In the US, "liberalism" is synonymous with the Democratic left. However, the US liberal paradigm is not primarily freedom. It's primarily belief in institutions and their ability to solve problems. Obviously, there's nothing liberal about this, so it's better called "progressive" or somesuch, but the idea is to have strong, powerful institutions and to solve all sorts of problems with them.
It doesn't strike Democrats as ironic at all that the most powerful institution on Earth, the US federal government including the armed forces that are by far the largest in the world, is currently led by Donald Trump. The left fails to realize how this is a bit of a chink in our plan to save the world with powerful institutions, seeing how we haven't solved the problem of who leads them.
The desire to save the world with powerful institutions comes hand in hand with a mentality that if you're not prospering, then an institution has failed you. If you're mentally struggling, then the health care system has failed you. If you're a minority and economically struggling, then systemic racism has failed you. If you're obese, it's not how much you're eating and moving, it's that the companies that sell you food have failed you.
In this paradigm, no personal circumstance is under the control of the person experiencing it. People come together to create the world, and yet everyone is seen as helpless, and some top-down intervention is required to fix everyone's outcomes.
This is profoundly fascist. The very concept of society coming together to exert top-down control is the core property of fascism. The disempowerment of the individual that this involves is what makes it creepy and dystopian. The right is guilty of that to some extent, like when it wants to regulate sexuality, but the left wants to use the state to "fix" pretty much all problems.
This is the symbol of fascism, the fasces. The many (the sticks) bundle together and create a joint force to "fix" things (the axe).
As an example, here are some things believed by US progressives:
We can trust the USPS to handle elections without shenanigans. The many individuals who would have unsupervised access to ballots all have integrity, none of them can be swayed by beliefs or money to do certain things, or to look the other way when they happen.
We can trust the CIA and the NSA to have our best interests in mind. Snowden and Assange deserve punishment for informing us how these agencies grossly violate laws and the constitution. It is good that we're protected from such knowledge so that the principled people at these agencies are most free to act with our best interests in mind.
The intent of the media is to inform us. They would never use editorial control to limit the content we see, spin it to make us support some things and oppose others, and consistently avoid criticizing the US foreign policy. This is, except when the out-of-control President is betraying the country by not involving us in enough new wars.
The intent of schools and universities is to educate. They would never engage in widespread indoctrination based on some borderline-religious secular ideology completely based on denial and misrepresentation of fact.
Conservatism has its own problems, but its current flavor avoids these naive beliefs. For this reason, conservatism is currently the more grounded option than liberalism. Even though Trump is obviously corrupt, he represents casual, individual corruption, where liberalism represents systematic, institutional corruption. The accusation of fascism is projection: except when it comes to human sexuality, the left is more guilty of it than the right.
Showing 8 out of 8 comments, oldest first:
Comment on Sep 28, 2020 at 00:52 by Ray
"This is profoundly fascist. The very concept of society coming together to exert top-down control is the core property of fascism. The disempowerment of the individual that this involves is what makes it creepy and dystopian. The right is guilty of that to some extent, like when it wants to regulate sexuality, but the left wants to use the state to "fix" pretty much all problems."
Yeah, Progressives are fascists because they have a patronizing view of the population where they believe everyone must be protected from everything else, that no one should be held accountable for their own faults, that someone else is always to blame for our problems. I agree, that is a problem; Progressives should encourage more individualism, but fascism? Imagine calling Progressives "fascists" for having a policy that is rooted in a flawed, misapplied, and stupid-ass attempt to ultimately improve lives, while downplaying Republicans for supporting and bending over backwards for Trump, whom you always for some bizarre reason treat with kiddy gloves. I don't think I need to go over everything that is wrong with Conservatism. Progressivism is to Democrats as Republicanism is to Conservatism. You know everything that's wrong with it. You just choose to ignore it because you've got such a hate boner for Liberals.
The right is guilty of fascism only to some extent? You actually have the audacity to that while being fully aware of what the hell is going on right now?
- Over 70% of the mail sorting machines that were shut down were in counties that voted for Hillary in 2016. Is that a coincidence?
- DeJoy, a Trump appointee who had no previous experience of history with postal service and couldn't even answer basic questions about the postal service including the cost of postal stamps, having tens of millions in stocks in USPS' competitors. A conflict of interest. Is that a coincidence?
- DeJoy, again a Trump appointee, circumventing campaign donation limits by having his employees donate out of their own pockets then reimbursing them. Is that a coincidence?
