Fact is, all sorts of bad stuff have happened in the US, carried out by duly elected representatives, following (sort of) open procedures in legislative sessions, and signed by elected chief executives. Fascists weren't required. — BC

Exactly. So how come? What's the real lesson? And how to reverse it when there's a vocal minority claiming taxation is theft and vested interests keen on keeping their privileges because any loss of privilege is considered an injustice by them? And how come a relative minority benefitting from it gets such widespread support from voters? It doesn't, for instance, comport with studies where people would rather force both parties to end up with nothing than accept an unfair result from a negotiation. Fairness is a strong motivator yet we'll gladly vote for parties or people who have no interest in fairness.

Edit: I think the first one is obvious. It's not a negotiation in Parliament and not a trade. So there is no social "contract", just people pursuing their self-interest to the furthest extent as possible that the system permits. This is mitigated to some extent in multi-party systems that require coalitions to form majority voting blocks but over the years has been avoided by trading off unrelated issues before parties actually come into power and thereby avoid democratic control.

These nations do not share the same security concerns as the European mainland, so should not be permitted to have this kind of influence over European (mainland) security. — Tzeentch

Depends on just what UK does. Yes, it's likely that if the US under Trump really would leave NATO, then I guess UK would be the first in line to make a bilateral defence treaty with the US.

But you see the negative effects of this already in Far East Asia: US has bilateral defense agreements with Japan, South Korea, Phillipines etc, and then there is the strange AUKUS. But there isn't coordination among these countries. And SEATO simply fell apart as the countries had so little in common.

Hence taking out the UK from an European helps only Russia!

This is a very interesting subject, but perhaps a little off-topic for the thread. Lets continue this discussion in the future. :pray:

Well, if Trump goes really with what he possibly said, then we'll get in no time this debate to start in earnest.

BRUSSELS — One of Europe's most senior politicians recounted how former U.S. President Donald Trump privately warned that America would not come to the EU's aid if it was attacked militarily.

"You need to understand that if Europe is under attack we will never come to help you and to support you," Trump told European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in 2020, according to French European Commissioner Thierry Breton, who was also present at a meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

"By the way, NATO is dead, and we will leave, we will quit NATO," Trump also said, according to Breton. "And he added, ‘and by the way, you owe me $400 billion, because you didn’t pay, you Germans, what you had to pay for defense,'" Breton said about the tense meeting, where the EU's then-trade chief Phil Hogan was also present.

A while back I pointed out how, if you want a real example of looming fascism, one should look no further than our own backyard, Europe.

Today it seems European Union is becoming more and more authoritarian, now overtly threatening to sink the Hungarian economy if it refuses to back aid to Ukraine.

Brussels threatens to hit Hungary's economy if Viktor Orbán vetoes Ukraine aid (Financial Times)

Note the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Hungary, and the EU's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience.

The Duran did a good report on this, in which they also briefly touch on Donald Tusk whom I mentioned earlier in this thread as an example of looming fascism.

FT report, EU planning to destroy economy of Hungary (The Duran)

When thinking the global development a strict(er) block-building course might be the way to go. My parent's generation had the cold war scenario which resulted in a situation where every opportunity to sabotage and subdue the other half of the world was eagerly taken which, in effect, resulted in a huge economic advantage and relative prosperity. After the fall of the soviet union the west started to become a victim of it's own greed, shifting production to China and becoming reliant on Russia. Trump becoming president in the US might give the opportunity to cripple China's economy again if the EU jumps onto the band-wagon. This might make economies strive again. Therefor human right violations - especially in China - cannot be tolerated. Maybe one could start to theorize about the cost-reward ratio of sending weapons to Ukraine and destroying Russia's eco...

It can't happen here? :brow:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/962250 (loads slowly)

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/962520 (loads slowly)

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/962668 (loads slowly)

Fascism in the US starts tomorrow. New variety: techno-fascim. Not as blatant as the older versions, but far more insidious.

Note the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Hungary, and the EU's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience. — Tzeentch

For reference I give Paxton's list below which to me seems a reasonable list of indicators of fascism. Notice how it does not include politically strong arming nations into stepping in line with a multi-level legal order of which it is part. You seem to equate fascism with policies you do not like. The great sovereign nation of Hungary though is free to leave the EU if it so pleases. The problem though is it benefits enormously from it, so it will not.

I think the EU has every right to demand a certain compliance. A monetary and economic union has no future when it does not have a certain level of political coordination. Would you feel better if the EU just decides to sever ties with Hungary or would you think that amounts to 'fascism' too?
Or perhaps you return from your misguided ways and concede you just made a rather poor argument which simply distracts from the discussion at hand?

