Category Archives: HIST107-Archive

What is Fascism

Posted on by

AUTHOR: Benito Mussolini was a member of the Italian Socialist Party prior to WWI, when he disagreed with the parties advocacy for neutrality during the war he was kicked out. He denounced the party and began to work on his fascist movement.

CONTEXT: At the time of writing What is Fascism in 1932 Mussolini had already been in power for 10 years. He wrote a entry for an Italian encyclopedia at this time defining what exactly fascism was. Despite the fact that he and his party had been in power for 10 years the general public was unclear as to what exactly fascism was and this entry was meant to help define it.

LANGUAGE: Mussolini wrote this piece so that the general public could better understand his ideas, he did not use terribly scholarly language that was meant to overwhelm the people, he wanted them to understand. This piece is also persuasive, Mussolini needed public support for fascism so he was trying to gain it in this piece.

AUDIENCE: Mussolini’s audience was the people of Italy, he needed public support to keep fascism and himself in power so he was trying to persuade the people that fascism was a positive form of government.

INTENT: Mussolini’s intent was to define fascism for the people of Italy in his own way which he hoped would help the people see that they should support him and his political ideas.

MESSAGE: Mussolini’s goal in writing this piece was to show people that fascism was a good thing for Italy and that they would benefit from it, his message was the same and worked to accomplish that goal.

What is Fascism – Mussolini

Posted on by

A: Benito Mussolini was the founder of the National Fascist Party during the first half of the twentieth century. As Prime Minister of Italy, he removed the state from the idea of democracy and established himself as the dictator of the state.

C: Mussolini experienced WWI and declared socialism was a failure. He wrote ‘What is Fascism’ in 1932, as a way to introduce a new political doctrine to the world.

L: Mussolini writes in the common tongue. It’s very easy to understand exactly what he’s presenting.

A: His intended audience is primarily the citizens of the Italian state. He aims to enlightened the on his new political system that will change the way in which the state operated.

I: His intent is to educate his people on why Fascism is a better alternative to democracy and communism. He believes the establishment of a legal absolute dictatorship to be very valuable to the success of a nation.

M: His message can be seen when he wrote, “ For Fascism, the growth of empire, this is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence.” He believe fascism is the answer to solve Italy’s problems.

Mussolini & Fascism

Posted on by

Mussolini was a huge contributor in the creation of fascism. Initially being a supporter of socialism, Mussolini changed his view when he was thrown out of the Italian Socialist Party for not believing in neutrality during World War I. Mussolini became prime minister of Italy in 1922 following the March on Rome and immediately started the fascist movement. With the onset of fascism, people were still perplexed by what this term actually meant. This document was written 10 years after Mussolini had already been in power in order to try to give people a legitimate definition of fascism and convince them of its benefits. This language of this document is very straightforward. It is simply a definition of what fascism entails. The audience of the document is all of Italy and possibly to the rest of Europe. He wanted to convince Italy of the benefits of fascism and why it was better, and also hoped that other countries would adopt this ideology. He intended to promote fascism in order to keep it going and wanted to explain why it was the best option available.

What is Fascism?

Posted on by

AUTHOR: Benito Mussolini started out as a strong advocate for socialism and was imprisoned multiple times for his promotion of strikes and the use of violence.  He earned the reputation of a potential revolutionary with incredible rhetorical skills.  Because he has such a strong background with socialism, many elements are prevalent in fascism.

CONTEXT: Mussolini had already been in power for ten years while writing this.  Although fascism had been in place for years, it lacked a clear definition and people were unsure if they were benefitting from this system at all.  To persuade the people of the benefits of fascism, the party published this document to prolong their time in control.

LANGUAGE: The language of this document is very straightforward and direct.  Mussolini is concise, getting straight to the point.  However, their is also some elements of persuasion throughout the piece as he is writing to convince the people to keep this method of government in place.

AUDIENCE: This document is most likely directed towards as many people of the Italian population as possible.  As stated before, the context of the publication date requires Mussolini to persuade the population into keeping fascism.

INTENT: Mussolini’s intent is to promote Fascism throughout Italy and allow people to gain a better understanding of what it truly is.  By publishing the true definition of fascism, Mussolini promotes the idea even more, allowing him and fascism to stay in power.

MESSAGE: Mussolini’s message was that fascism was the best choice for Italy at this moment.  Mussolini displays all the benefits fascism will offer for Italy in order to maintain his power.

For Discussion: How big of an impact did Mussolini’s experience with socialism have on his later work with fascism?

((http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:Critical_Analysis_of_the_Doctrine_of_Fascism))

((http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/399484/Benito-Mussolini/5090/Dictatorship))

What is Fascism?

Posted on by

Fascism came from Benito Mussolini. Mussolini was a socialist but after coming to power in the troubled country of Italy, he created fascism to unite all of Italy. Fascism was created to adapt to represent the wants of a changing nation, making it appealing to a country like Italy which struggled under the rule of other countries for centuries. While it works with the wants of a nation, fascism demands organization. People have their freedom but only under the rules of the State.

While socialism is based on materials and all people sharing their hard work, fascism is based on the people. Nothing is done to help the economy, but help the people themselves. Mussolini stated that the twentieth century was going to the century of fascism, the century of the State((http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.asp)).

The Economic Consequences of Peace

Posted on by

The Economic Consequences of Peace addresses the effects of the Versailles treaty on the already fragile German system. It described provisions of the Versailles treaty and then illustrates the tragic effects. Keynes explained how before the war the population was living “without much margin of surplus” (Keynes), and in the aftermath people had to restore this system before starvation became a huge issue. Keynes also issued the warning that “men will not always die quietly”, directing this at politicians and men in power and saying that the negative temperaments brought on by starvation/desperation could be fuel for future issues. Another issue with the treaty was that it limited Germany’s ability to import raw materials, which in turn would cause the industries to collapse. If the industry of Germany were to collapse, it would be another factor in mass starvation and discontent in the population. Essentially Keynes issued a warning to not be rash in the direct aftermath of WWI, saying “some of the catastrophes of past history….have been due to the reactions following [war]”. If a population were to grow beyond what it is able provide food for while the economy is still in a fragile state, there is a higher likelihood of it causing future conflicts. Keynes showed a great understanding of predicting the economic side of the German situation, and approached it from this view instead of becoming personally invested in the political aspects of the war.

Keynes and the Treaty of Versailles

Posted on by

In reading the “Treaty of Versailles,” it becomes clear that the idea behind the treaty was to limit the powers and territories of Germany and have them surrender during the Great War; making them go from a very powerful country to a very weak country in the blink of an eye.  In his piece titled “The Economic Consequences of the Peace,”, English economist John Maynard Keynes spoke to the negative effects that the Versailles settlement would have on the nation of Germany.  Keynes’ highlighted that Germany would lose “her colonies, her merchant fleet and her foreign investments,” (Keynes) after signing this treaty.  Furthermore, due to these losses, Keynes argued that the industry of Germany will “be condemned inevitably to destruction,” (Keynes) and made it clear that German citizens will suffer many deaths due to the poor quality of life that will occur once the treaty is signed.  And while Keynes believed that the next logical step for German citizens would be to move to other places, for no work would be available in Germany, “many countries and the most important ones will oppose any German immigration,” (Keynes) forbidding them to move out of Germany, for once the treaty is signed they would want nothing to do with them.

Keynes believed that if Germany were to sign the Treaty of Versailles, they would be making a rash decision and could “throw back human progress for centuries.” (Keynes)  Rather than jump at this idea of a treaty, Keynes believed that Germany should wait it out and see if something more favorable might pop up.  And while Keynes’ piece was passionate and provided key points as to why the German community should not sign the treaty, Germany ended up signing anyway, ending the misery that the Great War provided them.  In signing this treaty, the German population displayed the exhaustion that the Great War had caused them and proved that they were willing to give up many of their powers in order to end their involvement in the war.  Ultimately, I think the biggest takeaway from Keynes’ piece is that Germany was willing to give up all their powers and territory in order to get out of World War I.  This is important because it showed that Germany was weak and exhausted.  By displaying their weakness in signing this treaty, a man named Adolf Hitler was able to take notice and developed a plan that involved him taking over Germany; a plan that became successful and with his leadership, Germany became a rather violent nation and caused another World War to begin.

