These are not actually defining characteristics of fascist governments as defined by political scientists, or by actual fascist governments, who defined themselves in terms of the class-conflict paradigm that dominated European political thinking in the early part of the 20th century as an alternative to 1) rule of the working class (Marxism/Bolshevism) and 2) rule of the capitalist class (capitalist liberalism) -- instead supposedly all classes in society would work together in a harmonious whole under the direction o the State. That's the fascist ideal.

FWIW.

The Imperium is a feudal society as imagined by 20th-21st century Brits is what it is.

EDIT: Yeah I think this list was made up by somebody in the recent past with liberal-leftoid values -- "rampant sexism" is a concern of the present era, everbody was rampantly sexist in 1935, it certainly isn't a defining characteristic of fascism. Neither are "falsified elections" -- did the fascists even have elections? I don't think so, it goes against their whole ideology.

bogi_khaosa said:

Actually these 14 observations came out of a sudy of the actual character of the fascist regimes in German, Spain, and France, as opposed to the 'textbook intentions' of fascism.

Hitler was elected.

Fascism is not totalitarianism and is actually quite happy with democractically mandated governance. There are many technically fascist governments in the world today - most of them elected, and continuing under the democratically elective system.

HOWEVER, if you reject these 14 characteristics, what would you suggest in their place as yardsticks to assess whether or not the Imperium is fascist?

Luddite said:

Hitler was elected in nonfalsified elections before conditions of fascism or quasifascism (see below), and then the NSDAP got rid of elections (leaving to one side the contested issue of whether or not Nazism is a form of Fascism at all, a notion that derives historically from Soviet ideology and not something that the Nazis themselves believed). I don't think there are ANY fascist governments in the world today frankly but I'm not going to argue the point since it depends on one's definition, which is exactly what is in question.

My opinion is that for a government to count as fascist it has to be something that, if Mussolini were brought back to life, he would point at and say, "hey, that's like us!" Which would include:

* denial of egalitarianism values; belief that human beings and peoples are inherently unequal, and that this inequality should be celebrated and embraced

* belief that everything in society should be subservient to the State, which serves as a kind of quasimystical embodiment of the Will of the People.

Those really are the distinguishing characterictics of fascist ideology. The Imperium is feudal and does not try to subsume and control everything in society, limiting itself to making sure planets don't break Imperial Law. So not fascist (though individual planets or parts of planets might be).

Excellent arguement sir, though refuting the framework of the arguement that i put forwards certainly helped!!.

So we have the view that the Imperium is clearly fascist, rebutted well by your argument that it is inherently not fascist.

This is the common resolution to this particular topic i find as both positions are correct based on different interpretations. Which is why i tried to put forwards a frame of reference to drive the debate.

It seems however the point remains somewhat moot since 'fascist' remains a disputed term.

Ah well...

I doubt the Imperial scholars recognise the phrase Fascism or Fascist or Human rights, or Nationalism for that matter.

So purely from our own view of it I'd take a look at a simple dictionary deffinition:

Fas·cism

n.
1. often Fascism
a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

Specifically, there is always going to various veiws about it one way or another, and because the far future renders many of the standard similiarities with existing (mostly) excepted fascist governments obsolete there is further disparities.

However 'Fascist' is one of the most overused epithets in the English language and I'd say few cases are more deserving than the Imperium.

Fascinating debate.

From my perspective, the Imperium unquestionably has many of the features of a Fascist state. However, I would argue that it lacks many of the underlying idealogical underpinnings found in what we currently understand to be "classic" fascism. Beyond venerating the Emperor and defending his legacy through any means necessary, the Imperium ostensibly lacks an underlying political ideaology.

The Imperium, while looking like a fascist state and acting like a fascist state, doesn't regard itself as such. Arguably a defining characteristic of a fascist government is that it regards itself as such! The Imperium simply believes that the measures it adopts are necessary to survive in an incredibly harsh universe.

