Farrerons debate: are Spain's neo-Nazis a creation of the system?

Farrerons argues that the system manufactures its own neo-Nancy

The philosopher Jaume Farrerons claims that the system creates its own neo-Nancy in order to feed antifa stereotypes and thereby discredit any nationalist movement. The thesis, laid out in a talk of more than two and a half hours released at the end of the year, has peine the discussion over whether Spain's far right is a creation of the intelligence services or simply a collection of groups with no real influence. The conversation drifted toward monetary control, national debt and China's role as an exporting power.

Is neo-Nancy a creation of the CNI?

Some of the participants argue that Spain's far-right groups are the product of a design by the intelligence services. The argument rests on the figure of the activist who covers his face with a balaclava even to go out for bread: whoever hides his face does not truly believe in what he claims to defend. Others reply that the explanation is simpler and less flattering: these are people who have read Evola and repeat slogans about race and Europe with no connection to real life, the same crop as the nineties and two-thousands, now with social media. The debate remains open, but the recurring point is that these groups count for nothing, either electorally or in the public sphere.

The capitalism that no longer exists

The economic core of the exchange starts from a correction: we do not live under classical capitalism, but in a fiat era with all its associated complexities. The objection is aimed at those who keep using the word capitalism as if it described today's system. The reply is that the term catches on because it sounds like talk about money when it is really talk about a hammer and sickle. The underlying charge is that Marx himself was not up to the monetary mutation of his time, and no one is up to ours.

China, debt and the liberal trick

On China a specific doubt is raised: it is not clear how its model works, but if it stops exporting, the country faces a serious problem. The Chinese system is described as a botched hybrid, with opaque accounts and large financial banks inherited from its socialist era coexisting with a perverted debt system. The criticism extends to liberals who lecture others while their own debt is paid by someone else. The counterargument is that all nations issue bonds, generate money supply through their private sector and allow their central bank to buy whatever assets it pleases, so the analysis gets murky as soon as you go into detail. The dollar, it is recalled, is the hegemonic currency by inertia of the Bretton Woods agreements.

Ageing and immigration as a patch

The final stretch of the exchange tackles demographics. The position defended is that population ageing is not fought by importing people, and that basing a nation's existence on economic potential amounts to reducing it to serving the market. The reply is that the documentary under discussion does in fact end up calling for immigration to be brought in by the boatload to patch up the previous mess, which is described as demented. Here the analysis stalls: whoever holds that certain monetary questions exceed all of us, from Hayek to Keynes, will not accept concluding that something exceeds us and leaving everything up in the air.

---

The discussion closes without settling whether the national core is made up of infiltrated traitors or of people incapable of building anything. Those who demand rebuilding what was destroyed remind us that from zero you get nowhere. Those who point at the usual suspects present no evidence either. The exact point where the analysis stalls is this: nobody has yet proven who really governs.