Lawrence Dennis: The Father of American Fascism

by Zoltanous

Introduction

Lawrence Dennis was an American Fascist political theorist and writer who rose to prominence in the 1930s as a leading advocate of Fascism. He wrote extensively on topics such as economics, foreign policy, and race relations, and his works continue to be studied by scholars and political theorists today. While some see him as a dangerous figure who advocated for discriminatory policies, others view him as a complex and nuanced thinker whose ideas are worthy of serious consideration. In this article, we will explore the life and ideas of Lawrence Dennis and examine his impact on American political thought.

“Lawrence Dennis was an important and highly influential political thinker whose ideas and writings continue to be studied by scholars today. His advocacy of corporatism and his critiques of liberal democracy and capitalism were controversial, but they were also part of a broader critique of modernity that remains relevant in the 21st century."

— A James Gregor, The Search For Neofascism: The Use and Abuse of Social Science

American Fascism

Lawrence Dennis was born in Atlanta, Georgia, on December 25, 1893, into a family marked by the complex racial dynamics of the time, with a mother who was a former slave and a white father. Growing up in a devout Baptist household, Dennis's Christian faith would deeply influence his later life and political ideologies, incorporating Christian principles like social justice and the value of personal accountability. From an early age, Dennis faced the harsh realities of racial prejudice and economic hardship. His family's financial struggles meant that Dennis had to contribute to their livelihood early on. Despite these challenges, Dennis was a standout student, demonstrating exceptional academic abilities that provided him a path out of poverty. His academic journey led him from Georgia Tech, where he initially pursued engineering, to Harvard University. At Harvard, he shifted his focus to economics and political science, a move that would lay the groundwork for his complex and controversial career.

The racial climate of Dennis's time likely exerted pressure on him to "pass" as white, a strategy that could afford him social and economic opportunities otherwise inaccessible to Black Americans. This societal backdrop, coupled with his mixed heritage, might have influenced his decision to primarily identify with his White American lineage, downplaying his Black ancestry. This complex identity negotiation was a reflection not only of personal choice but also of the broader societal constraints imposed by the pervasive racism and discrimination of the era.

A young Dennis with his mother

People who knew Dennis often described him as charismatic, highly intelligent, and extensively well-read, possessing a natural talent for convincing others through his articulate arguments. His sharp wit and readiness to question established norms were well noted. Nonetheless, not everyone found him easy to get along with. To some, he appeared egotistical and arrogant, with a tendency towards temperamental outbursts. His confrontational nature and propensity to bear long-standing resentments towards those who opposed or wronged him were also pointed out. Dennis's manner of speaking was elegant and sophisticated, diverging from the stereotypical expectations associated with African Americans at the time, which inadvertently facilitated his identification with being White.

Following his graduation from Harvard in 1916, Dennis's career path took him from journalism to military service during World War I, where he served in France as a liaison between the American and French armies. Post-war, he returned to the U.S. and embarked on a career as a speechwriter and public relations consultant, working for major corporations like General Electric and Standard Oil. In the 1920s, Dennis ventured into the world of Wall Street as an investment banker and stockbroker, where he made a name for himself through his keen eye for undervalued stocks and his adeptness at market analysis. He also entered into matrimony with Margaret Case, a White woman, in 1925, and their union lasted for the remainder of their lives.

In the 1930s, he became an advocate for fascism and authored several books on the subject, including The Coming American Fascism and Is Capitalism Doomed? The reasons behind his fascination with fascism were complex and varied. His disenchantment with liberal democracy, intensified by the Great Depression, was a significant factor. Dennis viewed democracy as inherently flawed, susceptible to corruption, inefficiency, and the whims of the masses. He was convinced that the United States required a robust, centralized authority capable of effectively tackling the nation's challenges and safeguarding against both domestic and international threats. He ultimately believed fascism represented a superior and more efficient form of governance than liberal democracy, presenting a remedy for the era's economic and political strife.

