Fascism : 100 Questions
Asked and Answered
 The
following is an extract from the 1936 British Union of Fascists publication
which answers 100 questions about Oswald Mosley and British Fascism.
Why did you
leave the Socialist Party ?
For the same
reason that I left the Conservative Party, namely that it had broken every
pledge it ever gave. I entered Parliament as the youngest member after
the war. I was Conservative because that Party had been loyal to the country
in the war and advanced a great programme of Social Reform. "A land
fit for heroes to live in" is a bitter mockery in the light of the
subsequent betrayal, but it was a living reality to my generation at the
end of the war. That conception went down in the triumph of the war profiteers
who comprised the majority of the post-war Parliament. I left the Conservative
Party and fought and beat them twice as an Independent in their old stronghold
at Harrow. Independence appeared to me to be sterile in service to the
country, and I joined the Labour Party, which then presented the only
hope of any effective action despite its many and obvious defects.
For seven years I
worked hard for Labour, and in 1929 we came to office on a pledge to tackle
unemployment. I was one of the three Ministers charged with that great
task. For a year the Government would do nothing. At the end of a year
I produced a plan I had worked out within the Departments for giving immediate
work to 800,000 men and women, and a futher long term policy for the reconstruction
of British industry in accord with modern facts. I said to the Government
"Either accept this plan or produce a better one of your own."
They would do neither, and I resigned. I took the issue to the Parliamentary
Party warning them of the coming crisis which arrived eighteen months
later. Out of 290 only 29 voted with me. I took the issue to the Party
Conference and over a million voted with me, but the big block vote in
the hands of the Trade Union bosses voted us down. I then turned my back
for ever on the old system and began the long and hard struggle to create
from nothing the new force capable of winning a new civilisation.
The Labour Party,
including the present Leaders, clung to their offices for another year,
while the unemployment figures mounted by over a million until the bankers
knocked them on the head like the tame cattle they were. These men climbed
to great positions on the shoulders of the workers, only to betray them
for office and power. It was right to give both the old Parties a chance
to make good - I shall never regret it. If I and millions of others had
not given them that chance our case for a new Movement would not now be
so strong. The fact that I have belonged to both the old Parties is often
urged against me. I regard it as one of the strong points in my case and
am prepared to argue it before any tribunal of my countrymen. For they
too have trusted the old Parties and have been betrayed by them.
How
could the Labour Party carry out their Policy when they had not a majority
?
The
simple and conclusive answer is another question. If they had an unemployment
policy, why did they not present it to Parliament ? If they had been defeated
they could have gone back to the country and swept it at a General Election.
They had neither a policy to present nor the courage to fight.
Why is the
Movement called Fascist ?
Fascism is the name by which the modern Movement has come to be known
in the world. It would have been possible to avoid misrepresentation by
calling our Movement by another name. But it was more honest to call it
Fascism and thus to let everyone know exactly where we stood. It is up
to us to defeat misrepresentation by propaganda and explanation of the
real policy and method of Fascism as it will operate in Britain. In the
long run straightforward dealing is not only honest but also pays best.
The alternative name for the modern Movement is the National Socialism
used in Germany. But the German Movement also is known throughout the
outside world as Fascist, which is the name commonly used to describe
the phenomenon of the modern Movement whether in Britain, Germany or Italy.
National Socialism and Fascism in my view are the same Movement, finding
different expressions in different countries in accord with different
national and racial characteristics. For seven years in the Labour Party
before founding Fascism in Britain, I fought for a National Socialist
Policy in contradistinction to the International Socialism of that Party.
If you do
not copy foreign ideas, why do you (1) wear a black shirt, (2) use the
Italian Fascist salute, (3) use the Italian Fasces ?
(1) We wear a Blackshirt because the colour Black best expresses the iron
determination of Fascism in the conquest of red anarchy. Symbolism in
itself is nothing new in British politics. The Conservatives, who are
naturally rather shy about their creed, wear a modest primrose once a
year in memory of Mr. Disraeli. The Liberals wear rosettes of varying
hues at election time. The Socialists wore red ties until they faded pink
after the last Labour Government. In symbolism as in our creed we are
more full-blooded people and, literally as well as metaphorically, have
put our shirt on Fascism. Our members are not compelled to wear the Blackshirt.
In most districts only about 1 in 20 wear it. But those who have worn
the Blackshirt in the early days and publicly proclaimed their faith before
the world, have performed a service to Fascism which will never be forgotten.
Strongly held opinions, strongly expressed, are a necessity in the chaos
of a flabby age. The Blackshirt, therefore, is the symbol of Fascism.
(2) The salute is
not Italian nor is it German, but the Germans also use it. It is the oldest
salute of European civilisation and was used in early Britain many centuries
before a Fascist Party was created in Italy.
(3) The Fasces, too,
are a symbol used in Britain for the last 2,000 years and are to be found
on most of our great monuments. The symbol was brought to Britain by our
Roman ancestors, who were here for four centuries and their stock remained
for ever. The Fasces were the symbol of the Roman Empire. What more fitting
than that they should be used by the Empire which succeeded and surpassed
the Roman Empire ?
What
does the flash and circle mean ?
This is our modern
symbol which belongs exclusively to British Fascism. It portrays the flash
of action in the circle of unity. National action can only come from national
unity, which in its turn can only come from Fascism that ends the strife
of Parties.
What are the
differences between Fascism in Britain and Fascism in Italy and Germany
?
The main difference
is that they are Italian or German and that we are British. From this
all other differences follow. Fascism in essence is a national creed finding
a different national expression and method in each nation. For this reason,
Fascist Movements in' each country vary more than Socialist or Communist
Movements, which are international. All great Movements have been common
to the world as a whole, both political and religious. All the old Parties
have their foreign counterparts. Liberalism, for instance, deluged the
continent with blood, but came to Great Britain by British methods characteristic
of this nation's ordered greatness. In this respect we do what our forefathers
did before us. We seek to bring the creed of our age to Great Britain
by British methods in accord with British character. We seek also to emulate
their example by finding for the creed of our age its highest expression
and development in these islands. The British have not always originated
the creed of the age, but they have usually perfected it. We claim that
the policy of Fascism in Britain goes far beyond any continental analogy
in constructive conception.
