• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fascism - Why...

Kfox

Well-Known Member
In the same way that apple is different than fruit. All apples are fruits but not all fruits are apples. All facist regimes contain dictatorships but not all dictatorships are facist regimes. Fascism - Wikipedia
There are specific characteristics that make a fruit an apple. What specific characteristics make a dictator fascist?
The link you provided said it was a “far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist movement. Now I understand what it means to be authoritarian and ultranationalist, but what characteristics make up far-right in this case? I understand Hitler and Mussolini may have been far-right of their day, but far right a hundred years ago is not far right today! As a matter of fact, many issues embraced by the right today, would have been considered left wing 25-30 years ago. So what specific right-wing characteristics are required in order for a dictator to be fascist? Your link doesn’t seem to answer this question.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
They attacked police officers with weapons. They smeared their feces everywhere. They stole things from senator's offices. They attempted to enter the Senate Chamber where senators were holed up trying to hide from the mob while armed guards tried to hold the mob off at the door. They erected a gallows and chanted "Hang Mike Pence." (There is footage of Mike Pence narrowly escaping the mob.) They had weapons, military gear and zip ties on them and in their vehicles.
Is that it? Excuse my skeptcism, but that does not sound like the actions of people trying to overthrow the government and install Trump as Dictator to me.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member

My assessment is that Trump and his MAGA movement meets 14 out of 14.

The U.S. in the early days meets maybe three, and those are pretty iffy.

Perhaps. I've seen this list before, and some of it may apply to the U.S. at various points in the 18th, 19th, and/or 20th centuries.

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

I would say that this would apply through much of U.S. history, with an aggressively expansionist history which would eventually go beyond our own continent and turn into global imperialism boosted by intense patriotism and gunboat diplomacy. This continued under different names during the Cold War, and even up to the present day, there's been a strong, ultra-patriotic, quasi-nationalist component to US foreign and military policies. It's been tempered and moderated somewhat - not like the days of Joe McCarthy or Nixon. But it is what it is.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

I would say that this also would apply through much of U.S. history, although there were slow and steady improvements and reforms that took place. It wasn't really until after WW2 that America's government really started to recognize human rights.

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

I would say that this changed over time, depending on the circumstances. In the early days, the British and/or Monarchists were the enemy. In a way, one could say that white supremacy was contrived in order to create the same effect. In the 20th century, it may have been evident during the various Red Scares and the Cold War.

Supremacy of the Military

Hard to say if they could be considered "supreme," but the U.S. military obviously figured prominently all throughout our expansionist history, as noted in the first point. Perhaps the Civil War might be a turning point, as the U.S. started to pay more and more attention to its military capabilities in the Postbellum era as it pushed out on to the world stage. However, during WW2 and ever since, the military has gotten much more powerful and expensive.

Rampant Sexism

Well, this was probably true for the entire world up until about the 1940s - or even longer in some countries. It's true that fascists and fascist governments are/were sexist, but I wouldn't see this as particularly unique to fascism.

Controlled Mass Media

This characteristic seems to apply only after the invention of radio, film, and television. Although thinking about it, I don't know if I can think of a time when America's media can be characterized as "controlled" in the same sense as Goebbels. I don't think the media can be controlled that way, not unless we become a completely closed-off society like North Korea.

Obsession with National Security

We've always had an obsession with national security. It was on a much smaller scale at first, but the obsession was always there.

Religion and Government are Intertwined

I suppose fascism may share some overlap with theocracy. Although we have a separation of church and state, there have been some on the religious right who still maintain the U.S. is a "Christian nation." This has been a sticky point for a long time, I think. However, I wouldn't considering this to necessarily be a distinctive characteristic of fascism, and moreover, a fascist government can exist even without religion.

Corporate Power is Protected

Well, that's definitely been the case in the U.S. for quite some time. Perhaps even more so since the Reagan era.

Labor Power is Suppressed

I think the labor movement has had its ups and downs. We've had a long history of labor suppression in this country, although admittedly, it's probably a lot better now than it was 100-150 years ago. On the other hand, many of the products and commodities we consume today don't actually come from our own country, but rather, from countries where U.S. labor laws don't apply and labor power is most definitely suppressed.

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

I think this may be true for certain portions of America which have a more provincial outlook on things. This even seems to be a trope or stereotype about Americans and how unsophisticated and low-brow we are compared to Europeans. Trump seems to reflect that with his ill-mannered ways and his boorishness.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment

Some states still practice capital punishment, and we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. In the past, it was probably a bit more ad hoc and loosey-goosey with all the lynchings and other forms of vigilante justice, as well as "hanging judges." Nowadays, at least in the past several decades, the police have become more militarized. Some of it due to the War on Drugs, but also due to skyrocketing crime rates through the 1980s and early 90s.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

This also can be found throughout early U.S. history, to varying degrees.

