The only real fascist state to have existed is Mussolini's Italy in the 20s and 30s. Mussolini invented fascism, and the other far-right dictatorships of the twentieth century are merely imitations.
Mussolini wrote an explanation of Fascism for the 1932 edition of the Italian Encyclopedia. If we go through Mussolini's text (at
Internet History Sourcebooks) and compare it to the philosophy and practices of the US state, then we can decide whether Bush's government is fascist, whether it approaches fascism, or whether it is something different.
Mussolini writes:
Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace...War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it. All other trials are substitutes, which never really put men into the position where they have to make the great decision -- the alternative of life or death
I'm not sure that the US state believes in this. Now I'm not saying that they aren't willing or able to have perpetual war. But what they say they want is peace.
Bush (state of the union) writes:
America is a nation with a mission, and that mission comes from our most basic beliefs. We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire. Our aim is a democratic peace -- a peace founded upon the dignity and rights of every man and woman. America acts in this cause with friends and allies at our side, yet we understand our special calling: This great republic will lead the cause of freedom.
I take this as a statement that stability is what the US government wants. It wants a stability that is in its own interest, and with callous disregard of the human rights of others, but it wants stability. It doesn't appear to glamourise perpetual war in the way that Mussolini did. I can't imagine Bush writing in favour of perpetual conflict, and i can't imagine Bush writing the statement I just quoted from Mussolini. He just wants to win the conflict, and leave it at that. I have no doubt that he will continue to fight perpetually if he feels that is necessary. but if he's a fascist, he has abandoned the romanticism of fascism and turned it into utilitiarianism.
Mussolini writes:
The Fascist accepts life and loves it, knowing nothing of and despising suicide
Bush is definitely with Mussolini on this one. He's about as pro-life as they come. Along with Mussolini, he shares no interest in human self-determination (i.e. the right to commit suicide). "Life" as a romantic symbol is more important. Bush wants
Bush (2005) writes:
a culture of life
what about economic injustice?
Mussolini writes:
Fascism [is] the complete opposite ofMarxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production.... Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect
I think Bush is pretty close to this. All of his rhetoric is about "humanity", and he shows a distinct lack of willingness to talk about economic injustice. In fact he shows a distinct lack of willingness to countenance the idea that different social groups in society might have differeng economic interests.
Bush (state of the union) writes:
We are living in a time of great change -- in our world, in our economy, in science and medicine. Yet some things endure -- courage and compassion, reverence and integrity, respect for differences of faith and race. The values we try to live by never change. And they are instilled in us by fundamental institutions, such as families and schools and religious congregations.
This quote shows how Bush believes that the unifying institutions of society are stronger than the class divisions. in fact if you read his state of the Union address you will see that the interests of "entrepreneurs" are made to equate with the interests of "workers".
Bush (state of the union) writes:
My administration is promoting free and fair trade to open up new markets for America's entrepreneurs and manufacturers and farmers -- to create jobs for American workers
So Bush is with Mussolini when it comes to internal economic conflict - this conflict just doesn't exist.
Mussolini writes:
Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage
Bush at least pays lip-service to democracy. he is elected. Although his cronies are accused of manipulating votes (i.e. especially in the first election) it doesn't look like he will be suspending elections any time soon. The question of whether the US election system is fair, or whether it has been manipulated by his cronies is open to debate, but I don't imagine that Bush could have written the quote attributed to Mussolini. he would never do it so openly, though perhaps his government would do it if they had the opportunity. I honestly believe that if Bush felt he could suspend elections, then he would do so. His legalized patriotism (Patriot Act) is probably a more sophisticated and gentle means of controlling the population than outright dictatorship.
As for the fruitfulness of inequality - Bush is extremely silent when it comes to discussing inequality in society. We have already noticed that it doesn't exist in the US... His policies appear to reward the wealthy at the expense of the poor. So he is probably with Mussolini in spirit, but not quite at the level of overt policy just yet. Certainly his record doesn't suggest any interest in reducing inequality.
Mussolini writes:
if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State...The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State...the Fascist State is itself conscious and has itself a will and a personality -- thus it may be called the "ethic" State
Bush has certainly increased the power of the state with respect to the individual. He has suspended judicial procedure on US territory, for example. He's definitely with Mussolini on this one. Though, interestingly, his statism is dressed up as individualism. This is just a propoganda exercise as far as I'm concerned. He loves big government, that's for sure. Look at the corporate welfare programs. But his rhetoric is definitely distinctly difrerent from the fascist rhetoric of Mussolini.
Mussolini writes:
The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential
Yup, useless things like healthcare, freedom from being imprisoned, education, ability to have abortion, and one's own life (he rather likes the death penalty). Bush is definitely with Mussolini here.
Mussolini writes:
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence
Bush has increased the US overseas military presence, and his imperial credentials are impeccable.
Chicago Tribune (2004) writes:
In the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and combat in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States has dramatically expanded its military presence in the Middle East and Central Asia, building a vast network of bases designed to counter what military officials call an "arc of instability." U.S. military installations in the region extend from Turkey to near the Chinese border, and from former Soviet republics in the north to the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. The facilities surround Iran; are situated in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and are close to Syria and Lebanon. Several were created to address the confrontation with Iraq, and continue to support operations there. "No one could have anticipated in the summer of 2001 that the United States would be basing forces at Karshi Khanabad, Uzbekistan, or conducting a major military operation in Afghanistan," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told Congress last year. Experts fear the ubiquity of U.S. forces may fuel belief in radical Islamic claims that America is bent on controlling the oil and politics of the Islamic world.
what about the political authority of Bush's policies?
Mussolini writes:
never before has the nation stood more in need of authority, of direction and order. If every age has its own characteristic doctrine, there are a thousand signs which point to Fascism as the characteristic doctrine of our time. For if a doctrine must be a living thing, this is proved by the fact that Fascism has created a living faith; and that this faith is very powerful in the minds of men is demonstrated by those who have suffered and died for it
Replace "Fascism" with "freedom" and I doubt we could tell whether this quote was written by Bush or Mussolini.
so what are the similarities between Bush's world view and Mussolini's world view? Both are extremely anti-theoretical. They are interested in synthesis rather than analysis. They gloss over domestic divisions in favour of big concepts like life, faith and unity. They are anti-intellectual. They are in favour of state power, big business, and individual sacrafice to the grand national cause.
What are the differences? the contemporary US state lacks a cult of the leader. I cannot imagine that Bush would deign to write an Encyclopedia article about his politicial beliefs. In fact he is even more fascist than Mussolini in this respect - he would probably deny he has a political program at all. Furthermore, there are also democratic means for the removal of Bush from office. Whether the US government is "sliding into fascism" will be revealed by the extent to which democratic freedoms are eroded in the US over the coming years before the next general election.
This message has been edited by mick, 04-27-2005 03:01 PM
added in edit:
In summary, the US government is NOT fascist. But it shares important ideological similarities with fascism. It's too early to tell whether it's sliding into fascism or not.
I suspect not.
This message has been edited by mick, 04-27-2005 03:08 PM
™ Version 4.2
