for the destruction of tradition through the promotion of a modernizing, utopian ideology" (Kevin Passmore "Fascism: A Very Short Introduction" 'Oxford Press' (2014) p.16).
What an incredibly smart man.
Best definition ever heard, should be supplemented using Stanford economy prof Robert Leeson analysis in order to conceive a bigger and more complete spectrum of what fascism was and where card-carrying fascists lied, specially considering membership 282632 Vaterländische Front
"This book is not concerned with the so-called 'mainstream right,' such as conservatives and liberals/libertarians, but only with those on the right who are 'anti-system,' defined here as hostile to liberal democracy. This is what I call the far right, which is itself divided into two broader subgroups. The extreme right rejects the essence of democracy, that is, popular sovereignty and majority rule. The most infamous example of the extreme right is fascism, which brought to power German Führer Adolf Hitler and Italian Duce Benito Mussolini, and was responsible for the most destructive war in world history. The radical right accepts the essence of democracy, but opposes fundamental elements of liberal democracy, most notably minority rights, rule of law, and separation of powers. Both subgroups oppose the postwar liberal democratic consensus, but in fundamentally different ways. While the extreme right is revolutionary, the radical right is more reformist. In essence, the radical right trusts the power of the people, the extreme right does not" (Cas Mudde "The Far Right Today" 2019 digital: p. 6).
“As I finish this manuscript, in May 2019, three of the five most populous countries in the world have a far-right leader (Brazil, India, and the US) and the biggest political party in the world is the populist radical right Indian People’s Party (BJP). Within the European Union (EU), two governments are fully controlled by populist radical right parties (Hungary and Poland), another four include such parties (Bulgaria, Estonia, Italy, Slovakia), and two are held up with support of a populist radical right party (Denmark and the United Kingdom).” (Cass Mudde “The Far Right Today” 2019 digital: p. 1).
“'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism' (Griffin 1991: 26)” (Roger Griffin “Fascism” 2018 digital: p. 45).
It would be nice to cut a video in a way that lets the voice of the speaker breathe, thank you. Especially if someone is trying to formulate something substantial, endangered to drift off into the routine of their lifelong main topic. - Jumpcuts are for idiots.
“Ian Kershaw, a major expert on Nazism” (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 11).
"[Read] Ian Kershaw's chapter 'The essence of Nazism: form of fascism, brand of totalitarianism, or unique phenomenon?' in his seminal work The Nazi Dictatorship (third edition: London, Edward Arnold, 1993)" (Roger Griffin “International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus” ed. Roger Griffin ‘Arnold Readers in History Series’ 1998 p. 325).
"[A] world expert on the Third Reich [...] Ian Kershaw was now prepared not only to classify Nazism as a form of fascism but to assert that ‘The quest for national rebirth lay, of course, at the heart of all fascist movements’" (Roger Griffin "Fascism" 2018 digital: p. 54).
"The preeminent biography of Hitler is now Ian Kershaw, Hitler, 1889-1936: Hubris (New York: Norton, 1999), and Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis (New York: Norton, 2000). Kershaw relates the dictator to the society that imagined him, and that 'worked toward' its leader without needing to be forced" (Robert O. Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" 2004 digital, loc. 4,302).
(‘Remember This’ “The Most Compelling Biography of the German Dictator Yet Written (1999)” video [lecture by Ian Kershaw] ‘UA-cam’ 03/30/2016). m.ua-cam.com/video/udJZogklcZI/v-deo.html
"According to Roger Griffin, fascism can be defined as a revolutionary species of political modernism originating in the early twentieth century whose mission is to combat the allegedly degenerative forces of contemporary history (decadence) by bringing about an alternative modernity and temporality (a ‘new order’ and a ‘new era’) based on the rebirth, or palingenesis, of the nation. Fascists conceive the nation as an organism shaped by historic, cultural, and in some cases, ethnic and hereditary factors, a mythic construct incompatible with liberal, conservative, and communist theories of society. The health of this organism they see undermined as much by the principles of institutional and cultural pluralism, individualism, and globalized consumerism promoted by liberalism as by the global regime of social justice and human equality identified by socialism in theory as the ultimate goal of history, or by the conservative defense of 'tradition' (Anton Shekhovtsov "Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir" ‘Fascism and the Far Right Series’ p. xxi-xxii).
