Tag Archives: fascism

New Look Fascism: Hiding In Plain Sight

We all know the old footage. The stark, monochrome marches, the rigid salutes, the frenzied crowds. It’s the ghost that haunts our modern world, and we’ve convinced ourselves we’d spot its return a mile off. We tell ourselves, “Never again,” with a quiet confidence that comes from knowing the enemy’s uniform. But what if the uniform has changed? What if the new fascism isn’t wearing jackboots, but a tailored suit, a tech bro’s hoodie, or the ironic grin of a meme?

That’s the unsettling truth we have to face. The aesthetics of authoritarianism have undergone a quiet but total redesign for the 21st century. It’s a friendlier, more insidious form that creeps in not with the bang of a dictator’s fist on a podium, but with the soft, persuasive glow of a smartphone screen. It’s less about stormtroopers and more about Silicon Valley’s vision of a tech-utopia, less about blood-and-soil rallies and more about the curated nostalgia of a “lost” masculinity. To my own mind, the most dangerous trick it’s pulled is making the whole thing feel like one big, bad taste joke.

Take a look around. The Italian Futurist Artists glorified war and speed; today’s tech oligarchs preach a gospel of progress, selling us a shiny, minimalist future where their corporations, not nations, are in charge. It’s a vision of power wrapped in the cool, unobjectionable aesthetics of a corporate keynote. And when that feels too cold, it offers Solar Punk—a beautiful, green-washed dream of harmony that can so easily be twisted to justify eco-fascist ideas of population control and exclusion. It’s utopia as a sales pitch, and it’s dangerously persuasive.

But the real shift, the one that leaves many of us feeling like we’re shouting into a void, is the weaponisation of irony. The symbols of hate have been replaced by cartoon frogs and anime girls. The dehumanising rhetoric is hidden behind layers of “just banter, mate.” It’s a shield of plausible deniability that allows cruel ideologies to spread through gaming chats and podcast bro culture, targeting young men who feel adrift. When you try to point out the nastiness lurking beneath the surface, you’re instantly labelled a humourless “snowflake.” It’s a brilliant, frustrating tactic: they make the world meaningless, so that caring about anything at all becomes a sign of weakness.

And now, we have AI. This, to me, feels like the final stage of this aesthetic hollowing-out. We’re being flooded with AI-generated slop—politicised art created without a shred of human conviction or creativity. It’s the ultimate tool for aestheticising politics, turning historical atrocities and genocidal fantasies into just another piece of content, stripped of all weight and horror. When everything can be faked and every image is just empty aesthetics, how do we hold on to truth?

So, how do we push back against something that’s designed to be slippery, ironic, and everywhere? I don’t claim to have all the answers, but I believe it starts with a kind of stubborn, clear-eyed authenticity.

First, we have to get better at reading the aesthetics. We need a new kind of literacy that looks past the what and questions the how. Why does that political ad look like a video game trailer? Why is that leader communicating entirely in memes? We have to name the tactics when we see them, pulling back the curtain on the irony and the aesthetic whitewashing.

More importantly, we have to offer a better, truer story. You can’t fight a sense of belonging built on hatred with a list of policy points. We need to build real, tangible communities—through unions, local projects, mutual aid—that give people a genuine stake and a connection that no online cult can match. And we need to champion art and narratives that are unafraid of complexity and rich with empathy, that offer a vision of a future worth fighting for, one that includes everyone.

Ultimately, it comes down to a simple, profound choice: we have to insist on meaning. In a world that’s being deliberately drained of it, we must value truth over fiction, complexity over simplistic lies, and the inherent dignity of every person over the fascist’s cruel hierarchy of worth.

It’s not about winning an online argument or a single election. It’s a long, persistent effort to build a world where people feel secure and respected enough to see the new fascism for what it is: a seductive, well-designed package with nothing but emptiness inside. And that requires us to be, above all else, true to ourselves.

The Keep Sane in Troubled Times Playbook
1. Develop Critical Aesthetic Literacy
The first step is to recognise the weaponisation of aesthetics. This means moving beyond analysing what is said to how it is presented.

  • Teach Media Literacy 2.0: Go beyond identifying fake news. Teach people to deconstruct visual rhetoric: Why does a political ad use a specific type of animation? Why does a leader’s social media feed look like a meme page? What emotions is a corporate “utopian” video trying to evoke, and what material realities does it hide?
  • Name the Tactics: Publicly label the strategies when you see them. Point out the irony-poisoning, the co-option of subcultures, the use of AI slop to flood the zone. By making the mechanics visible, you rob them of their power.

2. Rebuild Trust through Material Politics and Local Organising
Fascism feeds on alienation, despair, and the collapse of trust in institutions. The most powerful antidote is to demonstrate that collective, democratic action can improve people’s lives.

