Tomgram: Bob Dreyfuss, Will The Donald Rally the Militias and the
Right-to-Carry Movement?
By Bob Dreyfuss
Posted on March 13, 2016, Printed on March 13, 2016
http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176114/ ;
You must have noticed the Hitler comparisons, right? Amid the recent Nazi
controversy (over whether those right hands raised in a pledge to vote for
Donald Trump at his movement rallies are actually copycat Sieg Heils), a
bevy of pundits, commentators, and other figures, including the Mexican
president and Anne Franks stepsister, have been comparing The Donald to
Adolf Hitler. But have you noticed that others are pointing to Italian
fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, Argentinian caudillo Juan Perón,
right-wing Italian newspaper magnate, billionaire, and former Prime Minister
Silvio Berlusconi, present head of the far-right National Front Party of
France Marine Le Pen or her father, the founder of that party and Holocaust
denier Jean-Marie Le Pen (who endorsed Trump recently), and even left-wing
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez? And thats not to speak of President
Richard (Tricky Dick) Nixon, segregationist Alabama governor and
presidential candidate George Wallace, senator and Republican presidential
candidate Barry Goldwater, Louisiana governor and populist Huey Long, and
former car manufacturer, presidential possibility, and notorious anti-Semite
Henry Ford, which is just to begin a list of historys potential Trump
impersonators, not end it. (And dont even get me started on mentions of
fascism and authoritarianism in the media these days!)
If nothing else, such a strange and varied list of comparisons tells us one
thing: that Trump has taken the American political system and white working
class voters in particular into territory uncharted in recent memory. Hence
all those fingers pointing to whatever extreme figures come to mind. Of
course, since at least the Clinton years, the Democratic Party has been
slowly melting down, leaving a political structure lacking much of a base as
the power of the unions has evaporated, big city political machines have
largely been relegated to old Thomas Nast cartoons, and neo has been added
to those liberal politicians who have started making their off-hours money
by preaching the good times gospel to the big banks rather than regulating
them. Of course, that meltdown is mostly ancient history these days, as
Bernie Sanders takes many of the partys voters on a trip elsewhere. On the
other hand, the Grand Old Party is melting down right now, before our eyes,
and it couldnt be a more dramatic spectacle. There was, for instance, that
recent assault on Trump as a failed businessman, con artist, and fraud by
2012 losing presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the casino capitalist who
had a knack for pillaging companies and jobs. A recent poll now tells us
that his verbal assaults and tweets on Trump actually helped increase both
The Donald's voters and their commitment (as last Tuesdays primaries seemed
to indicate).
So perhaps its time to start writing those GOP obituaries. After all, were
talking about the party that, from Nixons southern strategy to that
infamous George H.W. Bush ad linking Willie Horton to Michael Dukakis, used
racially coded appeals to attract voters. In the meantime, its leadership
mainlined into a new billionaire class and a Supreme Court-approved world of
funding in which everything political seemed to be up for sale for sums
beyond imagining. So how can the Romneys, Ryans, and others not feel the
bitter sting of a runaway billionaire who has used open racial taunts and
appeals to steal their party while rejecting their money?
On such a darkened and racially charged stage, some speculation is certainly
in order. What else is there to do, after all, when the future seems more
unknown than usual? So TomDispatch has called on Bob Dreyfuss, author of
Devils Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, who
knows a thing or two about extremists and authoritarians of various sorts,
to give some thought to where Trumpism, with or without The Donald, might
actually go. Tom
It Cant Happen Here... Can It?
Trumps Storm Troopers and the Possibility of American Fascism
By Bob Dreyfuss
Can it happen here?
Thats the question circulating now that Donald Trump, the nativist,
rabble-rousing xenophobe, and billionaire, is threatening to capture the
Republican nomination for president of the United States -- and its a
question that isnt being asked only on the left. Its been raised by a New
York Times editorial, which claimed that Trump has brought the GOP to the
brink of fascism, and by Republicans, ranging from neoconservative pundit
Max Boot to Virginia's centrist former Governor Jim Gilmore. Conservative
Times columnist Ross Douthat was reasonably typical in a piece headlined Is
Donald Trump a Fascist? While he allowed that The Donald may not be Adolf
Hitler or Benito Mussolini, he added, It seems fair to say that hes closer
to the proto-fascist zone on the political spectrum than either the
average American conservative or his recent predecessors in right-wing
populism.
