css notes pdf free download, css notes 2018, css essay notes pdf, css point, css forum, islamic history and culture css notes pdf,

1. 1

2. 2
CSS International
Relations Notes 2
(Created and Designed by Entireeducation.com)
Contact Us:03084293988

3. 3
About Entireeducation.com
You are welcome for visiting our website which is fully composed of educational systems
including different countries university admissions which consist much essential for admitting
in University. Some university not only provides information but also ask that you can take
admission on-line so, we also provide on-line admission. We take daily update to each and
every university or other educational institute. We are now providing now daily new
university admission from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Our first objective to
give first South Asian universities then We will provide the international, worldwide
universities.
Entireeducation Team incorporates with professional and create a new CSS notes for
aspirants. CSS Notes are fully comprises in accordance with new syllabus updated in 2016.
Our professional stay and layout notes up to mark. Student will get an extensive hub of
knowledge regarding International Relations from these notes. The best thing of
Entireeducation notes reflects only one handbook for the students. Through which a student
can easily extract and through out the entire concepts. Fully updated notes assist student to
pulls through life career in a gleaming way with collaboration of Entireeducation notes.
Thanks
Regards, Entireeducation.com

4. 4
Table of Content
I. International Relation between two Wars……………………………………..…259
• Russian Revolution, Fascism, League of Nations, Second World War
II. Cold War…………………………………………………………………….………………..315
• Decolonization in Asia and Africa……………………………………………………....317
• Rise of United States and Soviet Union,…………………………………………..….320
• Era of Tight Bipolarity, Détente and Loose Bipolarity, Revival of Cold War
III. Post Cold War
• End of History, Clash of Civilization, Terrorism, Globalization, unipolarity New
world Order
IV. International and Regional Organizations
• League of Nation………………………………………………………………….….…384
• United Nations……………………………………………………………………..…….393
• Regional Organizations.. ………………………………………………………..………429
• EU………………………………………………………………………………..………..431
• ASEAN.. ………………………………………………………………………..…….…434
• NAFTA.. …………………………………………………………………………..…….…436
• SAARC………………………………………………………………………………….…440
• SCO…………………………………………………………………………….…………..444
• OIC.. …………………………………………………………………………..……………451
•
ECO………………………………………………………………………..…………..……45
7
• WTO…………………………………………………………………………………….…….4
63
• Reforms in the United Nations, World Bank and the
IMF………………………………468
V. Foreign Policy of Selected Countries……………………………………………480
• USA, Russia, China, UK, India, Pakistan and EU
VI. South Asia……………………………………………………………………………630
• Peace-making and Peace-Building in South Asia: Analytical overview of peace
processes between/among the states of South Asia especially between India and
Pakistan…………………………………………………………………………….630

5. 5
• India and Pakistan: Overview of agreements and accords, Indus Water Treaty;
Composite Dialogue; Sir Creek & Siachen border, Visa and People to people
contact; Trade; and Role of civil society…………………………………………..642
• Afghanistan: Cold war theatre; Soviet Invasion Mujahedeen; Geneva Accord; Post
Cold War situation---Rise of Taliban, AL-Qeada & 9/11; Operation Enduring
Freedom; The Bonn Process-
Withdrawal………………………………………………………..694
VII. Weapons of Mass Destruction
• Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons…………………………………………………….719
• Nuclear Weapon States- Programs and Postures: Indian-Pakistan Nuclear
Doctrines
• Nuclear Non –Proliferation Regime: International Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear
Non- proliferation Treaty; Nuclear Supplier Group; Partial Test Ban
Treaty;………746
• Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty……………….759
• Challenges of Non-Proliferation, Nuclear Civil Deal Regime…………………..…764
• The Missile Defence Systems and their impact on global strategic environment
• Militarization and Weaponization of Space………………………………………...782
VIII. Contemporary Issues….……………………………………………………………….793
• Indian Ocean and PACIFIC Ocean; Great Powers Moves and hegemony
• Kashmir Issue………………………………………………………………….804
• Palestine
Issue……………………………………………………………………………..839

6. 6
International Relation between two
Wars:
International relations, the study of the relations of states with each other and with
international organizations and certain subnational entities (e.g., bureaucracies, political
parties, and interest groups). It is related to a number of other academic disciplines,
including political science, geography, history, economics, law, sociology, psychology, and
philosophy.
Historical development:
The field of international relations emerged at the beginning of the 20th century largely in the
West and in particular in the United States as that country grew in power and influence.
Whereas the study of international relations in the newly founded Soviet Union and later in
communist China was stultified by officially imposed Marxist ideology, in the West the field
flourished as the result of a number of factors: a growing demand to find less-dangerous and
more-effective means of conducting relations between peoples, societies, governments, and
economies; a surge of writing and research inspired by the belief that systematic observation
and inquiry could dispel ignorance and serve human betterment; and the popularization of
political affairs, including foreign affairs. The traditional view that foreign and military matters
should remain the exclusive preserve of rulers and other elites yielded to the belief that such
matters constituted an important concern and responsibility of all citizens. This increasing
popularization of international relations reinforced the idea that general education should
include instruction in foreign affairs and that knowledge should be advanced in the interests
of greater public control and oversight of foreign and military policy.
This new perspective was articulated by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson (1913–21) in his
program for relations between the Great Powers following a settlement of World War I. The
first of his Fourteen Points, as his program came to be known, was a call for “open
covenants of peace, openly arrived at” in place of the secret treaties that were believed to
have contributed to the outbreak of the war. The extreme devastation caused by the war
strengthened the conviction among political leaders that not enough was known about

7. 7
international relations and that universities should promote research and teaching on issues
related to international cooperation and war and peace.
International relations scholarship prior to World War I was conducted primarily in two
loosely organized branches of learning: diplomatic history and international law. Involving
meticulous archival and other primary-source research, diplomatic history emphasized the
uniqueness of international events and the methods of diplomacy as it was actually
conducted. International law—especially the law of war—had a long history in international
relations and was viewed as the source of fundamental normative standards of international
conduct. The emergence of international relations was to broaden the scope of international
law beyond this traditional focal point.
Between the two world wars
During the 1920s new centres, institutes, schools, and university departments devoted to
teaching and research in international relations were created in Europe and North America.
In addition, private organizations promoting the study of international relations were formed,
and substantial philanthropic grants were made to support scholarly journals, to sponsor
training institutes, conferences, and seminars, and to stimulate university research.
Three subject areas initially commanded the most attention, each having its roots in World
War I. During the revolutionary upheavals at the end of the war, major portions of the
government archives of imperial Russia and imperial Germany were opened, making
possible some impressive scholarly work in diplomatic history that pieced together the
unknown history of prewar alliances, secret diplomacy, and military planning. These
materials were integrated to provide detailed explanations of the origins of World War I.
Among such works several are particularly noteworthy, including Sidney Bradshaw Fay’s
meticulous The Origins of the World War (1928), which explored prewar diplomacy and
alliance systems; Bernadotte E. Schmitt’s The Coming of the War, 1914 (1930) and Triple
Alliance and Triple Entente (1934); Pierre Renouvin’s The Immediate Origins of the War
(1928); Winston Churchill’s The World Crisis (1923–29); and Arnold J. Toynbee’s The World
After the Peace Conference (1925). There also were extensive memoirs and volumes of
published documents that provided much material for diplomatic historians and other
international relations scholars.
The newly created League of Nations, which ushered in the hope and expectation that a new
and peaceful world order was at hand, was a second subject that captured significant
attention. Some of the international relations schools that were founded in the interwar
period were explicitly created to prepare civil servants for what was expected to be the
dawning age of international government. Accordingly, intensive study was devoted to the
genesis and organization of the league, the history of earlier plans for international
federations, and the analysis of the problems and procedures of international organization
and international law.
The third focal point of international relations scholarship during the early part of the interwar
period was an offshoot of the peace movement and was concerned primarily with
understanding the causes and costs of war, as well as its political, sociological, economic,

