There is so much out there to get mad about. Social injustices, class warfare, continued

colonization, the act of destruction of our planet by those focused on prophets and not

people. We can find it overwhelming at times. The good news is there are equally as many,

if not more, stories of people coming together and rising up against the forces at play. So

the creators of Blueprints of Disruption have added a new weekly segment, Ravel Rants, where

we will unpack the stories that have us most riled up, share calls to action, and most importantly,

celebrate resistance. Canada's Parliament gave a standing ovation to a Nazi. The Canadian

state is sponsoring an ongoing genocide. Members of the targeted group in Canada are being silenced

and fired. Provincial governments are introducing explicitly anti-communist school curricula.

It's here. This tweet really caught my attention. It was a tweet by Prabhagandha, who everyone

should follow because one of the most entertaining accounts on Twitter, or should I say X? No,

I'm saying Twitter. And it stuck with me. I've been thinking of... I mean, this tweet was

November 29th, so it's not recent. Well, I guess, you know how things move. You've been chewing

on it. It stuck with me because, yeah, the it's here. We're talking fascism. And I would argue.

It's been here for a while, bubbling beneath the surface. It's just getting a lot more comfortable

being honest about what it is. The rise of fascism. Should be. of genuine, urgent concern to all

of us, because it is rising a hell of a lot faster than any counter movement to it is rising.

Fascism, I would argue, is the dominant Western ideology at the moment. And we have some serious

work to do when it comes to dismantling it. And so we're going to talk about that. See,

a lot of people would mock you for that. You know, I'm on, obviously we're going to have

a discussion here. We're going to lay out an argument to demonstrate what Santiago just

said and what you heard in that tweet, because I wholeheartedly agree with you. But you can't

tweet about fascism. And I'm sure if you read the comments or the replies there to propaganda,

there's going to be a lot of folks seemingly on your side telling you not to just throw

that term around there. You know, that we can't minimalize actual fascism by talking about

Stephen Lecce in the sense of being a fascist. That it waters down the term, that it's not

helpful. You know, a political scientist would perhaps suggest there's certain check boxes

that need to be done, like certain legislations that need to be passed in order to declare

a regime fascist. But you know, I think a large part of our argument will be centered around

like, that is too late. Once it gets to that point where the courts have been legislated

and you're already seeing police being used to crack down on dissent and those who oppose

what the head honcho says, what Trudeau's position, anything counter to Trudeau's position right

now is being sold as un-Canadian, a danger, a threat to society even. And that's absolutely

essential in fascism. So you can't just wait until it's like got a swastika band on its

arm and it closely resembles what your textbook showed you fascism was. Right. There's, there's,

and there's so many more definitions. Like I think, I think we've got to open up on that.

There's one that I want to talk about specifically, and it's not a fascism that has a swastika,

it's a fascism that has a cross. And it's a fascism that has been growing for a while.

And I'm going to quote the words of a very interesting individual for a variety of reasons. Frank

Zappa, back in 1986, had this to say. The biggest threat to America today is not communism. It's

moving America towards a fascist theocracy. And everything that has happened during the

Reagan administration is steering us right down that pipeline. When you have a government that

prefers a certain moral code, derived from a certain religion and that moral code turns

into legislation to suit one certain religious point of view. And if that code happens to

be very, very right wing, almost towards Attila the Hun, what do you call that? Fascism. It's

fascism. And we need to talk about this because when you look at the biggest figures on the

right now, it's textbook theocratic fascism. When we're talking about Jordan Peterson when

he talks about Judeo-Christian values, or we talk about Ben Shapiro who does the same. When

we see the moral panics that have been attacking anything to do with the LGBTQ movement or with

various rights for various minorities, that has been growing in the past few years. It's

textbook. theocratic fascism or to talk about what's happening today Zionism is textbook

theocratic fascism It's the two words are essentially interchangeable to me. It is exactly the perfect

example of Theocratic fascism and it's happening right now and we can see Who is aligned with

it? And there's an old kind of saying about how liberals will always align themselves with

fascism over actually embracing anything remotely, truly progressive, socialist, Marxist, whatever

word you want to use. Well, we can see our federal government being liberal. They have no problem

with. embracing the fascism that is currently happening in Israel. They have no problem with

applauding a fascist in an OG fascist, you know, like a actual swastika fascist. There's no

issue there, whether or not it's through putting up memorials, honoring those fascists, welcoming

them into parliament, or having one of them sit as your deputy prime minister. Putting

them into government in Latin America, in South America? Yeah, whether or not it's overthrowing

democratically elected indigenous leaders to install fascist puppets, whether or not it's

supporting fascists in Brazil, whether or not it's supporting fascists in Chile or so-called

libertarians in Argentina who have more in common with fascists than they do with anything even

remotely. libertarian or right here at home because the fascism is happening both internationally

in our foreign policy but it's also happening domestically. It's happening on so many levels

that we can't quite see it and it's not always going to be so obvious as having a swastika,

having some simple or being ultra white nationalists. I mean, there's, we can identify certain elements

as obviously fascist, but the liberal party, they're not going to be as easily to identify.

