“You don’t even know yourself what actually makes Trump a Nazi, but because everyone around you and in your social circle says it, you start believing it without question… It works like a hive mind. The moment you have your own opinions on a matter, like for example saying that not all right wingers are fascists, you can expect that all the ties and reputation you built up can be ruined in an instant because of it.” — Lavader
It’s been a while, but lately I’ve been watching Youtube videos made by right-wing content creators. It’s not because I’m nobly pursuing truth, but the algorithm started recommending them to me and they’re not so terrible that I can’t sit through them. Apparently, that’s all it takes for me to expand my horizons.
The most recent channel I’ve stumbled across is Lavader, a self-declared monarchist or “National Conservative”. In his video “The Fascist Card: Why Does the Left Label Opponents as Fascists?”, he argues that actual fascism is irrelevant in modern politics. Instead, the term “fascism” is used almost entirely as a bogeyman by the left to restrict thought and discourse, parallel to what McCarthyism and the red scare did to the term “communism”. Basically, fascism is a slur used to brand anyone “to the right of the Menshiviks”.
In a recent article, I heavily implied that the Heritage Foundation’s “Mandate for Leadership” used fascist rhetoric. Much longer ago, I wrote an article that basically took for granted that Donald Trump and MAGA were fascist. If there’s a conspiracy to falsely paint the right wing as fascist as Lavader claims, I’m at least a little bit liable and might as well respond. It’s also relevant as media outlets like Sky News Australia have begun to promote a similar narrative of braindead leftists clutching their pearls and hysterically calling Trump a fascist.
Lavader decides not to refute any leftist arguments for why Trump’s ideology might be considered fascistic, of which there are many. Fortunately, the video I watched right before this one is an explanation of Lavader’s own definition of fascism. He argues it consists of three overarching features: Populism, Ultranationalism, and Palingenesis. Populism is a process by which the mythic power of the people is harnessed by visionary leaders into a great awakening. Ultranationalism is a rejection of liberalism and representative democracy in favor of an ethnic group or culture united by an authoritative state, an elevation of the nation above all else. Palingenesis is a process of a nation rising from degeneration and decline into a revolutionary new era, like a phoenix rising from the ashes.
Basically, fascism is a narrative about a great nation brought low by corruptive outside influences being reborn with a great leader or vanguard party harnessing the power of the people to bring forth a new era of greatness and prosperity. So… Make America Great Again, right?
Of course, this connection is a matter of perspective. In particular, I interpret Project 2025 in my own article as an effort to purge the American government of a liberal civil service corrupting the moral framework of the nation and replacing it with a revolutionary “conservative” vanguard that will restore timeless American values. A rejuvenated federal government with a CEO-like presidency will be invigorated with the power to bend federal agencies, judges, and congress to heel. Outside of this bureaucratic takeover, some hope the will of a mythologized “people” will be embodied in the quasi-religious moral authority of a historic leader like Donald Trump. The answer to 1984 is 1776: We must have a new American Revolution that brings old values into a new age.
When the Founders spoke of “pursuit of Happiness,” what they meant might be understood today as in essence “pursuit of Blessedness.” That is, an individual must be free to live as his Creator ordained — to flourish. Our Constitution grants each of us the liberty to do not what we want, but what we ought. — Mandate For Leadership
Personally, I’m not the biggest fan of this definition, but it was patently obvious to me watching the video that it fit the MAGA movement. Reading his suggested author, the “Philosopher of Fascism” Giovanni Gentile, didn’t do much to change my mind. To his followers, Donald Trump is not primarily a representative of an interest group or a set of policies, but “an idea become person,” “the conscience and the will of an epoch,” a heroic figure who sacrifices his own private comforts and interests in the pursuit of a conviction to restore the glory of the organic nation. At this very moment the Republic National Convention is being retooled to become “an inflexible and perfect hierarchy obedient to the intentions of its Leader.”
There are still some critical differences between Trumpism and fascism proper. Most critically, the American right still sees itself as deeply individualistic, as compared to the fanatic collectivism of historical fascism. Deep in the moral essence of fascism is the meaning of war: A people unified through violent struggle and self-sacrifice, the realization of their maximum energies in service of a higher cause. There are hints of this in Trumpism, most notably in the mass hysteria of political cults like QAnon, but even then there’s a deep current of individualism at play.
The truth is that Gentile held freedom and liberty to be central normative convictions of Fascist doctrine… For Gentile, only when the individual fully identifies with the community, and its expression in the state, is true freedom and democracy possible. — A. James Gregor, Introduction to the Translation of Origin and Doctrine of Fascism
Fundamentally, I agree with Lavader that it’s not strictly historical to call the Trump movement fascist. Substantively, I think he’s severely downplaying the danger of these far-right movements, perhaps intentionally. He does self-identify as a monarchist, and I argue that Project 2025 and Trump’s current campaign is essentially an effort to establish a monarchy in the United States. It’s important to make these distinctions for an accurate analysis, but in terms of popular discourse, when most people say fascist, they really mean a violent, illiberal, far-right ideology dangerous to minorities. Fundamentally, this is what we are facing across the world.
The left needs a compelling and competitive vision of the future to combat the rise of the far-right. “Fearless cities” like Barcelona are paving the way forward with daring policies to build community through superblocks, coordinate people power with e-democracy platforms like decidim and cooperative economic institutions, and establish a high standard of living through guarantees to health and housing. It’s possible to make meaningful change at the local level, and individuals with inclinations towards right-wing authoritarianism can be mobilized towards wholesome projects like community gardens, food forests, and mutual aid networks.
The far right has built a highly effective vision for the future based on fear. Our job is to replace it with one based on hope.
