In another thread, recently I conceded my fascist claim and decided authoritarian is more accurate.

Then I read the following article:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...e9d877e198a65f&ei=25

Opinion: Donald Trump is not a fascist. Why that label is inaccurate.
Opinion by Jeremy Etelson, opinion contributor • 20h • 5 min read

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

I was expecting to affirm the notion that Trump isn't a fascist, but after reading the article I have changed my mind.

The argument points made by the author, IMO, are BS or just plain not true - inaccurate.

The first inaccuracy is the author uses the examples of WWII for comparison. Those definitions aren't written in stone. Trump's brand of fascism has far more similarities than differences.

Trump(ism) is definitely authoritarianism. It/he is also fascist-like in many ways.

I could go point-by-point refuting the author.

For example - Last paragraph:

"With a second Trump term, we appear to be in store for the opposite of a fascist regime: a coalition of individualist rivals constitutionally implementing government reforms while diplomatically ending international conflicts. The 2028 election will proceed unhindered. And when Trump leaves the White House in 2029, it will be as the outgoing president of a liberal capitalist constitutional republic."

I don't see any of those claims being true.

Turds don’t all look alike, but they’re still all shit.

Hitler, Mussolini, Ceausescu, Pol Pot, Pinochet, Hoxha, Stalin, Mao, Kim, Putin - lots of dissimilarities, but all fundamentally the same and all assumed power through similar paths. Start by mesmerizing the weaker minds into a cult like following, establishing an inner circle of acolytes that are then held by fear of having their misdeeds exposed, and then simply ..well..dictating.

I seriously hope that history isn’t about to add a name to that list.

Read Robert Paxton's book Kabob.
He breaks down all forms of fascism.
Trump is not a nationalist, which all fascism follows. It is why the harvard professors said he is not He is an authoritarian though.
Some of the left causes are also fascist causes, but it doesnt mean they are either.

You mean besides being a convicted felon, sex abuser, philanderer, narcissistic egomaniac??

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
Read Robert Paxton's book Kabob.
He breaks down all forms of fascism.
Trump is not a nationalist, which all fascism follows. It is why the harvard professors said he is not He is an authoritarian though.
Some of the left causes are also fascist causes, but it doesnt mean they are either.

I agree a you. I disagree only on the assertion that Trump as a political entity a candidate is not nationalist.

Ultimately, I do not consider Trump the person as Fascist because he is too lazy, or too removed from direct thought of what he does in relation to the body politic. He did not lead Jan 6. He did not intend what to happen happened, he did try to use the certification process to stop the transition of power. However, he did not direct the violence he inspired.

Fascism is an entire political theory. Fascism reach includes the social and economic. Trump’s tariffs can be seen as nationalist economic policy.

Trump as a person simply does not put enough thought into anything. Trump is not the problem. The problem is the political ideology Trump is the champion for.

I respectfully disagree with TB40 and LHeym500.

I could argue your points, but I don't think that's necessary. For example - Trump being lazy, and "He did not lead Jan 6. He did not intend what to happen happened". I disagree. Trump being lazy or not is not relevant. And he did intend what happened to happen insofar as invading the capitol, but he intended the invasion to thwart the certification, which didn't happen.

Firstly, TB40 mentioned Robert Paxton several times before. Certainly, he is a good source.

https://web.archive.org/web/20...rump-fascist-1560652

I've Hesitated to Call Donald Trump a Fascist. Until Now | Opinion
Robert O. Paxton
On 1/11/21 at 5:13 PM EST

(excerpt)

"Trump's incitement of the invasion of the Capitol on January 6, 2020 removes my objection to the fascist label. His open encouragement of civic violence to overturn an election crosses a red line."

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

There are long articles in Wikipedia about Trump and fascism and the relationship:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Paxton#Fascism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ld_Trump_and_fascism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ld_Trump_and_fascism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-fascism

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

In the news lately there are several Fascist-like moves such as legislation to make it easier for Trump to attack the press and tax-exempt status of orgs opposing him, and a lot more.

https://www.theguardian.com/us...s-media-outlets-bias

Trump sues for billions from media he says is biased against him
President-elect intensifies longstanding media hostility by filing lawsuits against New York Times, CBS and others

https://www.propublica.org/art...n-northern-wisconsin

https://www.google.com/search?...sclient=gws-wiz-serp

A Patriot, perhaps.

Wikipedia has a definition of fascism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

This snippet:

...subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race...

unite the oxen under one yoke, so to speak.

It would help if people would pull in the same direction and place the interests of Americans first. Those that don't are definitely not Patriots.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
It would help if people would pull in the same direction and place the interests of Americans first. Those that don't are definitely not Patriots.

"direction" and "interests" --- Hummm.

Well, a fascist regime by design and intent can "fix" all that for the self-deemed patriots. It won't be pretty or really unified. There will still be dissent, mostly silenced by force or threat of force.

The problem is that the nation is divided about 50/50 and that division has hardened due to Trumpism. So far, the authoritarian or fascist movement led by Trump is half assed, mostly promise and hope for the far-right or alt-right. In order to achieve the unity of "direction" and "interests", the movement has to go full tilt.

There is a plan: https://www.youtube.com/shorts...Oa97Xg?feature=share

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

The term "fascist" or "fascism" tends to blur the situation right now. That's because it seems impossible to get beyond the unique definitions of it in Germany and Italy, pre-WWII. There is neo-fascism which is post WWII. The KKK was/is fascist as another example.

"Alt-Right" is a better definition, IMO, and it too has ambiguities.

