Mussolini was more concerned with tactics to attain political power than with ideology and consequently searched for social voids to fill with political solutions. Was it solely nationalist ideology, or were there other progenitors that accounted for the origins of the fascist mentality?
Perhaps one should consider Social Survivalism as a sane alternative.
Fascism, Socialism, and Communism are just different names for the same thing: Written in it is usually recognized by historians as nothing more than a propaganda sham. None of the economic principles were even attempted and Hitler was to repudiate them when he came to power.
They were only a device to attempt to steal issues from the real left. We should look and see more truth behind his Jan. And we can believe that because that is how he acted. He attacked socialism, communism and leftists in general, and protected private property that was not slow in meeting the needs for his war.
NONE of the economic principles in the 25 Points were even talked about being put into action after they were written. By putting weight upon the words of propagandists without convening actions, only makes one a victim of that propaganda.
No, we can only put weight behind the words that are backed by action, and as Robert Paxton states: By contrast, they enforced with the utmost violence and thoroughness their threats against socialism. Street fights over turf with young communists were among their most powerful propaganda images.
While they denounced speculative international finance along with all other forms of internationalism, cosmopolitanism, or globalization — capitalist as well as socialistthey respected the property of national producers, who were to form the social base of the reinvigorated nation.
When they denounced the bourgeoisie, it was for being too flabby and individualistic to make a nation strong, not for robbing workers of the value they added.
What they criticized in capitalism was not its exploitation but its materialism, its indifference to the nation, its inability to stir souls. More deeply, fascists rejected the notion that economic forces are the prime movers of history. For fascists, the dysfunctional capitalism of the interwar period did not need fundamental reordering; its ills could be cured simply by applying sufficient political will to the creation of full employment and productivity.
Once in power, fascist regimes confiscated property only from political opponents, foreigners, or Jews. None altered the social hierarchy, except to catapult a few adventurers into high places.
At most, they replaced market forces with state economic management, but, in the trough of the Great Depression, most businessmen initially approved of that.
They cherished national producers. Above all, it was by offering an effective remedy against socialist revolution that fascism turned out in practice to find a space.
Rich and poor remained in the Third Reich, as much as they ever had. Peasant families that had run their village community for decades or even centuries managed for the most part to retain their position by reaching a limited accommodation with the new regime.
Businessmen, big and small, continued to run their business for the usual capitalist profit motive. This was seen as a law of nature. The government sold public ownership in several state-owned firms in different sectors. In addition to this, delivery of some public services welfare previously produced by the public sector was transferred to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the Nazi Party.
Both regimes dipped heavily into the public treasury to re-float or subsidize private heavy industry. Agribusiness farming was expanded and heavily subsidized.
Both states guaranteed a return on the capital invested by giant corporations while assuming most of the risks and losses on investments.
As is often the case with reactionary regimes, public capital was raided by private capital. These firms belonged to a wide range of sectors: Discussion of privatization was increasingly common soon after the Nazi government took office early inand privatizations soon followed.
These shares amounted to Rm. Deutsche Bank was reprivatized in several operations effectively implemented in It is rather disingenuous and simplistic to use the words of propagandists and ignore what really was actually the case.
Leave a Reply Your email address will not be published.Fascism And The Creation Of Fascism - Each and every individual country has its own ideologies, economies, and ways of governing. In the early ’s Italy had developed its own ideology that had a huge impact on the lives of the Italian people.
Benito Mussolini and his Fascist Party were able to seize power in Italy due to the economic hardships and the political instability that interwar Italy experienced. Once in power, Mussolini. To what extent did Mussolini rise to power because of the appeal of the fascist ideology?
Mussolini’s rise to power was largely accredited to the appeal that fascist ideology had on post World War I Italy, and the violent methods with which Mussolini scared his political opponents into subm. This was a bundle of rods tied around an ax, which represented the power of Rome.
Mussolini established the first fascist regime, followed soon after by others, including Nazi Germany. Fascism, however, differed somewhat from one nation to another. Thus, scholars often disagree on a precise definition of fascism.
Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, left, and Adolf Hitler, the leader of Nazi Germany, led fascist movements in the s and ‘40s. Credit: Fox Photos/Getty Images Fascism is a complex ideology.
The Business of War. By Wade Frazier. Revised July Introduction. The Business of War. The "Good War" Brown Shirts in America. A Brief History of Western Anti .