Mussolini and a Defiance of Democracy - Essay Example

Fascism: Mussolini and a Defiance of Democracy Most political systems have definitions, but are generally still vague as they are interpreted by various people involved in political discussions. Classism is often one of the cornerstones to defining political systems as the elite work towards oppressing the lower classes to increase their wealth. In the 1920s there was a rise in the belief that democracy allowed for the incompetent many to have power over the corrupt few, placing the classes in diametric opposition and challenging the system of democracy. For a time, Fascism became popular as a way to counter this belief, supported by those who wanted a way to step away from democracy (Payne 4). Fascism asserts that the state is the most important factor in government and that devotion to a strong leader, an ethnocentric outlook, and support of the nation above all other considerations is the primary ideology that should be followed. The term ultra-nationalism is often associated with Fascism (Payne 5). Mann writes that “Ideological power derives from the human need to find ultimate meaning, to share norms, values, and rituals that seem to make sense of the world and that reinforce social cooperation” (78). In the aftermath of World War I stabilizing the economy and the lives of the people in Europe became difficult and the people in the various nations were seeking strong leaders. Borejsza, Ziemer, and Hulas discuss Italian Fascism as a form of National Socialism. When in 1870 the Italian unification took place, a statesman of the time said “We have made Italy, now we must make Italians” solidifying the need to create a national identity (22). The new regime was a constitutional monarchy under King Victor Emmanuelle II and this lasted through his descendents until Benito Mussolini conducted the March on Rome in 1922 where he seized power. The rise of Fascism in Italy was defined by its radical nationalism as it fell under Mussolini. Fascism was a phenomenon that rose after WWI and when Mussolini took power by forcing the King Emmanuelle III to resign his Fascist Party had already taken control in the government (Knight 28). Knight writes that “Where liberalism believed in the rights of the individual and the power of reason and science to bring about progress, the new thinkers emphasized emotion, instinct, and the primacy of the race or nation” (9). The new regime was defined by the belief that faith in an external force, such as the dictator, could cure the ills of social systems. Mussolini admitted that it was through his will that Fascism was born. As a dictator, his will was the driving force behind the turn in the political tide in Italy in the beginning of the 20th century. Mussolini said “All force is subordination…Remember that in this subordination of all to the will of the leader…Fascism has found its strength yesterday and will find its strength and glory tomorrow” (61). In 1926 Mussolini’s absolute power and his ability to act independent of the other governing bodies was ratified through Law Number100 (Falesca-Zamponi 62). Under Mussolini’s control, he was not only independent of other governing parties, but was also becoming independent from the Fascist Party. Through the marginalization of the Party, they were reduced to daily administration of government which meant Mussolini’s will, but with no power. Fascist culture was never fully developed, meaning that rather than a Fascist based nation Mussolini had ultimate power that could bend to his whims rather than be constructed under a formal system. Through the dictatorship of Mussolini, Fascism was a shadow, but never fully formed. Works Cited Borejsza, Jerzy W, Klaus Ziemer, and Magdalena Hulas. Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes in Europe: Legacies and Lessons from the Twentieth Century. New York: Berghahn Books, 2006. Print. Falasca-Zamponi, Simonetta. Fascist Spectacle: The Aesthetics of Power in Mussolini's Italy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Print. Knight, Patricia. Mussolini and Fasicm. New York: Routledge, 2003. Print. Mann, Michael, Fascists. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print. Payne, Stanley G. A History of Fascism, 1914-1945. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1995. Print. Name Professor’s Name Class Date Hitler’s Rise to Power Adolf Hitler left a legacy of terror and madness that is one of the strongest historical narratives of the 20th century. A decorated war hero from World War I, he soon became the leader of the German Worker’s Party and tried to take control of Germany during the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923. As a result of this rebellion he was sentenced to five years in prison during which time his good friend Erich Ludendorff kept his presence alive in the party and even ran for Hitler as a surrogate in 1925 promoting the party as it had been transformed into the Nazi Party (Nicholls 159). Through the beliefs of Hitler’s other friend, Kark Lueger, anti-Semitism was discovered to be a powerful political motivator. Lueger shaped the Christian Social Movement at the turn of the 19th to the 20th century and became the mayor of Vienna in 1895 using anti-Semitism as a platform on which to move emotions. Using the power of the working class, he manipulated their emotions into a rallying cry from which he took his own power. Hitler began to model Lueger and while Hitler was in prison and he wrote his book, Mein Kampf, a growing anti-Semitism was a part of the foundation of his discourse (Nichols 160: Giblin 46). While in prison he told one of the Nazi Party members that his new strategy would not be to create another coupe by stating that the future would be found in the ballot box (Giblin 46). There are many speculations as to why Hitler was such a fervent anti-Semitist. One very logical answer is that it was originally a political move that galvanized people under his control (Nicholls 165). As he wrote Mein Kampf, with the help of then imprisoned Rudolf Hess, he used this hatred as a way to focus people to his purpose (Giblin 47). Hitler’s plans are not strictly outlined in his book, but he makes it clear that what he intends is to expand the German territory through the destruction of Russia and into Eastern Europe so that the Germanic people could populate those regions. He calls for the complete eradication of Jewish people. Nicholls writes that “His aims are set out as the destruction of