Fascism revisited, again

Has enough evidence accumulated to reasonably consider DJT, the GOP, Project 2025, Christian nationalism and all the rest of the American MAGA package close enough to old-fashioned fascism to call it fascism or some form of it, e.g., American fascism or soft fascism? DJT and the GOP have certainly gone authoritarian. Project 2025 looks awfully authoritarian and shockingly Dark Ages in some policy areas, e.g., climate science. Some supreme court rulings since the six Republican radicals took control and are now running free and butt naked wild are undeniably anti-democracy and authoritarian.  

Or, is it the case, that given modern circumstances that old-fashioned fascism or something close to that is simply impossible to happen. Lots of people believe that, probably most, maybe ~75%.

Q: What are similarities and differences of the MAGA and Christian nationalist movements and classical fascism?

A: The relationship between MAGA/Christian nationalist movements and classical fascism is complex, with some notable similarities but also key differences:

Similarities

1. Both MAGA/Christian nationalism and fascism emphasize a strong nationalist ideology that references an idealized mythic past. For MAGA, this involves nostalgia for a perceived "great" America of the past, while Christian nationalism connects America's founding and future success to its Christian heritage.

2. There are parallels in hostile attitudes toward intellectualism, education, and science (anti-intellectualism). Christian nationalism is associated with opposition to scientific consensus on issues like evolution and climate change. Classical fascism also promoted anti-intellectual and anti-science views.

3. There are similarities in the emphasis on "law and order" and support for strongman leadership figures. Both movements can display authoritarian leanings.

Differences

1. MAGA politicians generally argue that America's liberal democratic tradition needs to be saved, rather than abolished. Classical fascism explicitly rejected liberal democracy.

2. Classical fascism involved totalitarian one-party rule, secret police, and comprehensive control of society. The MAGA movement operates within the existing democratic system, despite concerns about democratic backsliding.

3. The MAGA and Christian nationalist movements arose in a very different historical context than classical fascism of the early 20th century. They lack the same mass movement character and paramilitary organizations.

Scholarly debate
There is ongoing debate among scholars about how to categorize these movements. Some see clear parallels to fascism, while others argue the differences are significant enough to warrant distinct classifications. Terms like "semi-fascism" or "neo-Bonapartist patrimonialism" have been proposed as alternatives. .... The debate over proper classification remains active in academic and political discourse.

Differences #1 and 2 arguably are more mirage than real. I don't believe either is more true than false. Available evidence strongly indicates that MAGA explicitly rejects liberal democracy. DJT and the GOP are both openly anti-voting rights and anti-free and fair elections.[1] After DJT's 1/6 auto-coup attempt, here is no way anyone can rationally argue that the MAGA movement operates within America's existing democratic system. That is pure blithering nonsense. MAGA has accepted, rationalized and justified the insurrection, elevating that to mandatory core belief in the GOP. 

However, difference #3 is real -- these are different times and circumstances. And, there still isn't a real fascist American paramilitary presence here yet.

Not surprisingly, DJT and the MAGA movement do not refer to themselves as fascist. They are superb propagandists. They shamelessly and cynically claim to be pro-democracy while being at least authoritarian, if not close to fascist.

Other commentary include this from 2022:

“To call a person who endorses violence against the duly elected government a ‘Republican’ is itself Orwellian. More accurate words exist for such a person. One of them is ‘fascist.’” .... Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank dropped the f-word after the Republican National Committee (RNC) on February 4 declared the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol “legitimate political discourse.”

Others—former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum and Democratic journalist Ed Kilgore among them—agree that the Trump-appeasing GOP is akin to the European fascists who rose to power between the two world wars. The concern predates the RNC’s endorsement of violence. Frum noted the insurrection itself, while Kilgore detected such parallels to interwar fascism as a “foundational” lie (Nazi claims about German sellouts after World War I, Trump supporters’ claims about election theft) and alliances with “reactionary religious interests and radical elements among the police and military veterans.”[2]

A Wikipedia article comments on Trumpism:

Trumpism is a political movement in the United States that comprises the political ideologies associated with Donald Trump and his political base. It incorporates ideologies such as right-wing populism, national conservatism, and neo-nationalism, and has been described as authoritarian and neo-fascist. Trumpist rhetoric heavily features anti-immigrant, xenophobic, nativist, and racist attacks against minority groups. Identified aspects include conspiracist, isolationist, Christian nationalist, evangelical Christian, protectionist, anti-feminist, and anti-LGBT beliefs. 

Trumpism has significant authoritarian leanings, and is strongly associated with the belief that the President is above the rule of law. It has been referred to as an American political variant of the far-right and the national-populist and neo-nationalist sentiment seen in multiple nations worldwide from the late 2010s to the early 2020s. 

Some commentators have rejected the populist designation for Trumpism and view it instead as part of a trend towards a new form of fascism or neo-fascism, with some referring to it as explicitly fascist and others as authoritarian and illiberal. Others have more mildly identified it as a specific light version of fascism in the United States. Some historians, including many of those using a new fascism classification, write of the hazards of direct comparisons with European fascist regimes of the 1930s, stating that while there are parallels, there are also important dissimilarities (links and citations removed to reduce distractions)

Q: Is authoritarianism a better, i.e., more persuasive, label for DJT, the GOP and MAGA than fascism, American fascism, semi-fascism, soft-fascism, defanged fascism (no paramilitary thugs on the streets) or neo-Bonapartist patrimonialism? 

PS: Consider this highly charged interaction: 

Irate neighbor: Hey, you neo-Bonapartist patrimonialist, get off my lawn!

Neighbor kid picking up ball that rolled onto the lawn: Huh?

Footnotes:

1. Also, the state of Georgia has just implemented new rules or laws that allow easy disruption of election results that Republicans refuse to accept. Georgia state government has gone full-blown authoritarian. And, DJT has publicly made clear his seething hate of political opposition, the Democratic Party and a free press. That is definitely authoritarian. 

2. That article included these comments:

Boston University Today: Could the Republican Party be described as either fascist or fascist-leaning?

Historian Jonathan Zatlin: From the historian’s perspective, fascism was a response to problems after 1918—the collapse of multiethnic empires, economic crises—that we don’t have today. If we’re experiencing crises, they’re crises that only superficially resemble what was going on in the interwar period: high inflation, the pandemic [of] the Spanish flu. What we’ve been experiencing the last couple of years are just very different situations. And we don’t have a four-year-long war that killed millions and traumatized a whole generation of young people who found it hard to be integrated back into society and work 9-to-5 jobs, then later experienced mass employment and a Depression lasting years. That, plus weak democratic traditions, led many Europeans to conclude that democracy brought crisis and poverty, and that only authoritarian regimes could ensure prosperity and stability.

One can rationally argue that DJT, his MAGA movement and Project 2025 are all doing their absolute best to weaken, discredit and subvert American democratic traditions and institutions, especially the rule of law and elections.

Beau gets it right!

(who is Beau?)