What would have been the racial policies of a US that went fascist?

If the US had become fascist within the first few decades of the 20th century what kind of racial policies would have been implemented? Aside from stricter immigration controls what would have happened to the 10% black population?

Some thing along the scale of segregation to apartheid to genocide?
 

Manman

Banned
Honestly you will probably see a system where people are all equal in the law of the land or atleast second class citizens.

Just because you are fascist doesn't mean you have to be racist when you can just hate communism or the Jews.
 
Honestly you will probably see a system where people are all equal in the law of the land or atleast second class citizens.

Just because you are fascist doesn't mean you have to be racist when you can just hate communism or the Jews.

I always believed fascism and racialism were intertwined? Were there examples of fascists government that weren't racist?

Also the US in the first few decades of the 20th century was already pretty racist and had a fair eugenics movement, are you saying fascism might have actually brought about more equality?
 
I always believed fascism and racialism were intertwined? Were there examples of fascists government that weren't racist?

Also the US in the first few decades of the 20th century was already pretty racist and had a fair eugenics movement, are you saying fascism might have actually brought about more equality?

Doubt it. Fascism is a very far-right movement born from reationary thought, nationalism and this mythologizing the past and idea of a nation. Here, everyone who wasn't a white anglo-saxon protestant would be considered second-class citzens at best and there would e information suppression.
 

Manman

Banned
It depends on why and what type of fascism it is. If it's racial based then yes blacks can expect slavery, but if it has to do with anti communist or anti British there is no reason for blacks to be treated any worse.

Also what type of leader he is matters. If it's a klansman or a technocrat or whatever, this will determine how black people will be treated.
 
The big problem with American fascism (before WWII) is that the United States is a very diverse place compared to Italy or Germany. There's so many different (European) ethnic groups, there's a massive amount of Catholics (who have been there since the 17th century), and there's a massive diversity of Protestants too.

So probably what you'd have is a policy of no immigration except from Protestant Northern European nations and deport as many Chinese and Asians as possible. Antisemitism would be the norm, but there wouldn't be death camps, just tons of restrictions on what Jews were allowed to do. They'd do something about the Great Migration of blacks to the North too, since Southern planters hated that, so probably there'd be some sort of system of internal passports/residency permits applied to blacks which would effectively chain them to where they lived (and no doubt could be "traded" around).

I always believed fascism and racialism were intertwined? Were there examples of fascists government that weren't racist?

Also the US in the first few decades of the 20th century was already pretty racist and had a fair eugenics movement, are you saying fascism might have actually brought about more equality?

Fascism is not necessarily a racist ideology. Fascist Italy was not a particularly racist state, not much moreso than other colonial empires were (although during WWII it got much worse as Nazi influence seeped into Italy). They certainly discriminated against their Slavic population, but it wasn't for the same reason the Nazis discriminated against the Slavs. Eugenics is definitely not a trait of fascism, given it was advocated by people on every part of the political spectrum until the Nazis took eugenics to its logical conclusion.

"Race? It is a feeling, not a reality. Ninety-five per cent, at least. Nothing will ever make me believe that biologically pure races can be shown to exist today.… National pride has no need of the delirium of race." - Mussolini, 1932.

It depends on why and what type of fascism it is. If it's racial based then yes blacks can expect slavery, but if it has to do with anti communist or anti British there is no reason for blacks to be treated any worse.

Also what type of leader he is matters. If it's a klansman or a technocrat or whatever, this will determine how black people will be treated.

The 20s KKK was more concerned about Catholics, communists, and immigrants than anything else. And by the 20th century nobody would reinstitute actual slavery, it would be some different form of oppression although it would be very comparable to slavery. The Klan was also opposed by numerous Southerners for various reasons. Some powerful planters hated the Klan because they knew violent racism and lynching was a factor in driving blacks to the North.
 
Doubt it. Fascism is a very far-right movement born from reationary thought, nationalism and this mythologizing the past and idea of a nation. Here, everyone who wasn't a white anglo-saxon protestant would be considered second-class citzens at best and there would e information suppression.

The revived KKK of 1915-1925 is a good example of this. 'Negros' we're hardly mentioned in the documents and speeches of the leaders. Catholics we're at the top of the hate list, as we're Greeks, Italians, Poles, Urkrainians, Asians... Even Scandanavians & Germans we're undesirables. If you were not WASP you were not eligible to be a "American".
 
Its debated about how much racism was integral to fascism, and I myself lean towards the answer of "not much" because this seems to have been very much a Nazi thing. Even the Nazis, apart obviously from the Jews, seemed much more interested in having large colonial populations to exploit and otherwise were happy to co-operate with all sorts of non-German groups, including the Japanese, Arabs, and slavic Bulgaria and Croatia, it it furthered their strategy.
 
