What Is Fascism and the Issue with the Modern and Academic View I — Q&A

ENQUIRER: What is Fascism, from your view?

DOMINIQUE: Italian Fascism is a distinct, historically rooted philosophical system, and is not the vague pejorative slur or catch-all authoritarianism it has become in modern popular discourse. I utilize primary sources (Giovanni Gentile’s Actualism, Mario Palmieri, Mussolini’s own statements and their limited interpretations of Vico and divergences from Mazzinianism) comparing traditions that claim Rome’s legacy — REPUBLICANISM and FASCISM. Fascism is a specific Italian “Third Position” response to the degenerative decline of liberalism and a development out of European absolutism, with its own metaphysics, ethics, and mission. It is not something that can be casually reproduced or equated with any strongman rule today, despite broad parallels.

It is a philosophical system with metaphysics, not a hastily concocted idea or mere authoritarian tactics. It is a “totalist system” or “Mazzinianism and Totalitarianism” (Mussolini’s terms), rooted in the Risorgimento’s drive for Italian redemption and unity.

Although, Mazzini’s core ideas embodied in his Republicanism differ from Fascism and its interpretation of him, but I will explain this in a separate entry for you.

Mazzini’s doctrine of Duty and the nation as “Deity in Motion” has precedent influence in the politics and philosophy emerging during Giovanni Gentile’s early life as influence. Gentile saw the State as a wholly spiritual, always-in-process creation. Dante, Vico, and earlier Stoic Roman traditions influenced the early Fascist thinkers. It emphasized Unity, Authority, and Duty; the “Hero” as spiritual embodiment of the People (a Platonic philosopher-king reinterpreted); with a mystic belief in the oneness of the nation and the divine essence in the leader.

Fascism is a spiritual and martial discipline aimed at moral regeneration, countering materialism, decadence, and individualism. It sought to restore Rome’s eternal mission (order, law, family, world empire for perpetual peace) through a dynamic ethical State that subordinates even the Church to its totalitarian framework. Palmieri explained that Fascism means the return to Order, to Authority, to Law; the return to the “Roman conception” of human Society.

This makes Fascism historically specific and non-reproducible. Fascism will never be reproduced again and yes; it would have indeed naturally died out. But the paranoid opposition has immortalized it. It evolved organically from Italian conditions (post-WWI veterans, radical socialism into corporatism, anti-leftist street politics) and cannot be reduced simply to “anyone who rules in an authoritarian manner” and this checklist of patterns.

My approach to the study of Fascism is historical and philosophical study only, for the sake of accurate comparison and to combat conspiratorial distortions (e.g., linking Theosophy indiscriminately to Fascism, Communism, etc.), which come from the political left and political right not studying the historical and theoretical material.

The modern view says that Fascism has no theory, no philosophy, is not a system. But then you go to the primary sources, and the prime movers of Fascism are saying, it is philosophy, is based on these theories, these precursor thinkers, and is an over-arching and total metaphysical system. I often feel like I am gaslighted on this simple provable thing.

I do admire certain strengths (Stoic influences, martial discipline, anti-materialist metaphysics, precursors in Japanese Samurai and Zen thought) but I ultimately warn explicitly against it, and not because I am suspected of being a Fascist, or in agreement with them as one person has suggested. Fascism is ultimately limited and flawed when compared to Republicanism. Its shortcomings include its: incomplete metaphysics; imperfect, romanticized interpretations of ancient thinkers; resort to censorship, thuggery, suppression, and forced cultural renaissance through national myths; later adoption of scientific racism (abandoning Mazzini’s multi-ethnic vision); and roots in absolutism rather than open civic debate. Fascism and Republicanism are thus not the same system, and one cannot adopt Fascist habits of thought on authority while remaining truly republican.

“It is crucial to warn that you do not diverge into certain logic shared in Fascist Philosophy, or you have made a mistake and must circle back again very quickly. I urge, that you stay steady on the path of Republican Philosophy.”

Is something I have stated.

My focus on the study of Fascism is the original Italian philosophical project and its phases, which was serious, metaphysical, Rome-obsessed, and context-bound formed by Italian veterans and others of various background. I find that very interesting. This allows me to study less examined cases of Jewish involvement in Italian Reunification (the Risorgimento). Risorgimento republicanism produced hyper-patriotic Italian Jews who initially saw Fascism as defending that legacy against socialism and liberalism, until it betrayed them. So, Fascism is studied as one would study any historical ideology like Marxism.

ENQUIRER: What is the basis of your issue then with the modern popular and academic view of Fascism?

DOMINIQUE: The modern popular and academic view of Fascism in contemporary Western discourse (media, education, politics since 1945) functions primarily as a pejorative synonym for authoritarianism, right-wing dictatorship, or any perceived threat to liberal democracy. It is routinely applied loosely to conservatives, populists, strong leaders, or even cultural conservatives (“fascist” as insult). Academic definitions exist (e.g., Roger Griffin’s “palingenetic ultranationalism,” Umberto Eco’s 14 points: cult of tradition, rejection of modernism, action for action’s sake, etc.), but public usage collapses it into “evil authoritarianism, racism and militarism.” People might dive, e.g., into Mein Kampf and come away with “this was dumbest book I ever had to stomach” on TikTok, but that is the history of National Socialism which interweaves with Italian Fascism. I am studying Italian Fascism and Italy’s history directly post-Risorgimento, and the modern view is heavily shaped by WWII, the Holocaust, and Italian Fascism’s later racial laws/alliance with Nazism. It is equated with total suppression of opposition, cult of personality, corporatist economics, and anti-liberal/anti-communist “Third Way” ideology, but almost always framed normatively as the ultimate political evil to be opposed rather than neutrally dissected as philosophy.

People shake if you tell them to digest the primary sources of Fascism, because it does reveal ugly things, just as I mentioned with Jews in early Fascism and the connection of those Jews from the Risorgimento to Herzl, later revisionist Zionism and Pre-Herzl Zionism. More on that another time. I can understand that this angle leads to certain uncomfortable notes in history and can be abused by other types of researchers if you elect to leave out information and not explain the history fully. Trying to control this entire historical narrative has led to the condition of our world at present with its intellectual dishonesty and its scapegoats. We want to break from the pattern, or narrative and move on.

Clearly, some do not want that, and that is coming from numerous opposing political sides and ideologies, not just one. Some of these forces seem to be coddling the People, and lacks faith in them.

The entire dialogue on Fascism is stripped of nuance and is rarely discussed as a coherent Italian-specific metaphysics or Risorgimento continuation. It is instead, reduced to symbols (fasces, blackshirts, Mussolini’s balcony) or generic “far-right” threat.

Fascism was not a mere synonym for Authoritarianism, and I insist on primary-source depth, historical specificity, and philosophical seriousness. The modern view is emotional, ahistorical, and weaponized. I study it to fortify republicanism by understanding what it is not; whereas modern discourse often uses the label to shut down debate or equate any defense of authority, moral or regenerative spiritual vision, and tradition with 1930s Italy and Germany. This is crippling to human political creativity, and keeps what you are allowed to think is viable tight within small limits, and this is produced out of fear and paranoia, but it has bred control. It has, from my observation contributed to our modern polarization and political degeneration. Help to arm citizens with precise classical and republican ideas to diagnose and reject any form of arbitrary domination, Fascist logic included, while preserving the American Republic’s civic tradition.

I am not done. I have much more to say on this.