EX-PRESIDENT INDICTED

ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
Ugh, I typo'd. I meant can't, and Hitler was exactly who I was alluding to. My apologies.
Wait, I just reread my original statement and I was right. TLS, have another cup of coffee. ;)
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Wait, I just reread my original statement and I was right. TLS, have another cup of coffee. ;)
TLS is right. The Nazi Party became by far the biggest party (but still in minority) in the German parliament Reichstag and was appointed Chancellor to form a government. By new laws Hitler got dictatorial powers, and that became the end of German democracy.
 
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
TLS is right. The Nazi Party became by far the biggest party (but still in minority) in the German parliament Reichstag and was appointed Chancellor to form a government. By new laws Hitler got dictatorial powers, and that became the end of German democracy.
My point is that fascists will use democracy when it suits them, and destroy it when it doesn't.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
There were a lot of moving parts involved in the Nazi's rise to absolute power, which unfolded over the course of several years. It wasn't a matter of winning one election and deciding to stay in power forever. There were instances where, if the Supreme Court had acted, unconstitutional chicanery could have been circumvented. However, the justices were apparently quite subservient and didn't think it was their place to challenge these manoeuvres.

This is just conjecture on my part, but the lack of cojones on the part of the courts may lie in the youth of the Weimar Republic and its constitution, as well as the instability of the country's politics. With SA thugs - and communists, for that matter - running amuck, how safe would justices feel in sticking their necks out?

While the US constitution is just a piece of paper that won't physically man the ramparts in defence of democracy, the reverence in which it is held by (most) Americans and the clear division of powers amongst the arms of government should provide more protection against a descent into totalitarianism than we saw with the Weimar Republic.

Of course, the constitution is only as reliable as its interpreters, i.e. the justices of the SCOTUS. As long as the SC is willing to bash aspiring fascists over the head with it, American democracy should whether the current storm. If not, well....we'll see.
 
Last edited:
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
My point is that the reverence (which I agree exists) is superficial, and too many people are content to think that if they just vote against fascists that they won't come into power.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
The "Stop The Steal" movement and January 6th are/were obviously unconstitutional. Where we differ is that you don't think fascists can come to power via democratic processes, which is obviously incorrect.
In a prior post you said "[Trump] was legitimately elected in 2016 and he was no less fascist then."

As I see it, Trump can s*ck without actually being a fascist (see, Roger Griffin, below).

I think we agree that Trump s*cks. I think we may disagree somewhat on what the term "fascist" means.

>>>At that point [December 2015], the Muslim ban proposal, I contacted five fascism experts and asked them if Trump qualified. They all said no. Every one of them stated that to be a fascist, one must support the revolutionary, usually violent overthrow of the entire government/Constitution, and reject democracy entirely. In 2015, none were comfortable saying Trump went that far. He was too individualist for the inherently collectivist philosophy of fascism, and not sufficiently committed to the belief that violence is good for its own sake, as a vital cleansing force. Roger Griffin, the author of The Nature of Fascism and a professor of history at Oxford Brookes University, summed it up well: “You can be a total xenophobic racist male chauvinist bastard and still not be a fascist.” . . . Five years have now passed . . .
So I reached out to the experts I talked to back then. Four of the five replied, and I also got in touch with a few more scholars who have researched fascism to get a broader view.

The responses were, again, unanimous, albeit tinged with much greater concern about Trump’s authoritarian and violent tendencies. No one thinks Trump is a fascist leader, full stop. . . .

[Roger Griffin] Basically, I think it matters whether we call Trump fascist or not fascist, not academically or intellectually, but because it’s a red herring — it actually diverts attention from where we should be doing the critique. If all our intellectual energies are, like Don Quixote, jousting with windmills and fascism, instead of actually jousting with the real enemies of democracy, and using our energies to avert the climate crisis, which is going to engulf us all, if we’re not careful, then we’re wasting our time.<<<(emphasis added)


The Vox article above was written in 2020. The following was written shortly after January 6. The responses were more varied. Some thought Trump crossed the line, others still didn't think Trump qualified.

 
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
In a lot of ways it's too soon to tell, but I think at a minimum that Trump presidency represents a hard right turn towards fascism in the US. Whether this continues or if those 4 years represent an aberration is really the pertinent question now.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Whether Trump is a fascist or whether he represents a hard turn towards fascism is somewhat interesting, but ultimately irrelevant.

What does matter: Is he guilty of obstructing the Constitutionally mandated exchange of presidential power?
Former President Donald Trump will go to trial in March 4, 2024, on federal charges alleging he worked to overturn the 2020 presidential election, federal Judge Tanya Chutkan said Monday.

