>>4655
this is a totally ahistorical gibberish. Fascism and nationalism are not same things as liberal republics had been perfectly willing to use the same brutal measures when the situation willed it. Calling fascism as a new feudalism threatening the bourgeoisie order is even more absurd when you actually examine what fascist movement was.

Instead of an attempt at fedual restoration, fascism was completely in line with modern capitalism with every function fundamentally remaining the same. The reproduction of capital and all other goodies of capital and such continued in Nazi Germany with little difference. The fascist movement is also not necessarily racist as how Italian fascism wasn't based upon race. Even through Italian fascists were racists, that couldn't be called as feature of fascism as their racism wasn't any more than Churchill's gassing of Kurds and American eugenics.

>What followed was less a coup d’état than a transfer of power with the support of a whole array of forces. The “March on Rome” of the Duce (who actually took the train) was less a showdown than a bit of theatre: the fascists went through the motions of assaulting the state, the state went through the motions of defending itself, and Mussolini took power. His ultimatum of October 24 (“We Want To Become the State!”) was not a threat of civil war, but a signal to the ruling class that the National Fascist Party represented the only force capable of restoring state authority, and of assuring the political unity of the country. The army could still have contained the fascist groups gathered in Rome, which were badly equipped and notoriously inferior on the military level, and the state could have withstood the seditious pressure. But the game was not being played on the military level. Under the influence of Badoglio in particular (the commander-in-chief in 1919-21) legitimate authority caved in. The king refused to proclaim a state of emergency, and on the 30th he asked the Duce to form a new government.

>The liberals — the same people anti-fascism counts on to stop fascism — joined the government. With the exception of the socialists and the communists, all parties sought a rapprochement with the PNF and voted for Mussolini: the parliament, with only 35 fascist MPs, supported Mussolini’s investiture 306-116. Giolitti himself, the great liberal icon of the time, an authoritarian reformer who had been head of state many times before the war, and then again in 1920-21, whom fashionable thought still fancies in retrospect as the sole politician capable of opposing Mussolini, supported him up to 1924. Democracy not only surrendered its powers to the dictator, but ratified them.

>We might add that in the following months, several unions, including those of the railway workers and the sailors, declared themselves “national”, patriotic, and therefore not hostile to the regime: repression did not spare them.

Fascism is very simple, it's another expression of a capitalist society.