For figures ranging from comic Louis C.K. to right-wing commentator Glenn
Beck, making direct Hitler-Trump comparisons has become the fashion of the
moment. I must admit, however, that proto-fascist sounds about right to
me. Certainly, the rise of Trump has caused many voters to take notice --
the question being whether the real estate mogul (who further stirred the
pot recently by retweeting a quote from Italian fascist dictator Benito
Mussolini) could cobble together enough of a coalition of nationalists,
Angry White Men, poorly educated working-class backers, the disaffected
religious right, Islamophobes, immigrant-bashers, and others to wield the
figurative pitchforks in a march to victory in November.
If indeed Trump is a mere proto-fascist, then what ingredients, if any,
are still needed for the emergence of an authentic twenty-first-century
American fascist movement? To think about that question, I recently read
Richard J. Evans book, The Coming of the Third Reich. It spans the era from
1871 to 1933, describing in exquisitely painful detail the gestation and
growth of the Nazi party. If you decide to read the book, try doing what I
did: in two columns in your head draw up a list of similarities and
differences between the United States today and Weimar Germany in the 1920s
and early 1930s.
In this edgy moment in America, the similarities, of course, tend to jump
out at you. As Trump repeatedly pledges to restore American greatness, so
Hitler promised to avenge Germanys humiliation in World War I. As Trump
urges his followers, especially the white working class, to blame their
troubles on Mexican immigrants and Muslims, so Hitler whipped up an
anti-Semitic brew. As Trump -- ironically, for a billionaire -- attacks Wall
Street and corporate lobbyists for rigging the economy and making puppets
out of politicians, so Hitler railed against Wall Street and the City of
London, along with their local allies in Germany, for burdening his country
with a massive post-World War I, Versailles Treaty-imposed reparations debt
and for backing the Weimar Republics feckless center-right parties. (Think:
the Republican Party today.) As with Trumps China-bashing comments and his
threats to murder the relatives of Islamist terrorists while taking over
Iraqs oil reserves, Hitler too appealed to an atavistic, reckless sort of
ultra-nationalism.
The Second Amendment Society
But dont forget the differences, which are no less obvious. The United
States has a long-established tradition of democratic republicanism, which
1920s Germany did not. The economy of the planets last superpower, while
careening into a near-depression in 2008, is incomparably too strong to be
put in the same category as the hyperinflation-plagued German one of that
era.
There is, however, another difference between Donald Trump of 2016 and Adolf
Hitler of 1921 (when he took over the leadership of the fledgling National
Socialist German Workers Party) that overshadows the rest. From the
beginning, Hitler wielded the support of a brutal, thuggish armed
paramilitary wing, the notorious Sturmabteilung (SA), the Storm Detachment
(or storm troopers). Also known as the Brown Shirts, the SA often used
violence against its opponents in the streets of Germanys cities, and its
sheer presence intimidated Germans across the political spectrum.
And that got me thinking. Would it be possible for Donald Trump or some
future Trump-like figure to build an armed following of his own?
Frighteningly enough, the answer is certainly: yes. And it might not even be
that hard.
Bear with me a moment here. Back in 2010, in Alexandria, Virginia, radical
partisans of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, bolstered by
Virginias egregiously anything-goes open-carry laws, held a Restore the
Constitution Rally in Fort Hunt Park on the Potomac River -- and they came
armed. The event was, by the way, scheduled for April 19th, the anniversary
of Timothy McVeighs 1995 bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City.
At the time, I lived a mile or so from that park, and the combination of
fear, anger, and disgust that such a weapons-displaying political
demonstration could happen in the virtual shadow of the Capitol was
palpable.
Admittedly, only about 50 armed people took part, though 2,000 others held
an unarmed, parallel rally in Washington, D.C., where carrying weapons is
forbidden. Think about how many more might turn out today in a country where
there have already been a number of armed rallies and demonstrations by
Second Amendment activists, and in 2016, thanks to effective lobbying by the
National Rifle Association (NRA), the majority of states have enacted
complete or partial open-carry laws. Meanwhile, all 50 states now have
concealed-carry laws, meaning that pistol-packing is lawful in most public
places other than Washington, D.C.
