https://youtu.be/9XTJNy_OrjE

Is Donald Trump a Fascist? | Robert Reich

Who is Robert Reich?

https://www.google.com/search?...Ip8CxTTtTgZM&vssid=l

I disagree. Did you watch the video?

I think he's full-fledged Fascist and his cult are fascist fodder.

Also:

https://youtu.be/SGzbflcbjyw

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I disagree. Did you watch the video?

I think he's full-fledged Fascist and his cult are fascist fodder.

Also:

https://youtu.be/SGzbflcbjyw

Since you started this brain teasing thread why don't you provide us first with a solid footing on exactly what Fascism is then we may debate facts supporting both positions, for and against. Go.

I did that in the OP the first thing is the video you tube link which lays it out very well.

. . . anyone remotely familiar with the history of the 1930's and early 40's would be grasping at straws to argue otherwise. The parallels are deeply troubling.

Please. It’s not even close to the 30’s. Anyone more than remotely familiar with that time will know this. Germany was heavily heavily sanctioned as a result of WW1. It was not a great place to be. Throw in the depression on top of that and Germany was bleak to say the least. You can’t have a conversation about the rise of Nazism and WW2 without discussing WW1. Without WW1 there is no Nazi movement. Fascist is recklessly thrown about these days. Keep it up and it will mean nothing, right there along the lines of racist.

Trump will pretend to be anything the weak minded want him to be. At heart he is a narcissistic Fascist.

There is a Netflix show "How To Become A Cult Leader". There are close parallels to how Trump controls his MAGA Morons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DI98_a_1jg

They feel lost and vulnerable because they don't fit in, and fear immigration of people smarter than them, and not as "white" as them.

What is surprising is that they didn't find one of their own to follow. They picked a billionaire who doesn't give a shit about them, but wants their money to help support his family and pay his legal fees.

. . . you confuse the circumstances giving rise to fascism with the ideology itself. There can be more than one cause to produce a given effect.

Not at all. You are confused. In one sentence Trump and his minions are buffoons, clowns. In the next he’s diabolical and masterminding the take over of the worlds most powerful country. You can’t have Nazi’s sans WW1. And WW1 was the absolute worst war ever wrought on earth…till WW2. I would be careful of bandying fascist about. Do it enough and it will mean nothing. Notice how benign racist is these days? It means nothing, so much so they’ve had to go further with white supremacist. You can despise Trump but I’ll call the the horseshit fascist talk out. Today is not remotely close to the early 20th century.

quote:

Originally posted by bluefish:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I disagree. Did you watch the video?

I think he's full-fledged Fascist and his cult are fascist fodder.

Also:

https://youtu.be/SGzbflcbjyw

Since you started this brain teasing thread why don't you provide us first with a solid footing on exactly what Fascism is then we may debate facts supporting both positions, for and against. Go.

What Robert Reich? How about something academic and non-partisan for starters.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Not at all. You are confused. In one sentence Trump and his minions are buffoons, clowns. In the next he’s diabolical and masterminding the take over of the worlds most powerful country. You can’t have Nazi’s sans WW1. And WW1 was the absolute worst war ever wrought on earth…till WW2. I would be careful of bandying fascist about. Do it enough and it will mean nothing. Notice how benign racist is these days? It means nothing, so much so they’ve had to go further with white supremacist. You can despise Trump but I’ll call the the horseshit fascist talk out. Today is not remotely close to the early 20th century.

Many Germans thought Hitler and the Nazi's were clowns and buffoons too. There are disturbing parallels that one would be wise not to ignore. Given half a chance, I am convinced that trump would seize whatever powers he thought he could get away with beyond just executive power. And, his cult members, as he has consistently pointed out, wouldn't care if he shot someone down on main street. They'd still support him.

His history and rhetoric establish that he is a potentially mortal threat to democracy and the country. Just look at J6 if you have any question regarding how far he is willing to go.

quote:

Originally posted by tomahawker:
Please. It’s not even close to the 30’s. Anyone more than remotely familiar with that time will know this. Germany was heavily heavily sanctioned as a result of WW1. It was not a great place to be. Throw in the depression on top of that and Germany was bleak to say the least. You can’t have a conversation about the rise of Nazism and WW2 without discussing WW1. Without WW1 there is no Nazi movement. Fascist is recklessly thrown about these days. Keep it up and it will mean nothing, right there along the lines of racist.

