Hot Best Seller

How to Stop Fascism: History, Ideology, Resistance

Availability: Ready to download

The far right is on the rise across the world. From Modi's India to Bolsonaro's Brazil and Erdogan's Turkey, fascism is not a horror that we have left in the past; it is a recurring nightmare that is happening again - and we need to find a better way to fight it. In The Truth Is Not Enough, Paul Mason offers a radical, hopeful blueprint for resisting and defeating the new f The far right is on the rise across the world. From Modi's India to Bolsonaro's Brazil and Erdogan's Turkey, fascism is not a horror that we have left in the past; it is a recurring nightmare that is happening again - and we need to find a better way to fight it. In The Truth Is Not Enough, Paul Mason offers a radical, hopeful blueprint for resisting and defeating the new far right. The book is both a chilling portrait of contemporary fascism, and a compelling history of the fascist phenomenon: its psychological roots, political theories and genocidal logic. Fascism, Mason powerfully argues, is a symptom of capitalist failure, and it has haunted us throughout the twentieth century. History shows us the conditions that breed fascism, and how it can be successfully overcome. But it is up to us in the present to challenge it, and time is running out. From the ashes of Covid-19, we have an opportunity to create a fairer, more equal society. To do so, we must ask ourselves: what kind of world do we want to live in? And what are we going to do about it?


Compare

The far right is on the rise across the world. From Modi's India to Bolsonaro's Brazil and Erdogan's Turkey, fascism is not a horror that we have left in the past; it is a recurring nightmare that is happening again - and we need to find a better way to fight it. In The Truth Is Not Enough, Paul Mason offers a radical, hopeful blueprint for resisting and defeating the new f The far right is on the rise across the world. From Modi's India to Bolsonaro's Brazil and Erdogan's Turkey, fascism is not a horror that we have left in the past; it is a recurring nightmare that is happening again - and we need to find a better way to fight it. In The Truth Is Not Enough, Paul Mason offers a radical, hopeful blueprint for resisting and defeating the new far right. The book is both a chilling portrait of contemporary fascism, and a compelling history of the fascist phenomenon: its psychological roots, political theories and genocidal logic. Fascism, Mason powerfully argues, is a symptom of capitalist failure, and it has haunted us throughout the twentieth century. History shows us the conditions that breed fascism, and how it can be successfully overcome. But it is up to us in the present to challenge it, and time is running out. From the ashes of Covid-19, we have an opportunity to create a fairer, more equal society. To do so, we must ask ourselves: what kind of world do we want to live in? And what are we going to do about it?

