What is fascism - when did it originate and how did it differ from Nazism. Evgeny Popov. The difference between fascism and Nazism (national socialism) Differences between fascism and nationalism

Most, even fairly educated people, most often do not know that there is a difference, and quite a big one, between Mussolini's fascism and Hitler's National Socialism. National Socialism is often referred to as fascism, or Germanic (German) fascism. Most often, this identification of concepts is observed in an environment brought up on communist ideology, which called the manifestations of totalitarianism in Europe fascism. Often a person simply did not want to share these ideologies, considering them the evil of one root, common, mixing both concepts and not wanting to understand the difference.
Fascism as a totalitarian movement originated in Italy and got its name from the Italian word "fascio", which means "bundle", "bundle", "association", "union". Somewhat later, Hitler, taking the idea of Mussolini as a basis, developed it on racist soil and created already National Socialism or Nazism.

Nazism is dominated by the racial idea, brought to the point of anti-Semitism. The attitude towards all other nations also has a connection with the Jews. Everything is associated with the Semites.
According to Mussolini, “the main provision of the fascist doctrine is the doctrine of the state, its essence, tasks and goals. For fascism, the state appears as an absolute, in comparison with which individuals and groups are only "relative". Individuals and groups are conceivable only in the state. Even more specifically, this idea is indicated in the slogan that Mussolini proclaimed in his speech in the Chamber of Deputies on May 26, 1927: "everything is in the state, nothing is against the state, and nothing is outside the state."

The attitude of the National Socialists to the state was fundamentally different: it is "only a means to preserve the people." Moreover, National Socialism had as its goal and main task not even the maintenance of this "means", but the rejection of it - the restructuring of the state into society. What was the society of the future supposed to be like? First, it had to be racial, based on the principles of racial inequality. And the main initial goal of this society was the purification of the race, in this case Aryan, and then maintaining and maintaining its purity. The state was conceived as an intermediate stage, which is necessary at first for the construction of such a society. There is a certain similarity with the ideas of Marx and Lenin, who also considered the state a transitional form on the way to building another society (communism).

The fascists are characterized by a corporate approach to solving the national question. The fascists want to achieve their ultimate goal of an absolute state through the cooperation of nations and classes. National Socialism, in the person of Hitler and his other leaders, decides national problem through a racial approach, by subordinating the "sub-humans" to one superior race and ensuring its dominance over the rest.
The above is confirmed by the statements of the leaders of these movements:
B. Mussolini:“Fascism is a historical concept in which a person is considered exclusively as an active participant in the spiritual process in the family and social group, in a nation and in a history where all nations cooperate."
A. Hitler:"I will never agree that other peoples should be equal to the German, our task is to enslave other peoples."

The main thing in the ideology of National Socialism is race. At the same time, in Nazi Germany, race was understood as a very specific type of people, laws were adopted to ensure the purity and preservation of the Aryan race, and specific measures were taken to breed a certain physiological type.

Mussolini, on the other hand, argues that “race is a feeling, not a reality; 95% feeling." And these are not particulars, these are fundamental ideological differences. Mussolini does not use the concept of "race" at all, he operates only with the concept of "nation". Hitler, on the other hand, argued that the concept of “nation” is an outdated, “empty” concept: “The concept of a nation has become empty. The "nation" is the political instrument of democracy and liberalism."
Hitler fundamentally rejects the concept of "nation". Moreover, he sets the task of abolishing this concept. Mussolini, on the contrary, identifies the concept of "nation" with the basis of the fascist doctrine - the concept of "state".

Anti-Semitism was the cornerstone of the national policy of National Socialism. At the same time, in fascist Italy, there was no persecution of Jews for any ideological reasons. Fascism, as an ideology, is generally free from anti-Semitism.

Moreover, Mussolini strongly condemned the Nazi theory of racism and anti-Semitism.
Fact, but not widely known, that Hitler and Mussolini extremely disliked when their doctrines and ideologies were confused.
Hitler in his ideology took as a basis a way to unite it around pseudo-socialist ideas, transforming Mussolini's idea of an absolute Italian state into the idea of a society with racial inequality, where the Aryan race would dominate.
Mussolini believed that it was necessary to revive the former power of the Roman Empire, he solved the national question in a corporate manner. For Mussolini, it was important to organize equal cooperation of nations in order to achieve the common goal of organizing an absolute state, where the individual would be under complete, both spiritual and physical control.

