Fascism

The Fasces is a prominent symbol of Italian Fascism

Of the ideologies that emerged in the tumult following the First World War, the one that proved to have the greatest success in achieving and maintaining power in Europe was the ideology known as fascism. Borne out of the beliefs of disillusioned communists and authoritarian nationalists, fascism is often characterized as being "third positionist" due to its ideological inspiration from both the radical left and right. Although traces of Marxist doctrine can still be found buried in its worldview - it embraces a producer-parasite dialectic, but between nations instead of economic classes - its virulent nationalism puts it at odds with the internationalist mindset of socialism, and it inevitably led to violent conflict within Germany, Spain, and Italy in the interbellum decades. In all cases, the fascist parties eventually won out and forced their socialist rivals underground. Fascism's most defining qualities come from its slavish devotion to the state. The government, often under the control of a single strongman, serves as the final arbitrator and authority in the land. Religious institutions, trade unions, private businesses, and the like are permitted to exist in some limited form, though their subservience to the state's authority is made clear. The government also upholds a national mythos, spinning tales of a noble people with past glories that were unfairly stripped from them, and demands that the populace find strength in unity and reclaim what was lost. They sneer at liberal nations for decadent complacency and socialist nations for succumbing to degeneracy - yet paradoxically view those outsiders as a looming threat who are posed to destroy everything they hold dear.

Proponents and subideologies

Note: People marked with an asterisk are their countries' starting leaders.

Subideology	Description	Adherents
Default (None)	Of the ideologies that emerged in the tumult following the First World War, the one that proved to have the greatest success in achieving and maintaining power in Europe was the ideology known as fascism. Borne out of the beliefs of disillusioned communists and authoritarian nationalists, fascism is often characterized as being "third positionist" due to its ideological inspiration from both the radical left and right. Although traces of Marxist doctrine can still be found buried in its worldview - it embraces a producer-parasite dialectic, but between nations instead of economic classes - its virulent nationalism puts it at odds with the internationalist mindset of socialism, and it inevitably led to violent conflict within Germany, Spain, and Italy in the interbellum decades. In all cases, the fascist parties eventually won out and forced their socialist rivals underground. Fascism's most defining qualities come from its slavish devotion to the state. The government, often under the control of a single strongman, serves as the final arbitrator and authority in the land. Religious institutions, trade unions, private businesses, and the like are permitted to exist in some limited form, though their subservience to the state's authority is made clear. The government also upholds a national mythos, spinning tales of a noble people with past glories that were unfairly stripped from them, and demands that the populace find strength in unity and reclaim what was lost. They sneer at liberal nations for decadent complacency and socialist nations for succumbing to degeneracy - yet paradoxically view those outsiders as a looming threat who are posed to destroy everything they hold dear.	Johannes Steinhoff Alf Larsen Whist* Axel Heiberg Stang Gulbrand Lunde Henri Barbé Todor Zhekov Galeazzo Ciano* Alessandro Pavolini Italo Balbo Pino Romualdi Pino Rauti Stanislao Lepri Leonida Suzzi Valli* Ezio Balducci Tefik Mborja* Georgios Themelis* Ramfis Trujillo
Statist Corporatocracy	Money can buy many things - towers of steel, cities of gold, the loyalties of craven men - but not a monopoly on violence. Or a country. At least, not yet. Although the role of corporate capital in this polity is monumental - entirely out of the scope of what would be expected anywhere else in the world - the state maintains its prerogatives. Though the corporations and their lieutenants are omnipresent, and their wishes cannot be ignored, their desires and machinations are ultimately subject to the whims and needs of a single primarch. Even if the economic and social life of this society is dominated by private enterprise, the political direction of the state remains firmly in the grip of a singular entity, bending the efforts of others to serve a purpose greater than mere profit. Here, labor and capital are both subsumed under the vision of their betters.	Suzuki Teiichi* Ibuka Masaru (persistence ending) Jean Schramme Nikolay Talberg
