Given
that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism,
of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily
follow that the twentieth century must also be a century
of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines
pass, but humanity remains; and it may rather be expected
that this will be a century of authority. . . . a century
of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century
of individualism. . . . it maybe expected that this will
be the century of collectivism, and hence the century of
the
State. . . .
The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient
margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived
of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains
what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot
be the individual, but the State alone. . . .
For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion
of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality,
and its opposite a sign of decadence.
