Benito Mussolini: “The Doctrine of Fascism”

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

Mussolini’s statement of Fascist doctrine first appeared in the Enciclopedia italiana in 1932. The Enciclopedia was begun in the mid-1920s as a collection of articles on all aspects of human learning and culture with a decided emphasis on Italy’s contributions. The first edition eventually numbered thirty-five volumes; Mussolini claimed to have read them all. This essay was later republished in an official publication, Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions, issued in 1935.

As printed in 1935, the essay has two main parts. The first, “Fundamental Ideas,” is a series of introductory or basic philosophical tenets. This section presents the definition of Fascist principles. The second and longer section, entitled “Political and Social Doctrine,” is more of a background piece. It is Mussolini’s historical narrative of political and philosophical events in Europe, especially in Italy and, specifically, his role in them. It combines supplemental descriptions and definitions of the meaning of Fascism.

“Fundamental Ideas”

The first section’s opening paragraph describes Fascism as a combination of both action and thought. It is tied to historical forces and the here and now, the material world. Fascism is rooted in spiritual influences as well as in what is called “the transient and the specific reality” and the “permanent and universal reality.” Here Mussolini also claims that while Fascists are men of action, they are not violent; among them are men who are restless but thoughtful. One other key point introduced here, which surfaces again in this essay, is the importance of dominating others.

In the second paragraph, the individual’s role as a subordinate entity serving the state’s larger goals is stressed. The devotion to the larger goal calls for avoiding “selfish momentary pleasure” and embracing self-sacrifice and duty, which would allow an individual to achieve a “spiritual existence.” In other words, the ideal man—the Fascist—is not only a man of action but also one whose actions are in no way directed toward his own well-being but instead toward the good of the state. The following paragraph sets Fascism’s spiritual conception in opposition to the previous century’s materialism, which Mussolini sees as an effect of the era of the French Revolution in 1789. Here the essay uses the neither/nor type of opposition, often found in this piece. Fascist spirituality is described as “anti-positivistic but positive; neither skeptical nor agnostic; neither pessimistic nor supinely optimistic.”

The fourth paragraph emphasizes action. To be active means to face difficulties. Constant struggle was a consistent tenet of Italian Fascism—as opposed to the democratic spirit, which Mussolini oddly characterizes as lacking in personal responsibility. Education is valued, as are all efforts to develop the self. Again, however, the individual does this for self but not for selfish ends. The objective is to become an “implement” for the state. The importance of work as the way to subjugate nature (draining marshes and agricultural projects were important Fascist programs until the mid-1930s) is emphasized.

The following paragraph discusses the positive conception of life embraced by the Fascist, with its ethical basis. It is described as “serious, austere, and religious.” This particular phrase is interesting in that the medieval imagery of monks who were also knights fighting for a pure cause was found in more than one Fascist movement. In Germany, for example, the Teutonic knights, a religious order of warriors who had fought in eastern Europe in the thirteenth century, were seen as role models in their devotion to duty, self-sacrifice, and effectiveness as soldiers. The paragraph concludes that the Fascist disdains an “easy” life.

Next Mussolini proclaims that the Fascist concept of life is religious in nature in the context of a “higher law.” The higher law, in this case the needs of the state, possesses an “objective will” (making any disagreement with the state a subjective disagreement with what is stated to be objective and therefore correct). The concept of Fascism as a religion means specifically that it can be regarded as a religious alternative to traditional Christian doctrine such as that taught by the Catholic Church. The paragraph closes with the comment that “Fascism is not only a system of government but also and above all a system of thought.” This last statement has been vigorously questioned by both commentators of the time and subsequent historians.

The seventh paragraph provides more historical context, listing the movements of the past that Fascism opposes. The materialistic view of the eighteenth century (embodied specifically in the Enlightenment and the French Revolution), with its view of the human being’s perfectibility, is dismissed. Perfectibility is seen as an individual pursuit that does nothing to help the state achieve its objectives. Also discredited is the religious notion that peace and rewards will come at the end of life, as the Fascist is a realist and knows there will always be problems to confront and solve.

The eighth paragraph declares that the individual can be accepted only on the basis of his usefulness and relationship to the state. Further, the liberty granted by the state, which is the set of values directed by the state, is the only liberty worth having. Here Mussolini contradicts the usual understanding of personal liberty, glorifying the liberty of the state to do as it will. He declares that Fascism is totalitarian and therefore interprets and develops the lives of all people, because the Fascist conception of the state is all-embracing. Nothing outside of what the state allows can even exist, “much less have value.”

The next two paragraphs express opposition to other forms of political organization. There can be no organizations or individuals outside the state. Fascism is opposed to Socialism and trade unions but allows the existence of those trade unions that function in conformity with the policies of the state. Mussolini then declares Fascism’s opposition to democracy as it is generally understood—a society in which the majority governs the will of the state. He provides his own definition of the purest form of democracy in terms that are contradictory to what is generally accepted as the real concept of democracy: The nation’s will expressed and directed by the few is the most coherent and most ethical form of democracy. He offers a dramatic reversal of the concept of nationalism as it had developed in the preceding century. In the wake of the Napoleonic Wars and in empires containing many different nationalities, such as those found in Austria-Hungary, ethnic groups began to develop an identity based on language, literature, and culture. That gradually increasing awareness sparked movements resulting in new unified states, such as Germany and Italy, or new nations, such as Czechoslovakia and Poland. Mussolini refutes this process, stating that nations (that is, a group of people of the same nationality or using the same language) do not create states (that is, governments); indeed, the opposite is true.

In the eleventh and twelfth paragraphs, Mussolini declares that the state “creates the nation” and that “it is the state which, as the expression of a universal ethical will, creates the right to national independence.” An inactive nation without will may sacrifice its independence to another, more active state. That provides a transition in the next paragraph to the discussion of the state, which is described as both a living and an ethical thing. It has the necessary right and duty to be active, with the power to extend its will beyond its borders. By this time Italy had already shown its ambitions for projecting power. In 1923 it had seized the island of Corfu from Greece. Three years after this article first appeared, it would invade Ethiopia.

The closing paragraphs characterize the Fascist state as the summing up of “all the manifestations of the moral and intellectual life of man; indeed, it is the “soul of the soul.” Its importance, especially in the context of what is described as an individual’s “supposed rights,” is here defined as a personality and force, although it is a “spiritual” one. As a basis for life, Fascism is the source of laws and institutions and is based on discipline and authority—the reason why the lictor’s rod was chosen as the emblem for Fascism.

“Political and Social Doctrine”

The second section’s purpose is to define Fascism by spelling out its differences from other doctrines. The Fascist state is totalitarian, what Mussolini calls a “new departure in history.” It is absolute, and individuals and groups are admissible and acceptable only to the extent to which they are willing to subordinate themselves to the new state. Fascism, he concludes, represents a moment in time.

In the narrative of this section, Mussolini asserts that in 1919 he had no doctrinal program and felt that existing doctrines were dead. Fascism was born of the need for action and answered this need because it was action. He emphasizes that Italy’s situation before the 1922 March on Rome did not allow for the creation of an elaborate and detailed doctrine. Fascist doctrine, he goes on to say, was actually constructed in the ensuing years, as action was taken to change the Italian state. He admits that even in the early stages there were hints and forecasts of what would be the doctrine of Fascism, and in those early statements the careful reader can find doctrinal development.

In emphasizing action over the development of careful thought, Mussolini stresses the importance of not only action but also confrontation, with significant results. He states in paragraph 23 that “fighting was going on in the towns and villages. There were discussions, but there was something more sacred and more important: death. Fascists knew how to die.” While the emphasis on action may seem to be constructive, encouraging people to fight and die for a cause that is not even well defined is a rather odd virtue. On the other hand, it is entirely consistent with Fascism’s emphasis on the state over the individual.

Many of the points that Mussolini raises in the first part are raised again here, with additional detail. Peace and pacifism are cowardly and do not encourage self-sacrifice. War “keys up” human energy and is noble. Internationalism and international organizations (such as the League of Nations, which Italy would successfully defy in the coming years) are also undesirable. Mussolini identifies and then dismisses the various doctrines, movements, and schools of thought to which Fascism is opposed, including Marxism and Socialism, democracy, and what he calls “liberalism” with its emphasis on the individual. Yet Mussolini states that he does not want to return to feudalism. Further, in a rather strange claim, he declares that Fascist authority has nothing in common with a police state, a comment that political dissenters in Italy would have found ironic.

In the final paragraphs of this section Mussolini repeatedly emphasizes and expands on the theme that the state is the most important entity. The individual must be made secondary to what is good for the state. Mussolini claims that people have never desired an authoritarian government more than they do now and Fascism, the system of action and thought that makes the state the supreme entity, answers that need.