The revived KKK of 1915-1925 is a good example of this. 'Negros' we're hardly mentioned in the documents and speeches of the leaders. Catholics we're at the top of the hate list, as we're Greeks, Italians, Poles, Urkrainians, Asians... Even Scandanavians & Germans we're undesirables. If you were not WASP you were not eligible to be a "American".

And yet the KKK didn't stop hating blacks in its revived form as your statement implies- lynchings increased during this period, as did the number of Confederate statues.

Also, the idea that fascist Italy wasn't particularly racist is just plain wrong

Indeed, the slaughter in Ethiopia was so out of keeping with Italians’ self-perception as the more “humane” dictatorship that it has been edited out of popular and official memory. Until 1995, the Italian government, and former combatants such as Indro Montanelli, denied the use of gas in East Africa.

Fascist policies of “demographic colonization” that foresaw the creation of permanent Italian settlements would not only solve Italy’s land hunger problem but begin the repopulation of East Africa as a white European space.
 
Last edited:
And yet the KKK didn't stop hating blacks in its revived form as your statement implies- lynchings increased during this period.

The suppression of African Americans, the 'Terror' as some called it, was continuous from the Reconstruction era & was done well enough on a ad hoc basis. The KKK revival of 1915 did not address the 'Negro Problem' specifically because the suppression was institutionalized within the state governments/law and local culture. A organization like the KKK was unneeded. Suppresion of the African Americans was in the open. As I pointed out earlier the literature & cannon of the revived KKK was aimed at other ethnic groups, & on a moral basis. The story line was these non WASP groups were at different levels of racial inferiority and culturally degenerate. Action at several levels, political to impose laws, and direct action including violence, was necessary to stop the growth of the immoral practices from these degenerate cultures. Through legal and 'community action' the general population were to be forced to adhere to WASP mores and culture.

A close look at the actions of the KKK in the first decade shows a pattern of organized intimidation and political action vs the 'White' non WASP targets. That the primary growth of the KKK in that first decade was in the northern states & areas where African Americans were not numerous & not a political or economic factor.

The attention of KKK groups to the 'Negro Problem' gradually revived in the 1920s & 1930s. As the fragmented KKK groups began changing their views of Nordic ethinc groups, dropping Catholics from the enemies list, ect... greater attention turned to ethnic groups of non European origins. This was in part in reaction to efforts in that era to remove institutional suppression of those ethnic groups, or their ability to work around the legal barriers. It looks to me that this change was also in part to the narrow base of the first decade, where so many ethnic and cultural exclusions existed. KKK leaders eventually recognized they would gain insufficient political traction when they were excluding 60 to 70% of the voters from their membership qualification.

In the 1950s the new generation of the KKK leadership returned to primary focus on suppression of African Americans. Tho there was at least one residual chapter in Indiana which was virulently anti Catholic and members raged over the Kennedy Presidency.
 
Last edited:
The revived KKK of 1915-1925 is a good example of this. 'Negros' we're hardly mentioned in the documents and speeches of the leaders. Catholics we're at the top of the hate list, as we're Greeks, Italians, Poles, Urkrainians, Asians... Even Scandanavians & Germans we're undesirables. If you were not WASP you were not eligible to be a "American".

Yup pretty much. Just combined all of the racism above plus blind nationalism, anti-intellectualism and so on. Also get your target lackeys to turn against the corporations in favor of the state while hiring said corporate heads as government to merge.
 
I always believed fascism and racialism were intertwined? Were there examples of fascists government that weren't racist?

Also the US in the first few decades of the 20th century was already pretty racist and had a fair eugenics movement, are you saying fascism might have actually brought about more equality?
technically they aren't synonymous, but they often go hand-in-hand--it's easier to justify authoritarianism if you have a "common enemy" to scapegoat, and visible minorities work best for that. for the KKK, it's blacks; for the Nazis, it was Jews, among others; for Saddam, it was the Kurds and Marsh Arabs; in Rwanda, it was the Tutsi; for ISIS, it's "infidels"; and in North Korea, it's the West as a whole
 
... Just combined all of the racism above plus blind nationalism, anti-intellectualism and so on. Also get your target lackeys to turn against the corporations in favor of the state while hiring said corporate heads as government to merge.

Sounds a lot like Louisiana back in the day. Just without the Blackshirts and Facist symbols.
 
It depends on why and what type of fascism it is. If it's racial based then yes blacks can expect slavery, but if it has to do with anti communist or anti British there is no reason for blacks to be treated any worse.

Also what type of leader he is matters. If it's a klansman or a technocrat or whatever, this will determine how black people will be treated.

It's the United States, there's going to be some or even extreme forms of racism involve. The entire book of American history has been pretty much covered in genocide, internment camps, mass murders, mass rape, slavery, and general racism to anyone whose not a WASP. It's more likely racism would definitely be involved, given the heavy history it has over in America.
 
It's the United States, there's going to be some or even extreme forms of racism involve. The entire book of American history has been pretty much covered in genocide, internment camps, mass murders, mass rape, slavery, and general racism to anyone whose not a WASP. It's more likely racism would definitely be involved, given the heavy history it has over in America.

Based on all that it can be seen as surprising the US never went actually fascist?

Maybe it was due to the defacto institutionalization of the racism that there was no impetus for a political revolution?
 
The big problem with American fascism (before WWII) is that the United States is a very diverse place compared to Italy or Germany. There's so many different (European) ethnic groups, there's a massive amount of Catholics (who have been there since the 17th century), and there's a massive diversity of Protestants too.

It should be noted Germany was pretty religiously divided, with the 1937 borders being about one third Catholic and then the Pre-September, 1939 borders being about 50/50 with Protestants.

Fascism is not necessarily a racist ideology. Fascist Italy was not a particularly racist state, not much moreso than other colonial empires were (although during WWII it got much worse as Nazi influence seeped into Italy). They certainly discriminated against their Slavic population, but it wasn't for the same reason the Nazis discriminated against the Slavs. Eugenics is definitely not a trait of fascism, given it was advocated by people on every part of the political spectrum until the Nazis took eugenics to its logical conclusion.

"Race? It is a feeling, not a reality. Ninety-five per cent, at least. Nothing will ever make me believe that biologically pure races can be shown to exist today.… National pride has no need of the delirium of race." - Mussolini, 1932.

Adding to this, with all quotes from the Last Will and Testament of Adolf Hitler:

"The white races did, of course, give some things to the natives, and they were the worst gifts that they could possibly have made, those plagues of our own modern world-materialism, fanaticism, alcoholism and syphilis. For the rest, since these peoples possessed qualities of their own which were superior to anything we could offer them, they have remained essentially unchanged. Where imposition by force was attempted, the results were even more disastrous, and common sense, realizing the futility of such measures, should preclude any recourse to their introduction. One solitary success must be conceded to the colonizers: everywhere they have succeeded in arousing hatred, a hatred that urges these peoples, awakened from their slumbers by us, to rise and drive us out. Indeed, it looks almost as though they had awakened solely and simply for that purpose! Can anyone assert that colonization has increased the number of Christians in the world? Where are those conversions en masse which mark the success of Islam? Here and there one finds isolated islets of Christians, Christians in name, that is, rather than by conviction; and that is the sum total of the successes of this magnificent Christian religion, the guardian of supreme Truth! Taking everything into consideration, Europe's policy of colonization has ended in a complete failure." - February 7th, 1945

"In saying this, I promise you I am quite free of all racial hatred. It is, in any case, undesirable that one race should mix with other races. Except for a few gratuitous successes, which I am prepared to admit, systematic cross-breeding has never produced good results. Its desire to remain racially pure is a proof of the vitality and good health of a race. Pride in one's own race—and that does not imply contempt for other races—is also a normal and healthy sentiment. I have never regarded the Chinese or the Japanese as being inferior to ourselves. They belong to ancient civilizations, and I admit freely that their past history is superior to our own. They have the right to be proud of their past, just as we have the right to be proud of the civilisation to which we belong. Indeed, I believe the more steadfast the Chinese and the Japanese remain in their pride of race, the easier I shall find it to get on with them." - February 13th, 1945

"The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France." - April 2nd, 1945

Now, with regards to the American aspect, I think George Lincoln Rockwell's ties with the Nation of Islam should serve as a bias for speculation, given how that was a more uniquely American movement compared to previous ones like the Bund.
 
Yup pretty much. Just combined all of the racism above plus blind nationalism, anti-intellectualism and so on. Also get your target lackeys to turn against the corporations in favor of the state while hiring said corporate heads as government to merge.

I would guess that in US fascism there would actually be good tycoons and bad tycoons, since a succesful self-made-businessman seems to be key portion of US folklore.
 
Based on all that it can be seen as surprising the US never went actually fascist?
The natural political base for fascists, the petit bourgeoisie, were in the US extremely skeptical of centralized political power. Fascism, as opposed to plain old reaction or conservatism, also require a degree of military fetishism and soldier-worship that was absent in the US during that era.
 
If the US had become fascist within the first few decades of the 20th century what kind of racial policies would have been implemented? Aside from stricter immigration controls what would have happened to the 10% black population?

Some thing along the scale of segregation to apartheid to genocide?

It all depends on who runs the nation, and what ideology they have. There's a chance the fascists would try to create a "perfect American" mindset of Protestant White Christian, and if you were not the perfect mindset, you'd be a second-class citizen or worse set for Race war.

Or the Fascist leader could try to avoid such a thing and bring more national unity instead of ethnic unity, and give everyone equal rights, and instead focus on the greater good of fighting Jews, or Communists,
 
Top