There are so many things about the modern world that are different from the 1920’s and 1930’s that I’m reluctant to make comparisons between the two eras. But there is one commonality that has me very concerned as we head into the 2020 presidential election. I’m worried about what will happen if a significant fraction of our economic elites in the business community conclude that their interests are better protected by siding with Donald Trump. This isn’t an ordinary progressive concern. It’s usually taken as a given that rich business executives will mostly side with the Republican nominee for president. The reason this upcoming election is different is because Trump and his political movement are different, and in many ways un-American.
This WikiPedia entry on the economics of fascism isn’t perfect, but it can serve as my starting point:
The first fascist movements arose in the last years of World War I. They were a form of radical nationalism carrying a promise of national rebirth, they blamed liberalism, socialism, and materialism for the decadence they perceived in society and culture, and they expressed an appreciation for violence and the role of leadership and willpower in shaping society…
…Fascism rose to power by taking advantage of the political and economic climate of the 1920s and 1930s, particularly the deep polarization of some European societies (such as the Kingdom of Italy and Weimar Germany), which were democracies with elected parliaments dominated by supporters of laissez-faire capitalism and Marxian socialism, whose intense opposition to each other made it difficult for stable governments to be formed. Fascists used this situation as an argument against democracy, which they viewed as ineffective and weak. Fascist regimes generally came into existence in times of crisis, when economic elites, landowners and business owners feared that a revolution or uprising was imminent. Fascists allied themselves with the economic elites, promising to protect their social status and to suppress any potential working class revolution. In exchange, the elites were asked to subordinate their interests to a broader nationalist project, thus fascist economic policies generally protect inequality and privilege while also featuring an important role for state intervention in the economy.
As a caveat here, I want to be clear that I’m not predicting an imminent reprise of the Holocaust or an outbreak of World War Three. I hope we can agree that fascism would have been undesirable even without extermination camps and wars of aggression. What troubles me is the potential for a breakdown in our basic system of checks and balances which protects our civil rights, economic freedom, and First Amendment rights.
The commonalities I see between today and the interwar period should be pretty obvious to you too. We have two sides of a political divide that are increasingly unable to work together, making a functional government harder and harder to assemble. The American public now holds Congress in extreme low regard and is beginning to doubt the integrity of many other core institutions, including our law enforcements agencies, courts, intelligence community and even the media.
One side of the political divide is promoting “a form of radical nationalism carrying a promise of national rebirth.” They are attacking liberalism and socialism. The attack on materialism doesn’t originate at the top with Trump, obviously, but it is a key element of the religious conservatives’ critique of American society. They call it “secularism,” and they are Trump’s most ardent and reliable supporters.
On the economic front, the Trump movement isn’t consistently aligned with big business (on free trade and cheap labor, for example) but their anti-regulation and anti-tax policies are a way of promoting the elites’ interests and protecting their social status.
Since the Great Recession hit in 2007-2008, the Democrats have been gradually moving in a more economically populist direction, and their current crop of candidates is collectively far to left on economics than in any previous presidential election cycle. While the party doesn’t resemble the #Occupy Movement, it is still perceived as threatening. Some of the leading Democratic contenders, like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, are explicitly threatening to the business community, and proudly so.
I’m not making an argument against populist progressive Democrats when I say that I worry about the consequences if we reach a tipping point where business leaders conclude they need to fall in with Trumpism in order to protect themselves from a bigger threat. Just in terms of freedom of the press, our major media outlets are big business conglomerates now, and if they don’t rigorously defend our First Amendment rights, we will lose a free press and potentially our rights to free expression. That’s what I hear echoing when I read that the fascists protected the economic elites and “in exchange, the elites were asked to subordinate their interests to a broader nationalist project.” I’d like to think that our business elite is different from the folks in Italy and Germany during the rise of fascism. I hope that they have enough patriotism and respect for our Constitution to see that it would be a mistake to align with Trump. But this isn’t something I have a lot of confidence in, and that’s what is keeping me up at night.
I guess this is less of a prescription than a warning. If the left in this country wants to run on an economically populist platform that scares the bejesus out of our big business community, they cannot afford to lose. We’re in a bad position now as a country because Trumpism by its nature corrupts the morals of its adherents and undermines support for our rights and institutions. When it begins to undermine our elites’ support for civil rights and the rule of law, that’s when it gets truly dangerous. There is more to think about here than just needed reforms to our laws. We have to think about how what we do has an influence on how others react.