How are you
going to break down the barriers of class ?
By establishment
of the principle of no reward without service, and the consequent elimination
of the parasite who creates the barrier of social class. Functional differences
will exist according to difference of function, but differences of social
classes will be eliminated. They arise from the fact that in present society
the few can live in idleness as a master class upon the production of
the many. Under Fascism all will serve in varying manner and degree the
nation to which all are responsible.
This present
conception of divided social classes invades even productive spheres.
With the abolition of a parasitic cUss by our proposals for dealing with
hereditary wealth, this tendency too, will be eliminated. The Managing
Director of a business will perform a different function from that which
the Charwoman performs in sweeping out his office. But the difference
will be functional and not social. Outside the difference of function
and of service the Fascist State recognises no difference between its
citizens. The recognition of functional differences, however, marks another
difference between Fascism and Socialism. The equalitarian doctrines of
the latter, which are not only social but functional, lead logically to
the performance of the Managing Director's function by a committee of
Charwomen.
We believe everywhere
in the Leadership principle and the functional differentiation which allocates
definite responsibility to the individual. This principle rests on an
obvious fact of human nature which Socialism ignores. Men and women are
born with varying gifts and capacities.
What
about Freedom ?
At present the
mass of the people have no freedom. Under Fascism for the first time they
will have freedom. What is the use of a vote if the people never get what
they vote for ? How can they get what they vote for when only two big
Bills can be carried through Parliament in a whole year on account of
obstruction ? The beginning of freedom for the people is that the programme
for which they vote shall be carried out. It cannot be carried out until
the Government has power to act. By giving" Government the power
to act, Fascism brings not the end of freedom but the beginning of freedom.
Real freedom is economic freedom. Economic freedom cannot come until economic
chaos ends ; and it cannot end until a Government has power to act.
Real freedom means
good wages, short hours, security in employment, good houses, opportunity
for leisure and recreation with family and friends. Modern Science enables
us to build such a civilisation. It is not built, because Democracy prefers
talk to action. We have to choose between the freedom of a few professional
politicians to talk and the freedom of the people to live. In choosing
the latter, Fascism makes freedom possible and releases the people from
the economic slavery riveted upon them by the Democracy of talk.
What is your
attitude towards religion ?
We believe in
complete religious toleration. The Fascist attitude is well summarised
by the Christian precept " Render unto Caesar the things that are
Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's."
We are concerned with
the business of the Nation, not with the business of religion. None of
the great religions preach the subversion of the State, and therefore
they have no conflict with Fascism. On the contrary we welcome religion
which inculcates a sense of service and of spiritual values, for service
and the values of the spirit are the essence of Fascism.
Will there
be freedom of the Press under Fascism and will newspapers be free to criticise
the Government ?
The Press will
not be free to tell lies. That is not freedom for the people but a tyranny
over their minds and souls. Much humbug is talked on this subject. What
is Press freedom ? In practice it means the right of a few millionaires
to corner newspaper shares on the stock exchange and to voice their own
opinions and interests irrespective of the truth or of the national interest.
Newspapers are not
made any longer by news or journalism. They are made by sheer weight of
money expressed in free gift schemes, etc. They serve not the interests
of the many but the vested interests of the few. In that service they
will stoop to any lie or any debauch of the public mind. This must be
stopped, and the freedom of the National Press to serve great interests
at the expense of the nation must be curtailed. On the other hand, local
newspapers, generally speaking, are fairly conducted, with a sense of
national responsibility and will certainly be treated differently by Fascism
from the great dope machines of the vested interests which now are dignified
by the undeserved title of National Press.
Constructive criticism
will always be welcomed by Fascist Government. False and malicious criticism
designed to serve vested interests will be dealt with as follows. The
Government representing the Nation will have the same right to sue a newspaper
which makes untrue statements about it, as an individual at present possesses.
If an individual is libeled he has redress in the Courts. But the Nation
has no redress. Any lie may be told by a newspaper, however damaging to
the national interest, with complete impunity. Lies against the nation
should be dealt with even more severely than lies against the individual.
Therefore, the right to sue in the Courts should be extended to the Nation
represented by its elected Government. Press attacks on the Crown and
Royal family will be regarded as an extremely serious offence. In brief,
our Press policy is that newspapers shall tell the truth. The principle
is novel but who can say that it is wrong ?
Will free
speech be allowed such as is enjoyed today by Parties in opposition
to the Government ?
When the Parties
come to an end, their methods will also come to an end. But in place of
that obsolete system the people will possess a much more real freedom
of speech than they enjoy to-day. The people have no freedom of speech
to-day except in private conversation, which gets them nowhere. Only the
organised Parties can afford to take halls for meetings, and only professional
talkers from Westminster do the talking. The liberty of professional talkers
to talk for ever while the Nation perishes will certainly be curtailed.
But idle faction will be replaced by opportunity for the whole people
to express their opinions, and to help the Government with constructive
criticism in the great corporations constituted for that purpose. Within
the appropriate corporation every farmer or farm-worker, every engineer
and miner, every doctor and accountant, every housewife in the special
corporation for married women, will be invited to express their opinion
and their suggestions will be welcomed. That is real freedom of speech.
Will Fascism
allow opposition parties to exist ?
It is the deliberate
aim of Fascism to bring to an end the Party game which we believe to be
the ruin of the Nation. We substitute a new system of action suited to
the modern age for the system of talk which belongs to the past. For instance,
a Parliament elected under Fascism will be a technical and not a political
Parliament. The franchise will be occupational and not geographical. Men
and women will vote according to their industry or profession, and not
according to their locality. They will vote for people versed in the problems
of their industries, and not for professional politicians. In such a system
there is no place for parties and for politicians. We shall ask the people
for a mandate to bring to an end the Party system and the Parties. We
invite them to enter a new civilisation. Parties and the Party game belong
to the old civilisation, which has failed.
