The Different Origins of Italian Fascism and German National Socialism: From the Crisis of Liberal States to the Revision of the European Order
The history of twentieth-century Europe is often described through a simplified comparison between Fascism and Nazism, presenting them as two almost identical expressions of authoritarian politics. This interpretation is understandable because the two regimes shared many characteristics: both rejected liberal democracy, opposed Marxist revolutionary movements, created single-party systems, promoted the cult of the leader and developed forms of totalitarian control over society.
However, a deeper historical analysis reveals that Italian Fascism and German National Socialism were born from different circumstances and responded to different historical problems. Their alliance during the Second World War should not obscure the fact that they emerged from distinct national crises and developed different strategic ambitions.
Italian Fascism was primarily the product of the political and social instability that followed the First World War. It grew in a country shaken by economic difficulties, social conflicts and fears of revolutionary upheaval. The movement presented itself as a force capable of restoring state authority, suppressing revolutionary movements and rebuilding national unity.
National Socialism, by contrast, emerged from a defeated Germany that interpreted its post-war condition not only as an internal political crisis but as the consequence of an international order considered hostile to German power. From the beginning, Hitler’s movement presented itself as a revolutionary project aimed at overturning the European balance created after 1918 and restoring Germany as the dominant continental power.
Understanding this difference is essential because it explains why the two regimes, despite their similarities, pursued different historical objectives.
Europe After the First World War: The Collapse of the Old Order
The First World War represented one of the greatest turning points in modern history. It did not simply produce a military defeat for some countries and victory for others; it destroyed the political structure that had governed Europe for more than a century.
The German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman Empires collapsed. Monarchies disappeared. New states were created. Millions of soldiers returned home after years of brutal conflict, facing unemployment, economic uncertainty and social disillusionment.
The economic consequences were devastating. European countries were burdened by enormous debts, industrial production had been disrupted and inflation weakened the purchasing power of large sections of society.
At the same time, the political consequences were equally profound. The Russian Revolution of 1917 introduced a completely new ideological challenge. For the first time, a revolutionary socialist movement had successfully seized power in a major European country and openly promoted the expansion of communist revolution beyond Russia.
Across Europe, many conservative groups, business elites and middle classes feared that the social tensions produced by the war could lead to revolutionary movements similar to the Bolshevik Revolution.
However, the way these fears developed was different in Italy and Germany.
In Italy, the main concern was the possibility of internal social revolution and the collapse of political authority.
In Germany, the crisis was connected not only to social instability but also to national defeat, territorial losses and the desire to overturn the international system created after the war.
These different starting points shaped the development of Fascism and Nazism.
Italy After the War: The Birth of Fascism as a Response to Internal Crisis
Italy emerged from the First World War on the winning side, but victory did not bring political stability.
Although the country had obtained some territorial gains, many Italians believed that the sacrifices made during the conflict had not been adequately rewarded. This feeling became known as the idea of the “mutilated victory” and contributed to widespread frustration.
The economic situation was extremely difficult.
War industries had to be converted back to civilian production.
Inflation reduced wages and savings.
Unemployment increased.
Millions of veterans returned to a society unable to offer them adequate opportunities.
At the same time, Italy experienced a period of intense social conflict between 1919 and 1920, known as the Biennio Rosso (Red Biennium).
Factories were occupied.
General strikes spread.
Agricultural conflicts intensified.
Socialist organizations gained significant influence among workers and peasants.
For many sectors of Italian society, especially industrial entrepreneurs, landowners and parts of the middle class, the situation appeared to be moving toward revolutionary chaos.
It was within this environment that Benito Mussolini founded the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento in 1919.
Initially, Fascism was not a clearly defined ideological system. It contained different elements: nationalism, revolutionary rhetoric, anti-socialism, demands for political reform and the legacy of interventionism from the First World War.
However, the movement quickly transformed itself into a force primarily focused on restoring order and fighting socialist organizations.
Italian Fascism and the Defense of the Social and Political Order
The rise of Fascism was connected to the fear that the Italian state was losing control over society.
Many conservative groups viewed Fascist squads as a tool capable of restoring stability and preventing a socialist revolution.
A significant part of historical scholarship has emphasized that Fascism gained support not only because of political violence but also because many Italians considered parliamentary democracy unable to manage the country’s crisis.
The Fascist movement presented itself as an alternative to what it described as the weakness of liberal institutions.
When Mussolini came to power after the March on Rome in 1922, he gradually transformed the movement into an authoritarian state system.
