Chris Hedges, the noted anti-fascist campaigner in the USA, has recently pointed out that fascists are unusually candid. They tell you what they are going to do. The problem is not that they hide their intentions, but that too many people refuse to believe them.
Hedges is right: we are seeing this played out in real time at present, and the march of fascism in the USA and UK is so fast that most people are not noticing it.
Donald Trump's latest presidential order – National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), issued on 25 September – is a case in point. Entitled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence”, this should be seen as the direct equivalent of Stalin's Article 58 of the USSR's Penal Code of his era, and the Nazis' Malicious Practices Act, because, like them, this gives the US authorities sweeping powers to target anyone indiscriminately.
What this memorandum does is codify into official policy the idea that dissent itself can be redefined as terrorism. It says that critics of capitalism, of the Christian right, of US power, or of immigration enforcement can now, in Trump's world, be treated as potential domestic terrorists. What is most important to note is that this is not rhetoric. This is a legal instruction to the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the Treasury and even the IRS (the US equivalent of HM Revenue & Customs) to tackle those deemed as a result to be terrorists, even though they are nothing of the sort.
In plain English, what NSPM-7 requires is draconian:
-
It directs terrorism task forces to investigate not just violent acts, but also the networks, funders, and organisers whose words and ideas might be deemed to encourage what is deemed to be political violence, although it is nothing of the sort.
-
It gives the Attorney General the power to label such groups as “domestic terrorists” if any of their members are implicated in such acts.
-
It tells the Treasury and IRS to hunt down donors, charities, and NGOs whose funds or activities might indirectly support those labelled violent.
-
And it elevates all this to be a national security “priority,” ensuring resources and political will are thrown at the task.
The risks are obvious. Political speech and association are blurred into radicalisation. Civic groups and charities will face suspicion and false accusations when all they are doing is exercising their right to free speech. At the same time, deep-seated financial surveillance will be extended far into civil society, and beyond immediate actors to those who might lend support to them in any way, inclduing by making donations. In effect, all forms of ordinary political opposition are redefined as a security threat in the USA as a result.
This is the DARVO playbook in action. The acronym describes the process of 'Deny, Attack, and Reverse the Victim and Offender'. Trump is denying the legitimacy of his critics. He is attacking them as dangerous. And then he reverses the ordering of the victim and offender by claiming the state itself is under siege from so-called terrorists who are, in reality, his political opponents who, in US law, have a completely legal right to make clear their opposition to what he is doing.
The result is a situation akin to that created in Germany in 1933. The internments in the first concentration camps, in places like Dachau in suburban Munich, started in March 1933, a month after the Reichstag fire. It is no coincidence that this new Presidential order comes less than a month after the murder of Charlie Kirk, which it explicitly uses as an example for action.
Dachau was created to imprison political opponents of the Nazi regime, not Jews, at least in the first instance. The first prisoners were communists and social democrats. Troublesome priests and intellectuals, as well as members of other persecuted groups, such as Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, and those labelled antisocial, then followed. Expect this to start to happen in the USA very soon. As Chris Hedges says, fascists say what they will do, in plain sight, and then do it.
And do not think that this will not happen in the UK. Just look at what is happening now in this country. Reform has already, this week, accused Labour of “inciting violence” against Nigel Farage simply for calling his policies racist, which they are. Again, DARVO is the method being used. Reform is denying the legitimacy of the critique and is attacking it as dangerous, even though it is obviously true. They have then reversed the roles of the victim and the offender, suggesting that Farage is the one under mortal threat, while his opponents are to blame.
The consequence of this narrative is easy to predict. If criticism is treated as violence, as Reform - like Trump - clearly want to do, then silencing critics can be justified as self-defence. What Trump has already written into law, Reform is rehearsing in opposition.
The trajectory is chillingly consistent. First, opponents are stigmatised as dangerous. Then, the state apparatus is mobilised against them. After that, censorship, repression, and criminalisation of dissent are presented as security necessities.
Fascism tells us what it intends to do. NSPM-7 is Trump's warning. Reform's claims about Farage show the same script being tested here. The question is whether we are willing to hear what is being said – and to resist before the logic of authoritarianism becomes the new common sense.
