It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


List of fascist movements by country

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 07:47 AM
This is taken from Wikipedia.

There are so many parties that started post-wwII, which I find interesting.

I am also shocked that Canada had 8 different parties under Fascism.
The most recent one, started in 2000 and disbanded in 2003, and members went their separate ways, some even to the 'New' Democratic Party.

We hear about the growing fascism in the U.S. these days, and what went on in Germany, but what about in between WWII and now?

Does/did fascism exist in your country?



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 07:48 AM
Please click on some of the party names and look at their symbols. Quintar's picks are:

Parti Communautaire Européen
Bolivian Socialist Falange
Heritage Front
Lapua Movement
Breton Social-National Workers' Movement
Parti Populaire Français
Deutsche Reichspartei
Chrysi Avyi
National Liberation Movement (Guatemala)
Arrow Cross Party
Kach and Kahane Chai
Fascism and Freedom Movement
Kataeb Party
National Syndicalists (Portugal)
Iron Guard
Noua Dreaptă
Liberal Democratic Party of Russia
Russian National Socialist Party
Slovenská pospolitosť - Národná strana
Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging
Boerestaat Party
National Socialist Workers' Party (Sweden)
Socialist Party (Sweden, 1929)
British Fascist Society

You will notice some re-occuring symbols such as the iron cross (cross with a circle around it), lightning bolts, shapes of a Badge or Shield, the number 3 (3 lines making up a symbol), the color red, black, the branches (such as the ones we see in the U.N. logo?).

No symbol here, but if you live in Toronto Canada this might be of interest:
Nationalist Party of Canada (The current Mayor of Toronto belongs to them???)

posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 08:02 AM
I can only speak for the UK but some of the parties listed consist(ed) of little more than a very small handful of members.

In addition, I am certain that The British National Party, BNP, would contest being labelled Fascist and feel they are Nationalists.

I'll let you decide if there is a difference.

posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 09:12 AM
reply to post by quintar

Is there something wrong with Fascism? .. Honest question, is there something specifically wrong with it? Other then the history of the Fascist movement in Germany? Seems like Fascism, like Communism, is an over used term to place anyone of differing political ideologies under one umbrella..

I could list all the Communist or Socialist movements in every country.. it would most likely be a longer list as well.. but then even I would ask my self and others... is there something actually wrong with a Communist movement/party? .. Even though that is not my set of ideologies, I must say, there is nothing specifically wrong with people being communist, socialist or any other political demography..

Personally I prefer a Monarchy. I could start my own political movement. Does that actually MEAN anything though? I will only cause a congregation of a very few minority that have the same beliefs as me.. just like all these other parties you list.. whether or not they have a party, they still believe what they will believe..

Are you saying all members of a Fascist movement are in fact dangerous to society?

I belong to the Libertarian party.. its a pretty backwards party.. it would cause drastic change in the country.. is this bad?

People in the Fascist party are probably making lists of people in the communist party, believeing that its THEM who are actually working to undo America.


My point being..

People of a specific ideology are making parties.... though I thought that was the point of freedom of thought and speech, and the right to congregate with like minded individuals.. so its not the Fascist I fear.. its those who would wish to censor the Fascist.. or any group for that matter.

The short version of this would be:

What your point?

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by Rockpuck

Fascism is basically the continuation of politics through WAR. That is why it has such a negative connotation. Fascism=WAR.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 06:44 PM
reply to post by Threadfall

Negatory good buddy, Fascism is a political doctrine like any other which believes in ultimate control from the centre in every facet of peoples lives from economic control, to social control.

I personally happen to agree with Fascist ideologies in the very unusual circumstances of extreme destruction, or during the first 40 years or so of a nations inception. Basically when a nation has to be built of out scratch, it is unhelpful to have opposition voices slowing down progress. As they say, extreme circumstances warrant extreme responses.

If you think about it logically, democracy cannot occur when the population are uneducated and riotous. Rather than having a slug fest to see who is the most powerful in regional circles, it is better to allow a big bully to oversee all developments.

Of course, that is assuming that the person would be a benevolent dictator, and then hand over power once the initial setup of a country has finished... In reality of course this would never occur.

Fascism doesnt really have any place in a civilized society, as there is no need for it.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 09:15 PM

Originally posted by Threadfall
reply to post by Rockpuck

Fascism is basically the continuation of politics through WAR. That is why it has such a negative connotation. Fascism=WAR.

I don't know where you learned that at. Fascism as nothing to do with war.. Communist countries tend to engage in war.. its somewhat the opposite of Fascism.. yet.. still war. That does not mean Communist = war. nor Fascism = war.

It means Humans = War. No matter what the government is. And whether or not War is a BAD thing.. is.. another topic.

I believe you have been misled by the typical online news stories or.. well not exactly news.. er, blogs if you will. The Alex Jones of the world. Fascism is no different then George Bush standing infront of the nation and declaring war on terrrist.. you have a personal vendetta against Fascism. Spooky Fascist out to ruin everyone's day, tapping phones, logging internet activity, torturing poor insurgents in Cuba.. God awful Fascist.

And you don't even know what a Fascist is.

Which ironically.. makes you a hypocrite. Which I find mildly amusing.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 09:32 PM
Fascism is inextricably linked with militarism.
Historically fascists have always held up the Roman Empire as the ideal they'd like to emulate.

The only fascist government I can think of that didn't immediately start invading other countries upon assuming power was that of Spain, and that's only because they were too busy fighting a brutal civil war.

Of course, authoritarian ideologies all tend to resemble one another once put into practice, and authoritarian leftists are no less violent than authoritarian rightists, the distinctions between the two being largely academic.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 09:47 PM
Monarchies = War
Communism = War
Fascism = War
Democracy = War

Can you name a system of governing that DOES NOT = war

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 11:26 PM
Yes, but only fascism makes war and warmaking the very purpose of the state.

Pretty much every type of state engages in war, but none celebrate it the way fascism does.

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 01:42 AM

Originally posted by xmotex
Yes, but only fascism makes war and warmaking the very purpose of the state.

Pretty much every type of state engages in war, but none celebrate it the way fascism does.

The above is an example of what happens when you adhere to the irrational out of complete stubbornness.

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 01:58 PM
What are you talking about?!?
Talk about ignorance & stubbornness

Militarism is part of the definition of fascism.
It's one of the fundamental elements of the philosophy, along with authoritarianism, nationalism, and state corporatism. Don't ask me, ask any fascist, they happily admit it:

"War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it." —Mussolini

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 07:25 PM
Maybe fascists revel in the percieved glories of war, but in actuality they dont wage a disproportionate amount of time in warfare.

Nazi Germany turned warlike to regain the grounds lost at the treaty of Versailles. And expanded on it with the Lebensraum doctrine which Hitler used to extend his own power and reputation amongst his citizens.

If we are to contend with the issues surrounding annexation as an arm of fascist states, isnt Communist Russia far more guilty? The USSR took control of the entirety of Eastern Europe.

It is not fascism which is exclusive in its use of war, it is all forms of extremist governments if not all forms of governments in the history of time.

Fascists only extol the virtues of war because it allows the impression of a strong state to be formed amongst the people... which is one of the aims of Fascism. War is not the end, but the means to the end.

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 08:07 PM
Look ...... Nazi Germany WAS NOT FASCIST ...

In fact.. Hitler HATED the fascist.. he was very suspicious of Italy and the Fascist movement..

Ironically.. the ONLY person that Hitler DID NOT worry about was Stalin, who was a COMMUNIST.

And equally ironic Stalin considered Hitler the only person he could trust.. and Hitler who considered the Fascist strong and the Communist weak, attacked Stalin, the only person Stalin ever trusted.

Fascism is the combination of corporate powers to the strong centralized government. It has nothing to do with war, no more then so any other government has in relation to war.

(just to add in order for our democracy to survive we need war......)

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 08:35 PM
If Hitler wasnt a Fascist, what was he?

His government seems like a pretty textbook example of governmental control of social and economic order to me...

Nazism was essentially the same as Fascism but with emphasis placed upon Race rather than State.

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 09:09 PM
He was a guy.

A guy who, through a microphone converted and awed a nation..

A man who through no specific ideology sect set forth and converted a population into a current of war, death and a depopulation in the sake of the Fatherland..

He was essentially a ruler. Classifying him, like others, helps other Humans feel more comfortable in the fact that once labeled a threat can be isolated when in fact its that very ignorance in that specific line of thought that because one is classified hes identified that leads to the rise of men like Hitler.

Which ironically made Hitler an even better ruler then he was. And now he will be idolized by the ignorant who with anything representing turmoil, disruption, death and destruction will be tied with his own leadership..

Even though through the eyes of a Nazi his actions where more rational then irrational..

And lets not forget.. the Nazi part was a Socialist part.

History, with common sense and understanding can be a powerful thing.

posted on Apr, 4 2008 @ 10:07 PM

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Look ...... Nazi Germany WAS NOT FASCIST ...

In fact.. Hitler HATED the fascist.. he was very suspicious of Italy and the Fascist movement..

Fascism is the combination of corporate powers to the strong centralized government.

I don't think the you are being entirely fair on this one given the fact that most political historians are incapable of agreeing on a definition as to what Fascism is.

I think by your definition Nazi germany was fascist. I also think that it is a push to suggest Hitler hated fascism, he was certainly outspoken against capitalism but he also spoke of how he admired Mussolini's acheivements, he received him at the Wolf's Lair on numerous occasions (including the day after the failed 20 July 1944 assassination attempt). Hitler constantly contradicted himself and evolved his political philosophy, much of the anti-capitalism went out the window when he started receiving substantial contributions from capitalists. I am assuming the two are connected

Hitler's main problem with Italy was that they weren't hungry enough for war which made them a poor ally, combined with the British SIS generated partisan activities in Italy, there was some tension, but on the whole, Hitler admired the merger of high finance/business with government initiative as well as their tough stance against the RCC. Hitler also sought stronger links with Franco's fascist Spain, but Britain out bid Germany for Franco's favour, so any criticism for fascism there would most likely just be sour grapes.

I think that the reason fascism has become so strongly associated with war-mongering is because of profiteerism (and corruption, if the two are indeed mutally exclusive). While other regimes may have benefitted territorially or by gaining trade freedoms, under the fascist system individuals and corporations profited and were able to retain those profits whether they backed the winners or the losers. Fascism in Germany, was different to fascism in Spain and Italy, but it was still fascism. The Proto-fascist Prussians developed Realpolitik which was intergral to Hitler domestic policies and ideologically compatible with fascism or corporationism. Spain and italy had other root influences on the way fascism developed but all three emerged from nationalistic socialist movements. There is some commonality.

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:22 PM
What about the Fasciae?

It's several rods coming together to create the handle of the axe.

Doesn't the axe symbolize war?

So it's a nation coming together to go to war.

Is that flawed logic?

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 05:18 PM
"Fascism" comes from "Fascio", Italian for the word "group" or "crowd".

Its a philosophy of collectivism with the main aim of empire I would say.

Nothing to do with a battleaxe as far as im aware.

[edit on 10-4-2008 by 44soulslayer]

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 06:03 PM

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
"Fascism" comes from "Fascio", Italian for the word "group" or "crowd".

Its a philosophy of collectivism with the main aim of empire I would say.

Nothing to do with a battleaxe as far as im aware.

I think Qunitar might be right, the fascista was the centre point of the flag of the Italian fascists and emblematic of their struggle.

I think that the origins of the word are the same, strength through unity.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in