16 Comments

In light of the Durham Report, I'd be interested in what people reading here think about the the ongoing recourse to a 1930s Redux narrative that has prevailed since 2016. A controversial topic for sure, so maybe you'd prefer to pass this time, but I think there are thoughtful and measured comments to be made. Maybe take a look at this article just out in The TransAtlantic for context…

https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history

Expand full comment
author

A thought-provoking article. James Lindsay has made the argument that there is no difference between communism and fascism in the 21st century. The two branches of totalitarianism have essentially fused into communo-fascism. When Marxists and Leftists call people on the Right "fascists," they are projecting their own actions onto others. In the U.S. today, it is the the dominant Leftist culture and the Leftists that are acting most like fascists, i.e., totalitarians. I have it on my list to write about the identifying characteristics of totalitarianism, which is what the Western world is drifting toward today. Much of Asia and many underdeveloped countries are already there.

Expand full comment
Jul 3, 2023Liked by Elizabeth Smoots

The shaping of the tone and tenor of political discourse, as explained by this artcle, is, I believe accurate...and quite sad.

Expand full comment
Jun 1, 2023Liked by Elizabeth Smoots

I like "Democratic Republic" probably because "Republican" has the word Republic in it and therefore the Marxists a.k.a. the Democrats despise it.

Expand full comment
author

The U.S. is classified as a democratic republic. The Republican Party derived its name from this fact.

Expand full comment

Simply total government control as totalitarianism on the left end, minimal government and maximum freedom on the right end (I prefer to define anarchy as the total a lack of order, so I don't put it on the spectrum, which to me is a range of kinds of order). I know that few people want fascism to be the left end, but I do!

And yes, there's no right or wrong-- it's a matter of definition, like 'democracy'. Still, I think in practical terms, some definitions work better than others. Mine isn't perfect, but it's mine so I love it.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for sharing your political spectrum schematic with me. It is worth considering. I derived my circle from Paul Kengor, PhD, professor of political science at Grove City College, PA. In his book "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Communism," he wrote that his political schematic is a circle. He didn't provide the details. So I took his idea and developed a circle schematic. It would be interesting to see what he puts on his circle; I will let you and all of my subscribers know if I find out. Kengor is considered an expert on communism and serves as academic advisor at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. I have read many of his books.

Expand full comment

" Since I consider the political spectrum to be circle instead of a line, I place Marxism at the bottom of the circle alongside fascism. Totalitarianism consists of both communism and fascism—two ideologies that are very much the same."

Serious question. Why not just place communism and fascism at the far left end of a "Left ---Right" line, and, presumably, democracy at the right end?

Expand full comment
author

In my political spectrum circle, I place democratic republic at the top. This is the balance point--the U.S. as it was originally founded. Going to the left involves expanding the government. The left side of the circle goes through welfare state democracy, government-sponsored anarchy and then dictatorship before arriving at totalitarianism (communism and fascism) at the bottom. Going to the right involves limiting government. It goes through libertarianism to anarchy and then dictatorship before arriving at totalitarianism. My circle shows how totalitarianism can result from going too far to the left or to the right. The goal is to be at the balance point at the top.

Expand full comment

I thought you would find this interesting. A new kind of government called "anarcho-tyrannny".

https://chroniclesmagazine.org/view/anarcho-tyranny-u-s-a-7/

I'm fascinated to know where you put it on your circle! Is it where the left meets the right?

Expand full comment
author
Jun 7, 2023·edited Jun 7, 2023Author

Thanks for sharing the article about anarcho-tryanny. It provides many examples of how this is currently happening in the U.S. I believe this is the same as what I have labeled "government-sponsored anarchy" on the left side of my circle. This government-sponsored anarchy gives Leftist elites an excuse to install a dictatorship. When the dictatorship gains total control over people's lives, the result is totalitarianism, at the bottom of my circle.

Expand full comment

Thank you for you reply, I really appreciate it. So I won't argue that it's wrong, although I have an impulse to.

Expand full comment
author

I don't think there's a right or wrong here. After all, no one else has come up with a really accurate depiction, at least that I'm aware of. I'm certainly willing to consider other possibilities. How do you think the political spectrum can most accurately be depicted?

Expand full comment

Excellent piece. If our world were sane, this piece would be in The Atlantic this month, instead of what actually is in The Atlantic this month.

It's interesting that leftists in the UK are starting to use the world 'democracy' to refer to the US system of government -- the US kleptocratic oligarchy-- the same way as the US media uses the term. But of course the Brits cannot say "our" democracy. E.g. this quote from today's Financial Times:

"We’re often told that US politics is in the grip of dark forces fed by political manipulation and Big Tech as misinformation undermines democracy."

WaPo would surely have said "our democracy". But the FT can't, being Brits, though they refer to the same system.

Expand full comment
author

I looked up "kleptocratic" in the dictionary. Merriam-Webster defines it as "government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed." Oligarchy is defined as "a small group of people having control of a country, organization or institution." Both terms would certainly seem to fit the small group of Leftist elites who are currently controlling the federal government with the goal of increasing their own power.

Expand full comment
Jun 4, 2023·edited Jun 4, 2023Liked by Elizabeth Smoots

Yes. The US government IMHO is little more than an organized crime syndicate (the root of 'kleptocracy' meaning 'theft' of course). The word “our” is used by leftists in "our democracy" in the same way as the Italian phrase “our thing” was “Cosa Nostra”.

Expand full comment