So imagine this scenario for a moment: Donald Trump (or a future Trump-esque
demagogue) announces that hes convening a rally in a state where open-carry
is permitted -- say, in Dallas, at the Cowboys' AT&T Stadium -- and adds
that he wants his supporters to come armed. (Trump has loudly defended the
NRAs interpretation of the Second Amendment during the primary season and
on his website theres a plank called Protecting Our Second Amendment Will
Make America Great Again.) Under Texas law, it would be perfectly legal for
his supporters in the thousands to attend such a rally armed with
semi-automatic weapons. And there, at the podium, looking out over the crown
of gun-wielding militants would be The Donald, smiling broadly.
It doesnt take much to imagine the instant backlash this would engender,
from near-apoplectic television talking heads to scathing editorials in the
New York Times and other newspapers to sputtering denunciations from liberal
and moderate politicians, especially those from urban areas. But its also
easy to imagine Trumps vitriolic disdain for the naysayers, while the NRAs
pet Republicans tut-tutted over Trump but defended his right to organize
such an event.
Imagine then that he repeated the event in other stadiums in, say, Denver,
Phoenix, Indianapolis, and Miami -- and then announced that hes
establishing the Donald Trump Second Amendment Society? He might even issue
specially designed baseball caps emblazoned with the name. How far might we
then be from armed marches by the new organization in the streets of
American cities, its name, of course, soon abbreviated to the Trump SA (for
Second Amendment) Society?
To some, this may sound like an outlandish, near-doomsday scenario. (It
cant happen here.) But developments in this country in recent years
suggest that the path is open to just such a possibility, and that the
question is less if than when. The groundwork is already potentially
being laid. According to the latest report from the Southern Poverty Law
Center (SPLC), 2015 saw a significant increase in hate groups in this
country, with militias and anti-government patriot groups growing last
year from 874 to 998, having fallen precipitously in the previous two. Of
these, says the SPLC, at least 276 were anti-government militias. It adds:
Generally, such groups define themselves as opposed to the New World
Order, engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to
extreme antigovernment doctrines.
In early January, the nation watched in shock as a band of dozens of white,
armed American militants stormed a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon seeking
to take a hard stand against federal government tyranny. The action
thrilled militia and patriot groups across the country, while, oddly
enough, the mainstream media was reluctant to apply the obvious word --
terrorism -- to this armed rebellion by political radicals led by the sons
of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy. (Juliette Kayyem, a Harvard expert on
terrorism and a former assistant secretary of homeland security, was a rare
exception in writing for CNN, The men, heavily armed, urging others to come
support their cause, and claiming somehow that, while peaceful, they will
defend themselves whatever it takes, are -- by any definition -- domestic
terrorists.)
The occupation was eventually suppressed, but in the present overheated
atmosphere expect other provocative actions by some of the 200-plus militias
that the SPLC has identified. Though Trump himself expressed mild
disapproval of the Oregon militia, calling for law and order, Gerald
DeLemus, a co-chair of Veterans for Trump in New Hampshire, praised the
action as a great success, insisting in an interview with Reuters that the
militias cause was peaceful and constitutionally just. He was later
arrested as a mid-level leader and organizer of a conspiracy to recruit,
organize, train, and provide support to armed men and other followers of
rancher Cliven Bundy.
Trump, of course, has repeatedly played with fire when it comes to violence,
intimidation, and the role of white supremacists, the radical right, and
others. His dog-whistle refusal to instantly disassociate himself from David
Duke and the Ku Klux Klan on the eve of the Super Tuesday primaries in the
Deep South was widely condemned even by Republican officials. But in at
least one case, an actual neo-Nazi, Matthew Heimbach, the leader of the
Traditionalist Workers Party, used physical force against protesters at a
Trump rally in Louisville.
Uniquely American Fascism
However reprehensible Trumps dalliance with the far right may be, however
disturbing the actions of figures like Heimbach, were still a significant
way from the birth of a true national fascist movement, even if the Timess
Roger Cohen can already write a column headlined Trumps Weimar America.
