Fascist reading list?

[Anonymous No.17026913]

I want to put together a Fascist reading list. I want to get at least 100 different authors and 100 different books.

So far, I have:
>Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler (What’s the best English translation?)
>The Decline of the West (2 vol.) by Oswald Spengler
>Imperium by Francis Parker Yockey
>Revolt Against the Modern World by Julius Evola
>Western Civilization Bites Back by Jonathan Bowden
>The Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspail
>The Alternative by Sir Oswald Mosley
>Nomos of the Earth by Carl Schmitt

What would you guys add? Maybe some make a chart eventually.

[Anonymous No.17026929]

>>17026913
>literally not even got the The Doctrine of Fascism by Giovanni Gentile and Mussolini OR Marinetti's Fascist Manifesto
How serious about this are you, anon? Basic research!

[Anonymous No.17026932]

I would like William Luther Pierce but I think The Turner Diaries and Hunter are kind of low-brow fiction.

I was hoping Pierce has a non-fiction book that talks about his philosophy. Anyone knows if he has any?

[Anonymous No.17026936]

Evola called himself a supra-fascist and had nothing but criticism for the fascism he saw. Maybe you could spend your time critically thinking instead of trying to out-fascist your fellow nincompoopers. Or, better yet, make some friends and become a normal person

[Anonymous No.17026944]

>>17026929
Sorry, I really am pretty basic. But I’ll definitely check that. I was wondering if Mussolini had a major written work like Mein Kampf.

[Anonymous No.17026956]

>>17026936
I’m actually don’t consider myself a Fascist. I’m just researching it and want to create a reading list of primary sources. So works from actual Fascists.

[Anonymous No.17026957]

>>17026913
How about you read the Bible instead

[Anonymous No.17026966]

>>17026944
It's cool. Check out Ezra Pound and Wyndham Lewis, too. A good link between fascism and its literary origins.

[Anonymous No.17026971]

>>17026913
Why? Also jfc
>Spengler
>Evola
>Bowden
>Raspail
>Schmitt
None of those were fascists. Do you even know what fascism is?

[Anonymous No.17027009]

>>17026956
> Evola himself preferred to call himself a radical traditionalist, seeing most of the fascist movements and governments of the time, especially in Italy, as tepid bourgeois frivolity (the fascist authorities in turn saw him as a crank).

If you really are researching fascism I strongly hope you explore the angle of fascism as anti-capitalist-populism. Many on what I consider the actual "far-right" (extremist darwinism, libertarianism, capitalism) considered the Alt Right a leftist movement, and all ethno-nationalist movements to have a strain of leftism in them as well since they are essentially anti-competitive in blocking out other ethnic groups from markets and physical areas

[Anonymous No.17027012]

>>17026971
Their works are frequently cited by Fascists.

[Anonymous No.17027029]

>>17027012
You said
>So works from actual Fascists.
These weren't actual facists. Fascist-adjacent, to some extent. Evola even wrote books critical of fascism lmao. Spengler was no fan of fascism.

[Anonymous No.17027033]

For My Legionaries
Doctrine and Origins of Fascism
Mussolini's speeches
Doctrine of Fascism
Varieties of Fascism by Eugen Weber gives a good overview and includes selections from primary sources
Mazzini's works also give a good primer for the sort of thought that preceded the development of fascism
Understanding the philosophical development helps as well, check out Mussolini's Intellectuals by Gregor
Civic Foundations of Fascism by Riley is okay as well

Don't fall for the /lit/ esoteric fascism bs if you want an actual understanding of fascism. Evola was not a fascist per se and his works were not as influential in Italian Fascism as one might believe from how much he's shilled as a fascist. His doctrine of race was basically just adapted by Mussolini as an anti-materialistic version of National Socialist biological racism to appeal to Hitler.

In my opinion you can't really understand fascism without also understanding the historical circumstances. It's pretty specific to the 20th century.

>>17026944
>>17026956
You are actually retarded.

[Anonymous No.17027043]

>>17027029
>>17026936
Even though Evola was critical of what fascism became, his work is still useful for illuminating what fascism was, and what it could have been. I don't like him, personally, but I wouldn't say OP is wrong to have him on the list.

[Anonymous No.17027048]

>>17027033
Got any hot opinions on fascism anon? You seen very well-versed in it. also, why do you know so much about it?

[Anonymous No.17027061]

>>17027043
Sure, but OP wanted works from fascists. I do like him, and while he respected certain aspects of fascism, he was was still very critical of it, was never a fascist himself, and even defended himself in court against accusations of post-war fascist activity.

[Anonymous No.17027068]

>>17027061
http://www.fatuma.net/text/evola-autodifesa

[Anonymous No.17027118]

>>17026913
I would add The Disintegration of the System by Franco Freda.

[Anonymous No.17027194]

>>17027048
I am personally interested in it and chose to write a couple of my research papers this semester on the subject. I think it presents a very compelling alternative to liberal democracy, and its adaptation of idealism responds well to developments in socialism, capitalism, the failures of representative democracy, and overall social distress in a time when other ideologies had failed. The rejection of individualism and its inverted relationship between state and individual compared to liberal democracy is imo its most important element and also what makes it so alarming for people in contemporary society who fear a resurgence, since large-scale social cohesion in a densely populated and interconnected world requires an all-encompassing idea of the individual which cannot accommodate national or racial considerations. I'm skeptical as to whether it would be of any use nowadays, and it seems that people who get caught up in it as an ideology are basically impotently pontificating on the National Soul or what have you while certain other elements in society have progressed far past the stage of history in which such an idea even held water for more than a tiny portion of society, and they have created new conditions which the fascism of the 20th century doesn't address. For instance, the socialism Italian Fascism contended with looks very different from today, as does labor, technology, and simply the biggest issues facing society. We are in a different stage of development. While fascism in the 20th century responded to the shift away from traditional vestiges to a more highly developed capitalism, now we're moving from that full-on capitalism to a much more global, homogenized society coming to terms with whether such an existence is even desirable or possible. I also think that society still had room for the idealism of fascism when it first came about; today, any sort of idealism is nearly foreign to most people in society, so mobilizing people on such a basis is probably less likely now.

But anyways, I think studying fascism can be very informative as long as one approaches it without the expectation that it can solve the social problems of today. Understanding the fascist conception of the individual and the state, its attitude towards violence, its understanding of democracy and the failures of liberalism, why these ideas developed in the first place and what influenced them, why fascist regimes failed, etc. are all very interesting topics which you can learn a lot from and then apply the underlying principles and such to today and see what still stands and what didn't work.

[Anonymous No.17027239]

>>17026932
Can’t help you there, but isn’t it incredible that the US is turning into the US from The Turner diaries?
All the way down to using minorities as the enforcers of their new rules

[Anonymous No.17027323]

>>17026913
Imperium is just a 40s schizo post
I read it and he has some good arguments like on history(most of which is copied straight from Spengler) and against liberalism but the rest is just rambling.

[Anonymous No.17027328]

>>17026913
>So far, I have:
>>Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler (What’s the best English translation?)
Adolf Hitler was a National Socialist you absolute imbecile.

[Anonymous No.17027337]

>>17026956
If you are please don't spread the capitalism in decay bullshit, there's a good author who deboonks it I forget his name though

[Anonymous No.17027348]

>>17026932
Those are retarded /pol/tier books "le brown people are bad"
Add Jose Antonios Anthology instead

[Anonymous No.17027374]

>>17026913
It should go
>sorel, marinetti, selective readings of marx and proudhon
>junger and schmitt only from the conservative revolution
>primo de riviera
>contemporary neo-marxist culture critique (fisher, lasch, debord, etc)
>close it all with some dugin
Most modernists are pretty unnecessary, as we're in a whole different society compared to a few decades ago. You could pretty much skip everything you listed and get straight into the contemporary critique and dugin to be politically conscious.
>>17026929
this

[Anonymous No.17027383]

>>17027348
>>17027374
If you add José Antonio, don't forget about Ramiro Ledesma

[Anonymous No.17027401]

>>17026913
Good luck. Stick with theb Italians and Spaniards for your own sanity

[Anonymous No.17027760]

>>17027194
Thanks for the huge reply, very interesting and informative.

>its inverted relationship between state and individual compared to liberal democracy
Can you explain this to a brainlet? Not me but for a friend

[Anonymous No.17027946]

>>17027348
>>17027374
>>17027383
based spaniardbros
>>17027401
the french are good too, germany a little bit too, if you want that integral nationalism

[Anonymous No.17028028]

>>17027194
Would you look at that?A good post on my /lit/?No fucking way.....