The Fascist conception of politics placed the state at the center of national life.
The individual was considered part of a larger national community.
Social conflicts between classes were supposed to be overcome through the corporative system, in which workers and employers were organized under state supervision.
The famous Fascist idea that “everything exists within the State” reflected this attempt to create a political system in which the state controlled economic, social and cultural life.
However, despite its authoritarian nature and imperial ambitions, Italian Fascism remained primarily focused on strengthening Italy itself.
Mussolini wanted Italy to become a great power, inspired by the symbolic legacy of ancient Rome. His ambitions were concentrated mainly on the Mediterranean, Africa and southeastern Europe.
The Fascist project was therefore fundamentally a national project: the transformation of the Italian state into a stronger and more influential power.
Germany After 1918: Defeat, Versailles and the Search for Revision
The German situation after the First World War was fundamentally different.
Germany was not a victorious country experiencing internal instability. It was a defeated great power that had lost its imperial position.
The collapse of the German Empire in 1918 created a deep political crisis.
The new Weimar Republic inherited the consequences of defeat and became associated, in the eyes of many Germans, with national humiliation.
The Treaty of Versailles of 1919 became the central symbol of this resentment.
Germany lost important territories.
Its military forces were severely limited.
Its colonial possessions disappeared.
Economic reparations placed additional pressure on an already fragile economy.
Many Germans considered Versailles not simply a peace treaty but an imposed settlement designed to permanently weaken their country.
This perception became one of the foundations of radical nationalist movements.
Unlike Italy, where Fascism developed mainly from fears of social revolution, Germany’s crisis was closely connected to the question of national power and international status.
The central question was not only:
“How can Germany restore internal order?”
but also:
“How can Germany regain its position among the great powers?”
The Weimar Crisis and the Rise of National Socialism
During the 1920s, Germany experienced repeated crises.
The hyperinflation of 1923 destroyed the savings of millions of citizens and deeply damaged confidence in democratic institutions.
Political violence increased.
Extreme movements from both the left and the right challenged the stability of the republic.
Then the Great Depression of 1929 produced an even more dramatic collapse.
Millions of Germans lost their jobs.
Economic insecurity intensified political radicalization.
It was in this environment that Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (NSDAP) transformed themselves from a marginal political movement into a mass organization.
The Nazi movement exploited economic desperation, national frustration and distrust toward parliamentary democracy.
However, the ideological foundation of National Socialism contained an element that distinguished it from Italian Fascism: the interpretation of Germany’s crisis as part of a much larger international struggle.
For Hitler, Germany’s problems could not be solved simply through domestic political reform.
The entire European order created after 1918 had to be changed.
National Socialism as a Revisionist Geopolitical Project
From the beginning, Hitler viewed the Treaty of Versailles as only one expression of a broader international system that prevented Germany from becoming a dominant power.
The objective of National Socialism was therefore not merely to revise certain clauses of the peace settlement.
It was to create a completely different European order.
Hitler believed that Germany needed to recover its status as the leading continental power through military reconstruction, territorial expansion and the creation of a larger economic and strategic space.
This vision was later expressed through the concept of Lebensraum, or “living space.”
According to Hitler’s geopolitical thinking, Germany required additional territory and resources, especially in Eastern Europe, to become an autonomous great power.
The Nazi project was therefore not simply a nationalist movement seeking national revival.
It was a revolutionary attempt to transform the balance of power in Europe.
This represents the fundamental difference between Fascism and Nazism.
Italian Fascism sought to strengthen the Italian state within the international system.
National Socialism sought to replace the existing European order with a new hierarchy centered on Germany.
Two Movements, Two Different Historical Missions
By the end of the 1920s, Fascism and Nazism shared many characteristics, but their historical purposes were different.
Italian Fascism emerged from the fear of internal collapse and revolutionary conflict. Its primary objective was the reconstruction of state authority and the creation of a strong national regime.
German National Socialism emerged from defeat, national humiliation and the desire to overturn the international structure established after World War I.
The Fascist question was:
How can Italy become stronger?
The Nazi question was:
How can Germany transform the European balance of power?
This difference would become increasingly clear after Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, when Germany began a policy of rearmament, territorial revision and geopolitical expansion that would eventually lead Europe into another world war.
The Nazi Geopolitical Project, German Continental Hegemony and the Challenge to the International Order
The deepest difference between Italian Fascism and German National Socialism becomes evident when analyzing their approach to international politics.
