History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
Reporters ask questions. That’s what they do. Sometimes they ask meaningful and tough
questions; sometimes not so much. The answers people give are frequently insightful or, as the
case may be, sometimes strange.
In December of 2014 Jonathan Bernier, a goalie playing for the Maple Leafs, was asked his
opinion on the importance of Nelson Mandela:
Reporter: Just wanted to ask you, I mean, obviously Nelson Mandela [was] one of the most
significant historical figures of the twentieth century. What knowledge or awareness did you
have of him growing up or when did you learn of him?
Bernier: Well, obviously, growing up, you uh, he’s one of the most known athletes, uh, in the
world and, uh, lot of impact in any kind of sport that he did, and uh…that I, you know, even
playing hockey, everyone knows him from being the type of person he was off the ice and on
the ice and so, it’s unfortunate that he passed away a year ago, but, um, he changed a lot while
he was with us and he’s a tremendous guy.
Here's a link to the interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrAWrsb13bU
After watching the interview I felt a little bit sorry for Bernier…and then I started feeling
sorrier for society. We are surrounded by a lot of misinformed and ignorant people. In this case,
the reporter exposed one of Bernier’s blind spots (and to be fair we all have them). Some blind
spots are harmless but others are problematic, i.e. in order to preserve democracy citizens
need to be informed and educated; and we’ve all seen it: reporters asking people random
questions on the street testing the public’s knowledge about particular topics.
In 2008 I recall watching television interviews of reporters asking people their opinion about
President Obama. Obama was accused by critics of being a fascist and by others a communist.
People were asked to explain what fascism was and nobody could. Likewise people were asked
to explain what communism was. Again, nobody could provide a cogent answer.
The answer from one person was telling: “I don’t know what fascism is I just know it’s bad and
it’s what Obama is.” Such is the power of the meme: for this reason I wrote this article. I
wanted to provide the students with information related to the context, principles and nuances
1
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
of communism and fascism. If for no other reason, students can read this article, learn a few
technical terms, and then cast more philosophically accurate aspersions towards politicians
they don’t like.
WHAT IS FASCISM?
Fascism emerged formally as an ideology in the early 19th century. Fascism is more or less a
response of conservative thinkers to the perceived excesses of the Enlightenment. The
Enlightenment, also known as the Age of Reason (1650-1800), placed all traditional
understanding of life, morality and the world in to question; to that end thinkers like France's
Voltaire, England's John Locke, and Scotland's David Hume, all encouraged people to possess a
questioning attitude (especially towards power). The result of this promotion was both an
intellectual revolution and two political revolutions—the American (1776) and the French
(1789)—sweeping away traditional authority.
Nineteenth century conservative thinkers like France’s Joseph de Maistre responded to the
Enlightenment by doing two things: firstly, he used his significant skill as a writer to oppose
democracy because representative systems of government gave power to people who neither
deserved it nor understood how to wield it. The only people worthy of ruling, argued de
Maistre, was the elite—an aristocratic and educated one. Secondly, de Maistre was a protofascist: as such he, like all fascists from Gabriele d’Annunzio to Benito Mussolini or from
Houston Stewart Chamberlain to Adolf Hitler, held an idealized view of the past: the present
was chaotic and disorderly while the past was a simple and pure time. Taken at face value
simplicity and purity appear to be virtues; however, in their 20th century expression simplicity
took the form of anti-intellectualism (think Nuremberg rallies and book burnings) and purity
took the form of master race theory being taught in German classrooms giving birth to a
generation of mass murderers (think Holocaust). Lastly, fascists did not embrace skepticism or
the questioning attitude promoted by the vast majority of the Enlightenment’s philosophers; on
the contrary, proto-fascists and fascists alike hated the disorder resulting from a society
unwilling to give unqualified support of its elites while likewise despising the disorder
unleashed by the Age of Reason.
2
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
FASCISM & MASS MOVEMENTS
Fascism is always tied to a mass movement. In 1933 Germany was ruled by the National
Socialists (Nazis). The Nazi movement stressed the glorification of the state and the importance
of racial purity. For this reason the Nazis sought to control every aspect of German society—
education, politics, the arts, the media and, of course, the economy. Reinforcing the Nazi's hold
over the minds of Germans was the pseudo-science of ethnology. Ethnologists borrowed H. S.
