Lawyer: Donald Trump is NOT a Fascist
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- To support me on Patreon (thank you): / cosmicskeptic
To donate to my PayPal (thank you): www.paypal.me/c...
VIDEO NOTES
This clip is taken from Within Reason episode #26 with David Renton, which will be available in full this Sunday.
LINKS
Buy "No Free Speech for Fascists" by David Renton: amzn.to/3MqYyFC
SPECIAL THANKS
As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons:
Itamar Lev
Evan Allen
John Early
Dmitry C.
Seth Balodi
James Davis
g8speedy
James Davis
Mouthy Buddha
CONNECT
My Website/Blog: www.cosmicskept...
SOCIAL LINKS:
Twitter: / cosmicskeptic
Facebook: / cosmicskeptic
Instagram: / cosmicskeptic
Snapchat: cosmicskeptic
The Within Reason Podcast: podcasts.apple...
CONTACT
Business email: contact@cosmicskeptic.com
Or send me something:
Alex O'Connor
Po Box 1610
OXFORD
OX4 9LL
ENGLAND
------------------------------------------
It's not fascism as long as there is no murder seems like a very low bar... There is so much more than can be seen as violent subjugation of the opposition aside from murder...
when did he say that. also do you acknowledge that ANTIFA are fascists?
Indeed.
Yes, but we should only outlaw fascism once it takes power and proves to be fascistic. Otherwise it could be problematic.
I think it's also just plain wrong by his own standards.
Donald Trump isn't a fascist because he isn't rounding up groups of people and subjugating them? He outright was tying to ban muslims from entering the country. He ramped up the US immigration policy so high that we started ripping children from families and letting them get human trafficked.
That's just fascism and it's actually HIS definition.
Like using violence and intimidation to bully people into accepting political and social ideology? In other words, "antifa" playbooks?
While i agree that the word “fascist” is used too loosely these days, this is a bit pedantic and a bit disingenuous to me.
"These days"
Orwell complained about the overuse of the word back in 1944.
It's also flatly wrong. Trump is a fascist by every metric, no two ways about it.
@Nicholas Time ou mean people who were once under fascist rule? I didn't realise I was a king! Awesome!
@Nicholas Time If being ruled by a fascist makes someone a fascist, then 2016 to 2020 saw America with a 100% fascist population.
Fascist is the insult de'jeur against the right. Leftist is hurled at the left.
Let's not pretend it's a tactic used only on one side.
Especially the "banning" of speech part.
I like how everyone came to the same conclusion lol, glad I wasn't the only one getting the vibe of "It's not fascism until it suddenly is too late"
If you really believe that to be true why not stamp out socialism before it becomes communism?
@@ltmund because no country has ever achieved communism (not in the modern era anyway), communism isn’t inherently harmful like fascism is, any country that’s claimed to be communist has had authoritarian leaders and interference from capitalist nations, by the very definition of communism (a stateless, moneyless, classless society where the means of production is owned by the community as a whole) none of those countries are or were communist.
@@robbs808 it doesn't matter if they didn't quite meet the definition of communism. Its the outcome. All previous attempts at communism set out to achieve your definition, yet all ended up the same, with state sponsored murder.
Fascism is an example of an attempt to fix the failure of socislism by the Soviet Union.
Right? "Didn't jail his political enemies" *queue 4 years of "lock her up" and "didnt contain racially motivated discrimination (i forget his exact words) queue "build that wall" and the muslim travel ban. The dude *tried* to enact these things but our government withstood the attempts. That doesn't make him not a fascist, it makes him an unsuccessful one.
@@jimpoulos01 let's not forget about him trying to steal the election and jan 6
American here. There is no way shape or form that the Republican Party is "center right".
Imagine a European saying that!
Donald trump is centre right. He's not even close to being anywhere near the right wing of the republican party
Right? The conservatives in the UK are basically center democrats in the US. Not sure how he can make this argument
You need to study your shapes and forms then, because it might be that you are standing very far on the left.
What right wing thing do they want to do?
That's just so narrow though isnt it? You cant just hinge the meaning of fascism on the presence explicit violence, cmon now
You can and you should.
Any other way and fascism loses its meaning.
I mean, it already lost but it doesn't mean we shouldn't learn the lesson of crying wolf.
@@teIekid fascistix actions equates fascism does it not
You can be a bit looser in conversation but you should be extremely narrow if you are proposing restricting speech over a definition. That being said, I do think Trump crosses the line.
@@teIekid so essentially treat fascism when violence has already happened versus warn people about its lead up via actions known to be fascistic
even with that definition, trump crossed that line already
Am I wrong in thinking it's probably best to identify people as fascists _before_ they're packing you onto cattle trains?
The same cattle trains that CS would now support because hes no longer vegan?
Hell no! This man is a damn fool and Alex should be ashamed for propping his ass up like this. Even Alex himself says Trump is "just right wing". This idiot says, "well fascists imprison and or execute their opponents. Donald trump openly admits that is just what he wants to do! Just because he can't do it yet, without jeopardizing his power, doesn't mean he's not a fascist. This shit is infuriating, especially coming from a show run by a guy who I considered to be a sensible guy. The idiot goes on to talk about Trump as if he's a historical figure, ffs
@@DiahRhiaJones chill dude, he's still supporting6 vegan though it's disappointing .
@@Nonamam no, he isnt.
I think you are absolutely right. He doesn't become a fascist only when he starts packing the cattle trains. He's a fascist on the road there.
I somewhat agree, that the word 'fascist' currently is used too loosely. But he takes it too far. When someone uses violence against their political opponents or any arbitrary group of people, it's not a reason to deplatform them. It's a reason to throw them in jail. Preferably for a very long time. Deplatforming should be used before violence, so said violence would be prevented.
That's slightly sinister isn't it? By your rationale we could throw anyone into prison under the guise that they're on a trajectory to commit violence at some undisclosed time in the future. This is quite common on the left: "we know what they're really thinking when they say [insert entirely innocent remark]"
Why not apply this idea to the state monopoly on violence?
So Black Lives Matter should be deplatformed?
How did he use violence? The January 6 riots? Did he tell the people at his rally to storm the Capital, or did he tell them to go protest peacefully and patriotically. The storming didn't occur until Ray Epps had a conversation with some group (ProudBoys?); yet Epps surprisingly was of little interest to the get-Trump mob.
@@Jay_in_Japan Because that would be too inconvenient for them, they're leftists, if they had no double standards they'd have no standards at all.
So basically it's not fascism if they aren't successful in their goals? That's an insanely thin line to draw. Some lawyer he is.
By that logic the BUF - British Union of Fascists led by Oswald Mosley wasn’t fascist.
Ah yes because Trump's goals were to greatly suppress the American people.
So we can't call a fascist a fascist until it's too late lmao
I heard the same thing.
This was my exact reaction. This video is hopelessly naive.
Read George Orwell's "what is a fascist?" You fascist 😉
What Makes Trump a fascist?
@@mikeekim242 I would recommend Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism for an actual attempt at defining what makes something fascist. Renegade Cut on RUclips has a very good video about MAGA and Fascism. In brief, MAGA as a movement is ideologically centred around: the cult of traditionalism, a nostalgiac "return" to an imagined greater past, scapegoating based on essentialist characteristics, culture of machismo, emphasis on the in/out group. It's a politics of "shit sucks, shit used to be better, and THEY took this better shit from you." Phrases like "real Americans know what's happening" and "we used to be a real country" are serious red flags
It's not Fascism if it isn't literally a genocide, is one of the stupidest points I heart from this channel
What's odd is that I have only ever seen this point from fascists. Today I think I see a liberal agreeing with them. I'm not aware of any historical tendencies of liberals and liberal groups aligning with fascists but who knows.
good thing that wasnt said. ANTIFA is explicitly fascist why dont you focus on that if you actually care about fascism in America? what actions has Trump shown that allude to fascism?
@@VashTheDamnFiend if antifa is explicitly fascist, why do they literally call themselves "antifascists" and fight nazis?
@@VashTheDamnFiend lmao so you're saying ANTIFA...which is short for Anti-Fascist is fascist? Did I get that right?? 🤣
@@VashTheDamnFiend TURBO🧠
Alex, April Fool’s Day was 6 days ago mate
Exactly no free speech only people who think like you only thats not thinking
🤣
Trump is factually not a fascist. That’s not an unbelievable statement, anyone with any idea what they’re talking about would know that and clearly you are not one of them.
This guy's point is trivial. Trump and the far right would use all of those tactics if they could reach the critical mass where they could push back the resistance.
Your "Trump and the far right" boldly displays how ignorant and brainwashed you are. Try to actually think for yourself and break out of Leftist indoctrination.
It’s a marriage between the android progessive left and the corporate far right
They might, that is true. But this is not about what Trump is as much as it is about how to counter Trump and others like him. And calling him a fascist and trying to deplatform him is futile because that just backfires and gives him more power and following.
Hmm. Of course there likely are trump supporters who would use violence...but I never saw any. The only people that I know of who actually use political violence are antifa lol.
What’s your evidence, or reason for your assertion? I don’t believe Donald Trump ever condoned killing your political opponents.
