‘Fascist’ modes of thought
Dear editor:
As regular readers know by my past comments, I am not a strong fan of our POTUS. However, I believe the charge being made by some writers that he is a “fascist” is going a bit too far. In everyday policy matters, he seems to have adhered to Republican orthodoxy, although some of that I strongly disagree with. But on the matter of “fascism,” he has not changed the libel laws crippling the news business (although he threatened to), he has not yet directly defied court orders (although he has attacked judges) and he has not destroyed the independence of law enforcement (though his acts appear to undermine its credibility at times).
I agree with Michael Gerson, (conservative syndicated columnist) that the charge of “fascism” must include specific actions, including those mentioned earlier. As Gerson reported, it is the POTUS’ language and arguments that echo “Fascistic” ones. He seems to think of a national unity giving deference to a single leader (not a government designed as ours that has Congress as a check and balance). In claiming to promote American values, he defines such through exclusionary actions by showing bigotry and contempt toward outsiders. To quote Gerson, “He paints the picture of an idealized past, involving pride, ethnic solidarity and national greatness.”
Perhaps those of us who are strong critics of the POTUS should not be so concerned about a “fascist dictator,” but rather the legitimacy of “fascist” modes of thought coming from the POTUS being approved by the Republican Party. When the GOP dominated Congress continues to support such echoes, the danger grows, taking a heavy toll on our representative form of democracy, which our forefathers fought and died for.
My real fear now is that if the GOP retains control of both congressional houses, the POTUS will see that as strong approval for his methods, including his “fascist” sounding language. To quote Gerson again: “More generally, a leader with no commitment to the separation of powers, with no respect for the traditional self-restraint of the presidency, with savage disdain for the free press, with an admiration for authoritarians, with a history of menacing individuals and companies by name and with a talent for division and dehumanization would feel unbound.” John W. “Doc” Crawford Hot Springs