Well, Hitler was an authoritarian, racist baiting liar with delusions of grandeur…
… I grant you, however, that Trump lacks the mustache.
WTF does that have to do with “ongoing military conflicts with many, many veterans returning with PTSD”, for one example?
So as long as one of his many faults isn’t Hitleresque, no need to worry?
Hey, don’t get angry with me, buster.
You asked:
I answered:
You don’t like these principles?.. I’ve got others.
Fair point – I admit that Feinstein wasn’t the best example. What I was trying to point out, however, is that the progressives need to put ideological purity aside and present a united front against the likes of Trump and Bannon. Yes, Trump looks like a clown, and it’s inconceivable to think that he makes it past 2020. But his winning in the first place was pretty improbable. The worst-case scenario becomes more realistic when you consider the fact that Trump wasn’t a vice president who somehow ended up President. People elected him. They elected everything he campaigned on.
If we can agree that he’s not Hitleresque, I’d consider that massive progress for this thread.
Sorry, but these things ARE Hitleresque:
- the deliberate attempt by leaders to distort truth
- the rise of political powers who believe in a fact-free world
- violent and vitriolic discourse in right wing media
- the open embrace of authoritarianism by people in power
- the politics of the dangerous “other”
Take another look at the list and you’ll see that some of the items have nothing to do with left-right political paradigm. The lack of faith in political institutions is widespread, and it’s extremely dangerous. When people in a democracy are just madder than hell but don’t know whether they’re angrier at the presidency, the congress, the judiciary, the bureaucrats, or the media, and that they’re all just equally bad, that’s a problem. Because what you have then is a vacuum in the public trust that ends up getting filled somehow. There are any number of places around the world where that vacuum is filled by political and military strongmen, where military or a national security force, and not a democratically-elected body of representatives, are the law of the land. Or places where a ruling party rules and becomes obsessed with crushing opposition.
The thing authoritarianism is that they might come to power with consent, but they don’t leave when people want them to. You don’t get to determine when they leave, or when they’ve crossed one of your lines. From an authoritarian’s point of view, anyone who dares to challenge authority becomes the enemy of the state.
Would you settle for Mussolini-esque?
All politicians do this. Did you forget about Obama’s “Lie of the Year”?
See above.
You don’t think “violent and vitriolic discourse” is unique to right wing, do you? Remember Kathy Griffin’s little stunt?
Right-wingers felt the same way about Obama and his ‘phone and pen’.
I don’t follow. Are you saying Trump is the dangerous “other” and the Left is using “the politics of the dangerous other”
Sure, if we can cut down on the Hitler references around here, that’s progress.
Please drop the Hitler or other historical fascist-type hijacks. This thread is about Bannon and other electoral politics.
[/moderating]
Are you saying you’re worried about a military coup?
Some do it more than others. Hell, I forget about Trump’s lie of the past 24 hours. Who can keep up anymore?!
Don’t focus so much on the individual, Hurricane. That’s not important. Nobody knows whether Trump or Bannon will ultimately become successful authoritarians – too soon to tell. But don’t ignore their behavior is what I’m saying. Acknowledge it for what it is. On that point, note that there are times when rhetoric isn’t just empty words, but can have real power, such as when a president threatens to remove television licenses using the FCC power he has at his disposal.
I can’t predict what will happen with Trump or Bannon. What I can tell you is that they are thinking, speaking, and behaving like people who subscribe to fascism. Whether they end up following through with it is not necessary to establish that we are in really dangerous territory. We’re in danger in part because a large part of this country doesn’t seem aware of the danger.
I think there’s a quote that is attributable to Edmund Burke, in which he says that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. If I may add a twist, I would say that all that is necessary for fascism to triumph is for democratic and liberty-loving people to not take the words and deeds of authoritarians seriously, to over time, accept them as somehow a different less-democratic, but otherwise “normal”, alternative faction in a democracy.
No, not necessarily. But think about the fact that we have a president who refers to his secretaries as “my (his) generals.” They’re supposed to be OUR generals, not his. If he weren’t behaving like an authoritarian otherwise, it would be a forgivable slip of the tongue.
Bannon is like the guy who put $10 on a longshot horse and it comes through for him, and all of a sudden he’s a handicapping genius. He knows how to make a fraction of the electorate salivate, but that’s about it. He got lucky in that he got to campaign against Hillary. But seriously, he thinks he can take McConnell and Ryan down? He backed Moore in Alabama, but that’s rather like betting on Brazil to qualify for the World Cup. The voters that he resonates with are loyal, but they’re a fraction of Republican voters. I think he’s getting way more than his 15 minutes of fame and he seems to be a bit full of himself.
Sorry, I know I made a few posts after - didn’t see this until just now. My own personal opinion is that it’s sometimes difficult not to bring up these references when discussing Bannon, but I will respect the moderator’s decision and take it to the pit or elsewhere from now on.