StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Hello there. This is an aspect of the Star Wars saga I haven't seen much discussed, and I registered to get your opinions on it.

Robert O. Paxton, in his excellent study The Anatomy of Fascism, holds that there are three primary characteristics unique to a fascist form of government (i.e. National Socialist Germany under Hitler and Fascist Italy under Mussolini) that differentiate it from a run-of-the-mill paternalistic despotism (such as Portugal under António de Oliveira Salazar):

1. The first, and most obvious, is the lack of a Party to compete with the civilian bureaucracy or civil service in a generic dictatorship. In both Nazi Germany and Italy under Mussolini the bureaucracy was stymied by the existence of similar services under the direct control of Party leadership. This often caused the system to bloat. The lack of the total dominance of a single party in Franco's Spain (the falangistas existed, but after Franco's rise to power were marginalized in favor of the existing social system), for instance, leads Paxton to consider 'Fascist Portugal' a sort of aborted fascist state.

2. A radicalization of the fascist movement - fascism, like Communism, is very much a revolutionary movement in that it relies upon a glorification of physical violence and hierarchical social systems in extremis to keep itself alive. These radical strains of fascism often appear during the birth and the collapse of such a movement, and 'traditional' authoritarians - such as the aforementioned Salazar, a quiet scholar who wanted nothing to do with the fascist extremists in his nation - tend to shy away from this. Fascisms tend to be vitalistic; dictatorships merely stodgily conservative.

3. The existence of a broad support base made up from members of all classes. While traditional tyrannies tend to be established by members of one class (such as the military in the instance of a junta), fascist societies are often established with the support of members of all walks of life. The industrial proletariat and the factory-owner might throw in for the same fascist party, for two highly different reasons: the former out of enthusiasm for its anti-bourgeois rhetoric, the latter out of an illusion that fascism is a mere reactionary form of conservatism.

Taking these three differences into account, I think any attempt to call the Galactic Empire a 'fascist' state is misbegotten. Other than COMPNOR, which seems merely to be a sort of political think-tank, there is no official 'Imperial' party, and while Palpatine certainly prompted his underlings to compete with each other for attention he never seems to have established a Party-based rival to the civilian government in place since the days of the Galactic Republic. Further, there is no evidence of any sort of radicalization, and Palpatine's rise to power differs from the real-life ascensions of Hitler and Mussolini in that, while the real-world nations were fully aware of the party platforms of the fascists, Palpatine gave no hint of his ambitions. The only similarity between the Galactic Empire and a fascist state is that both the fictional Empire and real-life fascist governments were established during periods of tremendous political turmoil and social upheaval, while most dictatorships are generally created during periods of stagnation.

The Italian fascist movement began as a perverse form of anarcho-syndicalism. Fascism's roots lie in revolutionary political theory, while 'mere' authoritarian dictatorships are much more banal. I do not feel either is an appropriate description of the Galactic Empire.

Publis is probably going to be in here as soon as he shows, up, and totaly blow what I am going to say out of the water with his awesomeness. Regardless, I'll list why I disagree.
I'd personally consider the 'New Order' at least in its early stages, to be Facist in the classical sense. Palpatine had a lot of new people come into government, people who did fill the roll of the Party. They were not uniformly from across the galaxy or of the same age but instead weighted towards the youth of the core. Irregardless, the number of competeing agencies under the Emperor seem to indicate that the first requirement is being fulfilled.
If the Declaration of Palpatine Galactic Emperor was not radical, I do not know what was. Furthermore, the Imperial state depended on the Sepratists and the Rebels to keep the public keyed up and fearful. This helped secure its stability as the Republic was phased out.
Imperial supportes do seem to come from many walks of life. Thrawn and Tarkin both held high office and each had his own reasons for being there.

So in conclusion, the Empire might not be EXACTLY fascist, but that word seems closer than any other. If both Rome and America can be republics, why doesn't the Empire fit the definition of a Fascist state?

Vehrec wrote:Publis is probably going to be in here as soon as he shows, up, and totaly blow what I am going to say out of the water with his awesomeness. Regardless, I'll list why I disagree.
I'd personally consider the 'New Order' at least in its early stages, to be Facist in the classical sense. Palpatine had a lot of new people come into government, people who did fill the roll of the Party. They were not uniformly from across the galaxy or of the same age but instead weighted towards the youth of the core. Irregardless, the number of competeing agencies under the Emperor seem to indicate that the first requirement is being fulfilled.
If the Declaration of Palpatine Galactic Emperor was not radical, I do not know what was. Furthermore, the Imperial state depended on the Sepratists and the Rebels to keep the public keyed up and fearful. This helped secure its stability as the Republic was phased out.
Imperial supportes do seem to come from many walks of life. Thrawn and Tarkin both held high office and each had his own reasons for being there.

So in conclusion, the Empire might not be EXACTLY fascist, but that word seems closer than any other. If both Rome and America can be republics, why doesn't the Empire fit the definition of a Fascist state?

I have no doubt that the Galactic Empire had a number of characteristics that would be regarded as 'fascist' in nature, most explicitly its corporatist economic policy. What I argue, however, is that it lacks certain characteristics unique to the fascist form of government which are not present in more traditional authoritarian polities.

Even the xenocentrism displayed by the Empire is not expressly fascist, in that certain real-life fascist governments (i.e. Mussolini's) were not influenced by the biologicist vogue common in nothern Europe at the time, and adopted anti-Jewish measures, for instance, only when it became apparent that it was necessary to appease Hitler.

As for 'radicalization', what is meant is a complete devotion of the national economy and national structures to total war, as exemplified in Goebbel's Sportpalast speech. The Galactic Empire never fought such a war.

Another objection which might be offered against the fascist interpretation of the Empire is in the existence of an Empire itself - historical fascists saw themself as much opponents of 'traditional' reaction in the form of the Church and the crown as much as they were enemies of socialism. Mussolini, for instance, worked to greatly undermine the powers of the court of Vittorio Emmanuel. While this is more to do with Italy's historical position than any docrtinal opposition on the part of fascism, one would not expect to find a fascist leader assuming the title of 'Emperor' or creating a nobility.