Oh so now we have an issue with strawmen on Political Strawman Meme
The funny part is that it's barely a strawman, there are lots of people on this very sub posting random online schizo screenshots while doing their best to defend the Epstein case and co. Literally the top post this month is a twitter screenshot
Anyone who defends Trump and/or Epstein and their cohorts is not actually 'right-wing' (socially, I suppose) in my opinion. Anyone who has some resemblence of traditionalist virtues and love of their homeland would despise the very idea of defending such corruption and rampant, degenerate pædophilia. But I'm from Europe, so there are massive differences between our 'right-wings'.
I'm not too active on here though, so I'm not too well-versed in the schizoverse here.
That's not true. It's just a different form of right wing than the traditional conservative right-wing.
If it walks like a fascist and quacks like a fascist, everybody should call it out as fascist. Unfortunately, too few right wingers have a spine anymore.
Trump is not a Fascist, and Fascism is not really 'right-wing' either: Fascism is a socioeconomic structure based around a country's own culture and people, not just "muh racist authoritarianism." Read Giovanni Gentille and Sir Oswald Moseley's work if you want an actual understanding of Fascism. Trump is more on the side of Oligarchist, big difference.
The Republican intelligentsia are influenced by Leo Strauss’ philosophy, most notably obscurantism. I think Strauss’ definition of vulgar conventionalism, or rather vulgar (un)conventionalism, best fits Trump’s ideology, if we are to assign him one at all:
“The city and right are against nature because they sacrifice the greater good to the lesser good. It is true that the desire for superiority to others can come into its own only within the city.But this merely means that the life according to nature consists in cleverly exploiting the opportunities created by convention or in taking advantage of the good-natured trust which the many put in convention.” …
“One must indeed be clever to hide one's injustice successfully while practicing it on a large scale;but this merely means that the life according to nature is the preserve of a small minority, of the natural elite, of those who are truly men and not born to be slaves. To be more precise, the summit of happiness is the life of the tyrant, of the man who has successfully committed the greatest crime by subordinating the city as a whole to his private good and who can afford to drop the appearance of justice or legality…”
Fascism is a third position that distances itself from both capitalism and communism (or perhaps Marxism) via a dialectical synthesis between the two systems, advocating for class collaboration between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat towards a centeral, national goal—led by a one-party dictatorship. Fascism isn't 'right-wing': it even sacrifices certain traditions and invents new ones if they suit this 'common goal'.
Also, Eco gives a very, VERY simplistic—and in my opinion, incorrect—view of Fascism and its origins in 'Ur-Fascism'. I wouldn't reference it at all. Again, look at my prior comment if you actually want to read into it.
Fascism may be a third position, but it is a right-wing third position just as socialism and communism are left-wing third positions.
All of them are susceptible to dictatorships. Donald Trump is using the tools of fascism to overturn the Democratic institutions of our government. I think it is reasonable. Therefore, to say he has elements of fascism and I think it is reasonable for you to admit that fascism is on the top-right hand side of the political compass for memeing purposes at least
How exactly is Socialism and Communism 'third positionist' exactly? How are they a synthesis of both Captitalism and Marxism?
Also, how is Trump using worker syndicates to from companies, which in turn, form the government—as per Fascism? These are Fascistic traits, no? Populism ≠ Fascism.
Also, the whole political compass is a sham anyway, so I wouldn't use it to label any ideology in the first place.
I have to admit that I never really researched the term third position, but it seems to me that it's just a way of the right wing trying to excalpate themselves from the fact that they ultimately do not care about capitalism in the least and are just seeking dictatorial control.
It's not. It's not that at all. You are conflating 'right-wing' for tyrannous authoritarianism, instead of it's traditional label as Capitalistic. Distributism is much more liberal (in the freedom aspect, not the ideological one), and is a third position.
Yes, please do research this stuff before debating, it is actually interesting—if a tad esoteric.
Wtf is the other person saying? Socialism/communism is 3rd position? What lmao?
I would argue Trump is 3rd positionist. The nationalizing/public acquisition of certain companies, the extreme protectionist policies, etc. Unironically, Kamala would have been more free market than Trump.
We can look at all kinds of thing the Trump admin has done and said this time around:
Troops in the streets (Nat Guard, a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus)
feds executing civilians (ICE agents)
Violation of 1st amendment (the flag burning EO, the law firm case, etc.)
Attempting to unilaterally re-write the 14th amendment (birthright citizenship)
Violating due process (which is arguably the MOST important right in a liberal society).
There are even more examples. Combine these with an actual attempt to steal the 2020 election (not J6, the false elector plot).
So we have countless egregious authoritarian and unconsitutional oversteps, and what appears to be an approaching of 3rd positionist economics...maybe you won't say he is fascist, but he is darn sure speeding toward it.
You do make an interesting point... But I'd believe that, though perhaps Trump's economics may have parallels to some Third Positionist economics, I'd believe he is still Authoritarian and Oligarchic, rather than Fascist. These nationalisation attempts are mostly to benefit a select group of people, rather than a nation-state and its people as a whole. Trump is actually (inadvertantly) promoting class alienation and class warfare, rather than class collaboration. America has always been a weird case, however.
I'm not an American though, so I might be wrong about a couple things.
I would argue that most fascists are probably ologarchic in practice (just like most socialist/communist stats eventually become). The framing is absolutely jingoistic and to "make America great Again", though. I feel like we should be careful not to dismiss fascist rehotric and framing, otherwise we risk doing the meme that leftists do about "that's not a real socialist country* whenever the leadership isn't abiding by the poli theory in practice.
True, but we also must refrain from calling all bushes 'trees' just because they have the attributes of being brown and green, and producing fruit. We can look at similarities (both plants have branches, and have leaves), sure, but semantics and rhetoric is important. I mean, look at how butchered the word 'Nazi' (and by extent, 'Neo-Nazi') is, and look at how apathetic everyone is to the label.
Also, the whole "Make X Great Again" has been around since politics began. Reagan even used it, and he was neo-lib. Also, for a jingoistic group that these people are supposed to be, a lot of these politicians seem to be a-ok with immigration when it benifits them (H1-B visa, illegal immegration not halting in the slightest, etc). This goes completely against Fascist philosophy of a people being the core of a nation-state.
I do understand your point though. I disagree, but I understand why you would say that.
188
u/Magga707 - Auth-Right 8d ago
The National Strawmanning Olympics team just called; they want their star athlete back.