Corporate Statism	Corporatism has defined the twentieth century as the leading economic system of its time, much as fascism has become one of its most dramatic ideologies. While both of these systems have undergone significant changes and evolutions, often, they come together as a raw instrument of power - a way to uphold what is believed to be good and true — and crush everything that is not. Corporate Statism offers the corporatist system as it was originally intended: a body constituted of economic classes, each acting as a fundamental unit of society, each taught that the greatest good can only be achieved through class collaboration rather than class struggle. Capitalist individualism creates only opportunism and selfishness, while socialist collectivism offers only radicalism and senseless destruction without any solutions. The corporative state offers harmony and peace between the classes, all acting together as cogs in the machine known as nation. Social radicalism is similarly discarded for a belief in the traditional, preferring the stability of their social fabric to anything that may tear it asunder. The economy consists of corporate bodies based on industry, comprised of workers and employers alike, with these bodies acting as their representatives to the state. To some, this has created a remarkably hierarchical and undemocratic state. To others, it has created an organic democracy, where the common people's divergent interests can be fully incorporated unlike in majoritarian democracies. Such a system may be crushing and totalitarian, but dissent has not made itself known, and likely will never be able to.	Funada Naka* Kishi Nobusuke Sang Phathanothai Son Sann Cornelis van Geelkerken Nikola II* Zhang Renli Mikhail Matkovsky* Higinio Morínigo*
Sansepolcrismo	Taking its name from a discourse held by Benito Mussolini in Milan's Sansepolcro Square, Sansepolcrismo is the very first incarnation of the fascist ideology, back when the PNF didn't exist yet, and fascism still called itself "Fighting Fasces". At the time, the movement's name and iconography were a tribute to the Arditi, Italy's elite assault corps and the very first to wear the black shirt - which would become the uniform of the future MVSN, the feared Camicie Nere. The Sansepolcro Manifest advocated for a "Third Way" between capitalism and communism, taking the best from both sides while discarding what was deemed unnecessary. As such, early fascism conjugated private economic initiative with heavy state intervention in the economy, parity between sexes and worker uplifting programs with rabid nationalism and unbridled militarism, vote for women with single party state: a mèlange of political, social and economic beliefs, kept together by the messianic figure of the Duce, the voice of the people, who knew what was best for all - and had the strength to pursue it. Abandoned over the years in favor of less revolutionary policies that catered more to the middle classes, Sansepolcrismo has been brought back to the forefront of political discourse by Ettore Muti's meteoric rise to power. While unstable and somewhat erratic, it is undeniable that this ideology finds fertile ground among the lower classes and the military, making it a powerful tool to counter the advancement of socialism in society: only time will tell whether it will be successful, inaugurating a new age of nationalistic zeal and class cooperation, or it will once again be forgotten.	Ettore Muti
Fascist Mysticism	Founded by Niccolò Giani, the School of Fascist Mysticism has spent years crafting a comprehensive analysis of both modern and ancient philosophy, society and religion. Constantly striving to find the reasons behind the great events of History, the members of this school came to the conclusion that matters of state, economy, religion, ethics and race are tightly bound: as such, there must be something capable of holding everything together, espousing the supreme good and fighting the supreme evil - and that something is Fascism. In the eyes of Niccolò Giani, Fascism is more than a political ideology. Preaching eternal devotion to the State, unflinching faith in God, and utter loyalty to one's family, comrades and brothers-in-arms, it is a comprehensive code of values that can find application in every moment of a person's life, replacing all other social constructs, including religion: in fact, Fascism is the final and logical conclusion of Christianity, with the messianic figure of the Duce acting as paragon of virtue, and supreme authority in both political and religious matters - making the corrupt and decadent Clergy unnecessary. Previously confined to academic halls and theoretic debate, Niccolò Giani's meteoric rise to power in the Italian Empire has seen Fascist Mysticism experience a dramatic increase in both importance and adherents, as its teachings offer hope to desperate Italians: duty in place of uncertainty, and devotion in place of doubt. As the faithful grow in strength and numbers, the Duce smiles, for every new follower is not only a step closer to what Fascism was meant to be - it is a step closer to ascension, in both body and soul..	Niccolò Giani
