Let's Call Trumpism what it is - American Fascism.

1) Food garden towers in cities will feed 10 million+? One such tower couldn't even feed one similarly sized residential tower, even at bare minimum rations. Importing your food is insane. America is rated food secure, in that you can feed your citizens without recourse to imports - and that's what every nation should be striving for anyway. At least any nation which claims to care about its people, and about the environment. Globalism is killing the planet, ruining intact beneficial cultures, and now also spreading death to the people.

2) The class war is coming from the other side. They're they sneering elitists, after all.

 

"when I accurately describe someone with evil qualities, such as MY ENEMY, that is not demonizing - because demonizing means to characterize someone who is not evil as evil."

Said every ideologue in the history of humankind.

And FTR, accuracy is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to ideology.

 

In general, Authoritarianism is a more general phenomenon than Fascism. It is somewhat anachronistic to describe the Antebellum South as Fascist (even though there will be definite parallels that can be drawn with Fascist states). I think the racial caste-system in the U.S. that dates from the days of slavery right up to our own day, can be better understood under the ethos of White Supremacy. But let's assume that the South won their independence in the Civil War; in that case they would be a sovereign Modern state with an institutionalized racial hierarchy (and absent any countervailing Liberal traditions). That state could count as Fascist, I think, except for that fact that it would lack a charismatic authority. Or then again maybe it wouldn't lack this; the general or generals that were able to pull off a huge upset-victory against the North would be culture-heroes who might be able to build up the new state around their person (sort of like Washington could have, if he wanted to be a dictator).

Most Modern nations are nation-states, defined by nationalism, and wherever nationalism is pronounced it can tip into Authoritarianism and ethnic hierarchies. It is Liberal-national states that resist this tendency. But the example of the United States under Trump gives ample demonstration of the potentially illiberal potency of ethnic nationalism. My point about Fascism being a normal, standard part of the paradigm of Modern mass-politics, means that most any state can shift from a tolerant civic nationalism, to an invidious ethnic nationalism, depending on the circumstances. Perhaps at least in some cases, the criteria for whether a state has become Fascist might be a matter of Justice Potter Stewart's criteria for pornography. Fascist states and Liberal states alike belong to the paradigm of the Modern state, and likely exist along a continuum of Modern state-forms. This is one of the reasons why it's difficult to define Fascism (and one of the reasons I opt for a fairly open-ended definition of the phenomenon, and why I speak of "American Fascism," i.e. not lumping all political manifestations of Fascism together, as essentially one and the same).

White Supremacy is not necessarily, or at least not formally, Fascist; not anyway where there exist legal means of redress for racial discrimination. But the Trump phenomenon gives an example of how a free society can be subverted by a race-baiting Demagogue. Fascism as an ideology (of ethnic populism and chauvinism, as I have defined it above) certainly marks Trump's political support, and his rise; Conservatives and Conservatism are implicated in the Demagogue's rise, in so far as - well prior to Trump - Conservative political messaging traded on racial animus and cultural Othering, and Conservative political actors resorted to extraordinary measures to retain and expand their power. Conservatives by these means directly prepared the ground for Trump.

In general, one of the reasons why the Right is more often associated with Authoritarians, more apt to collude with Fascists, is that both see in Left-liberalism a common foe. One of the grace-notes of our dalliance with American Fascism during the Trump years, is that it brought home to a few Right-liberals that they are more the natural allies of Left-liberals, than they are of the Fascists; some Right-liberals have even issued mea culpas for how they, in the last generation or two, facilitated the rise of Trump (and so, I would say, the rise of American Fascism).

There might be metrics available, theoretical frameworks, that enable us to descry when a relatively free society is tipping into Fascism (there might be some such formula drawn up at the State Department, for example). But I don't have any of those to hand.

 

No need. Isolating the increasingly medieval large coastal cities is all that needs to be done. Just the ones with insanely high taxes and a massive wealth divide. The ones in which state politics have driven out the working and middle classes, leaving only the very rich and the very poor.

Of course it's those cities which house the Americans least able to fend for themselves, while even the poorest rural person has a reasonably good shot at staying alive quite nicely. And there would still be plenty of decent towns and cities for the urban necessities. Towns and cities with a much smaller wealth divide. Places the working and middle classes can still live a good life.

 

It makes no sense that it would even be considered a food-sourcing option, if it were that inefficient. Besides that, I see no reason why the ability of agrotech to increase yields could not be applied to this form of food production.

