he classical statement of fascist ideology came from Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile (in 1932). Fascists, according to Mussolini, do not believe that perpetual peace is possible or useful. They renounce pacifism and a ‘cowardly’ renunciation of struggle and embrace the view that war alone brings out the noblest qualities in human beings.

This ideology fostered the idea of a national security state as opposed to a social security state. By its very nature tends to allow the army high command to monopolise decision-making. In neocolonial polities lacking the temerity to wage wars against foreign adversaries, the military prowess is turned against the citizens, particularly those who disagree with government policies.

One can infer that in a fascist set up the government and the state work in unison to suppress the people holding divergent ideas and opinions. Disagreement with the government is frequently construed as treason against the state. Thus, one must realise that fascism repudiates and combats the ideology of democratic politics. It denies that the majority – merely by virtue of being the majority – can direct the society.

Instead, it affirms the immutable, beneficial and fruitful inequality among mankind, and denies the ‘myth of happiness and progress.’ Egalitarianism has no room in fascism.

The word fascism is derived from the Italian term fascismo, a derivation from the word fascio, meaning ‘bundle of sticks’, ultimately from the Latin word fasces. This was the name given to political organisations in Italy known as fasci, groups similar to guilds or syndicates. According Benito Mussolini’s own account, the Fasces of Revolutionary Action were founded in Italy in 1915. In 1919, Mussolini founded the Italian Fasces of Combat in Milan. Two years later it became the National Fascist Party.

The fascists came to associate the term with the ancient Roman fasces or fascio littorio, a bundle of rods tied around an axe, an ancient Roman symbol of the authority of the civic magistrate carried by his lictors, which could be used for corporal and capital punishment at his command.

The symbolism of the fasces suggested strength through unity: a single rod is easily broken while the bundle is difficult to break. Similar symbols were developed by other fascist movements: for example, the falange symbol is five arrows joined by a yoke.

Although fascist parties and movements have differed significantly from one another, they have also had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism; contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism; a belief in a ‘natural’ social hierarchy and the rule of elites; and the desire to create a volksgemeinschaft or people’s community in which individual interests are subordinated to the good of the nation.

As an ideology, fascism is antithetical to Marxian socialism, which explains history in terms of a conflict of interests between various social groups. Fascists deny the economic conception of history and the idea of class war. Instead, they believe in holiness and heroism in actions wholly uninfluenced by economic motives.

As Mussolini once said, fascism is a religious conception in which man is seen in his imminent relationship with a superior law and with an objective will that transcends the particular individual and raises him to conscious membership of a spiritual society. Whoever has seen in the religious politics of the fascist regime nothing but mere opportunism has not understood that fascism, besides being a system of government, is also a system of thought.

Once in power, the fascists refused to ‘play the old parties’ games.’ They took over completely where they could. Once a total transfer of power through elimination of all rivals was established, no internal limits could be placed on what became characteristically, the untrammeled autocratic/ centralised rule of whoever was in the saddle. This aspect was the principal attraction for the ruling elite in the neocolonial polities.

In a neocolonial state, democratic structures are either non-existent or in a state of infancy. This allows the fascist tendency to make its way and overtake the state structure. The autonomy of various organs of the state is usurped and policy formulation becomes person-specific.

Such trends exist in many countries even now. Fascism has that uncanny ability to mutate and adopt to the exigencies of time and space. Its traces exist in seemingly liberal spaces. In several democratic republics, fascism exists in the garb of parliamentary democracy. India is an example of such a hybridised system. Rashtriya Sewak Sangh (RSS) is the virtual nerve centre of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP). When it came into being in 1925, the RSS drew inspiration from the fascist ideology.

In several other countries, the fascist impulse exists in a more tangible manner: the freedom of speech is curbed; the Judiciary is subdued and harassed; opposition workers are incarcerated and subjected to custodial torture; people are sometimes denied the right to choose their representatives; and the rule of law exists only in name.

As a result, the powerful can’t be held accountable. The elite capture holds the whole countries hostage. The stranglehold of the elite does not allow the politics, societal values or the economy to flourish.

In many polities fascism operates in a surreptitious manner. Sometimes it takes the form of religious outfits or ethnic and lingual entities. States where armed forces control the political destiny of the masses are more vulnerable to fascistic tendencies.

Many of the countries that attained independence through a process of negotiation (after World War II) developed fascistic tendencies. The countries that had to fight for their independence were relatively immune to the trend. Freedom comes at a price; the nations ready to pay that price (often in blood) alone enjoy the fruits of freedom.

The writer is Professor in the faculty of Liberal Arts at the Beaconhouse National University, Lahore