Widespread frustration and resentment have taken root with the resumed presidency of Donald Trump. Countless individuals are seething with anger, looking for a scapegoat to take responsibility for this unexpected turn of events. They seem to find various groups to blame – one such group absurdly being black men who chose to vote Trump. Following closely in this blame game are Latino and Hispanic men who followed a similar voting pattern. Surprisingly, the list also includes young voters – criticized for either their non-participation in voting or their opinion tilted towards Trump.
The blame doesn’t stop there; it’s extended to white women who decided to cast their vote for Trump. It seems as though the public holds a multitude of groups accountable for the return of Trump. Individual opinions are being scrutinized and picked apart in the hopes of finding plausible reasons for his re-election. In this search for answers, the Democratic candidate Kamala Harris is unexpectedly blamed for her defeat. Criticisms range from suggesting Biden should be the candidate instead, to the lack of substantial policy ideas in her campaign. Even Biden’s administration isn’t immune to the blame, receiving flak for supporting Israel’s actions in Gaza which allegedly led to voter alienation.
Mainstream media follows these baseless criticisms with ridiculous claims about Harris’s failure to address egg prices as the cause of her defeat. Some within the Democratic Party itself join the chorus of blame, alleging that her inability to tackle a seemingly irrelevant issue led to her downfall. Although, I personally believe there could be some truth to these allegations, I also maintain that they tend to overlook the underlying misogynistic and racist tones in Trump’s campaign, especially once Harris was announced as the Democratic candidate.
The deeply ingrained racism and misogyny combined, played a significant role in swaying the majority of white citizens to vote in favor of Trump – the most openly racist and misogynistic candidate. Along with the alarming absence of the millions who voted in 2020, which would have significantly altered the outcome, Trump’s return was unfortunately cemented.
Trump returns not alone, however, backed by powerful forces that feed his ego, run his administration, and financially support him. This alliance, made up of white supremacy, Christian nationalism, greed-driven libertarian capitalism, imperialist war advocacy, and unashamed misogyny, uplifts and reinforces Trump. While it’s debatable if Trump wholly believes in the values of these support groups, there’s no doubt he’s content in utilizing their resources to his advantage.
The people behind Trump aren’t merely passive followers; they are ideologues, each with their particular viewpoints and motivations. One egregious example would be Stephen Miller, a name synonymous with his deep-seated hatred for immigrants. As an advisor to Trump, his harmful policies, including the infamous ‘Muslim ban’, have sown fear and uncertainty among immigrant communities and those associated with them.
The individuals that Trump plans to place in military, diplomatic and intelligence departments seem to share a common ideology as well. Positions such as the Secretaries of State and Defense are being earmarked for individuals known for their aggressive interventionist beliefs, a trait that is worryingly not new to the administrations. However, their readiness to use the forces at their disposal to enforce their supremacist ideals sets them apart menacingly.
When it comes to the agencies designed to regulate corporate activities, regulation is by no means going to be high on the agenda. All the nominees are avid supporters of unchecked neoliberal capitalism, placing profit far above every other priority, including honesty.
Faced with this grim scenario, how can we stand against the rising tide of Trump-centred fascism? When legal authorities themselves show little regard for the law except as a means to suppress opposition and cater to their benefactors, what avenues are left open for the opposition?
While the suggestions initially provided to combat this situation are basic and straightforward (‘Don’t panic’, ‘Don’t disengage’, ‘Don’t fear infighting’, ‘Find a charismatic leader’), they quickly devolve into defeatist notions – ‘Skip the Protests and Identity Politics’. Aydintasbas discourages street protests, claiming that while they may be an inspiring call to defend democracy, they alienate conservatives and suburban America. Along with these, they also emphasize the need for an economic message and the showcasing of the leadership potential of Democratic politicians.
It’s rational to argue that the Democrats and identity politics alone cannot alleviate the situation. So, the question persists: how can we effectively counter Trumpism – the US brand of fascism draped in the American flag, bankrolled by right-wing evangelical churches, and promoted by capitalists with a distaste for labor unions and the very workers who contributed to their wealth?
Trumpism didn’t just surface with his election in 2016 – it’s been festering for a while. Literature opposing the fascism of the 1930s – a period witnessing peak fascist victories worldwide – highlight this fact. The spirit of this era was revived by Trump supporters in a rally at Madison Square Garden in October 2024.
The unnerving similarities between the Trump-aggrandizing MAGA movement and the fascism depicted in Sinclair Lewis’s antifascist novel ‘It Can’t Happen Here’ are evident. The novel offers a chilling representation of what a potential US fascism might look like, which bears an uncanny resemblance to the circumstances under the current Trump-led administration.