No, they do a really good job, especially domestically. Like if you look at their foreign policy with

any kind of lens, it becomes obvious, right? We are not the good guys, and we absolutely

support far right regimes, right? Fascist regimes. regimes. But here in Canada, the liberals do

a particularly good job in not even allowing themselves to frame that in the religious sense,

because the conservatives are less skilled at doing that. In fact, oh, you can probably hear

yelling on my end. In fact, there's one interview where Maxime Bernier is interviewing one of

the PPC candidates and she tells him to his face, you're fulfilling an ancient biblical

prophecy, basically frames him as the second coming of Jesus. And he replies, I'm doing

my best. Playing into that trope of having the moral high ground, right, based in family values,

I think. Conservatives here in Canada, they use the family values framing narrative, but

really we know what that means. That means Christian values. And we see it, especially now that

they pop their head up on the LGBTQ issues and other things that are real dog whistles for

white Christian nationalists. And you talk about like liberals historically cozying up to fascists.

Organized religion is another. example, I was reading an article and the author was careful

to say, you know, inherently religion isn't fascist, but historically they've played a

huge role in establishing fascist regimes. And I would argue that inherently they are mostly

fascist. They do require sticking to an ethics, a moral code, that moral code provides you

with some sort of superiority over those not following that code. It really normalizes an

authoritarian regime, an unquestionable regime that then everyone kind of fits into that image

or they do not. And the alternative is death and purgatory and all that awful stuff. So

they always walk side by side. So in Canada, I think that's why it's harder for people to

identify this as fascism, because it doesn't traditionally resemble the really hyper religious

fascists or nationalist regimes that we've seen. What is fascism? It depends on who you ask.

It does, because it's inherently an incoherent ideology that's not very well laid out at all.

And that's part of the problem. And I want to take a moment to acknowledge the fact. It's

very like we as a society were raised on the idea that fascism is bad. You know, you ask

people is fascism bad? And I'd say 19 out of 20, probably more than 19 out of 20 times.

I don't know. The vast, vast majority of the times you're going to get the answer. Fascism

is bad, because that that's what we were raised with. If you use the F word. Fascism is inherent,

like we associate fascism with the ultimate evil, just like we associate the term genocide

with the ultimate evil. So when leftists who are the historical enemies of fascism, when

we use the word fascism, it gets laughed off easily because we are, we're, what's the word,

we're invoking the ultimate evil, or like invoking the, yeah, what we identify as being the ultimate

evil. So it gets laughed off, it gets dismissed. And so sometimes like, it's both useful and

not useful, because what's happening is fascism, and we can define the ways that it is fascism.

But fascism is an ideology that evolves, just like all ideologies evolve. The ideologies

of the early 20th century are not the ideologies of today. They may share the same words, but

they are very, very different things. Tactics change. Ways of going about things change.

And fascism has become very, very good at disguising itself. And this is something that was predicted.

And a very good example of something that everybody read in school, or at least I hope that everybody

read in school. 1984, George Orwell, famous socialist, he was talking about... the way

that fascism would evolve, that it would change, that it would be harder to identify. And so

many of his predictions have played out in modern society. And it has become very difficult because

if it doesn't have that swastika, if it doesn't have that easily identifiable thing, we don't

know what's going on. I know, I wonder if people knowing the Nazis look back and think that

Hitler and that ideology just appeared kind of overnight and were installed undemocratically,

you know, under the cloak of night. And it wasn't, it was slowly accepted, it became part of the

ideology. And like to my earlier comments and then yours, it's not inherently that it is

religious, that I think it was Chris Hedges said, what it does is it's catering to the

emotional needs of the moment, right? And that's part of the evolution. So if religion is the

poison of the day, if that's what will sway the most amount of people in the nation that

you are trying to adopt fascism in. then of course you adopt that language, you adopt that

ideology. Netanyahu isn't even all that religious. We know that. He's pretty much an atheist or

has been framed as such earlier on in his political career, but he adopts this language because

it's going to work. Not only will it give you the moral superiority, it will sway people

who are already drinking that Kool-Aid. They are already buying into that, so why not just

saddle up to it? And so the United States, that populism also that we're seeing here, the anti-migrant

scapegoating and the narratives that go around that are catering to the emotional needs of

the moment, which are economic devastation. Because that's another absolute need for fascism

is an exploited populace. There needs to be a populace that is looking for a way out. They

need to be riled up like that base needs to be angry and then pointed in a direction that

is not up but down. And so whoever the easiest targets are at the moment that people are already

kind of targeting are just then amplified by leaders. It's kind of like this organic relationship

that they use what's already on the ground. And then it's top down as well. I want to maybe

take an opportunity to offer a potential definition for. what fascism often looks like. And I would

use the, I would say it's opportunistic authoritarianism. Yeah. Is what, it seizes whatever is, it seizes

whatever is happening at the extremes of the Overton window and seeks to push the Overton

window further right, is how I would say. But it operates within that Overton window as much

as possible. as much as possible within what is acceptable within society, and then seeks

then to change it. And that's why you see these moral arguments being used. So many of the

arguments that are dominating right-wing ideology right now are moral arguments. And it's bringing

back all kinds of things. Like we're seeing misogyny on the rise, and that misogyny is

on the rise through moral arguments. That's why figures like Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro

are so large. That's how they center their arguments. They're appealing to that. And it's what makes

it so difficult to argue against for people who have embraced it, because it's absolute.

