Focusing on the six countries in which fascism became most dominant (Italy, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania and Spain), this study analyzes the beliefs and actions of people who became fascists in an attempt to view fascism through its own eyes. The result is an original depiction of fascism as "violent, transcendent nation-statism", and a unique perspective differing from other previous theories of fascism.
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Sell Back Your Copy for $1.93
No matter where you bought them, get up to 70% back when you sell your books at Amazon.com.
Used Price$3.35
Trade-in Price$1.93
Price after
Trade-in$1.42 |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
Review
"...an eminently satisfying and absorbing account by a powerful and erudite mind, with Mann's exceptional analytical and theoretical skills on full display." Foreign Affairs
"Michael Mann is the outstanding historical sociologist of his generation. He invariably asks penetrating questions and his rigorous comparative method enables him to reach novel and striking conclusions. He has now produced one of the most original studies of Fascism ever written, a brilliant and disturbing analysis which constitutes a seminal work on the most destructive political phenomenon of the modern era." Sir Ian Kershaw, Professor of Modern History, University of Sheffield
"This incisively written and boldly argued book is full of insights and offers many challenges to the specialists. Mann breathes fresh life into this complex topic, and this study is bound to stimulate renewed discussion across the disciplines." Prof. Robert Gellately, Earl Ray Beck Professor of History, Florida State University
"Michael Mann here applies his legendary combination of historical sweep, synthetic verve, and common sense to a major unsolved problem: what and why was European fascism? We leave his company much the wiser." Charles Tilly, Joseph L. Buttenwieser Professor of Social Science, Columbia University
"Mann's newest book provides fascinating insights into the sources of European fascism. Erudite and theoretical, yet plain-speaking, Mann analyzes the beliefs and actions of fascists themselves, coming to the conclusion that youth culture and society across class played a critical part in this ultimately self-destructive movement." Norman Naimark, Robert and Florence McDonnell Professor of History, Stanford University
"Michael Mann, one of the great sociological thinkers of our day published two impressive books this year (both from Cambridge University Press)...in "Fascists" he analyzes the development of right-wing authoritarianism in several European countrieso [and] unlike most sociologists, Mann does not write in jargon. Though certainly dense, these books will reward the effort of any non-scholar willing to tackle them." Newsday
"This is by far the best comparative study in recent years of interwar fascisms, an analytical tour de force." American Historical Review, Robert J. Soucy
"This is a thoughtful, clearly written, convincing study. Highly recommended." CHOICE May 2005
"Fascistsis extremely useful for anyone interested in a synthesis of the latest work on the social history of fascism. The author does not try to force everything into a rigid framwork. When a case is exceptional, he recognizes it." - Alexander De Grand, North Carolina State University
"As mentioned, Mann's ambition is to offer a synthesis of the materialist and the ideological interpretations of fascism. The overall result, as we have seen, is that he uses the methodology of the materialist school and ends up with an interpretation of fascism that largely resembles the ideological ones already formulated. In other words, in his conquest of historiographical terrain, he reaches territory that has already been captured. Nonetheless, the route he takes to get there is novel, and the traveler reaches the destination having accumulated a great deal of useful baggage. And that is a laudable achievement. " - Per Biensø, Department of History, Aalborg University, Denmark, H-NET
"Michael Mann is the outstanding historical sociologist of his generation. He invariably asks penetrating questions and his rigorous comparative method enables him to reach novel and striking conclusions. He has now produced one of the most original studies of Fascism ever written, a brilliant and disturbing analysis which constitutes a seminal work on the most destructive political phenomenon of the modern era." Sir Ian Kershaw, Professor of Modern History, University of Sheffield
"This incisively written and boldly argued book is full of insights and offers many challenges to the specialists. Mann breathes fresh life into this complex topic, and this study is bound to stimulate renewed discussion across the disciplines." Prof. Robert Gellately, Earl Ray Beck Professor of History, Florida State University