Chamberlain’s term “Aryan” to refer to the German people—a mythologized group of
apparently genetically superior people originally from Northern India who eventually migrated
and settled, as coincidence would have it, in Central Europe (aka Germany).
Not all fascists are racists like the Nazis. For example, Italian fascists in the 1920s were more or
less ultra-nationalists wanting to establish law and order in Italy. Italy became a country in 1861
and from its inception suffered from constant political division. There were so many political
parties—some representing a Catholic bloc, some socialist, others fascist, and still others a
liberal worldview—that no party could establish a majority in the Parliament of Italy. Italy
actually continues to suffer from a similar problem with plurality in the present day. Again,
Italian fascists, far from being racists or promoters of silly master race theories, simply wanted
to rein in the divisive forces unleashed by democracy in order to make Italy strong again.
FASCISM & FREEDOM
Although fascists are not democratic they typically allow people a small measure of freedom;
that is, a citizen is free so long as freedom does not interfere with the greater aims of the state.
For example, in Germany Aryans could marry anyone who was an Aryan but they were
forbidden to marry a non-Aryan (to preserve racial purity).
(By the way "racial purity" is not a scientific concept whatsoever. There is no such thing as
"pure genes" either; moreover, race doesn't exist objectively; rather, it is a historically
conditioned and created idea. In the case of genes: there simply exists genetic variation
suggesting no particular group of people is better or superior or weaker or inferior than
another; every person belongs to a single human genome. In modern biology, some scientists
argue there's no human genome but a universal genome to which all life on earth belongs. This
is a minority view but it is gaining more and more adherents as our understanding of genetics
improves over time. I digress.)
3
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
In the context of the 21st century, some political theorists like Sheldon Wolin argue the control
corporations exercise over the political decision making process in the United States is proof
positive of America being a fascist state (an expression of so-called "inverted totalitarianism").
Although counter-intuitive at a certain level, Wolin argues freedom can co-exist with fascism
provided citizens remain incapable of effectively challenging the power of either the
government or the corporations. For this reason fascism can be an insidious thing; you can
evolve in to it. When it comes to communism, historically speaking, it is born out of something
more obvious: violent revolution.
FASCISM & THE INDIVIDUAL
In the case of fascist Italy or Germany, individuals do not own themselves but exist as
indistinguishable from the state. In this sense, fascism owes a lot of its inspiration from the
Catholic Church: the Church likewise treated the faithful as a “corporate whole” who belonged
to one body and who were required to unquestioningly accept Rome’s authority; that is not to
say the Catholic Church was fascist; however, fascists like Church authorities desired to recreate
an orderly past, a time before democracy (or a time before The Fall)—a period when the people
were one and did not challenge either the Church or the king (or in the case of the Church,
God).
In reality no such period ever existed. Kings like Henry II (1133-1189 AD) of England successfully
challenged Rome by pressuring the Vatican to appoint the bishops he wanted; moreover, Peter
Abelard (1079-1142 AD) a French thinker wrote Sic et Non (literally “Yes or No”) effectively
placing in to question the wisdom of unquestioningly accepting a number of the Church's bestestablished doctrines. Yet, fascists do not fret over whether or not their view of the past is
accurate; they are worried about creating a view of the past that supports their narrative in the
present which justifies future action. For this reason businessman turned politician Donald
Trump appeals to many people (forming the basis of a mass movement in the United States).
Trump argues America “doesn’t win any more” implying America always won (a quick study of
the War of 1812 should disabuse the Americans of this view); and he promises that if he’s made
president he’ll solve all the country’s problems which, interestingly, have a lot to do with
America’s longstanding racial issues.
4
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
FASCISM & AUTHORITARIANISM
Fascist governments are authoritarian by nature: decisions are not made through consensus
building or parliamentary debates. Rather, fascist states dictate to the people what can or
cannot be done. The assumption is the average person doesn’t know what is good for them.
Therefore, people need a benevolent (infallible) leader to make important decisions for them.