Saying Trump is not a fascist because he didn't lock up his enemies is a weird take. He talked about locking up Hillary all the time, he didn't lock up his enemies because he was held back by public opinion and the rest of the people who would have to carry out his wishes.
I think he is mixing up fascist governing and fascist ideology in reference to trump but then still advocating for banning the ideology?
of course you can be a fascist but live in or even be president in a liberal democracy
Mind reading
So do we finally call Hitler a socialist then, given the amount of socialist propaganda he pushed and agreed with? Or is this logic only applicable when it benefits your party?
@@whitehavencpu6813 You have not read 'Mein kampf' authored by Adolf Hitler. See if you ask that question or will you ask are all Christians fascist.
What's with all the capitalist thugs popping up for no reason? WTF are you even talking about dude? How does that have anything to do with this comment thread?
Ridiculous.That he was constrained by democratic institutions of government doesn't negate that he is fascist at his core. Wth does this guy think the run up & Jan.6 event is if not the violence & willingness to harm?
What was antifa doing for months when they used violence and intimidation to bully people and hold cities hostage? What was the left doing when the indicted Trump on b.s. charges? Is that fascism?
There were like 5 jan. 6 style events performed by leftists since 2020. This whole rhetoric is just a whole load of "it's good when we do it".
There's the comment I was looking for. So because his fascist desires were suppressed by a system of checks and balances, we cant label him a fascist or highlight that he has fascist tendencies... yet? Not until he's successful in implementing a total takeover of the system? That's just silly. I tend to oppose hyperbolic language (like calling implicit bias "violence," it can lead to violence but it's not violence just in of itself) but I don't see this one as hyperbole. It's like this guy is conflating calling someone a fascist because of their policies and calling someone a fascist because they actually installed a fascist regime. Is Bernie Sanders not a democratic socialist just because he hasn't had a chance to implement any of his policies on a national scale? Can none of us use a label for our political positions because we haven't been in a position of power and changed the system to our worldview?
It's like he looked at Eco and went, "Nah, fascism only exists when there are death camps."
Then ignored all of the "migrant detention centers".
Bro, Jan 6 is just propaganda. It was a protest. You've been brainwashed by the media who's taken over your mind as your epistemology. Ironic considering this channel.
So we can't call fascists fascist till there's a night of the long knives?
He's not tho in any way he was voted in for his opinion and bias just like Biden
Well, the Biden administration just had Trump indicted on bullshit charges, which is a pretty fascistic move. The left also used antifa as their violent arm to use violence and intimidation to bully people into falling in line.
@@davidevans3223 I am going to let you guess who was voted to be chancellor of Germany
@@Mattdewit No, Hitler was not fascist, he was just anti-immigration 😬 /s
@Macdonald Yes, in the off chance that we accidentally vote in a psychotic murderer, we should instead have an eternal rule by an inbred family of psychotic murderers. Much better.
It will be interesting to see what this guy's definition of fascism actually is. And freedom of speech for that matter
The Wikipedia definition (which is very in depth compared with normal dictionary definitions) works with what he was saying except he added a racial bit that isn’t explicit in the Wikipedia version. Trump wasn’t doing the “forcible suppression of opposition” part at scale (At least while he was in office).
[Edit: from Wikipedia] Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement,[1][2][3] characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
@@glenecollins what makes that definition far right? (It's seems to just be word play, the far right isn't right wing)
What's the key difference between this and it being far left?
@@Raygun9000 I should have put that in inverted commas it is the definition from Wikipedia.
I am pretty convinced of horseshoe theory I don’t think there is in the end much difference between very far right and very far left dictatorships.
The most obvious difference is the belief in social stratification which should be very much against leftist ideals (but which has shown up in every communist and socialist country).
"Fascists are people who want to limit free speech... but not me... because I'm not a fascist :)"
@@glenecollins I think you were quite clear it was from Wikipedia. The problem is the definitions aren't usually neutral.
Hmm, natural social hierarchy doesn't fit right somehow.
Thoughts on the idea that he's just an unsuccessful fascist? Like he's indicated he would act in the way a full blown fascist would if America's institutions were as strong, why should fascism be dictated by success?
So you can ideologically justify not doing anything to prevent the conditions that allow fascism to flourish
Promotion of violence.
Persecution of political oponents.
Getting corporations to act on behalf of the state. Everything for the state, nothing outside the state.
The democrats do all of the above
Add in trying to disarm the population and the democrats tick almost every box
Because you are assuming that those are his goals when the reality is we just don't know.
Donald Trump's not a fascist, here's what a fascist is: proceeds to list fascist things the USA government does on the regular.
Truly, lawyers are the REAL experts when it comes to weaseling out of a definition to avoid blame!
Donald Trump is not a fascist . That’s true . But the current US. Government is behaving in a fascist like manner . That’s fair comment .
Straight up, if he’s not a fascist, he feeds into every fascist government system in place in the US. The 24 hour news cycle, the right wing dog whistles. He may not look a fascist on the outside, but you’d be an idiot to say he doesn’t feed into fascism.
Authoritarianism can be non-fascist.
Yeah, saying that 'he didn't have his political opponents jailed' doesn't say anything about Trump's fascism, but rather America's non-fascistic constitution and laws. Because Trump's charisma is so limited and his political skills so lacking, he was a failure as a fascist within a non-fascist political system. (and not saying that one cannot do fascistic things within this system, cause we do... just that it takes charisma and skills that were not on exhibit between 1/2017 and 1/2021)
@@ruskyalmond1977 yes but fascism is fascism - there’s so many papers where people like Laurence Britt, Umberto Eco have outlined what pins fascists.
"Lock her up", anyone? I mean, I think the fact that he never locked up his political opponents was more for lack of ability to do so, than for lack of desire...
Biden just had his political opponent arrested. Does that count?
"fascist" isn't just a synonym for illiberal or authoritarian...
Why shouldn't she have been locked up?
Hillary Clinton is human garbage but who cares?
Anyone but Trump right?
You're a bunch of dummies.
@@yeahohright3097 I... didn't say it was... I was just commenting that Mr. Renton said that Trump wasn't a fascist on account of the fact he didn't lock up his political opponents. I was pointing out that in fact Trump gave every indication that that's precisely what he'd have done, had it been in his power to do so.
@@CaptainTrismegistus Oh I see what you mean now.
This a giant swing and a miss. This guy is a complete donut.
An articulate argument if I have ever seen it.
@@greeny_119 do we really need to make arguments about such bafoonery? The dude defined fascism as effectively 1942-1945 German and if it's not exactly that it's not fascism.
@@JackieVargo And why that's missing the mark is because that describes _Nazism,_ not fascism. People who haven't read Mussolini and Hitler don't know the difference
@@greeny_119 Not all arguments need be articulate nor rational to be effective. For example, you're quite the pastry yourself. And I donut care that you claim otherwise
@@Jay_in_Japan I would go even further and say that the dude's definition doesn't even cover nazism before the camps started. Making fascism a post hoc label to be applied. Again, incoherent.
The big flaw in this man's assessment of Trump is that he's categorizing the man in political terms; Trump is not a politician, he's an opportunist. Anything remotely resembling governance from Trump came from other people, not him. A more fascistic bent to his administration was not avoided but thwarted. Trump sees himself as a ruler, not a public servant; to think otherwise is folly.
That's the point nobody is qualified they are voted in for there opinion and bias they use exsperts to advice no career politician will know more they can't it's not what you vote for he's an idiot to me but of course it's a democracy
You could replace "Trump" with any american politican in the last 10 years and that sentence is valid. Its a problem with the country, not the one man.
@@ByteSizedGamer yeah, no - I get the sentiment but it's an unequivocal false equivalency. We actually do have true public servants, on both sides - but Trump is a unique type of social pathogen.
Thwarted by who? The Military Industrial Complex that he criticised publicly? One of only 3 presidents in America's entire history to do so? The others being Eisenhower and JFK?
@@fuckamericanidiot Seriously? We have military leaders who upheld their oath by either constantly getting into fights with him, or just ignoring his batshit-crazy and uneducated things he thoughy he was entitled to do. He literally said started his own social media channel where free speech that is negative to him isn't allowed. He actively encouraged organic violent groups that would support him with armed violence, and did it with Mafia-don tactics that let his people put themselves at risk while claiming his hands were clean. If you want to argue semantics, perhaps hes better labeled as a would-be authoritarian who was thearted by the system, but then you'd also have to accept the fact that the party he joined was and is actively working to dismantle the protections that kept him in check. But, if you go there, then you have to also accept the clear connective tissue between authoritarianism and fascism. Using violence to maintain power is a hallmark of fascism. This guy's assertion that Trump-as-fascist is "just a prediction" is historically ignorant: Trump is in it for Trump, and that's it - to think otherwise is equally ignorant.
Have to agree to disagree on this one
but you cant actually provide any examples as to how Trump is a fascist
@@VashTheDamnFiend I think “Let’s talk about Trump’s accomplishments” by Beau of the Fifth Column here on RUclips does an excellent job both sides-ing the argument. Really helped me understand why Dems are so rabid about it and why Republicans don’t agree with them.
