• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Are we now in full blown fascist totalitarianism?

In a Truth Social post on Wednesday, President Trump said Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker "should be in jail."

"Chicago Mayor should be in jail for failing to protect Ice [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] Officers!" Mr. Trump posted. "Governor Pritzker also!"

Pritzker issued a statement on X in response to President Trump's post.

"I will not back down. Trump is now calling for the arrest of elected representatives checking his power. What else is left on the path to full-blown authoritarianism?" Pritzker wrote.

Pritzker continued in a thread of X posts: "His masked agents already are grabbing people off the street. Separating children from their parents. Creating fear. Taking people for 'how they look.' Making people feel they need to carry citizenship papers. Invading our state with military troops. Sending in war helicopters in the middle of the night. Arresting elected officials asking questions."

 
Hilarious.


I'm sure the right wing nutters on this forum actually believe this though.

The bat shit is strong with Kristi Noem.
Mark my words, there'll be zero pushback against it from any of the right wingers on this forum. In fact they'll care more about her being referred to and "Ice Barbie" and whine about that.
 
Last edited:
Though your brother's bound and gagged
And they've chained him to a chair
Won't you please come to Chicago
Just to sing

In a land that's known as freedom
How can such a thing be fair
Won't you please come to Chicago
For the help that we can bring

We can change the world -- rearrange the world
It's dying -- to get better

Politicians, sit yourself down
There's nothing for you here
Won't you please come to Chicago
For a ride

We can change the world -- rearrange the world
It's dying -- if you believe in justice
It's dying -- and if you believe in freedom
It's dying -- let a man live his own life
It's dying -- rules and regulations, who needs them
Throw them out the door.


-Graham Nash (1971)

(He needs to add a new verse or two!)
 
Last edited:
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
Huh?

How is he not a fascist? He's rapidly turning our government into fascism.

This is like calling someone who was rude to you once for a narcisist.


It's just hyperbole. Yes, there's fascist traits. But he's right at the top of a slippery slope, that's not particularly slippery.

Not a racist? You realize some of his crowd have admitted they intend to purge the country of non-whites?

Where are the racist laws that he's passed?

Not a rapist? He's admitted to rape.

No, he hasn't. Don't relativise rape. It's a serious crime. Not cool.
Whereas sexual assault is not? What the fuck is your problem?

Answer the question: Do you think it is acceptable to sexually violate someone with your fingers or an object? And before this specific opportunity to defend the president came up, would you or would you not have considered it rape to do so?
 
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
The ignorance you display is baffling. What do you use as news sources?


Racist
In 1973, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Donald Trump, his father Fred Trump, and their company, Trump Management, Inc., for allegedly discriminating against Black renters in New York
. Evidence gathered during the investigation showed that prospective Black renters were denied housing, while prospective white renters were offered apartments at the same buildings.
Key details from the lawsuit and settlement include:

Discrimination tactics: Employees at Trump buildings reportedly marked the rental applications of Black prospective tenants with a "C" for "colored" and instructed building staff to lie about apartment availability to Black applicants. A former rental agent for the Trump organization also stated that Donald Trump, in his father's presence, instructed him not to rent to Black individuals.
Government investigation: The Justice Department's case was based on evidence from housing rights "testers" who posed as renters to document discriminatory practices.
Settlement and denial of guilt: The Trumps fought the lawsuit for two years before reaching a settlement in 1975, which did not require them to admit guilt. The consent decree, however, included mandates for the Trumps to advertise apartment vacancies in minority publications, provide the New York Urban League with weekly vacancy lists, and familiarize themselves with the Fair Housing Act.
Further litigation: In 1978, the Justice Department again accused the Trump Organization of failing to comply with the terms of the settlement, and they were later included in another class-action discrimination lawsuit in 198s.
He also spread lies that Haitians in Ohio were "eating the cats and dogs."

Rapist
Many women have accused Trump of physical sexual harassment or rape. Trump has bragged of "grabbing pussy." Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled against Trump in Case 1:22-cv-10016-LAK. His legal opinion of Trump's misdeed couldn't be clearer than his comment that "As is obvious, the central issue in both Carroll I and Carroll II is exactly the same– whether Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll."

