The Ultranationalist International: Fascism in Global Historical
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Ultranationalist International: Fascism in Global Historical Perspective by Mike Ross A thesis submitted to the Department of History in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Queen's University Kingston, Ontario, Canada October 2020 Copyright © Mike Ross, 2020 i Abstract The following is an effort to conceptualize fascism as a global historical problem. Given its ultra-nationalistic bent, approaching fascist movements as a phenomenon entirely distinct to particular national contexts seems logical. However, fascist regimes and movements emerged simultaneously across the world in the interwar period. Therefore, studying fascism in global historical terms can reveal different aspects of the oft-nebulous subject of fascism that are not as readily apparent when studying fascist movements strictly in terms of the peculiarities of their specific national manifestations. The first chapter outlines the dimensions of the global historical approach to fascism in historiographical terms, highlighting some of the problems of boundaries and definition that have plagued the study of fascism as well as the limits of studying fascist regimes entirely within the confines of particular national movements and the unique national factors which shaped their emergence. The second chapter develops an analysis of the emergence of ultra-nationalistic politics especially in the contexts of India and Argentina, where fears of degeneracy and the dissolution of the social order were shaped by allegedly anti-national groups and movements that were seen as posing an imminent and existential threat to the national community. Finally, the third chapter locates fascism within the broader political spectrum in global terms, taking advantage of multiple cases to evaluate broad similarities across different fascist movements in terms of general political orientation. While fascism can be characterized as a retreat from the global and to the nation, viewing fascism as a global historical problem reveals the ways in which this orientation towards ultra-nationalist politics was in fact reflective of the powerful influence of global processes and transnational movements on national politics in the interwar period. ii Acknowledgements I owe gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Amitava Chowdhury of the Queen's Department of History, and to Dr. David Parker, also of the Queen's Department of History. Their support was essential to the development and completion of this thesis. Professor Chowdhury offered me consistent and detailed advice on research suggestions, support, feedback, and encouragement from the earliest stages of the thesis. Professor Parker introduced me to a vast array of scholarship on the subject of Argentine ultra-nationalism and provided comprehensive feedback that was indispensible in honing the focus of my research. iii Table of Contents Abstract............................................................................................................................................i Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ii Table of Contents..........................................................................................................................iii Introduction...................................................................................................................................iv 1. Historiography of fascism.........................................................................................................1 I. Diffusionist approaches to fascism................................................................................2 II. Problems of definition................................................................................................11 III. The Epistemological Limits of Methodological Nationalism.................................23 2. Degeneracy, Decline, and Regeneration.................................................................................35 I. Ideas, Power, and Ideology..........................................................................................36 II. Immigration, Radical Politics, and Argentine Nacionalismo..................................45 III. Hindu Revivalism: Humiliation, Decline, and Rebirth..........................................60 3. Fascism and the Political Spectrum.......................................................................................74 I. Re-evaluating the European Cases.............................................................................75 II. Fascism, its Allies, and its Targets.............................................................................81 III. Capitalism, Socialism, and Corporatism: Ideology and Practice.........................87 IV. Nacionalismo and Historiography...........................................................................92 Conclusion....................................................................................................................................99 Bibliography...............................................................................................................................107 iv Introduction The study of fascism is, for many reasons, a complicated and nebulous one. Definitions, understandings, and interpretations of historical events as fundamental to the modern world as the rise of industrialization and nationalism are already ordinarily rife for rigorous debate and re- evaluation by various historical scholars. With fascism, however, disagreements and confusion have been endemic among observers and academics alike since the beginning. Indeed, the eminent historian of fascism, Robert Paxton, prefaces his attempt to dissect the contours of a generic fascism by stating that "the more I read about fascism and the more I discussed it with students, the more perplexed I grew."1 Along similar lines, Tim Jacoby writes in a 2016 article on global fascism that fascism's "precise meaning remains far from evident."2 Indeed, major scholarly publications on fascism frequently begin with the author conceding that there exist 1 Robert Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004), xi. 2 Tim Jacoby, "Global Fascism: Geography, Timing, Support, and Strategy," Journal of Global History 11, no. 3 (2016): 451. v numerous attempts to clearly define the ideology, none of which have firmly won out.3 As an ideology, both in theory and its implementation in actual movements and regimes, fascism presents a number of puzzling contradictions that have made consensus elusive. To elaborate on this point, compare fascism to socialism, another political ideology whose advocates frequently found themselves among the primary targets of fascists. While there exists a number of manifestations of socialism — some of which had radically different, and even opposing, aims and views — its quintessential ideological core is clear: the social ownership of the means of production in some form.4 What "social ownership" denotes could range from social democratic approaches that promote social-welfare policies within the framework of a capitalist economy, to complete state control of the economy a la Marxism-Leninism, to the anti-authoritarian direct democratic control of the economy espoused by anarchists. Therefore, while socialism is a heterogeneous ideology that contains contradictory and conflicting accounts, the basic underlying economic/political principle uniting these disparate movements is straightforward. Fascism, on the other hand, has been subject to debate on virtually every level: which regimes can be considered fascist, what can be considered fascist, or even what fascism is as a historical process have all been frequently brought into question. The greatest consensus converges around Italian Fascism and Nazi Germany as unambiguously fascist regimes, but then a number of scholars have questioned whether or not Nazi Germany was too different in its 3 Roger Griffin's book, The Nature of Fascism, points out that nearly every survey begins with an author offering their own definition of fascism for heuristic purposes. 4 That said, socialism and communism, much like fascism, are frequently made less clear by their currency as insults (and, sometimes, as badges of prestige) in political discourse, and widespread misconceptions are endemic, to the extent that it is (like fascism) sometimes equated directly with government control. Frequently, social democratic policies are identified as the essence of socialism by both proponents and detractors, and regimes like the Soviet Union are identified monolithically with communism, which is really an ideology which includes a range of different approaches, such as anarcho-communism. There are also many debates about whether or not social democracy really fits into the socialist movement since it works within the capitalist economy. However, while disagreement, stereotyping, and misconceptions are rife, the basic shared ideological core can be readily identified. vi radical racial ideology to be considered fascist in a generic sense. Furthermore, disagreement comes on a variety of other points, including the role of racial ideology — was Italian Fascism "non-racist," because it did not espouse the radical rhetoric of Nazi biological racism, or did Mussolini's notions of a Mediterranean race (cultural or otherwise) share crucial continuities that imply an underlying ideology of race in Fascist thought? — its position in