@@VashTheDamnFiend "Make America Great Again" is an inherently fascist slogan, paired with his rhetoric. Blaming worker's struggles on immigrants, muslims, the LGBT community, as well as other general markers of fascism like anti-intellectualism, really make a surefire case. General fascism can be summed up in two words, palingenetic ultranationalism.
@@nousernameinputed ok cool where do you stand politically so i can see how to take your comment? This channel's comment section is a shitshow so no offense
@@VashTheDamnFiend I flip your statement on it's head. Name a SINGLE tenant of Fascism that Trump and the GOP doesn't completely embody.
I disagree. When people like Trump are called fascist it is not because they are not liked, it is because they demonstrate some fascist tactics. This has been shown by plenty of other experts. I think most of us understand that if people of his ilk could get away with more extreme actions they would.
What facist tactics? You mean like using violence and intimidation to bully citizens into accepting a political ideology? Because that's, ironically, antifa's gig.
Explain the fascist tactic; I mean something that is purely unique to the fascist ideology.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040
Trying to overturn the results of an election with force. Having government committees review library books to filter out queer content. Calling for the eradication of whole groups of people.
@TourDroneNr595 There was no authoritarianism. Of course his own campaign was "centered around himself", are you stupid? Being a "protected class" by law is fascist, fighting against that concept is anti-fascist. He has done nothing against same sex marriage or interracial marriage or contraception. Climate change is a separate issue entirely and his pandemic response was to decentralize it, which is again the opposite a fascist would do (look at China for the authoritarian response). No evidence for religious cult of personality, the religious always like to "magify" political leaders, it has no bearing on them.
@TourDroneNr595this was also prevalent during the great leap forward to an even greater extent, was chairman Mao a fascist?
The historical ignorance of this comments section is astounding. If you were seriously interested in the topic you would go and read what the fascists themselves (Mussolini etc...) had to say on the matter and not the 2016 - 2023 guardian opinions section lmao.
Bro, you're getting super interesting guests (even if they occasionally make a dumb point). You are not afraid to have people who you disagree with on the channel, and that is great!
Adulation magnification stagnation. All these words, and what do they mean? You tell me, because I ain't telling thee.
@@mmhmm9271 I don't understand your point. I know what the words mean.
Get Jordan Peterson on! 😂
@@mmhmm9271 You have internet access, use it. They aren't obscure words.
He absolutely is scared. He is totally ignoring all the vegans that can hold him accountable for his claims since ditching veganism.
Political representation is based on intent and behavior not ability or access. He says donald didn't lock up his political opponents, but "lock her up" was his most popular chant. He says he didn't do concentration camps, but we had mexican immigrants camps and Trump would've gone further if he could've. Donald was a fascist in charge of a nation with protections against authoritarianism. Just because he failed doesn't mean he wasn't a fascist.
(Edit: I've seen it pop up multiple times in the comments, Obama's versions of the immegrant cages was very problematic but was only for child found crossing the border already alone. The impromptu cages were not the best option but were much easier handled and regulated do to thier scarcity. The same can not be said for the trump administration with its failures of abuse, neglect, and straight up losing children. The biden administration has failed to fully phase out this practice but has taken measure to reduce them and reunite separated families. There are absolutely administrative problems with both these administration's, but the trump administration turned the stupid desperate thing that Obama was doing fascistic and left a giant mess for the Biden administration to sloppily fix. The difference is apparent.)
So it's basically impossible to be a fascist leader in America?
Good, good.
Now try to build something instead of destroying a straw man.
@@teIekid not that it is necessarily impossible, but that our protections, which are neither automatic nor necessarily enforced, were deliberately used against trump. People looked at trump, saw a fascist, and blocked it deliberately. From my angle trump meets this guy's definition of fascism to a T other than his odd requirement for success. I like to quote mussolini's definition, not a guy I trust on most things but I'll trust him on this, "fascism is a marriage of goverment and buisness". Donald trump was a buisness man taking the single most powerful position in our already existing goverment and where we would ussually require the abandonment of his buisness man role, he circumvented. If you want a long point by point answer, "some more news" did an entire series of videos on how Trump meets all the signs, parallels particular examples, exhibits specific tendencies, and attracts similar behaviors and groups as fascism has in recorded history.
Who built the cages though lmao? They were used before Trump. And are the left not trying to imprison their political opponents every chance they get? Plus the Twitter takeover exposed the state's merger with corporations which was used to silence people with opposing political views like conservatives. the most damning aspect is how the left are anti-free speech - that alone is all you need to know which side is actually fascistic vs regular incumbent government.
Clinton is a evil criminal. Just do half a minute of research Jesus Christ.
yep. when you look at Umberto Eco's list of Ur Fascism, you see a disturbing similarity with Donald Trump and the Republicans and well.. fascism. I mean, they're already passing anti-trans legislation. I wonder ... which previous group did something like that.. .somewhere in middle of Europe. They also talked about making Germany Great Again.
These people want to have a ditto copy rather than seeing the substance of the right wing populist nationalist Christian movement that supported Trump. I guess for them, as long as Trump's birth certificate doesn't list Adolph Hitler, it's not facism or nazism.
Jewish survivors of the Holocaust are reminded of those dark times when they hear Trump. So something is triggering those memories and we have to wonder why Trump and not say, Bush Jr. something is there.
Then, we have Holocaust experts and they're also deeply concerned because it's very similar. What is it that they are noticing? Oh wait.. could it be updated nazi terminology like cultural marxism (they used to say cultural bolshevism) or MAGA?
Even the guy who created Godwin's rule. said.. that is no longer in effect because these right wingers are well.. modern day nazis. Do we really need to create an American version of Nazi Germany before the liberals and the moderates say "Oh, I got it now. Please don't blame me for playing games."
In medical diagnoses, patients don't need to express all the symptoms to be diagnosed with the disease. You don't need to have a ventilator to be diagnosed with Covid. We're all special and unique snowflakes. These children who have the privilige of not being in the target group and in the society where their rights and being are threatened.. they don't have the right to say "Well acktuschually... (internet nerd speak)". This guy will never run the risk that a brown person has to deal with in the US. He will never have to seriously consider a knee on his neck. He'll never have to be asked "excuse me but are you legally here". He's going to be fine in the US and that's why he doesn't see the danger.
That guy’s arguments were pretty silly. The fact that Trump didn’t have death camps after 4 years doesn’t mean he’s not a fascist. To be fair, I don’t think Trump himself has a political ideology, he just does what gives him applause. But his current hardcore audience is certainly fascist
right, if only all forms of fascism fell into a narrow perspective and unique form of politics. Political ideologies evolve, it isn't restricted to the 1940s. Trump is 100% Fascist
He never implemented any fascist policies. You may not like what he says, but he is not 100% fascist.
@@thSpeedyTurtle bro they just declare it and never have to prove their claim lmao this comment section is stepping into the belly of the beast of Clown World
@@thSpeedyTurtle The harsh immigration policies, the rhetoric, the Muslim travel ban, c'mon dude. Just look at his presidency, literally every marker of fascism is in what he says.
@@VashTheDamnFiend _"bro, they just declare it and never have to prove their claim."_ You just accurately described Donald Trump and every Trumpist alive, all of which would happily point at the color blue and swear up and down it is red if they felt it best served them. I can agree the term "fascist" may be thrown around a little loosely, but nowhere near as incorrectly as Trumpists throw it around (that's right, they use the term, too) as well as "communist" and many other terms they have no understanding of but run around saying anyway because Tucker Carlson and others like him pump their brains full of that shit day in and day out. That's the clown show. If you think people calling Trump a fascist (which he absolutely would be if he could get away with it) are clowns for doing so, you're most likely one of Trump's apologists who try to excuse everything he does and support his countless lies, while never having to prove their claims.
@@codenamepyro2350 Harsh *illegal* immigration policies = fascist?
You’re grasping for straws Right now.
“Center/Right party”… ?!?!
I imagine he’s speaking in a global context where it has to be compared to things like the CCP and middle eastern theocracies.
@@ABurch13 no the republican party was a centre/right party, the description is accurate for the longest part of history abd currently doesn't reach far right levels, you could say right, and the center was abandoned but not far right by any means
In context to globalism the republicans are progressive LMFAO
@@Cecilia-ky3uw the republican party is about as far right as you can go in the US and still have political power.
They're literally destroying democracy before our eyes and stoking violence against minority groups and blame them for all the counties political problems. Trans people are literally dying for lack of care, black folk are being targeted by a police state, and governors like Gretchen Witmer had plots on their lives from these right-wing militias who swear allegiance to strongman Trump.
I don't know how anyone can call what happened on Jan 6th and the response to it from Republicans in power right now, people in leadership positions like MTG, an attempted fascist takeover. Failed? Of course. But its either fascist or theyre fascist sympathizers no matter how you slice it.
It definitely is… A majority of Americans, regardless of left or right, are closer to the center.
I will withhold full judgement until I watch the whole episode, but this feels a little like not calling someone a "murderer" when in reality they only haven't committed a murder because they haven't had the chance to.
This plus the idea that they are simultaneously attempting to put themselves in a position in which they have the chance to murder.
Saying we shouldn't deplatform someone like Trump feels like saying "we shouldn't prevent someone from going out with a knife at night and cornering people in alleys because it is wrong to take rights away from non-murderers"
Name a murderer who hasn't murdered yet. One.