Italy? Mussolini? they weren't burdened with reparations, but Italy still became firmly fascist. It's not something that only arose because of the terms of the treaty of Versailles and reparations.

Some timely commentary on the topic:

A New Kind of Fascism

I’ve resisted using the word until now, but something menacing and novel is taking shape with the possibility of a second Trump term.

By Christopher R. Browning


For some years, a variety of news commentators and academics have called Donald Trump a fascist. I was one of those who resisted using that term. I thought it had long been abused by casual, imprecise applications, and as a historian of Nazi Germany, I did not think Trumpism was anywhere close to crossing the threshold of that comparison. I still deny that Trump’s presidency was fascist—but I’m concerned that if he wins another trip to the White House, he could earn the label.

Fascism was most fully exemplified by the regimes of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. These regimes combined totalitarian dictatorship, wars of imperial conquest, and outright genocide in the case of Hitler (of Jews, Slavs, Roma) or ethnic mass murder in Mussolini’s case (of Libyans, Ethiopians, Slovenes). Placing Trumpism in the same category seemed to me trivializing and misleading.


I argued instead that Trump was more like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán or Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan than Hitler or Mussolini, and should be categorized as an “illiberal populist” rather than a fascist. And in one very important respect, Trump differed sharply from the European fascists of the interwar period.

They were ardent militarists and imperialists. War was the crucible in which the new fascist man was to be forged; territorial expansion was both the means and the end of fascist power and triumph. Trump has shown little ambition to pursue such aims. In his first term, he shamelessly abased himself before Russian President Vladimir Putin, exchanged “love letters” with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, signed the Doha Agreement with the Taliban committing the U.S. to withdrawal from Afghanistan, and petulantly sought to downgrade U.S. treaty obligations to NATO and South Korean allies that he deemed to be “delinquent” and getting a “free ride.”

Trump has continued in the same isolationist vein in recent interviews and speeches. He has railed against “globalists.” He has promised to settle the Russian-Ukrainian conflict in 24 hours by cutting off aid to Kyiv if President Volodymyr Zelensky does not reach an immediate settlement with Moscow—that is, capitulate to Putin. He has disparaged Taiwan as a predator nation that stole microchip manufacturing from the U.S. (That Chinese President Xi Jinping would construe the simultaneous abandonment of Ukraine and dismissal of Taiwan as anything other than a green light to invade the latter seems improbable.)

No question, Trump inflicted grave damage on our country’s political culture, stoking toxic polarization and reveling in dishonesty. And Trumpism did exhibit distinct elements of the fascist style of politics: the inflammatory rallies; the incessant mongering of fear, grievance, and victimization; the casual endorsement of violence; the pervasive embrace of conspiracy theories; the performative cruelty; the feral instinct for targeting marginalized and vulnerable minorities; and the cult of personality. But the Trump presidency lacked any warlike, expansionist interest, and that made it decisively unlike 20th-century fascism.


Thankfully, also, Trump himself was too lazy, inexperienced, and unprepared to set about systematically constructing a true dictatorship. The main focus of the Trump presidency was less plans and programs and more the theatrics of satisfying his constant, insatiable need for attention and adulation. Everything—whether the state of the economy or the chocolate cake served to China’s Xi Jinping at Mar-a-Lago—had to be extolled as “the greatest ever.”

Until the final weeks of Trump’s term, the guardrails of American democracy seemed to hold firm. The institutions of the federal government remained relatively intact, and civil servants largely secure and uncorrupted. The United States experienced democratic backsliding but not democratic collapse.

In a second term, however, a newly emboldened Trump could well attack democracy itself. The MAGA Republican Party of his making has openly explored ways to transform states where they control all branches of government. States that were once pluralistic democracies with at least some chance of a transfer of power are coming to resemble one-party regimes directed by a minority of the population. (Anne Applebaum’s report from Tennessee is a case history in point.)

In Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis, Trump’s putative rival for the 2024 Republican nomination, has turned his state into a laboratory for testing how a determined, calculating, uninhibited authoritarian can maximize executive power. In many respects, he has already accomplished at the state level what Trump did not have the discipline and focus to do at the federal level. And DeSantis has created a blueprint for other Republican state leaders to follow.

Just as state Republicans have become more ruthlessly autocratic in their methods, a new Trump presidency would be much more efficiently goal-oriented at the federal level. A huge transformation of the administrative state is being deliberately planned. The government agencies and civil service he has decried as the “deep state” would be purged or politicized, and the “retribution” he has promised against his enemies would also be carried out. The “unitary executive” theory long promoted by some Republicans would become the reality of an unabashed authoritarianism.

The very last months of the Trump presidency foreshadowed what a second term would entail. When formerly loyal vassals such as Attorney General William Barr and Defense Secretary Mark Esper demonstrated that they would not cross the line into unconstitutional insurgency, Trump sought sycophants for whom no such line existed. In a new Trump administration, total devotion to the leader would be the sole qualification for appointment.

Unlike previous fascist leaders with their cult of war, Trump still offers appeasement to dictators abroad, but he now promises something much closer to dictatorship at home. For me, what Trump is offering for his second presidency will meet the threshold, and the label I’d choose to describe it would be “isolationist fascism.” Until now, such a concept would have been an oxymoron, a historical phenomenon without precedent. Trump continues to break every mold.

Christopher R. Browning is the Frank Porter Graham Professor of History Emeritus at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the author of The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939–March 1942.

https://www.theatlantic.com/id...nist-fascism/674791/

MM, the first half of that article is excellent, and spot on.
The second half is speculation.
All in all, not a bad write up.

Yeah i tend to agree with the last article more than the first.

trump is a despotic populist -
fascists? I don't think so -

First off, Robert Reich is no expert on fascism. He’s a professor at Berkeley of public policy based on being Clinton’s labor secretary. His academic background is a JD.

As to his “basis of Fascism” per the video-

Rejection of democracy- I can buy that from Trump. Too bad it really doesn’t apply to Fascism. They maintain elections, etc. by manipulation of the popular opinion, not by rejection of democracy. The democrats are closer on this- when Clinton was president, gay marriage was a nonstarter. They manipulated public opinion and within 2 presidential terms it became mainstream. How?

Rage against cultural elites?

Yes, Trump does that.

Again, not fascism. Fascists utilize scapegoating and rage… but not against elites, rather against a particular group for retribution. The Nazis used the Jews as a whipping boy for why Germany was a mess- because Hitler himself had antisemetic beliefs and it bound the populace to him.

Encouragement of violence- there also I think there is a difference. Fascists actually used real violence; Trump used the language of violence. Unless they come up with some real evidence, I don’t think Trump ever wanted actual physical violence. Did his words encourage some to violence? Absolutely. Compare that to fascist movements actual participation. Hitler led a coup attempt including having a gun. Mussolini had the blackshirts and gave explicit instructions publicly.

Reich again gets into his own line with attribution of race, religion, and bloodlines to nationalism. Here is the fundamental failure of the left’s Nuevo fascism kick. There is no consistent race (Trump has lots of racial minorities in his constituency) religion Trump calls himself Christian, yet other than use of Christ as the savior, there is no real religious consistency to either his followers or his message. The fascist movements made their own religion- you can’t have competition for loyalty in a fascist state.

As to his commentary on social Darwinism- what a crock. Darwinism is evolution. Using the term social Darwinism to mean a strong and immobile class system is not darwinistic or evolutionary. It’s typical liberal academic buzzwording that is used to do exactly what fascists do by labelling a group in a fashion that gains the speaker political power.

As to fascism and disdain for women? Really? Yes, the Nazis had a very sexist system, but that was more their society than fascism. Women were celebrated in Nazi circles for their adherence to the party and submission to the goals of the state (primarily having babies to make the military potential of the nation stronger.). The anti LBGTQ isn’t nazism/fascism… It’s the era. The US was putting gays in prison for sodomy. The Brit’s put their best codebreaker in prison over it after the war. That Hitler put them in the concentration camps is more a sign of the times than it being part of fascist ideology.

