The Resistance Reports
March 8, 2017
Over the past week, when I wrote this blog early in February, I counted about 10 to 15 global political leaders, member of parliament & law makers who called Trump “Fascist” & please excuse me, I cannot remember them all & if you need source, I am sure the media has news on most of them, but I will point to a few, and this include former Mexican leaders, and a horde of MPs speaking in the UK parliament & law makers globally, from Canada, Australia, France and other.
There are three basic fundamentals that points to Trump being a Fascist, first his history as a business person is one of a very long track record of Trump being a fierce racist, and here, is often the best sign if someone is a Fascist and also Trump’s father participates in White Supremacist gatherings. Personality wise, Trump uses massive amount of lies and bullying other.There is a great deal of secret to his financials & Trump believes in conspiracies, meaning secret plots. Trump is hateful towards minority and sees himself as superior then them.
Then if one looks at the tactics Trump used to rise to power, from making a country great, to blaming minority for a country’s failure, to mass deportation, to massive use of propaganda and other, clearly, Trump looks a great deal similar to Hitler’s tactic. Then last fundamental is Trump’s actual governing, with banning immigration, crack-down on the press and other executive orders, clearly points to Trump being a Fascist.
What constitutes a definition of fascism and fascist governments
What constitutes a definition of fascism and fascist governments is a highly disputed subject that has proved complicated and contentious. Historians, political scientists, and other scholars have engaged in long and furious debates concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets.
A significant number of scholars agree that a “fascist regime” is foremost an authoritarian form of government, although not all authoritarian regimes are fascist. Authoritarianism is thus a defining characteristic, but most scholars will say that more distinguishing traits are needed to make an authoritarian regime fascist.
Similarly, fascism as an ideology is also hard to define. Originally, “fascism” referred to a political movement that was linked with corporatism and existed in Italy from 1922 to 1943 under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. Many scholars use the word “fascism” without capitalization in a more general sense, to refer to an ideology (or group of ideologies) that was influential in many countries at many different times. For this purpose, they have sought to identify what Griffin calls a “fascist minimum”—that is, the minimum conditions that a certain political movement must meet in order to be considered “fascist”.
Several scholars have inspected the apocalyptic, millennial and millenarian aspects of fascism. According to most scholars of fascism, there are both left and right influences on fascism as a social movement, and fascism, especially once in power, has historically attacked communism, conservatism and liberalism, attracting support primarily from what in a classical sense is called the “far left” or “extreme left”.”
“In his 1995 essay “Eternal Fascism”, Umberto Eco lists fourteen general properties of fascist ideology. He argues that it is not possible to organise these into a coherent system, but that “it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it”. He uses the term “Ur-fascism” as a generic description of different historical forms of fascism. The fourteen properties are as follows:
- “The Cult of Tradition”, characterized by cultural syncretism, even at the risk of internal contradiction. When all truth has already been revealed by Tradition, no new learning can occur, only further interpretation and refinement.
- “The Rejection of modernism“, which views the rationalistic development of Western culture since the Enlightenment as a descent into depravity. Eco distinguishes this from a rejection of superficial technological advancement, as many fascist regimes cite their industrial potency as proof of the vitality of their system.
- “The Cult of Action for Action’s Sake”, which dictates that action is of value in itself, and should be taken without intellectual reflection. This, says Eco, is connected with anti-intellectualism and irrationalism, and often manifests in attacks on modern culture and science.
- “Disagreement Is Treason” – Fascism devalues intellectual discourse and critical reasoning as barriers to action, as well as out of fear that such analysis will expose the contradictions embodied in a syncretistic faith.
- “Fear of Difference”, which fascism seeks to exploit and exacerbate, often in the form of racism or an appeal against foreigners and immigrants.
- “Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class”, fearing economic pressure from the demands and aspirations of lower social groups.
- “Obsession with a Plot” and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society (such as the German elite’s ‘fear’ of the 1930s Jewish populace’s businesses and well-doings; see also anti-Semitism). Eco also cites Pat Robertson‘s book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.
- Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as “at the same time too strong and too weak.” On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.
