Skip to main content

Ur-Fascism: The anti-democratic impulse of Trump's populism


Ur-Fascism: Trump’s Anti-Democratic Populism

The King's Hour: Panel Discussion on “The Problem with Trump”

King’s University College at Western, September 27, 2017.





I have been agonizing for the past week as to what I would say in this address, not because I have nothing to say but because I have too much. How do I frame this in a way to outline coherently my angst beyond a performance of Edvard Munch’s The Scream.  As this is the beginning of the school year, in class we focus on first principles or concepts, so it makes sense for me to return to first principles.


First, as a common principle, it is safe to say that Nazi’s are bad. The question this raises though, is why are we even having a conversation where we have to preface our remarks with a reminder that Nazis are bad?

We are having this conversation because Donald Trump is a “charismatic populist.” Populism can be a progressive force of democracy when viewed in terms of participatory engagement in voting, referendums, deliberative consultations, or direct democracy projects. However, the anti-democratic impulses of populism emerge when mobilization is associated with charismatic authority – and I will argue (but not here) that this occurs on both the right and the left.

Charismatic authority generally is characterized by the individual personality of a leader who is seen as extraordinary and exceptionally persuasive. It’s hard, as an outsider, to see this in a pudgy man in an ill-fitting suit, a bad comb-over and small hands; a man whose fame is based on an accident of birth to a wealthy father. I’m being particularly pejorative here to make the point of how absolutely laughable “The Donald” can be. But, and this is important; as a leader, he is making it work because it is not about the leader per say but emotional resonance. It is about the emotional relationship followers have with the person.

Charisma is fundamentally emotional and as such is antithetical to the legal-rational form of authority that is necessary for democracy – in short, the ‘rational’ basis of inclusion, protection from the mob and tyranny of the majority, that emerges from the rule of law, institutional processes of government, and facts derived from observable realities.

To illustrate this, as legal-rational authority Trump is a failure. He has been unable to pass his substantive policy agenda through a Congress dominated by the party of which he is the ostensible leader. His response, is to go on the road, to ignore as best he can legal-rational structures,  and hold “campaign-style” rallies, in Alabama for example, to bring focus on his personal magnificence and the magnificence of militarized heroic American first-responders of which he is the natural head, and to attack those who appear to question the flag and national anthem. This is very important because the flag, national anthem, and military are not being put forward as SYMBOLS of America, they are actually idealized SUBSTITUTES for America itself, and American democracy. The flag, anthem and military have become signifiers of a romantic and emotional ideal of GREAT AMERICA and how dare a few suspiciously brown people not respect that

They are anti-American because they deny the Truth. The only truth being that which is viscerally felt. It scares me because, you know who get this? Alex Jones, an apoplectic, infomercial huckster and stroke waiting to happen; he gets it. As he responds to the oh so cool, hipster, intellectual (the English accent, oh, what a give-a-way) John Oliver’s criticism –

Quote: “make fun of me, take me out of context, look at this loon! Hey Boy! People want legitimacy, they want real, they want to hear somebody that speaks to them and touches them inside.” Unquote

The only reality, the only truth are the emotional, political and social aesthetics that produce visceral, stomach churning, heart-twanging feelings. This is an appreciation, apprehension, and view of the world around you based on how it makes you feel – a rationality based on irrational love and hate.

This is at the heart of charismatic authority. Trump’s authority comes from his ability to construct his relationship with a constituency, 30% of Americans looking at latest approval ratings, and looking at the divisions that have emerged around the debate of 1st Amendment Rights versus Respecting the national anthem probably includes more.

Why am I concerned, actually rather scared, with this conception of charisma and its association with Trump’s populism? I am concerned because the Weberian typology links sources of authority, that is what we obey or what authorizes what we do, and ideas of Truth, in other words how we know and what authorizes our knowledge. This is about the mobilization of action. The basing of truth on feelings and romantic idealizations of America and Americans sets a framework for action that is based on emotion and not the rule of law. We only have to look at the distain shown for legal institutions – not just the constitutional provisions for free speech and dissent – but the attorney generals office, the lack of concern or attention to the legal issues of conflict of interest, sexual assault, and, if any part of the Russian scandal is true, treason.