What to do next
We are not powerless in the face of this. But it requires action. We must:
-
Name what is happening. DARVO cannot be allowed to work. When critics are accused of being the aggressors, we must call out the reversal for what it is.
-
Defend dissent. Free speech and the right to criticise those in power are the foundations of democracy. If Reform or any other party tries to shut that down, we must resist it publicly and vocally.
-
Hold MPs to account. That means writing to your MP to demand that they oppose any attempt to redefine dissent as violence, and that they defend civil liberties in the UK.
-
Build awareness. We need to share information about NSPM-7 and Reform's rhetoric. The more people understand the playbook, the less effective it becomes.
Authoritarianism thrives on silence and confusion. The best defence is clarity, solidarity, and the refusal to accept that criticism is violence.
Writing to your MP
If you want to act, here is a suggested text you can copy, paste, and adapt to send to your MP.
Subject: Defending free speech and opposing the criminalisation of dissent
Dear [MP's Name],
I am writing to express my deep concern about the way dissent is being redefined as a threat both in the United States and here in the UK.
Donald Trump's recent National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 has authorised US agencies to treat critics of government policy as potential “domestic terrorists.” At the same time, Reform UK has accused Labour of “inciting violence” against Nigel Farage simply for criticising his policies.
This is a dangerous trend. It follows a familiar pattern: deny the legitimacy of criticism, attack the critic, and reverse the roles of the victim and offender so that those with power are portrayed as the persecuted. If this logic takes hold, democratic opposition itself is turned into a security risk, and silencing critics becomes an act of “defence.”
In that case, might I urge you to:
-
Publicly affirm that criticism and dissent are fundamental democratic rights, not threats to security.
-
Oppose any attempt by political parties to equate critique with incitement to violence.
-
Demand clarity and transparency about how UK security and policing bodies assess political risk, to ensure they are not used to stifle lawful opposition.
-
Support civil society, free speech, and the right to protest as essential checks on authoritarianism.
This matters because once the frame shifts, repression becomes normalised. That is why I am asking for your support in defending the principles of open debate, even when you may disagree with the substance of what is said.
I look forward to hearing from you about what you might plan to do in response to this threat to our democracy in the UK, as well as your thoughts on how we should react to the developments in the USA.
Yours sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Address & Postcode]
Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.
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!
“It’s not enough to be able to lie with a straight face; anybody with enough gall to raise on a busted flush can do that. The first way to lie artistically is to tell the truth — but not all of it. The second way involves telling the truth, too, but is harder: Tell the exact truth and maybe all of it…but tell it so unconvincingly that your listener is sure you are lying.”
Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love
Ironically, Labour has kick-started this very process in the UK by proscribing Palestine Action, and then arresting hundreds of harmless protesters against this proscription as terrorist supporters.
Yvette Cooper used classic DARVO tactics to justify this.
Correct
Much to agree with.
ref – writing to yourt MP, those in Runcorn & Helsby could do well to write to their Deform MP Sarah Pochin who was busy manufacturing straw dogs concerning Islamic Sharia courts in the UK: “Sharia law has no place in Britain.”
It is the usual lies and nonsense that Fart-rage’s acolytes spount. Instead of focusing on what the area needs (re-investment in industry) the gormless one does dog-whistle garbage Industrial revivial would put money in people’s pockets, Pochin and her ilk have zero interest in that – & probably lack any sort of mental capacity as well.
So Trump can turn any domestic adversary into a terrorist?
So how an earth can the American people expect this man to uphold elections? I think that the U.S. is well on the way to some sort of civil war – things could turn very nasty indeed.
And Putin will take advantage, for sure – he detects this happening all ready as he plans to re-sovietise the East as the West collapses under its own liberal contradictions.
[…] have already noted their backlash this […]
What I can’t understand is how people can’t see what is happening and has slowly been creeping towards us for many years. Many have criticised the Germans for allowing the Nazi party to develop and rather smugly implying it couldn’t happen here. We study history to give us insight and I thought to ensure that history doesn’t repeat itself. The rise of the Nazis and the second world war have been on school curriculums for many years, but most seem unable to observe the creeping authoritarianism in ours and other countries. The situation in the US is particularly awful and not really being reported for what it is, but the UK is not much better, and whilst we can all see the absurdity of pensioners and disabled people being arrested under terrorism legislation for holding a plackard, it should scare us all that this is possible.
