RISE OF FASCISM IN ITALY AND NAZISM IN GERMANY : A COMPARITIVE

STUDY

Submitted by

Moon Mishra

UID : SF0117029

B.A LLB (2nd Year, 3rd Semester)

Faculty in-charge

Mrs. Namrata Gogoi

Assistant Professor of History

National Law University, Assam

Guwahati

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

[1]INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................3-4

[1.1]Literature Review

[1.2]Objectives of the research

[1.3]Research Questions

[1.4]Research Methodology

[2]THE RISE OF FASCISM IN ITALY..........................................................................5-8

[3] THE RISE OF NAZISM IN GERMANY.................................................................9-12

[4]COMPARISION BETWEEN ITALY’S FASCISM AND GERMANY’S

[5]CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................21

BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................22

2
 [1]INTRODUCTION

Italian Fascism (Italian: fascismo italiano), also known as Classical Fascism or simply
Fascism, is the original fascist ideology as developed in Italy. The ideology is associated with
a series of three political parties led by Benito Mussolini: the Fascist Revolutionary Party
(PFR) founded in 1915,[1] the succeeding National Fascist Party (PNF) which was renamed
at the Third Fascist Congress on 7–10 November 1921 and ruled the Kingdom of Italy from
1922 until 1943 and the Republican Fascist Party that ruled the Italian Social Republic from
1943 to 1945. Italian Fascism is also associated with the post-war Italian Social Movement
and subsequent Italian neo-fascist movements.

Nazism is a form of fascism and showed that ideology's disdain for liberal democracy and the
parliamentary system, but also incorporated fervent antisemitism, scientific racism, and
eugenics into its creed. Its extreme nationalism came from Pan-Germanism and the Völkisch
movement prominent in the German nationalism of the time, and it was strongly influenced
by the anti-Communist Freikorps paramilitary groups that emerged after Germany's defeat in
World War I, from which came the party's "cult of violence" which was "at the heart of the
movement."

Fascism was a system of government that reigned in Europe between the First and Second
World Wars. It was a far-right form of government which was characterized by extreme
nationalism, racial discrimination, promotion of violence and war, gender discrimination
against women, and an unapologetic hatred for socialism.

The most notorious regimes that practiced fascism were Benito Mussolini in Italy and Adolf
Hitler of Germany (as Nazism). Although, there were other fascist regimes and movements in
Spain, Croatia, Hungary, and Britain and so on, none of there was as vibrant, feared and
influential as Mussolini and Hitler. There has been a strong and ceaseless debate among
historians about whether fascism as practiced in Italy under Mussolini could be described as
the same with the Nazism practiced in Germany under Hitler.

This research examined the similarities and differences, if any, between Mussolini’s fascism
and Hitler’s Nazism with considerable study of the assertions of scholars on the debate.

[1.1] LITERATURE REVIEW :

3
1. A History of the Modern World, Ranjan Chakrabarti:- This book provides a
wellrounded, historical account of the processes of the modern world, including Fascism in
Europe. The work assesses major moments and transitions in European and world history. A
detailed account of Fascism in Italy and Nazism is Germany has been given, describing all
the courses of history during this period. The book helps the readers understand the complex
world that surrounds us today. It is written in simple language which makes it easy to register
and retain.

2. Norman Lowe, World History :- This book provides an intensive account of rise of
Fascism in Italy and rise of Nazism in Germany. The factors which led to the rise of both the
ideologies are comprehensively provided in a book. It is more than sufficient for the
understanding of the ideologies. This book is an account of Italian Fascism and German
Nazism as a system of government, a means of dominating, controlling, and guiding human
beings as a piece of machinery for providing economic and social services. It addresses the
important issues like the factors which led the dictator to choose this ideology, the
contribution of the force of his own character, the machinery through which the Dictator’s
policy worked, the spiritual and economic effect of the system upon the Italian people.

[1.2] SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE

1. To study the rise of Fascism in Italy.

2. To study the rise of Nazism in Germany.

3. To compare Fascism and Nazism in Italy and Germany respectively.

[1.3] RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What are the factors which led to the rise of Fascism in Italy?

2. What are the factors which led to the rise of Nazism in Germany?

3. What are the similarities and differences in Fascism and Nazism in Italy and Germany
respectively?

[1.4] RESEACH METHODOLOGY

In this project, doctrinal form of research has been applied wherein materials form secondary
sources such as libraries , archives, articles and the internet have been used.

4
 [2]THE RISE OF FASCISM IN ITALY

Fascism did not rise spontaneously nor was its growth prompted by one single event. Its roots
grew from actions of people and groups over many years and of course one unique man,
Benito Mussolini. Although Mussolini took power in 1922 the conditions allowing the
germination of Fascism came from the years around 1914. Mussolini was quick to sense any
political opportunity that came about over the following years.

