Renewed Latvia. A Case Study of the Transnational Fascism Model
This article examines the lesser-known authoritarian regime of Kārlis Ulmanis, the Vadonis [Leader] of Latvia from 1934-1940, as a case study of transnational fascism. Specifically, by investigating the nature of Mazpulki [Latvian 4-H] – an agricultural youth organization modeled on American 4-H which became during the Ulmanis regime a sort of unofficial ‘Ulmanis Youth’ institution – and its international connections, and particularly with Italy, the article contends that we should view the Ulmanis regime as having been part of the transnational fascist wave that swept over Europe in the period between the two world wars. The article also makes the historiographical point that the transnational fascism model offers key analytical methods for interpreting fascism’s syncretic nature, especially in the case of those regimes which had some recognizable features of ‘generic’ fascism but which have previously been categorized as merely authoritarian. Future studies of such regimes will expand our understanding of the nature of and links between the many varied manifestations of interwar fascism.
The Nature of Fascism
Preface Acknowldgements 1. The 'Nature' of Generic Facsism 2. A New Ideal Type of Generic Facsism 3. Italisan Fascism 4. German Fascism 5. Abortive Fascist Movements in Inter-war Europe 6. Non-European and Post-war Fascisms 7. The Psycho-historical Bases of Generic Fascism 8. Socio-political Determinants of Fascism's Success Postscript Index Glossary
The Men of the Archangel
We are often told that fascist movements recruit most heavily among the middle or lower middle classes, a point which is supposed to show their essentially conservative or reactionary nature. This raises several questions. First: is the assertion factually correct? Do fascist or fascist-type movements actually draw their leaders and followers in significantly high proportions from the middle sections of society ? Second: is the concept of middle classes a meaningful one in this context? And last: is there something particularly reactionary about those groups among whom fascism recruits most heavily and, indeed, what are the particular characteristics of such groups ? If questions of this nature are more easily asked than answered, it is because information is thin on the ground. Analytical studies of party membership and party leadership are very scarce indeed. No study like Daniel Lerner's Nazi Elite has been devoted to other movements. Harold Lasswell and Renzo Sereno on 'Governmental and Party Leaders in Fascist Italy', published nearly thirty years ago,1 is not very helpful; Dante L. Germino's Italian Fascist Party in Power adds little on this score; the NSDAP has fared a little better, with Hans Gerth's essay (in Robert K. Merton, ed., Reader in Bureaucracy), Rudolf Heberle's studies of Schleswig-Holstein, written in the thirties and gathered in a slim but useful volume, From Democracy to Nazism, and Theodore Abel's very suggestive inquiry among Nazi Party members, Why Hitler Came Into Power. But that is about all. And in the absence of evidence, especially such evidence as would allow us to compare the recruitment and motivations of fascist movements in different countries and condi-