Janis Kliphardt (Emery)
“It is impossible to listen closely to Trump without hearing echoes of fascist language and arguments. He describes a form of national unity based on deference to a single leader. He claims to lead a movement that speaks exclusively for American values. He defines this movement primarily through exclusion, by directing bigotry and contempt toward outsiders. He paints the picture of an idealized past, involving pride, ethnic solidarity, and national greatness.
“Fascism may not describe what Trump has done, as opposed to what he says. But what he says matters and can create its own dangerous dynamic. It is possible for a leader to be incompetent and still profoundly corrupt the people who follow him, undermining the virtues—tolerance, civility, and compromise—that make democratic self-government work. It is possible for a foolish leader to leave the imprint of fascism on a portion of his followers. And the language used by Trump—particularly a certain racially tinged nostalgia and a tribal resentment for the other—strikes me as at a higher level of prominence and acceptance than at any time I can remember. So maybe, rather than fearing a fascist dictator, we should fear the legitimacy of fascist modes of thought in the Republican Party.
“This is a more complex danger than most talk of fascism generally suggests. But it is a danger nonetheless.
“And one event in particular could quickly heighten that danger. Consider what American politics would look like if Republicans—against all odds and expectations—were to keep the Senate and House. There might be many explanations for such a result—exceptional economic conditions, bad Democratic strategy, the rallying effect of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh among Republicans—but we know how the president would interpret it. He would regard such a victory as the complete vindication—the stamp of national approval—on his entire approach to politics.
“All the last remaining opposition in the GOP would melt, and many of his supporters would be calling for retribution against enemies and traitors. The whole leadership of the FBI and Justice Department—anyone who ever displeased him—would be at immediate risk of replacement. Trump would take his victory as permission for even more brutal treatment of migrants. More generally, a leader with no commitment to the separation of powers, with no respect for the traditional self-restraints of the presidency, with savage disdain for the free press, with an admiration for authoritarians, with a history of menacing individuals and companies by name, and with a talent for division and dehumanization would feel unbound.
“The boor, the bluffer, the bully would be a political colossus. Then the language of fascism might become less theoretical. Then alarmism would be realism.”
-- Michael Gerson, “What does Trump’s ascendancy mean about America? October 18, 2018 The Washington Post
Michael Gerson is the author of “Heroic Conservatism” (HarperOne, 2007).
|