I figure that almost every (developed) nation imports some significant share of their staples. Call it insane if you want.

Elevating a Demagogue like Trump to Chief Executive, on a decidedly minority-share of the of ballots, sure feels like warfare to me. That he won't concede the election, and continues to contest it, has the outlines of an existential threat.

 

1) Won't make a jot of difference. You can give people every possible advantage in terms of a starting point, but if they're determined to stay poor they'll find a way to not make it work for them. Remember that 'welfare' is meant to propel people out of dependence and the poverty which goes with that .. not keep them in it.

2) Public healthcare is definitely needed in America. But it should be funded by every citizen - rich or poor, as it is in my country.

 

1) You're proposing Soilent Green. Have fun with your GMO freak food

2) Yes, but we shouldn't be importing food when we are rated food secure (as is my nation, and as is America). Globalism will destroy everything and everyone.

3) I'm not American, couldn't care less about Trump, and want to see an end to the perpetually increasing division which has been created and fostered by the Progressive Left (aka, white elites) since the beginning of this century.

 

Any American city with river-access to the sea would hardly be isolated, it would have access to global trade. As the coastal cities would control all the ports, it would be rural America that would be rudely thrust back on its own meagre resources.

City-dwellers are quite adaptable creatures. A lot of urban Detroit has been converted to farmland, for example. Without however easy access to the work-product of the cities (including for example cheap foreign imports), I'm afraid that the rustics would quickly find out how crimped their standard of living had become, especially when it comes to things like medicines.

 

Eh, for a long time we've developed non-GMO hybrid-tech which can expand food production. Hydroponics would eliminate the gross water-waste of a lot of food production. And lab-grown meat could spare us the environmental catastrophe of factory-farming.

I think this is more a matter of ideological belief for you, than a practical viewpoint.

Eh, the class war is global, anyway. It is (very) doubtful that the rustics will have any better go of it outside of America.

 

Did you miss the bit about the environment and globalism? Perhaps you're one of these Climate Change deniers. Cool if you are, we're all entitled to our own position on that.

And there, you leapt straight to the sneering (my bold). Meantime, not sure why you think an entire nation is so dependent upon a few decaying medievalesque coastal cities. People are leaving those places in their millions, so America goes with them. Those places will be dirty husks, with no one but homeless people and the super rich. Like Calcutta but without the sense of social responsibility and general decency.

 

1) Yum

2) Oh yeah, it's just me. I mean, Globalism has been so good for the planet, and for pandemics, and for the rapid decay of European stability, and so on and so on and so on.

3) You can't help but sneer and call names, can you? This is why I'm so disgusted by my own side. The Party of Contemptuous Sneering Snobs, mocking the peasants.

 

Let us come to an understanding of sorts, if you will bear with me a bit longer. Every man who sits in the chair of the President of the United States of America, the commander in chief, of the most powerful military the world has yet seen will at times experience a peculiar quirk of vision in which a surprising number of the problems he faces start to look astonishingly like a nail. This, of course, because the President has at his beck and call the biggest damn hammer the world has ever seen. Add too that the most expensive and best set of spy toys ever, and the urge to make use of all these assets in some way or the other can be damn near over whelming. Especially when the men who control the information flow to you think they're the ones who ought to be formulating policy rather than implementing some one else's. In short there is and was a very good reason to limit president as to two terms. That much power is bad for your mental health, and the well being and freedom of the Body politic.

In short no politician is God, and the mist dangerous set of circumstances to a republic is when a politician or a set of bureaucrats. Begin to believe they are God. To date that hasn't happened with Trump.. iitt clearly did with Obama and his henchman whether the leftist here want too believe it or not is irrelevant.

 

Uh, what makes you think the hinterlanders are going to be spared whatever climatological effects are coming down?

Dense population centers, as a matter of fact, are more ecological, more efficient in their use of resources, than people spread out are. And I don't know where you get your little formula of "a few decaying medievalesque coastal cities" - that certainly doesn't apply to my country. The problems our cities do have, are a consequence of bad land-management, which is something we can fix (and should fix, as a matter of environmental justice). Under the pressure of an exogenous forcing factor like climate change, we'll adapt.

 

In discerning a person's expectations of the just-passed election, in many cases, just knowing their news-network of choice would probably enable a pretty fair guess-- of everything from who they voted for to how the vote count appeared to be going. Yes, the press has long had the ability to mold, manipulate, & control public opinion, or at least that of its audience. This is something that, with all its dimensions, is deserving of multiple threads: the watchdog, inhibitor, gauge, & the propaganda tool, for all. And I thank you for reminding me to keep this in mind, as the conversation develops. Since I've not completely established the lay of the land yet, of Modus's argument, I feel it's now a bit premature, for myself, to toss this into the mix.