Fascist Populism	Placed upon a pedestal stands the nation's leader - their smile comforts a people angered with the faults of modern life. A voice waxes lyrical on job security, wealth, and patriotism. To some, these words mean exactly what they say. To the person in the know, it says far more, speaking out on the rot surrounding society, whether it be liberalism, Marxism, or something more nebulous. But to both, the voice reassures them that only they can solve life's ills. This kind of leader does not blindly rely on dogma for authority. As the armbands are swapped out for national flags, parts of fascism can be emphasized to maintain moral control, while other parts can be de-emphasized in favor of a vague nationalist fervor. Consistency is traded in for popular support, the currency used to buy their regime time to sustain itself until the people consider their leader an equal to the nation and see the two as synonymous. In place of a comprehensive set of policies, they will often use bombastic and populist rhetoric touching upon real or imagined grievances, using charisma as a substitute for substance. This is often supplemented with copious amounts of corruption, backroom deals, and political stunts to disguise shortfalls in governance - the quality of which is meaningless to their supporters as long as they can hear their leader's voice reassure them that everything will be alright.	Andrew Fountaine Jeffrey Hamm John Bean Lauri Törni Elias Simojoki Thammanoon Thien-ngern Igor Shafarevich Rafael Trujillo* Juan Domingo Perón Manuel de Anchorena Victoriano Benítez Vera
Revolutionary Nationalism	Heralding a new era for the people now stood atop the shoulders of slain giants, a new wave of energy had emerged from the rotting carcasses of empires; a zealous 'Revolutionary Nationalism', materializing wherever the imperialist boot had once tread. Rejecting unequal treaties from London, resource-pillaging from Paris, and imperial diktats from Berlin, this newfound nationalism has roared in the shadows of Europe's empires to repel the horrors and brutality that had once emerged from the colonial office. Many of these post-colonial regimes govern underdeveloped and highly hierarchical economies as a result of their historical exploitation. However, authorities drive to modernize their countries, often unifying their people around a powerful figure or institution alongside patriotic, and sometimes revanchist, rhetoric. The newly-founded nation remains at the center of all political life; workers are instructed to toil for the strength of the country just as soldiers are told to fight to defend the homeland's recent freedom. Social views on morality and personal autonomy vary, but almost all agree upon a single, unified cultural identity in the face of a new modernity. As Europe lies fractured and limp under the grey jackboot, the liberated peoples cheer to celebrate independence from the masters who could no longer bear the whip.	Roman Shukhevych Ngô Đình Diệm Pach Chhoeun Khieu Samphan Ea Sichau Plaek Phibunsongkhram* Chalard Hiransiri Ruslan Abdulgani Grégoire Kayibanda Baymirza Hayit Roberto Viaux Juan Manuel Frutos Pane Juan Natalicio González Edgar Ynsfrán
Ordosocialism	In 1847, Karl Marx shook the world to its very core. He created an ideology that discarded the old order, and addressed the true struggle of the common man. Now, Marx's true successor has arrived. Ivan Serov, creator of Ordosocialism, did not understand why one's patriotic love for their country must be at odds with their nation's class struggle. Why must they demonize the Germans, when their ideology clearly has unique characteristics that could better serve the forces of revolution? Ordosocialism is the resolution to these conflicting questions and ideals. Ordosocialism is the synthesis of the class struggle and the national struggle. Ordosocialism is the synthesis of all that opposes both capitalism and cosmopolitanism. Ordosocialism concerns itself with the destruction of those who decided to follow the path of reaction, and those whose reactionary tendencies are of a more... hereditary nature. Some fools accuse Ordosocialism of being a reactionary, corporatist betrayal of all that Marx stood before. Some fools accuse Serov of being a madman, no better than Hitler himself. These individuals attempt to weaken the revolution with their slander, and defend hereditary reactionaries despite their inherent opposition to the revolution. Serov and his followers will not let these false claims distract them, however, for they have a new revolution to bring forth. A revolution free of the rot that plagued its predecessors.	Ivan Serov
