Some in Democrat leadership, joined by avowed communists, socialists, cultural activists, organized atheists, and parts of ANTIFA, BLM, and national “liberation fronts,” paint conservatives as “fascist,” implying they want political violence – but what is fascism?
Surprisingly, popular definitions are unsatisfying, slippery, and subjective. They tend to be circular, incomplete, and strangely hypocritical, using ambiguous terms like “traditional conservative,” “right-wing,” “patriotic,” “nationalist,” and “nativist” – to describe fascism.
But stop. What exactly is fascism? Properly understood in historical and modern contexts, it is an ideology, strategy, and tactical approach to change that pushes hate and political violence.
More specifically, it is an all-consuming belief in one – only one – pure and unalterable political ideology, to the point of intolerance for all others. It embodies a strategy that seeks, in accord with this ideology, to delegitimize other views, laws, institutions, groups, and protections.
Based on the unwavering conviction that one centering ideology is true and must be spread, it works to delegitimize different views, laws, institutions, groups, and protections. Fascism uses proven tactics – including persecution, harassment, denial, cancellation, fear, and violence.
Finally, to keep the ideology unchanged, strategy in motion, and tactics rolling, a fascist movement or regime will stoke prejudices, hate, and demonization based on differences in people.
These differences might be racial, religious, ethnic, socio-economic, geographic, educational, or just invented or interpretive – but are used to divide people, justifying political vilification and ultimately political violence, with the longer term aim of centralizing power.
Correctly, many identify Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and – the source of the ideology’s name – Mussolini’s “Fascist” Italy, before and during World War II, as fascist. But if this is an accurate historical description of fascism – now almost cliché – what specific groups do this today?
The question is seldom asked – but deserves, almost demands, an answer in this upside-down time. Let’s start with the allegation that conservatives are – by definition – fascists. Does the term fit – conservative individuals, the Republican Party, leading candidates, or Trump?
Do those who advocate “viewpoint diversity,” “free marketplace of ideas,” “religious diversity,” “individualism,” and “fair and open” exchange of non-violent ideas in business, government, and on campuses…sound like pushers of “one pure and unalterable ideology?”
Unless one twists words beyond recognition, vilifying advocacy of multiple points of view, one is hard-pressed to see how these tolerant views – premised on our Bill of Rights– could be fascist.
How about those who respect – yet recognize limitations on – legislative, executive, and judicial powers exercised by the government, who understand the state-federal balance, and who honor the nation’s long-held military mission, namely war-fighting and deterrence?
How about those who abide by “black letter law,” who honor Supreme Court rulings, traditional understandings of procedural due process, equal protection, and the national aspiration to equal opportunities for all Americans – a chance at “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?”
Do these groups seem to be following a strategy of “delegitimizing” ideas or seeking debate and logical defense of competing views, laws, institutions, groups, and individual protections?
Now examine tactics. Do conservatives concentrate power, spend, tax, regulate more, grow government, misuse laws to persecute, harass, cancel, indebt, create fear, or push violence?
Or are these the Americans arguing for less government, more freedom and self-reliance, self-restraint, self-discipline, and the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Tenth Amendment rights?
As you contemplate these questions – trying to understand “fascism” – think about what we see daily. Who – which party – holds an ideology against “viewpoint diversity,” a “free marketplace of ideas,” “religious diversity,” “individualism,” and “fair and open” exchanges?
Who tries to intimidate Supreme Court justices, undermine institutions and the military mission, and seek to transform society by subverting established meanings, due process, and equal protection?
Which political party cancels and silences debate on opposing ideas, including traditional, individualist, family, religious, government-limiting, solvency-advocating, or contrarian views?
Which party aims to solve problems by aggregating power, attacking Americans on the basis of their race, class, economic, religious, geographic, gender, parental or another status, swapping rule of law for violent riots, destroying history, condemning others as “enemies of the people”?
Just ponder – for a moment – which political party, which activists, are increasingly violent, radicalized, and purist, and more closely resemble the worst actors of the past century. When you weigh what lies in the scale – just ask yourself quietly: Who behaves most like fascism? The answer is enough to give Americans a shudder. Hint: It is not the Republican Party.
Robert Charles is a former Assistant Secretary of State under Colin Powell, former Reagan and Bush 41 White House staffer, attorney, and naval intelligence officer (USNR). He wrote “Narcotics and Terrorism” (2003), “Eagles and Evergreens” (2018), and is National Spokesman for AMAC.
