İdeolojiden Algoritmalara, Faşizmin Yeni Yüzü: Dijital Faşizm

Öz

Klasik faşizm, Benito Mussolini tarafından tanımlanan, otoriterlik ve aşırı milliyetçilik unsurlarını barındıran bir ideoloji olarak literatürde yer almaktadır. Dijital faşizm ise, bu ideolojinin sosyal medya ve büyük veri gibi dijital platformlar aracılığıyla yeniden üretilmesi ve güçlendirilmesi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Çalışma, klasik faşizmin dijital çağda nasıl evrildiğini ve teknolojik gelişmelerin otoriter ideolojileri nasıl yeniden şekillendirdiğini incelemektedir. Araştırma, nitel yöntem yaklaşımı benimseyerek kapsamlı bir literatür taraması ve vaka analizleri üzerinden gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada, Facebook, X ve Aadhaar Biyometrik Kimlik Sistemi gibi algoritmik uygulamalar incelenmiş, bu sistemlerin otoriter ideolojilerin yayılımına ve bireylerin gözetimine nasıl katkı sağladığı araştırılmıştır. Dijital faşizmin merkezi bir lider veya örgütsel yapıya ihtiyaç duymaksızın sosyal medya üzerinden yayılabileceği ve bu süreçte algoritmaların manipülatif gücünün toplumsal kutuplaşmayı derinleştirdiği düşüncesi savunulmaktadır. Çalışmada, sosyal medyanın manipülatif kullanımının yanı sıra büyük veri ve yapay zekâ teknolojilerinin etik dışı kullanımı ile bireylerin sürekli gözetim altında tutulduğu, bu gözetimin otoriter rejimler ve büyük şirketlerin güçlenmesine katkı sağladığı görüşü üzerinde durulmaktadır. Bu durum, faşizmin otoriter ve baskıcı yönüne atıfta bulunarak “dijital faşizm” kavramı çerçevesinde ele alınmaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında, dijital faşizmin geleneksel faşizmle ideolojik bağları incelenmiş ve dijital çağda bireylerin özgürlüklerinin nasıl baskı altına alındığı tartışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Faşizm
• Dijital Faşizm
• Sosyal Medya
• Yapay Zekâ

From Ideology to Algorithms, The New Face of Fascism: Digital Fascism

Abstract

Classical fascism, as defined by Benito Mussolini, is widely recognized for its authoritarianism and extreme nationalism. By contrast, digital fascism refers to the reproduction and reinforcement of these ideologies through digital platforms, including social media and big data technologies. This study examines the evolution of classical fascism in the digital age, emphasizing how technological advancements have reshaped authoritarian ideologies. Utilizing a qualitative methodology, the research integrates an extensive literature review with detailed case analyses. Platforms such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and the Aadhaar biometric identification system, alongside their algorithmic applications, are analyzed to assess their roles in disseminating authoritarian ideologies and enabling individual surveillance. The study contends that digital fascism operates without requiring a central leader or organizational structure, instead exploiting social media algorithms to exacerbate social polarization. Furthermore, the manipulative use of social media and the unethical application of big data and artificial intelligence technologies are identified as key mechanisms for sustaining constant surveillance. This dynamic not only consolidates the authority of authoritarian regimes but also amplifies the power of large corporations. Within this framework, digital fascism is conceptualized as an extension of the authoritarian and oppressive dimensions of classical fascism into the digital domain. The research underscores the ideological continuity between classical and digital fascism, highlighting the growing suppression of individual freedoms in the digital era.

Keywords

• Fascism
• Digital Fascism
• Social Media
• Artificial Intelligence

References

1. Acker, A. (2018, Kasım 7). How Fascism Went Digital: A Historian’s Perspec­tive on Bolsonaro’s Victory in Brazil. Geschichte der Gegenwart. https://geschichtedergegenwart.ch/how-fascism-went-digital-a-historians-perspective-on-bolsonaros-victory-in-brazil/
2. Adamson, W. L. (1983). Hegemony and Revolution: A Study of Antonio Gramsci’s Political and Cultural Theory. University of California Press.
3. Aharony, M. (2010). Hannah Arendt and the Idea of Total Domination. Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 24(2), 193- 224. https://doi.org/10.1093/hgs/dcq023
4. Akarcalı, S. (2003). 2. Dünya Savaşında İletişim ve Propaganda. İmaj Yayınevi.
5. Arendt, H. (1973). The Origins of Totalitarianism (First Edition). Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
6. Artemiw, D. (2014). Towards a Definition of Fascism. HPS: The Journal of History and Political Science. https://doi.org/10.25071/2291-3637.39585
7. Balkin, J. M. (2004). Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society. New York University Law Review, 79(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.470842
8. Banaji, S. (2018). Vigilante Publics: Orientalism, Modernity and Hindutva Fascism in India. Javnost - The Public, 25(4), 333-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2018.1463349

