As far as Pareto was concerned, human action is mostly non-logical in character,
and stems from non-rational sentiments and impulses: what he called underlying
‘residues’. In his most important political and sociological work, the Mind and
Societywhich he wrote in 1916, he distinguishes between Class I residues, inventive,
imaginative capacities, and Class II residues, conservative, persistent tendencies.
All government is government by an elite who use a combination of coercion
and consent. Class I residues predominate when ‘foxes’ are in control – manipulative
politicians who create consent – and Class II residues when violence is necessary.
Each of these residues has its strengths and weaknesses, and the ‘circulation of elites’
can be explained as ‘lions’ – those who rule through brute force – replace ‘foxes’.
He saw in Mussolini a politician with a lion-like character who had displaced wily
politicians.
Perhaps most important of all in analysing the intellectual roots of fascism was
the work of Michels (1876–1936), a disillusioned German socialist who gained an
academic position in Turin, and was greatly influenced by syndicalism. In 1911 he
published Political Parties.Here he argues that all societies and all organisations
are subject to ‘an iron law of oligarchy’ (i.e. a small group controlling the masses).
Struck by what he saw as the contrast between the official statements of the German
Social Democratic Party and the timidity of its political practice, he argued that
oligarchy is present even in parties apparently committed to the norms of democracy.
The fact that leaders are in practice autonomous from their followers derives from
the constraints of organisation. Although he wrote a good deal about psychology,
Michels argued that oligarchical tendencies are based upon organisational rather
than psychological factors. The complexity of organisations can only be grasped by
professional leaders who have communication skills, and who understand the rules
of elections and other external pressures. This leadership is made all the more
entrenched by what Michels regarded as the incompetence and emotional
vulnerability of their mass membership.
In 1914 Michels wrote a study of Italian imperialism and published widely on
politics and sociology. In 1930 he wrote the entry on ‘Authority’ for the
Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. He admired fascism and argued that, as with
Bolshevism, it was a reflection of the general tendency to oligarchy. Michels also
wrote a good deal on nationalism, with his later writings becoming increasingly
anti-democratic in tone (Beetham, 1977).Fascism in Germany
Nazism is, in our view, a form of fascism. Despite historical and cultural differences,
both Hitler and Mussolini saw striking similarities in each other’s regimes, and the
Nazis were greatly influenced by Mussolini’s theory and tactics. It is true that
Hitler’s movement was more extreme than that of Mussolini’s. Its racism was more
aggressive, its hatred of democracy more intensive, and its expansionism more
grandiose. However, as will become clear from the analysis of its features, it was
a form of fascism, and there is no need to take the position that the differences
between Hitler’s and Mussolini’s regimes outweighed their similarities.288 Part 2 Classical ideologies