Hitler, so to speak, squeezed the juice out of Mussolini's doctrine, as well as out of communist ideas, turning them into a monster not only from the inside (total control over the individual in the state), but also from the outside, turning the German people into a machine of war, destruction and subjugation other nations.
Totalitarianism is an ideology. Both Mussolini and Hitler wrote their own works, which were the doctrines of their regimes. In Italy it is "The Doctrine of Fascism", while in Hitler it is "My Struggle". These doctrines were the foundations with which the people were persuaded, and which were supposed to be the book of the "being" of every fascist and Nazi.

Under totalitarianism there is no place for the individual. Everything is absorbed by the state, in the case of fascism, or society, in the case of National Socialism.
Totalitarianism is terror. In Italy, these are the Blackshirts, and in Germany, the SA, SS, Gestapo, as well as the "People's Tribunal" and other bodies of fascist justice.

And on these grounds, specialists attribute the fascist and Nazi regimes to the totalitarianism of the twentieth century.
After the collapse of the USSR, and Ukraine's exit from it, the pro-fascist in views, the policy of forcible total Ukrainization of the Russian nation-forming indigenous population should include the RUH, "NU-NS" Yushchenko, BYuT and, regrettably, the current ruling Party of Regions ... having come to power with votes Russians, it has slid sharply to the right from a democratic one in terms of ideas and program, abandoning regionalism, the Russian language, an alliance with fraternal Belarus and Russia, the CES ... becoming a clone of its previously mentioned Russophobic parties ...

In Ukraine, Tyagnibok's Svoboda should be attributed to the Nazis without evasions and reservations and, on the basis of the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, declare it OUTSIDE THE LAW; say the same thing about an organization that is not registered anywhere, and therefore CRIMINAL - an ethnic organization in terms of ideas, membership and actions in favor of only one nationality - the Tatars of Crimea, the so-called "Mejlis". According to all of the above signs, this is an organized crime group based on Nazi ideas of supremacy over other peoples inhabiting Crimea.

#SaveDonbassPeople
#DonbassAgainstNazi

Nationalism - love for one's own people, setting their interests as a defining criterion.

There is also the concept of "Spiritual nationalism".

Fascism is rather a form of dictatorship, the unification of all the resources of the country, the people into unity in order to overcome an internal or external threat.

One can distinguish between positive fascism (the movement of Minin and Pozharsky, for example) and negative fascism (US mondialism).

Nazism is the ideology of the superiority of one nation over others, with corresponding conclusions for practice. If Nazism is combined with fascism, then the Hitler Reich is obtained.

The ideology of nationalism in itself is not totalitarian. It was formed in Europe in the 18th-19th centuries and reflected the aspirations of peoples divided between patchwork feudal empires to create their own national states.

The focus of the policy on the protection of national interests in international arena fully compatible with any political regime including liberal democrats. At the same time, as the experience of the 20th century showed, an ideology based on nationalism, under certain conditions, can become the basis of a totalitarian regime. At the same time, nationalism acquires a hypertrophied character. It not only ceases to reflect the interests of the nation, but also reduces the meaning of its existence to serving an abstract national idea, including by such methods that contradict the objective interests of the people.

The prerequisites for the growth of the popularity of the national idea in Italy and Germany were the same.

Italy suffered heavy losses in the First World War, emerged from it with a weakened and undermined economy, and, although it belonged to the camp of the victors, received from the Allies much less than it expected. Accordingly, the idea of restoring "justice", creating a Great Italy met with a positive response in society.

Germany capitulated in November 1918, when there was no longer any chance of a military victory. In the country, exhausted by the war, a revolution began. However, difficult and humiliating peace conditions were imposed on her, although her army still retained the ability to resist, the territory was not occupied. This gave rise to the myth that Germany owed its defeat in the First World War to betrayal by internal anti-national forces.

important common feature characterizing the development of both Germany and Italy in the early 1920s was the acuteness of internal socio-economic problems and contradictions that could not be resolved.

The national idea in Germany and Italy was expressed in similar formulas. They included an appeal to the unity of the nation, expressed the desire for a common higher goal - the achievement of national greatness; the assertion that only one political party can express the interests of a single nation. Its leader - A. Hitler in Germany and B. Mussolini in Italy - was considered a symbol of the nation, realizing its will. This will was primarily associated with the implementation of the program of subjugation and subjugation of weaker states, which were considered as potential adversaries.

