[armada651]

The moment they made that name change and stated their expansionist agenda it finally became clear to me that this wasn't just MAGA anymore, this was actual fascism.

Whether you think the current targets are legitimate or not, the fact that the U.S. is going to war without seeking any democratic approval anymore is deeply troubling.

[autoexec]

> The moment they made that name change and stated their expansionist agenda it finally became clear to me that this wasn't just MAGA anymore, this was actual fascism.

I'm pretty sure MAGA was always fascism. I mean, all the signs were there and people were sounding alarm bells almost immediately.

[lo_zamoyski]

I an opposed to Trump's unhinged offensive, but let's not fall prey to media narrative. Nobody called similar actions "fascism" before (or they did, as the word is thrown around casually in the US, but then nothing has changed). Similarly, when Obama vastly expanded deportations and the like, nobody cared.

I don't like Trump. At all. I think he's a terrible president on the whole and a shameless opportunist. But I don't like one-sided politics and hypocrisy even more so, and I dislike hysteria. History and long term trends paint us a different picture of current events. Most people's horizons are limited to the shallow, tendentious, cherry-picked, and sensationalist news cycle, unfortunately, regardless of outlet. Should we criticize Trump? Yes. But we should criticize all leadership when they do what they should not be doing.

BTW, the Dept. of War was the original name from 1789 to 1947. Curiously, it was soon after the change to Dept. of Defense that people like Eisenhower began to worry about the Military-Industrial Complex. That should give us pause. The name change conceals the intention, and coincides with a hungry imperial war machine that WWII helped bring into existence. Recall that Americans were largely isolationist before that.

[Saline9515]

This is clearly not fascism, and not very different from what the US is accustomed to. Let's not waste the meaning of words by throwing them at any occasion.

[autoexec]

What do you think fascism is? What we have is a populist, nationalist, racist, far-right regime headed by a man that our highest court has ruled can't be held accountable for his "official" actions and who acts like a dictator (as further evidenced in this case by going to war without congress) who uses to the power of the government to attack/threaten/suppress his "enemies" here in the US. If this isn't textbook fascism you must admit that it at least checks a lot of the same boxes

[Saline9515]

Well this is not fascism, this is, as you said, a populist regime.

The far left loves to categorize everything at its right as "fascist". The infamous Berlin wall was the "antifascist protection wall". In Yugoslavia, you'd hear every day at the radio a rant about the "fascists", even though the country was communist.

There are many definitions of what "fascism" is. The best I think is to refer to the historical italian fascist government, to understand it.

Btw presidential immunity is not fascist, many countries have similar laws.

[dns_snek]

> The best I think is to refer to the historical italian fascist government, to understand it.

Sure, why don't we:

- leader with a cult of personality

- an idealized story of the prosperous past (make america great again)

- pinning blame for the nation's downfall on marginalized minorities and persecuting them (immigrants, socialists)

- aggressively anti-socialist/leftist, protection of capital and suppression of labor rights

- glorification of violence (ICE, hate crimes, "department of war")

- ramping up existing and starting new imperialistic conflicts (Venezuela, Cuba, now Iran)

- rolling back personal liberties (freedom of speech, right to due process, women's rights)

- suppression of the free press given unfavorable reporting (revocation of TV licenses, revocation of access to white house)

- clear desire with ongoing attempts to dismantle democracy (capitol attack, violating separation of powers by illegally withholding funding for programs and violating court orders)

- demands complete subservience rather than competence in all appointed roles

- all of this with full support of the elites (clear shift in the 2nd term)

If you want to argue that the US isn't fascist because Trump hasn't completely dismantled the judicial branch yet, be my guest.

But fascism isn't just a concrete political system where a dictator has absolute power, it's an ideology, and Trump and the Republican party are clearly fascist in that sense - that is their goal. It's just a question of whether they'll succeed in dismantling the judicial branch before his term is over.

The only people who benefit from this sort of language policing are the fascists themselves.

P.S. I probably shouldn't be saying this but the fact that you refer to people sounding the alarm as "the far left" really gives the game away.

[Saline9515]

Each point, aside from the cult of personality regarding Trump, is shallow.

