The animating concept behind the Trump campaign will be chaos. This is what history shows us fascists do when given the chance to participate in democratic political campaigns: They create chaos. They do it because chaos works to their advantage. They revel in it, because they can see how profoundly chaos unnerves democratic-republicans—everyone, that is, whether liberal or conservative, who believes in the basic idea of a representative government that is built around neutral rules. Fascism exists to pulverize neutral rules.

So they campaign with explicit intention to instill a sense of chaos. And then comes the topper: They have the audacity to insist that the only solution to the chaos—that they themselves have either grossly exaggerated or in some cases created!—is to vote for them: “You see, there is nothing but chaos afoot, and only we can restore order!”

  • CarbonIceDragon
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    To be fair, the parties themselves have changed significantly since then.

    • EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      To be fair, no two-party system is a healthy democracy, and the way our elections are designed it’ll stay that way.

      • thisisawayoflife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Our election system is generally bad. Elections aren’t controlled by the federal government, even for federal elections, they are run by counties (or whatever the locality calls a county - in Louisiana they are parishes) and each county runs their elections differently unless the state steps in and regulates it. Some states have mail in voting, some make you stand in line on election day. Some counties have FPTP voting, others might have STAR or RCV.

        The only way I see things changing at all are two fold: publicly funded elections with no private money at all AND abandoning FPTP voting for a broader method with an added benefit of potentially eliminating primaries. I know parties would complain, but things would be much more democratic.

        • EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          This is entirely correct. The only way to heal the nation is to take steps forward, not relying on an archaic system that ‘works’ and building out something that actually works.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          We won’t get rid of FPTP or gerrymandering so long as we elect our representatives from geographically defines districts. We should empanel state congressional delegations in statewide elections, rather than by districts.

          In a state with 20 congressional seats, any party that wins at least 5% of the vote should have a seat. A party that wins 10% of the vote should have 2 seats.

      • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        America’s founders biggest fear were political factions forming. But when they were concerned the voters were all landowning men, how could people with shared economic interests ever form factions?