Fascism: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)

Fascism is one of the more complex political movements of the past century and one of the more difficult to satisfyingly define. Philosophers sometimes seek the necessary and sufficient conditions for defining some term or concept. The problem with fascism is that while there are a number of necessary conditions, they are not in themselves sufficient in designating a movement as fascist. Fascism is always ultranationalistic, racist, and anti-liberal, but these are features it holds in common with a host of other right wing political movements. In the end, identifying a movement as fascist is more of an art than a science, akin to the famous definition of obscenity by U. S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart: "I know it when I see it." Kevin Passmore's fine book can help one know it when one sees a fascist movement.It is important to understand this movement for a host of reasons, many of them historical but some of them contemporary. For instance, calling someone a fascist has become a commonplace of contemporary political vituperation. In the 2004 election I heard a number of people call Bush a fascist, and while he holds a few positions in common with fascism, they are in the end very few and the differences significant. Less understandably, I heard more than one right wing commentator call Kerry a fascist, which is beyond comprehension, since he does not espouse a single position that connects with what we understand as fascism. So we really do need to understand what it means when we properly identify someone as a fascist. Passmore's approach is primarily to discuss a host of national situations from a historical perspective that were at the time either self-identified as fascist or, in the wake of WW II and the utter discreditation of fascism, that share a significant number of features with pre-WW II fascism. Obviously this approach means discussing Italian and German fascism, but Passmore also spends a good amount of time on nations that will be unfamiliar to all but serious students of Eastern Europe, such as Romania.The picture that gradually emerges of fascism is of a movement that is anti-modern, rascist, masculine and anti-feminist, corporatist, rabidly nationalistic, rural rather than urban, largely undemocratic, leans towards a dictatorship, tends to be anti-free market and at the same time anti-trade union, and paramilitary in nature. What can be bewildering is that not every incarnation of fascism can be characterized by all of these features. This is less true of pre-WW II fascism than post-war, when movements that are largely fascist have been forced to espouse democratic principles and even claim not to be racist. In the end, what one gains is not a crystal clear of what is or is not fascism, but a general impression of what might count as a fascist movement.This is not a well-written book, which is the only complaint I would like to make about it. The structure is awkward and one chapter does not naturally flow into one another. There seems to be little rhyme or reason why one bit of the subject is dealt with in one part of the book and not another. Furthermore, Passmore never really states clearly what he sees as lying at the heart of fascism. I managed to figure out what he meant by typing out various identifying characteristics as I read through the text, but unless one undertakes some such exercise, one could end the book a bit confused about the whole matter. Had the book been more clearly structured, it would be a far more valuable introduction to the subject. In the end, one does get a good sense about fascism, but only if one is willing to work hard towards that end. The author doesn't help the reader as much as he might have. Nonetheless, I strongly recommend this book. Although we are unlikely to see the kind of fascist movements that we saw in the interwar years, it represents tendencies in political thinking that have never really disappeared and persist even today. We need to be sensitive to these tendencies and prepared to deal with them in the future.

