Talk:Fascism/Archive 43

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

→

Archive 50

Fascism definition & Other Encyclopedia Entries

Hi, Everyone,

To help us along, I am pasting below a bunch of other online encyclopedia entries on Fascism.

I agree with the last post that we will not achieve consensus. In a situation like that, it helps to turn to other neutral options. I suggest we use the Oxford Dictionary, which is about as neutral and normative as one can get.

Here is the Oxford definition of Fascism. I propose that we use this as a model for the first sentence of our entry.

"an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.

(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

If using "rightwing" as an adjective troubles people, then we would reword this way: "an authoritarian and nationalistic system of government and social organization that embodied the principles of the extreme Right."

In thinking about the current definition in the entry of Fascism as "radical nationalism", ask yourselves the following question. If you were asked to define Stalinist Communism, how would you do it? Stalinism is the inverse of Fascism. So they should be defined alike, right?

Stalinism was a violent overthrow of property rights, the forced collectivization of farmers, the complete elimination of the right to engage in economic enterprise, the brutal suppression of dissent, the subsumption of all private life by the state, etc.

But Stalinists also celebrated Mother Russia.

Would you be content to have Wikipedia define Stalinism as "a form of authoritarian nationalism"?

I doubt it.

You'd recognize that such a definition would leave out the specific political content of Stalinism.

The same is true of defining Fascism as "radical nationalism." That also ignores its specific political content.

What was that content?

We historians point to the way Fascism came into being: it arose right after Communism began to make serious headway in Europe and elsewhere. Leftwing movements threatened an old order founded on the unequal distribution of property, conservative values, the authority of elites, etc. The Communist revolution of 1917 scared a lot of people on the political Right. As did the spread of other attempts at similar revolutions in places like Germany in 1919. At the same time, the world was undergoing a economic depression that left many in need of hope. Fascism rallied the masses and prevented Communism from succeeding by offering a compelling vision of a restored national order based on conservative principles. It sided with the wealthy industrialists and large landowners. It suppressed the Socialists and Communist Parties. It suppressed the labor movement. It terminated liberal democracy to assure that the Left would not get elected (as it almost did in Germany). It imposed ultra conservative social values on a terrorized society.

Those specific political ends should be foregrounded in our summary definition at the start of Wikipedia's entry. Yes, Fascism was nationalist and statist, but it also was anti-communist and it also imposed ultra-conservative social values on society.

So something like this: "Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement, system of government, and mode of social organization that arose in the early 20th century in Italy, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere in response to Communism, economic decline, and loss at war. It is usually seen as embodying the principles and ideologies of the extreme Right."

This entry has been like an ocean over the years--constantly changing. We will not be able to achieve consensus. So I suggest a different method. I will re-post a beta of a revised version of section one that takes your recent comments into account.

I will leave it up for a week. During that time, make specific suggestions for revision to me here on the Article Talk page. I'll accept the ones I can or work with you on compromises.

After a week, I propose we vote. I will post a new revised version here. All engaged editors will say either "Old Version" or "New Version."

And whichever one gets the most votes will be posted.

If someone is dissatisfied, he or she can request Dispute Resolution. A committee of outside editors will come on board and try to sort things out.

Mryan1451 (talk) 11:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Here now are the other encyclopedia entries.

