Fascism: A Very Short Introduction

Jack Kirschner

Fascism: A very Short Introduction

Kevin Passmore, 2002

Oxford University Press

2nd Edition

Kevin Passmore, a history teacher at Oxford University, writes a short introduction that pursues a valid definition for a movement that has been infamously difficult to define. That movement is known as fascism, which Passmore claims to have been started by Maurice Barrés, a national socialist, who contended that ‘nationalism was the solution to all’. In this short introduction, he connects the lineage of Fascism in the East and West as well as its ideology and political nature. Passmore’s definition changes throughout the book with regards to assumptions made by Marxist, capitalist, liberal and nationalist views (others could be mentioned). His definition concludes that Fascism relied heavily on the sense of nation, which is argued by Maurice Barrés. Kevin Passmore argues fascists wanted a mobilized nation that had a strong ultra-nationalistic background, supported destruction of the weak, and opposed any left wing opposition.

The main point of this book is summarized in the introduction by Jose Ortega y Gasset. Gasset mentions that Fascism is simultaneously one thing and not the other, which I will mention later on. The basic of Kevin Passmore’s argument is to break down this acknowledgement using the definitions of other political movements and ideologies through out the 20th century. From this notion by Gasset, the reader already knows that they are in for a rough ride. However rough it may be, Kevin Passmore delicately approaches this topic to provide a readable and comprehensive novel.

Passmore’s work is exactly what it is said to be, short. It is most likely the most informative and persuasive ‘definition’ for such an inconclusive topic. He doesn’t conclude any affirmative definition because all forms of fascism, whether in the east or west, were slightly different. He looks at the actions of Italian fascists, Nazism, Ku-Klux-Klan, social Darwinism, ultra- nationalism in France, the ‘Black Hundreds’ in Russia and the Italian nationalists. He also provides comprehensive reports that exhibit how each nation differed in the sense. Further, he attempts to explain why it became so immensely popular. For example, the Weberians struggled to undermine democracy and socialism and in turn fascism seemed to be an equitable option. As well as the Marxist claim that fascism was a more profound capitalistic approach that appealed to the masses. As these are only a few examples that Passmore explains, it proves that he is able to knowledgably break down fascism into its bare components to give the reader a true understanding of its nature.  

The book argues in more detail the ability for fascism to flourish in Italy and Germany. Passmore digresses to say these were where the two most influential fascist parties reigned. However, he finds that both parties existed not because of similar issues in the state, but shared values and in both instances the party was led by a ‘superhuman’ figure that guided the general population. Passmore appeals to the notion that all fascist movements shared similar core values. The fascist regimes exhibited an extreme sense of nationalism that placed the party on the far right of the political scale.  As well as preference to national families instead of foreigners, replacing the weak willed with the young and strong and that mediocre masses elect mediocre leaders, all of which separate fascism from capitalism.

Kevin Passmore makes a strong argument on how to define a movement that is ‘A and not A’ based off of Gasset’s definition. He states,

Yet how can we make sense of an ideology that appeals to skinheads and intellectuals; denounces the bourgeoisie while forming alliances with conservatives; adopts a macho style yet attracts many women; calls for a return to tradition and is fascinated by technology; idealizes the people and is contemptuous of mass society and preaches violence in the name of order. ^[1]

 He later links this argument to the birthplace of fascism, which was placed between the two world wars. Fascism to Passmore was effectively a product of fearful nations that had been in a constant struggle, bankrupted by war and practically rearranged by communism. This simple statement accounts for a majority of the reason as to why fascism became so popular.

Passmore explains that a great deal of attention goes into the hatred of Jews by the fascist party. Not only in relation to Hitler but also neighboring countries and especially the upper class consisting of lawyers and doctors. Passmore argues that a good portion of the cause to Nazi ideologies was the understanding that Jews were feminists and feminists were Jews. Passmore later ends in stating that a majority of Fascist parties were inherently racist. Passmore adds,