Reviews

This is a hell of a book to read - in a good way, really.

The title is a little bit of a misnomer in that I shall not be single-handedly toppling fascism any time soon, which is a shame. Instead, it analyses the history and philosophy of fascism: its roots in Nietzche, irrationalism, and Futurism; the "perfect storms" that allowed it to develop in the past in different places; and the responses of people and political groups, however they turned out. Mason also looks over the leftist theory at the time in lesser detail - typically more specifically how the prevalent theory and discourse of the time affected the responses of left-wing groups.

I have to say, the whole thing about irrationalism did make the ideology make more sense to me. There are times where I see right-wingers argue points that I believe are abhorrent, but which I can understand in terms of how they got to their perspective; however, often, it all seems very obviously nonsensical and made-up (i.e. whatever is/was going on with QAnon; "women are naturally subservient but I can't get laid because women are too entitled and men are oppressed" incel arguments; "transvestigators" circlejerking about the wrist width of celebrities). That some of the traceable philosophy is quite literally "it is this way because I say so :)" is a much simpler answer than I expected, but it tracks.

That a lot of the philosophy is about leaving behind humanity and becoming objects that simply produce capital is absolutely harrowing, but also kind of makes sense. Of course, any governmental system that scapegoats entire groups of people is going to benefit from dehumanising their targets, but that a lot of it is based around dehumanising <i>themselves</i> is also pretty enlightening.

The history section was pretty frustrating to read because, as ever, the leftists couldn't stop in-fighting. Look, I'm not going to pretend I agree with every leftist out there - quite the opposite. I am a person. But the fact that historical leftists refused to acknowledge the fascist groups of their time as the real enemy, and instead focusing their attacks on each other and anyone else close-but-not-close-enough to their personal political beliefs would sound like a complete joke if I didn't believe that would <i>absolutely</i> happen again. It probably still is! I mean, look at the response to the person who leaked the TSA no-fly list - it was a very important leak, but half of what I saw about it outside of "holy fucking bingle!" memes was people arguing whether or not the labels she used to describe her gender and sexuality were "problematic" or not.

Still, that's kind of the point of the inclusion of it all, isn't it? The successes and failures of anti-fascists in the past need to be taken note of if we're to contain the threat of modern fascism while it's in its infancy. Current politics is taking a dangerous turn, but we're nowhere near the point of no return, thankfully.

Following the spirit of the Popular Front - a short-lived but vitally important alliance of political groups left of centre made to dissolve fascist groups - Mason suggests that a similar attitude of cutting out the in-fighting for five minutes and focusing on the real enemy is probably a good idea. I don't wholly disagree. Those working to remove the rights of minorities will happily team up with just about anyone to bring about their vision, so we should probably be teaming up with others who think that minorities should have rights, actually.

I'll admit, I'm less of a fan of his self-admittedly flawed suggestion of large social media platforms (or the Internet as a whole) requiring ID and such to post. As Mason says himself, people in high-control situations (political, familial, whatever) will be put at a severe disadvantage. Content creators - especially those that make adult content - would be at much higher risk of rogue fans finding their information. Of course, the anonymity of the Internet is exactly what allows people to spread misinformation, pull political strings, and incite violence, so I do see what he's getting at. But god, there's got to be a better way, surely!

My own ramblings aside, though, this is a well-argued, easy-to-understand book that I reckon is worth the read.