Extended content

Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Science Fascism is a totalitarian doctrine and a form of political system that was prevalent between the two world wars. The word was coined from the 'fasces', a bundle of rods that the magistrates of the Roman Empire used to chastise people. The Fascist movements saw themselves as punitive, purifying agents of a new national spirit that must redeem their nations from the decadence and defeatism into which they had sunk. Concerned to rejuvenate their nations, their doctrine presented an analysis of the reasons for national disaster and the principles by which national greatness was to be restored. They anticipated much conflict in this enterprise. Fascism was essentially a militant form of nationalism. War was glorious. The predicament in which the nation found itself was the result of its attachment to liberalism, egalitarianism and democracy. These notions represented a rejection of the nation's true, old values for a false conversion to values which were internationalist. Democracy was a slow and unsatisfactory way of making decisions and it allowed much arguing with rulers. Moreover, its populist possibilities were encouraging socialists and Bolsheviks to take power. Hence it is not surprising that the major locations for the emergence of Fascism were Italy and Germany. Both countries had achieved nationhood in 1870; both had since then experienced a rather unsatisfactory form of parliamentary democracy; both felt shattered by their experiences in World War I (though Italy was on the side of the victors); and both felt threatened by the results of the Russian Revolution in 1917 with workers' and soldiers' councils, strikes and general disorder common in central Europe. Fascist rule would reverse these tends. For disorder it would substitute Fascist discipline; for democratic delay it would substitute swift decisive action, Will rather than Reason would prevail; instead of division there would be national solidarity; in place of egalitarian values there would be a return to hierarchy and leadership. Fascism promised to resurrect the old values which had been discarded during the flirtation with democracy. But the instrument for this rejuvenation was not the old discredited aristocratic elite, but a new meritocratic elite with modern technological expertise. Consequently, Fascism could appeal to either conservatives or radicals, they could be united under its nationalistic appeal. This spirit would also permeate industrial relations. There could be no conflict and the Fascist state would supervene over worker and employer — the so-called Corporate State. Much is sometimes made of the differences between the Italian and German regimes. It is interesting to consider these, though they are not very important. For the most part they are either cultural, or concerned with the philosophic roots, such as they were, of the two parties. Italy could scarcely be called an industrialized country. It had an inferior communications system and even in the 1920s national feeling was not strong. Consequently, in spite of all his efforts, Mussolini never succeeded in thoroughly indoctrinating his countrymen, or mobilizing them and militarizing them for battle. Moreover, Italian elitism had a pedigree going back to Machiavelli, recently delineated by Mosca and Pareto. There were also Hegelian undertones in the philosophy of Gentile. Yet Mussolini had been influenced in his syndicalist period before 1914 by Sorel and the idea of the importance of the Myth. 'Our myth is the greatness of the nation', he declared. What is noteworthy is that in spite of considerable differences these two countries produced dictatorial, totalitarian systems which were very similar. It is an example of the importance of historical experience as an explanation of socio-political phenomena. Glossary of Political Thought One of the major ideologies and political movements of the twentieth century. The term is sometimes used exclusively to describe Mussolini’s movement in Italy but its scope is wider than this. Fascism arises in situations in which liberal democracy appears to have failed, and whereas Marxism criticises liberalism from the ‘left’, fascism attacks from the ‘right’. It is hostile to the notion of reason and individuality as a universal attribute. It regards the Enlightenment as espousing decadence and identifies with the collectivity rather than the individual, exalting nationalism and rejecting cosmopolitanism. Fascism embraces modern technology and sees the state as the supreme expression, along with the nation, of personal loyalty. It is strongly opposed to notions of democracy, and identifies repressive hierarchy as natural and inevitable. It is intolerant of political oppositions and favours totalitarianism, and thus the rejection of all liberal freedoms. Although German Nazism differed from Italian fascism in its hatred of Jews, fascism in general privileges a particular ethnic group. Fascism therefore always espouses some kind of racist doctrine. Its attitude towards capitalism is ambiguous. It is hostile to liberalism and the free market, but in practice fascists can come to terms with capitalist interests, even though they subject the latter to nationalist and statist regulation. Although fascism was a major movement in the inter-war period, it continues in the post-war period, rejecting immigration, and expressing visceral opposition to pluralist respect for different cultures. The British National Party and the French National Front are examples of current fascist parties. Bloomsbury Fascism is a term used to describe historically specific interwar (1919-45) European political movements and doctrines. Its derivation is from fasces, the ceremonial bundles of rods containing an axe with its head protuding, symbolizing the authority of the ancient Roman republic (which many Fascist governments wished to emulate). Fascist is also used more loosely to describe any form of right-wing authoritarian régime which is not explicitly socialist. In its most loose usage fascism is employed to denigrate people espousing either right-wing or left-wing views with which the speaker or writer disagrees. Interwar European fascism is easiest to define by what its exponents opposed. They were anti-democratic, anti-Marxist, anti-liberal and anti-conservative: although they were prepared to make temporary alliances with their enemies, normally with conservatives. They rejected cultural and economic conservatism, including its Christian foundations, but also the internationalism, pacifism and materialism of liberals and the left. They invariably embraced an extremely chauvinistic form of nationalism, usually in a form which emphasized the racial or ethnic foundations of national identity, and committed them to the imperial aggrandisement of their nations and to militaristic doctrines and practices. They were generally in favour of totalitarianism: the total control of the polity, economy and society by a fascist party which would create a new national and secular culture, and indeed a new (or revived) people. Fascists were élitists, emphasizing the role of charismatic and authoritarian leaders: although they claimed that fascism represented the interests of all the nation and they mobilized mass political parties. Many of the characteristics of interwar European fascist ideas and movements have been found elsewhere, in Europe, both before and after the interwar period, and in Latin America, Asia and South Africa. However, most historians and political scientists tend to see fascism as a uniquely interwar European phenomenon, and one utterly discredited by the defeat of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy. Whether they are right to be so sanguine remains a moot point. Dictionary of Cultural Literacy A system of government that flourished in Europe from the 1920s to the end of World War II. Germany under Adolf Hitler, Italy under Mussolini, and Spain under Franco were all fascist states. As a rule, fascist governments are dominated by a dictator, who usually possesses a magnetic personality, wears a showy uniform, and rallies his followers by mass parades; appeals to strident nationalism; and promotes suspicion or hatred of both foreigners and “impure” people within his own nation, such as the Jews in Germany. Although both communism and fascism are forms of totalitarianism, fascism does not demand state ownership of the means of production, nor is fascism committed to the achievement of economic equality. In theory, communism opposes the identification of government with a single charismatic leader (the “cult of personality”), which is the cornerstone of fascism. Whereas communists are considered left-wing, fascists are usually described as right-wing. Chambers Dictionary of World History A term applied generically, and often inaccurately, to a variety of extremely nationalistic and authoritarian, populist movements that reached their pinnacle in the interwar years. The movement originated in Italy, centred on Mussolini. It is hard to define the central tenets of fascism even in Italy, where it began as a republican, anti-capitalist, anticlerical movement with a strong syndicalist influence, and yet quickly switched to supporting the free market, the monarchy and the Church. However, all fascist movements (Oswald Mosley's blackshirts in Britain, the Iron Guard in Romania, the Croix de Feu in France or any other of its manifestations across Europe) shared common features: an aggressive and unquestioning nationalism; a disrespect for democratic and liberal institutions, which did not, however, preclude using them to attain power; a profound hatred for socialism; an emphasis on a single charismatic leader; a strong association with militarism. There are many similarities between fascism and Nazism, the latter often being described as simply an extreme manifestation of the former. However, it should be stressed that, although xenophobic, there was nothing intrinsically anti-Semitic about Italian fascism, at least in its early stages. After the end of World War II, fascism was largely discredited, although groups such as the Italian Social Movement and the British and French National Fronts show many similarities. Hutchinson Encyclopedia Political ideology that denies all rights to individuals in their relations with the state; specifically, the totalitarian nationalist movement founded in Italy in 1919 by Mussolini and followed by Hitler's Germany in 1933. Fascism came about essentially as a result of the economic and political crisis of the years after World War I. Units called fasci di combattimento (combat groups), from the Latin fasces, were originally established to oppose communism. The fascist party, the Partitio Nazionale Fascista, controlled Italy 1922–43. Fascism protected the existing social order by suppressing the working-class movement by force and by providing scapegoats for popular anger such as minority groups: Jews, foreigners, or blacks; it also prepared the citizenry for the economic and psychological mobilization of war. The term "fascism" is also applied to similar organizations in other countries, such as the Spanish Falange and the British Union of Fascists under Oswald Mosley. Neo-fascist groups still exist in many Western European countries, in the USA (the Ku Klux Klan and several small armed vigilante groups), France (National Front), Germany (German People's Union), Russia (Pamyat), and elsewhere. Germany experienced an upsurge in neo-fascist activity in 1992 and again in 1998, with rioting in several major cities. The winning of a London local-government seat by the British National Party in 1993 raised fears of the growth of right-wing racism in Britain. In Italy the discrediting of the Christian right-of-centre parties resulted in a triumph for right-wing groups, including the neo-fascist National Alliance, in the 1994 elections. However, by 1998 the National Alliance had adopted a less extremist programme and claimed to be a mainstream conservative party. Greenwood Encyclopedia The term derives from the fasces, a sheaf of rods carried as a symbol of office by Roman consuls, and is a political philosophy that was adopted by the radical, antidemocratic movement that brought Mussolini to power in Italy in 1922. From this exemplar, in common discourse “fascism” is also applied to Nazism and refers to roughly comparable mid-twentieth-century movements in Croatia, Rumania, Spain, and on a smaller scale all across Nazi-occupied Europe. Burma, China, India, and Japan had fascist movements and parties as well, in this broad sense. Milder variants spread to Latin America. In general, fascism was a totalitarian ideology that looked to a strong dictator and veneration of an almost sacralized state and/or nation partly in response to, and substitution for, a broad decline in formal religious belief throughout the West. It