.
I think I figured out why people have such a hard time to believe that the current American government is Fascist.
There are two paths to fascism.
One entails forming an ideology based on certain roots, jingoism, it includes building up organisations, rewriting/reinterpreting national mythology and history. The mythically inflated nation becomes supreme to the individual. It's an effort of thousands of people.
The other path is to simply be an ignorant piece of shit who doesn't give a shit about the well-being of fellow citizens. This path is just fine for ignoramuses, including those who fell for propaganda lies that amoral yet intelligent people devised decades earlier. This path leads to Fascists who don't proclaim to be Fascists, and make minimal use of Fascist-y visual elements. Basically, this is Fascism as the natural destination of moronic sociopaths.
The challenge is probably not so much to be alert and push back against the beginnings of formal Fascism. The challenge for the society is rather to keep dangerous idiots away from extraordinary power.
But I repeat myself.
/2009/07/permanent-challenge-for-societies.html
/2012/09/a-permanent-challenge-for-societies-ii.html
/2013/08/a-permanent-challenge-for-societies-iii_5.html
S O
.
Seems to me less like fascism and more like "normal" autocracy, the kind now usually found in third world states. I also recall one guy (long ago) compare Trump to the south american caudillos.
ReplyDeleteCheck for yourself.
Deletehttps://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2019/12/lets-open-our-eyes-to-ugly-reality-as.html
Ordinary autocracies don't have the full list of typical Fascism features/bugs.
It's the same path: be a lesser evil than the liberal bureaucracy and people will choose you.
ReplyDeleteThe challenge for bureaucrats is to not be more evil to ordinary citizens than the "fascists" are. They frequently fail.
The lying moron isn't a lesser evil by a long shot.
DeleteYou appear to have your brain rotten away by right wing propaganda. There are flaws in what Americans call "liberalism" (which is actually a kind of establishment social democracy). They could be dealt with by pushing for direct democracy, in the U.S. by joining the primaries and selecting a candidate who stands against the flaws.
Nobody needs to go to arkham asylum to find an alternative to the establishment and its mistakes.
You're a good example of the problem. You'd rather spam insults and denials than recognize normal people's troubles.
DeleteBother to back that up at least a little bit?
DeleteThe US is not a democracy. The elections are just a schtick to pacify the serfs. The elected are only beholden to their donors, because Americans legalized bribery and called it lobbying. As of 2025, they have elected Shrek twice to drain the swamp!
DeleteWhere does illiteracy, christianity and capitalism come into play? Because that's the thing I have noticed about MAGAtards (statistically). A cesspool of flat earthers, vaxxtards, firmament nuts, deus vult blubbers, virgin spergs, anti-intellectuals, cryptobros, steroid addicts, and temporarily embarrassed millionaires. It's hilarious!
ReplyDeleteWipe the foam of your mouth.
ReplyDeleteYour inflationary use of the term "fascist/fascism" tells more about yourself than about Trump.
So, do you have anything to write about the blog posts' contents?
DeleteOr maybe you have an objective metric about how much mentioning Fascists and Fascism is appropriate?
Among US historians, sociologists and other people studying how societies and thus politics work the debate whether the current republican party is fascist is over.
DeleteAnd it's fine to disagree with this notion, these people are used to it. They actually made relevant disagreement a significant part of their process. Evaluating other standpoints is how consensus emerges as the agreed upon least untested theory.
In order to elevate disagreement to relevance, it has to contain an argument that has not been previously disproven and is more substantial than "I don't like this".
When faced with the situation that the vast majority of arguments supporting my position have been refuted several times, I have three options:
- I can find new arguments and have them tested
- I can reevaluate my position
- I can reject discourse as a method to improve society and become an extremist.
Also keep in mind that "I haven't heard that argument" is not equivalent with "that point isn't valid or worthy of consideration".