Basically every historic precedent works here. The turn of the 19th to 20th century can be mainly characterized by the results of a rapid technological advancement via industrialisation in which the workers were left behind while the control sat in higher-up circles, partly made up from remaining aristocracy and partly from rich high education citizens who accumulated mnost of the produced wealth. This basically slowly eliminated a general middle-class, provoking clashes between left wing worker movements representing the majority but not having the power and an established rich upper class trying to exploit them for more wealth. (To no one’s surprise this is exactly the time when capitalism was defined in details: Karl Marx - Das Kapital (volume 1 to 3, 1867-1894 ))
That scenario can only (and usually has) resulted in either revolution or focusing that (poor, and usually less educated) majority’s anger into another direction. The latter resulted in nationalist populist movements all throughout Europe. The only thing in doubt is if it would have won everywhere over time (as in some countries there still was a stable enough middle-class to delay that development at least fo a time). I assume so, but we will never know, as the countries where this development won faster (usually because the pre-conditions for the poorer population were already worse) changed the course of history for all.
If you want to call it a rise of fascism (the original one in Italy), nazis (in Germany) or a definitely fascistic military dictatorship based on “popular front” politics -with some support by monarchists realizing the risk they were in- (Spain) doesn’t make a huge difference in the big picture.
Also: for a less historic and more “today” point of view look at Russia. Contrary to people still associating them with communism their form of oligarchy is definitely a variant of late-stage capitalism. In fact the risk of the US’ capitalism developing even further into a pure wealth-based oligarchy is a discussion topic for at least two decades. And look were Russia is taking pointers from right now… straight from the nazi playbook.
(And now that I have mentioned it… and the discussed risk of the US moving into the same oligarchy direction: Isn’t there a certain guy leaning heavily into far-right nationalism while using fascist and nazi rhetorics at times, who wants to become president again?)
What historical precedents would you cite as examples of your statement, “fascism is a natural consequence of late-stage capitalism”?
Basically every historic precedent works here. The turn of the 19th to 20th century can be mainly characterized by the results of a rapid technological advancement via industrialisation in which the workers were left behind while the control sat in higher-up circles, partly made up from remaining aristocracy and partly from rich high education citizens who accumulated mnost of the produced wealth. This basically slowly eliminated a general middle-class, provoking clashes between left wing worker movements representing the majority but not having the power and an established rich upper class trying to exploit them for more wealth. (To no one’s surprise this is exactly the time when capitalism was defined in details: Karl Marx - Das Kapital (volume 1 to 3, 1867-1894 ))
That scenario can only (and usually has) resulted in either revolution or focusing that (poor, and usually less educated) majority’s anger into another direction. The latter resulted in nationalist populist movements all throughout Europe. The only thing in doubt is if it would have won everywhere over time (as in some countries there still was a stable enough middle-class to delay that development at least fo a time). I assume so, but we will never know, as the countries where this development won faster (usually because the pre-conditions for the poorer population were already worse) changed the course of history for all.
If you want to call it a rise of fascism (the original one in Italy), nazis (in Germany) or a definitely fascistic military dictatorship based on “popular front” politics -with some support by monarchists realizing the risk they were in- (Spain) doesn’t make a huge difference in the big picture.
Also: for a less historic and more “today” point of view look at Russia. Contrary to people still associating them with communism their form of oligarchy is definitely a variant of late-stage capitalism. In fact the risk of the US’ capitalism developing even further into a pure wealth-based oligarchy is a discussion topic for at least two decades. And look were Russia is taking pointers from right now… straight from the nazi playbook.
(And now that I have mentioned it… and the discussed risk of the US moving into the same oligarchy direction: Isn’t there a certain guy leaning heavily into far-right nationalism while using fascist and nazi rhetorics at times, who wants to become president again?)