utterly rejected the values of the Enlightenment and French Revolution, displacing “liberty, equality, fraternity” with submission and racial and national hierarchy (as in the Nazi slogan, “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer” [One People, One State, One Leader]). It emphasized militarism to the point of cultlike worship of warriors and of war, along with chauvinism, racism, and usually anti-Semitism. In Italy, Germany, and Japan, fascists were also imperialists who called for acquisition of new territories not part of the historic nation-state and who celebrated war both as an instrument of expansion and a positive social force. Fascism’s revolutionary character and intentions ought not to be underestimated. Fascism was not simply “more conservative” conservatism or far-right reaction (an abusive, trite, and ahistorical misuse common in later pejorative speech and writing); rather, it was an utter rejection of democratic norms in favor of mass worship of, and personal surrender to, the ethnic or state collective. In theory, fascism vehemently repudiated capitalism and Marxism, but in practice it proved more comfortable with the former. It viewed democracy and the search for tolerant social consensus as weak and decadent. It was spawned by the desolation, nihilism, and despair of World War I, which shattered the weak civil consensus within the newest European nation-states (Germany and Italy). It thus exerted genuine appeal to tens of millions in the 1920s and 1930s: it was greatly attractive to those, mainly in the middle classes but also among the rural population, who craved dissolution of bitter class conflicts, personal misfortune, and national economic woes into an “organic community” based on unity of the nation, redefined ethnically or even racially. That longing to surrender individuality to some putatively higher collective purpose was made acute by the travails of the Great Depression, during which fascism presented itself as a distinct alternative to the promotion of class conflict by the extreme left, while still offering radical answers to problems that appeared to defy solution by traditional democratic means. World War II saw the apex and then military and ideological defeat of the major fascist states. Some individuals continue to be attracted to fascism’s celebration of the irrational; its declaration of the superiority of emotion, intuition, and will over reasonableness and intellect; its shrill insistence on direct action as against reason; or just because they enjoy antisocial violence and the feeling of belonging to a herd. Social Science jargon Buster The First World War left many European nations in a shambles. Economies were falling apart, there was intense fear of communist revolution, and belief in those that ruled was extraordinarily low. Many felt a need for strong and powerful leadership that could rebuild ‘great nations’. There was a desire for revitalized national identity and economy. Mussolini's Italy, with its strong ties to the military and campaign of national propaganda was the first state to be identified as fascist. But between the World Wars many other European nations, for example, the Iron Guard's Romania, Hitler's Germany and Franco's Spain adopted similar ‘fascist’ doctrine. Now fascism is highly nationalistic, so actual doctrines are culturally specific. There are, however, certain common characteristics, including a hatred of communism and Marxism; a belief in capitalism (which is organized and managed through the state); cynicism over democratic principles; a belief in a need for charismatic leadership with authoritarian and even dictatorial powers; the complete immersion of education, the military, media, and the legal system into the political regime; totalitarian power and lack of pluralism in government; the right and ability to violently fend off any who dare question the regime; but yet a strong desire for public support (often built by both propaganda and terrorism). And while violent, terroristic, and dictatorial, many citizens (particularly those in the middle class) believed in a need for an all-powerful state that would protect them from communism, economic crisis, and the old ruling class. Cambridge Dictionary of Social Science Sometimes used as a word of abuse to refer to movements or individuals who are intolerant or authoritarian, fascism is certainly intolerant and authoritarian, but it is more than this. It is a movement that seeks to establish a dictatorship of the “right” (that is an ultra-conservative position that rejects liberalism and anything associated with the “left”). It targets communists, socialists, trade unionists, and liberals through banning their parties and their members, so that these groups cannot exercise their political, legal, or social rights. It is anti-liberal, regarding liberal values as a form of “decadence” and seeing them as opening the floodgates to socialist, communist, and egalitarian movements. As a movement, fascism extols action and practice over ideas and theory. It uses ideas with considerable opportunism, mixing socialist ideas, avant-garde positions, anti-capitalist rhetoric, ecological argument, and pseudo-scientific ideas to do with race and ethnicity in a veritable potpourri. Is it an ideology at all? Some have suggested that fascism is too jumbled and incoherent to be called an ideology, but, while fascism is peculiarly “flexible,” there are particular features that characterize it, so that a general view of fascism can be created. The term derives from the fasces - the bundle of rods carried by the consuls of ancient Rome; the word fascio was used in Italy in the 1890s to indicate a political group or band, usually of revolutionary socialists. But fascism is essentially a twentieth-century movement, although it draws upon prejudices and stereotypes that are rooted in tradition. Italian fascism saw itself as resurrecting the glories of the Roman Empire, and Alfredo Rocco (1875-1935), an Italian fascist, saw Niccolo Machiavelli (1459-1517) as a founding father of fascist theory. Nazism (which is an extreme form of fascism) was regarded by its ideologues as rooted in the history of the Nordic peoples, and the movement embodied anti-Semitic views that go back to the Middle Ages. Fascism appeals particularly to those who have some property but not very much, and are fearful that they might be plunged by market forces into the ranks of the working class. Fascism is particularly hostile to Communism, since it is opposed to the cosmopolitan contentions of Marxist theory, and its belief in a classless and stateless society. It is a movement that dislikes universal identities of any kind, although of course fascists may call for unity with kindred spirits in other countries. Nevertheless, it is intensely nationalistic, and takes the view that the people must be saved from enemies whose way of life is alien and threatening. Differences are deemed divisive and menacing, and war extolled as a way of demonstrating virtue and strength. The idea that people are divided by social class is rejected in favor of the unity of the nation or people, so that industry is to be organized in a way that expresses the common interest between business and labor. In practice, this did not happen, and it is arguable that fascism is anti-capitalist only in theory, not in practice. Fascists vary in their attitude towards the church (extreme fascists may see religious organizations as a threat to the state), but they regard religion in a loose sense as being a useful way of instilling order and loyalty. Certainly, they use a religious style of language in invoking the need for sacrifice, redemption, and spiritual virtue, and fascists attack materialism, consumerism, and hedonism as decadent and unworthy. Although women can be fascists as well as men, fascism is a supremely patriarchal creed, by which I mean that women are seen as domestic creatures whose role in life is to service men, to have children, to be good mothers and wives, and to keep out of politics. Fascism is hostile to the liberal tradition, and it dislikes the notion of reason. It regards the individual as subordinate to the collectivity in general, and the state in particular. Liberal freedoms are seen merely as entitlements that allow the enemies of the “nation” or the “people” to capture power. Fascist regimes are highly authoritarian, and use the state as the weapon of the dominant party to protect the nation, advance its interests, and destroy its enemies. They are strongly opposed to the idea of democracy (although fascists may use democratic rhetoric to justify their rule or use parliamentary institutions to win access to power), and regard the notion of self-government (the idea that people can control their lives in a rational way and without force) as a dangerous myth. As a movement based upon repressive hierarchy, fascism argues that all institutions should be controlled by “reliable” leaders, and the “leadership principle” comes to a climax with the supreme leader, seen as the embodiment of the nation and the people. Fascist leaders may be civilians, but they are closely identified with the army and police, since these institutions are crucial to rooting out opponents. Fascist movements extend beyond the state, but the violence of these movements is condoned and encouraged by the state; given tight control over the media, this violence is then justified in the light of fascist values. Fascists see themselves as revolutionary in that they are concerned to “rejuvenate” a tired and decadent society, and some fascists speak of creating a “new man” in a new society. They are, therefore, anti-conservative as well as anti-liberal, although they may form tactical alliances with other sections of the right when they can establish momentary common ground. Many regimes, loosely called fascist, are in fact conservative and reactionary systems - Franco's Spain, Pétain's “Vichy” France (a regime that collaborated with the Nazis who occupied the country), Japan under Tojo, and so forth. They may have fascist elements within them, but they are not really anti-conservative in character. Postwar fascism has generally sought to distance itself from intrawar ideologies in Germany and Italy, and has ranged from movements that see the European Community as containing the germ of a “United Europe” to movements hostile to the European Union. Some fascist movements claim democratic credentials, although these are not really plausible, given their intense chauvinism, anti-feminism, and hostility to liberalism and socialism. Collins Dictinoary of Sociology a political ideology forming the basis of political parties and movements which emerged in Europe between the two world wars, which was the basis of the extreme nationalist governments of Italy 1922-43 and Germany 1933-45, and has been continued through parties in many countries since the 1940s. Unlike other political ideologies of the 20th-century, fascism has no large body of systematic intellectual work elaborating its political philosophy, in part because anti-intellectualism is a constituent element of the ideology, so the tenets of fascism are not clearly delineated. One basis, however, is the preference for voluntarism over determinism or materialism, leading to the view that the human will, particularly as exercised by the strong leader, can overcome structural obstacles and make possible what others would see as impossible. This view has affinities with the philosophical writings of Friedrich NIETZSCHE, from whose work German fascists drew. The following are some of the main constituents in fascist writings and actions: extreme racist nationalism linked with territorial expansion; virulent anti-communism combined with intolerance of most other political ideologies and independent working-class organizations; the open use and glorification of physical violence and terror against these groups; a reliance on a mass party organized around a powerful leadership, and once in power engaged in most areas of civil life and depending on continual mass mobilization to sustain support for the leadership; the glorification of militarism, the cult of the presumed masculine virtues, with women defined mainly as mothers and supporters of men; predominant support from the middle classes who are the main, though not exclusive, mass support. The experience of fascism varies. The vicious ANTI-SEMITISM of the German Nazi party was not found originally in Mussolini's Italy. In postwar Europe, fascist parties have been less open on anti-Semitism, their racism more commonly being expressed against people of non-European origin. However, British fascists in their party writings claim that postwar immigration into Britain from the Commonwealth was promoted by Zionists to weaken the racial stock, and anti-Semitism has been a persistent feature of fascist organization and thought elsewhere. Fascism is a specifically 20th-century phenomenon: unlike earlier 19th-century authoritarian and militaristic governments, it depends on the use of mass party organizations both to come to power and to sustain itself in power. The biological notions of race upon which it builds were only developed in the latter half of the 19th century and had widespread acceptance in Europe in the early part of the 20th century, for example in the EUGENICS movement. NATIONALISM, too, was developed as the basis of political organization and mobilization from the mid-19th century Despite these continuities with other general intellectual and political thought, fascism is often thought of as unique in its association of racism, nationalism, mass mobilization and expansionism in such a violent form. Explanations for the emergence of fascism continue to be the subject of extensive debate. The debates centre around the role of socioeconomic forces linked to the crisis of Western capitalism in the aftermath of World War I; the specific political characters of Germany and Italy with relatively late emergence of national unity and parliamentary democracy; the general problems of industrial modernization which give rise to social crises at particular points of transition, especially from small-scale competitive capitalism to large-scale and wider industrial capitalism; and the psychological motivation of fascist leaders and their supporters Palgrave Macmillan From Latin: fasces, the bundle of rods with a projecting axe-head, carried before the consuls as a sign of the state authority of Rome, and adopted as a symbol of social unity (the bundle) under political leadership (the axe). The name was given by Mussolini to the movement which he led to power in Italy in 1922, but is now used more widely, to include German Nazism, and Spanish falangism, on the basis more of a common ethos than a common doctrine. Fascism is characterized by the following features (not all of which need be present in any of its recognized instances): corporatism; nationalism; hostility to democracy, to egalitarianism, and to the values of liberal enlightenment; the cult of the leader, and admiration for his special qualities; a respect for collective organization, and a love of the symbols associated with it, such as uniforms, parades and army discipline. In Germany the cult of violence, together with a violent anti-semitism, were added to these features, with notorious results. The anti-communist and anti-liberal stance of fascist movements, together with the loath-someness of many actual examples, have made the fight against fascism a rallying point for left and liberal causes, so that the label ‘fascist’ may often be applied very loosely, to denote almost any doctrine that conflicts with left-liberal ideology. In this expletive use the term conveys no very clear idea, a fact which perhaps explains its popularity. From the intellectual point of view fascism remains an amalgam of disparate conceptions, often ill-understood, often bizarre. It is more notable as a political phenomenon on which diverse intellectual influences converge than as a distinct idea; as a political phenomenon, one of its most remarkable features has been the ability to win massive popular support for ideas that are expressly anti-egalitarian (see Reich). Mussolini’s own ideas were derived from a heady mixture of popular science, Marx, Sorel and Nietzsche. He advocated regeneration through conquest and perpetual struggle, and spoke, in speeches seething with sexual imagery, of the need to overcome degeneracy and impotence, to make sacrifices for the nation, and to connect to the great ‘dynamo’ of fascism. Fascists are ‘not republicans, socialists, democrats, conservatives or nationalists. They represent a synthesis of all the negations and the affirmations.’ In other words, the ultimate doctrine contains little that is specific, beyond an appeal to energy and action: it is, one might say, the form of an ideology, but without specific content (other than can be provided by admiration towards the leader). This perhaps explains some of its appeal; it seemed to make no demand other than those which the individual himself would make had he the energy. It then provided the energy. Dictionary of Human Geography A political ideology that formed the basis of political parties and social movements that emerged in europe between the two world wars. The nationalist governments of Adolf Hitler in Germany (1933–45) and Benito Mussolini in Italy (1922–43) are the most notable examples, but fascism was a political force across Europe at the time, including Oswald Mosley’s ‘black shirts’ in Britain, the Iron Guard in Romania and the Croix de Feu in France (Laqueur, 1996). Despite the lack of a seminal intellectual text, the following characteristics of the ideology can be identified: extreme racist nationalism; a desire for a ‘pure’ nation-state that contains just one national group; goals of territorial expansion to include all members of a nation within the borders of the state (cf. lebensraum); anti-communism and other forms of working-class organization; violence represented as necessary for the survival of the nation and as a pathway to fulfilling innate human needs; a glorification of manliness and gender roles, promoting men as defenders of the nation and women’s primary role in the biological reproduction of the nation (cf. masculinism); and a mass politics in which the state and the party fuse and mass participation in politics (based upon a cult of the leader) is encouraged. Elements of these ideologies exist in contemporary nationalist political parties across the world, as extreme nationalism is mobilized in the wake of social dynamics (such as immigration and a decline in the power of the state) that are identified as ‘threats’. Political parties in Russia and Serbia display some of these traits, as do the British National Party and some extremist right-wing movements in the USA. The racism of fascist movements is often, but not necessarily, anti-Semitic. Jews are frequently targeted as enemies because, prior to the establishment of the state of Israel, they lacked connection to a particular territory. Hence, they were seen as disloyal to the nation or inimical to the idea of territorial nation-states. The foreign policy of the Nazi Party was partially informed by the ideas of geopolitik, which saw territorial expansion as a strategy related to the holocaust and the extermination of Jews (as well as gypsies, communists and homosexuals), to create a political geography of a ‘pure’ and ‘greater’ Germany (Clarke, Doel and McDonough, 1996: see also genocide). Social scientists and historians have debated the social bases of fascism. The idea that the middle classes were the main source of support dominated until recent years, when the notion of a cross-class support for the Nazis emerged. The geography of fascism shows that support is based upon different class coalitions in different localities, within the broader context of economic restructuring and inter-state competition (Flint, 2001). Recent scholarship has argued that the support for inter-war fascism was more widespread than had been believed (Goldhagen, 1996), with ‘ordinary citizens” rather than committed party members carrying out much of the killing in the Holocaust. This controversial work has contemporary implications as geographers have turned their attention to genocide, under the label of ‘ethnic cleansing’, in the former Yugoslavia and in Africa. Western Ideologies Fascism developed as the third major competing ideology of the first half of the 20th century. It was not simply an assertion of dictatorial or military rule, nor was it a socially conservative perspective, although many conservatives preferred it to either communism or democratic liberalism. Fascist movements that emerged after World War I took a number of different forms, but they shared an ideological perspective that subordinated the individual to the state, opposed class struggle, and affirmed nationalist identities and a corporate state. Structures were elitist rather than egalitarian, and there was an emphasis on the role of the great leader. The first major Fascist leader to come to power was MUSSOLINI in Italy, who became prime minister in 1922 and seized full power by 1926. Other states came under the control of dictators in the interwar period, including Poland (1926), Lithuania (1926), Portugal (1932), and Estonia (1934). The most important Fascist-style regime was established in Germany during the 1930s by the NAZI MOVEMENT led by HITLER. Fascist-style governments also came to power in Greece in 1936 under General Johannes Metaxas, and in Spain with the victory in 1939 of the Falange led by Francisco Franco in the Spanish Civil War. In Argentina, a group of military officers impressed by Nazi achievements seized power in 1943, and their dominant leader, Juan Perón, established a Fascist-style dictatorship in 1945. In JAPAN a distinctive statist authoritarian regime developed in the interwar era, and it established ties with the major European Fascist states in the late 1930s. Fascist-style movements also developed in a number of countries: the Iron Guard, founded in Romania in 1927; the “Black Shirts” of Oswald Moseley in Great Britain (formed in 1932); Young Egypt (the “Green Shirts”), formed in Egypt in 1933. Elsewhere, including in the U.S., many people became convinced that some form of authoritarian fascism was necessary in the face of the Communist challenge and the difficulties of the Depression. Encyclopedia Brittanica Philosophy of government that stresses the primacy and glory of the state, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the state's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent. Martial virtues are celebrated, while liberal and democratic values are disparaged. Fascism arose during the 1920s and '30s partly out of fear of the rising power of the working classes; it differed from contemporary communism (as practiced under Joseph Stalin) by its protection of business and landowning elites and its preservation of class systems. The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922–43), Germany (1933–45), and Spain (1939–75)—Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco—were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936–45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice. Seealso totalitarianism; neofascism. Philip's Encyclopedia Political movement founded in Italy by Benito Mussolini (1919), characterized by nationalism, totalitarianism and anti-communism. The term also applied to the regimes of Adolf Hitler in Germany (1933), and Francisco Franco in Spain (1936). A reaction to the Russian Revolution (1917) and the spread of communist influence, the movement based its appeal on the fear of financial instability among the middle classes and on a wider social discontent. Basic to fascist ideas were glorification of the state and total subordination to its authority; suppression of all political opposition; preservation of a rigid class structure; stern enforcement of law and order; the supremacy of the leader as the embodiment of high ideals; and an aggressive militarism aimed at achieving national greatness. It also typically encouraged racist and xenophobic attitudes and policies. Discredited by defeat in World War 2, fascism was insignificant in Western European politics for many years. In recent years, however, far-right nationalist groups re-emerged in many countries. Macmillan A 20th-century political movement. Taking its name from the fasces, the bound bundles of rods that symbolized the authority of ancient Roman magistrates, fascism first became an organized movement in Italy in 1919 under Mussolini. Social and economic backwardness, fear of communism, and frustrated national ambitions following World War I encouraged its growth, and in 1922 Mussolini's Blackshirts came to power. Fascism, rejecting ideas of individual liberty and equality, emphasized national or racial superiority and concentrated authority on a dictatorial cult figure. In Germany Hitler, who came to power in 1933 as leader of the Nazi Party, added antisemitism to fascist militarism and anticommunism. World War II destroyed Mussolini's and Hitler's dictatorships and fascism won little support in other countries, except in Spain, where Franco's regime survived almost 40 years. The term fascist is now sometimes used pejoratively to describe any advocate of extreme right-wing views. Andromeda Encyclopedia Right-wing political ideology based on the idea of national rebirth and the cult of the leader, in which the fascist party gains totalitarian power. The Italian fascists under Benito Mussolini were the first to come to power, and were subsequently imitated by other violent mass movements across Europe, including Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party and Spain's Generalissimo Franco.

I'm not going to repeat what I posted above, but this is beginning to seem a little disruptive, and I gather that the editor is not a native speaker of English.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 11:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Look, again, that's a huge amount of text even now, let alone pre-collapse. I know you're simply posting source/reference material but it's still far too much. I'd also briefly observe that if the wall of text proves anything, it's that there are 101 ways to offer a broad description of fascism, not one Platonic ideal form that we should necessarily be striving towards and that is within our grasp if we just try hard enough. Also, your references to holding a "vote" and a "committee of outside editors" coming in suggests that you haven't quite grasped how WP works. N-HH talk/edits 11:53, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, guys, please refrain from insult. Saying someone does not speak English is insulting. Politeness and civility are cardinal rules here. I'm not going to make a complaint, but please don't do it again. Thanks. Mryan1451 (talk) 13:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Pointing out the fact that you are not a native speaker of English is not an insult. It does, however, indicate that there are certain parameters with respect to language usage with which you may need assistance. In a topic of this nature, that can be problematic.

In light of the fact that, as pointed out above and as is further evident from the material you've posted below, you are not familiar with how Wikipedia works, perhaps you should consider requesting WP:MENTORSHIP.

You should not to disrupt Wikipedia to try and make a point.

You should also read WP:LEAD.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 14:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

N-HH, I forgot to respond. I know that consensus is the ideal here, but it's clear there won't be consensus. The other option is voting. Or requesting mediation through Dispute Resolution. Do you have another suggestion?

Ubikwit, we should not make comments about each others' abilities or capacities. That's ad hominem and inappropriate. We are supposed to try to come up with as good an entry as we can and focus on content and wording. I don't ask you or the others what your academic credentials are, and I won't. It would be rude and inappropriate. The irony with your odd accusation is that I was in fact an English Professor at several leading US universities for many years. I have taught writing for ages, and I continue to do so. I have professional academic training in history, philosophy, and social theory. I have published many books with reputable presses. People commend me on my writing all the time. I've written the proposed revision in what is called "academic prose," which is a bit more complex than the current style of the entry. But it is the accepted form of writing in the academy (ie, in universities). I could simplify it and break down the sentences, but cadence can be important, and I think it helps here. It livens up boring topics. Sorry to hear you don't like it. Mryan1451 (talk) 15:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

And I am in fact a native speaker (of god's own Irish English, the true English language). LOL. Mryan1451 (talk) 15:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

First, no one is impressed with any of your talk about academian credentials and the like, so I suggest you cease and desist, as NHH has basically done already. Thus far, on this talk page, you have posted walls of text from rudimentary tertiary sources in relation to a very complex and highly studied topic. You are going to have to do better than that to impress anyone here.

This is a quote of your "native" Irish English from a statement of yours seen above from a day or two ago

Hi, Everyone. If you wish to communicate with me about the Fascism: Talk issue I raised, please do so on this page rather than write to me on my Talk page. I will not read or respond to notes from you about this issue on that page.

--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 16:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Mryan, you suggest that there isn't going to be a consensus on this page. I suggest that there is a growing consensus. That seems to be that your proposed edits are largely unhelpful, your grasp of wikipedia policy and practice needs some real work, and that your adding of walls of words is becoming disruptive. I'd suggest limiting your talk page efforts to brief, succinct additions and (as other editors have suggested) exploring WP:MENTORSHIP. Capitalismojo (talk) 16:44, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, all, there are many ways to edit an entry. One is by accretion. But that assumes that what is there is good and worth revising. I think by having lived with the opening for a while, you think it is okay. But it really isn't. I've explained why. And I provided examples of other encyclopedia entries to justify my case. If you read them, you'll see that the opening section of the W F entry leaves a lot out. Another way is to rewrite sections until they are better. That moves things along more quickly. It assumes what is there needs more than just improvement in wording or in a few sentences. I've come to the conclusion that the opening section is not salvageable. It really needs to be redone in its organization and in the main points it mentions. Parts of it can be retained, and my beta contains them.

You don't see how the beta contains more information about F than the current version? I'd be surprised if you said it did not. Our goal is to provide as much info to readers as possible.

As for "walls of words," that is what W is about, and that is what knowledge is about. We owe it to readers of W to read as much as possible and to familiarize ourselves as much as possible with other competing encyclopedias. A different metaphor for that is "deep knowledge" or "expertise," both of which require that you read "walls of words."

U, your speech continues to be aggressive, insulting, and inappropriate. Please desist or I will report your behavior. Mryan1451 (talk) 16:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Mryan again you misunderstand, walls of words is reference to this guidance on Wikipedia: WP:WALLS. It is a essay on the dis-utility and disruption brought about by editors adding vast mountains of text to talk pages, as you have done. By mentioning walls of words with a link to the page I was encouraging you to familiarize yourself with this helpful understanding of best practices on wikipedia talk pages. Your full-throated defence of adding mountains of text misses the point. Please take the time to read the WP:WALLS page if you could. I believe you would find it helpful in understanding some of the resistance you are encountering on this page (and would encounter across Wikipedia talk pages generally). Capitalismojo (talk) 21:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Fascism entry first section new version--beta

Hi, Everyone,

Here is the revised version of the first section of the F entry.

I took your advice into account, and I consulted the other online encyclopedias.

Please make specific suggestions for revision directly to me.

I will either accept or offer a compromise.

I propose that we do this for two weeks.

Then, I suggest we vote, as I proposed in my earlier post. I suggest that we leave a week for voting.

I have tried to preserve as much of the current first section as possible. What I could not directly keep, I tried to reword.

My goal was to bring back in material that had been there before (years ago) but that has slipped out.

I also wanted to make sure we sounded like other encyclopedias and that we included material and ideas they include but that we were leaving out.

I suggest that you propose changes and revisions directly to me on my talk page rather than here. Otherwise, this new section could get really cluttered and hard to read or follow.

Mryan1451 (talk) 12:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement, system of government, and mode of social organization that arose in the early 20th century in Italy, Germany, Spain, and elsewhere in response to Communist revolution, economic decline, and loss at war. It is usually seen as embodying the principles and ideologies of the extreme Right in that it favors discipline, hierarchy, authority, and inequality over the liberal and socialist ideals of personal liberty, economic equality, human rights, and democracy.

Fascism was characterized by the mass mobilization of the national community around an idealized vision of the nation and the race. Usually ethnocentric in its celebration of national superiority, it veered at times into over racism. It relied on a totalitarian state, the cult of the charismatic leader, and violence against political opponents to maintain social order and to achieve its goal of creating a conflict-free, well-disciplined, post-democratic society. Fascists were hostile to liberal democracy, and they opposed the economic egalitarianism of the Socialists and the Communists. Although critical of the materialism and individualism of capitalism, they sided with the big industrialists and large landowners and preserved traditional economic hierarchies by suppressing trade unionism. They sought to quell the division between classes that gave rise to Communism by creating a corporate economic order. Fascism proposed what is sometimes called a Third Position between capitalism and communism. It advocated a mixed economy with the goal of achieving autarky or national self-sufficiency through protectionism and state intervention in the economy.

Fascists emphasized militarism and national rejuvenation through military conquest and imperialism. They advocated a belligerent, chauvinist nationalism and distrust of foreigners. Fascists believed that stronger nations have the right to obtain land and resources by displacing weaker nations. Fascism displaced the class conflict the Communist movement exploited onto a conflict between races and nations. Fascism was characterized by a celebration of the virtues of military life as an individual and national ideal. Public life was organized along military lines and an emphasis was placed on uniforms, parades, and monumental architecture.

The fascist movements sought to turn back the tide of liberal modernization, which they perceived as decadent, by turning to the past for ideals--the German medieval Reich and the Roman Imperium. They rejected the Enlightenment ideal of human progress through science and reason and instead celebrated the Will of the leader, the irrational power of the race and the nation, and traditional values such as "Kinder, Kuchen, Kirche" or family, home, and church.

The fascists came to power by non-parliamentary means, usually using violence to intimidate opponents and to organize anti-democratic revolutions. They were defeated in World War II in Germany and Italy by an alliance of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union (now Russia). The Spanish movement lasted until 1976. Fascist movements can still be found in many countries. And the term is often used to characterize rightwing military dictatorships.

I believe that the vast section above was added by Mryan. I suspect, but can not be certain, that the unsigned paragraphs are a proposed change of the entire lead. If I am correct in this, I suggest that changes be proposed on a line-by-line basis from the current lead. Moreover, I would suggest, as many other editors have now done, that the editor make a serious effort to learn more about how wikipedia works before jumping into the deep end. Making enormous changes in controversial articles, posting walls of words, and initiating dispute resolution processes are not generally the most fruitful endeavors for new editors. This is becoming disruptive. Capitalismojo (talk) 15:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't disagree that the proposal represents a reasonable summary lead section for an entry on fascism, just as 101 other proposals probably would (although there's a couple of things that might benefit from some copyediting and I think more, for example, could have been retained of the current last paragraph re "neo" & "post" fascism). The problem is, as noted, that we have someone posting confusingly formatted walls of text, insisting where and how a debate about any changes is conducted, and seemingly not understanding that writing and improving a WP page is usually a gradual and collaborative process not something that happens through wholesale rewrites affirmed by plebiscite. In a way, that's a weakness, and sometimes more radical action is indeed necessary, but that's the process we have. N-HH talk/edits 16:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Dbrodbeck (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, guys,

I believe my beta adds more information about F that is essential to understanding it. The current version is very clipped. It is ahistorical. It leaves out the social values of F. It focuses on nationalism and militarism and a bit on statism (but does not mention corporatism or the alternative F offered to Communism or social/cultural values). I could go through the current version of section one revising it a sentence at a time, but I'd essentially be re-proposing by beta a sentence at a time. Mryan1451 (talk) 17:01, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Things tend to move incrementally here on wikpedia, you should familiarize yourself with this by paying attention to and editing less contentious articles so you can learn how things work around here. Dbrodbeck (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Dispute resolution & Beta Revision

Hi, Everyone,

I just realized that the best way to propose changes to the beta I posted is right here on the talk page. That way, all can see revisions.

N-HH has suggested that voting is not the way to go, but I can't imagine another way since we will not achieve consensus. That's clear from the discussion of the first version I posted.

I think our only other recourse would be the dispute resolution process, which would get other people involved.

Mryan1451 (talk) 16:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Propose your line-by-line changes or a new paragraph. The other editors will weigh in. If your proposal finds merit it will achieve consensus. It happens every day here at Wikipedia. Wholesale revisions are not likely to easily achieve consensus, in my experience. Capitalismojo (talk) 21:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

PS I'd suggest that you consider, please, ceasing the use of 'beta'. Wikipedia is thousands of versions into this article presently, not in a 'beta' version. Capitalismojo (talk) 21:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Section One Paragraph One Sentence One

Hi, All,

The mediator assigned to us has suggested that we work a piece at a time. That essentially is what CM and NH requested yesterday.

So here goes.

Here is sentence one, paragraph one of the current entry:

Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

Here is the new version I am proposing:

Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement and system of government that arose in the early 20th century in Italy, Germany, Spain, Japan, and elsewhere in response to Communist revolution, economic decline, and loss at war.

Justification:

The current version lacks a sense of history and of location. It provides no cause or reason for the emergence of F. It leaves out "populist." It does not specify that F was an actual political movement and a successful form of government. It makes it seem like an idea (nationalism).

For now, I'm leaving out the "rightwing" that dictionaries and many encyclopedias apply to F. We can deal with that in the next sentence.

Mryan1451 (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Can I ask where a '...mediator was assigned to us'? Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Mediator? Capitalismojo (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

The addition of "populism" seems fine. The addition of "movement" and "system of government" is a good addition. We have no information or refs in the body of the article that would allow us to include Japan in this lead sentence. Removing Japan leaves us with three European counties. Perhaps "initially arose in 20th century Europe" would fit better. Italy was a victor in WWI and Spain neutral, obviating the "loss at war" piece as an overall cause. I'd put possible reasons for Fascism's rise in a seperate sentence. Capitalismojo (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I broadly agree with those suggestions for the proposal. I did have doubts about the "loss at war", but then thought that although Italy was on the winning side in WW1, it didn't do well out of it, which did have an impact on the rise of fascist nationalism. Given the German situation, which speaks for itself, I think we are OK with the broad suggestion that military failure or setback, however we phrase that exactly, was one factor among others that helped drive the emergence of fascist movements, even if it did not apply in every case. N-HH talk/edits 14:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I disagree regarding the military setbacks proposal, as per Capitlismojo and other reasons. Basically, syndicalism started in Italy for economic reasons not connected to any military setback. The pressures were of a different nature, and to claim military setback would simply be fallacious. Germany is a different case, but that doesn't justify a false generalization.

Let me repeat, any edits made to the lead are going to be made on the basis of material in the body of the article. I would suggest finding sources that support any proposed changes and editing the body of the article first.

Obviously the inclusion of "populism" and "political movement" in the lead would be desirable, but they should be incorporated in a weighted manner.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 14:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

But we're not talking about syndicalism per se and even then I don't think this can be narrowed down to simply "economic reasons" in Italy. Perhaps loss or setback doesn't work, but at the very least the broader observation that WW1 had an impact – in many different ways – in driving the emergence of fascism is well attested and is arguably worth listing as an overall factor; again, even if it did not apply in every case. As for the lead/body issue, the WW1 point is currently covered in the body, as indeed are most of the points that Mryan will no doubt want to propose for the lead as a whole. The complete version proposed earlier was as much about shifting emphasis as about introducing anything totally novel. Even if we might disagree more generally on how rigorously the lead/body rules need to be applied – I think sticking to them too rigidly can simply act as a brake on any improvement; if we can at least sort out a reasonable lead, isn't that for the better? – I'm not sure the issue really comes up here anyway. N-HH talk/edits 15:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Something like "the after effects of World War I" rather than "loss in war"? Capitalismojo (talk) 16:23, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Basically, as long as it isn't the case that WP:OR is being introduced into the lead with respect to speculation of a spectral causal relationship between fascism and WWI, fine. Needless to say, WP:RS and WP:NPOV apply. I have no qualms with improvement.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 16:28, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Given the discussion above, the line might read:

Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement and system of government that initially arose in early 20th century Europe in response to Communist revolution, economic decline, and the after-effects of World War I."

Is that a good formulation? Capitalismojo (talk)

That is a positive suggestion. My concern is that by defining the topic we are taking a position. The article "Defining Fascism" (which is Part I of World Fascism: A Historical Encyclopedia, Volume 1) may be helpful as a source and guide for the lead. It begins by saying that not all scholars believe that there is/was a fascist ideology and those that do (the majority) are divided on its definition. It then says that a "consensus" has developed in this century among non-Marxist English-speaking scholars that it is an ideology with three core elements: ultra-nationalism, revolution and rebirth. It then outlines "sources of confusion": "taking fascist ideology at face value", and its relationships with conservatism, modernity, and religion. After defining fascism, we should then say something about actual fascist parties and fascist regimes. TFD (talk) 17:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd be fine with that too, although "threat/fear of .." might be useful addition ahead of "Communist revolution" (plus I'd always prefer lower case for communist, especially in a phrase like that, but that's a trivial point). After all, there was only one successful such revolution. N-HH talk/edits 17:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I think that simplicity is desirable as far as the language used to in the lead to define the topic of the article. There is far too much packed into that sentence to aid the reader in understanding in a clear manner what the characteristics of "fascism" are.

The language needs to be clear and concisely phrased.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 17:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with Ubikwit on that point. Break it into two sentences?. Capitalismojo (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Here is a revised sentence one with sentence two. The current section lacks a clear definition of F's politics. Again, I'm using the existing competing online encyclopedias as a guide here as well as standard dictionaries like the OED, which defines F as "a rightwing political movement."

"Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement and system of government that arose in early 20th century in Europe in response to Communist revolution, economic decline, and loss at war. It embodied the values and ideas of the extreme Right."

An alternative would be to go with the OED and combine sentences one and two: "F was a rightwing, authoritarian, populist and nationalist political movement..."

24.34.171.166 (talk) 12:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Proposed revision section one

Hi, all,

We seem stalled. What's up?

It might be easier if I just posted my proposal for a revision of the entire first section. I do that below, taking into account your comments so far:

Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement and system of government that arose in early 20th century in Europe in response to the threat of Communism, economic decline, and the after-effects of World War I. It embodied the values and ideas of the extreme Right.

Fascism was characterized by the mass mobilization of the national community around an idealized vision of the nation and the race. It relied on a totalitarian state, the cult of the charismatic leader, and overt violence against political opponents to maintain social order and to achieve its goal of creating a conflict-free, well-disciplined, post-democratic society. Fascists were hostile to liberal democracy, and they opposed the economic egalitarianism of Socialism and Communism. Although critical of the materialism and individualism of capitalism, they preserved traditional economic hierarchies and suppressed trade unionism. They sought to quell the division between classes that gave rise to leftwing radicalism by creating a corporate economic order. Fascism proposed what is sometimes called a Third Position between capitalism and communism. It advocated a mixed economy with the goal of achieving autarky or national self-sufficiency.

Fascists emphasized militarism and national rejuvenation through military conquest and imperialism. They advocated a belligerent, chauvinist nationalism and distrust of foreigners. Fascists believed that stronger nations have the right to obtain land and resources by displacing weaker nations. Fascism displaced the class conflict the Communist movement exploited onto a conflict between races and nations. Fascism was characterized by a celebration of the virtues of military life as an individual and national ideal. Public life was organized along military lines and an emphasis was placed on uniforms, parades, and monumental architecture.

The fascist movements sought to turn back the tide of liberal modernization, which they perceived as decadent, by turning to the past for ideals--the German medieval Reich and the Roman Imperium. They rejected the Enlightenment ideal of human progress through science and reason and instead celebrated the Will of the leader, the irrational power of the race and the nation, and traditional values such as "Kinder, Kuchen, Kirche" or family, home, and church.

The fascists came to power by non-parliamentary means, usually using violence to intimidate opponents and to organize anti-democratic revolutions. They were defeated in World War II in Germany, Italy, and Japan by an alliance of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union (now Russia). The Spanish movement lasted until 1976. Fascist movements can still be found in many countries. And the term is often used to characterize rightwing military dictatorships. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.171.166 (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Spain

Doesn't seem to be much on Spain and the Spanish Civil War. At the time of writing it's mentioned in passing as a regime that survived WWII. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.106.246.224 (talk) 20:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Newer Version--section one

Hi, all,

This is a version with what I think might be a better opening. It specifies that F is the name of a movement in Italy; then it goes on to say it is used to name other, similar movements.

That is really more accurate historically.

It follow below.

Can one of you say why the discussion stopped earlier? Are you all hesitant to name F as "rightwing"? If so, why?

24.34.171.166 (talk) 18:58, 10 September 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

Here is the revised version.:

Fascism was a rightwing political movement in Italy between WWI and WWII. The term is also used to characterize similar movements in Germany, Spain, and elsewhere during the same period and since.

Fascism arose in response to the threat of Communist revolution, economic decline, and loss in World War I. It was authoritarian, populist, and nationalist.

Fascism was characterized by the mass mobilization of the national community around an idealized vision of the nation and the race. It relied on a totalitarian state, the cult of the charismatic leader, and overt violence against political opponents to maintain social order and to achieve its goal of creating a conflict-free, well-disciplined, post-democratic society. Fascists were hostile to liberal democracy, and they opposed the economic egalitarianism of Socialism and Communism. Although critical of the materialism and individualism of capitalism, they sided preserved traditional economic hierarchies and suppressed trade unionism. They sought to quell the division between classes that gave rise to leftwing radicalism by creating a corporate economic order that was meant to be a Third Position between capitalism and communism.

Fascists emphasized militarism and national rejuvenation through military conquest and imperialism. They advocated a belligerent, chauvinist nationalism and distrust of foreigners. Fascists believed that stronger nations have the right to obtain land and resources by displacing weaker nations. Fascism displaced the class conflict the Communist movement exploited onto a conflict between races and nations. Fascism was characterized by a celebration of the virtues of military life as an individual and national ideal. Public life was organized along military lines and an emphasis was placed on uniforms, parades, and monumental architecture.

The fascist movements sought to turn back the tide of liberal modernization, which they perceived as decadent, by turning to the past for ideals--the German medieval Reich and the Roman Imperium. They rejected the Enlightenment ideal of human progress through science and reason and instead celebrated the Will of the leader, the irrational power of the race and the nation, and traditional values such as "Kinder, Kuchen, Kirche" or family, home, and church.

The fascists came to power by non-parliamentary means, usually using violence to intimidate opponents and to organize anti-democratic revolutions. They were defeated in World War II in Germany, Italy, and Japan by an alliance of the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and the Soviet Union. The Spanish movement lasted until 1976. Fascist movements can still be found in many countries. And the term is often used to characterize rightwing military dictatorships.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.171.166 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 September 2013

We need to reflect how reliable sources cover the topic and not right our own summary based on our personal views of the subject. Your summary for example ignores the "consensus theory". TFD (talk) 00:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure the above suggestions could be seen as a fair reflection of sourced material, albeit leaning towards one interpretation more than others (as said previously, I'm not sure there's one perfect intro waiting to be found that represents an ideal distillation of all published sources). The second bothers me though with its immediate and initial identification of fascism as simply a right-wing movement in Italy. Yes, that's the origin, and should be specified as such but surely the point is, as the later proposed text acknowledges, that the term is generally used to cover broader ground now. I also think some of the detail in the current last para needs to be in any lead. As for why the discussion dropped off, that's because contributing here is not a full-time job, and those who do spend even an hour or so here each day get distracted by real life and by other pages. Not many of us have the time and energy to invest in total rewrites, especially when it comes to such contentious topics. N-HH talk/edits 07:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

If it leans toward one interpretation more than other then it is POV. Given that the "consensus" theory holds that fascism only existed in Italy and Germany between 1918 and 1945, we cannot state as a fact that it lasted in Spain until 1976. The ranking of the countries that defeated fascism and the inclusion of Canada as one of the four is curious. TFD (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

As was discussed a while back now, I'd be happy with some variation broadly based on the first paragraph or two of the first of the two options just posted above (ie "Fascism was an authoritarian, populist, and nationalist political movement and system of government that arose in early 20th century in Europe ..." etc) replacing what we have now. I think the first sentence proposed there is a bit more comprehensive and accurate than what we have now, and I'd also happily lose the stuff about vanguard parties and how fascists want to "organize the nation on fascist principles", which isn't really very illuminating, all told. N-HH talk/edits 19:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I had a chance to go through the lead a bit just now, and agree that material from the last paragraph. There is also the point that national syndicalism predates WWI. I also made everything consistently past tense with respect to the movements per se, leaving only the discussion of ideology in the present tense.

Obviously there's more that can be done, but there has to be sources and the lead has to be summary style. In this regard, I noticed that the material (removed) in the following passage was not only unsourced, but not mentioned at all in the main body of the text. I am familiar with the discussions on monumental architecture and the like, but there has to be reliably sourced material--preferably in the main body of the article--to be summarized in the lead.

Fascist movements emphasize a belligerent, virulent form of nationalism (chauvinism) and a distrust of foreigners (xenophobia), the latter closely linked to the ethnocentrism of many fascist movements. The typical fascist state also embraced militarism, a belief in the rigors and virtues of military life as an individual and national ideal, meaning much of public life was organized along military lines and an emphasis put on uniforms, parades, and monumental architecture.

That would not seem to be text that clears the bar of WP:NOR. --Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 14:20, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't seem wholly inaccurate though, hence is not technically original research, just currently unverified and lacking parallel detail in the main body. As I think discussed previously, the logical conclusion of taking out such content is that if we have an unbalanced and incomplete body we must have an unbalanced and incomplete lead to match too. Surely it would be better to maintain a more comprehensive lead and look instead to building up the body to reflect that?

