Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Guns N' Roses concerts now have an obligatory part where they hung the giant Donald Trump and beat him up.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
(January 25, 2026 at 4:56 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: Guns N' Roses concerts now have an obligatory part where they hung the giant Donald Trump and beat him up.
Not really. That was a one-off at a Mexico City concert in 2016.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
January 27, 2026 at 2:28 pm (This post was last modified: January 27, 2026 at 3:09 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
I found interesting article in which author claims that it is irrelevant whether trump is personally a fascist or not because thing that matters is how the system he created operates. It is in Polish so I will provide translation:
Quote:There is a remarkable scene in Alex Garland's mediocre film Civil War. During the civil war, captured journalists are being interrogated by one of the combatants. The soldier, played by Jesse Plemons, has just shot one of them. Another reporter tries to calm the situation down and says, “We are Americans.” To this, the soldier, standing in front of a mass grave, points his rifle at him and asks in a nonchalant tone, “But what kind of Americans are you?”
In Garland's world, who is fighting, what they are fighting for, and why they are fighting is secondary. There is no moment when the lights go out and a new regime begins. There is a series of minor events, each of which can still be explained away: “procedure,” “threat,” “mistake,” “self-defense.” At some point, it is too late to back out, and the country descends into fratricidal conflict.
The footage from Minneapolis looks like one of those moments when everything could still be explained away.
The authorities speak the truth
Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old nurse, recorded with his phone the intervention of officers who began to brutally pacify the people on the street. One of the officers used pepper spray on them several times. Pretti tried to shield himself from the spray and help a man who had been knocked down to get up. He was surrounded by several officers and knocked to the ground. One of the officers took his gun out of its holster and moved away from the scuffle. Pretti lay incapacitated on the street. Then another agent pulled out his gun and fired the first shot into his back at very close range. After a moment, another officer joined in. Ten bullets were fired into the body lying on the street. It all took less than a minute.
Renée Good, Pretti's peer and mother of three, was shot dead in the same city a few weeks earlier. Her last words, addressed to her future killer, were, “It's okay, I'm not mad at you.” After firing three shots at close range at the departing car, the agent did not even approach the motionless vehicle. He turned around, muttering, “stupid bitch,” got into his car, and drove away.
In such situations, a familiar set of words usually comes into play: procedures, investigation, inquiry, presumption of innocence. Not this time. Donald Trump and his people presented the only correct interpretation of events. Renée Good became an “internal terrorist” who “deliberately drove into an ICE officer.” Alex Pretti became an ‘assassin’ planning to “massacre officers,” even though he did not even reach for his legally owned weapon.
There was one goal—to define reality before others did.
The authorities first announce their version of events, and then check who dares to question it.
But Orwell didn't write about leftists, did he?
For years, George Orwell functioned in right-wing debate as a bogeyman: a metaphor for censorship, political correctness, and “leftist newspeak.” Meanwhile, Trump himself suggested that one should not believe what one sees on screen. The hero of the right-wing universe thus paraphrased Orwell's diagnosis of power: “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your own eyes and ears.”
So when recordings are “incomplete,” witnesses are “biased,” and reality “requires context,” what is really at stake is the imposition of a narrative. You are to see what the authorities tell you to see. Or else.
Power that operates in this way is no longer based on institutions, but on relationships. What counts is access, recognition, and publicly displayed loyalty. Communications precede decisions, and decisions precede the possibility of opposition. Those who confirm the version of events remain in the loop. Those who question it are immediately excluded. In such a system, procedures become an obstacle and the law a tool used selectively. The most important thing is whether you can read the signal sent from above and adapt to it early enough.
In this logic, ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and Border Patrol agents become more than just a service fighting illegal immigration. The reactions of the administration and its allies have contributed to a narrative in which brutality is not a mistake, but an instrument. Vice President J.D. Vance has publicly stated that agents are protected from legal consequences by immunities. He later emphasized that he was not talking about “absolute” protection, but the message was clear: responsibility is relative if the goals are achieved.
The federal agency is no longer a chaotic group of “corrupt,” poorly trained officers tasked with combating illegal immigration. In practice, it has begun to function as an instrument of systemic violence.
ICE and Border Patrol officers have repeatedly demonstrated a lack of professionalism and morality. But that does not mean that things should be any different. Things are supposed to be the way they are.
These are elements of a spectacle designed to intimidate, paralyze, and set limits on acceptable dissent. To convince people that the truth they have all seen in dozens of recordings is irrelevant. That there are no rules and no one is safe. That anyone who tries to control power, even with a phone in their hand, can be shot in broad daylight in the middle of the street, and the perpetrators will go unpunished.
