Allen Liao
My knowledge on Fascism prior to reading this is limited, so I cannot comment on the accuracy of Stanley's portrayal of it. However, he paints a wide and interesting picture of both the ideology of fascism and its strategies to obtaining power. Chapter 1, 5, and 6 seems to be the essential chapters to understanding the politics of Us and Them, with other chapters detailing the strategies or the societal effects of such politics.
The book is a bit confusing, as it weaves in between the ideology and strategies, and draws no clear line between conservative ideologies and fascism itself. The last chapter is a bit clearer on this distinction, but I wish it had come sooner. The book would benefit from replying to possible counter objections and dispelling any notion that fascism has a monopoly on totalitarianism, or that conservative ideologies inevitably slides to fascism (with no further qualifications)--notions that careless reading of the book would suggest. Peter Ludlow's review of this book (^1) misinterprets many aspects of Stanley's work in this way, as I have at first, but Stanley's reply (^2) made clear the project of the book and the nature of fascism. As a companion, is worth a read.
^1: http://quarterly.politicsslashletters.org/fascism-doesnt-work-like-that-a-review-of-jason-stanleys-how-fascism-works/
^2: https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campuspress.yale.edu/dist/7/272/files/2021/02/Reply-to-Ludlow-HFW.pdf
My knowledge on Fascism prior to reading this is limited, so I cannot comment on the accuracy of Stanley's portrayal of it. However, he paints a wide and interesting picture of both the ideology of fascism and its strategies to obtaining power. Chapter 1, 5, and 6 seems to be the essential chapters to understanding the politics of Us and Them, with other chapters detailing the strategies or the societal effects of such politics.
The book is a bit confusing, as it weaves in between the ideology and strategies, and draws no clear line between conservative ideologies and fascism itself. The last chapter is a bit clearer on this distinction, but I wish it had come sooner. The book would benefit from replying to possible counter objections and dispelling any notion that fascism has a monopoly on totalitarianism, or that conservative ideologies inevitably slides to fascism (with no further qualifications)--notions that careless reading of the book would suggest. Peter Ludlow's review of this book (^1) misinterprets many aspects of Stanley's work in this way, as I have at first, but Stanley's reply (^2) made clear the project of the book and the nature of fascism. As a companion, is worth a read.
^1: http://quarterly.politicsslashletters.org/fascism-doesnt-work-like-that-a-review-of-jason-stanleys-how-fascism-works/
^2: https://bpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campuspress.yale.edu/dist/7/272/files/2021/02/Reply-to-Ludlow-HFW.pdf
The story ended too optimistically. I don’t think a society which has degraded like that would fix itself in such a short time, and it’s a bit disappointing that once Earthseed has taken roots, the rest of the world seems to fall in line. Or at least, the troubles are no longer present in the narrative. What was somewhat realistic though was the decline of Christian America, provided that Jarret’s fascism has not persuaded the masses sufficiently.
I really liked Parable of the Talents otherwise. The middle section was a HARROWING read, but never unbelievable. I shudder to think what might be done in the “Camp Christians” of today.
The story ended too optimistically. I don’t think a society which has degraded like that would fix itself in such a short time, and it’s a bit disappointing that once Earthseed has taken roots, the rest of the world seems to fall in line. Or at least, the troubles are no longer present in the narrative. What was somewhat realistic though was the decline of Christian America, provided that Jarret’s fascism has not persuaded the masses sufficiently.
I really liked Parable of the Talents otherwise. The middle section was a HARROWING read, but never unbelievable. I shudder to think what might be done in the “Camp Christians” of today.