Over the last few quarters I’ve been struggling with whether to engage with folks who try to claim that we are not heading to a violent fascist statist outcome, but instead are headed toward a freedom-oriented capitalistic outcome. I would have been happy to vote for Trump if I thought he actually stood for capitalism and individual rights, but I do not think there is a chance of this.
One problem with trying to engage is that a tactic of the right, as they move toward fascism, is to try to send us all down rabbit holes researching this or that, pooh-poohing and sneering at our concerns about the parallels of 2020s America to 1930s Germany,
I don’t follow TYT that closely, but my impression is that Cenk and Ana have not been fully helpful when it comes to figuring out ways to address and counter the impactful right-wing rhetorical strategies. I seem to recall Ana pooh-poohing Cenk’s use of the word “fascist” when he was discussing Trump before the election. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong). Maybe since then she has improved her approach to the topic. And recently Cenk pooh-poohed Francesca Fiorentini when she brought up the possibility of sending people into “camps”. I don’t say that these matters are not debatable, but that they are topics that merit MUCH more robust and honest discussion.
I’m concerned that I haven’t seen any experts invited onto TYT to speak about the history of fascism and statism, and how we should interpret Trump, Musk, Vance and their move toward some form of statism. Maybe I have just missed them.
So, what do I mean by fascism? A dictionary definition:
“…noun A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
[…]
noun Oppressive, dictatorial control…”
I think that Trump and team are checking off at least some of those boxes.
[cont.]
We could use improved help from Cenk and Ana, including inviting fully expert guests on that could help deal with this. There is a very good expert historian from Yale university who I think would make a good start. https://communications.yale.edu/media/experts/all/timothy-snyder
Timothy Snyder Ph.D.
Richard C. Levin Professor of History
Field [International][Social Sciences/Politics]
Expertise Russia, Trump, Europe, democracy, authoritarianism
Here was a good article from last month that did a better job than usual, I thought, of helping us understand more about right-wing “peakaboo trolling” … trolling which has been slowing down their opposition, while they move toward increasing fascism.
COMMENTARY
Elon Musk’s salute falls flat: Why far-right trolling isn’t working this time around
As Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said to defenders of Musk’s provocation, “People can officially stop listening to you”
I don’t see how Cenk can do that, when they have already stated:
sending migrants to Guantanamo (and they didn’t even qualify that as a migrant who is also a ““terrorist””…); and
sending US citizens to El Salvador prisons.
Yeah, it’s completely illegal, and will probably get bounced by most courts. But now you have the new lawlessness where they demonstrated they will ignore laws. You can say: well, Elon is observing the court order for now… But where is the penalty for breaking the law? On multiple counts?! So this is how the law will work now? You can break a law until a court order is issued? And you won’t get a penalty for having done so, even when it is done on MULTIPLE COUNTS?? “Oh, gee your honor: me, a super plutocrat, had no idea this was illegal and I needed to run my actions by my counsel.” With the counsel he has on retainer, he can’t even make a claim of ignorance!
And does anybody actually believe he won’t ““forget”” to destroy information he has already snapshotted, and won’t then sell it later to the highest bidderS? Mr.Scout’s Honor lying professional gamer?? It’s pretty much a rinse and repeat of the modus operandi of what Stupid Hitler did with classified records (and note he has been busted blabbing sub secrets, though not by a court since the Kangaroo Court didn’t want to have a review of that prior to his being elected…)
Scotty, beam me up. If the Supreme Court won’t be meting out any penalties for violating our laws REPEATEDLY, see my thread on a course of ACTION for exiting this newfound anarchistic interpretation of US law:
That’s a very interesting question. I think many people (myself included) are worried but struggling to know how much to be freaking out right now. Like I definitely want to take these fascistic threats seriously, but I also don’t want to give myself crazy unnecessary anxiety because it’s hard to gauge how truly imminent all these threats are, even if things are clearly headed in the wrong direction. It’s also hard to keep up b/c every damn day it’s something new with Trump/Elon.
Many on the right are blind to the authoritarian direction, or plainly embracing it because it’s their side. That said, some left channels do seem to be a little over the top hysterical lately. Like e.g. I love Kyle Kulinski but if you weren’t following the news super close and just scrolled through his video titles, you’d get the impression that everything is collapsing and the US is on the verge of total dictatorship. And maybe it is, but it’s hard for the average person to gauge. That’s why I love your idea of TYT bringing on experts for further discussion. PLEASE DO THIS TYT! (do they actually read our comments here? lol). Use the click-bait titles (Expert Answers: How Scared Should You REALLY Be About Trump? MUST WATCH) to get the views but then provide real expert analysis.
