Elite theories have often been associated with fascism. In particular, elite theorists such as Pareto and Michels had undeniable ties with the Italian Fascist party and the latter even supported Mussolini. One of the strongest arguments for this association is that elite theories are usually deemed to be anti-socialist and anti-democratic. By rejecting both Marxism and the democratic system, elite theories seem to be advocating for new forms of power, which fascism can easily be seen as the expression of. Moreover, part of the engrained rhetoric of elite theories is the criticism of elite-led societies. This criticism can easily be construed as a form of populism, which was a driving force of Italian fascism.
In this essay I will attempt …show more content…
Populism is a core element of Italian fascism. Robert Griffin, a scholar of fascism, coined the theory of palingenetic ultranationalism. In other words, fascism at its base relies on nationalistic myths, especially those that stress the idea of national rebirth. Fascism is also anti-rational because it relies on national sentiment from the bottom up. In fascism, intellectual and technocratic approaches to government are usually supplanted by active, visceral and violent approaches. This is especially the case in Italian Fascism. The word fasces itself recalls both the violent nature of the regime and the myth of Ancient Rome, which was invoked as an example of Italy. Populism an important component of fascism is wary of elites. Still today, populist movements use elite bashing at the core of their rhetoric. If we look at left-wing populism, candidates like Bernie Sanders usually lambaste an economic elite — the 1% or the Wall Street Banks. Conversely, right wing populism is usually critical of political elites, who are overly pervasive. Trump tries to distance himself as much as he can from career politician and establishment …show more content…
However, if we look at Pareto’s political theory it fundamentally clashes with the spirit of fascism. Elite theory is specific in that it criticizes elites without resorting to a marxist approach. Whilst Marx also criticizes elite manipulation, more specifically the economic elites, marxist theory provides for an answer in communism. In Marxist theory, society will ineluctably move in the direction of a proletariat revolution that will allow elitism to cease. What we can see in Pareto’s work is a disbelief in Comtian positivism and Marxism, because he inherently does not believe in social evolution and the fact that man can govern himself. Similarly, when Michels talks of an iron law of oligarchy, we can clearly see that there is an attempt to sociologically disprove socialist utopianism: elitism is something that is inevitable. The fact that Pareto both believed democracy was an illusion and did not believe in the fact that man could govern himself gives a very pessimistic tone to his elite theory. This pessimism in democracy and socialism however should not directly be conflated with a support of fascism. Much like Marxism, fascism was trying to shape man into a new form and believed in his inherently perfectibility. The Fascist New Man was also supposed to surpass individualism like the Marxist Species-Being in “On the Jewish Question. It is important however to argue
In this essay I will attempt …show more content…
Populism is a core element of Italian fascism. Robert Griffin, a scholar of fascism, coined the theory of palingenetic ultranationalism. In other words, fascism at its base relies on nationalistic myths, especially those that stress the idea of national rebirth. Fascism is also anti-rational because it relies on national sentiment from the bottom up. In fascism, intellectual and technocratic approaches to government are usually supplanted by active, visceral and violent approaches. This is especially the case in Italian Fascism. The word fasces itself recalls both the violent nature of the regime and the myth of Ancient Rome, which was invoked as an example of Italy. Populism an important component of fascism is wary of elites. Still today, populist movements use elite bashing at the core of their rhetoric. If we look at left-wing populism, candidates like Bernie Sanders usually lambaste an economic elite — the 1% or the Wall Street Banks. Conversely, right wing populism is usually critical of political elites, who are overly pervasive. Trump tries to distance himself as much as he can from career politician and establishment …show more content…
However, if we look at Pareto’s political theory it fundamentally clashes with the spirit of fascism. Elite theory is specific in that it criticizes elites without resorting to a marxist approach. Whilst Marx also criticizes elite manipulation, more specifically the economic elites, marxist theory provides for an answer in communism. In Marxist theory, society will ineluctably move in the direction of a proletariat revolution that will allow elitism to cease. What we can see in Pareto’s work is a disbelief in Comtian positivism and Marxism, because he inherently does not believe in social evolution and the fact that man can govern himself. Similarly, when Michels talks of an iron law of oligarchy, we can clearly see that there is an attempt to sociologically disprove socialist utopianism: elitism is something that is inevitable. The fact that Pareto both believed democracy was an illusion and did not believe in the fact that man could govern himself gives a very pessimistic tone to his elite theory. This pessimism in democracy and socialism however should not directly be conflated with a support of fascism. Much like Marxism, fascism was trying to shape man into a new form and believed in his inherently perfectibility. The Fascist New Man was also supposed to surpass individualism like the Marxist Species-Being in “On the Jewish Question. It is important however to argue