Agreed, Donald Trump is a supremely unattractive character for folks like us. And that’s putting it mildly. He’s defiantly not “politically correct” and we hate that. But is he a harbinger of fascism?
Trump certainly fits the Hollywood version of the proto-fascist. He’s loud, scowls, has a stiff presence, and is uncomely. But beyond what central casting defines as fascist, does he fit the political definition as some fear (see CounterPunch (August 25))?
Historical Fascism
Aside from the particularities and indeed peculiarities of Mr. Trump’s persona, it is instructive to posit him in the current U.S. historical context.
Fascism historically came about when the working class and its allies (i.e., popular classes) – and their organizations such as unions and left political parties – were so strong and well organized that they threatened rule by the corporate class. That was the case in Spain, Italy, and Germany in the 1930s. What happened under fascism is the corporate class imposed a dictatorship over themselves rather than risk loss of power to the popular classes.
In the US today, unions are at an historical nadir and no socialist party is on the verge of challenging state power. The corporate class can comfortably and confidently engage in the circus known as the presidential primaries knowing that whatever clown emerges at the top will serve their interests and – most importantly – the popular classes will continue to consent to their rule.
That is not to say there are no dangers ahead. US society is becoming more and more repressive. But that is not the same as fascism. There is still a thriving democracy for the elites where they can compete to see which faction captures the White House.
So what is the face of repression? Does it have a comb-over and a grimace or can it be a happy face? An objective look at the march toward a police state in the US may show that Bill “I feel your pain” Clinton (effective death penalty act, end of welfare, etc.) and Barack “hope” Obama (NSA, drones, extension of the Patriot Act, militarization of the police, deporting the undocumented, etc.) have been more terribly effective in eroding our commonweal than the Bush boys.
Playing the Scary Card
In the end, dealing the scary card will surely be the game plan for the Democrats in the 2016 presidential race. The Democrats will be saying, “look how scary the Republican is … vote for me” when in fact the presidential race largely represents a corporate good cop/bad cop routine. Both sides will be equally dedicated to serving the corporate class and repressing any opposition to corporate rule.
Meanwhile after the primary warm-up act is concluded, Bernie Sanders will in all likelihood dutifully encourage his faithful to vote Democrat not withstanding that none of the major substantive issues that distinguished the Sanders campaign from that of Clinton will have been picked up by the triumphant side.
On the contrary, the Democrat platform will move in subtle ways to be similar to the Republican one, although the style and presentation will differ. Both will say “make America strong” (with “strong” meaning in fact more aggressively repressive) and “strengthen American world leadership” (with “leadership” meaning U.S. imperialism and war without end).
Still we will be exhorted to vote for the “lesser of the scariest” appropriately symbolized by the party with a jackass for a logo. Which is really scarier, being stabbed in the belly (Republican) or the back (Democrat)? Perhaps it is time to say none of the above and not being scared of choosing a third party candidate that reflects our interests.
Roger D. Harris is a member of the Peace and Freedom Party State Central Committee from Marin County.
He may not actually be a fascist, just using fascist rhetoric and sentiment to aggrandize himself and get more money, fame, and perhaps power. If so, I don’t think he would be the first fascist demagogue leader to be cynical, insincere and just using his followers for personal gain. Then again, maybe he really is a fascist in his heart. I don’t think it matters what he actually believes, only what he says and does.
I do not believe Trump to be a fascist. Instead, I see Trump to be such an unbelievable JOKE, that I cannot get around that fact to consider him for anything other than being a complete and utter fool with his only designs being to make people laugh out loud!
Sincerely,
Steve Scheetz
Sanders and Trump are the versions of these ideologies rhetorically softened to appeal to what is acceptable within US politics right now. It shows that we are in some trouble that they are doing as well as they are in the polls right now, especially Trump.
Meanwhile, Rand Paul is sinking like a rock and relegated to the kids table in the next debate, because his compromised politics is less appealing than his father’s relatively more unbending and hardcore dedication to ideology over popularity over the course of decades… the same thing that is a big part of Bernie Sanders’ appeal, albeit from a different ideology.
Paulie, that’s a good description of the two ideologies. I’ve always said, communism is a lot like fascism, except with better marketing!
The biggest practical differences are
1. In fascist nations industry remains nominally private, but heavily intertwined with government; in Marxist nations it is nationalized outright.
2. Although ethnic groups are sometimes targeted in Marxist states, the primary scapegoats/internal enemies are based on economic class rather than ethnicity. Fascists do have economic class enemies/scapegoats too, primarily the underclass (especially if there is an ethnic/race disparity involved) and certain segments of the rich (those not of the ethnic majority, “limousine liberals,” etc), but the primary hostility is generally along lines of ethnicity.
The rhetorical differences are more significant than the practical ones, as fascism celebrates dictatorship as an end in itself while Marxism sees it as a temporary stage of evolution, and whereas fascism tends to see foreign expansionism openly in terms of greater glory for the ethnic group, Marxism hides it behind a veil of liberating the working class of the world. The primary practical impact of these rhetorical differences is to give foreign liberals and progressives relatively more sympathy for the Marxist dictatorships as opposed to the fascist ones.
Proto-fascist seems accurate. He is not openly advocating full blown dictatorship, getting rid of elections etc.
That should say, “but in practice, it worked almost exactly the same…”
Trump isn’t a proto-fascist. He’s a downright fascist. Such as his political agenda works within any normal political category, that would be it. Complete with ethnic cleansing, protectionism, xenophobia, merger of corporate and state, and the triumph of the leader’s will over petty legal procedure.
True, but guys like Stalin and Mao did all those things, as well (in theory, they didn’t merge the state and the corporations, but in principle, it worked almost exactly the same). The distinction between communism and fascism is primarily rhetorical, which makes this article (written by a socialist) quite ironic.
He’s much more educated than the dumbass character that he portrays as his public persona. He knows exactly what he is doing and is hamming it up for the cheap seats just like demagogues from times immemorial. I’m sure he has studied the playbook thoroughly.
Trump isn’t a proto-fascist. He’s a downright fascist. Such as his political agenda works within any normal political category, that would be it. Complete with ethnic cleansing, protectionism, xenophobia, merger of corporate and state, and the triumph of the leader’s will over petty legal procedure. If he isn’t a fascist, nothing short of openly praising Mussolini and Hitler would qualify him as one. And I wouldn’t even be that surprised to hear himself joke about making the trains run on time, if I thought he was educated enough to know the reference.
He’s more in the direction of fascism. See links I posted above.
And as for the titular question, I think trump, like virtually every duopoly politician, combines aspects of both fascism/corporatism and socialism/communism. Of course, those ideologies really aren’t all that different to begin with.
Maybe the author could explain how “ending welfare” (which, of course, Clinton didn’t do) is a step in the direction of a police state.
If anything, the truth would seem to be just the opposite. The more dependent people are on the state for basic necessities, the more likely they are to put up with tyranny and abuses of their civil liberties, for fear of rocking the boat.
Yes, Trump is.
https://tucker.liberty.me/did-donald-trump-unleash-the-neo-nazis/
http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/437195328/how-white-nationalist-groups-found-their-candidate-in-donald-trump
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/08/28/trump-nazis-finally-conquer-america.html
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/meet-the-prominent-white-nationalists-fired-up-to-support-do#.holOzLvLnL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-white-supremacists_55dce43ee4b08cd3359dc41a
http://irregulartimes.com/2015/08/31/the-neonazi-supporters-of-donald-trump/
http://irregulartimes.com/2015/08/26/donald-trump-and-adolf-hitler/