;;Order, Authority, Nation;;: Neo-Socialism and the Fascist Destiny of an Anti-Fascist Discourse.

Fascism;Socialism;Conversion;History (General);Sociology;Social Sciences;Sociology

Desan, Mathieu HikaruSapiro, Gisele ;

University of Michigan

关键词: Fascism;    Socialism;    Conversion;    History (General);    Sociology;    Social Sciences;    Sociology;   

Others  :  https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/133506/mdesan_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

In 1933, a faction of the French Socialist Party caused a scandal by proposing ;;Order, Authority, Nation;; as a new basis for Socialist propaganda. Ten years later, some of these so-called ;;neo-socialists;; became Nazi collaborators. In explaining their trajectory, the extant historiography has tended to highlight the elements of neo-socialist ideology that supposedly pre-disposed it toward fascism. But neo-socialism was first articulated as an explicitly anti-fascist discourse. How could an ostensibly anti-fascist discourse mutate into its political opposite?I argue that a relational approach allows us to register the profound transformation in the neo-socialists;; politics despite superficial continuities in their discourse. I draw on discourse analysis to trace the changing meanings of neo-socialism, and on a situational analysis to relate the different moments in its development to their respective political contexts. I claim that, far from being a coherent and fixed doctrine that drove the neo-socialists;; political trajectories, the meaning of neo-socialism changed in relation to its position in a given discursive system and according to the conditions of the political fields in which its protagonists were invested.In Part I, I examine the 1933 schism in which the neo-socialists were expelled from the Socialist Party. I show that neo-socialism was not a ready-made doctrinal revision at the origin of the schism, but only came to be defined as such as a consequence of the schismatic dynamic itself. In Part II, I trace the evolution of neo-socialism from a moderate socialist dissidence in 1933 to an equivocal ;;third way;; position in 1934, and its subsequent decomposition and marginalization during the Popular Front era. I argue that this trajectory was not reducible to inherent ideational features of neo-socialism, but represented at each step an adaptation to a particular state of the political field. In Part III I explain the neo-socialists;; embrace of ;;totalitarianism;; as a function of the competitive dynamics of the field of collaboration. I conclude that the neo-socialists;; path to fascism was not a straight line, but was rather punctuated by a series of ideological adjustments to shifting political fortunes.