You cannot possibly know.
Do you want to stick with your analogy?
Remember when Nancy Pelosi tried to persuade the US Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces to remove DT because she was worried that he might unilaterally access the launch codes to initiate a nuclear strike to divert attention away from the election? The Joint Chiefs ignored Pelosi’s request, and DT didn’t do what she was terrified he would do.
Sounds like an idea of pre-crime policing like in that movie Minority Report. Imagine if the justice system went around locking people up on the suspicion that they were “about” to commit a crime. That would be the very definition of fascism. And you would advocate for that?
You sound like someone who has no actual political knowledge outside of the propaganda they’ve been fed
That's not how the justice system works in America tho. That's a terrible analogy. One isn't labeled a murderer or punished for murder if it hasn't been proven that they actually have murdered someone. And that's the way it should be. Our justice system is intended to protect citizens from dangerous people. So what kind of sense does it make to put someone away or ruin someone's reputation when they haven't done anything. That's hurting the people! Even with the current "innocent until proven guilty" mentality in America innocent people do STILL end up wrongfully convicted. It's tragic and terrifying but realistically with the number of people in this country it just bound to happen. There's no such thing as 100% accuracy. Now imagine an America where you can be put away for simply thinking something (which BTW only the person having the thought can really know what they are thinking. Anyone else's opinion is pure assumption) or imagine an america where someone can be murdered and you happened to be the closets person to the body when it was found so it HAD to be you right? Or maybe the people around you just FEEL like that's something you would do. Jail time. Ruined reputation. You're an ex con everywhere you go. Just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time or for just being a "weird dude that would probably murder a guy" "innocent until proven guilty" isn't there to protect dangerous people from being convicted. It's there to prevent ruining the lives of innocent people.
@@MyTimelord11 Pre-crime
In his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language, George Orwell observed, ‘The word fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable."’ So it seems that misuse of the word is not an entirely modern phenomenon.
Great comment.
That was a great observation by Orwell. He also noted that leftwing intellectuals were anti-patriotic and hated their country. Not much has changed there, then, except that the ordinary upper middleclass appears to have adopted this view also now.
Orwell would likely have thought Trump was a fascist, considering how he conceptualised fascism, but without a coherent ideology.
My view is that if you act the playbook of an ideology out, your motives are irrelevant. In politics, you are what you act like.
What the guest gets absolutely wrong is what fascism does when in power. First it undermines the democratic institutions, then it starts mass repression. All widely recognised forms of fascism begun with a period in coalition with conservatives and waited for their moment of transition. Some regimes were arguably on track but never quite made the full transition. The Trumpist, or Putinist, strategy of dominating your coalition by rallying the extreme and pushing it into the mainstream and moving against democratic barriers is completely consistent with early fascism.
I think he also speaks about it in Homage to Catalonia.
It was a tactic used by Communists at the time to label anything as fascism.
This feels like the whole 'you can't call it genocide till your in the camps' argument
Yet that is a fundamentally true statement
Idk, wanting to ban life saving healthcare for everyone and restrict gender identity expression is pretty fascist, among many other things
Especially using force and violence to attempt to take over a government. That pretty much does it.
4:40 I would argue that the constitution and the people upholding it allowed trump’s political opponents to be free. I think that if he had his way they would be in jail. “Lock her up” after all
And you would be 100% correct in that argument. Did you notice how this guy spoke as if Trump was a historical figure?! This man is clearly a right wing loon. Only fascists and fascists apologists speak of fascism as if it's this far away and complex and sophisticated ideology, and this comment section is filled with em. You can identify the right wing thugs immediately. WTF are they all doing here? They must hatewatch this channel, or only come here to vent in the comments or to practice their mental jousting with an audience where they can remain anonymous and there are no consequences. Real life frightens the bejesus outa those types.
That's just baseless speculation. There's no evidence he had any intention of imprisoning political opponents. The only example people ever give is the "Lock her up" chant which Trump never even said himself.
Trump isn’t really a doctrinal fascist, but he intuitively learned that spouting fascist talking points will get him the applause and admiration he so desperately craves every minute of his life.
He also has a history of admiring explicit fascists (we’re literally talking Mussolini here), again, likely for the same reason and not because of much ideological overlap. He doesn’t care about fascism as long as he can’t be the leader in question.
That’s why he’s currently sabotaging DeSantis, who, at least in my book, seems much more like someone who genuinely believes in fascist ideology.
How is he sabotaging him? He is currently his political opponent...
How does he believe in facist ideology?
24 likes for this moronic garbage.
>"we will not allow strangers to mutilate children without the parent's consent"
>"genuine fascist ideology"
This is what woko haram does to your brain.
Lawyer: Richard Nixon is NOT a Crook
Alex, I love that you have conversations with all kinds of different people with different opinions.
But I expect a much stronger push back from you, otherwise, these interviews are just a platform for hurtful ideologies.
👏👏👏👏 I have a more cynical take. I think Alex is courting a right wing audience.
Possible. Are you saying he is grifting? If so, can you defend that assertion?
Yeah, Alex is smart enough that questioning this line of thinking should've been child's play.
I haven't watched the full interview, and based on this clip I don't know that it'd be worth my time. Part of me wonders if by this point in the interview Alex had identified this interview was a lost cause to the point it wasn't worth asking some obvious and basic questions.
@@Michigntiger08 You know Alex's character. Why doubt it? Judging an hour long clip on 8 minutes seems to be unreasonable.
For instance - @misterchief242
@misterchief242
3 days ago
Wow! I came into this thinking I would be mostly disagreeing after watching yesterdays clip…. And now I have a new name written down to keep checking on in the future. Loved this talk!
Don't dismiss things that you have limited understanding of, simply because you presume you dislike it.
@@pmbcdirector1489 I said nothing about Alex's character; you're the one who has assumed I made judgements of his character based on an 8-minute clip.
I questioned why Alex let such an obvious flawed argument go without question. That's it.
And to clarify, if I choose not to watch the clip it's because of the guest, not Alex. Based on this clip I have serious questions about this guest and not seeing much value in hearing him talk for another hour.
Yea I mean come on, this is absurd. To argue Trump is not a fascist is to deny virtually all the published definitions of fascism, which Trump unsurprisingly fits all of them. The most common of these definitions usually come not as strict definitions, but as a list of characteristics. The "Fascism Checklist" as one might say. Most scholars argue that it is only necessary that one aspect from the checklist be present for Fascism to coagulate around it and blossom from there. The means by which fascism attains and holds it's power can be completely different, but as long as it maintains one of those characteristics as a central part of it's movement, it's fascist. Again, this is according to most scholars.
This may include ultra nationalism, fear of difference, an appeal to the frustrations of the middle class, obsession with the plot, contempt for the weak and machoism (anyone notice how Trump consistently refers to certain individuals as tough and strong), and most notably - the cult of tradition. This is of course but a few characteristics of fascism. All of these that I mentioned this far however, apply to Trump indefinitely.
Also, why are we asking a lawyer about fascism? Fascism is a topic in political philosophy, not law. It has nothing to do with law. It's no surprise that a lawyer says he's not fascist. Ask a professor of political philosophy and I guarantee they will define Trump as fascist without any hesitation. Many of those characteristics make a significant amount of conservative pundits fascist as well, the most well known of which I would say would be Jordan Peterson and Matt Walsh.
I might put JP slightly outside the label of fascist, but only because he seems so dedicated to upholding particular parts of the current status quo. He's certainly laying ripe seeds for fascism to grow, as you explained... So actually at that point, the defining seems to be more an issue of semantics. "Almost fascist" is still a huge red flag.
lmao it's absurd you think Trump is a fascist by any of the criteria you named. you cant just name your cute little checklist like a midwit to make yourself feel intelligent. you have to actually provide examples for each of your criteria and prove how Trump fits them
Here is the thing, those are one of the things we list. But fascism if we take nazi germany's later stages included the working class, machoism is not a good standard for fascism and can be taken as simply building confidence, to call fascism a cult of tradition is ABSURD and reveals a flaw in this definition, due to the looseness of the definition of cult, in essence, this is why the term fascist has become meaningless, ESPECIALLY when used by thsoe on the left, because they throw it at almost anything conservative. When you say ultranationalist it can mean that trump is very unfascist with the way nationalism works and a fear of difference is a common fear of all people. And the biggest part of this is that the term fascist is thrown around for its connotations here.
This is probably the problem. Scholar does not equal correct.
Waiting for the comment: “I was with you until you mentioned Jordan Peterson”
Wow lawyers are the worst
He may not be a fascist, but he does have fascist tendencies.
Im glad that most of the top comments have pointed out that having such a narrow term for fascist is of no use and that going by behavioral, rhetorical and historical markers for what makes someone a fascist is actually useful for identifying such individuals.
Fasc ism is a narrow term. You can always invent and use some other random term instead of using the term 'fasc ism' wrong.
This guy doesn't seem to know what fascism is either. Damn.
What is the difference between patriotism and nationalism?
The huge majority of commenters on this video don't either. Many are equating the Nazis with fascism, or Trump with fascism, which would be hilarious if they weren't so disastrously misinformed.
