Fascism's father would be Mussolini because he "invented" it.
Fascism's grandparents or influences would probably be Thomas Hobbes
, Maurice Barrès
,Gabriele d'Annunzio
,Friedrich Nietzsche's sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche
,Enrico Corradini
, anyone who contributed to the idea of Social Darwinism
,Charles Maurras
, and Georges Sorel
. (The last two listed played a role almost a large as Mussolini in Fascism's creation.)
I've always thought of Fascism as Neo-Conservatism taken to its extreme, in the same way Communism and Social-Anarchism are different variations of Liberalism taken to there extremes and Anarcho-Capitalism is Libertarianism taken to its extreme. I'm not entirely sure what Conservatism taken to its extreme would be, but I think it would be a variation of Anarcho-Capitalism.
edited 18th Aug '12 7:03:18 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016As for Liberalism being the origin of Fascism, I would say that is a wrong but understandable idea.
I think the confusion is that Fascism is similar to Communism (A variation of Liberalism taken to its extreme) in that they both contain aspects of Statism
, Authoritarianism or Totalitarianism (depends on the government), and Social Interventionism (basically they both want the Government to be extremely powerful.) The difference between the two is the Fascism practices Social Darwinism and while Communism practices Collectivism. Also Fascism greatly emphasized Patriotism/Nationalism (though that's not to say that Communism was against the practices, they just emphasized it less.)
I should also point out that Nazism differs from "classic" Fascism in three important ways. The first being that Nazism was influenced by Racial Supremacy and and Anti-Semetism. Unlike Mussolini's Fascism which just emphasized survival of the fittest, Nazism "identified" and attempted to eliminate the "unfit", i.e, Jews, Roma, Eastern and Western Slavs, Homosexuals (although Mussolini's Italy was actually more homophobic than Nazi Germany, at least until the Night of the Long Knives) and the Physically and Mentally retarded.
The Second way, is that Classic Fascism practiced Corporatism
while Nazism did not.
The Final way that Nazism differs from "Classic" Fascism, is that Nazism was far more Socialist than Classic Fascism, and in a way managed to combine Social Democracy with Fascism, creating a near-socialist society for those deemed "fit" by the Nazi ideology. In a sense Nazism is Social Fascism
with many racial undertones.
And in case anyone is wondering:
Neo-Conservatism: More Government, Social Conservatism
Liberalism: More Government, Social Liberalism
Libertarianism: Less Government, Social Liberalism
Conservatism: Less Government, Social Conservatism
..Did I say anything useful or am I just babbling?
EDIT: Sorry for the huge wall of text, but I felt I needed to say this. The TL:DR version is that this book is wrong, but it's understandable why they would be mistaken.
edited 18th Aug '12 8:06:52 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016I've heard Nazism described as Volkish Fascism, in that Hitler wanted all 'Germans' the world over to play their part in creating a Reich (this was part of the reason for the policy of Lebensraum, or living space that lead initially to Germany's European expansion) - in which case there are some parallels to be drawn with the 'stage 2' of Marxism - world revolt of the working classes and the call to arms of all those Hitler considered German.
Danger's over, Banana Breakfast is saved. FC: 0576 - 4632 - 1517

The State described in The Republic is not fascist anyway - a fascist state is one that is structured like a pyramid with all of the lower levels striving to support the pinnicle of a couple (or even one) people/person. The described state is more of a circle, each of the three 'castes' strive for the benefit of each other and not for one guy.
EDIT: 'Liberalism' is a difficult concept to pin down as well as many modern definitions require liberals to have a degree of tolerance (which is, in itself, a very difficult concept to qualify) - most definitions of which require somekind of political, not to mention racial, equality, something a fascist one party state does not allow...
edited 18th Aug '12 3:23:02 PM by Hilhog0
Danger's over, Banana Breakfast is saved. FC: 0576 - 4632 - 1517