Tag Archives: fascism

Donald Trump is not a real Fascist, he just plays one on TV

Leave a reply

I have been thinking that Trump is basically a psychopath, someone without normal human emotions or morals, who nonetheless has a very keen sense of how to manipulate other peoples’ emotions and morals for his own gain. This sounds bad, and it is. But the silver lining, if it is true, is that although he is appealing to some very ugly impulses in a certain segment of the public now, he would become more moderate if he were elected and had to appeal to the full range of the people. However, it turns out that people said the same thing about Hitler in 1922.

financial crisis and the right wing

Leave a reply

According to Vox, there is strong statistical evidence that financial crises have tended to favor the right wing in Europe. And not just in the 1930s.

What does history have to say about the political after-effects of financial crises in modern democracies? Can we, over the long run of modern history, identify systematic shifts in the political landscape after financial crises? …

In a new paper (Funke et al 2015), we conduct the most comprehensive historical analysis on the political fall-out of financial crises to date. We trace the political history of 20 advanced democracies back to the 1870s and construct a dataset of more than 800 elections from 1870 to 2014. We then complement this dataset with existing data on more than 100 financial crises and with historical data on street protests (demonstrations, riots, and strikes)…

Our first main finding is that politics takes a hard right turn following financial crises. On average, far-right votes increase by about a third in the five years following systemic banking distress, as shown in Figure 1. This pattern is visible in the data both before and after WWII and is robust when controlling for economic conditions and different voting systems. The gains of extreme right-wing parties were particularly pronounced after the global crises of the 1920s/1930s and after 2008. However, we also find similar patterns after regional financial crises, such as the Scandinavian banking crises of the early 1990s. Moreover, we identify an important asymmetry in the political response to crises – on average, the far left did not profit equally from episodes of financial instability.

 

not time to worry about Trump

Leave a reply

I’ve been asking whether Trump is using a fascist playbook and we should be worried, but here are a couple articles that say no, it is not time to worry. Both point out that the share of media coverage a candidate gets does not have much to do with the proportion of voters that actually support them. Alternet says that more likely voters support Bernie Sanders than Donald Trump, although the latter gets 23 times more media attention:

The Tyndall Report, which tracks coverage on nightly network newscasts, found that Trump has hogged more than a quarter of all presidential race coverage — and more than the entire Democratic field combined.

Hillary Clinton — who enjoys the most voter support, by far, of any candidate in either party — had received the second-most network news coverage.

Sanders, who is supported by more voters than Trump, has received just 10 minutes of network airtime throughout the entire campaign — which translates to 1/23 of Trump’s campaign coverage.

Nate Silver tries to break it down some more. One interesting data analysis he has done shows that at this point in the last two elections, only 8-16% of all Google searches that would eventually be made related to the primaries had been made. So let’s hope that means that only the crazies on the fringe are paying attention at this point.

more on Robert Paxton

Leave a reply

Recently I was musing about the U.S., Donald Trump, and fascism. I suggested that the U.S. has a fairly rigid social order favoring and enforced by traditional political, bureaucratic, business and professional elites. We also have a grassroots movement based on rhetoric of national, religious, and to some extent racial unity, and fearful of outsiders. Here is Robert Paxton’s definition of fascism in his 1998 paper The Five Stages of Fascism:

Fascism is a system of political authority and social order intended to reinforce the unity, energy, and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline.

So fascism is not just a social order cynically maintained by and for the interests of traditional elites. It is somewhat the opposite – a grassroots movement based on a myth of national, religious or racial purity and unity. The grassroots believe the rhetoric while the elites probably do not, but both are interested in maintaining the social order. The danger arises when the traditional elites cynically choose to join forces with the grassroots fascists, because they do not feel strong enough to maintain the existing social order on their own. Together, the two groups are strong enough to come to power where neither could on its own, but once in power the traditional elites may lose control, particularly under war or crisis conditions.

So ironically, it is at a moment when liberal elements in society are making some progress against the entrenched elites that we may be most vulnerable to a right-wing grassroots movement arising. The Tea Party’s anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim rhetoric, and Donald Trump’s attempts to use that rhetoric to rise to power, would seem to fit the bill. It is ironic that a modern American fascism would use rhetoric of freedom and democracy to undermine freedom and democracy, but that is our national unifying myth so it makes some sense.

U.S. Fascism?

1 Reply

Is it even remotely possible that the U.S. could go down a Fascist path? I don’t know. Let’s first ask if the U.S. unequivocally qualifies as a democracy. If you set the lowest possible bar, democracy could just mean that government leaders are nominally chosen by majority vote, and there is therefore a process for non-violent change of government. We pass that test. A better definition though, in my view, would be that there is a process for choosing government policies that represent a consensus among most of the people, and that represent a compromise reflecting the interests of most of the people. We clearly do not have this. We clearly have policies that represent the interests of a relatively small class of political and business elites, and we have an entrenched political party system that presents almost insurmountable obstacles to anyone who might seriously challenge that social order. It would take widespread violence or civil disobedience to do that, which is the opposite of a functioning democratic political system. So we have a fairly rigid social order enforced by traditional elites.

If our definition of fascism involves jack boots and arm bands and cattle cars, clearly we are not even close, thank goodness. But could we be headed there? What is a registry database for a small minority religious group, if not a modern version of the armband? Robert Paxton’s stages of fascism start with a sense of victim-hood, nationalism based on religion or ethnicity, anger, and some external or internal enemy to blame. We seem to have these ingredients, at least among the angry white men supporting Donald Trump. Next comes a charismatic leader. I don’t find Donald charismatic, but some people clearly do. Next comes acceptance of the extremists by the conservative establishment because they are not strong enough to govern on their own. I don’t think we are there yet, but we did have the recent capitulation of the more moderate conservative elements in Congress to the Tea Party extremists. After these stages come the assumption of power and exercise of power. That is hard to imagine, but we will find out by this time next year.

I still think Donald Trump is a clown. An amoral attention-seeking clown at best, a Fascist clown at worst. It is reassuring that demographics continue to shift so that angry white men can’t just always get their way, no matter how loud and menacing they are. But I am getting just a bit worried. More geopolitical turbulence or random acts of violence in the next year could shift more people into a scared, angry state of mind where they are more open to the extremist rhetoric.