One of the first questions we get when converting someone from a non-Fascist to a Fascist is often, “What about the Nazis? Weren’t they Fascists? How can you claim Fascism is not tied to race when the Fascist Nazis committed one of the most heinous acts in history?”
This question is one that is based off a common historical misguidance, partially the result of a certain Bulgarian Stalinist who linked the two in relation to the political situation of Bulgaria in the 1940s. However, the governments of the United States and United Kingdom of the World War II and post-war era especially are also to blame for this misconception, and the Soviet Union’s constant parading of how they “defeated Fascism” when they marched into Berlin in 1945.
Usually, an in depth explanation is not given when we answer this question, as it is very nuanced. One of the comparisons I use best when answering this question is that if you held a gun to a Nazis head and chose him to choose the nation or his race, the Nazi would choose race, whereas the Fascist would choose his nation or more accurately, the State. National Socialist doctrine completely revolves around race theory and oftentimes the theories of eugenics that emerged in the early 1800’s as a kind of racial science. Fascism, on the other hand, developed entirely separately from this philosophy–a key detail here lies in the origins of Fascism, when the moderate Socialists, the Syndicalists, and Nationalists took arms together against the Communists in Italy, becoming the first of the Fascisti.
So what is the difference between the two? More accurately, what are the similarities? The two share Nationalism, but National Socialism does not hold the same level I would argue that Fascism does. Fascism and National Socialism also both belong to a broad spectrum of political ideologies called Third Positionism. Third Positionism is essentially neither left, nor right, neither Capitalist, nor Socialist. But this definition also fits many other entities and ideologies even in the modern day. One could make a convincing argument that the People’s Republic of China is Third Position, due to their unique State Capitalism. On the other end of the spectrum you would have National Anarchism, that being anarchist communes with a Third Position economy. These two examples are clearly not tied to Nazi Germany in any way.
One of the most major differences is that of our views on race. Everyone knows about what life was like in the Third Reich for non-whites and Jews, but not everyone knows that in Italy, Catholics, Protestants, Whites, Africans, Jews, Muslims, and all sorts of people from across the nation unified under the Fascist banner. When Mussolini marched on Rome, the Jewish community in Italy marched alongside him, something the Nazis were critical of. Fascism does not see race as a divider. If you are a citizen of my nation, you are my countryman, end of story. This does not mean we don’t want to halt excess immigration, but we won’t persecute people who are already here. Especially if they march alongside us, why the hell should we?
Other differences between National Socialism and Fascism–outside of our views on race–lie in the broader scope of economics. National Socialist economic program is a difficult subject especially as the economy of Germany changed drastically as the war went on. At first, industries were privatized en mass, but as things carried on the government directly seized control of all businesses and industries in the nation to assist the war effort. This program was referred to as a “Total War Economy” by Albert Speer, the economic minister for Hitler’s Germany. The economically inclined among you might notice a similarity there to the Soviet Union’s collectivization that occurred in the 30’s and 40’s. Obviously the USSR and the Third Reich were vastly different, not saying the two were similar, but it does bring up an interesting train of thought. Nowhere is the failures of the German economy however more visible than the memoirs of the aforementioned Speer, who commented on how frequently he had to save Germany’s economy from collapse mid-war. The Nazi economic plan rapidly became whatever Hitler wanted it to be and the consistency was nonexistent.
Fascist economics vary, the Corporatist economy (no, Google, it’s not Corporate rule) was a type of hybrid Socialist and Capitalist economy, focused around class cooperation rather than conflict. The rich were still rich and private property still existed, but predator monopolies were regulated and wealthy assets were used to benefit the development of the state. Italy’s economic recovery from the great depression is largely thanks to this system of cooperation. Mussolini himself even would travel out to help bring in the first harvest of the season. Everyone had their role to play in the furthering of Italy, its state, and its economy. On the other end is National Syndicalism, which has its best example in Spain, under the Falange, but as well in Oswald Mosley’s proposed plan for Britain, though Mosley himself likely wouldn’t have referred to it by this name. This idea revolves (roughly) around organization of both the employees and employers into Syndicates, who would help mutually assist the economy. In Britain, Mosley wanted a kind of elected house of union leaders to replace the House of Lords, a far cry from the total state control of the Third Reich.
Other examples are visible in how the two came to power. In Germany, Hitler immediately disregarded and suspended the constitution. In Italy, Mussolini both came to and was removed from power legally, according to the constitution. There’s a rather famous Mosley quote we usually use about dictatorship, and how a Fascist does not propose one, but rather drastic reforms to the democratic process. A kind of authoritarian democracy if you will.
There is much more nuance to this discussion and I may put out future articles discussing the differences more in depth, and our Guilded server (which you can join by filling out the contact form here on the website) is an open forum for this conversation.
God bless you all comrades.
Tomorrow we live.
“Capital.. is an economic instrument which must serve the entire economy, and hence may not be an instrument for the advantage and privilege of the few who have had the good luck to get in first.” – Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera
The Seamusite Fascisti 