Fascist
Most sentient observers regard the actions of the present Trump Administration as obviously "fascist." But that word is rather ambiguous. Rather than wasting effort in pointless rejoindering, YOU offer a definition of "fascism" and explain why YOU think Trump's fascism doesn't qualify.


Your turn, Dr. Z.
 
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
The ignorance you display is baffling. What do you use as news sources?


Racist
In 1973, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Donald Trump, his father Fred Trump, and their company, Trump Management, Inc., for allegedly discriminating against Black renters in New York
. Evidence gathered during the investigation showed that prospective Black renters were denied housing, while prospective white renters were offered apartments at the same buildings.
Key details from the lawsuit and settlement include:

Discrimination tactics: Employees at Trump buildings reportedly marked the rental applications of Black prospective tenants with a "C" for "colored" and instructed building staff to lie about apartment availability to Black applicants. A former rental agent for the Trump organization also stated that Donald Trump, in his father's presence, instructed him not to rent to Black individuals.
Government investigation: The Justice Department's case was based on evidence from housing rights "testers" who posed as renters to document discriminatory practices.
Settlement and denial of guilt: The Trumps fought the lawsuit for two years before reaching a settlement in 1975, which did not require them to admit guilt. The consent decree, however, included mandates for the Trumps to advertise apartment vacancies in minority publications, provide the New York Urban League with weekly vacancy lists, and familiarize themselves with the Fair Housing Act.
Further litigation: In 1978, the Justice Department again accused the Trump Organization of failing to comply with the terms of the settlement, and they were later included in another class-action discrimination lawsuit in 198s.
He also spread lies that Haitians in Ohio were "eating the cats and dogs."

He's not passed any racist laws. Or tried to. So there's that.

The above is grasping at straws. He wasn't convicted.

Rapist
Many women have accused Trump of physical sexual harassment or rape. Trump has bragged of "grabbing pussy." Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled against Trump in Case 1:22-cv-10016-LAK. His legal opinion of Trump's misdeed couldn't be clearer than his comment that "As is obvious, the central issue in both Carroll I and Carroll II is exactly the same– whether Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll."

He's obviously an entitled and horrible person. That's not the same thing as being a rapist. Until he's convicted it's not cool to call him a rapist. It relativises rape.

Fascist
Most sentient observers regard the actions of the present Trump Administration as obviously "fascist." But that word is rather ambiguous. Rather than wasting effort in pointless rejoindering, YOU offer a definition of "fascism" and explain why YOU think Trump's fascism doesn't qualify.


Your turn, Dr. Z.

other people have done the work for me


There's many factors. But the big one, which is missing in USA is a violent overtly anti-democratic mass movement. And after gaining power that mass movement is protected by the govornment and given special status, acting outside or above the law. It becomes a terror organisations terrorising anyone to speak up against the govornment.

The other one is freedom of speech. USA still has freedom of speech. One of the more tolerant ones. It's not even lose to threatened. It's not like democrat policians are routinely beaten and harrassed.


Calling him a fascist is absurd. He's not.
 
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
Huh?

How is he not a fascist? He's rapidly turning our government into fascism.

This is like calling someone who was rude to you once for a narcisist.


It's just hyperbole. Yes, there's fascist traits. But he's right at the top of a slippery slope, that's not particularly slippery.

Not a racist? You realize some of his crowd have admitted they intend to purge the country of non-whites?

Where are the racist laws that he's passed?

Not a rapist? He's admitted to rape.

No, he hasn't. Don't relativise rape. It's a serious crime. Not cool.
Whereas sexual assault is not? What the fuck is your problem?

Answer the question: Do you think it is acceptable to sexually violate someone with your fingers or an object? And before this specific opportunity to defend the president came up, would you or would you not have considered it rape to do so?

Now you're changing the subject. He's a sexual predator. You'll have no argument from me on that. But calling him a rapist is hyperbole.