(Welcome to Weimar America: Its getting restive in the beer halls. People
are sick of politics as usual. They want blunt talk. They want answers.) As
of yet, Trump has not tried to fuse his far-right allies into a genuine
movement -- though he has started using the term movement -- or a party,
nor has he made any real effort to rally the countrys gun-owning right-wing
militants into his own version of the SA. And he may never do so.
Keep in mind as well that an American-style fascist movement would hardly be
a precise copy of either the German or the Italian models, or even of the
parties currently building far-right movements in France, Hungary, Greece,
and elsewhere. Nor would it copy the proto-fascist coalition of
ultra-nationalists and religious zealots being courted by Russias Vladimir
Putin. It would undoubtedly be a uniquely American creation.
Though Trump has managed to bring together disparate elements of what an
American fascist movement might roughly look like, he may not, in the end,
be quite the right messenger for its development, nor may this be quite the
right moment for it to fully develop. Among other things, for such a
movement and the armed militias that would go with it to coalesce, you might
need another 2007/2008-style economic meltdown, a crisis long and profound
enough for such a movement to seize the moment. In that case, of course,
its also possible that a Bernie Sanders-like leftist or socialist -- or
maybe Sanders himself -- would emerge to capture the ensuing political and
economic unrest in a very different manner. But in The Donalds America,
dont rule out the possible emergence of an even more formidable and
threatening Trump-like figure, one unburdened by his clownish persona, Trump
University, and the rest of his billionaires baggage.
Whether or not Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination or is elected
president, for the gathering members of his grassroots coalition, hes
certainly shown what can, indeed, happen here.
Bob Dreyfuss, an independent journalist in New York City and Cape May, New
Jersey, specializes in writing about politics and national security. Hes
written widely for the Nation, Rolling Stone, the American Prospect, Mother
Jones, the New Republic, and other magazines. He is the author of Devils
Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest
Dispatch Book, Nick Turses Tomorrows Battlefield: U.S. Proxy Wars and
Secret Ops in Africa, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government:
Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a
Single-Superpower World.
Copyright 2016 Bob Dreyfuss
© 2016 TomDispatch. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176114
Tomgram: Bob Dreyfuss, Will The Donald Rally the Militias and the
Right-to-Carry Movement?
By Bob Dreyfuss
Posted on March 13, 2016, Printed on March 13, 2016
http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176114/ ;
You must have noticed the Hitler comparisons, right? Amid the recent Nazi
controversy (over whether those right hands raised in a pledge to vote for
Donald Trump at his movement rallies are actually copycat Sieg Heils), a
bevy of pundits, commentators, and other figures, including the Mexican
president and Anne Franks stepsister, have been comparing The Donald to
Adolf Hitler. But have you noticed that others are pointing to Italian
fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, Argentinian caudillo Juan Perón,
right-wing Italian newspaper magnate, billionaire, and former Prime Minister
Silvio Berlusconi, present head of the far-right National Front Party of
France Marine Le Pen or her father, the founder of that party and Holocaust
denier Jean-Marie Le Pen (who endorsed Trump recently), and even left-wing
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez? And thats not to speak of President
Richard (Tricky Dick) Nixon, segregationist Alabama governor and
presidential candidate George Wallace, senator and Republican presidential
candidate Barry Goldwater, Louisiana governor and populist Huey Long, and
former car manufacturer, presidential possibility, and notorious anti-Semite
Henry Ford, which is just to begin a list of historys potential Trump
impersonators, not end it. (And dont even get me started on mentions of
fascism and authoritarianism in the media these days!)
If nothing else, such a strange and varied list of comparisons tells us one
thing: that Trump has taken the American political system and white working
class voters in particular into territory uncharted in recent memory. Hence
all those fingers pointing to whatever extreme figures come to mind. Of
course, since at least the Clinton years, the Democratic Party has been
slowly melting down, leaving a political structure lacking much of a base as
the power of the unions has evaporated, big city political machines have
largely been relegated to old Thomas Nast cartoons, and neo has been added
to those liberal politicians who have started making their off-hours money
by preaching the good times gospel to the big banks rather than regulating
them. Of course, that meltdown is mostly ancient history these days, as
Bernie Sanders takes many of the partys voters on a trip elsewhere. On the
other hand, the Grand Old Party is melting down right now, before our eyes,
and it couldnt be a more dramatic spectacle. There was, for instance, that
recent assault on Trump as a failed businessman, con artist, and fraud by
2012 losing presidential candidate Mitt Romney, the casino capitalist who
had a knack for pillaging companies and jobs. A recent poll now tells us
that his verbal assaults and tweets on Trump actually helped increase both
The Donald's voters and their commitment (as last Tuesdays primaries seemed
to indicate).
