Yale Professor Jason Stanley Identifies 3 Essential Features of Fascism: Invoking a Mythic Past, Sowing Division & Attacking Truth

New books on fascism are popping up everywhere, from independent presses, former world leaders like Madeleine Albright, and academics like Jason Stanley, Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University. Stanley’s latest book, How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them, has been described as a “vital read for a nation under Trump.” And yet, as The Guardian’s Tom McCarthy writes, one of the ironies Stanley points out is that—despite the widespread currency of the term these days—fascism succeeds by making “talk of fascism… seem outlandish.”

Is it?

The word has certainly been diluted by years of misuse. Umberto Eco wrote in his 1995 essay “Ur-Fascism” that “fascist” as an epithet was casually thrown around “by American radicals… to refer to a cop who did not approve of their smoking habits.” When every authority figure who seems to abuse power gets labeled a fascist, the word loses its explanatory power and its history disappears. But Eco, who grew up under Mussolini and understood fascist Europe, insisted that fascism has clearly recognizable, and portable, if not particularly coherent, features.

“The fascist game can be played in many forms,” Eco wrote, depending on the national mythologies and cultural history of the country in which it takes root. Rather than a single political philosophy, Eco argued, fascism is “a collage… a beehive of contradictions.” He enumerated fourteen features that delineate it from other forms of politics. Like Eco, Stanley also identifies some core traits of fascism, such as “publicizing false charges of corruption,” as he writes in his book, “while engaging in corrupt practice.”

In the short New York Times opinion video above, Stanley summarizes his “formula for fascism”—a “surprisingly simple” pattern now repeating in Europe, South America, India, Myanmar, Turkey, the Philippines, and “right here in the United States.” No matter where they appear, “fascist politicians are cut from the same cloth,” he says. The elements of his formula are:

1. Conjuring a “mythic past” that has supposedly been destroyed (“by liberals, feminists, and immigrants”). Mussolini had Rome, Turkey’s Erdoğan has the Ottoman Empire, and Hungary’s Viktor Orban rewrote the country’s constitution with the aim of “making Hungary great again.” These myths rely on an “overwhelming sense of nostalgia for a past that is racially pure, traditional, and patriarchal.” Fascist leaders “position themselves as father figures and strongmen” who alone can restore lost greatness. And yes, the fascist leader is “always a ‘he.’”

2. Fascist leaders sow division; they succeed by “turning groups against each other,” inflaming historical antagonisms and ancient hatreds for their own advantage. Social divisions in themselves—between classes, religions, ethnic groups and so on—are what we might call pre-existing conditions. Fascists may not invent the hate, but they cynically instrumentalize it: demonizing outgroups, normalizing and naturalizing bigotry, stoking violence to justify repressive “law and order” policies, the curtailing of civil rights and due process, and the mass imprisonment and killing of manufactured enemies.

3. Fascists “attack the truth” with propaganda, in particular “a kind of anti-intellectualism” that “creates a petri dish for conspiracy theories.” (Stanley’s fourth book, published by Princeton University Press, is titled How Propaganda Works.) We would have to be extraordinarily naïve to think that only fascist politicians lie, but we should focus here on the question of degree. For fascists, truth doesn’t matter at all. (As Rudy Giuliani says, “truth isn’t truth.”) Hannah Arendt wrote that fascism relies on “a consistent and total substitution of lies for factual truth.” She described the phenomenon as destroying “the sense by which we take our bearings in the real world…. [T]he category of truth verses falsehood [being] among the mental means to this end.” In such an atmosphere, anything is possible, no matter how previously unthinkable.

Using this rubric, Stanley links the tactics and statements of fascist leaders around the world with those of the current U.S. president. It’s a persuasive case that would probably sway earlier theorists of fascism like Eco and Arendt. Whether he can convince Americans who find talk of fascism “outlandish”—or who loosely use the word to describe any politician or group they don’t like—is another question entirely.

FYI: You can download Stanley’s new book How Fascism Works, as a free audiobook if you want to try out Audible.com’s no-risk, 30-day free trial program. Find details here.