His perspective was heavily influenced by the perceived accomplishments of Mussolini's Italy. During the 1920s and 1930s, Mussolini's regime was admired by some for its apparent efficiency and strength. While other nations struggled economically, Italy seemed to thrive, unaffected by the global financial crisis. Mussolini's administration succeeded in enhancing Italy's economy, infrastructure, and military might. Dennis, who visited Italy in both the 1920s and 1930s, was notably impressed by the transformations he witnessed, leading him to believe that the United States could similarly prosper under fascist-inspired policies, particularly in addressing the Great Depression's economic woes.

Dennis proposed corporatism as a solution to the economic downturn, drawing on elements of fascist economic strategy. In his vision, corporatism emphasizes the importance of unions in economic governance. It envisions a system where corporations I.e. unions, form functional groups representing key economic sectors like agriculture, manufacturing, and transportation. These groups would be responsible for overseeing their respective sectors, coordinating economic activities, and ensuring the nation's needs are met. Under this framework, the government would play a significant role in regulating the economy, working closely with these corporate groups to align economic policies with the country's broader interests. Dennis argued that this approach would be more effective and socially conscious than capitalism, which he criticized for prioritizing individual profit over societal welfare. He believed that this could promote social cohesion and stability, providing a sustainable economic model. Dennis viewed this system as adaptable to the specific needs of different nations, presenting a solution to the limitations of both democracy and capitalism.

“The doctrine of the canonists or Aristotle about usury is coming back into its own in the world-wide collapse of credit, repudiation and devaluation. This doctrine is not opposed to property ownership or business enterprise, but it is incompatible with the spirit and technique of modern finance capitalism. It is a doctrine which fascism everywhere must adopt and follow as rapidly as possible. For the benefit of the professional economists who may be inclined to sneer at any one who reasserts doctrines which they have thought they had disposed of during the past hundred years of rationalization of modern capitalism, I may say that I have read most of the leading theoretical explanations and defenses of interest. I might add that I could, had I time, demolish each of these theories of interest, one by one, with the arguments of another. But what is the use of demolishing with theoretical analysis the academic theories of interest when defaults, repudiation, bankruptcies and successive currency devaluations the world over are doing so much more devastating a job of confuting classical theories of money-lending and interest?"

“The fascist State, through government-assisted unions of workers, government-regulated associations of employers, and special executive tribunals for hearing appeals and complaints, can afford far more redress and correction than the liberal State with its judicial process available only to the rich individual and the large corporation."

— Lawrence Dennis, The Coming American Fascism

Initially, Dennis was a proponent of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal policies. During the 1930s, he lauded Roosevelt's attempts to rejuvenate the economy and generate employment through government initiatives like the Works Progress Administration and the Civilian Conservation Corps. Dennis particularly endorsed the economic strategies of the New Deal, viewing them as essential interventions to counteract the severe economic downturn of the era. He perceived the New Deal as a means to rebuild trust in the American economy, aiming for a more stable and flourishing society, and likened it to a form of corporatism due to its focus on centralizing the economy.

“This New Deal dilemma is not the way to avoid fascism, as the New Dealers have hoped, but rather to make it inevitable.“

— Lawrence Dennis, The Coming American Fascism

As time passed, Dennis underwent a shift in his perspective, leading him to increasingly criticize Roosevelt and the New Deal. In 1933, while working as a journalist in Germany and reporting on the emergence of Nazism, Lawrence Dennis had a notable encounter with Adolf Hitler. During this encounter, Dennis was able to secure an interview with Hitler, which later appeared in various American newspapers. In the interview, Dennis expressed a combination of admiration for Hitler's policies and criticism of what he saw as their extreme nature. Additionally, Dennis argued that the American press had misinterpreted his words, distorting his views in the published interviews. He believed that these alterations were made to portray the interview with a more anti-Hitler tone, a manipulation he strongly opposed. Dennis also perceived Italian Fascism, Nazism, and FDR's New Deal as having socialist characteristics similar to Communism.