So perhaps its time to start writing those GOP obituaries. After all, were
talking about the party that, from Nixons southern strategy to that
infamous George H.W. Bush ad linking Willie Horton to Michael Dukakis, used
racially coded appeals to attract voters. In the meantime, its leadership
mainlined into a new billionaire class and a Supreme Court-approved world of
funding in which everything political seemed to be up for sale for sums
beyond imagining. So how can the Romneys, Ryans, and others not feel the
bitter sting of a runaway billionaire who has used open racial taunts and
appeals to steal their party while rejecting their money?
On such a darkened and racially charged stage, some speculation is certainly
in order. What else is there to do, after all, when the future seems more
unknown than usual? So TomDispatch has called on Bob Dreyfuss, author of
Devils Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam, who
knows a thing or two about extremists and authoritarians of various sorts,
to give some thought to where Trumpism, with or without The Donald, might
actually go. Tom
It Cant Happen Here... Can It?
Trumps Storm Troopers and the Possibility of American Fascism
By Bob Dreyfuss
Can it happen here?
Thats the question circulating now that Donald Trump, the nativist,
rabble-rousing xenophobe, and billionaire, is threatening to capture the
Republican nomination for president of the United States -- and its a
question that isnt being asked only on the left. Its been raised by a New
York Times editorial, which claimed that Trump has brought the GOP to the
brink of fascism, and by Republicans, ranging from neoconservative pundit
Max Boot to Virginia's centrist former Governor Jim Gilmore. Conservative
Times columnist Ross Douthat was reasonably typical in a piece headlined Is
Donald Trump a Fascist? While he allowed that The Donald may not be Adolf
Hitler or Benito Mussolini, he added, It seems fair to say that hes closer
to the proto-fascist zone on the political spectrum than either the
average American conservative or his recent predecessors in right-wing
populism.
For figures ranging from comic Louis C.K. to right-wing commentator Glenn
Beck, making direct Hitler-Trump comparisons has become the fashion of the
moment. I must admit, however, that proto-fascist sounds about right to
me. Certainly, the rise of Trump has caused many voters to take notice --
the question being whether the real estate mogul (who further stirred the
pot recently by retweeting a quote from Italian fascist dictator Benito
Mussolini) could cobble together enough of a coalition of nationalists,
Angry White Men, poorly educated working-class backers, the disaffected
religious right, Islamophobes, immigrant-bashers, and others to wield the
figurative pitchforks in a march to victory in November.
If indeed Trump is a mere proto-fascist, then what ingredients, if any,
are still needed for the emergence of an authentic twenty-first-century
American fascist movement? To think about that question, I recently read
Richard J. Evans book, The Coming of the Third Reich. It spans the era from
1871 to 1933, describing in exquisitely painful detail the gestation and
growth of the Nazi party. If you decide to read the book, try doing what I
did: in two columns in your head draw up a list of similarities and
differences between the United States today and Weimar Germany in the 1920s
and early 1930s.
In this edgy moment in America, the similarities, of course, tend to jump
out at you. As Trump repeatedly pledges to restore American greatness, so
Hitler promised to avenge Germanys humiliation in World War I. As Trump
urges his followers, especially the white working class, to blame their
troubles on Mexican immigrants and Muslims, so Hitler whipped up an
anti-Semitic brew. As Trump -- ironically, for a billionaire -- attacks Wall
Street and corporate lobbyists for rigging the economy and making puppets
out of politicians, so Hitler railed against Wall Street and the City of
London, along with their local allies in Germany, for burdening his country
with a massive post-World War I, Versailles Treaty-imposed reparations debt
and for backing the Weimar Republics feckless center-right parties. (Think:
the Republican Party today.) As with Trumps China-bashing comments and his
threats to murder the relatives of Islamist terrorists while taking over
Iraqs oil reserves, Hitler too appealed to an atavistic, reckless sort of
ultra-nationalism.
