What do you think?
Rate this book
Against the Fascist Creep
What are the origins of fascism’s current rise in the US and around the world?
What are its links to Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach, Ken Blackwell, and others in the new administration?
How has Vladimir Putin used the global far right to increase his power and influence?
Where did hate-speech celebrities like Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopolous come from?
What role has Silicon Valley played in the fascist creep?
As the election of Donald Trump shows, fascism in all its white nationalist and “alt-right” permutations is alive and well in the United States. A terrifying tour of the history and influence of the forces that helped bring the forty-fifth president to power, Against the Fascist Creep maps the connections and names the names. It traces today’s often-disguised forms of rightwing extremism through the decades and across the globe to show how infiltration is a conscious and clandestine program for neofascist groups that seek to co-opt and undermine both mainstream and left-wing institutions in order to win elections, take political power, and create a new racist and authoritarian society.
What are its links to Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach, Ken Blackwell, and others in the new administration?
How has Vladimir Putin used the global far right to increase his power and influence?
Where did hate-speech celebrities like Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopolous come from?
What role has Silicon Valley played in the fascist creep?
As the election of Donald Trump shows, fascism in all its white nationalist and “alt-right” permutations is alive and well in the United States. A terrifying tour of the history and influence of the forces that helped bring the forty-fifth president to power, Against the Fascist Creep maps the connections and names the names. It traces today’s often-disguised forms of rightwing extremism through the decades and across the globe to show how infiltration is a conscious and clandestine program for neofascist groups that seek to co-opt and undermine both mainstream and left-wing institutions in order to win elections, take political power, and create a new racist and authoritarian society.
400 pages, Paperback
First published May 10, 2016
80 people are currently reading
1044 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
January 30, 2025
What could have been an amazing book was absolutely ruined by a nearly complete lack of citations to back up the claims that were being made. As a result I had to do outside research to learn about the things that were being discussed, and when I did I discovered that many of the claims being made were exaggerations, manipulations, or outright lies. I gave up on this book in frustration about two thirds of the way through after discovering the author tried to pass off as happening before 2003 something that happened in 2011 in order to fit his narrative.
We need a detailed and heavily cited tour of fascist history. Unfortunately this book isn't that
We need a detailed and heavily cited tour of fascist history. Unfortunately this book isn't that
October 8, 2017
Now this one I REALLY recommend. 'Against the fascist creep' (2017) is probably one of the most relevant books I have read in quite a while. I am sure there are more seminal studies on fascism, but this book is great because it provides a historical and ideological/theoretical analysis of fascism while remaining accessible for those without a solid political theory background.
The book analyses how fascism can share ideological space with (parts of) the left and other non-fascist extreme right-wing ideologies and provides an excellent global overview of protofascist and fascist movements, organizations and parties plus their various ideological transmutations. I had no idea how interconnected and 'internationalist' the various ultra-nationalist tendencies appear to be.
Most importantly, the book analyses the 'fascist creep', ie the various strategies and tactics used by fascists to connect fascist thought with non-fascist discourses and movements and how, for instance, the radical right - often at odds with fascist organizations - enables fascist growth and mainstreams their talking points, think Trump, Le Pen, AfD etc.
At the same time, the rise of right-wing populism since the 1990s is also a protest vote against neoliberalism and the book shows how 'third position' fascists continue to try to ride on/ infiltrate left-wing anti-globalization, anti-neoliberal, anti-capitalist and anti-war movements and parties.
Being a very recent publication (2017), the book includes a chapter on Islamophobia/ anti-immigrant/ 'counter-jihad' movements and parties and their relationship with the ongoing 'refugee crisis' and jihadi terrorism. The book shows how these latest 'patriotic grassroots movements', think tank networks and citizen journalists (think PEGIDA or Alex Jones talk shows) have enabled Donald Trump taking power and shifted mainstream Republican discourse very firmly into ethnocentric populism and emboldened anti-semitism. According to the author, the ongoing overlap of fascist counterculture and its 'respectable' ideological analogues has created protofascist conditions in the US beginning to move into fascists seizing power through a kind of 'creeping coup' for which Trump has presented the perfect populist figurehead. In his words "The outbreak of violence following Trump's election serves as a warning to all people of Europe, however: go down this road, and there may be no turning back."
