Fascism Essay Research Paper If it is

Fascism Essay, Research Paper

If it is admitted that the nineteenth century has been the century of Socialism, Liberalism

and Democracy, it does not follow that the twentieth must also be the century of Liberalism,

Socialism and Democracy. Political doctrines pass; peoples remain. It is to be expected that

this century may be that of authority, a century of the “Right,” a Fascist century. If the

nineteenth was the century of the individual it may be expected that this one may be the

century of “collectivism” and therefore the century of the State.

—Benito Mussolini, The Doctrine of Fascism, 1932

While most of the lost and troubled generation found newness in their unconsciousness or in the efforts to twist

the rules of “rational” art, there was also something real and vital which would become their experience. Not just

the backdrop to their experience, but their experience itself. In the 1920s and 30s, liberal democracy was faced

with a grave crisis and its greatest challenge. A new political theory emerged — one which drew its inspiration

from Caligula, Nero and Commodus. It was Benito Mussolini who proclaimed that universal suffrage was the

greatest of lies. And it was Lenin who proved Russian

bourgeois democracy to have been both decadent and

impotent. In THE REVOLT OF THE MASSES (1930), the

Spanish philosopher Jos. Ortega y Gasset (1883-1955)

remarked that:

There is one fact which, whether for good or

ill, is of utmost importance in the public life of

Europe at the present moment. This fact is the

accession of the masses to complete social

power.

The German OSWALD SPENGLER (1880-1936), believed

that liberalism led to democracy which in the end would lead to

caesarism. This development he outlined in his massive philosophy of history, The Decline of the West, which

he published in 1919. George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) believed that democracy substituted the rule of the

incompetent many for that of the corrupt few. Shaw admired Lenin — Shaw admired Mussolini. Why. Well, it

was quite simply, really: any enemy of democracy was a friend to Shaw.

It seemed as if perhaps Plato was right after all. His Republic, written as the classical age of Greece came to a

close, was a dialogue about the education required for a perfect society. Democracy had no place in such a

society: Plato merely called it “a charming form of government.” In its place, Plato believed that a special breed

of man, a Philosopher-King, ought to govern. One man — endowed with the mind of a philosopher and body of

a general. The Romans understood Plato — so too did the moderns. Lenin believed he was that man — so too

did Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Mussolini. Perhaps the rule of superior beings was required for the 20th

century. Perhaps democracy and parliamentary government, and socialism and communism, had run their

course. After all, none of them had brought about peace. Instead, they had brought about the Great War.

Although many intellectuals toyed with fascism, their general sympathies were stated in a more negative fashion.

That is, they may have become fascists, but only because fascism contained no democratic principles. H. G.

Wells (1866-1946), the author of The Time Machine and War of the Worlds, called for a class of governing

experts or technocrats. So too did the American critic, Walter Lippmann (1894-1974). D. H. Lawrence

believed that democracy was spent force — a new Caesar was needed. Evelyn Waugh (1903-1966), author of

Brideshead Revisited, accepted both Mussolini’s Fascists and Franco’s right wing dictatorship. A new

ideology, Italian fascism appeared after World War One in a country which had clearly been demoralized by

war. The nation found itself frustrated and basically left out of the peace negotiations in 1919.

Italian Fascism was not a consistent doctrine but rather a fusion of different ideas. It was successful, temporarily

at least, because Italy was near total collapse. The collapse was precipitated by war but there were other

elements as well. There was, for instance, conflict between socialist trade unions and industrial capitalists. On

top of that, there was the general failure of parliamentary democracy. The key to these crises was fascism with

its aim, the end of class conflict. The Fascists, like the Marxists, recognized the existence of class conflict, a

class war which had existed, according to Karl Marx, throughout history. The Marxist solution was a

world-wide proletarian revolution in which workers would rise up, break free their fetters and seize and then

control the means of production. This great event would usher in the historical stage of production known as

socialism. With time, Marx argued, the state controlled economy would whither away and the perfect form of

social organization, communism, would take its place.

Mussolini had nothing to do with such a scenario. To believe that the proletariat would rise up on their own was

ideal

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать