It's worth reading Fascism if only to appreciate the great contributions to our historical understanding from A.
Gottfried, like my friend and mentor De Felice (with whom I published a book-length interview in 1976, Fascism: An Informal Introduction to Its Theory and Practice, which devastated the Left's stereotype and stressed the revolutionary components), rather reluctantly concludes that the differences between Nazism and fascism are so significant that it's a mistake to try to pack both phenomena into a box labeled "fascism.
This line of analysis adds power to Gottfried's masterly discussion of the death of "totalitarianism" as an explanatory concept that included Soviet tyranny alongside Nazism and fascism.
Themes such as fascist fathers and rebellious children are considered within the social-political context of Italian fascism
during the 1940s-1970s, the impact of fascism
on young people in Italy, and the role of youth in rebellion, innovation, and idealism.
According to Eatwell, it is unlikely that fascism will ever be repeated in its classical forms, although a partial rehabilitation of fascism--a "repackaging" of fascism for the twenty-first century--is helped by new economic and political trends.
Eatwell's chapters on interwar fascism synthesize a good deal of previous scholarship, although his definition of fascism relies on conservative historiography.
Eatwell argues that Mussolini's creation of a Ministry of Corporations to organize the syndicates was "largely a sham," that the syndicalist Alceste De Ambris "quickly came to reject fascism because of its compromises with landowners and business," and that Mussolini's "socialistic" Salo Replic in 1944 targeted "strike leaders" for death.
Similarly, Sternhell identifies fascisms defining characteristic as the conjunction of elements of the nationalist, antiliberal and antibourgeois right on the one hand and the antidemocratic and antiMarxist socialist and quasisocialist left on the other, both of which were equally determined to destroy liberal democracy.
Although few historians would now deny that fascism in some form was an important part of France's political terrain in the 1930s, there is still little agreement about its origins, its nature, or the extent to which it infiltrated French politics.
In 1954 Rene Remond, Frances foremost historian of the right, concluded that fascism had not existed in France.
Given that the word "fascist" has recently become a pervasive, catch-all term for every form of modern political authoritarianism, books such as Gregor's, which attempt to clarify what fascism was, is, and most likely will be in the future, are increasingly necessary.
His research was innovative because it set out to demonstrate that Italian fascism (1) did have a proper revolutionary ideology; (2) that it belonged to neither the right nor the left; (3) and that it differed vastly from Hitler's National Socialism.
Italian fascism is, according to Gregor, a form of socialism for capitalist systems that are not mature enough for a revolution to happen--that is, systems in which a conscious proletariat cannot yet exist because of the retarded state of capitalist development.
In other words, interwar French fascism drew from a style of anticapitalist thought whose detournement from Marxism Antliff documents with both conceptual clarity and historical specificity.
Avant-Garde Fascism is thus also a study of the catholicity of these fascist movements themselves.