My Life

My Life - Oswald Mosleythis unique kinship, but divided by a nationalism which in the view of history must beregarded as artificial. It was the sin of fascism to repeat this error, with consequencesof still enduring tragedy.We were sometimes suspected of being organised in a fascist International. On thecontrary, we were much too national; the view of history may well be that we werenot nearly international enough. There were sporadic meetings between leaders, andoccasional holiday parties touring each other's countries, but no form of systematicorganisation. I myself met Mussolini about half a dozen times, and Hitler twice;neither of them after 1936. In those critical years I was much too busy at home to goabroad at all. Our fault was not union, but division. Yet it arose from the natural causethat we were different in our policies and outlook, by reason of the national charactersof our movements.More, not less, should in my view have been done to surmount these differences forthe purpose of preserving peace. Fascism in each country was too busy serving itsnational interest. Confronted with a clear choice between pursuing national ambitionsor promoting some form of European union through the universalism of fascism, thenational socialist and fascist leaders invariably chose the former course. Wheneverfascism was really beginning to succeed throughout Europe, it always received aknock-down blow from the leaders already in power prancing into some territory orother in service of purely national interests, often accompanied by boastful andmenacing language which created the alarm of war and increased opposition. Evenwhen the Axis leaders came together in the last phase, it was more on the basis of anold-fashioned alliance of mutual interest than of any union of the spirit. Never talk tome of a fascist International, for the peace of Europe might have been maintained ifsuch an organisation had existed. If our continent had found a reasonable measure ofunion through a new European spirit, instead of division by the old nationalism,twenty-five million people might be alive today and Europe the greatest power in theworld.An exaggerated nationalism must be counted both the strength and the weakness offascism. It was strong because nationalism is always a quick starter in popular favour,but it was weak because narrow nationalism has the same short legs as lies, and issoon overtaken by facts. Another characteristic of fascism combined the same blendof merit and error in an almost equal measure. The drive to action was right, it was anurgent need of the period. Unemployment, bad housing, and poverty when sciencehad already virtually solved the problem of production in any well-organisedcommunity —these were wrongs crying to Heaven for vigorous action. Yet one of thesad lessons of history, which must be learnt, is that action can be too dearly bought.Individual liberty is the basis of any civilised society, and we regress to the chaos ofthe Dark Ages if this is not recognised. Individual rights should not impede orblackmail the advance of the whole community; no man can claim to set his rightsabove those of the whole nation, and no minority can claim in effect the right to rule,but the right of the individual to suffer no loss of liberty without trial must beinviolate. Personally, I maintained this right before, during and after my longimprisonment without trial.The rights of the individual were not preserved under fascism abroad, and therebymore was lost, even in terms of action, than was gained. Even in the eighteenth243 of 424