In both countries, the national idea was linked to social egalitarianism. The liberal-democratic state, the propertied classes were criticized, promises were made to solve the problem of unemployment, raise living standards and reduce social inequality, put forward populist slogans such as "Land to those who cultivate it" (the slogan of B. Mussolini).

The only significant difference between the ideologies of Italian and German fascism was due to the fact that the latter was based on outright racism. A. Hitler and his entourage proclaimed the Aryan race as the highest, called upon to lead other peoples, who were declared inferior, occupying the living space necessary for Germany.

German fascism converted the racial theory, justified by references to the power of the "Aryan spirit", anthropological and ethnographic research, against the European peoples themselves.

The ideology of Italian fascism was dominated by references to the Roman Empire, whose successor Italy was declared, claiming dominance over the Mediterranean. It was the ideology of expansion in pure form, but without such a pronounced racist component as in Germany.

The significance of the anti-war movement that unfolded in the 1930s goes far beyond the limits of its time. Anti-fascism has become not only its cementing force, but also the defining trend of the historical process. The origins of the anti-fascist orientation of broad sections of the international community were rooted in the awareness of the danger of fascism as a weapon of reaction, trampling on the values of human civilization, bringing the world a destructive and barbaric war. Therefore, the flow of various anti-war political movements and social organizations revealed a centripetal tendency to "accumulate unity" in order to prevent war.

However, although the peace-loving public understood what the growing military threat posed, the anti-war forces remained fragmented. The ideological and political differences in the main directions of the anti-war movement - communist, socialist, pacifist, religious - were significant. They were reflected in the political choice, in the degree of realism in the assessment of international conflicts, in varying degrees of awareness of the universal nature of the fascist threat, in relation to violent (armed) methods of preventing war.

The disunity of the anti-war movement, and primarily its left wing, was largely determined by the split in the proletarian anti-war forces, the differences between the Communist and Workers' Socialist Internationals. The burden of distrust and suspicion towards each other, the history of the past, replete with disputes and mutual accusations, and mainly in connection with the Stalinist thesis about social democracy as an accomplice and twin of fascism, on the one hand, and the frank anti-communism of many social democratic leaders, on the other ( 527), laid a heavy burden on the proletarian anti-war organizations, on whose unity the effectiveness of the anti-fascist struggle depended above all.

The communists (528) were the first to come up with the historical idea of forming a “united popular front in the struggle for peace” (529), the first, according to M. S. Gorbachev, “to sound the alarm about the danger of fascism, the first to rise up to fight against it ... They were the first - having come from all over the world - to enter into an armed battle with fascism in Spain. They were the first to raise the banner of Resistance in the name of the freedom and national dignity of their peoples” (530).

The 7th Congress of the Communist International (Moscow, 1935) proclaimed the struggle for peace as the main slogan of the Communist Parties. Having discarded the dogmatic attitudes of the "smug sectarianism" of the past years (531), the incorrect and insulting definition of social democracy as "social fascism", the communists put forward the goals of universal anti-fascist unity, the general democratic, humanistic tasks of preserving peace and repelling fascism (532).

The communists considered the formation of a united workers' front to be the main prerequisite for preventing war, opening up the prospect of including all workers in the anti-fascist struggle, regardless of political views and religious beliefs, and their independent anti-war actions at the international level (533).

In close connection with the policy of the united workers' front, the policy of the Popular Front was justified, which had the goal of creating a broad association of anti-fascist forces either in the form of a militant mass movement or in the form of democratic regimes.

Finally, the program for creating a broad peace front was to unite all peace-loving forces, including the USSR, a number of bourgeois-democratic states, and all anti-fascist and anti-war movements. Congress has revised the previous negative assessment of the role of pacifists. The involvement of pacifist organizations in the anti-fascist struggle began to be seen as the mobilization against the war of the petty-bourgeois masses, the anti-fascist part of the bourgeoisie, the progressive intelligentsia, women and youth - in a word, those sections of the population who were ready to fight against the threat of a new war (534).

The historical merit of the anti-war communist movement was the conclusion that it was possible to prevent war. The Comintern resolutely refuted the fabrications of bourgeois propaganda to the effect that the Communists "think that only war will create a situation in which it will be possible to fight for the revolution, for the conquest of power" (535). The provision on the possibility of preventing a world war reflected objectively existing trends in social development. However, in the pre-war period, they did not reach the degree of maturity and strength that was necessary to resist fascism.

