The January 6 hearings showed why it's reasonable to call Trump a fascist

[babylonsister]

The January 6 hearings showed why it’s reasonable to call Trump a fascist
We now know Trump expressed support for hanging Pence and did little to stop the violence — actions that suggest some very dark historical parallels.
By Zack Beauchamp@[e-mail] Jun 10, 2022, 12:20pm EDT


snip///

Throughout Trump’s presidency, there was a raging debate among experts as to whether it was accurate to describe him as a “fascist.” One of the strongest counterarguments, that his political movement did not involve the kind of street violence characteristic of Italian and German fascism, was undermined on January 6 — though some scholars still argued that the term was somewhat imprecise.

But when a leader whips up a mob to attack democracy with the goal of maintaining his grip on power in defiance of democratic order, then privately refuses to stop them while endorsing the murderous aims of people he claims as his own supporters, it’s hard to see him as anything but a leader of a violent anti-democratic movement with important parallels to interwar fascism.

This doesn’t prove that fascism is, in all respects, a perfect analogy for the Trump presidency. Yet when it comes to analyzing January 6, both Trump’s behavior and the broader GOP response to the event, last night’s hearing proved that the analogy can be not only apt but illuminating.

snip//

What this record shows is that the potential for a Trump-led political movement to lead to bloodshed was always there. The president seemingly believed in the cleansing and redemptive power of violence; it has been a hallmark of his thinking for years, even decades. That he would sometimes frame these comments as jokes, or even backtrack after offering them, is characteristic of fringe right political movements — which often cast their most extreme positions in a kind of ironic tone that allows for their supporters to simultaneously embrace radical ideas while also distancing themselves from them.

The question about Trump was whether his fascination with violence would ever manifest in a mass movement: that he would align himself with an illegal violent action designed to secure his own grip on power.

This, of course, happened on January 6. But as the events unfolded, there was crucial information we didn’t know: the extent to which Trump intended to encourage violence and how he reacted as it unfolded in real time.

more...

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2022/6/10/23162442/january-6-committee-hearing-june-10-trump-fascist

[agingdem]

1. Trump, a Putin/MbS/Mussolini/Hitler/Kim Jung-un

wannabe despot...he wants their "toys": punishing perceived enemies ("off with their heads" literally), absolute subservience/fealty, a show of might and allegiance (remember Trump's desire for an Independence Day goose-stepping military parade?), and above all amassed wealth (planes, yachts, cash)..Trump has no set ideology unless hate and greed are ideologies

[moondust]

2. Somewhat reminiscent

of the Nazi playbook:

~
(For his role in the Beer Hall Putsch) Hitler was found guilty of treason and sentenced to five years in Landsberg Prison,[note 2] where he dictated Mein Kampf to fellow prisoners Emil Maurice and Rudolf Hess. On 20 December 1924, having served only nine months, Hitler was released.[4][5] Once released, Hitler redirected his focus towards obtaining power through legal means rather than by revolution or force, and accordingly changed his tactics, further developing Nazi propaganda.[6]
~

TFG's putsch failed so his gang has "redirected (its) focus towards obtaining power through legal means rather than by revolution or force" by running for state offices where they can decide the outcomes of elections rather than voters. That's basically what Bannon has been pushing on the radio.

Anecdotally, I spent some time in Berlin when Rudolph Hess was the last prisoner there in Spandau Prison and where he later died with his head in a noose in an apparent suicide.