The book analyses how fascism can share ideological space with (parts of) the left and other non-fascist extreme right-wing ideologies and provides an excellent global overview of protofascist and fascist movements, organizations and parties plus their various ideological transmutations. I had no idea how interconnected and 'internationalist' the various ultra-nationalist tendencies appear to be.
Most importantly, the book analyses the 'fascist creep', ie the various strategies and tactics used by fascists to connect fascist thought with non-fascist discourses and movements and how, for instance, the radical right - often at odds with fascist organizations - enables fascist growth and mainstreams their talking points, think Trump, Le Pen, AfD etc.
At the same time, the rise of right-wing populism since the 1990s is also a protest vote against neoliberalism and the book shows how 'third position' fascists continue to try to ride on/ infiltrate left-wing anti-globalization, anti-neoliberal, anti-capitalist and anti-war movements and parties.
Being a very recent publication (2017), the book includes a chapter on Islamophobia/ anti-immigrant/ 'counter-jihad' movements and parties and their relationship with the ongoing 'refugee crisis' and jihadi terrorism. The book shows how these latest 'patriotic grassroots movements', think tank networks and citizen journalists (think PEGIDA or Alex Jones talk shows) have enabled Donald Trump taking power and shifted mainstream Republican discourse very firmly into ethnocentric populism and emboldened anti-semitism. According to the author, the ongoing overlap of fascist counterculture and its 'respectable' ideological analogues has created protofascist conditions in the US beginning to move into fascists seizing power through a kind of 'creeping coup' for which Trump has presented the perfect populist figurehead. In his words "The outbreak of violence following Trump's election serves as a warning to all people of Europe, however: go down this road, and there may be no turning back."
December 9, 2018
Superb exploration of the insidious nature of fascist movements -- 'creeping' into the left by coopting organizing strategy, talking points, and speaking to a shared disaffection. Informationally dense, sophisticated analysis, and horribly prescient.
January 11, 2018
The book is probably better than 3 stars for informed readers; however, I came at it as an outsider and a non-historian. It is scholarly and well footnoted. The index is useful. It is dense and nuanced. I don't have enough background to evaluate findings, but they seemed well argued. Sometimes I wondered if there was too much guilt by association--a closer second reading would answer that.
Although I got lost in the detail and alphabet soup of abbreviations, I got the general drift. There are variations of fascism with their slight differences, but there is a core of nationalism, individualism, authenticity, tribalism, and hate. I was surprised at the role of punk music, sometimes even called hate music.
There is infiltration of leftist groups and there is an anti-system attitude that sometimes finds right and left groups in temporary partnership. And the overlap suggests the need for caution, especially when there is an emphasis on hierarchy, misogyny, nationalism, and authenticity. As racism, and even fascism, become more covert, it is more difficult--but still possible--to recognize the core features.
The chapters that dealt with US fascism were easier to follow because they were more familiar. One could almost read them in isolation, using the index to look up references to groups and leaders discussed earlier.
After I have done more reading, I'll probably read it again.
Although I got lost in the detail and alphabet soup of abbreviations, I got the general drift. There are variations of fascism with their slight differences, but there is a core of nationalism, individualism, authenticity, tribalism, and hate. I was surprised at the role of punk music, sometimes even called hate music.
There is infiltration of leftist groups and there is an anti-system attitude that sometimes finds right and left groups in temporary partnership. And the overlap suggests the need for caution, especially when there is an emphasis on hierarchy, misogyny, nationalism, and authenticity. As racism, and even fascism, become more covert, it is more difficult--but still possible--to recognize the core features.
The chapters that dealt with US fascism were easier to follow because they were more familiar. One could almost read them in isolation, using the index to look up references to groups and leaders discussed earlier.
After I have done more reading, I'll probably read it again.
March 19, 2018
Somehow freedom of expression blooms among laws restricting expression. And like Jesus said that simply thinking to a sinful act is committing the said act, Thought Police to the rescue. How to make people more free by applying the blessed club of State Power.
September 23, 2018
It took a weirdly long time for me to get around to this book, as I have read many (and lousier) examples of writing on our contemporary fascists… I think part of my brain slotted it as “anti-fascism,” which obviously I support but about which I don’t feel the need to go out and keep up with the literature. Memetic association with AK Press, I suppose.
Like most of our books about recent fascism, “Against the Fascist Creep” serves as something of a primer, and also advances a thesis on what should be done. Ross, an anarchist writer, also makes some provocative statements about fascism as a whole, dipping a toe into the perennial intellectual wrangling around defining fascism. Most of the latter turns on the “fascist creep” of the title- not gross haircuts with unwholesome habits saying repugnant things to trigger the libs (though it’s presumably a happy accident), but fascist entryism into and poaching from the left. This is both an interesting subject and an invitation to some fancy footwork around definitions of “fascist,” “radical right,” “populist” (and “left” for that matter) that Ross doesn’t quite carry off- some of his definitional portions get confused and this confusion finds its way to spots throughout the analysis, where you’re not sure whether he’s talking about fascists or mere “radical right-wingers” and what either might mean. This gets especially confused around Ross’s analysis of ideologies like anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism, frequent sites both of entryism and genuine sympathy to fascist ideas from people like von Mises and Rothbard, but that don’t quite fit the categories Ross lays out…
But for the most part, it’s an interesting and informative analysis. Anarchists have, by and large, borne the brunt of fascist attempts to enter the left, from infiltration of the punk scene to “National-Anarchists” trying to get tables at their book fairs. The snob in me wants to say this might have something to do with their lack of theoretical sophistication… but the trying-to-be-better-comrade in me also has to say that it probably has something to do with the ways in which anarchists emphasize going along the grain of people’s lived experience, and that many of them have been alert to these things more consistently than, say, democratic socialists have always been.
Inter-left inside baseball aside, the space of fascist entryism is an interesting one. I go with the Robin definition of left and right- the right is about bolstering (or reinscribing) hierarchy, the left is about distributing power downward and horizontally (liberalism is about rules- I say that in jest, but only partially). But, naturally, not everyone goes with the program. Horseshoe theory is mostly nonsense, but there is a point where people on both sides of the spectrum meet up- undertheorized anti-system sentiment. AFAICT, this is what Ross means when he distinguishes “fascism” from “the radical right”- fascism has an anti-system bias, or anyway rhetoric. This is far too much of a thin reed — most fascists usually wind up liking capitalism, the police, the army et al just fine — for me to place much emphasis on. But it is useful as a heuristic to see who on the far right could try to play entryism with the left. “Radical rightists” like the John Birch Society or the Minutemen would find it tough, given their attachment to both the structures AND the symbols of traditional power. But those who can eschew the symbols — skinheads, “national anarchists,” right-counterculturalists, “national bolsheviks” et al — can make a better try, especially when people’s guards are down. Ross does a good job encapsulating many of these efforts- his narratives are clear, interesting, well-written.
I’m not going to recap them here (just read the book if you want that- there’s so many weird little groups and fashy randos running around). There is a degree to which I was right about my initial impression- in certain respects, the thesis (if not all of the content) is about the left — how it needs to be careful about fascist entryism and vigilant in antifascism — than about the right. I want to illuminate a few interesting points about the stories Ross tells-
First, the dynamic wherein fascists after the end of the war flocked to the proverbial last men standing- who tended to be outsiders and space-takers when the fascist regimes were still in good shape. So you wind up with people flocking around fascist occultist woo-slinger Julius Evola, who Mussolini would barely give the time of day to, and the few remaining Strasserites (Nazis who were a little more mad about bankers than the dominant Hitler wing of the party) or “conservative revolutionaries” in Germany, never-wases like Oswald Mosely, or National-Bolshevism, a small but surprisingly hardy and insidious germ of fascist entryism.
Call it an example of the “cunning of history,” or natural (read- the Russians killed and/or the CIA stashed away everyone more important) selection, but this, in certain ways, helped them in a left-entryist strategy more than if more competent, central fascists had survived. Strasserites and Nat-Bols can pretend to be leftists, if you don’t look too close. Followers of Evola and other cultural fascists can even more more easily infiltrate the arts and various subcultures. Their very marginality under actual existing fascism provides an alibi- they weren’t really fascists, the arguments go, because Hitler/Mussolini/whoever didn’t take them seriously and sometimes vice-versa. Of course, that argument doesn’t hold water — Strasser was also a vicious antisemite, Evola if anything wanted a crueler state than Mussolini wanted, etc etc — but that requires research and argument, and entryists look for spaces where people won’t bother with that… like countercultures, spaces where people go more by feel — the feel of rebellion, of authenticity, whatever — than by thought.