8. 8
and psychological dimensions. Interest in the question “Why war?” also brought a host of
social scientists, including economists, sociologists, psychologists, and even
mathematicians—all of whom were pioneers in the intellectual movement known as
behaviourism—into active participation in international studies for the first time.
In the 1930s the breakdown of the League of Nations, the rise of aggressive dictatorships in
Italy, Germany, and Japan, and the onset of World War II produced a strong reaction against
international government and against peace-inspired topics in the study of international
relations. The moral idealism inherent in these topics was criticized as unrealistic and
impractical, and the academic study of international relations came to be regarded as the
handiwork of starry-eyed peace visionaries who ignored the hard facts of international
politics. In particular, scholars of international relations were criticized for suggesting
standards of international conduct that bore little resemblance to the real behaviour of
nations up to that time. As the desired world of peaceful conflict resolution and adherence to
international law grew more distant from the existing world of aggressive dictatorships, a new
approach to the study of international relations, known as realism, increasingly dominated
the field. Nevertheless, the scholarly work on world affairs of the early interwar period,
despite the decline in its reputation and influence, was extensive and sound, encompassing
the collection and organization of large amounts of important data and the development of
some fundamental concepts.
Some topics of study in international relations that are still considered novel or of recent
origin were already being vigorously explored in the interwar period. Indeed, a brief review of
these topics tends to undermine the image of the interwar period as one dominated by
moralistic ideas. The topics include the causes of wars; the relationship between
international affairs and the problems of racial and ethnic minorities; the effects of population
change on foreign policies; the effects of nationalism, imperialism, and colonialism; the
strategic aspects of international relations, including the importance of geographic location
and spatial relationships (geopolitics) for military power and the influence on governments of
what later was called the “military-industrial complex”; the implications of economic
inequalities between countries; and the role of public opinion, national differences, and
cultural orientation in world affairs. Although these earlier studies tended to be somewhat
short on theory and long on description, most of the topics examined remain relevant in the
21st century.
The scholarly contributions of some individuals in the 1930s were particularly noteworthy
because they foreshadowed the development of international relations studies after World
War II. Harold D. Lasswell, for example, explored the relationships between world politics and
the psychological realm of symbols, perceptions, and images; Abram Kardiner and his
associates laid the groundwork for an approach, based on a branch of anthropology known
as culture-and-personality studies, that later became a popular but short-lived theory of
international relations; Frederick L. Schuman, setting a style that is still followed by
interpreters of foreign policy and by journalists, synthesized analytic commentary with
accounts of current international events; Quincy Wright investigated numerous aspects of
international behaviour and war as head of one of the first team research projects in
international relations; and E.H. Carr, Brooks Emeny, Carl J. Friedrich, Schuman, Harold

