A government that says you can’t call it authoritarian is most certainly authoritarian.
That and illegal search and seizure and ignoring due process and such. As far as I can tell if the constitution has it they are breaking it.
If you don’t want to be called a fascist, simply do not behave like a fascist. It doesn’t get any easier than that.
Before you take any action, simply ask yourself, “Is this something that a fascist would do?”
Okay but what if I just like the runic script and ancient Rome and medieval Rome and early modern Rome and whatever the fuck the Pontic Greeks were doing Rome?
Well then you are of the same ilk as the illustrious founders of our great nation, which is to say, a fascist
Given the fact I don’t like power as a baseline either wielded by mine self or others, I’m gonna disagree. Power corrupts inevitably so thusly to prevent corruption we must prevent people from having power over eachother as much as possible, within reason at least don’t think anyone is bitching about paramedics having the power to give someone anesthesia.
I was just joking you can like those things, I have an interest in a lot of stuff. Be curious, learn history and culture, its an improvement over the garbage we are force fed in public schools.
I don’t agree with the ol “power corrupts so power bad” mindset. It’s learned helplessness. Workers need to become very interested in building power for ourselves as a class. Of course its rife with problems, the 20th century was disaster after disaster wrt socialist politics. Some bright spots, but it didnt pan out. Granted, I am not an anarchist, I know lots of anarchists who organize pretty darn well while pretending they aren’t building power.
But we can’t pretend, we have to deal with facts. How are going to create a better world without a comprehensive theory of power? Its pure idealism and I don’t have time for that.
But educating yourself, being interested in something like ancient Rome, and then building on it and educating is probably the best way forward for a lot of people.
I just have an issue with the neoclassicism of all these slave owning founders, who didn’t understand what the romans also didn’t understand about their society: the basis of all their progress and success is the slave labor they compel to carry it out.
I largely agree I was just a little fucked up and couldn’t think good when I wrote the comment, slipped and smashed into the ground hard nothing dangerous but I physically hurt bad. Regardless I meant undue or unearned power over people cult leaders, cops, and pseudoscientists would be the best examples I have for what type of powers I dislike due to their corruptive tendencies. But of a hard thing to describe since I don’t think English quite has the words required, but I am mostly against undue influence over people be it due to lack of education, dishonesty, dishonorable conduct, etcetera etcetera.
Hard to think still I’m gonna nurse this headache and literal pain in the neck while thinking about how I need to get a bath rug so I don’t slip again.
Oh no! I hope you feel better!
He’s a pedo facist Nazi imbecile crybaby
Nicely said, but you forgot rapist, conman, pants-shitter.
Nepo, thin skinned, business failure
Draft dodger, charlatan, media whore
The draft was fucking stupid and is the least egregious of his crimes, frankly I don’t blame him on that one. Now if only he wasn’t a bitch ass bastard wannabe strongman who would happily inflict the draft on others.
Bankrupter of Casinos. Pornstar Hush money Payer. Exploiter of Cancer Foundations.
Kids cancer foundations
Kids
If we put everything shitty thing he is in there he’s gonna end up with a title like a Game of Thrones character
DONALD THE CHEAPSKATE, BREAKER OF TREATIES, MOLESTER OF CHILDREN, PROTECTOR OF PEDOPHILES, AND SHITTER OF PANTS. FIRST OF HIS NAME AND LAST IF WE’RE LUCKY. LONG MAY HIS STENCH LINGER.
“bankrupter of casinos and countries”?
Nailed it
Okay, pants-shitter is a bit unfair - we’re almost all likely going to start having bodily malfunctions by that age.
But the rest? Hear, hear!
Pants shitter stays
A government that says you can’t call it authoritarian is most certainly authoritarian.
A cursory search on X shows dozens of examples of Miller referring to Democrats as “fascists” over the years, but as I’ve previously written, it’s a fool’s errand trying to shame MAGA bigwigs by holding up a mirror to their flagrant hypocrisy. They don’t care, and they relish shameless trolling — like wielding awesome power to police the same words they use all the time.
Don’t be cowed by MAGA’s speech-policing threats. Just as it has the right to say horrible things, you have the right to call the president a fascist. God bless America.
One that outlaws anti-facists is facist
Yes, but for the sake of accuracy the president is a vulgar conventionalist and parafascist. Factions within the Republican party, such as the Christian nationalists, meet academic definitions of fascism but Trump has no ideology. He uses fascism as a tool to gain more wealth and power, he’s not a “true believer” like many of his followers.
Vulgar conventionalism is … 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.
Natural Right and History, Leo Strauss.
para-fascism – a form of authoritarian and ultra-nationalist conservatism which adopts the external trappings of fascism while rejecting its call for genuine social and ethical revolution (see pp. 120–4)
Nature of Fascism, R Griffin
While interesting bit of political theory, do these distinctions really make that much of a difference? Like pretending to be a fascist, and being a fascist both seem like they’re heading toward the basically the same end result, a singular authoritarian dictator who uses the power of the state to their functionally exclusive advantage.
Not in everyday conversation, no. In an accurate analysis, they make a useful distinction, yes.
They do in so far as understanding motives and anticipating actions, it’s like any science, you want to be as accurate and precise as possible to avoid errors in making decisions.
His narcissistic personality disorder and deteriorating mental condition leaves him increasingly vulnerable to manipulation by advisors. The fascist elements within the party are prone to factionalization without competent leadership, these elements are a legitimate threat to his rule. It’s beneficial to know that while these parties all share a version of a palingenetic myth, the utopian visions differ considerably after America’s destruction, which can be used as a wedge to promote infighting and schisms between them.
For instance, the Dark Enlightenment oligarchs and JD Vance are working to scapegoat and get rid of Trump, (see mimetic theory of desire). Normal conservatives would be put off by the idea and their public support would wane, and the MAGA diehards possibly turn rabid to defend Dear Leader against Trump’s financial backers.
Edit:
Or push stories equating Trump/MAGA with Marxism/communism to sow division among the pure capitalist conservative types against his agenda.
https://fortune.com/2025/08/12/maga-marxist-maoist-trump-assault-free-market-capitalism-socialism/
I find it interesting that after a media companies licenses were threatened, pundits/comedians jobs threatened, and their editorial sovereignty threatened they suddenly decided to start writing articles criticizing the administration. Even if it is self serving.
😭 the paper the slavers wrote when they stole this joint says we got cut in!! we voted for fascism over there, not over here!
