Iâm still not sure itâs 100 percent clear that Donald Trump really understands that heâs a neo-fascist. He may not know enough history to be fully aware of the now-undeniable odor of his rhetoric and campaign. He may think a member of a racial minority being beat up and called a ân***râ by his racial-majority supporters at a rally, and his own joking about it, is just a little incident; something for which thereâs no larger historical context. I know he allegedly had the book of Hitlerâs speeches by his bed, but I still think heâs doing most of this on instinct rather than with intellectual intention because I doubt he knows enough about fascism for it to be the latter.
But stop and think about this: I just wrote a paragraph musing on whether the leading candidate for president of the United States from one of our two major parties is knowingly fascist. Weâre at the point where weâre debating whether the Republican Party frontrunner is or is not objectively a fascist.
His admirers would surely take issue with the term, but I should note that itâs not just liberals using it. A Jeb Bush adviser posted a tweet using the word. Erstwhile presidential candidate Jim Gilmore referred to Trumpâs âfascist talk.â
Gilmoreâs willingness to say whatâs what is admirable, but letâs face it: Heâs running 17th in a field of 17. And an aide is an aide, at the end of the dayâand to boot, heâs an aide working for a flailing campaign. Whoâs really going to listen to them?
And that brings us to the question: Who in the Republican Party is going to step up here? Because this is A Moment for the GOP, make no mistake. Itâs a historical moment, and when your leading candidate is joking about his supporters beating people up at rallies and musing about religious ID cards for around (ahem) 6 million of your citizens, itâs time to say something.
Reince Priebus, after the last election, called on his party to be more inclusive. Is this what you had in mind, Reince? How about the other leading candidates? Is this where you want your party to be taken? Karl Rove and others in the professional political classâwill they say anything, if not out of moral principle then at least to try to protect their partyâs candidates from down-ticket disaster?
And most of all, what about the partyâs graybeards and elder statesmen? Looking at you, John McCain. How about a little âStraight Talkâ now, about a man who proposes to come into your state, where there are an estimated 300,000 or so unauthorized immigrants, and break up families because one of themâs illegal and the other is not?
I would suspect that this week weâll start to see a little of this. Marco Rubio might make a statement thatâs very carefully worded, as most of his statements are. Lindsey Graham may have it in him to say something interesting and semi-honest. But for the most part, Iâd suspect that what weâre going to hear will be the rhetorical equivalent of wallpaperâtheyâre going to try to cover up the ugly exposed surface and nothing more.
And why would they do more? If they admit that Trump is a fascist, theyâre calling one-third of their voters fascist. Will they do that? And this predicament raises the interesting question of how one-third of their voters came to admire a neo-fascist and open racist in the first place. Gee, it canât have anything to do with the kind of rhetoric and âharmless jokesâ about the current president and about the 47 percent that Republican leaders have winked at for seven years, can it?
Thereâs precedent for the courageous path, should anyone choose to take it. On Feb. 9, 1950, Joe McCarthy gave his famous speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, charging that communists were working in the State Department. The months that followed were very much like these last five months of the Trump ascendancy, as the official party stood mute in the face of the hysteria created by one of its number.
Then in June, one Republican senator said âenough.â Margaret Chase Smith of Maine was a freshman senator, having taken her husbandâs seat. She took to the Senate floor and gave a 15-minute speech (PDF), which has gone down in history as her âDeclaration of Conscience,â that all of us, starting with leading Republicans, ought to be reading this week. Two choice excerpts:
âAs a Republican, I say to my colleagues on this side of the aisle that the Republican Party faces a challenge today that is not unlike the challenge which it faced back in Lincolnâs day. The Republican Party so successfully met that challenge that it emerged from the Civil War as the champion of a united nationâin addition to being a party which unrelentingly fought loose spending and loose programs.â
âThe Democratic administration has greatly lost the confidence of the American people⌠Yet to displace it with a Republican regime embracing a philosophy that lacks political integrity or intellectual honesty would prove equally disastrous to the nation. The nation sorely needs a Republican victory. But I do not want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of CalumnyâFear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear.â
Six of her Republican colleagues signed with her a statement of principles that began: âWe are Republicans. But we are Americans first.â So thatâs what people can do in the face of extremism, if they want to.
In the end, it doesnât matter how much history Trump knows. All that matters are his words and the ugly actions his words encourage. I donât expect him to know history. But we have a right to expect certain others to. Itâs time for the GOP to choose.