People often think of the concept of the fascist dictatorship as inherently bad because it often employs discrimination of the highest order & rulers (dictators) have unchecked power. The very same people who claim that this form of governance is bad turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed by liberal, democratic governments. Many African countries are currently ruled by what is called kleptocratic governments where politicians divert state funds into their own pocket, these governments are liberal democracies. This is no worse than what a fascist dictator would do.
FASCISM AT IT'S CORE
I don't think reasonable fascists see their "tribe" as the best but simply seek for what's best for their "tribe" & it's survival, basically known as patriotism. The same patriotism seen in every modern country. Patriotism, simply put, is liberal fascism. We've seen how patriotism can lead to the persecution of minorities just like how people assume fascist dictatorships should be. Yet in the fascist dictatorships of Franco of Spain, Mussolini of Italy & Sun Yat-sen of China only criminals & people harming their land seem to be the only people "persecuted".
RULER FOR LIFE
At the core of every human being is the need to be in a land where the people governing it are reliable & competent. Knowing that the nature of human beings - like all things - is to eventually succumb to entropy & descend into corruption especially in underdeveloped lands. Why shouldn't disillusioned people allow a leader known to be reliable & competent govern the land for life? Monarchies rely on this concept, a leader was obeyed in ancient times for the good qualities he had & would rule unopposed for the rest of their lives. It was believed that the children & descendants of such a leader would possess the same qualities as their father & lead in the same fashion allowing for long-term consistency over the centuries. The concept of a monarch being obeyed irrespective of how they lead a land is self-destructive. This is why corrupt monarchs were overthrown by "enlightened" & impoverished societies. So, for me, if a monarch governs badly, the monarch should be scrutinized & checked not the most enduring & most tried & tested system of governance in history. Of course, a dictator is not a monarch but it's virtually the same idea if you remove the technicalities & legal frameworks.
Comments