It seems that C&A are trying to take a more balanced approach now than in years past, in conjunction with reaching out to the right (the strategy of which can be debated). Especially Ana seems to be trying to be more journalistic vs left-wing commentary. Which in general I think is fine/needed, but they sometimes spend too much time trying to differentiate their new approach from the “far” left. Like when e.g. doing a story on some Trump nonsense, they’ll try to be more balanced, but end up spending more time in the video explaining “to be fair to Trump…” than actually calling out whatever the Trump nonsense of the day is. This is one reason why they have lost some subscribers and views (plus the sniping/burning bridges with other left commentators that many TYT viewers watch/like). It’s clear that pre-election Ana misjudged the potential severity of the situation, although to her credit she did correct herself regarding Project 2025, and C&A have had many harsh criticisms of the administration lately. It could be that while trying to forge this something of a new path (while taking a lot of heat from other leftists), C&A swung a little too far the other way and are self correcting a bit (Cenk was an absolute beast of a wrecking ball tonight). I think TYT will weather the storm, and I hope they can lead the charge against any authoritarian developments going forward. We also should remember that TYT isn’t just the main show, it’s the whole network. Many other shows on the network are now further left than C&A and have been sounding the fascist alarm loud and clear.
@ryandejager
Regarding someone (Cenk and Ana) telling me when to be alarmed or panic, I’m a grown-ass woman who doesn’t need to be told how to feel. Unless Cenk and Ana have some Magic 8-Ball that tells them the future, they can leave the condescension at the door. In terms of the whole Fairness Doctrine idea, I want the facts. If the facts include legitimate, opposing ideas directly related to the story, then include those. What I don’t want to hear about is something random the Democrats did that was bad because the Republicans are putting us in a Constitutional fucking crisis, so we should say something bad about them too. That’s bullshit. It’s like reporting: DOGE is illegally firing people, cutting funds and programs, and mining through classified information. And Trump plans to own the Gaza Strip and ethnically cleanse it of Palestinians. But do you remember how Biden was old and tried to stay in Office, and Kamala likes Liz Cheney. Seriously?! It’s like saying other presidents used Guantanamo Bay. Yeah, they did, but the numbers and conditions were vastly different. And how does that make Trump’s plans okay?! I’m sick of hearing one sentence of the fucked up shit Trump is doing, to then be barraged by the evils of the Dems. Plus, it’s important to remember that while they’re condescendingly saying they’ll tell us when to worry and panic, they also said people were stupid to think Trump is a fascist who will use the 2025 playbook. I take Trump and MAGA exceptionally seriously, and I want the News I listen to to do the same while providing experts to back it up. Their opinions have become more meaningless and based on ego and negativity as time goes on. Because of this, I now more often opt to find my News elsewhere, mainly in places that don’t call me names for having intelligent questions or finding facts that differ from their opinions. I’m primarily here for the community (whom I love!), as I pessimistically hope things will change for the better.
So, we have a point of unification, which is: could TYT please invite highly expert people on the show to discuss such matters as defining fascism, diagnosing where we are in the process of declining into it, and some history of resistance efforts and how they did.
I would add that, to the best of my recollection, Ana pooh-poohed the use of the word “fascist” in discussing Trump, before the election, and while everyone makes mistakes and overall she often does an excellent job, she and Cenk are not (IMO) the only voices who should be heard on this. We need further proper subject matter experts in front of us (not just very smart people who have become show hosts) to help us understand what is happening. What is the saying I’m looking at live on TYT right now … “You’re Our Boss”?
We’re not asking for that much here. I’m sure there are some extremely capable folks out there in the ivory tower who are extremely knowledgeable and insightful in this area, and who would be happy to use the platform of proper TYT appearances to help the audience understand a few basics.
Good points dreamr, I hear ya and I don’t disagree. Your criticisms absolutely have merit. I especially agree with you that the ratio of “dems bad” to “republicans bad” in segments has been off. Like for sure call out the failures of the dems leading into this mess, and criticize their impotent response, and C/A’s frustration with the dems never ending losing strategies is valid. But enough, it’s time to move forward and mobilize against the people that have all the power now. It’s also been particularly sad to me to see all the fighting with other left content creators and the bridges burned, sigh.
That said I’ve watched since 2008 and have never interpreted their segments as being intentionally condescending to viewers. Many times in the past they’ve encouraged their audience to get their news from a variety of sources to prevent echo-chambers/biases, and stressed that disagreement is okay. I don’t watch for them to tell me how to feel, I watch as one way of informing myself and enjoy the hosts and their analysis/commentary. C/A’s fighter personalities and passionate delivery style can definitely come across as egotistical sometimes (though we all have our egos, don’t we) and yes in the heat of the moment they can fly off the cuff a bit sometimes or have a foot in the mouth moment. They’ve been online for so long and been attacked/dogpiled so many times I can’t help but wonder what that does to the brain psychologically and it makes their occasional lashing out in a sense seem more understandable. Not saying it’s right, but like if I put myself in their shoes I’m sure I’d have had plenty of bad takes and said shitty things over the years too. I prefer to look at the whole of what their message, accomplishments and direction is vs focus on occasional specific segment screw ups (like Ana vs Cenk on fascism, guantanamo), and I do still believe that their commentary/message/mission is trying drive positive change and be as truthful as possible; not perfect but well intentioned. Maybe they veered a little off-course after the election, but I’m hopeful they’ll find a good place going forward. I’ve kept watching even during all the recent drama, and it does seem that in the last few weeks they have been coming out hitting more heavily against Trump/Elon (Monday Cenk was really on the warpath, yesterday they were both going hard). Which gives me hope. Given their 20+ year history of contributions to the progressive movement I’m more than willing to give some grace and stick it out and see how things go.
