Who will fight for Anti-Fascist Economics? The Role of Transformative Cells in the Face of a Regressive State
by Ulrich Brand
15.10.2026
Progressive proposals for improving the lives of the many often leave the question of how to transform power structures unaddressed. Similarly, recent proposals for an anti-fascist economics tend to portray the state as a benign actor driving progressive transformations. Challenging this view, Ulrich Brand argues that the state should instead be understood as a condensation of capitalist power relations. Based on this understanding, he proposes building power within and beyond the state through “transformative cells” – formal and informal networks within organizations that share the goal of advancing social-ecological transformations, be it in trade unions, schools, workplaces, government agencies, or other organizations. According to Brand, we must not underestimate the many ways in which transformative cells can strategically use their room for maneuver to shift power relations over the medium and long term.
Progressive political forces have good reason to view the future with little optimism given the rise in geopolitical tensions and armed conflicts, the enormous increase in power wielded by the super-rich, and the escalating ecological crisis. Nevertheless, many debates are underway and proposals are being put forward on how to strengthen emancipatory causes and, in turn, shift the balance of power.
There is thus no shortage of proposals and initiatives aimed at improving the lives of the many. Yet what is currently lacking is the political power to implement a progressive socio-ecological agenda. This raises several questions: How can the prevailing power and wealth structures be transformed? In what ways can concrete alternatives be developed on a small scale, as well as at a societal and even international level? And how can existing approaches be strengthened?
Weber’s Anti-Fascist Economics and the Problem of Power
This is where the currently important discussions around “anti-fascist economics” – shaped by Isabella Weber – come into play. Through measures such as combating inflation, imposing a tax on excess profits, implementing price controls, and expanding public goods, the aim is to curb powerful interests and improve the lives of the many. Sabine Nuss and Michael Heinrich, however, criticize these left-Keynesian proposals for not sufficiently distinguishing themselves from the bourgeois narrative of harmonious national communities of production and shared interests, united against competitors such as China [1]. Accordingly, the authors warn of the dangers of a politically progressive economic nationalism.
In my view, the proposals for an anti-fascist economics seem somewhat traditionalist; for example, they fail to recognize the significance of the escalating climate crisis. On the other hand, the state’s role as a regulator and protagonist of antifascist economics strikes me as portrayed in too positive a light. The idea of “the good state versus the problematic market” rests on a strong assumption. It is oversimplified, because the state not only drives the radicalization and brutalization of capitalism but also promotes reactionary – and even fascist – policies, as in the field of migration policy. The extent to which Weber addresses these arguments remains to be seen in her forthcoming book.
To avoid any misunderstanding, the state – or rather, the various state apparatuses at the international, supranational, national, regional, and local levels – possesses specific regulatory powers. Despite the current unfavorable balance of power, the state could potentially counter (fossil) capital through its financial and administrative resources, through legislation, and the recognition and support of progressive actors. Shifts in the balance of power and in constellations of interests in favor of progressive social and ecological causes could be advanced and consolidated through state institutions.
But “the state” does not do these things as an autonomously acting agent that solves problems or acts in the interest of the common good, such as good living conditions for all. Rather, the state and its policies are themselves an expression of social struggles and capitalist, imperial, patriarchal, and racialized structures. And the actors engaged in these struggles have highly unequal resources at their disposal. The owners of vast fortunes and the top management of corporations decide on investments – and thus on jobs; they influence public opinion, organize through their associations, and produce knowledge through their think tanks.
The State as the Condensation of Capitalist Power Relations
Fifty years ago, in his groundbreaking work State, Power, Socialism, the Marxist political theorist Nicos Poulantzas developed the argument that the “general function of the state” consists in securing the conditions for capitalist reproduction [2]. It is a highly conflict-ridden process, the outcome of which is by no means guaranteed. Thus, the power of (fossil) capital can be challenged, but not simply through state policies. It requires a much broader process of social mobilization and change, which might then lead to shifting state policies.
According to Poulantzas, one reason for this is that the ruling classes and class factions also wield power through certain state apparatuses – or, rather, that their power “condenses” within them. Some members of the current federal government in Germany are a direct and brazen expression of how fossil capital is able to place its own people at the helm of key state apparatuses, as can currently be observed in the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. Conversely, according to Poulantzas, the ruled classes and their representatives – such as the trade unions – cannot count on similarly powerful state apparatuses. Even a Ministry of Social Affairs, while more open to the interests of the governed, remains closely tied to capitalist interests and logics.
Going beyond Poulantzas: The state, in its very structure, is a fossil-capitalist state – whether in its historically liberal “face” in the 19th and early 20th century, later in the form of a welfare state in both the West and the East, or, since the 1980s, in its neoliberal and, increasingly today, geo-economic orientation. The state is therefore structurally linked to the fossil-capitalist growth economy [3], from which it derives its resources and, not least, its legitimacy. This affects how progressive social and environmental concerns can be articulated within state apparatuses [4].
However, the Greek-French intellectual also pointed to “centers of opposition” within state apparatuses. These do indeed exist in many cases where individuals or groups within these apparatuses resist directives “from above” or “from outside” because, in their view, they are heading in the wrong direction: namely, toward promoting fossil fuels, slowing down the energy transition, pursuing anti-social or anti-immigration policies, or deepening inequalities between classes or genders.
