politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » It’s not neo-fascism, it’s the classic variety

Trump being sworn in — political cartoon gallery pic.twitter.com/bAlxBrbv2d
0
This discussion has been closed.
Trump being sworn in — political cartoon gallery pic.twitter.com/bAlxBrbv2d
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXxGPDBRUzs
It is worth considering that on your analysis, Hugo Chavez was a ravening Fascist...
Interesting to note that the present trend - of which Trump and Le Pen are both a part - comes at a time when the generation (in the West) that has any memory of what fascism was in practice has essentially died out. We are doomed to learn the lessons of history by (to some extent) repeating them.
F1: third practice is in about 20 minutes, with qualifying at 4pm.
My estimation of Warren has gone up leaps and bounds with this.
The figures were - Con 40 Lab 32 UKIP 13 LD 6 Grn 4 -a Con lead of 8 points compared with 9 points two weeks earlier.
The culprit is the so called free market.Rather than producing "trickle down it has produced suck up with wealth shifting from the poorer to the richer".Put another way the free market maybe good at producing economic growth but it fails lamentably to distribute the rewards fairly.
We need a new world economic order that combines the advantages of free markets with mechanisms that gives a fair share to those who have been left behind.
Without this the result will be more power to right wing parties and ultimately a return to facism.
If there was a tipping point it was the failure of the liberal west to contain Islamic fundamentalists.
Which type of tyranny do we prefer? Isis or trump? That's how people see it. That and ignorance of history.
Of course old wooden teeth may be uncomfortable seeing a black man as POTUS.
Much of the political climate now is a delayed reaction to the prevention of the operation of free markets in the 2007-8 crash. People feel a visceral unfairness that, at all levels of society, the responsible were expected to bail out the irresponsible.
In short too many folk ( especially on here ) are arguing thatvthe fact he won shows he campaign behaviour wasn't fascistic. That's a non sequitur. It may just be that a fascistic campaign has now won.
"Fascist. It’s a word that could have been designed to be spat out as an insult. The first syllable invites you to screw up your face and the second is little more than a glorified hiss. And a very good insult it is, one that’s easily thrown at anyone seeking to implement liberty-curtailing or discriminatory policies.
The problem is that’s it’s been so readily used as an insult for so long that it’s easy to miss the real thing when it rears its ugly head. "
I'd argue that the same is true of the words 'racist' and 'sexist'. These words have been banded around so carelessly and to describe, in many cases, such innocuous behaviour that they have been rendered meaningless - they essentially mean behaviour of which the user of the word disapproves. The words have lost their power; the first reaction to them is an eye-roll: what are the terminally outraged outraged about now? - so when they get used about behaviour which maybe people genuinely should take note of, people tune out.
http://www.cirsd.org/en/horizons/horizons-autumn-2016--issue-no-8/populism-as-a-backlash-against-globalization
(Edited to add: good afternoon, everyone)
People are asleep. My colleagues reaction to crimea in 2014 was " shit I don't want to go to war"
Syria - shit I don't want to get called up.
Not difficult to see how this ends
1. Action for action's sake. Check - wall, Muslim ban etc.
2. Disagreement is treason. Check - that's certainly been the tone, and indeed the terminology for many.
3. Fear of difference. No argument this is central.
4. Obsession with "plots". Check - birtherism; belief election was being stolen; all this nonsense about the Khans and various beauty queens.
5. Frustrated middle class. Absolutely - worked on fear both of the "inner cities" (blacks) and elites.
6. Enemies BOTH too strong and too weak. Check - Clinton was apparently BOTH an evil criminal genius and a physical wreck.
7. Machismo/misogyny. Well, quite.
8. Contempt for the weak. This is a big part of Trump's rhetoric - constantly evoking supposed weakness of people he disagrees with.
9. Selective populism. This is the idea there is a common will of "the People" which is invoked against any individual views - certainly seems to be some element of this in Trump, especially in approach to violence against protesters at his rallies.
10. Newspeak. This is absolutely part of Trumpism - he is actually quite a smart guy, but deliberately impoverishes his language to the extent that the transcripts of his speeches are frequently meaningless.
11. Everyone is a hero/cult of death. To a degree - the references to people taking it into their own hands if Hillary won. But less so than other elements.
12. Permanent warfare. To a degree - let's see who the new enemy is post-Clinton. He's more conciliatory on some aspects of actual war though.
13. Rejection of modernism. There's certainly some of this in the rhetoric, although in a sense his own well known moral weaknesses mean he hasn't really played up the idea of the moral descent of man that much.
14. Cult of tradition. Maybe less so than other elements.
"If fascism ever comes to America, it will come wrapped in an American flag."
@RobBurl: @jeremycorbyn on Trump and more, Marine Le Pen, @crispinbluntmp and Sir Stuart Peach, Chief of The Defence Staff
"Yet whatever the similarities, we should think twice before interpreting the present as a re-enactment of the past.
For one thing, fascism is notoriously hard to define. Decades of research have not enabled academics to agree on a definition."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/donald-trump-nigel-farage-fascists-intolerance
Note that the Guardian published this article - not all their contributors are jumping on the lazy idea that this is just a rerun of 1930s German all over again.
Other contributors to this debate:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/absurd-call-trump-fascist/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/02/is_donald_trump_a_fascist_an_expert_on_fascism_weighs_in.html
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/12/nativism-racism-anti-migrant-sentiment?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Personally I don't view populism as a fundamentally bad thing as long as it is tempered by compassion and tolerance. It is on that score that I believe Trump completely fails.
It's a powerful piece. I really respect David for writing it.
75% of the French oppose Trump.
The effect of the second primary debate (and/or Trump - the fieldwork was Wednesday onwards) was to move votes from Juppé to Fillon, i.e. one centre-right to another (Juppé 36%, Sarkozy 26%, Fillon 20%). Most of these votes come home to Juppé in the second round (now 57 v 43 among all voters).
I can't see an updated overall 2017 presidential election poll but I can't see any justification on these figures for believe Le Pen will add anything more than a point or two to her 30-32%.
Wind forward to 39mins in - before that bit it's still fascinating about GamerGate and other stuff
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FvADt-mJ_o
Mr Herdson; you need to give your head a wobble.
Nope. It's silly OTTness worthy of the cry bullies demanding the overturn of a democratic election.
Voters saw little progress made since 2008 in jobs, security, immigration and crime https://t.co/b9FkKcVBCp https://t.co/mMmlSiYPLn
I know - those radical pentecostal terrorists are absolutely ripping Europe apart.
He said (of ILLEGAL Mexican immigrants)
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re not sending you, they’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bring crime. They’re rapists… And some, I assume, are good people.”
I am sure that the women of Cologne could sympathise.
Well, well, well! David Herdson proclaims Donald Trump a Fascist. And all the liberal and lefty PBers jump as one to agree with him.
Lets pull this apart a bit. Now I haven't the writing ability of Herdson to refute the main thesis of his arguments, but refute them I will, and I will refute them by numbers.
Trump has done the following:
1. Called some women names. Except for some women, Haven't we all.
2. Called Muslims names. Except for some muslims, Haven't we all.
3. Called Mexicans names. Well Mexicans are not our near neigbours, but France is, and Except for some Frenchmen, Haven't we all.
4. Called for the end of abortion on demand. Well Except for some women, Haven't we all.
5. Called for the end illegal and massive immigration. Except for some Liberals and Lefties, Haven't we all.
6. Called for the re-establishment of industry in the country. Almost without exception, Haven't we all.
I could go on, but you get my drift.
So Trump the Fascist will go to the White House in January, sans Storm Troopers, sans a Fascist Party, sans organised thugs on the streets, and sans support from the military.
In the meantime there are thugs and hooligans on the streets from the so called Democratic Party and extreme lefties calling for the dismembering of the recent elections and the possible assasination of Trump before inauguration day.
Who are the real Fascists here?
The Foreign Secretary was not at home at the time but one protester remarked that if Boris were to return, he would 'probably be killed'.
EU gets in the way of free parking at Tesco.
FWIW - IMHO the 'storm troopers' etc were probably only effective because Germany Government was so weak, with its armed forces being castrated after World-War 1. Any 'organised' storm trooping would meet the USA National Guard, who are not known for pussyfooting around.
In the meantime Democrats are trying to storm Trump Towers.
At the end there was a discussion involving the Spectator US editor, Emmett Tyrrell. He was SPECTACULARLY stupid.
What's the fundamental difference between French people and Brits/Americans that they won't vote for an anti-globalist/populist candidate/referendum?
The electoral system has held against the FN so far, but MLP knows that her route to power is to convince ordinary socialist party voters that they are better off backing her in round 2 than Juppé - accordingly her campaign will focus strongly on protectionism/frexit, and less on anti-Muslim policies
I do prefer Ferguson's take on it in the article I linked below - populism has a few things in common with but is not fascism; it lacks its militarism, violence and racial scapegoating - but is equally misguided and, when it fails, dangerous, all the same
Is he right, though? I don't think so. I can see that in the right (or perhaps I should say 'wrong') circumstances, a Trump-style victory and presidency could develop into fascism, but there are lots of reasons to be confident that that won't happen in twenty-first-century America. As David concedes in his penultimate paragraph, there are hugely powerful institutional protections in the US which will prevent a crazy populist victory morphing into something much darker. As others have said, Trump seems to be more Berlusconi than Mussolini.
If we substitute a Scottish heritage judge making a decision on a golf course case - he'd have made the same argument. It's not racist FFS - it's about the emotional pressure a judge may experience if they go against the expectations of their family/cultural diaspora.
David is muddling up a demagogue (albeit one who makes some of the same appeals that a racist would ) with a Facist.
He is not a socialist (obviously)
He is not a conservative
He is not a liberal
He is not a democrat (having said he will accept the result if he wins)
So what's left?
A pragmatist?
A nihilist?
A nationalist?
A demagogue?
Maybe. Maybe it goes further. We'll see soon enough.
Edit/ All these labels assume he has some big agenda for the US and the world; we just need to work out what it might be.
Maybe he just wants the job and the profile for himself?
Twice he is on record as saying he will leave the domestic policy and foreign affairs mostly to his deputy.
I think there's a bit more to it than that. Trump is smarter than the average populist demagogue.
Sweary but funny
https://youtu.be/GLG9g7BcjKs
Apparently.
If Trump starts to act fascistically once inaugurated, there will be no end of people on both the left and right, from each House, the judiciary, and civil society, lining up to bring him down.
I'm not looking at this through the liberal group think. That was why I opened by dismissing the description as insult.
What we shouldn't do is rule out of hand descriptions simply because they're beyond the normal discourse. The fact is that Trump is beyond normal politics.
Admittedly, as Malmesbury has said, he doesn't have a paramilitary organisation and isn't explicitly aiming to overturn democracy. But then the former doesn't change what he is; it just makes him less effective in implementing it. And his unwillingness to commit himself to accept the result suggests at least an inclination to ignore democracy, due process and the rule of law - and that wasn't his only such comment: 'jail Hillary' was of the same nature.
Did he mean it? In a sense it doesn't matter. His willingness to play to that gallery defines what he sees as acceptable limits.
There's nothing new about this hysterical nonsense.