Guest Blog by John Broesamle: Is America Trending toward Fascism?

I cannot imagine writing a piece with this title prior to the Trump era, but it reflects where we are now. Responsible people who have long viewed Donald Trump as a simple authoritarian are taking the question further: Is he also pulling this country in the direction of fascism? Half a century ago, it was common for student radicals in the college classes I taught to accuse Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon of being fascists. I would ask them to consult a dictionary before tossing that word around.

In that era, the dictionary would have been a Webster’s Collegiate. In today’s online version, Webster’s defines fascism as follows:

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

This definition takes us only so far. Exalting the nation above the individual, centralized autocratic government, dictatorial leadership, severe economic and social regimentation, and suppression of opposition—these describe Stalin’s Soviet Union as well as they describe Hitler’s Germany. The one term remaining is that troubling word, “race.” We will come back to it.

To seize control, Windrip calls on a corps of paramilitary thugs, the Minute Men. Bullyboys like these are a constant in fascist regimes, whether called the Blackshirts (Italy) or the Brownshirts (Germany) or something else. These bruisers are not people the economic elites—corporate executives, big landowners—would invite into their homes; even so, for their own reasons, such elites have also become willingly ensnarled in fascist regimes. For one thing, fascism portrays itself as the polar opposite of socialism or Marxism; rather than a classless society, fascism places great store in a hierarchy of classes and groups. As part of the call to restore and renew tradition and fight Communism, fascist regimes, or governments that have collaborated with fascism, have also linked themselves with right-wing religious elements—for example, in the case of Franco’s Spain and Vichy France, reactionary elements of the Church. (One of the reasons for the French defeat in 1940 was that there were many who yearned for “national regeneration” and considered a German victory preferable to continuing under the French republic.)

Fascist leaders thrive on the big lie. The term comes from Mein Kampf, where Hitler observes that, if a lie is sufficiently “colossal,” it can inspire belief by its sheer magnitude, since it would be impossible to believe anyone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” The bigger and more often repeated the lie, the better. There is no finer setting for promulgating the big lie than the big rally. Hitler’s rallies were legendary—meant to overwhelm with their sheer crowd size, to intimidate with their show of military force, and to be constantly replayed in propaganda films. Similarly, thousands would congregate in front of a balcony facing Rome’s Piazza Venezia to hear Mussolini rant.

Fascist leaders go by the dictum, divide and conquer. In the name of “Nordic superiority,” Hitler took “othering” to the darkest depths in history. The fascistic Japanese regime claimed exalted status for its own population over other Asians, with horrific results in China, Korea, and elsewhere.

Fascist leaders famously cultivate and reward sycophants. Hitler kept a whole stable of them around him, including some convenient generals. At the same time, Hitler consistently disregarded their sound, obvious advice. It was certainly not the advice of his general staff to take on Britain, Russia, the United States, and a vengeful France all at once.

Fascist leaders have built powerful (or seemingly powerful) militaries, but vary on what comes next. Hitler used the revived German military machine to overrun most of continental Europe. Mussolini’s grand visions of re-creating the Roman Empire ran afoul of astonishing military ineptitude. The Japanese regime was as imperialistic as Germany or Italy. Franco, though himself a general, stayed out of World War II and largely confined himself to the Iberian Peninsula.

Finally, fascist regimes construct themselves around a cult of personality. One thinks of Hitler or Mussolini in particular. Millions found them fiendishly magnetic. Blind loyalty to a supposedly divine emperor served something of the same function in Japan. The democracies of World War II produced an astonishing array of great leaders—Roosevelt, Churchill, de Gaulle. But their followers did not march in lockstep with glassy eyes. Allied troops became infuriated toward the end of World War II, when the outcome was clear but German troops kept fighting. Part of the reason was that if they didn’t they would be promptly shot for cowardice. But another reason was that so many of them remained brainwashed.

So, then: Is America trending toward fascism? The short answer, unfortunately, is yes. Consider:

The cult of personality is obvious in Trump’s base. The only question is, How does he do it?

