What do you think?
Rate this book
Revolutionary Fascism
Benito Mussolini (1893 – 1945) is the living image of Fascism and one of the most well known historical figures ever, the antonomasia of a Dictator: nevertheless few are the ones aware that early in the 20th century he was the coming man of the Italian Revolutionary Socialism, headed to represent the Socialist Party, in which everyone had high hopes for the overthrowing of the so-called “bourgeois system”, when Socialism was still revolutionary and hostile to Capitalism.
Lenin said of him: “in Italy, comrades, in Italy there is only a Socialist capable of guiding the people towards the revolution, Benito Mussolini”, soon after the Duce would lead a revolution, but a Fascist one…
So, why did he become a Fascist after wall? Has he really betrayed Socialism as his critics accused him of doing? Or was Fascism the genial and natural outcome of a Socialist’s evolution, of a charismatic mass leader, towards the real revolution?
In “Revolutionary Fascism” Erik Norling, author of “Blood in the Snow: The Russo-Finnish War” (Shelf Books, 2001), acquaints us not only with the Revolutionary and Socialist roots of primeval Fascism but also describes the Italian Social Republic period, at the end of the war, when these values reemerged in its utmost purity.
Authored by Erik Norling
Prologue by Francisco Calderon
Supplement by Jaime Nogueira Pinto
Lenin said of him: “in Italy, comrades, in Italy there is only a Socialist capable of guiding the people towards the revolution, Benito Mussolini”, soon after the Duce would lead a revolution, but a Fascist one…
So, why did he become a Fascist after wall? Has he really betrayed Socialism as his critics accused him of doing? Or was Fascism the genial and natural outcome of a Socialist’s evolution, of a charismatic mass leader, towards the real revolution?
In “Revolutionary Fascism” Erik Norling, author of “Blood in the Snow: The Russo-Finnish War” (Shelf Books, 2001), acquaints us not only with the Revolutionary and Socialist roots of primeval Fascism but also describes the Italian Social Republic period, at the end of the war, when these values reemerged in its utmost purity.
Authored by Erik Norling
Prologue by Francisco Calderon
Supplement by Jaime Nogueira Pinto
144 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2011
2 people are currently reading
108 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
April 12, 2023
More of an examination of the events of the Fascist movement than a biography. It is surprisingly honest about the merits and courage of the Italian as they wrestled their country from the communist parasites that sought to violate it.
September 20, 2016
This is a very interesting book. Norling is a neofascist; and the translation is just awful, like put through a google translate grinder. Norling is interested in tracing the current pan-european, left-fascism back to the fascism of San Sepolcro and to the RSI, the Social Republic of Salò. His claims that fascism was neither left nor right, but transcended both; and that there was no inherent contradiction in having dedicated communists (like Nicola Bombacci) dying by Mussolini's side -- is quite unconvincing. But the book is short, and not without insights.
January 25, 2024
Revolutionary fascism by Erik Norling
I bought this book off Amazon because it was actually cheaper to buy there than in the original language at my local “dissident” bookshop. I suppose the Spanish edition is a little bit more refined but I did enjoy reading it in English, so far I can extract many points and arguments which I would like to develop into an essay. For one, the leftist attitudes of both early and late fascism, second the europeanism of the fascist propaganda machine and finally figures like Bombacci or Pavolini. The original socialist values of the national fascist party makes it look more fascist than the socialist party of the communist party itself. Being pro worker and wanting women to be more involved in political life and abandon old patriarchal values, without embracing feminism. Fascinating to say the least, it's curious to think about where would fascism position itself in the xxi century as so many of its intellectuals saw themselves on the left or at least far from the right. Fascism in many countries did end up becoming the capitalist last resort but in some countries it did not. In Italy, during the Italian social republic, Mussolini went back to his original socialist values, beginning the process of socialization and social progress with the exaltation of a common socialist front against both communism and capitalism. The ISR did indeed in 1943 finally declare war on its two enemies, capitalism and communism, even going as far as preferring a communist occupation than a capitalist one. This reminds me of how fascism has constantly had debates on which of the two is worse, but the obvious one for me is capitalism. Communism has a utopia the return to a primitive and communal world, something impossible Under Capitalism as it constantly ask for the constant progress of man.
