Prominent leftwing intellectuals are allowing their singular, disdain-driven focus on (neo-) liberalism to completely distort their perspective on the Right
Tyrannophobia is the big threat to democracy? Seriously, do these guys work for Trump? (I know that's almost always tired binary straw man horseshit, but... C'MON!)
"They are engaged in a political struggle against what they believe is the real enemy: The (neo-) liberal elites, which they define in very broad and unspecific terms to include basically the entire mainstream of American politics from Center-Left to Center-Right, and particularly the Democratic establishment."
It's more accurate to say elitism (undemocratic soft power) is the "good cop" to fascism's "bad cop." Elitism from the DNC has no doubt empowered Republican fascism with its antipopulist determined loserism. If the real enemy is fascism, then attention must be paid to fascist tendencies in elitist/ protofascist (anti-democratic, anti-poor) governments/ parties which nurture and enable latent fascism.
One year later, the arguments look pretty silly. The whole categorization of camps is just determining which circle one chooses to sit with for one’s jerking, while undeniable progress toward fascism is occurring. Using one’s free hand to point at the other circle is so very effective, rather than, you know, defending the country from tyranny.
A month after 9/11 I saw a "soldier" in downtown Austin, wearing all black, pants tucked into his boots and a lightning bolt up his arm. I shuddered THEN, ANTICIPATING NOW.
Anyone who still argues that we are not fighting against fascism is someone to dismiss. It is plain before us. We see examples of their intent in how they rule in the states they control. Engaging with these academics who are this clueless is a waste of time and counter productive. I liken the discussion similar to the current academic talks about scotus and whether they are really consolidating power to themselves while also feasting at the teat of Harlan Crow. That, too, is a waste of time. It is, what it appears to be. Action to defeat is all that is left and activists like myself must take that action irrespective of what the academics blather on about. The GOP is a fascist movement and SCOTUS is part of that effort.
Excellent article as always, Thomas. Well reasoned and supported. The one thing I would add is the cost of being wrong if one downplays the rise of fascism. The skeptics warn that about the rise of the police state by wrongly using the fascism label, but seem to disregard the opposite threat. It's a little late to warn (or admit you were wrong) once the fascists are in power.
These guys couldn't be trusted to babysit... A golden retriever.
Now I see where the batshit theories and behavior coming out of the pro-Hamas left comes from. It's entirely constructed theory, nothing natural, no existence of human nature, of our natural instincts permitted. Perfect way to prepare people for cults.
This is how you deny the existence of mass rape and atrocities. All in pursuit of a theoretical future that will never, ever, ehh-verrr happen. Does it bother them that they're on the same side as neo-Nazis now? Literally? Given the latter funded a sign truck to drive around Union Square with false accusations about Israel and thejews?
And in attempting to destroy the village so they could save it, they blew up everything around the village, including themselves.
These fools have no business in education. They're duplicitous, for changing their text to match reality while insisting the reality they had gotten out of touch with so much they had to make a sneaky change isn't really real. Their methods are literally shared with brain-washing.
I stopped reading after he got to the part about that sleazy move with their content. That tells me everything I need to know. They are incapable of honest dealing with humanity, or humans. I know the type. They're going to continue to be wrong and their predictions will be, probably are alreqdy, increasingly out of sync with reality. What they don't edit in secret they'll claim didn't really happen or the cause was outside of their prediction and it may even have been done to make them look bad. Or their movement look bad, but, of course, same thing, right? Either way, they will never be wrong, ever. Just ask them, if it doesn't happen it's not their fault because... But this next thing "DEFINITELY will happen totally certainly... oh it didn't? Not my fault!"
Sound like anyone we know?
If they didn't get jobs in academia they'd have employment records of going from low-level clerical jobs one after another, alienating people over petty diversions, unable to change enough to ever fit somewhere. They're incapable of understanding other people so they put enormous energy into making reality bend to their interpretation of life and their innate feelings. This kind of brain is enormously toxic, and usually they can't cause much damage, but sticking them in front of a captive audience of open-minded neophytes with very little stake in real world risks thanks to the shelter their parents built around them, they don't understand the stakes for the larger world at all either.
This bit of writing explains it aaall to me now.
Congrats left-lefties, you're now so purist you're allied with both fascists and rabidly violent genocidal regimes, meaning Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas... and technically, Bibi, bcuz he is at heart an autocrat, just like those others.
This explains the horseshoe of extremists on the continuum. They close the oval for me. Finally, this illustrates for me why the center MUST hold. And I'm damn determined it will.
