Listen to the article
Fascism, as a term, often evokes the notorious figures of the 20th century: Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco and Antonio de Oliveira Salazar. Rarely, if ever, does the name “Plato” enter the discussion. Yet, the philosophical musings of this ancient Greek thinker carry resonances with the same ideologies that many find abhorrent in modern contexts.
The Essence of Fascism: Insights From Benito Mussolini
In contemporary media, there is an increasing tendency to label those with conservative views as “fascists.” However, to genuinely understand the term’s meaning, it is crucial to refer to the thoughts of an authoritative figure associated with far-right ideologies. One such figure is Benito Mussolini, often known as “Il Duce.”
In his influential treatise The Doctrine of Fascism, Mussolini delineates that fascist ideology is fundamentally “anti-individualistic.” He posits that while the fascist paradigm is rooted in the state’s primacy, it also emphasizes the individual’s alignment with the state. In a more assertive stance, he proclaims that neither individuals nor collective entities (be they political parties, associations, unions, or classes) should exist outside the state’s ambit.
Continuing his exposition, Mussolini critiques renowned liberal thinkers such as Jules Simon, Wilhelm von Humboldt, and Jeremy Bentham. He states, “If liberalism signifies the individual, then fascism signifies the State.” This declaration underscores fascism’s collectivist nature, which advocates for the curtailment of individual freedoms in favor of the nebulous concept of the “common good”—a notion that, according to Mussolini, only the state is competent to define.
Mussolini ardently champions a state that consolidates, oversees, harmonizes, and simultaneously moderates the interests of all social strata, ensuring their protection. Succinctly put, his philosophy can be encapsulated in the phrase: “Everything within the state, nothing against the state, nothing outside the state,” which he pronounced in the Chamber of Deputies on May 26, 1927.
However, Mussolini’s reign was not a solitary endeavor. He relied heavily on the backing of bureaucrats, business magnates, and, crucially, the military apparatus, all of which constitute the so-called “corporatist state.”
Platonic Fascism: Tracing Ideological Foundations
What possible connection could there be between the ancient philosopher Plato and modern political ideologies like fascism? Isn’t Plato renowned as one of the foundational figures in philosophy, introduced to students in high school classrooms? As it happens, many of the tenets championed by Mussolini find echoes, albeit in a more rudimentary form, in Plato’s writings. In his seminal work, The Republic, Plato outlines his vision for an ideal society termed the “kallipolis.” Central to this vision is an oligarchy overseen by philosopher kings and their elite cohorts. In theory, this structure ensures that the wisest among the citizenry ascend to leadership, predicated on the belief that the common populace is ill-equipped for self-governance.
Beneath the philosopher kings are the guardians–essentially soldiers–tasked with territorial expansion and safeguarding the “polis” or city-state from external threats. However, this conception is idealistic. In a more pragmatic light, these guardians primarily shield the interests of the oligarchic elite.
At the base of this societal hierarchy lay the producers: workers and merchants deemed lacking in insights into virtues, beauty, and the common good. To maintain dominion over this class, Plato suggests that philosopher kings propagate “noble lies,” such as fabricating claims about the divine lineage of the oligarchs, positioning them as descendants of Greek deities. Intriguingly, Aristotle, Plato’s most illustrious student, believed manual labor was the purview of slaves. Additionally, Plato’s apprehension towards art, seen as a mere imitation (“mimesis”) of reality, denotes a stance that it could potentially taint minds, necessitating stringent censorship.
The Platonic State epitomizes centralization. Power is consolidated in the philosopher kings who wield control over virtually every facet of life, from production and recreation to the pedagogy shaping young minds, molding them into conformist, obedient subjects. The individual, in Plato’s worldview, is subsumed by the overarching city-state and collective welfare, reminiscent of Mussolini’s ethos. However, the “polis” isn’t an autonomous entity that thinks, reasons, or acts; it’s a euphemistic term representing the interests of the oligarchic elite. It’s intriguing to ponder the practical implications of such a system.
The Iranian State: Parallels with Plato’s Republic
The Islamic Republic of Iran exhibits numerous characteristics reminiscent of Plato’s envisioned Republic. Foremost among these parallels are the theocratic elite—the Mullahs—seen as possessing a divinely ordained duty to shepherd the masses along the path of righteousness. In pragmatic terms, the role of this ruling class encompasses crafting narratives and mythologies, all while extracting value from the productive sectors of society. Any challenge to the state’s overarching interests is met with swift retribution.
Subsequently, there are the stalwarts of the Islamic Revolution—the Pasdaran or Revolutionary Guards—who are tasked with defending against perceived external threats, particularly from the United States, and maintaining domestic power through force. These zealous guardians adopt an ends-justify-the-means approach; hence, practices like censorship and enforcement by the morality police are deemed essential. Their ethos echoes the sentiment: nothing outside of the state.
Lastly, there are the everyday Iranians—workers and merchants—who find themselves distanced from the tumultuous theocratic agendas and holy wars. However, they are inexorably entwined in a system that subverts individual freedoms, all purportedly for the greater collective good. In candid terms, this collective good invariably emerges as state-defined and imposed, making the state akin to an all-powerful, unyielding Leviathan.
