Counterrevolution: The Global Rise of the Far Right

by Walden F. Bello

The far right is on the rise. The rhetoric of anger and resentment is emanating from personalities like Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Rodrigo Duterte and Viktor Orban and is captivating and mobilizing large numbers of people. In an increasing number of countries, the extreme right has already captured the government or is on the threshold of power.
While this swift turn of events has shocked or surprised many in the North, the extreme right’s seizure of power is not an uncommon event in the South. In Counterrevolution, Walden Bello deconstructs the challenge from the far right by deploying what he calls the dialectic of revolution and counterrevolution and harnesses the methods of comparative history and comparative sociology. Using case studies from Italy in the 1920s, Indonesia in the 1960s, Chile in the 1970s and contemporary Thailand, India and the Philippines, Bello lays bare the origins, dynamics and consequences of counterrevolutionary movements. Reflections on the rise of the right in the United States, Europe and Brazil round out this remarkable and timely study by one of the premier intellectuals of the South.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction

196 pages, Paperback

Published July 2, 2019

Reviews

[Karlo Mikhail · Rating 2 out of 5]

Situating the rise of fascism as a political current across the Global South as a symptom of crisis of the world capitalist system is a step in the right direction for the book. But this is stymied by the privileging of reformist and parliamentarist responses that have proven in all cases cited in the same book to be utterly incapable of confronting the fascist challenge.

In particular on the chapter on the Philippines, I find questionable the book's (1) imputing originality on run-of-the-mill fascists like Duterte thereby overestimating the enemy and (2) dismissing Maoist-inspired peasant organizing in the Philippines because it does not conform to normative liberal democratic or movementist approaches to the peasant question.

[Miguel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was a bit hesitant to start on this book, since it’s built around case studies of a bunch of states plunging into the far right. I was thinking that it might get a bit redundant and boring, as the essential themes would be the same, just with different examples.

I was wrong. Bello presents some of the most nuanced analysis I have encountered of the different elements that contribute to democratic backsliding in multiple states. I love how honest he is that oftentimes class conflicts can play second fiddle to more relevant conflicts such as religion, security fears, etc. I think this runs in contrast to many of the common ways the left portrays the rise of the right wing as simply the doing of elites targeting the maginalized.

Another thing I really loved was that he goes against the grain by being honest about how much of an effect US involvement has had on some of the cases, specifically Indonesia and Chile. He admits that he understands why the global left would love to frame these cases of the utter destruction of left wing politics in these countries as being owed mostly to CIA intervention. However, the facts reveal that homegrown disenfranchisement and targeted political manoeuvring were the main drivers of these counterrevolutionary projects. Not sure if I understood this added point entirely, but in a way, always pointing to the US and the West as being the primary actors when bad things happen in post-colonial countries is a sign of our own neo-colonial mindsets. Why do we think that political upheavals in our own countries require the injection of US imperialism to occur? It’s not only dishonest at times, but also counterintuitive to more astutely assessing the legitimate disaffection present in these countries.

Lastly, because there are multiple case studies, and I read all of them in the span of a few days, I would often mix some details up. However, Bello often refers back to previous case studies to compare and contrast everything. I find that this really helps.

PS. I also enjoyed reading some of his hot tales like that Ferdinand Marcos Sr. was an authoritarian and a shithead, but he technically wasn’t a fascist.

[Joma Geneciran · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very accessible look at 6 case studies of counter revolutions; a useful term to think about neoliberalism as a political project. The cases were Italy, Indonesia, Chile, Thailand, India, and the Philippines.

Two lessons from Bello’s monograph that I had not significantly considered: first, was the
centrality of the middle class for the reactionary political project. It appears that the middle class
is the social actor for the right that the peasantry is for the left. This insight demonstrates Lenin’s
dictum that “a social system emerges only if it has the financial backing of a definite class (on cooperation)”.

While accessible, Bello and the editors were rather sloppy. It could have used more footnotes and more engagement. Some of the chapters relied on one or two historians to do a lot of heavy lifting. I found the Philippines chapter to be the most wanting (but also, the one I'm most knowledgable about which suggests the other chapters are likely wanting as well). He focuses on Duterte and not the longer history of counterrevolution in the Philippines from (at least Marcos to Marcos, 1965 to 2023) or at least 1972-1981 (martial law).