9. 9
Sprout, Nicholas Spykman, and others developed the main lines of what became the
“power-politics” explanation of international relations, also known as realism. In 1937 the
Spanish poet, historian, philosopher, and diplomat Salvador de Madariaga, founder of the
College of Europe, relied upon his experience in working with the League of Nations
Secretariat in Geneva to describe the gap between what was being said or written about
international relations and what was actually happening.
The broadened definition and scope of the study of international relations were among the
fundamental contributions of scholars of the interwar period. Many of these innovators were
enlisted by governments during World War II for work in intelligence and propaganda, as well
as other aspects of wartime planning. In this respect the war stimulated systematic social-
scientific investigations of international phenomena. It also led to important technological
advances—notably the computer—that would later have a major impact on the study of
international relations.
In other ways World War II was a divide for academic international relations. The war itself
brought about a drastic change in the agenda of world politics, and the postwar intellectual
climate was characterized by a marked shift away from many earlier interests, emphases,
and problems. In the early postwar years there was a quest for analyses that would cut
through the details of studies of myriad international topics to produce a general
understanding of common elements and a clear view of the fundamental nature of
international politics. There was also a growing interest in developing theories that could help
to explain the major issues of the changing international scene. New security issues
emerged, including the issue of nuclear weapons, which led to extensive writings on
deterrence as a basis of strategic stability. Bernard Brodie’s treatise on nuclear deterrence
was highly influential, as was the work of Herman Kahn, Glenn Snyder, Thomas C. Schelling,
Henry A. Kissinger, and Albert Wohlstetter. Other issues that were addressed in the vast
literature of international relations include international, and especially European, integration;
alliances and alignment, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); ideologies;
foreign-policy decision making; theories about conflict and war; the study of low-intensity
conflict; crisis management; international organizations; and the foreign policies of the
increasing number of states that became part of the international system in the mid- to late
20th century.
Russian Revolution:
The Russian Revolution took place in 1917, during the final phase of World War I. It removed
Russia from the war and brought about the transformation of the Russian Empire into the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), replacing Russia’s traditional monarchy with the
world’s first Communist state. The revolution happened in stages through two separate
coups, one in February and one in October. The new government, led by Vladimir Lenin,
would solidify its power only after three years of civil war, which ended in 1920.
Although the events of the Russian Revolution happened abruptly, the causes may be traced
back nearly a century. Prior to the revolution, the Russian monarchy had become

10. 10
progressively weaker and increasingly aware of its own vulnerability (and therefore more
reactionary). Nicholas II—the tsar who led Russia in the years leading up to the revolution—
had personally witnessed revolutionary terrorists assassinate his grandfather and,
subsequently, his own father respond to the assassination through brutal oppression of the
Russian people. When Nicholas II himself became tsar in 1894, he used similarly severe
measures to subdue resistance movements, which were becoming bolder and more
widespread every year. As Nicholas’s newly imposed oppressions in turn incited still more
unrest, he was forced to make concessions after each incident: it was in this manner that
Russia’s first constitution was created, as was its first parliament. These concessions
continued gradually until Nicholas II’s grip on power became very tenuous.
As Nicholas II grew weaker, Vladimir Lenin rose to prominence as the most powerful figure in
Russia. Although this famous leader of the October Revolution was not even in Russia for the
February Revolution—he had lived in self-imposed exile in Europe since 1900 and returned
to Russia only in April 1917—he nonetheless exerted tremendous influence. Whatever
history’s judgment of him, few other Russian revolutionaries possessed Lenin’s decisiveness
and strength of vision for Russia’s future. Born in 1870 in the provincial town of Simbirsk as
Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov, the young Lenin was profoundly affected by his older brother
Alexander’s 1887 execution for being involved in a plot to assassinate the tsar. As a young
adult, Vladimir joined the resistance movement himself and took the pseudonym Lenin but
swore that he would never engage in the sort of “adventurism” that had ended his brother’s
life. Nevertheless, his actions would one day become very adventurous indeed.
The revolution that Lenin led marked one of the most radical turning points in Russia’s 1,300-
year history: it affected economics, social structure, culture, international relations, industrial
development, and most any other benchmark by which one might measure a revolution.
Although the new government would prove to be at least as repressive as the one it
replaced, the country’s new rulers were drawn largely from the intellectual and working
classes rather than from the aristocracy—which meant a considerable change in direction
for Russia.
The revolution opened the door for Russia to fully enter the industrial age. Prior to 1917,
Russia was a mostly agrarian nation that had dabbled in industrial development only to a
limited degree. By 1917, Russia’s European neighbors had embraced industrialization for
more than half a century, making technological advancements such as widespread
electrification, which Russia had yet to achieve. After the revolution, new urban-industrial
regions appeared quickly in Russia and became increasingly important to the country’s
development. The population was drawn to the cities in huge numbers. Education also took a
major upswing, and illiteracy was almost entirely eradicated.
The Russian Revolution also had considerable international consequences. Lenin’s
government immediately pulled Russia out of World War I, changing the balance of forces for
the remaining participants. During the ensuing civil war in Russia, several nations, including
the United States, sent troops to Russia in hopes of keeping the chaos from spreading
beyond Russia’s boundaries. Over the next several decades, the Soviet Union actively
sponsored and assisted Communist movements and revolutions around the world in an effort

11. 11
to broaden its sphere of influence. The country also played a fundamental role in the defeat
of Nazi Germany during World War II.
Threatened by the possibility of revolutions in their own lands, the governments of many
Western nations viewed Communism as a spreading threat and moved to isolate the Soviet
Union as much as possible. Following World War II and the advent of the nuclear age, a
confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States took center stage. As this
Cold War got under way, the two countries emerged as superpowers with much of the rest
of the world falling in behind one or the other. A protracted nuclear arms race between the
United States and Soviet Union would last until the USSR finally collapsed in 1991
Fascism:
Fascism is highly controversial mindset that has explored many questions to be answered.
The geographical and chronological mindsets are consistently fighting against each other
since its rise in 1919. It is very hard to pin down the exact way in which most inferior party
can be extract out. Hostile situation has created for both liberal democracy and Marxism.
(Roberts, 2013)
The liberal democracy did not feel any relieve in such circumstances and Marxism was still
not in good condition. The strong state is only agenda. There was no realization that what
would be outcome of fascism and how it can achieve it realistically. Strong state means that
how can every affair of state is matter of debate. (Roberts, 2013)
There was less ideas more illusion about future of strong and required state. The agenda has
come again and it has shown that Mussolini’s government in 1922 was first supporter of
fascism. The Mussolini government was not ended at that time. It was continued. For
example, In Germany, National Socialism was come up with same myth as Mussolini’s
government had in 1922. Adolf Hitler was person who endorsed it but never show it
explicitly. (Roberts, 2013)
Scholars of that time saw both persons in one threat. Another way of Fascism was adopted
by Italian case because they want to see what they are and how they react with each aspect.
The general fascism was thought by such Italian and German cases. The German Nazism
and Italian Fascism are different in their actions and their direct implementation at mass
level. Someone can think that because Fascism is entirely different from authoritarian, than it
can be called as totalitarian. (Roberts, 2013)
Since establishment of Fascism, it has mild touch of authoritarian that was considered as no
evil before Fascism. Further, when Soviet Union was under government of Joseph Stalin in
early 1919 it was clear that Fascism needs boasted way to be contributed as required. In his
age of authority, government was moving towards political innovation and government
creativity. (Roberts, 2013)
The idea was fully flawed after WWII and scholars, political thinkers and politicians,
practically did not see anything to apply Fascism with its zeal and zest. The entire

