The Pilgrim Underground: The Revival of Franco and Francoism

19 January 2024

The Revival of Franco and Francoism

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/15/us-far-right-francisco-franco-spanish-civil-war

This caught my eye because I've heard recent attempts by figures on the Right to argue that Francoism was not fascism. Usually the argument relies on limiting fascism to the Third Reich and anti-Semitic Hitlerism – and maybe taking into account something of Mussolini. Franco is treated as something outside this spectrum and usually much is made of the fact that his regime did not pursue anti-Semitic policies.

This latter point is actually more complicated, but the argument fundamentally misunderstands and confuses fascism with Hitlerian anti-Semitism. There were and are anti-Semites who are not fascist, just as there were and are fascists who are not anti-Semitic. Fascism is a form of authoritarian ultra-nationalism. In some contexts it can embrace anti-Semitism, it others it can simply be expressed as a general xenophobia, anti-immigrant, or even some other form of racism depending on its individual situation.

These apologias for Franco also fail to take into account the various other fascist movements that arose in the 1930's, such as the Iron Guard in Romania (which was anti-Semitic), the Ustaše in Croatia (which directed its hatred primarily toward Serbs), and the Arrow Cross of Hungary (which was also anti-Semitic). There were also significant fascist movements in France, Slovakia and Ukraine. For some their anti-Semitism was almost a side-show and in other cases such as Italy under Mussolini it wasn't even an issue that garnered a great deal of attention. Franco for his part was certainly anti-Semitic and employed the rhetoric but had no interest in death camps or in violent persecution directed at anyone other than his political opponents or those advocating open dissent.

But in every case the primary focus of fascist hatred was against communism. For some like Hitler, the anti-Semitism was racial but in all cases of anti-Semitism (including Hitler) the hatred of Jews was connected with the real object of hatred – communism. This was due to the fact that many of the prominent communists (such as Trotsky) were Jewish.

Franco was an authoritarian ultra-nationalist and a fascist. As much as the revisionists try to explain this away or spin it – this cannot be disputed. His primary aim was to eliminate the Left and to wage war against communism and modernity. As such, he like the fascist leaders in Slovakia and Croatia forged close ties with elements of the Roman Catholic hierarchy. In places like Romania and Serbia, there was an embrace of ultra-nationalism in the form of Eastern Orthodoxy. While Mussolini made peace with the Vatican in 1929, and pleased Rome by warring against communists, Il Duce was not terribly keen on forging the kind of relationship seen with the fascist leaders of Croatia or Franco in Spain.

The embrace of Franco by elements within the American Right is not surprising to me but I'm certain that many have a convoluted understanding of the history. For Catholic Integralists, Franco is the ideal and this came up years ago when Rick Santorum (who is probably a member of Opus Dei) ran for president and was wholeheartedly backed by the Evangelical community – a watershed moment. Today, the Evangelicals don't even blink at supporting a Catholic. It's no longer an issue as their movement has shifted doctrinally and abandoned whatever ties it once had with the Protestant Reformation. Today the enemy is secular humanism and in that fight, they view Rome as an ally.

The problem is fascism and Francoism are a repudiation of Classical Liberalism. Unwilling to return to the old Throne and Altar paradigm, fascism is a recasting of the old order for modern industrial times and tends toward an ad hoc mixing of the ideologies as the situation requires. Ironically fascist dictators often end up with more power and majesty and wield more fear than many a king.

These arguments are further confused by the phenomena of Stalinism which represents a kind of Bonapartist reaction to Communist Revolution. Just as Napoleon generates a debate over the French Revolution – as to whether he was the faithful servant and outgrowth of it, or its betrayer, the same is true with Stalinism. Was he a faithful communist? A faithful Marxist-Leninist? Or did he betray this legacy (as Trotsky accused him) by recasting the revolution in nationalist terms. As such, the authoritarian Soviet regime when wed to nationalism descended into a kind of fascism dressed up in Marxist clothes and nomenclature.

To take this discussion further one can look to the question of totalitarianism raised by Arendt and others. Totalitarianism is its own beast and it can use any paradigm as a fig-leaf justification for what it's doing. At the end of the day whether fascist, communist, monarchical, or even ecclesiastical (as was seen with the post-Gregorian Papacy), the end result is a terror-system of thought police and repression – a state of that turns its power of violence inward and crushes any hint of opposition to the power. At that point the slogans and symbols are more or less meaningless, especially in everyday life. Might makes right and the people living under such regimes understand this. The leader can tell them that down is up and up is down and they'll believe it – or at least pay lip service to it in order to survive.

