Quote Originally Posted by Elmetiacos View Post
Objectively speaking though, if you look at what Benito Mussolini did, Vladimir Putin comes closer to it than any other leader has done for a long time. The main difference is that he still pays lip service to the idea of his authority coming from the will of the Russian people; a proper fascist would derive his authority simply from having that authority - might makes right or auctoritas.
Actually, I would suggest that only Franco rested everything on a "might makes right" platform. Both Mussolini and Hitler used the political systems as were to rise to power and then were VERY assiduous in using their claims regarding the "will of the people" to retain their status as champion of the people. The sold the idea that they embodied the will of the people and therefore were empowered to act as THE leader. Call it propaganda, call it "smoke and mirrors," put it down to stacking the crowd to be televised or what-not. They managed to sell the concept well enough that people tacitly accepted it.

ou cannot rule absent the consent of the ruled, and pure coercion is impossible in the long term due to resources required to maintain it. You CAN manufacture that consent and -- the term used by critical theorists is concertive control -- use messages, institutions, and some coercion to enact a situation where the governed police themselves. THAT is what the fascist dictator strives for. Or, to use your Romanesque reference, they used auctoritas to beget gravitas and presumed dignitas (both elements of making the leader the symbol of the people being lead) which in turn granted ever greater auctoritas.