In French as in most European languages the word "liberal" meant, and still means "tolerant", for those who use language carefully. At the beginning of the 19th century a semantic shift occurred in its political use. Henceforth, it also meant "supporter of free enterprise". Still now in the European French speaking areas, it means "business friendly". As English spreads as a lingua franca the use of "liberal" denoting the two extremes of the political spectrum: liberal for "leftist", (neo-l)iberal for what in Europe is "far-right" is too often used by the media to create confusion and manipulate public opinion. The same can be said of the term "democrat" when applied to the US Democrat Party. Some in Europe believe that the Party of Clinton, Obama, Biden is a left of center party. Most Europeans ignore that Clinton, Obama, Biden State Department personnel has consistently been a fief of the war-monger neoconservatives who, along European continental categories, can rightly be called fascists. Let's hope the time is near when Europeans will judge parties not on their names but on their stated agenda and program.
The correct term is “Democratic” Party. The term “Democrat” Party is a Republican term used disparagingly. It is a signal of disrespect and bias as I assume you know.
I agree that the Skeptics are off the mark. I also don't see that Fascism and Neo-liberalism are all that incompatible. Trump is dream come true for the "greed is good" crowd. A while back Chomsky pointed out that Fascism "classic" had the government dominating the corporations while what we seem to be heading into is the reverse - the corporations will own the government. Let the Skeptics debate how many Proud Boys can dance on the head of a pin and we'll do whatever we can to keep Trump - as well as his toadies AND puppet masters - out of power.
While the two posts make a reasonably strong case for the technically equating Trumpism with fascism, I think the political implications would hurt the left. Fascism = nazi-ism in the public’s mind. So either:
You get the left to start universally associating Trumpism with fascism and swing voters notice the absence of a few thousand political executions and conclude that the left is once again is crying wolf and everything it says can be ignored.
AND
Since if anything justifies political violence and assassination, it’s trying to stop nazis from seizing power, the left now becomes the ones guilty of stochastic terrorism when someone decides to stop Hitler early with bombs and political assassinations.
OR
You really do persuade millions of pro-Trump supporters that Trumpism is fascism and thus logically, what America needs is fascism. If I wanted to bring the term fascism into the Overton window, I could see no better way than successfully labelling a broadly popular political movement fascist.
Trump was never an aberration. In the 2016 debates, he didn't deviate much from Republican orthodoxy, except his dislike of trade deals and his desire (for now) to not go after Social Security. (He was more willing to cut it in a second term.) That is to say those elements were always there and it has been more of an evolution than a revolution. Trump distinguished himself by saying the quiet part out loud and (shockingly) empathized with the grievances of many in America, probably because of his exclusion from the New York elite (despite his wealth).
Many people on the Left criticize the Democratic Party because they fundamentally mischaracterize the Party. The Democratic Party is more of a consensus Party than the Republican Party. The Democratic Party of Clinton (which included the likes of Richard Shelby and Zell Miller) was to the right of the Democratic Party of Obama (who had Ben Nelson and Bart Stupak) who is to the right of the Democratic Party of Biden (which includes Manchin and +/- Sinema (who is a fascinating character who doesn't neatly fit any prevailing narratives)). There is still an alignment going on and what the Left (in my opinion) fail to recognize is how that divide was accelerated by the Democratic Party's embrace of civil rights. The Left's vision of a more robust safety net cannot be a reality without a concerted effort to incorporate marginalized populations into the net, a movement both the Left and the Right deride as "identity politics". There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth but Trump's electoral victory as being due to economic anxiety was more prevalent on the Left than the mainstream Democratic Party. So much so, there was many people of color in the Democratic Party who believe that the Left think that their rights are taking a back seat to a leftist agenda that doesn't truly acknowledge them.
Ultimately the Left continues to fight a battle where the combatants largely agree but they have to distort the Democratic Party agenda so they don't have to ever reckon with their electoral and political weakness. Sadly, their distortions are seen most prominently in Joe Biden. Biden has been in office since before Reagan so he has always been in favor of what would now be called a more progressive economic program. This is the first time he is in a position to act on it. Also, not to say he has been perfect on Gaza but he has taken the position of a powerful ally and not an imperialist. It is ironic that the Left's major criticism of Biden in Gaza is because he doesn't act like the Left's impression of America. Also, it's clear he does not subscribe to the Louis XIV belief that "L'etat, c'est moi", which allows him to support a ME Democratic state as opposed to a leader he has political disagreements with. The Left, who tend to be indifferent to political parties, would be grateful to countries who don't share that philosophy because they wouldn't want to be mistreated because they have a President, like Trump, who many countries despise.
As a historical reminder, the Left continues to fight this silly battle against neoliberalism, which is nothing more than shadowboxing, all the while leading the way to a situation where their progressive dreams become more impossible to achieve. Despite their beliefs to the contrary, people will remember their role (like they remembered in 2020) and they won't take power. Humility and reality based arguments shouldn't hurt the Left.
There are cranks in every group
YES, IT IS FASCISM!
Tyrannophobia is the big threat to democracy? Seriously, do these guys work for Trump? (I know that's almost always tired binary straw man horseshit, but... C'MON!)
"They are engaged in a political struggle against what they believe is the real enemy: The (neo-) liberal elites, which they define in very broad and unspecific terms to include basically the entire mainstream of American politics from Center-Left to Center-Right, and particularly the Democratic establishment."
It's more accurate to say elitism (undemocratic soft power) is the "good cop" to fascism's "bad cop." Elitism from the DNC has no doubt empowered Republican fascism with its antipopulist determined loserism. If the real enemy is fascism, then attention must be paid to fascist tendencies in elitist/ protofascist (anti-democratic, anti-poor) governments/ parties which nurture and enable latent fascism.
One year later, the arguments look pretty silly. The whole categorization of camps is just determining which circle one chooses to sit with for one’s jerking, while undeniable progress toward fascism is occurring. Using one’s free hand to point at the other circle is so very effective, rather than, you know, defending the country from tyranny.
A month after 9/11 I saw a "soldier" in downtown Austin, wearing all black, pants tucked into his boots and a lightning bolt up his arm. I shuddered THEN, ANTICIPATING NOW.
These are the people who have destroyed the Dem Party. DINOs, I suppose.
Excommunicate them and reorganize as HUMANISTS.
Anyone who still argues that we are not fighting against fascism is someone to dismiss. It is plain before us. We see examples of their intent in how they rule in the states they control. Engaging with these academics who are this clueless is a waste of time and counter productive. I liken the discussion similar to the current academic talks about scotus and whether they are really consolidating power to themselves while also feasting at the teat of Harlan Crow. That, too, is a waste of time. It is, what it appears to be. Action to defeat is all that is left and activists like myself must take that action irrespective of what the academics blather on about. The GOP is a fascist movement and SCOTUS is part of that effort.
Excellent article as always, Thomas. Well reasoned and supported. The one thing I would add is the cost of being wrong if one downplays the rise of fascism. The skeptics warn that about the rise of the police state by wrongly using the fascism label, but seem to disregard the opposite threat. It's a little late to warn (or admit you were wrong) once the fascists are in power.
The mental self-stroking... omg.
And that's the guy I agree with.
These guys couldn't be trusted to babysit... A golden retriever.
Now I see where the batshit theories and behavior coming out of the pro-Hamas left comes from. It's entirely constructed theory, nothing natural, no existence of human nature, of our natural instincts permitted. Perfect way to prepare people for cults.
This is how you deny the existence of mass rape and atrocities. All in pursuit of a theoretical future that will never, ever, ehh-verrr happen. Does it bother them that they're on the same side as neo-Nazis now? Literally? Given the latter funded a sign truck to drive around Union Square with false accusations about Israel and thejews?
And in attempting to destroy the village so they could save it, they blew up everything around the village, including themselves.
These fools have no business in education. They're duplicitous, for changing their text to match reality while insisting the reality they had gotten out of touch with so much they had to make a sneaky change isn't really real. Their methods are literally shared with brain-washing.
I stopped reading after he got to the part about that sleazy move with their content. That tells me everything I need to know. They are incapable of honest dealing with humanity, or humans. I know the type. They're going to continue to be wrong and their predictions will be, probably are alreqdy, increasingly out of sync with reality. What they don't edit in secret they'll claim didn't really happen or the cause was outside of their prediction and it may even have been done to make them look bad. Or their movement look bad, but, of course, same thing, right? Either way, they will never be wrong, ever. Just ask them, if it doesn't happen it's not their fault because... But this next thing "DEFINITELY will happen totally certainly... oh it didn't? Not my fault!"
Sound like anyone we know?
If they didn't get jobs in academia they'd have employment records of going from low-level clerical jobs one after another, alienating people over petty diversions, unable to change enough to ever fit somewhere. They're incapable of understanding other people so they put enormous energy into making reality bend to their interpretation of life and their innate feelings. This kind of brain is enormously toxic, and usually they can't cause much damage, but sticking them in front of a captive audience of open-minded neophytes with very little stake in real world risks thanks to the shelter their parents built around them, they don't understand the stakes for the larger world at all either.
This bit of writing explains it aaall to me now.
Congrats left-lefties, you're now so purist you're allied with both fascists and rabidly violent genocidal regimes, meaning Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas... and technically, Bibi, bcuz he is at heart an autocrat, just like those others.
This explains the horseshoe of extremists on the continuum. They close the oval for me. Finally, this illustrates for me why the center MUST hold. And I'm damn determined it will.