“Communism, Fascism and Nazism. As for these terms, there should be no question as to definition: First, because each is authoritatively defined by its official governmental exponent; second, because, in this book these terms are little used and never as important elements in any statement. In the theory of this book communism (Russian style), Fascism, and Nazism are merely different national variants of socialism. And all these variants combine many of the features of capitalism, laissez-faire and the free market with socialism, state capitalism and planning.

In the United States it is obvious that we shall not have a Russian, Italian or German, but an American brand of national socialism. What we call it is of little importance. As for the question what will it be like, the most important and informative answer that can be given at present is that it will be a permanent revolution.

And so this book is about the new revolution in the United States as a process of change already begun rather than about some dream of a new American utopia. One cannot talk realistically about a new order to be realized years hence either here or anywhere else. One can, however, talk realistically about a current process of change.

In linking together Russian communism, Italian Fascism and German Nazism and in declaring that the New Deal is a movement in the same general direction, I do not say or imply that these different national phases of the same world-wide revolution of socialism are entirely alike. Still less do I imply that they are friendly to each other. In this there is nothing contradictory. Capitalistic and democratic countries have fought each other in the past and, in all probability, socialistic countries will fight each other in the future. People fight because of their similarities more often than because of their dissimilarities. There is for the time being a natural tendency among the capitalist great powers to combine against and resist the socialist great powers, because the latter are challenging the status quo.

The world-wide revolution of socialism, however, is greater than this conflict and will go on during, and in spite of, and after these wars just as the capitalist revolution of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries went on through the inter-capitalist wars of that era. One can follow intelligently the new revolution, though not the day-to-day military and diplomatic moves of the leading contestants.”

— Lawrence Dennis, The Dynamics of War and Revolution

Dennis advocated for the establishment of a separate "Negro state" within the United States as a solution to the country's racial issues. He believed that such a state would allow Black Americans to cultivate their own culture and institutions away from the influence of white society, thereby addressing racial tensions and promoting social harmony and stability. Dennis argued that this arrangement would be beneficial for both Black and White Americans, enabling each group to follow their own developmental paths.

Dennis developed a connection with Charles Lindbergh in the late 1930s, particularly through the America First Committee (AFC), which opposed U.S. involvement in World War II. Dennis admired Lindbergh as a symbol of American nationalism and anti-interventionism, influencing Lindbergh's political views and assisting in crafting his speeches and public statements. Dennis's stance was firmly isolationist, arguing against U.S. engagement in European conflicts and viewing the war as contrary to American interests.

He was also a vocal opponent of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's foreign and domestic policies. Dennis viewed Roosevelt as a warmonger misleading the U.S. into an unnecessary war, suggesting in his book The Dynamics of War and Revolution that Roosevelt was using the war to distract from domestic failures and advance his globalist political agenda. Dennis accused Roosevelt of manipulating public opinion through propaganda and was particularly critical of the New Deal, which he saw as harmful to American workers due to it helping capitalistic plutocracy.

“Up until recently Moscow talked democracy here to spread communism while the American plutocracy talked democracy to get lower taxes and less government regulation. Mr. Roosevelt has talked democracy to keep war against Hitler as an ever available ace up his sleeve to win a third term.”

“Seven years of the New Deal phase of the new revolution in America have failed to develop either a new dynamism or a new folk unity. The explanation is simple: A national electoral majority of “gimme” groups does not add up to a national unity. Mr. Roosevelt’s only success in national unification for the purposes of dynamism has been in the realm of foreign policy, where he has united the plutocratic critics of his social policy with the masses, those on relief sharing the same sentiments as the plutocracy as to the necessity of putting an end to the wicked foreign isms. All this merely proves that the American people are united over European and not over American problems. The explanation is simple: The solution of our own problems calls for a quality of folk unity which we lack, whereas an attempted solution of Europe’s problems calls only for a hate of Hitler, Stalin and the Japanese, which we do not lack. A solution for America’s problems would require folk unity, which we lack. A solution for Europe’s problems, namely hating Hitler and killing Germans, calls only for moral unity which we have to burn.”