51 review for How to Stop Fascism: History, Ideology, Resistance

  1. 5 out of 5

    Brian Clegg

    The author, Paul Mason, always came across as a thoughtful presenter on the TV, but released from the constraints applied to broadcast news, his unashamed Marxist viewpoint shines through in this history and analysis of the threat of fascism. I found the historical aspects really interesting - we did the Second World War as part of history when I was at school, but there was very limited material on what drove the rise of Fascism and how it operated. I also found Mason's expectation of a second m The author, Paul Mason, always came across as a thoughtful presenter on the TV, but released from the constraints applied to broadcast news, his unashamed Marxist viewpoint shines through in this history and analysis of the threat of fascism. I found the historical aspects really interesting - we did the Second World War as part of history when I was at school, but there was very limited material on what drove the rise of Fascism and how it operated. I also found Mason's expectation of a second major rise of Fascism and analysis of what to do about it interesting, but in a different way - here it was more an opportunity to see how an intelligent person's thinking can be painted into a corner by his ideology. For example, Mason spends a considerable amount of time exploring why the left failed to stop the rise of fascism in Italy and Germany - but doesn't touch on the more useful potential of why fascism failed to take off in the UK, which would be a far better source of lessons - one probably being the lack of Marxism in mainstream UK politics. Similarly, Mason links the right wing with violent language on social media leading to fascist action, yet this does not fit with the reality that you are much more likely to find hateful language on social media from the left aimed at the right than vice versa. The left tell us they hate Tories, the right that they disagree with Labour. And Mason rightly berates the far right for its antisemitism, conveniently forgetting that the left has had more problems that the right with antisemitism of late. Occasionally I found Mason's views distinctly amusing. He tells us 'The ideas of these self-styled "philosophers" of the far right are not simply grotesque: they would not last five minutes if subjected to the rigours of logic and analysis in an actual philosophy department. That's why they communicate in obscure, long-winded and unintelligible prose. However, they are persuasive.' Leaving aside how anything unintelligible can be persuasive, no doubt what he says about right wing extremists is true - but has he ever read the obscure, long-winded prose produced by many academic philosophers? It's hardly a discipline that specialises in a clear, comprehensible writing style. Another hilarious lack of understanding came when Mason says 'At this stage Thiel, despairing of a political solution, urged libertarians to create communities of survival not resistance; this is the rationale for Silicon Valley's obsession with building undersea cities and space travel.' No, it's because they're science fiction fans. One final quote that produced a raised eyebrow. Mason tells us 'Large numbers of people experienced the years after 2008 not just as economic dislocation but as a crisis of identity. They asked: if I am no longer a consumer, or an atomized individual in a competitive marketplace, defined by the brands I wear, the car I own and the credit card in my wallet, who am I?' It does make you wonder if Mason has ever spoken to a real person outside academia. I can honestly say I have never met anyone who has asked this. Underlying the issues with this book is a problem I see all the time in undergraduate essays - stating 'A therefore B' without presenting any evidence that A causes B. For example, he repeatedly over-simplifies developments such as Brexit, linking them to Trump in the US and racism without having good justification for this. Sometimes this results in statements which it's hard to link to reality such as 'Tory leaders openly celebrate Britain's history as a slave power.' Like those undergraduates he can be quite poor about defining terms before he uses them. For example, he refers to the 'working class' all the way through the book, but it's only about three-quarters of the way through that he defines what it means in a modern world, where the original concept is a very poor fit to the reality. All in all an interesting book that is thought provoking, but it would have been better written by someone who doesn't still believe that Marxism has the answer to everything.