Related Content:

Umberto Eco Makes a List of the 14 Common Features of Fascism

Hannah Arendt Explains How Propaganda Uses Lies to Erode All Truth & Morality: Insights from The Origins of Totalitarianism

George Orwell Tries to Identify Who Is Really a “Fascist” and Define the Meaning of This “Much-Abused Word” (1944)

20 Lessons from the 20th Century About How to Defend Democracy from Authoritarianism, According to Yale Historian Timothy Snyder

Josh Jones is a writer and musician based in Durham, NC. Follow him at @jdmagness

by | Permalink | Comments (22) |

Support Open Culture

We’re hoping to rely on our loyal readers rather than erratic ads. To support Open Culture’s educational mission, please consider making a donation. We accept PayPal, Venmo (@openculture), Patreon and Crypto! Please find all options here. We thank you!

Comments (22)
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
  • Dennis Davis says:

    Amazing how the intolerant violence-threatening left accuses conservatives of being fascist.

  • Bobster says:

    Honestly, this “fascism” can indeed describe the current left zeitgeist. Trump (not defending him, mind you) can be seen as a reaction to the constant redfining of terms and cultural chaos, and the denial of science when it suits the left (as does the right). As far as a Mythic Past, casting all whites as gnarling slave owners when it was only a very small percentage, acting as if there was a golden era before colonialism could also be seen as making up a past.

    Not arguing the professors list, just saying it can apply to more than one political ideology, even at one time. Oppose Trump’s policies, but please, name calling is not helping.

    FWIW, ideologically fascism is an outdated term that should only be applied to Mussolini’s regime.

  • Bill W. says:

    “Fascism” to today’s Leftists (specifically Progressives), means ANYONE to the right of Stalin, classic-liberals included. The word, like “bigot,” “racist,” “hater,” and others before it, have been so misused and thrown-around so carelessly that it’s original meaning and implications have cheapened, devalued of it’s true meaning. Too many of those who like to use that word, are actually projecting their own beliefs and attitudes–mask-wearing people who carry weapons destroying property, and verbally and physically attacking anybody who disagrees with their radical, narrow-beliefs comes to mind. No, I’m not talking about the almost non-existent and decades-defunct KKK-bogeyman, either! Meanwhile, Communists, with their millions more dead than Nazism, loom in the corner, completely unnoticed by those worried about totalitarianism…

  • JustSayin says:

    3a: Accuse the other side of the very things you’re most guilty of. It’s an effective propaganda tool. Rhetorical ju-jitsu. Thus, the left is uniquely “intolerant” or “bigoted” or “dangerous” or “violent” or “wanting to perpetuate slavery.” (That last one’s especially rich coming from Republicans.)

  • TexasHoldEm says:

    The coordinated stream of propaganda and hatred coming out of the news media since election night on 2016 is exactly what you’d expect from a fascist nation, except the fascist lost, but they still control the microphones and TV broadcasts, and can’t tolerate being called out for what they are.

  • Ralph Musgrave says:

    I’m amused by the way Jason Stanley supports his claim that the word fascism has been over used for a long time by referring to something written in 1995. Actually George Orwell pointed out in the 1940s that the word had become meaningless thru over-use.

  • Ralph Musgrave says:

    Lefties repeat the word “fascist” like demented parrots because like parrots, dogs, cats etc they have difficulty in enunciating more than about ten noises: fascist, racist, Nazi and that’s about it…:-)

  • Plum says:

    … so it isn’t the same at all.

  • Jesus says:

    Das Kapital would beg to differ!

  • Thomas R Bowes says:

    how any sane person cannot see a direct link to fascism by the democratic parties behavior is insane.
    trying to control the media, shutting down free speech,conjuring fake charges against people they want to eliminate, calling all opposing views “hate speech” etc.its appalling
    when the backlash kicks in i hope all of the evil sick people suffer

  • Richard Purdie says:

    This is fine from Jason Stanley, yet he misses a crucial element whose understanding is vital for those who would prevent a fascist resurgence: namely the recruitment of a Street army of thugs equipped to employ violence to destroy opposition

  • Dan Grossman says:

    Those are apt points, and those three features were certainly ways that fascist leaders tried to generate support for their cause. In other words, they provided the “appeal” of fascist ideology. But fascism is not just about “style” (the ways fascists seek to generate support) but also substance (the policies advocated, and adopted once in power). The SUBSTANCE of fascism (as opposed to the reasons for its appeal) involved the elimination of political freedoms (press, speech, etc.) and centralized government control of all private activity (industrial, professional, social, etc.) exercised by one leader.
    The three things in this article do describe ways that fascists of the past tried to make their ideology appeal to people, but they also describe ways non-facists tried to generate support as well. These tactics have been used by both fascists and non-fascists, and the existence of these particular features do not define whether or not a particular politician or political movement is “fascist.”