"Michael Mann here applies his legendary combination of historical sweep, synthetic verve, and common sense to a major unsolved problem: what and why was European fascism? We leave his company much the wiser." Charles Tilly, Joseph L. Buttenwieser Professor of Social Science, Columbia University
"Mann's newest book provides fascinating insights into the sources of European fascism. Erudite and theoretical, yet plain-speaking, Mann analyzes the beliefs and actions of fascists themselves, coming to the conclusion that youth culture and society across class played a critical part in this ultimately self-destructive movement." Norman Naimark, Robert and Florence McDonnell Professor of History, Stanford University
"Michael Mann, one of the great sociological thinkers of our day published two impressive books this year (both from Cambridge University Press)...in "Fascists" he analyzes the development of right-wing authoritarianism in several European countrieso [and] unlike most sociologists, Mann does not write in jargon. Though certainly dense, these books will reward the effort of any non-scholar willing to tackle them." Newsday
"This is by far the best comparative study in recent years of interwar fascisms, an analytical tour de force." American Historical Review, Robert J. Soucy
"This is a thoughtful, clearly written, convincing study. Highly recommended." CHOICE May 2005
"Fascistsis extremely useful for anyone interested in a synthesis of the latest work on the social history of fascism. The author does not try to force everything into a rigid framwork. When a case is exceptional, he recognizes it." - Alexander De Grand, North Carolina State University
"As mentioned, Mann's ambition is to offer a synthesis of the materialist and the ideological interpretations of fascism. The overall result, as we have seen, is that he uses the methodology of the materialist school and ends up with an interpretation of fascism that largely resembles the ideological ones already formulated. In other words, in his conquest of historiographical terrain, he reaches territory that has already been captured. Nonetheless, the route he takes to get there is novel, and the traveler reaches the destination having accumulated a great deal of useful baggage. And that is a laudable achievement. " - Per Biensø, Department of History, Aalborg University, Denmark, H-NET
Book Description
Anew study of fascism in Europe, focusing on the six countries in which it became most dominant: Italy, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania and Spain. Focusing on the beliefs and actions of people who became fascists, it attempts to see fascism through its own eyes. This leads to an original view of fascism as "violent, transcendent nation-statism", a perspective which is superior to all previous theories of fascism.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
21 of 32 people found the following review helpful
By Chuck Crane
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
If asked to define Fascism, I could say "It is a vague epithet used by people who have no bloody clue what they are talking about, and who could not give a coherent definition of it if they tried." And this would cover nearly all uses of the term in the mainstream media and the internet.
But there are people who care about defining their terms. If you are one of them, Michael Mann will give you a definition of fascism that is among the best. Not definitive, because there is no definitive definition, but thoughtfully derived and well-supported.
Mann defines fascism as "the pursuit of a transcendent and cleansing nation-statism through paramilitarism." And he is nice enough to give you the definition on page 13, though you have to read the entire book to understand how it was derived. This definition will be clearer if I explain the terms.
Transcendence: Belief that the state can transcend social conflict and blend all social classes into a harmonious whole. Belief in the power of political ideology to transcend human nature and produce a better world. Cleansing (ethnic): Favoring one or more ethnic or racial groups over others, either by granting special privileges or imposing disabilities; deportation of ethnic minorities, or worse. Cleansing (political): Silencing the political opposition so that the transcendent aims of fascism can be realized. Restricting the freedom of speech, outlawing opposition parties, imprisoning political opponents (or worse) and indoctrinating youth in fascist principles. Statism: Promoting a high degree of state intervention in personal, social, or economic matters. Belief that the state can accomplish anything. Nationalism: Belief in the inherent unity of a population with distinct linguistic, physical, or cultural characteristics and its identification with a nation-state. Belief that the nation possesses special attributes that make it superior to other nations in some or all ways. Paramilitarism: "Grass roots", populist squadrism aimed at coercing opponents and obtaining popular approbation by acting as a supplementary police force.