Franco was not a totalitarian in the same sense as Stalin or Hitler but he was a fascist and for those rejecting the regime, life could be difficult and dangerous – and in some cases impossible.

It's troubling that Protestant intellectuals (or pseudo-intellectuals) are raising the possibility of a Franco. The sites in question (American Reformer and First Things) are quite popular in Reformed circles and pushed by outlets like The Aquila Report. But it's not surprising. We've seen this coming for a long time. And we've also seen how the media complex of outlets like FOX and PragerU have more or less inoculated the Right to being able to discern what fascism even is. They have misidentified it and their spin job has been so successful that most on the Right associate fascism not with the Ultra-Right ideology that it is – but with modern liberalism. The likes of Houdini and David Copperfield could never have pulled off such a trick or sleight-of-hand illusion. It's revisionism on a sweeping scale.

This slip toward authoritarianism and the abandonment of Classical Liberalism has been a multi-decade project and the scope of the delusion is exemplified by the fact that many of these people are still waving the flag and actually believe their values are compatible with the Classical Liberalism of the Founders.

If they had any integrity they would renounce the American Founders and reject the American Revolution. But they can't do that as America is a religion for the Right – its true religion whether or not a Christian profession is included. And if that's taken as a sweeping condemnation of the millions of professed patriotic Christians in American Churches – it's meant to be.

And because it's their religion, history must be re-written and money has made it possible. To write scholarly articles you need sources and footnotes. And so when you don't have them, spend the money and within a generation you'll have enough institutions, endowed chairs, think-tanks, and publishing houses to make it possible – and for the myopic, plausible. Regardless of what one thinks of them, one must admit they have pulled off a pretty astounding feat. Despite its sinister aspect, it is nevertheless impressive.

All of this has come together and culminated in all that is Trump and Trumpism. For those of us who remember Trump from back in the day – it's surreal and absurd, but American memory is defective and in the context of this shallow and consumerist (and thus easily manipulated) culture, it somehow all makes tragic sense.

The article raised an interesting point – about how the American Right was rehabilitating Franco as soon as the war was over. Initially this would have been the Spanish Civil War in 1939, but then Franco was a passive ally and partner of the Axis. That's usually ignored and the real rehabilitation began with the Cold War and the fight against communism. Spain was a cherished American ally and long hosted US military bases – even while it was a dictatorship. The US didn't care as long as they had Spain as an ally.

Roman Catholics within the American Right have long revered Franco and the same could be said of figures such as JRR Tolkien in the UK – who also happened to detest Hitler. Integralism in a post-industrial, liberal context almost demands such a response and thus it shouldn't surprise us that Protestant Dominionists come to the same conclusion. No one wants to own Hitler and his record with regard to Christianity is dubious. Mussolini was both secular and a buffoon. Pavelic, the fascist leader of Croatia has too much blood on his hands and the history of Yugoslavia is too complicated and ugly to generate appeal.

But it's no accident that when the Ustaše collapsed, after an extended stay at Castel Gandolfo, and a decade in South America, Pavelic eventually found refuge in Franco's Spain – where he died in 1959 and was buried. Not a few ex-fascists and Nazis also found a haven in Spain – something Franco apologists often choose to ignore.

Franco is the one figure they can point to that can (at first glance) seem appealing – even though his regime and character should generate revulsion in all who name the Name of Christ. But it's clear enough the Right is ascending both in Europe and America and were a fascist dictator to emerge in the American context, he would be supported not only by the GOP but the Christian Right as well. Neo-Evangelicalism's abandonment of New Testament Christianity and capitulation to the world – all in the name of the Kingdom – has gone to seed. The evil fruit it produced has now rotted and the whole thing lies on the ground, a mass of stinking decay that no longer represents the life it once purported to stand for. It cannot even pretend anymore and its moral faculties and discernment are clearly gone – the movement is rapidly descending into a status that can only be described as not only apostate but reprobate. The celebration of Franco and the advocacy of Francoism only testify to this.

The very men that are celebrated by the contemporary Evangelical movement – men like Charles Colson, Francis Schaeffer, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, RJ Rushdoony, and even figures like Billy Graham all played their part in bringing things to this point. The Apostate Church loves its false prophets and lionises them failing to recognize them for what they really are.

The Pilgrim Underground

19 January 2024

The Revival of Franco and Francoism

No comments:

Post a Comment

Contact