Potential facism

[Paradoxum]

At what point does Donald Trump become a potential fascist?

He seems to demonize minorities, he doesn't condemn violence from his supporters, and doesn't seem to respect basic liberty, like free speech.

“We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...l-ask-bill-gates-to-close-it-up-a6764396.html

Perhaps I'm wrong; I'm not saying he is fascist, but if it came to America, would it be significantly different?

 

[seashale76]

At what point does Donald Trump become a potential fascist?

He seems to demonize minorities, he doesn't condemn violence from his supporters, and doesn't seem to respect basic liberty, like free speech.

“We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...l-ask-bill-gates-to-close-it-up-a6764396.html

Perhaps I'm wrong; I'm not saying he is fascist, but if it came to America, would it be significantly different?

America has corporatism. Our system of government, while officially a democratic republic, is, in effect, an oligarchy. While many different ideologies can include corporatism (including fascism), what Trump is advocating is really no different from what we've already got. I personally tend call what we have a corporate fascist oligarchy- but it is important to note that I think we've had it since well before I was born (since the days of FDR).

Trump runs off at the mouth and says outrageous things precisely to stick his finger in the eye of all of those that have tried to PC and stifle alternative points of view for a long time. That reason, and that reason only, is why he has become so popular among so many so quickly. Yes, he is wealthy. Yes, he will likely make good on his promise to not drop out of the race. However, he is simply a distraction. He will not see the White House (and neither will the likes of Sanders for that matter). The reason is because he won't maintain the status quo, which is already bought, paid for, and maintained.

One administration bleeds into the next, and the ruse is that they've fooled democrats and republicans into thinking there is any significant difference between the two. Despite their words, it's the actions you need to really look at. When it comes down to it there has been no difference between Bush Jr. and Obama. The next POTUS will be just like Obama.

 

[Paradoxum]

America has corporatism. Our system of government, while officially a democratic republic, is, in effect, an oligarchy. While many different ideologies can include corporatism (including fascism), what Trump is advocating is really no different from what we've already got. I personally tend call what we have a corporate fascist oligarchy- but it is important to note that I think we've had it since well before I was born (since the days of FDR).

While I agree to some extent, I think your skepticism is just as misplaced as ideology.

Trump runs off at the mouth and says outrageous things precisely to stick his finger in the eye of all of those that have tried to PC and stifle alternative points of view for a long time. That reason, and that reason only, is why he has become so popular among so many so quickly. Yes, he is wealthy. Yes, he will likely make good on his promise to not drop out of the race. However, he is simply a distraction. He will not see the White House (and neither will the likes of Sanders for that matter). The reason is because he won't maintain the status quo, which is already bought, paid for, and maintained.

I'm not sure Sanders is likely to lose.

One administration bleeds into the next, and the ruse is that they've fooled democrats and republicans into thinking there is any significant difference between the two. Despite their words, it's the actions you need to really look at. When it comes down to it there has been no difference between Bush Jr. and Obama. The next POTUS will be just like Obama.

I know people think they are clever to say there is no difference between main parties, but I think that's quite ignorant. 'Obamacare' has done alot of good, and Obama's support for gay marriage is helpful to liberty.

Obama isn't as liberal/left as some would like, but Republicans are generally vile in their proposals. eg: keep Iran potentially nuclear when Obama is trying to make peace.

So I'd say it shows ignorance or apathy to think both parties are the same. Democrats are moderate, whereas Republicans propose crapping in your water; in terms of climate, or sex education, guns, or pretty much anything. More death and harm.

 

[seashale76]

Also, you'll have to explain what you mean by my skepticism. There is no real reason to get alarmed at people like Trump, when he isn't anything new in the grand scheme of things. He's just a loud mouth.

I live here in the reality. There is no difference. Rhetoric means nothing at the end of the day. Actions are what count. Obama has continued the same crap Bush did. And, yes, Sanders and Trump will both lose, despite popular support. I lost any lingering faith in how our system of government works after the last election proved the reality was something else entirely. Anyone that advocates for real change finds himself/herself between a rock and a hard place.

Regarding the Affordable Care Act, it was a poorly executed disaster all around. Despite its existence, I still know people living without health insurance. Our government is simply a failure. The true ignorance is failing to wake up to how things really work.

Put not your trust in princes, in sons of men, in whom there is no salvation. ~Psalm 146:3 (This sums up my view of politics, in general, these days.)

 

[SteveB28]

At what point does Donald Trump become a potential fascist?

He seems to demonize minorities, he doesn't condemn violence from his supporters, and doesn't seem to respect basic liberty, like free speech.

“We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...l-ask-bill-gates-to-close-it-up-a6764396.html

Perhaps I'm wrong; I'm not saying he is fascist, but if it came to America, would it be significantly different?

No it would not.

His recent utterances are directly from the handbook of i fascisti. Take it from one who lived through their time in Europe.

 

[Eudaimonist]

At what point does Donald Trump become a potential fascist?

Like, right now. If he isn't a fascist in some form, I find it difficult to distinguish him from someone who is.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

"To be blunt: Donald Trump is not a fascist. "Fascism" has been an all-purpose insult for many years now, but it has a real definition, and according to scholars of historical fascism, Trump doesn't qualify. Rather, he's a right-wing populist, or perhaps an "apartheid liberal" in the words of Roger Griffin, author of The Nature of Fascism. He doesn't want to overthrow the existing democratic system. He doesn't want to scrap the Constitution. He doesn't romanticize violence itself as a vital cleansing agent of society. He's simply a racist who wants to keep the current system but deny its benefits to groups he's interested in oppressing.

Griffin, who is a professor of history and political theory at Oxford Brookes University, puts it best: "You can be a total xenophobic racist male chauvinist bastard and still not be a fascist..."


Source: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/10/9886152/donald-trump-fascism

 

[SteveB28]

"To be blunt: Donald Trump is not a fascist. "Fascism" has been an all-purpose insult for many years now, but it has a real definition, and according to scholars of historical fascism, Trump doesn't qualify. Rather, he's a right-wing populist, or perhaps an "apartheid liberal" in the words of Roger Griffin, author of The Nature of Fascism. He doesn't want to overthrow the existing democratic system. He doesn't want to scrap the Constitution. He doesn't romanticize violence itself as a vital cleansing agent of society. He's simply a racist who wants to keep the current system but deny its benefits to groups he's interested in oppressing.

Griffin, who is a professor of history and political theory at Oxford Brookes University, puts it best: "You can be a total xenophobic racist male chauvinist bastard and still not be a fascist..."


Source: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/10/9886152/donald-trump-fascism

The democratic system? He wants to deport citizens whose religious beliefs fall under a certain category.

The Constitution? He wants a particular religion to be considered verboten, thus violating the establishment clause.

Romanticise violence? He has called for protestors at his rallies to be "roughed up a little".

So, what other fascist characteristics doesn't he portray?

 

[Martinius]

Yes, he's there, or really close to it. It is chilling to realize that so many people agree with him. We have had some Bozo's running our government in the past, but to me Trump is the scariest possibility so far. Sort of a combination of Joe McCarthy and Milo Minderbinder.

 

[Eudaimonist]

"To be blunt: Donald Trump is not a fascist.

Well, we don't actually know that. I assume you mean that he hasn't yet filled out a fascist checklist completely.

Rather, he's a right-wing populist

He is that, no doubt. And his ex-wife says that he used to keep a book of Hitler's speeches by his bed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...is-bed-according-to-his-ex-wife-a6765391.html

That doesn't automatically make him a fascist -- I personally have read (with great distaste) Mein Kampf once through, and I am very far from being a fascist, or even a right-wing populist -- but it creates the suspicion that he may admire Hitler and wish to emulate him. That makes him at least a potential fascist, if not a known actual fascist.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[SteveB28]

Many will claim that the comparisons with Hitler are somewhat coarse. And they may be right. But:-

One of them was an 'outsider' without a traditional political background.

One of them was a skilled orator who managed to attract media attention largely through his public statements and speeches.

One of them rose to prominence at a time when his nation was suffering economically.

One garnered popular appeal by promising a return to national strength and pride under his leadership.

One played upon the fears of the populace by exaggerating national concerns as crises.

One furthered his support by successfully branding one group of people within his nation as a threat.

One encouraged his supporters to use violence as an intimidatory weapon.

And so did the other.

 

[Martinius]

Many will claim that the comparisons with Hitler are somewhat coarse. And they may be right. But:-

One of them was an 'outsider' without a traditional political background.

One of them was a skilled orator who managed to attract media attention largely through his public statements and speeches.

One of them rose to prominence at a time when his nation was suffering economically.

One garnered popular appeal by promising a return to national strength and pride under his leadership.

One played upon the fears of the populace by exaggerating national concerns as crises.

One furthered his support by successfully branding one group of people within his nation as a threat.

One encouraged his supporters to use violence as an intimidatory weapon.

And so did the other.

Yup, Trump has studied the playbook.

Although I am not sure that Trump is a skilled orator, but he knows what buttons to push.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Well, we don't actually know that. I assume you mean that he hasn't yet filled out a fascist checklist completely...

Not my words.

I quoted somebody else.

 

[Paradoxum]

"To be blunt: Donald Trump is not a fascist. "Fascism" has been an all-purpose insult for many years now, but it has a real definition, and according to scholars of historical fascism, Trump doesn't qualify.

Has fascism been used alot?

Also, I said be might be potentially fascist. You don't know what he's going to do till he's in power.

I don't think he'll be a huge fascist... but I don't really know. I don't think Hitler claimed to be genocidal before he got power.

Rather, he's a right-wing populist, or perhaps an "apartheid liberal" in the words of Roger Griffin, author of The Nature of Fascism. He doesn't want to overthrow the existing democratic system.

Would a clever fascist be openly against democracy before being elected?

He doesn't want to scrap the Constitution.

Well I'm glad you have that insight.

He doesn't romanticize violence itself as a vital cleansing agent of society.

Nor does he condemn violent followers... like it's expect from an oppressor.

He's simply a racist who wants to keep the current system but deny its benefits to groups he's interested in oppressing.

Yeah... just like Hitler wanted to minimize the influence of Jewish is society and make Germany great again. I don't think Trump is a murderer... but he at least tends towards fascist way too much.

Griffin, who is a professor of history and political theory at Oxford Brookes University, puts it best: "You can be a total xenophobic racist male chauvinist bastard and still not be a fascist..."

Well my main point is that he seems to tend that way. It's too late to figure it out after.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Well I'm glad you have that insight...

Nothing in the post you are quoting is my own words.

I quoted somebody else.

 

[Paradoxum]

Nothing in the post you are quoting is my own words.

I quoted somebody else.

Well it's nice of you to quote someone you don't agree with.

 

[nightflight]

LOL @ "fascism"!