USA under presidency of a know-nothing, neo-fascist, racist, sexist, mobbed-up narcissist!!

[Peter Lemkin]

Peter: If I may, I will list your five main ingredients of fascism:
1) Rule of the wealthy and powerful
2) Use of heavy state propaganda
3) Militarism and masculine orientation
4) Prominence of Intelligence apparatus
5) Blaming disaffected groups as scapegoats
I have a problem with this definition. Based on your definition, there is no distinction between monarchism and fascism. Russia under the Czars or England under the Stuarts would qualify under your definition as fascism. It would also include the theocratic government of Iran. The government of Frederick the Great of Prussia and Prussia under Bismarck were essentially military dictatorships but there was no need to invent the word fascism until Mussolini came on the scene. These were either ordinary dictatorships or monarchies. All dictatorships are not fascist, or at least they weren't prior to the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century. Pericles was the dictator of Athens in the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] century b.c.
The definition and discussions of fascism that I have seen on various sites says that the use of the term fascism originated in the early twentieth century, mostly under Mussolini. If one recognizes that fact, then it is disingenuous to then retroactively include governments which existed prior to Mussolini. Those governments in their day had a name. Before 1920, the choices were oligarchy (labelled by Aristotlle in 400 b.c), monarchy, republics, tyrannies (dictatorships) and theocracy. All of those were represented in the ancient world. Today, one could also add Communism, although that existed, arguably, in the Book of Acts in the Bible and in early American history at New Harmony, Indiana and in the Paris Commune of 1870.
The word "fascism" means bundle. One source which I read said that the bundle is the people ( who are bundled). That is patently incorrect. Every government bundles its people. The "bundle" which was originated by Mussolini was the bundle of the military, the state established church and the corporations. The important point here is that fascism was invented as an antidote for communism. And the three major interest groups that stood together in opposition to communism were corporations (and the wealthy), the state established church and the military, which was groomed to serve the interests of the first two.
The following would be a list of consensus fascist goverments:
1) Italy under Mussolini
2) Germany under Hitler
3) Argentina under Juan Peron
4) Spain under General Francisco Franco
5) Portugal under Antonio Salazar
6) Chile under General Augusto Pinochet
7) Argentina under the Generals in the 1970's and 1980's (and Pope Francis)
8) Greece under the Colonels in the 1970's

Since most people hated and currently hate fascism, then it is easy to borrow the term to label any government you don't like as fascist. But that takes the meaning out of the word fascism which, in fact, had a very specific meaning.
All of the above listed fascist governments involved a state established church and in all except Greece, it was the Catholic Church. But what about Hitler?
Actually, Hitler started out in Munich. And Bavaria where Hitler began was 70% Catholic. It is well-known that Hitler, as a youth, was an alter-boy. The more unique aspect of German fascism is that Germany had an established Church but as a defense, they had also established the Lutheran church under law. But it has always been clear that fascism was invented by the established church(es) to oppose communism.
There are two legal definitions of religion in American law. The generic definition requires belief in a higher power. But for Constitutional purposes, it only requires a group of people who are bound together by a list of beliefs and principles which govern their life. Ironically, under the Establishment clause, communism should have been protected as a religion under legal precedent just like Buddhism which does not believe in a higher power.
It seems clear that fascism was invented by the Catholic (and sometimes the Eastern Rites and in Germany Lutheranism) to compete with communism for the same flocks, and also by large corporate interests which also surfaced for the first time around the late 19[SUP]th[/SUP] and early 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century.
It is especially inapplicable to claim that Putin and Trump somehow represent establishment religion. In a biography of Putin that I read recently, he was ruled by seven oligarchs, four of whom were Jewish. America (or probably Russia) do not have legally established religions. I don't think, also, that you could really define America under Trump as a fascist government. That's just labelling for its own sake.

James Lateer

James, I'm really not up for this discussion/argument - I think it is not that important and depends on perceptions and definitions. You seem to think that only post WWII governments can be fascist. I fully consider that of Caligula as such - as well as many other of the late Roman Emperors and governments. It is a new name, but not a new concept. Then they didn't have corporations per se, but they had the ultra-rich which were the contemporary equivalent. As to whether Trump [or even Bush II or Bush I] were or were not fascist or crypt-fascist or neo-fascist, I could [but will not be drawn into] expound. I think yes to all of them. I think the USA has been on the trajectory toward classical fascism since the end of WWII. It has its periods of faster movement and slower movement - of slight retreats and then advances - but we are IMO now over the line - not because of Trump, but in the time of Trump he puts the icing on the cake Bush II and his team built with the unPatriot act [started under Reagan or before], National Security Police State, permanent war, total propaganda from the government and its MSM puppets, corporate/ultra-rich/financial-State melding, masculine [false ones at that] values, and the denigration of perceived outsiders and others as scapegoats. And I do NOT find the Democrats, especially at the National level to have been anything of a moderating factor. They usually were the periods of slower movement toward a full fascist state - but not in all aspects. They too have become the half of the one US Corporate and Oligarch Party in the U.S. The neo [sic] fascist secret state has compromised and now controls both to varying extents - but too much - far, far too much.
You are welcome to differ. What we call it matters little. What it IS and what it DOES and how that EFFECTS us even if we call it high tea with the Cheshire Cat matters not. I personally have called myself an anti-facist researcher for decades [while looking at JFK, MLK, RFK, Malcolm-X, other assassinations, government overthrows, dirty tricks, black ops, propaganda, secret government actions, growth of military and police state, 'trickle-up' economics, the BIG LIE of false flags, etc, et al. My great and late friend John Judge first used the term and I adopted it too. If you say you are fighting Oligarchy, or [choose and one or several terms], fine. As long as we analyse and fight these......