Catch-all Fascism?

Since the origin of fascist movements in Nazi Germany and the Kingdom of Italy it has become a custom fro historians to simply label the ideology of governance as right-wing totalitarianism opposite the force of communism, commonly viewed as the Left's own version of top-down control. Though many are happy to simply agree to this, there is reason to suggest that this general consensus needs to be more totally fleshed out.

(Image credit goes to www.JewishVirtualLibrary.org)

This is because labeling fascism as necessarily right-wing also demands the notion that the fascist dictatorships which endured so long without much opposition internally were not supported by at least a majority of the country's population. Both Augusto Pinochet and Francisco Franco could well be viewed as conservatives, yet their governments were largely powerless outside of the nation's confines, requiring focus almost exclusively on domestic policies due to a limited support base. The fact that strict ideologues have such a difficult time keeping control better gives them the association with authoritarianism, a style that desperately needs strong policing to prosper for more than a few years.

When history is taken into account, fascism would best be described as a populist, centrist, or generalist movement that has never truly been opposed by a simple majority of citizens underneath its government of operation. Mussolini is often attacked for his supposed anti-leftist policies, but in reality he held the support of numerous labor unions and implemented the establishment of public corporations to consolidate political power. Hitler was not very different, with the Nazis openly promoting socialism and expanding government services to accommodate even the poorest of citizenry.

Perhaps the best explanation for why fascism is at its core a populist movement is that most people under its girdle asked for its all-encompassing implementation. Mussolini's rise may seem anti-democratic in the eyes of today's scholars, but it was not so far removed from the Roman Empire's system of totalitarian monarchs dating back to the glory ages of previous decades. The National Fascists also offered order in a country torn by cultural divisions and a hate for a democratic voting system -- an emotion that translates into the lackluster turnouts of the present day. Even Hitler was hardly a loathed figure when he came to power, as he promised and delivered on restoring the country's economy for all Germans -- radical socialists and laborers included.

As far as the supposed international opposition to fascism, evidence would suggest to the contrary. Mussolini's policies of equality were immensely popular among Italian Jews during the early days of his rule, and across the English Channel even the heroic Winston Churchill looked to the Duce as a potential ally in the post World War anti-communist movement.

So is fascism of one strict ideology, or a melting pot of different beliefs? The conclusion is up for grabs.


Michael Veramendi

National Alliance Vice President for Foreign Issues

How to Save Italy

One need not be a follower of political philosophy to realize that Italy is in deep trouble. With an incompetent prime minister and corruption permeating both major parties in Rome's Chamber of Deputies, it seems inevitable that the country will fall back into the 50-year pattern of presidents on the council of ministers barely managing to hold 9-month mandates before collapsing or resigning in shame. In truth, the only periods of stability experienced by birthplace of the Roman Empire since the death of Mussolini have been the noble Alcide de Gasperi's 8-year mandate which ended in 1953, and Bettino Craxi's 48 months during the 1980s, known best for their fields of corruption and assistance in producing the clown prince of Rome who holds power today.

(Photo credit goes to GlobalFirepower.com)

With such a horrific record behind state, some might question why anyone would bother to consider the possibilities any longer, and yet the reality is that good reason remains in the interest of doing so. Europe is dying. In England, David Cameron's waffling on neo-multiculturalism is sealing his nation's twilight, and "economics only" policies have prevented needed changes to the countries of Germany as well as Spain. Under Nicholas Sarkozy, France has somewhat pulled itself back from the brink, yet the shadow of his defeat in next year's elections could well undermine this progress forever.   

And so we are left with Italy, a strong Roman Catholic nation that has the opportunity to be the equivalent of Britain during the Second World War, albeit in a different style. By adopting six key reforms to government, Rome may well be capable of turning back the dangerous lean towards Europe's general path, a road lined with destruction and undoing. Few of these changes would be easy to adopt, and some might even endanger the life of the leader to pursue them, but the interests of such a historic world power should not be dashed by fears of death--no matter how serious. Should such a commander arise, Italy may have golden years rather than a winter era in its future.

• Reformation of the Chamber

 Political power always begins or rest within a legislature, and so it is understandable that the heart of the Italian stability problem rests in the divisions of the lower house, which can make or break a prime ministers. More than 600 members currently serve in the house, which creates a singular problem when attempting to achieve a majority government or pass a referendum without needing the consultations of the people, who fail to turn out and render the tests invalid. In order to fix this demise, the number of deputies should be reduced to 533, thus reducing the number of swing blocs that often cripple executive decisions by withdrawing from a coalition. This will further prevent regionalism from continuing to undermine a firm national government, preventing the Party of Values and Lega Nord from winning no confidence votes whenever they please.

•  Reformation of the Senate

The purpose of any upper house is to give membership to a nation's oligarchy; the rich few who can deliberate and pass a resolution without the regional squabbling seen in its lower counterpart. As such the Senate should be made up of the wealthy few, not a colorful bloc of members who can undermine stability by             rejecting a government's formation.  Again, a change in numbers is needed to better the senate's stability. Rather than 315, the chamber should be reduced to 101, allowing for more decisive majorities than what is seen in Rome today.   Furthermore, lifetime senatorial positions must be abolished, eradicating an unneeded drain on the country's monetary supply to provide exorbitant salaries to former executives.