Authoritarianism is elemental to Trump’s governing approach and to his appeal. What kind of president declares repeatedly that he may not respect the results of the election, or an FDA ruling on a vaccine? An estimated 40 percent of Americans have authoritarian inclinations, preferring obedience and order over freedom. Many favor a powerful leader who shouldn’t have to concern himself with elections or interference by other branches of government (Matthew C. MacWilliams, Politico, September 23, 2020). Trump speaks directly to these people when he “jokes” about exceeding the constitutionally-limited number of terms. The penchant for hierarchies is a signature of authoritarian leanings.

The big lie. According to the Washington Post’s running tally, Trump has made over 20,000 false or misleading statements as president. Bob Woodward’s Rage has offered a rare window into the difference between what Trump knows and what he says.

The big rally. Trump famously yearns for huge, tightly-packed crowds, emphasizing or falsifying their size. Attending these rallies is a potential kamikaze mission in the pandemic era.

Divide and conquer. When, since the Civil War, have Americans been as split as they are now? Trump did not originate this condition, but he has been extraordinarily cunning in exploiting it, from Birtherism to blaming “blue” states for their own pandemic deaths.

Xenophobia and racism. No sitting president in the past century has elevated either to such a pitch. None has ever expressed his loathing of immigrants so openly; none has launched his presidential campaign denouncing any group as “rapists.”

Repression using secret police and other means. Over the summer, the administration dispatched federal police, some unidentified and some untrained, to confront protests in cities from Washington, D.C. to Portland, Oregon. At the same time, the president refused to condemn a seventeen year-old who shot two people dead in the streets of Kenosha, much as he declined to condemn neo-Nazis and other white supremacists in Charlottesville two years ago.

Reliance on the religious right. Historically, where fascism is concerned the branch of Christianity doesn’t seem to matter. Trump’s base is particularly populated with evangelicals.

Enlisting and coddling economic elites. A great many wealthy people laud Trump for his economic performance; some, like Steven Mnuchin and Betsy DeVos, sit in his cabinet. Many of those less well-off approve of what Trump has done for their 401(k)s or, pre-pandemic, for the unemployment rate.

A circle of sycophants. The circle extends beyond Trump’s immediate entourage to his cabinet, agency heads, and Republicans in Congress, who have often been likened to Vichyites. Inside accounts, e.g., John Bolton’s The Room Where It Happened and Michael Cohen’s Disloyal, document that Trump will tolerate none but toadies around him. This has meant curtain calls for the likes of Bolton, H. R. McMaster, and James Mattis.

Expanding the military. In the manner of Franco, Trump has done this while at the same time constricting commitments abroad and avoiding another war—so far.

Disregard of expertise. Hitler routinely ignored his smartest generals. Trump ignores his leading doctors in favor of, for example, the current favorite, Dr. Scott Atlas.

Through the first decades of American history, ours was a democracy of property-owning elites. The system worked because, no matter how hard they played the game, the Hamiltons and Madisons played by the rules they themselves had made. The big question then was, What would happen if the electorate were expanded to take in non-elites? The first result of that experiment at the national level was not promising. Andrew Jackson was a wealthy, slaveholding planter who ran as a rough-hewn man of the people. (Donald Trump’s admiration of Jackson is not accidental.) After Jackson’s first inauguration in 1829, 20,000 people crashed the White House and tore the interior apart. Historians and political scientists have never fully settled the question of mass democracy. In Lincoln’s famous aphorism, you can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time. How many? For how long? At what risk of losing democracy?

Is this a fascist country? Of course not. Not yet. But it is trending that way. The present moment is a test of mass democracy. Those who cannot discern what is at stake—democracy itself—deserve to be outvoted by those who do. As Trump likes to say, “We’ll see.” In Sinclair Lewis’s It Can’t Happen Here, the final outcome is left unclear.

John Broesamle, a previous contributor to RINOcracy.com, is Emeritus Professor of History at California State University, Northridge. His books on American politics and society include Reform and Reaction in Twentieth Century American Politics, Twelve Great Clashes that Shaped Modern America: From Geronimo to George W. Bush (with Anthony Arthur), and, most recently, How American Presidents Succeed and Why They Fail: From Richard Nixon to Barack Obama.