>Fascism has no succinct definition
Who started this meme? Is it just because of reductio ad hitlerum obfuscating all right wing ideologies?
'Revolutionary social organization utilized by traditionalist, reactionary power structures.' What was so hard about that?
>>875503
Mosley would disagree with you.
>>875507
And the Falange.
>>875507
Ironically, the British example means that the Labour party is fascist, by this definition.
>>875503
It is false. Nothing about fascism is reactionary or traditionalist. Nationalism and traditionalism are opposed to one another.
>>875503
Palingenetic ultranationalism.
>>875503
Got into an argument with my professor because I disagreed with the course reading stating that "The projection of masculinity onto the hard body is inherently fascist." Had to explain that correlation doesn't imply causation
>>876314
What course is this? What is meant by "hard body"
Also easiest, most succinct definition of fascism I have found is conservative revolution focused on national renewal, coupled with protection of "people" from perceived social threats
It's kinda like porn, you know it when you see it
>>876316
Freshman English
Something about the fit and masculine body being fascist and the soft, unfit body of the other was projected on the Jew etc
Think it was Klaus Theweleit
>>876318
*this projection of the soft body onto the "Other" was inherently fascist. The reading went on to state that it was the same thing with portrayals of Jews and Asians in modern Western media
>>876318
>Totalitarians portray themselves as strong and others as weak
Gee anon, who would've guessed? Your professor seems very smart actually. I wouldn't have guessed that propaganda was used in Nazi Germany!
National Socialism is not Fascism.
You don't even know what Fascism is, retard. There's nothing reactionary or traditionalist about it. It's not even right wing (nor left).
>>875802
>Nationalism and traditionalism are opposed to one another.
How?
http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc
>It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.
>Yet underneath all this mess there does lie a kind of buried meaning. To begin with, it is clear that there are very great differences, some of them easy to point out and not easy to explain away, between the régimes called Fascist and those called democratic. Secondly, if ‘Fascist’ means ‘in sympathy with Hitler’, some of the accusations I have listed above are obviously very much more justified than others. Thirdly, even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.
>>875503
>Who started this meme? Is it just because of reductio ad hitlerum
Basically, yes.
Core Fascism Checklist:
>Authoritarianism
>Autarky
>Militarism
>Nationalism
Common optional extras:
>Corporatism
>Xenophobia
>Expansionist
>Nativism
>"Strongman"/ cult of personality
>Revanchism
>Strongly defined by its opposition to the left
>>876344
Traditionalists don't believe in the "nation". You should read Evola, he is completely against the idea of the nation and it's discourse.
>>876334
>There's nothing reactionary or traditionalist about it
>only i know what my super esoteric autistic special snowflake alt-right definition of fascism is
wew
>>876350
>wants to destroy pre-existing national institutions
>allows abortions and eugenics
>advocates doctrines of violence
no. read a book.
>>876348
Never read him, but don't "Traditional Values" imply a love, or at least loyalty, for your state?
>>876347
The alternative definition is less ideological and more historical, only applying it to groups that trace their heritage the European Fascist regimes of the 30s and 40s.
Whilst a broader definition would allow you to call places like Putin's Russia and the Kims' North Korea as Fascist, this definition is stricter. The only groups that really qualify are some European far right parties and modern Neo-Nazis.
I'd argue that this definition is less useful, because those groups often only give lip service to actual, original fascists ideas, bearing more of a superficial resemblance than an ideological one.
>>876318
>>876322
I think that's a very strong claim to be making and I think it's a reductive reading of fascist masculinity
Plus also Jews were also hypersexualised, as fornicating with Aryan women, as having voracious sexual appetites, in a similar way to how blacks have also been positioned: see Kimmel
>>876348
I think you should probably read more than Evola. Fascism is generally defined by its focus on renewing the nation back to its traditional place of glory - that is to say, restoring a tradition - and the two are very easily able to co-exist and Evola's esotericism isn't every traditionalist ever
>>876358
No. Not actual aristocratic tradionalism.
>>876334
>There's nothing reactionary
Correct, at least with the first examples of fascism. Modern fascists sure are, thought
> or traditionalist about it.
