The Wild Hunt Podcast, Episode 2: Politics, Politics, Politics!

The Wild Hunt Podcast, Episode 2: Politics, Politics, Politics! April 1, 2012

Welcome to the latest installment of a new supplemental feature here at The Wild Hunt, The Wild Hunt Podcast (focus groups loved the name). This weekly podcast will take a deeper look at stories, links, and personalities that I feature in my daily updates. In this second episode of The Wild Hunt Podcast we chat with PNC Managing Editor Cara Schulz and resident Theodism expert Nick Ritter about the congressional candidacy of New York City Councilman Dan Halloran. Then, in the second segment, we interview folklorist and anthropologist Dr. Amy Hale about her recently-published paper “John Michell, Radical Traditionalism and the Emerging Politics of the Pagan New Right.” Finally, I speak briefly with Occupy Eugene activist Alley Valkyrie about separating your private life from the high-profile activism you’re known for.

Alley Valkyrie. Photo by Rob Sydor.

[iframe 500 50]

You can listen to, and download, the episode at

Segment Listing:

  1. Intro
  2. “Psychopsis” by The Shroud from their album “In the Garden.”
  3. Talk with Nick Ritter and Cara Schulz about Dan Halloran’s candidacy.
  4. “I Can See Now (Live)” by Dead Can Dance from “Live Happenings IV.”
  5. Interview with Dr. Amy Hale about her Pomegranate article.
  6. “Beltane” by Seventh Harmonic from their album “Garden of Dilmun.”
  7. Interview with Occupy Eugene activist Alley Valkyrie.
  8. Outro

Relevant Links:

I hope you enjoy the show, stay tuned for next time where I’ll discuss chants, pilgrimages, and other journeys.

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Excellent…I love to see Pagan Media going to a higher level. 

  • Thelettuceman

    Thank you, Jason. You have a very easy voice to listen to – I can’t listen to a number of voices without visual accompaniment.  I’ll echo Ed Hubbard, that I love and appreciate seeing Media (especially Pagan) growing to a larger level. 

  • Jason and Amy Hale make repeated accusations that there are “crypto-fascists” attempting to “infiltrate” modern Paganism under the guise of “Traditionalism”. This is classic McCarthyite fear-mongering. Amy Hale specifically states ther “there
    is a lot of what is called Radical Traditionalism that has some politics that I
    personally believe and would define to be what we call little ‘f’ fascism.” But she never once tells us who these people or groups are.

  • Dr. Amy Hale has done extensive research on this topic, and your knee-jerk accusations of “McCarthyite fear-mongering” are un-called-for. Have you even read the paper in question? Have you read her source material? It was a mutual decision to not “name names” at this time, as she has future papers awaiting publication that will go more in-depth into her assertions. 

    Further, having looked into the “Radical Traditionalism” and European “New Right” subcultures in the past, everything she says lines up with what my own digging has shown me. That there are crypto-fascists using those labels to infiltrate Pagan and esoteric groups.

  • Until you name names you are just engaging in a classic witch hunt. You and Hale are no different from Joseph McCarthy waving a blank sheet of paper in the air and pronouncing “I have hear in my hand a list of known Communists …”

    If the evidence is there, present it. If the evidence is not yet ready for prime time then why make the accusations? This is journalism 101, Jason. And you are failing.

  • It seems to continually escape you that we are discussing a peer-reviewed and published paper. Have you read it? Have you read its citations? 

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Jason, the link to the paper in question provides only an abstract, with the document itself behind a paywall. Demanding that AP read it — well, I don’t know how he’s situated financially but it certainly would be a barrier for me. Pomegranate hasn’t gotten the memo that information wants to be free.

    Apuleius, Hale does name one name, John Michell (I assume not the John Mitchell of the Nixon administration).

  • Hale specifically states in the interview (which is what I am responding to) that she has very limited knowledge concerning Michell’s (whose name Jason doesn’t even know how to pronounce) political activities.

  • Baruch, radio programs discuss books quite often, that, when I last checked, aren’t free. Making all information free of charge is not a prerequisite of good journalism.

  • As far as the paper itself goes, I am unimpressed with Hale’s engagement, or, to be precise, her lack thereof, with the broad scope of recent scholarly literature on fascism. She relies almost exclusively on two authors, Roger Griffin and his student Tamir Bar-On, while ignoring other views of fascism. In particular Hale completely ignores the criticisms that have been made specifically of Bar-On’s views on fascism and the New Right by Arthur Versluis (link). The result is that Hale give the appearance of making uncritical use of a theoretical paradigm she has not actually thought through for herself.

