Austerity, not corporativism, was the thread uniting Fascism’s laissez-faire and corporativist phases.

Evidence

Traditional historiography envisages a discontinuity between Fascism’s initial laissezfaire period (1922- 1925) and the corporativist epoch that followed in Italy (usually understood as the “real” expression of Fascism). By viewing this same period through a lens of austerity, in terms of both economic policies and economic ideology, one can observe greater coherence across these two diff erent phases. Austerity, in fact, is the thing that ties the two together. It embodied the active intervention of the state to reinforce capital accumulation through privatizations, bailouts of fi nancialindustrial complexes, monetary defl ation, and especially coercive control of labor. Speaking broadly, the nationalist slant of Fascist austerity emerges through the sacrifi ce of the majority for the saving/investing minority, who purported to represent the interests of the whole nation. Our story supports the notion that the interwar economy’s truly Fascist element was its coercive control of the labor force (see Toniolo 1980, xii- xiii; and Ciocca 2004, 198- 99). — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order, 1620

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s core reading purpose — austerity as class weapon — and echoes the ‘sacrifice of the majority for the saving minority’ logic that ties to contemporary austerity discourse. — connects to: Fascism’s founding political program was framed in austerity terms. — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 1037; Austerity unified Fascism’s laissez-faire and corporatist economic periods. — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 1045; Austerity needed strong government, which Fascism supplied — Clara E. Mattei, The Capital Order: How Economists…, 1329 (+6 more)
  • DEFINE: Defines ‘austere Fascism’ as the Fascist right strand drawing on pure economics, distinct from corporativist doctrine.

Broader Connections