Is Trump / MAGA / the US Fascist?

[Saint Frankenstein]

I have no idea why you associate fascism with environmentalism

Because it was part of National Socialism, its Blood and Soil ideology and the Völkisch movement that proceeded it. They had environmental laws and established nature preserves. They also had animal welfare laws and Hitler was a vegetarian for ethical reasons. They were strict Darwinists who revered nature, as these quotes attest to: https://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/reading/germany/Radical Ecology.htm

As for other kinds of Fascism like Italian Fascism, the Iron Guard movement, Falange, Integralism, etc. - I'm not as sure. NS is honestly its own thing in various ways.

, but JD Vance did say back in May that one could call the US a "fascist state".

I didn't see that.

Maybe that's what he was thinking of--a country with environmental, safety, and public welfare regulations. Most Americans define it more closely to Trump's former Chief of Staff John Kelly's description:

Kelly pointed The New York Times to a definition of fascism: “It’s a far-right authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy.”​

​

“So certainly, in my experience, those are the kinds of things that he thinks would work better in terms of running America,” Kelly said.​

​

Kelly added that Trump is in the “far-right area,” and “admires people who are dictators,” which in Kelly’s view places Trump in “the general definition of fascist.”​

​

Source:

People are calling Trump a fascist. What does that mean?​

I'm not interested in how "most Americans define it". I know what it is.

 

[Copernicus]

Historically, fascism was created by Benito Mussolini in Italy, not Adolf Hitler, who was an early admirer of Mussolini. As for JD Vance, the reference to his remarks is in the article I cited but which you did not read.

I'm not interested in how "most Americans define it". I know what it is.

How you personally define it doesn't matter. What matters is how people use the word in the context of the American election. Kelly's description is spot on. Your attempt to tie it to a quasi-ideological description of Nazism, not so much. Especially your nonsensical association of fascism with environmentalism. I still have no idea where you got that impression.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Historically, fascism was created by Benito Mussolini in Italy, not Adolf Hitler, who was an early admirer of Mussolini.

What does that have to do what what I said? Are the Nazis Fascists or not?

As for JD Vance, the reference to his remarks is in the article I cited but did not read.

Uh, okay?

How you personally define it doesn't matter. What matters is how people use the word in the context of the American election. Kelly's description is spot on. Your attempt to tie it to a quasi-ideological description of Nazism, not so much. Especially your nonsensical association of fascism with environmentalism. I still have no idea where you got that impression.

I'm not "personally defining" anything, just using actual sources for it. Not political mudslinging garbage. You just want to use it as a insult, not consider what the ideology actually is. It's no different than conservatives and libertarians calling people they don't like "commies" and "socialists".

And I provided you the information about Nazism having an environmentalist aspect. It's also a part of neo-Fascism in general now, especially as many combine it with Paganism. But I guess you're too damn busy blindly bloativating to actually read my posts. How boorish.

 

[Copernicus]

What does that have to do what what I said? Are the Nazis Fascists or not?

You tied it to specific elements of historical Nazism. I was merely pointing out that, if you want to go back to historical roots, Mussolini is the source. Hitler, Franco, and others were inspired by the Italian movement. They were just copycats. But, OK, Hitler is the internet standard. I get that.

I'm not "personally defining" anything, just using actual sources for it. Not political mudslinging garbage. You just want to use it as a insult, not consider what the ideology actually is. It's no different than conservatives and libertarians calling people they don't like "commies" and "socialists".

No, I'm giving you professional advice as someone who has spent many years dealing with definitions and word meanings. The word "fascist" can have more than one meaning. Let's focus on the one that most people are using, not your version of how you wish to define the word.

d I provided you the information about Nazism having an environmentalist aspect. It's also a part of neo-Fascism in general now, especially as many combine it with Paganism. But I guess you're too damn busy blindly bloativating to actually read my posts. How boorish.

This is a nonsensical argument. Germany had a lot of laws and regulations, not all of which had anything at all to do with fascism. Just because Hitler's Germany had environmental regulations, that does not mean they had anything to do with fascism.

 

[Estro Felino]

It's funny and grotesque that a writer from UK (or USA?) takes a term from Italy's history and dictates what fascism is, on the basis of his own impressions.
Very good.

It's like I took the term Thatcherism and imposed on the intellectuals the definition of Thatcherism.

There's not even a wikipedia page about Lawrence Britt...for the record.

 

[Estro Felino]

I would like to tell all these leftists here: why don't you use the term Nazi and Nazism instead to define those whom you hate?

Why do you have to take a piece from the history of my country and deform it and distort it to ridicule your political opponents, in the 21st century?

Fascism was something that ended in 1945,...and it was buried forever by history, by constitutional rights, by progress.

It's offensive and denotes allergy to history books.
Because if someone from the Left had ever opened a history book, they would never use the term fascism.
There is a terrifying allergy to culture, to history books. Anti-intellectualism.

 

[Estro Felino]

The leftists will also say that Rachele Mussolini is a fascist because her grandfather was the one who founded Fascism?

Can't you see that fascism is gone forever? That it's a piece of history and if that person were alive today, he would be a completely different man, with other values and other goals?

 

[danieldemol]

I'm not sure if Trump ticks every last fascist checkbox in the definitional model of fascism, but he ticks way too many for comfort in my view.

And besides, he needs to be electorally defeated because he threatens his peaceful opposition with the military in my view, and that alone is more than enough, so I'm hardly worried if his opponents missed some minor check-list boxes

 

[Stevicus]

I would like to tell all these leftists here: why don't you use the term Nazi and Nazism instead to define those whom you hate?

Why do you have to take a piece from the history of my country and deform it and distort it to ridicule your political opponents, in the 21st century?

Fascism was something that ended in 1945,...and it was buried forever by history, by constitutional rights, by progress.

It's offensive and denotes allergy to history books.
Because if someone from the Left had ever opened a history book, they would never use the term fascism.
There is a terrifying allergy to culture, to history books. Anti-intellectualism.

I've noticed that quite a number of people get hooked on semantics and word choice to the point where that becomes a more important issue than the actual issues.

If people don't like Trump, they can vote against him and leave it at that. If the label of "fascist" doesn't really stick to him, is it really that big of a deal, just as long as he loses the election? I fail to understand why so many people are obsessed over words and labels, other than the fact that some people have a shockingly limited vocabulary.

 

[RestlessSoul]

How likely is it that people who offend Trump will, in the event of another Trump
Presidency, end up at the bottom of the river? He can be vengeful, sure, but is there any evidence he’s ever tried to have any of his opponents killed?

 

[RestlessSoul]

How likely is it that people who offend Trump will, in the event of another Trump
Presidency, end up at the bottom of the river? He can be vengeful, sure, but is there any evidence he’s ever tried to have any of his opponents killed?

 

[Ambivalence]

Obviously not- Fascism was as much an economic doctrine as anything else and clearly one that Trump does not hold.

 

[Wirey]

How likely is it that people who offend Trump will, in the event of another Trump
Presidency, end up at the bottom of the river? He can be vengeful, sure, but is there any evidence he’s ever tried to have any of his opponents killed?

"He didn't get caught trying to actually murder anyone yet, even though he wants to use the military against people who disagree with him ideologically, so he's good. It's not like there are people in history who said what they planned to do to their enemies in advance after being accused of fascism, and then followed through with some kind of holocaust after they were elected and tore down the system of government so they could never be gotten rid of by using a fanatical and violent base of supporters to suppress rebellion. That would be a brand new thing!"

Duly noted.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I've noticed that quite a number of people get hooked on semantics and word choice to the point where that becomes a more important issue than the actual issues.

If people don't like Trump, they can vote against him and leave it at that. If the label of "fascist" doesn't really stick to him, is it really that big of a deal, just as long as he loses the election? I fail to understand why so many people are obsessed over words and labels, other than the fact that some people have a shockingly limited vocabulary.

The problem is that his supporters really fail to grasp anything true about the man. That in itself is a complete mystery, because it's all right out there, for anybody to see. But they don't see. I get the feeling that when he lapses into his "weave" that doesn't ever come together eventually, they feel as if they're being told something mysterious, something "religious" that they accept that they're too small and human to understand -- like the Trinity, I suppose.

It's for that reason that some of us are trying to break that spell, by showing -- as clearly as we're able with nothing but words -- who he really is.

Sadly, I think we're failing at that, too.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How likely is it that people who offend Trump will, in the event of another Trump
Presidency, end up at the bottom of the river? He can be vengeful, sure, but is there any evidence he’s ever tried to have any of his opponents killed?

AFAIK, he hasn't had anyone killed yet, but he's definitely thought about it.

He's also expresed frustration at administrators pushing back against plans when they're illegal, which has ended up with his plan to purge the federal civil service and replace them with his loyalists.

So in his first term, I think the outcomes were more about him not knowing how to effectively use his power and also checks and balances in the system working as they should... which I don't think we can expect these limitations on him for a second term.

 

[crossfire]

Here is a picture of the US House Chambers. Do you recognize the two fasces on the wall on either side of the podium?

 

[Revoltingest]

I have no idea why you associate fascism with environmentalism....

Fascists are humans, & despite their evil politics,
can advocate good things, eg, good health care,
a clean environment, great food, strong defense.
So if one wants to criticize any one of those good
things...just associate it with fascism.

 

[RestlessSoul]

"He didn't get caught trying to actually murder anyone yet, even though he wants to use the military against people who disagree with him ideologically, so he's good. It's not like there are people in history who said what they planned to do to their enemies in advance after being accused of fascism, and then followed through with some kind of holocaust after they were elected and tore down the system of government so they could never be gotten rid of by using a fanatical and violent base of supporters to suppress rebellion. That would be a brand new thing!"

Duly noted.

Pretty sure Hitler and the Nazis were already responsible for widespread violence and hundreds of murders before they came to power.

Questioning the use of the term ‘fascist’ to describe Trump, is not to exonerate his obvious criminality.

Your failure to recognise the distinction is duly noted.

 

[Kathryn]

Your statement is bizarre, since it seems to suggest that opposition to fascism is a recent phenomenon. Historically, both were antidemocratic and anti-American. In some sense, they were just opposite sides of the same coin.

it reminds me a lot of the word "narcissist" - used by many people to describe something they are not really familiar with, but they think they are.

 

[Revoltingest]

it reminds me a lot of the word "narcissist" - used by many people to describe something they are not really familiar with, but they think they are.

And sometimes the term is correctly applied, eg, Trump.
His self aggrandizing, susceptibility to flattery, self importance,
expectation of loyalty, hostility towards those who don't fete
him, dismissal of lesser people, arrogance, rage when not
getting his way, & love of luxury, are characteristic.