The pre-war years were an insecure time in Italy. Although unification had taken place in
1870, no real national identity existed. This was due to the individuality of region, since they
had been independently governed for so long, this included regional languages. There was
also the problem of the north-south divide which was further increased by the industrial
developments of the north. Whilst the north was beginning to prosper due to the introduction
of modern methods in all of its business, the ancient agricultural techniques of the south
barely sustained its population.1

At this time, a limited number of men had the right to vote, many, however, passed this
opportunity as they saw they governments as corrupt, this grew from the system of
trasformismo. Faith in the governing bodies was also waning, as the life span of governments
was extremely short. The people were dismayed at the fact that the governments had gotten
the country into huge debts, which they attempted to solve by placing high taxes upon the
poor. The governments’ lack of initiative in foreign policy angered certain sections of the
Italian community.

The lower ranks of the army had always been avid supporters of Fascism, to the extent that
they diverted equipment to them. The officer class to tended support Fascism but could not
openly show their allegiance as to keep discipline. The Police openly showed their support by
standing back whilst the Fascist used extreme violence against socialists.

Some Italians unification of Italy was not yet complete and the terre irredenta, that is, the
national movement, needed to be given Italian sovereignty. These were lands that had a
majority Italian-speaking population but were still run by the Austrians.

The government had also embarked upon a war with Abyssinia, where they suffered a
humiliating defeat at Adowa. Italy suffered 15,000 casualties and the war costs further put the
country in debt. The government took a huge blow by receiving opposition from the Church.
1
Norman Lowe, MORDERN WORLD HISTORY 299 (5th Edi 2013)

5
The Pope told Catholics not to participate the new state and priests helped to stir up unrest
amongst the peasantry. These were very insecure times for the new state. It is already visible
how people might turn to a radical solution in this bleak period. The government was left
with an inferiority complex, which would be further emphasised, along with other problems,
during the war.

Italy’s involvement in the war was an attempt by the government to solve the problem of
terre irredente and to unite the people. However, there was much debate over whether Italy
should join the war at all. The two camps were the neutralists and the interventionists.

The government felt it had no choice in the matter; it had to go to war. Its reasoning was
based on the belief that a victorious nation would look badly at Italy for not joining the war
and they also wanted to be on the winning nations side. They of course did not know who
was going to win so they decided they would join the side that offered them the best deal.

Meetings with the Austrians over the terre irredente proved fruitless after which the Allies
offered a better deal and so the “Treaty of London” was signed and Italy joined the war. The
interventionists had proven decisive in the government joining the war, after they had had
street demonstrations for a month the government gave its backing to the war.

This is an early indication of parliament not standing up to groups who opposed it. These
revolutionary groups were called “Fasci di Azione Revoluzionaria” and Mussolini was part of
one such group. Although the Italian forces were under prepared for conflict they did fight
nobly. They did, however, suffer a major defeat at Caporetto, which had a huge impact on the
course of the war. Not because it sounded a death knoll for the Italians but rather because the
news of the defeat caused such outrage in Italy it made the Italian government readdress the
current military structure.

The defeat had reinforced the tide of defeatism and social tension. The government spent vast
sums on military equipment to ensure an Italian victory. 2 The head of the military was
replaced and the army began to make gains on the war front. This culminated in a dramatic
victory at Vittorio-Veneto, this produced a wave of hysterical nationalism. Against this
background the problems of Italy were far more exaggerated. Especially the actions of the
government, who had shown itself to be open to pressure, fickle in its support and unreliable
with the nation’s money.

2
Ranjan Chakrabarti ,A HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 317 (4th Edi., 2017).

6
 The two major consequences for Italy due to the end of the war were national resentment and
social tensions. The national tensions grew from Italy not being given all the territories it had
been promised at the Treaty of London. This was largely due to President Woodrow Wilson
and his concept of a New World Order. Many war veterans felt particularly hurt by this
feeling as is there sacrifice had gone in vein. They were angry that the government had not
secured what it had promised for its people. These war veterans would be the early supporters
of Fascism in later years.

The squads also proved to be highly effective security guards for frightened businessmen and
bankers, who rewarded their services with money for Fascist funds.9 Socialist activity
continued to play into the hands of the Fascists when they called a general strike. The
government did nothing to prevent it and Mussolini announced if the government would do
nothing then he would. 3

Fascist took over public transport and the postal system and obverted the effects of the strike,
which soon collapsed due to poor organisation. Conservatives were now seeing Mussolini as
someone who could be used to stop socialism. Even former socialists were beginning to turn
to Fascism since 1921. These turncoats saw socialism as a sinking ship and were quick to join
the alternative the Fascists. During these years Mussolini successfully convinced many
people that he was their defender against Communism and importantly he gained the support
of the Church for this. 4

The rise of Fascism was due to a concatenation of events. All the necessary elements were
there for the rise of a radical movement. Many countries in Europe had similar activities in
them, but Italy was the first to embrace these views. As it had the society, culture and
political system in place which left the country open to the birth, growth and rise of
extremism.