Second, even taking into account Ross’s desire to warn and energize his readership, it really is notable, when you read about them one after another, how widely fascist entryism has extended its tendrils. Not always effectively, mind- I’d say it goes wide, but not notably deep. But especially in the period between the downfall of the global oppositional, anti-capitalist left in the late 1970s and, basically, the alarms that white behavior in the wake of the Obama election in the US began to ring, people really seemed to have their guards down about who fascists are, what they do, and why they should be driven out of anywhere they take a hold. When people lose the ability to name the structures of power — which, then and now, means capitalism and what comes with it — that opens the door to all kinds of silliness, which can turn insidious where it isn’t simply useless.
Anti-system — as opposed to anti-hierarchical-structures (like capitalism and racism) — thinking took hold hard in this time, and a lot of people who should have known better flirted heavily with what amounted to red-brown politics, though it seldom called itself by that name. People knew what Gavin McInnes was, or what Jim Goad was, or what Death In June was singing about, or what the post-Soviet Nat Bols were, in the nineties just as much as today. They just didn’t care, or felt there were bigger fish to fry in the form of “the system,” generally defined more by mundanity than oppressive power… This affected a wide range of actors: European Greens, anti-Zionism, anti-globalization movements, numerous artistic and literary figures who confused edginess with insight and freaking out the squares with a meaningful goal… we’re still shaking off the aftereffects of how badly the global left managed the fin de siecle, in this way as in many others, and some of them still don’t manage this stuff very well. In part, this is because the left for decades failed to articulate a meaningful critique of fascism, either relying on a Trotskyite (or Stalinist) catechetical definition, which doesn’t have much room to develop even where it’s strong, or else basically letting liberalism turn these issues into moralism, which tend to lose their force once, well, people stop taking the moral (or its messengers) seriously. It’s good we’re doing it now. Let’s hope it’s not too late. ****’
https://toomuchberard.wordpress.com/2...
Like most of our books about recent fascism, “Against the Fascist Creep” serves as something of a primer, and also advances a thesis on what should be done. Ross, an anarchist writer, also makes some provocative statements about fascism as a whole, dipping a toe into the perennial intellectual wrangling around defining fascism. Most of the latter turns on the “fascist creep” of the title- not gross haircuts with unwholesome habits saying repugnant things to trigger the libs (though it’s presumably a happy accident), but fascist entryism into and poaching from the left. This is both an interesting subject and an invitation to some fancy footwork around definitions of “fascist,” “radical right,” “populist” (and “left” for that matter) that Ross doesn’t quite carry off- some of his definitional portions get confused and this confusion finds its way to spots throughout the analysis, where you’re not sure whether he’s talking about fascists or mere “radical right-wingers” and what either might mean. This gets especially confused around Ross’s analysis of ideologies like anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism, frequent sites both of entryism and genuine sympathy to fascist ideas from people like von Mises and Rothbard, but that don’t quite fit the categories Ross lays out…
But for the most part, it’s an interesting and informative analysis. Anarchists have, by and large, borne the brunt of fascist attempts to enter the left, from infiltration of the punk scene to “National-Anarchists” trying to get tables at their book fairs. The snob in me wants to say this might have something to do with their lack of theoretical sophistication… but the trying-to-be-better-comrade in me also has to say that it probably has something to do with the ways in which anarchists emphasize going along the grain of people’s lived experience, and that many of them have been alert to these things more consistently than, say, democratic socialists have always been.
Inter-left inside baseball aside, the space of fascist entryism is an interesting one. I go with the Robin definition of left and right- the right is about bolstering (or reinscribing) hierarchy, the left is about distributing power downward and horizontally (liberalism is about rules- I say that in jest, but only partially). But, naturally, not everyone goes with the program. Horseshoe theory is mostly nonsense, but there is a point where people on both sides of the spectrum meet up- undertheorized anti-system sentiment. AFAICT, this is what Ross means when he distinguishes “fascism” from “the radical right”- fascism has an anti-system bias, or anyway rhetoric. This is far too much of a thin reed — most fascists usually wind up liking capitalism, the police, the army et al just fine — for me to place much emphasis on. But it is useful as a heuristic to see who on the far right could try to play entryism with the left. “Radical rightists” like the John Birch Society or the Minutemen would find it tough, given their attachment to both the structures AND the symbols of traditional power. But those who can eschew the symbols — skinheads, “national anarchists,” right-counterculturalists, “national bolsheviks” et al — can make a better try, especially when people’s guards are down. Ross does a good job encapsulating many of these efforts- his narratives are clear, interesting, well-written.