These principles are absolute. And when it's linked to a higher power such as you know a

god of whatever flavor there's no logical argument that overrules the absolute power of the universe

which is why fascism has such a strong grip when it takes hold and it's very difficult

to defeat and it's applicable to all religions because all religions can be manipulated often

bring up the famous example of how Buddhism was warped in imperialist Japan to be compatible

with imperialist Japan, right? The whole idea of Zen murder, of disconnect from your body

to be able to murder others was a corruption of Buddhism. And Buddhism, we... typically

associate with being one of the more peaceful spiritual religious beliefs. But that's to

say that all beliefs are can lend themselves to this if manipulated by the proper authoritarian

figure. And anyway let's talk about Canada for a second because fascism is often associated

with dictators and that's true a lot of the time but I would say Not all of the time. I'd

say, like what I said earlier about the opportunistic nature of it, if the opportunity presents itself

to have a dictator, it will have a dictator, but it doesn't need one. But I think then you're

stretching the definition. I think a charismatic point person is one of the essential factors

for fascism. And although they may not fit like the

I think it's the same with fascism, is they can take many forms. Because if you even look

at the way the Canadian parliament is structured, in a majority government in particular, I know

we don't have that federally, but the prime minister or the premier in a majority government

province can act as a dictator. The way that our checks and balances are and the way that

the Senate is appointed and whatnot, and the way that the decisions come strictly from the

cabinet, who is essentially then ruled by the prime minister, you know, they're not dictators,

but they can play that role. I would say though that in many ways, dictators are just bad at

being fascists, in a way. Like I would say that fascist dictatorships are... so inherently

unstable that it's they bitten off more than they can chew and often they will eventually

be overthrown. I mean, what fascist dictatorship has actually provided stability for fascism?

That is my point, though, you know, even though they've goes back to our earlier point how

liberals are just much better at it. It doesn't mean they're not. It doesn't mean he's not

ruling with an iron fist in what one person says goes and everyone will enforce that and

that becomes the norm. It just means he won't absorb that label. He never will. And if you

use it, you'll look silly. But operationally, it ends up with a very similar result. Right.

Obviously, once you take it too far, thankfully all fascist regimes fall. Yeah. Fascism is

really bad at existing long-term because in the words of Charlie Chaplin, like as long

as dictators die, you know, liberty will always be possible or something along those lines.

I think, yeah. Yeah. I think when you're talking about the definition that you had and you talked

about authoritarianism and, and what it does, I think that's more to how it gains power.

So it's definitely part of what you look for, how you define it and how it gets there. But

the reason that they fall, is more to do with the purpose of fascism. And I think sometimes

we look at fascism and how we've been taught and it looks like just death and destruction.

Like we can't really understand it because it's been framed in the sense of the Holocaust or

other like atrocities that really just don't make sense, right, from a human perspective.

And so until it's as obscene as that, we don't feel comfortable giving it a label, but its

purpose. isn't necessarily death and destruction like that, right? Even if you're looking at

the Zionist regime and what they are doing right now to Gaza, although it looks like it's to

ethnically cleanse, like some sort of biblical revenge or whatnot, it has nothing really to

do with that. It's about industry, capital and wealth. And in a fascist regime, that is completely

unchecked. And so the masses that you got worked up and had punching down soon realize when

you take all of that from them, when it gets worse for them, because it will under fascist

regimes, right? A very small circle will benefit like it does in hyper capitalism. And so that

is untenable. And the populace quickly realize their mistake and often turn the other way,

which is why anti-communism is such a huge tenant of fascism, right? Because it is the alternative

to it. It's also what people will turn to when it falls. It's what will organize people to

stop it. And if you're looking from the Canadian perspective and the way that we've become focused

on anti-communist monument and we'll talk about education, that's really not... That's based

in propping up capitalism, right? And inherently that is what fascism is for.

I'm thinking of what I want to say next because there's so much to say. Well, let's get into

the anti-communist fervor that exists in Canada, because I think it is evidence of the rise

of fascism. You can't judge fascism alone just on electoral success either. It's the ideas

behind it, right? That's important, right? Those have to take hold. Those have to be widespread

because once they are, the electoral successes will come quick, fast and furious, and we won't

be able to stop them. There'll be majority and it'll be lost. And so we're seeing real efforts

to lay the groundwork for that ideology. And I think a lot of it is not only based in like

propping up fascism around the world and adopting some of their tactics to a degree. I think

Canadians do it quite well in rooting it in anti-communism. That's where their battleground

seems to lie. And so, you know, we see the monument being built. And one of the big reasons that,

you know, this thing started getting funding in 2013. So we've had liberals and conservatives

just determined to build this thing for 10 years. And the reason it's fallen so flat kind of

bolsters by argument, it's because it wasn't really an anti-communist monument.

fascism to wash it. The same way we applauded the Nazi in the House of Commons wasn't because

it was a Nazi, not so much even propping up Ukraine, right, or celebrating Ukrainian resistance.

It was based in anti-Russian sentiment and building that up. And so that's what this monument is.

That's what Lecce's curriculum changes are for. It's a real Cold War. tactic to seize an enemy,

right? And that enemy being communist in general. And it's interesting because that use of, you

know, Russia, the Soviet Union as the center for opposing, like for providing a definition

of communism to oppose, I think is, it's very intentional. in trying to discredit what are

the movements that are actually a concern to those in power. I would argue that the Soviet

Union was one of every poor example of communism. I would argue that it was very authoritarian.

And I would argue that is the reason why they're rooting

The real threat that they're concerned about in Canada today, the threat to Canadian values

that they're worried about, the reason that they're talking about this, is not because

a Soviet-style communism is on the rise. That's not what they're concerned about. It's not.

They're concerned more with, you know, the actual people organizing for change. who are not particularly

rooted in that at all. It's not very authoritarian at all. And... That is the reason why they

always must bring it back to something that is unpopular. And it's unpopular for a reason.

And we also have to not fall into the trap of then trying to defend something that doesn't

align with our values. I don't feel a kinship to authoritarian regimes of any color. I...

feel a kinship to people who struggle against authoritarianism wherever they might be in

the world. That is who I have a kinship with. Those are the people who are my comrades. And

that is vastly more popular. And that is what they're worried about because they're seeing,

well, we've kind of pushed things pretty far. every single social service, every single essential

good and service, sorry, is in disarray. They're seeing that while people can't afford their

food and people can't afford their rent and inevitably that it's not quite stable. That's

not stable at all. People can only take so much before they rise up and overthrow in whatever

form overthrowing might look like. And they are, right? We're seeing those workers organize

and unionize and tenants organize and unionize at alarming rates, especially if you're a capitalist.

So this is a very preventative move, what they're doing here. They know that we can only take

so much before our movements really start to grow at a rate that will actually present to

them. Because I would say right now we're a threat, but we're not winning the ultimate

battle anytime soon, but they're concerned that we might get there because they fucked up society

so much. So they're prevent preemptively. Starting to increase the propaganda against anything

resembling socialism. Because they know that is the response. And it will be. Yeah. I think

it's kind of ironic that the anti-communist narrative that will be taught in Ontario schools,

it's really easy to come back at folks who object to this and say, oh, you know, you don't want

history being taught. the man-made famine that killed Ukrainians? Do you want to just hide

that from history? And of course not, right? But I think it's just so ironic they're using

famine as an example of deaths caused by communism and not by war, particularly when we're watching

Israel. starve out 1.2 million Gazans at this point. And so we know that it's not communism

alone that's caused famines worldwide. In fact, I would say capitalism. Not, I would say, I'm

sure most people could acknowledge that capitalism has actually caused far more famines intentionally.

Shit, look at our bread lines. We always use the bread lines in the USSR as examples of

why you don't want communism or the rationing that happens in Cuba. Yet we have food banks

giving out expired food. You don't even get what you need from these food banks. You aren't

getting staples even. You're getting people's castaways. That exists in our capitalist society.

And I imagine when you try to teach youth. from this lack of nuanced position that Leche's

taken, that communism is bad because it caused a famine, that the youth are gonna look at

this and be like, are you serious? Like, is this the only famine? Like, you just can't

teach kids this way anymore. So I don't think it's gonna stick in the way that they want

because- Absolutely. The resources are out there to understand that is a tool of oppression,

regardless of who wields it. It's not a communist tenant to starve people. It happened. It's

awful. It shouldn't have ever. But yeah, it's like if you don't have anything to actually

tear it down from, then you do something ridiculous like that. And I think that's why they really

latched on to Fred Hahn and his position on Palestine, because it was a real opportunity

to just kind of bring down union leaders, right, to frame them as extremists and dangerous.