An interesting debate could be had over whether Republicans or Democrats have more fascist attributes. Given the Democrats' love of affirmative action (which amounts to shutting out qualified Jews, Asians, and Whites from universities in the same way that fascists limited Jewish admissions to universities to make room for "disadvantaged" non-Jews), their support for repressive "speech codes" on university campuses, their firm belief in statism, and their naive belief that human behavior can be changed to create a "new man", it could be argued that the Democrats are more like fascists than the Republicans. The Republicans have it over the Democrats on nationalism, of course. Neither has an edge in paramilitarism -- the few right-wing "militia" groups that exist make no attempt to influence elections or intimidate rivals. Development of this comparison is left to the reader as an exercise.
Reading Mann's book -- especially if you have read other books on this subject or have a good grounding in 20th century European history -- will make it clear how these fascist attributes all tie together into one nasty whole. Mann's scholarship overall is very good, though his conclusions have been criticized in part by some (e.g. R.J.B. Bosworth and Robert Paxton, who are both worth reading). Notably, however, Mann (unlike Bosworth and Paxton, who are both historians) includes some simple statistical analysis to disprove widely-held notions about Fascist demographics. I think he does this fairly convincingly. I would have used a multivariate model myself, but if Mann had done so he would have lost most of the book's audience immediately; he has however reviewed such studies and obviously understands quantitative methods. Perhaps the use of even simple quantitative methods is what irks historians Bosworth and Paxton. But in my opinion, history needs a lot more of this, not less.
After reviewing the rise of Fascism in Italy, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania, and Spain, with references to authoritarian regimes elsewhere (e.g. Portugal and Greece) Mann winds up by saying that "Fascism was a product of a sudden, half-baked attempt at liberalization amid social crisis." It occurred in countries in the south and east of Europe that had conservative and strong but decaying executive branches and relatively weak (and new) parliamentary branches. They were "dual states" without the firmly established democratic traditions that existed in the north and west. Fascists could work with the conservative executive branch to seize power under such conditions. But sometimes the conservatives just seized power and shut the Fascists out (as occurred in Romania and Hungary until late in the war).
Some of Mann's final conclusions are dubious. He denies that "Islamic Fascism" is fascism because it is religiously and not politically based. But he has just concluded a discussion of the Romanian "Legion of the Archangel Michael," a fascist organization with, as the name suggests, essential religious characteristics. And a few pages earlier he has talked of Franco's self-described "Crusade" against the Spanish Republican priest-killers. To compound the oddness, he also says that "Islamic Fascism" is not fascism because it is not "nationalist", apparently forgetting that many Muslim nations are arbitrary creations in which nationalism would make no sense anyway (as we are seeing in Iraq) and that the only meaningful solidarity is religious.
Mann concludes by saying that "fascist-leaning movements are most likely to occur in the south of the world" if "capitalist exploitation" of the south (PC for Third World) by the north (PC for First World) and "widening north-south inequality" continue. What cave has he been living in for the last 20 years? Does he read the Economist? Well, since "north-south inequality" is shrinking not widening, and "capitalist exploitation" is bringing joy to the world, I guess all is well.
But there are people who care about defining their terms. If you are one of them, Michael Mann will give you a definition of fascism that is among the best. Not definitive, because there is no definitive definition, but thoughtfully derived and well-supported.
Mann defines fascism as "the pursuit of a transcendent and cleansing nation-statism through paramilitarism." And he is nice enough to give you the definition on page 13, though you have to read the entire book to understand how it was derived. This definition will be clearer if I explain the terms.
Transcendence: Belief that the state can transcend social conflict and blend all social classes into a harmonious whole. Belief in the power of political ideology to transcend human nature and produce a better world. Cleansing (ethnic): Favoring one or more ethnic or racial groups over others, either by granting special privileges or imposing disabilities; deportation of ethnic minorities, or worse. Cleansing (political): Silencing the political opposition so that the transcendent aims of fascism can be realized. Restricting the freedom of speech, outlawing opposition parties, imprisoning political opponents (or worse) and indoctrinating youth in fascist principles. Statism: Promoting a high degree of state intervention in personal, social, or economic matters. Belief that the state can accomplish anything. Nationalism: Belief in the inherent unity of a population with distinct linguistic, physical, or cultural characteristics and its identification with a nation-state. Belief that the nation possesses special attributes that make it superior to other nations in some or all ways. Paramilitarism: "Grass roots", populist squadrism aimed at coercing opponents and obtaining popular approbation by acting as a supplementary police force.