I’m not going to recap them here (just read the book if you want that- there’s so many weird little groups and fashy randos running around). There is a degree to which I was right about my initial impression- in certain respects, the thesis (if not all of the content) is about the left — how it needs to be careful about fascist entryism and vigilant in antifascism — than about the right. I want to illuminate a few interesting points about the stories Ross tells-
First, the dynamic wherein fascists after the end of the war flocked to the proverbial last men standing- who tended to be outsiders and space-takers when the fascist regimes were still in good shape. So you wind up with people flocking around fascist occultist woo-slinger Julius Evola, who Mussolini would barely give the time of day to, and the few remaining Strasserites (Nazis who were a little more mad about bankers than the dominant Hitler wing of the party) or “conservative revolutionaries” in Germany, never-wases like Oswald Mosely, or National-Bolshevism, a small but surprisingly hardy and insidious germ of fascist entryism.
Call it an example of the “cunning of history,” or natural (read- the Russians killed and/or the CIA stashed away everyone more important) selection, but this, in certain ways, helped them in a left-entryist strategy more than if more competent, central fascists had survived. Strasserites and Nat-Bols can pretend to be leftists, if you don’t look too close. Followers of Evola and other cultural fascists can even more more easily infiltrate the arts and various subcultures. Their very marginality under actual existing fascism provides an alibi- they weren’t really fascists, the arguments go, because Hitler/Mussolini/whoever didn’t take them seriously and sometimes vice-versa. Of course, that argument doesn’t hold water — Strasser was also a vicious antisemite, Evola if anything wanted a crueler state than Mussolini wanted, etc etc — but that requires research and argument, and entryists look for spaces where people won’t bother with that… like countercultures, spaces where people go more by feel — the feel of rebellion, of authenticity, whatever — than by thought.
Second, even taking into account Ross’s desire to warn and energize his readership, it really is notable, when you read about them one after another, how widely fascist entryism has extended its tendrils. Not always effectively, mind- I’d say it goes wide, but not notably deep. But especially in the period between the downfall of the global oppositional, anti-capitalist left in the late 1970s and, basically, the alarms that white behavior in the wake of the Obama election in the US began to ring, people really seemed to have their guards down about who fascists are, what they do, and why they should be driven out of anywhere they take a hold. When people lose the ability to name the structures of power — which, then and now, means capitalism and what comes with it — that opens the door to all kinds of silliness, which can turn insidious where it isn’t simply useless.
Anti-system — as opposed to anti-hierarchical-structures (like capitalism and racism) — thinking took hold hard in this time, and a lot of people who should have known better flirted heavily with what amounted to red-brown politics, though it seldom called itself by that name. People knew what Gavin McInnes was, or what Jim Goad was, or what Death In June was singing about, or what the post-Soviet Nat Bols were, in the nineties just as much as today. They just didn’t care, or felt there were bigger fish to fry in the form of “the system,” generally defined more by mundanity than oppressive power… This affected a wide range of actors: European Greens, anti-Zionism, anti-globalization movements, numerous artistic and literary figures who confused edginess with insight and freaking out the squares with a meaningful goal… we’re still shaking off the aftereffects of how badly the global left managed the fin de siecle, in this way as in many others, and some of them still don’t manage this stuff very well. In part, this is because the left for decades failed to articulate a meaningful critique of fascism, either relying on a Trotskyite (or Stalinist) catechetical definition, which doesn’t have much room to develop even where it’s strong, or else basically letting liberalism turn these issues into moralism, which tend to lose their force once, well, people stop taking the moral (or its messengers) seriously. It’s good we’re doing it now. Let’s hope it’s not too late. ****’
https://toomuchberard.wordpress.com/2...
