I decided to call Donald Trump a fascist when I was on BBC Radio 5 Live this morning.
That was a conscious, preordained choice.
I did so because, in my opinion, Trump is trying to create either a technocratic autocracy or a white, male, Christian in name only (Chino) theocracy in the USA, which he intends to export through the medium of economic warfare to the rest of the world, destroying liberal democracy in the process.
Although he very clearly could not say it, I got the impression that Nicky Campbell had sympathy with my view. A comment that he made on the inappropriateness of the attacks that Trump has made on countries in the global South made it clear that he does understand that there is a form of economic warfare being conducted by Trump. That is about as good a comment as I could hope for from a BBC presenter.
The question I am asking, though, is whether I was right to go all out with this accusation of Trump being a fascist (which I am sure he is), or whether a softer line would have been appropriate?
Ross Clark of The Spectator could not hide the fact that Trump is not a friend, but then tried to frame what is happening within a conventional understanding of politics and economics, making a ridiculous swipe at Joe Biden when doing so.
A BBC economics correspondent also suggested that there was some economic logic to what Trump was doing, because other countries did impose tariffs on the USA. However, given that the charges being imposed by the USA do not relate to tariffs in other countries, this comment made no sense. Trump's charges are calculated on the basis of trade deficits, not tariff rates.
I have to, therefore, stand back and ask the question as to whether, when I have the opportunity to speak truth to what represents power in this country, should I speak as I think appropriate, as I did on this occasion? If we are, as I think, facing a corporate fascist regime in the USA, with what Trump is doing undoubtedly fitting the technical definition of such a structure, was I right to say this when no one else might do so?
Unfortunately, because of the prior commitment, I did not hear what Adam Bienkov of Byline Times had to say after I left the programme at 9:30, but I hope he reinforced my point.
It is vital that we now present narratives that make it clear just how great the threat that we face is, whilst making it clear that we should not be confused by what Trump is doing, as some who contributed to the programme suggested we should be, because what we are actually facing is a deliberately coordinated assault on democracy and the lifestyles that go with it across the world, to which the rest of the world must react, which was the point I sought to make.
What does anyone else think? Did I get this right or wrong?
You can listen to what I had to say on the Programme by listening to it on BBC Sounds. If it is more convenient, this clip covers what I said:
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Good for you. You can’t beat a bit of early morning name calling. Candidly it’s a pity that you couldn’t expand on the theme of white male Christian-focused theocracy and throw in a ‘deeply neoliberal’ for good measure.
I think Campbell will be having you back.
There are a number of measures of Fascism. When someone ticks enough of the boxes and is far enough along the spectrum, they fit the description.
Fascism varies with the country as ultra-nationalism is a vital component.
Trump’s lawfare against the media, the intimidation and abusive language directed at opponents, the de-funding of Universities, ignoring parts of the Constitution and arrest of people exercising their right to speak-are all Fascist.
Fascist like to represent themselves as defending traditional values – like the Chinos ( where did I hear that term first?) They claim to be the will of “The People”and divert our attention from the reality.
We should not play their game.
Tell me what of the following doesn’t describe of fit Trump: ‘Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, etc …’ (source: Wikipedia).
Answer: everything. So yes, Trump and his acolytes are undoubtedly fascists and so you were right to refer to him as such.
Indeed, it’s worth adding that Lawrence O’Donnell (from the Last Word on MSNBC), has been complaining since before 2016 about the fact that Trump gets away with not being called out for what he is and what he does by the mainstream media in the US (and elsewhere it has to be said). Instead it’s: ‘Oh, it’s only Trump’, or ‘Well Trump would say that wouldn’t he, but he doesn’t mean it.’, and on and on. Or as O’Donnell puts its, and endless stream of excuses for not calling him out for behaviour, comments and beliefs that would be the end of the road for anyone else trying to run for office in the US (or indeed, most other countries).
Attempted rape: Oh, it’s only Trump, what do you expect. Fraud: Oh, it’s only Trump, what do you expect. Talking complete bollocks: Oh, it’s only Trump, what do you expect. Add to that the fawning interviews, from everyone, because, ‘Trump gets so easily upset and we don’t want to upset him do we.’ And on and on it’s gone for years – even now!