9. Baradat, L. P. (2012). Siyasal İdeolojiler Kökenleri ve Etkileri (A. Aydın, Çev.). Siyasal Kitabevi.
10. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139198752
11. Bogerts, L., & Fielitz, M. (2019). “Do You Want Meme War?” Understanding the Visual Memes of the German Far Right. Içinde M. Fielitz & N. Thurston (Ed.), Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right (ss. 137-154). Transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839446706-010
12. Britt, L. (2003). The 14 Characteristics of Fascism. Free Inquiry Magazine. https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.pdf
13. Brooker, P. (2014). Non-Democratic Regimes. Bloomsbury Academic.
14. Brooks, J. (2006). Totalitarianism Revisited. The Review of Politics, 68(2), 318-328. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670506000088
15. Castells, M. (2013). Communication Power. OUP Oxford.
16. Chatterjee, A. (2023). Majoritarianism and digital rights: Understanding Kashmir and the ‘Othering of Other’ in the context of India. Visual Studies, 38(5), 869-879. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2021.1951122
17. Coe, P. (2015). The Social Media Paradox: An Intersection with Freedom of Expression and the Criminal Law. Information & Communications Technology Law, 24(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2015.1004242
18. Coleman, G. (2014). Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy. The Many Faces of Anonymous. Verso.
19. Çakan, V. (2018). Rohingya Müslümanları ve Arakan Soykırımı. Asya Araştırmaları Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(1), Article 1.
20. Çakı, C. (2018). Adolf Hitler’in kült lider inşasında kullanılan propaganda posterlerinin göstergebilimsel analizi. Abant Kültürel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 3(6), Article 6.
21. Dahl, R. A. (1972). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. Yale University Press.
22. D’Amato, D. S. (2016). Mussolini and the Press | Libertarianism.org. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/mussolini-press
23. Daniels, J. (2009). Cyber Racism: White Supremacy Online and the New Attack on Civil Rights. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
24. Davies, P. (2024, Kasım 6). Musk, Trump yanlısı paylaşımlar için X’in algoritmasını mı değiştirdi? euronews. https://tr.euronews.com/2024/11/06/musk-trump-yanlisi-paylasimlar-icin-xin-algoritmasini-degistirdi-arastirma
25. Davis, W. (2024, Kasım 17). A study found that X’s algorithm now loves two things: Republicans and Elon Musk. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/17/24298669/musk-trump-endorsement-x-boosting-republican-posts-july-algorithm-change
26. Eatwell, R. (1996). On defining the ‘Fascist Minimum’: The centrality of ideology. Journal of Political Ideologies, 1(3), 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569319608420743
27. Eco, U. (1995, Haziran 22). Ur-Fascism. The New York Review of Books, 42(11), Article 11. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
28. Faramelli, A., & Piper, I. (2023). Everybody Wants to be a Fascist Online: Psychoanalysis and the Digital Architecture of Fascism. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 24(4). https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.4089
29. Fekete, E. (2018). Europe’s Fault Lines: Racism and the Rise of the Right. Verso.
30. Fielitz, M., & Marcks, H. (2019). Digital Fascism: Challenges for the Open Society in Times of Social Media. Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy University of Hamburg, Germany, 1-25.
31. Finchelstein, F. (2008). On Fascist Ideology. Constellations, 15(3), 320-331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8675.2008.00494.x
32. Fiori, G. (1989). Antonio Gramsci: Bir Devrimcinin Yaşamı (K. Emiroğlu, Çev.; 1. bs). V Yayınları.
33. Friedrich, C. J. (1971). Fascism versus Totalitarianism: Ernst Nolte’s Views Reexamined. Central European History, 4(3), 271-284. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008938900015375
34. Fuchs, C. (2016). Red Scare 2.0: User-Generated Ideology in the Age of Jeremy Corbyn and Social Media. Journal of Language and Politics, 15(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.15.4.01fuc
35. Fuchs, C. (2022). Digital Fascism: Media, Communication and Society (4. bs). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003256090
36. Ganesh, B. (2018). The Ungovernability of Digital Hate Culture. Journal of International Affairs, 71(2), Article 2.
37. Gaufman, E. (2015). World War II 2.0: Digital memory of fascism in Russia in the aftermath of Euromaidan in Ukraine. Journal of Regional Security, 10(1), 17-36. https://doi.org/10.11643/issn.2217-995X151SPG48
38. Gentile, E. (2021). Der Antifaschismus und die Ursprünge des faschistischen Totalitarismus (1923–1926). Totalitarianism and Democracy, 18(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.13109/tode.2021.18.1.33
39. Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (Q. Hoare & G. N. Smith, Ed.; Reprint, 1989 edition). International Publishers Co.
40. Gramsci, A. (1990). Selections from Political Writings, 1910-1920 (Q. Hoare, Ed.). University of Minnesota Press.
41. Gramsci, A. (1998). Komünist Partiye Doğru (C. A. Kanat, Çev.). Belge Yayınları.
42. Gregor, A. (2012). Totalitarianism and Political Religion: An Intellectual History. Stanford University Press https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:141548579
43. Griffin, R. (1993). Faşizmin Doğası (A. Selman, Çev.). İletişim Yayınları.
44. Griffin, R. (1995). Fascism. Oxford University Press.
45. Gupta, A. (2023, Ekim 6). In Manipur, another internet shutdown, a conflict intensified. The Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/apar-gupta-writes-in-manipur-another-internet-shutdown-a-conflict-intensified-8970390/
46. Harrison, K., & Boyd, T. (2003). Understanding Political Ideas and Movements (1.). Manchester Univ. Press.
47. Hassan, R. (2022). Digital exclusion and its impact on journalism in Kashmir. E-Learning and Digital Media, 19(5), 475-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530221104880
48. Helbing, D. (2017). Global Democracy, Global Future & Global Technology. Digital Fascism Rising? The Globalist. https://www.theglobalist.com/fascism-big-data-artificial-intelligence-surveillance-democracy/
49. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Pantheon Books.
50. Hintz, A. (2016). Restricting Digital Sites of Dissent: Commercial Social Media and Free Expression. Critical Discourse Studies, 13(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2016.1141695
51. Hobsbawm, E. J. (2017). Kısa 20. Yüzyıl 1914-1991 Aşırılıklar Çağı (Y. Alogan, Çev.). Everest Yayınları.
52. Holmes, L. (2001). Totalitarianism. İçinde N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (ss. 15788-15791). Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01240-7
53. Iakovou, V. (2009). Totalitarianism as a Non-StateOn Hannah Arendt’s Debt to Franz Neumann. European Journal of Political Theory, 8, 429-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885109337999
54. Imbong, R. A. (2024). Fascism and the Omnipresence of Communication. Kritike, 18(1), 157-183. https://doi.org/10.25138/18.1.a7
55. Iordachı, C. (2015). Karşılaştırmalı Faşizm Çalışmaları (İ. Ilgar, Çev.; 1. bs). İletişim Yayıncılık.
56. Isaak, J., & Hanna, M. J. (2018). User Data Privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and Privacy Protection. Computer, 51(8), 56-59. Computer. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268
57. Jain, S., & Gabor, D. (2020). The Rise of Digital Financialisation: The Case of India. New Political Economy, 25(5), 813-828. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2019.1708879
58. Jarrett, K. (2008). Interactivity is Evil! A critical investigation of Web 2.0. First Monday, 13. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v13i3.2140
59. Kahraman, Ö. F., & Aydın, A. (2021). Çağdaş Siyasal Akımlar (Y. Sayın, Ed.; 1. bs). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
60. Kallis, A. A. (2003). The Fascism Reader. Routledge.
61. Karaca, M. (2018). İtalyan Propagandasinda Kült Lider Olgusu: "Il Duce" Benito Mussolini. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 6(2), 1203-1220. https://doi.org/10.19145/e-gifder.442905
62. Laclau, E. (1979). Faşizm ve İdeoloji—II (M. Mutman, Çev.). Birikim, 48, Article 48.
63. Lanier, J. (2018). Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now. Henry Holt and Company.
64. Linz, J. J. (2003). Fascism as Latecomer: An Ideal Type with Negations. The Fascism Reader (A. A. Kallis, Ed.). Routledge.
65. Lovink, G., & Rossiter, N. (2018). Organization after Social Media. Minor Compositions.
66. Lumley, B. (1977). Gramci’s Writings on the State and Hegemony, 1916-35: A Critical Analysis. The Universty of Birmingham.
67. Macciocchi, M. A. (2000). Faşizmin Analizi (C. Süreya, Çev.; 3. bs). Payel Yayınları.
68. Mann, M. (2004). Fascists. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806568
69. McChesney, R. W. (2000). Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times. The New Press.
70. Mechant, P., & De Marez, L. (2012). Studying Web 2.0 Interactivity: A Research Framework and Two Case Studies. International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies (IJICST), 2(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijicst.2012070101
71. Mozur, P. (2018, Ekim 15). A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar’s Military. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html
72. Pada, R. T. D. (2023). New Forms of Fascism. Philosophia: International Journal of Philosophy, 24(2), 328-340.