Urgeo-liberal pacifist organizations and religious-pacifist peace movements (544) were also divided on the question of how to keep the peace.

These tendencies were initially revealed in disagreements about tactics in relation to Italian aggression in Ethiopia, Japanese aggression in China, German violations of the Treaty of Versailles, and then to civil war in Spain, betrayal of Czechoslovakia, as well as on the application of League of Nations sanctions against aggressors (545). G. Pollit, characterizing the situation in the pacifist movement, emphasized that within it “the ambiguity on the question of the ways and methods of struggle for peace. Everyone wants peace. But the greatest disagreement reigns over the question of how to preserve the world” (546).

A military (violent) rebuff to aggression was rejected by a number of influential pacifist organizations (the International of Opponents of War, the International Brotherhood of Reconciliation), by the majority of religious-pacifist organizations as a method incompatible with the main (non-violent) principle of the pacifist doctrine. At the same time, in the second half of the 1930s, another trend emerged: thousands of pacifists actively opposed fascism and the policy of war and condemned "non-intervention." Together with the communists, they participated in the defense of the victims of aggression and supported the Popular Front in a number of countries (547).

In the main, the positions of the communists and pacifists coincided, since the main goal - the prevention of war, the protection of civilization from fascism, being a value of universal significance, was the same. Therefore, the idea of a broad front of peace has become widespread in pacifist circles, contributing to the strengthening of democratic and anti-fascist tendencies.

Brussels Congress (September 3–6, 1936), held under the slogan “The world is in danger. We must save him!” adopted the manifesto “Peace Charter”. It was attended by 4,900 delegates and 950 guests, including communists, socialists, liberals, conservatives. Pacifist organizations of various trends were represented, including those from countries threatened by fascist aggression, delegates from semi-colonial and colonial countries, representatives of 15 national trade union centers, and 12 socialist parties. This forum has taken important and positive decisions. At the same time, their weakness was that specific warmongers were not indicated, the connection with the anti-fascist struggle was still not clearly expressed. R. Cecile and P. Kot were elected co-chairs of the created World Association for Peace (WOM), F. Noel-Baker and Pastor Zhezekil were elected vice-presidents.

The most important outcome of the Brussels Peace Congress was the entry into the forefront of the history of a new movement of social protest against war - the World Association for Peace, in which for the first time communist, democratic and pacifist forces were ready to fight together to prevent war.

The Moscow Congress of the Comintern and the Brussels Peace Congress laid a solid foundation for uniting peace adherents of various orientations and created the prerequisites for the formation of a broad anti-war coalition. A trend towards the internationalization of anti-fascist actions emerged, reflected not only in the increase in the number of anti-war international forums, but also in the joint actions of social forces on both sides of the ocean. Internationalism became an important weapon in the struggle of the progressive public for the cause of peace. Such was the alignment of forces in the anti-war movement when the growing military threat became the determining factor in the development of international relations.

Then, when Germany launched aggression against Poland, it first launched a bloc of allies to fight aggression, then an anti-Hitler coalition.

Problems of the "North-South" Dialogue at the Present Stage.

From Palych: for me, these two terms were unambiguous. That's what they told me at school and college. Fascists and Nazis are Germans and Germany in 1939-45. It turns out this is not so. Want to see and understand the difference? Read...

Differences between "fascism" and "Nazism"

Fascism and Nazism are by no means identical concepts. But we do not like to dwell on this slippery topic in detail. Who wants to find out the difference between two kinds of scoundrels?

Alas, experience shows that terminological confusion invariably gives rise to a distorted perception of history. Even if we are talking about such odious phenomena as fascism or Nazism.

The memoirs of a war veteran describe a curious episode that took place in Germany in the winter of 1945. A Soviet officer called an elderly civilian German an "old fascist", puzzling him a lot:

The German asked:

Warum Faschisten? Faschisten - Italian. Mussolini.

Fascists in Italy?! And here who?!

Hitler. NSDAP. Nazis.

Look at you, - the captain said to the guards. - It turns out there is a difference. Nothing. Let's hang Mussolini, we'll hang Hitler."

Indeed, the NSDAP functionaries and SS thugs did not even suspect that they were considered fascists in the USSR. In turn, the Soviet people did not realize that fascism and Nazism were different, though in many ways similar movements.