[Anonymous No.17028929]

>>17026913
A James Gregor has some great secondary literature about the fascist philosophy

[Anonymous No.17028960]

>>17027194
I got one for you:
In your own words, and as succinctly as possible, explain fascism. Pretend I have never read a book that even tangentially brushes upon the subject.
It appears to me, that Fascism is the most amorphous, elusive, and misunderstood of the primary political ideologies. I used to identify as one before I realized that it involves the subsuming of pre-existing corporate entities for state use. Is this an accurate characterization? I have only heard this method of explaining fascism from far leftists.
>moderate right wingers think fascism=Authoritarianism
It is a strange bird indeed.

[Anonymous No.17028987]

>>17026936
>Evola called himself a supra-fascist
Just cope to evade responsibility for supporting the regime, like all those goody two shoes.
>Oh but I'm not a fascist
>I'm a SUPER FASCIST
>It's different, believe me
lmfao

[Anonymous No.17029003]

Can someone explain why western civilization is supposed to bite back?
It has been biting other civilizations for 300 years. Its about time the others have their vengeance.

[Anonymous No.17029027]

not fascism, better than fascism

[Anonymous No.17029043]

>>17026913
>half of the books read by OP are by non-fascists
>those are the only decent books in that list
wow

[Anonymous No.17029052]

>>17029027
Right wing socialism?
So basically socialism for the rich? Like when america bails out big corps and wall street

[Anonymous No.17029062]

>>17028987
It is a display of intellectual cowardice.

>I'm just soooo abstract that I am like, a super-version of x or y ideology

>>17029027
I consider myself a socially right wing fauxalist

[Anonymous No.17029146]

>>17029052
'Right wing' in the sense that it is nationalist and calls for putting the people (of the nation) first (ahead of foreigners). That is so clearly what should be the default for any government its bizarre it needs a specific name.

[Anonymous No.17029287]

>>17026929
Mussolini is irrelevant. Nothing he wrote is interesting in any way.

[Anonymous No.17029365]

>>17027760
>Can you explain this
Liberal democracy sees the individual as preceding society, while fascism views the state as preceding the individual. So for a liberal, the state only exists to serve the needs of the individual, and the responsibilities of the individual to the state and his community are limited. Fascism, however, views the individual outside of association with others as basically impossible; we only exist because of the State, which serves as a sort of over-soul, collecting and giving purpose to the souls of the masses. We live to serve the state, because our existence derives from it. In liberalism, the state exists to serve us, ensure our rights, etc. Much more responsibility is implied in the fascist view, along with a clear ideal of community and a strong sense that family underlies all. Liberalism is more value-free in that sense. This relationship is also where the authoritarian democratic element of fascism develops; we get these authoritarian, often repressive, violent regimes, but they see this as the embodiment of the will of the masses in the leading figure/party.
>>17028960
I would propose as a definition "A view of society which emphasizes the precedence of the state Soul over the individual soul," as I believe most of what sets fascism apart from other ideologies can be clearly traced back to this premise.
>subsuming of pre-existing corporate entities for state use
I would call this an accurate fact about what fascism entails, but it does not nearly "characterize" fascism.

The vague and all-encompassing view the average person has of fascism imo comes from the knee-jerk reaction of most people postwar (and more specifically when the Holocaust and Nazis gained precedence in people's considerations of the era). You had people conflating fascism with WWII, and trying to identify common threads between these regimes which they saw as resulting in atrocities. That's where you get people like Eco painting with a very broad brush and muddying the waters, and of course since the liberal democracies won out, they didn't really want to encourage treating an antithetical worldview seriously, and characterized it as irrational and reactionary and stopped there.

[Anonymous No.17029432]

>>17026913
Its more tangential but
>The Manifesto for Breaking the Financial Slavery to Interest by Gottfried Ferder

[Anonymous No.17029553]

>>17026971
What would you call Bowden?

[Anonymous No.17029560]

>>17026913
Half of these are not fascist

[Anonymous No.17029656]

>>17028960
No corpatism in fascist terms is like syndicalism and not "corporations" like used in America.

