I think it is important to specifically qualify Trumpism as “postmodern neo-fascism” (kind of like Peterson’s “postmodern neo-Marxism” label for the “woke” left). Fascism was a very serious ideology with leaders who believed in it very unironically. This neo-fascism is not that: it is opportunistic, sophistic, post-truth. Basically it is a free-floating symbolic discourse that can be redefined to mean anything at any time for any reason, as long as it is expedient for advancing the interests of privileged groups. It is not serious at all, and by that very fact it is more serious than a serious fascism could be in this day and age. I don’t think this ideology will go away even if Trump is defeated. The left is going to have to come up with something better which is capable of consistently defeating it. If the right is capable of being serious without being serious, then so should the left. It should reclaim play, fun, enjoyment, instead of only taking the moral stance (even if it does rightly have the moral high ground). These things should not be considered mutually exclusive. The left can out-pomo the right, but I think that means rethinking (or actually fully committing to) some of its most fundamental assumptions, whether that is its orientation towards capitalism and imperialism, or its attitude towards cultural war issues.
Great reflection, thank you. I do think Trump’s (neo-)fascism could get very serious very quickly, allowing it to reactivate some of those harder, unyielding elements from 1930s-style modernist fascism. But yes, as Žižek and others have pointed out, Trump is the postmodernist par excellence. How to counter that is a tricky question, but your comments are a great way into that discussion.
I think it is important to specifically qualify Trumpism as “postmodern neo-fascism” (kind of like Peterson’s “postmodern neo-Marxism” label for the “woke” left). Fascism was a very serious ideology with leaders who believed in it very unironically. This neo-fascism is not that: it is opportunistic, sophistic, post-truth. Basically it is a free-floating symbolic discourse that can be redefined to mean anything at any time for any reason, as long as it is expedient for advancing the interests of privileged groups. It is not serious at all, and by that very fact it is more serious than a serious fascism could be in this day and age. I don’t think this ideology will go away even if Trump is defeated. The left is going to have to come up with something better which is capable of consistently defeating it. If the right is capable of being serious without being serious, then so should the left. It should reclaim play, fun, enjoyment, instead of only taking the moral stance (even if it does rightly have the moral high ground). These things should not be considered mutually exclusive. The left can out-pomo the right, but I think that means rethinking (or actually fully committing to) some of its most fundamental assumptions, whether that is its orientation towards capitalism and imperialism, or its attitude towards cultural war issues.
Great reflection, thank you. I do think Trump’s (neo-)fascism could get very serious very quickly, allowing it to reactivate some of those harder, unyielding elements from 1930s-style modernist fascism. But yes, as Žižek and others have pointed out, Trump is the postmodernist par excellence. How to counter that is a tricky question, but your comments are a great way into that discussion.
Fint, takk for denne og andre gode tekster i valginnspurten. Hilser fra Queens!
Thanks for this, Victor. It’s an excellent overview of the electoral choices facing Americans in this pivotal election
Thanks for your support, Don. Always good to hear from you.