Fascists by and large hate the disorder perceived to be inherent in democracies. In particular,
the Nazis rejected any notions of entertaining pluralism (that there's more than one valid way
of looking at the world)—a situation where minorities maintain their unique identity
independent of the majority. To the Nazis all of the people must agree both in their thinking
and in their genes for order to be preserved.
FASCISM & THE INTERNAL THREAT
Another feature common to most fascist states—from Germany, Italy, "Communist" China or
even to the United States—the greatest threat to society comes from within the country. Thus,
fascist states seek to create and promote national unity at all costs. In Germany, this meant
purging “undesirable” or “racially questionable” elements from the body politic. In the case of
fascists in Italy, they sought to bring order to a country paralyzed by political disorder by
sweeping away democracy altogether and establishing a dictatorship. In China it means
rejecting any notion of electing anyone outside of the Communist Party to a position of
meaningful influence; and in the United States, a softer, subtler form of fascism has led to the
creation of identity cards for Hispanics in the state of Arizona, a concerted effort to deny gay
people legal equality, and to the passage of the most intrusive piece of legislation passed by
any government—democratic or otherwise— in history: the Patriot Act. An act designed to give
the government unfettered access to the digital communications of Americas. This act also
suspends habeaus corpus among other rights.
WHAT IS COMMUNISM?
During the Industrial Revolution (1750-1900 AD), a new industrial society emerged generating
enormous wealth. Wealth, unsurprisingly, was not distributed equitably or enjoyed equally.
Those who owned businesses profited significantly while laborers received low wages, lived in
squalor and eked out a miserable existence in growing, overcrowded cities.
5
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
Karl Marx, the father of communist theory, developed the political philosophy of communism in
response to the social, economic and political problems he believed were created by the
Industrial Revolution. With exception most communists are motivated by ending the
exploitation of workers by the business class. In order to end the exploitation, every
citizen must be made economically (and therefore politically) equal by eliminating social class.
According to Marx history was best understood as a conflict between classes (or those
that have versus those that have not). In the Communist Manifesto Marx describes a struggle
between the Proletariat (workers) and the Bourgeoisie (business class). Marx sought to end this
perpetual conflict by establishing a “classless society” based upon the common ownership of
the “means of production.”
In a communist state, the government abolishes the ownership of private property. Marx
believed if no single person possessed more property than another—but shared everything in
common—then no one would have the power to exploit others. Marx considered capitalism a
great social evil: the business class exploited the fact workers needed money in order to live;
and since thousands of workers competed for the same jobs the employer could pay workers
whatever they wanted (contributing to exploitation). Compounding the problem was the fact
workers, not employers, were the ones who did all the actual work while employers reaped all
of the benefits. With that said, Marx did not adequately take in to account the relative risk run
by entrepreneurs when setting up a business, i.e. if a business failed the investor lost
everything. Yet, in the aggregate, there were more workers than there were capitalists; and, as
such, the risk assumed by an individual entrepreneur or that entrepreneur's right to make a
profit from his business did not outweigh the injustice of that same entrepreneur exploiting
vulnerable workers.
Marx believed communism was a genuine political alternative to representative democracy.
According to Marx there were at least two problems with representative institutions: the first
problem was they pitted the different social classes against one another (as exemplified by the
situation of both Italy's Parliament in the 1910-20s or the Congress of the United States in the
2000s). According to Marx competing demands meant the needs of the people as a whole were
never met. Instead, elites would continue to exploit the resultant division to maintain
the status-quo.
6
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
The second problem was the fact that in democracies, monarchies, etc. the wealthy elite,
though small in number, exercised a disproportionate amount of influence over the decision
making process. In a communist society (at least in theory), decision-making is supposed to be
genuinely democratic; that is, there is no elite (there isn’t even a central government or
legislature). Instead, decisions are made at the local or regional level through workers councils
(called soviets in the Russian context); and membership on these councils wasn’t based on
education or class but was rotational—everyone was given a turn to shape the decision making
process. A good idea...until it's Jonathan Bernier's turn to chair meetings. I digress, again.
