The Dangerous Allure of Fascist Government

Photo by colros (License: Creative Commons Attribution)

The word "fascism" has lost almost all currency in modern political or historical discourse. It has become a political curse word, among the handful that both the right and left wing use as a synonym for "oppressive evil" in government. Despite the word's murky and confused history of use, there remains a very real threat, both abroad and at home, of the kind of political movement that originally inspired its use.

I hope to define, in clear terms, what I mean by the word, and how it comes to appeal to well-meaning people.

A Little History

The term "fascism" comes from the Italian "Fascismo," the political doctrine of Benito Mussolini. Published in 1932, his "Doctrine of Fascism" remains a telling window into the term as defined by a true believer:

The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State—a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values—interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.

Mussolini was very explicit in distinguishing his "Italian Fascism" from left-wing, liberal, or socialist movements:

Fascism is therefore opposed to Socialism to which unity within the State (which amalgamates classes into a single economic and ethical reality) is unknown, and which sees in history nothing but the class struggle. Fascism is likewise opposed to trade unionism as a class weapon. But when brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which gave rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State.

Also:

After Socialism, Fascism attacks the whole complex of democratic ideologies and rejects them both in their theoretical premises and in their applications or practical manifestations. Fascism denies that the majority, through the mere fact of being a majority, can rule human societies; it denies that this majority can govern by means of a periodical consultation; it affirms the irremediable, fruitful and beneficent inequality of men, who cannot be leveled by such a mechanical and extrinsic fact as universal suffrage.

Also:

Fascism is definitely and absolutely opposed to the doctrines of liberalism, both in the political and economic sphere.

It can be difficult to believe that these descriptions of fascism are written as an endorsement of this form of government, rather than as a critique. The themes its attacks are precisely those upon which America was founded: democracy, equality before the law, protection of the rights of the individual, etc. It therefore seems impossible to many Americans that fascism could be a force at work in American government. But this force exists (exemplified by some of the more extreme elements of the right wing). It may not be as brazen, as explicit, or as extreme as Mussolini's form of fascism, but it nevertheless represents a reason to worry about the integrity of our democracy.

So What Is Fascism, Really?

Laurence Britt authored an excellent article in Free Inquiry magazine that outlines the common traits of seven dictatorships commonly identified as "fascist:" Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Franco's Spain, Salazar's Portugal, Papadopoulos's Greece, Pinochet's Chile, and Suharto's Indonesia. These regimes had in common:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.

For the purpose of a civilized discussion, I feel Britt's characteristics to be, when taken as a set, a fair, historically accurate, and applicable definition of fascism. And, alarmingly, some of these characteristics seem to apply to elements of the political spectrum both in America and in other democracies worldwide.

In the seven regimes Britt analyzed, the dictatorship came to power under a banner of popular support. Fascism is not merely a problem of leadership, because such leaders come to power with the support of fascist followers. If we are to safeguard our own democracy, we must think seriously about our own beliefs, and to make sure we aren't, with the best intentions, setting ourselves up for disaster.

Why People Choose Fascism

The similarity among fascist regimes is no accident: fascism addressed the deeply-held concerns of some proportion of the societies it arose in, and promised comprehensive, aggressive reforms to address those issues. By examining fascism in terms of the needs it addresses, we can better understand how democracies can go fascist.

The Need For Supremacy

The rallying cry of every nationalist group worldwide is "We're Number One!" People are drawn to being a part of something great, and strong national identity is a core component to fascist mass movements because it puts the State on a pedestal. The same goes for religious or ethnic supremacy. Perhaps it's "whites" and "Christians" in addition to "Americans." The point is that fascism embraces the idea that "us" is better than "them." Better need not mean more powerful or more rich; it often means "more pure," "morally superior," or other ambiguous qualifiers of superiority.

The myth of supremacy is critically important because anything that questions that supremacy can be seen as a destructive force. Those who question the myth are attacked as being insufficiently patriotic, even treasonous, because of the need to believe.

The Need For Consensus

A common thread among supporters of fascist policies is an aggressive dislike of disagreement, as mentioned above. It's not enough for some that they believe their own nation to be supreme - they imagine a nation unified in belief and action, free of dissent. Those who support fascist policies not only feel visceral anger when faced with dissent, but they tend to filter their exposure to the media to actively ignore such dissent.

Part of the reason fascist leaders have had such success in disseminating propaganda is that their supporters are inclined to believe anything that agrees with their worldview, and to reject anything that disagrees with it. The presence of other opinions offends fascist mass movements, who take great comfort in being part of a group.

The Need For Safety

Fascism plays on the fears of the people, and a fascist regime is forever displaying itself as under attack. When military threats aren't apparent, the threat of sleeper cells, attacks on culture, or other forms of "invasion" are invoked. The supreme nation is, in a fascist mentality, forever under siege by an aggressive, self-destructive world. Consequently, massive steps are taken to ensure that not only is the nation safe, but the nation's culture is safe as well.

Fascist states invariably invest heavily in state security, whether or not a real threat exists. Because of this widespread fear of threats, both foreign and domestic, a society's need for safety can trump their good sense, and the apparatus of authoritarianism is usually erected under the auspices of keeping a nation safe.

The Need For Retribution

Protecting the country from evil is not enough. Fascist policies call for an overwhelming response to real or imagined transgressions. Those guilty of crimes, the thinking goes, deserve to be treated as traitors, because any crime is a crime against the nation and the national interests. In the fascist mindset, "criminals" are a different class of citizen, inferior by definition to the "good folk" and not entitled to the same rights and privileges. It is from this thinking that human rights abuses are not only perpetrated by fascist states, but even condoned by its citizens.

This thinking extends to dissenters as well. The fascist masses are uncompromising in their attacks on critics, and (because their cause is noble) any tactics are acceptable. Smearing enemies of the state and generally making their lives miserable is simply "just deserts" in this view.

The Need For Sacrifice

Perhaps the most perverse component of fascist mass movements is the call to sacrifice for the good of the state. Not only are civil liberties and civil services scaled back, but these sacrifices are embraced as being "for the good of the nation." Fascist citizens hold a common belief that win-win scenarios are fantasies, that all policy situations are zero-sum games.

The flip-side of this is that anyone who isn't willing to sacrifice those things is accused of wanting the nation to fail. The fascist ideology imagines that such sacrifices are not only sufficient - they are necessary, and must be made. Anyone who doesn't agree is a coward or a parasite.

Getting Perspective

This article isn't an attempt to single anyone out. Extremism of every stripe is dangerous, because it (by definition) rejects the values of compromise and negotiation. My position is simply that America should recognize that, in the past, fascist policies have had disastrous consequences. They have bankrupted nations and institutionalized criminality. They have embraced crimes against humanity and stand vilified in the eyes of history. When modern politicians take steps in the direction of fascism, we should be alarmed, as history has shown it to be the road to strife and ruin.

Back To Top