As has already been pointed out, the powers that be within the Imperium probably aren't really conscious of viable alternative systems of government that could be adopted. (OK, there are democratic worlds or rebellions occasionally, but it's clear that the High Lords of Terra regard democracy as a pernicious irritation that only occurs on the planetary scale. I would suggest that it would never occur to them to consider applying democracy as a system of government on a galactic scale.) If, as has been already suggested, fascism is historically a reaction to other extremes of government, then, the Imperium isn't acting on the same historical impulses as recent fascist regimes.

Part of the unspoken dark attraction of 40k is that the Imperium is the harshest government in human history, one which daily commits horrible atrocities in order to survive, yet there is the horrific sense that because the alternatives are worse, they are justified in doing so.

Another point is that if the Imperium resembles a fascist state, it is through accident of history: it was originally intended by the Emperor to be something very different form its current form. (I suppose this happens to a lot of governments over time: they mutate into something totally unintended. Look at North Korea: what began as a far left ultracommunist state is now effectively an absolute monarchy masquerading as a communist state.)

Great thread! I've been thinking about this a little as well but I never got around to post anything about it.

Luddite said:

Alright, but where do you take this list from and who has put it together? When I studied 20th century history at the university our teachinger used a very different way to define fascism from other types of authorian movements and views that existed during the early 20th century.

Luddite said:

To be honest I didn't like this list at all and I don't really see how it would be of much use to identify something as fascist. Most of these points seem to be more about a what defines an un-democratic system as there are alot of basic stuff that needs to be done in a modern society if you want an authocratic system to work. In particular I can't see the points of 5, 8 and 13 as pretty unnecessary in any attempt to help us define if a system is fascist or not or for that matter to determin if a system if anyhing except sexist, secular or corrupt, and neither of these translates directly to if a system if fascist or not.

My thoughts on is that the Imperim is a very clear case of theocracy rather than a fascistic construction.

I personally don't think the Imperium would neatly fit any of the models we currently use to identify a type of government. It certainly has features of a fascist state and a theocracy, but ultimately it's a mess - a (an?) historical accident on a vast scale, with its masters just muddling through and doing what they can to keep it going.

This is not to dismiss any of the points raised so far! I think all arguments raised on this thread are excellent.

But the Imperium is going to resist easy pigeon-holing. Labels used to define pre-21st century governmental systems are likely to break down in defining the state of humanity in the 40k setting.

Plus as well, remember that the Imperium is an Empire of Empires: it consists of millions of seperate organisations, each of which would be at least the size of a 21st century state, with each one run differently:-

• The Ministorum is a Theocracy, which contributes towards Imperial society as a whole being theocratic.
• The Administration is a vast autocratic bureaucracy which enforces a tithe system which is effectively feudal in nature
• Individual planets are run by governors who are free to impose whatever style of government they wish, from the typical pure dictatorship through democracy to even weirder schemes.

In a way, defining the relationship between citizen and government is highly contextual in 40k, depending upon the world where the individual lives and the nature of the local Imperial hierarchy he operates within.

Gurkhal said:

Here: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BRI411A.html

Personally i don't neccessarily agree or disagree with these 14 characteristics.

What i do like is that they've come from and actual (admittedly subjective) assessment of the regimes themselves rather than the 'on paper' ideologies.

Luddite said:

I had a look at the site but I can't say that I was very impressed by it. For a start I'm not sure I agree that Franco, Pinochet or the guy over in Indonesia were really fascists, and even in the case of Hitler I would be a bit careful to label him a fascist as opposed to a national socialist, which is a bit different from fascism. Then again I'm well aware that commonly Franco and Hitler are counted as fascists so I won't cry a buckt over that one. Still I feel that it would probably be more giving to take a look at more "pure" fascist ideologies and organizations to get what characterizes fascism. And yes that will mean that we go to "paper ideologies" to a large extent but I think that it would probably be a bit more productice than this all to vague definition.