And there was a lot of people who took his same position, right. But they weren't. kind of

the hype against them wasn't amplified in the way it was there because it wasn't just a blow

for Zionism and the occupation, but it was a way to tear down commies as well. It's the

reason why they have to go so far back in history to find things to complain about, right? That's

why they use... Why are we talking about the Soviet Union and not Bolivia? Bolivia. Why

not talk about Bolivia in your anti-communist propaganda? Maybe it's because under a socialist

government, Bolivia saw extreme poverty reduced by half and poverty reduced by half. I think

it was something like poverty went from 60% to 30% and extreme poverty went from like 30%

to like 10%, something like that. Some ridiculous numbers under Evo Morales. And then we had

a hand in overthrowing that government. Why? Ask yourself that. Why would we install a fascist

puppet dictator in Bolivia when that government was so successful in reducing misery for their

people and providing the indigenous people a voice in representing the workers? We have

much more contemporary examples that we can base ourselves off. Because like I said, ideologies

evolve. And there are many, many success stories in Latin America of how socialists have won

real victories for the people, real victories for workers. And it's typically only interventions

by other state powers that allow fascists... I can't say that word anymore. to allow these

authoritarian regimes to succeed after the populace has installed. And you see in Brazil is the

best example of the tactics that need to be used to remove Lula from the first place, install

Bolsonaro, and then when I think that pressure was just too much worldwide, globally, that

was just one of those two obvious moments that the liberals stepped in and we see a reversal

there. but not short of any efforts from Western nations trying to, you know, overdo that knowledge

that people gain when they experience fascism and don't want it to repeat itself. I don't

think it's so much, especially in South America, that it is that folks have this like short-term

memory. It's so much mass global intervention in these moments where populists gain power

and then it's taken away from them. We've come so normalized to that we don't see it as fascism

at all. you know, as being hand in hand with it. It's just bringing stability and all this

other nonsense, economic stability and whatnot. And we totally buy into that. But there's a

lot more modern ways to define fascism as well, you know? One of the telltale signs that you

can see easily in North America is the disdain for democracy and its institutions, its procedures.

I mean, it starts as mundane as red tape, right? You hear that on the municipal level, you can

really get that out. Nobody bats an eye. It's it's safeguards usually that they're talking

about. There is bad red tape. I know some municipalities are freaking awful, but that's really not what

that's where it starts. And like Premier Ford, he openly talks about his disdain for the courts,

for judges. And we then see it in his legislation that a lot of people don't pay attention to.

you know, where he has lessened their power, he's lessened the ability for you to use the

courts to challenge him or to hold him accountable. And that is part of the tenets of fascism,

right? Not only an open disdain for these institutions, but dismantling them, weakening them, right?

To allow for a more authoritarian regime to exist within something that still resembles

democracy, right? Because we don't have time to really pay attention to how the courts actually

work. And that's what I mean when I say fascism has been here for a while. It's not new. How

long have we been taught? I mean, as long as this show has been going on, we've been talking

about how we don't live in a democracy. Nothing even close to resembling a democracy. But it

calls itself one. It dresses up like one. Right. It likes to pretend that it is so we don't

see it. But we're not in a democratic society. Our system is the farthest thing possible.

We know the ways that the parties control. who's even allowed to get their name on a ballot.

We see how they control, how little public will in elections actually influences policy. How

you can say whatever the fuck you want, but if there is private interest, that overrules

everything. I mean, look at what's going on right now. Look at what happened with the green

belt. Look what is happening right now with Ontario place, right? Is this public will?

No, but- Legislation is being introduced to overrule any sort of democratic check that

could possibly hold them accountable. Whatever systems we've had that we hold on to as evidence

of a democratic system, all of it is eroded so quickly through a legislative vote from

a party that is operating without the approval of the majority of the people. Environmental

checks? Forget about it. We don't need that. we can just introduce legislation against it.

Right? So my point, and that's a very tame example, I would say. Like, it's just what's on the

top of my mind because it's happening right now before our eyes, but it's with everything.

It's with absolutely everything. And so...

I guess the question I have now is like, because I want to focus on what we can control because

we can't control everything. These fights have to take place all around the world and you

know, that's going to take a lot of us. But what can we do here in Canada? What's happening

here at home? And what should we be doing against this? Because it's on us, right? It's on us

to do something about it. So what do we have to do and what are the battles that need fighting,

I guess is my question. Well, I think part of it goes back to the question you had for me

before we started recording, which we should always record. But it was in response to the

police violence that we saw in Toronto earlier this week. And a protester knocked to the ground,

punched repeatedly, need A knee from a police officer just like ground this guy's face this

person's face into the ground over and over again this was from a pro-palestinian rally

and Either way, that's what the discussion was Santiago wanted to know I don't know if you're

gonna like me why we don't fight back more Against police officers and I know some people are

gonna be like because they'll shoot you I get it Like I understand your knee-jerk reaction

to that. But you know The person who was beat by police, the reasoning is they retaliated

when the police knocked a woman off of their bike or knocked them over, you know, unprovoked

and they fought back. And Santiago is like, why don't we do that more? Why do we allow

them to evict our neighbors? Why do we allow them to push our lines back the way that we

do? And I guess a lot of things. can feed into that and I think maybe that's like another

episode kind of question that part of it. But I think part of the answer of why the right

has done such a good job of mobilizing folks and why fascism takes hold, I kind of go back

