It’s no coincidence that the mode of being of the technological showed itself most prominently under capitalism in the modern age of industry. That the objectification of objects resulted in standing reserve, as something to be gathered and categorized and ordered, and subsisting as something that is on hand and is to be used and used up. All this ordering and calculating, of course, on the basis of making products to then be sold for a profit.

Even historical advances in science which led to superior engineering and manufacture of technology were motivated in the first place through capitalist profit. It has never been and will never be about the pure understanding of nature, which makes possible the betterment of life through technological advancement. It’s rather an understanding of nature insofar as it yields profit. Technology here in this case is secondary, as an afterthought, regarding betterment, while also imagined and pursued as something else to market and make profitable.

Standing reserve as the result of the objectification of objects had to come to presence as such in order to be ordered and calculated as something to increase profit. Ordering and calculating are structures of capitalism and the industries it made. Objectification of objects under capitalism is commodification, productification: producing and production of commodities. The objectification of objects as standing reserve and commodification / productification results in ordering and calculating and producing and production of commodities; these go together. What is being ordered and calculated, standing reserve, becomes what is commodified and produced for profit so that it can then be ordered in a sale after having its value calculated.

The earth shows itself as something which is to be given up, yielding resources that are to be exploited, primarily for profit and secondarily for subsistence, sustenance, and advancement. The earth shows itself as a resource which yields ore or oil or fossil fuels, but not in any way that freely betters people and communities; no, these resources are stolen from us—violently pursued and taken up by the rich who are owners of corporations with capital and vital resources. They don’t directly take up the manual labor themselves. They “buy” the labor of others, others who have also had the free enrichment of the earth stolen from them. And so then we enter into the vicious cycle wherein we have to sell our time and labor in order to secure our living and dwelling upon the earth—a living and dwelling that is otherwise freely secured due to the free and arguably abundant richness of the earth.

Electromagnetism is a fundamental force of nature that is freely available. The flowing of valence electrons we call electric current, or electricity. Electricity is a necessary mechanism for daily life for every single person on this planet. It provides us with light and the power necessary to keep warm or cool and cook food, as well as provide power for buildings and dwellings, medical devices, and traffic lights, which keep the streets safe and functional. Electromagnetism is also responsible for chemistry and molecular interactions necessary for life. And yet, this freely available natural force and resource has been violently seized up by power companies and corporations in order to create an industry which generates profit. A fundamental force of nature necessary for life has been stolen from us.

We cannot separate the essence of technology as a disclosure of nature as standing reserve from the essence of capitalism as commodification and productification. They fundamentally go together. Standing reserve stands there as reserve in order to become a commodified product to be sold for profit—on the basis of exploitation. A twofold exploitation: exploitation of nature and exploitation of labor (and time). Heidegger presumably knew this, and knew it better than most of us; for his thinking was clear and rich. So many times this great thinker came so close to linking these two together as the great problem of our time; that nature is no longer disclosed as that which shelters and nourishes, but as that which must be challenged in order to yield standing reserve in order to secure profit.

It makes one angry and hostile to see the farsightedness and unequivocal clarity of Heidegger’s thinking for him to slink back and remain in the stubbornness and mindlessness of ideology, and one as unequivocally morally corrupt and unforgivable as National Socialism.

The pre-givenness of the political is given in the pre-givenness of the worlding of the world. Technology reveals nature as something to be challenged and exploited in order to be ordered and calculated and kept on hand as standing reserve in order to then be something to sustain industry and secure profit. This at the outset, the pre-givenness of the political; for this worlding is already a political one which is based on capitalism and, with that, already is held in a contexture that points to class and social hierarchies—which point back to and reinforce racial and global capitalism. Conservatism seeks to uphold and protect this status quo. So too does fascism, only it seeks a more radical and violent implementation of it, and it sees conservatism as a weak, not fully committed, and failed project which is supposed to conserve this status quo.

It’s necessary to unfold both conservatism and fascism in their essence and to show their necessary siblinghood, that they’re in the first place siblings, sisters, belonging to the same origin, same mother, which is authoritarianism. Likewise, it’s necessary to show the familyhood of liberalism and libertarianism which are related to conservatism.

First, the world worlds as political in its pre-givenness; second, the formation of political beliefs and political ideologies.

Metaphysics must not abandon the political.

The Siblinghood of Conservatism and Fascism

It isn’t the case that conservatism and fascism are fundamentally different, that fascism somehow makes a break with conservatism and is more radical and extreme. No, they are siblings, through which a convergence and continuum of authoritarianism flows. They are sisters which share a common origin, and that is the preservation and upholding of social hierarchies. It’s just that fascism is more explicit about it and perhaps more radical in its implementation of its ideological goals, which end in systematic genocide of its opposition and those it seeks to eradicate from society, always marginalized and oppressed communities, and views them antisemitically, as an animating force.

But, of course, conservatism can be just as ruthless and genocidal as its sister, if we consider its historical violence and murder of specifically Black people and Black revolutionary movements, such as the Panthers and MOVE. Systemically racist and violent institutions such as the police, a wholly conservative enterprise, are a fascist apparatus of the State. The police in the US were originally formed to capture escaped slaves. The US military, for example, is a fascist arm of the State which exploits the resources of other nations and States for profit under imperialism and colonialism, and also profits from its wars. Not to mention, on the comparison of conservatism and fascism, that Nazi Germany was inspired by the US’ playbook.

Consider the difference between a conservative and a cryptofascist. A cryptofascist is a fascist but quieter. The cryptofascist is allowed to be given cover under the concealment of conservatism. For the cryptofascist already fundamentally agrees with the essence of conservatism, that social hierarchies ought to be preserved and maintained—conserved.

It’s true that the cryptofascist may have disagreements about how certain things should be carried out and to what extent or even to what end, and may also have critiques of conservative implementations of its ideology, such as Richard Spencer’s complaints about conservatives selling each other out by giving in to migration and immigration through legal channels, but the cryptofascist is fundamentally in agreement with conservatism. The cryptofascist wants the immediate eradication of all LGBT+ people but isn’t allowed to say that out loud explicitly, and so will slink back behind the veil of conservatism and will couch anti-LGBT+ sentiment in emotional arguments about the corruption of girls and youth by framing LGBT+ people as “groomers” who are trying to sexually prey on children and teenagers.

Which, by the way, these arguments do become prominently spread around and they do instill anti-LGBT+ sentiment which bottoms out in outright dehumanization. Conservative media “personalities” such as Steven Crowder and the like make an awful racket about “grooming,” and the cryptofascist is made to feel right at home. However, there is no real difference between a conservative and a cryptofascist. Even Steven Crowder has engaged in antisemitism, and his audience is made up of, in part, unabashed Sieg Heiling Nazis.

The difference between conservatism and fascism is that fascism seeks a more radical implementation of the status quo and the systematic genocide of its political enemies, such as Jewish people, Black people, Brown people, Indigenous people, people of color, LGBT+ people, and people who are marginalized and oppressed under white supremacy and global racial capitalism. Which, to be sure, as we said, conservatism can be just as violent and genocidal, reflecting on its violent history in regard to slavery, Indigenous people, and Black radical and revolutionary movements—and the ongoing genocide in the streets and neighborhoods where the police indiscriminately kill Black people. They are two sides of the same coin, conservatism and fascism, being siblings, sisters, sharing a common origin, a mother, that is a continuing flow of authoritarianism.