What about
Dictatorship ?
The Fascist
Movement represents Leadership, not Tyranny. It offers to the people a
Leadership in national revival which they will accept of their own free
will. The Dictatorship is a Dictatorship of the will of the people expressed
through a Leadership and Government of their own choice. The only way
in which the will of the people can be carried out is through a Leadership
which they choose for the purpose and give the power to act.
Fascism offers that
Leadership through which the will of the people can be effective. Thus
a Dictatorship of the people themselves replaces the present Dictatorship
of Vested Interests. Parliament and Government are paralysed by universal
talk. Programmes for which the people have voted are never implemented.
As a result real Government under Democracy rests in the hands of the
great interests, such as International Finance. Fascism restores to power
the people. That power can only be expressed through Leadership voluntarily
accepted and chosen, but armed by the people with power to do what they
want done.
How will you
gain power ?
By legal and
constitutional means. We seek power by the winning of a Parliamentary
majority. Directly we have completed our election machinery we shall contest
Parliamentary elections. Our first task was to create the Fascist Movement.
Our second task is to create an election machine, which in Britain is
a highly technical process. When this second stage is complete we shall
fight elections.
How will you
use Parliamentary Power ?
The first Act
of a Fascist majority will be to confer on Fascist Government the power
to act by Order, subject to the right of Parliament at any time to dismiss
the Government by vote of censure if it abuses that Power. Thus we shall
combine the power of the Government to act with the right of the people
to control the Government through the Parliament they have elected.
If a Government
has the power to act by order does it then injure the freedom of Debate
and the right of minorities ?
The present
system ignores the fact that majorities also have their rights. In the
name of free debate a minority now has the power to prevent a Government
carrying out the programme for which the majority of the people have voted.
The first necessity is to secure the right of the majority to the action
which they demand by their vote. This is impossible so long as an obstructive
opposition has the power by endless talk to prevent action by Government.
The will of the people is greater than the right of the minority. That
first principle is denied by the practices of present Democracy.
How do the
people retain control of a Fascist Government after giving it ''power
of action by order"?
(1) The Parliament
they have elected can at any time dismiss it by vote of censure. In this
respect they retain the same control as they at present possess.
(2) At the end of
a normal lifetime of a Parliament or a lesser period they can themselves
dismiss it by a direct vote on universal franchise. The most effective
control the people can possess is that any Government will have this possibility
in mind.
At the end
of the first Fascist Parliament how would Governments be chosen and Parliaments
elected ?
The first Fascist
Parliament will come to an end within the normal lifetime of a present
Parliament, and before that date the permanent Fascist system will be
introduced. Thereafter the life of Government will depend, not on Parliament,
but on the direct vote of the whole people by universal franchise. Nothing
shall come between Government and People. They will be asked whether or
not a Government shall continue in a direct "Yes" or "No"
decision. Parliament will be elected to advise Government on the technical
problems of a technical age. Therefore, it will be elected not on a geographical
but on an occupational franchise, according to industry or profession.
Parliament will become a serious body suited to the complex problems of
the modern age, and the knock-about frivolity of the Party game will be
eliminated.
When the first
Fascist Government introduces a Bill to confer power of action by order
on the Government, what will you do if the House of Lords throws it out
?
The people will
have voted for a Government returned with a constitutional majority to
pass this measure as its first Act. If the House of Lords throw out the
Bill under these circumstances it will violate not only the spirit but
also the practice of the British Constitution in modern times. The Peers
will be rebels against Crown and People and will be treated as such. Fascism,
therefore, would grasp the nettle and would suppress the House of Lords.
It would immediately be replaced by a Second Chamber truly representative
of Modern Britain.
The people,"
you have stated, "will vote within their own industries on subjects
with which they are familiar." How then, will the people be able
to express their opinion on non technical subjects such as Religion, Foreign
and Imperial Politics, Education, etc. ?
They will be able to express their opinion in the same way as they do
now by voting for or against the Government which represents them in these
matters. In addition, they will have greater opportunity to express their
opinions on these subjects through the Second Chamber, which will largely
exist to deal with them, in place of the anachronistic House of Lords.
What will
be the position of the House of Lords ?
The House of
Lords will be replaced by a Second Chamber representing the industry,
culture and ability of the Nation. This Second Chamber will also contain
representatives whose technical knowledge of science and industry shall
be specific and detailed beyond the needs of the House of Commons, and
will also contain representatives of Education, Religion, the Services,
Science, Art, and every aspect of the people's spiritual life. From this
national pool of culture and ability, Government will derive a real assistance.
The present House
of Lords is an anachronism. It was originally intended that the House
of Lords should broadly represent industry and culture. In early days
the Peers owned the land, which was the only industry, and enjoyed exceptional
opportunities of education. To-day, Agriculture is not the only industry
and many Peers are not even connected with land or industry. Further,
none would claim they enjoy a monopoly of culture. Therefore, by abolishing
the present House of Lords in favour of an Assembly genuinely representing
the industry and culture of the Nation, we restore the original conception
of the British Constitution.
If voting
is on an occupational basis, who will represent that quite large number
of people who live on allowance or pensions ?
A special Corporation
will be constituted to watch their interests, from which in particular
consumers' representatives be selected by Government for service in other
Corporations. Ex-Service men will, of course, be conspicuously represented
in this Corporation.
Have occupational
groups any control over their elected representative on their Corporation
? Can they dismiss him if he does not fulfil his duties to their satisfaction
?
Yes, they can
dismiss him by their periodic votes at Corporation elections as they can
dismiss any other representative or Government itself.
What will
be the relation between Parliament and the National Council of Corporations
?
In brief definition,
Parliament will deal with the general problems which confront the Nation.
They are largely but not entirely the broad aspects of industry. The National
Council of Corporations will deal with the more detailed industrial problems
and for many years, during the creation of the complete Corporate State,
will be very fully occupied with that detail.