In the hearing earlier Monday, Chutkan rejected trial dates proposed by both the Justice Department and Trump's legal team. Prosecutors had requested that the trial begin in January, 2024, while Trump’s lawyers had asked for a date in April, 2026.

The set trial date comes just one day before Super Tuesday – when Primary Elections occur in more than a dozen states, including California and Texas.
 
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
In the short term, you're right, it doesn't matter. In the long term, the effects of the Republican party become implicitly (wink wink, nudge nudge) fascist, or more explicitly (January 6th as bellwether) fascist obviously has severe potential consequences, especially given the structure of the electoral college and congressional districting.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
In the short term, you're right, it doesn't matter. In the long term, the effects of the Republican party become implicitly (wink wink, nudge nudge) fascist, or more explicitly (January 6th as bellwether) fascist obviously has severe potential consequences, especially given the structure of the electoral college and congressional districting.
Hard-core reactionary right-wing politics, or Fascism, have existed in the USA at least as early as the 1920s, if not earlier. Most of this involved the GOP.
  • After the end of WW1, three consecutive GOP presidents were in the White House, Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover. They were all involved in right-wing efforts to clamp down on prior reform movements. Among other groups, the KKK re-emerged from the shadows.
  • During the late 1930s, groups emerged opposed to any US involvement in the coming war in Europe. These groups were mainly in the mid-West, and primarily GOP voters who opposed the FDR administration, some of whom were isolationists and some were overt fascist sympathizers. Involved in this was Charles Lindbergh a well-known spokesman for the 'America First' group. (It was no accident that Trump often made reference to "America First" in his campaign speeches.) One group, The German-American Bund was directly infiltrated by Nazi agents.
  • After WW2, a similar efforts to clamp down on wartime liberalism were made by the GOP – most notoriously, Joe McCarthy. Trumps favorite lawyer & mentor, Roy Cohn, was one of McCarthy's most vicious attack dogs.
I could go on, but that's enough. Among US voters, as many as 30-35% always seem to support these right-wing efforts. Even though they've managed to influence US democracy, they have never managed to permanently overthrow the government. For example, in 1941 when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the mid-West opposition to the 'European War' rapidly folded. In 1952, when Eisenhower was elected president as a GOP candidate, he won by accepting the FDR reforms instead of trying to undo them. Without that, another GOP candidate probably would not have won.

Donald Trump is only the latest GOP politician who has tried to take advantage of these right-wing voters. I personally believe that Trump is more of an amoral opportunist, a con-man & career criminal, than he is a dedicated Fascist. But he clearly does court the hard-core right-wing, whatever you want to call them.
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
I wonder if a judge can be sarcastic and come back to the Trumpster, would you like 12th of never then? :D
 
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
Donald Trump is only the latest GOP politician who has tried to take advantage of these right-wing voters. I personally believe that Trump is more of an amoral opportunist, a con-man & career criminal, than he is a dedicated Fascist.
I think the real question is what comes after Trump. Is this just a cult of personality or a harbinger of things to come? Will Trumpism and an ascendant wave of fascism outlast Trump? Will that steady 30-35 grow, or dwindle. The current legal maneuverings won't have much impact on the long term, in my opinion.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Donald Trump is only the latest GOP politician who has tried to take advantage of these right-wing voters. I personally believe that Trump is more of an amoral opportunist, a con-man & career criminal, than he is a dedicated Fascist. But he clearly does court the hard-core right-wing, whatever you want to call them.
I agree with this. While I would suggest that there are fascist-minded individuals amongst his coterie of cling-ons,
his own interest in political philosophy is as deep as his religiosity. He has/had more interest in being president than in presidenting.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I think the real question is what comes after Trump. Is this just a cult of personality or a harbinger of things to come? Will Trumpism and an ascendant wave of fascism outlast Trump? Will that steady 30-35 grow, or dwindle. The current legal maneuverings won't have much impact on the long term, in my opinion.
The issues that lead to his presidency won't just go away if that sorely overtaxed heart of his explodes. They long preceded him and they will be here when he's gone. Illiberalism is a world-wide trend. We see it in Poland, Hungary, Italy, Poland and Israel - and that's just for starters. We see signs of it here in Canada, too.
 
ben_

ben_

Junior Audioholic
Agreed, completely. I just feel like there is so much focus on Trump when there seems to be much more going on. Trump is a symptom of something larger, not a root cause. Ultimately he is extremely uninteresting on his own. It's his role in the greater context of what's happening in America, and internationally, that really raises questions.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
Looks like Trumpys big mouth was his undoing....Judge wants trial ASAP to minimize influence from his social media posts.

From another article:

>>>Trump will also file a motion arguing he is being selectively prosecuted as a “political persecution,” Lauro added.<<<


Hmmm, I wonder what the odds of success on that are? (sarcasm alert).
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top