At the end, he exposes his partisan basis by labelling the GOP a White Christian movement. Reich is a strong partisan who is using that which he attributes as fascist ideology to further his own.

I do think that MM’s article is much more logical in its initial premises.

Suffice it to say that while there are some similarities between Trump and various regimes of the past, and he’s not a good leader for the US, your continual attempt to label him as fascist both weakens the actual stigma to fascism and strengthens Trump’s position.

Trump is a stew of authoritarianism, nationalism, narcissism, populism, and salesmanship.

Reich falls into the trap of demonizing your opponent rather than just showing that they are wrong. You guys are talking in the same vein.

Trump didn’t win the election. He lies about it.

Rather than demonizing the folks who believed him, convince them by open examination of the evidence. You may not convince all, but you will convince most if you give the actual unvarnished evidence.

Nicely put!

I think this sums it up nicely.

quote:

Suffice it to say that while there are some similarities between Trump and various regimes of the past, and he’s not a good leader for the US, your continual attempt to label him as fascist both weakens the actual stigma to fascism and strengthens Trump’s position.

quote:

Suffice it to say that while there are some similarities between Trump and various regimes of the past, and he’s not a good leader for the US, your continual attempt to label him as fascist both weakens the actual stigma to fascism and strengthens Trump’s position.

quote:

Rather than demonizing the folks who believed him, convince them by open examination of the evidence. You may not convince all, but you will convince most if you give the actual unvarnished evidence.

BS

They have been denying the evidence all along.

You too.

Calling Trump a fascist and his cult followers fascist fodder is how I see it, based on the evidence, which is readily available to all.

In fact, there is little evidence to support the claim that he's NOT a fascist.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...b3881970641f7f&ei=70

'Worst indictment' of GOP is that party chooses Trump over Democracy: columnist
Story by David McAfee •
1d

https://youtu.be/s5ffe7MYSo8

Does the Constitution Ban Trump from Running Again? | Robert Reich

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...8c037c245b59f1&ei=32

Here's how to ban Trump — and other MAGA cultists — from holding public office
Story by Thom Hartmann •
14h

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

The problem is, of course, that even if Trump is banned, the fascist fodder will just find another fascist to represent them. Or, the flip side - the next fascist will find them, just as ready and willing as Trump found them.

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

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...8c037c245b59f1&ei=22

‘They’re coming for everyone’: Looming Georgia indictments send Trump allies running for cover
Story by Gideon Rubin •
4h

so, your original question was disingenuous and merely a pathetic attempt at self-aggrandizement.

Got it - you aren't actually looking to discuss a matter, rather snipe at people.

I am certain you have lots of long-term friends

quote:

Rather than demonizing the folks who believed him, convince them by open examination of the evidence. You may not convince all, but you will convince most if you give the actual unvarnished evidence.

Yeah....well.....that will give the communist bastards some heartburn.......

Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.
depends on the lie.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

Unfortunately, also depending on the truth.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

I think you just doubled down on Jeffeosso's reading of your intent.

The fascist has found himself with his nuts in a vice and Smith tightening the jaws.

Yeah but thats the " greatest!" checkers piece of all time, no other can match it.

I like Dr. Butler's penultimate post. Except for the conclusion.

In my experience, it does no good to show Trump followers the evidence. Whey you try to do so, you're met with one or more of three responses:

1. Denial of what is right before our eyes.

2. Deflection to something bad the Democrats did. "Look! Over there!" Hey, folks, this is more than a contest between D and R. We unaffiliated voters deserve to be heard too.

3. Declaration of bias by your source. E.g., "Snopes is a liberal source." Sorry, no points awarded in debate for unsupported, conclusory assertions.

Nevertheless, I will persist in pointing to the evidence.

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

I think you just doubled down on Jeffeosso's reading of your intent.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
so, your original question was disingenuous and merely a pathetic attempt at self-aggrandizement.

Got it - you aren't actually looking to discuss a matter, rather snipe at people.

I am certain you have lots of long-term friends

My intent is to make a claim, with evidence and persuasion, that Trump is a fascist. I'm inviting the same from those of opposing views.