I’m guessing that sales of Fascism: A Very Short Introduction (by Cardiff University professor Kevin Passmore) have spiked since the election of Donald Trump!That is certainly why I chose to read this book. We on the Left are very fond of bandying about the word “fascist” (count me guilty as charged!) so I wanted to educate myself a little more about what fascism is, at least so I can be somewhat intellectually honest should I seriously brand someone a fascist.Passmore goes to great lengths in pointing out that fascism is not easily defined (Fascist/Fascism- with a capital F- refers specifically to Mussolini’s Italian political party) but that fascism can entail a number of traits. By giving a history of political parties and movements that might be labeled fascist, he shows that there are often differences between the goals, methods and make up of these parties.(Interestingly Nazism differs from fascism primarily in its racist policies. While fascists are generally racist, anti-immigrant and may even believe in a hierarchy of races, the actual pursuit of a policy of racial extermination like the Final Solution differentiates Nazism from fascism. And recent right-wing leaders like Thatcher and Messrs. Reagan and Bush Jr are more correctly defined as Neo-conservatives.)So what are some of the hallmarks of fascism? Some of the more obvious ones are ultranationalism, racism, a cult of personality/charismatic leadership, anti-constitutionalism and a level of violence. In addition, a true fascist movement will often have its own paramilitary wing. A strong element of Social-Darwinism pervades fascism as well (and the irony of American Evangelical voters supporting Social Darwin-like Republican economic policies is rich to me!)It can get a little more complicated when it comes to economics and fascism. While fascists often appeal to the working classes with a pro-worker sort of populism (particularly where socialist parties have failed in leadership or simply don’t exist), fascists are often corporatist. They cosy up to big business for a variety of reasons, and as big business naturally lacks a moral compass besides that of making a profit, it will often tolerate fascist political leadership.The book also discusses fascism’s often fluid relationship to religion and the role of women in a fascist state, fascism usually having an aura of machismo.Fascism of course didn’t die with the defeat of Hitler and Mussolini and it has taken various forms in disparate places and populations around the globe since.It was interesting (and disheartening) to consider that while this book was revised and reprinted in 2014 and the author discusses various right-wing political movements especially across Europe, I don’t think even he anticipated the rapid growth of parties like UKIP in the UK, the FN in France, etc.While the far-right parties today that may indeed be fascist, none really ever embrace the term openly. Ultimately, this book succeeded for me in that now I better understand fascism’s history, what fascism is (and is not) and its place in contemporary politics. I am far more comfortable in using it to describe one when I see one.A few final thoughts on the book itself. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in the subject but while it’s a relatively short and very engaging read, it does assume a fairly good knowledge base of 20th Century history and politics. Also, and this might sound silly, but it is important for context: the book is written with and embraces the assumption that fascism is in fact a BAD thing!

This is a densely written book which claims that it is impossible to define fascism except as 'a contradictory set of interrelated and contested ideologies and practices' . It ranges widely over manifestations of what was called fascism in many different countries. It's a book to wade through rather than read with pleasure. On the plus side, it does contain a huge amount of information and it looks at fascism from many different angles including class, gender, nationality etc. It's evidently written from the point of view of a progressive liberal academic who dislikes elements of modern right-wing populism whilst refraining from simply categorising them as 'fascist'. In other words, a phenomenon like Trump should be assessed in contemporary terms rather than simply labelled and thereby dismissed as 'fascist'.

As with all the other books of the series I've read, it's a great little gem.The author presents the various and very complicated facets of fascism in a very orderly manner, with a certain degree of distance from the subject itself, but obviously without it being totally objective (if such a thing can ever be written).It covers a lot of aspects of fascism that don't immediately come to mind when thinking about it, and it makes various ambiguities about the nature of fascism very transparent, and gives some good insight on how the context under fascism arose, its brief history, and the aftermath: what impacts fascism has had (and still has) in our societies.Great book for anyone who wants to be introduced to what proves to be a very complicated and fragile issue in our modern history.

To me "A short introduction to" should also mean an easy read not a scholarly prose without the use of everyday language. It could have been used without detracting anything from the authenticity of the authors research and knowledge of the subject. I debated giving it 3 stars but overall it's a good informative little book, just not a bus/train reading.

I bought this book to try and figure out what makes the government of the United Kingdom tick. It helped somewhat.

I've read quite a few of the very short introductions now and I have to say this one was my favourite. Some of the others spend too long discussing people who discuss the subject, which might be fair enough as it gives you a decent reading list to investigate the subject further, but I preferred the engaging and comprehensive writing style of this book. I didn't read much that particularly surprised me but yet I feel much better informed now and have actually learnt a fair amount about other political ideologies too. I certainly couldn't previously have described the key differences between fascism and, say, authoritarian conservatism. I found there to be a healthy balance of history, critical analysis, and future (somewhat terrifying) prospects.