Falangism	Born in the chaos of the Spanish Second Republic, Falangism seeks to marry the revolutionary economic ideology of National Syndicalism with conservative catholic Christian teachings. While conserving the anti-capitalist, anti-communist, inflammatory, and dynamic rhetoric of National Syndicalism, it is way more moderate in practice. Falangists will still call for the creation of vertical syndicates, but they are not as radical as their predecessor and Falangists will often find themselves working under a state capitalist system. In line with their policy of class collaboration, the worker-manager relations in these syndicates will be managed by the state through the state-owned syndicates. However, this extensive state control of the syndicates and the economy as a whole can often cause Falangist states to fall under the system of Corporatism. The aspect where National Syndicalism and Falangism clash the most, however, is their social outlook. While the former advocates for a "Constant Revolution", the latter is ultra-conservative. Falangism also rejects the separation of church and state, and it often advocates for Christianity as a state religion. Its also a very nationalistic ideology, especially when applied in hispanic countries, where it seeks to unite the Spanish-speaking world in something called "Hispanidad". For this reason, South America is where Falangism enjoys the most popularity outside of Spain. It also endorses a form of Christian-based nationalism, which can cause problems in nations where Christianity is not the dominant religion. Looking at it from the surface, Falangism seems very similar to National Syndicalism, but as you delve deeper, the social and cultural differences become evident between the two ideologies.	Jaime Milans del Bosch José Luis de Arrese Alfonso Armada Pierre Gemayel Óscar Únzaga de la Vega Carlos Valverde Barbery
Reform Bureaucracy	Like most great powers, Japan found itself deeply divided during the interwar period of the early 20th century. At the close of the Great War, it had been a mere 60 years since the nation had begun its transformation from an isolated, feudal society to a modern and industrialized nation-state. No such change would be without teething problems, particularly in the field of economics - after all, the free-market status quo had originally developed naturally, over a lengthy period of time, and the arrival of revolutionary socialism only complicated matters further. From a combination of that era's uncertainties, ideological experimentation, and the new experience of colonialism emerged a uniquely Japanese phenomenon: 'kakushin kanryō', or 'Reform Bureaucracy'. For such an unassuming name, Reform Bureaucracy carries quite the legacy of cruelty and exploitation. Best realized in the ruthlessly exploited puppet state of Manchukuo, it is unapologetically dehumanizing, corporatist, and even fascistic. To these bureaucrats, economics is a matter of nothing but numbers and well-trained cogs, a series of gears dedicated to expanding the nation's preparedness for war and mobilisation. Drawing upon the 'total war' economy of the late German Empire, the economic rationalization of the Weimar Republic, and the planned economy espoused by many hardline socialists, Reform Bureaucracy's ultimate goal is simple: the complete subordination of the economy to the needs of the state, generally with the military and a politicized bureaucracy as the main benefactors.	Sakomizu Hisatsune Komai Kenichirō
Integralism	There exist many variants of Integralism, often affected by the circumstances in which its exponents find themselves. Yet the core principles are very much the same, and have the same basis: that of stridently fundamentalist, traditionalist Catholicism. Integralism rejects the values brought about by the Enlightenment - those of secularism, democracy, and liberalism. Rather than embracing 'progress' and change, an integralist go the other way, insisting that the only way for people to lead moral, dignified lives is through a return to agrarian medievalism, in a society predicated upon hardline Catholicism. Based on a corporative concept of the society working as a human body, integralism is not built on a concept of a glorious future to be built off of an ancient ideal, but instead on a ruthless, hardline attempt to bring that glorious - and usually imagined - past back, by any means necessary.	Plínio Salgado