How can new
Ministers emerge if Party Politics do not exist ?
New Ministers
will not emerge as at present by their skill in the Party game. Reputations
will not be made by sitting up all night in Parliamentary obstruction
to prevent a Government carrying out the programme for which the people
have voted. Reputations will be made not by cheap debating but by constructive
ability. New Ministers will emerge within the great Corporations and new
organs of national life by virtue of their constructive ideas. Thus Ministers
will be drawn from the whole nation, wherever ability can be found, and
not from a small circle of professional politicians. Far more opportunity
will exist for new men and new Ministers to emerge under Fascism than
exists under the present system, which confines Ministers to the relatively
few people who can secure the independence requisite to a political career
or, worse still, to the " kept men " of the Party machine.
What are your
proposals for the reform of local Government ?
No nation can
be efficient if the Government pulls one way and the local authorities
pull another way. What would be the fate of a big business whose head
office pursued one policy, and whose branch offices pursued an opposite
policy ? Yet this is the system under which the country is governed at
present, with a consequent increase in the chronic paralysis of Government.
The Fascist principle is that the will of the majority of the country
as expressed through their elected Government must prevail nationally
and locally. Action is impossible until this principle is established.
Local authority areas will be greatly enlarged for the sake of efficiency
and will be governed during the transitional period as follows.
The local leader,
armed with executive authority and responsibility, will be an M.P. of
the majority party in Parliament, selected from, an area with which he
is specially acquainted. He will be advised by a council elected locally
on an occupational franchise which will provide a technical and non-political
council. Thus the majority of M.P.'s will all possess executive function.
Instead of hanging about Westminster obstructing in the Chamber and gossiping
in the lobby, they will be among their own people doing a job of work.
When Parliament meets at regular intervals to review the work of the Government
they will be armed with practical suggestions and criticism from first
hand knowledge of local problems. M.P.'s will be converted from windbags
into men of action. But electors must be more careful than at present
to select men of capacity. They will have not merely to talk but to act.
Would women
be eligible as representatives (i) on all Corporations, (ii) on any Corporation
?
They will be
eligible on all Corporations representing their industry or profession.
In addition the great majority of women who are wives and mothers will
for the first time be given effective representation by Fascism. A special
Corporation will be created for them, which will have special standing
in the State. That Corporation will deal with outstanding women's questions
such as mother and child welfare. In addition, it will assist Government
in such matters as food prices, housing, education and other subjects,
in which the opinion of a practical housewife is often worth more than
that of a Socialist professor or spinster politician.
Will the position
of women be in any way inferior under Fascism ?
Certainly not.
Fascism in Britain will maintain the British principle of honouring and
elevating the position of women. We certainly combat the decadence of
the present system which treats the position of wife and mother as inferior.
On the contrary, we consider this to be one of the greatest of human and
racial functions to be honoured and encouraged. But women will be free
to pursue their own vacations. Fascism combats the false values of decadence
not by force, but by persuasion and example.
What is your
attitude to Science ?
Science must
be the basis of the technical State of Fascism. In the modern world the
function of the State is largely to keep the ring clear for the technician.
The money spent on both scientific and technical research is absurdly
inadequate With a more far-sighted policy, not only could industrial discovery
one hundred-fold replace the money expended, but many of the ravages of
disease might be conquered. Democracy is always penny-wise and pound-foolish.
Fascism, not only by money but by honour, will repose its faith in the
scientist.
What is the
difference between Fascism and Capitalism, since both admit the system
of private enterprise ?
In brief definition,
Capitalism is the system by which capital uses the Nation for its own
purposes. Fascism is the system by which the Nation uses capital for its
own purposes. Private enterprise is permitted and encouraged so long as
it coincides with the national interests. Private enterprise is not permitted
when it conflicts with national interests. Under Fascism private enterprise
may serve but not exploit. This is secured by the Corporative System,
which lays down the limits within which industry may operate, and those
limits are the welfare of the Nation.
If industries
are to be self-governing under their own Corporations, how will you prevent
the financiers and bankers from continuing their present policy ?
A Corporation
would be established for the control of Banking and Finance as for all
other industries. In this case, as in all others, the Corporation would
work within the limits of national welfare as laid down by Government.
The governing principle of finance will be that British credit shall be
used for British purposes alone. The export of credit or capital will
be absolutely prohibited. A banking code applying the principle in detail
will be devised, having the force of law. Not only the Bank of England
and the Joint Stock Banks will be subject to the Corporation, but also
the Finance Houses. It is noteworthy that the Socialist Party do not include
in their scheme the Finance Houses, which are responsible for most foreign
banking. The reason is not only that they are largely Jewish, but also
that they can break any Government pursuing an international economic
policy by breaking the exchange. Free movement of capital and credit from
one country to another is implicit in an international trading system.
Therefore, under internationalism it always rests in the power of the
Finance Houses to break a Government by sudden and excessive movements
which break the exchange and create panic. A national economic system
alone is independent of the necessity for such movements in its normal
trade and, therefore, is independent of international finance.
How will you
enforce your banking code ?
The banking
code will have the force of law with heavy penalties attaching to it.
Any banker who breaks the law will go where the poor go to-day when they
break the Law. As most bankers prefer the luxury of their present apartments
to a sojourn in gaol, very few will break the law. Furthermore, the worst
offenders will already have been deported as falling within the category
of Jews who have grossly abused the hospitality of Britain.
Will the depositors'
money be safe in the Banks and the Post Office ?
Far safer than
at present. The Banks now use your money abroad in every wild-cat scheme
for financing foreign countries, and many a mess they have got themselves
and your money into as a result. Under Fascism, British funds will have
to be used for British purposes alone. Your money will be far safer at
home than abroad. Then you will know what is being done with it. Fascism
wants to see capital in as many hands as possible. The small investor
and individual savings will be its special care. Further control and regulation
of the Stock Exchange will prevent the small investor being fleeced, as
at present.
Do you
suggest that this country can grow all its own foodstuffs ?
I am certain
that we can produce in Britain all the foodstuffs now imported from foreign
countries to the extent of nearly £200,000,000 a year, with few
exceptions, such as Manitoba hard wheat, which we can obtain from Canada.
I have addressed
farmers' meetings through Great Britain, and have not yet found a single
farmer to deny that British Farming could even double its production provided
Fascism affords it a stable market and an economic price. This we do (1)
by excluding foreign foodstuffs ; (2) by raising the purchasing power
of the population which affords the market; (3) by eliminating excessive
distribution costs.
What
is your attitude to the private ownership of land, and hereditary tenure
?
We believe that
the private tenure of land should be as widely diffused as possible in
many different hands. Our policy will aim at the maximum number of owner-occupier
Farmers, and will encourage in every way the handing down of such land
from father to son. This will create a hereditary interest and pride in
the land, which will revive the spirit of the countryside. Big landowners
will be treated as all other owners of hereditary wealth. Land ownership
will be regarded as a Trusteeship on the principle of no reward without
service. A landlord who abuses that trusteeship will lose his land without
compensation, and it will be split up into owner-occupier farms. On the
other hand, a landlord will be encouraged if he exercises a real local
leadership and gives back in service to the countryside the equivalent
of his reward derived from the land. Such men have been singled out for
attack by the Social-Democratic system, which has permitted gross abuses
of hereditary wealth.
A Jewish financier,
stock-exchange speculator, or bucket-shop keeper may amass a large fortune
and leave it to his son. That son's interest in the country may not extend
beyond a night club and a liberal supply of champagne. Yet under the present
system, such an owner of hereditary wealth is treated as altogether admirable,
while an object of scorn and attack is the man devoting his whole life
to the countryside, where the roots of his family have extended for centuries
in the hereditary tenure of land. This is one of the many examples of
the false values of present financial Democracy. Under Fascism, the land
of the absentee landlord and waster will be expropriated. The local leader
and servant of the countryside, where he was born and bred, will be encouraged.
What
changes, if any, will Fascism make in the law with regard to inherited
wealth ?
Fascism does
not recognise the principle of reward without service. Hereditary wealth,
therefore, will not be permitted unless service is given in return. This
need not necessarily take the form of productive service. Public service
may be given in return for the privilege of hereditary wealth. It is right
that a man should be able to work not only for himself but for his children.
It is wrong that the children should be able to live in idleness on the
wealth which others have created. Service must be given equivalent to
the reward enjoyed. Hereditary wealth which is not justified by service
will revert to the State.
Have
you any scheme for reorganisation of the coal industry or nationalisation
of coal-royalties ?
We have a scheme
for reorganisation of the coal industry, but reorganisation alone is not
enough. It is necessary also to create the conditions in which it is possible
to conduct the industry economically, while paying to the miner a living
wage worthy of a dangerous occupation. To do this, it is necessary again
to cut adrift from internationalism. Mining and the miner can never prosper
while the struggle continues against cheap labour like that of Poland,
paid £2 per month in mines created by the finance of the City of
London. Therefore, we join reorganisation with a national economic policy.
For purposes of reorganisation a miners' corporation will be established
governed by equal representatives of miners, mine-owners and consumers,
the latter being appointed by the Government. This corporation will be
charged with the task of exploiting hidden profits and stopping the wasteful
extravagance and intertwining now existing on the distributive side. It
will also impose a national agreement guaranteeing a real living minimum
wage to the miner.
The Royalty system
will be abolished without compensation, except in cases of hardship or
service. The Mining Corporation will also be responsible for the re-housing
of the miner, and the immediate execution of other urgent reforms to which
all Parties pay lip-service, but which have never been executed during
the age of talk, and never will be until action is made possible. These
reforms will be made possible by a national economic policy. Foreign oil
and petrol will be excluded, and Britain will be supplied with oil and
petrol from her own coal. This alone will give employment to over 90,000
miners. Modern science has made it possible to produce oil and petrol
from British coal without increase of price to the consumer, as is shown
in our detailed publications. This great development is at present prevented
by the fact that the City of London has £140,000,000 invested in
foreign oil and petrol companies, and its interests will be adversely
affected by giving employment to British miners in the production of coal
from which oil and petrol will be extracted, and yet more employment,
afforded in the process. Fascism, as ever, subordinates the interests
of the international financier to those of the British producer. In addition,
more coal will be consumed by the greater production and consumption of
goods in Britain, and more coal will be sold to the Empire in return for
the greatly increased quantities of raw materials which we shall buy from
them to serve our expanded industries. Reorganisation is a vital necessity,
but it is not enough to save the miners. A national and Empire economic
policy is also necessary. But this means the substitution of a dictatorship
of the will of the people for the present dictatorship of finance.
What is the
Fascist attitude towards Trade Unions ?
No Trade Unionist will
suffer under Fascism the loss of any benefit which he now enjoys. On the
contrary, he will derive greater benefits, because Trade Union funds will
be available for the full benefit of Trade Union members when strikes
and lockouts are prohibited. The Trade Unions will no longer be instruments
of class war. They will be one of the main pillars of the Corporate State,
participating actively in the industrial government of the country. The
workers will have equal representation with the employers on all corporations.
In the event of dispute, the issue will be settled by consumers' representatives
appointed by Fascist Government, which is elected by and responsible to
the whole people. Thus the workers will enjoy, not only security, but
full participation in the profits of industry which they have never yet
achieved from strikes. The Trade Unions, like every other great organ
of the nation, will be removed from the political control which has corrupted
and perverted their purpose. Trade Union Leaders will look after Trade
Union members instead of looking after their political careers.
What is the
Fascist attitude towards the Shopkeeper and the Co-operative Societies
?
The position of the
small shopkeeper will certainly be maintained. He gives to the people
a personal service and attention which cannot be given either by co-operative
society or chain store. He is also a factor of stability, enterprise,
and patriotism within the Nation which must be maintained. There is room
within the organised State for both Co-operative Society and small shopkeeper.