What
>It's not even right wing (nor left).
What
>>876361
The OTHER other definition is broader still, the one used by leftists is just.
>Reactionary Rightists
Whilst most fascist groups fall under this definition, I'm not that fond of it because of how broad it is. Using this you could call things that pre-date fascism by hundreds of years fascist, like the White Russians, or even the Swabian League (Ha), or indeed any gang of feudal enforcers putting down rebellious peasants.
>>876364
Look up fucking actual Traditionalism. What is traditional about abortion, eugenics, nationalisation of industry.
>>876356
>wants to destroy pre-existing national institutions
double wew
>>876363
But for modern day traditionalism or traditionalist conservatism yes.
Maybe we are just discussing about two or more different things
>>876368
>gets rid of democracy
>severely limits the power the Church
>limits the power of the aristocrats
>Destroys unions and labour movements
Do go on.
>>876367
>eugenics
>fascist
kill urself my man
>>876372
it happened in Fascist Italy, dolt.
>>876371
>gets rid of democracy
this is about as reactionary as it gets
>severely limits the power the Church
obviously the state doesn't want anything to get in its way, but it's nothing like liquidating the clergy in the soviet union
>limits the power of the aristocrats
and puts it into the hands of industrialists
>Destroys unions and labour movements
how is this not reactionary?
>>876375
It also happened in the Social Democratic Sweden and the Liberal Democratic USA. Eugenics is not distinctly Fascist.
>>876367
Yeah let's not talk about nationalism or totalitarianism but let's just add that the Nazis legalized abortion if the fetus was damaged or if it was "inferior"
>>876376
You're looking at "Reaction" as a ideological movement conceived post 1945. Nothing the Fascists in Italy did was particularly reactionary.
>>876380
nothing they did was particularly revolutionary either, emmanuel had mussolini somewhat under control unlike hitler who just did whatever the fuck he wanted
i still don't understand why autists sperg out when you say nazism is fascism and they spout "n-not true fascism!"
The fact that you retards can't agree on anything is the reason why fascism has no actual definition.
>>876385
How the hell is it not revolutionary?
It's probably because you probably think Fascism is just a bunch of thugs moving around and smashing shit up in the name of "conservatism". You fundamentally understand none of the ideology at hand.
>>876376
>gets rid of democracy
>this is about as reactionary as it gets
Yes but a reactionary would replace it with some sort of Monarchy or Aristocracy. Fascists did not believe in this, they believed in a sort of survival of the fittest, whoever can take the leadership and can hold it deserves it kind of logic.
>severely limits the power the Church
>obviously the state doesn't want anything to get in its way, but it's nothing like liquidating the clergy in the soviet union
When Reactionaries take power they empower the church as one of the pillars of the state and tend to follow the ideological line of the church. Fascists saw the church as competition to state power, not as a means of the state to operate. Which is why they sought to take destroy any independence it had.
>limits the power of the aristocrats
>and puts it into the hands of industrialists
Which is not reactionary. This is revolutionary, it is a transfer of class power.
>Destroys unions and labour movements
>how is this not reactionary?
Not only reactionaries are against Labour movements.
>>876382
>Nazism and totalitarianism is not Fascism
This has to be bait, even if you change nazism to nationalism
>>876389
Simply epic strawman bro.
You're exactly like the socialists, when you're confronted about your bullshit on how you dodge definitions you accuse the opponent of not knowing what "actual" fascism is and retreat into your autistic splinter ideology. Hayek or some other libertarian writer talked about this.
>>876399
>T-THAT WASN'T REAL FASCISM
Consider suicide.
>>876401
How is this even considered an argument?
>>876399
But if
>The only true Fascist state was Italy
how are you saying that it wasn't totalitarian or nationalist
>>876406
Because it wasn't totalitarian, it was authoritarian.
>>876404
What are the core differences between the NSDAP and the Italian fascists that makes the Italians true fascists, but the Nazis not?
>>876407
>The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State--a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values--interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.
Benito Mussolini, 1935, The Doctrine of Fascism, Firenze: Vallecchi Editore, page 14.