The eccentric poet Gabriele D’Annunzio took the resentment to the extreme when he took
over the Yugoslav port of Fiume. It took the Italian government over a year to react, showing
their indecisive nature. The social resentment lay in the declining Italian industry.

During the war the government had spent a huge amount of money on equipment for the
military and the Italian industry had prospered due to receiving these large orders. After there
was no longer the need for the equipment, therefore no orders and so the industries began to
3
Ranjan Chakrabarti ,A HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 317 (4th Edi., 2017).
4
Norman Lowe, MORDERN WORLD HISTORY 295-306(5th Edi 2013)

7
decline. This did not only affect the business owners but the workers too. Millions of men
were retrenched from the armed forces.8

Inflation at this time meant that small worker wages could buy even less. The workers felt
outraged that they had been made to work long hours in poor conditions for the government
during the war and now this was their reward. The war had failed to unite the country nor had
it made Italy a major power, the true consequences would be seen in a disturbing display of
lawlessness and violence over the following years. 5

There were red flags flying over town halls post war, postage stamps showing the hammer
and sickle, and Socialist making blood-curdling speeches about revolution. This period
became known as the “two red years,” and Mussolini was out to portray himself as the only
person to stop the spread of the “red menace.” During these years there were frequent strikes,
land seizures and factory occupations by trade unionists and peasant leagues.

The reaction of Giolitti, the Prime minister, annoyed employers, as he suggested they make
concessions to the workers. Mussolini seized this opportunity to send in action squads to
assist businessmen in the northern industrial cities and landowners, estate manager and
farmers in the Po valley and Tuscany by breaking up strikes in factories and by destroying the
power of the peasant leagues in the countryside.

[3] THE RISE OF NAZISM IN GERMANY

5
Herman Finer, MUSSOLINI’S ITALY (1st edi, 1935)

8
With the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 and the end of World War I the previous
year, Germany was not only held almost entirely responsible for the war, but the country was
required to pay reparations for the damages in Europe.

After the elections, the Weimar politicians faced a number of issues that demanded their
immediate attention. The peace treaty after the World War 1 known as the Treaty of
Versailles. The Paris Peace Conference began in January 1919 but the peace treaty with
Germany was only ready to be signed in June.

Most Germans were appalled when the terms of the treaty were finally presented to them.
The terms of the Treaty of Versailles were much harsher. The clauses of the Treaty of
Versailles were to have a devastating impact on the perception of democracy and the republic
in Germany. The Treaty had violated both national pride and national honour of Germany.6

As a result of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was forced to cede large chunks of her
territory to France, Belgium, Poland and Denmark. Her overseas colonies were divided by the
Allies in the War among themselves. Germany was forced to pay heavy reparations to the
tune of 33 billion dollars and the total strength of the German army was fixed at one lakh.
The terms of this treaty were greatly resented by the Germans who eagerly looked for an
opportunity to avenge the same. These sentiments were exploited by Hitler who openly
encouraged the Germans to consign the Treaty of Versailles into the waste paper basket, to
rebuild the empire of Germany, and to recapture the lost colonies.7

There were swift political consequences for Germany. Support increased for anti-Versailles,
anti-Weimar political parties. Years later, Hitler would use this simmering resentment to
establish the Nazi Party.

After the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the Communist influence in Germany increased
considerably. The Communists organised themselves effectively and succeeded in capturing
a number of seats in Reichstag. However, there was also a growing fear of communism. An
alternative ideology was much needed for the governance of Germany. Hence, Hitler used
this to his advantage, warning the people that Communists of Germany would become the
servants of their Russian masters and follow the dictates of Communists.

6
William Woodruff, A CONSICE HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 203 (4th Edi., 2002)
7
Norman Lowe, MORDERN WORLD HISTORY 310 (5th Edi 2013)

9
Due to the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany had to suffer in agricultural
production, colonies, foreign investment, trade contracts, etc. The foreign countries raised
tariffs against the German goods. The number of unemployed people increased. There was a
severe economic crisis. There were price hikes and food shortages.8

Prior to World War I, the German economy had been one of the world’s strongest. This was
based on plentiful resources such as coal and iron ore, a highly developed industrial base, a
sophisticated education system and advanced banking techniques. Germany also had a navy
second only to Britain’s.9

However, four years of total war had put enormous strain on the economy. Germany was
forced to supply its allies with food and other materials, and the Allied naval blockade
ensured that Germany could not import necessary supplies or export goods for payment. The
German government paid for its war expenses by borrowing money and soon the national
debt began to soar.