The camera, which in the liberal imagination was supposed to be a mechanism for controlling power, becomes part of the staging. It does not record abuse, but a signal given to society by the authorities using systemic violence. The recordings are therefore not a problem to be silenced, but material for reflection on whether it is worth rebelling.
Violence must be visible.
What happened in Minneapolis could be described as a series of abuses: mistakes made by officers, overly aggressive intervention, fatal decisions made under pressure. Such a description allows us to believe that the problem can be solved by correcting procedures, training, or replacing personnel. Except that in this story, there is no indication that the system failed.
On the contrary: all elements worked quickly, consistently, and without hesitation. Shots were fired. The narrative was announced. Doubts were invalidated. Trump claims that he is limited only by his own morality. And Gregory Bovino, in an increasingly convincing wannabe-Nazi cosplay, adds that the only victims are the agents.
In this logic, violence is to be visible and unpunished. As in the case of Trump, who never accepted defeat in 2020, called for a coup, and then pardoned nearly 1,600 people who participated in the storming of the Capitol. State institutions do not disappear, but change their role: from arbiters, they become resources.
One that can be used selectively, personally, and on a case-by-case basis—for example, by removing local authorities and services from an investigation.
It is an instrument used not only domestically, but also abroad. Don't like it? Watch out, or you'll end up like Maduro. Don't want to give up part of your country? Time for mafia threats and blackmail.
White Farm
In addition to violence and manipulation, there is another mechanism that has become a hallmark of Donald Trump's second term: turning the country into a family farm. Something that we know in Poland on a local scale has taken on a stereotypically American dimension in the United States.
The New York Times' findings show that Trump and his inner circle have enriched themselves by at least $1.4 billion over the course of a year.
Through licenses, settlements in lawsuits against the media (which are increasingly resorting to self-censorship), cryptocurrencies, technology contracts, and gifts from foreign governments. At the top of the list is a $400 million Boeing 747, a modest gift from Qatar, which the president plans to keep after leaving office.
This is neither a coincidence nor a side effect of vanity. It is a simple message: access to power comes at a price. And the line between what is public and what is private no longer applies, because the president himself defines his interests as matters of state.
A MAGA sign? You can have one too.
The state continues to function, but on a franchise basis. Acquiring a franchise does not guarantee security, but rather a moment of peace. Functions deemed unnecessary, primarily the control of selected entities, are eliminated either directly, by removing specific offices or people, or indirectly, through budget cuts and mass layoffs of civil servants. Profits are private, risks are public, and loyalty is more important than the law.
If any foreign leader wants to be closer to the center of decision-making, for example by becoming a member of the Peace Council, a billion dollars will suffice. And if not, you can always buy a sweatshirt from the collection of Kai Trump, the president's granddaughter, promoted in a photo shoot from the White House gardens.
Institutions are not disappearing, but they are increasingly being stripped of their autonomy, becoming tools of punishment and reward. They are gradually being used against Trump's rivals. And if they are inconvenient, they are simply ignored.
The same mechanism can be seen in this administration's relationship with the media. It is not just a battle for narrative and intimidation with lawsuits. It is a direct restriction of the press's access to places where decisions are made – eliminating undesirable editorial offices, selectively granting accreditation, visas, and passes. Journalists are no longer opponents in the debate, but a logistical obstacle. If they are not there, there are no questions. If there are no questions, there is no problem.
A court without a king
In this system, the media learn when it is better not to ask questions; officials learn when it is better not to sign documents; politicians learn when it is better to pay a visit, pay tribute, or remain silent. What matters is not what is written down, but who belongs to whom.
The decision-making process in Donald Trump's administration often seems senseless. And it probably is in practice, but there is a method to this apparent disorder. Political scientists Stacie E. Goddard and Abraham Newman propose a name for this order: neo-royalism.
It is a system that functions like a court: real power lies in the hands of rival cliques and coteries, and the state becomes an infrastructure serving their interests. In return, it expects one thing: unconditional loyalty. Displayed publicly and on time.
One of the key cliques today are the techno-oligarchs – former beneficiaries of the liberal order who are increasingly distancing themselves from its norms, celebrating “masculine energy” and aversion to control. Discouraged by the Democrats' vision of regulation, they unanimously supported Trump, standing proudly in the front row during his inauguration. The narrative of freedom of speech becomes a convenient alibi for the lack of accountability for the operation of algorithms.
In this arrangement, technology platforms are not neutral intermediaries, but machines for distributing favor and anger. Capital no longer lobbies quietly—it demonstrates its loyalty publicly, knowing that in return it will receive protection and support.