One of the key arguments in the Philippines chapter is that Duterte is a 'fascist original'; unique because rather than "leading a counterrevolution against a direct threat from below,' according to Bello, Duterte was leading "one against a liberal democratic regime." (103, 118). This erases the ND Movement and the ongoing 53-year long protracted people's war in the countryside with 110 guerrilla fronts in 800 municipalities in 74 out of 81 provinces. It erases the analysis from the AFP itself (the reactionary Armed Forces of the Philippines) that names the CPP-NPA as "the primary national security challenge." Bello notes the EDSA revolution which he positions as spontaneous and ignores the unity and centrality of the ND Movement in organizing the people in urban areas in a united front of progressive parties, trade unions, and other mass organizations from the first Quarter storm of 1970s to the edSA revolution that ousted Marcos.

It's worth reading; but could have been much better.

[Jeffrey Bumiller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thorough and very important, but a little dry.

[Jan Kashmir · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although not exhaustive, Bello's discourse about counterrevolution (which according to him may be 1.) the classic class-based conflict, w/c stems from a revolution-counterrevolution dialectic, and 2.) a fundamentalist movement in response to a social order which failed to live up to its promises like liberal democracy, or one which seeks to restore an imagined golden era, the status quo ante) and the global rise of the far right provides some interesting insights about the underlying patterns in this project in the experiences of the countries, mostly from the Global south, which he chose to include in this collection of essays. I find it interesting that Bello, citing other scholars, gave a clear distinction of the different bases which make up a counterrevolutionary coalition or movement namely, the conservatives, reactionaries, and the counterrevolutionaries (under which category, accdg to Bello, fascists fall). Bello also clearly explains their respective roles, whether active or passive, in the counterrevolutionary project. For instance, Bello notes that the middle class, who would usually belong to the conservative section, initially assumes a passive role, but that given its volatility as a class (and depending on whose side of the spectrum it would feel its interests will be protected) may either form an active role in the counterrevolution such as in Thailand, or may also take part in ousting a dictator like Marcos Sr in the Philippines (a class which ironically also helped catapult Duterte, whom Bello refers to as a 'fascist original,' to power in 2016)

I do not agree with some of Bello's thesis statements and recommendations for countering counterrevolution because of his silence (or lack of discussion about) on the role of armed struggle in revolution, but the book is generally comprehensive and written in understandable, conversational language. Will be reading Parenti's Blackshirts and Red next.

PS: Jakarta Method is also a nice read if you wish to know more about the Indonesian experience (and if you wish to challenge Bello's assertion that simply pinning the blame on foreign conspiracy, mainly US's intervention in Indonesia---in its global project to maintain its hegemony---is lazy, reductionist, and dismissive of the role of local actors led by Suharto & the military, and a fascist mass organization in the country in the bloody massacre, (matanza masiva; indiscriminate killings), of millions of members and alleged members or sympathizers of the PKI).

[Pep · Rating 3 out of 5]

The revolution-counterrevolution dynamic is an interesting and useful frame for the rise of far-right movements at the expense of left-wing ones, as it's a nice and easy-to-understand story of the factors that helped their rise to power. And the case studies are all relevant and intriguing explorations of the ever-shifting coalitions of political parties in countries where the far-right was successful. Enjoyed the comparisons between the different countries, as some of the subtle differences (e.g. selective v. broad violence, defeating insurgencies v established orders) helped provide nuance to my basic understanding of the politics in these places.

But while the theory is plausible, I wished there were more of a justification of why this was the most relevant way to analyze these issues. What were the other potential factors that led to the rise of these movements, and why were these not as important? There is a lot of assuming that the reader agrees with some basic premises about the nature of these movements, which I guess makes sense given the target demographic of this work, but kind of leaves me unsatisfied and wishing for a stronger defense of these premises.

And lastly, though this is more of a me thing, the writing was at times quite dry and academic (which starts to turn my brain off), and fell into discussing oft-repeated left-wing talking points, which I am very steeped in anyway, making them less novel and interesting.

[Lawrence Cusipag · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The times, in short, call for a progressive politics that goes beyond calling for a return to the old discredited elite democracy, where equality was purely formal, and mobilizes the citizenry behind a national popular program that has as its centerpiece the achievement of genuine economic and social equality, whether one calls this socialism or post-capitalism"

[Rufus · Rating 4 out of 5]

pretty good