So would you draw a distinction between Trump, who displays elements of fascistic leadership, but not necessarily the movement or the people voting for him?
It’s hard to know. We have to rely on history. There are books that would say that Hitler had willing executioners, that it was a culture that allowed for Hitler’s rise, and that the culture itself and therefore the people themselves are in some sense culpable. Others would say no, he manipulated the people.
This is where it’s hard to parse, because the last thing the Democratic Party wants to do is to tell swing voters that they’re potentially fascist. What they’re trying to say is that the candidate is fascist, therefore don’t vote for him. This is why it’s risky, because it seems to be suggesting that maybe the people themselves who are voting for him are fascist, or if they are even thinking about voting for him, they are knowingly and willingly voting for a monster. And that can be alienating, I think, to voters.
I just want to reiterate, there is a view that if you were a liberal or further left of that, if you don’t call this fascist, you’re somehow complicit, or you’re somehow mitigating the real problem. And I think that’s wrong.
I teach at a liberal arts school, everyone I know is terrified about what’s happening. They do not want Donald Trump to be president of the United States. It’s just how we go about managing to defeat him and the way that we do it, I think that is the issue. And as a historian who’s trained in these areas, there’s also a professional obligation. So I just want to make that point, that by not framing him this way, it does not at all mean that he is not a threat.
Things that are not fascist can also be dangerous.
Yeah, absolutely.