This is bad because it is the gate-way to Eternal Fascism as identified by Umberto Eco, a writer who as a child had first hand experience with fascism. This is bad because as mentioned before I think we can accept that Nazis are bad.

In 1995, Eco wrote a list of how to recognize Eternal Fascism or Ur-Fascism. I’m paraphrasing the 14 identifiers –

A cult of tradition that implies a rejection of modernization defined by enlightenment rationalization which it sees as denying the romantically idealized natural community. It is a form of irrationalism that privileges action over the critical thought of effete, paralyzed, elitist, intellectualism. Don’t think, act because intellectualism or critical rationality makes distinctions which support and celebrate diversity which weakens and fragments the ideal community. This ideal community is the one and only plot line, that is the national plot line. The individual and social frustrations felt by the middle class is an indication of how the natural community is besieged domestically by the Others within who are not allegiant to the natural community and internationally. Therefore, all members of the community are protagonists in the plot and all are heroes in their active commitment to defending and expanding the shared community.

This is Ur-Fascism or Eternal Fascism, this is the charismatic authority of Donald Trump’s populist mobilization. This is history repeating itself not as tragedy but as farce – a very scary farce – scary clown like farce.


References:

Umberto Eco. 1995. Ur-Fascism. The New York Review of Books. June 22, 1995.

Alex Jones. 2017. Excerpt. Screened on John Oliver, This Week Tonight with John Oliver. July 30, 2017.

Max Weber. 1946. “Politics as a Vocation” & “The Sociology of Charismatic Authority” H.H. Gerth & C.W. Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 77-129 & 245-252.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Women Mayors in Ontario

 Recently, I've been up-dating the information on women councillors in Ontario. The following table lists the women elected Mayors in the municipal elections held in October 2022. The list is organized in order of descending population of the municipality. It notes whether the Mayor is an incumbent or newly elected, while new position indicates that the Mayor is new to the position, but was an already incumbent member of council.  Of the 417 Ontario Councils which held elections, 101 are now led by women. (There maybe a few I've missed, as I have not included Reeves.) Mayor Incumbent or New Municipality Pop Acclaimed Bonnie Crombie incumbent Mississauga 717,961 Andrea Horwath new Hamilton 569,353 Marianne Meed Ward incumbent Burlington 186,948 Elizabeth Roy new position ...

The State of Gender Parity in 2019

On December 16, the World Economic Forum (WEF) released its Global Gender Index for 2020 based on 2019 country performance. Canada has dropped 3 places in the ranking since the last report a year ago.  Since 2006 the WEF has produced annual reports on the progress made toward gender equality using benchmarks based on four thematic dimensions: economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment. In the latest edition of Women, Politics and Public Policy: The political struggles of Canadian women, (Newman, White and Findlay, 2020, p. 389) we had this to say of the 2017 report:  According to the 2017 report, no country has fully closed its gender gap; four of the five Nordic countries, Rwanda (4th), and Nicaragua (6th) have closed more than 80 per cent of their gaps. And Canada? Canada does not crack the top ten; it ranks 16th out of 144 countries, which is 2 points lower than its first ranking in 2006. This d...

Is Low Voter Turnout Actually A Good Thing?

 [It's a provocative position. I hope my answer is a bit more nuanced. Thinking with a pen, so the views are my own and likely to change as I think about it a bit more.] The big talking point regarding yesterday's municipal election in London is the free fall debacle in voter turnout. Only 25.5% of eligible voters cast a ballot, a significant plunge from the 40% turnout in 2018 (the BRT election) and from the 2014 high of 43% (the get rid of Fontana and the Fontana 8 election).  This low turnout is seen as the reason for the rather surprising outcomes in some of the words, namely the defeat of three "incumbents."* Incumbents are considered safe bets because they have name recognition and represent the status quo for voters. Generally, the mass of voters in municipal election have little to guide their votes other than name recognition and a desire not to change things up. However, when that "mass" of voters decides not to show up, that generalized support fo...