Is Trumpism a flavour of fascism (and is it useful to call it that)?

First, a disclaimer. I am not seeking to insult or label people. My goal is to start a dialogue about a development that deeply concerns me. This development is not US-specific, but is occurring in Russia, Israel, Europe and undoubtedly other countries as well. However, since the US seems to be drawing a lot of attention lately, it seems logical to focus on the Trump administration.

Let’s start with the question in the title. During a previous discussion with TSZ-residents dazz and Erik, I initially resisted the “fascism” label for the Trump adminstration. In my opinion, that label is often applied too eagerly and I wanted to preserve the term for movements that objectively fit the term. The fascists from beginning of the 20th century were militarist and resorted to violence, for example through paramilitary forces such as the infamous Sturmabteilung in Germany. This is way more radical than their modern far-right counterparts, such as the German Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) or the French Rassemblement National, which mostly seek political influence through democratic and parliamentary means. But what then makes a political party or movement a fascist one? The characteristics of fascism I had to memorize for history class in high school were:

  • Ultranationalism
  • Admiration for strong charismatic leaders
  • Preoccupation with racial purity
  • Anti-liberalism
  • Populism
  • Militarism

The striving for racial purity is currently replaced by nativism, but otherwise the Trump administration is ticking a lot of boxes here. Still, I noted a lack of militarism (The “no new wars” claim). Also the fact that experts were not using that label weighed strongly in my opinion that it was premature to openly call modern far-right movements fascist. That time I said:

Of course, I am not a historian nor a politologist so once the experts start calling the Trump administration a fascist regime I will gladly follow suit.

Fast forward one year. The Trump regime broke its campaign promise and has started two illegal military conflicts, one in Venezuela and one in Iran. It has threatened both Canada and Denmark, two allied NATO members, with military action. The regime has also proved to be hostile towards its own citizens: Two peaceful demonstrants have been executed by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the Minneapolis protests. Note that ICE is beginning to look a lot like a paramilitary force. Also, i have since learned that the Department of Defense has been renamed “Department of War”. I cannot decide whether that is more creepy or more childish. So far for “no militarism”.

Importantly, I found that professional politologists started openly calling the Trump regime fascist. Recently, I read the book “Dit is Fascisme” (no translation needed, I trust) by Rosan Smits. Smits is a politologist who for years researched radicalization and violence in war zones. Currently, she is adjunct editor-in-chief at the online news platform De Correspondent. Her ideas are strongly influenced by historian Robert Paxton and philosopher Jason Stanley. Robert Paxton has been specializing in Vichy France and fascism. Like me, he initially resisted the “fascism” label for Trumpism, but changed his mind after the Capitol attack. Jason Stanly wrote the book “How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them” in which he outlined ten “pillars of fascism”. These people I definitely regard as experts in relevant fields. In the book, Rosan Smits argues that it is not useful to distinguish between radical right, right-wing extremism and fascism. Rather we should think of these movements as consecutive steps in a progression towards ever more radical fascism. She compares this to a plan-of-action (draaiboek) that all proto-fascist movements go through. She has no problem calling the Trump administration fascist. In fact, this is even the title of chapter 2 in the book: “Het fascistische regime-Trump”. Again, I trust this does not need translation.

So now I am not sure whether it is right to call the Trump administration fascist. There is little doubt that Trumpism sports several hallmarks of classical fascism, such as an appeal to a mythical past (Make America Great Again), anti-intellectualism, a culture of victimhood and violent hostility towards critical counterforces. Therefore, it seems defensible to call Trumpism a form of fascism. On the other hand, the term “fascism” seems to generate more heat than light, often rendering reasoned debate impossible. Therefore, it could be more useful to focus on the actions of the adminstration than trying to affix a label to it.

Regardless of whether you agree or disagree, I would appreciate if people could do their best to create a “reasoned debate” in the thread. That is, I would like to hear the reasons you have for agreeing or disagreeing with the premise of the post. A discussion that only feeds on fear and anger will only serve as fertile soil for fascism, whatever you take that to be.

239 thoughts on “Is Trumpism a flavour of fascism (and is it useful to call it that)?

  1. colewd, to Corneel:

    Your sources were probably biased. Newsom is a terrible governor and is clearly a money raising machine which he along getting elected is all he focuses on.

    Your reasoning is that “Trump and I think ‘Newscum’ is a terrible governor, so it’s OK for Trump to break the law by invading LA against the wishes of the governor, the mayor, the chief of police, and the citizens”? Also, “Your sources were probably biased” appears to mean “your sources disagree with what Daddy says.”

    There are these things called “facts”, Bill. You might want to acquaint yourself with them.

