Once upon a time a man named Barry Goldwater appeared on the political scene. And the radical cried, “Danger! A fascist!” And the people came running, but they saw that, actually, he was just a right-wing authoritarian, and he was making no effort to build a mass movement based on violence and terror in order to overturn democratic institutions, so the people went away grumbling.
Then a man named Nixon appeared, and the radical cried, “Danger! A fascist!” And the people came running, but they saw that, while he was extremely right-wing, and was, indeed, chipping away at democratic institutions, he still had no mass movement based on the frustrated petty bourgeoisie, nor an agenda to lead such a movement to establish himself as dictator on behalf of finance capital, so the people went away annoyed.
Then Trump came along….
Blaming Donald Trump for everything is ridiculous. He is the result, not the cause, of the corrupt end days of capitalism. Biden is also a product of this corruption.
I quite agree, Carolyn. Trump is a symptom. But my point was different. I agree listening to middle class radicals denounce everything as “fascism” if it was right wing. I would tell them that disarms us. Trump is an actual fascist, as Trotsky described fascism. And all of those petit bourgeois radicals who called everything fascism are now unable to identify the actual thing, the actual danger. I believe this is a point worth making, don’t you?
It probably does not matter much whether Trump wins or loses, there is going to be big trouble either way. The Corporate Dems have proven themselves far less than useless in resisting Trump’s machinations. Only popular movements will be able to stop him.
@Kragar
I agree in principle, but here is the scary part.
Trump is an idiot. I don’t just mean that rhetorically. He’s actually a not-smart person of a very high degree. My concern is that his idiocy is the key to his success. He was never cautious or clever enough to try to hide what he was doing, and so he just bulls on ahead with his outrageously awful and illegal behavior, challenging the system (the one set up by the wealthy specifically so that wealthy people never have to face any real consequences for their actions) to hold him accountable. The surprising thing to me is not that he hasn’t been put in jail yet, but rather that people are even TALKING about putting him in jail. The whole system is set up to protect people like him–which is exactly how he’s gotten away with everything (so far).
But, as people have observed, Trumpism is just a symptom. My real worry is not that Trump will succeed (as I’ve noted, he’s really a not-smart person which ultimately is going to limit his potential for doing harm) but rather, what power-hungry douchebag is waiting in the wings right now, zealously taking notes, and preparing for the inevitable downfall or death of Trump so he can rise to take his place.
Chances are, that successor is going to be a lot smarter than Trump (I mean, it’s not a high bar). And THAT person (okay, let’s face it, that MAN) is going to immediately present a much greater danger than Trump ever has. We need to be ready to resist when (not if) that day arrives.
Jon: The danger is present whether it’s Trump, those who pull his strings, or someone new. If possible, I’d prefer striking first to resistance because the body count is lower, but developments are unlikely to give us a choice. At any rate, the US has a tradition of preemptive counter-revolution triggering revolutions: see 1861-1865.
But we need to remember that totalitarian dictatorship, whether fascist, military dictatorship, junta, or some other form, is expensive. Jails, police, police equipment, secret police, cost immense amounts. Never in history has a ruling class resorted to such measures unless they (or a significant section of them) felt they had to. They’re scared, and they are right to be. The resistance is growing, but it has not yet taken managed to acquire a coherent program to unite all of the oppressed and give the struggle a clear direction. That is what is missing, and providing that is exactly the job of the most advanced sections of the working class, or, as we call them, socialists.
There is a flip side to that particular parable: pay attention to what matters. Blaming the little boy means eff all when the sheep are getting slaughtered. Focusing on language is immaterial when the wolves are running rampant.
controlZED: I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with me or disagreeing. Words mean a great deal when they are precise and accurate; they are how we communicate our understanding of the world to others. Calling a wolf a flower won’t save any sheep.
And the ruling elite control the media to make sure they never allow the words they do not like to be spoken or written. And their servants in the corporate media perform their tasks very well.
skzb: my point is that while the townspeople were quibbling about the boy’s accuracy and precision of the phrase “a wolf is coming” the wolf continued to kill sheep (and furthered the wolf’s cause).
You suggest that calling a wolf a flower won’t save sheep, I’m saying defining a wolf won’t save any sheep. Language is not precise and can never be depended upon for accuracy. Suggesting we build a more accurate language model, seems to me (respectfully, of course) an inherently lost cause that will inevitably be won by the establishment (see Orwell, Trump, et al.)
Kragar: similarly, the focus on the media’s role in maintaining the status quo and stifling dissent is also misguided. The dissemination of mistrust regarding the media has had disastrous consequences
ControlZED: Well, this is rather remarkable. If we are not using words to communicate, why have language? If we are using words to communicate, surely it matters whether we are being precise. If I should ever go into the hospital with shortness of breath and acute chest pain, it would matter a very great deal to me whether it was a coronary event or indigestion, and I would hope the physician would not only diagnose it correctly, but use the right words when describing it. If someone were constructing a building, one would think the distinction between a beam and a girder would matter a very great deal. I assure you, no pilot would care to take landing instructions in an emergency from an air traffic controller who didn’t think the difference between pitch and roll was important.
And as for the idea that it doesn’t matter if the information we are receiving it truthful also astounds me. I guess what unites these positions is that they seem to carry with them the implication that we aren’t going to do anything, because if we are to act, how can it not matter that we know what we are acting on, and communicating it precisely?
Trust in the media has had disastrous consequences. See Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Gaza, the destruction of unions, neoliberalism, the destruction of the environment, loss of the right to bodily autonomy and privacy. Luckily it has almost entirely eroded by now, as the public can determine the truth for itself from other sources.
The information that most closely resembles facts is available. Unfortunately, much of the public seems to lack the skills needed to tell the difference between facts and propaganda.
The default screen most people seem to use is “Person (I like) in authority made a statement and so that must be the true one.”
This is currently and really always has been a pretty bad information filter.
For the comment from controlZED — words have meanings and it is very important to use the right words.