As industry concentrated on military supplies rather than consumer products, prices began to
rise much faster than wages. The situation was made worse by the terms of the Treaty of
Versailles. By handing over territory to other European nations or to the League of Nations as
mandated territory, Germany lost 75 per cent of its iron-ore reserves and 26 per cent of its
coal reserves. 10

By 1919, the national debt was 144000 million Deutsche marks, and by December 1922 this
had reached 469000 million marks. In order to reduce the debt level and make reparations
payments without charging additional taxes, the Weimar government started printing more
money. This only made the situation worse. 11

The price of everyday goods, such as bread, started to rise faster than money could be
injected into the economy. A vicious cycle of inflation had set in. While the policy of passive
resistance achieved its goal of denying France access to Germany’s resources, it had a
devastating effect on Germany’s already struggling economy. Despite having almost no coal
or iron ore to export, the government pledged to pay the workers’ wages for the duration of
the occupation. This forced the government to print even more money, which led to

8
Ranjan Chakrabarti ,A HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 317 (4th Edi., 2017).
9
Ibid.
10
Norman Lowe, MORDERN WORLD HISTORY 309(5th Edi 2013)
11
Ibid.

10
hyperinflation. There were so many Deutsche marks in circulation that they became
worthless.

Because banknotes were worthless, people traded items they possessed for goods that they
needed. This tended to favour wealthy people, who had more possessions to barter with. The
government’s health minister noted that there was an increase in a range of ailments caused
by a poor diet. In addition, crime, suicides and attacks on minority groups, such as German
Jews, all increased.

The government realised that it had to do something to end the hyperinflation spiral. A new
chancellor, Gustav Stresemann, had been appointed in August 1923 and he was determined to
take measures to stabilise the economy and end the occupation of the Ruhr.

He called off the campaign of passive resistance and in September, Germany resumed
making reparations payments. The mark was abolished as a form of currency and replaced by
the Rentenmark (later renamed the Reichsmark), which was much more stable. In order to
save money, the government sacked 700000 civil servants. Finally, Stresemann asked the
Allies for an international conference to discuss Germany’s dire economic situation and to
reassess the reparations plan.

However, not all of the outcomes for the republic were positive. There was lasting resentment
against the Weimar government, which was blamed for the crisis, particularly by members of
the middle class who had lost all their savings. Workers who lost their jobs or were forced to
sell their possessions for necessities such as food also carried deep grievances. Amid the fury
at the government’s response, there were political uprisings from the fringes of the political
spectrum.

Under the Treaty of Versailles, Germany’s military force was considerably reduced and a
large number of German soldiers were thrown out of employment. Hitler roped in all these
soldiers and organised them into Volunteer Corps that served as the party army. The
members of the Volunteer Corps propagated the programme of the Nazi Party and worked for
safeguarding its interests.

The Germans preferred prestige and glory to liberty and freedom and hence could not
reconcile with the democratic parliamentary system prevailing in their country. They felt that
only a strong man could restore the past prestige of Germany and check the rising popularity

11
of Communism. When Hitler promised them all glory with his ideology of nationalism, they
welcomed him with open arms.

The Nazis described the Jews as traitors. They said that the Jews had conspired with the
Allies during the War and could again commit treason against Germany. They told Germans
that their hardship was due to the exploitation by the Jews, who dominated German economy.
The Nazi Party did not encounter any effective resistance and its popularity achieved great
heights.

Hitler, a shrewd politician and a brave soldier, was a gifted orator who captivated the
Germans by his emotional speeches. The Germans nourished a feeling of resentment against
the humiliating and insulting behaviour meted out to them by the Allies and wanted to avenge
the same. Hitler fully exploited the sentiments of the Germans and openly encouraged them
to consign the Treaty of Versailles into the waste – paper basket, rebuild the German Empire
and to recapture the lost colonies. Hitler assured the Germans that if they would abide by the
Nazi ideology their economic misery would come to an end. This greatly appealed to the
German people and they extended full support to Hitler and his Nazi party. 12

These are the circumstances and factors that led to the rise of Nazism in Germany.

Ian Kershaw,Reflections on the Nature of the Hitler’s Dictatorship, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY

PRESS(2013).