    The protest was violent and beyond the capability of local law enforcement.

    The protest was fully within the capability of local law enforcement, and the police chief said so explicitly. Trump lied about that:

    If we weren’t there, if we didn’t bring in the National Guard and the Marines, you would probably have a city that was burning to the ground. You would have had a big problem there, if we weren’t — in fact, the police chief said so much if you look at what his statements were. He said “we’re very lucky to have had them.”

    And:

    The head of the police in Los Angeles, a good man, I hear a good man. But he was actually saying we really did need this help. It had gotten away from them. It had long gotten away, and we gave it to him.

    Those are complete fabrications. Asked about Trump’s claims, the police chief said:

    No, we were not in a position to request the National Guard… We’re nowhere near a level where we would be reaching out to the governor for the National Guard at this stage.

    Trump lied about that because he knew that people like you would buy it. He regards you as a sucker that he can freely lie to in order to manipulate you. Sadly, you’ve proven him right.

    The data I have at this point is that the LA protests were not peaceful and resulted in property damage.

    The law doesn’t permit the president to send in troops because of mere property damage. Also, Trump lied to you about the extent of the unrest. He said this regarding his invasion:

    …if we had not done so, Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated.

    The actual area involved? Less than five blocks of downtown LA, which is less than 0.005% of the area of the city. Does that sound like the city was on the brink of “obliteration”? Trump knew he could lie about it and that people like you, whom he doesn’t respect, would fall for it. He wanted power over LA and needed an excuse to justify breaking the law, and you bought it.

    He did the same thing in Portland, claiming that the city was “war-ravaged” and saying “Portland is burning to the ground, it’s insurrectionists all over the place.” In reality, only two city blocks were affected. The governor, the mayor and the police chief all said they didn’t need Trump’s help, which is obvious when you see what the protests actually looked like. Does that seem “war-ravaged” to you?

    Trump just wanted power, and he was lying in order to get it. Do you support that?

    Your information sources look highly biased at this point. Does this concern you?

    To which I reply: Your information sources look highly biased at this point. Does this concern you?

  2. colewd: property damage

    Okay, I think this is the moment where I need to step out of this discussion. I do wonder what you were going to prompt grok with to justify the Minneapolis killings. Perhaps “Were Renée Good and Alex Pretti looking at ICE agents in a funny way”?

  3. Allan Miller: My demeanour on reading these exchanges becomes more and more like your avatar….

    Well, we know how these discussions eventually turn out. I do confess that it is a lot more unsettling now then when we were discussing creationism.

  4. One TV opinion show, which shall not be named, has spent months showing, once a week, peaceful protests from cities all over the country. Many of these were of the national “no kings” variety, but some were protesting ICE prisons, or deportation airlines, or just walking around carrying signs. NONE of these were violent, nor was there any property damage.

    But of course, Fox News does not cover such things. Fox News barely mentioned the 5-8 million protesters on the No Kings days. Fox News is too busy searching for some low-level crime committed by an illegal immigrant (or a negro).

  5. Corneel,

    Okay, I think this is the moment where I need to step out of this discussion. I do wonder what you were going to prompt grok with to justify the Minneapolis killings. Perhaps “Were Renée Good and Alex Pretti looking at ICE agents in a funny way”?

    I am wondering how this relates to property damage? What’s important IMO is that we understand truth vs spin in order do think critically as Flint advocates.

  6. keiths,

    Your reasoning is that “Trump and I think ‘Newscum’ is a terrible governor, so it’s OK for Trump to break the law by invading LA against the wishes of the governor, the mayor, the chief of police, and the citizens”?

    My knowledge is that Newsom is terrible governor separate from Trumps opinion. I live in California and have to deal with poor fiscal management high taxes and a budget that won’t balance and projects like the new rail system that are not executed on. People are leaving the state which does not make sense except for the management of the state. Bottom line is the Democrats are tolerating very weak leaders. Fortunately we were able to fix this in San Francisco. Hopefully Los Angeles with follow San Francisco’s lead.

  7. colewd:

    My knowledge is that Newsom is terrible governor separate from Trumps opinion.

    I didn’t say anything about where you got your opinion. I said:

    Your reasoning is that “Trump and I think ‘Newscum’ is a terrible governor, so it’s OK for Trump to break the law by invading LA against the wishes of the governor, the mayor, the chief of police, and the citizens”?

    What does anyone’s opinion of Newsom have to do with whether it’s OK for the president to invade Los Angeles, an American city? Troops weren’t needed or wanted. State and local officials, including the police chief, made that clear to Trump. It’s illegal to use troops for domestic law enforcement. Sending troops exacerbates tensions.