My problem is with the hyperbole. Everyone you don't like isn't Hitler. I don't like Trump either. But he's done plenty of actually questionable stuff. There's no need to exagerate or make stuff up.
 
He's not passed any racist laws. Or tried to.
Yeah, that would be because US Presidents don't pass laws. Passing laws is the job of the legislature, not the executive.

He has however rolled back measures to limit the impacts of racism, to the extent possible via executive orders, some of which are clearly unconstitutional.

He has also ordered ICE to (unlawfully) arrest and deport people based on their race.
 
Until he's convicted it's not cool to call him a rapist.
He has been convicted. It is not only cool, but correct and honest to call him a rapist.

If you prefer to downplay his rape by calling it "sexual assault", that's up to you, but you don't get to tell others whether or not it is "cool" to call a convicted rapist a rapist.
 
There's many factors. But the big one, which is missing in USA is a violent overtly anti-democratic mass movement.
"Missing in the USA"??

Do you live under a rock???

Just stop it. The organised violent and anti-democratic mass movements have no comparissons to the disorganised violent mobs of today. The fascist mass movements were all about extininguishing personal freedoms. To become a willing mindless tool of the govornement. Today's mobs are absolutely obsessed by personal freedoms, to such an extreme degree that it's the pushing of the conflicting personal freedoms is the problem now. Everyone is equally obsessed by democracy. They accuse the other side of not being democratic enough.

Both communism and fascism want to go back to an imagined earlier time where we didn't have choices to make. We would be born into a station in life, where we'd stay, just keep grinding in life, and the state would look after us. The idea of the body politic. All of society to be as of one mind. The very opposite of today's mass movements.

The fact that there's violence today is where the comparisson ends. The type of violence is also different. Mass movements in the early 20th century were organised like armies. The various communist movement in the 1920's and 30's were litterally organised centrally from Moscow. The fascist orginasations where organised like armies.

Today's mass movements are more reminiscent of the Reformation IMHO. or the 17th century. These were technologically driven. Information technology.

The printing press in the 15'th century led to the rise of protestantism, fundamentalism and witch hunts. Because the church no longer could control the narrative disiminated. Kings and princes who wanted to take over Catholic property jumped on the bandwagon.

Industrialisation led to a rise of litteracy and an educated urban class. In the 18th century the aristocrats could no longer use their monopoly of access to wealth to strangle opposition. Because now the commoner industrialists had more money than them and wanted a share of the power. They started printing their own newspapers. Something that was prohibitively expensive before this.

Today the Internet as removed the monopoly of information from the educated urban middle-classes. Previously you had to have access to a newspaper to be able to spread your ideas. Or be able to start a radio channel. To put it in other terms the winner of the 18th and 19th century revolutions were the indstrialist capitalists. It's these people's power that is being challenged today, by the IT billionaires.

What has happened is that issues more important to provincials and the working class have taken over, ie the economy. Rather than virtue signalling about environmentalism, caring about brown people in jungles or whatever marginalised group we're now supposed to pretend we care about.

I see a paradigm shift in politics now. It's the old virtue signalling middle-class urban elites, who are being replaced by a new class of politicians. It's not a left or right thing. The old right is being replaced by a new right. And the old left is being replaced by the new left. And as always when there's a paradigm shift there's social instability and violence.

Calling this fascism is hysterical IMHO

But it is a worrying trend. I agree about that. Let's hope our civilisation doesn't shake itself apart in the process. The only thing I am 100% sure about is that change is comming. There's no going back to the pre-Internet world. That is rapidly dying as those who didn't have the Internet when they were teenagers are litterally dying. Young people care about different things than old people. In paradigm shifts that difference becomes extreme.

edit: Tom Holland has a good quote. "Revolutions happen when people are either out bread or when the newly educated college graduates can't get jobs that match their aspirations". We're on the second one now.
 
Last edited:
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
The ignorance you display is baffling. What do you use as news sources?


