ur-fascism is a text about semiotics, not politics.
while it can be useful in decoding political stuff, it’s not a tool intended for that use, like scraping paint with a flathead screwdriver.
while i don’t think it’s out of the ordinary to reference the fourteen points, ur-fascism is absolutely convoluted and not considered a standard interpretation of the politics of fascist movements. in ecos defense, most semioticians are incapable of writing without convolution for obvious reasons.
i’m not saying this to be pedantic, but to maybe help someone reading along to understand why anyone would reference ecos fourteen points. they make a lot more sense when theyre taken as an outline of fascism’s semiotic content, not a checklist of actions some regime needs to meet before it’s officially fascist or else be considered merely sparkling corporatism.
ur-fascism is a text about semiotics, not politics.
while it can be useful in decoding political stuff, it’s not a tool intended for that use, like scraping paint with a flathead screwdriver.
while i don’t think it’s out of the ordinary to reference the fourteen points, ur-fascism is absolutely convoluted and not considered a standard interpretation of the politics of fascist movements. in ecos defense, most semioticians are incapable of writing without convolution for obvious reasons.
i’m not saying this to be pedantic, but to maybe help someone reading along to understand why anyone would reference ecos fourteen points. they make a lot more sense when theyre taken as an outline of fascism’s semiotic content, not a checklist of actions some regime needs to meet before it’s officially fascist or else be considered merely sparkling corporatism.