  2. 4 out of 5

    Bagus

    Paul Mason’s latest book would make a nice compliment to Madeleine Albright’s Fascism: A Warning. Whereas Albright’s book speaks from her professional experience as former US Secretary of State and her personal experience of migrating from her native Czechoslovakia after Hitler’s advance to Prague, Paul Mason offers a richly detailed analysis on the nature of fascism which analyses the past- and the present-form of fascism. One thing that is particularly intriguing in Mason’s book and not in the Paul Mason’s latest book would make a nice compliment to Madeleine Albright’s Fascism: A Warning. Whereas Albright’s book speaks from her professional experience as former US Secretary of State and her personal experience of migrating from her native Czechoslovakia after Hitler’s advance to Prague, Paul Mason offers a richly detailed analysis on the nature of fascism which analyses the past- and the present-form of fascism. One thing that is particularly intriguing in Mason’s book and not in the main agenda of Albright’s book is the time limit that we currently have to stop fascism with climate change and the need to reach net-zero before 2050. In this regard, Mason’s project is also an extension of Bill Gates’ mission in How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need. And with the upcoming COP26 in Glasgow next month, this topic might be highly relevant. So what is the relation between climate change and modern fascism? The perspective that Mason echoes throughout this book about fascism is “the fear of freedom, triggered by a glimpse of freedom. It is the violent mobilization of people who do not want to be free, around the project of destroying freedom.” In the word of the Italian antifascist Enzo Traverso, it is condensed into the view of fascism as ‘a revolution against the revolution’. What Madeleine Albright’s stated as a warning in 2018 in lieu of Trump’s presidency finally changed with the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic. The current situation triggers people to differentiate between ‘before’ and ‘now’, such was the case in the 1930s when people took the First World War and the Great Depression as ‘before’. Covid-19 pandemic with its myriad of implications and the ticking clock of climate change might push us to put fascism into the table as a problem to solve more than ever before. Despite the fact of his leftist political opinion, Paul Mason in this book could break free from the Orthodox Marxism which views the historical inevitability of the collapse of capitalism as a given fact and suggests a temporary coalition between the liberals and the lefts to destroy a common enemy. Many scholars have provided some factual accounts and analyses of why fascism offers an alternative solution for most people who feel that the system they believed in slowly collapsed. The myths embraced by the fascist movements in Italy to recreate the great Roman Empire and in Germany to build a thousand years Third Reich provided alternatives for people with their doctrines, albeit with their irrationalities. Mason asserts the view that fascism comes from the total break from ideologies that we used to believe—democracy, market forces, globalism, science and the rule of law—to form a set of disconnected theories that make sense for people feeling hopeless with the crumbling of our systems. The digital platform has become the new battleground for fascists of the twenty-first century. Mason outlines that disinformation has become the main tool to sabotage digital platforms with trolls, doxxing, threats, hate speech, etc. Internet used to be a platform based on writing where people exchanged thoughts and ideas. In the past decade, the move towards mobile devices has changed the way we interact on the internet into pictures- and short texts-basis which offer ease for people who want to manipulate the platforms with misinformation to create as much content as possible in just a short span of time. No example is more striking than the one given by Carole Cadwalladr in her 2019 TED Talk about Facebook’s role in Brexit — and the threat to democracy in which she conducted small research based on the fact that sixty-two per cent of people in her hometown in South Wales Valleys voted to leave the European Union, despite the fact that there were several large construction projects in that county with the sign ‘Funded by the European Union’. She interviewed several people to get more insights. One of them noted the fear of immigrants and refugees (she didn’t meet any immigrants or refugees in the whole county, only a woman from Poland). The other commented on Turkey’s entrance into the EU, which was not true since the decision for Turkey to enter the EU was not even on the table in the EU parliament. The connecting dots corresponding to the source of information from the people she interviewed, Facebook. All traces of the disinformation could be traced back to ‘Vote Leave’ ads on Facebook which specifically targeted a sliver number of people that the ads identified as ‘persuadable’. The failure to mitigate fascism in the past has been attributed to the failure of the left and the liberals to work together to suppress the common enemy. Instead of seeing fascism as a threat, Stalin and the Comintern had embedded the view that the social democrats are ‘social fascists’, while the liberals also saw the lefts as their nemeses and refused to cooperate or form a coalition in the government. Paul Mason seems to be fond of the idea of forming Popular Fronts, to contain fascists such was the case in 1936 France when the working class worked together to push back the Croix de Feu and subscribes to Karl Loewenstein’s idea of militant democracy to outlaw some basic features that give way for fascism to thrive (uniform, banner, hate speech, etc), something reasonable at this stage of development. Despite the fact that this book is hardly able to provide detailed historical accounts of fascism and is highly sporadic in quoting sources, I still find most of Paul Mason’s ideas insightful. For people who don’t subscribe to Marxist ideas, the book might give an eyebrow here and there, however, the point that there is the need to act now due to the pressing issue of climate change is relevant for all of us today.

  3. 5 out of 5

    David

    What an excellent summary of the origins of fascism in the 20th century. Mason argues persuasively, within the context of the 2008 financial crash and its repercussions, for an updated definition of fascism in the 21st century. His summaries of the emergence of Fascism/Nazism in inter-war Italy and Germany are clearly explained, as are the failures (and limited successes) of other parties, particularly the socialists and communists in Western Europe. Mason's focus on the centrality of misogyny to What an excellent summary of the origins of fascism in the 20th century. Mason argues persuasively, within the context of the 2008 financial crash and its repercussions, for an updated definition of fascism in the 21st century. His summaries of the emergence of Fascism/Nazism in inter-war Italy and Germany are clearly explained, as are the failures (and limited successes) of other parties, particularly the socialists and communists in Western Europe. Mason's focus on the centrality of misogyny to 21st century fascism is convincing, and another big takeaway from this book is his insistence that a 21st century version of a Popular Front is required to ensure the defeat of Fascism, whether it be in India, Turkey, Hungary, the USA or the UK. Tellingly, Boris Johnson is named alongside Modi, Bolsinaro, Erdoğan, Trump, Orlando and Putin as the most likely gatekeepers to allow the re-emergence of a reinvigorated Fascism in the next few years. It's down to all of us!! An essential read!

  4. 4 out of 5

    Ken Bell

    Paul Mason is one of those interesting characters who now seem to pop up everywhere telling the rest of us what to believe. In his student days, he was a member of Workers’ Power, a Trotskyite grouplet that never had any actual workers in it. After a period as a teacher, he moved into the media, first as economics editor of BBC Newsnight, then switching to Channel 4 in a similar role. He is now a freelance writer who pops up far too often in the Guardian and his work seems to influence today’s l Paul Mason is one of those interesting characters who now seem to pop up everywhere telling the rest of us what to believe. In his student days, he was a member of Workers’ Power, a Trotskyite grouplet that never had any actual workers in it. After a period as a teacher, he moved into the media, first as economics editor of BBC Newsnight, then switching to Channel 4 in a similar role. He is now a freelance writer who pops up far too often in the Guardian and his work seems to influence today’s left, which is probably why Labour keeps losing elections. His latest offering, How to Stop Fascism, is a case in point. It argues that there is a new, fascist menace in Britain that must be rooted out. However, he presents no evidence to back up that claim, but it is quite likely that he doesn’t need any. Mason’s works are clearly aimed at a particular middle-class readership; people who are convinced that working people are a racist tribe to be overcome. That does not stop him from looking around to find evidence of this threat, and funnily enough his working class enemies always turn up to illustrate and confirm everything he is saying to his readership. So, in the 2019 general election, he went back to his home town of Leigh to campaign for the Labour candidate in that division, and on the doorsteps he heard “men my own age openly fantasizing about the ethnic cleansing of Romanian migrants.” Of course, you did, Paul. My experience of canvassing is that if you can get people away from the TV long enough to open the door they tell you just what you want to hear to get rid of you, before going back to Coronation Street. The last thing you get is anything approaching a political debate. Fast forward to June 2020 and our hero is in London, “an obviously multicultural city.” On the day that he was there, the statue of Sir Winston Churchill in Parliament Square had recently been defaced by the Black Lives Matter rabble, so understandably, groups of British working people had turned up to protest at that outrage to one of the nation’s heroes. Mason was just outside the square and found that he had “entered a zone of white monoculture. Suddenly there were no students, no people of colour, no tourists, no out-gay people. I was back in the world I grew up in. White men, working-class… shouting profanities and swilling lager.” It really is amazing how this author manages to keep bumping into working-class men who confirm his colourful thesis. He even managed to see a postman in the crowd, and you can’t get prolier than that. He ropes in Donald Trump to help bolster his case, even though he admits that “Trump is not a fascist.” However, he then goes on to say that “there is a plebeian mass base for American fascism, and Trump has chosen to lead it”. It is hard to know what to make of that concept, which reads as if Trump is a sort of Schrödinger’s Politician, simultaneously in two states of being at the same time. I was also taken with his “plebeian mass base” line: presumably, he feels that the problem with today’s world is that patricians like him do not rule it. Mason goes on to write “Trump’s victory in 2016 was a turning point. It confirmed that there is a massive constituency in the United States for economic nationalism and isolationism, and forced all other countries to accept deglobalisation as a strategic reality.” Now, given that for most of its history up to the advent of the Progressive Era in the 1890s the USA had been firmly isolationist and had protected its nascent industries behind a massive tariff wall, a very good case can be made for arguing that all Trump wanted to do was to restore the status quo ante, which is hardly the mark of a fascist. More importantly, Mason claims to be a socialist, and since when have socialists been in favour of globalisation? It should be remembered that globalisation is not the same as internationalism. I can remember when Communist shop stewards in British factories collected money to buy bicycles that were shipped to Vietnam. There they were used on the Ho Chi Minh Trail to carry war supplies to the South, as part of Vietnam’s war of national liberation. The aim was not the globalist one of opening Vietnam’s borders to all and sundry, or seeing Vietnamese people flooding over here to provide cheap labour in nail bars. It was the internationalist one of providing help to a people who wanted to govern themselves without interference from outside. (A bit like us with Brexit, perhaps?) Mason is clearly a great fan of globalisation, since the politicians he hates, specifically Trump and Johnson, are “authoritarian nationalists” who “broke with the globalist consensus in the 2010s.”It is difficult to imagine either man as being authoritarian, with Boris in particular anguishing over the lockdown to try and control the coronavirus and Trump leaving all that up to the states. However, both men did break with the “globalist consensus” and since Mason is all in favour of that consensus it must mean that they are authoritarians. Or something; you can never tell with this author. He never gets close to actually pointing his finger at any real fascists, or explain what fascism is, so that we can recognise its followers if we ever see them. To get around that problem he tells us that, “Once we move beyond sterile definitions and understand fascism as a process of social breakdown,” then “we can see the nit-picking formalism among some historians and the left as an obstacle to comprehension.”I hope that is clear to you because it reads like gibberish to me. The best I can come up with from a reading of the text is that fascists are the socially conservative, perhaps economically radical, “plebeian mass” who refuse to listen to Paul Mason. Do I recommend this book to my readers? Surprisingly enough, I do. If you are a Tory worried by the shenanigans of Boris and his surreal cabinet, then you may be worried that your party will lose the next election, so read Mason’s book and put your mind at ease. On the other hand, if you are a Labour man who hopes that your party will win the next election, you should probably have your hopes dashed now, so you will be emotionally prepared for defeat at the next election. People like Mason obviously detest traditional British values and the people who uphold them, and they now control the Labour Party, especially at the local level. They are the ones who read works like this and believe the arguments in them because they tie in with views that the readers already hold. Come the next election, all Boris has to do is point out the contempt and disdain so many Labour intellectuals have for ordinary people – the plebeian mass – and then ask if they want Paul Mason types ruling over them? I think that the answer to that question is obvious. An edited version of this review has appeared in The Brazen Head, an online political and literary quarterly journal. https://brazen-head.org/