"Perhaps the best definition [of fascism] comes from Robert Paxton professor emeritus at Columbia University and holder of the Legion d’Honneur, despite all the books he has written on wartime France’s pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism analyzes the stages by which 20th century fascisms rose and fell. It should be essential reading for any student of fascist movements, and especially for anyone thinking of founding one. Fascism, Paxton says, is a dynamic process, rather than a fixed ideology like socialism or communism. There are five steps on Paxton’s road to hell, and not all fascist parties made it past the second step" (Dominic Green "The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'" ‘The Atlantic’ 2016 web). m.ua-cam.com/video/eB07s3PGG5I/v-deo.html
Roger Griffin has given us an indispensable definition of fascism: palingenetic ultranationalism. But listening to him speak, I think there are some gaps in his theory and some biases in his understanding. Failing to take in the Marxist conception of fascism, in which the decline of liberal democracy and capitalism cause the ruling class to appropriate popular sentiment, leads him to an incomplete understanding.
He is explicitly against the Marxist understanding of fascism and makes it clear in The Nature of Fascism, which I think is a shame
It is my understanding that the Griffin and Marxist conceptions are incompatible because Griffin understands it as a distinctive separate system which is it’s own revolutionary mass movement and Marxist theory does not allow for this because follows the strict progressional system which moves from feudalism, capitalism, socialism, stateless communism and therefore fascism must be an extension of the Capitalist phase therefore it stresses the economic factors such as the economic crisis that states were in that became fascist which was the sole reason for it’s development; how fascism was a tool of the ruling class to suppress the working class; and it can’t have it’s own ideology of it’s own because it is still a part of the capitalist phase.
I disagree with the comment about secularism being a necessary component of pre-fascist conditions. In the US those who are moving toward fascist mentalities have weaponized Christianity and this is playing a critical role in the movement toward fascism, as you've defined it, in the US.
Name an actual Fascist movement in the US right now? Far-Right rhetoric, ideologies, and philosophies don't necessarily equal Fascism.
Extreme religious fundamentalists within a States population or a States government can and have been drawn towards fascist movements. With that being said, many other historians that also specialize in the study of fascism agree with Griffin. Fascist movements can & have only grown to governing a State within secularized countries (for the very reason that Griffin lays out).
"Perhaps the best definition [of fascism] comes from Robert Paxton professor emeritus at Columbia University and holder of the Legion d’Honneur, despite all the books he has written on wartime France’s pro-Nazi Vichy regime. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism analyzes the stages by which 20th century fascisms rose and fell. It should be essential reading for any student of fascist movements, and especially for anyone thinking of founding one. Fascism, Paxton says, is a dynamic process, rather than a fixed ideology like socialism or communism. There are five steps on Paxton’s road to hell, and not all fascist parties made it past the second step" (Dominic Green "The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'" ‘The Atlantic’ 2016 web). m.ua-cam.com/video/eB07s3PGG5I/v-deo.html
Robert Paxton is one of the world's leading scholars on the study of fascism. In this excerpt Hull correctly points out that Paxton believes a fascist movement can come from the extreme Christian-Right, but Paxton also describes in his book ("The Anatomy of Fascism") that fascist movements can only grow to a governing power within a secularized society (read Paxton's & Griffin's book for greater detail & explanation):
"Eco's seven signposts of fascism are an OK start, but Eco wasn't an historian, and most historians would be more specific than that. [Political scientist and fascism historian] Robert Paxton once made the excellent point that fascism in the US would doubtless come from the Christian fundamentalist right-and I [Hull--political scientist & historian] think he's correct about that" (Mike Pearl "We Asked a Fascism Expert if Donald Trump is a Fascist" 'Vice' 12/04/16).
"The most influential recent attempt to define fascism comes from Roger Griffin, 'The Nature of Fascism' (London: Routledge, 1994), and 'International Fascism: Theories, Causes, and the New Consensus' (London: Arnold, 1998), though his zeal to reduce fascism to one pithy sentence seems to me more likely to inhibit than to stimulate analysis of how and with whom it worked" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" loc. 4302).
"The most widely accepted recent concise definition of fascism as an 'ideal type' is by the British scholar Roger Griffin: 'Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism'" (Robert Paxton "The Anatomy of Fascism" digital: loc. 415). ua-cam.com/video/dNVKEGZVkFk/v-deo.html
ERNST NIEKISCH .