Is MAGA a fifth column?

[Measure_for_Measure]

@Dissonance

Might I humbly suggest you actually look up the definition of fifth column yourself rather than relying upon a cherry-picked single definition from a single dictionary provided by the OP. Because that isn’t the actual definition of the term fifth column. One may as well rely upon Humpty Dumpty to define what he means by the phrase “there’s glory for you” and then run with his incorrect definition.

Reasonable request, followed by overblown rhetoric. I cite Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 4th ed. They list definitions in historical order:

1. those people in Madrid who aided for forces of Francisco Franco in his uprising against the Spanish republic (1936-39)… 2) any group of people who aid the enemy from within their own country. - fifth columnists.

Not an archaic term according to my cite. Wholly consistent with Happy Fun Ball’s definition. You would have a point if Happy Fun Ball was arguing that MAGA were closet Franco fans. But of course he didn’t argue anything like that.

@Dissonance

Would you say the US was in a proxy war with Hitler from Sep 1, 1939, until Dec 10, 1941, because we were providing arms to France and the Commonwealth?

I would be comfortable saying that the 1941 Lend Lease bill opposed Hitler by proxy. I wouldn’t call it a proxy war against Hitler, any more than I would call the Ukrainian War a proxy war against Putin.

My examples were wholly consistent with Happy Fun Ball’s definition, and definition 2 of Webster’s New World College Dictionary.

@Dissonance

A fifth column is an organization hidden within a government or its armed forces that is working directly for its enemies to undermine it from within and hand it over to those it is fighting.

That’s not the definition given by Happy Fun Ball, nor is it the one supplied by Webster’s New World College Dictionary. But if that’s what you mean by “Fifth column”, I would not call MAGA a fifth column because Trump never hid his loyalties. There’s no problem with using an unusual definition, provided you state it so that the reader can understand it.

@Dissonance

It is not a Russian conspiracy to hand the US over to Russia, which is what the OP suggests in some rather wild conspiratorial thinking, accusing it of being nothing more than a colossal psyop set up by the Kremlin in 2008. For all of the things I despise MAGA for, being a massive Russian plot isn’t on my Bingo card.

Well, Russia intelligence services did what hostile dictatorial intelligence services do, which is foment chaos within democracies. The Russian plot was massive, meaning it involved a substantial expenditure for a Mexico-sized economy. It’s the “nothing more” part that moves us into fantasyland. Happy Fun Ball: does Dissonance present an accurate characterization of your views?