Fascism, American Style
As sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz., Joe Arpaio engaged in blatant racial discrimination. His officers systematically targeted Latinos, often arresting them on spurious charges and at least sometimes beating them up when they questioned those charges. Read the report from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and prepare to be horrified.
Sheriff Arpaio signing autographs at a rally sponsored by the Tea Party in Tempe, Ariz. in 2009.
Jim Wilson / The New York Times
Once Latinos were arrested, bad things happened to them. Many were sent to Tent City, which Arpaio himself proudly called a “concentration camp,” where they lived under brutal conditions, with temperatures inside the tents sometimes rising to 145 degrees.
And when he received court orders to stop these practices, he simply ignored them, which led to his eventual conviction — after decades in office — for contempt of court. But he had friends in high places, indeed in the highest of places. We now know that Donald Trump tried to get the Justice Department to drop the case against Arpaio, a clear case of attempted obstruction of justice. And when that ploy failed, Trump, who had already suggested that Arpaio was “convicted for doing his job,” pardoned him.
By the way, about “doing his job,” it turns out that Arpaio’s officers were too busy rounding up brown-skinned people and investigating President Barack Obama’s birth certificate to do other things, like investigate cases of sexually abused children. Priorities!
Let’s call things by their proper names here. Arpaio is, of course, a white supremacist. But he’s more than that. There’s a word for political regimes that round up members of minority groups and send them to concentration camps, while rejecting the rule of law: What Arpaio brought to Maricopa, and what the president of the United States has just endorsed, was fascism, American style.
So how did we get to this point?
Trump’s motives are easy to understand. For one thing, Arpaio, with his racism and authoritarianism, really is his kind of guy. For another, the pardon is a signal to those who might be tempted to make deals with the special investigator as the Russia probe closes in on the White House: Don’t worry, I’ll protect you.
Finally, standing up for white people who keep brown people down pleases Trump’s base, whom he’s going to need more than ever as the scandals creep closer and the big policy wins he promised keep not happening.
But the Trump base of angry white voters is a distinct minority in the country as a whole. Furthermore, those voters have always been there. Fifteen years ago, writing about the radicalization of the G.O.P., I suggested the hard core of angry voters was around 20 percent of the electorate; that still seems like a reasonable guess.
What makes it possible for someone like Trump to attain power and hold it is the acquiescence of people, both voters and politicians, who aren’t white supremacists, who sort-of kind-of believe in the rule of law, but are willing to go along with racists and lawbreakers if it seems to serve their interests.
There have been endless reports about the low-education white voters who went overwhelmingly for Trump last November. But he wouldn’t have made it over the top without millions of votes from well-educated Republicans who — despite the media’s orgy of false equivalence or worse (emails!) — had no excuse for not realizing what kind of man he was. For whatever reason, be it political tribalism or the desire for lower taxes, they voted for him anyway.
Given the powers we grant to the president, who in some ways is almost like an elected dictator, giving the office to someone likely to abuse that power invites catastrophe. The only real check comes from Congress, which retains the power to impeach; even the potential for impeachment can constrain a bad president. But Republicans control Congress; how many of them besides John McCain have offered full-throated denunciations of the Arpaio pardon?
The answer is, very few. Paul Ryan, the speaker of the House, had a spokesman declare that he “does not agree with this decision” — not exactly a ringing statement. Yet Ryan did better than most of his colleagues, who have said nothing at all.
This bodes ill if, as seems all too likely, the Arpaio pardon is only the beginning: We may well be in the early stages of a constitutional crisis. Does anyone consider it unthinkable that Trump will fire Robert Mueller, and try to shut down investigations into his personal and political links to Russia? Does anyone have confidence that Republicans in Congress will do anything more than express mild disagreement with his actions if he does?
As I said, there’s a word for people who round up members of ethnic minorities and send them to concentration camps, or praise such actions. There’s also a word for people who, out of cowardice or self-interest, go along with such abuses: collaborators. How many such collaborators will there be? I’m afraid we’ll soon find out.
-------------------------------
by Paul Krugman
There may be links in the Original Article that have not been reproduced here.
Tags
Who is online
270 visitors
Let’s call things by their proper names here. Arpaio is, of course, a white supremacist. But he’s more than that. There’s a word for political regimes that round up members of minority groups and send them to concentration camps, while rejecting the rule of law: What Arpaio brought to Maricopa, and what the president of the United States has just endorsed, was fascism, American style.
It's more than time to stop beating around the bush. Good manners must be maintained...and above all the CoC must be respected!
So I will not say that so-and-so is a fascist. Comment removed for skirting the CoC [ph] That is to say, they are fascists.
Mussolini did not establish death camps. But his regime very ordinarily arrested and indefinitely detained anyone whom they disliked. Does that sound like Joe Arpaio? That's because Arpaio is a fascist, very much on the model of Benito Mussolini.