Paxton's list

a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions;
the subordination of the individual to the primacy of the group;
the belief in a collective victimhood, justifying any action against its enemies without legal or moral limits;
the fear that individualistic liberalism, class conflict, and alien influences will lead to a decline in the group
the need for a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary;
the need for male authority culminating in a national chief who incarnates the group’s historical destiny;
the leader’s instincts are superior to abstract and universal reason;
the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success;
the right of the select group to dominate others without restraint from any kind of human or divine law, right being decided by the sole criterion of the group’s prowess within a Darwinian struggle.

I think there are fascists in the US. Left and right. Is the actual country - the infrastructure and government going to turn fascist? No. There will always be elements, but as an actual driving systemic element? No. Don't think so. That said, I think what a lot of people call fascist is patently not fascist, so ... tough one.

Well worth another look at Paxton's list, given the recent coronation in Washington.

I think it would take losing a war or a deep economic collapse. Everything else is in place, ready to go.

Fascism in the US starts tomorrow. New variety: techno-fascim. Not as blatant as the older versions, but far more insidious. — Wayfarer

Quite blatant enough, to judge by the spate of post-putsch executive orders.

Note the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Hungary, and the EU's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience — Tzeentch

Denying financial aid to a member nation that has repeatedly flouted both the human rights and foreign policy requirements of the union? That's not so much fascist as sensible - and in this case, several years overdue.

I think it would take losing a war or a deep economic collapse. — frank

The economic collapse will be a total surprise to its engineers. As for losing a war, you'd have to engage in one first. The "Let's you and him fight!" approach won't have much domestic impact; the arms merchants will still be fat and happy; the private prisons will be filled up with young people protesting things other than war. The only things we can't predict, yet, is how soon the civil war begins and which side will be supported by more of the professional military - in which I include police.

~~

Ah-yup, that's about it.

The only things we can't predict, yet, is how soon the civil war begins and which side will be supported by more of the professional military - in which I include police. — Vera Mont

I doubt there will be a civil war. We're too lazy for that.

“Now it’s our turn,” said (Proud Boys Leader Enrique) Tarrio, who received the longest sentence in the riot for mobilizing his right-wing group as an “army” to keep Trump in power through violence as Congress met to confirm the 2020 election (and was pardoned by Trump). Trial evidence showed that he and his lieutenants, inspired by Trump’s directive to “stand by” during a 2020 presidential debate and join a “wild” protest on Jan. 6, drew scores of followers to Washington who helped instigate the mob at the Capitol.

Tarrio called into Infowars.com, the web stream hosted by pro-Trump conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, hours after his Tuesday release and claimed to be the victim of a campaign to put Trump supporters in prison. He called for imprisoning Biden attorney general Merrick Garland for “corruption” to “give him a taste of his own medicine.” — WaPo

Trump has instigated a 'commission' to 'look into' the January 6th enquiry, and also issued an executive order to investigate the 'weaponisation' of the Department of Justice.

All highly ominous.

Who'd like to take me up on a bet that in 4 years nothing of particular note will have happened, and you all are a bunch of hysterics?

I bet a 1000 Tzeentch-coins on it.

Who'd like to take me up on a bet that in 4 years nothing of particular note will have happened, — Tzeentch

Well, perhaps not to you. But they are already happening to others.

Well, perhaps not to you. But they are already happening to others. — Banno

Furthermore, regarding some issues like climate change prevention and mitigation, "nothing of particular note" happening is a catastrophe.

As they do under any president. Trump's first presidency was nothing special, no fascism, no World War 3, no end of days, etc. and I see no reason to believe his second will be any different.

But by all means, believe the hysteria and propaganda. We'll see in four years. Take me up on my bet. There's a 1000 Tzeentch-coins in it if you win.

rump's first presidency was nothing special, no fascism, no World War 3, no end of days, etc. and I see no reason to believe his second will be any different. — Tzeentch

I mean by your own metrics, it seems like he's already being a fascist if these past few weeks mean anything:

Today it seems European Union is becoming more and more authoritarian, now overtly threatening to sink the Hungarian economy if it refuses to back aid to Ukraine.

Brussels threatens to hit Hungary's economy if Viktor Orbán vetoes Ukraine aid (Financial Times)

Note the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Hungary, and the EU's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience. — Tzeentch

Trump threatens retaliation against UK over tax on tech giants

Of course, I suspect they don't mean anything because at the end of the day nothing means anything except left vs. right.

I don't see how the two are remotely comparable.

If you want to believe economic rivalry between two independent nations equals fascism then you've thrown all sense of reason and proportion out of the window.