12
 [4]COMPARISION BETWEEN ITALY’S FASCISM AND GERMANY’S NAZISM

Fascism was an extreme right-wing form of government that existed after the First World
War majorly in Italy under Benito Mussolini and in Germany under Adolf Hitler (as Nazism).
Fascism is a concept that has a contentious definition. Attempts at defining or explaining it
has led to scholars describing what it is not rather than what it is. The Marxist schools of
thought see it as a product of capitalism and a manifestation of its decline. Some others
describe it as a bunch of nonsense based upon “an ill-sorted hodge-podge of ideas”. Another
group of historians such as Griffin, Eatwell acknowledges the ideological content of fascism
describing it as nationalistic response to the ideological internationalism of Marxism, by
linking with other ideological traditions of the 19th century – romantic irrationalism, social
Darwinism, Hegelian exultation of the state, Nietzeschean ideas, Sorelian conception of the
role of myth, imagery of the great man and the genius turned explicitly antidemocratic. It is
antiliberal, anti-parliamentarian, anti-marxist and particularly anti-communist, not committed
to a conservative continuity, a clerical, partly anti-bourgeois and anticapitalist, Romanization
of the peasants, artisans and the soldiers.There has been contentious debate among historians
as to the similarities and differences between Italian fascism and German Nazism. Richard
Thurlow sees “no Siamese twins” in the two, while Zeev Sternhell emphasises the ‘racism’ of
Nazism and the ‘State’ focus of fascism. But some historians emphasise the similarities. For
instance, Roger Eatwell describes the two as a “holistic national ‘Third Way”while Roger
Griffin argues on ‘generic’ fascism characterized “polygenetic ultra-nationalism and national
rebirth”.This study attempts to examine the various views and it finds out that fascism and
Nazism are similar except that Nazism was built on the foundation of racism which is not the
case in Italy.

Fascism originated from the Italian word fascio (plural is fasci) meaning ‘bundle’. Politically,
it means ‘Union’ or ‘League’. It was first adopted by a revolutionary syndicalist called
‘Fascio d’azione rivoluzionaria’ in the late 1914. This was revived by Mussolini on 23rd
March 1919 when he organised a group of World War One veterans who later called
themselves ‘fasci di Combattimento’.It adopted as symbol some ancient Roman fasces – an
axe bound in rods. Benito Mussolini was a World War One veteran who got injured in the
war and returned home to continue his journalism. The movement was transformed into
National Fascist Party. Like Mussolini, Adolf Hitler was a World War One veteran. He was a
runner, which was a dangerous job but he did it enthusiastically. He joined the German
Workers’ Party which he changed to National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party)

13
in April 1920. Both of them rose to the rank of NCO in the Army but ended up on the wrong
end of the war as Germany was defeated while Italy was not able to gain any significant
‘spoils of war’. They had a humble and socialist background and were both ardent admirers
of Nietzsche, right-wing nationalist elite. The outcome of the war was a serious frustration for
both. However, they both seized the ‘opportunity ‘within the despair and unemployment to
stir up nationalistic feelings amongst the people of Italy and Germany.

Both Mussolini and Hitler were desperate to gain power. Mussolini was hungry for power
and accepted whatever compromises he believes were necessary to achieve the goal. Some
salient and similar issues had aided fascists to rise to power in both countries. There was
serious discontent about the treaty of Versailles. Only Southern Tyrol and Trentino were
seeded to Italy after the War. The promises of territories in Turkey and Germany were not
fulfilled. German territory was dismembered, and her colonies shared amongst the Allied
Powers with heavy reparation of 33 billion dollars imposed on Germany. Germans and
Italians resented the terms of the treaty blaming their incumbent governments for the
problems. The economic crisis that followed the end of the War led to unprecedented
unemployment and food shortage in both countries. Series of coalition government in Italy
created political instability as policies were inconsistent while inflation soared amidst lack of
basic necessities. The rising influence of communism with the Bolshevik revolution in Russia
was also a factor in the rise of fascism and Nazism. Hatred for socialism, which ironically,
Mussolini and Hitler once revered, motivated them to violently attack socialists. With all
these problems King Vittorio Emanuele who was already dissatisfied with the performance of
the post war governments invited Mussolini to form a new government by the end of 1922.
Similarly, in Germany, President Hindenburg appointed Hitler as Chancellor in January 1933.
The March on Rome claim by fascists was a fallacy and the Munich Putsch took Hitler to jail.
The promise of ‘Risorgimento’, that is, a regeneration of the fatherland, national renewal,
new man, eternal Rome, superindividual reality by the fascists made fascism appealing to the
people. Hitler also promised the restoration of the German Aryan race, recapture of German
territories and obliteration of communism to gain the confidence of Germans.

One significant element that was critical to the success of fascism was the use of violence. It
was almost legitimized by the regimes. Violence was used in attaining power and it was used
to hold on to power. Mussolini believed that violence was necessary to acquire political
goals. The fascist party in Italy created ‘Squarest’ headed by ‘Ras’ who were local leaders
with diverse backgrounds but with a common belief that ‘politics now require the violent

14
suppression of opposition’. The squad comprised of mostly men of action, not thinkers, who
believed that they were nationalist and anti-socialists. Some joined because of the violence
and criminal opportunities it offered. They were transformed into State guards after
Mussolini got to power and funded with state funds. 288 people were killed in 1920 with 172
socialist deaths. The total casualty figures in Italy between 1920 and 1922 was between five
to six hundred fascists and two thousand anti-fascists and non-fascists, followed by another
one thousand of the later. In Germany, there was no difference, the SA harassed opponents
on the street mercilessly. There were 69 political murders during the March 5th, 1933
election campaign. While 103 people were killed and hundreds wounded prior to that. They
setup wild concentration camps where ‘enemies’ were incarcerated and tortured in a
microcosm of the holocaust that followed. Passmore claims that although before they came to
power, the Nazis were far less violent than the fascists had been, they proved incalculably
more violent afterwards.

