Nazism was just so radical that it rapidly diverged from almost all other variants of fascism. But in letting fascism define itself by its actions and allowing for the obvious necessity of treating Nazism as the fundamental instance of fascism to be examined, he narrows the field down to the point where there's practically nothing left but Nazism (and perhaps Vichy France and the rump portion of Italy that Mussolini ruled after Hitler rescued him from the Allies, with maybe Milosevic's Serbia thrown in for good measure). He takes an interesting route to his goal, denying that there is a consistent and coherent ideology underlying fascism and refusing initially to offer a comprehensive definition, letting it be defined by how it developed historically instead. A political climate in which decent Christian men like George Bush, John Ashcroft, and Tony Blair are routinely compared to Hitler and the Nazis obviously requires a cold harsh dose of reality and Mr. It is especially timely given the unfortunate tendency, which has accelerated in recent years, of those on the Left to refer to any and every political party and leader they disagree with as fascistic. First, it must be said that this is a very fine history of fascism and a much-needed attempt to define just what we mean by that elusive term.
0 kommentar(er)
