Proximity: The antidote to fascism

In a now largely forgotten book published in 1989 called Modernity and the Holocaust, Polish-Jewish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman examined the overwhelming evidence for why the Holocaust happened. It required a gang of political adventurers who seized control of the German state, wielding its immense organizational and industrial capacity. But this still leaves the question of how they managed it. In a key section titled Social Proximity and Moral Responsibility, Bauman argues that the decisive factor wasn’t ideology but the creation of psychological and physical distance between Jewish people and the rest of the population.

In 1933, the Nazis called for a boycott of Jewish businesses. It failed because too many non-Jewish Germans personally knew their local Jewish shop owners and felt a moral responsibility not to harm them. The Nazis learned from this and, over the next decade, progressively reduced the proximity between Jews and other Germans. Jewish people were forced to wear identifying badges, then moved into camps, and ultimately, when they were murdered, the separation had become so vast that most people felt no moral responsibility to intervene.

This mechanism of distancing is not merely a historical artifact; it has manifested over the past 75 years in Palestine, and what we observe today in Gaza represents a contemporary extension of how powers enforce separation to facilitate the subjugation of people. The erection of physical barriers such as walls exacerbates this enforced separation, reflecting the diminishment of proximity that Bauman delineates in his analysis. This deliberate estrangement serves not only to isolate but also to diminish the mutual recognition and moral obligations that might otherwise act as a check on oppressive actions. This deliberate distancing has created conditions that enable Israel to commit what is seen as the most violent genocide to occur since the Holocaust.

To prevent fascism, we must do the opposite. A pro-social movement of political adventurers must take control of the state and progressively increase proximity. Proximity—not “economic growth”—is the key determinant of a flourishing civilization. It’s what people truly crave: to connect, to sit down in small groups and talk. We care about “politics” and “self-interest” only to the extent that they foster this connection. Love—mutual care and recognition—is humanity’s foundational need. This truth spans the social sciences and is echoed in the wisdom traditions.

Let me give a few examples. Rogan Hallam’s award-winning research at King’s College London demonstrates that when people sit in small circles to discuss a social issue (with biscuits on the table!) for most of a public meeting, 80% leave feeling empowered. In contrast, only 20% feel empowered after a conventional meeting with a series of speakers and no small group discussion. Research shows most people initially attend campaign meetings not for political reasons but because a friend invited them or they seek human connection. A Harvard study on negotiation found the single biggest predictor of success is whether the other party personally likes you. The early Christian church, one of the most successful movements in history, didn’t convert people through doctrinal persuasion but by fostering friendships.

The role of decentralization in proximity

Proximity as a foundational human need aligns closely with the principles of decentralized and egalitarian governance. To beat fascism, fostering closeness and connection is necessary—but this requires a structural reimagining of how we organize power and decision-making in society.

Fascism thrives on distance: physical, psychological, and moral. By centralizing power in the hands of a few, it becomes easier to implement policies that alienate and dehumanize groups of people. To prevent this, we must decentralize control, bringing decision-making closer to where people live and interact. Decentralization allows individuals to directly participate in governing their communities, fostering relationships of trust, mutual care, and accountability.

Integrating egalitarian and decentralized decision-making both horizontally and vertically

To effectively combat the roots of fascism, it is crucial to integrate both horizontal and vertical decentralized decision-making structures. Horizontally, citizen assemblies at the community level enable local engagement and decision-making, reflecting the immediate needs and diversity of each area. These assemblies operate on a platform of participatory democracy, where decision-making power is spread evenly among all participants, fostering a deep sense of ownership and responsibility.

Vertically, representative assemblies function as the connective structure where decentralized nodes—each representing their local citizen assemblies—converge to discuss and make decisions on broader issues that transcend the local scope. This vertical integration ensures that while local communities retain autonomy, there is also a coherent alignment with larger societal goals. Such a structure bridges the gap between local initiatives and overarching policy needs, ensuring that decisions are both locally relevant and beneficial on a wider scale.

This dual approach of organizing decision-making horizontally at the local level and vertically across broader networks minimizes the psychological and physical distances that can lead to dehumanization, as seen in fascist regimes. It promotes a governance system that values mutual respect and accountability, crucial for a society committed to preventing the rise of authoritarianism.

Egalitarian governance and the moral foundation of proximity

Egalitarian principles are essential to cultivating proximity because they counteract the hierarchies and inequalities that create divisions. When everyone has an equal voice in decision-making, it strengthens bonds of solidarity and reduces the likelihood of “othering” individuals or groups. Egalitarian governance fosters inclusivity and shared leadership, embedding proximity into the fabric of society.

Consider Bauman’s observation that proximity enables moral responsibility. Decentralized, egalitarian systems amplify this effect by making it impossible for individuals to become anonymous cogs in a distant system. Instead, people engage face-to-face, forming relationships that humanize rather than alienate.

Building a civilization of proximity

To beat fascism, we need more than political adventurers reclaiming the state; we need a societal transformation that prioritizes proximity, connection, and shared governance. This transformation involves reshaping institutions to enable small, self-governing communities where people interact directly, deliberate collectively, and take mutual responsibility for their actions.

Proximity is not merely a defensive strategy against fascism—it is a blueprint for a flourishing civilization. By decentralizing power and embedding egalitarian principles into our political and social structures, we can create a society rooted in care, trust, and love. This approach challenges the alienation and fragmentation of modernity, offering a vision of governance that is as humane as it is resilient. It is a path forward that not only beats fascism but also lays the foundation for a world where humanity can thrive.

See here sustainability performance of companies like Longevity Partners and Climate Dividends

illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.