The word Fascisterne, the Danish term for “the Fascists,” carries with it layers of meaning that stretch far beyond its simple translation. It is not just a historical label. It is a term that has been invoked in heated political debates, wielded as an insult in modern discourse, and dissected by historians trying to separate fact from myth. Understanding the legacy and myths surrounding Fascisterne is essential, not only to grasp a turbulent part of European history but also to comprehend the ways in which political memory continues to shape public consciousness.
This exploration will examine who Fascisterne were, the historical contexts in which they emerged, the ideologies they embodied, the societal impact they had, and how myths—both demonizing and romanticizing—have intertwined with reality over the decades.
The Origins of Fascism and Its Spread to Denmark
The fascist movement originated in Italy during the early 20th century, led by Benito Mussolini. It was rooted in ultranationalism, authoritarianism, and the belief that the state should hold supreme power over all aspects of life. Fascism rejected liberal democracy and Marxist socialism, instead promoting a one-party state, militarization, and the glorification of a mythical national past.
In Denmark, Fascisterne did not rise in the same overwhelming wave as in Italy or Germany, but the currents of European politics in the 1920s and 1930s brought echoes of fascist ideology to Danish shores. Several small nationalist and right-wing extremist groups emerged, inspired by Mussolini’s Italy and Adolf Hitler’s Germany. These Danish fascists sought to strengthen the national identity, oppose communism, and, in some cases, align with broader Nordic racial theories.
The Danish Fascist Movements
While Denmark’s political system remained largely democratic during the interwar years, the nation was not immune to the appeal of extremist ideologies during times of economic instability. Groups such as the National Socialist Workers’ Party of Denmark (DNSAP) took cues from Germany’s Nazi movement, adopting similar symbolism, rhetoric, and anti-Semitic policies.
The Fascisterne in Denmark were never able to secure mass political dominance. This was partly because Denmark’s democratic traditions were deeply rooted and because the Danish population was generally resistant to radical authoritarianism. However, during the German occupation of Denmark in World War II, the Fascisterne found new relevance. Collaborationist groups worked alongside the occupiers, some believing they were serving Denmark’s long-term interests, others motivated by ideological alignment or personal gain.
Ideological Pillars of the Fascisterne
To understand Fascisterne, one must examine the core beliefs that united fascist movements in general:
-
Nationalism and Ethnic Unity – A belief in the superiority of the national identity, often defined in exclusionary ethnic or racial terms.
-
Anti-Communism – A fierce opposition to Marxist and socialist movements, which were seen as threats to national unity.
-
Authoritarian Governance – The conviction that a strong, centralized, and unquestionable leadership was necessary to maintain order and greatness.
-
Militarism – The glorification of military strength and the idea that conflict could be a regenerative force for the nation.
-
Cultural Traditionalism – Upholding an idealized vision of the past, often rejecting modernist or liberal cultural trends.
In Denmark, these ideas were adapted to local culture, with Fascisterne presenting themselves as protectors of Danish values and opponents of “foreign” ideological influence.
World War II and Collaboration
The German occupation of Denmark from 1940 to 1945 provided the Fascisterne with a unique but controversial opportunity. The Nazis initially pursued a relatively lenient occupation policy in Denmark, allowing for some political autonomy. During this period, fascist and pro-Nazi groups sought to expand their influence.
Certain members of Fascisterne openly collaborated with the German authorities, joining German-aligned paramilitary forces or assisting in propaganda campaigns. Others took part in efforts to recruit Danes to the German war effort, including service in the Waffen-SS. While these actions were justified by some collaborators as a way to secure Denmark’s position in a “new Europe,” they left a deep scar on the nation’s postwar memory.
The Collapse and Postwar Reckoning
When Germany’s defeat became inevitable in 1945, the Fascisterne faced political annihilation. Collaborationists were arrested, tried, and in some cases imprisoned or executed. Many members went underground, erasing or minimizing their wartime affiliations. Danish society largely rejected fascist ideology, and the postwar years were marked by a strong reaffirmation of democratic values.
The stigma attached to the term Fascisterne became permanent in the public consciousness. It was no longer just a political label; it became shorthand for treachery, oppression, and moral corruption.
Myths Surrounding Fascisterne
Over time, myths—both exaggerated and understated—have emerged around Fascisterne.
Myth 1: They Were an Overwhelming Threat to Democracy
In reality, while Fascisterne in Denmark were vocal and visible, their numbers and influence never reached a level that could have toppled the democratic system without external intervention. The German occupation gave them a temporary boost, but this was tied to foreign military power rather than domestic political strength.
Myth 2: All Fascists Were Driven by Ideology
Not all who joined or supported fascist movements did so out of deep ideological conviction. Some were opportunists, careerists, or individuals seeking personal protection during occupation.
Myth 3: They Disappeared Completely After the War
While organized fascist parties lost their legitimacy, certain elements of the ideology—nationalism, authoritarian leanings, and xenophobia—survived in various fringe movements, resurfacing in different forms in later decades.
Myth 4: They Were Entirely Foreign-Influenced
While Danish fascists borrowed heavily from Italy and Germany, they also adapted fascist ideas to local history, folklore, and nationalism, creating a distinct variant that resonated with some parts of Danish society.
The Modern Use of the Term “Fascisterne”
In contemporary Danish political discourse, Fascisterne is often used loosely as an insult directed at political opponents, regardless of whether they have any actual connection to fascist ideology. This rhetorical inflation can dilute the historical meaning of the term, making it more of a weapon in political debates than a precise descriptor.
This misuse is not unique to Denmark. Across the world, “fascist” has become a catch-all insult for authoritarian or right-wing figures, which risks trivializing the real dangers posed by historical fascist movements.
The Psychological Legacy
The memory of Fascisterne is more than a historical footnote—it is part of Denmark’s national identity. For many Danes, the fascist collaborators during World War II represent a betrayal of national values, a reminder that even in a small and relatively peaceful country, extremist ideology can take root under the right conditions.
This psychological legacy has shaped Denmark’s postwar political culture. There is a general wariness toward authoritarian rhetoric, an emphasis on democratic institutions, and a tendency to scrutinize any political movement that appears to flirt with extremism.
Lessons from the History of Fascisterne
The history of Fascisterne offers several important lessons:
-
Economic and Social Instability Breeds Extremism – Times of crisis can make radical solutions seem appealing.
-
External Influence Can Amplify Internal Movements – Without the German occupation, Danish fascism would likely have remained a marginal political force.
-
Memory Shapes Politics – Postwar Danish politics was deeply influenced by the rejection of fascism, and this rejection continues to shape public debate.
-
Ideologies Evolve, But Core Principles Persist – While overt fascism is rare in Denmark today, elements such as ultranationalism and authoritarianism can appear in different political guises.
Conclusion Balancing Legacy and Myth
Understanding Fascisterne requires separating historical fact from the myths that have grown around the term. They were never the dominant political force in Denmark, but they played a significant role during one of the nation’s darkest chapters. Their legacy is one of collaboration, ideological extremism, and the dangers of compromising democratic values for perceived short-term gain.
The myths—whether they exaggerate their power or underplay their existence—can obscure the nuanced reality. Fascism in Denmark was a complex phenomenon: small in numbers, but historically impactful due to the wartime context. Its ideological traces remind us that vigilance against extremism is not a matter of the past, but an ongoing responsibility.
In the end, the story of Fascisterne is not simply about those who wore uniforms or saluted foreign powers. It is a story about the fragility of democracy, the power of ideology, and the importance of historical memory in guarding against the mistakes of the past.