Both movements rejected liberal democracy, opposed Marxist revolutionary movements and developed authoritarian states based on nationalism and political control. However, their understanding of power and their ambitions beyond their national borders were fundamentally different.
Italian Fascism sought to restore Italy’s status as a great power. Mussolini wanted to transform Italy into a stronger nation, inspired by the symbolic memory of the Roman Empire and determined to expand Italian influence in the Mediterranean, Africa and southeastern Europe.
National Socialism, on the other hand, represented a much more radical project. Hitler did not simply want Germany to recover lost prestige. He wanted to overturn the entire European balance of power created after the First World War and establish a new continental order dominated by Germany.
The Nazi movement therefore cannot be understood only as an authoritarian nationalist regime. It was also a geopolitical project aimed at changing the structure of international relations.
The British-Led International System and the German Question
To understand Hitler’s foreign policy ambitions, it is necessary to examine the international system that existed before the Second World War.
During the nineteenth century, Great Britain had built a global position based on naval superiority, colonial expansion, commercial networks and financial influence.
The British Empire represented a unique form of power. Unlike traditional continental empires based mainly on territorial expansion, Britain’s strength depended on controlling maritime routes, global trade and strategic points around the world.
London’s historical strategy was based on preventing any single European power from dominating the continent.
This principle had guided British policy during the Napoleonic Wars and continued to influence British diplomacy throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
The rise of Germany after unification in 1871 created a new challenge.
The German Empire quickly became one of the most powerful industrial economies in the world. Its steel production, chemical industries, scientific institutions and technological development placed it among the leading nations of the modern era.
However, Germany’s economic power was not matched by equivalent geopolitical influence.
Unlike Britain, Germany did not possess a global empire of comparable size, nor did it control the major maritime routes that connected the world economy.
This contradiction contributed to tensions that eventually led to the First World War.
After 1919, the situation became even more dramatic. Germany was no longer simply a rising power competing within the existing system. It had become a defeated nation whose international position had been drastically reduced.
For Hitler and the Nazi movement, this situation was unacceptable.
The Treaty of Versailles as the Symbol of a Defeated Germany
The Treaty of Versailles became one of the central elements of Nazi political propaganda.
For Hitler, Versailles represented not only the consequences of military defeat but the symbol of an international system designed to prevent Germany’s return as a great power.
Germany had lost territories, military capacity and colonial possessions.
Its armed forces were severely restricted.
Its influence in European affairs was limited.
The Nazi movement presented this condition as proof that Germany had been deliberately weakened by foreign powers.
However, Hitler’s objectives went far beyond the simple cancellation of Versailles.
The goal was not merely to restore Germany to the position it held before 1914.
The objective was to create a new order in which Germany would become the dominant political and strategic force in continental Europe.
The revision of Versailles was therefore only the first stage of a much larger geopolitical program.
Hitler’s Vision of a German Continental Empire
The concept of Lebensraum, or “living space,” was one of the most important elements of Hitler’s geopolitical thinking.
According to this vision, Germany needed additional territory, resources and strategic depth in order to become an independent great power.
The areas of Eastern Europe became the main focus of Nazi expansion plans.
These territories were viewed as essential for obtaining agricultural resources, raw materials and security.
Unlike the traditional colonial ambitions of maritime empires, Nazi expansion was primarily continental.
The objective was not simply to acquire overseas colonies but to transform the political structure of Europe itself.
In this sense, the Nazi project represented a radical attempt to replace the existing balance of power with a German-centered continental system.
The difference from British imperial power was therefore significant.
The British Empire was based mainly on maritime dominance and global commerce.
The Nazi vision was based on territorial control and continental supremacy.
Germany and the British Empire: Rival Models of Power
Hitler’s relationship with Britain was complex.
On one hand, he admired certain aspects of British imperial power.
He viewed the British Empire as an example of how a nation could organize a vast geopolitical space and maintain global influence.
On the other hand, he believed that Germany should achieve a similar position of dominance within Europe.
Hitler’s strategic vision suggested that Britain and Germany could potentially divide spheres of influence:
Britain would remain the dominant maritime empire.
Germany would become the dominant continental power.
However, this ambition directly conflicted with the traditional British principle of maintaining a balance of power in Europe.
A Germany controlling Central and Eastern Europe would represent a direct challenge to British strategic interests.
Historically, Britain had opposed the emergence of any single continental power capable of threatening its security.
For this reason, the Nazi project inevitably came into conflict with London.