@@Jay_in_Japan One of the left's tactics is to control language. The use terms like racist, fascist, transphobic, etc. simply to put their opponents on the defensive by explaining why they are not those things.
@@Jay_in_Japan Nazism is fascist by every definition of fascism as an ideological construct. Italian Fascism and National Socialism are _the_ prototypical fascist ideologies everything else is compared to.
@@willguggn2 Nope. Read _Mein Kampf_ then read Gentile.
I actually wrote a 20 page essay in university on this question and I think it boils down to this:
He wanted to lock up his opponents, he wanted to overthrow the democratic order but he was just too incompetent and the US institutions were too strong.
It's about intent and possibility.
He never tried to lock up opponents
@@PointNemo9 There is a difference between trying and wanting. I would say having his crowds shout: "Lock her up" ad nauseam shows a desire to put Clinton (the main political rival at the time) in prison.
Again, a lack of a viable path to get this done doesn't mean didn't want to do it.
Also his wanting dirt on the Bidens from Selenskyy goes in that kind of direction.
Even though I don't think the Bidens are completely clean, it's not his place (as the president and political rival) to intervene like that.
And there is also an angle of frequent arrests of protesters during his admin which i could also get into...
@@PointNemo9 The point is that he WANTED to, and so did his followers.
@Barry Moore No, he didn't. You are just making baseless assumptions.
@@PointNemo9 Not baseless at all. You followers of this sociopath kept chanting "Lock her up" at his rallies, and he never discouraged any of you.
The Webster definition of Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
I am an American. If that doesn't describe Trumpism, I don't know what does.
Well it doesn't. Trump never favored race over individuals - that's the left peddling racism to divide people. Furthermore he reduced regulations on the market, its the left that regimented the economy, and he never suppressed any opposition, the democrats are by trying to imprison him.
Seems the left are actually fascist, i mean after all, Mussolini's fascism evolved from socialism, and Nazi is literally "National Socialism", but of course, lets hear the cope 'that's not real socialism'...
The definition kind of hides multiple different meanings: It describes a political philosophy, movement, and regime all at once. If you think of it just as the regime, then you can argue that Trump never managed to become a dictator, and therefore he also never formed a fascist regime.
But this doesn't change that the word also describes a person's political philosophy and what movement they belong to, and I honestly don't know if Renton left this out to be deceptive or if he really believes that this limited definition is appropriate.
Needless to say, if you're only going to take action against someone once they've literally become a dictator in the sense that they have the power to imprison you if you take action, then maybe you made a mistake in your judgement
A coup is not fascism.
A dictionary definition holds little weight. It describes Trumpism, sure, which includes a variety of reactionary ideologies including fascist ones, but fascism is also a unified ideology, which Trumpism isn’t and we should be glad they have a lot of infighting. Trump, however, the dictionary doesn’t define. Trump has zero convictions and if he professes anything it will be because of a profit motive which is connected to ego. Pence has two: God and America. Trumpists have many fascists in their ranks whom many of them cozy with. Their membership consists of paleocons, neocons, libertarians, or fascists. Trump himself is a capitalist who chose to sell and pander to his base which has a large fascist cohort. That’s a good distinction to make, but a good enough reason to, say, outlaw the existence of Parler, for it is a safe space for fascists not just reactionary groups. They can still protest in favor of Trump in a town square, so long as no one brandishes a swastika or a confederate flag or related symbols or recite fascist slogans, or incites threats of violence. The point I think his book wants to make is to not alienate conservatives entirely but to limit reactionary talking points enough to avoid their spread without forcing them to go underground (and unwittingly let them spread where no one can see and criticize them). Among the many Trumpists, those who are religious fundamentalists and are part of a tight-knit paramilitary (like that pro-Trump militia in Oregon) and are racists most qualify, but Trump has yet to harness his influence well to mount something organized. The fascist subgroups who fall under Trumpism organized on their own, got him to sign off on the idea and pander some more, doesn’t quite make Trump a fascist but that makes him terribly cozy with them. There are more priests I know in my country (Philippines) who qualify as fascist than Trump does.
Well, it doesn't at all.
I don't know if I'd call him a fascist, ideologically. He clearly is an idiot who will do anything as long as it gets him applause, and he's been so sheltered from the consequences of his actions that he doesn't think the law doesn't applies to him. At the very least, he will be responsible for at least beginning this country's descent into fascism. I'm not sure who the guest is, but I've heard more coherent criteria for what people consider fascist, and a lot of those points can apply pretty cleanly to Trump.
How much fascist theory have you read? Read any Gentile?
thing is historical fascist leaders were also idiots who sought applause and attention. stupidity and narcissism are not mutually exclusive with fascist.
The idea that it's only fascism once explicit violence is involved is a hilariously disingenuous/naive outlook and in the case of Donald Trump, he fits even that standard because of January 6th violence.
He told his rally to march to the Capital and protest peacefully and patriotically. People seem to ignore that.
Trump would have to advocate for the state control of the means of production to even begin to possibly be considered a "fascist". But exactly 2 people in the entire comment section have actually studied fascism and know anything about it
Yes, the definition of fascism is not entirely agreed upon and the term is used lightly... but come on, essentially saying "it's a counteractive regime that crosses serious moral lines and persecutes its enemies" is comically insufficienct.
You guys clearly not have heard his speeches at his rallies during the past year. He's gotten way more extreme and clearly uses violent loaded language
Like what? I haven't watched a whole rally since the burning of the Reichstag.
BLM is way worse
Example of these violent language without taken it out of context
@@killermoon635 "Knock the crap out of him. I'll pay your legal fees."
@@xensonar9652 You missed the "without taking it out of context" part. Context typically refers to the 30 seconds before, and after the sentence. Taking Trump's sentences out of context is a classic tactic from the left. They used it with "good people on both side" to manipulate people into believing Trump was saying white supremacists were good people after he explicitely said he condemned them 10 seconds earlier. So, until proven otherwise, you are just another idiot repeating lies to manipulate other idiots like you.
Calling the Republican Party center-right is pretty ridiculous in an international perspective, where the Democratic Party would count as somewhat right-wing, with only the left fringe crossing the center.
Lawyer: despite it walking like duck, quacking like a duck and looking like a duck, it’s definitely not a duck.
Duck: I’m a fucking duck.
*Dude gets ducks and small geese confused
*rages at $60.00 piece of paper on wall reading "rage against the machine - fight the man"
@@pmbcdirector1489 are small geese a euphemism for trying to establish an dictatorship after dismissing the outcome of the election?
@@thelector6549 In that case, all the far-left rioters should be considered fascists too.
This is on par with Matt Walsh saying it's not genocidal because he didn't even mention genes.
Wow, what a compelling argument u got
Wait, people take that claim seriously? How would you steelman Walsh's position?
@@robk5427 -that is a steel man. That is literally what he said
@@PhreemunnyI'm guessing that was a one-off response to show the absurdity of some midwit's claim at one if his events. Are you saying he's a proponent of some form of cide?
Someone doesn’t understand sarcasm
I am not familiar with Mr Renton or his writing but he sounds like a serious bloke, so it's surprising to me that he takes a position which is so weak and unsupported by evidence on the question he discusses here. A RUclips comment is not the place to make a detailed critique of his statements in this short extract, but he is entirely wrong about both the nature of Fascism and whether or not Donald Trump meets the criteria to be labelled as a fascist.
Firstly, racism and the murderous persecution of racial 'enemies' is NOT a core principle or defining feature of fascism. It may be an almost constant feature of fascist political movements and their leaders (because xenophobic nationalism and the desire to identify 'enemies of the nation' to demonise and to promote public paranoia and fear about, IS a defining feature of Fascism) but it is possible to envisage a fascist party or leader that was not fixated on race - look at early Italian Fascism for example.
Secondly, Trump does indeed tick virtually all of the boxes to qualify as a fascist, even though he has no idea what the word means. Noam Chomsky makes a similar mistake to Mr Renton, saying that "Fascism is a serious ideology" (which it is) and therefore that Trump cannot be a fascist because he has no serious ideology. Well, it's true that venal corruption and greed, obsessive malignant narcissism, petty vindictiveness, instinctive racism, contempt for the Human or legal rights of others, authoritarianism, and a willingness to incite and promote violence for political ends (or just for revenge) does not amount to a coherent ideology, but 'Fascism' is not just a noun, but also an adjective. A person or a political movement that ticks all the boxes can be described as 'fascist' even if its leader and most of its supporters have no idea what fascist ideology is (or even what the word 'ideology' means). Trump IS quite prepared to incite and use violence, and to incarcerate and/or kill his political opponents - he ran his first Presidential campaign on the slogan "lock her up' and although he didn't do this (because he couldn't), he did have his ex-lawyer (Michael Cohen) recalled to prison after being released on licence, solely to stop him making statements critical of Trump. The office of the US President is constrained by certain legal and Constitutional factors, but Trump did make some headway in undermining these, and if he ever got another chance then he would certainly try to smash them altogether, because he is the ultimate opportunist... and this is also a feature of Fascism.
Here in the UK the policy position of the main fascist parties has shifted over the last few decades from "support for the Palestinian people's right to self-determination" (the OLD NF policy motivated by their visceral anti-Semitism) to a much more supportive position towards Israel as an ally in the fight against 'Islam' - by which they mean Arabs and non-Europeans (especially as the Israeli government now includes Zionist racial fascists who they basically agree with on almost everything).