to this interview with Chris Hedges and

Jeff Charlotte, and they're talking about how Trump and other heads and other fascists normalize

violence in protests from police, but sometimes just like in their language, like that locker

room shit that a lot of people chalk it down to, you know, and I'd beat that guy up, throw

him out of here, you know, make that guy pay for disrupting my rally. You know, if I met

that guy on the street and what that does, it appeals to a certain part of our emotions,

right? Like a real... deep, powerful, passionate, even though we're talking about violence, it's

still a real passionate trigger for people, especially when you're really struggling, especially

when people have you riled up looking for scapegoats and stuff like that. And what the right has

done is they have sparked that and they've pointed it at migrants. They've pointed it at trans

people. They've pointed it at us, you know, the left in general. And it's not that we should

adopt violence as a mantra, but in terms of fighting, sometimes we even lack that language.

Like people aren't willing to use class war, right? Our leaders aren't willing to declare

class war or resisting police in that way, right? Fighting. It's always framed as defending ourselves,

defending our human rights and securing that as opposed to going on the offensive. And that

doesn't spark the same kind of push, fervor, passion in people. And so in a time where,

especially after COVID hit us at a time where you could already argue we were in end-stage

capitalism, that it hit us in this awful moment. And The Right captured that. They captured

that anger. Quite often it was pointed into violence and unfortunately that really did

appeal to people because they knew they were in a time where you needed to fight, fight

or flight and fleeing isn't an option. And we didn't point them into a fight, the left I

mean, you know, especially our leaders who we look to. They tried to appear like liberals,

really passive, really just in a real gentle way. And that isn't doing us any good. and

I'm gonna get labeled a tanky, that's a favorite term folks like to throw at me online, I'm

never happy, you know, because of this, like all's I want is revolution, and that's true.

I'm sorry, that is true, because this piecemeal shit that we're getting is garbage, and it's

gonna end in fascism. And so absolutely you have to push for the extreme opposite of that

and hold to it, right? Or folks will water it down, but. You know, the left has just been

afraid to really get people fired up in that way, not the entire left, because I think the

Palestinian youth movement is a great example of people absolutely unapologetic in their

language. Like their use of the term, certain terms that they use within their campaign are

of war and resistance, and because that's what it is. Right? So meanwhile, you know, the NDP

is supposed to... We're supposed to be getting excited about means tested dental care when

the right is offering really transformative visions to people. They're awful. It's like

a world without migrants or something. You know, I don't know what their vision is, but it's

really different than what we have. Right. And, and that's, that's not anything that we've

provided. And I think what concerns me is that I have no doubts in my mind. that we will get

to the stage where we will be resisting much more aggressively than we are today. No doubt

in my mind that will come because like we said like fascism is inherently quite unstable and

the people will always rise up against it eventually. My concern is how far do we let it get before

we do that? How long are we willing to wait? How many rights are we willing be stripped

away. How strong are we willing to let fascism grow before we say enough is enough? And that's

the danger of liberalism, is that liberalism dulls the senses, it dulls the mind, it gets

you into this very like, oh well, you know, we must piece by piece, slowly, you know, ask

nicely for change and hope that it comes. and That lends itself so much to the growth of

authoritarianism and fascism. And so, like, just to be clear, like, I'm not, I'm not calling,

like, we need to be con- like, we cannot- my values are rooted in anti-authoritarianism,

and so any resistance must be anti-authoritarian. That is foundation to my belief system. So

the question of what we do, I don't know. I don't fully, like, I think that, like, there's

a lot of good work going on right now. I think. What I think my concern isn't so much tactics

right now, it's how many people are actually getting involved and are actually aware of

this and actually talking about this and identifying it for what it is. I don't think we're aware

of the threat. I don't think we're aware of how bad it is and how bad it's gonna get. I

think people are very hopeless right now. And that was intentional. Our hope, taking away

our hope is a very intentional thing. And I... am as guilty as anybody else of... those falling

into despair quite often. I think. Yeah, I think that is very, very intentional. And so I think

building hope, building our communities, bringing us closer together. I mean, these are the things

we always talk about, but that is exactly what we need. You know, I just thought of like a,

a stupid line, but like it's, it's fun to hunger games, but you know. Where Snow said something

along the lines of, hope is the only thing stronger than fear. And Hunger Games comes in handy

sometimes, I think. And I think that was one of the things that I think really does come

in handy. But like we live in a society that's trying to push us apart, we need to come together.

I think... I think part of the answer, part of the hope unfortunately lies within the despair.

What I mean is when you see these fascist regimes masks falling away, when it becomes easier

to have and make the argument that fascism is rising around us, it means they are losing

grip. and they're worried and they're only ever going to be worried when they see resistance

otherwise they're in cruise control. But that is not what we are seeing right now. And it's

because of the organizing that is happening worldwide and the resistance that is happening

to climate change, to genocide, to capitalism and that is why you're seeing this response.

So although it always has to get worse before it gets better, that is a sign that the things

that are happening on the ground are worrying the people at the top. But I think we've normalized

what fascism looks like or doesn't look like for too long that we don't recognize a lot

of the regimes that exist in Europe, in South America as fascist because we're not living

it. We only know really what we see, which is why the ins and outs of what's happening in

Germany and Poland and Hungary, or the political unrest even in France, and the rise of the

far right throughout Europe. They're sometimes hidden within coalitions, but still evidence

that the ideology as a whole is really gaining traction. When they start scoring these electoral

victories, like in Argentina and whatnot, then... That is the point where you have to stop going,

you know, is it coming? That it's evident that it is very much present in people's lives.

Like even by the textbook definition of it, people are experiencing that right now around

the world. And we are not that far behind. No, no, it's we're not even far behind. We're just

in a very smart, evolved version of it, a very, a version of it that's just so good at, at

pretending to be something it's not, you know, at having that illusion of choice, that illusion

of control, that illusion of democracy. It's like not just that, but the image of the tolerant

left, too, I think is not a good one. You know, the way that some people feel the need to distance

themselves from Antifa and what the implications are and worrying about image and whatnot. There's

just so much of that playing in here, especially in North America. And perception is such a

huge, big part of that. I think we need to let go of that, that there is no space for hate.

There is. Like, this is war. And I'm not, this isn't a call to arms, because like, again,

this is just the language that we're using, but you have to be in that mindset. You know,

this makes me kind of realize how sanitized our movement has become over the last few years,

you know? Like, it wasn't long ago that ACAB was a much louder slogan than it is now, you

know? That... defund the police was a louder slogan. Now we have Olivia Chau as mayor in

Toronto. And when was the last time you heard someone talk about defunding the police? Because

I don't hear it. And as long as the police are being careful about their brutality and are

not, because I think they've gotten more careful about it. I think that they recognize the very

real threat to their institution that this movement posed. So I think they have gotten more careful.

I think they're more hesitant. It's the reason why encampment evictions don't have a line

of cops today. They have private security overseeing and they bring out the claw in the night, but

they don't have the line of cops anymore. And I think that's intentional because they've

gotten, they were afraid of the movement, but now that they've gotten so good at that, where

are the calls to defund the police? Because that was not to do just with like, recent examples

of police brutality is not the reason to defund the police alone. It's about the monopoly of

state violence. It's about how that threat is ever present because if we ever push too far

that's what we get. That's what we will be met with and how those resources are better gone

to actual services for the community. But we seem to have forgotten that. Our person, our

person quote unquote won. And now do we actually do it? Do we actually defund the police? No,

that's not what's happening. No one's talking about that. And this is true, not just in that

movement, but in all of our movements. I feel like we've become sanitized. We've become so

careful with image that we have taken out the radical nature that we need to actually be

effective in bringing about change. Because let me ask you, what change have we actually

won in the last few years? Nothing. nothing. And we were a lot, we were a lot closer a few

years ago than we are today. Because, and the people in power have become a lot better at

taking the fuel out of our fire. Meanwhile, on the right, you watch them nurture those

extremists, right? Whereas on the left, we are isolated, I would call myself the extreme left,

Lord knows other people do, right? And, but they're not ostracized in the same way. They're

given platforms. They're celebrated. Sometimes a little bit distant, so I did, I take a photo.

Oh, I didn't know who they were, but you took the photo. It made its rounds on social media.

The dog whistle was sounded. And those personalities and those ideas, those radical ideas, like

the idea of outing. trans kids to their parents. That is a radical idea. That's an extremist

viewpoint. That is open business. Right? But talking about revolution, talking about more

far left ideas is purposely curtailed, silenced in environments like conventions or where it

could get some air and debate. the House of Commons, you know? And so it's like we've taken

everything the right is doing politically and try to apply the opposite to it as a reaction,

as though we would just be so obviously the other guys. And the other guys were just nothing

to inspire, right? They were a non-entity for people who were absolutely struggling.

those political choices quite quickly. I think the, the linguistics behind this all is really

important. And it goes kind of on scene, but the words that we use are so, so powerful subconsciously,

and we need to like, when we use the word extremist, right? Well, extremist relates to fanaticism,

right? And fanaticism is ignorant, right? Fanaticism. by definition is, you know, like this excessive,

like by that, it's excessive, single minded zeal, right? But radical. Radical is about.

The fun affecting the fundamental nature of something about thorough and complete political

and societal change, that's what we're advocating for. So when they call us extremists, I'm not.

Extremism. We're not, we're radicals is what we are. And we need to embrace being radicals.

And there's a reason why these words are used, even if we're not thinking of the definitions,

there's so many ways that these things affect our subconscious, right? And I feel like that's

what I'm trying to get at too, is just like that radical nature is gone. Not gone, but

it's definitely been subdued, it's missing. We're not comfortable being radical in public.