It is not difficult to name the common features of the two ideologies: the total rejection of democratic values, the desire for a tough one-party dictatorship, the cult of the leader, hatred of Marxists and liberals, and finally, the unconditional primacy of national interests over individual and class interests. There are, however, significant differences as well.

It is no coincidence that the emblem of fascism, which originated in Italy after the First World War, was the ancient Roman fascia - a bunch of rods, a symbol of unity and power. The fascists put forward an attractive thesis about the "unity of the nation" - as opposed to the class struggle and party strife generated by the "rotten" democratic system. The ideologists of fascism believed that parliamentary democracy should be replaced by the so-called. "corporate state" based on professional groups (corporations) that perform certain functions. Together, corporations make up a single national organism, and the result is a complete idyll ...

To separate classes and parties, fascism opposed, in modern terms, a political nation. And we should not be surprised by the fact that in the 20s there were ethnic Jews among Benito Mussolini's associates - for example, senators Luria, Ancona and Meyer, chairman of the State Bank Teplitz or Guido Jung, member of the Great Fascist Council, finance minister and active developer of "corporate » ideas. The same can be said about the fascist regimes in Spain and Portugal, which by the way successfully survived the war, allegedly marked by victory over fascism.

But in the case of the Nazis, the situation is fundamentally different. Here, concern for the the purity of the nation”, intolerance towards foreigners, dense biologism with measuring skulls, calculating the percentage of Aryan blood, etc. It is Nazism that is characterized by the idea of “inferior races” and a “race of masters”, allegedly designed to rule the Earth. The Nazis were much less ambitious than the Nazis, who were building grandiose plans for a radical reorganization of the whole world.

From this follows another significant difference between fascism and Nazism - the attitude towards religion. If in the fascist states church institutions enjoyed great authority and influence, then the Nazis frankly did not favor the church. For them, religion was a competitor in the struggle for the souls of fellow citizens.

Back in the 1970s, the American historian Alan Cassels put forward an original theory regarding the spread of fascist and Nazi ideologies in the states of Europe. In his opinion, fascism was characteristic primarily of relatively backward countries, which hoped to achieve accelerated development rates with the help of a tough dictatorship and a centralized economy. Nazism, on the contrary, should be seen as a negative reaction to the industrial revolution and urbanization, which gave rise to the "mixing of tribes" and the erosion of national characteristics. Therefore, Nazi ideas received the greatest support in advanced industrial countries like Germany.

It is a mistake to assume that the fascists and Nazis, who acted as a united front during World War II, were eternal allies. The example of Austria is very indicative. In the early 1930s, Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss, a staunch fascist who dreamed of a corporate state, dissolved parliament, abolished basic civil liberties, and formed an alliance with Mussolini, was in power here. Wherein worst enemies Dollfuss were local Nazis, supporters of the annexation of Austria to the Third Reich. In the summer of 1934, the Austrian Nazis attempted a putsch, seizing the residence of the fascist chancellor, mortally wounding him. By the way, these turbulent events almost provoked a military conflict between Germany and Italy.

One of the greatest crimes of the twentieth century, no doubt, is the genocide unleashed by the Nazi regime. And the odiousness of the concept of "fascism" for us is associated primarily with the tragedy of the Holocaust. But, paradoxically, the Nazis had a very distant relation to it.

For 15 years after Mussolini came to power, there was no national discrimination in the Italian fascist state. The Duce adopted anti-Semitic laws only in 1938, under the influence of a newly acquired ally, the Fuhrer. Nevertheless, Mussolini categorically refused to participate in the "final solution of the Jewish question" and did not extradite Italian Jews to Hitler. They remained safe until the autumn of 1943, when Italy capitulated and the Germans, who occupied the north of the country, opened the account for the Italian victims of the Holocaust.

A few more telling facts. Albania, which was under Italian occupation, was not affected by the Holocaust at all. In Croatia in 1941, several thousand Jews fled from areas controlled by the Germans and Ustasha into the Italian occupation zone. A year later, the German leadership demanded that Italy extradite the fugitives. The Nazis refused...

Finally, there were the classic fascist regimes of Franco in Spain and Salazar in Portugal. Far from persecuting "their" Jews, they provided shelter to thousands of Jewish refugees from other countries.