The Second Amendment Society
But dont forget the differences, which are no less obvious. The United
States has a long-established tradition of democratic republicanism, which
1920s Germany did not. The economy of the planets last superpower, while
careening into a near-depression in 2008, is incomparably too strong to be
put in the same category as the hyperinflation-plagued German one of that
era.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1608463656/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1608463656/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20There is,
however, another difference between Donald Trump of 2016 and Adolf Hitler of
1921 (when he took over the leadership of the fledgling National Socialist
German Workers Party) that overshadows the rest. From the beginning, Hitler
wielded the support of a brutal, thuggish armed paramilitary wing, the
notorious Sturmabteilung (SA), the Storm Detachment (or storm troopers).
Also known as the Brown Shirts, the SA often used violence against its
opponents in the streets of Germanys cities, and its sheer presence
intimidated Germans across the political spectrum.
And that got me thinking. Would it be possible for Donald Trump or some
future Trump-like figure to build an armed following of his own?
Frighteningly enough, the answer is certainly: yes. And it might not even be
that hard.
Bear with me a moment here. Back in 2010, in Alexandria, Virginia, radical
partisans of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, bolstered by
Virginias egregiously anything-goes open-carry laws, held a Restore the
Constitution Rally in Fort Hunt Park on the Potomac River -- and they came
armed. The event was, by the way, scheduled for April 19th, the anniversary
of Timothy McVeighs 1995 bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City.
At the time, I lived a mile or so from that park, and the combination of
fear, anger, and disgust that such a weapons-displaying political
demonstration could happen in the virtual shadow of the Capitol was
palpable.
Admittedly, only about 50 armed people took part, though 2,000 others held
an unarmed, parallel rally in Washington, D.C., where carrying weapons is
forbidden. Think about how many more might turn out today in a country where
there have already been a number of armed rallies and demonstrations by
Second Amendment activists, and in 2016, thanks to effective lobbying by the
National Rifle Association (NRA), the majority of states have enacted
complete or partial open-carry laws. Meanwhile, all 50 states now have
concealed-carry laws, meaning that pistol-packing is lawful in most public
places other than Washington, D.C.
So imagine this scenario for a moment: Donald Trump (or a future Trump-esque
demagogue) announces that hes convening a rally in a state where open-carry
is permitted -- say, in Dallas, at the Cowboys' AT&T Stadium -- and adds
that he wants his supporters to come armed. (Trump has loudly defended the
NRAs interpretation of the Second Amendment during the primary season and
on his website theres a plank called Protecting Our Second Amendment Will
Make America Great Again.) Under Texas law, it would be perfectly legal for
his supporters in the thousands to attend such a rally armed with
semi-automatic weapons. And there, at the podium, looking out over the crown
of gun-wielding militants would be The Donald, smiling broadly.
It doesnt take much to imagine the instant backlash this would engender,
from near-apoplectic television talking heads to scathing editorials in the
New York Times and other newspapers to sputtering denunciations from liberal
and moderate politicians, especially those from urban areas. But its also
easy to imagine Trumps vitriolic disdain for the naysayers, while the NRAs
pet Republicans tut-tutted over Trump but defended his right to organize
such an event.
Imagine then that he repeated the event in other stadiums in, say, Denver,
Phoenix, Indianapolis, and Miami -- and then announced that hes
establishing the Donald Trump Second Amendment Society? He might even issue
specially designed baseball caps emblazoned with the name. How far might we
then be from armed marches by the new organization in the streets of
American cities, its name, of course, soon abbreviated to the Trump SA (for
Second Amendment) Society?
To some, this may sound like an outlandish, near-doomsday scenario. (It
cant happen here.) But developments in this country in recent years
suggest that the path is open to just such a possibility, and that the
question is less if than when. The groundwork is already potentially
being laid. According to the latest report from the Southern Poverty Law
Center (SPLC), 2015 saw a significant increase in hate groups in this
country, with militias and anti-government patriot groups growing last
year from 874 to 998, having fallen precipitously in the previous two. Of
these, says the SPLC, at least 276 were anti-government militias. It adds:
Generally, such groups define themselves as opposed to the New World
Order, engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to
extreme antigovernment doctrines.