73. Paunksnis, Š. (2023). India digitalized: Surveillance, platformization, and digital labour in India. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 24(2), 297-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649373.2023.2182942
74. Paxton, R. O. (2004). The Anatomy of Fascism (1. bs). Alfred A. Knopf.
75. Payne, S. G. (1996). A History of Fascism, 1914–1945 (1. bs). University of Wisconsin Press.
76. Peters, M. A. (2018). The Return of Fascism: Youth, Violence and Nationalism. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2018.1519772
77. Phillips, W. (2018). The Oxygen of Amplification. Better Practices for Reporting on Extremists, Antagonists, and Manipulators. Data & Society; Data & Society Research Institute. https://datasociety.net/library/oxygen-of-amplification
78. Poulantzas, N. (2019). Faşizm ve Diktatörlük (A. İnsel, Çev.; 4. bs). İletişim Yayıncılık.
79. Prasad, R. (2021). Bodies And Data: The Dıgıtal Sovereıgnty Of The Indıan State. AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research. https://doi.org/10.5210/spir.v2021i0.12016
80. Ransome, P. (2011). Antonio Gramsci Yeni Bir Giriş (A. İ. Başgül, Çev.). Dipnot Yayınları.
81. Reichardt, S. (2002). Faschistische Kampfbünde: Gewalt und Gemeinschaft im italienischen Squadrismus und in der deutschen SA. Böhlau Verlag Köln Weimar.
82. Rosenberg, A. (2012). Fascism as a Mass-Movement (1934). Historical Materialism, 20(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1163/156920612x634898
83. Roy, M. N. (1945). The Problem of Freedom. Renaissance Publishers.
84. Sakman, M. (2018). İdeolojik Hegemonya İçerisinde Örgütlenen Siyasal Bir Sistem Olarak Totalitarizm / Totalıtarıanısm As A Polıtıcal System Organızed Wıthın The Ideologıcal Hegemony. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi(55), 117-126.
85. Scheufele, D. A., & Krause, N. M. (2019). Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news. Proceedings of the
86. National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(16), 7662-7669. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805871115
87. Schroeder, R. (2019). Digital Media and the Entrenchment of Right-Wing Populist Agendas. Social Media + Society, 5(4), 2056305119885328. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119885328
88. Selvi, M. (2024, Eylül 13). Big Tech’s Digital Hegemony Over Freedom and Information. TRT World Research Centre. https://researchcentre.trtworld.com/featured/perspectives/big-techs-digital-hegemony-over-freedom-and-information/
89. Silveira, F. L. da, & Amaral, A. J. do. (2023). Bolsonarismo e o fascismo na Era Digital. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Políticos, 127(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.9732/2023.V127.962
90. Spector, H. (2016). Hannah Arendt, education, and the question of totalitarianism. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(1), 89-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.927113
91. Sriramesh, K., & Vercic, D. (2009). A Theoretical Framework for Global Public Relations Research and Practice. İçinde The Global Public Relations Handbook (ss. 3-24). Routledge.
92. Sternhell, Z. (2008). How to Think About Fascism and Its Ideology. Blackwell Publishing, 15(3), Article 3.
93. Strick, S. (2021). Rechte Gefühle-Affekte und Strategien des digitalen Faschismus. Transcript Verlag. https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-8376-5495-0/rechte-gefuehle/
94. Tornberg, A., & Wahlström, M. (2017). Unveiling the radical right online: Exploring framing and identity in an online anti-immigrant discussion group. Sociologisk Forskning, 55(2-3), Article 2-3. https://doi.org/10.37062/sf.55.18193
95. Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest. Yale University Press.
96. Turner, F. (2019). Machine Politics, the Rise of the Internet and a New Age of Authoritarianism. Harper’s Magazine, 1. https://harpers.org/archive/2019/01/machine-politics-facebook-political-polarization/
97. Turner, H. A. (1975). Reappraisals of Fascism. New Viewpoints, States Fascism’s “Goals of Radical and Authoritarian Nationalism”. Littlehampton Book Services Ltd.
98. UN Human Rights Council. (2018). Report of the detailed findings of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar (No. A/HRC/39/CRP.2). [UN],. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1643079
99. Watson, H. S. (1980). Fascism, Right and Left. İçinde S. N. Eisenstadt (Ed.), Political Sociology: A Reader. Rawat Publications.
100. Yilmaz, I., & Saleem, R. M. A. (2022). Https://www.populismstudies.org/hindutva-civilizational-populist-bjps-enforcement-of-digital-authoritarianism-in-india/. European Center for Populism Studies (ECPS). https://doi.org/10.55271/pp0017
101. Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power (1. bs). Profile Books.