    Now it is February 2020. If anyone thinks Trump has NOT become more deeply entrenched in his desire to create an authoritarian system answering only to him, then they are seriously misreading the evidence. The bizarre gaslighting and “no, the left is the one who is fascist” nonsense here would be funny if it were not disturbing. I have a PhD in History from UC Berkeley (2011). The way that Trump’s rise rhymes with that of Mussolini and Viktor Orban is clear.

  • Alex Mavro says:

    Just like the federal grab-bag possee in DC and Portland, correct? “Violence to destroy opposition,” indeed!

  • Janice K Filley says:

    Now it is 2021.

  • TommyD says:

    EXACTLY. Of course, this is a classic Saul Alinsky tactic of accusing your opponent of exactly what you yourself are doing.

  • TommyD says:

    The NAZIS (National SOCIALIST German Workers Party) were, duh, LEFT WING SOCIALISTS. Everything about the Hitler and his National SOCIALISTS was LEFT WING from their nationalized healthcare to their defacto centrally planned economy.

    Heck, it was Hitler himself who commissioned the design and creation of Liberal’s favorite car, the Volkswagon. Even the car’s names (The People’s Car) is Leftist meme invoking the Collective. Had a Conservative invented the VW it would have been name the Freedom Car invoking the individual.

  • TommyD says:

    Hey, JustSayin,

    DEMS were the slave owners
    DEMS lead the Confederacy
    DEMS founded the KKK
    DEMS wrote the Jim Crow Laws
    DEM President Woodrow Wilson segregated the Federal Government and military
    DEM President Woodrow Wilson promoted the KKK to its zenith of power and respectability
    DEM Superhero MAGARATE SANGER was a rabid, racist, White Supremist who dreamed of eliminating Blacks from the human gene pool. She also proudly published in the April 1933 issue (just after Hitler came to power) of her Birth Control Review magazine an article by Ernst Rudin who was a key intellectual architect of the Halocaust. Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi both proudly accepted, with tears in their eyes, the coveted (by Liberals) MARGARET SANGER AWARD.

    Today’s DEMS think Blacks are too stupid to get VOTER ID. Almost no DEM leaders will denounce the rapid anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan. Virtually all DEMS support Planned Parenthood (founded by White Supremist Margaret Sanger) which targets Blacks for abortion.

  • TommyD says:

    To: Bill W

    Stalin was a Left Wing COMMUNIST. I’m sure you knew this and I appreciate your “ANYONE to the right of Stalin …” expression, but it perpetuates the idea that Communist dictator Stalin was somehow Right Wing.

  • Oliver Surpless says:

    Never unexpected to see such fanciful notions, but after the article has Stanley quoting “fascism succeeds by making “talk of fascism… seem outlandish.”, pulling out the “Nazis were socialists!” canard is a real

  • Oliver Surpless says:

    phenomenon in itself…

    Fortunately we have scholarly articles like this readily available:

    “The Nazi economic theory, as laid down in the Official Party Programme, is not worth the paper it is printed on. The so called socialistic elements were finally purged on June 30, 1934, because they objected to the way things were going, and because their organization, the S.A. (Brownshirted Stormtroopers) was considered dangerous by the powers in the state.

    But it was clear at a much earlier stage that the socialistic talk in the Nazi Party was not to be taken seriously.” – Stargardt, 6 – https://www.jstor.org/stable/20631220

    And the mere fact that Stargardt had figured this out before the war was EVEN over (writing in 1944) suggests that there is a deliberate effort to obfuscate history on the level of the Lost Cause…

Leave a Reply

Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.