Sivad wrote:there are many parallels between red fascism and brown fascism:
both are authoritarian
Not true. Since the 1930's most communists in the West, especially in the United States, have been
left communists or
anarcho-communists.
both are totalitarian
See above.
both are obsessed with identity politics
I'm not sure what this even means, it's a very broad truth-statement that can just as well be countered with the statement that identity is politically important due to the social alienation engendered by capitalist production (as well as capitalism's disintegrating and uprooting effect on traditional modes of production}.
both deify the state and the collective
You're only as free as the people are, that is, if you're not exploiting them.
As Hegel writes:
The Greeks were still unacquainted with the abstract right of our modern states, that isolates the individual, allows of his acting as such, and yet, as an invisible spirit, holds all its parts together. This is done in such a way, however, that in no one is there properly speaking either the consciousness of, or the activity for the whole; but because the individual is really held to be a person, and all his concern is the protection of his individuality, he works for the whole without knowing how. It is a divided activity in which each has only his part, just as in a factory no one makes a whole but only a part, and does not possess skill in other departments, because only a few are employed in fitting the different parts together. It is free [i.e. republican] nations alone that have the consciousness of and activity for the whole; in modern times the individual is only free for himself as such, and enjoys citizen freedom alone - in the sense of that of a bourgeois and not a citoyen. We do not possess two separate words to mark this distinction. The freedom of citizens in this signification is the dispensing with universality, the principle of isolation; but it is a necessary moment unknown to ancient states. (Philosophy of Right, II, 209)
both are extremely scientistic
Fascism is generally rooted in
mythos (see also the
Thule Society in the case of Germany and
State Shinto in the case of Japan) rather than
theory.
both are obsessed with social engineering the "New Man"
lol so did Thomas Paine. Welcome to the club.
both are violently anti-individualist
What you call individual liberty is merely bourgeois privilege. As Marx writes,
"In bourgeois society, therefore, the past dominates the present; in Communist society, the present dominates the past. In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality."they really are just two wings of the same bird.
The only thing they really have in common is that they are illiberal. In actuality they represent an intensification of two polar-opposite views of the world, best summarized as egalitarian and anti-egalitarian. The fact that both are violent or have used the state in authoritarian ways doesn't qualitatively make them the same thing.