Fraudulent Elections

This has been kind of a touchy subject lately, although there may be a few elections in America's history which may have been questionable. It's kind of difficult to gauge, especially since only white males who owned property were allowed to vote in the early days. Then it was widened to include all white males, even those who didn't own property. After the Civil War, black males were also guaranteed the right to vote by the 15th Amendment, but the state and local governments used rather fraudulent and dishonest methods to find ways to prevent them from voting just the same. Grandfather clauses, literacy tests - things like that. That went on for quite a long time and wasn't really significantly challenged until the 50s and 60s.

While there still may be gaps, I think there's been more effort at enforcing universal suffrage in recent decades. As for how elections would be run in a MAGA world, it's hard to imagine. If Lauren Boebert were running against Marjorie Taylor Greene, then it might very well be an honest election.
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Our nation’s egalitarian, democratic aspirations have always competed for supremacy with a darker tradition rooted in authority, obedience and the hegemonic enforcement of majoritarian interests and norms. But it has never confronted a challenge like this. Trumpism is McCarthyism on steroids, and its full expression menaces the stability of our democracy. A country where authoritarian ideals are ascendant, and remain ascendant, is no longer a democracy. It is on the road to fascism, or what some now call, euphemistically, illiberal democracy.

I don't really know that we disagree that much, although it may be just the word "fascist" itself which may be problematic. What America was in the past may not have been fascist, although it may have had many of the same odious elements as fascism. Or maybe the word itself doesn't even apply in that context.

My point is that, regardless of what one calls MAGA or Trumpism, it seems to resemble something closer to an older form of Americanism than anything resembling Germany or Italy in the 1930s. That doesn't make it good, and any attempts at that kind of regressive, atavistic way of thinking will probably lead to chaos and disaster - just as it did for the fascists way back when.

The other side of the discussion is how (as the article you link points out) we become predisposed to authoritarianism in the first place. But there's also weaknesses within the system which kind of set us up for this kind of possibility. How did our system become so vulnerable as to be under threat from someone like Trump?
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Fine, we won't call it fascism. Whatever you'd like to call it, it's still ugly, and another name won't make it any prettier than lipstick on the pig.
Yup, agree with that. Glitter on the turd is how I think of it.
And I do not know the answer to the thread's question about why so many Americans appear to want what Trump represents. As I tried to point out in another thread (Biden tanking) I think that it might well be some combination of "fear of other," racism and hate that Trumpism and Magaism seem to give permission for, and a certain darker side to the fundamentalist Christian right-wing.
I'll have a stab, but like you I'm an outsider.
I'm always of the mind that more general uncertainty makes simpler answers attractive.

At some point when faced with a Gordian Knot, people start looking around for a sword. As a centrist, I have to admit I see that on both sides of the political spectrum, though I'm not painting then as equivalent in how, or the impact.

Getting people to focus on the complexity of issues, and particularly the uncertainty of answers is almost impossible these days, and that's not a uniquely American thing. There seems to be increasingly a view that assigning fault is required whenever things go wrong (again, not just American) and that people who lack certainty also lack knowledge. In my experience the opposite is true at some point, but that's not often a popular opinion.

That is a global issue, but the American political system almost mandates 2 opposing parties, and no relevant third option. That binary position seems to have bled through to almost every area of disagreement and discussion, and I think to some degree that is uniquely American.

There is also a somewhat natural element of nationalism being encouraged. America was 'stronger' in the past, in many ways, so casting about and suggesting having a 'more American America' seems somewhat inevitable. Whilst many countries have levels of exceptionalism cooked into their national identity, the USA has always been a little more explicit and less ironic about this than most (in the last 100 years).

Perhaps it's the lack of nationally humbling experiences? I'm not sure.

There is also endless discussion and protection of individual rights. Sounds good, but this almost invariably encourages people to protect and defend their own individual rights. This often ignores issues like overlapping rights, and steers clear of societal responsibilities entirely. Happens everywhere, but by degree this seems quite American.

Then there is a somewhat historical aspect. American myths are largely centred around the American frontier. Rugged, masculine and exceptionally self-sufficient characters are promoted over feminine, civilised or emotional expressions of American heroism.

That last one is not so much my position, but one I heard in a history podcast earlier this week that was interesting.

 

Secret Chief

Vetted Member
What I see is authoritarianism with extreme nationalism, an obsession with national security, disdain for human rights, persecution of minorities and immigrants, rampant sexism, attempts to control media etc.

If that is not fascism, it is fascism's identical twin.
Is "alt-right" still a thing? Fascism rebranded?
 

Unfettered

A striving disciple of Jesus Christ
Fascists and communists and socialists are all equally dangerous. Each is about control. Each wants to appropriate either a portion of the rights of the people, or all of them. Anyone who fixates on any of these "isms" without condemning them all is enabling the contraction of human and civil rights. IE, that person is part of the problem. The path forward has always been to judge and vote and act from the basis of a conscience free of political entanglements. Judge and vote and act on the basis of rights and their protection; history has shown that this is the only reasonable path to liberty and peace.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Fascists and communists and socialists are all equally dangerous. Each is about control. Each wants to appropriate either a portion of the rights of the people, or all of them. Anyone who fixates on any of these "isms" without condemning them all is enabling the contraction of human and civil rights. IE, that person is part of the problem.
Fascism subordinates human rights and individual freedom to the will of The State. Socialism, on the other hand, is radical democracy and anti-authoritarianism, holding individual rights and freedoms paramount.
The path forward has always been to judge and vote and act from the basis of a conscience free of political entanglements. Judge and vote and act on the basis of rights and their protection; history has shown that this is the only reasonable path to liberty and peace.
This pretty much describes the philosophy of the left.
 

Unfettered

A striving disciple of Jesus Christ
Fascism subordinates human rights and individual freedom to the will of The State. Socialism, on the other hand, is radical democracy and anti-authoritarianism, holding individual rights and freedoms paramount.
Does socialism allow for one to choose not to participate in socialism?
This pretty much describes the philosophy of the left.
Not in my lifetime.
 
Last edited:

Kfox

Well-Known Member
I just happened to post a list in post 379.
Just about everything there, a case could be made applied to leaders of this country prior to Trump being elected perhaps with the exception of the run on the Capital an extreme result of "Fraud elections". Though foolish, I don't think the run on the capital is enough to qualify Trump as fascist
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
There are specific characteristics that make a fruit an apple. What specific characteristics make a dictator fascist?
The link you provided said it was a “far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist movement. Now I understand what it means to be authoritarian and ultranationalist, but what characteristics make up far-right in this case? I understand Hitler and Mussolini may have been far-right of their day, but far right a hundred years ago is not far right today! As a matter of fact, many issues embraced by the right today, would have been considered left wing 25-30 years ago. So what specific right-wing characteristics are required in order for a dictator to be fascist? Your link doesn’t seem to answer this question.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Yup, agree with that. Glitter on the turd is how I think of it.

That works. I think it may be that we're getting too hung up on the term "fascism" itself. I'm not sure if it's all that vital that we all agree on a term to call whatever it is we're talking about. Some terms seem more specific to a country or timeframe, such as "Jacobin." Nobody ever calls anyone a "Jacobin" anymore, at least not in America.

I'll have a stab, but like you I'm an outsider.
I'm always of the mind that more general uncertainty makes simpler answers attractive.

At some point when faced with a Gordian Knot, people start looking around for a sword. As a centrist, I have to admit I see that on both sides of the political spectrum, though I'm not painting then as equivalent in how, or the impact.

Getting people to focus on the complexity of issues, and particularly the uncertainty of answers is almost impossible these days, and that's not a uniquely American thing. There seems to be increasingly a view that assigning fault is required whenever things go wrong (again, not just American) and that people who lack certainty also lack knowledge. In my experience the opposite is true at some point, but that's not often a popular opinion.

That is a global issue, but the American political system almost mandates 2 opposing parties, and no relevant third option. That binary position seems to have bled through to almost every area of disagreement and discussion, and I think to some degree that is uniquely American.

There is also a somewhat natural element of nationalism being encouraged. America was 'stronger' in the past, in many ways, so casting about and suggesting having a 'more American America' seems somewhat inevitable. Whilst many countries have levels of exceptionalism cooked into their national identity, the USA has always been a little more explicit and less ironic about this than most (in the last 100 years).

Perhaps it's the lack of nationally humbling experiences? I'm not sure.

There is also endless discussion and protection of individual rights. Sounds good, but this almost invariably encourages people to protect and defend their own individual rights. This often ignores issues like overlapping rights, and steers clear of societal responsibilities entirely. Happens everywhere, but by degree this seems quite American.

Then there is a somewhat historical aspect. American myths are largely centred around the American frontier. Rugged, masculine and exceptionally self-sufficient characters are promoted over feminine, civilised or emotional expressions of American heroism.

That last one is not so much my position, but one I heard in a history podcast earlier this week that was interesting.

I agree with this, as it presents a clear enough picture. As an American, I try to step back and look at my country with a certain objective eye, while piecing together events and circumstances which led us to the point we're at now.

I'm not sure what the issue here is, whether Trump is a fascist or whether America in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries was not fascist - but had many of the same elements of fascism. I sense a conscious effort to try to separate the two, but I'm not sure if I understand the reasoning behind that. If anything, it seems to minimize or ignore the long-term factors and root causes which have essentially set us up for authoritarianism.

I think we're seeing shades of how it could play out, at least in terms of the right-wing working at the lowest levels of government, such as school boards, county sheriffs, state governors (such as Abbott and Costello...er...DeSantis), state legislatures, city/town councils, and so on. The election campaign rhetoric will become dirtier and even more strident than it is now.

I was born in America, and I've lived most of my life in the American southwest. I've lived and worked among a wide variety of people of different backgrounds and political persuasions. I live in a state where a lot of right-wingers live. Trump fans (although Trump didn't win in Arizona last time, though some people don't really seem to accept the results). Kari Lake lost in her bid to become Governor, but she still insists that she won and that it was all a big fraud.

There's a strange confluence of cultures at work. I don't know how to describe it, nor am I sure what it could develop into. It doesn't feel like "fascism" to me, as I view that as mainly something from Italy. In Germany, the same ideology was called "National Socialism," and it wasn't really exactly the same as its Italian counterpart. Japan also had its own version of fascism, but I can't remember offhand what they called it. But the actual labels don't matter as much as the ideas contained underneath. That's what I would look at.
 

anna.

colors your eyes with what's not there
I don't really know that we disagree that much, although it may be just the word "fascist" itself which may be problematic. What America was in the past may not have been fascist, although it may have had many of the same odious elements as fascism. Or maybe the word itself doesn't even apply in that context.

My point is that, regardless of what one calls MAGA or Trumpism, it seems to resemble something closer to an older form of Americanism than anything resembling Germany or Italy in the 1930s. That doesn't make it good, and any attempts at that kind of regressive, atavistic way of thinking will probably lead to chaos and disaster - just as it did for the fascists way back when.

The other side of the discussion is how (as the article you link points out) we become predisposed to authoritarianism in the first place. But there's also weaknesses within the system which kind of set us up for this kind of possibility. How did our system become so vulnerable as to be under threat from someone like Trump?

The writer I quoted in my initial post in this thread also said this, that American fascism would not "necessarily or even probably turn out like Italian Fascism — or German, Syrian, Argentinian, or any other. We are not going to live a shot-for-shot remake of the Holocaust or the Second World War." But when you break fascism down to components, the building blocks are there. I do agree with you that it resembles something from America's past. Our history isn't pretty, and the Nazi goons we see today aren't the first time we've seen them.

1920px-German_American_Bund_NYWTS.jpg

American Nazi march, East 86th St., NYC October 1939

How are we predisposed to it? As a nation, maybe it goes back to the Calvinists. To the way we treated the Native Americans, the Blacks, the Catholics, the Chinese, the Mexicans, all 'othered' by the system. But that's a thought, I don't know the answer.

But individually? The right wing authoritarian personality is measurable.


I was looking for my own transcribed notes from one of my psychology texts and couldn't find it but can definitely pull out the book and screenshot the actual page for you if you're interested.
 

Kfox

Well-Known Member
Just let me recommend the book "Strongmen" by Ruth Ben Ghiat, political science professor at NYU, who goes into great detail on this as this is her expertise. It is available at Amazon, btw.
If you can't answer the question yourself, forget about it.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
hey attacked police officers with weapons. They smeared their feces everywhere. They stole things from senator's offices. They attempted to enter the Senate Chamber where senators were holed up trying to hide from the mob while armed guards tried to hold the mob off at the door. They erected a gallows and chanted "Hang Mike Pence." (There is footage of Mike Pence narrowly escaping the mob.) They had weapons, military gear and zip ties on them and in their vehicles. Their goal was to stop the peaceful transfer of power to the newly elected President, which they almost accomplished. Mike Pence was determined to do it though, and did at like 2am or something. Trump et al's whole plan was to stop the peaceful transfer of power from happening so that it would have to go back to the states, and then they could install the fake electors that they'd set up across several states creating a constitutional crisis wherein they could declare martial law and get the military involved. This trial is going to be something else.

Is that it? Excuse my skeptcism, but that does not sound like the actions of people trying to overthrow the government and install Trump as Dictator to me.
Really? Then what does it sound like to you? The effort to stop the vote in which the people chose their President -- which is what a democracy is about, after all, and replace the people's choice with one of their own, and who would therefore NOT be properly elected but hold all the power -- certainly sounds exactly like trying to overthrow the government and install a dictator, to me.
 
Top