  5. 5 out of 5

    Toby Martin

    Having been suitably impressed by Mason's multi-discipline analysis on the modern political climate in 'Clear Bright Future', I was intrigued to see what he'd make of the modern far-right, with the benefit of a few years and the book being very up-to-date (as in, it had only been out for a few weeks or so when I bought it, if that). And, upon finishing, I'm impressed - mostly. I felt the comparisons he drew between the fascism of the 30s and the modern far-right were very on-point and enlightenin Having been suitably impressed by Mason's multi-discipline analysis on the modern political climate in 'Clear Bright Future', I was intrigued to see what he'd make of the modern far-right, with the benefit of a few years and the book being very up-to-date (as in, it had only been out for a few weeks or so when I bought it, if that). And, upon finishing, I'm impressed - mostly. I felt the comparisons he drew between the fascism of the 30s and the modern far-right were very on-point and enlightening. There isn't just continuity in aesthetics or rhetoric, but also in actions, the way its ideas can find life beyond and evolve beyond their original source, the situations in which fascism arises, and, most importantly for this book, how it treats its enemies and vice versa. Mason has handily convinced me that socialists and liberals refusing to put aside their differences, not blame each other for fascism and work together is one of the biggest barriers we face when it comes to effectively defeating the far-right, and this was done by using examples from history, and, I would argue, has shown to be effective today (e.g., the left and centre of the Democratic Party rallying behind Biden in 2020 to defeat Trump; all German federal parties refusing coalitions with the AfD etc). He rightly highlights how fascism is multifaceted, and, in its early manifestations, easily gets conservatives, traditionalists, and populists on its side. Perhaps the biggest challenge this book faced, however, was the difficulty it acknowledged in effectively defining fascism in a way that encompassed by the 1930s movements and the modern alt-right movement, and in this, I feel the book may have let itself down to a degree. There were so many points in the definition Mason eventually selected, that I feared it would have been one difficult to effectively use in rhetorical points, as it was preceded by a lot of coverage of competing definitions and analysis of why some definitions are less effective than others. In the end, even though we as the readers did have something of a grasp on the concept of fascism (enough to identify the commonalities between such disparate movements as the Identitarian movement, Hindutva, Han chauvinism in China, and Christian nationalism in the Americas), it was much easier to define it by what it wasn't. It isn't just the violent wing of the ruling class, it isn't just another form of totalitarianism, it isn't just palingenetic ultranationalism (Mason rightly points out that a lot of modern far-right movements are more obsessed with ethnicity and ambiguously-defined culture than they are actual nation-states), and it is very historically contingent on crises that are existential psychologically and socially, and not just economically. This is also put to us whilst juggling smaller definitions put into soundbites: 'The fear of freedom when given a glimpse of freedom,' 'The revolution against the revolution,' 'The mirror-image of Marxism, but anti-humanist.' The bottom line of it all was: whilst we were definitely given some important food for thought as far as how fascist movements begin, what the believe in, and how they differ from both left-wing socialist and centrist capitalist movements, they way it was all laid out meant it felt as though we had some pieces missing. I'm also not sure how to feel about Mason bringing psychoanalysis into it, from various Freudo-Marxist humanists. Again, very interesting reading, but ambiguous in how accurate they were. I felt it would have been better to back up these insights with modern psychological research on totalitarian mindsets, how humans cling to traditional insights in times of crisis and how this can evolve into dehumanizing. And I think there was a bit of this, but it doesn't stick in your mind. Also, it felt like there were gaps in Mason's case in how to actually stop fascism - uniting the left and the centre is an excellent point, but some of the more technical legal aspects raised questions. One might be able to disband far-right groups and drive them underground, but so malleable is fascism that I feel it would inevitably exploit loopholes. Much more understandable measures mentioned were good though - a ban on paramilitary-style gatherings (as specific and distinct from measures against protest in general) as well as a proper separation of powers in modern states, potentially enforced by constitutional police. Finally, Mason also invites anti-fascists to produce a counter-narrative to pervasive fascist one, one that transcends economics and embraces humanity, its achievements, and its potential for liberation. Though I very much agree with this, once again, it feels as though the answers to what form that narrative would take have to be drawn from various points in the book rather than just laid out as a single piece. Maybe I'd need to read Clear Bright Future again for a better look at such a narrative. All the same, he does manage to simplify it for us in a very effective ending, noting that faced with the realities the came to him upon visiting an old Nazi death camp for the first time, he just 'felt anti-fascist.' And with all that in mind - so do I, Paul. So do I.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Eric Lee

    Journalist and author Paul Mason turns to the past to see what worked — and what didn’t work — in the fight against fascism in the twentieth century. He confronts head-on the staggering failure of the German Left (both the Social Democrats and the Stalinists) to block the Nazis, even though the Left had millions of supporters and their own armed detachments with many thousands of members. He finds inspiration in the experience both of Spain and France in the 1930s when fascism was stopped — at le Journalist and author Paul Mason turns to the past to see what worked — and what didn’t work — in the fight against fascism in the twentieth century. He confronts head-on the staggering failure of the German Left (both the Social Democrats and the Stalinists) to block the Nazis, even though the Left had millions of supporters and their own armed detachments with many thousands of members. He finds inspiration in the experience both of Spain and France in the 1930s when fascism was stopped — at least temporarily — by Popular Fronts uniting the Left with parties of the liberal centre. Mason is quick to acknowledge the failures of the orthodox Marxists and seeks insights in some unusual places, including Hannah Arendt and Wilhelm Reich, whose masterpiece, The Mass Psychology of Fascism, deserves a wide readership. I finished reading this book on a weekend when Italian fascists stormed a national union headquarters in Rome, so the timing could not have been better.

