Abstract

This article first surveys the confusion that prevailed in fascist studies for decades, and which makes it quite understandable if the term ‘fascism’ has been generally avoided both by historians and by lecturers and others teaching inter-war European history to students in non-specialist ‘survey’ courses. It then outlines the main features of the ‘new consensus’ that is emerging among scholars on the heuristic value of seeing fascism as a form of revolutionary ideology, bent on purging society of decadence and inaugurating the rebirth of the nation. Next, it focuses on how this approach enables Fascism and Nazism to be located within the supranational forces shaping modern history, and on the light it throws on their profound relationship to totalitarianism, political religion and modernity. It closes with brief examples of how this approach can be applied to structuring answers to essays and exam questions on inter-war Europe, and welcomes the prospect opened up by the new consensus for greater collaboration between specialists in fascist studies, empirical historians, university lecturers, textbook writers and students – and even, one day, students in secondary education, and their teachers and examiners – in this fascinating, and rapidly evolving, field of teaching and research.

DOI: 10.1111/1478-0542.039