- Trump's unqualified, incompetent children and their spouses holding important, high level positions in the administration. A fucking handbag designer, who didn't even design the handbags, is one of his top advisors. Is that a coincidence?
- Trump refusing to commit to a peaceful transition if he loses. Is that a coincidence?
- Trump courting the support of, and encouraging, Q Anon freakshows who believe Democrats are running an international pedophilia ring, who for some weird reason have no problem ignoring Trump's own history and connections with Epstein and Maxwell. Is that a coincidence?
- Several Republican states attempting to force one ballot box per county which wildly favours rural areas over urban ones. Is that a coincidence?
- Trump attempting to, and seemingly succeeding in, ramming his Supreme Court nomination through so he can question the results of the election if it's a close one. Is that a coincidence?
- BILL FUCKING BARR who should be the US Attorney General but is acting like Trump's personal lawyer/fixer. Is this a coincidence?
- There are hundreds of high ranking military members, a lot of whom worked closely with Trump or dealt with him, dissenting against him and saying he is a threat to America and democracy. Is that a coincidence?
This is all to name just a few. But yeah, Progressives are definitely the real fascists here. Progressives do have a problem with respecting free speech sometimes, and they do get carried away with virtue signaling their wokeness, I can admit to that. But between attacks on free speech/wokeness from Progressives, and attacks on democracy as a whole coming from Republicans, I would say Progressives/Democrats are the lesser fascist of the two. I cannot believe you actually were able to type all of this with what I assume was a straight face.
Comment on Sep 28, 2020 at 15:49 by denisbider
Critical race theory has, unfortunately, strong overtones of fascism where dissent is not tolerated. For years now, people have been fired for disagreeing. Years ago it was James Damore for writing a pamphlet, then it was David Shor for writing a tweet and then Lisa Alexander's partner for confronting what looked like a person writing graffiti on someone's wall.
These are not exceptional cases. The banning of dissent is prolific on Reddit. You can expect a permanent ban from major subreddits for a first offense of voicing the wrong opinion about anything political, whether it is race riots or Covid.
People who disagree with critical race theory are called racist. Routinely and casually, as if this were an obvious fact. This has developed to a level where we're going to have to embrace "Yes, we're racist, and this is the right thing to be!" in the same way that the gay community had to embrace insults such as "gay" and "fag" to neutralize them.
When I'm getting blanket banned for dissent, and people are getting fired for saying obviously true things, this is fascism.
I can't remember anyone outside of government being fired for criticizing Trump. Everyone is free to shit on Trump. The fact that everyone can shit on Trump, and many on the right agree with it, shows you that the right is not, in fact, fascist.
Unknown: bending over backwards for Trump, whom you always for some bizarre reason treat with kiddy gloves
Anyone can shit on Trump for obvious reasons, and many people do so. Fact is that he deserves the Nobel Prize more than Obama did simply for what he did not do: the lack of foreign interventionism, and this is one of the top reasons to keep him in power. As soon as someone other than Trump takes over, foreign interventionism will resume.
For decades in a row, Americans have voted for their politicians exclusively on domestic issues, ignoring the long string of countries devastated in their name, and millions of non-Americans who die as a result of such policies. This is approximately as unconscionable as the treatment of animals in the meat industry, and it's similar in that we completely ignore the suffering we inflict on others, as long as it does not seem to affect us.
Trump has done less damage to the world than the US establishment has been doing for decades. So yes, yay Trump, for all of his obvious flaws.
The establishment itself is not fascist, but it is opportunistically tapping into a cultural movement which is fascist (that which champions critical race theory) in order to reestablish pre-Trump status quo.
The pre-Trump status quo primarily revolves around two things: maintaining foreign interventionism, and maintaining domestic corporatocracy. Everything else is fluff and not central to the establishment's objectives.
Right now, however, electing Biden means electing a fascist cultural movement on which he's piggy-backing for support.
Trump's various corruptions that you point out are blatantly obvious, and still minor compared to the left's ideological and policy flaws. Perhaps when the country has gathered its senses, future politicians can work on measures to limit future instances of such personal corruption. But the personal corruption of Trump and his lackeys is minute compared to the systematic corruption of the left.
Comment on Sep 28, 2020 at 17:12 by denisbider
By way of example, here's an establishment outlet, The Guardian, attempting a hit piece on Trump advisor Scott Atlas.
This is a supposedly objective article (not an opinion) where the subject (Scott Atlas) is introduced in a way as to maximally discredit him and his views (and by extension, to discredit Trump) while leaving redeeming information only to the most persevering readers.
To make sure the article hits hard, the critic and his criticism are established first. Atlas has reasonable policy opinions, the only counter to which is "But what if something goes wrong?" as if the alternatives do not already involve things going wrong. Atlas has a credible medical background, but the article introduces him as a "radiologist", "Fox News talking head" and "no background in infectious diseases", only later admitting he's a "former Stanford medicine professor".
The instinct of the left is to use Covid as an excuse to grant sweeping new powers to the government, to impose top-down measures that will save us from a virus that in the end might kill 0.5%, and that mostly elderly people who suffer from obesity and have a debatable zest for life.
Look to Europe to see how such efforts are working. The countries that introduced sweeping lockdowns are now seeing a resurgence, which was obviously going to happen half a year ago.
Of course they cannot learn from Sweden, where the pandemic is largely over. Instead, they are planning a second round of debilitating lockdowns.
Trump's response to Covid is sane in a way California's isn't. Atlas is someone to listen to, and instead he's being discredited by left-wing hacks.
Comment on Sep 28, 2020 at 18:58 by denisbider
The appointment of DeVos appears to be an obvious move in favor of more private and less public schooling. I used to be in favor of public schools, but now that I'm exposed to them as a parent, I'm beginning to think the opposite.
The public schools' reaction to Covid has been particularly telling. Instead of ensuring that children in elementary grades get their education and socialization, the teachers and administrators are asserting their own rights, looking to protect themselves, and thinking about the pupils' needs later.
Previously, I considered private schools and vouchers an obvious back door for religion in the school system. Now, I'm pretty sure the proper role of the state is to ensure that children get their education, but not to provide it. After I've seen the stark difference in how public and private schools reacted to Covid, vouchers seem like an eminently good idea to me.
If you object to religious parents sending their kids to schools that teach religion, then the religious can object to you teaching your child sex ed. Maybe public schools are not that great, and this is another example of the left's philosophy to solve all problems through a powerful state, not accounting for what people other than them might do with it.
Comment on Oct 4, 2020 at 12:45 by DanSmith
But the personal corruption of Trump and his lackeys is minute compared to the systematic corruption of the left.
It was clear - at least since the times of the Roman Empire, likely before that - that people in general will be influenced and model their behaviours after the way their leaders behave. Ever heard of "Lead by example"? It's quite astoundingly ignorant to assume that Trump's corruption doesn't has nation wide effects, and is limited to him.
But then again, you hail from a nation that has for the most of its history been a nation of serfs, so knowledge related to matters of leading/ruling is unlikely to be well entrenched there.
Comment on Oct 5, 2020 at 01:41 by denisbider
I find it refreshing that Trump is not a figure to which to aspire. Past US presidents had an air of untouchability, of authority, of being larger than life. God-like and imperial, even. The media help entrench that impression by treating them that way.
I find the god-like presidential figure highly problematic. First of all, it's a show, because no man is god-like. But more importantly, it entrenches the imperial nature of US presidency.
I like that Trump is obviously just a man. A very flawed man. Like the people who walk the planet.
Comment on Oct 5, 2020 at 03:53 by denisbider
I like to shit on Slovenia from time to time, but since you've taken it upon yourself to do that, let me remind you that Slovenia is one of the few countries in the world whose national anthem is about aspiring to peace and brotherhood among nations. Other nations seem to glorify war and blood, and can't feel secure about themselves unless they're fixing to kill someone.
Now, pray tell, what community of give or take 2 million people are you from? Does it have a name anyone might recognize, or is it suburb XYZ of some larger town? Does it have its language, history and culture, or does it blend in seamlessly into the anonymous, generic mass of the English-speaking world? Tell me, what kind of leaders come from your particular suburb? What's your special cultural relationship with them?
I can shit all day long on the Slovenian language and culture, and I have; but at least I have one. ;)
Comment on Oct 8, 2020 at 19:32 by DanSmith
Re godlike part: you're talking past me, not answering my point about leading by example at all.
Not quite following the point that you're trying to make with this paragraph. If I'm from, say Kansas, am I supposed to feel inferior to you because my dominant identity is also the same identity as that of the other ~325 million people in the US? Am I inferior, because I don't speak my own language (hypothetically invented in this case), but share it with the rest of the population - an arrangement that facilitates great economic prosperity?
Yes, it's admirable that Slovenians managed to keep their language and culture throughout this time. But we're not talking about self-preservation, but self-governance and leadership. That Slovenians lost when they came under foreign rule, and never really accumulated any experience with matters concerning ruling or leading. Hence you can't expect someone from a country like that to have much knowledge about it.