After the debate of the candidates for the presidency of the Government and the subsequent comments on the two blocks, also after the last rallies in which the left delves into uniting the "three rights" as if they were one and appealing to the vote of the fear of fascism, after Pedro Sánchez tried to make a profit from Franco's exhumation, the word "facha", which in recent months, has returned to the vocabulary of the street, expands to point out everything that does not correspond to the socialist ideology. It should be remembered, as we did a few months ago in this medium, where it comes from and where does a term that has become so used has lost meaning:
«Facha» derives from the pronunciation of the Italian «fascio» and «fascist». The origin is not in the use that fascism could give in its advertising, but just the opposite: in communist propaganda. The term was useful: it was possible to link the political concept with the proximity to the popular definition of "facha" as someone with a bad appearance, a "mamarracho, adefesio", says the RAE dictionary, and as a derogatory synonym of "fascist" , understood as a person of «reactionary political ideology».
This last meaning admitted by our Academy presupposes fascism as a reaction to the rest of ideologies, including communism and nationalism. Fascism would thus be contrary to the evolution of history, its progress, given the bonhomy of the rest, who do not have that disqualification. For example, "Stalinism" is defined by the SAR simply as "totalitarian communist regime imposed by Stalin in the Soviet Union in the twentieth century." There are no assessments of its harmful nature to human rights and, consequently, as intrinsically reactionary, there is not even a mention of its undemocratic attitude, as it does with the definition of "fascism."
In this conclusion that affects language and, as Kant explained, the mental construction of reality, two circumstances have concurred. The first is the victory of a Philosophy of History in which the idea of progress is marked by the fulfillment of the aspirations of the left. Not surprisingly, the "progressive" concept is rhetorical property of the different versions of socialism, from social democracy to communism. The "advance" of Humanity has only one direction, and is the one marked by the leftists. In fact, since 1945 the political center – five on a scale of one to ten – has been shifting towards socialist postulates.
The spokesmen of Leninism
The second reason, closely linked to the above, is the effective communist propaganda developed since the 1920s, and resumed by the New Left since 1968. Willi Münzenberg (1889-1940) launched since 1921 a plan for Western intellectuals became the spokesmen of Leninism. He bought or convinced many writers and journalists, professors and philosophers, who dedicated themselves to lying about the USSR, selling supposed achievements and hiding misery and crime. Language was the key to getting followers, forging new generations of communists and winning cultural hegemony, as noted by Max Adler and Antonio Gramsci. From that moment on, everyone who did not sympathize with communism was considered "fascist." Even George Orwell wrote in 1944 that this general application emptied the concept of meaning, which led to its use as a simple "curse word." Yes, but a curse with a political sense that bleached communism, which lacks in our pejorative noun language.
The emergence of right-wing populisms – not those of the left – has resurrected the word "fascist," despite the intellectual inaccuracy of describing exclusive movements from the 1930s to 21st-century movements, as noted by Stanley Paine , or it can be read in Robert O. Paxton's classic "Anatomy of Fascism."
That superficiality of the current discourse, which has an intentionality, is not only in the words of leftist parties and the media, but has been reflected in the emergence of surprising titles. One of them is «Fascism. A warning, ”by Madeleine Albright, once a respectable mandatory, or the interesting“ Antifa. The anti-fascist manual ”, by Mark Bray, where virtually everyone who opposes the leftist utopia or who denounces its cultural hegemony is identified as fascist.
The victory of Donald Trump has been decisive for the resurrection of the term "fascist." The most serious study in Spain has a significant title: «Facha. How fascism works and how it has entered your life »(2019), by the American Jason Stanley. Now, the conclusion is paradoxical and contradictory, to the point that it seems that it unintentionally defines the left: the facade acquires social weight thanks to the propaganda about history, sexuality and freedom of expression, to the mythification of historical episodes and people, to the collective identity, to the use of education and language, to the vision of society divided between those above and those below.
The façade, says Stanley, masks himself in criticism of the politically correct. It is quite possible that Jean-François Revel, having laughed at such simplicity, would have remembered the evil that intellectuals who sacrifice reality to ideology do to democracy.
Pablo Iglesias delivered an "anti-fascist alert" when the left lost the Andalusian elections of December 2018. His followers, along with the Socialists, surrounded the Andalusian Parliament and took the streets. The others were "facades." There was no general repudiation of that authoritarian attitude for tolerance towards these maneuvers if they come from the left, and that the term has passed to the current language and to the collective imaginary for everything contrary to the socialist ideal. Thus, "facades" are the Catholic Monarchs or Admiral Cervera – according to Ada Colau, or the three center-right parties, which he describes as "triplets," as Susana Díaz and Minister Dolores Delgado did – who added " three-phase »-. In addition, the use of national symbols such as the flag, or even the application of the Constitution for the maintenance of the unity of Spain when there is a separatist coup is described as "facades".
. (tagsToTranslate) jorge vilches