Fascism does not have a central text or a defining political position or policy that allows commentators to make a simple black and white determination (neither does 'democracy' come to that). However, anyone who understands politics and who knows their history should have no trouble applying the correct label to Mr Trump and his MAGA/America First movement, or to the USA's Christian Dominionist Clerical Fascists who overwhelmingly support him (despite the fact that he's very obviously an atheist), so I find Mr Renton's position baffling and verging on the politically illiterate.
Trump has never threatened concepts like free speech or disarming the population. Those are the 1st things a fascist would do and openly talk about.
It seems his definition of fascism is narrowly focused on action, whereas I think a more accurate definition includes the action based fascism and fascist rhetoric
And fascist ideology, surely?
@@LukeMcGuireoides Which absolutely no one in the comment section understands. I'd bet no one here has even heard of Gentile, or much less read him. Or _Mein Kampf_ for that matter (not that Nazis were fascists).
Where do these people hide? Ones that I can see have a bias but are still trying to be honest with the info they have. Gives me hope. Thanks
Yeah, before this show, I didn't think that there were serious, well spoken thinkers on Tucker Carlson. Not calling Tucker either of those, but Konstantin Kisin had some very fleshed out points and articulated them well
@@hahaihaveahandlenowBut Kisin is still a capitalist sympathiser. He doesn’t articulate well when he’s called out on hypocrisy of him wanting to protect his capitalist interests vs our social interests of protecting people within marginalised communities
Even people with highly posh accents can be wrong, as this guest so clearly demonstrates.
In the context of narrowly defining exceptions to free speech, I agree that the approach must be extremely conservative to avoid potentially infringing on people's rights. However, I also agree with many other commenters here on several points.
1. Let's not sugar coat it. The modern U.S. Republican Party is far right.
2. Trump is an opportunist. If he thought he could actually successfully carry out a plan to take power by force or remove groups he doesn't like, he absolutely would. He tried. His incompetence doesn't mean his ideals aren't fascist. That said, while Fascist might not describe him perfectly, the only things keeping him from taking final few steps towards it are sufficient ease and incentive to do so.
3. Deplatforming someone, in certain contexts, is not an infringement on free speech. You can say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean anyone has to to help you say it.
But using government influence to deplatform someone is a violation of free speech. We know that the left did this. Does that count? Trump was just indicted on bullshit charges. Does jailing your political opponents count as facism? Pretty sure it is.
In regards to point no. 1, far right as compared to what? The modern left? In that case, then yes. As compared to the political landscape only a handful of decades ago? The average modern republican citizen would be considered far left.
In no way is the US Republican Party far right
The policies of the Republican Party have been CONSISTENT for nearly 40 years. Economics side: low spending, cut taxes, higher tax credits, oil subsidies.
Social side: traditionalism, individual liberty, etc.
If anything the Republican Party today has shifted left on many fronts
It’s the modern Democratic Party that is FAR left.
@@TheBlacksmith5 That's just not true. Your perception is severely distorted.
1. Economically both parties have shifted to the right in the last 50 years. The democrats aren't a leftwing party.
2. On social issues both parties became more liberal yet more identitarian as well using strong enemy images instead of policy.
3. There was a major rightwing turn with trump in the republican party where now a major part of republicans will openly question the democratic system calling for election fraud where there is none.
That's some perspective.
So what do we call Trump? It can't be 'centre right'.
A authoritarian (loose) conservative
90's Centre left
@@Raygun9000 What?
@@codenamepyro2350 he was a Democrat.
@@Raygun9000 Since when were the Democrats left wing?
Does stochastic violence count as violence for this guy? To think that Trump was less of a fascist because the institutions of American politics were more resilient than he would have liked, despite ceaselessly calling for the jailing for his opponents, just seems daft. I know his primary concern is the use of "no platforming", so this categorization of Donald Trump is a somewhat side point, but to say that it's wrong to categorize fascist-friendly or fascist-aspirant political figures as capital F Fascist is just idiotic in our political discourse. Fascism itself isn't a stable, coherent ideology (so sayeth several other scholars), so pointing out that Trump himself isn't a stable, coherent exemplar of fascistic tendencies is just a non starter. All imo.
If stochastic violence counts as violence, whatever Trump did was self-defense. The left has been engaging in stochastic violence since Obama's 2nd term.
Credit to Alex as an interviewer/debater. Excellent questions.
This guy has a very narrow, etymogically fallacious definition of fascism. Literally every other definition would easily include Donald Trump and the American right wing as fascists. This guy's 'fascism ' is like Jordan Peterson's 'truth'.
Okay. What definition of fascist would include the entire American right?
Could you link me one please?
@@DrakusLuthos The first one from MW works fine:
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Perfect definition.
@@williamhutton2126 That definition misses Anarcho-capitalists, paleo-conservatives, religious right-wingers who claim god as higher than the state, and libertarian right-wingers in general.
Most right-wingers want a smaller, less powerful government, not a bigger one. “Don’t Tread On Me” is a massive slogan amongst the libertarian right-wing. A totalising state is the foremost fear for many of these guys.
@@nodruj8681 Your comment was censored, btw. Had to trawl through newest to see it.
@@DrakusLuthos Bruh, yer a clown. It incorporates literally ALL American right wingers. ESPECIALLY religious nutters and ALL conservatives. Do you not know how to parse a definition?
_"Most right-wingers want a smaller, less powerful government, not a bigger one."_ - Smaller (oligarchical - dictatorial), less powerful (please explain the push to legislate every aspect of a person's life as 'less powerful', simpleton). You truly are a clown
_"“Don’t Tread On Me” is a massive slogan amongst the libertarian right-wing"_ - Who regularly enact legislation to ban the right to choose, the right to self identify, the right to free speech, the right to protest, the right to be free from institutional religion. Clown.
_"A totalising state is the foremost fear for many of these guys."_ - Which guys? Name some. I bet I'll prove you wrong.
Arguing that Trump isn't a fascist is silly
Arguing that Trump is a fascist is silly.
Arguing that the left opposing him isn't fascist is silly.
Just goes to show how little the other side of the pond understands about the U.S.
Donald Trump isn't Mussolini or Hitler..
Yet.. But he does have many characteristics from Umberto Eco's list. You don't need it all to be a fascist, you can have fascistic tendencies though. Donald Trump radicalised political scene like no one else.
Obama met like 8 of his points… is Obama a fascist?
Trump: Does fascism.
These guys: "he's not a fascist tho"
If Trump was a Fascist…. There’d be no more CNN, MSNBC, or especially a democrat party. Period.
@@Elektroslag He cant, there's no examples of these claims, only claims, and then they run and hide. Pathetic trump haters.
@@Elektroslag Read my comment
you clearly dont know what a fascist is lmfao "does fascism" are you a child?
@@Elektroslag One they used in the video is wanting to use the military to force the outcome of the election in his favor/force people to accept him as the illegitimate president.
there's a lot that this "lawyer" guy said that I don't agree with in the slightest. Its almost like he doesn't live in America.
The word fascist is used very haphazardly these days that people forget it has a definition.
from some people, sure. and also others are unwilling to recognise fascism when the definition is actually being met, choosing to endlessly squirm away from the reality.
i'd like to hear this guys analysis of the treatment of and legislation against trans people during and post the trump presidency and how that doesn't fit into his definition of facism
The trans fantasy stops when it conflicts with my reality.
No one is in jail for being trans
Since you brought it up, maybe it's on you to explain how it does.
@@chesterdonnelly1212 That has happened though. Cece Williams, a Trans women, was being followed and called racial slurs on the street one night. She pulled out a knife and held it in front of her in self defense. Her assailant didn't notice the knife and came at her anyway, impaling himself and dying from his wounds. Cece was imprisoned for this. Since she acted in self defense, she should not have been imprisoned, but she was anyway. Also, when Trans people end up in prison, they are much more likely to be given solitary confinement than anyone else, simply for being Trans. Solitary confinement is considered torture by the U.N., and is so damaging to mental health that the people who invented it disavowed it. Your statement is simply untrue, on many levels.
@@ArcherJLady so he decided to carry a weapon and used it to kill someone. A prison sentence seems appropriate.
Yes, the only reason DT didn't persecute his political opponents was the vagueness of his ideological principles...what?
I think this view is a bit myopic and pedantic. If we only smother fascism and not the things that produce fascism then we're just playing a reactive game of whack-a-mole. Right-wing populism is just as dangerous as fascism because it has always become fascism. The earlier you treat cancer, the better the prognosis. We can't afford to get hung up on cleanly defining the parameters of fascism and only concern ourselves with what crosses that threshold.
What about left-wing populism, say, communism?
I applied the definition of fascism and showed how it fits trump, and he deleted my comment. I guess the fact that we got lucky and the checks to his fascism held means he is not a fascist. (Yes, I think that is profoundly silly too),
@@stefanbatory3632 What about it?
What are you on about?
