Mathieu Bock-Côté vs the Nazis
What is wrong with Mathieu Bock-Côté? Here’s his Tuesday column. Four fifths of it is a well expressed, level-headed summary of the history of World War II. But he rounds it off with a coda saying people are wrong who think we’re fighting the same fight today: “Le combat antifasciste appartient à cette époque, pas à la nôtre.”
We’re surrounded by fascists, both the very obvious type who flaunt the hateful WWII-era symbols with pride, and many others who dissimulate their fascist sympathies under a thin glaze of civilization, but whose opinions can’t so easily be hidden. What is Bock-Côté’s motivation for pretending he can’t see them?
CE 12:41 on 2019-09-03 Permalink
I’m not sure how much it applies in this case but I remember reading about the process of “Gleichschaltung” in Germany as the Nazis were gradually changing the shape of society. It loosely translates to “co-ordination” in English and describes how subtle and not so subtle steps were taken to normalize the new regime and its way of seeing the world. Many people didn’t really notice it happening.
Up until recently, I wouldn’t have made this leap, especially when talking about a well-known columnist in a mainstream newspaper. But up until recently, columnists in mainstream newspapers generally didn’t feel a need to defend white supremacists or fascist sympathizers. There’s an unsettling cultural shift happening right now and I worry about its end-point.
walkerp 13:12 on 2019-09-03 Permalink
He’s a racist and a fascist.
steph 16:59 on 2019-09-03 Permalink
Every time I read his column I feel stupider and I’m filled with regret. There’s nothing even handed about his commentary and there’s always a dose of bigotry.
Raymond Lutz 16:59 on 2019-09-03 Permalink
Loosely related: the latest Terrence Malick movie (A Hidden Life, to be released this December) depicts up close the social tensions re nazism in WWII Austria. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8k3Xt280Ws
Jack 20:48 on 2019-09-03 Permalink
I dont care how he cloaks it MBC is a cultural supremacist, of a culture that happens to be 99,92% white, so what do we call him? Let’s be honest why he wants to make that separation between now and then is because if this was the nineteen thirties he would be marching with Adrien Arcand.
https://ricochet.media/fr/2705/critiquer-l-immigration-massive-une-tradition-bien-de-chez-nous
qatzelok 08:30 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
I’m not seeing the shocking intolerance or subtle racism that other comments have mentionned.
But the column does seem to be incomplete. It just stops suddenly. I was hoping to see him develop his “not-the-same-today” a bit more than he does, since this is the main thesis.
Chris 10:04 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
I’d say it depends who he’s talking about, and even who are you talking about Kate? “We’re surrounded by fascists”? Are we? Who is “we”? And do we even agree what fascist means? Wikipedia’s first sentence is: “Fascism is a form of far right-wing, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy”. I don’t see that surrounding me. There are fringe groups to be sure, but nothing like the Third Reich. Or are you talking beyond Canada? China’s ‘reeducation camps’ for Uighurs and Saudi’s theocracy better fit the bill. Perhaps MBC is referring to those that think opposing Trump is tantamount to opposing Hitler? Because those people are stretching! I have nothing good to say about Trump, but he’s nothing like my China or Saudi examples, let alone Nazi Germany.
Blork 10:56 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
@Chris, the Wikipedia definition is for “fascism” not “fascist.” Arguably, we are not surrounded by fascism (” dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy”) because the fascists who surround us have not yet attained the level of power they need to implement fascism.
thomas 12:49 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
It is very wrong to think that fascism is a thing of the past.
Two days ago there was a state election in the German state of Brandenburg (the area surrounding but not including Berlin). The biggest gains were realized by the party AFD (Alternative for Germany — which started initially as anti EU morphed into anti-immigrant and now they have added anti-climate change and anti-elite). Now it is the second largest state party. The party leader has clear fascist roots, as described in https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/leading-afd-pol-in-brandenburg-has-extremist-background-a-1284477.html The photo in the article is from a rally in which he participated.
This party only just missed winning this election by a few percentage points. Incidentally, while the party finds plenty of external scapegoats a major reason for their popularity is a general mailaise in the region that come with an aging and shrinking population and young people escape to the cities. The same demographic pressures are happening in Quebec.
@Blork They may not have achieved power but in Austria, Germany, Poland, Netherlands, Denmark, Italy and especially Hungary they are certainly driving much of the political discourse.
Blork 12:54 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
@thomas: I didn’t say they’re not driving the discourse. I’m just commenting on Chris’s comment that he doesn’t see any overt fascism “surrounding him.” My point is there can be fascists without fascism. But if you ignore the fascists, it could very likely lead to fascism.
At the risk of having some idiot yell “Godwin’s law!” I would elaborate that Germany in 1930 wasn’t fascist, but it was full of fascists. Germany 1935? Fascists and fascism.
ant6n 13:13 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
Trump is for the moment being kept in check by the deteriorating institutions that surround him.
walkerp 18:38 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
“To be sure, one of the first steps taken by the Nazi government, back in 1933, had been the exclusion of Jews from the Civil Service (which in Germany included all teaching positions, from grammar school to university…”
from Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt
Just because the house hasn’t burnt down doesn’t mean you don’t put out the fire in the basement.
Chris 19:31 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
Blork, actually, wikipedia redirects fascist to fascism. Your point is well-taken that we can have fascists without fascism. Indeed their numbers are the main deciding factor. I don’t deny there are fascists, as I said, “there are fringe groups to be sure”. But to be “surrounded”, to me at least, implies they are numerous and everywhere. OED defines “surround” as “be all around” or “encircle so as to cut off”. Again, I don’t think in Canada we meet that bar. Don’t get me wrong, we should be vigilant against any fascist advance, mais faut pas exagérer.
ant6n, exactly, Trump is in check by other institutions, i.e. “dictatorial power” is not satisfied. No doubt he’d prefer otherwise, but it ain’t so.
Beware the boy who cried wolf.
Raymond Lutz 20:52 on 2019-09-04 Permalink
What is fascism? Glad you asked… 😎
For video buff, https://youtu.be/uBIawt5m91U?t=52
and for those who still read text, https://kottke.org/16/11/the-14-features-of-eternal-fascism