How Mussolini Triumphed

[X5N]

I read this on the MIA, as part of the Fascism: What It Is and How To Fight It pamphlet thing. And I kind of got the gist of it, but being so terrible at reading comprehension, I wasn't sure.

So, this is what I got out of it:

1) The reformists stopped the radicals from fighting the fascists, taking a moderate anti-violence view, even as fascists were murdering people, thus dragging the radicals down.

2) The state and the elite saw fascists as less of a threat than the radicals.

Is this accurate? Is there anything more to it?

[Ocean Seal]

2 seems to be more right than 1, and also fascism was a mass movement motivated by the petite bourgeoisie.

[jookyle]

Mussolini in particular had quite a bit popular support. A lot of people felt he brought strength back to the name Italy. The same goes for Hitler. After WWI nationalism became an immense force across Europe and the fascism that was seen of that era(and it's rise) was a direct result of the nationalism that spawned after WWI.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Mussolini in particular had quite a bit popular support. A lot of people felt he brought strength back to the name Italy. The same goes for Hitler.

I don't know about Mussolini, but it is interesting to note that Hitler never had support from the majority of the population. Michael Parenti's Blackshirts and Reds has a really good section on fascism and it's modern day apologists.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

From Gramsci:

"The fascists have been able to carry on their activities only because tens of thousands of functionaries of the State, especially in the public security forces (police, royal guards, carabinieri) and in the magistrature, have become their moral and material accomplices. These functionaries know that their impunity and their careers are closely linked to the fortunes of the fascist organization, and they therefore have every interest in supporting fascism in whatsoever attempt it may make to consolidate its political position." - Socialists and Fascists, 1921

"The popular masses, tormented, continuously exposed to mortal danger from the punitive expeditions, without protection from the legal authorities, were rising violently against the white terror. Automatically, precisely because fascism had become a national scourge, an uprising of a national character was maturing, which would have had very great revolutionary significance. The Socialist Party and the General Confederation of Labour, with their pacifist attitude, succeeded in achieving: on the one hand, a collapse of the revolutionary energies which were developing progressively among the broad popular masses; on the other hand, an internal crisis of fascism, which is one not of decomposition but of reorganization and improved reactionary functioning." - Against Terror, 1921

From Gramsci's perspective, the Socialist Party (which was more social democrat) took a stance of pacifism and reformism and negotiated with the fascists which allowed the fascists to gain ground and build on their power. Meanwhile many of the actual civil servants and police were actively aiding the fascists because the Blackshirts were useful in breaking strikes and preventing radical factory movements from taking hold.

[MEGAMANTROTSKY]

Don't forget that in the case of Germany, the Comintern played an active role in splitting the left in declaring that the Social Democrats were allies of fascism. But that having been said, it wasn't simply the "reformists" holding the "radicals" back, although that certainly took place. The socialist leadership in general was also won to pacifism and focused almost exclusively on legally ousting Hitler; they underestimated him and severely overestimated Weimar democracy. When Hitler "legally" took dictatorial powers in 1933 the socialist parties were so reduced to impotence that the Nazis destroyed the trade unions with little difficulty.

[X5N]

Thanks, all.