USA Politics (redux)

[ritter]

Honestly, my friend, no, it hasn't.

Re: his actions --- I'd like to be shown which of his actions were either unconstitutional according to the US Constitution, or broke the US statutory laws.

Re: his statements --- he is a foulmouthed idiot, but it takes much, much, much more than that to make a fascist.

I cannot read minds, and neither can you --- but I'm willing to bet he never ever contemplated taking a sourer turn. He took his chances within the US constitutional and legal frame --- and lost. Heck, can you imagine Mussolini or Hitler holding free elections and challenging their unfavorable results in courts? No, really, ponder just this for a second: holding free elections and then challenging the results in courts and losing --- can you imagine anything more opposite to fascism? I can't, honestly.

Bueno, my friend. A President who, just to use the most recent examples, says that his opponent "can only become President if he can prove he hasn't won fraudulently" (thus reversing the burden of proof), who refuses to accept the outcome of an election—even when none of his legal challenges have prospered—, sowing doubt among a good chunk of the population on the institutions he is supposed to uphold, and who asks "what kind of judiciary is this?" when things don't go as he wants, is no true democrat in my book, and clearly shows authoritarian traits.

His demonisation of some groups (Mexicans are "rapists and drug smugglers", Muslims are "terrorists", etc.), and his—not so veiled—apology of the use of force ("stand back and stand by") is, at the very least, proto-fascist, I'm sorry to inform you. That this kind of attitudes cannot prosper in a democracy as strong as the American does not mean that the man who parades them is a not what he seems intent in showing us he is.

[Todd]

who refuses to accept the outcome of an election

There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.

[Florestan]

authoritarian traits.

He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French. 

His demonisation of some groups (Mexicans are "rapists and drug smugglers", Muslims are "terrorists", etc.), and his—not so veiled—apology of the use of force ("stand back and stand by") is, at the very least, proto-fascist, I'm sorry to inform you.

Oh, really? Just a few years ago, the electoral slogan of the Romanian Social-Democratic Party was "Proud to be Romanian!" and they lost no opportunity to denounce the EU as colonists and exploiters of the Romanian people, and the staunchly pro-EU opposition as enemies and traitors of the Romanian people. Were they fascists? Not at all, they just employed age-old verified electoral tactics: anything goes as long as we get elected.

But let's get back to the point: can you please show me which of Trump's actions were unconstitutional, or breaking the US statutory laws?

[drogulus]

Hasn't it occurred to you that many of Mr. Trump's actions and, most particularly, statements do show a clearly authoritarian and anti-democratic, if not openly  fascist, strain, and that it is—as should be expected—the strength of the US institutions that has prevented this from taking a, let's say, sourer turn?

     All horses are dead, we live under a nothing new sun, and life is opinion. Any questions?

     

Trump is a former USA President.

     Not according to you. You have insisted Trump is not a fascist. The argument for that position can't be that he's a president, chancellor or prime minister who was born in Queens County, N.Y.

     If there are good arguments that Trump is not a fascist (hint: there are) you don't seem to be aware of them, or why serious scholars ponder them.

     That said, carry on.

[Florestan]

There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.

Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.

[ritter]

There is no Constitutional or other legal requirement for Trump to accept the outcome of the election.  He will leave office on January 20, 2021 whether he accepts the outcome or not.

Exactly. But that reflects the greatness of America and its democracy, not the democratic convictions of the current President (whose behaviour would lead one to think  they are shaky, to put it mildly).

[Florestan]

     All horses are dead, we live under a nothing new sun, and life is opinion. Any questions?

Yes, I have one: why do you still keep flogging dead horses?

     

     Not according to you.

I did not vote. The American people did, and according to them Trump is a former USA President.

By all means, carry on exploring what I would have voted were I Anerican.

    You have insisted Trump is not a fascist.

If my reckoning is correct, you linked to eight American professors that claim Trump is not a fascist. By all means, keep those links coming.

[ritter]

Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.

No hay más sordo que el que no quiere oír.

Andrei, you seem to think that because the American institutions are strong enough to make Mr. Trump's  behaviour and utterances irrelevant, and prevent what in many other countries would have degenerated into a grave political crisis, he is not behaving as he is, and that his behaviour is not that of an authoritarian and undemocratic personality.

[Florestan]

No hay más sordo que el que no quiere oír.

How about No hay más ciego que el que no quiere ver?

Andrei, you seem to think that because the American institutions are strong enough to make Mr. Trump's  behaviour and utterances irrelevant, and prevent what in many other countries would have degenerated into a grave political crisis, he is not behaving as he is, and that his behaviour is not that of an authoritarian and undemocratic personality.

|I ask time and again: who was the first POTUS denounced by his opponents as being authoritarian and undemocratic?

[drogulus]

He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French. 

     OK, let's subject them to the same criteria that gave us a non-fascist authoritarian Trump in the view of horse fancying historians.

     You can't kill a horse with a dirty look. The history of the 20th century is still a live subject, and Trump will feature bigly in future histories. The questions explored in them will be of the kind we are exploring now.

[Florestan]

let's

Let's not, really. Enough is enough.

[drogulus]

If my reckoning is correct, you linked to eight American professors that claim Trump is not a fascist. By all means, keep those links coming.

     Of course I did. I take the question seriously, which means examining the arguments made by scholars who take it as seriously as I do.

[Florestan]

     Of course I did. I take the question seriously, which means examining the arguments made by scholars who take it as seriously as I do.

Fine. By now it's Scholars 8 - drogulus 0. How much do you need to concede defeat? 13 - 0? 27 - 0? 147 - 0? Maybe a challenge in court? 

[ritter]

...
|I ask time and again: who was the first POTUS denounced by his opponents as being authoritarian and undemocratic?

TBH, I don't care, and I'm no "opponent" of Mr. Trump. How could I be? I'm just a person commenting on what I see now and expressing my views, which—whatever some here on GMG may believe—I'm perfectly entitled to do.

Un abrazo,

[Florestan]

TBH, I don't care,

You are entitled to not care, just as I am entitled to consider it a crucial issue.

I'm just a person commenting on what I see and expressing my views, which—whatever some here on GMG may believe—I'm perfectly entitled to do.

So am I, my dear friend, so am I.

Un abrazo,

Likewise. 

[Todd]

Exactly. But that reflects the greatness of America and its democracy, not the democratic convictions of the current President

Yes.

(whose behaviour would lead one to think  they are shaky, to put it mildly).

No.

Doesn't matter. He's a fascist, period.

I keep forgetting.  Good thing GMG exists to remind me.  If it is written on GMG, it is fact.

[BasilValentine]

He is authoritarian, no doubt about it. But if mere authoritarianism does a fascist make, then Napoleon I, Napoleon III and Charles de Gaulle were all fascists --- to keep things French. 

I think a more important point is that if one is looking to political philosophy for insight into Trump's actions and leadership style then ones ferret is down the wrong hole, as they say. Habitual patterns of criminality and personality disorders are more fruitful places to look.

[Todd]

personality disorders

What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 

As to criminality, well, let's just see what 2021 actually brings.

[Florestan]

What documented personality disorders, as diagnosed by clinical psychologists or psychiatrists who have met with Trump, have been disclosed?  As far as I am aware, claims of personality disorders are gossip only. 

Diner Cop!
 

[Todd]

Diner Cop!

It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it.