Let's Call Trumpism what it is - American Fascism.

The actual white supremacists have used hiding-in-plain-sight for a couple of decades now - they won't fix it if it ain't broke. And the dummies are still buying it, so ....

 

Is that what you think your 1st critique SAYS? That opposing any Globalist policies, makes a person a de facto NATIONALIST?

I think your difficulties with debate go beyond not merely taking the time to read, & understand, another person's argument. Clearly, you don't even comprehend what YOU'RE saying!

 

Oh, we'll have Trump to kick around, alright!

 

All I've done with the definition is to expand it's meaning, by laying emphasis on the fact that it's a popular phenomenon. My definition incorporates, rather than contradicts, the textbook understanding of Fascism.

No, Statism does not of itself indicate Authoritarianism, much less Fascism.

 

That's not true. Most people do not regard religion or national origin to be elective. That's the reason why they are classes that are protected in anti-discrimination law.

The xenophobe operates with stereotypes and caricature of the objects of their bigotry, rather than the real-world complexity. Note how Birthers conflated Obama's being Muslim and claims of his foreign origin. We're talking Trump and his supporters, here - these people are not known for nuanced thinking on these matters.

All kinds of Trumpists have to bend over backwards with their casuist "decoding" Trump's of xenophobia and racism. Why can't you just admit the plain facts?

Upshot, you people are intellectually bankrupt, a corollary of being morally bankrupt, if you ask me.

 

No. You -changed- its meaning to suit your needs, because you knew the -actual - definition does not apply to Trump.
Of course, you cannot demonstrate your "expanded" meaning applies to Trump, so you sacrificed whatever intellectual honesty you had for no gain.
Funny, eh?

 

@Modus Ponens

This is OUTRAGEOUS! I just got some breaking news from MSNBC's All In w/ Chris Hayes that, of the 4 people on the Wayne County, MI, Board of Canvassers, the 2 Republican members (Wm. Hartman & Monica Palmer) have refused to certify the ballot count, hence preventing Michigan, for now, from certifying its vote count.

They are citing, "irregularities," but the Sect'y of State, Jocelyn Benson, says these are not signs of widespread fraud or voter irregularities but, rather, clerical errors. Further, these same members certified, at the immediately preceding election, results that had higher levels of these errors. These errors were cited by the pair as occurring in Detroit. According to Michigan's Secretary of State, the nearby city of Levonia, with a different ethnic makeup than Detroit, actually had more clerical errors than Detroit, but was not cited by the two Republican boycotters. In fact, one of them-- Monica Palmer-- has said she is willing to certify vote-counts for counties, "outside Detroit."

Living history is supplying evidence for your case! I still have comments about your overall thesis, that I haven't had time to properly compose, which I hope we'll still have the chance to discuss. But, absent my having explained the contrasts between our two perspectives, this act does both smack of the tactics used by authoritarian movements to steal power, illegitimately, and, whether or not it is only because the voters of majority-black Detroit are known to strongly favor Biden, there is the unambiguous appearance, at any rate, of racism.

The next step, says Sect'y Benson, is for this Wayne County Board's report to go to the STATE Board of Canvassers, for them to go over & certify. That state Board, like the Counties', is composed, naturally, of 2 Democrats & 2 Republicans.

Taken in context with everything else that's been happening, like yesterday's twitter-firing of the Department of Homeland Security's Chief of CyberSecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, Chris Krebs, makes this type of behavior something we ignore at our own risk.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...ty-chief-chris-krebs-has-been-terminated.html

 

Xenophobia is an irrational fear of the unfamiliar or different
Bigotry is a obstinate or intolerant devotion to ones' own opinions and prejudices.
There's no necessary relationship between the two.
if you understood the definitions of the terms you use, rather than make up your own, as a means to obstinately hang onto your opinions and prejudices, you'd know this - but hey, at least you aren't a xenophobe.

 

Says she who has to make up the meanings of words to make a point, and then screams "I'm right prove me wrong!!!!" when asked to demonstrate her claims to be true.

 

There's only two plain facts here:
- Using the actual definition of the term, you cannot demonstrate that Trump is a racist
- Using the actual definition of the term, you cannot demonstrate that Trump is a xenophobe.

 

This kind of behavior has been inculcated among conservatives for some time now (around a quarter-century). Trump is the culmination of it. Mercifully, Trump's epic levels of incompetence at exercising the Fascist-style, means that his lemmings are still only capable of a mealy-mouthed sort of impunity. So much of it depends on having this rotting head at the top; since it will be removed shortly, I'm confident these same people who are breaking faith with democracy will slink back into their proper rule-of-law-respecting modes. For me the question of great moment is, how a Trumpified Senate acts vs. Biden. We can expect McConnell's obstruction to reach new heights; which will continue to delay the day that the government actually performs any service for the people.

 

1) You're literally claiming it isn't true that religion is mutable? Seriously? How do you explain converts, and apostates? Of course it's a bloody choice. The only immutables are race and gender. Show us where Trump discriminated against the race or gender of those in question.

2) Which stereotype is Trump opposed to? The blue-eyed European moderate muslim? The Indonesia quasi-animist muslim? The African Muslim? The Arab muslim?

3) The plain facts are that Trump is many (terrible) things, but he's no racist. That distinction belongs to the other side.

4) Who are 'you people'? I'm not American, nor a conservative - as pointed out clearly and often.

 

You wouldn't know fascism if it bit you on the arse.

 

No, I didn't say it was literally immutable. Rather it is practically immutable for the purposes both of nondiscrimination law and standard xenophobia.

Evidence of Trump's racism dates back at least as far as his attempts to keep Black people from becoming tenants in his properties, back in the 1970's. He's made disparaging comments about Black people handling his money (in connection with indulging "positive" stereotypes of Jewish people and money - really, just as invidious. There was the whole episode of the Central Park Five in the 80's, kids who he tried to have tried in the court of public opinion, and who he persistently and publicly demanded the death penalty for. Also in the 80's there was his obsession with Japanese economic competition with the US (which parallels his current obsession with China), which had and has an unmistakable undercurrent of racial animus and race panic about it. Then there was Birtherism, which he was the leading proponent of, which is commonly recognized as a flat-out racist conspiracy-theory. The evidence continues to pile up since he became a candidate for president.

All the above is common knowledge, and I presume you won't accept it as evidence, you'll insist on him being recorded saying racial epithets (which there may yet be evidence of, in the NBC archives, or in the burn-bag that The Enquirer had on him). On that count I just figure you're in willful denial about it, or indeed you his share in his exact same attitudes and don't want to face up to the fact that they are racist. But they ARE.

As for his misogyny - to begin, there's his philandering, which is strong prima facie evidence of misogyny. Then there's his creeping behavior at the beauty pageants he's sponsored, and last the several credible accusations of sexual assault against him (and at least one rape). Oh - I'm sorry, you asked about gender discrimination, not disrespecting and assaulting women. Apologies. Well, he is known to hire illegal immigrants for his resort properties, and he is accused of hiring (and firing) vulnerable young women on an appearance-basis, which is unlawful discrimination.

Trump as president has acted directly to discriminate against transgender servicemembers, as well - that's a matter of public record.

Yes.

Yeah, that's the Orwellian Big Lie. A specialty of Fascism.

"You people" are Authoritarians, the natural fascist constituency of the Modern state (as I lay out in the OP) - found all over the world, of course.

 

WONDERS NEVER CEASE

https://muckrack.com/kathy-gray/articles

After extreme public outcry in Detroit over the decision tonight of the two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers to vote to not certify the election results for Detroit, those two Republicans have reversed position & voted in favor of certifying, which now has been done.

That's the good news. I'm going to switch positions with you, on your post, by taking the darker view. First, your take:

"Mercifully, Trump's epic levels of incompetence at exercising the Fascist-style, means that his lemmings are still only capable of a mealy-mouthed sort of impunity. So much of it depends on having this rotting head at the top; since it will be removed shortly, I'm confident these same people who are breaking faith with democracy will slink back into their proper rule-of-law-respecting modes."
+++++++++++++++++++++

The way I see it, is somewhat the reverse. I think what throws people off, sometimes, in trying to either gauge or predict Trump, is their prejudice towards believing that he, like most, certainly in similar positions, operates according to a definite plan, or at least according to specific intentions. I see Donald Trump as an opportunist, always willing to switch course, if it seems advantageous. For someone who operates by that method, the priority is placed, sensibly, on keeping open as many OPTIONS as possible.

So, what I think is happening, is that the President is doing what he can to weaken democratic safeguards. Then he's throwing out accusations to fuel partisan rancor, to signal his willingness to "work" with accomplices, to tempt any whose moral compass is open to compromise. Last step: see what happens. And as it does, Trump will reassess his course.


So, while being the Tempter-in-Chief, and the shady, Suggester of the White House, he still is relying on others to join his unAmerican crusade, or-- considering your argument-- to support his undemocratic designs. And, should those forces present themselves to him, on our electoral field, he will become the Improvisor-General.

On a related note, PBS stations have just begun a series entitled Rise of the Nazis. Episode 2, in fact, aired tonight (but you should be able to catch the rebroadcast a little later, which I have already programmed my DVR to record). I wasn't set on watching when I came upon it, mid-broadcast, last week, thinking they might only be
retelling a story that I already, I believed, essentially knew. But it was surprisingly fascinating, & full of important strands of the story of which, up til then, I'd been unaware. Very interesting viewing, & a close study of a phenomena, our current times remind us, has been anything but left in the past.

 

Are you surprised? The legal recourses are almost all exhausted. Time to move to Plan B.

If that is not a fascist attitude, I don't know what is!

 

What you attempted to do is obvious and still doesn't change the definitions. When people are emotional, they exaggerate. While both parties abuse power, liberals are closer to authoritarian side. Recent events have shown the levels liberals are willing to overreach as they force mom n pop shops to close while people crowd Walmart to buy the exact same item. Politicians with nice hair cuts threaten to cut water and power to those giving us regular people a haircut.

Those pointing at Trump calling him a fascist, xenophobe, nazi, etc are merely parading their ignorance.

 

To me, this is a little overcooked. Trump is a punk whose bark is very much worse than his bite. At worst he's wannabe Peronist who's no threat to democracy. He has, after all, been peacefully voted out of office.

 

Behavior like... expecting people to support the claims they make?
Yes - its called discussing issues like an adult.
You'll catch on. Someday. Maybe.

 

Historical experience, including recent historical experience, shows that many people are disposed to some form political Authoritarianism. It can likely be accounted for in terms of evolutionary psychology. What I am actually doing is in effect normalizing this phenomenon. People in democratic societies are taught, as a matter of capital-L Liberal ideology, that Fascism is wrong, evil, etc. Instead it has to be understood that, whatever the political effects of Fascism, it is popular and is popular for a reason. Now, as a capital-L Liberal myself (and a small-l liberal, besides), I see this as pernicious for the long-term survival of Liberal state-forms. But many people prefer order and security to the potential chaos of "liquid Modernity."

Liberals, by definition, don't abuse power. If they do, they are not Liberals. But there are of course Left-varieties of Authoritarianism. However, I would aver that Authoritarian Socialism and Communism are not in fact political phenomena of the Left. Authoritarian Socialism etc. are in actuality variants of Fascism. They draw on the Left's rhetoric of egalitarianism and solidarity, but functionally they subvert both those values, for the sake of a minority-faction of the society getting monopoly power over the State. "Leftist" Authoritarianism may be more or less economically efficient than other forms (China right now doesn't seem to be doing too badly), but their real existing forms are indistinguishable from states that are "traditionally" understood to be Fascist.

Fascism, for its part, is not, properly speaking, a "right-wing" form of government. Instead the Left-Right political spectrum is a capital-L Liberal spectrum (born as it was in the French Revolution); both the Left and the Right are ranged in opposition to Authoritarianism (in all of its forms). However, we must make the caveat that Right-liberals often will make political alliances of convenience with Authoritarianism (when both regard the Left-liberals as a common foe)

The 'Authoritarianism' of the Left today, such as it is, can be seen in how they are operating as Culture-Commissars, using shame as an instrument to attack traditional power-structures (both informal and formal) in the society. All this has more the appearance of an organic social & cultural revolution, than any sort of political Authoritarianism. Of course that does not prevent the Right and the Authoritarians (who we might otherwise refer to as the Conservatives) from howling complaints about a slippery-slope, here.

Without clarifying what "forcing mom n pop shops to close" actually means, I have no reason to grant that as an example of Liberal "Authoritarianism."

Trump is without doubt a Fascist. He is an invidious nationalist, who bases his vision of the nation on White-ethnic populism. He uses this as a predicate to directly attack and subvert the rule of law in the United States. In the end I don't understand why you're even denying it, given that the term "Fascist," in my formulation of it, is more descriptive than anything else. Why not just come out and admit you embrace Authoritarianism? It's a popular point of view.

 

Only if you change the definition of "fascist" to mean something other than the actual definition.
And even then, you cannot demonstrate your claim to be true.
I don't know why you even deny it.

 

Someone doesn't know what fascism is. Even now democrats are calling for limiting free speech, the bedrock of our system. As usual, the left projects what they do themselves.

 

If you're a capital-L Liberal, this complacency is ill-advised. With Trump, the US has been playing a dictator-simulation game at the lowest level of difficulty. We have to understand why Authoritarianism is so popular, even in an archetypical Liberal (capital-L Liberal) state like the United States.

 

First of all, the freedom of speech cannot be absolute (cue the cliche of yelling fire in a crowded theater, etc)

Second, there are a variety of Fascist states in the world, and there are also a variety of Liberal states. And not all Liberal states subscribe to the free-speech absolutism of the United States. European democracies place various curbs on speech that would be unlawful in America, but they are still Liberal states in good standing (or at least will be, until the Fascists take over there)

Finally, it must be admitted that the cultural Left in the U.S. are today very much in position of the referees of the Culture, and that they have an itchy trigger-finger when it comes to putting people in the penalty-box (there's your mixed metaphor for today). Some people are worried about the downstream political implications of this - myself included. But in my judgment the threat this poses to our future is nothing compared to spreading lies about the integrity of a national election.

 

You're just a pseudo, and I've wasted enough time on you.