Fascist France

The First Republic was more Bolshevik than anything else. And the reason their military was so huge was because they were being invaded by the rest of Europe at the beginning. Then they stopped being so Lefty and got more Righty under Nappy.

They were lefties until Robespierre got his head chopped off, then they get more Righty directly during Thermidor and the Directory.
 
They were lefties until Robespierre got his head chopped off, then they get more Righty directly during Thermidor and the Directory.

Well, its a bit more complicated.
Sure, Paris was certainly more leftist, but the difference between Girondins, Montagnards, Thermidoriens and Bonapartistes aren't a difference of actual people in provinces.

Someone published the letter sent by the town of Montauban during the Revolution : "We thanks His Majesty Louis to grant a constitution for the kingdom" - "Down with the tyrant, oppressor of the people" - "Let's be humble and thankful before the Supreme Being" - "Hurrah for the republicans that put down the tyran Robespierre" - "The courageous general Bonaparte put an end to the anarchy of Directoire for the greater good of the Republic" - "We send our congratulation to His Imperial Majesty for the birth of his son and the perenissation of his dynasty" - "We thanks God to have sent back the true monarch of France, Louis XVIII, to crush the tyranny of Bonaparte".
 
From what I read on La Rocque he was advocating a presidential system rather then fascism that he did not seem to like very much.
 
From what I read on La Rocque he was advocating a presidential system rather then fascism that he did not seem to like very much.

La Rocque organisation hosted many fascist or fascism admirators (like the second most important man of PSF), and it didn't bothered him too much to use them (like De Gaulle did later).

Furthermore, we don't talk about a presidential regime option there, but more an ultra-presidential one, with a legislature that, if not deleted, would be under the feet of the president.

The refuse of nazism as a pagan and anti-french movment certainly played a role within the PSF to get rid of the most fascising elements (that wouldn't forget it, and would be the main reason of making an agreement with Pétain and him impossible, leading to the creation of a PSF resistence movment).

Now, his admiration for Mussolini is known, and show a repulsion for nazism proper rather than authoritarianism in general and called for a "continental soldiarity" with fascist Italy.

The PSF could be comparated to the FN in some points : nationalism, populism, use of a fascist and racist support base as well references...
 
I'm not too familiar with 19th century French history, but could Boulangism be seen as a proto-fascist movement?

Not really. You had anti-parlementarism, populism but it was more close to classical bonapartism than actual fascism that require a political coherence (that Boulanger didn't had, as every form possible of coherence), a clear political program...

Now, a more lasting boulangist movement could have bear many interesting offsprings.
And by interesting, I meant creepy.
 
i think you could place the first french republic as at least quasi-fascist;
i mean, mass executions of people considered traitors
huge military
trying to force their ideology on the world (sort of Ubermensch isn't it?)
that said, it would be interesting to see a real colonial power as Fascist (other than Japan, i mean one that could succeed)
I wonder if Fascism could help France hold on to its empire?

The First Republic was more Bolshevik than anything else. And the reason their military was so huge was because they were being invaded by the rest of Europe at the beginning. Then they stopped being so Lefty and got more Righty under Nappy.

The First French Republic, specifically the government during the Reign of Terror, had elements of both fascism and bolshevism. I suppose the Committee of Public Safety and the Committee of General Security could be called proto-Strasserist or proto-national bolshevist though these descriptions are imperfect.
 
The First French Republic, specifically the government during the Reign of Terror, had elements of both fascism and bolshevism. I suppose the Committee of Public Safety and the Committee of General Security could be called proto-Strasserist or proto-national bolshevist though these descriptions are imperfect.

It's a big anachronism. King-size.

Bolschevism implies marxism and revolution by class, when French Revolution wasn't based clearly on ONE thinker or even one school of tought, and based itself on nation rather than class (actually, Babeuf was an exception, but he didn't had a big impact on French Revolution itself.)

Fascism, while having a more blurry definition, indeed base itself on national communauty, but aslo on rejection of liberal ideas as individual freedom or liberal democracy and proposed a militarisation of society, as well the leader's cult as systematical.

I mean, you don't even have a REAL political populism, so how can we talk about bolchevism and fascism there?
Sure, you can find common features, but it's mainly due of French Revolution being have influential in almost every modern political school.
 

Cook

Banned
The First French Republic, specifically the government during the Reign of Terror, had elements of both fascism and bolshevism.
It is the other way around. Not too surprisingly both the Fascists and Bolsheviks were influenced by the first great European revolution.
 
