Italy goes Far-Right: Brothers of Italy win in national election

[CmdrKing]

The most instructive example for a likely ‘end-state’ had the Nazis remained in power (suppose Hitler appoints a like-minded successor and they don’t start the war until the mid-50s say) would probably be modern Russia. They rise to power on the backs of industry, and then slowly weed out those who could be a proper rival to them and replace them with bootlicks and true believers.

This would surely hold true in other ways as well however. The state retains the right to select heads of businesses for their loyalty, but otherwise they are still run as businesses. The Nazis themselves of course feed off the fat of those businesses, but the overall outcome is Capitalism for Thee but Not for Me.

The Nazi social programs were part and parcel of the eugenicist beliefs, designed primarily to serve that end. while in the beginning to placate people it was applied to most citizens, left on a longer timeline we can safely assume those programs would have narrowed in scope as the definition of Good German narrowed.

Like, there’s a reason parties in favor of highly deregulated capitalism tend to end at fascism, the core ideals of preaching the merits of competition while actually only caring about personal power are so overlapped it’s a natural fit, and the fascist ideals of nationalism and scapegoating are the candy coating the capitalists can use to sell their poison pills.

[Jonathan101]

They likely merely believe that the government has both the right and the responsibility to impose their sociopolitical goals on society at large... which makes them, in practice, little different from either the Democratic or Republican parties of the USA.

A wing of the Republican party lead by thier most recent president launched a coup d'etat against the United states less than three years ago. I also think the party apparatus of the Democrats would happily go along with a fascist regime because fascism exists to protect capitalism

Fascism is not about protecting capitalism- that's just Stalinist propaganda (literally- Trotsky offered a slightly different explanation, and Stalin pushed the "Fascism is an agent of capitalism" one which Trotsky thought was stupid, as part of their ideological war).

Fascists are neutral on the economy, with some supporting capitalism and others opposing it- NazBols are Fascists, but hardly capitalists, for instance.

In practice every fascist government that has gotten into power has been hypercapialist and backed by big business, even when nominally espousing socialist or communist economic policy. If they got power thr National Bolsheviks would no more be Bolsheviks than the National Socialist la were socialists.

Saying "Fascists are / tend to be capitalists" is one thing.

Saying "Fascism exists to protect capitalism" is something else entirely, and that "something else" is rooted in actual Stalinist propaganda, and it reduces Fascism (and politics in general) to capitalism vs socialism, as if those are the only things that matter.

[Draco Dracul]

That's nonsense. Especially the Nazis were anything but capitalists. They cooperated with select industrialists, sure, but their stated ideal was a state-controlled economy. The entire society was supposed to be "Gleichgeschaltet", meaning all power and control was to be concentrated in the hands of the state. Hypercapitalist is something quite different.

The word privatization entered the English language specifically to describe Nazi economics.

[Jonathan101]

That's nonsense. Especially the Nazis were anything but capitalists. They cooperated with select industrialists, sure, but their stated ideal was a state-controlled economy. The entire society was supposed to be "Gleichgeschaltet", meaning all power and control was to be concentrated in the hands of the state. Hypercapitalist is something quite different.

The word privatization entered the English language specifically to describe Nazi economics.

Re-privatisation, you mean.

Privatisation entered English a little earlier, and had been used in Germany for decades.

Also, Nazi economics weren't entirely consistent, and Italian Fascist economics even less so. Hitler and Mussolini both bragged about not having a consistent economic policy as they thought this made them more adaptable. Most historians accept they were mixed economies, of different kinds depending on the exact time one is talking about.

There were definitely Nazi's and Fascists who thought Hitler and Mussolini were way too cosy with capitalists, and a number of Italian Fascist syndicalists who thought that Italy had to go through a capitalist phase in order to industrialise so that it could become more socialistic later on.