If Brenton Harrison Tarrant Is A Fascist Then He’s A Left Wing Terrorist, Obviously

34
3162

That gross and appalling tragedy in New Zealand. Nutter opening fire at mosques as Friday prayers take place. Yes, obviously, a tragedy and appalling. We’re in tautology territory here. And yet there’s something wrong with the reporting of this. Benton Tarrant is being described as a fascist, possibly an eco-fascist. This could well be true. He’s also being described as right wing. That could be true too. What is not possible is that he is both fascist and right wing – for fascism is, by definition, a left wing phenomenon, ideology. Entirely true, today’s left don’t like to be reminded of this fact but then why should we succumb to this one of their delusions when we don’t their others?

Thus Jacinda Ardern is wrong here:

The prime minister has called the mosque gunman an extremist right-wing terrorist and revealed he’s an Australian citizen.

Or, of course, this is wrong:

Wearing handcuffs and a white prison shirt, Brenton Harrison Tarrant sat impassively as the judge read the charge against him. Tarrant, an Australian-born former fitness instructor and self-professed fascist, did not request bail and was taken into custody until his next court appearance scheduled for April 5.

It’s entirely true that his Blood and Soil idiocy is fairly Nazi let alone merely fascist – fascism including a rather wider grouping, including Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Stroessner’s Paraguay, Mussolini’s Italy and so on – but that doesn’t tell us whether he’s left or right, not in itself. There have been equally racial or racist left wing regimes. No one at all is going to claim Pol Pot was anything but left and extreme such and he most certainly insisted upon the primacy of the Khmer link to their land and the exclusion of foreigners – or their murder along with anyone who’d had anything to do with foreigners.

That fascism is a left wing preoccupation I’ve mentioned before. Colin Hines is very definitely lauded as one of Britain’s progressive thinkers yet there’s little in his economics – note, please, economics, not anything else – which wouldn’t fit into a British National Party manifesto. Indeed, there’s not much that didn’t:

Worstall implies that I am pushing a fascist approach by asserting that my desire to protect and rediversify national economies finds echoes in the policies of the BNP. Yet such a guilt-by-association approach is as vacuous and inaccurate as saying that since Hitler was a vegetarian, all vegetarians are fascists. So let’s move onto what I really say in my Compass Thinkpiece paper “Progressive Protectionism”, and why I am convinced that such a programme will increase economic security, and hence actually reduce the likelihood of a rise of fascism.


The alternative to this is a progressive protectionism which will allow countries to wean themselves off of present levels of export dependence. It would enable the rebuilding and re-diversification of domestic economies by limiting what goods states let in and what funds they allow to enter or leave the country. Having regained control of their economic future, countries can then set the levels of taxes and agree the regulations needed to fund and facilitate this transition. National competition laws would ensure that monopolies didn’t develop behind protective barriers. Finally, there is an internationally supportive approach to trade with poorer countries, ensuring that the gains from the remaining international trade would be targeted to help fund the move towards a localised economy that benefits the poor majority. In essence, this approach will make space for domestic funding and business to meet most of the needs of society worldwide. This taking back of national control over the economy is the only way to tackle the financial, social and environmental crises, return local power to citizens and provide a sense of security and hope for the future, particularly amongst the young. If implemented it could play a crucial role in seeing off the rise of the extreme Right, as this invariably flourishes when the sense of insecurity within the majority worsens. At present none of the policies offered by parties of any political hue are likely to tackle this in the way that progressive protectionism can.

That sort of national protectionism is a part of fascist economics. As Hines himself notes with the Hitler and vegetarian point, supporting national protectionism does not make you a fascist. But given that such national protectionism was a part of fascist economics it does mean you’re promoting the same economic idea the fascists did.

Or as I’ve put it elsewhere:

But a little point we would make to Hines. If your economic policy recommendations could have come from the manifestos of Le Pen, Melenchon, Mussolini, Moseley or the BNP then we would recommend a reconsideration of those economic policies you’re pushing.

As other little comparisons have shown other than that Blood and Soil nonsense there’s very little in the BNP manifesto that couldn’t have been fitted into Labour’s 1945 one. Or, indeed, wasn’t lifted from it.

Mussolini came from the Italian Socialist Party, Hitler declared he was a socialist, Moseley was a Fabian, Labour MP and Minister. Much of current progressive economic idealism would have fitted into a fascist playbook. The idea that the economy should be regulated into producing social outcomes at the expense of efficiency or freedom for example. That was the fascist method of economic management. They didn’t nationalise, they regulated to much the same effect.

And thus we get back to Brenton Tarrant. He’s obviously a nutter and an entirely vile one. Such people exist, sadly. But this idea that he’s both right wing and a fascist doesn’t stand up. For fascism is a left wing ideology whatever its connections to nationalism and spiffy uniforms. But then that’s just the language of our times, isn’t it? Vile nutters must be right wing for no lefty is ever vile nor a nutter. Despite the evidence of history.

34
Leave a Reply

avatar
10 Comment threads
24 Thread replies
2 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
14 Comment authors
Phil RyanDodgy GeezerSimon JenkinsQuentin VoleZizou Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Pat
Guest
Pat

These days right wing, like fascist simply describes something disapproved of.
Right started out as describing supporters of an absolute hereditary monarch. There’s only Saudi, N Korea and maybe Cuba in that club now.
Then it became Fascism/Nazism when Hitler and Stalin fell out. Since then it seems to mean anyone the speaker thinks would be disliked by Stalin- which effectively means anyone who isn’t literally Stalin.

Ghost Mermiad
Guest
Ghost Mermiad

Kind of like how anything considered “left wing” is anything people disapprove of, do you ever complain about that? People are right wing if they’re in favour of free market capitalism, economics is really what defines it. It’s not a coincidence that they are always the ones who resent people who need some kind of additional support, like welfare.

Pat
Guest
Pat

Nice to hear your agreement that Hitler, Musolini, Salazar and Franco were not right wing. None of them favoured free market capitalism. But does that make them left wing? Only if you think there are two and only two possibilities. Personally I think it ridiculous to suppose that all the possible views of humanity can be meaningfully represented as a point on a line. BTW successful capitalists frequently help those in need of support – witness Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, etc. But they use their own money and their own judgement, rather than giving their money for politicians to buy… Read more »

Ghost Mermiad
Guest
Ghost Mermiad

Charity doesn’t cut it. Why do people need things like charity or welfare in the first place? Because capitalism creates the poverty and financial strife they are in, therefor people end up grasping at whatever they can to counter the influence capitalism does in the first place. It’s so old and so obvious at this point, but people in favour of capitalism are emotionally invested in it, so it’s pointless to even talk about it a lot of them time. It’s not a coincidence that it’s always people who are pro capitalism that have resentment for people who can’t work.

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

Therefore by your empirical statement everyone is born wealthy and somehow “evil capitalism”, which finances civilization as you have experienced it all your life, steal it from them and makes them poor.
Did you learn all of your history from video games or did comic books supplant your intellect?

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

Since when did Marxism ever deliver anything but genocide on its own?

Rhoda Klapp
Guest
Rhoda Klapp

This Tarrant bastard seems to be described as a white supremacist. The other side seems to equate that with nationalism, but it ain’t so. In fact an extreme white supremacist knows he won’t need to do anything, the supposed superiority of his race should result in it winning, shouldn’t it?

Does his manifesto actually contain serious white supremacist thinking?

Ghost Mermiad
Guest
Ghost Mermiad

Why did he want to kill Muslims then?

Rhoda Klapp
Guest
Rhoda Klapp

Religion? Immigration? Nuts?

Ghost Mermiad
Guest
Ghost Mermiad

And who are the people generally fear mongering about immigrants and Muslims refugees coming and taking over? Or “rapefugees” as they are often called. I’m sure those kinds of people had no influence here…

“In fact an extreme white supremacist knows he won’t need to do anything, the supposed superiority of his race should result in it winning, shouldn’t it?” What a dumb comment. Why do white nationalists fear monger so much about immigration in that case?

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

The people who understand that Hijra is part of the Sunna of Muhammad.

The Quran encourages pedophilia and sex with slaves obviously with non Muslims. There was no rape in Sweden 20 years ago. Now there are rape crisis centers for men.

Zizou
Guest
Zizou

Excuse me, what?

Your first sentence literally makes no sense whatsoever, and please provide proof for the other claims you make.

Rhoda Klapp
Guest
Rhoda Klapp

Because we, or at least some of us, think our nation’s survival is important. Because we can see a threat from immigration, especially of religious nutcases who do not value our culture or our way of life and do not care to assimilate. You may disagree, but when we see attempts to suppress our views, we suspect that we may be right. If it’s not happening, why can’t it be discussed. Prove I’m wrong, with facts. Not just contradiction and suppression.

Do you personally agree that discussion of immigration from an opposing point of view to your own should be suppressed?

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

He was allied with Islam based upon their mutual antisemitic slant.
Where did you learn your history?

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

Will your Post Modernist masters ever allow you to NOT equate Islam as a race?
Islam is a political system with an incorporated mandatory plagiarized religion

under penalty of death. Islam and Muslims are NOT a race.
This coward, just like every other mass shooter, killed as many defenseless

(in this case non white) people gathered in an unguarded (gun free zone?) as possible. he stated in his manifesto that he is more aligned with Red China in his political perspective. First, understand how Red China deals with Islam.