    Ironically, Roger Griffin’s recent (2010) book, “Modernism and Fascism: The Sense of a Beginning under Mussolini and Hitler” argues for a close connection between modernism and fascism. 

  • Jason, since your have done your own research, when might we hear more about the “crypto-fascists” who are “infiltrating” Pagan groups that you have uncovered? Or is that evidence also not ready for the light of day? It’s kind of funny that you think this is an effective response, since you are simply stating that you, too, know of fascist infiltrators but you won’t name them, either. meh.

    I have done a lot research of my own, as a matter of fact. And I do name names. Anyone interested can go to my blog and search for posts tagged “traditionalism” and “fascism”. One thing you will find in my blog posts is an order of magnitude more scholarly sources on the subject of the nature and definition of fascism than you will find in Hale’s paper.

  • Ethan Doyle White

    Baruch, I am sure that many of those involved in producing The Pomegranate, from those high up on its editorial staff, to those (like myself), who have simply had papers and reviews published within it, would truly love to see it produced and distributed for free, both for Pagan Studies scholars and for practicing Pagans themselves. 

    Unfortunately, this cannot be the case. The Pomegranate is published by the company Equinox Publishing, that at the end of the day, must surely turn a profit, on top of covering its publication expenses. That’s the reality of capitalism, love it or hate it. 

    There is currently a great debate within the western academic community regarding the cost of producing peer-reviewed journals and the production of “open access” papers. It seems that a great number of figures involved in academia would simply love their work to be offered for free — after all, it would then receive a far greater readership! Of course, this clashes with the interests of academic publishers, who are in the business to make money. Its an interesting debate, and there seems to be quite a bit on the Internet about it if you’re interested in learning more. 

    For this reason (and I appreciate that I have had to oversimplify everything here), it really is unfair to state, as you have done, that “Pomegranate hasn’t gotten the memo that information wants to be free”. I’m sure that it’s gotten and read that memo. Its just that – as the world currently stands – things simply aren’t published for free, whether the editors of The Pom like it or not. 

  • HRM

    Jason, is there an actual subscription link for these podcasts? (I’m not see one on the site, but have been long known to not see the obvious.)

  • Not yet. Because I’m still working out the file-hosting process. 

  • All these posts that you have listed encourage an atmosphere of fear and suspicion among Pagans. While you cite specific cases (based on flimsy evidence) you leap to sweeping conclusions about whole ideologies and even musical genres. Anyone who reads Aleister Crowely or Edred Thorsson or Julius Evola, or listens to Neofolk music, or whose politics are too conservative, or even anyone who possesses books by such notable scholars as Joscelyn Godwin and Arthur Versluis is potentially part of this vast right-wing conspiracy to infiltrate Paganism and introduce foreign substances into our precious bodily fluids.

  • Anonymous

     Peer-review clearly doesn’t mean much. Beyond any murky interpretive issue, the article gets some very basic facts wrong. As just one example, Hale claims that Confessions of a Radical Traditionalist was “assembled and edited by Joscelyn Godwin in conjunction with Michell specifically for ULTRA Press” (p. 92) and then goes on to build a portion of her pathetic guilt by association (with people whose only guilt is their association with the allegedly guilty) argument on the basis of this (linking Ultra’s Buckley to Sam Dickson, etc.). This is would be weak enough if Confessions were actually published by Ultra, but it is not. It is published by Dominion, which Buckley is not a part of.

    But, of course, why let facts get in the way when we are out to bag on the traditionalists again? And especially dead traditionalists? Ancient pagans venerated their forebears. Modern pagans apparently denounce their spiritual forebears.

  • Your response here just proves my above assertion. Particularly with the Neofolk piece, which is rather balanced and nuanced, and comes from a place of experience with the actual subculture (I was a radio and club DJ within the Goth subculture for several years, and know Neofolk as a genre very well). 

    I have never asserted that “anyone who reads” the above authors is automatically suspect. Your insistence that I do makes engaging with you on this issue pointless.

  • The only accusation I have made against you Jason is that you are making sweeping allegations against whole groups of people based on very faulty evidence and logic. And these are not just any allegations, but the most poisonous kinds of allegations one can make in our society. You have repeatedly insinuated that Traditionalism and/or the New-Right are, in your own words “co-opted by extremists, racists and people who believe in a sort of virulent ethnic superiority.” In fact that is rather mild since you manage to avoid the words fascism and nazism.

