social science and public policy
Society
Transaction 
SOCIAL
SCIENCE
AND MODERN
(Volume 44, Number 4)
social science and public policy
Fascism in the Twenty-First Century?
Walter Laqueur
W
hat are the prospects of fascism (neo-fas-
cism, neo-Nazism) in Europe and North
America in the twenty-first century? Less
than brilliant, as far as one can look ahead, with, as
usual, certain reservations concerning above all East-
ern Europe. What if the Western democratic regimes
should prove unable to cope with the challenges facing
them? There is in many European countries growing
distrust towards politicians and political parties. But
if the achievements since World War II such as the
welfare state are in trouble, the public is on the whole
too mature to believe that neo-fascism could offer
solutions. If Europe is in decline, people will find it
extremely difficult to believe that parties proclaiming
extreme nationalism can bring salvation. The develop-
ment in many European countries of parallel societies
consisting of recent immigrants seems to present more
promising ground for fascist ambitions. In several coun-
tries, including Scandinavia, Holland, and Belgium,
anti-immigration parties have come into being. But it
would be quite inaccurate to call them fascist or even
of the extreme right; they are nationalist inasmuch
as they want to keep foreigners out who do not want
to accept the traditional values of the country and to
become integrated in its society.
The fate of these parallel societies may well be one of
the main political issues in Europe in the years to come.
In some countries these ghettoes are small and seem not
to constitute a threat to the existing order, especially if
one ignores the high birthrate among the immigrants.
If so, it will be too early to mobilize anti-immigration
political parties. Elsewhere, as in France, the foreign
element has grown to such an extent that a confrontation
seems no longer within the realm of practical politics
and even those very hostile to the immigrants have to
consider ways and means to attain peaceful coexistence
including painful concessions. What makes the task of
48 SOCIETY • MAY/JUNE 2007
would-be fascist parties in Europe even more difficult
is that they have no monopoly as far as the immigra-
tion issue is concerned. No government, no political
party favors unlimited immigration, all are aware of
the urgency and seriousness of this issue.
All this is not to deny that the immigrant issue is hav-
ing a profound impact on European politics, an impact
likely to grow even further in the years to come. But
would it be correct to call fascist even the French Na-
tional Front or its British or Italian equivalents? None
of them fulfils the “fascist minimum,” there is no leader,
no party aiming to establish a fascist (or totalitarian)
state, no storm troops, no street fighting, no desire to
go to war and achieve territorial expansion. They may
share certain ideological and political features with his-
torical fascism, but they are not its legitimate children.
The only true fascists (or Nazis) are a few ideologues
writing or speech making more or less in isolation and
also some sects found in many countries of Europe who
do not carry any significant political weight. Popu-
list movements on the other hand, may have a much
brighter future in the years to come in various parts of
Europe as well as the Americas. They are notoriously
difficult to define in view of their inchoate character.
They can with equal ease turn left as well as right or
even combine the two as in Venezuela. They are anti-
capitalist, anti-American but not quite socialist (more
in their rhetoric than in their practice), they claim to act
on behalf of the downtrodden popular masses but are
at least equally interested in the perpetuation of their
own rule. Their anti-imperialism resembles a little that
of early Italian fascism with its belief in “proletarian
nations” subjugated by the plutocrats. Are they national
socialist? Only vaguely so, their ideological beliefs are
neither clearly defined nor deeply held.
It is difficult to write with equal conviction about the
future of fascism in Russia and Eastern Europe. Under
 social science and public policy
Putin, Russia’s economic situation and also its politi-
cal clout have greatly improved owing to the greatly
increased price of oil and natural gas. The country is
more stable than it was at any time since the fall of
the Soviet Union. But the price that has been paid
was the erosion and sometimes the disappearance of
the freedoms gained under Gorbachev. Some Western
observers have argued that Russia could be on the road
to fascism; such judgment could be premature but the
danger certainly exists, what with the political parties
quite powerless, most of the media and the judiciary
mere tools of the government. While fifteen years ago
there was much support for democracy, there is little of
it now; the prevailing mood is nationalist. The gurus of
the extreme right such as Alexander Dugin, who were
considered even ten years ago at best eccentrics and
were not taken seriously have become respectable, even
fashionable figures listened to with attention by sections
of the intelligentsia and supported by the military.
A survey of the extreme right should include the
opposition Communist party which in this respect has
no quarrels with the right (“Russia for the Russians”).
The mood resembles somewhat the situation in Ger-
many (and Italy) after World War I, the feeling that the
country had been humiliated, lost its great power status.
Hence the feeling of revenge, the urge to punish the
ingrates—the republics that have chosen separatism,
and above all Russia’s traditional enemy—America, as
well as the Europeans under American influence.
What prevented so far a determined offensive and
major successes on the part of the extreme right in
Russia is the fact that it is difficult to outflank Putin
from the right in view of his foreign policy of nation-
alist assertion. Furthermore, the extreme right-wing
and neo-fascist groups are divided into many sects and
factions. Moreover, it is not at all easy to establish with
any certainty which of them are bona fide superpatriots
and which are sponsored or assisted by the FSB (Fed-
eral Security Service) (the former KGB). As in the last
decade of tsarist rule the secret police infiltrated the
extremist groups and to a certain extent took a hand in
their operations. On occasion these groups supported
by the police escaped the secret tutelage; this happened
before 1914 and it could happen now.
The leading groups among the Russian extreme
right and neo-fascists have been mentioned earlier on.
Some are pagan in orientation, others sympathize with
the reactionary wing of the Russian Orthodox church.
Some favor a fascist-Communist alliance, others favor
an Eurasian doctrine or all kinds of quasi-religious
ideas, occultism and astrology. Some favor an alliance
with Muslim countries including Turkey—but how to
combine this with deep-seated Russian xenophobia,
which is directed last not least against native Muslim
