"Yes, It’s Fascism" op-ed from the Atlantic.
Every delay has consequences.
The word is used too often and has a lot less meaning as a result. It also has too many definitions to be clear.*
Has the US crossed that line?
The Atlantic's conclusion about the US is correct. The country isn't fascist. My internal political scientist says US institutions are strong and still block authoritarian full consolidation. Or at least their resistance would not be trivial. So calling the US a fully fascist state overstates the case....for now. There is though evidence consistent with movement toward an illiberal or hybrid regime including some consolidation.
Consolidation is where the government pulls the power to act or govern from the States and Municipalities into the executive.
The things Miller has said about power recently, do echo fascism.
However, that's not uniquely fascist, for example, Miller is doing what the Atlantic author called "might is right" or "bully worship."
But that, or politicized law enforcement, having a leader cult, or disinformation can occur in many authoritarian or illiberal regimes. The question becomes whether the combination and direction is toward fascist radicalization, rather than just “authoritarianism plus nasty rhetoric.”
What good does it do to say the president is a fascist while not indicting the country, and other departments he controls?
Fascism is a system, not an individual attribute. It is imprecise to say a country is fascist based on a single leader while the rest of the government is still capable of democratically functioning.
And then from a completely personal point of view, the photos out of Minneapolis look a lot like the SA (Sturmabteilung.) But they are federal, not paramilitaries. That makes it worse. But that's the emotional side of me talking. The Border should be controlled. The laws should be enforced. But maybe not like this.
Hindsight is 20/20 but if we cross the lines and become fascist, we won't like what we see when we look behind us. So even if it isn't there yet, if the direction is towards fascism, then the job is to stop it before it gets there.
But is it that direction? It's a dire question.
*I used Griffen's and Paxton's Anatomy of Fascism definitions to work with for deciding what was what.
Original Here - Paywalled
Every delay has consequences.
The word is used too often and has a lot less meaning as a result. It also has too many definitions to be clear.*
Has the US crossed that line?
The Atlantic's conclusion about the US is correct. The country isn't fascist. My internal political scientist says US institutions are strong and still block authoritarian full consolidation. Or at least their resistance would not be trivial. So calling the US a fully fascist state overstates the case....for now. There is though evidence consistent with movement toward an illiberal or hybrid regime including some consolidation.
Consolidation is where the government pulls the power to act or govern from the States and Municipalities into the executive.
The things Miller has said about power recently, do echo fascism.
However, that's not uniquely fascist, for example, Miller is doing what the Atlantic author called "might is right" or "bully worship."
But that, or politicized law enforcement, having a leader cult, or disinformation can occur in many authoritarian or illiberal regimes. The question becomes whether the combination and direction is toward fascist radicalization, rather than just “authoritarianism plus nasty rhetoric.”
What good does it do to say the president is a fascist while not indicting the country, and other departments he controls?
Fascism is a system, not an individual attribute. It is imprecise to say a country is fascist based on a single leader while the rest of the government is still capable of democratically functioning.
And then from a completely personal point of view, the photos out of Minneapolis look a lot like the SA (Sturmabteilung.) But they are federal, not paramilitaries. That makes it worse. But that's the emotional side of me talking. The Border should be controlled. The laws should be enforced. But maybe not like this.
Hindsight is 20/20 but if we cross the lines and become fascist, we won't like what we see when we look behind us. So even if it isn't there yet, if the direction is towards fascism, then the job is to stop it before it gets there.
But is it that direction? It's a dire question.
*I used Griffen's and Paxton's Anatomy of Fascism definitions to work with for deciding what was what.
Original Here - Paywalled
"Yes, It’s Fascism" op-ed from the Atlantic.
Every delay has consequences.
The word is used too often and has a lot less meaning as a result. It also has too many definitions to be clear.*
Has the US crossed that line?
The Atlantic's conclusion about the US is correct. The country isn't fascist. My internal political scientist says US institutions are strong and still block authoritarian full consolidation. Or at least their resistance would not be trivial. So calling the US a fully fascist state overstates the case....for now. There is though evidence consistent with movement toward an illiberal or hybrid regime including some consolidation.
Consolidation is where the government pulls the power to act or govern from the States and Municipalities into the executive.
The things Miller has said about power recently, do echo fascism.
However, that's not uniquely fascist, for example, Miller is doing what the Atlantic author called "might is right" or "bully worship."
But that, or politicized law enforcement, having a leader cult, or disinformation can occur in many authoritarian or illiberal regimes. The question becomes whether the combination and direction is toward fascist radicalization, rather than just “authoritarianism plus nasty rhetoric.”
What good does it do to say the president is a fascist while not indicting the country, and other departments he controls?
Fascism is a system, not an individual attribute. It is imprecise to say a country is fascist based on a single leader while the rest of the government is still capable of democratically functioning.
And then from a completely personal point of view, the photos out of Minneapolis look a lot like the SA (Sturmabteilung.) But they are federal, not paramilitaries. That makes it worse. But that's the emotional side of me talking. The Border should be controlled. The laws should be enforced. But maybe not like this.
Hindsight is 20/20 but if we cross the lines and become fascist, we won't like what we see when we look behind us. So even if it isn't there yet, if the direction is towards fascism, then the job is to stop it before it gets there.
But is it that direction? It's a dire question.
*I used Griffen's and Paxton's Anatomy of Fascism definitions to work with for deciding what was what.
Original Here - Paywalled
0 Comments
0 Shares
29 Views
0 Reviews