Anyway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ld_Trump_and_fascism

(excerpt)

Fascism is an ideological term which refers to a broad set of aspirations and influences that emerged in the early 20th century, exemplified by the European dictators Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco; and include elements of nationalism, enforcement of social hierarchies, hatred towards social minority groups, opposition to liberalism, the cult of personality, racism, and the love of militaristic symbols.[4][5] According to the anti-fascist and socialist writer George Orwell, the term fascist was oftentimes rendered meaningless in common parlance by its frequent use as an insult. [6]

Since Trump was elected to office in 2016, many academics have compared Trump's politics to fascism. Several have pointed out that contrasts exist between historical fascism and Trump's politics. Many also suggested that "fascist elements" have operated within and around Trump's movement. Following the January 6 attack, some voices within the academic community felt that things had changed and that Trump's politics and connections with fascism deserved greater scrutiny.[7][8]

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

Alt-Right:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

In the Columbia Journalism Review, the journalist Chava Gourarie labelled it a "rag-tag coalition" operating as a "diffuse online subculture" that had "an inclination for vicious online trolling, with some roots in fringe-right ideologies".[8] In The New York Times, journalists Aishvarya Kavi and Alan Feuer defined the alt-right as "a loosely affiliated collection of racists, misogynists and Islamophobes that rose to prominence around the time of Mr. Trump's first campaign."[23] BBC journalist Mike Wendling termed it "an incredibly loose set of ideologies held together by what they oppose: feminism, Islam, the Black Lives Matter movement, political correctness, a fuzzy idea they call 'globalism,' and establishment politics of both the left and the right".[24] PCMag defines the alt-right as "An ultra-conservative movement in the U.S. that is not in favor of globalization, immigration and cultural diversity."[25]

This part of the article is under "History". If you want to read the whole sub-section scroll up within the link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ews_and_the_alt-lite

This section explains Trump's emergence.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
It would help if people would pull in the same direction and place the interests of Americans first. Those that don't are definitely not Patriots.

Your direction is not in the best interest of all US Citizens.

The idea folks should now form to a singular party line for the betterment of the state and folk is not American.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
It would help if people would pull in the same direction and place the interests of Americans first.

Yes it would. There is the small matter of deciding what's in our best interest. Each of us has an opinion.

quote:

Those that don't are definitely not Patriots.

We live in a country where individual liberty is enshrined in our Constitution. We are not to be coerced.

I dug into a couple of the links you posted Kabob.
The context was condensed from much larger interviews/articles. Done by everyone nowdays it seems. It is almost impossible to not have a story cropped to fit the narrative of the person reporting it.
I do wonder... trump will be here 4 years. He is being tied to the word fascist, like socialist was once used. I dont think the use of fascist will leave, but I doubt it will have the same impact when he is gone. The same thing happened with socialist. I think trump will fade into the next Biden, another goofy oldtimer the country moves on from after his term.

quote:

Originally posted by theback40:
I dug into a couple of the links you posted Kabob.
The context was condensed from much larger interviews/articles. Done by everyone nowdays it seems. It is almost impossible to not have a story cropped to fit the narrative of the person reporting it.
I do wonder... trump will be here 4 years. He is being tied to the word fascist, like socialist was once used. I dont think the use of fascist will leave, but I doubt it will have the same impact when he is gone. The same thing happened with socialist. I think trump will fade into the next Biden, another goofy oldtimer the country moves on from after his term.

The OP article doesn't "fit" the narrative that Trump is a fascist. That's why I posted it since I disagree with the author, and his points in support are flawed, some just not true.

I found an OP Ed by Robert Paxton where he changed his mind about Trump since you mentioned his name several times.

https://web.archive.org/web/20...rump-fascist-1560652

I don't think the use of the words socialist and fascist are the same. "socialist" used to describe liberal agendas is as inaccurate as "Fascist" is accurate i describing Trump.

I think Trump and Trumpism is and has been grossly underestimated. I think this will not fade and business is not normal. Trump and Heritage Foundation will do their best/worse to see to it that their changes will stick for a long time, and that includes changing the fundamentals of elections in ways they can't lose.

The problem is I am not aware of a fascist reformist that did not involve the government control of the economy to the exclusion of enterprise.

That said, I strongly believe the political agenda, movement string Trump to be fascist.

That includes members of this Forum.

I'm not sure I understand your post LHeym.

https://www.google.com/search?...FhAE&sclient=gws-wiz

Many articles on how Trump will "involve the government control of the economy to the exclusion of enterprise".

I don't know if the goal is exclusion or inclusion. I just know the plan is control. It could be for the kleptocracy or broligarchs.

Paxton, gave reasons why it doesnt fit in that article. He was wrighting an OP, not facts from his books. He gets to ad lib to that.

Yes, Paxton was writing his opinion, and I thought he did a good job. His opinion was tied to the facts and evidence of the event although while checking that by re-reading the article I noticed a mistake. He used the date 1/6/2020. The article was published 1/11/21. The date of the insurrection was 1/6/21.

I'm comparing Paxton's opinion article to the one linked in the OP.

Paxton's is better not just because I agree with him but because the supporting facts are flawed in the OP article.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
You mean besides being a convicted felon, sex abuser, philanderer, narcissistic egomaniac??

He doesn't seem to consider collateral damage when he makes decisions (be careful what you wish for).
He likes simple solutions to problems, and second-order effects are just not on his radar.
Not an issue when deciding what's for lunch, could be a problem when working on agricultural issues that affect food supply for millions.