Only independent podcasts and so on. They are keeping our democracy and freedom which really is under threat. They are keeping it alive. So please give them any financial help you can.

It's a good investment, not immediately, but in the long term. It's not that you get something for it, but in the spiritual sense, the air in the spiritual sense the air intellectual that you are breathing will be much better.

So please give the money to Novara Media and you will sleep better. F.N. N.

F. N. You know what fascism is.

You know what fascism is. You can point to it easily. It's jackboots and marching and powerful

symbols and death camps. But at the same time, fascism is one of the most slippery of all political categories.

Almost everyone agrees it's necessary to keep alerts to the threats of its return,

and yet some definitions of fascism seem determined to lock it safely

away in the 1930s and 40s.

And working out exactly what the contemporary far right has in common with the Nazis or

Mussolini's regime is hard. Every claim that some person or something is

fascist seems to trigger a series of reasons why things now are fundamentally different.

Every similarity with the period of classical fascism one can point to also highlights

conspicuous differences.

But what if we were to stop thinking about fascism

in terms of these simplistic comparisons with the past?

That's the suggestion of Alberto Toscano,

an associate professor Simon Fraser University in Vancouver.

In his new book Late Fascism, Alberto draws on W.E.B. de Bois to describe fascism as the counter-revolution of property in a way

that allows us to think through fascism's instantiations, not just in its classical

period, but now, and crucially, back into its colonial past.

That formulation allows us to grasp what we might call with the Black Radical tradition

...