Good Essay On Fascism: Mussolini And Hitler

- Benito Mussolini. “The Political and Social Doctrine of Fascism, edited by Philip F. Riley, Frank Gerome, Henry Myers, Chong-Kun Yoon, The Global Experience: Volume Two of Readings in World History Since 1500, Fifth Edition.
- Adolph Hitler. “Mein Kampf,” edited by Philip F. Riley, Frank Gerome, Henry Myers, Chong-Kun Yoon, The Global Experience: Volume Two of Readings in World History Since 1500, Fifth Edition.
I have chosen to analyze two documents by Mussolinin and Hitler because they both describe basic principles of the fascist ideology. This ideology was among the most destructive phenomena of the twentieth century. Both documents explain, in a certain way, how fascist ideology appeals to the masses with lowest level of intellect and denies the necessity to have a critical approach to life, the necessity to analyze events and make logical decisions.
The first point of the author is that war is a natural state of the society development, it is fully justified and it brings up the best qualities of an individual. “And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism-born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to meet it.” (page 224).
Another idea that Mussolini is bringing up in his work is his denial of the theory that economy shapes the development of the world. “Such a conception of life makes Fascism the complete opposite of that doctrine, the base of so-called scientific and Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history: according to which the history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in means and instruments of production” (page 225).
Third main point of the document is the rejection of democracy. Mussolini claims that majority-driven society is wrong and human equality is unachievable. “After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it’s a majority, can direct human society: it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage.” (page 225).
The target audience of the document is German people. Hitler was contemplating plans to win political power in Germany and he needed mass support. The first part of the text about the superiority of the Nordic race appeals to the broadest German audience of the time, while the second part about propaganda is for those, who already embraced the Nazi ideology.
One of the major points of the document the author wants to prove is the superiority of the German nation and it’s aspiration to rule the world. He also claims that only peculiarities of Germans’ historical development have not allowed them to do so. “If the German folk, in its historical development, had possessed that herdlike unity which other peoples have enjoyed, the German Reich would today be mistress of the globe.” (page 226).
Another point Hitler wants to prove is that propaganda must be aimed at the lowest level of human society with the lowest intellectual capabilities. “All propaganda has to appeal to the people and its intellectual level has to be set in accordance with the receptive capacities of the most-limited persons among those to whom it intends to address itself.” (page 227).
And the third major idea of the document is that the masses should be manipulated in such a way, that they believe they are fighting for a “right cause” with mutual enemy. “Consequently, a number of intrinsically different opponents must always be comprehended together, so that in the view of the masses of one’s own adherents the fight is only being carried on against one enemy alone.” (page 228).
Both documents have several common ideas, since both authors were close allies and shared the same ideology. The most vivid is the denial of pacifism and eagerness to wage war. “And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. It thus repudiates the doctrine of Pacifism-born of a renunciation of the struggle and an act of cowardice in the face of sacrifice. War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to meet it.” (page 224). “World history would have taken another course, and no one can tell whether in this way that might not have been attained which so many deluded pacifists are hoping today to wheedle by moaning and whining: A peace supported not by the palm branches of tearful pacifistic female mourners but founded by victorious sword of a master race (Herrenvolk) which places the world in the service of a higher culture.” (page 227).
The second common idea of both fascist leaders (since I believe Nazism is the same as fascism) is the superiority of their nations and their “right” to rule the world. “Thus the Fascist loves in actual fact his neighbor, but this “neighbor” is not merely a vague and undefined concept, this love for one’s neighbor puts no obstacle in the way of necessary educational severity, and still less to differentiation of status and to physical distance.” (page 225). I would use the same quote for Hitler, as I used in the first common idea. “World history would have taken another course, and no one can tell whether in this way that might not have been attained which so many deluded pacifists are hoping today to wheedle by moaning and whining: A peace supported not by the palm branches of tearful pacifistic female mourners but founded by victorious sword of a master race (Herrenvolk) which places the world in the service of a higher culture.” (page 227).