The former provides cheapness; the latter provides individual service
and variety. But there is not room as well for the chain store. The small
shopkeeper will be assisted under Fascism by a Distributive Corporation,
which will provide him with the cheap bulk-buying facilities at present
only enjoyed by the big combine. The Co-operative Societies will play
a greater and not a lesser part in the Fascist State. They support the
Fascist principle, which requires the widest possible diffusion and ownership
of capital. They oppose both the Socialist principle of State ownership,
and the capitalist principle of the concentration of capital in the hands
of a few exploiters. Under Fascism, they will perform the vital service
of bulk-buying and cheap selling. Their sphere will be enlarged, but in
return they must rid themselves of the political control which perverts
and corrupts the real purpose of co-operation. They will be genuine trading
concerns serving the people.
What is the
attitude of Fascism towards Chain Stores ?
Chain Stores owned
by Jewish and foreign capital will be eliminated. Their staffs will be
absorbed in the extended co-operative system to which reference is made
in the previous question. Chain Stores, which are British owned, will
be permitted only under licence, and to an extent which does not interfere
with the Fascist system of small shopkeeper and co-operative society.
Fascism will not tolerate the growing monopoly of the people's vital supplies
in alien hands.
What will
be the position of women in the Home ?
Women will not be driven
from industry, but also they will not be driven from the home as they
are at present, viz., many women who want to stay at home to marry and
to have children, are driven into industry because husbands or fathers
are unemployed or paid low wages. This is a grave threat to the race which
Fascist economic policy will check by its high wage system, which will
pay the man enough to maintain the home.
What will
be the position of women in industry and the professions ?
Women will not be forced
to retire from industry or the professions. The present sex war in industry
will be brought to an end by Fascist economic policy, because a sufficient
demand for labour will be created to provide work for all. The present
struggle arises from the shortage of jobs. Women engaged in industry and
the professions shall be remunerated at exactly the same rates as men.
Would you
raise the school-leaving age ?
I advocated the raising of the school-age when a member of the Government
in 1930. This scheme, like the Old Age Pension scheme, was turned down
by the Labour Party when in Office, which now advocates them both from
the safe shelter of Opposition. But Fascist views on Education go far
beyond present school-age theories. The children of the rich do not finish
their education until 18. The necessity for the young to earn now excludes
any such possibility for the children of the poor. When the father earns
a living wage under the Corporate System, it will not only be possible,
but it will be the duty of the Nation to provide all with equal opportunity
of education and a fair chance in life. Specialised training up to and
through the University will be available for youths of talent. For all,
full mental and physical development must be available until real maturity
enables them to enter industry without handicap. Sweated child labour
replacing adult labour is one of the disgraces of the present civilisation.
In the properly organised Nation the child will receive full mental and
physical training as a citizen, until he can take his place in industry
without harm to himself or his elders.
Are you in
favour of " Pensions at 60 " or at any other age ?
Not only am I in favour
of pensions at 60, but I worked out an emergency scheme when a member
of the Government in 1930, for the offer of a pension of £1 a week
to a man, and 10/- a week for his wife if he voluntarily retired at 60.
The scheme was worked out to provide immediate work for 280,000 who replaced
the old, voluntarily retiring at an annual net cost to the State of only
£2,500,000 over a fifteen year amortisation period. The low cost
arose from the great saving effected on unemployment benefit to the young
absorbed in the jobs of the old. Fascism would make such a scheme permanent
directly the increased revenue arising from expanded industry made possible
its finance.
What is your
view of the Means Test and the Anomalies Act ?
I have always opposed
this petty bullying of the unemployed. The only test of an unemployed
man is the test of a job at decent wages. This test is only possible when
the Government is efficient enough to organise economic public works on
a large enough scale to provide this test. When in office I devised useful
work schemes to provide 800,000 with immediate employment, even within
the limits of Democratic Government. This figure could be doubled if necessary
by Fascist Government with real power of action, until our economic policy
had absorbed the unemployed in normal industry. With such schemes in hand,
a Government can say to the unemployed, " Here is a good job at good
wages. Take it and do it, or you get nothing." That is the only proper
test. But that depends on courage and efficiency in Government. All present
Governments make the unemployed pay for their own laziness and failure
to produce work schemes of an economic character.
Would hospitals
be nationalised ? If not, would they be state-assisted ? If so, would
not this discourage the private donors ?
Voluntary hospitals,
which have done so much in the training of doctors, dentists and nurses,
are for financial reasons undoubtedly finding it extremely difficult to
carry on at the highest pitch of efficiency. We view with admiration the
work done by the men and women responsible for the building up of this
system, and we see no reason for the abolition of the voluntary system.
We would, however, appoint a National Director of Hospitals to co-ordinate
the working of all hospitals (both voluntary and state), who would be
represented by nominees on the governing committees of all voluntary hospitals.
The State, while making it its duty to find the necessary additional funds
for the efficient management of voluntary hospitals, would not interfere
with their internal management. The Government nominees would merely assist
with expert advice, acting at the same time as liaison between the Hospitals
and the National Director. We contradict emphatically the criticism that
the introduction of such a system would mean a decline in voluntary contributions.
Fascism will bring to Britain the real spirit of sacrifice for the common
welfare, increasing the willingness of people to support by financial
contributions such institutions as the hospitals of their country. Fascism
believes that it is essential that hospital accommodation should be available
for every citizen in need of it, and, in addition, highly trained medical
and nursing staffs must be attached to each hospital.
It is interesting
to note from Germany, that although the National Socialist Government
undertakes to look after the welfare of the people, the spirit of sacrifice
and of giving donations to charity has not been diminished. The best example
of this is the Winter Relief Service, collections for which have been
remarkable for the amount raised.
What is the
Movement's policy with regard to Birth Control, and does the Movement
approve of compulsory sterilization of the unfit ?