An interesting debate could be had over whether Republicans or Democrats have more fascist attributes. Given the Democrats' love of affirmative action (which amounts to shutting out qualified Jews, Asians, and Whites from universities in the same way that fascists limited Jewish admissions to universities to make room for "disadvantaged" non-Jews), their support for repressive "speech codes" on university campuses, their firm belief in statism, and their naive belief that human behavior can be changed to create a "new man", it could be argued that the Democrats are more like fascists than the Republicans. The Republicans have it over the Democrats on nationalism, of course. Neither has an edge in paramilitarism -- the few right-wing "militia" groups that exist make no attempt to influence elections or intimidate rivals. Development of this comparison is left to the reader as an exercise.
Reading Mann's book -- especially if you have read other books on this subject or have a good grounding in 20th century European history -- will make it clear how these fascist attributes all tie together into one nasty whole. Mann's scholarship overall is very good, though his conclusions have been criticized in part by some (e.g. R.J.B. Bosworth and Robert Paxton, who are both worth reading). Notably, however, Mann (unlike Bosworth and Paxton, who are both historians) includes some simple statistical analysis to disprove widely-held notions about Fascist demographics. I think he does this fairly convincingly. I would have used a multivariate model myself, but if Mann had done so he would have lost most of the book's audience immediately; he has however reviewed such studies and obviously understands quantitative methods. Perhaps the use of even simple quantitative methods is what irks historians Bosworth and Paxton. But in my opinion, history needs a lot more of this, not less.
After reviewing the rise of Fascism in Italy, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania, and Spain, with references to authoritarian regimes elsewhere (e.g. Portugal and Greece) Mann winds up by saying that "Fascism was a product of a sudden, half-baked attempt at liberalization amid social crisis." It occurred in countries in the south and east of Europe that had conservative and strong but decaying executive branches and relatively weak (and new) parliamentary branches. They were "dual states" without the firmly established democratic traditions that existed in the north and west. Fascists could work with the conservative executive branch to seize power under such conditions. But sometimes the conservatives just seized power and shut the Fascists out (as occurred in Romania and Hungary until late in the war).
Some of Mann's final conclusions are dubious. He denies that "Islamic Fascism" is fascism because it is religiously and not politically based. But he has just concluded a discussion of the Romanian "Legion of the Archangel Michael," a fascist organization with, as the name suggests, essential religious characteristics. And a few pages earlier he has talked of Franco's self-described "Crusade" against the Spanish Republican priest-killers. To compound the oddness, he also says that "Islamic Fascism" is not fascism because it is not "nationalist", apparently forgetting that many Muslim nations are arbitrary creations in which nationalism would make no sense anyway (as we are seeing in Iraq) and that the only meaningful solidarity is religious.
Mann concludes by saying that "fascist-leaning movements are most likely to occur in the south of the world" if "capitalist exploitation" of the south (PC for Third World) by the north (PC for First World) and "widening north-south inequality" continue. What cave has he been living in for the last 20 years? Does he read the Economist? Well, since "north-south inequality" is shrinking not widening, and "capitalist exploitation" is bringing joy to the world, I guess all is well.
3 of 13 people found the following review helpful
By Han Yu Huang
Format:Paperback
Michael Mann's Fascists offers a thorough exploration of Fascism as a movement and ideology with a view to historical, geographical, social, national, and conceptual differences. Readers inside and outside of academies, concerning about Holocaust or other contemporary extremist disruptions in human history, will acquire their own lessons from the book.
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
So You'd Like to...
Look for Similar Items by Category
- Books > History > Modern (16th-21st Centuries) > 20th Century
- Books > New, Used & Rental Textbooks > Social Sciences > Political Science > Political Ideologies
- Books > New, Used & Rental Textbooks > Social Sciences > Sociology
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Politics & Government > Ideologies & Doctrines > Communism & Socialism
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Politics & Government > International & World Politics > European
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Social Sciences
- Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Sociology
