Is Donald Trump a Fascist?

 Please read the whole thing (less than 1700 words), but here’s a hint: it’s not about ideology but about behavior.

As a political scientist, I approach the application of the term “fascist” to any contemporary figure with caution.

My reluctance is based on three major reservations. First, people often use the term pejoratively, sometimes out of ignorance, and not technically. Just ask President Obama. Second, using a term so closely connected to particular historical figures such as Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco can be misleading when we consider how the term might be used at present about far-right authoritarian figures such as Viktor Orbán of Hungary. The historical context might actually distract us from understanding contemporary varieties of fascism. Third, in political theory this term is essentially contested, meaning that no consensus definition exists.

Still, since the term is flying around like Mr. Trump’s hair in the wind, I’d like to decide whether it is appropriate.

A variety of definitions for fascism have been suggested by political theorists, politicians, and cultural commentators. I’ve selected a recent one from the throng that seems to shed the most light on the current situation. (Several others are similar in large degree; if we can’t come to a consensus definition, it seems to me that political theorists can probably agree on three-quarters of the term’s meaning.)

The definition I’ll use is by Columbia history professor emeritus Robert Paxton from his book, The Anatomy of Fascism (Vintage Press, 2005, on page 218):

“A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

Taking relevant phrases one-by-one will serve as my evaluation of Mr. Trump and his supporters. (I must evaluate his supporters at least generally; fascism may feature one man but must be, by most definitions, a mass movement.)

1) “obsessive preoccupation with community decline”—At the core of Trump’s message, this theme drives much of the rest. He asserts, and his followers declare, that America has fallen from greatness (in no particularly defined way). The “Make America Great Again” slogan sums this up neatly. This theme has been visible in his bashing of many American cities as crime-ridden and decrepit though this view is not factually in line with a number of recent trends in many cities.

2) “humiliation or victimhood”—This sums up Trump’s hazy views of foreign policy and helps explain some of his haphazard actions in that sphere. America, he says, is treated as second-rate by China and disdained by Iran and ignored by others in the international realm. Bluster and isolated military action (for instance in Syria) were his response. Trump also evokes as victims the citizens who are working class or small business owners, not prospering economically, white, and male. The fact that Trump, a big business owner who has shown little concern for workers in his own dealings, perhaps causes some measure of this victimization is an irony apparently invisible to many of his supporters.

3) “compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity”—Trump pays ample lip service to unity, by which he means absolute agreement with him. He continues to tout his energy (and that of his supporters), but in the current campaign has often looked tired and has rambled bizarrely, causing many observers to question his fitness. He has since 2015 continually disparaged immigrants as a form of support for white American purity. Some of those comments are so extreme (“they’re eating cats”) that they provoke laughter—and then deep concern that he would say such nonsense and be taken seriously by anyone.

4) “mass-based party of committed nationalist militants”—This seems to be how he regards his base, though because they number about a third of the electorate, he must also appeal to independent voters. The ultranationalist commitment of many Trump backers, and their willingness to excuse anything he says and does, remains as clear now as ever. Also, some of his most militant supporters include the KKK, American Nazis, and other white nationalists who exhibit fascist characteristics.

5) “working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites”—The Republican Party to a great extent has become the Cult of Trump. Leaders such as Sen. Mitch McConnell disparage Trump on occasion but usually treat him as the party leader and support him in public. Many in the GOP back him without question or reservation despite the anti-democratic comments he has made and actions he took as president. A large minority of prominent GOP officials and staffers have refused to cooperate with him this election, including his own former vice-president and more than half of his cabinet officers plus many from previous Republican administrations and former-nominee Mitt Romney’s staff. Still, the bulk of the GOP, the traditional elites, support him. Also, economic elite contributions to Trumpist candidates for office continue to flood in. Would many GOP leaders wish for a different candidate? Yes, but despite their misgivings, they did nothing to make that happen.

6) “abandons democratic liberties”—He’d like to. He does not respect democratic process or norms, civil rights, freedom of the press, separation of powers, and ethics laws and norms. The list of events in which Trump has thwarted or attempted to thwart the rule of law is too long to catalog—if a person is unaware of it, that’s simply self-delusion. In particular, his disdain for the electoral process (or rather his warped view of it) has continued unchanged from his 2015 candidacy.

7) “pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints”—Trump has incited violence, both during the 2016 campaign and during his term, particularly against scapegoated groups. He incited violence on Jan. 6, 2021, in what may be most accurately called sedition. His verbal attacks in this regard have almost no parallels in the history of presidents. And, as stated in 2016, “does Trump have personal ethical restraints? Have we seen any? (I’ll state this as an open question in the hope that someone will point out when he took an ethical stand that would not also result in some benefit to himself. My internal reference point on this topic is the Trump University scam and his series of lies by way of explanation.)”

8) “goals of internal cleansing and external expansion”—Trump’s internal cleansing as president took the form of deportations of undocumented people with no clear strategy or consistency; the targeting of Muslims from particular countries but not others (with no rationale to explain the distinction); the targeting of sanctuary cities, which are usually liberal and opposed to Trump in general; withdrawal of federal support for the civil rights of particular groups of citizens (for example, people of color and the gay and transgender communities); and vicious attacks on the free press. So far, Trump has not emphasized territorial expansion, though bellicose actions and rhetoric without a clear rhyme and reason were his presidential norm (as with Syria, NATO, Iran, and North Korea). He appears to be isolationist rather than expansionist. However, the “internal cleansing” agenda, including threats to his political opponents if he should be elected again, is clear.

A few relevant items may be added to Paxton’s description.

He has spoken and acted in such a way that he received the endorsement of white nationalist groups and leaders. They are in essence fascists. His endorsement by both Jean-Marie Le Pen and Marine Le Pen, the famed French fascists, is in keeping with this theme.

He holds no respect at all for fact and truth. If he truly believes all the contradictory things he says, then he has a serious psychological problem. If he does not, he’s an opportunistic, manipulative, and constant liar. Many fascist leaders historically have exhibited this characteristic—indeed, have specialized in it.

As president he surrounded himself with far-right advisors—that is, when he was not engaged in nepotism.

He cannot, for more than a few minutes at a time, behave publicly as presidents need to behave. His erratic statements and visceral loathing for anyone who disagrees with him—his bullying threats, his personal put-downs—are not remotely presidential and are unworthy of that office. (They are, however, reminiscent of a couple of famous fascist dictators.)

Finally, theorists speak often of a charismatic leadership principle in fascism. Trump’s few policy statements are notoriously vague, inconsistent (some are fairly liberal, some conservative), and frequently incomprehensible. The most famous is probably his grand claim that he would make Mexico pay for his “beautiful wall.” How would he make China kowtow to American trade interests? How could he accomplish any of the changes he advocated? Trump’s answer: he will do these things through the force of his personality and will.

But of course he was not able to. He had enough charisma to get elected in 2016—barely. He does not have enough to govern effectively, or to gain the cooperation of enough people in government to achieve his goals. For example, his failure to effectively address the COVID-19 pandemic created quarrels inside his administration and contributed to his loss to Biden in 2020.

Is Trump a fascist? Not ideologically, because he’s not ideologically much of anything except a plutocrat. However, to the extent he was able as president, he acted, functioned, as a fascist.

And that means it’s time for Americans of all political stripes to stop him, by any legal and ethical means, for example in the 2024 election.

What’s at stake? For Republicans, your political party is being undermined and sullied by this crass authoritarian. For all of us, the stakes are our liberties, our identity as Americans, and ultimately ourselves.

 

Note: During the 2016 presidential campaign, I posted an evaluation entitled, “Does This Term Fit That Candidate?” I updated it in August, 2017, after half a year of a Trump presidency. Now, with the 2024 election less than a week away, here are further thoughts. I’ve revised all earlier comments.