Clerical Fascism	With enough faithful, no barricade can hold, no walls can stand. There has never been a force such as faith in history, capable of galvanizing the masses and pervading every thought. It is capable of changing behaviors, outlooks, and personalities. As omnipresent as it is, it is evident that religion will eventually fuse with the nation, forming a chimera of an ideology known as Clerical Fascism. This ideology asserts that a nation is inherently interrelated with religion. The separation of faith and state is then completely erased, and policy takes a distinctly religious aspect. However, it still isn't a theocracy. Members of the clergy are not in positions of power, but the leader will be seen with high-ranking heads of religion. What organized religious movements exist will be subordinated to the state. On the subject of the history of the nation, Clerical Fascists will emphasize the deep-rooted links between the nation and religion, often glorifying religious and pious figures, like Saint Sava of Serbia or Jeanne D'Arc of France. These figures will not only be looked up to for their faith but their role in history. They will become political figures as much as religious figures as the state itself. Religion will become politics, and politics will become a religion. When one looks at Clerical Fascism, one can't help but wonder if this is the true purpose of faith or simply a transformation of religion into an insidious political tool.	Borivoje Jonić Branimir Jelić* Konstantin Rodzaevsky*
Neosocialism	The 1930s were a period ripe with unparalleled political polarisation emerging from the economic catastrophe that struck the Earth as a whole in the wake of the Great Depression. And it is from this state of misery and disillusionment with the traditional paradigms of political thought that the seeds of the Neosocialist ideological phenomena would first be cultivated within the rightist ideologues of the French Section of the Workers' International and the Belgian Socialist Party. Seeking to bring unity and tranquillity to societies stricken with dysfunction and chaos, the Neosocialists would reject the Marxist world-view and its theory of class struggle. Instead, the innovative architects of the newly-born Neosocialist Movement, such as Hendrik de Man and Marcel Déat, would nurture and advocate their own visionary theoretical conceptions of "Planisme" and the "Constructive Revolution" - a radical restructuring of society in a revolution from above carried out by a technocratic clique at the helm of the state through a mandate accorded to them by the masses. While it may not seem necessarily nationalist at first glance, the ideologues of Neosocialism with their autocratic bent and their flirtations with Fascist rhetoric and ideology would soon shift towards nationalistic attitudes as a way to bridge the discord that plagued their countries, thereby allowing them to make way for the technocratic, planiste, corporativist and socialist society that would follow the rigorous transformations arising from their revolution. With the fall of the arbiter of International Socialism in the Soviet Union, it appears that the time of the Neosocialists is perhaps now, as both former Socialists whose world-views were shattered by the crumbling of Bolshevism and former Fascists disenchanted by the stagnation and despair enveloping the once-victorious Axis powers rush to its promises and the cures it proposes for their afflictions of cynicism.	Christian Astrup
Ba'athism	"One Nation, Bearing an Eternal Message." The brainchild of Michel Aflaq and Zaki al-Arsuzi, Ba'athism is a revolutionary Arab nationalist movement, aimed at creating a 'renaissance' across the Arab world by means of revolution against foreign oppressors. Ba'athist ideology combines notions of pan-Arabism, Arab socialism, and secularism into an ideological platform that aims to mobilize and subsequently unify the whole Arab nation through revolutionary struggle, regardless of faith or region. The Ba'ath party functions as the universal vanguard for the Arab nation, accelerating its development in order to bring about the renaissance into all aspects of life. Its ostensible goals are progress, liberty, and socialism as defined by Aflaq, within a context suited to the Arab world. Dedication to modernization and progress means that the party opposes not only foreign rule but also all the forms of feudal and noble reaction across the Arab world. Liberty in the Ba'athism sense does not necessarily mean liberal parliamentary democracy, as it may subvert the revolution, and socialism here substitutes the Marxist notion of class struggle for a national struggle against colonialism. 'Arab Socialism' is considered an important means of reaching the renaissance, but not its ultimate purpose. In reality, the ideological purity of Ba'athist parties across the Middle East is incredibly varied and intrinsically linked with local culture and tradition, as well as an influx of foreign political theories. The policies followed by the Ba'athist movements range from the rampant militarism of some branches to promises of representative democracy and socialism by others. Their only common goal is the creation of a united Arab state, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Gulf.
