...
Turmp's Anti-Immigrant Bombast

A fascist is one whose lust for money or power is combined with such an intensity of intolerance toward those of other races, parties, classes, religions, cultures, regions, or nations as to make him ruthless in his use of deceit or violence to attain his ends.

Henry A. Wallace – 33rd Vice President of the United States

Fascism is capitalism in decay.

Vladimir Lenin – Socialist Leader

The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism: ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power.

Franklin D. Roosevelt – 40th President of the United States

Fascism will come at the hands of perfectly authentic Americans.

 John T. Flynn – American Journalist


Introduction

Turmp's Anti-Immigrant Bombast

Donald Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast is a fascist threat to the American democratic republic. His strategy is taken straight from the Nazi Playbook. Find an issue that can rile up a large portion of the population making it okay for people to express their hatred for the “other.” The “other” may be anything the leadership says it is.

In Nazi Germany, it was mostly Jews but included groups such as Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally deficient, and communists. Trump is attempting to paint the “other” as the community of immigrants to the United States. His rhetoric vilifies the immigrant in many ways, however, his use of the blood-liable meme is straight out of Mein Kampf and has been used against Jews for two-centuries, yet Trump claims out loud that he never read that book.

Donald Trump’s relentless harangue against immigrants prompts us to scrutinize whether his inflammatory rhetoric is tearing at the seams of our democratic foundations.

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast: Immigrants as “Poison” and “Blood Contamination”

Trump’s accusatory language, branding immigrants as “poison” and suggesting they “contaminate the blood of our country,” evokes unsettling parallels with historical fascist and antisemetic propaganda, urging us to question the implications.

Mass Deportations and Militarization

The audacious promise of executing the “largest domestic deportation effort” with military involvement intensifies concerns about the potential erosion of democratic norms. How does such an aggressive stance align with the principles of a Democratic Republic?

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast: Hitlerian Comparisons and Denials

Despite mounting comparisons to Hitler’s Mein Kampf, Trump vehemently denies any influence. What does one do when facing two opposing conditions, what one says and what one denies in the face of evidence? In Trump’s case, the obvious choice is to believe neither can be the truth. The bombast comes without evidence, while the denial is clearly a lie focusing on self-survival. Can these denials alleviate worries, or does the persistent denial itself raise questions about the sincerity of his democratic commitment?

Dangerous Language and Dehumanization

Trump’s sweeping accusations, labeling immigrants as criminals, mentally ill individuals, and terrorists, not only stoke fear but also echo the dehumanizing tactics employed by historical authoritarians. How does this rhetoric undermine the very essence of democratic values?

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast: Public Reaction and Desensitization

While Trump’s deliberate provocation sparks public outrage, the concern remains—does this strategy risk desensitizing the public to the erosion of democratic principles? Can a populace, habituated to divisive rhetoric, still uphold the tenets of a Democratic Republic?

Beyond Hitler Analogy

Steering clear of direct Hitler comparisons, it is crucial to focus on the broader danger. Trump’s language, reminiscent of authoritarianism, threatens the core principles of equality and the Bill of Rights. How can we address this threat without invoking historical extremes?

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast: Defending Democratic Values

To fortify our democracy, citizens must actively engage in critical discourse, challenging divisive rhetoric. This necessitates promoting education on democratic principles and fostering an environment where diverse perspectives are valued.

Political Accountability

In a thriving democracy, leaders must be held accountable for their words and actions. The electorate plays a crucial role in ensuring that elected officials adhere to democratic principles, fostering transparency and inclusivity.

Building Unity, Not Division: a Foil to Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Bombast:

Trump’s divisive rhetoric heightens societal fractures. Strengthening our democracy requires leaders who prioritize unity over division. Fostering an environment where all citizens feel heard and valued, irrespective of their background is a priority.

Conclusion

As Trump persistently amplifies his anti-immigrant rhetoric, drawing alarming parallels with fascist ideologies, the imperative to safeguard our democracy grows more urgent. The question persists: Is this rhetoric undermining the bedrock principles of our Democratic Republic, and what measures can we take to fortify our democratic values against such divisive onslaughts? It is through collective vigilance, education, and a commitment to unity that we can ensure the enduring strength of our democratic institutions.

One final thought. How is Trumps Bombastic immigration rhetoric different than screaming fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire?

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

Leave a Reply