Libertarianism vs. Fascism - Part One

1. Form of government

Fascists and libertarians fundamentally disagree on the very first point to be addressed. For some, the best form of government is a totalitarian one-party republic with themselves in power. For their part, others are often against the very existence of the state – many libertarians are advocates of the concept of anarchy. While not all are supporters of anarchy (many believe that there should still be a state that performs a legislative role and guarantees respect for property rights. The concept is called minarchism), no one is an advocate of the idea that there should be a strong state with an unchangeable one-party system.

2. Individual freedom

To understand how fascists understood freedom, we will turn to the most prominent fascist leader of the first half of the 20th century, Benito Mussolini. In his speech on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the Fascio di Combatimento (the organization preceding the National Fascist Party), the Duce stated: “The concept of freedom is not unconditional, because nothing in life is unconditional. Freedom is not a right, it is an obligation. It is not a gift, but a conquest; not universally available, but a privilege.”

This attitude towards individual freedom practically unties the hands of the state to act with its subjects as the party saw fit. The hypothesis that freedom is a “privilege” reached its apotheosis with Mussolini’s German counterpart – Adolf Hitler. It is precisely on the basis that freedom is not a right that the Führer seizes it en masse from anyone who is in any way considered “unfit”. The result – millions of victims and unprecedented suffering.

In this line of thought, fascists perfectly describe the statement: "A little tyranny is like saying touch on a pregnancy." But even if it does not lead to mass (or individual) murder, the taking away of any freedom is absolutely immoral for libertarians. For us, there are no people who are "more equal than others" - i.e. privileged to take away any freedom from anyone.

Let us now consider the right to property in more detail. It is one of the main prerequisites for the emergence of a market economy. Under fascism there is no mass nationalization of enterprises (as observed in the USSR and in Bulgaria after 1945, for example); i.e. one of the most important conditions for the development of a market economy is present, namely the right to private property. However, what is wrong with the system?

As Ayn Rand said: “Under fascism, citizens retain the responsibilities of property ownership without the freedom to dispose of it and without any of the advantages of ownership.” In practice, fascism provides only a nominal right to property, especially for companies, which, although private, are obliged to carry out central plans.

This is the complete opposite of libertarian principles, according to which the right to property is completely inviolable. Property is individual, not “group”[1], and only the one who owns it can derive benefits from it. The right to property is a particularly important postulate for libertarianism, because it is precisely this, as noted, that is the catalyst for free trade.

3. Form of trade

Fascism, as an ideology that denies the economic doctrines of both Marxism and free capitalism, preaches the economic system of the so-called "third way". In "Liberalism", Ludwig von Mises defines the economic doctrine of the fascists: "... generally anti-liberal, and its policy - completely interventionist ..."

But why does the Austrian economist hold such an opinion?

Fascists defend the idea that domestic production should not only be protected, but also supported. Moreover, the country should be independent of imports; i.e. they preach a system of autarky. Italian fascists put this into practice – they buy up bankrupt banks (the banks of Sicily, Naples and Rome) and support state-owned enterprises through direct injections (a wonderful example of this is the financing of Gio Ansaldo & Co. with 400 million lire).

Another important line along which the fascists limited the freedom of both trade and entrepreneurship was the application of the doctrine of corporatism. Aiming to eliminate the contradictions between employers, the state and workers, it practically destroyed unions and largely limited worker mobility. Private enterprises themselves were also state-regulated and subordinated to the central plan of the party, which, through state cartels in every sector, had a hand in the entire economy of the country.

The so-called "Battle for Wheat" is also infamous. This is a state policy, completely in the spirit of Mussolini's autarky, aimed at turning Italy into a country independent of wheat imports. The steps taken to win the "battle" are to ban imports with high tariffs and support domestic farmers. In the short term, this sharply increases prices, because domestic production cannot satisfy demand. Driven by the motive of winning the state subsidy and guaranteed purchase prices, Italian farmers begin to sow in uncultivated areas. But due to Italy's inability to import fertilizers, the quality of the produce drops significantly. Even in the 1940s, when wheat production almost completely satisfies domestic demand, the price of wheat products remains high as a result of the prohibited imports. We must also take into account the hidden price for Italians, expressed in state subsidies for farmers and a guaranteed price for their produce.

No less important is the Vatican's funding policy. The Fascists needed the support of the church to stay in power. In return, the Pope received significant privileges, including financial ones - Mussolini made probably the most generous donation to the Holy See of his time, in the amount of 500 million British pounds.

Ultimately, the fascists managed, through increased government spending, to maintain a quasi-autarkic system of trade that supported successful manufacturers, farmers and other select industries (heavy industry was the most favored), selected groups in society, and, of course, the fascist military policy that resulted in perhaps the most unsuccessful campaigns of World War II – the invasions of the Balkan Peninsula and Egypt.

In comparison, libertarians are against the economic policies preached by fascism. They support the idea of completely free trade – both domestic and foreign – of the laissez-faire type. This means not only the absence of barriers to entrepreneurs, but also the non-participation of the state in supporting the private sector through subsidies or regulatory restrictions for “political friends”. Another point where the two teachings diverge dramatically.

Did you like it? Take a minute to support the EKIP on Patreon!