ed note–with the news that Adelson had caved and was forced by entities more powerful than him to throw his support behind Trump, the NeoCons are doubtless going out of their minds, one tiny piece of evidence being the ridiculous piece appearing below, and we can dismiss with the notion that Kagan & co are doing this in order to give the ‘illusion’ that the Jews are worried about Trump and that they are doing this as a smokescreen to ‘fool America’. The entire ‘Nazi’ line of attack is/was/always will be reserved for those who have had a death sentence imposed upon them by Judea and Trump is no different, despite whatever pretenses he makes of posing as a ‘supporter’ of Israel’.
washingtonpost.com
The Republican Party’s attempt to treat Donald Trump as a normal political candidate would be laughable were it not so perilous to the republic. If only he would mouth the party’s “conservative” principles, all would be well.
But of course the entire Trump phenomenon has nothing to do with policy or ideology. It has nothing to do with the Republican Party, either, except in its historic role as incubator of this singular threat to our democracy. Trump has transcended the party that produced him. His growing army of supporters no longer cares about the party. Because it did not immediately and fully embrace Trump, because a dwindling number of its political and intellectual leaders still resist him, the party is regarded with suspicion and even hostility by his followers. Their allegiance is to him and him alone.
And the source of allegiance? We’re supposed to believe that Trump’s support stems from economic stagnation or dislocation. Maybe some of it does. But what Trump offers his followers are not economic remedies — his proposals change daily. What he offers is an attitude, an aura of crude strength and machismo, a boasting disrespect for the niceties of the democratic culture that he claims, and his followers believe, has produced national weakness and incompetence. His incoherent and contradictory utterances have one thing in common: They provoke and play on feelings of resentment and disdain, intermingled with bits of fear, hatred and anger. His public discourse consists of attacking or ridiculing a wide range of “others” — Muslims, Hispanics, women, Chinese, Mexicans, Europeans, Arabs, immigrants, refugees — whom he depicts either as threats or as objects of derision. His program, such as it is, consists chiefly of promises to get tough with foreigners and people of nonwhite complexion. He will deport them, bar them, get them to knuckle under, make them pay up or make them shut up.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump read a poem about a snake at a rally in Ohio to discuss immigration and terrorism. (Reuters)
[Editorial: The rank nihilism driving the GOP’s acceptance of Trump]
That this tough-guy, get-mad-and-get-even approach has gained him an increasingly large and enthusiastic following has probably surprised Trump as much as anyone else. Trump himself is simply and quite literally an egomaniac. But the phenomenon he has created and now leads has become something larger than him, and something far more dangerous.
Republican politicians marvel at how he has “tapped into” a hitherto unknown swath of the voting public. But what he has tapped into is what the founders most feared when they established the democratic republic: the popular passions unleashed, the “mobocracy.” Conservatives have been warning for decades about government suffocating liberty. But here is the other threat to liberty that Alexis de Tocqueville and the ancient philosophers warned about: that the people in a democracy, excited, angry and unconstrained, might run roughshod over even the institutions created to preserve their freedoms. As Alexander Hamilton watched the French Revolution unfold, he feared in America what he saw play out in France — that the unleashing of popular passions would lead not to greater democracy but to the arrival of a tyrant, riding to power on the shoulders of the people.
This phenomenon has arisen in other democratic and quasi-democratic countries over the past century, and it has generally been called “fascism.” Fascist movements, too, had no coherent ideology, no clear set of prescriptions for what ailed society. “National socialism” was a bundle of contradictions, united chiefly by what, and who, it opposed; fascism in Italy was anti-liberal, anti-democratic, anti-Marxist, anti-capitalist and anti-clerical. Successful fascism was not about policies but about the strongman, the leader (Il Duce, Der Führer), in whom could be entrusted the fate of the nation. Whatever the problem, he could fix it. Whatever the threat, internal or external, he could vanquish it, and it was unnecessary for him to explain how. Today, there is Putinism, which also has nothing to do with belief or policy but is about the tough man who single-handedly defends his people against all threats, foreign and domestic.
To understand how such movements take over a democracy, one only has to watch the Republican Party today. These movements play on all the fears, vanities, ambitions and insecurities that make up the human psyche. In democracies, at least for politicians, the only thing that matters is what the voters say they want — vox populi vox Dei. A mass political movement is thus a powerful and, to those who would oppose it, frightening weapon. When controlled and directed by a single leader, it can be aimed at whomever the leader chooses. If someone criticizes or opposes the leader, it doesn’t matter how popular or admired that person has been. He might be a famous war hero, but if the leader derides and ridicules his heroism, the followers laugh and jeer. He might be the highest-ranking elected guardian of the party’s most cherished principles. But if he hesitates to support the leader, he faces political death.
[George Will: The GOP must keep Trump out of the White House]
In such an environment, every political figure confronts a stark choice: Get right with the leader and his mass following or get run over. The human race in such circumstances breaks down into predictable categories — and democratic politicians are the most predictable. There are those whose ambition leads them to jump on the bandwagon. They praise the leader’s incoherent speeches as the beginning of wisdom, hoping he will reward them with a plum post in the new order. There are those who merely hope to survive. Their consciences won’t let them curry favor so shamelessly, so they mumble their pledges of support, like the victims in Stalin’s show trials, perhaps not realizing that the leader and his followers will get them in the end anyway.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and the GOP will find common ground ahead of the general election. (Reuters)
Hmmm
Here is a newsflash to kagan: your crowd brought “fascism” to American right after 9-11. What you are really attempting here is to try and perpetuate it.
Take note of these observations; Kagan is not identified as one of the planners of the Iraq war ,and close adviser to George W.Bush.
Nor is it revealed he is the husband of Obama administration Victoria Nulsnd who created the Ukraine crises by overthrowing there government ,and provoking Russia .
Kagan like all Jews love the Left/Right Matrix …” Liberal Conservative ” divide and he/they recognize Trump as a breaker of this …Hence he is charged .” Fascism ” ,Nationalism / Unity of interests and pragmatism the Jews eschew for division ,Globalism ,through the Talmudic Dialectic .
Every time a Jew attacks Trump it’s a great sign he is for real .
Sorry DDearborn ” Fascism ” used as a negative is a Jewish propaganda thing .
Fascism and Nationalism is not what ” his cruwd brought ” at all.
They brought International Jewish control …Finance ,war ,Cultural Marxism ,disintegrated industrial base private financed ( Jew) debt .
None of this is ” Fascism “… As to me the word is not a dirty one …as only by dropping the use of the Jews on demonizing of a system can we win.
Guess what ? Dante Ardenz meets the definition of a ” Fascist ” and I’m proud of it .
Hmmm
Like so many other terms bandied about these days, opinions vary.