A few days ago I responded to a post about Trump being a fascist on one of my friend’s social media page, then made a few comments on the consultancy social media page by way of follow up. Given the subsequent back and forth (including with regular KP reader Diane under her other social media moniker) I figured I might as well share my thoughts here. I realise that it may seem pedantic (it is) and inconsequential (it is not), but the misuse of value added terms is a trigger for me. So, with my political science/comparative politics hat on, let me offer some thoughts on the matter.
First, by way of prelude and backdrop to why I have decided to opine about this particular subject, let me explain something about analytic precision, specifically the notion of conceptual integrity. Conceptual transfer is an analytic tool where a concept is taken out of its original context in order to explain a different phenomenon that replicates the original meaning intact. The integrity of the original meaning is upheld in spite of the transfer. Say, a wheel back when is a wheel today even if its specific features are different. Conversely, conceptual stretching is a situation when a concept is stretched beyond its original meaning in order to describe a different, usually related but not the same, phenomenon. It loses explanatory and analytic integrity as it is stretched to explain something different. For example, when a hawk is called an eagle or an orca is called a killer whale. As an analytic tool the former is methodologically sound and intellectually honest. The latter is not. Conceptual integrity and precision is particularly important when using loaded or charged words, especially in contentious areas like politics.
There are plenty of authoritarians but only few were fascists or neo-fascists. There are Sultanistic regimes like those of the Arab oligarchies. There are theocracies like Iran (which used elections as a legitimating device). There one party regimes like the Belarus, PRC, DPRK, Syria and Cuba, one party dominant/limited contestation regimes like Algeria,Egypt, several of the K-stans, Hungary, Russia, Singapore, Tunisia, Turkey, Nicaragua and Venezuela and Egypt, military-bureaucratic regimes like those of the Sahel, and a variety of personalist and oligarchical leaders and regimes elsewhere. The way in which leadership is contested/selected and exercised, the balance between repression and ideological appeals in regime governing approaches, the mixture of inducements (carrots) and constraints (sticks) when it comes to specific key policy areas (say, in labor, tax, sexual preference and reproductive rights laws). There are many manifestations of the authoritarian phenomenon, so mislabeling some types as others compounds the practical and conceptual problems associated with the conceptual imprecision and confusion.
That is why it is unfortunate that Trump is being labeled a “fascist.” He clearly is a dictator wanna-be but fascism was a political movement specific to 20th century interwar Europe that combined charismatic leaders at the head of a mass mobilisational one party regimes with specific economic projects (state capitalist heavy industrialisation in the case of Nazi Germany) and state-controlled forms of interest group representation (state corporatism, to be specific). Fascist gain power via elections, then end them. Trump may lead the MAGA movement but he has no ideological project other than protectionist economics, diplomatic and military isolationism and nativist prejudice against assorted “others.” He prefers to manipulate rather than eliminate elections as a legitimating device. Barring an outright military takeover at this command, he will not be able to control the three branches of government even if he wants and tries to. He cannot control how interest groups are organised and represented unless he changes US laws governing interest representation and intermediation. Most fundamentally, he is just about himself, using tried and true scapegoating and fear-mongering in an opportunistic push to gain power. It worked once in 2016, so he is at it again, this time with a “better” (Project 2025) plan. That is scary but not fascist per se.
The closest he gets to a proper political category is national populist. As seen in the likes of Juan Peron in Argentina, Getulio Vargas in Brazil and Lazaro Cardenas in Mexico, these were charismatic leaders of mass mobilised movements as well, but who had different economic projects, different social bases (e.g. German Nazism and Franco’s fascist regime in Spain were middle class-based whereas Italian fascism and Argentine Peronism was urban working class-based and Mexican populism under Cardenas was peasantry-based), and who did not use warmongering to restore their nations to a position of global dominance (as did the European fascists). Trump’s base is low education working and lower middle class rubes encouraged by opportunistic business elites who self-interestedly see short-term benefit from supporting him. In other words, his supporters are the greedy leading the stupid.
It appears that respected people like Generals Milley and Kelly, who served in the Trump administration, are mistaken when they ever to him as a fascist. What they are describing is no more than garden party electoral authoritarians such as that of Viktor Urban or Recep Erdogan. Trump may admire despots like Putin, Kim and Xi, but he is a long way from being able to copy them, and none of them is a fascist in any event. Dictatorial ambition and authoritarian approaches come in many guises beyond the often misused term fascism. In fact, superstructural affinities like rhetorical style, corruption and bullying tendencies aside, Trump is less a fascist than he is a lesser moon in the authoritarian universe.
If I had to label him, I would say that Trump is a populist demagogue who has strong authoritarian ambitions such as purging the federal government of non-loyalists and persecuting his political opponents. Perhaps he will graduate into becoming a full-blown dictator. But what he is not is a fascist, at least not in the proper sense of the word. He is too ignorant to implement a modern variant of fascism in a place like the US, and there are too many institutional and social counters in the US to any move he may make in that direction. What I will admit is that he has neo-Nazis in his inner circle (Stephen Miller) and evil Machiavellians as his consiglieri (Steve Bannon, soon to be released from jail for contempt of Congress). Along with assorted lesser ogres equipped with the Project 2025 playbook, it is possible that they could turn the US political system into something resembling a modern variant of a national populist regime. But there is a ways to go before that happens.
I therefore feel that it is unfortunate and counterproductive to call him a fascist. It is like how he and his minions call Kamala Harris a “communist” or “socialist.” The labels are absurd and betray a profound ignorance of what those terms mean (and the differences between them), but they make for good red meat rallying points for a MAGA base that lacks the education or common sense to see the smear for what it is or the reality that communists and socialists do not get to hold the positions of California Attorney General, US Senator and Vice President (the closest they have come in recent times is Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and he is no communist).