A hollow empire
In such a world, there is no need to destroy the pillars of the rule of law or change the constitution. It is enough to hollow them out. Leave the facade, but take over the center. ICE, public media, courts, regulators, and even weaker states with conflicting interests—all these elements can continue to function as long as they fit into the logic of rewards and punishments. When they refuse, pressure is applied: financial, personal, symbolic. And when that is not enough – violence.
Trump's system of power is a classic court system: based on access to the body of power, personal favor, clique rivalry, and permanent uncertainty.
It is a form much older than fascism, of which Trump is increasingly accused – and that is precisely why it is so effective as his transitional vehicle.
In the late Roman Republic, institutions formally existed: the Senate deliberated, offices functioned, laws were cited. But real decisions were made in the princeps's entourage, in a network of patrons, favorites, and executors. Louis XIV’s Versailles did not abolish the nobility; it locked them in the palace and made them dependent on audiences and small gestures of grace. Post-Soviet autocracies went even further: the state remained on paper, but power was concentrated in a narrow circle of people bound by loyalty, fear, and mutual blackmail.
The question of fascism makes no sense
The president himself, whose physical and mental health is deteriorating rapidly, is secondary here. Donald Trump does not have to be an ideological fascist to create conditions in which fascism becomes possible.
All he has to do is systematically remove restrictions: undermine the independence of institutions, invalidate facts as a point of reference, reward brutality and impunity, and present violence as a necessity. He crosses new boundaries and paves the way for his much more radical entourage and potential successors.
Fascism begins with practices of power that gradually make resistance costly and loyalty a rational strategy for survival. That is why it is so important that violence—whether street violence, police violence, or administrative violence—is not an anomaly or a “system error” here. It is a test of the system. It checks who will submit, who will look away, who will decide that it is none of their business. There is no need for universal consent here. Universal adaptation is enough.
In classic analyses of fascism, one theme recurs: politics ceases to be a dispute over interests and solutions and becomes a struggle for domination. It is no longer about who is right, but who has the power. The law does not disappear, but becomes a tool. The media are not censored directly, but learn for themselves where the line is. The authorities do not declare a state of emergency, but simply begin to act as if one were in force.
Is the mechanism already working?
The court order only helps in this regard. It does not impose ideology, but disciplines behavior. It does not require faith, only loyalty. It does not need mass enthusiasm. Fear, opportunism, and profit and loss calculations are enough. In such a system, fascism does not have to break down doors that are already being opened.
And this is the fundamental difference between the question “is Trump a fascist” and what should really interest us today: can the system he is building function without violence, without an enemy, and without a permanent state of mobilization? If the answer is “no,” the label is meaningless. The mechanism is already in place.
No one will announce it explicitly. Instead, there will be more “incidents,” “procedures,” and decisions that can still be explained separately. Until the time comes.
A government that has to demonstrate its strength, loyalty, and impunity on a daily basis does so not because it is confident, but because it knows how fragile its position is.
Such an order is based on constant tension. It will not break at the moment of a great rebellion, but when more and more people see the logic behind its operation.
If that moment comes too late, the question of labels will lose its meaning. All that will remain is a system that worked according to plan. And people who have learned to live within it.
To me who is outside observer article appears to say it frankly scary without indulging in fear mongering and one line was particularly chilling: [...]The most important thing is whether you can read the signal sent from above and adapt to it early enough.[...] It's near exact copy of the mechanism that Ian Kershaw called "working toward the Fuhrer" which was about adapting and anticipating furher wishes.
Administrator Notice I placed the article in hide tags. No rules violated, just an extremely long post.
Boru
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.
(January 27, 2026 at 2:28 pm)Ivan Denisovich Wrote: (Is Donald Trump a fascist? That question no longer makes sense).
It never made sense, no more than asking whether he or maga was racist made sense. We're going to keep asking it until the heat death of the universe here in the states, though, because the performative uncertainty manufactured by the simple act of adding a question mark allows the fascists and the racists to distance themselves from the responsibility and consequences of their own choices and positions...while simultaneously putting space between our love and tolerance for a great many people in our lives, and what we know to be true about them.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Who doesn't want a picture of a terrorist hanging on the walls in the White House.
Quote:Trump Hung Up A Picture Of Vladimir Putin In The White House
A framed picture of President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin hangs in the White House, a photo taken by Bloomberg photographer Kent Nishimura in the Palm Room on Tuesday shows.
The Palm Room connects the West Wing to the White House residence and primarily serves as a lobby, according to the New York Times.
