Are you using the passive voice to hide that this is a narrative of your construction? You held up militarism as a facet of fascism.
Militarism is definitionally a characteristic of fascism. If there is no militarism, it isn't fascism.
Some people like you? You who raised militarism as a facet of fascism and then clung to just the single example of the parade when presented a list of other examples? A non-exhaustive list includes domestic counter protest deployments of Army & Marines in LA, some of the self-congratulatory antics after a sortie to Iran, the massive pool of funding to expand & further militarize ICE via "Big Beautiful Bill", the threats of massive force against anyone who might interrupt the parade, the use of riot control agents to facilitate a bible photo in Lafayette Square.
Are you trying to invert the burden of proof? I'm not the one here, or elsewhere, that proposes the Army parade or a deployment of soldiers to support ICE or an illegal deportation is evidence that the US is heading toward fascism. One of my general points is that people read too much into events to fit their preconceptions.
The specific point about the parade was that it could also be construed as the "circuses" part of "bread and circuses" as evidence of plain ordinary populism. Or it could have been just a parade. I suppose what Trump is doing is mostly just populism with a bunch of aimless hip-shooting thrown in, but I don't care to try to make a solid case. Whatever it is, it's not going to become fascism.
Speaking of some people pointing to single events. This seems to be all you've got on the idea that he's not really a tyrant. The lack of response to "No Kings" has more to do with the lack of endurance in the protest and not the benevolence of Trump. Yes the numbers were huge, but participants were out for a day and home for supper.
If there are a bunch of important ways in which the administration and government and society as a whole are not trending fascist (eg. the coalescing of the judiciary, legislature, military, media, etc behind the great leader), and only scattered events that have other plausible explanations constituting weak evidence of characteristics of fascism if they are not widely and consistently repeated, then the most likely conclusion is the US is not becoming fascist.
Should Americans be more amenable to being subjugated by a corrupt, nationalistic authoritarian because he is not Mussolini? Or because his racial bigotries are more directed to Africans and South Americans than toward some sub-set of Europeans?
If that's what you see, then just go on seeing it. You're not really going to be moved. My points are for the benefit of people disinclined to be alarmist.
Let's not pretend any previous administration came close to some of the things this current administration is doing. And, let's not pretend that you haven't whined and bemoaned far lesser transgressions from other administrations.
I pretend nothing. Your beef here is just disagreement over subjectivity. I have repeatedly raised the things that should be categorized as grave abuses and mistakes.
No. A wrong in the past does not justify repetition of the wrong in the present. That is an amoral philosophy.
When I expound a "tit-for-tat" position, I frame it in the context of politics and political norms, not morality or ethics. Is that clear enough?
This is insanity. You are advocating it is right and proper for political parties abuse power if another party did it before
That's not a complete characterization of my position. In general, people who behaved badly in the past (defected), must during their next turn in power behave pro-socially (cooperate). Otherwise, sliding continues even if only one party does it. Surely everyone can agree the sliding must stop. Enough time has passed to observe that defection continues even though some of the other "players" keep trying to cooperate. The only leverage available is defection. So the era of a Republican party of "comity, decorum, and norms" that people nostalgically pine for is over.
Continually raising the stakes, tit-for-tat in a race to the bottom that drags a whole country into its demise. There are norms that need to be upheld. There are norms that need to be rebuilt. And all parties have played a part in American democratic back-sliding.
Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed.
But, pretending Trump is continuing at the established standard is farcical. I mean, it is a great gas lighting narrative to say Trump is just doing what Democrats already did, but it is not true.
If an assumed premise is "in every case", then, sure, it's not true. Trump is bound to do some things without reasonable precedent.
If it is not your love for MAGA then maybe it is your hate for US Democrats that is enabling you to endorse some gross anti-democratic behaviours and human rights transgressions. Certainly, concentration camps to "own the libs" is not an okay thing.
What it is, is that I almost don't care about Trump's outbursts and the way he talks shit. I don't care much that he's a buffoon, or that he degrades the dignity of his office. Sure, it's bad, but with aesthetics and appearances discounted to zero, that leaves concrete policy and executive actions.
The bogus "Russian Collusion" investigations and the concealment of Biden's infirmity were huge anti-democratic behaviours. The Iraq war and the destabilizations of Libya and Syria were huge human rights transgressions. None of those were mistakes. They were all things the "players" wanted to do. What would the path forward in Iran be if the Boltons and Frums of the world were influential in a Republican administration right now?
Illegal immigration in the US is an enforcement problem created by preceding administrations. It's a huge problem, such a huge problem that I can only identify one practical humane CoA: amnesty and rigorous future border control. The Trump administration has chosen enforcement without amnesty. Unless they back down, that requires funding and facilities and a lot more opportunities for civil rights violations. All that can be avoided if they just give the Democrats what Democrats want. Well, that's a problem, isn't it, and it's created by Democrats.
nypost.com