subjects and immigrants from Central Asia and the
Caucasus. Thousands of young Russians parade fairly
regularly through the streets of Moscow shouting “Heil
Hitler” and “Sieg Heil”; their gurus claim that only fas-
cism and Nazism offer a way out of Russia’s present
misery and humiliation. It will be difficult to generate
among them and their supporters much enthusiasm for
a strategic alliance with Islam.
Yet with all this it is difficult to envisage a great fu-
ture for neo-fascism in Russia unless a total breakdown
should take place. Openly attacking the current politi-
cal leadership would not be too popular at the present
time, attacking Caucasian fruit and vegetable dealers
on Moscow markets, killing occasionally a few for-
eigners, does not amount to a major policy campaign.
Most Jews have left Russia; those who remain are no
longer the great demonic enemy. The neo-Nazis gener-
ate a paroxysm of hatred against America which, they
believe is the source of all evil and brought about the
downfall of their country. But America is distant and
the dangers facing Russia today emanate from other,
nearer quarters. There is no danger that the Americans
will take over the Caucasus, Siberia, or the Russian Far
East. Some spokesmen of the Russian far right have
already reached the conclusion that Islam is a greater
danger than America. Solzhenitsyn predicted ten years
ago that the dwindling Russian population would be
drowned in a sea of Muslims. Even the most enthusi-
astic advocates of an alliance with Islam among the
Russian right-wing extremists such as the entertainer
Eduard Limonov do not want their country to be the
junior partner in such a strategic alliance.
The new Russia has great fossil fuel reserves and an
impressive number of atomic weapons, but this is not
a sufficiently strong base for a return to superpower
status. While Moscow prospers the rest of the country
is depopulated, about 30 percent of the population of
Siberia, the Russian North and Far East has been leav-
ing during the last decade; more than 11,000 villages
and small towns have ceased to exist. At the same time,
the birth rate of the Muslim minority—about 20 mil-
lion—is considerably higher than the Russian and it is
projected that one out of three recruits to the Russian
army will soon be of Muslim origin. Where will the
FASCISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY? 49
social science and public policy
borders of Russia be by the middle of this century? where neo-Nazis have been successful on the local level
In these circumstances, the prospects of Russian even though there were virtually no foreigners in these
fascism, even a purely defensive fascism, are less than villages and little towns.
brilliant. While a nationalist dictatorship based on the Quite often success or failure of extreme right-wing
FSB and the army seems quite likely, this will be a far populist forces depends on the presence (or absence)
cry from both historical fascism and neo-fascism. There of a charismatic leader. While Joerg Haider headed this
will be very rich people in this system of corporate camp in Austria it was doing well but when internal
capitalism but as under historical fascism, political disputes caused disruption and eventually Haider’s
power will not be in their hands. exclusion their influence began to decline even though
The extreme right and, to a lesser extent, neo-fas- the “objective factors” that had favored their rise con-
cist groups appeared on the East European political tinued to exist. Skinheads (Glatzen in East Germany)
scene after these countries gained independence in the played an important role in the emergence of neo-fascist
1990s. The greater Romania party became the second groups in Russia, East Germany, and Hungary; they
largest in the country following the elections of 2000, provided the footfolk, which on the soccer playing
in Poland “Self Defense” and grounds and on other localities
the “League of Polish families” and occasions, provoked violent
were represented in the govern- The rise of religious funda- clashes with the police and their
ment in 2006. Similar forces mentalism in various parts other enemies whoever these
were active in Hungary (Group might be. They played to some
for a Hungarian Future and of the world was perhaps extent the role of the Nazi SA
Justice and Life party) as well the most important single (Sturn Abteilung) in the late
as in Serbia. After Romania and
Bulgaria joined the European
development influencing 1920s and 1930s.
The Skinheads had their
Union, the extreme right in the national as well as interna- kind of uniform and subcul-
European parliament was strong
enough to form a caucus of
tional politics during the ture but there were profound
differences. Whereas original
their own similar to that of the last years of the twentieth Nazism and fascism had been
Social Democrat and Christian century and thereafter. based on a doctrine of sorts,
Democrat parties. The political the motive force in the case of
and social base on which these the Skinheads was free-floating
groups developed differed only slightly from country violence and aggression which (like populism) could
to country. In common was the dissatisfaction with turn in different directions. Their violent slogans were
economic and social conditions—while the country meant to shock, they were not based on deep political
as a whole had made progress, some sections of the conviction. There was yet another obstacle that makes
population had done much better than others. the further spread of neo-fascism in Eastern Europe
The political ambitions of the nationalists were not difficult and this is the fact that the countries of East-
fulfilled. The Hungarians continued to worry about the ern Europe have become part of the European Union.
ethnic Hungarians outside their country (in Slovakia However much the radical forces of the right may
and Romania), the Romanians had similar complaints, resent this, there are too many common interests with
and the Serbs were deeply unhappy about the disap- the rest of Europe that cannot be ignored, and there is
pearance of Yugoslavia and the fate of their fellow Serbs growing dependence not only in the economic field.
in Kosovo and Bosnia. Anti-Semitism, which had been A victory of neo-fascist forces in one of these East
an important factor in some of these countries before European countries would almost automatically lead
World War II, had not disappeared but in view of the to its exclusion and this they cannot afford, unless, of
small number of Jews remaining, other enemies (such course the European Union ceases to exist.
as the Roma gypsies) largely took their place. However, The rise of religious fundamentalism in various parts
there are more than a few instances showing that neo- of the world was perhaps the most important single de-
fascism or neo-Nazism can appear even when outside velopment influencing national as well as international
enemies are not present. One example is East Germany politics during the last years of the twentieth century

50 SOCIETY • MAY/JUNE 2007

 social science and public policy
and thereafter. It was also the most important factor
affecting the fate of neo-fascism and neo-Nazism espe-
cially outside Europe. It has been noted earlier that the
term fundamentalism is an imperfect one but for want
for a better term it will be used to represent a radical,
militant usually fanatical movement trying to impose
its beliefs on others by force.
The issue of “Islamic fascism” has figured promi-
nently in recent years and the question arises whether
this was a new reality or mere defamation by the
enemies of Islam. As far as can be established, the
term was first used, albeit not frequently, in Western
textbooks on the Middle East in the early 1960s;
the well-known French Marxist Orientalist Maxime
Rodinson used the term in the 1970s with regard to
the Khomeini revolution (“archaic fascism”) and the
British orientaliat Malise Ruthven wrote about it in
1990. The first detailed discussion as to whether the
term was legitimate was contained in Ruthven’s book
when it first appeared. But not only Westerners applied
the term; Khomeini also used it (referring to Saddam
Hussein) and also his successor Khatami.
The origins of this general phenomenon can be
traced back, in part at least to the so-called “clerical
fascism” of the 1930s. There is a world of difference
between Austria in 1934 and Iran in 2007 (Austria
under Dollfuss and Schuschnig was far more Christian
than fascist) but some of the basic questions were raised
even at that early date. Was it true that fascism and
religion were incompatible because both were holistic
weltanschauungen (world views) laying claim to the
whole human being in all respects? Furthermore, a
fascist religious synthesis was said to be impossible be-
cause all varieties of fascism were deeply nationalistic;
whereas modern secular nationalism was considered
irrelevant by orthodox religion. However, it gradually
appeared that while this may have been true on the
abstract level, it did not apply in the real world. The
Muslim Brotherhood for instance (and in our days the
militant Hizb ul Tahrir or the Palestinian Hamas and
the Lebanese Hezbollah) rejected secular nationalism
and advocated the Khalifat—a Muslim world without
borders. In their daily activities they found it not at
all difficult to combine fanatical religious belief with
militant nationalism. The present Iranian leadership
with all its religious fanaticism also aims with great
vigor at the domination of the whole area of the Persian
Gulf and beyond, not by Islam but by the Iranian state
and never made a secret of it.
A German Catholic writer named Edgar Alexander
(Edgar Alexander Emmerich) published an interesting
work in Switzerland in 1937 entitled the Hitler Mythos,
which was translated into English and republished after
World War II in which he compared National Social-
ism and “Mohammedanism” and found similarities
between the two. In this book he stressed all along the
cardinal importance of hatred and fanaticism in the
Nazi movement; the strong appeal to national and social
resentment. He referred frequently to Hitler’s Moham-
medanism, but made it clear that this referred only to
external organizational forms, to mass psychological
effects and militant fanaticism. Alexander believed that
Mohammed’s religion was based on sincere, authentic
religious fanaticism combined with political impulses
whereas Hitler’s political religion and its fanaticism had
different sources. Could a religious regime be fascist?
This question has been asked many times since.
The Slovak regime during World War II was au-
thoritarian and an ally of Nazi Germany but not really
fascist. In Franco’s Spain there was a fascist party (the
Falange) but it did not amount to very much; there
were also other political forces. The country was more
similar to an old fashioned military dictatorship than
a modern fascist regime. Argentina under Peron was
considered by some political scientists to be fascist but
this view was not widely accepted because with all its
populist elements it was more in the tradition of Latin
American caudillos than of Hitler and Mussolini. On
the other hand, it is not difficult to find strong religious
elements in certain European fascist movements, not at
all in consonance with the pagan influences in Nazism
or Mussolini’s anticlericalism. Romania is another
good example; priests took a prominent part in the
activities of the Legion of the Archangel Michael (later
the Iron Guard), and the same is true with regard to
the regime of the Ustasha in Croatia. The fascist Rex-
ists in Belgium were originally the leading Catholic
youth movement in the country. Sir Oswald Mosley,
the British fascist leader, wrote after the war that his
movement would have been far more successful if it
had been more religious. One could also refer in this
context to Father Coughlin in the United States in the
1930s and the Reverend Gerald Smith who believed
in the coexistence of a Christian spiritual revolution
and fascism.
Fascism was less monolithic than Communism; there
were significant differences in its doctrine and practice
from country to country and coexistence with militant
FASCISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY? 51
social science and public policy
religion was by no means ruled out in principle or in
practice. Fascism made some inroads in the Middle East
in the 1930s, in Egypt, Syria, as well as Iraq, but these
were secular movements and with the defeat of the Axis
powers in World War II their influence waned. Colonel
Nasser’s pan-Arab dictatorship in Egypt had common
features with fascism—the monopoly of a state party,
the role of the leader, of propaganda, strict censorship,
arbitrary police rule. But all things considered it was a
modern form of old-fashioned military dictatorship and
after Egypt’s defeat in the war of 1967 and Nasser’s
death the attraction of Nasserism, considerable at one
time, waned and eventually vanished.
Following the failure of secular nationalism in the
Arab world the turn came of religious fundamentalism.
