Fascism - Volume 3, Issue 2, 2014

The focus of this article is the ideological formation of so called ‘New-Swedish Socialism’, an indigenous form of fascist thought formulated by the Swedish ideologue Per Engdahl (1909–1994) in the early 1930s. New-Swedish Socialism should not be equated with either Italian-styled Fascism or National Socialism, but must be seen as an original form of fascist thought. This fascist variant can be described as comparatively flexible, low-key and intellectual. The present analysis of the formation of New-Swedish Socialism follows the model for ideological analysis suggested by the British political scientist Michael Freeden. Freeden’s analytical mode defines an ideology in terms of a core cluster of interrelated and ineliminable political concepts which are essentially contestable. Starting from a definition of generic fascism and using the core concepts that can be identified from this definition, the presence, de-contestation and interrelatedness of these core concepts within New-Swedish Socialism is studied and analyzed. This article addresses whether New-Swedish Socialism can correctly be labelled fascist as well as capturing its special character as a fascist variant in its own right. The study has been limited to the ideological formation process in the early and mid-1930s but Engdahl remained an important influence on Swedish as well as European fascism throughout his life.

A key player in the campaigns against fascism, the Communist Party of Great Britain (cpgb) has been subject of much attention by historians of anti-fascism. The Party’s approach to anti-fascism, through various campaigns such as the ‘united front from below’ and the Popular Front have been well documented, however its own analysis of fascism has been subjected to much less scrutiny. It has generally been accepted that the cpgb faithfully followed the interpretation of the Communist International. While this is true, this article will argue that the cpgb’s analysis of fascism was often adapted to suit the British political climate. By examining the cpgb’s approaches to ‘social fascism’, democracy and the British Union of Fascists (buf), this article will show that the cpgb’s analysis of fascism was much more fluid. Moreover it will suggest that the Party only adhered to the strictest of Comintern analyses at times of increased attention from Moscow. Finally this article will show that the cpgb’s analysis of fascism as an antithesis to all things ‘British’ survived, and indeed was strengthened, by the end of the Second World War. By 1945 its analysis of fascism was much more generic, following an economic and ideological reading as per the Stalinist interpretation, but with a strong focus on patriotism, and the empirical evidence of the destructive and murderous qualities of fascism as shown by the Holocaust.

This article explores fascist mobilization in Romania on a regional and local level. Focusing on the south-western Romanian county of Rîmnicu Vâlcea it combines qualitative analysis with the quantitative analysis of approximately 1,350 members of the Legionary Movement. Vâlcea provides an example of a district which was not a fascist stronghold: the fascist leader Corneliu Zelea Codreanu failed to establish a stable organizational network. Only when the local bishop actively supported small circles of young village intellectuals did fascist mobilization gain momentum. The overwhelming peasant majority of members joined the movement rather late (1937). This article concludes that there were differences between village intellectuals who believed in an ideological community of creed and peasant members who strove for social revolution.

This conference, organized by Arnd Bauerkämper, Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe, Anna Lena Kocks and Silvia Madotto, and supported by the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung für Wissenschaftsförderung and Freie Universität Berlin, offered important insights into various aspects of the study of transnational fascism and diverse forms of connections and co-operation between fascist movements and regimes in Europe between 1918 and 1945. It fostered the concept of fascism as a border-crossing phenomenon albeit with strong national and local roots. The conference made clear that even without an institutionalized ‘Fascist international,’ fascism was a transnational phenomenon, which affected national societies and non-national groups. By widening the perspective on different forms of European fascism, the participants of the conference managed to highlight connections, interactions and entanglements not considered by the previous historical research. The conference demonstrated how this methodological approach proves useful for a more comprehensive understanding of the complex phenomenon of fascism and the numerous interactions between fascist activists, groups, parties, movements and regimes.