Fascist Trump presidency not just hyperbole
With the prospect of Donald Trump again being elected to the highest political office in the land, there have been several terms used to describe what type of government will evolve from a Trumpian America.
Two of the most common that have been cited are authoritarian and totalitarian. While often used as synonyms, many political scientists differentiate the two, stating that authoritarianism is where the rule of law is nonexistent, but that governmental power is nonetheless somewhat restricted by social institutions, such as religious or business interests.
A totalitarian government, by contrast, is also devoid of the rule of law, but also works to eradicate any social institutions viewed as a threat to its power.
But increasingly a third term is rising to the forefront to describe a second Trump government: Fascism.
Sadly, when you look at the rhetoric increasingly being used by Trump and/ or his sycophants, this reality is not as hyperbolic as it may sound.
While obviously there are nuances, there are two tactics fascists have historically used to gain power—tactics we are increasingly seeing in today’s America.
The first is to create a milieu where emotion is favored over reason. America is witnessing this firsthand with persistent attacks on science and education. Since facts create knowledge and knowledge creates questions, both are a threat to demagogues who thrive upon their audiences obsequiously accepting everything they say.
The second is to then elevate this emotion into a fanaticism that compels once rational people to engage in irrational activities, like political violence.
This fanaticism is created via two rhetorical strategies. The first is the “Great Lie Theory.” This theory maintains that while people may not believe “little lies,”because such lies are common and recognizable, they are inclined to believe “Great Lies,” especially when told by those they consider to be “leaders,” because of the tendency to believe that leaders they support would not lie about events of great importance so infamously.
The second is scapegoating. Like any political movement, fascism requires support, so scapegoats are chosen very carefully. They are normally people who are already marginalized because of their race, ethnic backgrounds, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, and/ or gender identity. Such groups are extremely easy to stereotype and generate hatred against since they often lack the voting power and/or political influence to challenge their scapegoating and marginalization.
What history has shown, however, is that once fascists gain and consolidate power, they frequently turn on other more numerous, but nonetheless “unfavorable,” groups, even when these groups once supported them. The Rev. Martin Niemoller made this clear in a poignant quote discussing how he didn’t object when the Nazis came for groups he disagreed with or didn’t belong to, only to realize there was no one left to speak out when the Nazis came for him.
In order to survive, democracy requires a knowledgeable electorate, whereas fascism thrives upon ignorance. In an age where information is literally at one’s fingertips, it would logically seem that such ignorance would be moribund. Instead, it prospers because learning the lessons of history is anathema to the desire for votes, clicks, views, and/or subscriptions sought after by many who control and dominate social media, because the willfully ignorant who often consume such media are repelled by any truths that might shatter their delusions.
So, the question remains, after so many have died defending America’s democracy from foreign threats and foes, will it, in 2024, be destroyed by Americans themselves?
Hoffman is a retired civil rights and constitutional law attorney living in South Bend, Indiana. This commentary appears exclusively in the American Statesman.
In order to survive, democracy requires a knowledgeable electorate, whereas fascism thrives upon ignorance. In an age where information is literally at one’s fingertips, it would logically seem that such ignorance would be moribund. Instead, it prospers because learning the lessons of history is anathema to the desire for votes, clicks, views, and/or subscriptions sought after by many who control and dominate social media, because the willfully ignorant who often consume such media are repelled by any truths that might shatter their delusions.