Also, Marx had little confidence in the capacity of democracies like Britain or the United States
to truly represent the interests of the people as a whole. The elites of these two countries used
their economic (and therefore political) influence to push for the invasion of other countries,
etc. in pursuit of profit for their social class. For example, Great Britain required soldiers (“wage
earners”) from Canada to fight the Boers in 1899 for control of gold mines discovered in the
Transvaal State; and in 2003, the United States invaded Iraq to guarantee its strategic access to
Iraqi oil. In both cases, the 99% fought, bled and died for the 1%. Communist states, in
principle, do not go to war with one another over profit. On the contrary, they make common
cause with one another because a worker in Germany is a brother to a worker in France,
Britain, Canada or the United States. For this reason Karl Marx famously exclaimed, “Workers of
the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!” With that said, the Soviet Union
invaded all sorts of countries, e.g. Afghanistan, Hungary, Poland, etc. etc.
So much for principles...
7
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
CONTRASTING FASCISM & COMMUNISM
In the second half of the article, I provide a technical and detailed contrast of fascism and
communism.
1. ULTRA-NATIONALISM
Communists are “international” in their outlook while fascists are “nationalist,” e.g. Nazi
Germany was aggressive to neighboring states like Poland because the Germans believed
themselves a “master nation” entitled to rule over so-called “slave states.”
Communist states, like the Soviet Union (Russia), were in principle governed by the working
class (a class transcending borders, language or ethnicity). Communists were “international” in
their outlook because regardless of the country where the working class was located they all
shared the same experience of being exploited and the need to overthrow the capitalists. In
short, workers from every country shared a common cause: defeat the Bourgeoisie.
Fascists aim at exclusion not inclusion, e.g. German fascists excluded those who did not belong
to the “master race.” Italian fascists excluded non-Italians because Mussolini was attempting to
reinvent the Roman Empire. Simply stated fascists tend to look inwards to protect their local
community from corrupting influences. However, communists from country to country to
country are joined by a common sentiment: the enemy are not workers from other countries
but capitalist exploiters outside of the communist's borders. In other words, communists
look outside to find their enemies.
2. AUTHORITARIAN
Both fascism and communism are authoritarian, e.g. decision-making power is not shared but
centralized around a dictator; that is, Hitler ruling Germany and Stalin ruling the Soviet Union.
People not belonging to either the Nazi or Communist governing parties had no decisionmaking power. However, members of these two ruling parties received benefits/privileges nonmembers did not. In the communist context, class was supposed to be abolished; yet, members
of the Communist Party definitely enjoyed material benefits the "average Vlad" did not.
Fascists want to build a strong state. In Germany, this was accomplished by ruling the people
through the Führerprinzip or “leadership principle.” The Führer's word was regarded “above all
8
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
written law.” Basically, whatever Hitler said had to be obeyed. Therefore, all government
policies, decisions, ministries, etc. operated in complete and absolute obedience to Hitler.
By contrast authority in a communist society is supposed to be decentralized (democratic). In
theory, authority was exercised by a collection of workers councils from all around the country.
In practice, however, authority in both the Soviet Union and Communist China was exercised in
basically the same way it was in Germany: decisions were centralized, made by a dictator, and
enforced by a ruling party through a combination of the military and secret police. The average
citizen had no say in decisions directly affecting them.
3. ECONOMICS
Economically speaking, fascist states allow citizens freedoms unavailable to those living under
communism. For instance, in Nazi Germany you could own your own home, factory or land. In
the Soviet Union, the government abolished the practice of private ownership of property. The
government owned everything. Taken at face value fascism would appear to offer opportunities
unavailable to communists; however, upon closer inspection the appearance of freedom
in Germany is deceiving, e.g. while you could own a factory and even keep profits for yourself
the Nazi Party told you what to produce, how much to produce, when to produce, how much to
pay workers, etc. In the Soviet Union, the government did the exact same thing—telling people
what to produce, etc.—but all profits went directly to the Communist Party before being
distributed, in principle, to the people.