Today's problems aren't due to cultural Marxism but due to capitalism. Contemporary Marxists are the sons of the capitalist cultural revolution after the call of Berlin, the new left is anti communist but postcapitalist. A postmodern bastard of the intellectual debates of anticapitalism, leading to absolute no change and the creation of new problems. The cases of LGTB issues and trans rights will be superceded eventually by the AI revolution and transhumanism. Fascism is much more of an anti-capitalist ideology than the new left but (only fascism in its purest modernist form) I still prefer the leftover the right. The right tries to preserve the non existent and the pointless, this has to be broken down, and create something new from the rubble. Maybe Franco Freda was right maybe Mussolini was right in begging the question wether the land empires should have joined to fight the sea ones. Was a communist-national revolutionary alliance possible? Certainly not under AH. One day we will see capitalism defeated under a new visionary left, but only time will tell. This book is a bible to understand what went wrong but also to see what could have occurred
I bought this book off Amazon because it was actually cheaper to buy there than in the original language at my local “dissident” bookshop. I suppose the Spanish edition is a little bit more refined but I did enjoy reading it in English, so far I can extract many points and arguments which I would like to develop into an essay. For one, the leftist attitudes of both early and late fascism, second the europeanism of the fascist propaganda machine and finally figures like Bombacci or Pavolini. The original socialist values of the national fascist party makes it look more fascist than the socialist party of the communist party itself. Being pro worker and wanting women to be more involved in political life and abandon old patriarchal values, without embracing feminism. Fascinating to say the least, it's curious to think about where would fascism position itself in the xxi century as so many of its intellectuals saw themselves on the left or at least far from the right. Fascism in many countries did end up becoming the capitalist last resort but in some countries it did not. In Italy, during the Italian social republic, Mussolini went back to his original socialist values, beginning the process of socialization and social progress with the exaltation of a common socialist front against both communism and capitalism. The ISR did indeed in 1943 finally declare war on its two enemies, capitalism and communism, even going as far as preferring a communist occupation than a capitalist one. This reminds me of how fascism has constantly had debates on which of the two is worse, but the obvious one for me is capitalism. Communism has a utopia the return to a primitive and communal world, something impossible Under Capitalism as it constantly ask for the constant progress of man.
Today's problems aren't due to cultural Marxism but due to capitalism. Contemporary Marxists are the sons of the capitalist cultural revolution after the call of Berlin, the new left is anti communist but postcapitalist. A postmodern bastard of the intellectual debates of anticapitalism, leading to absolute no change and the creation of new problems. The cases of LGTB issues and trans rights will be superceded eventually by the AI revolution and transhumanism. Fascism is much more of an anti-capitalist ideology than the new left but (only fascism in its purest modernist form) I still prefer the leftover the right. The right tries to preserve the non existent and the pointless, this has to be broken down, and create something new from the rubble. Maybe Franco Freda was right maybe Mussolini was right in begging the question wether the land empires should have joined to fight the sea ones. Was a communist-national revolutionary alliance possible? Certainly not under AH. One day we will see capitalism defeated under a new visionary left, but only time will tell. This book is a bible to understand what went wrong but also to see what could have occurred
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 29, 2017
The kindle translation is poor, but it is readable. A very interesting analysis of the roots of Italian Fascism, and the complex situation that existed in Italy as a result of internal and external factors. There was a lot of information about the origins of Italian Fascism and the ambiguity within the system.
January 4, 2022
A great book which debunks and actually delves into the left-wing roots of Fascism and its reemergence in the Italian Social Republic. An actual history book that is not just anti Fascist propaganda.
November 4, 2025
Give this book (and anything by James A Gregor) to any leftist that parrots Dimitrov's talking points about fascism not being revolutionary and merely a tool of capital.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews