<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Concise yet profound
Review: "Fascism has an enigmatic countenance because in it appears the most counterpoised contents. It asserts authoritarianism and organises rebellion. It fights against contemporary democracy and, on the other hand, does not believe in the restoration of any past rule. It seems to pose itself as the forge of a strong State, and uses means most conducive to its dissolution, as if it were a destructive faction or a secret society. Whichever way we approach fascism we find that it is simultaneously on thing and the contrary, it is A and not A."
Passmore's book takes the tone of this passage and writes his book re-affirming the above. He seems to masterfully handle all the problems and hazards of his study able to articulate a concept of fascism that makes room for both its modernity and anti-modernity. Not just an historical survey, it is also a presentation of common elements of a widespread ideology. This book is as fascinating as it is eye-opening. Very well-written.
Rating:
Summary: Concise yet profound
Review: "Fascism has an enigmatic countenance because in it appears the most counterpoised contents. It asserts authoritarianism and organises rebellion. It fights against contemporary democracy and, on the other hand, does not believe in the restoration of any past rule. It seems to pose itself as the forge of a strong State, and uses means most conducive to its dissolution, as if it were a destructive faction or a secret society. Whichever way we approach fascism we find that it is simultaneously on thing and the contrary, it is A and not A."
Passmore's book takes the tone of this passage and writes his book re-affirming the above. He seems to masterfully handle all the problems and hazards of his study able to articulate a concept of fascism that makes room for both its modernity and anti-modernity. Not just an historical survey, it is also a presentation of common elements of a widespread ideology. This book is as fascinating as it is eye-opening. Very well-written.
Rating:
Summary: True understanding of Fascism
Review: Kevin Passmore has pulled it off once again. I have read most of his books and enjoyed all I've read. I own 19 of the "Short Introduction," books, and I can say confidently that this is by far the best. This book takes the topic of fascism and looks at it with a whole new perspective. In my opinion, Passmore's data and opinions are equally balanced, which is very effective. It is correct to call the Nazi party fascist, as many of their belifes and plans were simply fascist. If you are interested in researching Fascism this is without a doubt the book to buy.
Rating: 
Summary: A very mixed bag
Review: The author has done a great deal of research on fascism and is knowledgeable about the subject. However the biggest problem with this book is that the author allows his political ideology to get in the way of his analysis and therefore he comes up with some flawed interpretations of the data. Fascism as the historical revisionist, including the author, sees it as some form of ultra right wing anti communistic/pro-capitalistic form of governance. While this may be the popular leftist drivel it definitely does not match the facts of fascism. The interesting part of this book is that you are given enough factual data to disprove the author's very thesis throughout the book. So just what are the major tenants of fascisms that make it a far right ideology? This is a question I have asked the few, professors that hold this false belief. The answers are usually a mumbled mixture of hmms, well, ahhh, I'll get back to you. So I waited in eager anticipation as to Mr. Passmore's reasoning and he did mention two. Fascism is hostile towards socialism and feminism. That's it, that's why he regards fascism as a far right phenomena, but lets take a closer look First of all the author incorrectly calls the German Nazi's a fascist party. This is so absurd that it is easily rebuffed here, but first let me give a little history. The term NAZI was a nickname given to the members of the National Socialist German Workers Party (Socialist is the operative word here.) This is of course Hitler's outfit, which formed the core of the Third Reich. National Socialists are just another variation on the theme of Socialism and they acquired their nickname though a cartoon character, "Ignaz", nicknamed "Nazi" who was the stereotypical Jew. Before the horror of the reality set in, it seemed a good joke on the posturing, parading, clearly anti-Semitic national socialists to share a nickname with a Jewish cartoon character. Later, Stalin thought up the switch of the applying the Italian "fascist" designation to German national socialist in order to erase from memory that the Nazis were, in fact, socialist.
Fascist just for you information, refers to members of an Italian political party, founded and led by Benito Mussolini, who was expelled from the Socialist Party of Italy and went on to start his own. The structure was a copy, the concept a variant of other socialist parties. "Fasces," a bundle of twigs with an ax, were carried before consuls of ancient Rome. Mussolini adopted the symbol, hence the name "fascist." Other popular names of Socialist parties are Bolshevik's and Communists. It is interesting to note that in Hungary alone, the communist party went through four complete name changes during its tenure including a fascist label. It is an integral part of socialist operational methodology to make an instant switch once a label has been tainted with "mistakes" (such as too many atrocities), or when a new compendium of deceptions is about to be announced. Regardless of the name that a socialist party chooses they all have the same elements in common. They are as follows:
1.Restriction of Individual Freedom
2.A strong central authority
3.The usurpation of legislative and judicial prerogative by the executive branch of the government
4.Some suspension of property rights. Since Hitler's party and the Mussolini's party both urged the people to go along with all four of the above premises, both the fascist and the Nazi's (National Socialist German Workers Party) was in reality a Socialistic endeavor. To label it conservative is arrantly illogical deduction. Since it is obvious that fascism is NOT against socialism what about the suggestion that it is against feminism? To answer this question one would need the author's definition of feminism to begin with. Unfortunately the author never defines what he means by feminism, but I find it captivating that the Italian Fascist party was one of the first governments to give women suffrage. It is also amusing to realize that today's radical feminist are many times referred to as Femi-Nazis, alluding to the how the militant feminist are very much likened to the German military. Overall this book is mediocre at best, the facts are present, the interpretation flawed. Caveat Emptor!
<< 1 >>
| 