    Of course one can find various forms of ugly extremism among leftists and progressives as well. For example, some self-identified socialists support cultural genocide in Tibet in the name of eradicating “theocracy” and “feudalism”. We have also witnessed the recent ugly fight over whether or not certain ideas from radical feminism amount to a form of bigotry. Obviously one cannot leap from these specific problems to sweeping characterizations about socialists and feminists generally. But apparently the same rules don’t apply to Traditionalism and the New Right?

    But if you look deeper and get to the bottom of things, the clearest pattern that comes through is that there are some white-supremacist groups that are trying to pass themselves off as Pagan-friendly, and this is a recruiting strategy aimed at young people. But the people behind this turn out not to be Pagan at all! Ideologically they celebrate the “Germanic” Christianity of the Carolingian Dynasty, which was the deadly enemy of all those in Europe who continued to worship the Old Gods. No real Heathen could ever break bread with those who admire Charles Martel, and whose only criticism of modern Christianity is that it has become too tolerant!

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    “Ancient pagans venerated their forebears. Modern pagans apparently denounce their spiritual forebears.”

    What we know of ancient Pagans is about societies long-settled in their ways. Modern Paganism is not settled, as this very thread demonstrates, and so behaves differently.

  • Amy Hale

    I am quite familiar with Versluis’ reply and his perspective on this material. It was not relevant to this particular discussion. It may well be in a subsequent publication.

  • Jeff Flagg

    I didn’t hear that in the interview.  Could you give the timestamp for that comment?

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Jeff, my statement that Hale names names was based on the Pomegranate abstract. I haven’t heard the interview. (A tic: I don’t go to the Internet to listen to the radio.)

  • Jeff Flagg

    Apologies.  I meant to address Apuleius but clicked your reply link instead.  Apuleius doesn’t have a reply link, but perhaps s/he is still reading and could happily provide an answer.

  • Alley Valkyrie is a real cutie!

  • Jeff Flagg asked where it is in the podcast that Hale states that she has limited knowledge concerning John Michell’s actual political affinities and activities. Here is my own transcript of the interview starting in at about 51m8s: “Confessions of a Radical Traditionalist is something that was edited toward the end of his life.  And from what I’ve read from his biographer, in his biography, he was trying to kind of shed this hippie image.  It’s really hard to know exactly what his involvement with New Right politics was or would have been. So I don’t want to overstate that he was all of a sudden becoming some sort of crazy activist, because I don’t have that specific data.”

  • Hale does “name names” in the Pomegranate article (my previous comments were in response to what she and Jason say in the interview), but her shotgun approach obscures (intentionally) the very real differences between those who genuinely do espouse white supremacist positions, such as Greg Johnson and Troy Southgate, and those who merely have ideas that Hale doesn’t like, such as Joscelyn Godwin and Stephen Edred Flowers. I say “intentionally” because Hale makes it clear that she wishes to impugn Traditionalists and New Rightists generally because she believes she possesses the ability to discern the carefully hidden plans of people who are involved in a secret conspiracy to infiltrate Paganism, and she is primarily interested in outing these internal enemies.

    In fact, if one reads the racist bilge published in Alternative Right, Counter-Currents, etc, one can see that there is nothing “secret” about any of this. Some white supremacist nimrods are in fact trying to pass themselves off as Traditionalists and Heathens, while simultaneously making common cause with Christian fundamentalists. What these people have in common is not “Traditionalism”, nor is it being part of the “New Right”, nor is it an interest in Julius Evola and Dion Fortune. What they have in common is precisely this willingness to rub shoulders with the likes of Pat Buchanan, David Duke, Peter Brimelow (who coined the phrase “War on Christmas”) and, more generally, with those who openly espouse slogans such as “Win White America” and who explicitly support the idea that America is a “Christian nation”.

    If anyone is actually interested in the real story behind all this, check out: “And if we occasionally speak of Baldur…” and also Yet More on Pagans, Christians and White Supremacists in the 21st Century. (they’re free.)

  • Jason what’s the ETA on when we can get a rss feed for the show? I’d love to sync it up and I’d hate to miss an episode.

  • For now you can use this feed:

    That will give you just the Podcast episode posts, but I’m still working out a system that will allow direct downloads of the show so that it can be added to itunes and other podcast services.

  • Look up National Anarchism, the magazine Tyr, Nouvelle Droit, Julius Evola, and the Green Star sometime.  Occupy Heathens has done a LOT of research into this topic, it is a growing problem that has been ignored by the broader community for too long.  I’ve had brushes personally with such individuals and had capital F Fascists try to recruit me into their organizations in the past.

  • The list you give, Ryan, is an excellent example of the kind of destructive broad-brush fear-mongering that I am trying to counter.

    The journal Tyr comes up over and over again. It is a Journal in which lots of people have published, representing a broad spectrum of views. There are at least two people who have been associated with the Journal that I have serious problems with: Stephen MacNallen and Collin Cleary. MacNallen in my opinion is one person who actually resembles the description of someone who is arguably a crypto-fascist or at least a (just barely) disguised white supremacist, and Collin Cleary (who was at one time one of the editors of TYR) is now hanging out with Greg Johnson who openly espouses White Nationalism and is now in the orbit of the American Renaissance/National Policy Institute crowd.

    But one of the authors also frequently associated with TYR is Edred Thorsson, who was one of leaders of the movement to explicitly renounce “racialist” Heanthenry in the US, a movement that has played a crucial role in exposing those, like MacNallen, who are only interested in a “Heathenry” that is defined in racial terms. And there’s also a number of other important authors who have published in TYR: Christopher McIntosh, Joscelyn Godwin, Nigel Pennick, John Matthews.

    Also, Mattias Gardell devoted several pages of his book, “Gods of the Blood”, to Michael Moyniham, one of the main editors of TYR. Gardell unreservedly exonerates Moynihan of any white-supremacist or anti-semitic leanings: “Moynihan is hardly anti-Semitic or white supremacist, and is definitely not a radical right ‘leader’ of anything.”

    If you are worried about Who Is Who, there are some simple guidelines: find out if people are fans of American Renaissance, The Occidental Quarterly, Counter-Currents, Alternative Right, the National Policy Institue, Youth for Western Civilization, or the Charles Martel Society (all red flags). These are not groups/journals that represent a broad spectrum of views: they are all white supremacists pure and simple. Also, have zero tolerance for racism, anti-semitism and homophobia. If on the other hand someone is reading books by Julius Evola or Aleister Crowley or John Michell (for examples), then it is unfair to immediately suspect they are are a crypto-fascist trying to infiltrate your group. In fact, it is not just unfair, it is a very very bad idea.

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    So could any of you well-read folks provide a ten-cent tour?

    Is fascism as big a feature of Paganism as veganism?

    Is this about the usual eurocentrism from the usual quarter? or are their new players?

  • Are you kidding me?

     Evola worked for the fascist governments of both Germany and Italy, that is a well known FACT. While his philosophy was slightly different than the strict political interpretations of governments at that time, he was a fucking fascist. And this writings are frequently cited by scholars and researchers as falling within the greater milieu of extreme right-wing thought. Modern fascists or ‘revolutionary Rights’ (or whatever new incarnation they call themselves this week) cite him ad nauseum, along with the garbage produced in Tyr. Stop being an apologist. Racists who co-opt Heathenry to recruit for their racist/fascist agenda should be stopped. Besides, its only a witch hunt if they (in this case fascists) are not real (like the communists ala McCarthy). These people are real, and unapologetic about what they are doing and they WILL be stopped!

  • Anonymous

     Thank you for acting as an object lesson about the fear-mongering to which Apuleius refers.

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Thank you for putting in your oar, AYKM.

    Can *you* tell me if fascism is as big in Paganism as veganism?

    Or if this is the usual eurocentrism from the usual places, or there are new players?


  • Are you kidding me?

    There are more racists heathens than vegan heathens. The old guard of NS Heathens are still around, only now they have networked with extreme Right wing European thinkers.

    @Folcwald – No one here is fear mongering. As I said, these people do exist. Only the Right makes up invisible boogey men to keep people afraid. It use to be more of a problem here in the States, but now its so bad, the Euros are reaching out to American Heathens for help and advice on what to do. No problem was ever solved by ignoring it.

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Thanks for your reply, AYKM.

  • Cigfran

    You seem to not have much confidence in anyone else’s capacity for discernment, and are much concerned with their mental hygiene.

    Racists cannot “infiltrate” anything. No one is fooled or coerced into racist points of view. A Heathen with racist ideas is no more or less likely than anyone else to ally themselves with supremacist and separatist programs.

    The constant furor over Evola is wildly overstated. Quite frankly, he is more tedious than dangerous, and modern romantics who think of his anachronistic fantasies as a template for social order are smoking it. There will be no fascist revolution from the readers of Tyr or any similar publication.