If the good generals and Vice President Harris decided to take a page out of his fear-mongering smear playbook by calling him a fascist, that may be understandable given the danger he poses for US democracy. But it is also dishonest (given Milley and Kelly’s educations, I find hard to believe that they do not know what fascism is and is not, but then again, many general grade officers major in military history, international relations and/or security studies rather than comparative political science and so may not be familiar with the proper definitions of the term. As for Harris, she is trained as a lawyer. Enough said).
Anyway, the point of this undoubtably boring exegesis is to get a pet peeve off of my chest, which is the resort to conceptual stretching in order to negatively frame narratives about political phenomena.
Reading this was a breath of fresh air.
Not boring at all, Pablo! It’s a very interesting & educative post, so thank you for that.
Over the past 2-3 years, I’ve been reading & listening to several historians (Jason Stanley, Timothy Snyder, Ruth Ben-Ghiat – who has not yet called Trump a fascist – are the main ones I read or listen to) who specialise in that period of history & it seems to me that they come to the subject of Trump & fascism from their historical perspective, not from the political science analysis that you have given us. It seemed to make quite a lot of sense to me that he fits that categorisation. However, you’ve given me much food for thought. I’ve been aware of the strong vein of Nazism dating back to the 1930s in the US & have been thinking that there’s been a very strong RW white supremacist thread running through the US’ history so, it wasn’t a stretch to believe that Trump had fascistic tendencies.
Anyway, thank you for your post. It has been very informative. Personally, I’ll be hugely relieved when the election is over, like so many other people, if Trump loses.
Also, I hope your boy is thriving and making great progress.
Best wishes,
Di Trower
Thanks, Stuart and Di, for the supportive words.
As I said in a social media post: “The US a political society rendered by hate. The election choice is between broad and inclusive or narrow and exclusive. There are barbarians at the gate. Will the gatekeepers resist? We have a week to find out.”
As for the boy, I am pleased to say that he has been given a full bill of health, is back to playing sports, enjoys being back in school and has raised $2000 for the Starship Foundation as part of his doing the 5K run at this upcoming weekend’s Auckland Marathon events. We dodged a bullet and are forever thankful to those who saved and cared for him in his time of need.
Lovely news about your son, Pablo – I am so happy to hear that. He sounds like a very motivated & thoughtful young man.
Just as an aside, almost against my better judgement I took myself off to see The Apprentice at my favourite cinema this morning. It’s absolutely excellent & I recommend it – that is, if you can stand to see a film about how Trump was shaped to become the person he is today. As the days go by & the closer to the election, the less confident I am that Kamala Harris has it in the bag. Another term (however long that might end up being) of Trump is too hard to bear. Hoping for good news on the 5th!
From an academic’s POV (that’s ‘point of view’ for those not in the know “in this space”), you’re probably correct (i.e. who is, or is not the fascist).
We’re in a different era though @ Pablo – unfortunately.
For practical purposes though, and in the age of TL:DR’s and look at moi look at moi, If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and repeatedly quacks like a duck – he’s probably a fascist. (Unfortunately). There’s a lot of it about. Contrasts are becoming stark too. Having just arrived back from a couple of months in the WIDER Bay Area and SFO, the fascists are pushing really hard against the mere mortals/slaves in order to preserve their thoroughly gorgeous status.
Whether it’s the traumatised ex-GI Joe living on the street and just out of the vet’s hospital in San Jose; or the gig worker trying to hold down 3 jobs; or the amputee Grandma from Freemont desperate to get to the methadone clinic in Oakland before it closes, Trump (and Musk for that matter) is a fascist.
As above – hopefully all is well, or at least improving with you and yours
Thanks Paul,
I guess from a non-scholarly perspective all authoritarianism seems pretty much the same. But having written quite a bit about he subject, lived under several Latin American military-bureaucratic dictatorships, dealt with several types of authoritarians as a US policy analyst (including Cuba) and participated in anti-authoritarian resistance movements, I think that the focus as you describe is often more on the behavioural traits of the (wanna-be) dictator rather than on the economic project underpinning his “vision” as well as the means by which the proposed regime goes about organising interest groups, who they mobilise in their favour and who they scapegoat/demonise, and how deep the ideological foundations of the proposed regime really runs. That is where I part company with those who call Trump a fascist. Like I said, he seems like a quite ordinary populist demagogue to me, more surrounded by grifters and opportunists than dyed-in-the-wool neo-fascists like Stephen Miller.
The trouble with all authoritarians is that they curtail individual and collective rights in order to pursue their agendas, so regardless of the sniping of pedants like me the practical effect of their winning office (because some enter by coups but others do not) is to curtail the freedoms of voice, assembly and movement normally associated with liberal democracy. That is what could happen in the US if the Trump agenda is imposed (think of his attacks on the press and on domestic opponents). And that would not be good.
@ Pablo: Oh how grateful I am that you’re “pedantically” left of centre, as would be the 1st Nations amputee racing to the Oakland methadone clinic; the traumatised alcoholic GI Joe, and a number of others.
Far better a slightly left of centre pedant than RWNJs who’re not just driven by an ideology, but an ideology that has become cultist in nature to the extent that although the IQ quotient might register favourably, the RWNJ has lost the ability for critical thought.
Thanks for your reply @Pablo.
The Orange-Beaked Trumpian Muppet………RNZ National. Beep beep beep beep beep BEEEP