[Anonymous No.17029663]

>>17029287
>Mussolini shouldn't be included on a fascist reading list

[Anonymous No.17029726]

>>17029146
Every government does that already. What fascists want is something beyond. Something that can only be achieved by genocide and war.

[Anonymous No.17030019]

>>17029726
the U.S. doesn't it shill for cheap immigrant labor which in turn undercuts the American worker that has to do stuff legally.

[Anonymous No.17030249]

There should be different parts, for example

>Orthodoxy
>>Italy
Volpe, History of the Fascist Movement
Gentile, Origins and Doctrine of Fascism: With Selections from Other Works (complete works too)
Mussolini, Doctrine of Fascism (complete works, speeches too)
Rocco, The Political Doctrine of Fascism
Turati, Ragioni ideali di vita fascista


>>Germany
Hitler, Mein Kampf, Zweites Buch, Speeches, Letters and notes (ed. Maser)
Goebbels, Journal, Battle for Berlin and whatever you can find of him
Schmitt, especially Concept of Political, Legality and Legitimacy, State, Movement, People, The Führer protects the law, Land and Sea

then you can make stuff about
-the different currents that existed within the movements as opposed to the "orthodoxs" (the left wing, like Bombacci or Himmler, the more conservative, like idk, the artists such as Speer),
-diplomats/journos that visited the countries (Ward's I Know These Dictators, E. Ludwig, Chateaubriant's Geballte Kraft, Bernes' The universal aspects idk)
-precursors (like Sorel, D'Annunzio, the Freikorps, authors of the Konservative Revolution)
-volunteers of the Waffen SS (Degrelle is the GOAT), soldiers' letters (Last Letters from Stalingrad for example) or books (Corti's Few returned, La Maziere Captive dreamer)
-Spain (Primo de Rivera's writings which are GOAT, the JONS, stuff about Franco, about the war, about foreign volunteers like Eoin O'Duffy)
-Salazar's works and stuff about his regime
-other, lesser movements (Codreanu, Mosley, Petain, Arcand, people who didn't get the power, usually less interesting except if you're a Romanian, an Englishman, a Frenchman and whatever)
-post-WW2 movements (peronism)
-solid secondary sources about the history of the country under fascism/national-socialism and so on

[Anonymous No.17030306]

>>17027323
Why is it a schizo post? Did you read it? If you did, you saw the parallels to Spengler, so you shouldve also noticed the ones to Schmitt.

[Anonymous No.17030308]

>>17029432
>>17030249
oh yeah Feder and Schacht for Germany are essential.
Maybe GLR can be interesting for the American reader too.

>>17029027
poseur

>>17027374
>dugin
Lol, no.
Ilyin would be better. Also The Russian Roots of Nazism.

>>17027323
This.
And it also applies to a lot of neonazis or authors that are presented as the parangons of fascism sadly.
Go straight to the sources (and by that I mean the real ones, you will not "get" fascism from Marinetti and D'Annunzio or national-socialism from Jünger, Heidegger or Rosenberg, you'll get people that were only a small part of that time's intellectual milieu, and not even the most "orthodox" ones when you know more about the history of said movements) rather than reading shit-tier post-war stuff by people disconnected from reality.

[Anonymous No.17030366]

>>17029553
A radical traditionalist.

[Anonymous No.17030826]

>>17029365
>I would propose as a definition "A view of society which emphasizes the precedence of the state Soul over the individual soul," as I believe most of what sets fascism apart from other ideologies can be clearly traced back to this premise.
Okay, I agree, but this goes back to my point about how amorphous and vague it is. What is socialism? Workers owning the means of production. From each according blah blah. Simple. Fascism is basically a philosophy, with economic positions simply stemming from that.
Critique?

[Anonymous No.17031929]

>>17026913
>Imperium by Francis Parker Yockey
>The Decline of the West (2 vol.) by Oswald Spengler
>Revolt Against the Modern World by Julius Evola
>Fascist
>>>/pol/ will likely be a better place for your midwittery.

[Anonymous No.17032717]

>>17029553

[Anonymous No.17032826]

Why do all of you attempt to sound smart
it's so pathetic lol
>midwittery
you don't speak like this outside of the internet, at least i hope you don't

[Anonymous No.17032835]

>>17026913
Add Bardèche, Brasillach, Drieu la Rochelle.