who rose to power based on a combination of social, economic, political and personal factors.
This analysis will be a comparison and contrast of Fascism and Democracy in the sense of how Hitler and Mussolini used Fascism to rise to power and fool the masses into thinking they had their best interests at heart. Both had the ability to identify themselves with their movements and their people by making the people fear they would be subject to communism, corrupt democracies and empty parliament process if they did not join them in all ways in fighting their respective country’s mutual enemies, “Like Hitler, Mussolini denied he was a dictator. He was the Leader, the expression of his people’s yearnings for rescue from fatuous parliamentary debates, the threat of communism, and the corruption of democratic governments. He did not share Hitler’s indelible anti-Semitism, but he could adapt himself to it in his references to the power of secret societies and the forces at work to foment another world war,” (Davidson, 1996: 163). The analysis will also describe the various methods and tactics that both leaders used to be able to gain a great deal of support from the masses, almost to the level of blind-worship. Different psychological aspects of the two men that allowed them to win this type of broad support from the people will also be addressed. A conclusion will give a final comparison and contrast of these two most infamous leaders.
There has never been a leader who could effectively lead a country if he did not have popular support. However, behind the scenes, political and economic support (with economics usually dictating politics) are even more crucial to allow for the mass stage to be prepared for a leader. One of the methods Hitler used to gain support within the wealthy business sector of Germany was one he would use again and again to bolster the support of the masses. He did this by raking up a feared en...