Actually not….
AI Overview
Fascism, broadly defined, is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology marked by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, and forcible suppression of opposition, according to Wikipedia. While the specific proposals you've mentioned – ending the Electoral College, abolishing the Senate, and expanding the Supreme Court – are significant institutional changes with potentially far-reaching consequences for the American political system, it's a stretch to label them as inherently leading to fascism in the US.
Here's why and the arguments surrounding them:
- Ending the Electoral College: This proposal aims to shift presidential elections to a national popular vote, which proponents argue would enhance democratic values by ensuring every vote carries equal weight regardless of location. Critics, however, might argue that it could diminish the influence of smaller states and exacerbate regional divides. While it represents a significant shift in the electoral system, it doesn't align with the defining characteristics of fascism like a dictatorial leader or suppression of opposition.
- Abolishing the Senate: This would eliminate a key part of the US's bicameral legislature, leaving only the House of Representatives. Arguments for abolition often cite the Senate's unequal representation of states and its ability to obstruct legislation. Concerns about abolishing the Senate often revolve around the idea of checks and balances and the protection of minority rights. While it would significantly alter the legislative process and potentially reduce checks and balances, it doesn't necessarily lead to the other traits of fascism.
- "Packing" the Supreme Court: This term refers to expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, which is within the power of Congress. Proponents might argue this could rebalance the Court's ideological composition or improve its efficiency. Critics raise concerns about eroding the Court's legitimacy and increasing politicization of the judiciary. While such a move could be seen as an attempt to exert influence over the judiciary, it's not a direct path to the complete suppression of opposition or a one-party state that characterizes fascism.
Key takeaways
- These are significant institutional changes with a strong potential to shift the balance of power within the US government.
- The concentration of power in one branch or a particular ideology is a concern for many when discussing the potential impact of these reforms.
- However, these reforms are not inherently fascist. Fascism typically involves a more systematic suppression of dissent, a cult of personality around a leader, and often a focus on hyper-nationalism and militarism.
Ultimately, whether these changes would lead to fascism is a matter of debate and interpretation, depending on the specific circumstances and how such changes are implemented. The historical context and the political culture in which these changes are made are crucial factors in determining their potential impact on democratic norms and institutions.
——————————————————————————————————————————————
“Fascism, broadly defined, is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology marked by a dictatorial leader,
centralized autocracy, militarism, and forcible suppression of opposition, according to Wikipedia.”
Regarding: abolish the senate, eliminate the electoral college, pack the SC: “However, these reforms are not inherently fascist. Fascism typically involves a more systematic suppression of dissent, a cult of personality around a leader, and often a focus on hyper-nationalism and militarism”.(wow, now THAT sounds just like Trump!)
Notice how the above quote seems to match Trump’s approach to governing more than anything else we are presently experiencing. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest Trump is a fascist…..