• A Stronger Presidency

The only European nation with as large of an assembly as Italy is France, yet this   reality is offset by the empowerment of the French President under the semi-presidential system. France's governmental structure allows the president to conduct foreign relations and hold certain basic legislative powers while serving    in an popularly chosen term of office. A prime minister is still employed, yet this position manages affairs of state and leads a majority to confirm the cabinet of the president by voting in approval. In short, the executive branch is independent enough that it can remain stable even when the legislative body is weak, thus         preventing the interruption of power that is very evident in Italian politics. Having an appointed president is not enough, as it is powerless in nature and serves little purpose other than to appoint the Council of Ministers.

• Privatization, Privatization, Privatization

 Italy currently struggles with debt making up 120% of GDP, a situation which could well lead to a Greek-style collapse if not adjusted. Instead of following this suicidal form of financial policy, the government should pass structural privatization laws, cutting down government spending and reducing the public workforce while attracting foreign companies to do business within its borders.This move could generationally impact the country, leading to a more motivated populace with less dependency on the government for employment.            Additionally, it would make the country more competitive in the EU race for economic supremacy, preventing its marginalization next to France and Germany in the coming future.

•  Island Security

Perhaps Silvio Berlusconi's greatest achievement during his years in office has been the imposition of harsh illegal immigration restrictions for violators who attempt to enter the country through its southern islands of Sicily and Lampedusa. Simply halting here is not enough, however. The Italian Navy should be moved to             create   a blockade around Lampedusa and its larger cousin, policing the waters and preventing smuggling vessels from dropping immigrants off without proper documentation. If necessary, the standing defense force would fire on ships from Tunisia or Morocco which have been known to transfer black market weapons and drugs into the Italian mainland.  

• Instating of Il Rosso Vento

 This is certainly not the first time when a call for the formation of a group such as Il Rosso Vento has been made, and common sense suggests it will not be the last.Why the title? Well, back in the day European nobles would hire mercenaries for the exact purpose of striking back at bandits and thieves without requiring the             constant use of their own judgment systems. These enforcers for hire were sometimes known as the "Red Wind," as they brought swift justice to lawbreakers without bothering the a lord beyond his money coffers.  

An Italian version of this system in the modern day could be equally as effective, trained by Russian or American private armies and tasked with the extrajudicial neutralization of Mafia members across Sicily and the mainland. With groups such as the Ndrangheta making up most of the South's import wealth, massive             tactical strikes without the interference of the justice system could absolutely undermine organized crime in the same way that Alberto Fujimori defeated the Shining Path terrorists in Peru. Other than being a quick method, the same groups would be able to find incriminating evidence regarding entrenched corruption in the government, handing this off to the authorities and resulting in a cleansing of the public sector.

Inaction has never produced freedom. Only courage can do so. Italy must have the strength to stand and do what is necessary to save itself from the future of Europe.

Nigel Garrison

National Alliance Vice President for European Affairs

Breaking Free (Not Apart)

For generations the argument has been made that the position of the nation of Italy is hopeless, with the prosperous north destined to remain dominant and whatever joys of the south simply drifting away into oblivion as the region becomes progressively less capable of sustaining spread wealth. Observers have almost conceded that it is a forgone conclusion, yet they miss a viable point which is causing Italy to rot from within--and the place where it can be resuscitated: strong federal leadership.

During the twilight days of World War II, Benito Mussolini made a considerable name for himself as the efficient caretaker of Italian dreams for the future. His methods were brutal, his process mechanical, yet for many citizens, it was a welcome break from the shoddy socialist parties of the latter 1800s which had done little to preserve national unity. Regardless of where he started, the Duce made a point to build up the army, consolidate power, and create an effort to dramatically restructure society so as to help each section of the country.

Even in the depths of the South, Mussolini employed federal funds to build schools and provide jobs to the citizenry, planting seeds which would momentarily lift Sicily out of its historical recession state before his empire came crashing down as the Allies prevailed in Europe.

No one is out to justify what Mussolini did besides those which can be looked to as merits, but he illustrates the sort of leader needed by the Italian state in order to hold a balance between the modernized northern tier and the Romanesque geography below it. If the picture is not clear enough as it stands, look to the election of media mogul playboy Silvio Berlusconi in 2001. Despite unorthodox tactics of control and partial suppression, the premier's overall leadership has brought about a period of stability in Italy's government which was unheard of since his fascist predecessor.

Yet it comes down to character, and therein lies the issue with both men, notwithstanding their considerable successes. A leader must appear to hold standards for their self, otherwise the people lose faith and eventually come to distrust  their would-be savior. In such this way it is not an Italian who can save the country, but an Italian who understands Western rhetoric and spirit. The general chances of a Northern League member winning the executive-ship is low by all means, and so the only solution is someone who can build a strong southern coalition of fused parties and then use Americanism to empower those still in the region. Better governance would involve efforts to draw American companies to the southern zone, employing people there and allowing the positive ethic of hard work to settle in where government dependency is rampant.

Weak governments are problematic because they cause the people to lose hope in the ability of their officials to rule impartially and without purpose of evasion. Even the most elite offices become simply rotational positions for those who can rub elbows with the rich--or the criminal.

Thankfully the future offers a plethora of opportunities for change, and with the migration to Italy from many other nations, a change for the better is more viable with each passing day; it is just up to the citizens to accept the benefits of new action.



Andrew Rimmer

National Alliance Vice President for Communication