    Stop playing mindcop and concern yourself with, you know, actual racist policy and actions advanced by actually committed racists.

  • Scott

    AP, can you provide a citation for that quote from Gardell?  Google Books is unable to locate the passage, though I’m mindful that their scans are not always complete.  I note that Gardell *does* identify Moynihan as a “heathen anarchofascist, with all the paradoxes and ambiguities that follow such a characterization” (p. 304), which suggests that questions about fascist allegiances may be separable from questions about white supremacist allegiances.

  • I don’t have my copy with me right now, but I should be able to get to it later today. On page 302 (which you should be able to see), Gardell does say that Moynihan’s world-view “hardly qualifies as anti-semitic”, and also that Moynihan has no sympathy for either white supremacy or even “white pride”.

    As far as the the “heathen anarcho-fascist” label, Gardell is only using fascism in a very narrow technical sense that does not involve many of the connotations usually associated with fascism. In particular, Gardell has already eliminated the idea that Moynihan is sympathetic either to racism or anti-semitism, and in common usage “fascism” goes hand-in-hand with both. In my opinion it is typical of Gardell’s work in general for him to first say, oh, well, certainly Moynihan is no racist or anti-semite, and then the next minute to turn around and hang the “fascist” label on him in a way that appears expressly designed to be lifted out of context.

    The Fascist party in Italy had a significant Jewish membership for many years, and elements of the modern Likud and other “far-right” Zionist parties can trace some of their political lineage back to inter-war Fascism. But in my opinion there is no justification for applying the term fascism to anyone today who is not racist and anti-semitic, and anyone who does so is intentionally inviting misinterpretation (or doesn’t realize the implications of what they are saying)

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    What is the point in preserving the term, then? If it no longer implies an economic or social theory, but only racism broadly defined, why use it at all?

  • Scott

    P. 302 is where I’d expected to find it, but Google Books is not including that page in its preview.  I’m a little concerned that HathiTrust’s search tool doesn’t find phrase components of that quote either, though it apparently is robust for other phrase searches within that text.  I’ll have to pull a physical copy from our collection when I get a chance.

    Can you expand on why you draw the boundaries on fascism to require white supremacy and anti-Semitism?  I’m certainly not an expert in this area, but I note that you approvingly cite Griffin above, who defines fascism as “a political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a
    palingenetic form of populist ultra-nationalism” (, which doesn’t imply a necessarily racist component to me.  This is, of course, not to say that fascist ideologies *cannot* be racist, but I’m concerned that arbitrarily drawing the boundaries in this way encourages spurious charges of libel/slander against those leveling accusations of fascist sympathies, on the grounds that their accusations necessarily include a charge of racism/anti-Semitism, which is a substantially stronger accusation in the current political environment.

  • In the meantime (until I get my hands on my own physical copy of Gardell) there is also a very interesting review of the journal TYR that was published in 2010 in the Pomegranate (link to freely available pdf). The author is Michael Strmiska, a self-proclaimed “leftist-liberal” and author of the “Political Pagan” blog (link). Strimska states: “Tyr is by no means a neo-Nazi or pro-Fascist publication … Tyr is not a bullhorn for a right-wing, ethno-nationalist agenda, let alone a Nazi call to arms, but an investiga- tion of Pagan European, primarily Norse-Germanic spiritual and cultural traditions, and the possibilities for the renewal and adaptation of such traditions in the current day.”

    I don’t agree with everything that Strimska says in this review, but his is clearly a view that is both “progressive” and well-informed (he was awarded a Fullbright Fellowship to study Old Norse, and he is currently on the faculty of Global Studies at SUNY), and he definitely does not believe that TYR, or Radical Traditionalism generally, represents a lurking internal enemy infiltrating Paganism in order to further a secret fascist agenda. Unless, of couse, Strimska is also part of the crypto-fascist conspiracy.

  • Merofled Ing

    Baruch Dreamstalker,

    seconding your wish for a ten-cent tour here, but with a question (genuine question, I’m not wielding a battle-axe, at least not yet):
    “usual eurocentrism from the usual players”? Can I get a tour on that?