Dodgy Geezer
Guest
Dodgy Geezer

“…….the supposed superiority of his race should result in it winning, shouldn’t it?……”

It is not a field I have studied much, but I would guess that a white supremacist would feel that his superior race was being attacked by traitors within his race who were bringing in other races to breed the pure white strain out of existence.

Ghost Mermiad
Guest
Ghost Mermiad

Hitler wasn’t a socialist. Just because that name was in the party doesn’t reflect what he actually was about.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

Hitler was certainly a socialist, a big fan of the state controlling the means of production was Adolf. But, of course, he was the wrong type of socialist – just like every other time socialism has been implemented in practice and ended (as it always does) in fire and death.

Simon Jenkins
Guest
Simon Jenkins

Hitler was not a socialist. Stop trying to rewrite history to make your team look better you disgusting weirdos.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

If you want to be taken seriously, rather than just play the troll, you will need to develop an argument rather than rely on playground insults. But since that would appear to overtax your limited intellect, probably better stick to selling Socialist Worker. Of course, it suits leftists to portray fascists as ‘extreme right’ because it implies that (say) Jacob Rees-Mogg (or, at least, anyone to the right of him) is a fascist. Whereas in fact, at the extreme right (accepting, for the sake of argument, this oversimplification) you will find Libertarians, who are largely the opposite of big state… Read more »

Simon Jenkins
Guest
Simon Jenkins

‘Of course, it suits leftists to portray fascists as ‘extreme right’ because it implies that (say) Jacob Rees-Mogg (or, at least, anyone to the right of him) is a fascist.’
Do you know what a strawman is?

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

Do you know what a strawman is?
I do, but you clearly don’t. Calling anyone to the right of you a ‘fascist’ has been a standard left-wing trope since at least the 60s.

I gave you a chance to demonstrate that you were capable of rational argument, but since you’re clearly not, I will draw a line under this fascinating conversation.

Simon Jenkins
Guest
Simon Jenkins

Oh, so because it’s an argument other people have made, I must have been about to make it too. Fascinating. This insight into the mind of someone stupid enough to believe Hitler was left-wing has really been an interesting one.

Dodgy Geezer
Guest
Dodgy Geezer

Your mind interests me. Tell me, which ‘wing’ would you classify an ‘extreme’ libertarian as?

Kevin
Guest
Kevin

Both Mussolini and Hitler were Socialists. Your Post Modernist indoctrination will never change that fact.

Jonathan Harston
Guest
Jonathan Harston

The Natzis built motorways…..

Q46
Guest
Q46

‘…. and inaccurate as saying that since Hitler was a vegetarian, all vegetarians are fascists. ‘

Not quite.

Hitler was a vegetarian because he ate only vegetables, all people who eat the same as Hitler are, like Hitler, vegetarian.

Hitler was a Fascist because he embraced Fascist principles, all people who embrace the same principles as Hitler, are, like Hitler, Fascists.

Martin Sewell
Guest

Indeed, Fascism was a product of Marxism. And right wing means conservative, by definition.

Zane Nobbs
Guest
Zane Nobbs

Fascism is, indeed, of the Left. Dinesh D’Souza has documented that Bolshevik Communist Vladimir Lenin sent a congratulatory telegram to Fascist Benito Mussolini upon his formation of the Fascist Party in Italy taking Rome with his Black Shirts. And don’t forget that even before being allied with Fascist Italy and Imperialist Japan, it was Bolshevik Communist Josef Stalin that was National Socialist Adolf Hitler’s ally for the invasion and occupation of Poland in September of 1939. And Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia remained allies until Operation Barbarossa when Germany and its allies invaded the Soviet Union, however, this was actually… Read more »

Pamela Valemont
Guest
Pamela Valemont

What utter bloody rot. Russia liberated Auschwitz and 30 million Soviets died among the Allies fighting Fascism. Anyone who thinks left = right is trying to confuse young minds and rewrite history. I’m 71, my Dad was a WWII returned man, and I know better. Sadly, young Americans have no idea what is left and what is right politically anymore, thanks to NeoNazis who write dangerous tripe like this.. Ulta right = Fascism. Pure and simple.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

You’re certainly simple, dear. Not sure about how pure, though.

Simon Jenkins
Guest
Simon Jenkins

Really would not insult other people’s intelligence if I were you, you huge dunce.

Simon Jenkins
Guest
Simon Jenkins

What ridiculous garbage.

Phil Ryan
Guest
Phil Ryan

No he is an extreme conservative and literally have nothing to do with left seriously. You are confused because how he label his own ideology yet it was wrong. He doesn’t indicate anything about social equality he reprimands conservatives for not conserving but blaming them to fuel globalism to profit.