Trump's first presidency was nothing special, no fascism, no World War 3, no end of days, etc. and I see no reason to believe his second will be any different. — Tzeentch

Fascism isn't really about what one guy is doing. It comes from the whole political scene. It comes from a change in attitudes toward acceptance of strong-arm strategies, and of course, acceptance of dictatorship.

Fascism isn't really about what one guy is doing. — frank

No, it's about a nation hearing what that guy intends to do to their institutions, their government, their personal lives, their environment and their foundational document - and then electing him top gun, because ... well, hell, it's better than being ruled by a bunch of liberal do-gooders.

It comes from the whole political scene.

Yes, we've been watching that political scene crumble for years.

It comes from a change in attitudes toward acceptance of strong-arm strategies, and of course, acceptance of dictatorship.

Done and done.

I doubt there will be a civil war. We're too lazy for that. — frank

Or just not hungry enough - yet.

This country is going towards civil war and I don't dare to say that it is all Trump's making. The Democratic Party is less democratic in its internal structure than the republicans. The democrats showed that when they sidestepped Bernie Sanders and Biden in order to make Hillary Clinton their front-runner; they showed it again when they made Kamala their front-runner.

The democrats also do not believe in democratic culture. For them "culture" means to do whatever your gut tells you; it suffices that you obey the (democrats') laws. If they believed in democratic culture, they wouldn't preach diversity, destruction of family, and other things that humans have used like tools (in the last 5000 years or more) in order to divide roles, responsibilities, labor, etiquette, and so on, without the interference of money, coercion, patrol and violence.

Now we have two parties which are unwilling to make any substantial reforms in the judiciary and electoral systems. The only things democrats and republicans are good at is to point the finger to each other and infuriate their supporters. In these circumstances (without the necessary judicial and electoral reforms), I won't be surprised at all if in the future we have a second civil war in this country. The only thing that surprises me are these Americans who can't see that both parties are contributing in making America a less free, less democratic, country.

You're backing the wrong horse then. This is our manifest destiny!



You are correct though, many of the executive orders are nothing special. When the Presidency changes changes parties there is always a flurry of executive orders, many meaningless (recall Obama signed an order to close Guantanamo Bay on his first day 16 years ago).

The DEI stuff Trump suspended he could suspend because it was created by executive orders, some being Biden's immediate orders upon taking office. What is exceptional in the immigration orders is the language, not the orders. Biden himself oversaw a flurry of orders on migration which is what led to net migration in his four years significantly eclipsing that of the entire Obama or Bush eras.

The stand out order is the pardons for the January 6th rioters, some of whom were obviously guilty of major offenses. The practice of shoveling out a bevy of odious pardons as a President leaves office is now well established, but it seems we might be facing a new norm of waves of odious pardons upon any new party taking control as well. And, as norms are destroyed and both parties rail about "corruption," neither is at all willing to actually place any restrictions in place to stop this sort of thing.

For instance, the scandals over the Clintons' speaking fees or the gifts received by Supreme Court justices would both be obvious felony offenses for the vast majority of public officials, even volunteers on a small town licensing commission. The most powerful officials in the government have, however, doggedly kept themselves exempt from all the anti-corruption measures in place for state and local or lower level federal officials.

The pandemic has already revealed that most of the so-called “liberal democracies” are at best illiberal, but at worst they’re fascist and totalitarian. In Australia they literally put people into camps for testing positive for COVID-19, for example. In Canada you had to show a vax pass to go to a restaurant. In the UK they’ll jail you for a tweet. It’s already here, it’s been here for a while, and we have a long way to go before we’re rid of any of it.

The pandemic has already revealed that most of the so-called “liberal democracies”, are at best illiberal, but at worst they’re fascist and totalitarian. — NOS4A2

The democrats are convincing young girls that being a liberal means that you have an higher IQ than the rest of the society/world, though all the data show that since 1975 (when the liberals and pacifists took over the western world) IQ has dropped sharply, like never before in human history :rofl:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/13/health/falling-iq-scores-study-intl/index.html

I don't see how the two are remotely comparable. — Tzeentch

Of course. One is a more left leaning group going after a right leaning country while the other is a right leaning country going after a left leaning country. One is bad and the other one isn't.

I'm guessing threatening to invade the Panama Canal if they don't do what you want also doesn't amount to what you call "fascism" either. Note the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Panama, and the US's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience. Not remotely comparable to the lack of respect for the rule of law, the sovereignty of Hungary, and the EU's willingness to strong-arm smaller nations into obedience when it comes to the EU's "authoritarianism".

If you want to believe economic rivalry between two independent nations equals fascism then you've thrown all sense of reason and proportion out of the window. — Tzeentch

If it was economic rivalry then the US would be concerned about it's own tax laws instead of the ones other countries make, specifically on Trump's new oligarch buddies.