tom nichols thinks we're over reacting calling it fascism.

[Hortensis]

14. No. He thinks it's dangerously counterproductive to call EVERYTHING fascism.

Important words have important, powerful meanings that need to be protected so they can be used to help people understand threats and solutions and take the right stands.

These days eager mudslingers on both right and left grab the word "fascism" to hurl at each other, like rock, mud, rotten melon rind, whatever it actually is doesn't matter as long as it's available and sounds bad.

There are different kinds of RW authoritarianism, of various degrees of extremism, and fascism is only one of them, albeit one of the very worst.

Our RW opponents here are not all fascists, and that's a mercy.

tRump's probably a sorta wannabe fascist because he loves the idea of people having to adore him as embodiment of "the state" they pledge to serve. His MAGAs are generally authoritarian personalities and ready to obey and worship, less so others who vote for him. I took a look at Tom's entries, and agree with the poster who thinks he may be too "lazy" to commit to what it would take to impose on others, though. Also too cowardly to try.

I think there's virtually no chance McConnell and most of his wing are the slightest bit interested in making the giant investments of wealth and attention to impose and maintain fascist control on society, to change culture to serving the state over individual rights.

Even the most greedy RWers, authoritarian and otherwise, in other nations are typically happy to let people live mostly free and get along as they choose, just coming down on those who cross them and dissidents who threaten their control.

It's of course necessary to know who your enemies and your potential allies are, and who theirs are also.