Racist
In 1973, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Donald Trump, his father Fred Trump, and their company, Trump Management, Inc., for allegedly discriminating against Black renters in New York
. Evidence gathered during the investigation showed that prospective Black renters were denied housing, while prospective white renters were offered apartments at the same buildings.
Key details from the lawsuit and settlement include:

Discrimination tactics: Employees at Trump buildings reportedly marked the rental applications of Black prospective tenants with a "C" for "colored" and instructed building staff to lie about apartment availability to Black applicants. A former rental agent for the Trump organization also stated that Donald Trump, in his father's presence, instructed him not to rent to Black individuals.
Government investigation: The Justice Department's case was based on evidence from housing rights "testers" who posed as renters to document discriminatory practices.
Settlement and denial of guilt: The Trumps fought the lawsuit for two years before reaching a settlement in 1975, which did not require them to admit guilt. The consent decree, however, included mandates for the Trumps to advertise apartment vacancies in minority publications, provide the New York Urban League with weekly vacancy lists, and familiarize themselves with the Fair Housing Act.
Further litigation: In 1978, the Justice Department again accused the Trump Organization of failing to comply with the terms of the settlement, and they were later included in another class-action discrimination lawsuit in 198s.
He also spread lies that Haitians in Ohio were "eating the cats and dogs."

He's not passed any racist laws. Or tried to. So there's that.

The above is grasping at straws. He wasn't convicted.

IIUC English is not your first language. Perhaps some simple yes/no questions can help us decipher your dialect.

Question 1: Multiple sources state that Al Capone ordered the deaths of "over 200" people. One source even shows this as an underestimate.
It is believed that Al Capone ordered the death of five hundred men in Chicago.
And yet Al Capone was never convicted of Murder.
Question for Dr. Z: Was Al Capone a murderer?

Rapist
Many women have accused Trump of physical sexual harassment or rape. Trump has bragged of "grabbing pussy." Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled against Trump in Case 1:22-cv-10016-LAK. His legal opinion of Trump's misdeed couldn't be clearer than his comment that "As is obvious, the central issue in both Carroll I and Carroll II is exactly the same– whether Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll."

He's obviously an entitled and horrible person. That's not the same thing as being a rapist. Until he's convicted it's not cool to call him a rapist. It relativises rape.

I enlarged Judge Kaplan's legal opinion for your benefit. The Judge found for the Plaintiff, while clearly stating that he could find for the plaintiff ONLY if Trump committed rape. (Criminal Rape was not charged in the lawsuit for several simple-to-understand reasons.) Can you paraphrase the reddened sentence into your native tongue for our perusal? It may help us get to the bottom of your poor English comprehension.

Fascist
Most sentient observers regard the actions of the present Trump Administration as obviously "fascist." But that word is rather ambiguous. Rather than wasting effort in pointless rejoindering, YOU offer a definition of "fascism" and explain why YOU think Trump's fascism doesn't qualify.


Your turn, Dr. Z.

other people have done the work for me


There's many factors. But the big one, which is missing in USA is a violent overtly anti-democratic mass movement.

Wow! I was being a bit "cute" about your lousy comprehension, but now you PROVE utter inability to read English. Is there no Wikipedia for a language you are competent in? The English article you link to begins:
What constitutes a definition of fascism and fascist governments has been a complicated and highly disputed subject concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets debated amongst historians, political scientists, and other scholars ever since Benito Mussolini first used the term in 1915.

The article "Definitions_of_fascism" contains no less than Thirty-four (34 -- almost three Dozen) definitions of "fascism." (I've espoused yet a 35th definition, to wit the one Madeleine Albright uses in her book titled Fascism.)

So do you pretend that a significant portion of the Thirty-five (35) definitions are compatible with your flawed claims? The word "violent" occurs only Two (2) times among the 35 definitions, and one of the two mentions refers only to "violent rhetoric."

British historian Ian Kershaw, while noting the difficulties in defining fascism, found [several] common factors in the extreme Right-wing movements of the late 1920s and early 1930s ...
  • complete destruction of political enemies – through radical and violent means ...
...
...
Zeev Sternhell, a historian and professor of political science, described fascism as a reaction against modernity and a backlash against the changes it had caused to society...  At the same time, Sternhell argued that part of what made Fascism unique was that it wanted to retain the benefits of progress and modernism while rejecting the values and social changes that had come with it; Fascism embraced liberal market-based economics and the violent revolutionary rhetoric of Marxism ...