12. 12
applicability was considered flawed because political phenomenon was in serious danger
and finally adopted New-Fascism. The new political platform was being developed through
ideas of Neo- Fascism. Studies has endorsed and will endorse generic fascism and its
implication even beyond Germany and Italy case only. (Roberts, 2013)
Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to
prominence in early 20th-century Europe, influenced by national syndicalism. Fascism
originated in Italy during World War I, in opposition to liberalism, Marxism, and anarchism.
Fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.[3][4]
Fascists saw World War I as a revolution that brought massive changes in the nature of war,
society, the state, and technology. The advent of total war and total mass mobilization of
society had broken down the distinction between civilian and combatant. A "military
citizenship" arose in which all citizens were involved with the military in some manner during
the war.[5][6] The war had resulted in the rise of a powerful state capable of mobilizing
millions of people to serve on the front lines and providing economic production and logistics
to support them, as well as having unprecedented authority to intervene in the lives of
citizens.[5][6]
Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete, and they regard the complete
mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation
for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.[7] Such a state is led by
a strong leader — such as a dictator and a martial government composed of the members of
the governing fascist party — to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly
society.[7] Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in nature, and
views political violence, war, and imperialism as means that can achieve national
rejuvenation.[8][9][10][11] Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of
achieving autarky through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.
Since the end of World War II in 1945, few parties have openly described themselves as
fascist, and the term is instead now usually used pejoratively by political opponents. The
descriptions neo-fascist or post-fascist are sometimes applied more formally to describe
parties of the far right with ideologies similar to, or rooted in, 20th century fascist
movements.
Tenets:
Nationalism:
Nationalism is the main foundation of fascism.
The fascist view of a nation is of a single organic entity that binds people together by their
ancestry, and is a natural unifying force of people.[155] Fascism seeks to solve economic,
political, and social problems by achieving a millenarian national rebirth, exalting the nation
or race above all else, and promoting cults of unity, strength, and
purity.[32][156][157][158][159] European fascist movements typically espouse a racist
conception of non-Europeans being inferior to Europeans.[160] Beyond this, fascists in
Europe have not held a unified set of racial views.[160] Historically, most fascists promoted

13. 13
imperialism, although there have been several fascist movements that were uninterested in
the pursuit of new imperial ambitions.
Totalitarianism
Fascism promotes the establishment of a totalitarian state. It opposes liberal democracy,
rejects multi-party systems, and supports a one-party state. The Doctrine of Fascism states,
"The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual
values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the
Fascist State—a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values—interprets, develops, and
potentiates the whole life of a people."[162] In The Legal Basis of the Total State, Nazi
political theorist Carl Schmitt described the Nazi intention to form a "strong state which
guarantees a totality of political unity transcending all diversity" in order to avoid a
"disastrous pluralism tearing the German people apart".
Fascist states pursued policies of social indoctrination through propaganda in education and
the media and regulation of the production of educational and media materials.[164][165]
Education was designed to glorify the fascist movement and inform students of its historical
and political importance to the nation. It attempted to purge ideas that were not consistent
with the beliefs of the fascist movement and to teach students to be obedient to the state.
Economy:
Fascism presented itself as a viable alternative to the two other major existing economic
systems – liberal capitalism and Marxist socialism.[167] Italian Fascism regarded itself as an
heir to the Sorelian syndicalist socialism but outside of fascism it regarded socialism in
general to have succumbed to the anti-national and materialist tendencies of Marxism, and
opposed such socialism.
Fascist governments advocated resolution of domestic class conflict within a nation in order
to secure national solidarity.[169] This would be done through the state mediating relations
between the classes (contrary to the views of classical liberal-inspired capitalists).[170] While
fascism was opposed to domestic class conflict, it was held that bourgeois-proletarian
conflict existed primarily in national conflict between proletarian nations versus bourgeois
nations.[171] Fascism condemned what it viewed as widespread character traits that it
associated as the typical bourgeois mentality that it opposed, such as materialism,
crassness, cowardice, inability to comprehend the heroic ideal of the fascist "warrior"; and
associations with liberalism, individualism, and parliamentarianism.[172] In 1918, Mussolini
defined what he viewed as the proletarian character, defining proletarian as being one and
the same with producers, a productivist perspective that associated all people deemed
productive, including entrepreneurs, technicians, workers, and soldiers as being
proletarian.[173] He acknowledged the historical existence of both bourgeois and proletarian
producers, but declared the need for bourgeois producers to merge with proletarian
producers.
While fascism denounced the mainstream internationalist and Marxist socialisms, it claimed
to economically represent a type of nationalist productivist socialism that while condemning
parasitical capitalism, was willing to accommodate productivist capitalism within it.[174] This