The eyebrow-raising framed photograph in question hangs above a photo of Trump and one of his grandchildren.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
Trump asked Putin not to bomb Ukrainian civilian infrastructure for a week. If he was president when Osama bin Laden was alive, he would have asked him not to do terrorism for a week.
teachings of the Bible are so muddled and self-contradictory that it was possible for Christians to happily burn heretics alive for five long centuries. It was even possible for the most venerated patriarchs of the Church, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to conclude that heretics should be tortured (Augustine) or killed outright (Aquinas). Martin Luther and John Calvin advocated the wholesale murder of heretics, apostates, Jews, and witches. - Sam Harris, "Letter To A Christian Nation"
(January 30, 2026 at 12:17 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Trump asked Putin not to bomb Ukrainian civilian infrastructure for a week. If he was president when Osama bin Laden was alive, he would have asked him not to do terrorism for a week.
(January 27, 2026 at 2:28 pm)Ivan Denisovich Wrote:
Quote:The mechanism is already in place.
Yeah, I think the mechanism we're seeing has been in place for a while now. Trump is the latest, the most erratic, and the least aesthetically pleasing of its representatives, but this is a difference of degree and not kind. The government serves well-connected rich people, and doesn't mind at all making life harder for everyone else.
This is bipartisan, and has been going on for a long time.
For example, research done at Princeton published 12 years ago shows that the US is not a democracy -- if by "democracy" we mean a government which works for its people.
Quote:Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
And several astute observers have described the kind of oligarchy that's in place.
Quote:similarities to classical totalitarian regimes include using fear,[6] preemptive wars[7] and elite domination.[8]
Powerful people in the US largely opposed Trump's election because they see him as unpredictable, which is a reasonable thing to conclude. The Democrats are much more reliable in the work they do for the banks, the insurance companies, and the corporate giants. But once Trump is gone, and we get someone more normal in office, it'll be back to business as usual.
Meanwhile these corporate masters are squeezing more and more cash out of US citizens who are finding that their quality of life is not improving. The big Internet operators, for example, have discovered that they can make more money by making their service worse, and giving the customer less of what he wants. The kind of capitalism we learn in kindergarten -- where the consumer buys from the company offering the best deal -- no longer holds in many important areas.
Quote:the tech bosses turned on us, relying on our dependency to keep us using the services even as they got worse and worse. The platform bosses did the same to the companies that had flocked to their services to sell stuff to us. Once we were all locked in―businesses and users―the tech companies stripped out all utility, save the bare minimum needed to stave off total collapse.
So Trump is a particularly unpleasant and, for the moment, particularly dangerous product of this environment. But focussing too much on him, as if he's the sole cause of our current fiasco, makes him into a sort of lightning rod, drawing all the ire and blame which in fact should be spread far and wide, and should be maintained at a high pitch whoever the next president turns out to be.
(January 30, 2026 at 8:26 am)Belacqua Wrote: Yeah, I think the mechanism we're seeing has been in place for a while now. Trump is the latest, the most erratic, and the least aesthetically pleasing of its representatives, but this is a difference of degree and not kind. The government serves well-connected rich people, and doesn't mind at all making life harder for everyone else.
This is bipartisan, and has been going on for a long time.
For example, research done at Princeton published 12 years ago shows that the US is not a democracy -- if by "democracy" we mean a government which works for its people.
That's hardly a definition of democracy. I'm not sure if even Scandinavian countries would count as democracies under such definition.
That said US have big problems - all else aside money is speech crap is enough in itself to cause issues and well, news regularly show everyone that USA problems don't end at this.
Quote:Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
That's nothing particularly surprising. Under capitalist economy it is moneyed class that will be in charge whether officially or unofficially. It's hardly an issue unique to US though.
Quote:And several astute observers have described the kind of oligarchy that's in place.
similarities to classical totalitarian regimes include using fear,[6] preemptive wars[7] and elite domination.[8]
This looks like some kindergarten bullshit. Inverted totalitarianism? I get that everyone and his dog want to come up with catchy new term but oligarchy serves well, similarly to illiberal democracy if we want to do a wide sweep or kakistocracy if one wants to be cutting.
Quote:Powerful people in the US largely opposed Trump's election because they see him as unpredictable, which is a reasonable thing to conclude. The Democrats are much more reliable in the work they do for the banks, the insurance companies, and the corporate giants. But once Trump is gone, and we get someone more normal in office, it'll be back to business as usual.
Seems like they did a shitty job of opposing it.
As for democrats, well, looking from outside USA they don't look all that hot. I think I would vote a third party.
The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.
![[Image: Bovino.webp]](https://www.n-tv.de/img/30285096/1769429649/Img_4_3/1200/Bovino.webp)
![[Image: rohm.jpg]](https://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/festjc/rohm.jpg)