Knowledge of birth
control, like all knowledge which modern science affords, should be available
to all who desire it. But again the new social sense of Fascism will secure
the production of children by the fit, and the raising of the standard
of life will further encourage it. At present, birth control is known
and practised by the relatively well off. It is largely unknown and less
practised by the very poor. The result is exactly the reverse of national
interest. The patriotism which Fascism will awaken, coupled with a greater
economic security, will lead to larger families among those who at present
practice restriction. We will not deny knowledge to the people, for if
they do not get good knowledge they are bound to get bad knowledge. But
the new values of Fascist civilization and the new social sense will prevent
knowledge being hurtful. Those who rightly oppose present tendencies of
birth control can alone secure the result they desire in the national
awakening of Fascism. The unfit will be offered the alternatives of segregation
sufficient to prevent the production of unfit children, or voluntary sterilisation—none
will be sterilised against their will.
What view
do you take of Roosevelt's New Deal ?
Roosevelt's New Deal
is an attempt to plan without the power to plan. Further, the New Deal
employs the instrument most opposed to the organised State, because it
battens upon economic anarchy, namely Jewish finance. In these two respects
it is the opposite to Fascism, and for these two reasons also it has failed.
Roosevelt's failure illustrates afresh the Fascist contention that a new
civilisation can only be introduced by a new Movement built from the foundations
in the new model of the modern age. The proper powers of Democracy in
America are sabotaged with ease by the great interests. Real power can
only come from the victory of Fascism, and from real power alone can come
great changes. Further, before a new civilisation can be born, the mind
and soul of the Nation must first be awakened. To this is necessary the
years of Fascist struggle and the fact of Fascist Triumph.
What is your
attitude towards Colonial emigration ?
We favour voluntary
emigration. In particular, we should assist the emigration of whole communities
to open up fresh territory after proper preparation for their reception
and proper financial support. Finance deprived of anti-social speculative
outlet will find here a fruitful field. The failure of present emigration
is due to lack of large, scale planning. Thus handled, a profitable outlet
for at least 100,000 per annum of our population could be provided.
What is your
attitude towards Welsh and Scottish Nationalists ?
Purely Welsh and Scottish
questions should be settled on the spot by Welshmen and Scotsmen. To this
extent we sympathise with Welsh and Scottish Nationalists, and wide powers
would be delegated to implement this principle. We believe in national
pride and tradition ; they should always be encouraged. Further, efficiency
demands the speedy settlement of local questions by the man on the spot.
But the splitting up of Great Britain into primitive anarchy we oppose.
With reasonable protagonists of Welsh and Scottish Nationalism we would
probably agree. With the extremists we should disagree very strongly.
The reasonable settlement is unity in economic matters combined with every
possible encouragement for the maintenance of national character, culture,
and tradition.
Is it your
intention to attempt the education of the Indian masses ? If so, how could
you prevent their becoming as discontented as the ex-university babu ?
If not, how will you eradicate the evils and oppressions inherent in the
Hindu religion ?
We will certainly attempt
the education of the Indian masses, but not on Western lines. The mistake
has been the imposition of western culture on oriental life. Indians should
be taught a higher ambition than to be a pale imitation of the West. The
best minds of India will be only too willing to co-operate in that conception.
It is a tragedy that Indians with an older cultural tradition than our
own should merely seek to imitate our failures, such as Parliamentary
institutions. Discontent arises from this inefficient imitation fostered
by Western Parliamentarians and academic ideologues. Fascist teaches pride
of race and racial culture. Under Fascism, Indian leaders will arise to
carry forward their own traditions and culture within the framework of
Empire and the modern world of science.
It is said
that Fascism means War. How do you answer this charge ?
Fascism alone can preserve
the Peace, because alone it removes the causes of war. The main cause
of War is the struggle for markets. Each nation produces more than it
can sell at home and so tries to sell its surplus abroad, in cut-throat
competition with other nations. Diplomacy, finance, armaments and ultimately
War are used as weapons in the struggle for markets. By building a self-contained
or autarchic system we withdraw from the struggle for markets and so withdraw
from the risks of war. This is the answer to the fantastic assertion that
Peace and Empire are incompatible. When other nations follow our example
there will be nothing left to fight about. It is true that in order to
do this the small nations will have to enter economic Federations. It
is also true that we must arrange for all nations in one form or another
to have access to raw materials. But this is by no means impossible in
a world producing more raw materials than it at present consumes. The
problems of abundance are not insoluble. This constructive task of Fascist
Government will be achieved when our doctrine prevails that inter-nationalism
and not nationalism means war. Remove the causes of War and Peace will
rest on reality.
Do you believe
in interfering in foreign quarrels ?
Our motto is "Britons
fight for Britons only." Never again shall conscript armies leave
these shores in foreign quarrel. We fight only in defence of the British
Empire. The only threat to that Empire comes from Soviet Russia. The union
of the great powers of Europe through universal Fascism in collective
security against the Soviet can avert war. The division of the great powers
by the policy of the present Government, plays into the hands of the Soviet
and threatens us with a universal conflagration, from which the Soviet
enemy of civilisation alone can benefit.
By excluding
Japanese goods from India and the Crown Colonies, to say nothing of Britain,
will you not tend to bring about war with Japan ?
Japan wants an outlet,
not only for her surplus goods, but also for her surplus population. Her
natural outlet is in the bandit-ridden territory of Northern China where
Japan might, found an Empire of her own, comparable to our Indian Empire,
and thus perform a service to herself and the world. She is prevented
at present by the Western Powers, notably Great Britain, because such
a policy adversely affects the influence and intrigues of Soviet Russia
in that territory. Western Democracies fawn upon the Soviet in order to
use these barbarians against the Fascist countries they dislike and fear.
Fascism would reverse this policy. We would approve Japan's entry into
Northern China on condition that she accepted the exclusion of Japanese
goods from British India and the Crown Colonies. Japan would welcome this
practical bargain. In addition she would probably consent to a reasonable
partition of South American and other markets, from which her cheap labour
is driving us at present. Thus Lancashire and Yorkshire trade could be
saved without war with Japan.