It’s looking like the left is going to inspire quite a reaction. Are we prepared to face the consequences if we don’t win that battle?
Big Business is going with Trump anyway, They got their deregulation and tax cuts So Dems have nothing to lose.
Trump is destroying the government as fast as he can. It is now or never…..
What troubles me is the potential for a breakdown in our basic system of checks and balances which protects our civil rights, economic freedom, and First Amendment rights. Already happening….
The American public now holds Congress in extreme low regard and is beginning to doubt the integrity of many other core institutions, including our law enforcements agencies, courts, intelligence community and even the media. Feature not a bug
The major difference with the 20’s and 30’s is that our institutions like government and Wall Street were basically sound when Trump took over and would be sound again with Democrats totally in charge. Yes, there was massive inequality that benefited Wall Street, but, both parties were essentially available to protect that.
Then the extremism of Trump enabled the left to organize and present a progressive agenda.
It’s a fight between economic stability (which requires capable government) and tax cuts. Since billionaires are essentially greedy morons, they favor tax cuts and then are surprised when this leads to popular discontent.
But, they don’t all seem to be lining up with Trump, and he doesn’t really need them anyway, since he can fund his campaign through millions of Trumpite donors.
Trump, like Mussolini doesn’t really intend to let Wall Street govern in any area where he has an interest. So, that’s pretty much a wash.
And he doesn’t care about whether their profits are impacted, at all. As he proved with his tariff policies.
We’re all going to die.
Business elites would rather risk the earth’s atmosphere becoming unmanageable without huge costs outlays in the near future, and are okay with leaving their grandchildren with that in order to continue to make obscene profits today, then I don’t see these same elites “having enough patriotism and respect for our Constitution” to forego the status quo. Many of these people are already morally corrupt in every way. Greed is their only principle. They could give a rat’s ass about “America” as long as they have a party in place that only exists to hand public wealth over them.
It’s not like there is much of a choice. Since billionaires collectively are a bunch of greedheads, they can’t steer up the economy, so you get crisis upon crisis, with wild bubbles in between. This serves to concentrate wealth, which creates discontent.
Either the left turns that discontent towards the wealthy or the fascist will come out of the woodwork to turn it against whoever has little power – minorities, women, gays, etc.
And yes, the upper class often allies with fascists to strike down radical movements, generally supported by imperial powers. Or even not so radical social democrats who just wants some minor reforms.
So it might be a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario. But if you do, at least there is a chance of winning.
The only group on the left in the 20-30ies I can come up with that didn’t vote for material gains for the working class are the German Communists. This is often considered a reflection of their theory that if it gets worse they would gain. Personally, I think that was more a rationalisation, it really was about deep seated mistrust against the social democrats who had collaborated with the German military to have leaders of the Communists murdered.
Of note a number of very rich billionaires have recently been talking about how having billionaires around might be a bad thing. Even if they are just lying for effect it shows that they recognize that the problem is so bad they are going to need to give a little or face revolt.
I wonder, just a little curious, if AOC and others do not push the GND with its attendant progressive policies, if any of us or our children survive in twenty years and beyond.
I have heard it somewhere that we are already in the sixth major extinction of life on earth as many animals are in danger of disappearing and the earth warms. Crop failures and evidence of climate change are all around, things like unusual storms, fires and floods. The movement of peoples in the ME has something to do with crop failure. And that has impacted the EU and resulted in Brexit.
So maybe this is not really an optional battle we face. Do we believe climate change is real and, if so, will the fascists, whoever they are, be able to defeat us and humanity?
A friend recommended the book to me, so I picked it up and read it on a flight. Well, by read it, I mean I made it through the first 7 chapters, after which I gave up because it was too depressing.
The wrecking of the 11,000 year old stable climate and necessary resulting collapse of the natural ecosystems means the American “conservative” movement intentionally destroyed the very foundation that kept the entire human enterprise in operation.
“Conservatives” have been brainwashed (willfully!) to believe climate change is not real, and those that do mouth some level of “belief” are most certainly not willing to make the slightest sacrifice to combat it. Indeed, we now face the ridiculous and unjust spectacle of the very geographic locales most susceptible to the dangers (and enormous costs) of climate change being the most pigheadedly resistant to its prevention, while expecting the citizens of (wealthier) Blue States to keep shoveling billions in disaster relief to the very fools who ensured that the climate crisis would become completely unmanageable.
Another great example of hypocritical “personal responsibility” claptrap found on the lips of all “conservatives”!
I don’t think the left is any more willing to make the sacrifices necessary to solve this problem than the right. The crazy denialism provides convenient cover for the rest of us. We get to support a “solution” that is impossible given current technology, and, even if it was possible, doesn’t come close to a.solution. We do have to give up our cars. We do have to stop eating meat and dairy. We do have to stop air conditioning. We have to live in an entirely different, far more uncomfortable way. We have to make carbon ridiculously expensive with say, a $500 a ton carbon tax.
I do not believe we are willing to do these things. I think we might be able to devote huge resources searching for a technological solution, but I do not believe we are willing to make any really uncomfortable sacrifice, and solving this problem will require real sacrifice. The very fact the AOC GND ignores this truth turns it into a PR stunt. Supporting it makes us feel good and righteous without changing anything in our personal lives.
I do believe we are in the throes of a sixth great extinction. Near term human extinction is a subject worth discussing. I take consolation from the fact that the extinction event will probably take hundreds or even thousands of years to complete. I also take consolation from the fact that we cannot destroy life on the planet. Give evolution a few million years….
Excuse me if I think the GND is a joke.
The dumbest possible argument: anything less than perfection is the same as nothing.
I think this is a poor interpretation of what I wrote. I expect imperfection. No matter what, we will always be able to say “It’s not enough!” I supported Obama’s imperfect plans as a decent start.
What I refuse to do is support a fantasy, a pretence that we can solve this problem without pain and a real hit to our standard of living. What we have now is the right pretending climate change is not happening and the left pretending they can solve it with magic beans. Nobody is acknowledging the reality.
It is becoming very obvious that the reality is that we are not prepared to do the things we have to do, and progressive politicians are afraid to present a realistic response. Fine. Que sera sera. The universe will unfold, etcetera. Just don’t try to tell me that the left is any holier than the right on this issue when the only thing we are willing to do is pretend magic beans will somehow work.
This is terrifying and accurate. Do you have an inkling of a prescription?
Win?
No other way to win.
Potential? Don’t you think we are already there? I realize it can always get worse, but right now we have cabinet members openly defying the law, a president that is firing congressionally approved department executives just so he can name boot licking toadies as “acting” heads for the purposes of avoiding congressional review and to further his defiance of lawful court orders, an attorney general that is obviously attempting to cover up damaging information on the president and now is considering unleashing the power of the department against the presidents perceived “enemies”, a Senate leader who’s great purpose in life is to pack the courts with partisan zealots, and it just goes on and on…
My feeling is that the Republican party has fully internalized the fact that they are a minority faction in the country and that the best way to preserve their power is to fully embrace the authoritarian, corrupt kleptocracy they are apparently working so hard to create. The Republican party is unified in their embrace of norm and law breaking if it advances their interests.
I really have no idea what the best strategy to return to reality is, or if it is even possible without the total defeat of the Republican party, which is very unlikely. But I’m guessing that any strategy that relies on the “good” Republicans in the Senate to finally come to their senses won’t work out so well based on their performance so far. Maybe it’s time to try the fear and panic in the billionaire class and see where it gets us.
Yes, the outlines of The Trump State are already very clear. Reliance on anti-democratic, minority rule, complete control of the law enforcement/prosecutorial functions, overt executive lawbreaking and contempt for rule of law, with a complicit judiciary that does the bidding of the dictator are elements that are already present. Add in a transfer of executive power to the most “loyal” National Trumpalist toadies and sycophants and one can see that an effective executive dictatorship has already been established, and in less than 3 years. It should be noted that the failed Constitution was powerless to stop it; indeed, it essentially created it.
Unlike the Reichstag, the national legislature has not been dissolved, solely because there is no constitutional mechanism for the dictator to do so. But it has been functionally neutered by an institutional set-up that allows the National Trumpalist party in permanent control of the (anti-democratic) senate to paralyze all attempts at liberal reaction, while giving the dictator free hand at his illiberal misrule. The one area where the (remaining) liberal forces do have some official power is institutionally feeble, as we will see when “conservative” US attorneys and Federalist Society courts refuse to enforce Congressional subpeonas.
The press is completely complicit in enabling the Trump State, as their ho-hum reaction to the installation of a rubber-stamping “conservative” fixer as Attorney General makes clear. That they are ignoring the white-wash of the Mueller report tells you all you need to know about their resistance to the Trump State. The “free press” has been either cowed or controlled.
The National Trumpalist movement itself has permanently poisoned tens of millions of citizens, with hate crimes and political violence on the rise everywhere, but especially in states most delirious with white supremacy National Trumpalism. The society is awash in semi-automatic weapons, making the outbreaks of rightwing citizen violence much more likely to be deadly, all of which is being winked at by the official arms of the Trump State.
Finally, one can basically predict that whatever the 2020 election holds, the Trump State and its minions will refuse to relinquish power, thus putting the military into play politically.
Is the last gasp in stopping the Trump State the formation by the liberal elements of some sort of “national unity” party (ala the failed state of Israel), which will promise to protect the complicit billionaires? That itself makes clear the complete failure of the governing structures and the irreversible rot of nation.
That was our slogan going into the 2016 election. And, ultimately, we were, stronger together; though we lost. But we’re hanging in there. The elites need us a little longer, I think. We pay the bills, after all. When the elites are ready to self-destruct–and clearly they’re getting close–we’ll be ready to win. Until then, it’s mostly the elites in the Democratic Party that will need to decide if we’re really stronger together. Next year, it doesn’t look like they will. But there’s still time for them to change their minds.
What exactly is the alternative?
Been reading Corey Robin’s “The Reactionary Mind”. He makes the point that conservatism is always a reaction to the left. Writing a year or so ago he observed that Trump represented a movement flailing without an enemy. He might be disturbed that perhaps we now are providing an enemy. I would add that I’m not sure what the left does really matters in this context as Republicans will lie to create a “socialist” enemy no matter what the left actually does.
if a significant fraction of our economic elites in the business community conclude that their interests are better protected by siding with Donald Trump
Donald received $5 billion in free media during 2016, according to The Street. The media and Donald are in a symbiotic relationship.
What troubles me is the potential for a breakdown in our basic system of checks and balances which protects our civil rights, economic freedom, and First Amendment rights
Do you mean like a purge at the Department of Homeland Security, followed by ineffectual sniping from Chuck Grassley? What about Donald saying that he wished the military could be rougher to migrants?
We have two sides of a political divide that are increasingly unable to work together
Allegedly “moderate” Republicans voted for Donald (and Miller and Nielsen and Barr and…) rather than fulfill their oaths of office, or even perform basic oversight. You’ve pointed out that Donald had openings to work with Democrats on key issues; he never made a serious attempt to try.
If the left in this country wants to run on an economically populist platform that scares the bejesus out of our big business community, they cannot afford to lose.
Many of Donald’s policies have done great damage (tariffs), or could cause much damage in the future (DOJ lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act). I don’t understand why the onus is on the left to coddle CEO’s. If the business class had forcefully pushed back on Donald, I would understand why it would make strategic sense to seek their support to outflank Donald. But they didn’t.
Are we prepared to face the consequences if we don’t win that battle?
Nazis are marching; Q-Anon is actively recruiting on multiple platforms; churches, mosques, and synagogues are under attack. Fascism is on the rise globally.
This piece spells out some serious grounds for concern. But winning back the executive and legislative branches will not save us if all it does is usher in an incrementalist Democrat rule. It would only be a brief interregnum.
Trumpism, and the shameless grab for unrestrained consolidation of oligarchic power by Mitch McConnell (that less conspicuous but more effective horseman of the apocalypse), are just predictable symptoms of a long wasting disease. In the absence of pretty radical change, the levers the economic elites have used to get this far will be there for them to press again.
And in the following cycle, press them they will, closer to the end zone than they’ve been after any previous Democratic administration. In the not very long game, incremental change guarantees their hegemony.
I’ll back whoever wins the nomination with passionate enthusiasm. But I fear we lose definitively if we don’t pick that fight.
Make no mistake, this isn’t John Brown we’re talking about. The fight came to us. We don’t have a choice.