— Lawrence Dennis, The Dynamics of War and Revolution

Dennis also collaborated with Father Charles Coughlin, sharing a mutual critique of the New Deal and advocating for a nationalist and populist political approach. Their partnership extended to various facets of their work against Roosevelt's policies. Beyond his connection with Coughlin, Dennis maintained relationships within the American Fascist movement, including significant figures and organizations like William Dudley Pelley of the Silver Legion of America, the German American Bund, and poet Ezra Pound. He contributed to fascist publications such as "Liberation" and was loosely associated with the National Renaissance party, indicating his deep involvement with fascist movements during this period.

Dennis strolling around in Washington, DC

In 1944, Lawrence Dennis found himself arrested on sedition charges as part of what was alleged to be a fascist plot to topple the U.S. government, an episode often referred to as the Business Plot. The scheme reportedly involved mobilizing a force of discontented veterans to march on Washington, D.C., with the aim of establishing a new regime under a military dictator. Dennis was implicated as a key figure in this plot, accused of using his talents as a writer and speaker to disseminate the conspirators' agenda and garner support. He was indicted alongside several others, including William Dudley Pelley. The trial also saw notable figures such as Edward James Smythe, leader of the Christian Mobilizers, and Robert Noble, editor of the pro-Axis publication "The Thunderbolt," facing charges.

This trial stands as one of the most prominent sedition trials in the United States, focusing on individuals with fascist and pro-Nazi sympathies during the Second World War as part of a broader governmental effort to address internal threats. While Pelley and a few others were convicted, the majority, including Dennis, were either acquitted or had their charges dropped. In 1954, Dennis was cleared of all charges, but not without significant damage to his reputation, a situation further complicated by the exposure of his concealed Black ancestry during the trial. Despite these challenges, Dennis continued to engage with political discourse, particularly concerning the Cold War. He adopted a stance that, while more moderated, retained core fascist elements. Dennis criticized the Cold War's intense anti-communist climate and authored books in the 1950s advocating for a policy of non-intervention, thereby contributing to the early development of American Paleo-Conservatism. Lawrence Dennis passed away on August 20, 1977, in Palm Beach, Florida.

A photo of Dennis with his library

Despite not being widely recognized, Lawrence Dennis's theories and writings are foundational to the ideology of American Fascism and have also significantly impacted the development of Paleo-Conservatism. His thoughts on foreign policy and economics have been acknowledged and praised by notable figures within the conservative movement. For instance, Patrick Buchanan has recognized Dennis as a key early intellectual influence, particularly valuing Dennis's criticism of American interventionism and his support for an isolationist stance in foreign policy. Similarly, Sam Francis championed Dennis's concept of "corporate statism," while Paul Gottfried has acknowledged Dennis's contributions to his understanding of the state's role in society. James Burnham is another who found Dennis's perspectives on economics and foreign policy to be profoundly influential.

In summery, the following quotation by Gerald Horne encapsulates his life and influence:

“Lawrence Dennis charted a singular course within Depression-era American protofascism. A veteran of the foreign service and an Ivy League graduate, Dennis stood as a respectable and dignified intellectual in the midst of frothing anti-Semites such as William Dudley Pelley and James True. His respectability resulted in Dennis being taken seriously in broad circles, and he gained a reputation as the “theoretician” of American fascism. Dennis managed to survive the mass sedition trial of 1944 debacle with his status intact, emerging in the postwar period as an influential Cold War spokesperson for noninterventionist conservatives. Dennis's supporters, however, did not know that the same man who met with Charles Lindbergh and Adolf Hitler began his life as a “famed, globe-trotting Negro child preacher” (p. xxii). Before entering Phillips Exeter Academy, Dennis began “passing” for white—a facade he maintained until his death.”

— Gerald Horne, The Color of Fascism: Lawrence Dennis, Racial Passing, and The Rise of Right-Wing Extremism In The United States