These Are No Longer the Words of a Scurrilous Populist: Trump Is a Fascist
Donald Trump has seriously suggested that gun rights supporters – “The Second Amendment People” – should just shoot Hillary Clinton, should she become president. Afterwards, as always, he tried to talk his way out of this, but this extremely reprehensible statement does not leave much room for interpretation. Because if you state that, once Clinton is elected, there is “nothing you can do, folks. Although, the Second Amendment people. Maybe there is,” then what are you suggesting these gun owners do? Organize a peace march?
It is a horrible statement. Of course, it has elicited commotion in the United States, but, all in all, there is not too much commotion. It is as if many are beginning to think: Oh well, it’s always something with Trump. Even so, this is a very different matter altogether. This is not crazy Trump humiliating the parents of a soldier who died in battle. This is not crazy Trump provoking his own party by hesitating to endorse fellow [Republican] politicians. By going this berserk now and depicting an attack on a political opponent, Donald Trump has, well, crossed a line. These are no longer the words of a scurrilous populist. Donald Trump has shown himself to be a fascist in the strictly politico-logical sense of the word. Seizing power and keeping it by means of (state) violence: That is the definition of fascism.
This is not just an academic matter of principle. In a country with a completely perverted political battle and a bloody tradition of murder attacks (Lincoln, the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King, the attack on Reagan…), Trump is striking a match in a gas-filled room. Those who still back him now should know that they are accomplices.
On a thankfully more innocent level, this matter also affects us. Here, too, politicians and other instigators (both left-wing and right-wing) seem to have to learn to live with the fact that threats have become part of the debate rhetoric. To the extent that this democratization of death threats is merely a consequence of a derailed assertiveness through social media, we should not pay too much attention to this. But here, too, the possibility of a lunatic taking his murderous desires seriously cannot be ruled out.
Thankfully, politicians around here are keeping a sufficiently clear head and do not call for violence against opponents themselves. But when calling an opponent “dangerous” – whether that opponent be left-wing or right-wing – one should realize that it can summon forces that can grow beyond control.
That is why we would like a debate that focuses more on content and less on male/female form. It is a lesson that we too should draw from Donald Trump’s extremism.
It is a horrible statement. Of course, it has elicited commotion in the United States, but, all in all, there is not too much commotion. It is as if many are beginning to think: Oh well, it’s always something with Trump. Even so, this is a very different matter altogether. This is not crazy Trump humiliating the parents of a soldier who died in battle. This is not crazy Trump provoking his own party by hesitating to endorse fellow [Republican] politicians. By going this berserk now and depicting an attack on a political opponent, Donald Trump has, well, crossed a line. These are no longer the words of a scurrilous populist. Donald Trump has shown himself to be a fascist in the strictly politico-logical sense of the word. Seizing power and keeping it by means of (state) violence: That is the definition of fascism.
This is not just an academic matter of principle. In a country with a completely perverted political battle and a bloody tradition of murder attacks (Lincoln, the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King, the attack on Reagan…), Trump is striking a match in a gas-filled room. Those who still back him now should know that they are accomplices.
On a thankfully more innocent level, this matter also affects us. Here, too, politicians and other instigators (both left-wing and right-wing) seem to have to learn to live with the fact that threats have become part of the debate rhetoric. To the extent that this democratization of death threats is merely a consequence of a derailed assertiveness through social media, we should not pay too much attention to this. But here, too, the possibility of a lunatic taking his murderous desires seriously cannot be ruled out.
Thankfully, politicians around here are keeping a sufficiently clear head and do not call for violence against opponents themselves. But when calling an opponent “dangerous” – whether that opponent be left-wing or right-wing – one should realize that it can summon forces that can grow beyond control.
That is why we would like a debate that focuses more on content and less on male/female form. It is a lesson that we too should draw from Donald Trump’s extremism.
Previous article![]( "Obama and Macri’s Masterful Ploy")
Next article![]( "We Need To Ignore Stereotypes in Foreign Policy")
