Similarly, both Hitler and Mussolini supported elitism. Since human beings are born with radically different abilities and attributes, those with rare qualities rise, through struggle, above those capable only of following. Influenced by Nietzsche’s idea of the “Ubermensch”, the “over-man”, both Hitler and Mussolini believed that a uniquely gifted individual would rise up and awaken the people to their destiny. His authority is therefore unlimited. In this way the phrase “Adolf Hitler is Germany, Germany is Adolf Hitler” was rigorously chanted at rallies, while the principle “Mussolini is always right’ became the core of Italian Fascist doctrine
Fascism and Nazism also embraced an extreme version of expansionist nationalism. They did not preach respect for distinctive cultures or national traditions, but believed the superiority of one nation should be asserted over all others. In this way, Fascists and Nazis were committed to promoting, protecting and expanding the nation. Such militant nationalism was underpinned by a desire to return to a “Golden Age” of the past. Indeed, Nazis and Fascists emphasised the moral and cultural decadence of modern society, stressing the possibility of rejuvenation of the nation, like a phoenix rising from the ashes. Griffen refers to this as “palingenesis”. Both Hitler and Mussolini promoted the glories of the past reflected in the greatness of the Roman Empire for Mussolini and the idea of the “Third Reich” in Nazi Germany.
Furthermore, both Nazis and Fascists are united in their anti-Capitalist and anti-Marxist nature. Fascism and Nazism found themselves at odds with Capitalism as they placed the community above the individual, reflected in the phrase “Common Good before Private Good” inscribed on the Nazi coin. Since Capitalism is based upon the pursuit of self-interest it thus threatens to undermine the cohesion of the nation. Fascists and Nazis believe that uniting workers and employers under the state could prevent class conflict. This was most vividly expressed in Mussolini’s Corporate State. Similarly, Fascist and Nazis aimed to lure the working class away from Marxism, which preached the idea of an international working class, which again undermined the principles of national unity and integration.
Finally, Fascism and Nazism are unique in their glorification of war and struggle. Indeed, Mussolini proclaimed that “war is to men what maternity is to women”, while Hitler emphasised the need to go to war every 25 years. Subscribing to Social Darwinism, Fascists and Nazis regarded struggle as the natural and inevitable condition of both social and international life. Only competition and conflict could ensure human progress and guarantee that the fittest and strongest prosper in a process of elimination entitled the “survival of the fittest”. War was the ultimate test as it allowed stronger nations to triumph over weaker ones.
On the other hand, there are some significant differences between Fascism and Nazism. While Italian Fascism emphasised the supremacy of the Fascist state, Nazism stressed the importance of the race. As Mussolini’s primary concern was submission to his will, Italian Fascism could theoretically embrace all people regardless of race, colour or even country of birth, In contrast, Hitler believed that only those of the correct biological origin could belong to the superior Aryan race. He divided races into categories, the Aryan “master race” being at the top while the Jews, Slavs “sub-humans” were at the bottom. Hitler believed that such people must be eliminated to prevent them from “polluting” the racial stock and threatening the “vital sap”. In this way, he embarked upon the “final solution” in order to eliminate all European Jews. When Mussolini passed anti-Semitic laws in the 1930s it was only to placate Hitler.
Their attitude toward the state also differed significantly. Italian Fascism was largely a form of state worship, reflected in the words of Giovanni Gentile regularly repeated by Mussolini “Everything foe the state; nothing against the state; nothing outside the state”. Mussolini believed the state was capable of motivating and inspiring individuals to act in the common interest. It was also essential in ensuring social cohesion. In contrast, Hitler saw the state more as a means to an end. Its primary role was to implement Nazi policy by controlling the media, arts and culture, education and youth organisations and to suppress all political opposition.
Furthermore, Hitler’s regime reached totalitarianism whereas Mussolini’s amounted to authoritarianism. Certainly, both had pervading ideologies that controlled every aspect of life, both controlled the economy, had a terror system with a single leader and party in control. Yet, by swearing an oath of loyalty to him in August 1934, Hitler controlled the army whereas Mussolini did not. Similarly, throughout Mussolini’s regime, the Italian monarchy survived, many local politicians continued in power and the Catholic Church retained its privileges and independence. The Italian state thus operated more as a personalised dictatorship rather than a totalitarian dictatorship.
Finally, Italian and German brands of Fascism differ in their attitudes towards modernism. While Mussolini was keen tom portray Italy as a modernising force and embrace the advantages of modern industry and technology, Hitler condemned modern civilisation as decadent and corrupt. In this way, he promoted the image of a peasant people suited to a simple existence. This peasant ideology had important implications for foreign policy-in order to restore the German people to their proper peasant existence, territorial expansion, “Lebensraum”, was crucial.
In conclusion, it can be said that Fascism ids a single coherent doctrine to a certain extent since both Nazism and Italian Fascism share many fundamental beliefs. The ideas of both helped to shape the doctrine of Fascism and had profound influences on other Fascist regimes both in Europe and abroad. Most notably, Franco’s Spain and Vichy France drew many of their central beliefs from the regimes of Hitler and Mussolini. Yet, there are many significant differences and the two should be treated as separate doctrines owing to the profound clashes over areas such as race and the state.