Racism was an issue that existed in both Italy and Germany but the way it played out in
Germany has made many scholars doubt whether fascism and Nazism could be grouped
together as ‘fascist’. Eatwell asserts that racism (precisely anti-Semitism) was not a major
feature of the early fascist movement. Anti-Semitic decrees were only introduced in 1938.
For example, a Jew, Aldo Fenzi held a government post and a Seat in the Grand Council, and
by mid-1930s about one in three adult Jew were members of PNF. Anti-Semitism in Italy was
far less virulent than that of the Nazis because 80% of Jews survived in Italy. The King,
Catholic Church and armed forces were opposed to it. In fact, Mussolini had a Jewish
mistress, Margareta and he ridiculed biological racism as merely a feeling. Passmore argues
that racist laws in Italy were introduced as much in a spirit of competition as in emulation of
Nazism. In corroborating this, Eatwell opines that Mussolini introduced anti-Semitism in an
attempt to launch a “second revolution” of reviving fascist radicalism as he gradually fell
under the influence of Hitler. In contrast to Italy, Sternhell, Passmore, Griffin and Thurlow
claim that racialism (the Aryan race) was the guiding principle of Nazism.[16] Biological
racism permeated all aspects of domestic and foreign policy of Nazism. Andrew Heywood
corroborated this claim with the views of Joseph Gobineau who stated that “the Aryans of
Germany were the ‘master race’ responsible for all creativity whether in art, music, literature,
philosophy or political thoughts while others races could only utilise the initiatives of Aryans
but the Jews were destroyers of culture”. Hitler argued that the German nation must maintain
the racial purity of the Aryan race in order to maintain the dominance over other races

15
especially the Jews. This ideology informed the ‘euthanasia programme’ against ‘the unfit’
and the unprecedented terror against the Jews in what was regarded as ‘Kristallnacht’, the
extermination of Jews and destruction of their properties in November 1939.13

Furthermore, both fascist Italy and Nazi Germany emphasized allegiance to State and Party
control but the degree varied. Eatwell presents it as a crucial difference where Italian fascism
tended to worship the state, while Nazism often elevated the party above the state. Paxton
corroborated this assertion claiming that Mussolini wand up with the state because he was
afraid of the local ‘Ras’ and their squadristi. Heywood also argues that fascism was an
extreme form of Statism but Nazism did not venerate the state as it was only a “means
(vessel) to an end”. According to Passmore, the party in Italy was turned into an inflated
parallel bureaucracy and a party card became a prerequisite of advancement in the state
service. While in Germany, the civil service was purged and the installation of the party and
‘Schutzstaffel’ became parallel administration as the personnel were recruited on the bases of
ideology and service to the party. Hitler emphasized this in Mein Kampf when he said “the
State is only a means to an end. Above all, it must preserve the existence of the race. We
must make a clear-cut distinction between the vessel and the contents. The State is only the
vessel and the race is what it contains”.14

One other similar feature of fascism and Nazism was the obsession with war and
expansionism. Eatwell argues that Mussolini supported war because he wanted to build
bridges with the military leadership and to transform his country and capture the minds of the
masses. In the same vein, Passmore asserts that fascists had always seen the conquest of
additional territory as the best means to resolve economic problems, and regarded war as
intrinsically good for the nation.The Italian invasion of Abyssinia (present Ethiopia) in 1935
is a testament to this. Mussolini believed that “war brings up to their highest tension all
human energies and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet
it. I do not believe in perpetual peace; I find it depressing and a negation of all the
fundamental viruses of man”.15 Like Mussolini, Hitler was passionately interested in
expansionism. He had always regarded the acquisition of ‘Lebensraum’ and the elimination
of race enemies and Bolshevism as essential to the establishment of a harmonious society.
War was used by both Hitler and Mussolini to mobilise the continued support and affection

13
Ibid
14
ibid
15
Katharine A. Mackel ,Fascism: A Political Ideology of the Past, INQUIRIES JOURNAL SOCIAL SCIENCE
AND HUMANITIES,(2010).

16
of the population. And the two regimes gave both financial and ideological support to other
European fascist regimes and movements in 1930s. Examples of such include General Franco
of Spain, Marshall Petain in Vichy France, Ante Pavelic and the Ustasha in Croatia, and
Vidkun Quisling in Norway. Others include Leon Degrelle and the ‘Rexist’ party in Belgium,
FerencSzalasi and the ‘Arrow Cross’ party in Hungary, Anton Mussert and the ‘National
Socialist Movement’ in Holland, and Arnold Lease and the ‘Imperial Fascist League’ in
Britain.