How helpful is the label “Islamic Fascism” with regard
to radical Islamists whether in power or in opposition?
There are some striking parallels with fascism—the
populism, the belief that they are the possessors of the
sole truth (“Islam is the answer”), the opposition to
democracy and liberalism, anti-Semitism and, in gen-
eral, its aggressive and expansionist character. Islam
as far as they are concerned is not only a religion but
is an all comprehensive political and social order from
which no deviation is permitted and which is not given
to reform or change. While it lacks a single Fuehrer or
Duce there is the spiritual leader (or collective lead-
ership) and their appointees fulfilling a similar role.
While there is no political party that has a monopoly
of power the mosque fulfils a similar function as far as
the mobilization of the masses is concerned and also
their ideological indoctrination.
At the same time there are differences that should not
be overlooked. Fascism was a European phenomenon,
modern dictatorships outside Europe such as Japan in
the 1930s and after were bound to develop on some-
what different lines according to historical and cultural
traditions as well as political conditions. The age of
fascism came to an end in 1945; since then there has
been neo-fascism and neo-Nazism, which also differ
in certain respects from their historical predecessor.
Radical Islamism could be interpreted as a post-fascist
movement but such a label tends to exaggerate the role
of its European predecessor and to downplay the spe-
cific homegrown, in other words the Islamic elements.
Hitler and Mussolini did not engage in Jihad and did
not want to impose the shari’a.
Political movements and governments may be
extremely violent, even barbarous and genocidal. Pol
52 SOCIETY • MAY/JUNE 2007
Pot’s regime in Cambodia is an example but this does
not necessarily make them fascist. There is a great
deal of evil in the world and it cannot possibly be sub-
sumed under one label, brought on by one common
denominator. The use of the Islamic Fascism label is
of doubtful validity, which does not mean that all who
protest it do so for the right reasons. One of the main
arguments against the use of the term has been that
it is deeply offensive to Muslims all over the world
and especially in the Middle East. Whereas “liberal”
or “secular” might cause offense there, the term fas-
cism (al fashiyye and al naziyyeh) has never been, nor
have Hitler and Mussolini ever been considered great
evildoers. The negative connotations connected with
fascism are purely European and have never extended
to Asia, Africa, and certainly not to the Middle East.
There are various good reasons to find the term Islamic
fascism wanting but the argument that it might cause
great offense outside Europe and North America is not
among them.
It ought to be mentioned, at least in passing, that
the issue of fascism and religion and their relationship
in the contemporary world, while most acutely posed
by the appearance of radical Islamism, is by no means
limited to this group. It is discussed, to give but one
example in connection with the Indian RSS (the Indian
Volunteers Union), a mass movement established some
eighty years ago but still very active. Like the Muslim
Brotherhood they believe that their Hindu religion is
not just a religion but also a way of life. Their structure
is hierarchical, they are less rigid in their outlook—op-
posing, for instance, the caste system—but like other
fundamentalist groups have engaged on occasion in
violence, including apparently Gandhi’s murder. The
RSS has been labeled fascist (“saffron fascism” in
accordance with the color of their uniforms) by its en-
emies, but such classification seems even more doubt-
ful than in the case of the Islamists; Hindutva (Hindu
nationalism) is less aggressive than the doctrine of the
Islamists and they have accepted the ground rules of
democracy. When their political party (the BJP, the
Indian People’s party) was voted out of power they
accepted the verdict.
To summarize our findings and arguments: Fascism
was the misbegotten child of a certain historical period
and as this period now belongs to the past, the chances
for a second coming of a movement or movements
along the same patterns are highly unlikely, above all
in Europe but also in other parts of the world. Fascism
 social science and public policy
was no more than a modern form of aggressive dicta-
torship making effective use of both propaganda and
terror, and dictatorships are certainly not going to dis-
appear from the face of the earth. In popular language,
fascism has become a synonym for particularly brutal,
inhuman form of dictatorship, the ultimate expression
of barbarism.
To say that historical fascism is a thing of the past,
unfortunately, does not mean that movements and
regimes of a similar barbaric character but different
in inspiration and motivation as well as in its outward
forms may not reappear. It does not mean that the
kingdom of freedom, democracy and human rights
has prevailed. On the contrary, it is quite possible that
murderous forces even worse and more dangerous
than fascism may confront humanity in the twenty-first
century what with the appearance of weapons of mass
destruction. The executioners of Nazism had to go from
village to village, from house to house to find and kill
their victims. In the age of weapons of mass destruction
in the hands of fanatics wholesale murder has become
so much easier and the number of its victims could be
even larger in the future. The survival of freedom and
democratic institutions in this new age is as much in
the balance as it ever was.
Walter Laqueur is senior adviser of the Center for Strategic
and International Studies in Washington DC. He had been
a long-time director of the Wiener Library in London, and
editor of the Journal of Contemporary History, the Wash-
ington Papers, and Washington Quarterly. He was professor
for many decades at the Universities of Brandeis, Harvard,
Tel Aviv, and Georgetown. His most recent book is The Last
Days of Europe: The Changing Face of a Continent.