    How on earth do you get from “I think Newsom is a bad governor” to “therefore it was OK for Trump to invade”?

  8. colewd:

    property damage

    Corneel:

    Okay, I think this is the moment where I need to step out of this discussion. I do wonder what you were going to prompt grok with to justify the Minneapolis killings. Perhaps “Were Renée Good and Alex Pretti looking at ICE agents in a funny way”?

    colewd:

    I am wondering how this relates to property damage?

    I believe he was pointing out the absurdity of you asking Grok if property had been damaged, as if mere property damage would justify the federal invasion of a major American city. It’s as absurd as asking Grok if Good and Pretti had looked at ICE agents funny, as if that would justify their murders.

    What’s important IMO is that we understand truth vs spin in order do think critically as Flint advocates.

    Your interlocutors have been doing that all along. Are you finally catching up, and do you now agree that truth matters? Even if it isn’t complimentary to your Dear Leader?

    Let’s start with this: do you acknowledge that Trump lied when he said

    If we weren’t there, if we didn’t bring in the National Guard and the Marines, you would probably have a city that was burning to the ground. You would have had a big problem there, if we weren’t — in fact, the police chief said so much if you look at what his statements were. He said “we’re very lucky to have had them.”

    And:

    The head of the police in Los Angeles, a good man, I hear a good man. But he was actually saying we really did need this help. It had gotten away from them. It had long gotten away, and we gave it to him.

    The police chief refuted that:

    No, we were not in a position to request the National Guard… We’re nowhere near a level where we would be reaching out to the governor for the National Guard at this stage.

    Troops weren’t needed and there was zero danger of LA “burning to the ground” or being “obliterated”, but Trump thought it would sound better if he lied about that and pretended that the police chief had asked him for federal help.

    Do you acknowledge that he was lying, or has distinguishing truth from lies suddenly lost its appeal?

  9. Harry Enten just pointed out that across all of the major polls, not a single one has shown Trump’s net approval in positive territory since March 29, 2025. That’s 413 days underwater.

  10. keiths: I believe he was pointing out the absurdity of you asking Grok if property had been damaged, as if mere property damage would justify the federal invasion of a major American city.

    There is that, but also the prompt clearly showed that colewd had already decided that deploying the National Guard was justified, but didn´t quite have his excuse ready yet.

  11. colewd,

    My knowledge is that Newsom is terrible governor ….

    Textbook case of NDS you have there, Sir.

  12. Allan Miller: Textbook case of NDS you have there, Sir.

    I was wondering why colewd reacted so violently to this guy, so I looked him up.

    As governor, Newsom has focused on infrastructure and housing, climate, gun control and LGBTQ rights.

    Ah … I see.

  13. Corneel,

    I was wondering why colewd reacted so violently to this guy, so I looked him up.

    He may have focused on several things but he accomplished nothing. He is all about raising money but his California record may have destroyed his political career.

  14. Corneel,

    There is that, but also the prompt clearly showed that colewd had already decided that deploying the National Guard was justified, but didn´t quite have his excuse ready yet.

    It was justified because local law enforcement was overwhelmed and poorly supported by the local and state leadership.

  15. colewd:

    It was justified because local law enforcement was overwhelmed and poorly supported by the local and state leadership.

    None of that is true. Law enforcement wasn’t overwhelmed, they were being supported by local and state leadership, and the invasion wasn’t justified.

    I covered this already. I don’t know whether the problem is that you’re not reading my comments, or whether it’s that you’re reading them and promptly discounting them because they don’t conform to the propaganda you’ve been fed by right-wing sources and by Trump himself.

    Read the police chief’s words:

    No, we were not in a position to request the National Guard… We’re nowhere near a level where we would be reaching out to the governor for the National Guard at this stage.

    That’s crystal clear, and it means that Trump was lying when he said:

    If we weren’t there, if we didn’t bring in the National Guard and the Marines, you would probably have a city that was burning to the ground. You would have had a big problem there, if we weren’t — in fact, the police chief said so much if you look at what his statements were. He said “we’re very lucky to have had them.”

    And:

    The head of the police in Los Angeles, a good man, I hear a good man. But he was actually saying we really did need this help. It had gotten away from them. It had long gotten away, and we gave it to him.

    Trump lied about because he wanted to justify the invasion. It was a power grab, and wannabe dictators like power. Trump didn’t care about the citizens of LA, just as he didn’t care about the citizens of Minneapolis. Trump cared about Trump, and power is what makes Trump happy. Remember this?

    TRUMP CAUGHT ON CAMERA: says he wants “his people” to obey him like in North Korea

    That’s pure lust for power.

    I know this is distressing to you. You’re a cult member, and Trump is your leader. He’s your hero, and you want (or rather, need) to see him as good, and honest, and working on behalf of the people rather than for his own personal gain. None of that is true, and we prove it on a daily basis here. That upsets you. You dislike reality and wish it would go away.

    Do you want to live like that? Wouldn’t you rather have the courage to face the truth, whether or not it makes you feel good? Do you really want to spend your life in the warm cocoon of the Trump cult, happy but delusional?

  16. I noted that there have been thousands of protests, and the ONLY violence or property damage has occurred when ICE is there provoking it. I wondered if Bill could grasp the difference between a handful of violent protests with ICE present and 10,000 peaceful protests without ICE present. I wondered if Bill could find a common denominator there. As expected, I got silence.

  17. colewd: He may have focused on several things but he accomplished nothing.

    That’s not what is claimed in the wikipedia lemma.

    In August 2004, the Supreme Court of California annulled the marriages Newsom had authorized, as they conflicted with state law. Still, Newsom’s unexpected move brought national attention to the issue of same-sex marriage, solidifying political support for him in San Francisco and in the LGBTQ+ community.

    And same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in California, right? Does that not count as an accomplishment in your book?

  18. colewd: It was justified because local law enforcement was overwhelmed and poorly supported by the local and state leadership.

    As I said before, and what you chose to ignore, a federal judge found Trump’s use of troops in Los Angeles to be illegal.

    Judge Breyer’s assessment was blunt, however. President Trump, he wrote, had exceeded the limits of federal laws that generally prohibit the use of the military for domestic law enforcement and had talked about doing it again in other U.S. cities, including others in California, necessitating immediate action.

    The administration, he found, “systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles.” Those actions, he added, violated laws that had been in place since the late 1800s.

    And, he said, the administration’s rationale for the deployment fell far short of the threshold for military action.

    Mr. Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Department of Defense “deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, ostensibly to quell a rebellion and ensure that federal immigration law was enforced,” he wrote. “There were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence. Yet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.”

  19. Corneel,

    And same-sex marriage is now legally recognized in California, right? Does that not count as an accomplishment in your book?

    I acknowledge this is an accomplishment. Can you name another? Are there any that improved the lives of most Californians?

  20. colewd, to Corneel:

    I acknowledge this is an accomplishment. Can you name another? Are there any that improved the lives of most Californians?

    I know you’d prefer to talk about Newsom, but I’m still curious about why you think Trump’s regime might be both fascist and supremely democratic:

    As far as the discussion goes ” Is Trumpism a flavour of Fascism”. it may be but it also maybe the ideal attempt at democracy.

  21. keiths,

    I know you’d prefer to talk about Newsom, but I’m still curious about why you think Trump’s regime might be both fascist and supremely democratic:

    Hi Keiths
    I am not sure how you discuss a subject while evading all discussion of alternative comparisons.
    Do you know of a perfect candidate where avoiding discussion of alternatives is a logical possibility?
    We know you hate Trump this is established at this point. Where do we go from here to have a productive discussion about public policy?

  22. colewd,

    Pretty ridiculous, Bill. To evaluate (for example) Trump’s appearance on both sides of a suit that he settled out of court with himself fot $1.7bn, which he then proposes to use to pay J6 rioters… is it really necessary to compare this with someone who does not do this? Like, everybody else? Good job you have Objective Morality on your side to tell you this is Absolutely Fine.

  23. colewd:

    I am not sure how you discuss a subject while evading all discussion of alternative comparisons.

    It’s easy. Suppose the question is whether the Chevy Vega came in a 4-wheel-drive version. You post the question to a gearhead forum and the response is “WTF? It was never offered with 4-wheel-drive. You were lucky to get 2-wheel-drive out of it.” Asked and answered without comparing the Vega to the Pinto, the Countach, or any other vehicle.

    Or suppose the question is whether Edward the Confessor was ruling England at the time of the Norman Conquest. You consult some history books and learn that no, he died just nine months before the invasion. Notice that it isn’t necessary to compare him to Harold Godwinson or any other king. You just need to know whether he was on the throne at the time.

    Now suppose the question is whether the Trump regime qualifies as fascist, which happens to be the topic of this thread. It isn’t necessary to compare it to the governments of Bolivia or Kyrgyzstan. We just need to see whether it has the characteristics of a fascist regime. You started to do that when you wrote

    What evidence would we look at to determine if someone was trying to establish a totalitarian state? The first move might be to make sure the population could not change the current regime. Do you agree?

