Reflection Paper
In his work, Riley Dylan explores the comparative analysis of the historical growth, development and varieties of fascism Europe and their relationship to the rise of Civil Society during the Interwar Period in Europe. In the study, he attempts to shed a light on the responsibilities political organizations and forms of regimes in the various interplays of Civil Societies from the interwar European fascism. From an analysis of the work, it is evident that Riley focuses on the different regimes rather than the movements from which the regimes emerged.
What was the role of democracy in the growth of fascism? Was the presence of a politically active civil society the cause of the development of the present liberal democracy? Is the insufficiency of this Civil Society a restraint to political activism? Riley rejects researches and analyses claiming and supporting that the current fascism is against democracy. He instead states that it is a rejection of the political institutions that are presently existent. Authoritarianism and other new forms of institutions have often been argued to create fascism but according to Riley, it is the other way round since fascism is based on the principles of legitimacy. Riley’s statements are, however, agreeable when given a keen eye since fascism as a matter of fact, represents a rejection of most of the procedural acts that portray democracy like divergent ideologies, voting processes and competition between parties. The political state has indeed shaped the face of fascism. Most of the leaders claim that their regimes offer a superior form of connection to the population through the practice of nonpolitical interest presentation. From his analysis, one learns that the democracy of the authoritarian government is simply a form of state representation devoid of politics.