Here's yet another thread, though it's certainly applicable to this thread, as well, should we make it in that deep.

While it's gratifying to know that there is an appreciative, if small, audience for my posts, I by no means wish to, or could, monopolize the conversation with Modus. So if you hear, in your mind, some missing accentuation or complimentary counter-rhythm to our discourse, by all means feel free to jump on a keyboard & join in ratta-tatt-tatting along.

 

That's delusional, good luck on your dependence of fickle sources VS domestic and stable, production. "Rural America" feeds the ingrates like you.

 

Well I dunno what to tell ya. Pre-modern societies were plenty good at pushing themselves past the carrying-capacity and into Malthusian crises, something that a globalized world has so far avoided. Of course we do need to live more ecologically, but we don't all need to run for the hills to do that.

"Rustics" is not exactly a slur. And it certainly isn't as if in this conversation you've been speaking in respectful terms of urban places and urban dwellers - so a little bit less hysteria from you might be in order. Anyway, in my country anti-elitism and especially anti-intellectualism is standard cultural fare; it's our experience that we are looked down upon by people who know less, amazingly enough just because they know less. Yeah, my patience with that is gonna be limited. Especially when they produce political leadership which is beyond all doubt morally inferior to us.

 

**** ideology. This is not about ideology.

Trump is the enemy of the people.

Evidence?

Anyone who declares that the American press is the enemy of the people IS the enemy of the people.

Why? Because the only thing standing between tyranny and the people is the free press.

It doesn't matter how perfect or imperfect the press is, the press is a very necessary function of society to speak truth to power, whether you like it or not.

Anyone who declares that which protects Americans from tyranny as the enemy is a tyrant or one that wants to be a tyrant.

Trump is not just my enemy, he is your enemy, he is my enemy, and my neighbor's enemy.

More evidence?

Trump said, years before the election, "they only way democrats can win is if they rig the election".

Only a tyrant or a wannabe tyrant would say that. No president in history has said that.

Only someone who is anti-democracy, anti-American would say that.

“Your campaign strategy seems to be to call Biden a criminal,” one correspondent pointed out. “Why is that?”
“He is a criminal!” Trump declared. “He got caught. Read his laptop. And you know who’s a criminal? You’re a criminal for not reporting it. You are a criminal for not reporting it.”

These are the words of a tyrant. A tyrant does not need evidence, he accuses, and poisons the landscape with lies.

Trump is YOUR enemy.

Trump, who squelched the health care of his grand-nephew, a toddler with cerebral palsy, out of vengeance to spite his deceased brother's estate who are suing him because he cheated them out of their inheritance, is not someone who gives a **** about democracy.

Trump is the enemy of the people, get that through your head.

 

If you cant see 98% of the press is just an arm of the Democrat propaganda machine, you simply dont want to. Now watch them fawn over Joe and the Hoe.

 

You're living. In the past. Under the current government in California I give it a decade at most before Ca returns to a semi arid steppe that can't even feed its own population.

 

Yeah, the entire West is gradually desiccating. But the problem with climate change is not wrought by the people living in the urban cores; it's the sprawl, which was always unsustainable. In general, the American Midwest and especially Canada needs to brace itself for a flood of refugees from the West and the Gulf Coast.

 

What you describe is called globalism and is fostered by capitalism (repubs and dems alike). We are living more and more in a global village, whether you like it or not. And all countries in the world are adapting to it, volens nolens.
Trumpism has chosen the nationalist attitude (his "America first" actually means "America alone") which is not sustainable in the long run.

 

I think we mostly agree.
The religious extremism is one of the most dangerous, since it so easily lends itself to the "I'm right because I know I'm right" feeling.

 

I know we agree. I just wanted to display some optimism.

 

Thanks for your invitation to join the conversation. However, my dialectics is not as sophisticated as yours and Modus Ponens', partially due to the fact that, as you probably noticed, English is not my native language, so I often need to look up in a dictionary for my posts.

 

So, when Obama said, I have a phone and a pen and proceeded to write law from the Obama Office, he was not an authoritarian, but when Trump undid Obama's illegal executive orders with executive orders of his own, that was authoritarian. I see how that works.