For instance, the US didn't start a war against Venezuela or Cuba under Trump. America was much more aggressive in the 80´s, if you want to compare.

Immigration can totally be a problem, and voters in the western world increasingly ask their leaders to address it. It's not "democracy" when it suits your ideas and "fascism" when it doesn't.

Opposing socialism isn't "fascist" and afaik the Trump admin has done nothing significant about it: social expenses and the deficit are still growing faster than ever. What is mainly happening is that ressources are being redirected toward the retired, who are influencial voters and a growing demographic. It's the same everywhere in the western world.

Again, all of those measures are very superficial and nothing like what real fascism did in Italy or what Nazis did when they came to power. You can't reason just with outrage and headlines.

By the way, most of those points have their Democrat counterpart with a different style, it's mainly linked to the evolution of the governance style in the US. Democrats also had their DEI unsuited hires, censorships (Meta was censoring on the order of the White House), and so on.

[dns_snek]

> Immigration can totally be a problem, and voters in the western world increasingly ask their leaders to address it.

Stop equivocating. I didn't say that opposing immigration = fascism, I said that identifying marginalized groups, pinning all of the nation's problems on those groups and then persecuting, victimizing, terrorizing anyone who looks like they belong to one of those groups - that is fascist.

> Opposing socialism isn't "fascist"

Again, stop equivocating. I didn't say that opposing socialism is fascist, I said "aggressively anti-socialist", as in, violent anti-socialist rhetoric. Similar to the previous point.

> afaik the Trump admin has done nothing significant about it

That's wholly detached from reality. The only reason he hasn't dismantled all of the social programs yet is because the courts have stepped in and intervened when he tried. See: USAID, withholding SNAP funding, Medicaid, the whole DOGE disaster.

> Again, all of those measures are very superficial and nothing like what real fascism did in Italy or what Nazis did when they came to power. You can't reason just with outrage and headlines.

Those are the core qualities of fascism. I get it, you don't like being called a fascist so you sea-lion about the differences to distract from the overwhelming similarities.

Even when Trump dismantles the judicial branch, people like you will maintain that the US isn't fascist because people aren't speaking Italian like they did in fascist Italy, or German like they did in nazi Germany.

I feel comfortable saying this because we're not just disagreeing on whether the US is fascist right now and there's still room to have argue there, but we're disagreeing on whether Trump has a fascist agenda and whether he's actively working to transform the US into a totalitarian regime following the fascist playbook, which he absolutely is.

[CrossVR]

> Let's not waste the meaning of words by throwing them at any occasion.

Honest question, but if this is not fascism, then what is? Aren't you also wasting the meaning of a word by refusing to acknowledge any application of that word?

[Saline9515]

There isn't a single accepted definition of what fascism is. The USSR and their left-wing allies in Western Europe would define everything that wasn't communist as “fascist”. It still continues to this day.

I'd suggest you read about fascist Italy to get a sense of what fascism is. So far I haven't seen Democrats repeatedly kicked out of cars in Times Square after drinking a bottle of castor oil. Trump said that he wouldn't look to be reelected for a third mandate.

The Iran war is mainly a consequence of the Israeli influence on US politics; it has nothing to do with fascism, and it is in continuity with the previous administration.

So yeah, populism likely, a plutocracy (evidenced by the role of AIPAC in elections) but not fascism.

[CrossVR]

> I'd suggest you read about fascist Italy to get a sense of what fascism is. So far I haven't seen Democrats repeatedly kicked out of cars in Times Square after drinking a bottle of castor oil.

January 6th had all the hallmarks of the black shirts marching on Rome. And ICE is definitely pulling people out of cars and homes in Democratic cities. But I guess everything is fine because they're not making them drink castor oil.

Immigration enforcement is necessary, but these actions clearly have less to do with people's immigration status and more to do with political reprisal.

> Trump said that he wouldn't look to be reelected for a third mandate.

They'll always say they'll follow the Constitution to legitimize themselves, but their actions don't reflect it.

> The Iran war is mainly a consequence of the Israeli influence on US politics; it has nothing to do with fascism, and it is in continuity with the previous administration.

It has everything to do with fascism, not because of its motivation, but it's lack of democratic approval. This administration has a clear disdain for the democratic process.

