By Jim Hayes

Gina Rineheart’s post-election declaration that the Liberal Party should stick with Donald Trump-like policies says it quite a lot. More so, when you consider that when she said this, she cited Italy and Hungary as the exemplars.

What distinguished these two countries then? Both saw the return of what is in many ways the fascism of the 190’s to the 1940’s in their own countries. In Italy it was the era of Mussolini. In Hungary, it was the Arrow Cross Party, modelled along the lines of the Ferenc Szalasi led German Nazi Parry. Szalasi and his regime were imposed on Hungary n the wake of the German invasion.

The relevance for today is that the present heads of state of Italy and Hungary are the inheritors of the old fascism and have shaped it to meet the conditions of today. Thay Gina Rinhart should admire this is not so strange. She has long shared this view of the world. What is far more telling is that she has clout inside the Liberal Party and is given credibility by the Murdoch media.

The billions of dollars to her name could be passed off as the reason. This is not a sufficient explanation. The best explanation lies in the present political climate and the essence of what is fascism. Economic and social decline has led to great political instability in societies largely in the control of a corporate elite. This sets the precondition for the rise of an ideology that is fixed on imposing discipline on society to retore and safeguard income going to the fabulously wealthy more than anything else. This core, what Mussolini called corporatism, is dressed in the clothing of the politics of hate and xenophobia.

I fact, the first step in the imposition of this regime was the introduction of what became known as neoliberal economics, which is about transferring income upwards and holding down wages, subsidising private corporate profit through the privatisation of the public sector. Neoliberalism included a major expansion of the handing over of tax revenues to the same corporations in the form of grants and subsidies.

Neoliberalism was introduced into Australia under the Hawke administration in the form of the misnamed Prices and incomes accords. Some people still refuse to admit this and cling to the myth of Hawke as a champion working class leader.

The corporatism part of these accords was the establishment of a tripartite regime, which Mussolini would have recognised, except that it was far less violent. But this mechanism was enough to police unions and make them ineffective. And it met the goal of a major transfer of income away from wages to dividend payouts on corporate shares.

Neoliberalism was itself a product of the decline of western capitalism and dissatisfaction of the people, which includes Australia, and a global regime in the hands of Wall Street. Instead of resolving this, neoliberalism helped to accelerate the decline, because it damaged the economy it was supposed to serve. In other words, the source of profit was undermined, through rising capitalisation, growing monopoly, and the destruction of industries, jobs, and the capacity of consumers.

This brings us back to Gina Rineheart. People like her understand what is going on, and they have reached a point where they are no longer satisfied with the neoliberal regime. They want it pushed to a new higher-level neoliberalism. They recognise that the package must come with a stepped-up mechanism to impose on an unwilling population. Hence the promotion of what is really fascism. The Liberal Party is the major mechanism to bring this about.

The same mindset has entered and expanded within the Liberal and National parties and is rife in One Nation and other similar small outfits. It even exists within the Labor Party. Murdoch and his stable do what they can to push it along. This is why Rinehart has such a high profile.

What she stands for is a clear threat to Australia. A threat that should be taken seriously, exposed, and fought against