>>876363
Aristocratic traditionalism is mostly a thing of the past based in pre-industrial socities and only dicussed amongst autistic alt-righters. Fascism is aristocratic traditionalism morphing into something more appealing to the working classes of an industrial society, and something that could actually work in it.
>>876407
It was authoritarian, but also totalitarian: only one political party, strong propaganda diffused with non-neutral media (luce), cult of Mussolini, no total freedom of speech, hard repressions and all that jazz.
Totalitarianism means a state that recognizes no limits to its authority
>>876411
It literally isn't. We're talking about Totalitarianism in terms of actual political theory here. Read Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt for further reference.
Totalitarianism runs on a doctrine of terror, constantly abusing and interfering with the lives of it's citizens through a web of secret police, the encouragement of telling the authorities of wrong doings by friend or family members, the complete control economic life and family life.
Authoritarianism runs on fear and the threat of massive retribution for wrong doing.
Whilst Nazi Germany and Soviet Union exhibited the features of the former, Fascist Italy did not.
>>876415
>Totalitarianism means a state that recognizes no limits to its authority
Not entirely. They are different doctrines of ways to run a country.
>>876417
>I know better than the guy who was actually running Fascist Italy
>>876420
Mussolini said Italy was greatest nation on Earth, doesn't mean he's right.
Most political scientists agree with me. As I've said, the seminal work on this topic is Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt.
He might of said it, but the country did not run in such a way.
>>876419
Well yes, I kinda oversimplified concepts.
But you can't deny that fascist Italy was totalitarian
>>876422
>A group of circlejerking """"""""intellectuals""""""" know better than the guy who was actually running the country
Fascism is a totalitarian ideology. Stop denying this.
>>876425
This argument is going nowhere. I'm correct by the fact that it didn't run as a totalitarian state. You just keep parroting the same thing over and over.
If a Cigarette CEO says smoking is good for you is he wrong because he runs a cigarette factory? I don't understand your logic here.
>>876417
>fascist italy didn't have secret police
>they didn't encourage people to snitch on anyone who wasn't an obidiant servant of the state
wew
>>876429
>obidiant
lol
Yes, I know they did. Try not to take everything on face value. As history tells us, they didn't use it quite to the effect that the Nazis or Soviets did.
>>876430
>what was the OVRA
>>876432
Again... please read what I actually typed. I know they had one. But as I've said twice now, they didn't use it to the effect of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.
>>876435
>shifting the goalposts
simply erin
>>876428
Because we are discussing the ideology, and the Fascist ideology is openly totalitarian. You are denying this based not on any ideological foundation but because the Italian state was not completely totalitarian and so Fascism cannot be totalitarian. My point is that your falure to understand this comes from you failing to understand how conclusions are derived.
Fascism is totalitarian because of what it aims to create. The fact that Mussolini (ignoring the puppet state of the Germans) failed to fully implement his ideology due to the restraints of the Italian King, political establishment and Army does not change this truth about its ideological nature.
>>876436
I started off by saying that you dolt. Please go back to highschool and ask for lessons in reading comprehension.
>>876438
If you actually thinking Emmanuel had an restraint on Mussolini you are KIDDING yourself. Mussolini simply kept him there in a pragmatic attempt to retain some form of unity amongst Italians.
If you think that somehow a totalitarian state was not possible under the impotent leader that was Emmanuel then you have no clue about Italian politics and history of the time.
Just stop man.
>>876445
Emmanuel made Mussolini look like a massive cuckold compared to Hitler. He managed to be even more incompetant than the king.
>>876447
>Mussolini marches on Rome with 1000 Black Shirts
>despite having an army situated inside Rome he instantly hands power to Mussolini
No.
>>876445
>If you actually thinking Emmanuel had an restraint on Mussolini you are KIDDING yourself.
He was not the only one. The Army for instance was loyal to the King and not Mussolini. Which is why it was possible for the Italians to remove Mussolini from power but it was not possible for the Germans to do the equivalent with Hitler. The risk of a possible coup was something that Mussolini always had to be cautious about and it acted as a bit of a restraint. Mussolini did not have complete control of the Italian state also, at the local level a lot of what was done was deals with local political figures to bring them into line with Mussolini. He was a strongman, but not a ruler with the sort of power that a Hitler or a Stalin had.