Well, the ‘joke’s’ well and truly been shown to be deadly serious now hasn’t it, and it’s too late to do anything about it. So yes, while the BBC et al desperately try to find some moral equivalence (spoiler alert – there isn’t any) as if it’s politics as usual you continue to get stuck in Richard. Someone needs to, not least to make up for all the apologists and spineless fools that have been well and truly taken in by Trump.
Thanks and much to agree with
Trump is an adjudicated rapist. For those of us women of a certain age who have spent a lifetime enduring the eternal destructive rolling fallout from a justice system that is not for purpose regarding sexualised and domestic violence and a media that still largely frames these crimes in a simplifying capitalist winner v loser narrative structure, Trump’s presidency effectively legitimises rising global Femicide. So yes, calling him out as a power abuser or fascist was the correct thing to do and a welcome recall to political sanity . Thank you.
Thanks
It’s easier for me to say this than do it myself, but if you hate what he does, and not him, then the right words will come. If you came across him on that winding road to Jericho, what would you do?
Listen to early comments I made in what I said. I understand what you are saying.
It depends if he were one of the robbers; the Holy Man who walked by on the other side, or the victim.
Many will be his victims and there are many who walk by on the other side. Ivan describes the modern version of them.
Trump fits the first. He should be stopped.
And I know what you are saying. I was a Samaritan (modern version ) for many years.
On the winding road to Jericho there were several chacters.
First of course, the reason for the story, the “expert”(well, he THOUGHT he was an expert) in the “law of Moses” – who seems to be a bit full of himself from Luke’s later comment (“he, wanting to justify himself”).
A traveller (no race or religion specified), who was beaten and robbed by bandits (no race or religion specified) and is urgently in need of first aid.
Bandits (see above), although they are off stage.
A Samaritan traveller (whom the audience of Jesus would identify as a hated alien heretic), who provides compassion, first aid, transport, shelter, food, medicines, and provides an open-ended financial guarantee.
An innkeeper, religion and race unspecified, who provides a competent, commercial service for appropriate financial reward.
Two Jewish religious figures, whom Jesus’ Jewish audience, and his Jewish interlocutor, would identify as figures normally demanding respect (but not necessaily deserving it), who for unspecified reasons, ignore their Torah duty to provide care to a victim, possibly because they prioritised ceremonial cleanliness above compassion (contrary to Torah, Prophets and Wisdom).
I think it is fairly easy to identify the cast list in contemporary terms for this blog. The territory, the bandit territory on the road to Jericho, is clearly the land of neoliberal economics, as practiced in the White House, Westminster, and many other places. We have clearly identifiable victims, neoliberal economics provides those in huge numbers, identifiable violent bandits, religious officials putting their own interests first, and ordinary decent innkeepers trying to earn an honest crust.
The challenge is perhaps identifying the “hated alien heretic” (The Samaritan) whose compassionate generous action shames everyone, including the audience (us) because the audience are inherently prejudiced against him too (he is not one of us). It also ensures the survival of the injured traveller.
If I found Trump lying by the roadside, I’d help him (I hope). But that is NOT his part in this parable. He is the lead robber. The Levite and Priest are also easy to cast – CHINO leaders like John Hagee et al. plus those “high priests of economics” like Reeves, Andrew Bayley and Starmer who practice their failing religious duties according to their own perversion of Torah that serves neither God nor their neighbour because it allows people to die on the highway.
But who is, or might be the “Samaritan” – the alien, heterodox or even heretical hero? The one whom everyone in the audience (even the “expert in the law who asked the question, and won’t have liked the znswer) has to agree HAS been “a good neighbour” (the religious duty required by Torah, from the good Jew).
The audience are ashamed of themselves, possibly even angry with Jesus the storyteller, when they identify him, and go away scratching their heads with all their assumptions about Torah and neighbourliness, challenged. They had fun when Jesus was talking about the Levite and priest, they enjoyed challenging “the religious hypocrites” – but when the hero turns out to be the SAMARITAN – that is a hard one to swallow. That unmakes our world and turns us upside down!
So who IS the Samaritan?
Has he even come on stage yet?
Will our own prejudices let him speak?