democracy, the creation of a racial state, the removal of the Jews from Germany, and an aggressive foreign policy leading ultimately to the expansion into Eastern Europe” (166). Benito Mussolini, the founder of Fascism, was a model for Hitler who saw the Fascist ideas as a belief system that made sense for his nation, still reeling from the effects of WWI (Whealey 34). Through powerful nationalism and a sense of inclusion, he motivated people to climb in behind his ‘reasoning’. Hitler’s aim was true. He began to accomplish exactly what he outlined in his infamous book. Becoming allies with Mussolini was in Mussolini’s interests because Italy was a ‘have not’ nation who envied the wealth of other European nations. Hitler and Mussolini differed on the issue of Austria which is what held up their alliance, possibly being one of the keys to the eventual demise of both. Once Hitler had more power than Mussolini through military might, the plan began to progress (Whealey 36). Despite his military power, it was through foreign relationships that he really consolidated his power. He had control of the military, but it was through alliances with Italy and then with Japan that he began to have real force behind him. He had gained the love of his people, initially, took power, and then moved to ally himself with other foreign powers that had the desire for empire (Giblin 145). It was not through physical power that Hitler was able to implement his plan but through knowing how to manipulate his political power. The reason that the UK and France did not go up against Hitler in a more aggressive way was that they had already gone through one World War and this would make any nation more tolerant with the intention of avoiding a larger consequence. It is the same reason that Desert Storm in Iraq was ended when its original objectives were met – larger theaters of war are a frightening prospect for any nation. Works Cited Giblin, James C. The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler. New York: Clarion Books, 2002. Print. Nicholls, David. Adolf Hitler: A Biographical Companion. Oxford: ABC-Clio, 2000. Print. Whealey, Robert H. Hitler and Spain: The Nazi Role in the Spanish Civil War, 1936- 1939. Lexington, Ky: University Press of Kentucky, 2005. Print. Name Professor’s Name Class Date The War Without Violence: The Cold War Although it can be said that The Cold War was largely without violence, it was not strictly without violent intentions. Nuclear weapons development, the race into space, and the spy culture all were the developments of a silent animosity between ideologies. The views were polarized by power and ideology as the Democratic nations were pitted against the Communist nations. It could be compared to Rome and Sparta where both practiced similar belief systems that manifested in very different ways. Communist equality was based upon absolute equality, forced by denying people the right to make their own choices, but to live by the choices of the state. Democracy is classist, but allows individuals the freedom to move up and down those classes as their own abilities and fate would allow. The wide diversity that was perceived between Democracy and Communism and the energetic competition between societies that fed into a cultural set of beliefs created a tense truce during the 40 years of the Cold War. Although ideological beliefs were at the foundation of recognizing differences, it was the race for being ‘the’ world power that was at the core of that tension. Technological advances during and after World War II promote industry and national pride, but in the Communist regime, the worker could not individually benefit from that race. National pride was at the core of technological advancement as capitalism was not allowed. Capitalism in the United States, on the other hand, provided for one of the riches decades of its history as the 1950s because of the growth of technological advancement, suddenly became the time to remember when speaking of the American Dream. True hate, however, was based on political manipulation. The McCarthy era of oppression when being a Communist sympathizer, or being accused of one, could ruin your life through being brought before Congress and denounced in the public eye. Blackballing in Hollywood was rampant, who in turn was fueling the fear of Communism by promoting the idea of a romanticized spy culture. The belief that Communist spies were everywhere with the intention of dismantling the Capitalist system promoted even greater fears in people who lived during that time. The threat of Communism was compounded by the threat of nuclear war with one consequence of the paranoia being the building of bomb shelters to protect families against a nuclear strike. Everyone was prospering but no one felt safe. Phillips lists a series of perspectives which form ideas about the Cold War. The Orthodox School sees the expansionist ideas of Josef Stalin as the origin of the Cold War. The Revisionist View sees the aggressive economic policies concerning Europe as the cause of tension. The Post-Revisionist perspective sees both sides to blame through a series of socially relevant ideological standpoints that fueled animosity. The seeds of the division were the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 which came into direct conflict with President Wilson’s liberalism of 1918 that supported individualism and open markets. This set both nations on diverse courses, but it did not begin until after 1945 when the US began to emerge as a superpower (Phillips 128). In my opinion, however, it was spy culture that supported the long period of time that kept the Cold War going on. The belief that the dramatizations of spy culture through film and television stereotypes of Russian spies were accurate created a populace that did not want to let go of the idea of the threat of Communism. Even current spy culture through movies like Salt and television programs like The Americans asserts a belief that the continuation of spy culture is still a valid state. Calls by politicians like Mitt Romney to once again consider Russia an enemy and threat is a way of reviving spy culture because it frees the government to spend on defense and use fear as a way to control opinion. The Cold War was a mechanism of fear that would move populations in the United States to vote for leaders who could go against the perception of threat. Works Cited Phillips, Steve. The Cold War: Conflict in Europe and Asia. Oxford: Heinemann, 2001. Print. Read More