It really is a great idea. The challenge is though, how do you bring one these experts and communicate their expertise in a way that’s digestible to online audiences and not boring? They could have a great discussion but if it only gets 11K views the impact is super limited. Maybe some kind of a town hall or something where viewers can actually interact and voice their questions/fears? Really hype it up? This is like where it’s great for us viewers to give ideas, but because most of us don’t work in digital media we don’t understand the reality of the difficulties of the industry. Nevertheless it’s a GREAT idea and I hope it happens!
Hi, it isn’t necessary to worry about doing anything that differently, and the subject matter expert does not have to be interviewed by Cenk or Ana. It could be an interview by one of the other hosts. It should not be a one-time thing and the effort should not necessarily be confined to one single expert. Whoever works.
As already suggested to TYT above, I believe I have heard at least one good interview on the Rachel Maddow Show awhile back with this expert:
While I get what you’re saying, I think of two things. One, it’s a little insulting to assume the audience won’t be able to understand or find interest in experts. Second, measuring the impact on the number of likes is short-sighted. If that is the measure, a Town Hall Meeting will have far less impact. Full disclosure: I find the whole fishing for likes idea off-putting, probably because I’m just an old Gen-Xer.
Fishing for likes - > I stopped listening to all like and subscribe requests on all youtube (which I pay for monthly) shows that I watch. I’ll hit like or subscribe if I feel like it.
Needing a special arrangement to bring on a guest to address the issues: just not needed. Find a solid knowledgeable person such as the one I’ve suggested and get into it. TYT has not attracted an audience of unthinking people. If Ana or others at TYT might have bought into the idea that calling out Trump as a fascist is too cringe and insane and out of bounds and is driving away reasonable people from the discussion, then let’s have the expert respond to that issue head-on and have a proper exchange of ideas with the TYT hosts on this central point.
Musk would not be able to get away with his dismissal of the topic by saying the Hitler stuff is so “tired” if he was not leaning into a culture where it all discussion of fascism has been shouted down and dismissed. This is something that needs to be addressed.
A couple of months ago I was speaking to someone who votes right-wing. When I mentioned that I saw the present US politics as being dangerously reminiscent of 20th century power-grabbing fascist efforts, he quickly and aggressively and condescendingly dismissed the entire reference to fascism as “tired”, as though it’s some left-wing extremist hysterical argument that has no merit and should only be condescended to with a dismissal and a refusal to discuss. The next time I remember hearing this sort of argument was, alarmingly, from Ana’s reaction to something Cenk said (although hopefully I am not mis-remembering this). I think she was just at a point of being very influenced by right-wing folks who (however many good points they may be making to her) were showing her where the boundaries are of what they’re willing to discuss and on what terms, and she mistakenly let that translate into her own position on what’s open for discussion, and what is cringe.
It is not cringe to see excellent multiple clear reasons to question whether the Trump administration is moving into anti-constutional illegal territory, to see that it is thus “statist”, and to question exactly what sort of statism it is. If right-wing rhetoricians have found a way to prevent some not in their camp from raising valid concerns about right wing statism and possible fascism (even with one of their own engaging in honest-to-goodness premediated two Nazi salutes at the Presidential inauguration), then that is a problem and we should be discussing this problem in a calm and sustained way.
At this point this is the way I see it playing out:
There will be civil unrest because they failed to address rising food and housing costs.
They will use a retooled military on people screaming about that -and that will include MAGAs.
Only then, when it is too late, will WORKING CLASS MAGAs get it.
[I am not without hope: I would like to see States seek an exit from the gangster lawlessness of the present admin and a majority of Repubs ignoring court orders and there not being penalties meted out and enforced for having done so. But I have to depend on power players at the State level to take all this seriously and start discussions with neighboring States and even other countries for trade support, and scheduling referendums on proposals for repaired systems of governance…]
Fair, good points and perspectives. I don’t view it as fishing for likes. I view it as spreading an important discussion as effectively as possible, beyond just the core TYT audience, and the reality is (one) part of that is getting views. If we want to maximize the effects of such segments some consideration should be given as to how to help them get attention. But you’re right, no special arrangements are needed and they should just do it and see how things go. That would be awesome. Here’s hoping!
another way to do this might be for us to lobby for one of the other capable hosts, such as Dr. Rashad Richey or John Iadarola, to interview a dictatorship and fasicsm expert such as Tim Snyder (or perhaps they have already done this).