Transformative Cells: Building Power Within and Beyond the State
Building on the previous reflections on the state and its capacity for governance, I want to outline a proposal for strengthening the capacity of progressive forces to act strategically. This is because conflicts over transformation play out not only within the state or at the societal level, but also within organizations. In our new book, Capitalism at the Limit: A Political Ecology of a World in Crisis, Markus Wissen and I refer to those groups and networks that seek to advance more ambitious social and ecological transformations as “transformative cells” [5], although this term is still tentative.
The underlying assumption is that the purposes and goals of various organizations – not only state apparatuses – are not set in stone but are contested. This means that most organizations are heterogeneous and contradictory. Many already have democratic internal structures and opportunities for participation, which can serve as entry points for progressive causes. This opens up room for maneuver within organizations that can be leveraged through smart strategies and tactics. Not all areas of an organization are always fully controllable “from above.” Individuals, groups, networks, or even departments possess knowledge, which can potentially be used to formulate and advance their own agendas. This offers opportunities to advance progressive social and environmental causes in workplaces, trade unions, government agencies, the media, schools, universities, associations, and other organizations.
“Transformative cells” is not a fixed term, but rather a designation for very diverse groups – both formal and informal networks within organizations – that specifically aim to strengthen the organization’s socio-ecological orientation. The term is intended to help committed actors become more self-aware and act with greater self-confidence. Transformative cells’ individual and collective capacity for action depends on a variety of factors, including their own knowledge and experience, networks within and outside the organization, motivation, as well as financial, time, and institutional resources. And certainly, it also requires some courage and the cultivation of a certain kind of rebellious subjectivity, both collective and individual, within the organization.
Actors within transformative cells are connected by shared worldviews and a common understanding of their specific situation. In addition to trust, the ability to manage internal and external conflicts, and strategic and tactical acumen, a certain degree of internal cohesion is also essential. Openness and a willingness to learn are important, as is the ability not to be discouraged by setbacks – for example, when the response to the crisis of Germany’s automotive industry is a shift to military production rather than the production of sustainable public transportation. Good connections beyond the organization – that is, to progressive actors in other organizations – are also important to prevent being “swallowed up” by organizational rationalities, hierarchies, and priorities.
The specific goals and strategies for driving fundamental societal and ecological transformation are diverse and exploring them is a worthwhile endeavour. They include influencing organizational strategies and their implementation; fighting to secure a certain degree of autonomy, decision-making authority, and responsibility for the transformative unit (for example, in hiring or resource allocation); providing specific training for employees; democratizing the organization; and making fundamental and concrete alternatives imaginable. In this way, for example, those segments of the chemical industry that prioritize resource-efficient and environmentally friendly production could be strengthened, while curbing the expansion of unsustainable chemical practices.
Within organizations, transformative cells also have the potential to divide the opposition, at least partially delegitimize their agenda, and act as a “spanner in the works” for misguided projects. Motivation and self-confidence can likely be strengthened by the awareness of being part of a progressive movement. External networking with like-minded individuals, and, where appropriate, with the media certainly plays a role here. More broadly, keeping in mind the long-term goal of shifting societal power dynamics is central. To achieve this, it is important to have a “big-picture perspective” and an understanding of political and economic interconnections, as well as the intended and perhaps unintended consequences of one’s actions. Taking the political and power relations into account – such as austerity policies, the fears they generate, and the simultaneous concentration of wealth – makes it possible to formulate more appropriate strategies that are more likely to gain support.
For the possibilities for progressive action within an organization also depend on broader societal conditions – for example, when a crisis leaves those in power unable to lead, address societal problems, or offer anything to subaltern groups. This can also happen when widely entrenched and accepted discourses and worldviews begin to crumble – such as the notion that the rich deserve their wealth or that economic growth ultimately benefits everyone. This opens up windows of opportunity that transformative cells must recognize, assess, and seize. A sense of social renewal – a widely shared, emotionally resonant experience that one’s own actions “make a difference” – also fosters the capacity for emancipatory action.
Not everything can be planned out in advance by transformative cells; many highly contingent situations arise in the course of the process itself – such as a change in leadership, unforeseen allies, or a higher-level policy shift. This can also happen when strategies to steer the organization toward a more ambitious social and ecological transformation begin to yield initial successes. Conflicts that are successfully resolved can thus become the driving force behind socio-ecological transformation processes.
The concept of “transformative cells” is no magic bullet for progressive, anti-fascist action under conditions marked by regressive dynamics that point in an entirely different socio-political direction. However, it can help foster self-understandings critical of existing power structures and enable actors to pursue the urgently needed structural transformations.
Ulrich Brand works as Professor of Intenational Politics at the University of Vienna
References
Nuss, S. and Heinrich, M. (2024, 27. November) ‘Antifaschistische Wirtschaftspolitik: Weg vom nationalen „Wir“’, nd. Link
Poulantzas, N. (1978) State, Power, Socialism. London: New Left Books.
- Brand, U., Hausknost, D., Brad, A., Eyselein, G., Krams, M., Maneka, D., Pichler, M. and Schneider, E. (2025) ‘Structural limitations of the decarbonization state’, Nature Climate Change, 15(9), pp. 927–934. Link
- For a closer examination, see the research approach to historical-materialist policy analysis in Brand, U., Krams, M., Lenikus, V. and Schneider, E. (2022) ‘Contours of historical-materialist policy analysis’, Critical Policy Studies, 16(3), pp. 279–296. Link
- Brand, U. and Wissen, M. (2025) Capitalism at the Limit: A Political Ecology of a World in Crisis. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 158–163.