[ek_hornbeck]

My point was simply that it's ludicrous to call American liberals, who (at least the white ones) hate their country, their military, and their heritage "Fascists" simply because neither Fascists nor US Liberals support free markets. Can a picture Francisco Franco traveling the world and apologizing for Ferdinand and Isabella or the Inquisition as Bill Clinton apologized for slavery in the US? That's why people on the right who call Clinton a "Fascist" sound like imbeciles - they're just using the word as an empty pejorative (in much the same way as liberals use it, as a matter of fact).

On the other hand, I agree with you that the "Leftism" practiced by third world people (and by racial minorities in the US) has little in common with classical Marxism. You don't hear much these days about class struggle or the proletariat, nor even about Labor Unions until some politician has to pander for a few more votes in the Rust Belt. On the other hand, you hear a lot about "oppressed minorities" and "colonial exploitation," so the US and European Left wind up encouraging the nationalism of third world peoples while rejecting their own.

So perhaps you could say that today's Left prescribes militant ethno-nationalism for the Third World and multiculturalism (along with pacifism) for the First.

[Zionist Conspirator]

And I agree with everything you have said. But I don’t think the article at the head of this thread was a typical Jonah Goldberg-esque accusation that the left is “fascist.” It is a serious look into how the left has changed from its classic form and the role Heideggerian philosophy may have played in that transformation.