- “Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy” because “Life is Permanent Warfare” – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to NOT build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.
- “Contempt for the Weak”, which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate Leader who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.
- “Everybody is Educated to Become a Hero”, which leads to the embrace of a cult of death. As Eco observes, “[t]he Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.”
- “Machismo”, which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold “both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”
- “Selective Populism” – The People, conceived monolithically, have a Common Will, distinct from and superior to the viewpoint of any individual. As no mass of people can ever be truly unanimous, the Leader holds himself out as the interpreter of the popular will (though truly he dictates it). Fascists use this concept to delegitimize democratic institutions they accuse of “no longer represent[ing] the Voice of the People.”
- “Newspeak” – Fascism employs and promotes an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.
So whet to do?
I came across the New Internationalist Blog, and the blob talks about what should be done & I copy & paste the report for you to read. To read other reports there, following this link, here.
New Internationalist Blog Reports:
Among the chants that rang out as thousands took to the streets in anti-Trump marches in cities and towns across Britain on Monday night was: ‘This is what democracy looks like!’
Indeed. And it was heartening to be part of it. Even Oxford, not known for its febrile political culture, massed thousands in a speedy response to two things: President Donald Trump’s travel ban on all citizens from seven mainly Muslim states, and British Prime Minister Theresa May’s promise of a state visit (Queen, pomp and circumstance included) to the new US leader.
The 90-day travel ban, officially on the grounds of protecting Americans from terrorism, demonizes a specific group of people on the basis of race and religion and effectively calls open season on Muslims. It is also without logic. Syria, Iran and Iraq are among the countries included but not Saudi Arabia, which provided most of the bombers for 9/11 – still the biggest terrorist attack the US has ever suffered.
Over the weekend we witnessed the pain and suffering of people, many of them refugees, affected by the US president’s brutal and suddenly imposed executive order. That the chaotic order was made on Holocaust Day was not lost on many observers.
But we still seem reluctant to say, of the politics emerging from the White House, that: ‘This is what fascism looks like!’
Now trying to define fascism is a tricky and highly contentious activity. But a quick survey of around 20 different political and philosophical attempts to do so reveals that Donald Trump meets the criteria of a fascist leader (pudgy) hands down.
In the first few days of his presidency, the fascist rhetoric has turned into reality. The scapegoating and apocalyptic fearmongering that fuels fascism has not toned down with high office. Trump’s wish to bring back torture is a clear indication of repressive intent. The similarities with Nazi Germany in its early days are too chilling to ignore.
But if you use ‘fascist’ to describe Trump – or indeed any of the other nationalist leaders on the rise in Europe (including Britain) – you are likely to be accused of hyperbole.
Part of the problem is that the word has been overused, especially by some on the Left, to insult anything they don’t like. But when you see an actual wolf in the henhouse, it’s necessary to cry out that this is what you are seeing – rather than quietly say that there’s a greyish-sort-of-a-dog about.
It may be semantics but what we call things matters. One of the most destructive effects of the machinery of fascism is that if you do not properly identify it and take a stand against it, you can easily become a part of it – especially if you do not, at this moment, belong to a group that is being targeted.
Those who lick the boots (let’s be polite) of fascists – say, in the quest of a post-Brexit trade deal, or to protect a ‘special relationship’ – need to have no illusions about what they are doing.
Identifying Trump as a fascist puts on the spot those who are doing his bidding, and gives due credit to those who follow their conscience and refuse to obey, as he makes his way through the list of targets – Muslims, women, sexual minorities – whose rights and freedoms are to be assailed.
Hitler was democratically elected. Say it three times, à la Trump. The trouble was not enough people, at the time, saw the monstrosity of his hate-fuelled politics and where they could lead. Not enough people took a stand at the time – or in time.
This is why immediacy and numbers matter – whatever the armchair cynics at the BBC say about the pointlessness of protest.
We need to be out there on the streets wherever in the world we live; clogging the system with our petitions; holding politicians, officials, corporations to account; agitating at every point and turn.
This is a critical moment in history. The good news is that we are alive to do something about it.
Here are some links to news: