Everything Belongs to Me!

trump and his minions may not be fascists, but they have the attitude of fascists. In their minds, the rules, norms, and laws of a civilized society simply do not apply to them. They are entitled to do what they want and take what they want, at any time and place they want.

We saw this when trump boasted about kissing or grabbing women without permission. We saw it when he refused to pay contractors and workers at his properties. We've seen it many times when his campaign has used music without getting the owners' permission, even when the owners have explicitly told them to stop. We saw it when trump insisted that he could own and possess (and, it seems, display, share, or dispose of) confidential and classified government documents.

Again and again, he and his associates have shown their arrogance, their insistence on privileged status, their contempt toward others, and their disdain for the behavioral norms that make it possible for society to function. Like many fascists before them, they have succeeded in bullying, intimidating, and litigating people into submission.

Most recently, we saw trump and his entourage violate federal law and all expectations of decency, when they chose to film a campaign video at our most sacred national cemetery. Further, members of the group may have assaulted a cemetery official who informed them they were not permitted to film.

And now, in true fascist fashion, they do not admit to being in the wrong. They posted the illegal video they made at the cemetery. Instead of apologizing or simply claiming they were in error due to a "misunderstanding" or "mistake," they are angry at the news organization that first reported the incident. Fascists do not like public scrutiny of their actions.

A trump spokesperson has made a statement accusing the official who was assaulted of being mentally ill, and triumphantly declaring trump "the real Commander in Chief." Fascists are never subtle. Their message is clear: journalists who mention issues that make the boss uncomfortable are "bad reporters" asking "stupid questions." Anyone who tries to get in their way is unfair, crooked, mentally ill, or a liar.

They are above the law - in fact, the boss IS the law. He cannot be restrained or criticized, no matter what outrage he chooses to perform. The rest of us and our expectations of lawful behavior, our hopes for good manners and public dignity, our desire for accountability, are just irritating obstacles along the boss's path toward complete domination.

 

A Free President

If the Supreme Court decides that Presidents and ex-Presidents have full immunity for any crimes committed while in office, it would lead to some exciting scenarios.

Imagine a vengeance-crazed chief executive, racing through the White House corridors with a deer rifle, hunting down terrified staff members and visiting Senators. Later, the President boldly robs Fort Knox, loading a stolen limo with gold bars. When the limo driver hesitates, the President shoots him and forces one of the Mint Police to drive.

On low-crime days, he just jaywalks, sprays graffiti on the Lincoln Memorial, and orders fast food without paying.

 

Rallies

There are people who think that holding rallies with enthusiastic crowds somehow proves that a candidate is great in some way. Yet we know that evil dictators throughout history have had big rallies. All kinds of charlatans, crooks, fraudsters, and destroyers started with rallies, tent meetings, well-attended lectures, and parades. It is obvious to mention Mussolini and Hitler, or even Jim Jones, well-known examples of people who used rallies and mass meetings to lure followers into belief systems that would prove disastrous.

A hundred years ago, Benito Mussolini used to travel across Italy, holding huge rallies for fans of his Fascist Party. In October 1922, speaking to a crowd of around 40,000, he urged his followers to march on Rome. Fascist militias began driving toward the capital.

Elected officials wanted to declare a state of emergency and defend the city. The poorly-trained militias probably would have lost any battle with the military, but the King refused to declare martial law. Government officials resigned in protest. The King decided to accept the Fascists, and made Mussolini prime minister.

Mussolini soon became a total dictator, rescinding civil rights, replacing the press with propaganda, and invading Corfu and Ethiopia. Mussolini's career inspired Adolf Hitler, and eventually Italy was aligned with Nazi Germany in World War II. At least 8,500 Italians were murdered in the Holocaust. ^@realrkwest

In 1943, the King, who had had enough, convinced Mussolini's close associates to turn against him, and he was arrested. He escaped and attempted to set up a new government, but in 1945 he realized that defeat was near, and tried to flee the country. He was recognized and shot. A crowd mutilated his corpse and hung it up in the public square. It was eventually buried in an unmarked grave.

 

Do We Need a Dictator to Just Step in and Fix Things?

Dictatorship does not lead to prosperity for the average citizen.

For example, under Mussolini (Italy 1925 - 1945), both imports and exports decreased, and unemployment increased.

Mussolini established bureaucracies and appointed many officials, but very little was ever accomplished. He was mostly concerned with making sure the newspapers reported what he wanted them to say. There were food shortages throughout the country. The national debt skyrocketed. Mussolini's spending on infrastructure and public works was extravagant. Banks and big corporations were given government support. Interest rates went up. In many cases, the rich got richer, but in the meantime, workers got poorer.

Italy was hit hard by the Great Depression of the 1930s. Eventually, the state took over ownership of the banks and most industries. Mussolini focused on increasing his own political power, rather than providing assistance to citizens.

Mussolini was eventually killed by an angry mob.

Nicolae Ceaușescu (Romania 1967-1989) used a secret police force for mass surveillance and suppression of civil rights. He controlled the media.

In an attempt to increase the population, he outlawed all abortions and contraception. This led to the proliferation of overcrowded, dirty orphanages; many neglected and abused children from these institutions had lifelong physical and mental health problems. Thousands of women died from illegal abortions.

Ceaușescu's policy of moving from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy seemed successful at first, but led to unemployment, food shortages, and an energy crisis. Without electricity, people died of the cold in their homes. Prices were high while wages were low. Ceaușescu spent money on big projects and personal luxuries while citizens were freezing and starving.

When anti-government protests began, he ordered the military to fire upon protesters, causing many injuries and deaths. Violent protests spread across the country, and the military defected. Ceaușescu and his wife tried to flee, but they were captured, tried, convicted, and executed. The country was left with a very weak economy that still has not recovered.

Under Hitler (Germany 1933-1945), hourly wages were very low, while most people worked more hours, creating the illusion that individual income had increased.

Germany increased military spending until it became the majority of the economy. Hitler believed that war was the best way for a country to make progress. Prisoners of war and inmates from concentration camps were used as slave labor to support corporations. By 1944, slave labor made up 1/4 of the work force. Even so, unemployment was low. The government used price controls to avoid inflation, and also introduced wage and rent controls.

The military buildup was financed largely through deficit spending. The national debt was enormous. Industries that had been state-owned were privatized, yet subjected to a great deal of government control. Business leaders were expected to fund the Nazi party, and in return, benefited from policies that froze wages and provided slave labor. Profits for big businesses increased, and tax policies were designed to benefit wealthy people. Real wages decreased substantially. Workers could not strike, and could not change jobs without the current employer's consent.

During World War II, imports were harder to get. Rationing was implemented. The government took the property of wealthy Jews and plundered whatever it could in the countries it invaded. Wartime destruction and the British blockade led to the collapse of supply chains. People in occupied territories were used as slave labor, and their children were killed. As the war progressed, Allied bombs destroyed factories and cities. There were catastrophic food and fuel shortages. As defeat loomed, Hitler committed suicide.

Please Control Our Lives

Browsing through social media, it is alarming to see how many people want to give up voting rights and a representative government in favor of a dictatorship.

Like the people who supported Mussolini because "he made the trains run on time," many of these people seem to think dictators will provide them with amenities like cleaner streets, and these things are, in their minds, worth giving up basic freedoms. Other dictator fans imagine that the dictator will share their world view and religion, and will create a society that enforces those ideas on the entire population. They think it's a good idea that dissenters might be imprisoned, expelled from the country, or executed.

It never occurs to them that (a) the dictator will not actually do what they imagine, (b) historically, dictatorships do not create prosperity for average citizens, (c) someday, the tables will turn and the former in-group will become the out-group.

 

Their Feelings Will Become Law

Abortion is such an emotional, polarizing issue that it's not surprising Republicans decided to use it as a wedge to open the door for them to just take over the country. They have a segment of the population that is so blinded by outrage over the issue, they will support anything that is done. Any violation of human rights is seen as justified in pursuit of what they believe is a righteous crusade.

The same people who screeched that asking about vaccinations violated medical privacy rights have no problem with scrutinizing the medical records of pregnant women, just in case they might contemplate an abortion. People who describe themselves as "pro life" really don't care if a woman's life is endangered - or ended - by an ectopic pregnancy or by complications of a miscarriage, as long as the doctors and nurses who refuse to help her are thoroughly intimidated by the threat of being accused of performing an abortion.

People who want the freedom to go anywhere in public with a rifle on their shoulder or a pistol in their pocket, don't object to laws that restrict the freedom of women to drive across town, just to make sure those women can't get abortions. Overwhelmed by powerful feelings, they see any kind of violation, restriction, or harm to women as completely justified by the massive importance of this one, all-consuming issue.

It never occurs to them that this sets a precedent. They don't foresee a time (coming sooner than we think) when other important issues will be the justification for violations and restrictions against everyone, including them. If we become indifferent to the oppression of women, how hard will it be to become indifferent to all oppression? If they can seize her medical records, why can't they seize yours? If they can prevent her from leaving town, just in case she might do something forbidden, why can't they prevent you from leaving town, just in case you might do some forbidden thing?

If they can refuse to abide by an election because of their opposition to abortion, why can't they refuse to abide by an election because of their opposition to gambling, or guns, or books?

These things matter! They are upsetting! Our strong feelings exempt us from obeying the law!

 

Freedom

We used to have something called "freedom of religion". The Republican Party has replaced that with something they call "religious liberty".

Freedom of religion meant you could believe anything you wanted, and you could engage in activities related to those beliefs, as long as you didn't interfere with someone else's rights (eg., no human sacrifice). In this regard, all religions were equal under the law. The government could not require religious observance.

"Religious liberty", by contrast, means that certain privileged religious or quasi-religious beliefs have priority over others. Those privileged beliefs can be imposed on non-believers, and compliance can be required by law. ^@realrkwest