In early January, the nation watched in shock as a band of dozens of white,
armed American militants stormed a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon seeking
to take a hard stand against federal government tyranny. The action
thrilled militia and patriot groups across the country, while, oddly
enough, the mainstream media was reluctant to apply the obvious word --
terrorism -- to this armed rebellion by political radicals led by the sons
of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy. (Juliette Kayyem, a Harvard expert on
terrorism and a former assistant secretary of homeland security, was a rare
exception in writing for CNN, The men, heavily armed, urging others to come
support their cause, and claiming somehow that, while peaceful, they will
defend themselves whatever it takes, are -- by any definition -- domestic
terrorists.)
The occupation was eventually suppressed, but in the present overheated
atmosphere expect other provocative actions by some of the 200-plus militias
that the SPLC has identified. Though Trump himself expressed mild
disapproval of the Oregon militia, calling for law and order, Gerald
DeLemus, a co-chair of Veterans for Trump in New Hampshire, praised the
action as a great success, insisting in an interview with Reuters that the
militias cause was peaceful and constitutionally just. He was later
arrested as a mid-level leader and organizer of a conspiracy to recruit,
organize, train, and provide support to armed men and other followers of
rancher Cliven Bundy.
Trump, of course, has repeatedly played with fire when it comes to violence,
intimidation, and the role of white supremacists, the radical right, and
others. His dog-whistle refusal to instantly disassociate himself from David
Duke and the Ku Klux Klan on the eve of the Super Tuesday primaries in the
Deep South was widely condemned even by Republican officials. But in at
least one case, an actual neo-Nazi, Matthew Heimbach, the leader of the
Traditionalist Workers Party, used physical force against protesters at a
Trump rally in Louisville.
Uniquely American Fascism
However reprehensible Trumps dalliance with the far right may be, however
disturbing the actions of figures like Heimbach, were still a significant
way from the birth of a true national fascist movement, even if the Timess
Roger Cohen can already write a column headlined Trumps Weimar America.
(Welcome to Weimar America: Its getting restive in the beer halls. People
are sick of politics as usual. They want blunt talk. They want answers.) As
of yet, Trump has not tried to fuse his far-right allies into a genuine
movement -- though he has started using the term movement -- or a party,
nor has he made any real effort to rally the countrys gun-owning right-wing
militants into his own version of the SA. And he may never do so.
Keep in mind as well that an American-style fascist movement would hardly be
a precise copy of either the German or the Italian models, or even of the
parties currently building far-right movements in France, Hungary, Greece,
and elsewhere. Nor would it copy the proto-fascist coalition of
ultra-nationalists and religious zealots being courted by Russias Vladimir
Putin. It would undoubtedly be a uniquely American creation.
Though Trump has managed to bring together disparate elements of what an
American fascist movement might roughly look like, he may not, in the end,
be quite the right messenger for its development, nor may this be quite the
right moment for it to fully develop. Among other things, for such a
movement and the armed militias that would go with it to coalesce, you might
need another 2007/2008-style economic meltdown, a crisis long and profound
enough for such a movement to seize the moment. In that case, of course,
its also possible that a Bernie Sanders-like leftist or socialist -- or
maybe Sanders himself -- would emerge to capture the ensuing political and
economic unrest in a very different manner. But in The Donalds America,
dont rule out the possible emergence of an even more formidable and
threatening Trump-like figure, one unburdened by his clownish persona, Trump
University, and the rest of his billionaires baggage.
Whether or not Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination or is elected
president, for the gathering members of his grassroots coalition, hes
certainly shown what can, indeed, happen here.
Bob Dreyfuss, an independent journalist in New York City and Cape May, New
Jersey, specializes in writing about politics and national security. Hes
written widely for the Nation, Rolling Stone, the American Prospect, Mother
Jones, the New Republic, and other magazines. He is the author of Devils
Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest
Dispatch Book, Nick Turses Tomorrows Battlefield: U.S. Proxy Wars and
Secret Ops in Africa, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government:
Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a
Single-Superpower World.
Copyright 2016 Bob Dreyfuss
© 2016 TomDispatch. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/176114