Of course, no normal person can feel sympathy for fascism, with its cult of the Duce or caudillo, blackshirt detachments and castor oil for dissidents. But at the same time, it is hardly fair to declare the Holocaust a product of the “bestial fascist ideology”.

We inherited the identification of fascism and Nazism from Soviet propaganda. And, obviously, it is connected with the desire of the Bolsheviks to fit all enemies to a common ranking. The fanatics, who observed reality in the distorted mirror of Marxist dogmas, confidently declared: the class essence of all bourgeois parties is the same! Stalinist propaganda in the 1930s easily equated Hitler with the British conservatives. Like, in Germany - "an open dictatorship of big capital", and in England - "disguised". Where is the difference between fascists and Nazis?

Italian fascism entered the historical arena before other odious movements, which is why the word "fascist" has become a universal label for politicians hostile to communism. From the beginning of the 1920s. so began to call literally all the figures of the right orientation, from Hitler to Pilsudski, from Mussolini to Ulmanis. Moreover, the European Social Democrats, who did not fall under the definition of "fascists" in any way, but Stalin did not like them either, were dubbed "social fascists." This absurd epithet was actively used until the mid-1930s.

By the way, the opposite camp in the 20-30s. also suffered from a tendency to artificial generalizations. The far-right press stigmatized the sinister "Reds", portraying the Russian Bolsheviks, the German Social Democrats and the British Laborites as a single entity. However, not a single researcher now operates with this propaganda label. But the many-sided "fascists" have successfully migrated from the propaganda of the Soviet era to modern monographs, articles and school textbooks. At the same time, we inherited several derivative stamps.

In particular, our media still like to use the term "fascist" to refer to Wehrmacht soldiers. It is absolutely incorrect to represent every German mobilized into Hitler's army as a carrier of a certain ideology, and not even Hitler's. With the same success, you can christen all the soldiers of the Red Army "Trotskyists."

It is worth mentioning the word "German-fascist". This term is not only erroneous in historical terms, but also quite questionable from the point of view of linguistics. Soviet propagandists spawned a lot of similar verbal freaks, but some of them quickly lost their relevance. Even under Stalin, bright pearls have sunk into oblivion: “social fascist”, “Ukrainian-German nationalist” (as they tried to call UPA fighters at one time), “right-left bloc Syrtsov-Lominadze” (Soviet newspapers reported on the defeat of this anti-party group in early 30s). The fate of the "fascist German invaders" was more successful - they are still with us.

Should we abandon the use of the term "fascism" in the wrong context? The question is not easy. If on one side of the scale is historical objectivity, then on the other side are established stereotypes, mountains of books and articles published over the past 70 years, and finally, political conjuncture ...

Fascism as a totalitarian movement originated in Italy and got its name from the Italian word "fascio", which means "bundle", "bundle", "association", "union". Somewhat later, Hitler, taking the idea of Mussolini as a basis, developed it on racist soil and created already National Socialism or Nazism.

The essential difference between these two teachings is the tonal coloring of their nationalistic ideas. Both ideologies are based on chauvinism, butif in fascism this chauvinism is aimed at strengthening the state, the revival of the former Roman Empire and the unity of the representatives of this nationthen national socialism It is the theory of the superiority of one nation over another.

Nazism is dominated by the racial idea, brought to the point of anti-Semitism. The attitude towards all other nations also has a connection with the Jews. Everything is associated with the Semites.

According to Mussolini the main position of the fascist doctrine is the doctrine of the state, its essence, tasks and goals. For fascism, the state is represented as an absolute, compared to which individuals and groups are only "relative". Individuals and groups are conceivable only in the state". Even more specifically, this idea is indicated in the slogan proclaimed by Mussolini in his speech in the Chamber of Deputies on May 26, 1927 : "everything is in the state, nothing is against the state, and nothing is outside the state."

The attitude of the National Socialists towards the state was fundamentally different: it "only a means to save the people". Moreover, National Socialism had as its goal and main task not even the maintenance of this "means", but the rejection of it - the restructuring of the state into society. What was the society of the future supposed to be like? First, it had to be racial, based on the principles of racial inequality. And the main initial goal of this society was the purification of the race, in this case the Aryan, and then the maintenance and preservation of its purity. The state was conceived as an intermediate stage, which is necessary at first for the construction of such a society. There is a certain similarity with the ideas of Marx and Lenin, who also considered the state a transitional form on the way to building another society (communism).

