Trump's Brand of Authoritarianism

Re:http://www.adividedworld.com/political-ideas/the-ideological-nature-of-authoritarian-government/#comment-422

Charles' analysis shows that Nazism was anti-capitalist, and that it shares certain characteristics with Marxist socialism. There is nothing in his writing demonstrating that a capitalist ideology inoculates a movement from helping an authoritarian to power, which is what really matters about whether a movement can be considered authoritarian or not. Trump is a trade protectionist/capitalist/flip flopper whose economic theory, in its peculiar flexibility, should remind one of Hitler's stated theory: "the basic feature of our economic theory is that we have no theory at all." But his theory doesn't really matter. Most politicians are unconcerned with theory, so one can forgive Trump for some of his apparent lack of integrity. What matters is whether Trump's supporters are capable of supporting a president in acting against the interests and structures of the republic. We should pay attention to their behavior and traits, not the mess of ideological left/right labels, which are based on concepts that date back to, and are perhaps mostly applicable to, the French Revolution. A study done by the Washington Post found that Trump's supporters are not any more Authoritarian than other Republican voters. The research also found that they are still much more Authoritarian than Clinton or Sanders supporters, which hardly obviates the necessity of treating them as a vulnerable to authoritarianism, as traditionally defined. More disturbingly however, are the other personality traits, each of which Trump supporters have in greater amounts than those nearly every other candidate: anti-elitist, mistrust of experts, and American identity. Granted, these are good, maybe even great things in moderate amounts. However, Trump supporters have higher levels of each these than any other candidate, with the sole exception of Sanders supporters' anti-elitism. Now, imagine a government that acts under all of these impetuses. I'm talking to you, now, Charles. I want you to consider carefully what such a government looks like, and then ask whether it looks American or authoritarian.

Mistrust of experts: What does a very high degree of anti-expert sentiment do? It creates a need for a new kind of expert, agnostic of the scientific scruples that enable our intellectual economy to exist. This means economic theory, too, Charles, hence why Trump feels comfortable throwing free trade under the bus. In short, his supporters don't believe in theories that can't be articulated in a few minutes using fourth grade language.

Anti-elistism: This is the mold into which anti-Jewish sentiment was poured by Hitler. For a populist, the elite represent an opportunity to scapegoat. In Trump's America, the elite and their shills, conveniently for you, Charles, are all of those with progressive political leanings. I urge you to consider the fact objectively that the current president views perhaps 40% of the country as elites or elite accomplices, based on what they believe, rather than their actual social status.

American Identity: Nationalism may come and go in popularity, but it is always a required ingredient for a hostile takeover of government to occur.

Finally Authoritarianism: The tendency to desire order and rigid social roles.

The disturbing thing about Trump's supporters, unlike those of any other candidate, score high in all of these categories, even though some of them appear to directly contradict each other. The anti-elitist sentiment, combined with high authoritarianism suggests that they do not dislike elites in general, merely the current social order. They apparently want to replace it with another equally or more rigid one. They may see in Trump an elite, the only elite, who they like. Thus they will happily give Trump the support he would need to abolish constitutional separations of power, if it means that Trump supersedes the complex matrix of elites with his singular personality. Look how nationalism plays into the history of authoritarian governments. Trump supporters are asking the government to protect their industry from competition in other countries. This, despite the fact that he is running as a pro free market, anti-regulation candidate. An incoherent economic theory, in fact one that uses incoherence as its core strength and appeal. Much like Hitler. Do you think it's a coincidence that so many neo-nazis like Trump? Sanders may be a socialist, but his supporters are not nationalists... they do not have a strong desire to cohere an identity based on national strength. They are also anti-authoritarian, and pro-science. If Sanders' economic advisors say that trying to raise taxes to Denmark's level is a bad idea, they will hold him accountable for ignoring them if he decides to raise taxes to that level anyway. If Trump's advisors tell him that protectionism is not a good thing, he will ignore them because his supporters only trust in him and his cult of personality. Does this movement sound like in keeping with American principles, or like an authoritarian movement?