@@stefanbatory3632 despite the whataboutism, it's a valid question worthy of an answer. But there's already a problem: left-wing populism is not the exact opposite of right-wing populism. Left-wing populism lacks the violent, chauvinistic vitriol you see in its counterpart. Left-wing populism is the foundation of many labor parties around the world, and you can understand why those movements aren't a threat the way right-wing populist movements are. Now if you're a billionaire or an oil tycoon, you would be more threatened by left-wing populism, but it's not going to target democracy or democratic values the way right-wing populism does.
You can call a political movement fascist, but ONLY after its too late to do anything about it.
Yeah...thats why you dont ask a lawyer what or who is a fascist.
Taking away free speech from someone results in the jeopardy of free speech for everyone.
Being an atheist who didn't fall off a cliff with the other lemmings is very lonely these days.
2016 was rough...
This guy has really underdeveloped ideas on this topic. They're so underdeveloped that it's obvious he's come to gut instinct conclusions and justified them post hoc.
A clear example is Stalin. By the definition he's given, Stalin is a fascist - and yet, Stalin was notoriously fickle in his beliefs; he was willing to abandon many of them in the service of broader political strategies - his primary reasoning for why Trump shouldn't be considered fascist.
Further, his definition was "a willingness to jail or kill political enemies" and notably, he included entire racial groups as potential political enemies. Here, I take the liberty to say that both of Trump's rhetoric against undocumented immigrants and Muslims could make them considered his political enemies - a pedant might challenge the exact relevance of "racial" here, but I presume that had these groups been massacred on the streets, Renton would consider that an act of fascism; and so, attribute this lack of pedantic accuracy to him. Of course, Trump's administration didn't attempt to massacre these groups (there would be no need for my hypothetical) but he did completely change the legal framework so that these groups could be arrested when otherwise they would not have been. Prior administrations developed the idea that "undocumented" migration was little more than a bureaucratic crime - rectified if recent, and largely ignored once the immigrant had developed a life within American society - under the principle of executive authority to allocate resources. Trump on the other hand, switched to completely upending those stable lives. Infamously, he even tried to go after DACA, which only survived his administration thanks to the courts.
Trump, by this standard, jailed his political enemies. Oh, but he's such a wacky guy - erratic even - this 70 year old man could hardly be considered to have a stable world view. He only started his administration by declaring a group of civilians as his political enemies after a lifetime of thinking through what his best strategy in acquiring political power would be. And then he only rooted for the deaths of politicians that didn't uphold fealty to him in an attempt to maintain that power. These are two completely different things, clearly he doesn't have a coherent philosophy of power, so he can't be a fascist. - So says Renton.
Enforcing borders is fascism? Maybe you're the wacky one.
I mean... stalin is pretty close to being a fascist. That's why people like Putin love the soviet union so much rather than seeing it as an aberation of what was the traditional russian state (the empire) the fact that Putin loves the USSR more than the Tzardom gives an indication as to how close stalinism was to fascism (as far as I can tell, Putin is absolutely a modern day fascist leader)
@@jhonjacson798 That's not in any way the point I was making. I suggest you at least finish that paragraph of mine.
And, it's unrelated, but since you brought it up, your suggestion that having an emperor is a desirable political system - it repulses me.
@@SlipperyTeeth from the perspective of an ultranationalist traditionalist, it probably would be, especially if it were one that were opposed to socialism, the point I was making is that it would be more within the character of a facist to prefer the russian empire to the soviet union, and yet Putin adores the soviet union.
And the point I'm making is that he fits the bill alot closer than someone like Trump. Never said he was outright a fascist, but he ticks way more boxes than Trump does even with your noted objection. If all you're doing is criticizing the ideas of the individual in the video then fair enough, I just made the case that it might not be an insane idea to label Stalin as fascist.
This podcast is looking really promising, happy to see you get interesting people on the show.
It was cynically amusing how he said at 4:49 "He [Trump] said various racist things about various ethnic categories of people, but those people *by and large* didn't end up in concentration camps".
It seems bad that our judgment of Donald Trump is whether or not *most* of the people he is bigoted against end up in a concentration camp.
an actual fascist doesn't actually care for race since the actualism part of fascism considers it outright stupid to judge people based on such birth factors
the reason why people see fascism as racist is because of their 1940s neighbour to the north of the alps, to which the italians alligned themselves as a strategic move for the further advancement of their recreation of the roman empire
there also were no anti-semitic policies in place in fascist italy until the nazis became a major power
and even when those policies were in place, they didn't result in any deaths as those policies weren't racial, they were religious
Okay.
A good rule of thumb.
If someone to your political right says "this person who is even further right than me isn't a fascist" it's worth doubting, very very severely.
Also, no - the Republican party is not center right. The Democrat party is. In the US, social democracy and the very concept of the common wealth are often considered "far left" types of "communism". One famous American "socialist" once quipped that the American right supports socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.
Not the whole of social democracy, but the implementation of cherry picked parts of it.
What makes someone far right? Being against abortion? Pro free market? Anti illegal immigration? All of the above? Maybe you're the one on the fringe.
@@ahampurushahasmi6040 Oh I'm definitely on the fringe. Most Americans don't even think social libertarianism is a thing - if they've ever heard of it at all. But then, they think American libertarianism IS a thing.
No, what makes the Republican party far right is its rejection of social welfare, its promotion of revanchist, white, Christian Nationalism, its preference for authoritarianism over human rights, its servile acquiescence to the interests of the wealthy, however much the cost to the rest of society or indeed the world.
Also, there's its increasing support for authoritarian monsters like Putin and Orban (though the "left" has issues with this too - but definitely the "far" left). There is its relentless use of race to attack the working classes. Its relentless attacks on social welfare benefits, from Reagan's cutbacks to benefits for low-income families, sending tens of thousands of families into permanent poverty, to Bush's attacks on Social Security, to Trump's insane attacks on vaccines.
There is its opposition to women's rights, which in fact amount to an attack on the essential liberal conception of self-ownership. There is its rejection of the Harm Principle in favor of a grotesque caricature of liberal property rights. There is its rejection of religious liberty - indeed, its preference for refusing even to understand what religious liberty is.
Objectively speaking, there is nothing in the actual political economy pursued by Republicans that fits with Western centrist politics - or even American centrist politics. Today, Eisenhower would be considered a "commie". Lincoln is despised as the father of big government. Nobody knows who the hell William F. Buckley, jr. was - to say nothing of Edmund Burke. There's nothing conservative about them. There is nothing centrist about them. They are not pro-free market - most don't even know what a "free market" is - even the more sophisticated of them buy into the proto-fascist nonsense of Vilfredo Pareto.
But some of them, I'm sure, are very fine people.
The problem with calling someone a fascist is that by using it as an insult for anyone who uses authoritarian rhetoric, it ceases to have any meaning. It just becomes an epithet. Even if people don't know the history of fascism, they know it's not a compliment.
A related case is is when someone is called a racist. Although in this case, the term is often attached correctly. People can get very offended when their racism is pointed out only because 'racism' is recognized universally as something we regard as bad , even by people who indulge in racism!
"Don't call me a shithead!"
"But what you just said made you a shithead!".
It's a problem for who exactly?! If you label someone with authorarian tendency you just trying to say they are bad. Fascism was bad because of it authorarian tendency not cause thet wanted to promote economic policies of class cooperation or wanted voting rights for women. This quest for being technically correct is so nonsense.
This clip is taken from Within Reason #26 with David Renton, which is coming out this Sunday. The full podcast is available now for Patreon supporters. If you would like to support the podcast, please visit support.withinreasonpodcast.com.
He wasn't a successful fascist. He was a wannabe fascist. He wasn't successful because the military and several other guard-rails would not obey him or allow it. He has now vowed to abolish everything and everyone that would prevent his upcoming reign of fascism.
This guest pegged fascism into an extremely narrow definition and didn't seem to be up on the latest Trump moves.
@Thomas Santa I like your optimism, douchebag!
Shameful
People look at politics with an American lens and it shows. There are no politicians that could even remotely be compared to historical fascists. We are super far left, even on the furthest right of American politics.
It seems a little like you (Alex) are maybe falling into a little bit of a neutrality bias with this new project. The fact that accusations of fascism are thrown in both directions doesn't imply that all accusations are equally valid or non-valid. I think a common cause of neutrality bias is the following reasoning:
Premise 1: a similar fraction of people from different regions of the political spectrum are honest about their political beliefs and goals
Premise 2: a similar fraction have well thought out and coherent analyses/models of politics
Premise 3: I am only one person with one worldview
Conclusion: therefore my worldview is unlikely to be the most accurate, and I would be wise to triangulate and adjust my worldview to the center of the distribution of political views.
I think there are issues with the first two premises. Notably, by accepting these premises, I am asserting my confidence in MY belief about the intentions, motivations, and rationality of other people across the political spectrum. To assert this belief as a matter of principle is to make a claim without evidence or justification. I would be equally justified in blindly claiming that my own region of the political spectrum has a great many more honest and rational people with worldviews that are likely to be close to accurate. But I don't think either of these approaches is ideal. Instead, I think a person should gather evidence and justifications for placing confidence in different people's opinions. I think there are some very reasonable models of the world that explain why bigotry, fear mongering, and attempts at seizing power undemocratically are on the rise within the conservative zeitgeist, and importantly, this doesn't require me to believe that they have a well thought out, rational, and honest reason to pursue these political paths. If you wish not to hold a belief about the goals, intentions, and behavior if people across the political spectrum, this lack of belief should result in low/zero confidence in anyone's analysis, and a total agnosticism towards the truth or falsehood of the claims made by others (in which case, it doesn't really make sense to get involved in talking about politics).