Freud: Civilization & Die Weltanschauung

Posted on by

Sigmund Freud was a controversial Austrian neurologist who is largely considered the founder of the psychoanalysis field of psychology. For this piece, Civilization & Die Weltanschauung, Freud diverts from the field of abnormal psych and the study of sexuality to write about the relationship between economics, civilization, philosophy, religion and science. Freud writes in 1918, around the end of the first World War.

It is clear that Freud is addressing an audience for this lecture, as he uses phrases such as “In an earlier lecture we have emphasized…”, beyond that Freud utilizes rhetoric skillfully to make his point, starting with the first sentence of the lecture in which he defines Weltanschauung,

 I mean an intellectual construction which gives a unified solution of all the problems of our existence in virtue of a comprehensive hypothesis, a construction, therefore, in which no question is left open and in which everything in which we are interested finds a place.

This definition can be applied to all of the topics on which he speaks. He, however, does not think that everything Weltanschauung applies to is created equal. Religion, he says, creates disastrous results by inhibiting thought, whereas he believes that reason/intellect are the human race’s best hope for the future. All of this culminates in Freud’s understanding of civilization and its evolution,  the struggle between death and the force that brings individuals together.

As an earlier poster pointed out, it is clear from Freud’s conclusion that he writes under the influence of war. In 1918 the Great War was coming to a close and Freud’s homeland of Austria was suffering massive losses. He was certainly not alone in seeking the meaning of the struggle between men.

John Maynard Keynes: The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1920)

Posted on by

John Maynard Keynes, one of the most important British economists of the 20th century, wrote The Economic Consequences of the Peace (1920) in response to the Treaty of Versailles. Keynes in his piece focuses on Germany and uses them as a representation as to what will happen, economically, if citizens of these countries follow this treaty.

Keynes argues that Germany, with a booming population and a rapidly increasing industry, can’t survive with the treaty’s proposed sanctions. He believes that the intellectual elite of the victorious countries fails to realize the stability of Europe, as a whole, and doesn’t promote economic solidarity in any way. The main danger here, Keynes believes, is that a rapid depression of the standard of life can leave to the starvation of many. He says, “Those who sign this treaty will sign the death sentence of many millions of German men, women and Children” (Keynes).

Although Keynes makes valid economic criticisms, his argument is more economic based and less political based. The political situation of 1919 has a lot of importance in what is happening throughout Europe and Keynes fails to address that and also fails to provide alternative solutions to the readers’ problems.

A Critical Phase Shift

Posted on by

The significance of The Decline of The West, extends way beyond surface level. Oswald Spengler, a german historian and philosopher, whose ideals in the early twentieth century surrounded civilizations and paradigm shifts between them. The Decline of the West is a book that describes the miraculous changes of world history, and the changes that might be faced with civilizations within the coming years. Through a historical/historicists lens, Spengler uses his knowledge of history to show the causes and effects of the worlds phases; using a very informative tone to present his point in the segment from the book. Through his language, he seems to target the general reader, to inform them of what is to come. The reader could have sympathized with it or revolted against Spengler’s opinion. The intent and message of this piece however goes along different lines. Spengler writes in this piece specifically the end of eras where money and intellectuals reign. He spoke about blood and instinct and how it will assist with the victory of the Caesars, as civilization shifted from Napoleonism to Caesarism. The people will obey the strong, and uniformity will lead a better world suited for the conditions present at the time.

Discussion for the Audience:

-It is interesting to see how Spengler writes to say – “Life will descend to a level of general uniformity, a new kind of primitivism, and the world will be better for it…” instead of saying how the changes that are present now will make the world a better place. The world will have to conform to the conditions not the other way around.

What do you think?