Biomedicalization of Alcohol Studies

“ Dr. Midanik gives us here a lucid and fair-minded exploration of the ideolo-
gies which shape today’s alcohol research in Biomedicalization of Alcohol
Studies. It deserves to be read by absolutely everyone engaged in such work,
whatever their parent discipline, and also by all those authorities who make
the funding decisions.
”
—Griffith Edwards, National Addiction Centre and editor, Addiction

Biomedicalization of Alcohol Studies

Lorraine T. Midanik
This book describes, assesses, and critiques biomedicalization and its
influence as a larger social trend on the health field and specifically in the
area of alcohol research, policy, and programs. This volume will stimulate
discussion of the processes by which social problems, and specifically
alcohol issues, are framed, managed, and studied. It will hold particular
interest for researchers and students in the areas of alcohol studies,
social science, and social welfare.
Lorraine Midanik is a professor at the School of Social Welfare,
University of California, Berkeley.
ISBN: 978-0-202-30835-7 (cloth) 2006 181 pp. $39.95

transaction Available at bookstores worldwide

Publisher of Record in International or direct from the publisher.
Social Science Toll free (US only)
Rutgers—The State University of New Jersey
35 Berrue Circle 1-888-999-6778 or fax 732-748-9801
Piscataway, NJ 08854-8042 www.transactionpub.com

FASCISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY? 53