Fascism Viewed From The Cross
A Book Review
A good friend recently suggested that I start doing some book reviews. I was initially against the idea, as I thought it might somehow influence my series on Political Theory, however, why would that necessarily be a bad thing? Anyhow, I couldn’t help but get Michael Witcoff’s new book, Fascism Viewed From The Cross. It was released about a week after I started my Substack, and I realized that we have a massive amount of overlap in topics. To be concise: Political Theory and Jews. So the idea struck me, maybe the occasional book review would be a nice break from my two ongoing series of essays. Full disclosure, Michael Witcoff is a friend of mine. We became acquainted sometime around 2017, before he was an Orthodox Christian. Since then we’ve met a handful of times in real life, have interviewed each other, and stayed in frequent contact. Therefore, I am most likely biased towards his work just because I like the guy, but I’ll make an effort to be as objective as possible. At least as objective as I was when confronted by a communist in Starbucks for not having the self awareness to avoid reading a book with the word FASCISM printed boldly on the cover in public. That led to an hour-and-a-half very tense discussion with an Emma Goldman type commie who informed me that true communism has never been implemented. I sure have never heard that one before. World view obliterated.
Fascism Viewed From The Cross, is obviously a play on Julius Evola’s famous book, Fascism Viewed From The Right. I’ve been telling myself and everyone else that I would read this book for 4 or 5 years now, and I still haven’t. Now I don’t need to, because Witcoff basically knocked it out of the park. In the first section of the book, Witcoff describes the different dynamics possible between the Orthodox Church and the State. The Church can rule the State (Theocracy), the State can rule the Church (Sergianism), the Church and State can be separate and competitive (secular democracy), or Church and State can be separate and cooperate (Symphonia). He then uses examples of various Saints, Patristics, and Orthodox History to demonstrate that Symphonia is the Orthodox ideal. The second half of the book is essentially a compare and contrast between Benito Mussolini’s Fascism, Adolf Hitler’s National Socialism, and Corneliu Codreanu’s Legion of the Archangel Michael (Legionary) movement with that of the Orthodox ideal. Interestingly, each is given a chapter on its relationship and orientation towards Jews, including the Orthodox Church. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, but I actually used this book as a source in my article, Forsaken By God: The Jewish People.
For the Orthodox Christian with an interest in Political Theory or State Craft, or if you’re some journalist wondering why the Orthodox Christian worldview seems “reactionary”, this book is a must-read. Overall, I’ll reiterate what I said in my review on Amazon: Witcoff does a fantastic job explaining the Orthodox Mind of the Church as it relates to State Craft, then holds the prominent “fascist” leaders against that standard. By modern standards, he critiqued Fascism for all of the wrong reasons, but I do believe that he remained committed to the eternal and objective truth. He also took the time to explain the Orthodox orientation towards Nationalism as a sort of duty towards one’s own family, kin, culture, and customs, but warns against the extremes of hatred towards others and puffed-up pride. Another book that I’ve been meaning to read for years, is Codreanu’s book, For My Legionaries. Witcoff does a very in-depth description of the Legionary movement, which I really enjoyed, being relatively unfamiliar with it (to my own shame).
I recommend this book strongly to anyone with an inkling of interest in politics, but I don’t think Witcoff adequately defines what Fascism is. This isn’t really his fault, as I think even Evola makes this same mistake – I’ll confirm when I finally read him. I’ve always critiqued Fascism as being a superficial attempt at trying to establish something like a Monarchy, but essentially being secular in nature. That’s the reason I called Thomas Hobbes the Father of Fascism, since that was his stated goal. I’ve also critiqued it for relying on the popular will of the people to justify its usurpation of power. Just like every other system spawned from the Enlightenment, it is still the “consent of the governed”. All of that being said, Mussolini’s Fascism and Hitler’s National Socialism seem different enough to be distinct and separate things. Moreover, after reading Witcoff’s description of Codreanu’s movement, which was explicitly Orthodox and sought to establish Symphonia with an Orthodox Monarch, I just don’t see how that is at all the same. How does a movement seeking to reestablish Monarchy, along with a Symphonia, cooperation with the State, and Orthodoxy as the divine unifier of Romanians get lumped together with Mussolini and Adolf Hitler? Also, why does French Fascism always escape commentary? Bertrand De Juvenal gets no love.
However, that is more of a critique about the general discussion of Fascism, and less against Michael Witcoff. He was just writing to a general audience that almost demands it be framed as such – that is no fault of his. This book remains an excellent resource for learning the mind of the Orthodox Church as it relates to State and government, and how Imperial Orthodox Saints conducted themselves as they managed the various Orthodox Empires, and contrasts how the 20th Century Fascists fell short. It also serves as a wonderful resource for future reactionary movements to learn from mistakes in past reactionary movements that struggled against the Left. An Orthodox Reactionary movement should not seek to place the Church in a subservient position to the State, but rather a cooperative one. Mussolini’s Fascists and Hitler’s National Socialists tolerated the Church only in so much as the Church offered no critique or spiritual repudiation. Byzantine Emperors on the other hand often submitted to penances from the Bishops for decisions made during the maintenance of the Empire. May the future State rule the temporal, while leaving matters of the spiritual to the Church. All in all, I score Fascism Viewed From The Cross 5 out of 5 stars. Purchase your copy while it is still available on Amazon!
I've not read this book, but this is a good overview. According to your description, Witcoff's book appears to be just as valuable as an introduction to the understanding of Orthodox/state symphonia as it serves as an analysis of three very different early 20th century fascist (more or less) governments from the Orthodox perspective.
And you're absolutely right, Michael, in pointing out that the public conception of 'fascism' is hobbled by lumping these very different nationalist, reactionary movements together. I also agree with your criticisms of the various fascist-type regimes of the time, that they tended towards too much statism and modernism to respect the proper balance and attitude of government, Church, and people. Yet, as you pointed out, Codreanu's unrealized vision for the state better represented this symphonic balance (and unlike the ideal communism that the Starbucks lady(?) gushed about, Orthodox symphonia has several examples of success throughout centuries of history, and Codreanu was attempting to install a government that implemented something like this ancient understanding.)
In all, after reading your review and then checking out the table of contents from Fascism Viewed from the Cross, I think Michael Witcoff's book will be a joy to read. I especially appreciate the organized structure of his book, methodically hammering a repeated rhythm of understandings about the Church, the State, and the Jews from the perspectives of Orthodoxy, Mussolini, Hitler, and Codreanu.
Thank you for this review!