The above is confirmed by the statements of the leaders of these movements:
B. Mussolini: "Fascism is a historical concept in which a person is considered exclusively as an active participant in the spiritual process in a family and social group, in a nation and in history, where all nations cooperate."
A. Hitler: "I will never agree that other peoples should be equal to the German, our task is to enslave other peoples."

The main thing in the ideology of National Socialism is race. However, in Hitler's Germany race was understood as a very specific type of people, laws were adopted to ensure the purity and preservation of the Aryan race, specific measures were taken to breed a certain physiological type.

Mussolini, on the other hand, argues that “race is a feeling, not a reality; 95% feeling." And these are not particulars, these are fundamental ideological differences. Mussolini does not use the concept of "race" at all, he operates only with the concept of "nation". Hitler, on the other hand, argued that the concept of “nation” is an outdated, “empty” concept: “The concept of a nation has become empty. The "nation" is the political instrument of democracy and liberalism."

Hitler fundamentally rejects the concept of "nation". Moreover, he sets the task of abolishing this concept. Mussolini, on the contrary, identifies the concept of "nation" with the basis of the fascist doctrine - the concept of "state".

Anti-Semitism was the cornerstone of the national policy of National Socialism. At the same time, in fascist Italy, there was no persecution of Jews for any ideological reasons. Fascism, as an ideology, is generally free from anti-Semitism.

Moreover, Mussolini strongly condemned the Nazi theory of racism and anti-Semitism.

It is a fact, but not widely known, that Hitler and Mussolini did not like very much when their doctrines and ideologies were confused.

Hitler in his ideology took as a basis a way to unite it around pseudo-socialist ideas, transforming Mussolini's idea of an absolute Italian state into the idea of a society with racial inequality, where the Aryan race would dominate.

Mussolini believed that it was necessary to revive the former power of the Roman Empire, he solved the national question in a corporate manner. For Mussolini, it was important to organize equal cooperation of nations in order to achieve the common goal of organizing an absolute state, where the individual would be under complete, both spiritual and physical control.

Totalitarianism is an ideology . Both Mussolini and Hitler wrote their own works, which were the doctrines of their regimes. In Italy it is "The Doctrine of Fascism", while in Hitler it is "My Struggle". These doctrines were the foundations with which the people were persuaded, and which were supposed to be the book of the "being" of every fascist and Nazi.

Under totalitarianism there is no place for the individual. Everything is absorbed by the state, in the case of fascism or society, in the case of National Socialism.

Totalitarianism is terror. In Italy, these are the Blackshirts, and in Germany, the SA, SS, Gestapo, as well as the "People's Tribunal" and other bodies of fascist justice.

And on these grounds, specialists attribute the fascist and Nazi regimes to the totalitarianism of the twentieth century.

After the collapse of the USSR, and Ukraine's exit from it, the pro-fascist in views, the policy of forcible total Ukrainization of the Russian nation-forming indigenous population should include the RUH, "NU-NS" Yushchenko, BYuT and, regrettably, the current ruling Party of Regions ... having come to power with votes Russians, it has slid sharply to the right from a democratic one in terms of ideas and program, abandoning regionalism, the Russian language, an alliance with fraternal Belarus and Russia, the CES ... becoming a clone of its previously mentioned Russophobic parties ...

In Ukraine, Tyagnibok's Svoboda should be attributed to the Nazis without evasions and reservations and, on the basis of the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, declare it OUTSIDE THE LAW; say the same thing to the address of nowhere registered, and therefore CRIMINAL - an ethnic organization in terms of ideas, membership and actions in favor of only one nationality - the Tatars of Crimea, the so-called "Mejlis". According to all of the above signs, this is an organized crime group based on Nazi ideas of supremacy over other peoples inhabiting Crimea.

Hello, dear readers of the blog site. For each of us, memories of the Great Patriotic War where our fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers fought.

The whole world is notorious for Khatyn, Auschwitz, Buchenwald and. These terrible crimes were committed by those who professed the fascist ideology and unleashed the bloodiest war on the planet, which claimed over 71 million human lives, of which 26.6 million were killed.

Let's see what fascism is, who gave birth to this monster and why today it is outlawed in all civilized countries.

Definition and origins of fascism

Fascism is a political ideology that originated in Italy after the First World War and later spread to Germany.

It expressed the views of the most reactionary strata of society, who dreamed of revenge for the defeat in the war and sought to quickly overcome its devastating consequences.

In modern political science, fascism is also understood as a set of political and ideological currents. extreme right wing who preach racism, xenophobia and other similar views.

According to Wikipedia, fascism has its roots in the concept fascio (conjunction), which formed the basis of the name of the organization of the founder of world fascism Benito Mussolini Fascio di combattimento. In an earlier sense, it was used in Ancient Rome like fascis (rods), which were worn in the form of bundles by the honorary guards of the Roman masters.

For the first time, a mass gathering of fascists was organized in Milan in March 1919 at the initiative of the then journalist and future Duce B. Mussolini. Many people suffered from the uncertainty of the consequences of the war, the socio-economic and political crisis was hard.

Fascism tried to give hope to the desperate masses by demanding social justice and the protection of private property.

In his book The Doctrine of Fascism, Mussolini stated that if the 19th century was a period of individual-oriented behavior, then the 20th century was destined to become an era of collectivism and total domination strong state.

Speaking with the idea of a firm order, the Duce organized a march on Rome in 1922 by the "Blackshirts", after which the Italian king instructed him to form a government. This marked the actual coming to power of the extreme right legally.

German fascism

Born in Italy, fascism reached its apogee in Germany. There were special conditions that contributed to the strengthening of such ideas.

Among favorable conditions It was:

humiliation and virtual isolation of the country after the First World War;
the deepest economic crisis, expressed in hyperinflation, a decline in production and mass unemployment;
heavy;
weakness political power who failed to offer a real scenario for getting out of a difficult situation.

In such conditions, the leader of the National Socialist Party came to the fore A. Hitler, who put forward his scenario for overcoming a protracted crisis.

The definition of fascism in the 20s of the last century proceeded from the principles antisemitism, patriotism, and the largest enterprises.

The Nazis put forward the idea of "living space" for the Aryan race, which they proclaimed the highest on the planet. To achieve happy life need a war. She will force other peoples who are destined to serve the chosen race into submission.

Similar Ideas impressed many Germans and the popularity of the National Socialists continued to grow at a high rate, although they were formally outside the law. After an unsuccessful attempt to seize power in Bavaria (the famous "Beer Putsch"), Hitler was imprisoned, where he wrote the book "Mein Kampf", in which he attacked the Jews with harsh criticism.

In the late 1920s, in the wake of the global economic crisis, the German government failed to properly build economic policy, which gave a new chance to Hitler, who proposed the "right course". This allowed his party to win the parliamentary elections, and the Fuhrer himself in January 1933 to head the government.

Soon all of Germany will be placed at the service of fascism, and the ideology itself will spread to other states.

Before the start of World War II, pro-fascist puppet regimes were established in many European countries - Portugal, Spain, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Finland.

Signs of fascism

Fascist ideology is characterized by the following features:

propagandized national intolerance - this becomes a universal national idea;
terror and violence against those who are objectionable on the part of adherents of ideology (beating in the streets, breaking into houses, temples, etc.);
anti-Semitism;
propaganda, chauvinism and;
denial and priority to violence;
, the desire to unleash a war, alarmist statements and appeals;

All of these features must be present in the aggregate (or in large part).

Differences between fascism and Nazism

Due to the extreme radicalism, aggressiveness, misanthropy of both ideologies, many do not understand how fascism differs. However, the difference exists and manifests itself in individual details:

Attitude towards the nation. The Nazis sought to form a superman, the Nazis proclaimed a certain nation as superhuman, and the rest were forced to work for themselves or simply destroyed.
. Fascism relies on the totalitarian state, turning it into an instrument of its policy. Nationalists see it as a transitional stage in the life of society, which will be replaced by a certain format of public institutions.
Correlation of concepts. The difference between fascism and Nazism also lies in the fact that the second was formed on the basis of the ideological views of the first. National Socialism is not always part of fascism. This refers to the regime of Salazar in Portugal or Franco in Spain.

The world appreciated the terrible crimes of the Nazis against humanity at the Nuremberg Trials in 1946. Those who lived to see the trial and gave orders to exterminate people, and were also involved in starting the war, received severe punishments.

The very fascist ideology outlawed and banned- for the edification of posterity and in memory of the millions who became victims of this monster.

Good luck to you! See you soon on the blog pages site