4. THE STATE
Fascist states typically glorify war; therefore, a strong government is considered necessary to
produce a strong, disciplined people. There is no room for catering to a plurality of public needs
in a fascist society. In principle, authoritarianism in a communist system is considered a
necessary but short-term evil, e.g. while fascists make a point of permanently establishing a
strong state by comparison communists actually want the central government to eventually
“wither away” and society run ultimately be managed by a series of workers councils.
The problem with communism, or any ideology for that matter, is it reflects an idealized version
of reality. Marx's claim the state would eventually disappear spontaneously out of the goodness
of the people is not only without historical precedent, it also ignores the realities of human
9
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
nature: human beings are selfish, egocentric, ambitious, etc. and anyone who is in a position of
power will, if not limited by either law or police, will not only allow the state to disappear but
they will also do whatever they can to continue benefiting as an individual from their position
of privilege, e.g. In the Soviet Union, communists overthrew the tsar (1917) to establish the
ideal workers society Marx envisioned; yet, the Communist Party far from establishing a
classless society simply became the new ruling class; that is, the exploitation of the Proletariat
by the capitalists ended and a new exploitative relationship emerged, an ironic one, with the
Communist Party's members exploitation of the Russian worker.
5. IDEOLOGY
Both fascism and communism are ideologies. An ideology is a philosophical and systematic way
of looking at the world. As worldviews go, neither fascism nor communism actually reflect how
the world actually works, how people think, or how they behave.
This is a problem.
Specifically, communists and fascists attempt to build new societies based on how the
world ought to be or how people ought to behave instead of on how the world actually works.
For instance, communists assume people are either capable of cooperation or competition
but never both. In reality, people are capable of both if reason and neither intimidation nor fear
is the basis of consensus building. For his part Marx did not anticipate elites in Canada, Britain
or the United States would voluntarily share their wealth or weaken their control by allowing
the passage of legislation protecting workers, giving people universal healthcare, or providing
workers with unemployment insurance. Marx did not anticipate this because his ideology
blinded him to the possibility of a change in attitudes over time. The reality is people are
complex and capable of both cooperation, competition, and everything in between (see the
work of Peter Kropotkin for more on the cooperation-competition dichotomy). Ideologies which
fail to take complexity in to account—and this includes the world's most dominant ideology,
free market fundamentalism—are doomed to fail because they encourage the development of
an incomplete understanding of the world and humankind.
Those ideologies or systems which take an accurate view of human nature's complexity in to
account are longer lasting, e.g. the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy has
10
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
existed uninterrupted since 1689. Democracies, unlike fascist or communist states, encourage
citizens to practice toleration, compromise, consensus building and pluralism; citizens are also
involved in decision making which means the public views decisions coming from government
as legitimate; moreover, democratic governments do not try to stamp out differences of
opinion or force people to agree with one another. Instead, the role of the government is
simply to preserve the peace; that is, democratic governments try to constructively manage
disagreement making sure parties involved respect the peace and the rule of law. By contrast
communists and fascists make extensive use of a secret police, concentration camps,
intimidation, murder, and terror, etc. to force their citizens to “behave” and “agree” with
official party policies and principles.
6. ANTI-DEMOCRATIC
Fascists attack other organizations or groups attempting to influence the country’s affairs.
Fascists despise unions because labor unions influence the country’s economic and political life
without actually being subordinate (or obedient) to the aims of the state; this means labor
unions can, in principle, provide a healthy counter-balance to governments which tend over
time to become dominated by the political right (especially so if the right is left unchecked). In
Nazi Germany, the individual was simply expected to obey—disagreement, disobedience,
freedom, etc. were considered contrary to the principle of building the perfect society. Thus,
fascists sacrifice liberalism and freedom in order to achieve goals like “racial purity” or the
“conquest” of weak neighboring countries.
In principle, communist countries are supposed to be democratic. Yet, in practice they tend to
be anti-democratic, e.g. you do not build the perfect society through parliamentary debates.
You build it through terror, fear and intimidation. The problem confronting any authoritarianminded political party is most people genuinely prefer living in freedom to living under a
dictatorship (if given the choice). Therefore, in a fascist society it is believed necessary to rule
the people by decree and remove (or kill) those elements of society who oppose destiny. In the
context of communism, Karl Marx assures us once the enemies of the movement are destroyed
the government mystically “withers away.”