  • Merofled Ing

    “The Fascist party in Italy had a significant Jewish membership for many years, and elements of the modern Likud and other “far-right” Zionist parties can trace some of their political lineage back to inter-war Fascism.”
    Spell it out AP, or take your gray hide to Isis. This is one of your favorites, and you’ve never ever explained what this – irrespective of whether it’s actually true – is supposed to mean. Oh – there were/are some stupid Jews somewhere? Oh, that does prove a lot! (What, exactly?) Oh, there were (allegedly) Jews in the Italian Fascist movement so fascism isn’t anti-semitic? And so by inference, “… in my opinion there is no justification for applying the term fascism to anyone today who is not racist and anti-semitic,..” fascism isn’t fascism and the term can’t be applied to Italian fascists?

    In Europe (sorry, Baruch) the point is moot. A lot of paths are approaching zero visibility because their symbols are being hijacked by fashion labels targeting young supremacists. I agree that neither the producers of these labels nor the young supremacists are in any way pagan. They still foul up our chances of serious community building.

  • Jason, in my opinion the piece you did on neofolk music was reminiscent of the way FOX News deals with issues such as whether or not Obama is a Muslim or whether or not Obama was born in the US. FOX is careful to take the pose of “only raising questions”, while at the same time everyone can see what they are up to, despite their fall-back position that they never actually say “Obama is a Muslim”, or “Obama was not born in the US”. FOX gets the job done by maintaining plausible deniability while simultaneously validating the people who make those claims by repeatedly coming back to these “investigations”.

    Your “fair and balanced” stance would be a lot more believable if you also investigated the excesses and violence that are associated with the antifa movement, or if you gave prominence to cases in which groups or individuals have been wrongly accused of being fascist or nazi and have then forcefully and convincingly defended themselves. Instead, when someone renounces nazism you just categorize them as “crypto-fascists” and treat them as more dangerous than ever.

  • @Merofled Ing: my meaning was quite clear. From a purely historical perspective of  technically defining fascism as a political ideology and a social movement, anti-semitism is not intrinsic to it, or at least it was not intrinsic to Italian Fascism, which is a rather important test case for any definition of fascism generally.

    My reason for going into this was that Mattias Gardell (in his book “Gods of the Blood”) had conceded that Michael Moynihan (co-editor of TYR) is neither a racist nor an anti-semite, but at the same time Gardell still tried to label Moynihan as a fascist. The point being that Gardell, who has studied fascism in some depth, was relying on the historical fact that fascism  need not necessarily imply racism or anti-semitism, but he was ignoring the fact that today in the 21st century if you call someone a fascist you are for all practical purposes labeling them as a racist and anti-semite.

    I hope that clears things up for you.

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Merofled Ing:

    I was referring to our Norse friends whose intensity over their ancestral religion spills over, for some, into race nationalism. I’ve expressed this in as judgement-free a manner as I can because I’m not passing judgement at the moment; I’m asking if there are any players I *haven’t* already heard of.

    I also wanted a gut-check estimate of how big it is as a component of Paganism, hence the comparison with veganism.

    The commenter who signs hirself “Are You Kidding Me” has given me a reply on both.

  • Scott

    AP, I’m confused.  Is it your contention that Moynihan *is not*, in fact, a fascist since he is avowedly neither racist or anti-Semitic?  Or is it that Moynihan *is*, in a technical sense, a fascist, but we should not *call* him a fascist because the popular usage implies (erroneously) a racist/anti-Semitic component?

  • Merofled Ing

    Baruch Dreamstalker,

    Thank you for your answer. And a good day!!

  • I don’t think the “fascist” label can be justifiably applied to Moynihan. Part of my own definition of fascism is that it is only meaningful when applied to a political movement with large-scale popular support. This is at least implicit but often explicit in definitions of “historical” fascism. Although Moynihan has gained a certain amount of notoriety in rather select circles, he has never come close to anything that in any way resembles a mass popular movement of any kind, and has absolutely no interest in any such thing.

    This is in response to Scott specific question that begins: “AP, I’m confused.  Is it your contention that Moynihan *is not*, in fact, a fascist since …” I do think that it was pretty clear that I was taking issue with Gardell’s use of that term with respect to Moynihan.

  • Merofled Ing

    @Apuleius Platonicus – thank you for your reply. It doesn’t really clear it up for me, but then, a discussion about how to define fascism would be very fascinating (ouch), and we probably wouldn’t agree much, however, it would also be off topic to the Wild Hunt. Still, (sorry for my brand of eurocentrism here, not the one Baruch Dreamstalker meant), if something/body smells of fascism ever so slightly, get away from it/them. Fascism is anti anything that disrupts monolithic thinking. Er, thinking being an optimistic term here.