It's that simple.

Attacking the messenger is deflection.

Insofar as Jeffe's insinuation about my long term friends - I value my long term friends, what few there are. And all of them are far right to some degree, IMO. We just avoid politics and religion talk. All my close relatives are Trump supporters. We have to get along.

That's partially why I vent herein. It's a safe place, where the same conversations with my friends and relatives stirs too much stress.

Trump is a sociopathic narcissist. He doesn’t care about anything but himself……. Country be damned.

You do realize by claiming his supporters are "fascist fodder" you are admitting that your claim is BS as you already are engaging in deflection?

I don't have time to sit and go through hundreds of youtube videos or through a bunch of (to make it similar to what you are doing) right wing agitprop sites to find a site that expressly says Trump is not a fascist.

I can pull my old college texts out (those that I still have) and find some relevant comments of fascism, but frankly as you use op-eds from politically charged sources and claim it is evidence and then ignore it, there is no point.

You spend a lot of time looking at internet searches. You could find the opposing viewpoint just as easily as you find the supporting one.

Again, I am not going to do the work for you. I put my arguments in a form that you can plug it in and do your own internet search if you want to argue the specifics- I have usually wasted enough time reviewing your source as it is.

That you can even think that Robert Reich is a legitimate source for declaration of fascism speaks poorly of your ability to discern a factual and legitimate piece of information. Demanding that your opposition has to disprove a piece of agitprop with evidence that meets a higher standard is intellectual dishonesty.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

I think you just doubled down on Jeffeosso's reading of your intent.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
so, your original question was disingenuous and merely a pathetic attempt at self-aggrandizement.

Got it - you aren't actually looking to discuss a matter, rather snipe at people.

I am certain you have lots of long-term friends

My intent is to make a claim, with evidence and persuasion, that Trump is a fascist. I'm inviting the same from those of opposing views.

It's that simple.

Attacking the messenger is deflection.

Insofar as Jeffe's insinuation about my long term friends - I value my long term friends, what few there are. And all of them are far right to some degree, IMO. We just avoid politics and religion talk. All my close relatives are Trump supporters. We have to get along.

That's partially why I vent herein. It's a safe place, where the same conversations with my friends and relatives stirs too much stress.

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Trump is a sociopathic narcissist. He doesn’t care about anything but himself……. Country be damned.

And that's the point.

Trump is a self serving idiot.

Not a fascist, not a socialist, he's whatever it takes to get his personal aggrandizement.

If you ever talk to a cop, they will tell you.
At an accident or crime scene, talk to 5 eye witnesses, you get 5 stories. It is all in how you want to see things, and what your imagination does to fill in the rest.
And we all know Kabob has quite an imagination!

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Originally posted by shankspony:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Tell a liberal a lie and it pisses him off.

Tell a conservative (these days) the truth and it pisses him off.

I think you just doubled down on Jeffeosso's reading of your intent.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
so, your original question was disingenuous and merely a pathetic attempt at self-aggrandizement.

Got it - you aren't actually looking to discuss a matter, rather snipe at people.

I am certain you have lots of long-term friends

My intent is to make a claim, with evidence and persuasion, that Trump is a fascist. I'm inviting the same from those of opposing views.

It's that simple.

Attacking the messenger is deflection.

Insofar as Jeffe's insinuation about my long term friends - I value my long term friends, what few there are. And all of them are far right to some degree, IMO. We just avoid politics and religion talk. All my close relatives are Trump supporters. We have to get along.

That's partially why I vent herein. It's a safe place, where the same conversations with my friends and relatives stirs too much stress.

I wasn't attacking you. I was pointing out what I see in your reply. And if you think it was deflection, what then was your reply I answered? because it sure brought nothing of value too the conversation.
It seems strange to me that you would get so defensive about your opinion, when almost everyone here who has commented has agreed that he is not worthwhile and was a bad president. We are by and large agreeing with you too the 80% mark. The only point of contention is the exact label.
I think you wish to see ghosts.

Once again, we hear from our resident Libtards. They love to take political "selfies" and label their opponents. Kinda like little Suzie eating grandma's cookies and blaming little Johnny. Shifting attention away from their own misdeeds.