This guy has obviously not spent much time around the more than half of America that is super willing to use violence against their political enemies.
I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say that more than half of Americans are in Antifa.
Gun toting in political ads isn't a warning to criminals. it's a threat against liberals by the minority against trying to make laws based on what the majority of the voters want. You can be blind to that, but that's weak shit.
You mean antifa, right?
"those people by in large didn't end up in concentration camps", so we are just going to forget what happened at the border which people familiar with the holocaust compared to concentration camps. We are giving credits to trump for not oppressing political opponents.... but here's the thing, he didn't have the power to do that just because he was the president. And then he tried to overtune the results of the elections...
Fascists drink water... therefore we’re all fascist.
@@ruskyalmond1977 fascists murder their opposition. Trump sent a mob to murder his VP because he wouldn't play his part in overturning the results of a democratic election. How daft and morally corrupt are you?
@@tinkywinky56 _"fas cists mu rder their opposition."_
All totalitarians do.
Buzzwords are making us all stupid
From my perspective as a German in his mid 50s this gentleman is hilarious.
I'm happy to see this comment, as a forty something US citizen. This guy strikes me as a fascist apologist. He talks about Trump in the past tense, which is just plain stupid. The man is the 24 republican presidential nominee as of now. And Alex has really let me down again. He's much more intelligent than I am. WTF is he thinking? Is the entire point of this new show to promote the thinking of the guests or what? I'm sick of all these people acting as if fascism is this overcomplicated far off esoteric ideology. As far as I'm concerned they're fascist enablers. Especially the Trump apologists
You're a German, so you think you know about fascism? How do you figure? ... you're not implying that the Nazis were fascist, are you? I sure hope not, because if you are, then truly the Germans have failed to learn from their own history. Nazism is distinct from fascism, and only those who understand neither would claim they're the same thing. Have you read _Mein Kampf?_ And Gentile?
Maybe he doesn't want to use the word "fascist" to describe ex-government employee Donald, but would definitely be fair to say that he's a self-serving and dangerous monster who doesn't care if we live or die. The only problem with that statement is that it does not fit on a bumper sticker.
As with most others commenting, I'm very confused on why anyone would narrowly define a political ideology by the achieved results... as opposed to the ideas themselves.
Trump clearly desires to accomplish some of these goals and it's utterly bizarre to claim we can't label him fascist until he gets the people and system in place that would allow him to actually do so.
Trump isn't a fascist only because in America it's very difficult to be one. but he certainly tried very hard to get there. Imagine if he had gotten his way on Jan 6?
define facism , you define trump, the trouble is there confusing hitler and national socialism with facism, you dont need swastikas or goose stepping to be facist
THANK YOU. You, one other commenter, and myself seem to be the only three who have actually studied fascism. Everyone else just parrots mindless tripe they've heard on TV, like some twisted parody of Idiocracy.
I haven't read the book. But from this clip it really does seem like this is a poor understanding of fascism. And the point about fascism being a dirty word that everyone calls each other , must always be held separate from the conversation of what actually is fascism.
Having the conversation be very muddied and complicated does not mean that a real problem is NOT being pointed at by some people.
I'll presume you forgot a not somewhere. I will say that the use currently for trump is more a smear word.
@@Cecilia-ky3uw Thanks for catching that.
I really don't agree. Umberto echo's 14 points of fascism is to me still one of the best resources for describing what fascism actually is. Because people confuse this a lot. Another definition that I am a fan of is palingenetic ultra nationalism. Which is a bit fancier but easier to throw out.
I think a lot of people hesitate to call Donald Trump a fascist just because they think he is a representative of a huge portion of conservatism in the United States. And if he is a fascist, then so much of the United States is fascist or openly sympathetic to fascism that it would be an incredible disaster. But I don't think that's far off exactly what's happening.
@@Ryan90red I wouldn't say outright that donald trump is racist, it is VERY hard to say he is, especially when surprise surprise, his voter base consists of many latinos
This hurt my heart.
Get sam Harris next. Then Jordan Peterson.
So Trump isn't a fascist because other people stopped him?
"Democrats and the police stopped my coup, so you can't call me a fascist! You can call me a fascist once I get my way!"
Is it not possible to say that Trump has fascist tendencies but is not a fascist until he actually realises his supposed goals? Like a person who plans to murder someone but is stopped. They are not a murderer until they actually murdered a person, no matter how much they plan and talk about murdering someone.
Define fascism, Steve.
And no it wasn't the Nazis
This dude ignores everything trump did that was out of the ordinary. Jan 6 and the unleashing of his MAGA Brownshirts proved that clearly.
… he attempted a coup
But it was unsuccessful so therefore it doesn't count. And he only *wanted* to jail his political opponents and said so many times, but wasn't able to due to the American justice system so that also doesn't count. And he spewed hateful rhetoric towards racial groups and literally put some of them in cages, but it wasn't all of them so it doesn't count.......... this guy 🙄
Whenever one starts a definition with "for me", it's a pretty good sign they're disingenuous or ignorant.
Fascism is in fact a revolutionary ideology, not a reactionary or counter-revolutionary one.
It is also not a racial or racist ideology in general, although some fascist groups have employed it.
None of its defining features were mentioned, just vague notions of racism and political violence. And speaking of the latter, I do feel tempted to extend Flaiano's thoughts of the division of fascists into fascists and antifascists from Italy towards a global stage.
Hell, “progressive”, revolutionary ideas such as the private being political are traceable to Giovanni Gentile himself and others, such as praxis are mirrored in his and Mussolini’s writing.
It has much more in common with Marxism than most people think on a philosophical basis, it just employs different self-mythologisation.
Also, can we please stop using "fascism" as a term for authoritarianism or dictatorship?
And Alex, Trump never banned muslims from entering the US; the ban was on entry form a very specific list of country that included neither of the top 6 largest muslim population coutnries, regardless of religious persuasion.
This is the sorta Academia that tends to get on my nerves--The meandering semantics that are all too worried about appearing neutral as possible .
This guys definition of fascism relying on the use of violence , is a useless definition -- I mean revolutions have used violence for political ends , would u say those are fascists revolutions?
I would defer to Umberto Ecos 14 characteristics to define fascism , as fascism tends to say whatever it needs to say ( or whatever it needs to become i.e socialism) to obtain power.
why would you defer to the words of a novelist rather than someone who actually studies fascism professionally? Granted a lawyer isn't exactly an expert on fascism either, but still, a daily reminded that umberto eco was not a scholar on fascism, he was mainly a novelist with academic training in medievalism (including scholastic philosophy).
@@jhonjacson798 because a politician and a novelist have very similar jobs , to convince the audience of a world that doesnt exist -- and in order to do that u must understand the world in front of u.
And if that isnt good enough and u want an appeal to authority
The 14 Characteristics of Fascism
by Lawrence Britt ( political scientist) and these lists were made independent from each other and still managed to be insanely similar
@@ji_ji_ if you want a conversation on what the nature of a particular thing is, in particular a particular ideology or ideological movement you don't ask a politician you ask political scientist or a philosopher.
Also there's nothing on Lawrence Britt that says he's a political scientist, he's a business person, writer, and commentator. He has as much academic clout and legitimacy as Tucker Carleson.
I mention this because people treat Eco as if he and apparently this Britt guy as if they were men who studied fascism extensively and had their ideas pushed through the peer review process and that their ideas are mainstream among scholars of fascism but they just aren't. They are popular lists pushed by youtubers, that's it.
@@jhonjacson798 what u seem to be looking for is a fallacy , u are hell bent appeals to authorities to define things.
I find this skepticism in the same a category of fence sitting meandering mentioned in my original comment-- as if we keep looking for only the people who have degrees in such subjects , we miss out on the insight of those outside of spheres of professions, it treats politics like a monolith.
You're gonna have to give me a reason outside of authority why it is necessary to be dismissive of these people , and why ignore their overlapping opinions.
@@jhonjacson798 but u failed to mention Umberto Eco's history in philosophy... he graduated from a philosophy school... Im gonna say u have some personal incredulity on top of that appeal to authority.
Have to agree with other posters. We are back to defining the main term in different ways. Since Trump is a 'Merican phenomenon I used Merriam Webster. Feel free to use the Cambridge but according to Merriam all the definition of Fascist needs is a picture of Trump to be complete. Bill Clinton was a lawyer. Bill Clinton said in the Paula Jones civil trial (I think) "it depends on what your definition of "is" is. Wittgenstein would have a lot to say about the veracity of lawyers defining words/meaning.
Me: *listening to this guy*
Also me: “Is this, fascism?”🤲🏼
This guy say it's incorrect to label trump a fascist and then goes on to describe the attributes of a fascist which happen to characterize Donald Trump 😂?
Am I crazy here?
These are some smooth brain takes gonna be honest
The thumbnail really does the guy no favors.. the facial expression along with the title gives off major "uhm, actually" vibes