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
Comment removed for skirting the CoC [ph]
"The misdemeanor criminal conviction handed down Monday by District Judge Susan Bolton found that Arpaio knowingly violated a federal judge's order in 2011. At that time, Arpaio was told he could not detain immigrants simply because they lacked legal status."
Seems codes say differently ?
8 U.S. Code § 1325 - Improper entry by alien
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months , or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
237 (a)(1)(B) which says: " Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this Act or any other law of the United States is deportable. "
Keep Detaining Sheriff.
Mussolini did not establish death camps. But his regime very ordinarily arrested and indefinitely detained anyone whom they disliked. Does that sound like Joe Arpaio? That's because Arpaio is a fascist, very much on the model of Benito Mussolini.
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
But his regime very ordinarily arrested and indefinitely detained anyone whom they disliked. Does that sound like Joe Arpaio? That's because Arpaio is a fascist, very much on the model of Benito Mussolini.
So Hollande is a fascist, too. Labour England? Fascist! Not to mention every communist leader, ever.
Great definition of fascism you ginned up.
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
I know endlessly repeating mindless slogans is a staple of left, but do you real think simply repeating unsupported conclusions is an effective debate technique on a discussion forum?
Comment removed for skirting the CoC. [ph]
Is it really within the coc for a seeder or a member making a post to accuse large portions of the NTers membership of being fascists or enabling them. This seems to me to be a slam article designed to accuse all who supported Trump pardoning an 85 year old man of a single misdemeanor offense being a fascist or enabling those who are.
I have named no names. If everyone knows who, on NT, is a defender of fascism, that speaks of those people, not of me.
Defending fascism is due to being either callous and stupid... or fascist.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
What's unsupported about it? The evidence is clear. He intentionally disobeyed a court order. He would have gone to jail if not for Trump running interference.
"But his regime very ordinarily arrested and indefinitely detained anyone whom they disliked."
Was it at least 6 months....which is allowed per U.S. code ?
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
Persisting is intentional.
Persistently FOLLOWING our law is a good thing.
Do you break the laws of this land....INTENTIONALLY.... Like ILLEGALS DO ?
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
The district dipshit wanted the "sanctuary city" style of law enforcement while Sheriff Arpaio went along with what the law actually says. In this instance, I'm with the Sheriff.
In regards to the tent city, I can't remember where I read it but I think he justified it as long as US Soldiers are living in these very same conditions in Afghanistan and Iraq, the inmates can endure it as well. But apparently the easily offended don't like it and are throwing a hissy fit.
If you are enforcing immigration laws along the US / Mexico border, you don't look for Koreans.
Anyone who endorses Arpaio's abuse of his authority is endorsing fascism.
Doing this once may be a foolish error. Persisting is intentional.
Anyone who persists in endorsing Arpaio's abuse of his authority is a fascist.
Does spamming the same comment further the discussion?
Hi, Cerenkov. Thanks for contributing.
"Does spamming the same comment further the discussion? "
Sometimes until reality changes the one answer is the only answer. I've needed to do the same thing.
Sometimes some people will never accept reality no matter how many times they hear it though. That's when ya give it up and move on. By by
Good try but wrong. The correct answer is "no".
Do you life in Phoenix Arizona ? Did you witness this crap for the last 10 years ?
Arpaio was obsessed after awhile here he became a bad joke but cost this country millions and millions of dollars as he almost terrorized anyone who didn't look white enough to be an american in his or his deputies eyes.
When he started he was OK as time when on the power went to his head. He became unreasonable and that's why he was not reelected ! Replaced !
Arpaio's time came and went. He should pay the price for breaking the law like everyone else.
If I disobeyed a judges ruling and then flaunted it how soon ya think trump would pardon my ass ?
Never !
He should have done the same for Arpaio.
Does spamming the same comment further the discussion?
Apparently the guy who likes to SPAM 'MAGA' in every comment thinks so. If there's nothing wrong with that, what's your problem with this?
Again, wrong. The correct answer is "no". Play again!
Sorry, but you didn't answer my question. Here it is again:
If there's nothing wrong with that (Spamming MAGA in every comment), what's your problem with this?
Someone adding MAGA to a post isn't spamming as MAGA is a slogan or signature line, not the whole post. No one is posting MAGA as the sole content of a post and doing it over and over again. There is no legitimate comparison with one adding MAGA to the end of a written post or all of their written posts and seeding an entire whole post repeatedly.
What sort of adult mind would add "MAGA" to the end of a comment? Sixth grader I could see.
The same kind that used to do it in 2008-2009 when it was "Yes, we can!" ?
The best thing about the Times and Krugman spewing this red meat click bait crap is that it motivates conservatives to get out and vote.
Hi, Dean. Thanks for contributing.
" it motivates conservatives to get out and vote. "
Lets see what the childlike, classless, authoritarian style, megalomaniac the republicans just elected to be the most powerful human on the planet does for a while longer before we all jump on the tumperika band wagon shall we.
Would the same delay before acting apply to the never Trump Trump bashers as well?