Furthermore, the romance between fascism and the Catholic Church was evident in both Italy
and Germany. While the influence of the Catholic Church was strong in Italy, Hitler was less
influenced. Eatwell and Duggan assert that even though Mussolini was an atheist and anti-
Catholic Church with preference for Islam16. The Vatican played a crucial role in the
consolidation of fascism in Italy. Mussolini got the support of some openly fascist priests
called ‘Clericofascists’. In return, Mussolini adopted policies that were favourable to the
Church like rescue of the Catholic bank of Rome, measures against abortion and
contraception. Symbolically, Mussolini married Donna in the church ten years after the civil
marriage. The relationship with the church was cemented in 1929 with the signing of the
‘Lateran Pacts’ which gave the Vatican sovereign independence, financial compensation for
losses suffered as a consequence of the Unification of Italy.In all, Mussolini benefitted more
domestically and globally because his association with the church made him more popular
and adored by the people. In Germany, it was not so rosy for the Church. Paxton and Eatwell
argue that Hitler and the Catholic Church signed a ‘Concordat’ in July 1933, which gave
support to Nazism and full freedom to the Catholic Church but almost immediately, the Nazis
began to go back on the agreement principally by harassing priests who were presumed
hostile. The Catholic Church responded with an overt attack on Nazism. The courtship
between the Catholic Church and fascism was because Pope Pius XI had the conviction that
communism was worse than Nazism. However, it is not surprising that the relationship fell
apart because racism and Catholic doctrines cannot dwell together.

The irony of fascism that continues to surprise people is a massive support received from
women despite the chauvinistic discrimination against them. Mussolini regarded women as
“incapable of synthesizing anything, of combining different ideas into higher form. He
proclaimed that their natural role was caring for a new generation of warriors. Several

Victor Brenntice, Differences and Similarities Between Fascism and Nazism, SOAPBOXIE WORLD
16

POLITICS( Dec. 2018, 5:08 PM)

17
policies were introduced to push women back into home. There were restrictions on the use
of contraception. Eatwell claims that taxes and subsidies were introduced to encourage
marriage and having more children; taxes on bachelors, employment discrimination in favour
of family men, 1938 law restricted females to 10% of the workforce. Although women
suffered employment discrimination during the interview war years due to economic
recession and conservative reactions, but the policies under Mussolini was basically a
fundamental ideological position. The discrimination against women under Hitler was also
very deliberate. In the public sector, married women were often dismissed to make way for
men. Although women employment increased during the Second World War, the vast
majority of jobs taken were menial and poorly paid. Marriage was encouraged with a system
of loans where over one million were given out to ‘happy Aryan couples’ between 1933 and
1938. The loans could be repaid by producing offspring, each one annulling a quarter of the
debt. Family allowances and changes to income tax in favour of larger families were
introduced. Yet a lot of women still adored Hitler and Mussolini.

Both fascism and Nazism survived through dictatorship. Both hated opposition and
eliminated all forms of dissenting views. Passmore claims that in January 1925, Mussolini
declared total fascist regime which set in his dictatorship reign. At the end of the year
political opposition was banned, freedom of the press ceased, and election of local
government ended. Similarly, Eatwell claims that after the fourth attempt to assassinate
Mussolini in 2 years, a series of exceptional decrees were passed in November 1926, which
banned all remaining formal opposition and established a special tribunal for the defense of
the state.Griffin argues that the establishment of dictatorship in Germany was swift, starting
with Emergency Decree which suspended the Weiner Constitution. And by July 1933, law
against the Establishment of political parties was passed and Germany became officially a
one-party state.

Even though Mussolini introduced the term and measures of ‘totalitarian’, Eatwell and
Griffin assert that the Nazis sought a far more totalitarian control of culture than the Italian
fascism. Hitler was more rigid and ruthless while using terror indiscriminately. After
crushing the ‘SA’ (Night of the long knives), Hitler empowered the ‘SS’ and made the army
swear personal oath of loyalty to him. There is a consensus on how totalitarian both regimes
were. Eatwell argues that in practice, Italian totalitarianism differed significantly from the
academic model because many departments owed much to chance, or the specific political
and economic needs of the moment. And considerable power remained in the hands of the

18
King, the Catholic Church and business, though none of them ultimately could control the
regime. In Germany, with the death of President Hindenburg, Hitler combined the roles of the
Head of State and Chancellor. As domineering as Hitler was, Griffin asserts that the ‘Total
State’ control was not as totalitarian as claimed. Hitler could actually be described as a ‘weak
dictator’ as he was constraint by the system he created. Although, both Hitler and Mussolini
were immensely totalitarian, the extreme powers were shared with other institutions such as
Catholic Church, King (in Italy) and Nazi party (in Germany).17