To my mind, fascism is often highly traditionalist and about using sheer brutality to defend the old order. In Spain and Portugal they were closely affiliated with the Church. The only reason they become anti-monarchy is because real life monarchs can be too liberal for them. I think Petainist France certainly qualifies as fascist.

It's between Naziism and fascism where I would argue the true break lies. Naziism was much more ideologically anti-monarchist and also believed in things like reconstructing Christianity etc, that the Francos and Salazars of the world would be appalled by.
 
To my mind, fascism is often highly traditionalist and about using sheer brutality to defend the old order. In Spain and Portugal they were closely affiliated with the Church. The only reason they become anti-monarchy is because real life monarchs can be too liberal for them. I think Petainist France certainly qualifies as fascist.

It's between Naziism and fascism where I would argue the true break lies. Naziism was much more ideologically anti-monarchist and also believed in things like reconstructing Christianity etc, that the Francos and Salazars of the world would be appalled by.

Raises the question if you could classify Salazar or Franco as fascists. AFAIK the Falange was a mixture of people normally hating eachother (monarchists, rightwing Catholics, Carlists, fascists etc.), being united under one banner to combat an even greater 'evil'.
 
Raises the question if you could classify Salazar or Franco as fascists. AFAIK the Falange was a mixture of people normally hating eachother (monarchists, rightwing Catholics, Carlists, fascists etc.), being united under one banner to combat an even greater 'evil'.

Well, the question is hard to be answered. Personally, I think we could make a distinction between fascist movments and fascist state.

As in Vichy France or Spanish State were fascist states without real fascist movment leading them, but with enough features to be classified as such and not as "traditional" autocracies.
 
It is the other way around. Not too surprisingly both the Fascists and Bolsheviks were influenced by the first great European revolution.

True. However, if you look back at the context of my post, you'll see I was commenting on the posts of others. Still, you make a good point.

To my mind, fascism is often highly traditionalist and about using sheer brutality to defend the old order. In Spain and Portugal they were closely affiliated with the Church. The only reason they become anti-monarchy is because real life monarchs can be too liberal for them. I think Petainist France certainly qualifies as fascist.

It's between Naziism and fascism where I would argue the true break lies. Naziism was much more ideologically anti-monarchist and also believed in things like reconstructing Christianity etc, that the Francos and Salazars of the world would be appalled by.

Fascism was about creating a new order. Yes, there were traditionalist elements in some fascist movements and there was a desire to keep continuity with the past or with a perception of the past. However, fascists also wanted to create a new man. Also, one should separate fascist regimes from authoritarian regimes with para-fascist elements.

I would define Austria, Poland, Spain, Portugal under Salazar, Yugoslavia, Romania (with the exception of the period of the shortlived National Legionary state and that's debatable), Hungary under Horthy (though Gombos a PM was indeed fascist), France, Japan, and debatably Turkey as authoritarian regimes with para-fascist elements. Italy and particularly the Italian Social Republic were fascist. Germany, Hungary under the Arrow Cross regime, and Norway to the extent it was under Quisling were national socialist. I understand why you classify France, Spain, and Portugal as fascist though I strongly disagree with your assessment.
 
Depends. What kinda fascist we talking? Proudhonist syndicalism or Maurassian integralism?

"Proudhonist syndicalism" is not fascism!

In fact, it actually is an anarchist ideology. (Cercle Proudhon does not count. Unless you consider Mussolini to be a marxist.)

Also, it is called Mutualism.

Now, there is NATIONAL syndicalism, which is a completely different ideology.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
"Proudhonist syndicalism" is not fascism!

In fact, it actually is an anarchist ideology. (Cercle Proudhon does not count. Unless you consider Mussolini to be a marxist.)

Also, it is called Mutualism.

Now, there is NATIONAL syndicalism, which is a completely different ideology.
I was referring to the Cercle Proudhon in my statement, but I shoulda been clearer. National syndicalism is what I ought to have said.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Italy and particularly the Italian Social Republic were fascist. Germany, Hungary under the Arrow Cross regime, and Norway to the extent it was under Quisling were national socialist. I understand why you classify France, Spain, and Portugal as fascist though I strongly disagree with your assessment.
Slovakia were fascist. Croatia was national socialist, and I'd argue that the Italian Social Republic was as well.
 
Top