"Militia movement often recruits in areas where there's no high-speed internet and they don't have ambulance service, things like that. If you get people those things, they oftentimes don't have a need for the militias anymore. You can ameliorate that, I think, in those things, and that's a good long-term project, and it's part of why anti-fascism is not disconnected from other social movements."
I am related to a lot of Trump voting rural Iowans, and I don't think the lack of infrastructure is per se why they are vulnerable to fascist thinking and I don't think infrastructure is something that militias are promising. Rather what people are looking for is hope, a life narrative, drama, etc. And that's also what fascist thinking provides.
They don't want to think that it was an unfair advantage that's been righted as people become more free when men either inherited business or got good factory jobs and women had no other opportunities besides staying in town to be helpmeets for them. Instead, that way of life is gone because of nefarious plots by the Mexicans and then"globalists" and the feminists. And while more universal access to infrastructure is nice and good, if liberals want to compete against this fascist impulse, it's that sort of hope and meaning we need to provide.
I agree. We see a lot of fascism and fascist sympathies among urban, conservative elites. The folks at the Claremont Institute aren't wanting for internet access or ambulences, and the breeding ground for what became Trumpism wasn't (just) disaffected rural communities, but very online right-wingers on 4chan etc. He's right that communities that feel put upon, or marginalized, or look around and see that they aren't benefiting from economic growth to the extent their neighbors are are more likely to fall to populism and fascism. And the things he's describing can contribute to that. But the Bernie Sanders idea that working class solidarity can be found in social democratic policies seems to overlook how much of the right is driven instead by nationalism, cultural anxiety, and fear of difference.
I brought it up because it's a relatively common thesis, and his book is the prime example of it. But he book is also just, well, really poorly researched and argued, and was thoroughly savaged by actual scholars of fascism when it came out. There's just not much to engage.
That’s fair, I think I just appreciate how Goldberg’s views about fascism evolved in the Trump era and he went on the record about what he thinks he got wrong in his book
Good grief, "fetishization" of free speech, eh? Thanks for confirming the fact that 'woke' libertarianism isn't libertarian at all, in the sense of defending the most key individual liberties. It sounds to me like you're simply trying to salvage some form of free market ideology in a larger context of woke authoritarianism. You folks are corporatists, not liberals or libertarians in any meaningful sense.
Fascism is when the general population walks in lockstep with the government while the government censors the media, just as it happened in every major Liberal country around the world.
When you're in the goldfish bowl and agree with the government, you wouldn't know what fascism is even if it killed your family.
More crazies in the comments 😆
I pretty strongly disagreed with this argument:
"Militia movement often recruits in areas where there's no high-speed internet and they don't have ambulance service, things like that. If you get people those things, they oftentimes don't have a need for the militias anymore. You can ameliorate that, I think, in those things, and that's a good long-term project, and it's part of why anti-fascism is not disconnected from other social movements."
I am related to a lot of Trump voting rural Iowans, and I don't think the lack of infrastructure is per se why they are vulnerable to fascist thinking and I don't think infrastructure is something that militias are promising. Rather what people are looking for is hope, a life narrative, drama, etc. And that's also what fascist thinking provides.
They don't want to think that it was an unfair advantage that's been righted as people become more free when men either inherited business or got good factory jobs and women had no other opportunities besides staying in town to be helpmeets for them. Instead, that way of life is gone because of nefarious plots by the Mexicans and then"globalists" and the feminists. And while more universal access to infrastructure is nice and good, if liberals want to compete against this fascist impulse, it's that sort of hope and meaning we need to provide.
I agree. We see a lot of fascism and fascist sympathies among urban, conservative elites. The folks at the Claremont Institute aren't wanting for internet access or ambulences, and the breeding ground for what became Trumpism wasn't (just) disaffected rural communities, but very online right-wingers on 4chan etc. He's right that communities that feel put upon, or marginalized, or look around and see that they aren't benefiting from economic growth to the extent their neighbors are are more likely to fall to populism and fascism. And the things he's describing can contribute to that. But the Bernie Sanders idea that working class solidarity can be found in social democratic policies seems to overlook how much of the right is driven instead by nationalism, cultural anxiety, and fear of difference.
I'd go even farther to say that dependence on charity and/or government is seen as an indignity only suitable for "those people."
Not sure about the unprompted Goldberg hate. Could at least be good faith in engaging with his analysis.
I brought it up because it's a relatively common thesis, and his book is the prime example of it. But he book is also just, well, really poorly researched and argued, and was thoroughly savaged by actual scholars of fascism when it came out. There's just not much to engage.
That’s fair, I think I just appreciate how Goldberg’s views about fascism evolved in the Trump era and he went on the record about what he thinks he got wrong in his book
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/gfile/what-i-got-wrong-about-fascism/
But other than that small complaint, thanks for putting this together it was a great conversation!
Good grief, "fetishization" of free speech, eh? Thanks for confirming the fact that 'woke' libertarianism isn't libertarian at all, in the sense of defending the most key individual liberties. It sounds to me like you're simply trying to salvage some form of free market ideology in a larger context of woke authoritarianism. You folks are corporatists, not liberals or libertarians in any meaningful sense.
Fascism is when the general population walks in lockstep with the government while the government censors the media, just as it happened in every major Liberal country around the world.
When you're in the goldfish bowl and agree with the government, you wouldn't know what fascism is even if it killed your family.