I sincerely hope there was some secret vote by Congress that we don't know about.

> So yeah, populism likely, a plutocracy (evidenced by the role of AIPAC in elections) but not fascism.

I would've agreed with you if we were talking about Trump's first term, that was clearly just populism. This second term goes far beyond what any populist leader has done in Europe.

[Saline9515]

> January 6th

Trump has no structured paramilitary militias like the Squadras or the SA. The January 6th was mainly a crowd movement, participants were a heteroclite bunch with very different political ideas.

> ICE

ICE is a state agency, which existed before and has never been known for its benevolent and non-violent actions. The problems mainly arise from the overhiring, lack of training, and braindead managers. By the way, many members agency are not white, which contradicts the racism narrative. Alex Pretti was shot by two latino officers, for instance.

> lack of democratic approval

Lack of democratic approval for a war isn't facism. It's a strong presidential regime. France has the same and is not fascist. And it's legal in the current form[0].

> farther than any populist leader

Politics aren't a 1d political spectrum were the ends are facism. Afaik declaring a war to satisfy the billionaires of another nation is clearly not fascism, nor even nationalist in the strict sense.

Words are important because if you earnestly want the situation to change, you need to assess it clearly. The Trump presidency has a more to do with the influence of money in US politics, and the media system which favors outrage and "loud" candidates. Democrats also commited a historical blunder with the botched Biden candidacy and the lack of a credible replacement (Kamala was clearly not convincing from the early start).

[0] https://time.com/7380309/iran-war-legal-trump/?utm_source=ch...

[CrossVR]

> Trump has no structured paramilitary militias like the Squadras or the SA. The January 6th was mainly a crowd movement, participants were a heteroclite bunch with very different political ideas.

The black shirts were no different.

> ICE is a state agency, which existed before and has never been known for its benevolent and non-violent actions.

Much of the prosecution of minorities in fascist regimes was not done by the militias, it was done by law enforcement.

> Lack of democratic approval for a war isn't facism. It's a strong presidential regime. France has the same and is not fascist. And it's legal in the current form[0].

A hallmark of fascism is the refusal to acknowledge any democratic limitations on the power of the leader. The article you reference states clearly that he has no legal authority to start the war, as he would need congressional approval.

France has the same system as the U.S., only parliament has the power to start a war.[0]

> Words are important because if you earnestly want the situation to change, you need to assess it clearly.

I'm glad we agree on that. I will concede that Trump may never become a true dictator, but the ideology is clearly there and if his power is not checked I worry about who will succeed him.

> The Trump presidency has a more to do with the influence of money in US politics

Fascists regimes have historically been well-funded by money in politics.

[0] https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...

[mint5]

Are you claiming Harris or Biden would have bombed Iran like this? That does not sound credible, but if the other party wouldn’t have attached Iran then this is not business as usual, it’s the GOP as usual.

[mixmastamyk]

Maybe not exactly but Dems have started many wars, often to look tough due to the perception of them being weaker.

[Saline9515]

Biden and Harris didn't have any problems shipping tons of bombs to Israel, aimed at being exploded on dense civilian zones so I don't think that there is are dramatic differences between the two parties.

[CrossVR]

The dramatic difference is that Biden had Congressional approval to ship weapons to Israel and Ukraine.

[Saline9515]

Trump doesn't need congressional approval to launch operations shorter than 60 days, per the War Powers act, a law introduced by Democrats, by the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

[CrossVR]

This isn't a simple operation, killing a foreign head of state is about as clear of a declaration of war as you can imagine. The law was introduced to put a check on the president's use of military force, it didn't give the president the power to declare war on another country.

[etc-hosts]

from 2024:

"Harris to Jewish voters: ‘All options on the table’ to stop Iran from going nuclear In pre-election High Holidays call, US vice president says diplomatic solution still preferable to keep Islamic Republic from the bomb, charges Trump won’t stand by Israel"

https://www.timesofisrael.com/harris-to-jewish-voters-all-op...

[bluescrn]

But the Iranian regime isn’t at all fascist, right?

[autoexec]

The existence of fascism elsewhere doesn't excuse its existence here.