August 12, 2017
I am so grateful to Alexander for writing this book. The amount of research and exposure to the most vile ideas and practices requires a special amount of fortitude. I especially recommend this book for political groups to engage collectively both to inform the group's analysis and to shape any and all liberation praxis as anti-fascist. I am currently reading the book with a group of fellow faculty, alumni, staff, and students from the school where I teach. The group's members are spread across the country and have an interest in bringing an anti-fascist analysis into local organizing and education efforts. As neoliberalism spins out its dead end of misery and destruction, at the same time as neoliberal fatalism holds a grip on our imagination for anti-capitalist resistance, the radical right will thrive. It's message of white victimization, xenophobia, and calls to "traditional" gender and sexual roles, will and are attracting more and more people across the U.S. and around the world. Opposing the neofascist creep requires direct and explicit confrontation while defending the boundaries of anti-racism, immigrant rights, and gender and sexual justice. At the same time, our movements has to do more than looking back to a mythical utopia when the liberal center ensured equality and prosperity for all. We need to look forward beyond the neoliberal consensus and against neofascist reaction. Standing against the right means fighting for an anti-capitalist and anti-racist world. The one informs the other. This book helps to name names in opposing neofascist reaction. Lived practice will be the site of making that other world possible.
September 7, 2020
An incredibly important and comprehensive book on the history of modern fascism, that does effectively draw a lot of points of connection between fascist ideology and other movements (anti-capitalism, ecology, Silicon Valley/tech culture, occupy Wall Street, occultism, punk, Portland, hipster culture are just some of my own reference points that get the fascist creep treatment, but the other obvious ones are there too - MRAs, 4chan etc.). My actual rating is more like 3 given that it doesn’t contextualise a lot especially in the beginning (same problem as Antifa by Mark Bray) which given the amount of information here made it pretty relentless. But I learnt so many things about fascism that feel close to necessary at this point in history, that I’m pushing it up a point.
I felt like there were further dots that could have been joined, in the end, to diagnose this moment. The role of Russia was underdiscussed, for example, and the book barely mentions climate disaster except as a motivation of accelerationists, rather than as a reality of garden-variety capitalism.
I felt like there were further dots that could have been joined, in the end, to diagnose this moment. The role of Russia was underdiscussed, for example, and the book barely mentions climate disaster except as a motivation of accelerationists, rather than as a reality of garden-variety capitalism.
April 10, 2017
See my full review in Truthout here: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item...
October 10, 2022
Very interesting history of fascist movements a day there rise and subsequent falls. An updated version for the post Trump administration would be a great edition
August 1, 2017
Decent overview of the fascist creep and various instantiations from world war II to the present. The author does a good job on touching on lesser known aspects of fascist right including the mysticism and folk lore aspect. The author could have done a better job of orienting the book for folks new to the subject. There is some prerequisite knowledge necessary that the author takes for granted, but nonetheless is a good introduction to fascist movements past and current.
August 25, 2018
I gave up around half way through Chapter 9- I picked this book up after listening to an interview with the author, it reads like a who’s who in the zoo of fascist ideology that’s heavy on the descriptive aspects but low on real in depth or nuanced analysis.
To be honest, the constant barrage of people, places and organizations began to make my eyes glaze over and when the author talked about dangerous radical right fascist groups, I was never sure of the scale of the movements he was discussing as he never fleshed out the context enough before hopping to the next time and place.
I would have preferred the author to structure it less as a chronological or regional run through and instead focus more on tracing or teasing out different aspects of what have been consider fascist thought along with how they’ve played out historically through his broad knowledge of the relevant social movements as I think this is when the book is at its strongest.
To be honest, the constant barrage of people, places and organizations began to make my eyes glaze over and when the author talked about dangerous radical right fascist groups, I was never sure of the scale of the movements he was discussing as he never fleshed out the context enough before hopping to the next time and place.
I would have preferred the author to structure it less as a chronological or regional run through and instead focus more on tracing or teasing out different aspects of what have been consider fascist thought along with how they’ve played out historically through his broad knowledge of the relevant social movements as I think this is when the book is at its strongest.
September 5, 2017
decent read with a lot of information- author goes into the book assuming the reader has a preliminary knowledge of fascism, which frankly I didn't so there was a lot of dog-earing, highlighting and wikipedia-ing. This is the kind of read that would appeal to your typical philosophy major, but will drive your english-lit student to tears due to a serious lack of editing- as far as social activism and political awareness go, i would definitely recommend reading this though over posting another punch nazi meme and going about your day.
Read
April 13, 2018I cannot recommend this book highly enough. At the same time, it's terrifying. It's hard to wrap one's mind around the "fascist creep" which attempts to link up with the ideas of the left in order to inject its agenda. What, in the end, does that agenda then mean, what does it further? Thankfully, I think the conclusions drawn are extremely solid ones.
