[D-MITCH777]

Does any one know any Third Position or Fascist Literature which I can read to get a better idea of what it is. Any thing online would be good to.

thanks.

[myrmeleo]

I'm copying this from another thread:

I'd suggest these works to get you more acquainted with Fascism:

- The Doctrine of Fascism by Benito Mussolini (canonical reading, you can find in this forum's Dodgy Dossier subforum)
- The Futurist Manifesto by F.T. Marinetti (it'll help you understand Fascism's militarist origins)
- See this thread; Fasces made a lot good suggestions.
- Read any of Oswald Mosley's works; he's the second most important Fascist figure after Mussolini, if you ignore Hitler.
- And, last but not least, this site is a wonderful source for Nationalist and Fascist books.

Be sure to click the "see this thread" link.

[Fasces]

For Benoist-ist literature (Nouvelle Droite), send Rei a PM.

[starman2003]

Read any of Oswald Mosley's works; he's the second most important Fascist figure after Mussolini, if you ignore Hitler.

I'm no fan of Franco and his brand of fascism, but at least he got in power.

[Far-Right Sage]

'm no fan of Franco and his brand of fascism, but at least he got in power.

Francisco Franco was not a Fascist, but a Spanish nationalist and authoritarian, and supported of limited forms of corporatism in Spain. Nationalism and authoritarianism make up various elements of Fascism, but that does not render all leaders of a similar stripe as Fascists. Franco was not revolutionary, but quite conservative, and Fascism is a revolutionary ideology. Under Franco, the Falange was unfortunately suppressed, and Jose Antonio being executed by the Red "Republican" scum years earlier, the true vision of Spanish Fascism couldn't be realized.

Pragmatically speaking however, Franco also had to appease the monarchist faction calling for King Alfonso XIII's return, the conservatives, and the Carlists, in order to build a strong base of support against the Reds among the Spanish right-wing, which Franco deserves much credit for.

Franco was a fantastic military strategist and had much personal bravery, as he proved in Spanish Morocco in the Rif War, and in orchestrating the seizure of Madrid from the Red filth, but ideally he could have handed over power to a Falangist leader who would have moved Spain more along the path of Italy and Germany.

[starman2003]

but ideally he could have handed over power to a Falangist leader who would have moved Spain more along the path of Italy and Germany.

Great in principle, but Spain probably then would've joined the axis and been crushed.

[Decky]

Great in principle, but Spain probably then would've joined the axis and been crushed.

Not necessarily, if Spain ha joined the Axis they would have took Gibraltar and closed the Med to the Allies (from the west anyway). I'm no expert but I assume this would have had a huge effect on the Battle for north Africa.

Just my 2p.

[Fasces]

Spain at the time was both ravaged by a brutal civil war, and was among the least economically developed states in Europe at the time. They would have quickly been crushed.

[starman2003]

Not necessarily, if Spain ha joined the Axis they would have took Gibraltar and closed the Med to the Allies (from the west anyway).

Hitler offered Franco German airborne forces which suggests the Spaniards might not have been up to the task, despite Franco's proud insistence that Spain take it. Even if they did take Gibraltar, I doubt they could've prevented Britain from retaking it or at least using its naval superiority to keep the west end open.

I'm no expert but I assume this would have had a huge effect on the Battle for north Africa.
Just my 2p.

Basically Spain, like Italy, would've been more of a liability; another basket case for the Germans to look after....

[Far-Right Sage]

Hitler offered Franco German airborne forces which suggests the Spaniards might not have been up to the task, despite Franco's proud insistence that Spain take it. Even if they did take Gibraltar, I doubt they could've prevented Britain from retaking it or at least using its naval superiority to keep the west end open.

Well, Spain has a historical claim on Gibraltar which many Spanish nationalists would have loved nothing more than to seize from the British Empire, but there were other factors to consider.

There was a plan, codenamed Operation Isabella, for the German occupation of Spain and Portugal, but given the already chaotic scope of the war, this was shelved. What Berlin really wanted was Spanish and Portuguese willing participation on behalf of the Axis. In the event of this, German troops would have moved through Spain and occupied Gibraltar - this would have later been turned over to Spanish control. German troops then would have moved through Portugal and with Portuguese naval assistance, the Kriegsmarine would have secured the Azores and Madeira. After such a strategic benefit but relatively easy victory contingent on Franco and Salazar's agreement, the Spanish and Portuguese navies would have worked alongside the Regia Marina in the Mediterranean, assisting in the siege and conquest of Malta, and making things untenable for British and other Allied forces in North Africa.

This would have had benefits which could have turned the tide of the war (at least the European theatre), but wasn't enacted for several reasons.

Franco recognized the destruction the war could bring to Spain, and as such, his demands to Hitler for Spanish participation were deemed too unreasonable:

Spain demanded shipments of grain and other foodstuffs in mass quantities, as it was still reeling from shortages following the civil war. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was about to be torn up, so Germany would no longer have access to raw materials from the Soviet Union, other than what could be transported by army caravan. Germany also already had the obligation of sending military hardware to Italy. On top of this, Spain demanded military hardware.

Spain demanded essentially all of French North Africa. These high-level talks between Hitler and Franco predate Operation Torch, Darland's arrest, and the fall of the Vichy government, and as such, North Africa was still in Vichy hands. Germany couldn't have seized these colonies or allowed Spain to, as such a move would have eroded all agreement between NS Germany and Petain/Vichy. Had Hitler anticipated the weak Vichy resistance to the Allied landings in North Africa and the eventual German occupation of all of France, he might have agreed to this demand.

Also, the United Kingdom employed its usual tactics towards nations which are in a position to hurt it, such as Spain: threats and bribery. Britain threatened to bomb the Spanish Canary Islands if Spain occupied Gibraltar or allowed German troops through its territory, and the Royal Air Force was in a strategic position to be able to do this. If the RAF managed to bomb the Spanish coast, the instability that could have arose could have greatly reinvigorated Republican forces now fighting as rebels in the hills to try and topple Franco's government. On the other hand, records indicate that Churchill authorized the payment of millions in gold to central Spanish banks, and British payment of gold to Spain was guaranteed as long as Spanish neutrality was maintained. These payments were sent even after Franco allowed the brave volunteers of the Azul Division to travel to the Eastern Front as an expeditionary force and fight alongside the Wehrmacht against the Red Army. So given Britain's position and gain to be had in currying favor on both sides, Madrid decided it best not to rock the boat.

That's my take on it anyway. Spain did greatly assist in the escape route for many brave Germans, Italians, and Croats who served in the war, and their relocation to South America, Egypt, and the Middle East. Otto Skorzeny, for example, lived for a time in Madrid.

If the Falange had real power in Spain, perhaps different decisions would have been made, but that's all speculative.

[Rei Murasame]

For Benoist-ist literature (Nouvelle Droite), send Rei a PM.

I should just say so that P&D people are aware, I did receive a PM about that, and I did indeed furnish him with things in response.

[Jackal]

I would suggest this site. It is not a huge collection like Marxists.org, but it does have some quality. I haven't noticed anything new be added to the collection, though, so the project may have been given up. I could be wrong, though, and have just overlooked anything new that has been added.

[Tribbles]

What about Keynes "General theory of..." Hm - what was it again, unemployment?

Anyway, John Maynard Keynes, and his most important book starts with "general theory"

He is mostly seen as a social democrat, but he had some fascist friends, I have heard. Don't know what Mosley thought of him, but since they both were at their height of fame during the 1930s, and since both were British, it could be interesting to find out.

Edit:
I might add that I have never read this book my self, but a Norwegian translation have just arrived, and the critiques say it is superb. Lately I have gotten the bad habit of buying a lot of books due to interesting titles and covers, and then forget about them after the first two-three-four chapters.

But was Keynes destroyed by the stag-flation crisis of the 1970s, or is he still valid? - That is the question..... Perhaps it has already been discussed in the economics-subsection? - Must go look

[Corinth]

I would suggest this site. It is not a huge collection like Marxists.org, but it does have some quality. I haven't noticed anything new be added to the collection, though, so the project may have been given up. I could be wrong, though, and have just overlooked anything new that has been added.

Ever since our move to a new forum, it has admittedly been shuffled to the side. However the project is still ongoing. Thank you for the recommendation.

[Jackal]

Ever since our move to a new forum, it has admittedly been shuffled to the side. However the project is still ongoing. Thank you for the recommendation.

To be honest, I was not aware that it was linked with any other site. I literally thought it was the fascist answer to Marxists.org. You're welcome, I suppose.

[Corinth]

To be honest, I was not aware that it was linked with any other site. I literally thought it was the fascist answer to Marxists.org. You're welcome, I suppose.

That's what it is designed to be, yes.

[VALIS_]

IMO, if you're completely new to third position/fascism/corporatism I would recommend you begin with Plato's republic. It is obviously quite antiquated but because Plato is such a lofty name in academia and the world in general it is a good introduction that avoids demonization by the left and the right. If you're curious about the economic aspect I would suggest Howard J. Wiarda's "Corporatism and Comparative Politics", heres a link http://books.google.com/books/about/Corporatism_and_comparative_politics.html?id=IKn2y2yS014C. I haven't read it yet myself but that is only because its pricey as hell.