  • Focus on Material Conditions: Shift the conversation from the abstract culture war to concrete, material issues: affordable housing, healthcare, wages, unionisation, climate resilience. Fascism offers scapegoats; a real alternative must offer solutions that address the root causes of anxiety.
  • Strengthen Local Community: Support and participate in local unions, tenants’ associations, mutual aid networks, and community gardens. These organisations build real-world solidarity, trust, and collective power that is immune to online manipulation. They provide a sense of belonging that is not based on hatred of an “other”.

3. Create Competing, Hopeful Narratives and Aesthetics
You cannot defeat a powerful aesthetic with a dry policy paper. The left and centre must relearn the art of storytelling and vision-building.

  • Articulate a Positive, Inclusive Future: Solar Punk, as mentioned, has positive potential. We need compelling, artistically rendered visions of a future that is both technologically advanced and socially just, ecologically sustainable, and inclusive. This vision must be attractive enough to compete with the nostalgic fantasies of the far right.
  • Support Art and Culture that Builds Empathy: Fund, celebrate, and amplify art, films, music, and games that celebrate complexity, diversity, and human dignity. Counter the dehumanising caricatures with rich, humanising stories.

4. Strategic, Unified Opposition and Deplatforming
While open debate is ideal, the video correctly shows that these movements often argue in bad faith, using debate as a platform to spread conspiracies.

  • Do Not Normalise: Avoid treating fascist ideology as a legitimate point of view in political discourse. The goal is not to “debate” whether some people are inferior, but to isolate and discredit those ideas. Media outlets have a responsibility not to platform figures who traffic in replacement theory or Holocaust denial for “balance”.
  • Strengthen Institutional Guardrails: Defend and strengthen independent journalism, an independent judiciary, free and fair elections, and the rule of law. Support projects that document hate speech and extremist networks. This is the unsexy, bureaucratic work that is essential for democracy’s survival.

5. Personal Responsibility and Courage

  • Interrupt Casual Bigotry: Do not let racist, homophobic, or antisemitic “jokes” slide in personal conversations. A calm, firm response like, “I don’t find that funny,” or “Why do you say that?” can disrupt the normalisation process.
  • Support Victims: Stand in solidarity with those targeted by hate. If you see someone being harassed, be a proactive bystander. This demonstrates that the community will not tolerate intimidation.
  • Protect Your Mental Space: The constant barrage of corrosive content is designed to exhaust and demoralise. It is essential to log off, engage in real-world communities, and protect your capacity for empathy and hope. You cannot fight a long-term battle while burned out.

The Core Challenge: Rejecting Meaninglessness
The video concludes that the ultimate goal of this aestheticisation is to make everything meaningless. Therefore, the most profound act of resistance is to insist on meaning.

This means:

  • Valuing Truth: Upholding the distinction between fact and fiction.
  • Valuing Complexity: Rejecting simplistic, us-vs-them narratives in favour of nuanced understanding.
  • Valuing Human Dignity: Constantly affirming the inherent and equal worth of every person, against the hierarchy of worth that fascism promotes.

Countering this new fascism is not about winning a single election or a viral online battle. It is a long-term, cultural, and political project to rebuild a society where people feel secure, respected, and hopeful enough to reject the seductive but deadly lies of fascism in any aesthetic guise.

How To Beat Reform

Core Strategic Principle: Diagnosis Before Prescription

Think of the 1970s and you think of flared trousers and Abba. You probably don’t think of Nazi salutes on British streets.

But for a time, the far-right National Front (NF) was a terrifying force in UK politics. Its skinhead gangs terrorised immigrant communities. Its leaders were open Hitler admirers. And in the 1977 elections, over 200,000 people voted for them.

Then, they were crushed. Not in a war, but by a brilliant, gritty campaign that united punk rockers, grandparents, trade unions and communities. Today, as a new wave of populism gains traction, the lessons from that victory are not just history – they’re a handbook.

Here’s how it was done, and how it applies now.

Lesson 1: Stop Debating, Start Disrupting

The anti-fascists of the ’70s knew a crucial truth: you can’t reason someone out of a position they weren’t reasoned into. So they didn’t try. Instead, their strategy was simple: make it impossible for the NF to function.

They physically blocked their marches. They packed their meetings and shouted them down. The goal wasn’t to win an argument; it was to create such a logistical nightmare that the authorities were forced to ban events and the Nazis were too ashamed to show their faces.

The Modern Application: Today, the town hall meeting has been replaced by the social media algorithm. The tactic of disruption isn’t just about physical blocking—which can backfire against a legal party—but about a more sophisticated, multi-pronged assault. This means flooding the digital space with compelling counter-content, using ‘pre-bunking’ techniques to inoculate the public against predictable manipulation, and actively ‘de-branding’ their language by refusing to parrot loaded terms. Instead of “stop the boats,” the debate becomes about “fixing the asylum system.” The goal remains the same: to deny their narrative the clean air it needs to breathe.

Lesson 2: Expose the Core, Not Just the Policies

The NF tried to hide its Nazi core behind a veneer of ‘respectable’ racism. Anti-fascists ripped this mask off. They circulated photos of leader John Tyndall in his not-at-all-a-Nazi-uniform and highlighted his speeches praising Hitler. The result? The more moderate followers fled, and the party splintered. The label ‘Nazi’ stuck because the evidence was overwhelming.

The Modern Application: This isn’t about slapping the ‘fascist’ label on every opponent. It’s about rigorous exposure. Who endorses this party? What do their policies logically lead to? When a candidate is found to have made extremist statements, the question to the leadership is simple: “Do you condone this? If not, what are you doing about it?” Force them to either repudiate their fringe or be defined by it. The battle is to expose the underlying narrative of national humiliation and purging, no matter how sanitised the language.

Lesson 3: Apply Institutional and Economic Friction

Beyond the battle of ideas lies the less visible but equally critical war of institutional accountability. The 1970s activists understood that pressure had to be applied at every level. When the Hackney Gazette ran an NF advert, its staff went on strike.

The Modern Application: The contemporary equivalent is wielding strategic economic and legal pressure. This means holding corporate donors publicly accountable, supporting rigorous challenges to potential campaign spending breaches, and demanding that media platforms couple any coverage with immediate, contextual fact-checking. The objective is to create friction—to make supporting or enabling populism a professionally and reputationally costly endeavour. This isn’t about silencing opposition, but about enforcing the rules and standards that populists seek to erode, ensuring demagoguery carries a tangible price.

Lesson 4: Out-Create Them. Make Hope Go Viral.

This was the masterstroke. While some groups fought in the streets, the Anti-Nazi League and Rock Against Racism (RAR) fought for the culture. They realised that to win over a generation, you couldn’t just be against something; you had to be for something better.

RAR staged legendary gigs that paired white punk bands like The Clash with Black reggae acts. Their 1978 carnival in London attracted 100,000 people—a joyful, defiant celebration that made the NF look like the miserable, hate-fuelled sect they were.

“This ain’t no fucking Woodstock. This is the Carnival against the Nazis!” – Red Saunders, RAR co-founder

The Modern Application: This is the most critical lesson. Populism feeds on pessimism and cultural despair. The antidote is to build a more compelling, positive, and inclusive vision. Where is the modern equivalent of RAR? It’s about supporting creators, artists, and community initiatives that showcase a confident, modern Britain. It’s about telling stories of successful integration and shared future, making ‘hope’ more viral than ‘fear’.

Lesson 5: Protect Your Own. Community is Armour.

When the state failed to protect them, targeted communities organised their own defence. The Southall Youth Movement and others made their neighbourhoods ‘no-go zones’ for racists, patrolling streets and confronting threats directly. This wasn’t just about physical safety; it was about building unbreakable social and political resilience.

“What did we  share with the white left? We learned from them   as well. We shared the vision of a new world,  our world, a world in which we were all equal,   a fairer world.” – Tariq Mahmood, activist

The Modern Application: The threats today are often more digital and psychological than physical, but the principle is the same. This means strengthening local community bonds, supporting organisations that monitor and combat hate crime, and building robust support networks. Critically, this work must be underpinned by a ‘marathon, not a sprint’ mentality. The defeat of the National Front was not the work of a single election cycle but a sustained, multi-year effort. The modern challenge is to build resilient, long-term infrastructure—’the bakery’—that can withstand populist waves by addressing the underlying grievances of isolation and economic despair they exploit.

The Uncomfortable Truth for Today

The crucial difference is that Reform UK is not the National Front. It is a populist party, not a fascist paramilitary one. Applying the 1970s playbook isn’t about mindlessly copying tactics; it’s about intelligently adapting the principles.

The battle against the NF was won by a coalition that understood this was a war fought on multiple fronts simultaneously. It required the raw energy of street-level disruption, the sharp wit of cultural creation, the shrewdness of political exposure, and the patient, grinding work of institutional and legal challenge.

To effectively challenge modern populism demands the same holistic courage. It is not enough to out-create them online if their economic enablers face no consequences. It is not enough to win a legal battle if the cultural narrative of grievance remains unchallenged. The lesson of the 1970s is that victory comes not from a single masterstroke, but from the relentless, coordinated application of pressure everywhere it counts. The question is whether we can build a movement with the strategic depth to fight on all those fronts at once.