Fascism in the Contemporary World

lly.On balance, the Milosevic government in Serbia qualifies for designation as an ultranationalist organization. On balance, however, the Milosevic government does not qualify for designation as a fascist organization.ConclusionThe contemporary governments in Croatia, Hungary, and Serbia are all ultranationalist in character. While the contemporary governments in both Croatia and Hungary are also fascist in character, the contemporary government in Serbia is not fascist. There is a tendency in the western nations to term the people in Croatia, Hungary, and Serbia as xenophobic because of their exclusionary policies. Xenophobia infers a fear of foreign persons. Because an individual hates persons of different races or national origins, however, does not necessarily infer a fear of those persons. Thus, while Croatians, Hungarians, and Serbians may well be largely racist, there are not of necessity xenophobic. To make such an assertion is similar in character to the gay rights propagandists in the United States who claim that all of the bigots who opposed equity for homosexual persons are in fact afraid of homosexuality. Such absurdities degrade justifiable accusations of bigotry, and similar assertions could degrade justifiable charges of racism in the Balkans. ReferencesAttacks by skinheads growing. (1992, 26 March). Facts on File, 52, 216.Auty, P. (1970). Tito: A biography. New York: McGraw﷓Hill Book Company.Avakumovic, I. (1964). History of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, Vol. 1. Aberdeen, Scotland: University of Aberdeen Press.Banac, Ivo. (1993, 25 October). Croatianism. New Republic, 209(17), 20﷓21.Bonin, John P. (1992, December). Privatization and efficient contracts. Journal of Comparative Economics, 16, 716﷓732.Branson, Louise. (1991, 7 October). Brutal rumors: Propaganda fuels ethnic fears. Maclean's, 10, 48.Buchan, John. (1991). A history of the First World War. Moffat, Scotland.Dedijer, V. (19...