Revolutionary Zionism	The original objectives of 'mainstream' Zionism, since the days of Theodor Herzl and Moses Hess, was to provide the Jewish people with their own land and their own national economy, accepted by the community of nations. This was a product of 19th-century Western Europe's alienated Jewry, who had engaged in political action according to the specific necessity of a place to call home, when no one else would accept them. But with no clear path to this homeland, the movement fractured. Liberals and Marxists embraced Zionism on notions that democracy or revolution could bring about freedom. However, Revolutionary Zionists deny these Herzlian ideals, considering their adherents to be too passive, waiting for Israel without being willing to take action for it. Instead, according to their readings of the Torah and of history, the Jewish people are eternally betrothed to Eretz Israel - even in its death, it lives on in the blood of all Jews. No deed in the cause of Jewish liberation is too extreme, including bloodshed and terror, for the Jews yearn for the Land of Israel like one yearns for their lover. Revolutionary Zionism is highly idiosyncratic, with few common ideals other than ultranationalism and a call for direct political violence. Most Revolutionary Zionists are not religious in the regular sense, but their commitment to their romantic-nationalist readings of history serves as a secular religion unto itself. Most Revolutionary Zionists draw inspiration from the fascist movements of Europe- many are admirers of Italian fascism- but since the 50s, under the leadership of Israel Eldad, the movement embraced strong, homegrown messianic influences. Its partisans now believe it is their goal to reestablish a Kingdom of Israel, as defined in the Bible according to their unorthodox readings - a centralized and militarized state for Jews alone, with a new, Third Temple standing as a symbol for the triumph of the Jewish people.	Geulah Cohen
Social Credit	C.H. Douglas, in his description of a model of economics in which debt-free purchasing power is supplied to all citizens, viewed it as a method by which the machinations of "the inner circles of High Finance" cauld be overcome. Fascists who believe in social credit make the implicit identity of said inner circles explicit. They brand financial institutions, both domestic and international, as Jewish plots for dominance, and seek to overturn this conspiracy with the deployment of social credit. For the social credit fascists, the influence of Jewish bankers begets the destruction of national traditions. Through their market manipulation, virtue is made worthless and vice made profitable; the people are thus drawn to abandoning God and Country in favour of aimless decadence. To these fascists, it is but another problem of artificial scarcity resolved by the distribution of purchasing power. By subsidising the righteous and making virtue profitable through social credit, these fascists believe that they can restore national values from the moral wasteland of modernity. Their critics are many, and their points are plentiful, but social credit is still a young ideology on the world stage, its fascist child even younger. Time will tell whether their dreams can be realised, or if their delusional voyage will be shattered against the rocks of reality.	Gerard Wallop
Aristocratic Fascism	The image of a fascist traditionally conjured by popular perception is that of a man of action — an aggrieved soul of the middle class — a fighter against those nefarious forces subverting their nation. However, fascism can also come from above rather than below, from the landed gentry rather than the landless masses. In fascism, many of the traditional elite found their perfect weapon against the forces of social disruption and upheaval, their weapon to batter and smother any semblance of change. It is a steamroller — a tired and old machine — yet one with enough to pave away the imperfections, to sweep away the dregs corroding the lower orders with wretched notions of egalitarianism. It is a tool to protect elite interests, to bond by blood class interests, and shatter the socialist threat of organized labor. It is a fortress of reaction, an ivory tower watching over the common masses with barely restrained contempt, as its doors remain battened down to their kind. It is perfection, never to be tainted by working-class touch or pseudo-communist excesses such as mass organization. As the days pass, time goes in reverse, as enlightenment and progress are etched away like the decaying ruins of a regime lost even to history. For the aristocrats in power, this is not a problem — this is the goal. They ruled like kings long ago, until liberalism and radicalism eroded their powers for false virtues held above God, nation, and tradition. In the twentieth century, they rule again, perhaps forever this time.	Barry Domvile* Ronald Nall-Cain Gerard Wallop Béla Imrédy* László Bárdossy Gilberto Alzate Avendaño* Carlos Echeverri Cortés
Antarctic Administration	Ever since the scramble for Antarctica began in the 1950s, the continent has been divided by several competing territorial administrations. What started as a border dispute between the Chilean and Argentinean regimes morphed into an international incident requiring the mediation of the Organization of Free Nations. Not to be outpaced by the forces of liberty, National Socialism reared its head in the form of Nazi-controlled Neuschwabenland, attempting to enforce a policy of colonization by the pure, Polar, Aryan race. Finally, the Japanese arrived, ignoring all pretense of legitimate claims, seizing their slice of Antarctica through force of arms. While each administration adheres to its specific ideological convictions, the harsh realities of life in the Great White Nothing, and lack of a notable civilian populace, has induced a measure of conformity amongst the regimes. All operate under some form of military governance, be they in direct control, in the case of Japan, or working alongside civilian partners, as with the OAA. Under these hierarchies, many thousands of personnel labor in the bitter cold and biting winds, trying to justify their presence on "the Exiled Continent". Each power attempts to wrest some modicum of value from their slice of ice, however many observers have named this struggle the ultimate in sunk cost fallacy. None of the powers can back down while the others remain, regardless of their losses in money, material, or men. It would take a colossal shift in fortunes to make the Antarctic ventures profitable...	Giovanni Torrisi