> Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.
> Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.
You say people are quick to throw around the term, yet you're equally quick to disregard those who see some very obvious similarities between Trump's style of campaigning and the rise of various fascist leaders.
These clues are not subtle in Trump's case. It's mind boggling to think that people do not see them. It's like watching Blue's Clues with the audience of children yelling "THE CLUE IS RIGHT THERE!" and Steve is completely oblivious for the whole episode. In the end Blue dies because Steve is ignorant. Blue is our Democracy. You are Steve.
For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.
Those on both sides of this debate who seek to silence and ostracise their opponents should rethink that position.
Would you also apply this to Al Gore's complains back in 2000? Why or why not?
You might also be interested in some analyses I found of how these points apply to Trump. Unfortunately some of these links are a few months old so they don't mention some more recent events (the second debate gave us plenty of more material for #3 and #14 and probably others, and the whole thing with the tape and the sexual assault allegations adds fuel to #12):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12175456
http://lithub.com/umberto-eco-on-donald-trump-14-ways-of-loo...
https://warisboring.com/yes-trump-is-a-fascist-heres-the-che...
http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/10/fascism/502841/
(and if I find more within the edit window, I'll add them)