In French as in most European languages the word "liberal" meant, and still means "tolerant", for those who use language carefully. At the beginning of the 19th century a semantic shift occurred in its political use. Henceforth, it also meant "supporter of free enterprise". Still now in the European French speaking areas, it means "business friendly". As English spreads as a lingua franca the use of "liberal" denoting the two extremes of the political spectrum: liberal for "leftist", (neo-l)iberal for what in Europe is "far-right" is too often used by the media to create confusion and manipulate public opinion. The same can be said of the term "democrat" when applied to the US Democrat Party. Some in Europe believe that the Party of Clinton, Obama, Biden is a left of center party. Most Europeans ignore that Clinton, Obama, Biden State Department personnel has consistently been a fief of the war-monger neoconservatives who, along European continental categories, can rightly be called fascists. Let's hope the time is near when Europeans will judge parties not on their names but on their stated agenda and program.
The correct term is “Democratic” Party. The term “Democrat” Party is a Republican term used disparagingly. It is a signal of disrespect and bias as I assume you know.
Pourquoi devrais-je savoir ?
I agree that the Skeptics are off the mark. I also don't see that Fascism and Neo-liberalism are all that incompatible. Trump is dream come true for the "greed is good" crowd. A while back Chomsky pointed out that Fascism "classic" had the government dominating the corporations while what we seem to be heading into is the reverse - the corporations will own the government. Let the Skeptics debate how many Proud Boys can dance on the head of a pin and we'll do whatever we can to keep Trump - as well as his toadies AND puppet masters - out of power.
While the two posts make a reasonably strong case for the technically equating Trumpism with fascism, I think the political implications would hurt the left. Fascism = nazi-ism in the public’s mind. So either:
You get the left to start universally associating Trumpism with fascism and swing voters notice the absence of a few thousand political executions and conclude that the left is once again is crying wolf and everything it says can be ignored.
AND
Since if anything justifies political violence and assassination, it’s trying to stop nazis from seizing power, the left now becomes the ones guilty of stochastic terrorism when someone decides to stop Hitler early with bombs and political assassinations.
OR
You really do persuade millions of pro-Trump supporters that Trumpism is fascism and thus logically, what America needs is fascism. If I wanted to bring the term fascism into the Overton window, I could see no better way than successfully labelling a broadly popular political movement fascist.
Gotta say, after reading these two thoughtful, reasonable posts about the "fascism debate," I was a bit surprised by the comments!
Trump was never an aberration. In the 2016 debates, he didn't deviate much from Republican orthodoxy, except his dislike of trade deals and his desire (for now) to not go after Social Security. (He was more willing to cut it in a second term.) That is to say those elements were always there and it has been more of an evolution than a revolution. Trump distinguished himself by saying the quiet part out loud and (shockingly) empathized with the grievances of many in America, probably because of his exclusion from the New York elite (despite his wealth).
Many people on the Left criticize the Democratic Party because they fundamentally mischaracterize the Party. The Democratic Party is more of a consensus Party than the Republican Party. The Democratic Party of Clinton (which included the likes of Richard Shelby and Zell Miller) was to the right of the Democratic Party of Obama (who had Ben Nelson and Bart Stupak) who is to the right of the Democratic Party of Biden (which includes Manchin and +/- Sinema (who is a fascinating character who doesn't neatly fit any prevailing narratives)). There is still an alignment going on and what the Left (in my opinion) fail to recognize is how that divide was accelerated by the Democratic Party's embrace of civil rights. The Left's vision of a more robust safety net cannot be a reality without a concerted effort to incorporate marginalized populations into the net, a movement both the Left and the Right deride as "identity politics". There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth but Trump's electoral victory as being due to economic anxiety was more prevalent on the Left than the mainstream Democratic Party. So much so, there was many people of color in the Democratic Party who believe that the Left think that their rights are taking a back seat to a leftist agenda that doesn't truly acknowledge them.
Ultimately the Left continues to fight a battle where the combatants largely agree but they have to distort the Democratic Party agenda so they don't have to ever reckon with their electoral and political weakness. Sadly, their distortions are seen most prominently in Joe Biden. Biden has been in office since before Reagan so he has always been in favor of what would now be called a more progressive economic program. This is the first time he is in a position to act on it. Also, not to say he has been perfect on Gaza but he has taken the position of a powerful ally and not an imperialist. It is ironic that the Left's major criticism of Biden in Gaza is because he doesn't act like the Left's impression of America. Also, it's clear he does not subscribe to the Louis XIV belief that "L'etat, c'est moi", which allows him to support a ME Democratic state as opposed to a leader he has political disagreements with. The Left, who tend to be indifferent to political parties, would be grateful to countries who don't share that philosophy because they wouldn't want to be mistreated because they have a President, like Trump, who many countries despise.
As a historical reminder, the Left continues to fight this silly battle against neoliberalism, which is nothing more than shadowboxing, all the while leading the way to a situation where their progressive dreams become more impossible to achieve. Despite their beliefs to the contrary, people will remember their role (like they remembered in 2020) and they won't take power. Humility and reality based arguments shouldn't hurt the Left.
"Owning the libs" seems to be a major attraction to both MAGA and the crowd described in this article.