Fascism: A History

by Roger Eatwell

Fascism is one of the most destructive and influential political movements of the twentieth century. Its imagery—of mad dictators and nihilistic violence—haunts our imaginations, and its historical legacy is almost too momentous to be understood. At the same time, it is curiously how do we define fascism? What is the basis of its appeal? Why did it take root so successfully in Germany and Italy, and not in France or Britain? Fascism —a sweeping, enthralling study—tackles these questions, and considers fascism in the round. It draws together its different strands, in Italy, Germany, France, and Britain, looking at its evolution up to and during World War II; and it assesses post-war fascism, and examines its future in a Europe whose boundaries continue to change. Along the way, Fascism provides vivid portraits of Mussolini, Hitler, Oswald Mosley, and other key figures within the movement. Lucid, dramatic, and challenging, Fascism is a definitive book of its kind.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, 20th Century, Reference

352 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1995

Reviews

[E. Kahn · Rating 2 out of 5]

A well-written and well-organized book that is nevertheless shot through with fatal flaws.

The author talks about the importance of studying fascist ideology and establishing a "fascist minimum" (that is, the minimum qualities which would enable someone to distinguish between a fascist and non-fascist ideology, regime, movement, whatever) and instead spends the entirety of its not-inconsiderable length talking about a handful of fascist "great men" ranging from Hitler and Mussolini to the likes of Sir Oswald Mosley, a risible figure who seems to be included only because he's English. And speaking of the English people the author presumes to build an argument for British exceptionalism, where he says British people were immune to the charms of fascist ideology thanks at least in part to good old fashioned Protestanism, an argument that he himself destroys in the text by pointing out that the Nazis were most successful in Protestant regions of Germany.

Fascism outside of Germany, Italy, France and Britain is ignored, leaving out everything from Russian Black Hundreds, Romanian Iron Guards, Spanish and Lebanese Falangists, Mexican Synarchists and so on. And while some argument might perhaps be made that these groups were not "really" fascist it's an argument that has to be made in a book that purports to be a history of that ideology.

The book also plays up the anti-capitalist rhetoric of fascist leaders and theorists without detailing that they use a completely different definition of capitalism than critics of that economic system from the Left. While leftists use "capitalism" to mean an economic system characterized by private control of the means of production and wage labor and propose to replace it with collective control of those, fascists call "capitalism" decadent and propose to fix its problems by making business owners less greedy and more patriotic. Yes, fascism economics really is just a bunch of stupid pie-in-the-sky platitudes and capitalists did in fact make out like bandits everywhere fascism actually came to power.

Finally (and infuriatingly) Eatwell makes a number of whataboutist arguments, claiming that atrocities against Italian civilians by the Nazis' lickspittle Salo Republic for example were "provoked" by communists. This is straight up Nazi apologetics in a book that's supposed to be a serious history.

I suggest anyone interested in the subject read Paxton's much better and much shorter "Anatomy of Fascism" instead.

[Mark Lisac · Rating 3 out of 5]

Useful in presenting a definition of fascism, a word often misunderstood and abused, and in surveying its complex and often chaotic history in Italy, Germany, France and Britain (but not in other countries). Eatwell begins by saying he wants to assess fascism objectively and as a serious body of ideas. The major disappointment is how much of the book is not an analysis of fascist thought and the practices of fascist governments, but a condensed version of more general history, especially of the period 1919-45. Other books do a much better job of describing how fascist governments operated in practice. It's clear that fascist governments tended to spring from violence but that violence is not absolutely necessary as a part of fascist beliefs. Also, fascist movements have invariably been national, while their great arch-enemy of communism (and to some extent socialism) has generally had international ambitions. The final section on post-1945 versions of fascism drifts into a list of individual and party names; many of them are no longer relevant, but this 1995 publication yields an interesting assessment of some trends that have since petered out and others that remain important.

[Adrian]

Eatwell analyses fascism in four countries; Italy, Germany, France and Britain from early 20th century right up till publication date. His thesis is that fascism flowered in the first two countries because fascism had roots there whereas it didn't in France and England. I don't know what to do with this theory. Fascism was successful where it was successful and wasn't where it wasn't? There is an informative and competent history of right wing politics in each country. In France fascism was only a buffer against possible Communist government and a small number of people in England took it up as a hedge against bad economic times. Once the Communist threat faded in France and the depression passed in England- fascism's allure faded. The author believes a resurgence of fascism is possible minus the religious violence and dictatorship. He writes this in 1996 when the book came out but 20 years later there is still no sign.

