Non-Violent, Non-Criminal Anti-Trump Protest

[Starbuck1975]

Let's examine the claims:

1. "cult of tradition" -- make murica great again
2. "rejection of modernism" -- them progressive leftards
3. " Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism."
4. "In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason."
5. "fear of difference"
6. " one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. "
7. "To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. ..The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia"
8. " The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies"
9. " life is permanent warfare."
10. " contempt for the weak"
11. " In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm."
12. "the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo"
13. "There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People."
14. " All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. "

Rather trivial to argue that american conservatism per Trump is just about the immaculate conception of fascism. Of course it's easy to see why fascists and friends would vehemently disagree no matter the facts & reality.

I noticed that for some you provided clear examples, yet did not for the same talking points I was unable to correlate as well.

Fascism was a unique product of the 20th century, and largely the response to the frustrations that spilled over from WW1.

Identity in Europe from the Middle Ages through the 19th century largely aligned to the divine right monarch. WW1 was the product of the dissolution of the divine right monarchs and the remnants of the entangling alliances they left behind. The Great War was meant to be the last war, yet it ended with much lingering resentment.

Despite overthrowing the monarchs, many societies in Europe ended up gravitating towards the cult of personality leader who filled the void. Russia had Stalin. Germany had Hitler. Italy had Mussolini. The UK had Churchill. Spain had Franco. All appealed to a renewed call to nationalism with identity being the underpinning. Churchill is the only outlier as not suppressing his political enemies, although he was no less the war monger.

The only overlap I see between Trump and the previous examples is the cult of personality and populist appeal. Some liberals were screaming fascism during the Bush years as well. That line of attack, as credible as you may think it is, has lost its effectiveness due to its overuse.

 

[Starbuck1975]

FTFY

You are not allowed to fix my posts with sh!t I have to go look up, although fiat authoritariasm is a welcome new addition to the bingo card. I will add it below alt-right and to the right of post-truth

 

[agent00f]

I noticed that for some you provided clear examples, yet did not for the same talking points I was unable to correlate as well.

You'll have to be more specific since pretty much all of them seem so self-evident that further elaboration would be patronizing. It's interesting that you call talking points literal descriptions of features common to fascist movements.

Fascism was a unique product of the 20th century, and largely the response to the frustrations that spilled over from WW1.

Identity in Europe from the Middle Ages through the 19th century largely aligned to the divine right monarch. WW1 was the product of the dissolution of the divine right monarchs and the remnants of the entangling alliances they left behind. The Great War was meant to be the last war, yet it ended with much lingering resentment.

Despite overthrowing the monarchs, many societies in Europe ended up gravitating towards the cult of personality leader who filled the void. Russia had Stalin. Germany had Hitler. Italy had Mussolini. The UK had Churchill. Spain had Franco. All appealed to a renewed call to nationalism with identity being the underpinning. Churchill is the only outlier as not suppressing his political enemies, although he was no less the war monger.

The only overlap I see between Trump and the previous examples is the cult of personality and populist appeal. Some liberals were screaming fascism during the Bush years as well. That line of attack, as credible as you may think it is, has lost its effectiveness due to its overuse.

Let's put it in easier to grasp terms: it would be difficult to find people who fit the description on every point better than Trump's party, even among literally fascist parties. The only difference is that this country still happens to have some legal protection from authoritarianism, but to be fair most governments did before fascist loyalists had their way. You might recognize some of those trumpsters here that you're obliged to speak for.

In fact it's quite obvious this situation where folks feel obligated to protect fascists like they're their own, not unlike pretty much all conservatives here for racists and the like.

 

[PokerGuy]

Hey, this is America, people can protest whatever they want, no matter how stupid. Sounds good to me so long as they can remain peaceful and respect the law and the rights of others -- something lefties seem to have a very hard time with.

 

[Starbuck1975]

You'll have to be more specific since pretty much all of them seem so self-evident that further elaboration would be patronizing. It's interesting that you call talking points literal descriptions of features common to fascist movements.



Let's put it in easier to grasp terms: it would be difficult to find people who fit the description on every point better than Trump's party, even among literally fascist parties. The only difference is that this country still happens to have some legal protection from authoritarianism, but to be fair most governments did before fascist loyalists had their way. You might recognize some of those trumpsters here that you're obliged to speak for.

In fact it's quite obvious this situation where folks feel obligated to protect fascists like they're their own, not unlike pretty much all conservatives here for racists and the like.

Maybe there are degrees of fascism.

You'll have to forgive me, but I've witnessed the aftermatch of facism and totalitariasm. Some reality star mouthing off on Twitter and saying offensive things pales in comparison to the real thing. Trump is like the cheap $1 store knock off of fascism.

Now, do I accept that there are some in this country who would welcome the warm embrace of fascism should it truly manifest itself. Absolutely. But I fear the alt-right about as much as I fear those anarchist knuckleheads that show up every so often at WTO conferences.

 

[PokerGuy]

Maybe there are degrees of fascism.

You'll have to forgive me, but I've witnessed the aftermatch of facism and totalitariasm. Some reality star mouthing off on Twitter and saying offensive things pales in comparison to the real thing. Trump is like the cheap $1 store knock off of fascism.

Now, do I accept that there are some in this country who would welcome the warm embrace of fascism should it truly manifest itself. Absolutely. But I fear the alt-right about as much as I fear those anarchist knuckleheads that show up every so often at WTO conferences.

Fascism is warmly embraced by both the far left and the far right. They just disagree on what beliefs or goals should be embraced, but they are both perfectly fine with silencing opposition in pursuit of things they agree with.

 

[bshole]

Hey, this is America, people can protest whatever they want, no matter how stupid. Sounds good to me so long as they can remain peaceful and respect the law and the rights of others -- something lefties seem to have a very hard time with.

...which explains the peaceful nature of the Bundy standoff....
...peaceful abortion clinic bombings...
...etc...

Here is a reality check for you regarding the pristine peaceful nature of right wingers.

In a survey we conducted with the Police Executive Research Forum last year of 382 law enforcement agencies, 74 percent reported anti-government extremism as one of the top three terrorist threats in their jurisdiction;
:
An officer from a large metropolitan area said that “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” are the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism. One officer explained that he ranked the right-wing threat higher because “it is an emerging threat that we don’t have as good of a grip on,

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-terror-threat.html?_r=0

 

[agent00f]

Maybe there are degrees of fascism.

You'll have to forgive me, but I've witnessed the aftermatch of facism and totalitariasm. Some reality star mouthing off on Twitter and saying offensive things pales in comparison to the real thing. Trump is like the cheap $1 store knock off of fascism.

Now, do I accept that there are some in this country who would welcome the warm embrace of fascism should it truly manifest itself. Absolutely. But I fear the alt-right about as much as I fear those anarchist knuckleheads that show up every so often at WTO conferences.

Trump & friends are literally pinpointed by every description of fascism, literally do everything possible to fulfill the trope, and apparently it's not so bad because at least he hasn't had his Reichstag opportunity yet. I don't see how this is any different than friends of segregation proclaiming that at least it's not slavery, it's not as if there's any incremental step they won't be obliged to say the same for.

Similarly for protecting white nationalists as conservatives have always done, no great surprise given how much more they relate to the chucky/roflmouths or their equivalent in america's chief strategist than any centrist democrat. The actual reality of matters is completely outranked by the primacy of ideological obligations.