I’ve been assembling material for an essay about the promiscuous use of the word “fascism” for some time. Though my ideas are not hammered completely into shape this Geoffy Nunberg article ably expresses my general views.

…it’s the point of symbolic words such as “fascist” to ease the burden of thought — as Walter Lippmann observed, they “assemble emotions after they’ve been detached from their ideas.”

Geoffrey Nunberg Who are you calling a fascist?

It’s struck me since my youthier days that the word fascism is almost always used as a substitute for bad, as humongous is used, in giganticism-obsessed America, as a substitute for big. Almost every time I hear the word fascism or fascist I am pretty sure that the brain sending it out hasn’t the slightest idea of what real fascism was.

Just for starters I’d like to remind folks that “fascist” and “Nazi” were words chosen by those people themselves, not something thrust upon them as dirty words. Tens of thousands of people identified themselves with pride as fascists and Nazis. They then created the horror which we refer to by those chosen names.

This seems a good model to follow: let people name themselves. Call them what they want to be called as we describe their evil actions. Two I have in mind are the Caliphate Reconstructionists and the Christian Reconstructionists. Each of these groups have visions of earthly life that if carried out would make a hell on earth for most of us. What they do in the name of their beliefs should be shown regularly, talked about, understood, resisted; they should not be taken lightly. But call them by their chosen name: so shall we know them.

Establishing security for ourselves and others depends on our knowing which dangers are real, what sights and sounds give us warning –and which sights and sounds are distractors, noises, false warnings, deceptions and merely, ghoulish fascinators. Calling others fascists is neither accurate nor useful. Let’s call them what they are.