>>876450
>1000 blackshirts
It was actually around 30,000 men.
>>876453
The Church was a really big cockblock to Mussolini. Italians cared far more about Catholicism than fascism which was also a political movement at the time that had its own party.
>>876407
>Because it wasn't totalitarian, it was authoritarian.
Read some Emilio Gentile, James Gregor or Michael Ebner. They argue that Fascist Italy did have totalitarian aims, even if it did not entirely achieve them.
>>876921
This is so wrong, why do you post that picture?
>>876921
/pol/ in 1 picture
>>876430
>Try not to take everything on face value
ironic considering your taking mussolini at face value
>>876453
>March on Rome
>30,000 blackshirts
30-40,000 blackshirts STARTED the March on Rome. But only 800-1000 actually got there.
>They are German and we are English, therefore our views and our methods on many subjects will be different. In this particular we possess a great Empire comprising many different races. They possess no such Empire, and their aim is a revived German race, geographically united. We believe profoundly in our own British race which has created the Empire, but we know also it would be bad for the Empire to stigmatise by law other races within it as inferior or outcast
>Fascism is the name by which the modern Movement has come to be known in the world. It
would have been possible to avoid
misrepresentation by calling our Movement by another name. But it was more honest to call it Fascism and thus to let everyone know exactly where we stood. It is up to us to defeat misrepresentation by propaganda and explanation of the real policy and methods of Fascism as it will operate in Britain. In the long run straightforward dealing is not only honest but also pays best. The alternative name for the modern Movement is the National Socialism used in Germany. But the German Movement also is known throughout the outside world as Fascist, which is the name commonly used to describe the phenomenon of the modern Movement whether in Britain, Germany or Italy. National Socialism and Fascism in my view are the same Movement, finding different expressions in different countries in accord with different national and racial characteristics. For seven years in the Labour Party before founding Fascism in Britain, I fought for a National Socialist Policy in contradistinction to the International Socialism of that Party.
Oswald Mosley (1936) Fascism: 100 questions asked and answered
>>876921
>Nationalism
Not an evil or wrong by definition
>Identification of enemies/scapegoats
I don't really see exploitative multinational organisations and reactionary out of touch politicians as an irrational scapegoat
>Supremacy of the military
Despite the British Union of Fascists recognising the military as only a necessary evil, Mosley on record expressing his support for Multilateral disarmament
>Rampant Sexism
Despite the fact the British Union of Fascists supported women's continued place in the workplace following their move their after WWI, and the party including s large female wing including many of the British suffragettes, pic related female division of the party:
>Controlled mass media
Opposed the large media empires of today which in many respects which in many respects influence and are influenced by government as much as state owned media, supported the right of free press
>Obsession with National security
Is this an issue, though I wouldn't call it an obsession
>Religion and govemrent are intertwined
Mosley himself identified as agnostic rstfrr than devoutly religious, and wished for religion to be a private matter alone, supporting the oppressed Catholics
>Corporate power is protected
Despite wanting to give workers a 50% stake in corporations of a certain size to create compromise with the elitrd owning companies, while advocating a govemrent of workers rather than career politicians
>Labour power is suppressed
See above
>Disdain for intellectuals and the arts
Despite the playwright George Bernard Shaw, author Henry Williamson, and others like Erza Pound being some of the earliest supporters of the BUF
>Obsession with crime and punishment
Hardly addressed in party literature so hardly an obsession by any means
>Rampant cronyism & corruption
Never achieved power so not really applicable here, was already rampant in Britain in the 1930s
>Fraudulent elections
Never contested a general election before their ban in 1940
>>877711
pic related on the issue of the classics Jewish scapegoat
>>877711
I guess the British weren't very good fascists.
Nationalism because bad when it turns into jingoism.
>>877754
>they don't fit my definition of fascism
>they were clearly just bad fascists
same
>>876921
>sexism
The fuck? When has a fascist or national socialist movement been sexist? If anything they supported progressive women's rights.
Most people who use words like fascists have no historical or theoretical understanding of the original Fascists, the Legion of the Archangel Michael movement, the Rexists, Estado Novo Salazarism, Francoism, Austrofascism, Falangism or even Nazism.
>>879049
>Salazarism
>Fascism
laughingmosley.jpg
Honestly, it has no succinct definition because it has been muddled and the movement itself was only in large operation for a short period.
The only true three things you'll find in self identified fascism in states are unanimously
>Authoritarianism
>Nationalism
>Militarism
But you can also find these in non-fascist states as well as this definition would apply to a huge amount of states past and present.
>Roman Empire?
>Fucking Fascists
why were the british union of fascist such cucks
>>875503
>reactionary
>this word actually means anything concrete
Leftist use reactionary as a catch all to describe anything they don't like at the moment, including other leftists
>>878940
The Nazis had clear ideas of what they wanted from women.
Women were expected to stay at home and look after the family. Women doctors, teachers and civil servants were forced to give up their careers. Even at the end of the war, women were never asked to serve in the armed forces.
Their job was to keep the home nice for their husband and family - their life should revolve round the three 'Ks':
church
children
cooking
Goebbels said: "The mission of women is to be beautiful and to bring children into the world."
>>879115
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzKv5gjOzTA
Never forget when they got BTFO
It's also fun when you bring up the ideas of Plato being the first Fascist with the Republic
I think a missing part that very few bring up is the total mobilization of the people on behalf of the state. A fascist state is a state on the precipice of open war to defend itself at any moment, with no sacrifice too great to make.
>>879084
>it wasn't condemned post-war and therefore it wasn't really fascism even though it strayed closer to the precepts of the original fascists than most
>>879138
To be fair, it was a peaceful protest deliberately disrupted by socialists shipped down to London to challenge in the BUF, despite the BUF achieving considerable local electoral success there, funnily enough one of the leading members of the opposition to Mosley was John Strachey of the Communist Party, former member of the Labour Party and previously Mosley's right hand man and protege, even joined the New Party but left when they became the British Union of Fascists.
Fascism was anti conservative
>>879162
>they dindu nuffin
>they were just doing a peaceful protest of intimidation in fascist blackshirt uniforms through an immigrant area
>>879195
by suppressing a peaceful protest the truly evil are revealed
See any KKK rally in the U.S that ends in a riot and blacks burn their own shit to the ground
>>879195
>holding a political rally in an area where a significant portion of your voter base is
>guess we've got to physically assault them
the British Union of Fascists may have made a provocative move, but fucking assaulting them wasn't the right course of action, even Mosley and his band of loonies had a right to free speech
>>876471
It was interesting how the catholic countries during the interwar period were becoming drawn closer together
>>879221
if you want to bring down democracy, become a firebrand preacher
Stand in a public park and decry the actions of dindus and see how quickly people try to suppress your freedom of speech and the police show up to try and haul you off and charge you with something just to keep you in jail and quiet, secluded.
>>876344
Nationalism is based on populism, traditionalism is based on aristocracy.
>>879120
>Women doctors, teachers and civil servants were forced to give up their careers.
False. Women were only barred from government, law and millitary, Everything else was open to women, they were also given a free university education from the state. The way they got women to adopt that kind of lifestyle was to give financial incentives. Women would be given monetary awards for having many children.
>>876344
Nationalism is an outgrowth of the French Revolution.
>>878502
Not that guy, but his definition of fascism isn't really what we're discussing. It's Mosley's fascism versus contemporary view of fascism. Like Hitler's socialism versus contemporary views of socialism.
>Arnold Spencer Leese rejected any overtures from Mosley due to the latter's initial reluctance to make anti-Semitism a central theme, leading to Leese dismissing Mosley as a "kosher fascist". He even dubbed the BUF the 'British Jewnion of Fascists' over the issue. One of their biggest differences was that the IFL held a biological view of anti-Semitism that the Jews were inherently inferior as a race in contrast to the BUF, whose eventual adoption of anti-Semitism was framed in ideas about the Jews supposed undue influence at the top echelons of society.
nuttin personnel kid
>>879221
well it did shut them down at the end of the day.
>>876329
What is it, if it's not fascism? Certainly nothing like socialism
>>879120
There's nothing wrong with any of that desu
>>880488
>removal of personal liberty even when it's not in direct conflict with the needs of the state
Even John Stuart Mill would want to slap your bitch ass face
>>880087
>dubbed the BUF the 'British Jewnion of Fascists'
Was he 15?
Simple definition:
For the health and well being of the nation and its people.
>>879138
>"""""btfo"""""
Anyway
>>876921
Fascism: a dictatorship I don't like that I attribute to all I don't like
>sexism
Since when?
>fraud elections
Never necessary, populism got Nazis in power, and it was even smoother in places like Italy
>church and state intertwined
Kek, in your Marxist delusions maybe
>>879138
>communist filth uses women and children to suppress political freedom, attacking a peaceful match, and attack police
>fascists are banned because feelings meanwhile communist leader behind it all makes political success
And then socialists today celebrate it
>>880087
>bbed the BUF the 'British Jewnion of Fascists'
>>876347
Many of the same traits of communism
>>879140
>I think a missing part that very few bring up is the total mobilization of the people on behalf of the state.
The very article by Ernst Junger where the term "total mobilization" originated claimed that liberal democratic states were much better at total mobilization than authoritarian ones, as seen in WWI.
This was later proven 100% correct during WWII.
>>882920
The issue is, that the Liberal states largely became authoritarian states when they mobilised the masses, especially in Britain, the state effectively commandeered most private industries at all related to the war effort, enforced conscription by 1916 when volunteers dried up, outlawed anything that could be seen as dangerous or aiding the enemy, even conscientious objectors in WWI were often imprisoned, some dying in custody; the Flying of any sort of kite was strictly monitored in many cases banned out of fear of communicating with the enemy, while with WWII you have security regulation 18b which coincided with habeus corpus being revoked, leading to the mass imprisonment of anyone at all suspected of possibily being a fifth columnist; most nobility the entire leadership of the British Union of Fascists was arrested and detained, and of course you have the suspension of elections in both wars, Britain went 10 years without a general election due to the decision not to hold any until 1945 after war broke out. It's not that a Liberal Democracy was better at mobilising society, more that when it did it was a rarer occurrence, one the people were mostly behind, rather than the constant mobilisation called for by some reigimes
>>882663
No, not to any extent you're asserting.
>>883717
very true. Historians call WWI Italy a "dress rehearsal" for fascism. A lot of the same actors in government and industry who implemented the war economy took up the role again under Mussolini
>>883717
You mean totalitarian? Liberals can be totalitarian too, see the Jacobins. The State functions as a tool to exclude and subdue the enemy of Liberalism.
>>884325
No it doesn't.
Women and men are very clearly unequal, but Fascism claims no such thing
Misogyny is the hatred of women, not the garbage you spew.
>>877643
>>They are German and we are English, therefore our views and our methods on many subjects will be different. In this particular we possess a great Empire comprising many different races. They possess no such Empire, and their aim is a revived German race, geographically united. We believe profoundly in our own British race which has created the Empire, but we know also it would be bad for the Empire to stigmatise by law other races within it as inferior or outcast
>>Fascism is the name by which the modern Movement has come to be known in the world. It would have been possible to avoid
>misrepresentation by calling our Movement by another name. But it was more honest to call it Fascism and thus to let everyone know exactly where we stood. It is up to us to defeat misrepresentation by propaganda and explanation of the real policy and methods of Fascism as it will operate in Britain. In the long run straightforward dealing is not only honest but also pays best. The alternative name for the modern Movement is the National Socialism used in Germany. But the German Movement also is known throughout the outside world as Fascist, which is the name commonly used to describe the phenomenon of the modern Movement whether in Britain, Germany or Italy. National Socialism and Fascism in my view are the same Movement, finding different expressions in different countries in accord with different national and racial characteristics. For seven years in the Labour Party before founding Fascism in Britain, I fought for a National Socialist Policy in contradistinction to the International Socialism of that Party.
>Oswald Mosley (1936) Fascism: 100 questions asked and answered
