Fascism as Philosophy

[btpound]

So I was listening to to a discussion on the general philosophy of Marx. In the course of the lecture, (btw this guy is not a Marxist), he said that Marxism and Fascism were the two big philosophical products of the industrial era. He goes on to say that while Marxism focuses on class, Fascism focuses on will. I never heard Fascism spoken of as an actual philosophy, and wondered if anyone could elaborate on the philosophy of fascism.

[Muzk]

The philosophy of fascism is hatred, greed and profit

... I can't think of something else it could be, and I guess the only philosophy the fascists back then had was their mass manipulation which already started in the kindergarden, they basically pushed their hatred into everyones head so they would make good soldiers later on. Like America does.

[Zanthorus]

In "The History of Western Philosophy" Bertrand Russell links the Nazi's philosophically to Rosseau, Fichte, Schelling & Hegel saying that their ideas layed the ground for Fascism.

Rudolf Rocker also mentions about the roots of nationalism being in German Idealism in his "Nationalism and Culture" but It's been ages since I read that book.

[btpound]

In "The History of Western Philosophy" Bertrand Russell links the Nazi's philosophically to Rosseau, Fichte, Schelling & Hegel saying that their ideas layed the ground for Fascism.

Rudolf Rocker also mentions about the roots of nationalism being in German Idealism but It's been ages since I read that book.

Thats an interesting point. Can anyone elaborate on the corrolation between these philosophers and Fascism?

[Nwoye]

I think what that guy is referring to is Fascism's (supposed) roots in Nietzsche's (supposed) nihilism. His assertion that Fascism is based on will could be an allusion to Nietzsche's "will to power", a law which he believed governed the action of conscious beings. If that's what he's doing, then he's completely wrong; Fascism's link to Nietzsche is extremely tenuous, and I don't think Nietzsche was even a nihilist so much as he was someone who rejected his time period's discourse on morality.

He also could be arguing that Fascism is based on darwinism and an attempt to apply darwinism to a socio-economic system, and that would be partly true. That was the fascist justification anyway.

Also keep in mind that Fascism took many different forms in many different places; Hitler's fascism was different than Mussolini's and Musso's was different than Franco's. Hell all three of those leaders made massive changes in their country's economic structure in order to fit changing conditions. Fascism imo isn't so much a coherent ideology as it is a reactionary social movement specific to its time period.

[Decolonize The Left]

So I was listening to to a discussion on the general philosophy of Marx. In the course of the lecture, (btw this guy is not a Marxist), he said that Marxism and Fascism were the two big philosophical products of the industrial era. He goes on to say that while Marxism focuses on class, Fascism focuses on will. I never heard Fascism spoken of as an actual philosophy, and wondered if anyone could elaborate on the philosophy of fascism.

Both Marxism and Fascism aren't exactly philosophies. Marxism is an economic theory - and this is important because it is communism which is a political philosophy. Likewise, fascism is a political ideology which has philosophical elements to it: It has an ethical code, a theory of human nature, etc...

Marxism, as an economic theory, focuses on class as the driving force of history. That is, Marxism claims that the class antagonisms are what drive the material course of history.

To say that fascism 'focuses on will' is rather short-sighted. The individual will is certainly a large factor in a fascist ideology, but it is an individualized factor, not an overarching one.
The general tenets of a fascist ideology are: fear of the 'other' (in Nazi ideology this other was the Jews, in KKK ideology this other is the black/Latino population), nationalism and a 'return to the golden era' (all fascist ideologies claim that the present state is a deformed version of a better time when their race/culture prevailed), militant aggression in defense of the nation and against the other, and a cult of personality surrounding the leader (in all fascist ideologies, the leader embodies both physically and psychologically the values/ideals of the people).

So as a philosophy, fascism is inherent reactionary. Fascism reacts to a present situation and attempts to re-establish a previous situation by destroying that which has 'tainted' it.

The draw of fascism is its inherent simplicity. If something is wrong, it isn't oneself that is the problem, it's someone else. Hence it is up to oneself and ones like oneself to solve the problem through ridding the community/nation of these problematic others. This is where the individual will factors in. Fascism imbues individuals with a sense of purpose and community through its focus on individual will. It makes the individual the driving force of change - remember that the 'leader' is the ultimate individual towards which all strive to emulate - and hence one can identify with the leader and take action in his name. Yet this action is always defined as one's own.
The key to fascism and the individual will is that while one's action is always one's own, it is taken in the name of the state. Hence one is absolved of responsibility for one is only fulfilling then needs of the state. This allows for great atrocities to occur as individual responsibility is transferred to an external ambiguous entity.

I hope that helps.

- August

[AkirAmaruBolivar]

It is morally bankrupt to say the least.

[Dimentio]

Fascism and national socialism are in some aspects similar, but still wildly different ideologies.

[Kayser_Soso]

Looking at the issue another way- We must remember that even by the late 19th century, capitalism was not fully developed in many areas. Capitalism almost since its inception induced fury and anger- reaction. Over time, people began to idolize certain aspects of the feudal era, where everything seemed to have its place, and the social contract seemed more equitable. Of course the feudal era had huge downsides, but fascists had not lived through this time and could only fantasize about an idyllic past when members of the ruling class were often warriors who led from the front. Even as a leftist, its not hard to see the appeal of a knight, samurai, or bey, as opposed to some fat fuck in a suit who doesn't lift a finger yet exercises almost god like power.

The ideological fascist hates capitalism, but doesn't quite understand it, and usually believes that there is some intermediary between capitalism and what English-speaking fascists would often call "free enterprise", which is in fact a non-existent society basically made up of small producers- the key word is producers, who make and sell things as opposed to say, bankers, who in the eyes of fascists just trade numbers around. The Nazi slogan "Gegen Bolshevismus und Hoch finanz"(pardon my spelling, German comrades) embodies this fascist idea that there is a "third way" between the capitalism they don't like(AKA capitalism as it actually is), and Communism. No surprise that since the end of WWII, a growing Fascist movement(mainly European) has been built up around this idea of "Third Positionism", that is a position supposedly between capitalism and Marxist socialism.

The problem is though, that when faced with Marxism, fascists have historically, and consistently, sided with capitalists every single time. In fact every existing fascist regime came to power via compromises in its ideology to the ruling class, the capitalists, and in many cases the monarchy(where applicable).

So essentially one can say there is a similarity between Marxism and Fascism in the sense that they both share a relation to capitalism- the difference being that Marxism is scientific and attempts to find a progressive answer to the capitalist problem, seeing that forward is the only logical direction to go. Fascism on the other hand seeks to go back to some ill-defined, often idyllic past which never existed in the first place.

[Kayser_Soso]

Fascism and national socialism are in some aspects similar, but still wildly different ideologies.

I would have to disagree, save for one important difference. National Socialism, at least in its German incarnation, was exclusionary. On paper, they did not want to rule other people or force people within their territory to become German, nor did they want to encourage other populations to call themselves German. Granted there were exceptions to this but the Nazis often violated their own racial laws out of convenience or necessity. By contrast, other Fascist regimes have often seen themselves as benevolent rulers over other people, and in some cases try to get subject peoples to identify themselves as part of the nation as a whole. The Croatian fascists for example created the Croatian Orthodox Church in order to encourage local Serbs to identify themselves as Croats.

[Nwoye]

edit: oops.

[RadioRaheem84]

I don't know why its so hard for liberal historians to clearly identify fascism as a political philosophy. There really is no economic ideology behind fascism other than 'capitalism that benefits the state'.

As far as it being about the "will", this only a small portion of fascist ideology. Instead of it being about class like in Marxism, it's about "nation". The nation operates as the "will" for the masses. The Party functions as the union that holds the state together, bringing class antagonisms to an end by enforcing class collaboration. I don't know how liberal historians equate this horrible and irrational ideology with Marxism. Even when the Nazis tried to appeal to socialists it wasn't socialist by any stretch of the imagination.

[Ravachol]

Fascism and national socialism are in some aspects similar, but still wildly different ideologies.

Actually National Socialism is an instance of Fascism. Fascism is a set of ideologies sharing common traits such as ultranationalism, conservatism, romanticism,etc. Italian Fascism and National Socialism differ yes, but one cannot state 'Fascism' and National Socialism differ, it's like saying fruit and apples differ.

If there is a core sentiment to be identified within Fascism, Ie the so-called Ur-Fascism, I believe an obsession with decay, a desire for homogenity and victimhood lie at the very core of Fascism.

The perceived decay and/or undermining of social structures that exist or existed (whether romanticized or not) is the driving force behind the reactionary nature of Fascism, it seeks to persevere or restore an old social order and the tradition and hierarchy that comes with it (which is examplified by the National-Socialist hatred for 'degenerated' art,homosexuality and other things perceived 'unnatural' for example).

The victimhood sentiment is also widespread throughout Fascist ideology, the perceived victimhood and 'national humiliation' (Ie. the Dolchstoss legend and the Versailles Treaty in the case of German National-Socialism) give rise to the machismo desire to compensate for this through a movement of 'men of action' that will combat the perceived social decay.