I am glad that there are still people like the person blasting out Things Can Only Get Better whilst Rishi Sunak was announcing the election and Led by Donkeys stunt at Windsor Castle, but our free speech is getting restricted and people risk being arrested for non violent protest.
Not only is it happening here but it is happening in Germany again, too. You would think they would know better.
So…..
In the UK we have ‘organised crime’ groups, mainly but not exclusively trading drugs. Waste Crime also appears to be another big area.
Amongst other things they use violence to protect their activities, which surely is terrorism by another name, involve young people in their activities and disrupt legitimate business through money laundering.
Now if I was looking at the ‘Security of the State’ I would suggest that putting resources into closing these operations and making sure that there are no ‘replacements’ either directly or by offenders moving into other areas.
The silence however is deafening.
Protecting people from swatting, looting, physical violence, etc, is something most support. The other dresses the repression in presentable clothing, then includes ‘civil disorder’ and trespass as supposed terrorism to massively expand any such definition.
Similarly, it reaches for anyone who associates with those declared terrorists, seeking to declare all opposition, including those just voicing disagreement, as guilty by association. The constitution means nothing, apparently.
The progress to the supremacy of what Trump desires and such public repression is happening approximately 10x as fast as the Weimar Republic moved to uphold the Fuhrer’s word as law.
Unless the course is changed, and soon, the concern then has to be that war will then be coming, not in decades to come, but around a year, maybe less. All that now needs is a modest expansion of the attacks on foreign property (such as claimed but unproven narco-terrorist property) in further violation of international war, or some other trigger, the likes of which are becoming more serious and frequent at present.
The last government changed the law to prevent protesters explaining in court why they had been protesting, the police were given more power.
No steer is allowing all English police forces to roll out facial recognition.
An example of what can be done with facial recognition?
I recently met a Chinese person who lives in the UK and had not visited China for over twenty years. On a recent visit to China a family member, who is a member of the Chinese police, demonstrated what information the Chinese state held. Taking a photograph on their mobile, instantly came up the person’s details, where they had lived in China and so on. Shall we say that the person I was speaking to was unnerved.
Theil in the US and in cahoots with no steer/Blair has spoken of the aim to connect all data held by the US and UK governments of its citizens in one place. So that for example the government will know in real time are your taking money out of your account and where you are spending it. Linked through the digital ID app.
The UK population is walking into a nightmare. It’s not apathy that rules. It’s the heart felt sense of hopelessness how do we get a proper voice that can produce action that stops this lurch towards an autocratic fascist state?
Much to agree with
If the proscribing of Palestine Action is not soon struck down in a UK court, then we will have already chosen the road to fascism that you describe.
Agreed
The American independent investigative organisation, the Intercept is worried they may be closed down by lawsuits from the Trump Administration. 38 degrees report cyber attacks.
The last government brought in a bill to prohibit public authorities from supporting the Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions ( against Israel) movement. It failed to pass the Lords.
I don’t know about Double Down news but the trend is clear. I see a battle for control of the news but shutting down alternative voices.
I’ve just read an email from the campaign group Eko (formerly SumofUs) saying they OpenAI is going after them for opposing their rapid transformation from not-for-profit into private company, demanding all their data in connection with the campaign. Eko are objecting to their consumption of tax subsidies, as OpenAI treads the same path as other big tech companies. It seems fair that public subsidy should gain us some concessions rather than the company pulling up the ladder and shutting the trapdoor.
This trend to fascism is already influencing the justice system in the UK. The High Court has refused the Quakers to give evidence in the appeal case against the banning of the Palestine Action pressure group being a “terrorist” organisation. This is trampling on the freedom of expression. civil and religious liberties and criminalising dissent.
Has it?
Utterly unjust.
report here
https://www.quaker.org.uk/news-and-events/news/quakers-denied-intervention-in-court-challenge-over-faith-rights-in-terror-law-case
Come on, rule of law and all that. The Quakers are not a party to the case, so what locus do they have to give evidence?
They support the cause and many members have been charged.
Thank you for using the full term: anti fascist. The crude alternative used by Trump et al (antifa) is designed to hide the truth: that they are fascists and offend against integrity and decency.