For an International Third Position

Cosmocracy and Corporatism 

Throughout history, the desire for a global empire (cosmocracy) has taken on many forms. We have seen the dawn of expansionism with tribal conflict all the way to the establishment of colonialism through imperial projects. 

In this day and age, cosmocracy takes on two major forms: Capitalist Globalism and Communist Internationalism. Both ideologies effectively employ imperialism to fight imperialism, they use propaganda to fight propaganda, they use ideology against ideology, and they war against war. In other words, both ideologies live in the shadow of Fascism in a Post-WW2 dynamic, wherein there is a war of values taking place in order to paint the enemy as a “Fascist”. 

Ironically, there have been exceptions to this throughout recent history, and there have been a few late 20th Century leaders who were bold and forthright in their calls for a kind of orderly authoritarianism akin to Fascist ideology. From Xi Jinping to Kim Jong Un, from Vladimir Putin to Alexander Lukashenko, from Lee Kuan Yew to Rodrigo Duterte, and from Hussein to Gadaffi to Assad––there is an emergent trend nations that have displayed a greater preference towards the strong state models of the past.

Even Hungary’s P.M. Viktor Orban, in a speech from a few years ago, recognized that: “a trending topic in thinking is understanding systems that are not Western, not liberal, not liberal democracies, maybe not even democracies, and yet making nations successful. Today, the stars of international analyses are Singapore, China, India, Turkey, Russia.”

Whether we look to the Spanish Miracle, the Greek Miracle, the Brazilian Miracle, the Chilean Miracle, or the rise of the Tiger and Tiger Cub nations, what we see is that, in many cases, a more authoritarian and protectionist model is more conducive to the growth of nation-states. Meanwhile, the IMF and World Bank try to attribute this growth to liberalization and democratization, when that couldn’t be further from the truth. This line of thinking is merely a petty excuse to justify multinational/transnational corporations betraying their nation-states by investing in nations that, ultimately, can only truly develop with a strong state. 

Internationalism and Globalism 

We must accept the reality of the fact that we live in a world where Globalism and Internationalism have prevailed. We live in an age where nation-states are largely subordinate to global markets and international/supragovernmental structures. This is precisely how trade blocs are maintained between the nation-states of today. 

Long gone is the age of nation-states in the way we once knew them, but this doesn’t mean there isn’t a future for them. It is important to note that, unlike Globalist Capitalism, Internationalism doesn’t necessarily imply a negation of nations more than it does an interrelation between them.

In a globalized and internationalized age, there is a need for a Third Positionist, Internationalist Council who can help to advise, direct, and consolidate the interests of Third Positionist movements in nation-states worldwide. 

The first to develop such an idea was Eugenio Coselschi, who Mussolini had appointed director for the Comitati d’Azione per l’Universalità di Roma (Action Committees for the Universality of Rome) in 1933. The goal of this organization was to achieve a Fascist international to combat the Communist International and a meeting was even held in Montreal, Canada. In other words, it was to encourage co-operation between nation states for the sake of class-collaborationist Corporatist ideologies rather than the Communist ideologies that could turn the proletariat against the social order needed to protect and further their interests. 


When it comes to National Socialism, as Distinct from Italian Fascism, there was also the Waffen SS, which was meant to encourage a certain type of Nationalism among many different nationalities, from the Bosnian and Palestinian Volunteers of Mandatory Palestine to the Indian Legion of Aza Hind (Free India). 

Ironically enough, many former members of the Industrial Workers of the World, like Edmondo Rossoni, ended up becoming Fascists themselves. 

Oswald Mosley also called from a United Europe in his policy for “Europe a Nation”, which he proposed in his book The Alternative in 1947, out of geopolitical necessity and the need for international solidarity between nationalist movements in a globalized world. 

It would be ignorant to undermine the tensions between these different factions during their respective time periods. The vision of a unified Europe under a kind of Mosleyite ideology, where Edward VIII would reign as king with Mosley as Dictator is vastly different from that of a unified world under National Socialism, just as a unified world under National Socialism would be vastly different than the Rebirth of the Roman Empire that Mussolini hoped to achieve. 

Concluding Remarks 

To quote the German Romanticist, Frederic Schlegel: 

“As the ancient commander addressed his soldiers before battle, so should the moralist speak to men in the struggle of the era.”

Our vision must be a total one. 

We must recognize things like ethnicity, religion, class, and culture are all TOOLS by which we can achieve our aim: a new regime, a new order, and a new man. Ultimately, we must recognize our end goal lies in the STATE

From the war, anarchy, and chaos of nature, we shall establish organic, corporate states worldwide: we must tap into the popular will, we must unify the classes, and we must militarize the STATE

We must establish solidarity between Nations to create a Fascist Confederation of Nations.

We must establish a Fascist Confederation of Nations to create a Continental Fascist Federation.

And we must establish a Continental Fascist Federation to establish a Global, Fascist, Unitary State.

One thought on “For an International Third Position

  • September 26, 2020 at 1:16 am
    Permalink

    Thanks for the article. You raise an interesting question. I didn’t know how far these things had been taken in the past. I think you go too far when you say “ethnicity, religion, class, and culture are all tools” though. They can be tools but they are also goals and things worth fighting for. What kind of a new man would forget the legacy that has been given to him?

    But I agree with the creation of an international third positionist movement to combat the globalization currently taking place. It seems like now globalization works to annihilate cultural traditions and legacies. Mutual respect of between nations’ cultures with the goal of each culture preserving their own connection to past is something I think we should strive for.

Comments are closed.