The Rhetoric of Fascism: Ignorant and Dangerous

The rhetoric of fascism once came from the sillier precincts of the academy; from the Vice President, it is dangerous. (500 words, 3 minutes)

This rhetoric of fascism is historically ignorant, and also dangerous: it incites violence, and does so in the presence of an active terrorist movement that asserts its right to use violence against anyone they deem "fascist."

Here, we have not a basement fulminator but an account associated with VP Harris's presidential campaign calling President Trump "fascist". This is new and dangerous ground:

https://x.com/harris_wins/status/1838696548613468377

The Harris campaign's specific allegation refers to Trump's insistence that he would fire generals who push woke ideology. The allegation is ridiculous. Civilian control of the military is a basic constitutional principle.

But it is the source of the absurdity that is most disturbing: it is common to hear leftist demonstrators, professors of sociology, and other woke ideologues bang on about "fascism," but not the Vice-President of the United States, nor her surrogates. A slogan once restricted to the anarchist Antifa left has migrated into the Vice-President's office. The Overton window is moving rapidly leftward.

The charge of fascism is an old Marxist habit. It comes naturally to those who think themselves on the correct side of a preordained history, expressing their anger at the failure of reality to conform to ideology. This is particularly the case when ordinary people, like President Trump's many working-class supporters, are guilty of supporting the wrong party. The Marxist reaction partakes of the anger reserved for the renegade.

The charge of fascism reflects the easy habit of arranging political beliefs on a left-right spectrum, and since President Trump's diverse supporters are clearly not socialists, Marxists, or other good Democrats, they must be over on the deplorable right, and since they are not Mitt Romney and wouldn't fit in at the opera, they must be far-right fascists. We get a lot of such one-dimensional thinking from the party of intellectual sophistication. They find the easy conclusion useful and also motivating, and intellectual laziness reinforces partisan anger.

It is from the original fascist Mussolini that we get the word "totalitarian." Mussolini boasted that under his rule Italy was a totalitarian state, where the state controlled everything, and the individual was as nothing in comparison to the nation. A fascist government was the biggest of big governments. To call President Trump, who wants to contain the state within its proper and limited boundaries, a fascist is historically ignorant as well as ideologically one-dimensional.

In practice, the allegation of "fascism" labels its target as illegitimate, beyond the pale, and certainly beyond discussion or engagement. And if argument is not possible, then all that is left is force. In the streets, this incites rioting, and in the minds of cranks, it may incite assassination attempts. In the Oval Office, we have no assurance it will not result in the use of anti-terrorism powers created to fight Al-Qaeda against domestic political opponents.

This wouldn't be new ground for the current Biden/Harris administration. Political opponents such as

Tulsi Gabbard

(@TulsiGabbard on X) have been put on a terrorist watch list, and critical journalists like

Matt Taibbi

(@mtaibbi on X) have been harassed by the IRS. And J6 protesters, including many who were peaceful, have faced vindictive prosecutions and terrorism charges.

Today, the charge of fascism is inflammatory and therefore dangerous. It calls into question VP Harris's judgment, and recalls the authoritarian tendencies of her party: if Trump and the Republicans are fascist, why not just arrest them all?

(also on X/Twitter: https://x.com/mfproudman/status/1839125409545253311)