Fascist Imperialism and Nazi Expansionism: Two Different Objectives
The differences between Mussolini and Hitler become especially clear when comparing their imperial ambitions.
Italian Fascism sought an empire inspired by Rome.
The conquest of Ethiopia in 1935 represented the most visible expression of this ambition.
Mussolini wanted Italy to be recognized as a major international power and believed colonial expansion was necessary to achieve this goal.
However, Italian imperialism remained limited by Italy’s economic and military capabilities.
The Fascist project aimed primarily at increasing national prestige.
The Nazi project was different.
Hitler did not simply want Germany to become more powerful.
He wanted to restructure the European system.
The goal was not merely territorial expansion but the creation of a new political hierarchy in which Germany would occupy the dominant position.
This explains why Nazi foreign policy became increasingly aggressive and revolutionary.
The issue was not only gaining territory.
It was changing the entire organization of European power.
The Ideological Dimension of National Socialism
A fundamental element of National Socialism was its racial ideology.
Unlike Italian Fascism in its original form, which initially focused primarily on nationalism, state authority and political transformation, Nazism placed racial concepts at the center of its worldview.
The Nazi interpretation of history was based on a distorted vision of racial struggle.
This ideology influenced both domestic policies and foreign ambitions.
Antisemitism was a central component of Nazi ideology. Hitler promoted conspiracy theories that falsely attributed complex economic and political phenomena to Jewish communities.
Historians have demonstrated that these accusations were ideological constructions and propaganda tools rather than accurate explanations of economic or international processes.
Nevertheless, these beliefs were fundamental to understanding the radical nature of the Nazi regime.
Nazism did not simply identify political opponents.
It created the concept of an absolute enemy, a process that contributed to increasingly extreme policies and ultimately to the Holocaust.
The racial worldview of Nazism therefore intensified the revolutionary and destructive nature of its political project.
Why Mussolini Failed to Fully Understand Hitler’s Project
The relationship between Mussolini and Hitler reveals another important difference between Fascism and National Socialism.
Initially, Mussolini considered Hitler a useful ideological and geopolitical ally.
The Italian leader hoped that cooperation with Germany would strengthen Italy’s international position.
However, the German project was far more ambitious.
Hitler was not seeking merely a stronger ally or a revision of individual treaties.
He was pursuing a fundamental transformation of European power relations.
As Germany became stronger, the relationship between the two countries changed.
Italy gradually moved from being a partner to becoming the weaker member of the Axis alliance.
The alliance between Rome and Berlin demonstrated that the two regimes, despite their ideological similarities, had different strategic capacities and different geopolitical objectives.
Mussolini wanted Italy to rise within the existing international system.
Hitler wanted to replace that system.
The Second World War as a Clash Between Different International Visions
The outbreak of the Second World War cannot be understood only as a conflict between individual countries.
It was also a clash between different visions of international organization.
The Allied powers defended, despite their own contradictions, a system based on preserving the balance of power established after 1918.
Nazi Germany sought to overthrow that system and replace it with a new European order centered on German dominance.
The war therefore represented the culmination of Hitler’s revisionist strategy.
The occupation of neighboring countries, the destruction of the Versailles restrictions and the expansion toward Eastern Europe were not isolated decisions.
They were parts of a broader geopolitical project.
The Nazi regime believed that Germany could only achieve security through domination of the continent.
This idea transformed European politics into a struggle for control over the future structure of international power.
Two Movements, Different Historical Purposes
Fascism and Nazism shared many characteristics, but they were not identical historical phenomena.
Italian Fascism emerged from the crisis of the liberal state after World War I. It was primarily a movement aimed at restoring authority, suppressing revolutionary threats and transforming Italian society through an authoritarian national state.
German National Socialism emerged from defeat, resentment toward Versailles and the ambition to overturn the international order.
The central difference can be summarized as follows:
Fascism sought to transform the Italian state. National Socialism sought to transform the European system of power.
Mussolini’s objective was to make Italy a great power.
Hitler’s objective was to make Germany the dominant power of continental Europe.
This distinction explains why Nazi Germany pursued a far more radical foreign policy and why its actions produced a conflict of unprecedented scale.
The Nazi movement was not simply an authoritarian government seeking influence within the existing international system.
It was a revolutionary geopolitical project aimed at creating a new order.
Its failure in 1945 marked not only the defeat of Germany but also the collapse of one of the most ambitious and destructive attempts to reshape the political structure of Europe in modern history.