advertisement


Post-Trump: Biden President Elect II (Trump tantrums, riots etc)

Status
Not open for further replies.
tones said:
Not quite true - the "prosperity gospel" originated in the mid-20th century, although hints can be seen back in the 19th. The original religious settlers came to the New World to escape persecution and to practise freely their particular religious beliefs. Many of them saw this as the founding of the New Jerusalem. The Founding Fathers, none of them particularly religious (many at best deists), were careful to preserve a great degree of religious freedom, including the lack of an established church, like the Anglican Church in England. Ironically, an established church did arise - America itself. The belief in exceptionalism, going back to the 19th century's Manifest Destiny, and the belief that, with hard work, anything was possible for anyone in the USA, and, if you weren't successful it was because you didn't try sufficiently hard. This fused with some religious beliefs in the mid-2oth century to produce today's prosperity gospel.
Click to expand...

Little House on the Prairie
 
Looking at the impeachment case so far the evidence is so compelling I can’t possibly see what argument Trump’s lawyers will use. Perhaps they will try the Chewbacca defense?
 
andrewd said:
Looking at the impeachment case so far the evidence is so compelling I can’t possibly see what argument Trump’s lawyers will use. Perhaps they will try the Chewbacca defense?
Click to expand...

The audience is a bunch of amoral chancers who hope to ride some of his base. They are gambling on future legal cases taking him out of the game so they don't have to look disloyal. Pathetic is the word.

I do hope the Dems don't waste these years and make sure the anti-voter suppression and electoral reforms badly needed to make sure these creatures are never elected on minority tickets in future are put in place.
 
Yank said:
He's both. Fascism is a tactic he uses to promote himself.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Same with Johnson. The thing the articles in the New Statesman misses entirely is the fact this is a global movement that both Trump and Johnson may have cashed-in on for personal gain, but with absolutely catastrophic effects on their countries. Le Penn is the same thing, as is Geert Wilders. They are all over the place. The fascist behind the whole thing would appear to Steve Bannon. All roads seem to link back to there with the Tea Party, Breitbart, UKIP, Farage/Banks etc.

Fascism is a very well studied and defined thing. It has a clear language of division, scapegoating, nationalism, xenophobia, isolation etc. “Take back control”, “Make [nation] great again” etc are tired old far-right phases and concepts. As is the tacit enablement of the disenfranchised racist and violent fringes that exist within all populations (Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, EDL, Britain First etc). Trump, Farage, May & Johnson have all given this element the quiet nod for years now, actively targeting them with nationalist and xenophobic rhetoric, even chanting far-right slogans “take back control”, parading ‘go home vans’, posters of fleeing refugees likened to vermin, promises to ramp up security and authoritarianism etc. It is all fascism. This language and rhetoric is too well documented for it to be anything else. The spoilt wealthy oligarch elite such as Trump, Farage and Johnson may be playing with it for personal gain, but that doesn’t stop it being exactly what it is. Does it being a lazy unimaginative cover-version of fascism make it any less fascist?
 
Hook said:
In his book “The Anatomy of Fascism”, Robert Paxton listed common traits he saw among fascist leaders:

- A sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of traditional solutions.

T***p has totally remade the GOP in his own image. It is now a populism, not conservatism, that drives their agenda.

- The superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason.

His total disregard for the truth, and the trust he places in his own gut instinct, captures this one well.

- The belief of one group that it is the victim, justifying any action.

Many in Trump’s base feel threatened by immigrants, so Trump bans Muslims and builds a border wall.

- The need for authority by natural leaders (always male) culminating in a national chief who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s destiny.

This seems like quite a good description of T***p’s boastful claims.

- The beauty of violence and the efficacy of will when they are devoted to the group’s success.

Until the police actions during the BLM protests, an argument could be made that T***p did not check this box. But January 6 pretty much sealed the deal.
Click to expand...
The thing that really brought this home to me was the Republican Convention where Trump was renominated. The Party had no policy platform - none whatsoever, which, I think, is unheard of. Its sole point was that The Man was Our Man, and had to be re-elected. And whatever The Man said was what had to happen. It was a terrifying illustration of just how thoroughly Trump had taken over the Party.

Again, it reminds me of Hitler. Hitler was a lazy man, with no interest whatsoever in the minutiae of policy - he made pronouncements from on high, and individual departments were expected to "work towards the Führer". The departments often ended up competing against each other. It is sometimes amazing that the Nazi state worked at all.
 
Last edited:
Trump messing around with fascist and authoritarian rhetoric and ideas for personal gain is, of course, going to enable all sorts of fascist elements (proud boys, etc.) and outcomes. But I don't think that makes him a fascist let alone part of a movement. All those fascist stormtroopers from Jan. 6 got exactly zero help from the Orange Fuhrer once their immediate use to him was over. At the point anyone becomes a liability to Trump they are going under the bus faster than you can say fascist coup.

The essence of Trump is that he doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself, so the idea that he is some kind of nationalist is surprising to me. Instead of the traditional fascist idea of loving the nation so much you are willing to die for it (and become a martyr), Trump famously said of the US military dead "Why would they do it? What's in it for them?".

I do think there is a trend in more authoritarian regimes and many of these are ideological (Poland, Hungary, Brazil, etc.) but I think this is as much a function of the economic problems of 2008 and the secular stagnation that has followed. I don't think Trump is anything to do with this though, other than for mutual benefit. If these populist governments were in more leftist nations I suspect we would be seeing a renaissance of Tankie regimes and Trump would have been just as happy to attach himself to one of those if it brought him to power.
 
Impeachment trial? It's no trial of any sort! Overwhelming proof of guilt, including TV footage of him committing the crime and of his "inbred piglets with cloven hooves" carrying out his wishes will be presented and then his GOP scum will find him not guilty! How is it any different to "Dave the axeman Smith" going on trial for murder at the Old Bailey and being allowed to have his mam, dad, 4 brothers and his best mates as the jury? It's a laughing stock!
He needs to be on trial in a criminal court.
 
matthewr said:
The essence of Trump is that he doesn't give a shit about anyone but himself, so the idea that he is some kind of nationalist is surprising to me. Instead of the traditional fascist idea of loving the nation so much you are willing to die for it (and become a martyr), Trump famously said of the US military dead "Why would they do it? What's in it for them?".
Click to expand...

I agree entirely. He is a narcissistic sociopath and is likely largely incapable of ideological thinking. He is certainly deeply racist, but beyond that he’s just a wealthy narcissistic thug. The point I’m trying to make is both Trump and the remarkably similar Johnson are merely the figureheads/frontmen for something bigger that is happening globally. It is the underlying aspect that is the problem. A timeline that can be linked back to the ideology that started with Steve Bannon, Arron Banks, the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and others. Trump and Johnson are both narcissistic media stars who will do pretty much anything for attention and power, and this movement gave them a popularist hard-right trajectory to ride. The ideology is very real and has now spread into Q-Anon conspiracy theory/religion. This is a radicalised far-right ideology and it is not going anywhere. The only evidence one needs is to watch the current impeachment process and to note that the majority of Republicans are about to defend the utterly indefensible. It is rooted deeply here in our Conservative Party too. The links are well documented, the divisive nationalist rhetoric, contempt for both law and order and public scrutiny identical.

PS In the most recent example the Tories have just spaffed £600k of public money we paid in good faith via taxation in an attempt attempt to silence public scrutiny of their corrupt architect Dominic Cummings in court (Guardian). It is all the same thing from the same alt-right playbook. The same contempt Trump showed the press and democratic process, the same contempt Johnson showed parliament, the queen, the High Court etc. It just goes on and on.
 
Sadly the likely not guilty verdict will only enhance his standing with his followers. Maybe the Dem’s shouldn’t have bothered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top