There are indeed Fascists in this country. They are part of the Uniparty. Both Democrat and Republican. Eisenhower warned us, and Kennedy was an impediment. LBJ was the first official fascist. Carter proved uncooperative, but after that there was a succession of presidents (even Reagan) who influenced industry (and vice versa) with policy. Trump proved to be another Kennedy/Carter and was also eliminated.

Sometimes I believe Nazi rocket scientists weren't the only ones brought into the gov't after WW2. US foreign and domestic policy has been shaped by the need for industry and gov't to enrich themselves.

https://english.illinoisstate....q/faq-homepage.shtml

Did Sinclair Lewis say, "When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"?

This quote sounds like something Sinclair Lewis might have said or written, but we've never been able to find this exact quote. Here are passages from two novels Lewis wrote that are similar to the quote attributed to him.

From It Can't Happen Here: "But he saw too that in America the struggle was befogged by the fact that the worst Fascists were they who disowned the word 'Fascism' and preached enslavement to Capitalism under the style of Constitutional and Traditional Native American Liberty."

From Gideon Planish: "I just wish people wouldn't quote Lincoln or the Bible, or hang out the flag or the cross, to cover up something that belongs more to the bank-book and the three golden balls."

There was also a play by Sherman Yellen called Strangers in the late 1970s which had a similar quote, but no one, including one of Lewis’s biographers, Richard Lingeman, has ever been able to locate the original citation.

Other variants include one from James Waterman Wise, Jr. in the Christian Century (Feb.5, 1936) who noted that Hearst and Coughlin were the two chief exponents of fascism in America. If fascism comes, he added, it will not be identified with any "shirt" movement, nor with an "insignia," but it will probably be "wrapped up in the American flag and heralded as a plea for liberty and preservation of the constitution" (245).Another version isfrom Halford E. Luccock, in Keeping Life Out of Confusion (1938): "When and if fascism comes to America it will not be labeled 'made in Germany'; it will not be marked with a swastika; it will not even be called fascism; it will be called, of course, 'Americanism.'" Harrison Evans Salisbury in The Many Americas Shall Be One (1971) remarked "Sinclair Lewis aptly predicted in It Can't Happen Here that if fascism came to America it would come wrapped in the flag and whistling 'The Star Spangled Banner'" (29).

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
Trump is a sociopathic narcissist. He doesn’t care about anything but himself……. Country be damned.

And that's the point.

Trump is a self serving idiot.

Not a fascist, not a socialist, he's whatever it takes to get his personal aggrandizement.

To you that's the point.

In haste I mistakenly titled this thread's scope too narrow.

I have corrected that.

Obviously, Trump couldn't be an effective Fascist without a following and appeal.

So any consideration of fascism has to be broader than just about Trump, his toxic ego and narcissism, lies, lack of morals, etc.

My assessment of Trump and Trumpism goes all the way back to before the 2016 election.

All that has happened since them only affirms early assessments.

Here is an article from May 22, 2016. Reading the article again - it's a bit surprising that everything therein has materialized and more - the trajectory of Trumpism was predictable from the beginning.

I posted this link before. As I recall it was the first time/post where I stated that I thought Trump is a fascist.

https://www.brookings.edu/arti...sm-comes-to-america/

This is how Fascism comes to America

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

Here's an article from 2/2020 to serve as an example of the progression of Trumpism.

We all know where it has progressed as of today. In the interim, it was apparent all along, yet we underestimated it.

https://www.theglobeandmail.co...sm-comes-to-america/

Is this how fascism comes to America?

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

We were adequately warned:

Another 2016 article:

https://www.the-american-inter...ald-trump-a-fascist/

Is Donald Trump a Fascist?

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

https://newrepublic.com/post/1...ederal-agencies-wins

July 17, 2023

Inside Trump’s Fascist Plan to Control All Federal Agencies if He Wins
Trump has a detailed plan to consolidate power if he retakes the White House.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...0bc8ef67325dfc&ei=19

America finally facing someone who has Mussolini’s willingness to see people die — and it's not who you think
Story by Thom Hartmann •
5h