[ceilingcorner]

I was just replying to the last line of the comment:

But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge—that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

That, to me, is just an unacceptable statement that is clearly wrong. Plenty of modern pagans, for example, draw some ideas from Christian writers like Augustine and combine them with symbols like Stonehenge. That certainly doesn’t make them fascists.

[kergonath]

It is a symptom, as in "fascism makes this type of combination of ideas more likely", not as "all syncretism is fascism".

A=>B, not A<=>B, if you will. B can result form many other things.

[ceilingcorner]

By that measure, virtually everything is a symptom of something else. Sorry, I fail to see how that is a useful statement.

And again, I have a deep problem with the idea that only “pure” religious beliefs are somehow less likely to lead to fascism.

[kergonath]

The medical analogy is useful. Tons of disease cause headache, or joint pain, or fever, or rashes, or stomach pain, or runny nose, or cough.

Some combinations of symptoms help diagnosing a specific disease. It's not the parts taken in isolation, it's the sum of it, and how it evolves over time. Some symptoms that worsen suddenly should be taken seriously.

> And again, I have a deep problem with the idea that only “pure” religious beliefs are somehow less likely to lead to fascism.

And you should be deeply suspicious of anything linking religious purity with anything. But he does not say that it leads to fascism, just that fascism feeds on it. Also, I think in this specific instance he lets his own religion cloud his argument, and that he should have said "ideologies" instead of religious beliefs. People do not need religion to be terrible to other people.

[nebolo]

No it doesn't make them fascist, and that's not what Eco is saying. Combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge is syncretism, which is a symptom of Ur Fascism (as discussed) above. Symptom does not equal implication.