7. RACISM AND XENOPHOBIA
Fascists believe their country is in crisis or “rotting from within” because of the presence of
11
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
“impure” people/groups. To address this crisis fascists attack enemies of the country’s “true
identity” (usually members of an ethnic, racial or religious minority). The current rash of
xenophobia in Canada towards Muslims (2015), Syrians in particular, demonstrates the
sobering prospect that fascism (however latent) exists in many of us and is never far from the
surface. Also, fascists consider any citizen who speaks out against attacks on minorities as
enemies. For this reason people who support the humanitarian aims of bringing Syrian refugees
to Canada are wrongly labelled as either sympathetic or active “supporters of terrorism.”
(People are just so intellectually lazy sometimes.) Fascists feel a sense of urgency when it comes
to purifying society; it cannot be achieved fast enough.
Communists likewise desire purity; yet, the purity they are after isn’t racial. Instead, they want
citizens to be ideologically pure. In other words, the Communist Party in Russia wanted the
“thinking” of their citizens to perfectly line up with the teachings of communist theorists like
Marx or Vladimir Lenin. Perhaps the greatest expression of this pathological desire for
ideological purity came when the Soviet Union liberated its soldiers from prisoner of war camps
in Germany during World War II. Instead of being freed and joining their comrades in the Red
Army, these former prisoners were sent to new prisons in Russia, i.e. they could not be trusted
because they had seen what it was like out of the Soviet Union and they might spread heretical
ideas in the USSR. Communists, like fascists, do not tolerate criticism of the government.
Individuals do not have the right to freedom of speech or even freedom of conscience. You are
expected to give yourself entirely over to the communist cause (a cause which requires great
sacrifice now with promises to pay off at some indeterminate time in the future—a future that
never seems to arrive by the way).
Fascists view minorities as the enemy. Communists, on the other hand, insist "big business” and
capitalism are the real enemy. Fascists deal with minorities in one of the following ways, e.g.
they’ll expel them; if this doesn’t work they’ll imprison them (the current for profit prison
system in America conveniently deals with the disenfranchised African American population);
and if imprisonment doesn’t you can always kill them. Communists, Marx in particular, argued
the extermination of the Bourgeoisie might be necessary; however, communists do not have to
kill the Bourgeoisie in order to establish communism. Instead, the wealthy as a distinct class can
be destroyed by simply taking their businesses from them and abolishing private property. In
12
History 30: Fascism & Communism Explained
short, communists seek to turn the wealthy elite (and middle class) into “wage earners” like
everyone else.
In principle fascism focuses on what a person intrinsically is or is not while communism focuses
its attention simply on a person’s social role. Both communism and fascism have some serious
drawbacks (yeah think?); but at least it can be said of communism that one doesn’t have to
resort to mass murder to “purify” society (although Josef Stalin did frequently resort to this,
e.g. Holodomor (1932-1933), the Great Purge (1937-1939) or the Katyn Massacre
(1941)). Again, in principle (so many principles), you can change a person’s social role without
having to first destroy the person. The difference between fascism and communism
is fundamental: communism seeks to develop everyone while fascism excludes or eliminates all
who don’t belong to the “ideal.”
FOCUS QUESTIONS
1). Why do you think fascists do not see any value in reaching decisions through either
democratic consensus building or parliamentary debate?
2). Why would “sweeping away democracy and establishing a dictatorship” solve Italy’s political
disunity and problems in the 1920s?
3). Why are fascists so fixated on purity and simplicity?
4). Why are democracies longer lasting than dictatorships?
5). Why is it problematic to base any decision-making on an ideology?
6). Do you agree or disagree with the statement, “Conflict and disagreement is inevitable in any
society”? Explain.
7). Do you agree or disagree with Karl Marx, in that, once communism was firmly established
the state would simply “wither away”? Explain.
8). Karl Marx believed strongly in the wisdom of establishing a classless society. In your
opinion, is it even possible to establish a truly classless society? Explain.
9). If you had to choose between living under either fascism or communism which one would
you choose? Why?
13