We're not comfortable owning up. to being radical and we need to be radical. The time is right

now to be radical. We need complete fundamental change. This system is deeply hateful, deeply

flawed. Look at the state of our society. It's bad and it's only going to get worse. Every

trend right now is to our society getting worse and worse. How long do we have to wait? to

do something about it? Are we like, do we have to wait until we're so uncomfortable that we

have no other choice to risk something? Because there are those of us here we're risking something

constantly. No, because it'll only get harder even though times will get worse. That idea

of fighting back in that world we so entrenched amongst activists that it will be impossible.

to flip that switch. So I think you've kind of answered your own question is where do we

go? How do you fight fascism? Is you make as much room as possible for radical socialism?

Or the like. I know labels sometimes cut people out and it's just a way of describing the alternative

to top-down rule. It's worker-led, people-led, owning the means of production. controlling

the places that they live, right? Like tenant organizations, workplace unions. Those obviously

are the answer, but in radical forms, unapologetic forms. And we need to start making the people

who speak this way our heroes, not in the way that we have a leadership cult, but that they

can speak for us. That they have a platform where they use this language. And it's not

just the radical elements. amongst the left that are using this language and taking to

the streets in this way. It's absolutely imperative that the leaders are doing it. That's why you

see Jeremy Corbyn at rallies, speaking on marches, not just holding the banner when it's politically

convenient, not just when you're marching for free healthcare or something really easy like

that, when it really counts, when it's really uncomfortable, when the police are facing you

down on the other side of the line. And yeah, I think that... you really hit on that, that

sanitized, controlled image needs to go across the spectrum. Because I think you're seeing

a lot of people on the ground doing what you're talking about. Being radical. And we will tell

their stories. We will make sure you hear about other people being radical because you will

find courage in the incredible acts. that are happening across the globe right now, the acts

of resistance. So part of wanting and being able to fight is seeing a victory first too.

So that you don't think it's for naught. Like a lot of people are willing to make that sacrifice

to risk their body, risk their job, risk their freedom in whatever sense that you see that.

But they need to know it'll be worth something. So, and there are victories. We just don't

hear enough about them. You just got to listen to our show more. I need to use right now the

example of Israel and Palestine to kind of show you what we're talking about, because for a

long time, many of us were talking about the conditions we were talking about, the oppression

in, in Palestine from Israel. We were talking about Israel, Israeli fascism. We have been

talking about this for years and very little happened. It took a very public. active genocide

for people en masse to rise up and oppose it. Do not let that be what it takes to do something.

Do not wait that long. We cannot keep repeating the same mistakes. Like that, like, and we

saw how, what were the narratives around those who spoke of Palestinian liberation? What were

the narratives that they were faced with constantly? We saw exactly what it was. Oh, you're anti-Semitic.

Oh, you're like, you know, you're an extremist. No, and now we know better. We do. And I think

now it becomes more obvious why it had been so important to do by some, obviously not all,

but to take that language of resistance, the right to resist and fighting. the right to

return, you know, asking for what's owed and using the language of war and fighting and

that right to resist. And when you placated that, when human rights advocates and amnesty

always couched this in legal mechanisms and defending rights and using the UN and not of

Palestinian resistance. It really opened up those attacks post October 7th, where it hadn't

been globally established that Palestinians can absolutely pick up a gun and try to resist

this by any means possible because it's unjust and we think the Ukrainians have the right

to do that. But that hadn't been fully established. It was safer to use the other language. But

in hindsight, if that had been firm, if it had all been known in all of our heads that was

a legal right that they had, and in fact that would be the natural thing that one would do

instead of signing petitions and doing resisting in the ways that we think are acceptable, then

that's when you saw so much, so many people fall silent. They didn't recognize that as

a legitimate form of resistance because it had never been sold to them as such. It had always

been framed as... absolute evil. And if you're ever going to study the likes of Che Guevara

and understand how some revolutions happen, how some resistance movements happen, they

are violent.

You can't overthrow an imperialist regime with your words. So look at what happened to the

Black Panthers, right? Look what happens when you represent a real threat. That's right,

because they will respond with absolute violence before you get the chance. So again, no one

wants to get to that point. It's important that we see fascism in all its forms, in all its

evolutions, and not be required to check off boxes of the fascists that have been used as

an example. And I think being able to have these discussions and pointing out the obvious to

people is one of the steps to... Allowing people to frame themselves as in a legitimate fight,

not just a ballot box battle. You know, things that have really dire consequences and require

radical action. That is a wrap on another episode of Blueprints of Disruption. Thank you for

joining us. Also a very big thank you to the producer of our show, Santiago Helu-Quintero.

Blueprints of Disruption is an independent production operated cooperatively. You can follow us on

Twitter at BPofDisruption. If you'd like to help us continue disrupting the status quo,

please share our content. And if you have the means, consider becoming a patron. Not only

does our support come from the progressive community, so does our content. So reach out to us and

let us know what or who we should be amplifying. So until next time, keep disrupting.