Who is “the good guy”?
(In the above, him includes her & he includes she)
PS – I’m not sure of the answer myself but the parable warns me I might find my OWN prejudices challenged when the answer becomes clear.
Thanks Cliff, for making me look at a too familiar story, all over again!
Thanks
Appreciated
Who was that Fliss ? woman at about 8 minutes in?
She seems to be unaware of the international economic context, the reality of dollar defecit recirculation, and economic history.
She seems to be confused on the difference between tariffs and export surplus, and unaware that Trump was doing his usual of just making numbers up.
40% Tariffs from the EU ? Really? Rubbish.
…
Ahh you start on that around 13 minutes in.
Sadly this defecit in understanding and thus lack of anything insightful to contribute is all to common among the mass media commentariat.
🙁
In contrast, one commentator with an interesting and considered view was
Yanis Varoufakis.
Here is the article that he wrote for unHerd:
https://unherd.com/2025/04/will-liberation-day-transform-the-world/
“Yanis Varoufakis: Trump just upended the global financial system”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FisWeqvblvQ&t=15s
He compares Trumps tariff shock to the Nixon Shock of 1971
She is a bbc reporter trying to do unbiased reporting – and it was rubbish.
“and it was rubbish. ”
british understatement?
BBC garbage
I can no longer abide the last remnants of wishy-washy ‘opposition’ to this new breed of far-right demagogues.
They are not afraid to actively use the fascist playbook for their policies. They are not afraid to dismantle democracy before our very eyes.
We’ve seen enough evidence that Trump supporters are gun-toting, racist, anti-knowledge fools willing to vote for and continually support a man convicted of sexual assault and further case of defamation.
So the time is right to call a fascist a fascist and a xenophobe a xenophobe.
He’s a fascist no doubt about it. The BBC and others might pussyfoot around the term but you are right to use it.
Trump’s playing golf in Florida this weekend whilst four members of the US armed forces were being repatriated after dying on a training mission in Lithuania last week. According to reports, their Commander-in-Chief did not attend their repatriation service at Dover Air Force Base in the US yesterday but instead continued with his golfing weekend. By contrast, the Lithuanian President and other leaders, as well as many members of the public, honoured the four dead soldiers as they began their last journey home.
I guess that’s just an example of the difference between normal human beings and a fascist shit.
Agreed
Huge appreciation of your analysis – and of your guts!
I tend to think that the historical definition of fascism is not particularly important. Distinctions of then and now don’t matter all that much. If someone else uses the word or questions you, then you will respond.
By using the word ‘fascist’ you have now communicated that the situation is exceptionally serious. That point needed to be made.
Having done so, my thought is tactical – focus on the issues: democracy, the rule of law, predictability, essential equality of all people, etc.
As a passionate lifelong “antifa”, I believe the term Fascist is correct for the current US government.
A previous commentator mentioned the Wikipedia definition , which quoted historian Ian Kershaw “trying to describe fascism is like trying to nail jelly to the wall”. But reading all through different definitions, and the Oxford Dictionary, I think enough boxes are ticked for that definition to stand. One speaker in that clip rather dismissed your claim of Trump being a fascist because he is not militaristic (but what about annexing Greenland!!?) , but in none of the definitions that I read was militarism an essential element.
I have a friend in academia at Harvard, who is scared witless , enough that fleeing in the future might have to be an option – you do not get that fear from even a very right / left wing democratic government. I think your definition this morning was correct.
Thanks
But where will anyone go?
Where indeed will we go ? This is a time for us all to look out for each other. It is the time Richard to call it what it is and to let people know the severity of what is going on. People don’t know…. I don’t think it is because they don’t care but I think it is all so big and out of control that they think what on earth can I do. I feel like that myself. We live in a fearful world, poor wages, insecure jobs and housing, and the poorer everywhere just keep on getting poorer. I really hope and pray that good wins and we can build a fairer world from all of this because I cant even begin to think of the consequences if evil prevails. I do have hope though …. there are lots of good people….
Any journalist/reporter claiming that any US president is not militaristic needs a change of occupation, toute suite!
Is Trump a fascist? Yes.
Does using that word help get your points across or divert people down the “what is a fascist?” rabbit hole? I don’t know.
What is clear that in such a short segment including lots of voices it is tough to get any detail/subtlety across.
At least you are getting heard; well done.
Thanks
What is the objective? My view is that it is to dissuade Starmer from capitulating to any of Trump’s demands, which would undoubtedly lead to more and more damage to both our economic interests and our global reputation. In pursuit of that objective, the more people who call Trump a fascist the better, as it makes Starmer look bad even for engaging in dialogue with Trump.
We should be siding with Canada as a member of both the Commonwealth and NATO, and not with America. We should be siding with our neighbours in the EU, as our most important trading partners, and not with the man trying to cause economic chaos in Europe. We should remain clearly in support of Ukraine, and avoid American flip-flopping on that issue. We should not be siding with those including Trump who support genocide in Gaza.
For all those reasons and more, the more clearly we call out the definite reality that Trump is a fascist, the better. So thank you Richard for having the courage to do that.
Thanks
If anything, Richard, it was more important to say it today, right after Trump did his most blatantly harmful act to the rest of the world.
Dearie, dearie me – I don’t know how you fucking do it Richard?!
All I was listening to was people wanting to be seen to be clever and looking for any excuse to put a different slant on what Trump is up to. It is more important now for journalism to create its own segmentation of issues and look at difference between them and to attract readership/repeat visits than look to history which is why you assertion – your correct assertion – about fascism was greeted with derision. History does not exist anymore apparently.
The comparison with the other tariff rates cannot stand on its own for two reasons that are obvious to me:
1. The dollar is the world’s reserve currency and the U.S has the world over a barrel no that whatever tariffs are in operation. The world pays for the U.S. deficit, much of which is defence spending. You reduce the dollars in circulation and watch what happens. Now that is truly bloody scary.
2. Why should American business offshore its products to China and then make them more expensive to American consumers? It was American business that voluntarily went abroad to increase the profit margins on its products and investments. Trump seems to think that China stole all that output. Bollocks. It was given to them on a plate in search of ‘efficiency’ by his rich fellow American dudes called ‘corporations’. Trump is so thick he cannot get his head around that, not can his ‘cabinet’ (or, they are just lying).
To go on air and say that Trump is justified in anyway – when America slit its own throat and let the rust belt rot – is just unbelievable.
To suggest that Stymied puts the risk of higher imports before principle is beneath contempt but if you believe in the UK’s pivot away from Europe, you would wouldn’t you. No – we must not go to Europe even if it sensible – it’s a big no-no!!! Bollocks!!
Honestly, stick a fork in the arses of these commentators and turn ’em over – they’re all done.
They’ve done us, that for sure. They’ve done us until we are dumb.
You did well. By the time I’d have finished with them they would not be having me back for sure.
I think I’ll be invited back.
Thanks.
My answer to the question you pose in your blog, Richard, is most definitely yes and I thank you for speaking out as you did. It is urgent to wake up those people like the other speakers in the broadcast to the advance of facism that is before us.
Thanks
Might two current behaviours of the American state, sanctioned to imposed by Mr. Trump, indicate his being placed well towards the fascist pole of a egalitarian – fascist spectrum or continuum?
One is the state treatment of vulnerable people, possibly to frighten/ influence/control others and the other is a disregard/contempt for the rule of law.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2025/03/27/first-they-came-for-the-venezuelans/
An alternative might be to say :
‘some might say his regime is tending toward fascism’- his project 2025 aims to take over the judiciary and the congress , universities, civil service – – so it becomes an authoritarian system – a dictatorship by one man as did Mussolini in the 1920’s.
But would there be time to say that?
I wonder how long before you are shut down and all of us with you….
I presume it will happen
Ask where I have gone when it happens
You are right to call out what Trump is. You are among only a few who are doing so.
And what he is actually doing must be called out to illustrate this, so people understand what fascism means.
