Wow! This is not the America I thought I knew! 16 minutes of essential listening and, from the sound of it, anyone over there should be extremely careful.
I might be naïve, but honestly, if it walks like a fascist, talks like a fascist and acts like a fascist it probably is fascist.
UK Atheist
I absolutely do not trust that there will be mid-term elections in the U.S. I think the fascist takeover has already been completed. The public is just now catching up.
Some people get hung up on the parallels with Nazi Germany specifically. IIRC it was here that we even had someone (from the UK I think) going on at length about how it was somehow trivializing the depredations of the Nazi regime to compare the US to it – for example, we shouldn’t call ICE torture prisons / opaque detention facilities as “concentration camps” simply because they aren’t gassing people to death in them (yet). Unless and until they match the Nazi list of war crimes it’s somehow dismissive to the victims of the holocaust.
I think that such concerns miss the point, which is what the actual definition of a “concentration camp” is, and that if you wait until it’s a full blown elaboration of the concept, it’s already too late. Plus, no one in their right mind should think that unless you have exact equivalents that you won’t have equally bad outcomes. History doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. Or echoes if you will.
To the OP’s question, yes we are echoing earlier authoritarian regimes, and certainly echoing early Nazi Germany. Just overnight Trump called for the execution (by hanging) of Democrats who simply pointed out that military personnel don’t have to obey unconstitutional orders such as the extrajudicial murders off the coast of Venezuela. And that “I was just following orders” was never a defense for same.
The comparison to Hitler seems to be the go-to over here to for quite a few people. As Mark Twain said, “It is not worth while to try to keep history from repeating itself, for man’s character will always make the preventing of the repetitions impossible.”
Hitler became Fuhrer in 1934, and I’m not out on a limb to say that Germany was no longer a Democracy. Everyone seems to forget that the first fascist regime in history was in Italy under Mussolini, who became Il Duce in 1925. Being the first, he wrote the first playbook…which makes sense as he was a journalist. Ironic, but it was for a Socialist newspaper.
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power”. This is widely attributed to Mussolini. Let that sink in for a moment while you consider the billionaire entrepreneurs Trump surrounds himself with…
Not that the US hasn’t had fascists before. Up to 1941, there were several groups active; The German American Bund, the Silver Legion of America and the Black Legion, to name just a few. After Congress declared war on Germany in 1941 they became outlawed and disbanded accordingly.
Margaret Albright wrote that fascism is a slow creep, not a giant step. One to three years, based on the limited history on the subject.
I think we will have mid-term elections this year. 161 years ago we had a Presidential election during a Civil War. Historically, they never go well for the party in the White House. Depending on the pain inflicted to the American people over the next year, it may even cost the Republicans seats in the Senate.
In order for Trump to form a new Reich, he’ll need to get past the kakistocracy he’s running now. Part of me wonders if the Republicans will tank Trump to save themselves in 2028. He’s a lame duck after 2026…and the more recklessly irresponsible moves he makes the fewer apologists will be around to explain to us how to pick up shit from the clean end.
There’s an old American saying, “Democracy is like two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner.” Trump is beginning to resemble the sheep…
Idiocracy was a documentary.
Do you think Agent Orange and his bootlickers will accept a defeat? My dystopian guess is they’ll just cry “Told you so – the Democrats cheated!” before invalidating the election, mass prosecuting democrats, and Trumpsplain how the US can never have elections again (“That’s why we can’t have nice things”).
There’s a school of thought (and mind you, I don’t know that I buy it even provisionally) that says that Trump has gotten away with as much as he has because the GOP has completely abrogated Congressional oversight that they still, on paper, have the right to perform, and in the process, have made most oversight by the opposition meaningless or infeasible (though the Democrats could have acquitted themselves better this past year). It is this, particularly in view of the inept, unqualified clowns Trump has installed to run the nuts and bolts of the government (the completely in-over-her-head prosecutor charging Comey comes to mind) and the cooperation of the Roberts court, that have given Trump fairly free reign.
But this is changing. Republicans are starting to oppose Trump on things like the Epstein matter, and they are also probably interested in saving their own skin because most of them would (should, or at least could) face prosecution in a Democratic administration. They are seeing that Trump is so off the rails and at times incoherent that he’s becoming a political liability. Also the oligarchs are getting restless over tariffs and such, which means GOP donors are applying pressure. Also as a practical matter many of them must actively hide from their angry constituents and that’s getting old.
I would have thought that Congress would be dissolved or disposed of with mass executions or something, but didn’t have it on my bingo card that they would simply roll over and play dead and not do their job. The theory goes, then, that now that they are even half-assed doing their job, combined with Trump and his regime’s utter lack of discipline or competence, the tide may be turning. Trump fears becoming so lame-duck including losing his majority in one or both houses for a reason.
