Fascism in progression fantasy
Thu, 14 Aug 2025
Philosophy, Literature, Opinion
===============================

I read a lot, and I read a lot of different types of works. On a
typical week I will read about one novel, one non-fiction
-article, or -essay, and a handful of blog posts.

In the novel-section of my weekly digest, one may often find
books in the `progression-fantasy' genre. Books about characters
getting progressively stronger, smarter, more powerful,
etcetera. There is broad overlap between progression-fantasy and
Xianxia cultivation fantasy, meaning that it involves elements
of individualism, spirituality, religion, and so forth.

In the non-fiction-essay-section one can find various political,
philosophical, or religious texts and manifests. This week, this
included Mussolini's[1] short essay ``La dottrina del
fascismo'', which I -- due to my still-lacking Italian knowledge
-- read and English translation of: ``The doctrine of Fascism''.
The Doctrine of Fascism, outlines -- unsurprisingly -- the core
tenants of fascism as a political, social, economical, and
spiritual doctrine. Also unsurprisingly, the essay is rather
unclear in many parts. Fascism is of course not known for its
rigorous philosophical basis, but I truly cannot overstate quite
how poor some of the reasoning in the work is.

It happens surprisingly often that my non-fiction reading finds
parallels, allegories, or examples in whatever fiction I am
reading at the time. Though I must admit that I was rather
surprised to find a great overlap between the tenants of fascism
and the ideas expressed in many progression-fantasy novels.

A brief disclaimer before I start: while this blog post intends
to point out similarities between the philosophies expressed in
The Doctrine of Fascism and popular progression-fantasy novels,
I do not intend for this to smear the genre or authors writing
in it. There are plenty of works of fiction wherein any number
of characters are adherents to awful systems of belief, or who
commit terrible actions and this does not make them worse works,
nor does this imply that the author adheres to-, or attempts to
glorify- these actions or beliefs. Furthermore, the
similarities are within fascisms `less' problematic doctrines
(anti-Semitism is luckily not a common occurrence in progression
fantasy nor is it actually a part of Mussolini's fascism).

Lastly, since I will be talking about various novels in this
post, there will be some MINOR spoilers for The mother of
learning, Defiance of the fall, and Cradle.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The doctrine of progression fantasy
----------------------------------------

Let's start with some frequently recurring ideas in progression
fantasy. Ultimately, in such works, the focus tends to be on
self-actualisation and -cultivation. The protagonist is trying
to become the most powerful-, smart-, developed-, version of
themselves. The path to such power is paved by hard work.
Certainly, there is often an element of luck involved, but the
protagonists of these stories succeed because they are willing to
put in the work to turn their fortunes around and to capitalize
on the advantages they receive.

This hard work usually takes the form of struggling on the brink
of death. Certainly this is not essential, but the greatest
gains are always found millimeters away from the breaking point.

Cultivation (which is how I will refer to the development of
these characters from now on) usually results in increased
physical-, and mental-, fortitude, drastically lengthened
lifespan, and higher social status. In most cases, society is
set up in such a way that the powerful rule over the weak.
``Might makes right'', as many like to say, and if a country
bumpkin manages to reach a higher level of cultivation compared
to the emperor, then the emperor will bow down to them from that
point forward.

Cultivation tends to require a lot of resources leading to
conflicts over materials and opportunities. Those that succeed
are the ones that seize whatever they can get their hands on.
Deference, sharing, and charity have no place in these worlds.

In fact, charity is actively frowned upon. Since power is gained
by struggle, when opportunities and materials are freely given,
then recipients will not struggle for them and will thus be
(perhaps permanently) handicapped. This leads to a strong
individualistic mindset, though also to the forming of sects.

Large organisations can get their hands on materials more
easily, and the presence of a high-cultivation individual keeps
members more safe and provides them with resources (all in
exchange for contribution to the sect of course; no charity).
Since a single patriarch or matriarch can outlive generations of
dependents at higher cultivation ranks, these sects often start
out as families.

The doctrine of fascism
-----------------------

Having covered that, let me try to outline the core element of
Mussolini's fascism as I understand them.

First and foremost, fascism is conceived by Mussolini out of a
disillusionment with the dominant philosophies from the early
20th century, namely socialism, liberalism, and scientific
materialism. This disillusionment seemed to stem (as it often
does) from a previous affiliation. During the first world war
there was an apparent schism in the Italian liberalism of which
Mussolini was a part. With one camp being in favour of the great
war (which we now call the first world war) and one camp being
against. Mussolini was in the former camp, which ended up being
the less-popular -- and therefore rejected -- path.

> When the war ended in 1919 Socialism, as a doctrine, was
> already dead; it continued to exist only as a grudge,
> especially in Italy where its only chance lay in inciting to
> reprisals against the men who had willed the war and who were
> to be made to pay for it.

Fascism, therefore, is anti-individualistic, pro-war,
pro-state, and anti-well-being.

Let's start with this first element: pro-war. Way, Mussolini
argues is the ULTIMATE occupation of any state (and the state is
all that matters as we will see shortly). War should not
necessarily be waged for any particular purpose. Indeed, I don't
think Mussolini saw it as a very emotional excessive. War is
waged for the purposes of strengthening oneself (id est: the
state) through struggle.

> The Fascist disdains an `easy' life

The idea that any state, race, religion, etcetera is
particularly better than any other -- and therefore should rule
over the others -- is laughable to Mussolini. War is held for
the purpose of struggle, and if any one state would subjugate
all the others, then there would be no more struggle, which
would be disastrous.

