Crying “Fascist!”

Democrats’ complaints about Trump being a fascist would probably be more effective if they hadn’t compared (nearly) every Republican presidential nominee since Dewey to Hitler.

10 comments… add one
  • steve Link

    Republicans also compared Dem presidents to Hitler, though they hav e been more likely to compare them to communists like Stalin. It’s mostly just a way to insult someone and not linked to any real definition of the term. What’s different about Trump is that people are using actual academic definitions of fascism that existed well before Trump became prominent. They also note that Trump sometimes uses almost the same words with the same intent that have been used by fascists in the past.

    I would note that no Trump defenders ever address the above. What they do is what you are doing by claiming that Dems call everyone Hitler. Note that among the people who are seriously discussing this there is no claim that Trump is Hitler. He hasn’t caused a holocaust. They are just noting that he has a lot in common with past fascists and his actions and words are consistent with fascism.

    Steve

  • Drew Link

    You never fail to amuse, steve.

  • What they do is what you are doing by claiming that Dems call everyone Hitler

    That wasn’t my claim. My claim was much more specific and easily verifiable: that Republican presidential candidates have routinely been compared to Hitler by Democrats for the last 70 years.

    Harry Truman said Dewey was like Hitler

    McGovern compared Nixon to Hitler

    Reagan, Bush, Romney, and now Trump have all been compared to Hitler by prominent Democrats. I stand by my assertion. If you want the charge to have force use it more sparingly.

  • PD Shaw Link

    Don’t forget the uniform. Fascists love a uniform and Trump was seen in uniform lately.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    I’m just not clear what is Kamala’s campaign strategy at this point — there is one, but I don’t get it.

    Not only did they bring up Hitler today, yesterday the Atlantic published another “unsourced” story that Trump disrespected veterans, and the Guardian just published a new accusation that Trump groped someone 30 years ago.

    And Kamala will give a speech next Tuesday from the Eclipse on Jan 6th. At what point will there be a new “Trump is a Russian asset” story going up?

    Is this supposed to change anyone’s mind on whether to vote or on who to vote; its the same set of accusations leveled against Trump for 8 years now. And yet his favorability and approval rating is the highest its been all these years. I notice Kamala’s ratings are noticeably declining.

  • PD Shaw Link

    @CuriousOnlooker, it means that her campaign to persuade people to vote for her is over; it’s now all about rallying her supporters to vote. I think the main confusion is that a couple of Democratic Senators up for re-election have recently run ads showing that they would work with Trump. They may be operating with different time horizons, local elections might not get as much attention early and more people might be deciding than they are nationally. It sets the stage for Democrats running in marginal seats to be asked whether they agree with Harris about Trump.

  • Cstanley Link

    A good read on the amplification of fearmongering political rhetoric:
    https://www.city-journal.org/article/prophets-of-doom

    @steve- what argument exactly do you think Trump’s supporters are failing to engage? Here’s how you stated it:
    “What’s different about Trump is that people are using actual academic definitions of fascism that existed well before Trump became prominent. They also note that Trump sometimes uses almost the same words with the same intent that have been used by fascists in the past.”

    “Sometimes uses the same words”? Such as?

    “With the same intent”? Mindreaders are we?

    “They are just noting that he has a lot in common with past fascists and his actions and words are consistent with fascism.”

    Which specific words and actions would those be?

  • This passage is a good one:

    It is too late to expect Trump to speak with precision and prudence. As the Times itself notes, many of his supporters treat his more flamboyant pronouncements as theater, not as serious policy. One’s partiality in either direction also depends on one’s assumptions. Conservatives are as alarmed by leftists’ rhetoric as Democrats and other leftists are about Trump’s. We give our side the benefit of the doubt but hear the worst in the other side’s excesses.

    For me the most significant question is whose rhetoric is best borne out by their conduct? Talk is cheap.

  • steve Link

    Dave- First, you ignore that Republicans called Dem leaders Hitler. It’s not unique to Dems. Second, just like the right wing partisans you deflect away from the actual claims. When you line up what train have long been considered part of fascism then Trump has a lot of overlap, more than anyone else in recent past.

    Steve

  • Yet again you ignore my specific claims. If you find an instance of a Republican presidential candidate comparing a Democratic presidential candidate to Hitler, I will write a post on it.

    And my point had nothing to do with whether Trump is a fascist. It was that when presidential candidates call the presidential candidates of the opposing party Hitlers, it loses force. “Communist” has lost force in much the same way.

    My view is that I think that Trump is a blowhard with a big mouth who speaks rashly. I think it would be a real challenge to come up with a definition of fascist (that doesn’t have “Republican” in it) that applies to Trump but doesn’t also apply to Wilson, FDR, Johnson, and Biden. Trump issued 220 executive orders in four years. Biden has issued 140 some-odd in his term to date. Does one illustrate authoritarian tendencies but the other doesn’t? My take: presidents have become more authoritarian and the state has increased in size and scope.

    Start with Mussolini’s famous definition of fascism:

    All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.

Leave a Comment