ONE of the 35 definitions, though confined to "the late 1920's and early 1930's", sort of supports Dr. Z's claim. The other 34 definitions do not. Is that how scholarly understanding works? Pick and choose the phrases you like from the writings of 35 often contradictory articles?

Calling him a fascist is absurd. He's not.

Wrong again! And, although your summary of the DefinitionS of Fascism is absurdly narrow-minded and wrong, Trump certainly does preach violence. He's solicited help from neo-Nazi groups like The Proud Boys. He encourages masked plain-clothes cops to arrest innocent "suspects." He literally declares "War" against America cities like Chicago and Portland.

Wow! An ignorant Trumplicker on another continent who doesn't even know he's a Trumplicker! Seriously: @DrZoidberg : Where do you get your "news"?

Is Trumpism running rampant in Europe? May the Omnidog save us!
 
The problem with calling Trump a fascist is that it relatvises actual fascism. It's the "cry wolf" problem. It's the same thing with calling his policies racist. It relativises actual racism. Has he put in place any laws that limits people based on race? If not, then his policies aren't racist. He can be a racist while his policies aren't racist. To the rape accusation. He hasn't been convicted of rape. So calling him a rapist relativises rape.

The problem with all of this is that it will make us blind to being taken over by actual racist rapist fascist.

You don't need to like Trump to insist that we call him what he actually is, a lying orange clown
The ignorance you display is baffling. What do you use as news sources?


Racist
In 1973, the U.S. Department of Justice sued Donald Trump, his father Fred Trump, and their company, Trump Management, Inc., for allegedly discriminating against Black renters in New York
. Evidence gathered during the investigation showed that prospective Black renters were denied housing, while prospective white renters were offered apartments at the same buildings.
Key details from the lawsuit and settlement include:

Discrimination tactics: Employees at Trump buildings reportedly marked the rental applications of Black prospective tenants with a "C" for "colored" and instructed building staff to lie about apartment availability to Black applicants. A former rental agent for the Trump organization also stated that Donald Trump, in his father's presence, instructed him not to rent to Black individuals.
Government investigation: The Justice Department's case was based on evidence from housing rights "testers" who posed as renters to document discriminatory practices.
Settlement and denial of guilt: The Trumps fought the lawsuit for two years before reaching a settlement in 1975, which did not require them to admit guilt. The consent decree, however, included mandates for the Trumps to advertise apartment vacancies in minority publications, provide the New York Urban League with weekly vacancy lists, and familiarize themselves with the Fair Housing Act.
Further litigation: In 1978, the Justice Department again accused the Trump Organization of failing to comply with the terms of the settlement, and they were later included in another class-action discrimination lawsuit in 198s.
He also spread lies that Haitians in Ohio were "eating the cats and dogs."

He's not passed any racist laws. Or tried to. So there's that.

The above is grasping at straws. He wasn't convicted.

IIUC English is not your first language. Perhaps some simple yes/no questions can help us decipher your dialect.

Question 1: Multiple sources state that Al Capone ordered the deaths of "over 200" people. One source even shows this as an underestimate.
It is believed that Al Capone ordered the death of five hundred men in Chicago.
And yet Al Capone was never convicted of Murder.
Question for Dr. Z: Was Al Capone a murderer?

He's the president. If he was a racist then he would probably pass racist laws.

Has he done that?

Do you think his voter base wants him to pass racist laws?

What's stopping him?

You got nothing other than that he’s a gross person


Rapist
Many women have accused Trump of physical sexual harassment or rape. Trump has bragged of "grabbing pussy." Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled against Trump in Case 1:22-cv-10016-LAK. His legal opinion of Trump's misdeed couldn't be clearer than his comment that "As is obvious, the central issue in both Carroll I and Carroll II is exactly the same– whether Mr. Trump raped Ms. Carroll."