Thanks
You are right to a great extent, but I would characterise Trump’s politics as part of process that’s been going on some some years which has been called “creeping fascism” – growing authoritanism and use of state power to crush dissent; increasing attacks on minorities and refugees/immigrants; the neutering of trade unions civil society and the Left; the growth of far-right/fascist politics in a number of countries – US, Europe, India, Israel some South American countries (Argentina and previously Brazil); the trashing of any attempts to save the global environment (which creates an existential threat to humanity and many plant and animal species); growing corruption and nepotism in mainstream politics; the implementation of harsh austerity/monetarist economic policies – which have enriched the wealthiest and increased poverty and inequality (and created a feeling of despair, disempowerment amongst many people). This may not be a fully comprehensive list – there are certainly more.
Trump may currently be the most clear example of creeping fascism heading towards full blow fascism, but he is not the first and probably won’t be the last – its a systemic political shift which is ongoing and intensifying.
My opinion:
1. Trump is undoubtedly a fascist and governments and the people of the world need to cotton on to this pretty sharpish so they can prepare to deal with it accordingly. However, as with all political descriptors, they conjure up and reinforce preconceived images and perceptions embedded within us. This means, in my view, that yes Trump should be referred to as a fascist but only when there is time and opportunity to explain how he meets the criteria, with examples.
2. I’m sure that you already do but I think it also important to consider your audience prior to any debate so no need to go for the jugular every time. Softly softly might be more appropriate and carry more weight depending on the situation/audience/listeners/viewers
Noted
I second this.
Bad actors have been actively working to muddy and ultimately weaken the meaning of words that are needed to accurately describe and criticize them.
Words like ‘fascist’ are seen as red flags that identify ‘leftists’, so anything said in the same breath is toxic because it will be actively ignored even if it otherwise makes sense.
Best to talk to the features of fascism more obliquely imo. Language is being weaponised.
Calling a spade a spade doesn’t work if prior messaging has convinced people a spade is really just a big spoon and spoons are great, actually. It is detrimental to communication to use words that are toxic to the portion of the audience that most need to hear the message.
But why must we censor the truth?
You were absolutely right to call him a fascist, Richard. He is. The commentators who attempt to justify Trump’s actions by “analysing Trump” or by bending the stark, clearly visible facts to soften and obscure the obvious are ostriches.
The chap from The Spectator who said that fascist usually have a military force to support them ignores the facts. Firstly, the U.S. has a massive standing army of some 1.32 million troops. Trump has already fired the Chiefs of Staff and replaced them with yes men, loyal to him rather than the Constitution. He has also declared two states of emergency: one on the Mexican border with 10,000 troops to repel migrants, and another “economic” state of emergency. He stated prior to the election that he would use troops on the streets to quell protests. Secondly, his supporters are mostly gun-toting NRA members who are loyal only to Trump and the Second Amendment. Many of those were rioters on Capitol Hill, and they have now received Presidential pardons. Those two things look, to me, very much like the military backup to a fascist dictator.
Everyone is quite content to admit that “the world has changed”. Yet those who matter – our leaders – are too weak and too frightened to say the obvious next sentence “It is President Trump who has changed it. Therefore, the UK must reluctantly accept that our Foreign Policy, our Defence Policy and our Trade Policy will have to be realigned to meet this change”.
Fat chance.
No Government can effectively respond to sudden global shifts unless it contains agile and flexible minds. This Government does not.
So it’s up to us, I’m afraid, to force our leaders to pay proper attention to the violent and disruptive trajectory of the Trump presidency.
Fascism it is, and fascism it must be called. You were absolutely right to do so.
Thanks
Yes! Trump is a fascist. Good on you for stating what so many must be thinking! You have no need to be diplomatic; no guidelines that Campbell probably has to adhere to.
..:But will you be invited back by the BBC? Does it matter? Not enough people called out Hitler… Sadly, history has a habit of repeating itself.
I think I will be called back.
Unfortunately there are growing numbers who will fit the term fascist. Netanyahu is also one but you would not get away with calling HIM that. Hate speech etc etc.
But he is a fascist
Why so nervous about calling Netanyahu a fascist? In my personal opinion he fits the bill perfectly, and as a defendant in an Israeli court for fraud, and as the subject of an international arrest warrant for alleged war crimes, who depends on convicted criminals to keep his government in power, I’m amazed at the lack of mention of this in our media.
The sooner he is removed from power, the safer diaspora Jews and Israelis will be, as well as Palestinians everywhere.
Have a read of Ha’aretz back numbers, I did a site search on haaretz.com for the word “fascist”. (requires subscription for full articles)
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3A+https%3A%2F%2Fwww.haaretz.com+%22fascist%22&t=fpas&ia=web
I commend them for their courage – they get a lot of stick for telling Israelis things they don’t want to hear.
Even that untrusted loss-making record-breaking (for upheld regulator complaints) UK publication, The Jewish Chronicle, occasionally handles the topic of historical Jewish flirtations with Fascism.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3A+https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thejc.com+%22fascist%22&t=fpas&ia=web
but not the modern expressions of it in the current Israeli government.
(I get my weekly free copy of JC from my local library as an “epress” library loan, it’s useful to know what the JC weekly agenda is, as it keeps me one step ahead of the Labour government’s propaganda machine.)
Thanks
And I am amused
On the question of whether Trump & Co are fascists, see this very disturbing article:
How Nazi Race Science Conquered the White House, and is Coming for Your Democracy https://bylinetimes.com/2025/04/04/how-nazi-race-science-conquered-the-white-house-and-is-coming-for-your-democracy/
Worth reading
Thank you
Thank you Basil Clarke for posting link
Richard, next time you’re doing media, as you press home the ‘fascist’ point, can you also toss in ‘thick as pig shit’ please. We can’t underestimate just how stupid these fascists are. It’s a toxic combo and next level to anything that has gone before. Thank you please.
I think I might ignore that advice.
Boooooooo
Simple answer -YES you were right, and about time too, for the BBC that was a significant step forward.
As for uniforms & militarism, you rightly reminded audience of Jan 6th violent armed insurrection against the Constitution. Trump has armed militias aplenty ready to turn his hate speech into action.
We used to hear of the militias in Iraq. We hear much today about Hezbollah and Hamas. Trump has his private armies too. He called them out on Jan 6th, and people died. They assaulted the Capitol baying for the blood of VP Pence.
At last a chink of sunlight breaking through the media fog.
Trump is leading a fascist administration.
Once we face that fact openly, we can work out how to deal with it, along with our allies (the ones who are NOT subverting our democracy or bullying us) and hopefully protect the most vulnerable in the current toxic “world order”.
Hopefully once we’ve got over that particular truth threshold, we can leave the (important but not primary) semantics behind and move on with practical politics.
As for the “uniform” issue, are they waiting for? Swastika armbands, brown shirts, jackboots and jodphurs? He’s already got a red MAGA cap, orange face paint and a red tie.
Agreed
Yes, Trump is a fascist, in what he says and what he does.
No question that you were right to say what you said and when you said it. Trump is a fascist and the Project 2025 goals he is working to advance are a huge global threat to both democracy and human well-being. The more people that are made to realise this and resist it the better.
Too often the word fascist has been thrown around lazily, to describe anyone who is to the Right of Left, to put it briefly. It rather devalues the term and most people dont understand it. And have certainly not read Eco!
Hence the term needs describing briefly if its going to be used in public and Eco’s ur fascism is a good start, though others are available. A quick run through of his criteria explains what fascism looks like and why Trump’s mob at least partially fits that definition, though Orban and Modi are better fits
Personally I think it is more of a mobster run oligarchy, using simple fear and greed to grab and hold power. There is no real ideology and as we have seen, it is chaotic rather than disciplined.
I think you are ignoring the Vance / Thiel wing of this. But, let’s see.
If the goal of the apparent chaos were to improve the US economy and domestic wellbeing, then it might rightfully be regarded be undisciplined and stupid, but if the goal of seeding that chaos were part of an organised strategy to terminate US democracy and institute a patriarchal theocracy or patriarchal technocracy, embodying dark age social values and prejudices, and to execute its realisation based on the strategies and principles articulated in Project 2025, then it strikes me that the choice of an unprincipled, deranged narcissist with a massive cult following, whom the intelligentsia insist on portraying as a mindless clown, to spearhead the process of instituting a state of domestic chaos exploitable for that purpose is not stupid at all and that the orchestration and progress of the programme indicates a very high degree of discipline and management. Time will tell, but I fear very few of us, and even less USA inhabitants, are going to enjoy the tale it tells.