Essay of a doctrinal definition of Fascism

Poster un commentaire

septembre 20, 2012 par Sororité Aryenne


From an historical point of view, Fascism until now has always presented itself as a reaction to a specific situation, based on given and precise circumstances. Moreover, and unlike Marxism, it can’t rely on a written doctrinal basis.

 

The most well-known Fascist movement, German national-socialism, was precisely what its name said it was : a particular socialism, suited to the very collective psyche of the people it was applied to, in the place where it was applied, in the time when it was applied. In addition to that, it lasted only six years, a lapse of time quite insufficient to estimate its effectiveness and assess its virtues.

 

Here would be a tentative of definition : Fascism is an authoritative and undemocratic form of socialism, which on the one hand is meant to substitute the collective ownership to the private property as far as the chief means of production and exchange are concerned, and on the other hand devotes itself to restrain the possession of material goods for each one. All this would be grounded on an organic and non-egalitarian conception of society where each one is devolved to the function suited to one’s psyche. The goal of such a society would be the continuous improvement of the race, and the enhancement of the living conditions of the individuals composing that society. The latters would themselves be regarded as the pool from where the great individuals leading society forward would emerge.

 

No doubt Fascism is to be regarded as a dictatorship. But all dictatorships are not fascist. Salazar, Franco, Pinochet, were dictators but certainly not fascist leaders, and their authoritarianism only aimed at preserving the financial interests of an upper class. Fascism is thus an altruistic dictatorship, deeply related to what was called, in the 19th century : “enlightened despotism”.

 

Based on what precedes, a few leaders only truly deserve to be regarded as fascist figures : Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Juan Péron, Gamal Abd-el-Nasser and Thomas Sankara. Those five leaders, and those five only, were considered to be dangerous enough by cosmopolitan plutocracy to have the latter unleash its armed forces or assassins against them. Stalin, Mao Zhedong, Castro or even Pol Pot (who still led a policy of racial purification when he ruled over Kampuchea) were never threatened during their rules, because of the failure of their economic policies which were never to give any convincing results. On the contrary,he decay and fall of the countries they led only contributed to reinforce the prestige of capitalism as only option against Communism.

 

Another somewhat disheartening assessment is that these “Fascisms”, or the regimes considered as such, were almost exclusively founded on the emulation of a personal power; but time has changed and it’s now our most impervious duty to give Fascism its genuine spirit, and true heart. And to that purpose, it’s of cardinal importance we ignore all those regimes which already existed in the past, and focus on the future. Until now, Fascism has always been a response to events happening in a certain place at a certain time. We must now entrust it with a timeless and purely ideal basis. Fascism shall not arise any more out of the facts. The facts themselves shall arise from a precise and clearly defined ideology.

 

It’s therefore necessary to get rid of the current nation-states (a goal which by the way is already achieved, thanks to cosmopolitan plutocrats): narrow-minded nationalisms led to the defeat of White Europe in1945. It was however obvious as early as in the 20’s that a confederation of European nations should have emerged as soon as possible between the USA and the USSR in lieu of petty-minded jingoism.

 

Fascism has to be doctrinal, that is, universalist.

 

This first observation leads to a second one: it’s of cardinal importance Fascism be based on biology, and especially on a strict policy of racial hygiene, in order to avoid prejudicial miscegenetions. And only a global fascist power would achieve so tremendous a goal. We must in addition observe that mankind does not require more intelligent people that the body requires brain cells, and that forgeing honest tempers in healthy bodies must be the top priority in education. This implies, of course, resorting to eugenism. Human mind being not, according to biological materialism, a transcendent being with regard to the body, but on the contrary deeply linked to it. Therefore, mental failures lead to a lower level humanity, a view utterly opposed to the Judeo-Christian so-called « humanism » which tends to see in any individual the same level of humanity, a view which will provide a moral guarantee to the 21st century Fascist when it comes to the termination of the waste and dregs polluting his race.

 

In order to be effective, 21st century Fascism has to be a biological materialism grounded on eugenism and on the predominant influence of Science and Technology on the social and intellectuel enhancement of the races as well. To sum up, Fascism has to be a scientific racialist socialism.

Publicités

Laisser un commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s

%d blogueurs aiment cette page :