The desire for homogenity echoes the fear of social undermining and usually manifests itself ultranationalism, where internal and external enemies are seen as a threat to 'national unity' and the root cause of the perceived social decay and victimhood.

[which doctor]

What's a lot more interesting, and more pertinent to avoiding fascism, is not the philosophy of fascism, but how philosophy degenerates into fascism. Looking at the relation between fascism and philosophy this way, one is able to see how what's more dangerous than fringe neo-nazi groups are the fascistic tendencies in contemporary philosophy itself. Since others have discussed it better than I have, I'll suggest you read Dialectic of Englightenment by Adorno and Horkheimer.

[Ravachol]

What's a lot more interesting, and more pertinent to avoiding fascism, is not the philosophy of fascism, but how philosophy degenerates into fascism. Looking at the relation between fascism and philosophy this way, one is able to see how what's more dangerous than fringe neo-nazi groups are the fascistic tendencies in contemporary philosophy itself. Since others have discussed it better than I have, I'll suggest you read Dialectic of Englightenment by Adorno and Horkheimer.

Yes it's very interesting, it's the work that got me into Critical Theory in the first place although I'm currently not a big fan of Critical Theory anymore.

[The Vegan Marxist]

To be open minded on this subject, why don't you ask a fascist yourself on what fascism means to them? I mean, for the most part, fascism is attacked by all sides & stays within a relative one-sided opinion. I mean, I've met fascists myself, & I can't say I'm a supporter in it, even the 'real' fascism, but it was nice to finally get another side to the idea. Just go to Prothink.org & start asking questions. They are one of the largest pro-fascist groups right now.

[Kayser_Soso]

To be open minded on this subject, why don't you ask a fascist yourself on what fascism means to them? I mean, for the most part, fascism is attacked by all sides & stays within a relative one-sided opinion. I mean, I've met fascists myself, & I can't say I'm a supporter in it, even the 'real' fascism, but it was nice to finally get another side to the idea. Just go to Prothink.org & start asking questions. They are one of the largest pro-fascist groups right now.

Oh boy, they are going to get some hilarious results if they do that.

[TheCuriousCommunist]

I was one so I'll try to answer your question. Fascism is a political philosophy of Nationalism and Corporatism. The Nation is more important then the individual good, but the people, being the nation, are well provided for under the Corporatist system. The Leader is elected from the Fascist Party, and is removed by the Fascist Grand Council if he is deemed a threat to the nation.

[Ravachol]

I was one so I'll try to answer your question. Fascism is a political philosophy of Nationalism and Corporatism. The Nation is more important then the individual good, but the people, being the nation, are well provided for under the Corporatist system. The Leader is elected from the Fascist Party, and is removed by the Fascist Grand Council if he is deemed a threat to the nation.

Well that's classical Italian-style Fascism as espoused by Mussolini's PNF. Early thought within the Squadrismo-movement differed from this though, as do a lot of fascist permutations. Take Codreanu's Iron Guard or Nouvelle-Droite thought for example, their highly mystical religious nature conflicts with general atheims found in other strains of fascism (Strasserism to name one).

Al those ideas, even though superficially different, can be traced back to the core elements I described earlier however.

[which doctor]

Yes it's very interesting, it's the work that got me into Critical Theory in the first place although I'm currently not a big fan of Critical Theory anymore.
Why did it fall out of favor with you?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

IMO Fascism has no tenable roots in philosophy, and has left little in the way of an indelible mark on the academic world.

Whereas Marxism and its associated branches have advanced many advanced intellectual theories such as Dialectics, there has been no such intellectual contribution from Fascism.

I simply fail to see it as more than a simpletons ideology that preys on the most basic and sinful of emotions - emotional hatred, 'divide and conquer' and so on.

[Ravachol]

IMO Fascism has no tenable roots in philosophy, and has left little in the way of an indelible mark on the academic world.

Whereas Marxism and its associated branches have advanced many advanced intellectual theories such as Dialectics, there has been no such intellectual contribution from Fascism.

I simply fail to see it as more than a simpletons ideology that preys on the most basic and sinful of emotions - emotional hatred, 'divide and conquer' and so on.

And that's the core of Fascism. You need to understand Fascism as highly anti-rationalist, in essence, it's a 'revolt against reason' rooted in anti-enlightenment romanticism. Fascism stresses emotion above ratio, they see emotion as 'pure' and 'uncorrupted' and an expression of the 'will to power' (although they often pervert the concept into a simpleton's glorification of violence). Fascism isn't rational, though it has rational components and most certainly rational causes and machinations.