Transatlantic Fascism

The extreme right has strongly affected Argentina and for this reason has attracted much scholarly attention. Researchers have viewed this movement, known as Nacionalismo, through different lenses. They have studied its ideas, male leaders, rituals and myths, social composition, differences and similarities with kindred groups in neighboring countries, and relations with the Catholic Church, the military, and the political system. Noting the European impact on Nacionalismo, some scholars have characterized it as fascist, while others have disagreed. Relatively few, however, have had the deep knowledge of fascism needed to develop their arguments. Federico Finchelstein’s extensive background in fascist and Holocaust studies and his work in Italian and French archives set this book apart. So, too, does his approach. Rather than simply discuss European influence on Nacionalismo, Finchelstein analyzes ideas and perceptions flowing in both directions across the Atlantic.He focuses primarily on the exchanges between Nacionalistas and Italian Fascists, who engaged radical rightist Argentines for a longer period and to a greater degree than did German National Socialists. Benito Mussolini and other leading Fascists believed that Argentina’s large population of Italian descent, and its relative prosperity and “whiteness,” among other factors, made it a fitting repository for their ideological export. Italian representatives and propaganda organs spread the message to Argentina. The Italian government subsidized Nacionalista newspapers and fostered ties between Italian and Argentine intellectuals. The regime followed Argentine events closely, often through the Nacionalista press. Argentines also studied Fascist texts and policies, visited Italy, and interviewed Mussolini and other luminaries.This transnationalism was myopic. Until 1943, Argentine ideas affected Italian Fascism only to the extent of confirming its preconceived notions, such as the need for Italian domination. Fascists regarded Argentina as an inferior country that required tutelage. They exoticized it and rewrote its history to highlight Italian participation. Some thought that Italo-Argentines should return to Italy, while others urged them to rule Argentina on Italy’s behalf. They also criticized Nacionalismo.Mussolini thought the Argentines would simply ingest and regurgitate the Italian version of fascism. Yet Nacionalistas rejected Italian paternalism and did not adopt Italian views in toto, although they sometimes acted as if they did. For example, Nacionalistas thoroughly integrated Catholicism into their version of fascism, which the Fascist regime pointedly did not do, although it accommodated the church and laity to a certain degree. In this and other instances, Nacionalistas willfully denied or did not acknowledge that their beliefs diverged from Italian Fascist ones. Nor did Mussolini seem to recognize and appreciate this significant difference until the eve of his removal from power.Finchelstein concludes that this conflation of religion and fascism set Nacionalismo apart from other fascisms, without removing it from this category. Indeed, he finds it even more religious in character than the Spanish and Romanian movements. One might add that the Nacionalistas were even more “clericofascist,” using Finchelstein’s word, than Brazilian Integralistas, who not only appealed to both Protestants and Catholics but constructed an alternative religion. How the pious Mexican Sinarquistas compared to the Nacionalistas deserves study.Finchelstein also examines exchanges between French and Argentine thinkers, priest and lay Nacionalistas, and Argentine fascists and anti fascists. With the Spanish Civil War, exchanges between rightist Spaniards and Argentines assumed particular importance. Like Italian Fascists, most Spanish fascist thinkers assigned their country leadership over a “spiritual empire” that included Argentina. Nacionalistas, however, adapted Hispanidad to justify their preeminence. They thought they had as much to offer as the other Latin fascist nations, if not more. José María Pemán agreed with them. He urged his fellow Spanish fascists to heed their Argentine counterparts and praised Argentine clericofascism as a suitable model for Europe.Gender lurks below the surface of this history of ideas. The author discusses Nacionalista spokespersons Delfina Bunge de Gálvez and Eugenia Silveyra de Oyuela (who later converted to antifascism), noting that the latter favored Nacionalismo’s Catholic character and its battle against Communism. Admittedly, they were among the few women intellectuals in movements largely constructed as masculine. Still, it would be interesting to know more about how these and other women in Argentina, Italy, and Spain engaged with the cults of violence and the sacred, which are deeply gendered concepts. Did they exalt bloodshed against the Other, as did men?A short review such as this one cannot do justice to the originality, richness, and subtlety of this book. Even the detailed endnotes, which practically constitute another volume, merit close examination. Finchelstein’s fine work surely will stimulate debates about fascist transnationalism, Nacionalismo, and this movement’s legacy for years to come

Art · Economic history · German · Humanities · Ideology · Immigration · Media studies · Mythology · Political science · Politics · Population · Sociology · Classics · Communism, Protests, Social Movements · Demography · History · Italian Fascism and Post-war Society · Law