    Another move might be to sensor free speech. Another might be to limit the balance of power by reducing the power of alternative branches of government.

    I showed you that the Trump regime ticks all those boxes. Then you lost interest.

    If the question is whether the Trump regime is “an ideal attempt at democracy”, as you put it, we can address that by considering the range of democratic values and asking ourselves whether the regime supports and promotes them. No need to ask whether Sparta or the Ming dynasty were democratic.

    Do you know of a perfect candidate where avoiding discussion of alternatives is a logical possibility?

    This again? Trump is not a candidate. He isn’t running for office. Newsom is not his opponent. We don’t need to decide which of the two to vote for. We’re just talking about whether the Trump regime is fascist and whether it is “an ideal attempt at democracy.”

    We know you hate Trump this is established at this point. Where do we go from here to have a productive discussion about public policy?

    You wouldn’t have bailed out of our discussion of the “Big Beautiful Bill” if you were truly interested in discussing public policy. What you’re trying to do instead, as you’ve done repeatedly, is to change the subject away from Trump. You’re in the uncomfortable position of worshiping a man whom you cannot defend, and since you can’t defend him, you’d much prefer to criticize someone else. It’s classic whataboutism.

    Back to the topic at hand. Why do you think Trump’s regime might be both fascist and supremely democratic?

  24. Allan Miller,

    Pretty ridiculous, Bill. To evaluate (for example) Trump’s appearance on both sides of a suit that he settled out of court with himself fot $1.7bn, which he then proposes to use to pay J6 rioters… is it really necessary to compare this with someone who does not do this? Like, everybody else? Good job you have Objective Morality on your side to tell you this is Absolutely Fine.

    Sure this is essentially compensation to people he politically supports. Are you claiming that Trump is the only one doing this? Are you claiming democrats do not riot? Are you ignoring the Fauci and Hunter pardons? You guys are like my wife who used to yell at our black lab for sniffing around our food garbage bin 🙂

    keiths,

    I showed you that the Trump regime ticks all those boxes. Then you lost interes

    Your link does not work. Please at some point demonstrate that you contain a single objective bone in your body.

  25. colewd: I acknowledge this is an accomplishment. Can you name another? Are there any that improved the lives of most Californians?

    Believe it or not, but I do not follow Californian politics all that closely. However, I’ll take someone improving the lives of some people over someone who destroys lives anytime.

  26. colewd,

    Sure this is essentially compensation to people he politically supports.

    And you see no moral issue with him settling with himself out of court to raise these funds from the taxpayer? And your justification for this is “someone else might do it too”? I guess rape is OK too. Since other people rape. Objective Morality, Ladies and Gentlemen.

  27. colewd:

    Your link does not work.

    Yes, it does. I checked it after I posted it and I’ve confirmed that it’s still working.

    Please at some point demonstrate that you contain a single objective bone in your body.

    Please at some point demonstrate that I’ve made any factually incorrect statements about Trump during our discussion, which has been going on for more than a year. Why make accusations that you can’t back up?

  28. Here’s a list of 14 characteristics of fascism, compiled in 2003 by the writer Lawrence Britt. Britt isn’t a political scientist or an expert on fascism as far as I know, but his list is a useful starting point. Here are the items, each of which is accompanied by a few examples of how the Trump regime fits:

    1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

    Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

    Playing “Proud to Be an American” at every rally, that photo of Trump literally hugging the flag, the slogans ‘Make America Great Again’ and ‘America First’, choosing “American Flag Blue” as the color for the reflecting pool, MAGA types running around calling themselves “patriots”…

    2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

    Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

    We don’t have executions yet, thankfully, although Trump threatened to hang the six lawmakers who pointed out that soldiers don’t have to follow illegal orders. Deplorable conditions in ICE detention facilities, illegal deportations of people to a hellhole prison in El Salvador where they are tortured, separating immigrant families, stating that the government should be able to deport American citizens…

    3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

    The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

    Characterizing Democrats as “the enemy within” and “the party of hate, evil, and Satan”, saying “they hate our country”, painting immigrants as criminals, referring to “Barack Hussein Obama”…

    4. Supremacy of the Military

    Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

    Record high Pentagon budget, Trump saying that we can’t afford to fund child care, Medicaid and Medicare because “we have to take care of one thing: military protection”…

    5. Rampant Sexism

    The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

    Trump has appointed women to his cabinet. However, he’s fired three of them without firing a single one of the equally incompetent men, floated a national abortion ban, singled out female reporters for abuse, bashed trans people…

    6. Controlled Mass Media

    Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

    Weaponized the FCC, tried to get comedians fired for criticizing him, extorted CBS, filed suit against the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, called unfavorable war coverage “treason” and ordered Todd Blanche to prosecute journalists…

    7. Obsession with National Security

    Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

    Invented bogus national emergencies to circumvent the law, claimed that we need to own Greenland for national security reasons, justified the Iran war by claiming they were on the verge of having a nuclear weapon…

    8. Religion and Government are Intertwined

    Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.

    Trump pretending to be a Christian, reading Bible verses on video, holding up a Bible in front of a church, allocating millions of taxpayer dollars for an religious rally on the Mall…

    9. Corporate Power is Protected

    The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

    Trump coddling tech billionaires, massive tax cuts for the ultrawealthy, approving the sale of AI chips to China…

    10. Labor Power is Suppressed

    Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

    Trump fighting against federal workers’ unions and collective bargaining rights, dismantling worker safety regulations, pressuring companies to abandon DEI programs…

    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

    Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

    Taking over the Kennedy Center, extorting universities by cutting research funding, revoking the visas of students who have participated in protests or expressed political opinions that the administration doesn’t like…

    12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment

    Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

    ICE operating with impunity, being told they have unlimited immunity, being protected after the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti…

    13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

    Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

    Trump settling a bogus lawsuit with himself for $1.8 billion, the Qatari jet, increasing his net worth by over $3 billion so far during his second term, selling pardons, directing government contracts toward his sons’ businesses…

    14. Fraudulent Elections

    Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

    Trump trying to steal the 2020 election, pressuring states to gerrymander in order to steal the midterms, talking about sending ICE to the polls, suggesting that Republicans take over elections, sending the FBI to seize ballots…

    A few I’d add, which I’ll discuss separately:

    15. Ambitions for territorial expansion
    16. Glorification of the leader
    17. Vindictive prosecution of political opponents

  29. colewd,

    You guys are like my wife who used to yell at our black lab for sniffing around our food garbage bin

    This is a particulatly weird comment. Is Trump the black lab? Are we supposed to not be yelling at him for sniffing round the garbage? Because it’s what dogs do?

    I’m not even an American taxpayer and I’m outraged at this incident. He has indemnified himself against tax investigation., and settled a suit against himself in his favour And used the fund of taxpayer money to compensate criminals. But Biden…

  30. colewd:

    You guys are like my wife who used to yell at our black lab for sniffing around our food garbage bin.

    Allan:

    This is a particulatly weird comment. Is Trump the black lab? Are we supposed to not be yelling at him for sniffing round the garbage? Because it’s what dogs do?

    Bill is a master of the backfiring metaphor. Remember this one?

    colewd:

    Instead of accusing him of lying which is like accusing a dog of barking…

    keiths:

    Haha. I don’t think that came out the way you intended. It’s an apt comparison, though: lying is to Trump as barking is to dogs, swimming is to fish, and slithering is to snakes. It’s in his very nature. He’s a liar to the core.

    Allan:

    I’m not even an American taxpayer and I’m outraged at this incident. He has indemnified himself against tax investigation…

    And his family, and his businesses.

    …and settled a suit against himself in his favour. And used the fund of taxpayer money to compensate criminals.

    And the recipients will remain anonymous, and the payout amounts will remain secret, because the deal wasn’t already sleazy enough.

    Bill, do you approve of this? No canine evasions this time, please. Give us a straight answer. What do you think of this corrupt deal? Support or oppose?

  31. Allan Miller,

    And you see no moral issue with him settling with himself out of court to raise these funds from the taxpayer? And your justification for this is “someone else might do it too”? I guess rape is OK too. Since other people rape. Objective Morality, Ladies and Gentlemen

    I don’t see the moral high ground with either party. Politics is a dirty business. That’s why I am independent.

  32. colewd, to Allan:

    I don’t see the moral high ground with either party.

    That wasn’t his question. He asked

    And you see no moral issue with him settling with himself out of court to raise these funds from the taxpayer? And your justification for this is “someone else might do it too”? I guess rape is OK too. Since other people rape. Objective Morality, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    I think what Trump is doing is corrupt, despicable and immoral. What about you? How do you feel about what Trump is doing?

  33. keiths,

    That wasn’t his question. He asked

    The answer is I am not evaluating politics on moral issues especially given the spin involved in these accusations. I am evaluating how the party in power helps the citizens of our country live free and prosper. The political noise is confusing you guys.

  34. colewd: The answer is I am not evaluating politics on moral issues especially given the spin involved in these acquisitions. I am evaluating how the party in power helps the citizens of our country live free and prosper.

    How are these two different things?

  35. Corneel,

    How are these two different things?