Also, FWIW, the chapters have over 100 footnotes. If, you know, you're measuring that kind of thing.
Also, FWIW, the chapters have over 100 footnotes. If, you know, you're measuring that kind of thing.
September 7, 2017
A great history of fascism and its many, many horrifying and confusing faces. Its quite a dense book in regards to the amount of names, groups and ideas in general but I thoroughly enjoyed it and seeing as it is a relatively small read (330 pages) it was great in pointing me in the direction of further reading and study.
January 13, 2018
The book is the most comprehensive and intellectually rigorous study on the terrifying history of fascism, its infiltration into the movements of both the left and the right, and how it infected the body politic and gave rise to the Trump era that I've read. Highly recommend to anyone that's curious as to how we arrived at this precarious moment in our history.
June 29, 2018
A very interesting look at post-WW2 fascism, with a particular focus on fascist attempts to blend their ideas with more left-wing ideas, like anti-capitalism and environmentalism.
July 20, 2018
A very comprehensive history of fascism, and rather terrifying commentary on how fascism "creeps" into liberal discourses by coopting issues such as environmentalism.
November 7, 2019
In this text, Ross weaves a deeply thorough and excellently cited journey through the evolution of what we can define as 'Fascism' in a contemporary and historical context.
This book can serve a broad range of audiences. Those who are interested in an over hundred year evolution of thought, ideology, action, and people will find the entire book informative. Those who wish to understand "what fascism is and is not" will find this book excellent in describing the nuance. One addition to this book that served my own research needs are the chapters surrounding 2000s era United States and European fascist ideologies and movements. In particular, there is excellent attention paid to online radicalization and its translation into real-world organizing and violence. From Gamergate to the Manosphere to mass shootings from 8chan, Ross is so elequant in providing a deep dive into this contemporary moment. It is a welcomed and necessary compliment to history which can too-often delegate Fascism to WW2 European contexts.
This book can serve a broad range of audiences. Those who are interested in an over hundred year evolution of thought, ideology, action, and people will find the entire book informative. Those who wish to understand "what fascism is and is not" will find this book excellent in describing the nuance. One addition to this book that served my own research needs are the chapters surrounding 2000s era United States and European fascist ideologies and movements. In particular, there is excellent attention paid to online radicalization and its translation into real-world organizing and violence. From Gamergate to the Manosphere to mass shootings from 8chan, Ross is so elequant in providing a deep dive into this contemporary moment. It is a welcomed and necessary compliment to history which can too-often delegate Fascism to WW2 European contexts.
September 19, 2018
Although I agree with the author’s assertions, the book quickly loses its narrative and starts reading like a well-cited stream-of-consciousness on every far-right group, individual and media that has popped up in the last century. It’s hard to tell if any specific group is a large influential political party or just a few individuals with a quixotic website. Without this context and analysis it’s impossible to explore what will be the biggest fascist threats moving forward, we are just left concluding that some new fascist will pop up from every and any direction.
February 15, 2019
Essential reading for anyone trying to understand the place of the alt-right and modern white nationalism in the history of fascism and similar ideologies. Ross reviews the history of fascism as a political force throughout Europe from the interwar period to the present day, focusing on the ways in which fascists borrow from both the "left" and "right" of the political spectrum. The author then discusses the similarities (and key differences) between these and modern far-right movements.
July 15, 2024
I knocked off a star because this is a difficult read, just in style and vocabulary. The information is so good and so important, but there were times I had a hard time connecting because the concepts and vocabulary went over my head. (Thank goodness for the built-in dictionary on kindle.) It was excellent in showing the connections in current fascist movements and explaining the differences in thought and how they came about.
March 2, 2018
This is a really useful intellectual history of fascist thinkers and movements a and field guide to contemporary fascisms. Reid Ross is particular attentive to how fascism attempts to enter and parasitically absorb left and anticapitalist/antiauthoritarian movements, from syndicalism to “deep ecology.”
January 19, 2023
Lot of good stuff in here and the author's focus on fash entryism and some of the red-brown/third positionist tendencies (something lots of people seemed to like to pretend didn't exist back in the good old left twitter days) is very useful but that focus does lend itself to slipping a little too easily into horseshoe theory rhetoric that I can't fully endorse
January 2, 2018
A well-documented history of fascism, including an assessment of fascism's unfortunate creep into popular discourse. Not an easy read: the brutal face of fascism is revealed and this is a scholarly book that covers a lot of ground, perhaps trying to cover too much ground at some points.