[Baker · Rating 3 out of 5]

I highly recommend the first couple chapters. I used this book as a reference for a school project and devoured it end to end. Eatwell’s explanation of fascism is very good, but the history gets touchy with some bias and blindspots.

If you’re unable to read it, let me give you the most important part of this book:

The ideology of fascism has two tenets
1. The presentation of “a holistic-national radical Third Way”
2. “Syncretic legitimation”

The former can be summarized in 4 points:
a) Synthesize progressive and conservative thought to market to everyone, the central message saying that man is constrained, but under the state, can be set free. Both Mussolini and Hitler took validity where they could find it, marketing themselves to progressive and conservative thinkers by making promises and proposing ideas that appealed to them. In this way, fascism has no unifying ideology, but merely acts as a veneer for an authoritarian regime to snatch power wherever able.
b) Geopolitics, or, an increased dependency on the functions of the military as time goes on and other nations, regions, and people groups grow. Fascism is innately dependent on the military due to its aggressive, nationalistic undercurrent. Fascism will use language that heavily favors nationalistic fervor, and it's here where the movement will usually find its scapegoat (mentioned more in the Syncretic Legitimation category below)
c) Both capitalism and communism are weak, so it is the duty of the government to regulate an economy that directly benefits the state. Fascism will always always always prioritize the state over the autonomy of individuals. It is widely agreed upon by scholars that there is no formal economic system under fascism. However, in practice, we see the dictator and his party seize the means of production for complete state control; this also gives them the power to control who is in the work force, who is considered exempt, and whose labor makes their bodies dispensable.
d) A need for propaganda. a charismatic leader, indoctrination of children, regular celebration of the state, with intentional misinformation so the public is not exposed to harsh truths. Google the "Reich Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda," handled by the infamous Joseph Goebbels himself, and see some of the stuff they taught in schools or wanted spread in society. Hitler is also quoted saying, ""A violently active, dominating, intrepid, brutal youth -- that is what I am after. Youth must be all those things. It must be indifferent to pain. There must be no weakness or tenderness in it. I want to see once more in its eyes the gleam of pride and independence of the beast of prey... I will have no intellectual training. Knowledge is ruin to my young men." (Source: "Adolf Hitler and Education." History Learning Site, 9 Mar. 2015, here)

Essentially, the term "holistic-national radical Third Way" defines fascism not as any political party, but an aggressive supreme allegiance to the country above all else. "Syncretic Legitimation", however, is more of a propaganda facet. This claims that citizens must be united under one goal, which is directly tied to self-sufficient statehood. This also allows for the use of a scapegoat that the government can dump all blame onto whenever something goes wrong or attention needs to be diverted. By having a scapegoat, the dictator can also push for purity; in Germany, they wanted to be biologically pure, in Italy, culturally pure. A fascist government (like any authoritarian government) must always have a scapegoat to survive. Once one group is exterminated, another will be chosen, and then another, and then another, on and on and on until the authoritarians are exterminated themselves or everyone below them is dead.

If you can understand this much and know how to use wikipedia, you don't really need to buy this book.

[Hamish · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting read and focusses primarily on the politics of fascism. It also gives a lot of context around the relationship between conservative politics in the latter 21st century and fascism around the courting of voters. The sections around the evolution of fascism as an ideology are extremely interesting and far more nuanced than I ever expected. This book is more based on the political landscape and figures, whilst briefly touching on the rationale behind the ideology. Although other texts are required to get a full understanding, it offers a great introduction to the history of fascism.

We live in a time of uncertainty, and understanding the nature of fascism is extremely important in these times.

[Michael Macdonald · Rating 4 out of 5]

A detailed introduction that places fascism in its historical context and gives some excellent background detail. Convincing arguments give a real insight into the conditions that created fascism and the divergent fates of German. Italian, French and English variants.

Interesting discussion of the fate of neo-fascism focussed on Italy is good but sidestepped by the past 13 years.

[Rock · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thorough, well-organized history of Fascist movements in Western Europe, but it probably should have been a political study instead. The author's history is a bit clumsy and very dry, while his political writing is incisive. Still worth a read for anyone interested in this topic, suddenly very relevant in the USA.

[Mahmoud Awad · Rating 3 out of 5]

Clear, to the point, and extremely thorough, "Fascism: A History" is a must-read for anyone with an interest in fascist ideology and politics.