Secondly, there is the pro-state mindset. The state, Mussolini
argues, is the only way for a person to fully express and
develop their moral, spiritual, and physical selves. At the same
time, the individual does not matter, in fact, they may
completely cease to exist, being incorporated entirely in the
state. This is to Mussolini the highest aim of life, in a rather
spiritual sense:

> which suppressing the instinct for life closed in a brief
> circle of pleasure, builds up a higher life, founded on duty,
> a life free from the limitations of time and space, in which
> the individual, by self-sacrifice, the renunciation of
> self-interest, by death itself, can achieve that purely
> spiritual existence in which his value as a man consists

The state therefore should manage everything, from religion, to
economics, as the state is the only thing which exists. On this
note, while this essay specifically suggests a roman catholic
religion and a guild-based economy, these seem to be to be
merely suggestions for the Italian fascist state in particular.
Mussolini does not seem to hold any particular affinity for
these (in fact, he actively despised catholic Christianity), nor
does he necessarily think they are any good. However, a state
should have a religion and an economy, the details don't matter,
all that matters is development through struggle.

Coming to the anti-well-being aspect, this is tied in closely
with the anti-individual aspect.

> the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the
> State and accepts the individual only in so far as his
> interests coincide with those of the State

The interests-, pleasure-, and
even life- of the individual does not matter to the state. Just
as any particular person does not care about the life of death
of a single cell in their body.

> the well-being and freedom of the individuals composing it
> does not seem to be in conformity with nature’s plans, which
> care only for the species and seem ready to sacrifice the
> individual.

The comparison
==============

I think those are enough fascist quotations for one post, let's
move on to the comparison with progression fantasy.

To point out the obvious: growth through struggle is a core
concept (perhaps THE core concept of both ideologies). And
everything, from pleasure to well-being to life can be
sacrificed before the altar of progress.

We see this in Defiance of the Fall, where The System (the
mechanistic god of this universe) plans and sanctions entire
wars between galaxies to strengthen the victor[2]. In Cradle, we
see a society which has lived in peace and prosperity for
generations and has grown weak and feeble because of it, with a
literal child from the outside being able to best the entire
valley if they wanted to. In The Mother of Learning, we see one
character becoming an Archmage by putting in the work, using
others, and having a complete disregard for their own life,
while we watch another with greater opportunities and talents
waste his potential by investing time in social bonds, romance,
and fun.

The anti-individualism of fascism seems at first glance to not
mix well with the individualistic mindset of cultivation, though
I believe they actually align rather well. You see, individuals
at the high-levels of cultivation are states unto themselves.

We see this for example in Defiance of the Fall where
individuals who have reached the `monarch` stage of cultivation
are entire worlds onto themselves, worlds which can house many
other people. In Cradle, the sects formed by lords, monarchs,
and sages often involve the (sometimes literal) sacrifice of
lower tiered members for the cultivation of the benefit
patriarch or matriarch, id est: the benefit of the sect.

Another interesting parallel is not as common across the genre,
but I feel like it is still worth pointing out. In Defiance of
the Fall, faith is a source of power which can be accumulated,
and is actually one of the most powerful forces in the universe
partially powering the system itself. Importantly however, faith
does not need to be targeted towards an actual god. Instead,
faith can be directed practically anywhere. No faith is
particularly better or more true than any other. Instead, most
major sects will have a faith directed towards their founder
with rituals and practices designed solely for the purpose of
accumulating faith power. This rings with Mussolini's approach
to Catholicism, where he didn't particularly believe in the
teachings of the Bible or pope, but DID believe in the earthly
benefits of having a unified religion.

The heroes of both the progression-fantasy novel and the fascist
mythos are the Nietzschian ubermenschen. Those who have shed the
weaknesses of morality, charity, and non-zero-sum-thinking, to
become truly noble. That is: brave, and strong, and demanding
respect. In all cases: if you help others, you will only cripple
them. If you truly want to help another state/person: declare
them war, fight until you are on the brink of death, then go a
little further.

Of course, In these novels, a common theme is that the
protagonists gradually lose their humanity, and typically
authors include interpersonal relationships to keep the
characters grounded and relatable. At the same time, the
attitude of that characters seems to be that you cannot argue
with the results. They might look at the great-war and world-war
in our universe and say: ``well you all learned a lot didn't
you? Warfare was revolutionized, the atom was split, advances
were made in medicine and science... And look at you now: Lazy,
decadent, content and deeply miserable''.

I don't know what to make of this. In a restrained quantity, I
think that the message that you can improve yourself by working
hard is a good one. Obviously fascist ideology goes much much
too far in this regard. Since progression fantasy is mostly
written-, and read-, by young men -- And since there are already
plenty of fascist influences on young men these days -- and
can't help but be slightly concerned. I would like to believe
that other readers can -- much like myself -- recognize that
these are works of fiction, that the ideologies and characters
should not be idolized, and that our world is one where human
life-, and well-being- matter. But I have been let down so many
times before.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

[1]: In truth, the first part of the essay (the part which
    actually outlines the fundamental tenants of fascism was
    written by Giovanni Gentile, but name-dropping the famous
    ``founder of fascism'' gets the idea across that this essay
    described fascism as it was originally envisioned.

[2]: I should also point out that The System was created by a
    society which was also literally fascist. That they
    designed the system for their ``eternal war'' against
    another civilisation, and that they ``programmed' it
    specifically to strengthen their army through conflict.

=================================================================

All of my writing and software projects are available free of
charge under CC-BY unless stated otherwise. I do not accept
monetary donations, but if my work has brought you value I ask
you to donate to a charitable cause or high-impact fund,
organisation, business, institute, or individual driving moral
progress.