    The fact that Bill Clinton had sex with his young staff member had nothing to do with him running the last budget surplus. The republicans made lots of noise and impeached him for lying about it but at the end of the day he was our last fiscally sound President.

  36. colewd:

    The answer is I am not evaluating politics on moral issues especially given the spin involved in these accusations.I am evaluating how the party in power helps the citizens of our country live free and prosper.The political noise is confusing you guys.

    OK, we can sort of separate the politics from the politicians. Now, how does it help our citizens live free and prosper if we cut their health insurance, cut child support, start wars, cause all prices to rise, essentially eliminate the CDC, the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, pardon thousands of violent rioters (many of whom have since been re-arrested on other charges), steal billions from the treasury, accept enormous bribes, sell beneficial policies to the highest bidders, grab nonviolent people (often citizens) off the street and punish them without due process, etc. etc. etc.?

    According to polls, most Americans consider themselves a great deal LESS free and prosperous. According to you, this matters.

  37. colewd:

    The answer is I am not evaluating politics on moral issues especially given the spin involved in these accusations.

    You’re refusing to weigh in on the immorality of Trump’s corruption for one reason only: it’s Trump’s. You’re a cult member who can’t acknowledge the truth, because the truth is that your Dear Leader is the most corrupt president in the history of the United States and you cannot bear to admit that.

    I am evaluating how the party in power helps the citizens of our country live free and prosper.

    You don’t care about the citizens. You supported the “Big Beautiful Bill”, remember? And you ran away from our discussion of it when I showed you how badly Trump and the Republicans were hurting ordinary citizens in order to transfer money to the rich. You bailed on that discussion for the same reason that you’re trying to bail on this one: you can’t defend your Dear Leader’s immoral behavior.

    The political noise is confusing you guys.

    We’re not confused. We possess a moral clarity that you lack. Do you really not understand that it’s immoral to steal $1.8 billion from the taxpayers to reward people for committing violent crimes on your behalf? (Or to rip taxpayers off to the tune of $1 billion to retrofit a jet that was given to you as a bribe by a foreign government?)

    I’ve made this suggestion before, but I’ll make it again. Get in the habit of asking yourself “What if Biden or Obama had done this?” You and I both know that you would be screaming about it. Why be a hypocrite?

  38. colewd:

    The fact that Bill Clinton had sex with his young staff member had nothing to do with him running the last budget surplus.

    Bill Clinton didn’t accept bribes, sell pardons, or steal billions of dollars from the taxpayers in order to reward criminals. Trump’s stolen money goes straight toward increasing the national debt.

    Also, I don’t know why you’re bringing up the national debt when you’re fine with Trump adding $4 trillion to it via the OBBBA or spending $2 billion a day on the Iran war.

  39. keiths: I don’t know why you’re bringing up the national debt when you’re fine with Trump adding $4 trillion to it via the OBBBA or spending $2 billion a day on the Iran war.

    It’s because when Trump does it and blows through all proportions and precedents, then it’s leftist liberal bias to say that Trump did it. In the universe of the Trump cult it did not happen. Trump can do no wrong. Trump can start shooting on the Fifth Avenue and not lose a single vote.

    Corneel,
    In the OP you said something about reasoned debate. Do you feel you had any thus far? Would you say there has been some progress in that direction?

    Can you name a single specific policy argument that Trump cultists have made during Trump’s second term, either on this forum or elsewhere, that counts as an actual policy argument with a basis in fact and reality? (Let’s not require that the policy be better than Dems’ policies, let’s not require that the policy be good for the people or good for the world in any way – this would set the bar impossibly high. Just name an actual policy that a Trump supporter informed you about as opposed to lawlessness, spite, bragging, lying, erratic flip-flopping and TACOing etc.)

  40. colewd,

    I don’t see the moral high ground with either party. Politics is a dirty business. That’s why I am independent.

    Chortle. So independent you can’t call out one of the most corrupt acts in history (to adopt a Trumpian turn of phrase – no-one’s ever seen anything like this). Imagine it was Biden. You’d just shrug and say “Trump was as bad”? Sure Bill. You’re independent. And a moral relativist

  41. colewd:
    keiths,

    The answer is I am not evaluating politics on moral issues especially given the spin involved in these accusations.I am evaluating how the party in power helps the citizens of our country live free and prosper.The political noise is confusing you guys.

    OK, so how does settling out of court a case that a judge gave a deadline to justify before throwing it out, using taxpayer money, improve the lives of Americans, as per the Vulcan valediction? Help us cut through the political noise and see the genius, O Independent One.

  42. Allan Miller,

    OK, so how does settling out of court a case that a judge gave a deadline to justify before throwing it out, using taxpayer money, improve the lives of Americans, as per the Vulcan valediction? Help us cut through the political noise and see the genius, O Independent One.

    What helps Americans is
    – Increased investment in American Jobs by building here
    -Controlling our borders
    -Allowing innovation like Crypto and AI to go forward wo over regulation
    -Making sure bad foreign actors do not get the capability to do great global damage
    -Helping reduce election fraud
    -Continuing to move toward energy independence
    -Reducing fraud at the National, State and Local level

    What does not help is overspending that increases our debt.

    What’s challenging in these discussions is sorting out the real facts due to media bias on both sides.

  43. colewd,

    Does not answer the question. He has taken $1.8bn of taxpayer money to compensate his criminal supporters – including cop beaters, vandals and those convicted of election fraud. How does that help ordinary Americans?

  44. colewd,

    Why do you quote the question when you are not answering it? Also, why is your post entirely made up of propaganda talking points, instead of what Trump actually does, which on some points, such as investments and administrative fraud, is him doing the direct opposite of what you think would help? (on other points your wishes are counterproductive and at least three of the points, namely borders, overregulation and election fraud, are proven non-issues, imagined to be issues only by brainwashed cultists)

    Nevermind. I know why. Carry on.

  45. colewd,

    Look at this sentence:

    It’s wrong for a president to steal billions of dollars from taxpayers to reward violent criminals who invaded the US Capitol, attacked police officers, and tried to assassinate the vice president for doing his job, all in an effort to steal an election.

    Do you realize that you’ve sunk to the level of not being able to agree with that statement? How low is the floor?

  46. colewd:

    What’s challenging in these discussions is sorting out the real facts due to media bias on both sides.

    Why do you keep saying that? You find it challenging, but we don’t. That’s why you haven’t caught us in any factual mistakes in over a year of discussion, while we find yours on virtually a daily basis.

    As an example, you mentioned election fraud. First, you’re overlooking the elephant in the room, which is that your guy tried to steal the presidential election. It doesn’t get any more fraudulent that, but you’re fine with it, just as you’re fine with financial corruption as long as it’s Trump’s.

    Second, you’ve bought into the goofy lie that voter fraud is a serious problem in the US. It isn’t. For instance, here’s Trump in his State of the Union speech:

    I’m asking you to approve the SAVE America Act—to stop illegal aliens and others who are unpermitted persons from voting in our sacred American elections. The cheating is rampant in our elections. It’s rampant.

    He’s lying. I posted this back in February, courtesy of Claude:

    Based on comprehensive research and state audits, noncitizen voting is extraordinarily rare. Here are the key statistics:

    Recent State Audits (2024-2025)

    Georgia’s comprehensive audit of 8.2 million registered voters uncovered 20 noncitizens who registered to vote, including nine instances when noncitizens actually cast a ballot.

    Michigan’s review found 16 credible cases of noncitizen voting in the 2024 general election out of 5.7 million votes cast — that’s 0.00028% of total votes.

    Iowa’s audit of 2.3 million voters revealed 87 instances where individuals cast ballots and later self-reported as noncitizens.

    Historical Data

    The Heritage Foundation’s own database — maintained by the conservative organization specifically to document voter fraud — shows just 68 total cases of noncitizen voting going back to the 1980s, less than 5% of all fraud cases in their database.

    The American Immigration Council’s analysis found only 10 cases involving undocumented immigrants since the 1980s.

    Research by New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice shows the rate of noncitizen voting is about 0.0001 percent nationwide.

    Trump regards you and your fellow MAGA types as gullible chumps whom he can manipulate with his lies. He doesn’t respect you enough to tell you the truth, and you keep falling for the propaganda.

  47. But you’ve got to give Trump credit for knowing his supporters. Turns out there is no lie he can tell, no matter how obviously flagrant, that his supporters either fall for, or excuse for some reason. There is no amount of money he can steal, or how rich he can make himself and his family, that can make any difference. About a third of the voting population would vote for him (and has 3 times already) even if he should become a vegetable or even die.

    So far, despite running the most corrupt administration in American history, he easily passes the colewd test (as do nearly all Republicans in Congress, but they know they’re licking Trump’s boots and why. Bill just does it because Trump tells him it tastes good!)

  48. Erik: In the OP you said something about reasoned debate. Do you feel you had any thus far? Would you say there has been some progress in that direction?

    If you are referring to the contributions of colewd: I only hoped for some insights into his motivations for supporting Trump. It takes some reading between the lines, but I get the impression those are no different from what we see with far-right support in Europe: political ressentiment and nativism.

Leave a Reply