Also, I think there's a problem with flipping the left-right stuff up to the top of the page. Even if the words haven't changed, because it now precedes all the stuff about nationalism and militarism, and hostility to socialism and communism, it gives too much prominence too early to the suggestion that fascism is based, in part at least, in "left-wing politics". N-HH talk/edits 09:34, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I think that it is important to mention national syndicalism at the beginning, as that eliminates a good amount of the problems with temporality associated with some of the more generalizing and overarching terms that have been suggested.

As for the left-right thing, it should be apparent that national syndicalism itself was a nationalistic movement, but the economics they embraced were not generally what would be considered "right wing". I agree that it is problematic to harmonize all of the elements, but the next paragraph focuses on the right wing stuff (i.e., totalitariansm, etc.), and the third paragraph delves into the economics ideology. Neither of those is contradictory to the lead. Fascism arose during a fragmentary, transitional period, and it ideology embraced what today may seem to be contradictory elements. It's probably better to try and get that across early--which the reference to "national syndicalism" should facilitate, than oversimplify.
Regarding the deleted material, I think there are some claims made there that would have to be sourced and attributed or based on a substantial body of text in the main article that provided context (and sourcing). It should be borne in mind that the WWII-era fascist states of Italy and Germany along with the then quasi-fascist Japan formed the "axis", for example, so the claim of xenophobia seems somewhat specious to me, though ethnocentrism sounds plausible. Just because it sounds plausible, however, does not mean that there are RS describing it as such. Militarism is a common thread, but how does monumental architecture relate to that? The sentence seems somewhat forced, so there has to be a concrete source connecting those in an intelligible manner.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 11:56, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

As I mentioned earlier there is no agreed definition of fascism or which groups, beyond the Italian party, were fascists. Also, it should be pointed out that fascist ideology changed and no fascist group came to power on its own or governed strictly according to fascist ideology. For us to come up with a definition is therefore POV. TFD (talk) 12:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Basically I agree that since there are diverse assessments in various RS on the topic of this article, all statements should be sourced.

You mention a "consensus theory" that includes Germany along with Italy (1918-1945), which is something with which most people would not disagree. The time frames are relevant to discussions of the left-right political spectrum characterizations, etc. As pointed out in Great_depression#Germany, for example, the Great Depression had a severe impact on the unemployment in the Weimar_republic#Onset_of_the_Great_Depression, facilitating the rise of the National Socialist party, etc.

It would seem evident that monumental disasters like the Great Depression had an effect on the ideology of Fascism and other movements as well. I'm sure that the sources address these issues much more thoroughly than is reflected in our article. For example, the following paragraph cites no sources whatsoever, does not even include a Wikilink to the Weimar Republic article, and seems to be generally lacking

The events of the Great Depression resulted in an international surge of fascism and the creation of several fascist regimes and regimes that adopted fascist policies. The most important new fascist regime was Nazi Germany, under the leadership of Adolf Hitler. With the rise of Hitler and the Nazis to power in 1933, liberal democracy was dissolved in Germany, and the Nazis mobilized the country for war, with expansionist territorial aims against several countries. In the 1930s the Nazis implemented racial laws that deliberately discriminated against, disenfranchised, and persecuted Jews and other racial and minority groups.

--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 15:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

If Italy and Germany were the only two countries where fascists came to power, then it is incorrect to say there were several fascist regimes. TFD (talk) 16:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that paragraph is a mess. For starters, there was already a fascist regime in Italy before the Great Depression. I've done a provisional edit to that paragraph, including a wikilink to Weimar, etc., which is all I can do at present.--Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 17:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

The lead was arrived at after much discussion, and including an understanding that claims made in the lead in Wikipedia's voice can be a problem where the body of the article does not make such a claim. I would note that "monumental architecture" has been found in almost every major civilization, including the present-day United States. It has very little to do with ideology at all. The common thread is that fascism was a pragmatic, totalitarian ideology which generally included irredentism and militarism as hallmarks. Other attributes are sometimes found, sometimes not found, and many of these attributes are found in distinctly non-Fascist regimes (Soviet and PRC irredentism, militarism and totalitarianism etc.) The topic is complex, and the proposal greatly oversimplifies it, as well as making claims which are not common to all fascist examples. Cheers. Collect (talk) 14:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Change to lede

I cannot discern where in the body "Fascism promotes the binding of economic, military and political power, making each stronger than they could be as independent entities" is adequately explained. Can someone point it out, please? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure there is anything in the body that suggests or explains this, or that it is a wholly accurate assertion anyway. It's not utter nonsense, but it's impossibly subjective and analytical for the lead, especially with no reliable source and/or content in the rest of the article to back it up. The IP who keeps editing it in needs to do more than that to justify its inclusion. N-HH talk/edits 17:32, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / I do not know if this is the correct place for mentioning it (so I apologize here and now if I am not in the proper location). Fascism, which comes from the Latin word fascis--"a bound bundle of wooden rods"--was a Roman symbol of "power and jurisdiction" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasces). The German National Socialists during the Hitler era used the word Gleichschaltung 'coordination' to indicate all areas of society in synchronous harmony with one another (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleischaltung). Consequently, the idea that fascism promotes "binding" is deceptive in the sense that it does not simply promote it; rather, it is the logical basis of system itself. As an aside, Gunther Reimann in his 1939 book, The Vampire Economy (Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007) shows that rather than promoting economic unity, fascist economic systems promote division, inefficiency, and corruption at levels significantly higher than found in free enterprise systems (0100 [UTC], 11 November 2013, Comment by Gesetzlich Geschutz). Gesetzlich Geschutz talk/edits 01:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)01:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Introduction: in one of the sources already in the article, it says that fascism's relationship with socialism is mixed

The intro is portraying a limited understanding of fascism's relationship with socialism. It does not acknowledge issues that the author Cyprian P. Blamires describes in World Fascism: A Historical Encyclopedia that is used in this article.

Blamires says that the relationship between fascism and socialism, including claims by some that fascism is a type of socialism is "complicated by a number of factors", including that Mussolini in World War 1 who upon becoming a supporter of Italy's intervention and a nationalist, initially claimed that he had not abandoned socialism but that he had abandoned internationalism, and that there. Blamires says that "the Left has almost from the very beginning universally regarded itself at the opposite extreme from fascism of any stripe". He goes on to say that the distinction from "mainstream" socialism and fascism is that it has regarded itself as a universal doctrine not limited to national boundaries or religious boundaries for instance and pursuit of equality, but that fascism in contrast outspokenly promoted elitist nationalism.

Thus Blamires addresses two key factors. (1) that the fascism-socialism relationship is mixed, including that socialists and members of the political left denounced fascism from the outset-this addresses external factors that affected this mixed relationship. (2) that its key difference or breaking point with socialism is its elitist nationalism.

Providing some clarification in the intro, as well as some detail in the main body of the article of Blamires' analysis, could improve readers' comprehension of why fascist movements that held figures with socialist backgrounds and some movements that called themselves "socialist", are not widely considered as socialist, nor left-wing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.88.216.184 (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

It is an odd introduction. Conservatism and neo-conservatism in the U.S. have similarly had apostate socialists as leaders, but no explanation is provided in articles about them. TFD (talk) 04:19, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The difference between fascism and the neo-conservatism example you mention, is that fascism appears to have a very mixed relationship involving socialism-in some instances distancing themselves and at other times embracing it, whereas neo-conservatives who were formerly socialists don't keep going back to socialistic themes to justify their actions. The content in the article shows that Mussolini at least initially claimed to support socialism after becoming a fascist. Then there is info that Mussolini sought to bring in the political right into the movement and watered down more radical elements of the movement. Lastly there is material showing a quote of him in 1940 denouncing both Marxism and "capitalist slavery". It seems at least that fascism appealed multiple times to socialistic political rhetoric to justify its actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.88.216.184 (talk) 06:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

if you read the before and after writings, you will see a lot has been retained. The modern right btw often uses a populist appeal against the elites, and claims to represent the people. TFD (talk) 07:04, 19 December 2013 (UTC)