Fascism versus Nazism
Both are bad; one is worse
Bryan Zepp Jamieson
September 21st, 2024
www.zeppscommentaries.online
David Runciman has an article in today’s Guardian that is well worth reading: Is Donald Trump a Fascist? It’s a well written article and gives a balanced and considered analysis of where Trump stands and what he might do under a second term.
There is, however, one problem with Runciman’s analysis: like many politically-oriented writers, he conflates fascism, a fairly common form of government, with its more vicious and rarer offspring: Nazism.
Nazism is a horrific form of government, It meets Runciman’s analysis of why such regimes are rare: “Calling a 21st-century politician a fascist is so damning – so much worse than any other label – because actual fascist regimes are very rare. One reason for that is none of them ever lasted. They were catastrophic failures – catastrophes not only for their friends and enemies but for the wider world – undone by their own appetite for relentless crisis and confrontation.”
True Nazi regimes are short lived, but extremely vicious, usually leading to mass death through wars and systematic exterminations.
Fascism and Nazism aren’t the same thing. Much of Europe has had fascist regimes at one point or another; Franco in Spain, the early days of Mussolini in Italy, Putin in Russia, Salazar in Portugal. Nearly every central and south American country has been under fascism at one point or another, and many still are. Examples are rife in Asia, as well: Modi in India, Suharto in Indonesia, Shah Pahlavi in Iran, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Marcos in the Philippines, Chiang Kai-Shek in China, and so on.
I’m deliberately excluding authoritarian regimes that are either military juntas or religious theocracies. They are their own breed of political creatures, and while they share many characteristics with fascism, neither Trump nor the GOP are on a path that leads to either of those types.
Granted, fascist regimes don’t hesitate to use the military or religion to their ends. Both are valuable instruments of social control, after all.
Back in 2003 Lawrence Britt published The Fourteen Signs of Fascism. Trump and his MAGA movement check every box. Indeed, the right wing of the GOP have done so dating back to the early days of the John Birch Society and McCarthyism
A good bumper sticker definition of fascism is that it is the merging of corporate and/or aristocratic power with the power of the state. Church and the military are subordinate, but nonetheless vital.
So fascist regimes are actually all too common, and some might last for decades. Unlike Nazi regimes.
Like monarchies, theocracies, and military rule, fascist regimes are born with the seeds of their own destruction. They are authoritarian, and thus demand unquestioning obedience from the population. They offer relatively little in return: a promise of stability and a sense of glory, with lots of god- and flag-waving. But authoritarianism is power, and power inevitably corrupts. Most such governments rapidly become kleptocracies. with functionaries standing in front of every door with their palms out, and the justice system designed to protect them becoming more and more capricious and cruel.
No free person with a sane mind wants to live under a fascist regime. Or any authoritarian regime, for that matter. George Washington framed the role of government power perfectly when he said, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence – it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and fearful master.” Democracy works because it puts government on a leash.
Yes, a GOP triumph in November would almost certainly bring about a fascist regime with Trump as an ever-more unreliable figurehead. It would be run by the congregation of plutocrats and other power brokers in their panoply of think tanks, corporate empires and suborned media outlets that I refer to as the National Association of Zealots and Ideologues. But while it would be nasty and corrupt, it wouldn’t be the immediate horrorshow that Runciman has in mind when he uses the word “fascist.” My “association” isn’t a true conspiracy; it’s merely a large group of aligned but often competing interests with similar aims. The cohesion stems from marriages of convenience, and once the country is spread out on the table before them, the knives will come out.
Yes, it will be a mess, and unless you happen to be a billionaire or a nimble functionary, you will suffer.
For a true Nazi regime, you need one final element: a Strongman. Trump, for all his personal power and viciousness, has never really been suited to that role, no matter how big his ego. He’s never had the skills needed to assure the fealty and loyalty of people around him, or the discipline and steadfastness to control people under him. And now, he’s a demented shadow of himself.
However, you do need a Leader for a true nightmare regime: a Hitler, a Stalin, a Putin. It’s the element that blends power and control with paranoia and capriciousness.
There may be any number of people in Trump’s ranks willing to audition for the role of strongman, and no doubt dozens who would have the requisite cleverness and savagery to emerge as a truly fearsome leader.
But they would be competing with others both at their level and facing resistance from others in more subordinate levels. And if Trump is still inconveniently alive, they have to keep it totally out of the public eye. (A Trump administration will bring back the grand old Political Science sport of Kremlin Watching).
But a fascist regime, especially one that is fairly rudderless as this one would be, does contain in its brutality and weakness the seeds for a Hitler, and an elevated chance for the rise of such. A GOP win in six weeks would put us all on the cusp of that, at our own expense.
Trump isn’t the real threat: the money and power backing him is the real threat.
David Runciman’s article can be found here.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/21/is-donald-trump-a-fascist