  7. 5 out of 5

    Becky

    An insightful, detailed and clear examination of fascism's history and present. This goes a long way towards providing an explanation to the mystery of why so many, seemingly ordinary people are now espousing radical views, it also convincingly links the rise of far right theory with the manosphere. At no point does Mason try to hide that this is fascism from the point of view of an old school leftist agitator, however the overall conclusion is that the left needs to learn to compromise and to r An insightful, detailed and clear examination of fascism's history and present. This goes a long way towards providing an explanation to the mystery of why so many, seemingly ordinary people are now espousing radical views, it also convincingly links the rise of far right theory with the manosphere. At no point does Mason try to hide that this is fascism from the point of view of an old school leftist agitator, however the overall conclusion is that the left needs to learn to compromise and to recognise where there true dangers lie. If you want a detailed look at the rise of fascism throughout Europe, and a clear eyed look at the conditions that are helping it rise again now then this is a must read book.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Mark Pedlar

    Best on the history of 20th century fascism, least good on how to resist today. Still not sure whether it's useful to label today's hard right as fascism and still not sure whether or not 20th century fascism was a unique manifestation brought on by particular economic conditions and the desire for restitution post-WWI. Equally or more useful would be to identify European countries where fascism didn't take off e.g. UK, Scandinavia, and examine what were the features of resilience in those count Best on the history of 20th century fascism, least good on how to resist today. Still not sure whether it's useful to label today's hard right as fascism and still not sure whether or not 20th century fascism was a unique manifestation brought on by particular economic conditions and the desire for restitution post-WWI. Equally or more useful would be to identify European countries where fascism didn't take off e.g. UK, Scandinavia, and examine what were the features of resilience in those countries. To resist fascism we need positive development of democracy and participation, not simply banning things like anonymity on the Internet, though that would help.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Simon Gibson

  10. 4 out of 5

    Black

  11. 4 out of 5

    Beukenick

  12. 5 out of 5

    Alex Wayne

  13. 5 out of 5

    Leanne Hosie

  14. 5 out of 5

    gaverne Bennett

  15. 5 out of 5

    Ed Bell

  16. 4 out of 5

    James Steele

  17. 5 out of 5

    Sue Chant

  18. 4 out of 5

    Ed Joseph

  19. 5 out of 5

    Tanju Cakar

  20. 4 out of 5

    Mandy

  21. 5 out of 5

    Paul Wagner

  22. 5 out of 5

    Ciaran

  23. 5 out of 5

    Andrei Martynov

  24. 4 out of 5

    Leo

  25. 5 out of 5

    Tom

  26. 4 out of 5

    Keifer

  27. 4 out of 5

    Purcell

  28. 4 out of 5

    Denis

  29. 4 out of 5

    Rebecca

  30. 5 out of 5

    Miles Fielder

  31. 4 out of 5

    Rebecca

  32. 5 out of 5

    Gian Mario Deidda

  33. 4 out of 5

    Ryan

  34. 4 out of 5

    Silvia

  35. 4 out of 5

    Mathé Többen

  36. 5 out of 5

    Lukas Dufka

  37. 5 out of 5

    Nico Macdonald

  38. 4 out of 5

    Molly Chambers

  39. 4 out of 5

    Lauren Rogers

  40. 5 out of 5

    Anna Lyche

  41. 5 out of 5

    Barnaby

  42. 4 out of 5

    Sara

  43. 4 out of 5

    Jack Mundale

  44. 4 out of 5

    Judy Schlotter

  45. 5 out of 5

    R. Gabriel Esteves

  46. 5 out of 5

    Saurabh Bagade

  47. 5 out of 5

    Omar El

  48. 5 out of 5

    Megumi Jo

  49. 4 out of 5

    Manuel

  50. 4 out of 5

    Ciprian

  51. 4 out of 5

    Sebastian

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.