Do you approve
of disarmament ?
Fascism does not approve
of Britain being the one unarmed country in an armed world. We should,
therefore, in the shortest possible time (1) give Britain an air force
equal to any in the world ; (2) modernise and mechanise our army ; (3)
modernise our fleet and put it into condition to defend our trade routes
; (4) finance these measures by a loan specially subscribed by patriots
at a low rate of interest amortised over a period of years (suggested
by writer in July, 1934). We are willing to disarm if other nations do
the same, and our relative security is not impaired. But we do not believe
in a weak Britain pleading with others to disarm, as we have done for
years past with no effect except contempt. Britain can only exercise her
leadership to Peace as a strong power capable of defending herself.
What is your
attitude towards the League of Nations ?
The present League
of Nations has been perverted from its original purpose and has, therefore,
failed. It has become an unholy alliance of decaying democratic systems,
with the bloodstained Soviet against the renaissant Fascist countries.
Thus, the system which was meant to abolish the balance of power, has
reconstituted it in a more vicious form. Such a division of Europe is
a menace to peace. The solution is the union of the Great Powers of Europe
in Universal Fascism. Collective security can come only from a collective
spirit. When Britain and France go Fascist as well as Germany and Italy,
a real League of National States will arise, with a real collective security
against the only enemy of Western civilisation, which is Soviet Russia.
In the strength of union the Great Powers can and will preserve the peace.
Do you believe
in the racial theories of the German Nazi Movement ?
They are German and
we are English, therefore our views and our methods on many subjects will
be different. In this particular we possess a great Empire comprising
many different races. They possess no such Empire, and their aim is a
revived German race, geographically united. We believe profoundly in our
own British race which has created the Empire, but we know also it would
be bad for the Empire to stigmatise by law other races within it as inferior
or outcast. We have created that Empire without race mixture or pollution,
by reason of the British social sense and pride of race. That is an achievement
unique in history, and we can trust the British genius in this respect
in the future as in the past. It should not be necessary to secure British
racial purity by act of law. It should only be necessary by education
and propaganda to teach the British what racial mixtures are bad. If a
Briton understands that some action is bad for his race he will not do
it. With the British this is a matter for the teacher rather than the
legislator, but if legislation was ever necessary to preserve the race,
Fascism would not hesitate to introduce it.
What alterations,
if any, will you make in the laws governing the immigration of alien races
into Great Britain ?
All immigration will
be stopped. Britain for the British, is our motto, and all of Britain
is required for the British. Further, all foreigners who have already
been naturalised will be deported unless they have proved themselves valuable
citizens of Great Britain.
What is the
Fascist attitude towards the Jews ?
Jews must put the interests
of Britain before those of Jewry, or be deported from Britain. This is
not a principle of racial or religious persecution. Any well-governed
nation must insist that its citizens owe allegiance to the nation, and
not to co-racialists and co-religionists resident outside its borders
or organised as a state within the State. The Jews, as a whole, have chosen
to organise themselves as a nation within the Nation and to set their
interests before those of Great Britain. They must, like everyone else,
put "Britain First" or leave Britain.
Is not this
hard on the minority of Jews who put " Britain First "?
Minorities always suffer
from the faults of the majority. Races, as a whole, suffer from the mistakes
of the majority of the race when a mistaken policy is pursued. Such Jews
would certainly not be molested, let alone persecuted. But they can no
more complain of suffering from the errors of Jewry as a whole, than members
of any other nation can complain of suffering for the mistakes of the
majority and the blunders of its Government.
Will the Jews
then be persecuted or ill-treated ?
It is untrue to suggest
that Jews will be persecuted under Fascism in Britain. Bullying or persecution
of any kind is foreign to the British character. We shall not keep Jews
here to bully them. Those who have been guilty of anti-British conduct
will be deported. Those against whom no such charge rests will be treated
as foreigners, but in accordance with the traditional British treatment
of foreigners within these shores, will not be ill-treated or molested.
On the other hand, foreigners who have not proved themselves worthy citizens
of Britain will be deported.
Will they
be allowed the right of citizenship or permitted to be officials or M.P.'s
in the Fascist State ?
As stated above, the
Jews have deliberately maintained themselves as a foreign community in
Britain, setting their racial interests above the national interest. As
such, therefore, they will be treated, and none can complain of treatment
which accords with their own actions. We do not permit foreigners to be
M.P.'s or officials, or afforded the full rights of British citizenship,
and Jews will not be afforded these privileges. Anyone in the service
of the State under Fascism must be entirely British.
Will Jews,
who are deported, be able to take their money with them ?
They will be able to
take anything they have honestly earned.
What are the
duties of Fascist stewards at meetings ?
At indoor meetings
to preserve order in accordance with the Law. If the Chairman orders the
removal of a persistent interrupter, it is their duty and instruction
to eject him with the minimum of force necessary to secure his removal.
No one is ejected unless he is making such a noise that the audience in
his vicinity is prevented from hearing the speech. At outdoor meetings
it is the duty under the Law of the police alone to preserve order, and
Fascists do not attend for that purpose.
Few aspects of Fascism
have been more misrepresented, and few have been more fully justified
by facts. When Blackshirts were first organised, free speech in Britain
had virtually come to an end. In great industrial centres Socialism could
not be vigorously attacked from the platform without the break-up of the
meeting by highly organised bands of hooligans. Political Leaders could
only hold ticketed meetings of their supporters, and exercised "free
speech" only in addressing the converted. We threw our meetings open
to the public and threw out the hooligans. The old gangs of Democracy
united to denouce us, but at the last election many of them had their
own meetings broken up and made belated, and entirely ineffective attempts
to imitate our methods. Blackshirts with their bare hands have overcome
red violence armed with razors, knives, and every weapon known to the
ghettoes of humanity. Their bodies bear the scars, but free speech is
regained.
| 