14. 14
was derived from Henri de Saint Simon, whose ideas inspired the creation of utopian
socialism and influenced other ideologies, that stressed solidarity rather than class war and
whose conception of productive people in the economy included both productive workers
and productive bosses to challenge the influence of the aristocracy and unproductive
financial speculators.[175] Saint Simon's vision combined the traditionalist right-wing
criticisms of the French Revolution combined with a left-wing belief in the need for
association or collaboration of productive people in society.[175] Whereas Marxism
condemned capitalism as a system of exploitative property relations, fascism saw the nature
of the control of credit and money in the contemporary capitalist system as abusive.[174]
Unlike Marxism, fascism did not see class conflict between the Marxist-defined proletariat
and the bourgeoisie as a given or as an engine of historical materialism.[174] Instead, it
viewed workers and productive capitalists in common as productive people who were in
conflict with parasitic elements in society including: corrupt political parties, corrupt financial
capital, and feeble people.[174] Fascist leaders such as Mussolini and Hitler spoke of the
need to create a new managerial elite led by engineers and captains of industry—but free
from the parasitic leadership of industries.[174] Hitler stated that the Nazi Party supported
bodenständigen Kapitalismus (productive capitalism) that was based upon profit earned from
one's own labour, but condemned unproductive capitalism or loan capitalism, which derived
profit from speculation.[176]
Fascist economics supported a state-controlled economy that accepted a mix of private and
public ownership over the means of production.[177] Economic planning was applied to both
the public and private sector, and the prosperity of private enterprise depended on its
acceptance of synchronizing itself with the economic goals of the state.[178] Fascist
economic ideology supported the profit motive, but emphasized that industries must uphold
the national interest as superior to private profit.
While fascism accepted the importance of material wealth and power, it condemned
materialism, which it identified as being present in both communism and capitalism, and
criticized materialism for lacking acknowledgement of the role of the spirit.[179] In particular,
fascists criticized capitalism not because of its competitive nature nor support of private
property, which fascists supported—but due to its materialism, individualism, alleged
bourgeois decadence, and alleged indifference to the nation.[180] Fascism denounced
Marxism for its advocacy of materialist internationalist class identity, which fascists regarded
as an attack upon the emotional and spiritual bonds of the nation and a threat to the
achievement of genuine national solidarity.
Economic self-sufficiency, known as autarky, was a major goal of most fascist governments.
In discussing the spread of fascism beyond Italy, historian Philip Morgan states
Since the Depression was a crisis of laissez-faire capitalism and its political counterpart,
parliamentary democracy, fascism could pose as the 'third-way' alternative between
capitalism and Bolshevism, the model of a new European 'civilization'. As Mussolini typically
put it in early 1934, "from 1929...fascism has become a universal phenomenon... The
dominant forces of the 19th century, democracy, socialism, liberalism have been

15. 15
exhausted...the new political and economic forms of the twentieth-century are
fascist'(Mussolini 1935: 32).
Fascists promoted social welfare to ameliorate economic conditions affecting their nation or
race as a whole, but they did not support social welfare for egalitarian reasons. Fascists
criticized egalitarianism as preserving the weak. They instead promoted social Darwinist
views.
Action:
Fascism emphasizes direct action, including supporting the legitimacy of political violence, as
a core part of its politics.[10][185] Fascism views violent action as a necessity in politics that
fascism identifies as being an "endless struggle".[186] This emphasis on the use of political
violence means that most fascist parties have also created their own private militias (e.g. the
Nazi Party's Brown shirts and Fascist Italy's Blackshirts).
The basis of fascism's support of violent action in politics is connected to social
Darwinism.[186] Fascist movements have commonly held social Darwinist views of nations,
races, and societies.[187] They say that nations and races must purge themselves of socially
and biologically weak or degenerate people, while simultaneously promoting the creation of
strong people, in order to survive in a world defined by perpetual national and racial conflict.
.

16. 16
For Complete CSS International
Relation 1:
Call At: 03084293988,
03314019933

17. 17
For Complete CSS International
Relation 1:
Call At:
03084293988,
03314019933