hankyoreh

a symbol of Nazism

Discourse on fascism is spreading, and not of the micro-level cultural “fascism within us,” but of the social and political “fascism outside of us.” This marks the first time since the end of the authoritarian government led by Roh Tae-woo in 1993 that “fascism as a system” has become a topic of controversy.

The debate began in May during the National Association of Professors for Democracy meeting where there was an outpouring of concern from the participants, including Sogang University Professor Sonn Ho-chul, who said, “’Fascism as a tendency‘ already exists.” Keimyung University Professor Im Un-taek, contributed by saying, “Unrest in life as a result of the economic crisis meeting up with political distrust could summon neo-fascism.”

Evidence of this emergent discourse has been found in various places. Moonhwagwahak (Culture and Science) quarterly published a “Feature on Fascism” in mid-June. A heated argument took place over the possible emergence of a “Korean-style fascism” at a Marx Communnale debate on June 26. Five days later, Hanyang University Professor Emeritus Lee Young-hee generated controversy for a speech he gave during the celebration for the tenth anniversary of Citizens’ Solidarity for Human Rights where he said, “We have entered the early stages of fascism.”

The reactions among academics have been mixed. Inha University Professor Kim Jin-suk is critical, calling the arguments, “A simple and crude diagnosis that lacks concreteness.” However, there are a number of academics that share the view that such discussion is useful as a form of preventative criticism of a potential danger. It is expected that this discussion will heat up in the second half of the year, when various sensitive issues such as the Irregular Worker Law and media-related laws are to be confronted.

Those participating in the discussion are focusing less on a situation resulting from the passing of the “MB bad laws” and the prominent role of repressive state organizations like the police and prosecutors, and more on the fact that this political regression is taking place against the backdrop of a global economic crisis. SungKongHoe University professor Lee Kwang-il says, “As the global economic crisis intensifies competition between states and between capitalists, political repression will intensify on territories that pose an obstacle to competition, and any vacancies will be filled with technocratic systems and police security.”

Of course, not all scholars who draw connections between the economic crisis and the all-out mobilization of a repressive political regime agree with the discourse on fascism. For example, Chung-Ang University Professor Shin Jin-wook does not consider the Lee Myung-bak government anything more than a “neoliberalist public security state” similar to the Thatcher government in Great Britain in the 1980s or the George W. Bush administration in the U.S. following the September 11 attacks. There is a simple reason for their skepticism about the possibility of an advent of fascism, namely that they view South Korean society as having a weak foundation for “mobilizing the public from below” as is typical of fascism.

However, academics warning of the possibility of fascism see this perspective as being caught up in the “myth of fascism.” They argue that the prevailing view that fascism has historically assumed power against the backdrop of a popular movement has “strong aspects of being manufactured after fascists took power.” Lee Kwang-il says, “Italy and Germany represented cases where fascist leaders were chosen as political proxies as conservative and liberal forces that were faced with political, economic and social crises cooperated with fascists in order to respond to the left.”

One noteworthy fact is that those talking about fascism now are not describing South Korean society at present as a “fascist system.” According to SungKongHoe University Professor Cho Hee-yun, in order for a system to be described as fascist, there needs to be “movement to concentrate the fears and hopes of the public expressed during a situation of extreme crisis under right-wing hegemony, thus unifying the people in a totalitarian manner under absolute power.” Cho suggests it would be difficult to say that South Korean society has arrived at this kind of extreme situation.

Thus, what the professors are emphasizing is a “fascist tendency” that appears as a “precursor.” Professor Park Yeong-gyun says this view is referring to “fascist elements” that lie dormant within mass psychology and then grow rapidly once appropriate conditions are secured. These fascist elements are identified by a destructive impulse that is expressed when the public is driven to the limits of survival, for example by a socioeconomic crisis. At the moment the state’s public character is lost and it is believed there is nothing more to hope for from institutional politics, this impulse erupts into a demand for charismatic leadership to destroy the existing systems and institutions. Park views recent phenomena in South Korean society, including indiscriminate hate crimes directed at the public and aggressive race-based nationalism among the younger population, as symptoms of fascist elements operating within popular psychology.

According to Lee Kwang-il, such a diagnosis of the current reality leads to the conclusion that “radical democratic forces and socialist forces need to form firm solidarity against deepening fascist tendencies” to build a kind of “21st century people’s front against fascism.”

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]