He's obviously an entitled and horrible person. That's not the same thing as being a rapist. Until he's convicted it's not cool to call him a rapist. It relativises rape.

I enlarged Judge Kaplan's legal opinion for your benefit. The Judge found for the Plaintiff, while clearly stating that he could find for the plaintiff ONLY if Trump committed rape. (Criminal Rape was not charged in the lawsuit for several simple-to-understand reasons.) Can you paraphrase the reddened sentence into your native tongue for our perusal? It may help us get to the bottom of your poor English comprehension.


I think you're the one struggling with your English.

He wasn't convicted. Rape is a serious crime. Its important to get it right.

Its also not cool smearing someone as a rapist if they're not convicted


Fascist
Most sentient observers regard the actions of the present Trump Administration as obviously "fascist." But that word is rather ambiguous. Rather than wasting effort in pointless rejoindering, YOU offer a definition of "fascism" and explain why YOU think Trump's fascism doesn't qualify.


Your turn, Dr. Z.

other people have done the work for me


There's many factors. But the big one, which is missing in USA is a violent overtly anti-democratic mass movement.

Wow! I was being a bit "cute" about your lousy comprehension, but now you PROVE utter inability to read English. Is there no Wikipedia for a language you are competent in? The English article you link to begins:
What constitutes a definition of fascism and fascist governments has been a complicated and highly disputed subject concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets debated amongst historians, political scientists, and other scholars ever since Benito Mussolini first used the term in 1915.

The article "Definitions_of_fascism" contains no less than Thirty-four (34 -- almost three Dozen) definitions of "fascism." (I've espoused yet a 35th definition, to wit the one Madeleine Albright uses in her book titled Fascism.)

So do you pretend that a significant portion of the Thirty-five (35) definitions are compatible with your flawed claims? The word "violent" occurs only Two (2) times among the 35 definitions, and one of the two mentions refers only to "violent rhetoric."

British historian Ian Kershaw, while noting the difficulties in defining fascism, found [several] common factors in the extreme Right-wing movements of the late 1920s and early 1930s ...
  • complete destruction of political enemies – through radical and violent means ...
...
...
Zeev Sternhell, a historian and professor of political science, described fascism as a reaction against modernity and a backlash against the changes it had caused to society...  At the same time, Sternhell argued that part of what made Fascism unique was that it wanted to retain the benefits of progress and modernism while rejecting the values and social changes that had come with it; Fascism embraced liberal market-based economics and the violent revolutionary rhetoric of Marxism ...

ONE of the 35 definitions, though confined to "the late 1920's and early 1930's", sort of supports Dr. Z's claim. The other 34 definitions do not. Is that how scholarly understanding works? Pick and choose the phrases you like from the writings of 35 often contradictory articles?

Calling him a fascist is absurd. He's not.

Wrong again! And, although your summary of the DefinitionS of Fascism is absurdly narrow-minded and wrong, Trump certainly does preach violence. He's solicited help from neo-Nazi groups like The Proud Boys. He encourages masked plain-clothes cops to arrest innocent "suspects." He literally declares "War" against America cities like Chicago and Portland.

Wow! An ignorant Trumplicker on another continent who doesn't even know he's a Trumplicker! Seriously: @DrZoidberg : Where do you get your "news"?

Is Trumpism running rampant in Europe? May the Omnidog save us!

Yeah, the proud boys are fascist. But they don't have extra legal status, nor are protected by Trump. When they fuck up they get arrested. Sure, a lot of them were pardoned. But Trump isn't systematically protecting them

Fascism is a very sinister ideology. Let's pay attention to the actual fascists. They're a much more serious threat
 

Wrong again! And, although your summary of the DefinitionS of Fascism is absurdly narrow-minded and wrong, Trump certainly does preach violence. He's solicited help from neo-Nazi groups like The Proud Boys. He encourages masked plain-clothes cops to arrest innocent "suspects." He literally declares "War" against America cities like Chicago and Portland.
There's also that time Trump said he'd like to punch a protester in the face and that we "used to be able" to put people like them on stretchers. Of course idiots are going to be idiots and ignore that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom