Yale Historian Warns It's "Inevitable" That Trump Will Stage His Own "Reichstag Fire"

[red dog 1]

Raw Story
May 1, 2017

"Yale Historian Warns That It's 'Inevitable' That Trump Will Stage His Own 'Reichstag Fire' To Save His Presidency"


Yale University Professor Timothy Snyder's recent book focusing "On Tyranny" not only puts President Donald Trump in context with other 1930s fascists, but it walks readers through steps for the resistance to maintain freedom.

In a recent interview for Chauncey DeVega's podcast, Snyder explained that Americans assumed nothing bad would ever happen since the Cold War ended.

Trump managed to tap into the idea that the U.S. isn't a democracy anymore so people should simply let him be their very own oligarch.

But because Americans tend to throw around terms like "fascist" "dictator" and "Hitler,"
the idea loses it's meaning.
Add to that, Americans tend to believe in our own exceptionalism.

"As I see it, there are certainly elements of his approach which are fascistic," Snyder explained.
"The straight-on confrontation with the truth is at the center of the fascist worldview."

Fascists during the 20th century were quick to urge putting aside the facts.
They also tend to use language similar to Trump's during his rallies.
They name enemies, remove opponents and use blunt slogans and soundbites over and over again.

More:
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/yale-historian-warns-its-inevitable-that-trump-will-stage-his-own-reichstag-fire-to-save-his-presidency/

[ladjf]

1. Study Hitler's strategies and you will know what Trump intends to try. nt

[GeorgeGist]

2. Eventually he must do something ...

to prove his mettle. His ego won't suffer anything less.


Martyrdom perhaps.

[YOHABLO]

3. Do I feel the American Public are smart enough to see through this?

NO NO NO .. too many uneducated lemmings.

[FiveGoodMen]

4. People aren't born that stupid.

They have to go to church first.

[Nitram]

5. I hope we can hold the line and prevent a takeover if Trump stages his own 'Reichstag Fire'.

I am not confident the GOP will do the right thing.

[yurbud]

6. Democrats response after 9/11 doesn't give much hope of that.

[Nitram]

8. I disagree. There's been a lot of water under the bridge since 9/11, and Democrats

have seen how the Bush Administration milked the terrorist "threat" to get elected to a second term.

[yurbud]

12. the "threat" profited people who have deep hooks into both parties.

[Nitram]

18. No, only one party had the ability to raise the threat level as a distraction

every time the other party was making headway in the polls.

[yurbud]

19. no argument there, especially during the Bush years. The Obama/Clinton method seemed to be

make war boring so the public stops paying attention.

[yurbud]

7. it would have to be bigger than 9/11 to have the necessary impact and a new enemy

like China or Russia.

It would be ironic if he went from the Siberian Candidate to starting a war with Russia inside of a year.

[red dog 1]

9. He's stupid, but, imo, not stupid enough to start a war with Russia or China,

However, North Korea is a possibility, (which will anger China)

[yurbud]

11. the neocons are that stupid and they have a track record of not being punished for their mistakes

they have been failing up since the late Cold War.

[red dog 1]

13. Trump also has a track record of not being punished for his mistakes

[FiveGoodMen]

17. As did Dubya

"Off the table" "Look forward, not back"

Let's face it, we've been let down by our own side for a long time now.

They should have cared enough to fight this evil.

And they shouldn't have to ask me ten times a day to bribe them to do the right thing on every single issue.

[onenote]

10. Actually Synder said it was "pretty much inevitable"

Which is a coward's way of making it sound like something's inevitable when it really isn't.

Of course that didn't stop Raw Story from leaving out the "pretty much" part.

When Snyder can predict what Trump's Reichstag Fire moment is going to be and ow it will be comparable to the actual Reichstag fire, get back to me.

There is serious stuff to deal with here without engaging in half assed predictions.

[Hortensis]

14. I actually disagree, Onenote. Remember Rump's very strong

pattern of creating distractions from his embarrassments? He does it almost as naturally as breathing.

Question is how big a distraction or series of he'd think he needed. Another 9/11 with a few thousand dead would probably be more than enough. If we're going to speak of cowardice, just remember how our nation reacted to that event.

But as for the risk of something bigger, I think he's probably every bit as dysfunctional and capable of acting on erratic whims and rages, unable to foresee or care about consequences, as many psychiatrists consider him.

[onenote]

15. The total unpredictablility of Trump's actions makes it impossible to say anything is "inevitable"

Not much in life, except death, is "inevitable."

I do agree that if there is a significant terror attack, Trump will try to use it as the basis for actions curtailing civil liberties, particularly those of Muslims and/or immigrants.

However, that's not a "Reichstag Fire" type event. The term Reichstag Fire is colloquially used to refer to an incident (possibly false flag) that is used as grounds for stripping power from political opponents. I do not believe it is inevitable that there will be an event (or that Trump could manufacture an event) that could then be used as the basis for rounding up Democrats or preventing elected Democrats from participating in the political or electoral process.

[Hortensis]

16. Well, I also blew off what I felt was the sort of exaggerated

statements attention-seeking intellectuals are prone to. Hitler's 1930s Germany was very different from 2017 U.S. And, no, Rump hasn't taken over the U.S. government by "coup," another of these irresponsible things.

Nevertheless, regarding that noise somewhat less than literally, as I did, it seems very likely to me that Rump will try to save his power through some big rabble-rousing event. It should be perceived as protecting the nation from threat, and as 9/11 showed us with the help of a sensationalist press it can take ridiculously little to do that.

Given where his strongest support comes from, his success with rallies, and the lessons from 9/11, of course he would seek to rouse fear and aggression in the populace--and with it eager, unquestioning support of the "strong," vengeful leader that anxious, angry people tend to yearn for.

Exploiting ignorance and character flaws is, after all, in chapter 1 of How to Be a Dictator for Dummies and also one of the few things he truly understands and is practiced in.

I wouldn't think he could have anything approaching Hitler's success, but he might shift a majority of public support for him and against democratic principles, and Democrats. For a while anyway.