One of the most noteworthy features that aided the sustainability of fascism and Nazism was
the extensive use of propaganda and leader-worship. Griffin, Eatwell, Passmore, Paxton,
Stern hell and others acknowledge the overwhelming use of propaganda in both states.
Although a full propaganda ministry was not to be established until 1935 in Italy, El Duce
(The leader, as Mussolini was called), had always demonstrated strong interest in style and
manipulation. He was a master of crowd manipulation. He was often found being
photographed with peasants at sporting events and revealing muscular torso at seaside and
hailed as ‘Mussolini-the-leader’ and ‘Man-of-the-people’. Eatwell describes this as
‘charismatic populism’. Tullio Cianetti described “Mussolini as the’ new man’ who will be
the future leader of a great European democracy that will spread from Rome to Moscow via
Berlin”.To achieve this, panoply of organizations like ‘Ballila’ were set up to indoctrinate
young people particularly for boys of 8 to 14 years. Girls had ‘Piccole Italiane’. Activities
included drills and carrying toy guns while girls were allowed only bows and arrows. Eatwell
submits that “by 1930s, five million young people had been indoctrinated in a drive towards
conformity and militarism”. The first new government department created by Hitler after
assuming office was the ministry of public enlightenment and propaganda under the
leadership of Joseph Goebbels. It was responsible for transforming Germans into Nazis.
Eatwell acknowledges that “Goebbels brilliantly choreographed funeral of Nazi activists who
had been killed in clashes with the Left to appeal both to religious sentiments sacrifice and
martyrdom and to a more pathologically war-oriented sense of brotherhood. Hitler Youth
(HY) organization was created in 1920 for indoctrination and by 1939; they had become
about 7 million. Griffin concludes that “well-coordinated posters and leaflet campaigns, the
invention of political rituals, and the holding of mass rallies were carefully designed not
merely to impress Nazi slogan on the public but to generate the cumulative sense that a vast
movement was aloof heralding a new era in Germany’s history”.

17
Ibid.

19
But was fascism a revolution? Historians have diverse views on this question. Eatwell and
Passmore is emphatic in their ‘No’ as the answer. Eatwell asserts that there were a degree of
compromises and pragmatism as such “there was no fascist or Nazi revolution”.
Corroborating this is Passmore who submits that even though it destabilized existing power
structure, fascism or Nazism was never revolutions. In a contrary view, Griffin concludes that
even though polygenetic core ensured that it was not reactionary, but fascism was a
revolution. However, Paxton presents a pluralistic view. He claims that fascism was
“revolution in it’s radically war conceptions of citizenship, of the way individuals
participated in the life of the community. But fascism was counterrevolutionary with respect
to such traditional projects of the left as individual liberties, human rights, due process, and
international peace”.18

Victor Brenntice, Differences and Similarities Between Fascism and Nazism, SOAPBOXIE WORLD
18

POLITICS( Dec. 2018, 5:08 PM).

20
 [5]CONCLUSION

It is only too easy to conclude that fascism in practice was nothing more than a tool of
reaction, or a vehicle for opportunism and nihilism. It compromises out of desperation for
power: fascism as both ‘law-abiding and law-breaking’, ‘aristocratic and democratic’,
‘conservative and progressive’. There was as much rivalry as emulation between Nazis and
fascists. Many fascists felt quite critical of Nazism and many Nazis felt ambivalent towards
Mussolini and his movement. The Nazis and fascists came to power lacking clear plans in
many areas, created a new political consciousness, a nation united around a sense of German
racial identity and Risorgimento respectively. Fascism (including Nazism) was less
pluralistic, ambiguous, and basically spontaneous, slightly ideological, more inclusive than
militarism, not liberalistic, pretentiously democracy, no freedom, less conservative, and more
change oriented. None of the imitators of fascism were identical to the original. Fascism in
Italy and Nazism in Germany virtually had similarities through and through. The difference is
the degree of implementation of the features. Under Hitler, issues such as racialism,
dictatorship, totalitarianism, and propaganda were extremely enforced, and even though in
lesser degree, they also existed in Mussolini’s Italy .

21
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS:

Ranjan Chakrabarti ,A HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 317 (4th Edi., 2017).

William Woodruff, A CONSICE HISTORY OF MORDERN WORLD 203 (4th Edi., 2002)

Norman Lowe, MORDERN WORLD HISTORY(5th Edi 2013)

Herman Finer, MUSSOLINI’S ITALY (1st edi, 1935)

ARTICLES:

Ian Kershaw,Reflections on the Nature of the Hitler’s Dictatorship, CAMBRIDGE

Katharine A. Mackel ,Fascism: A Political Ideology of the Past, INQUIRIES JOURNAL

Fascism in Italy, THE STUDENT ROOM GROUP LTD. (Oct. 29, 2018, 9:02 PM),
https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/revision/history/fascism-in-italy.

Victor Brenntice, Differences and Similarities Between Fascism and Nazism, SOAPBOXIE
WORLD POLITICS( Dec. 2018, 5:08 PM)

22