Reddit reviews Mussolini's Intellectuals: Fascist Social and Political Thought

Yes, righteous shitpost, but that's not what "fascism" means.

http://www.amazon.com/Mussolinis-Intellectuals-Fascist-Political-Thought/dp/0691127905

>fascism is literally anti-communism after all.

Well, actually fascism is literally a result of marriage between Italian revolutionary syndicalism and Italian nationalism but I don't expect socialists to know socialist elements of fascism. Don't tell them about Sergio Panunzio, Georges Sorel, Enrico Corradini, Ugo Spirito and their ideal of Proleterian Nation (which is what fascism is originally) or their head might explode.

Not everyone who comments on politics or acts in the political arena is a political philosopher (Hitler is no more a philosopher than Hillary Clinton is), if you want the philosophical side of fascism the sorts of people you'd be looking at are Giovanni Gentile (who co-wrote The Doctrine of Fascism with Mussolini), (to an extent) Martin Heidegger, and possibly some further from mainstream names like Julius Evola. I'll pass on a recommendation I've heard before of Mussolini's Intellectuals by A James Gregor.

Mussolini's Intellectuals: Fascist Social and Political Thought:
https://www.amazon.com/Mussolinis-Intellectuals-Fascist-Political-Thought/dp/0691127905

I suggest Mussolini's Intellectuals by A. James Gregor if you want to read up on Italian fascism.

Some have already pointed out the inconsistency of fascist doctrine across different nations. This is mostly due to the nature of right-wing movements - they’re rooted in culture and tradition, the idea of “peoplehood”, and so the way it manifests is going to vary from culture to culture by definition. This is why even though German National Socialism and Italian Fascism are both (reasonably) lumped in the same category, it’s pretty much universally recognized that they were also in some sense distinct. As was Franco’s Spain, as were the various right-wing groups of South America, etc. This is why it’s hard to pin down a precise definition of “fascism” (one reason, anyway).

If you’re talking about Fascism proper (capital ‘F’), i.e. the political doctrine of Mussolini, there’s a good book that examines the philosophical foundations of Italian Fascism, Gregor’s Mussolini’s Intellectuals. It’s far and away the most thorough and neutral book I’ve found on the topic. He outlines the evolution of Fascist doctrine over the course of the late 1910s till the end of WWII. That can at the very least help you understand Fascism as a historical phenomenon.

If you’re trying to understand “fascism” as a kind of blanket term for the general ethos animating right-wing groups, /u/t644sf12’s answer pretty much hits the nail on the head.

Currently reading:

My Rise And Fall by Benito Mussolini

I Am the Messenger


Thinking of buying:

Mussolini's Intellectuals: Fascist Social and Political Thought

Courting Greta - Not sure about this one.

https://www.amazon.com/Mussolinis-Intellectuals-Fascist-Political-Thought/dp/0691127905


Look into this book, Spirito is mentioned in one chapter, and there is aslo further reading part for more information.

this is one of the best books on the topic.

http://www.amazon.com/Mussolinis-Intellectuals-Fascist-Political-Thought/dp/0691127905

it was truly was a new ideology in the 1920s.

the nazis added some populism to it when they brought it to germany.


Rhom added some workers sentiment but was killed in the night of the long knives.

Hitler added the extermination of jews at the end.

But he had become a dictator just 18 months into his appointment to riechchancelor at the beginning he just started by kicking them out and stealing their property, like all the other jewish pogroms that were the sad state of normality Europe for 1,000 years. the UK kicked out all the jews at one point. look up the dreyfus affair for an idea about how deep antisemitism was ingrained in even the heart of paris in the early 20th century. the dreyfus affair, not incidentally, created one original Zionism's most powerful politcal advocates.


you aren't ignorant because there is so much shit on the internet that purports to be well informed, but there is information out there that is readily obtainable. we should attempt to maintain the meanings of some words in a historical context. everyone calls everyone a fascist. it ceases to be useful, is rendered meaningless for those that do know what the word still means.


in all events. these guys weren't right nor left. they were, as always utopianists. they felt the state needed to subordinate the competing classes that were tearing their nations apart, to harness the will towards the greater good. they saw evil in both right and left. hitler railed against american capitalism all the damn time. you can see why both the elite on the right who might be terrified of Bolshevism, and the progressives on the left that desired a firm hand from the state to push people toward their better angels, as it were, saw something promising in this. these people were lionized, by spectrums of the left and the right in the early 1930s.


*why would you fucking downvote this? what kind of fucking totalitarian ideologue could you be? I'm a god damn anarchist. I read these theories because I hate your shit. I can see this clearly, and I bet I know who downvoted this, the cunts on the left that have gained so much by pinning this atrocity on the right. fuck you. read about it and rebut the facts. go to school. do anything. something. god damn. you dispoiler. makes me sick coming here sometimes. you get a vote for I'm an idiot, this guy would like to educate generally. I'm about ready to pull my authority. j/k.