If Trump were more of a Hitler or even more of a Mussolini, if the country were a little smaller and more manageable, if the populace was a bit more complacent, if the tattered remnants of democratic institutions were just a bit weaker, things might be different, but, according to this line of reasoning, Trump has failed to consolidate power in the ways he needs to and the “good guys” are getting the upper hand.
I shy away from this interpretation because I don’t want any of the opposition to breathe a sigh of relief and “go back to brunch”, because it’s still going to be a struggle, and because there are still ways this could end badly, or regress back to something as bad or worse if we end up with another focus group-obsessed, ineffective, timid, incrementalist Dem administration.
The lame duck moniker is typically the 11 weeks from a President losing an election in November up to January 20th when his successor is sworn in. They lose most of their influence, as most of the focus is now on the new administration waiting to take power.
This is also when every member of Congress who suffered from aphasia during the majority of the administration’s term suddenly regains the power of speech in public. They decry and distance themselves from any documented cover or support they offered said lame duck previously.
Every President experiences this, from Hoover, Nixon, Bush, Biden and soon to be Trump. The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that Republicans will act out of self preservation and slowly begin the process after the 2026 mid-terms. Trump has been an existential threat to everyone, especially any Republican who dares to question or challenge Trump.
After the mid-terms the Republicans are faced with the reality they need to remove the Trump stain by 2028 to remain electable. Trump is term limited Constitutionally. This is the last time he can elected President. Do I really think the courts and senate are going to foment a coup, thereby jeopardizing their power and position, for an aging narcissist who wants to be king? Hell no. Their own self interest will slowly erode support from Trump back to themselves.
Marjorie Taylor Greene is already testing the waters. The House is especially vulnerable, as they are the lower “populist” house of Congress. The Senate is there, as Hamilton intended, to act as a check on populism, so they will be a bit more insulated and reserved in public, but given the opportunity, they will vote to preserve their own self interest.
Warren Buffet used to say “It’s never as good as it looks or bad as it seems”. This is just another example that.
I saw that, and am inclined to agree, so lets instead start talking about totalitarianism, and Trump showing signs of an autocrat in the making. No need for any comparisons with anyone then. So far his behaviour, and more importantly the reactions to it by a lot of the US and the Republican party, is deeply worrying.
Yes, my concern was that putting Nazi Germany into some special category to which nothing can ever be legitimately compared means that no one sees the concern or urgency in arguably “lesser” forms of autocracy. Authoritarinaism is authoritarianism, and it all leads to the same place, regardless of the particular byways and rationalizations that get you there. You do not wait for it to precisely match Nazi Germany or the novel 1984 before you start fighting it.
I do not think Trump is “showing signs” of being an autocrat “in the making”. He is one. He is in some ways not a very successful one; is is more a petulant child than a ruthless dictator and he has not seized power quickly enough to guarantee he can hold onto it. But he is merely the figurehead; he has more psychopathic managers like Stephen Miller doing most of the dirty work and so are arguably more dangerous.
I see signs that the Democratic party is starting, however haltingly, to behave like an actual opposition party, that larger parts of the electorate are unhappy (if not always for the right reasons) and Congress is starting to treat trump less like a magic totem than a political liability. The rats are starting to jump ship. Whether this continues and is built on is the question.
Wow! A lot of replies there, much of it very American which I struggle to understand even when my grip on politics isn’t shaky, and it’d take from here to tomorrow to answer them all so I guess I’ll just have to answer in summary (if that’s even a thing):
CyberLN: I don’t know if there’ll be midterms but even if there are, I suspect he’ll find a way round them.
Mordant: I knew it was bad and it shouldn’t surprise me but Trump wants to hang his opponents for just disagreeing? I also agree that Trump is an autocrat but it’s interesting that you view him as a figurehead as I came to that conclusion last night… mind you, I kinda wonder if Hitler wasn’t also partially the same (the people around him seemed worse than he was).
Cynical1: I remain to be convinced that it isn’t as bad as it seems.
Thanks for all the answers, however I will say this… you guys (your forum) need more damned icons than a heart to react to posts! Just sayin’!
I wrote this (edited slightly) to my brothers this morning: Me? I’m wondering if Trump is more a figurehead and the those surrounding him are the one’s using him to progress their own [uber-right-wing] agendas.
According to that video, he is already striking at targets without explanation claiming they are running drugs and he’s planning to do the same in Venezuela, Hegseth prefers to be known as “The Secretary of War”, there are masked, Nazi-like thugs roaming the streets arresting anyone who doesn’t suit their Aryan-like ideals, the Democrats and anyone funding them are being branded terrorists, the courts are being ignored or stacked in their favour.
At the pub last night, a friend (a pretty clued-up friend, ex-British military officer) reckoned that a NATO signatory, maybe Canada, could be on the list of potential American targets (steel IIRC?); the stuff Canada decided to sell instead to the EU because Trump was fucking about.
War presidents tend to become very popular and can call on legal powers that prevent them being removed… Bush (“W”) certainly became more popular when he started his “War on terror” (Nixon as well?) and although none that I know of have invoked such powers (IANAL, some 19th century act?), I’m inclined to believe that America (and probably the rest of the world) will be at war before Trump’s term is done.
Where the fuck is the “dinosaur killing” asteroid when you need it?
UK Atheist
Coups and revolutions, historically, are economically bad for the country they occur in. If nothing else, the 1% over here doesn’t like losing money…especially most of it.
I would go one step past figurehead to dance card. The Republicans gained power by propping up a potentially demented geriatric. As the Republicans would prefer to retain power after Trump, they will need to address the issue of his behavior and legacy. There’s an old saying, “When an ox moves into a palace, he doesn’t become a king, but the palace becomes a barn.” The ox is getting older and less predicable.
The average tenure for a US Senator is 11.2 years. For a President it averages at 5.24 years. The lesson here is that Senators outlast Presidents by more that 2:1. They don’t need to die on his sword…they just need to outlast him.
Most politicians are more absorbed in fund raising and re-election than governance and public service. For them to latch onto a cause that could potentially destroy them flies in the face of natural selection, IMHO.
If he was alive, you could tell that to George H.W Bush. His approval rating went from 89% right after the Gulf War to 29% around a year later…accounting for his re-election loss. Trump cannot run again, and the odds of the entire Republican caucus just locking step and marching into totalitarianism, to me, is just fear mongering to a liberal confirmation bias.
Trump isn’t running the show and never has been. The current regime can, and may very well go on far longer than trump walks the planet.
Oh, and so many of those 11.2 year Senators will go where the money leads.
Lol! During the first Trump administration a meme went around on exactly this topic, something to the effect “Killer Asteroid 2018 – Just End It Already!”
I think that a President can’t simply go to any old war and expect any lift from it – it has to be a war that’s perceived as “just” or “necessary” in some way – it has to defend against an actual perceived threat or redress a perceived wrong. While the whole Venezuela thing is something Trump is pursuing for his most devoted base, claiming they are the source of drugs coming here (they are basically not, and certainly not directly or in any way such that attacking Venezueala would massively stem the tide; and certainly not in these small boats that aren’t even capable of reaching Florida with multiple refuelings). Just as with Bush the US could not actually demonstrate that they were interdicting “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq (at all), nothing will change, except for the worse, for America if it attacks Venezuela. So I agree they are miscalculating here; the politics of resentment and cartoonish blame will only work for part of the base for a short time. Meanwhile the expense and lack of results and the potential to draw other actors into the conflict are things the public will quickly tire of.
Also the military is not going to be thrilled to be a tool for a fool, either. There may be outright insubordination there, or at least “quiet quitting”.
None of that makes such adventurism anything but very, very dangerous, of course.
It’s a legitimate fear. They would happily do it if they thought they could get away with it. Obviously they thought so until recently. It’s still subject to change. What moral concerns exist are almost exclusively absent on the GOP side of things IMO. Their self interest feels threatened right now by their political instincts. Too much public pushback, too muscular an opposition movement, and it is perhaps becoming clear to them that the legal and institutional realities are holding … enough, anyway. But they are also greedy for power and their hubris could get the better of them, so I’m not relaxing just yet.
Cynical1: You know your country better than I, I don’t really get your political system at all… then again, while I do get ours, I no longer approve of it. One man, one vote might be democratic but it no longer works… like the US, the lunatics are running the asylum (in the UK almost). I think you’re wrong WRT to Trump not being able to run again, that IIRC was an amendment introduced by FDR, so he only needs to get that overturned, doesn’t he? And then there’s the war thing, I don’t know much outside of what my friend said, the 19th century law that can allow a president to suspend elections or some such. I reckon he’ll stop at nothing to stay in power… he’s clearly a sociopath.
Mordant: I hope you’re right about the military.
UK Atheist
The current regime relies on puppet masters, or those just running in to grab whatever they can while the cat is away. I agree, much like Reagan, there is the voice that whispers in the ear that pulls the strings. Trump is just the face on the brand.
But that face is important. Who could pick up the mantel and assume the same level of fealty and submission that Trump does?
I can’t think of anyone. Everyone of these MAGA clones have made serious enemies in Washington…and Washington has a long memory and always evens the score.
The military certainly doesn’t seem to be buying in on a coup. I would find it very difficult to imagine a successful coup without the military.
The Kakistocracy Clown Car will fight and manipulate their way for as long as they can. They have built a small enterprise from grift and hyperbole. They all have a scam and sooner or later one of them will forget the share with the other children and the rest will turn on them. I give them credit for getting to where they are, but I give them small odds on holding it.
They are opportunists, not strategists. Everyone imagines three dimensional chess in their actions…but they’re just playing marbles…and losing them… They don’t plan to fail, they just fail to plan.
The 22nd Amendment is still in place. It specifically states: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”
It was only ratified in 1951 as a result a push by Republicans in response to FDR winning 4 consecutive terms. Ironic, isn’t it? Nixon toyed with how to get around it and I’m sure Trump has some lackey working on it, too.
And constitutional amendments have become basically impossible to pass in our highly polarized political environment. Even before that it took years for enough states to ratify an amendment. The bar is fairly high, as it arguably should be. The same thing applies to amending or rescinding amendments. It’s a nontrivial project.
Thanks, now I know what the amendment was. I actually thought it was FDR who introduced it.
Maybe nontrivial but I would have thought pretty much the same about Roe vs Wade.
UK Atheist.
The reason people are drawing those parallels to the emergence of Nazism in Germany, is because those parallels are real. Fake appeals to variations of “Godwin’s Law” don’t wash, when the facts point inexorably to this.
Though some of the parallels in question aren’t exact. For example, Trump is no Hitler. Hitler, however much one might loathe him and his legacy, did have the ability to produce Mein Kampf, the text of which he dictated to fellow Nazi Rudolf Hess, while the two shared a cell in Spandau after the Munich putsch. Hitler did possess the ability to present something resembling a coherent philosophy to disillusioned and fanatics alike, and possessed at least something resembling basic organisational ability. Admittedly, as time passed, he was able to delegate the treacle of detail to subordinates, and for a time, chose subordinates that in some cases weren’t complete and utter crackpots - Albert Speer most certainly cannot be called a crackpot, more a cynical opportunist, and one with considerable skill in several areas, as Neave reveals in the book I cite so often at this juncture.
Trump, on the other hand, is far closer to a less well known but, if anything, even more disgusting figure - namely, one Julius Streicher. Streicher was hanged at Nuremberg for war crimes and crimes against humanity, but his visible political role was minor. He was far more virulent behind the scenes, however, being responsible for the Nazi “newspaper” Der Stürmer, and various vicious pieces of anti-Semitic propaganda, including Der Giftpilz, though even in this respect, Streicher, despite having the lowest IQ of all the defendants at Nuremberg, still outstrips Trump in the cognition department by a country mile.
So, what are the parallels here?
First, from Neave’s account of the Nuremberg Trials, we observe the following passages devoted to Streicher:
Page 86:
Then, on page 87, we have:
Then, on page 88, we have:
Delving into the relevant chapter more deeply, we learn that there are the following direct parallels between Trump and Streicher:
[1] Both were financially corrupt to the core. Streicher was arrested by the Nazis themselves, for engaging in egregious embezzlement and plundering of stolen Jewish property. Trump, of course, has a fulminating track record of grift and financial malfeasance on an epic scale.
[2] Both were rampant sex predators. Streicher was tried on several occasions (including at Nuremberg pre-1945) for slander, sadism and rape, by the Nazi authorities themselves. Trump is a known and well-documented sex criminal, who has only escaped justice because of the warped application of justice in the USA, which allows rich white men to get away with virtually anything.
[3] Both were fulminating racists of the most lowbrow order. Streicher was instrumental in providing the propaganda background that made the Holocaust possible. Trump, likewise, is responsible for hate incitement against various vulnerable ethnic groups that has led already to atrocities that can correctly be described as crimes against humanity.
[4] Both presided over nameless horrors. Streicher presided over Kristallnacht, the destruction of Jewish life up to and including the extermination camps, and encouraged others to vent incited hate in murderous fashion. Trump has presided over the ICE horrors, and recently, has openly called for political opponents to be executed, just for being political opponents.
The data is pretty much impossible to avoid.
Roe v Wade was a SCOTUS decision, not a constitutional amendment. Any court decision is just a reversal away with the “right” judiciary. The conservative justices paid lip service to “respecting settled law” or precedent when they were appointed but then went right ahead and reversed it anyway.