November 30, 2025
about creeping fascism... incredibly detailed...how fascists worm themselves into mainstream and infiltrate/mimic the radical left.. shape shifting ...finished shortly after Trump was elected in 2016.. more changes after that
March 2, 2018
A compelling and disturbing history of Fascist thought, and the creeping influence it has around the world again in the midst of neoliberal failure and leftist inability to respond. Know thy enemy.
November 20, 2024
The analysis got long in the tooth towards the end, but the historical evidence and analysis is invaluable. Should be required reading for Americans in 2025.
January 12, 2021
A particularly troubling and confusing aspect of fascism is its deep syncretism, drawing elements from across the political spectrum to appeal to various groups and hide in more sympathetic rhetoric, co-opting the language of the left and the center to turn it against them or each other.
A fascinating and informative exploration of the complexities of fascist rhetoric spreading covertly into other ideological groups across the world, Alexander Reid Ross’ Against the Fascist Creep is an important resource. Ross, a faculty member at Portland State University, writes a complex, exhaustive account of the syncretistic and contradictory tendencies of fascism that allow it to infiltrate the “mainstream and radical subcultures” alike, stringently sourced and cited.
From “third positionism” (i.e, “beyond” socialism and capitalism but really an attempt to meld racist ethnonationalism to economically leftist ideas) to “National Bolshevism,” Ross delves deeply into the spaces where fascism “creeps” into other movements historically. Whether appealing to ideas of environmentalism or appropriating anti-capitalist sentiments, far-right actors draw upon ideas from throughout the political spectrum both to muddy the waters and to delegitimize left-wing beliefs.
During a time when the disaffected from all over the political map can see that contemporary discourse in many countries is broken, when people with entirely different motives reach the same conclusions, things can become difficult to parse, particularly on the fringe. Far more than a simplistic “horseshoe theory” analysis placing the radical right on the same footing as the radical left to prioritize centrism, I think Ross makes a strong argument demonstrating how fascism capitalizes on certain tensions to advance their goals. I think it is important to consider that claiming an “anti-capitalist” stance does not mean that one is not racist at the same time.
It is, all in all, a complicated mess of contracting elements and strange fringe actors, so I don’t think I would recommend Against the Fascist Creep is a good place to begin, but Ross really breaks some interesting ground here for those looking to delve deeper into the messy places where fascism can sneak.
I discuss nine other works defining and opposing fascism and white nationalism in the latest entry of my book review essays, Harris' Tome Corner, Against Fascism Part One: Fascism Rising.
A fascinating and informative exploration of the complexities of fascist rhetoric spreading covertly into other ideological groups across the world, Alexander Reid Ross’ Against the Fascist Creep is an important resource. Ross, a faculty member at Portland State University, writes a complex, exhaustive account of the syncretistic and contradictory tendencies of fascism that allow it to infiltrate the “mainstream and radical subcultures” alike, stringently sourced and cited.
From “third positionism” (i.e, “beyond” socialism and capitalism but really an attempt to meld racist ethnonationalism to economically leftist ideas) to “National Bolshevism,” Ross delves deeply into the spaces where fascism “creeps” into other movements historically. Whether appealing to ideas of environmentalism or appropriating anti-capitalist sentiments, far-right actors draw upon ideas from throughout the political spectrum both to muddy the waters and to delegitimize left-wing beliefs.
During a time when the disaffected from all over the political map can see that contemporary discourse in many countries is broken, when people with entirely different motives reach the same conclusions, things can become difficult to parse, particularly on the fringe. Far more than a simplistic “horseshoe theory” analysis placing the radical right on the same footing as the radical left to prioritize centrism, I think Ross makes a strong argument demonstrating how fascism capitalizes on certain tensions to advance their goals. I think it is important to consider that claiming an “anti-capitalist” stance does not mean that one is not racist at the same time.
It is, all in all, a complicated mess of contracting elements and strange fringe actors, so I don’t think I would recommend Against the Fascist Creep is a good place to begin, but Ross really breaks some interesting ground here for those looking to delve deeper into the messy places where fascism can sneak.
I discuss nine other works defining and opposing fascism and white nationalism in the latest entry of my book review essays, Harris' Tome Corner, Against Fascism Part One: Fascism Rising.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews