Authoritarianism / Fascism
âDonât mention Hitler and youâre sweetâ: The great March for Australia deception
in The AgeAnti-immigration rallies that have drawn out tens of thousands of Australians in capital cities are being secretly controlled by neo-Nazis â part of a co-ordinated âfraud on the publicâ experts say could become even more violent when they march again next month.
An investigation by this masthead can reveal how neo-Nazi leadership is using far-right influencers to sell the March for Australia rallies as a âspontaneousâ groundswell of âeveryday Australiansâ, while they stack crowds with plain clothes Nazis and send key members interstate to headline rallies. Some neo-Nazis have even donned yellow vests to act as official safety marshals in order to bring marches under the groupâs control.
Leaked chatlogs, recordings and insider accounts tell the full story of how the March for Australia rallies grew out of a mysterious TikTok video in early August and descended into a day of chaos and violence across the country on August 31.
And they lay bare the strategy of Australiaâs most prominent neo-Nazi group, the National Socialist Network, as they move to radicalise the right to their dangerous fascist ideology under the cloak of the Australian flag.
Is Trump Winning? Is He Losing?
Actually, the Kimmel story mattered quite a lot â both diagnostically (meaning: as a window into the state of American politics) and politically (in terms of how it is impacting the ongoing struggle). Regardless of its outcome, it pointed to what is one of the key differences between the first Trump administration and his second presidency. While the Trumpists were never defenders of free speech, there was no systematic attempt during Trump I to nullify the First Amendment or use the levers of state power to suppress protest and public dissent. They simply didnât know how to use the government in that way, and they didnât have the people in place who could have systematically used the state machinery as an instrument of repression. This led to a pervasive frustration within MAGA, and it is precisely what animated the big planning operations the Right launched during the Biden era â most infamously Project 2025. In fact, Brendan Carr literally wrote the chapter on the FCC in Project 2025âs policy agenda â in which he envisioned using the agency exactly the way he has since taking over as chairman in January: As an instrument to put pressure on business and media, threatening regulatory action or lawsuits against anyone not sufficiently deferential to Trumpâs will.
The FCCâs attempt to coerce ABC into canceling Jimmy Kimmel was a reminder that the Trumpists intend to use the federal government as a machine that serves only two purposes: To impose Trumpâs will and desire for retribution â and to impose a reactionary societal order against the will of the majority. It was also a demonstration of how an authoritarian transformation of a democratic society tends to work in the twenty-first century. Kimmelâs cancellation sits right at that intersection of open state repression â and pre-emptive self-censorship and complicity by businesses and civil society actors. No need to send the thugs in boots and brown uniforms to rough the place up, or to send the secret police to arrest everyone, if you can also ânudgeâ these institutions to comply by⊠less untidy means.
Neo-Nazis quietly forming a political party to try to get around the law
in The AgeWhile the National Socialist Network might be âdeluded in thinking they can get a Nazi electedâ, researchers at the White Rose Society say âyou just have to look at the way [some] mainstream conservativesâ have latched onto the Shrine booing stunt, to question Welcome to Country ceremonies, âto get a preview of how a Nazi political campaign will be used to push the Overton windowâ, referring to efforts to bring extreme views into the mainstream.
Far from deflating their party launch, researcher Dr Kaz Ross expects the publicity from the stunt will boost it. âTheyâre eating One Nationâs lunch,â she said. âAnd theyâre growing.â
The Influence of Authoritarian Beliefs on Support for Transgender Rights in the UK
In the UK one can barely turn the page of a newspaper without coming across some article written about transgender people. Such articles rarely tend to be transâsupportive. Sensational stories about trans women invading women's spaces, appropriating female âsexâbased rightsâ, and trans women dominating women's sports can be found in print, online, and on television. What is happening in the UK is somewhat paradoxical. On the one hand, the country has strong protections for trans people, but, on the other, hostility toward trans people is becoming more common. We seek to find out why. By using an online survey of UK residents, we found that antiâtransgender views tended to be held most strongly by those people who scored highly on a scale of authoritarianism. What these results mean in a country currently in the grip of an antiâtrans moral panic has yet to be fully determined.
White Nationalism Isnât the Fringe â Itâs the Future Republicans are Building
Senator Eric Schmitt took the stage at the National Conservatism Conference this past weekend and declared that America is âa nation and a people.â With those five words he threw aside the pluralism that has defined this country since before its founding and embraced an ideology rooted in blood and soil, in exclusion and hierarchy. He put it in context:
âThatâs what set Donald Trump apart from the old conservatism and the old liberalism alike: He knows that America is not just an abstract âproposition,â but a nation and a people, with its own distinct history and heritage and interestsâŠ
âWhen they tear down our statues and monuments, mock our history, and insult our traditions, theyâre attacking our future as well as our past. By changing the stories we tell about ourselves, they believe they can build a new Americaâwith the new myths of a new people. But America does not belong to them. It belongs to us.â
Itâs not new to hear Republicans peddling this kind of racialized âus versus themâ rhetoric, but itâs still shocking to see a sitting United States senator parrot phrases that would be more at home in the speeches of European fascists or Confederates in the years leading up to the Civil War than in the halls of Congress.
Well, it's Over
for SubstackIn the days since [Charlie Kirk's] killing, the US right wing has fallen over itself to blame trans people or, as Alex Jones put it to his almost 5 million followers, âthe tranny death cultâ. Similar formulations can be found across social media. Trans people are terrorists, a death cult, like the Taliban, need to be socially ostracised and banned from transitioning. And we all know there is only one type of trans person most of these people are imagining when they call for us to be electroshocked, shunned, and â letâs be real â beaten and killed. And thatâs trans women.
It's over. There and here in the UK. Today I doubt I will see another progressive measure (either in legislation or healthcare policy) put in place for trans people in my lifetime. Who knows what may yet be taken away. In the UK, the terf campaign groups make their goals quite clear: they would like transition banned before the age of 25 and for trans women to be compelled to carry male government ID in all contexts. Once the EHRC guidance banning us from all womenâs groups and spaces across society is in place, they intend to sue organisations and service providers that donât exclude us. Right now, I think itâs best to assume all these things are a likely prospect in the next ten years.
In the community itself thereâs been a definite shift in the way we speak about the future. The middle-class trans micro-economy that boomed in the 2010s: Pride month corporate sponsorship, jobs at LGBT charities, DEI talks and panels, diversity modelling and ad campaigns, progressive theatre, educational books about being trans etc, which some of us used to make a living, has gone. A friend and I used to riff on the old Susan Stryker joke that as a trans woman you must commodify yourself one way or another: itâs either escorting or the diversity and inclusion panel. The friend (a sex worker) always said she found more dignity (and better money) in the former.
Why the Extremists Took Over on the Right
Why is this happening now? The Right itself offers two contradictory answers simultaneously. On the one hand, they are constantly trying to project strength: They want us to believe they represent a vital, virile alternative to anemic liberal democracy â and a cohesive vision far superior to weak, divisive pluralism. Liberal democracy, in this tale, is destined to surrender to the far right. On the other hand, rightwingers are also obsessed with their own weakness. The Trumpist imagination is defined by a sense of besiegement: Powerful enemies everywhere, anti-American forces both from without and from within conspiring to destroy the nation, âreal Americansâ constantly victimized by a society they believe owes them eternal adulation and deference, made to suffer under the yoke of crazy leftist politics.
Relentless self-victimization â a veritable persecution complex â has been a defining feature of modern conservatism since its inception. The heightened version of this type of siege mentality we are seeing now points to something that is diagnostically important: Until very recently at least, the Right was indeed losing the fundamental struggle over what kind of country âAmericaâ should strive to be. The idea of a âcrisis of liberal democracyâ has dominated the political and broader public discourse over the past decade. But in crucial ways, it is the conception of âreal Americaâ as a white Christian patriarchal homeland that has come under enormous pressure. Socially, culturally, and â most importantly, perhaps â demographically, the country has moved away from the rightwing ideal since the middle of the twentieth century. It is not just a figment of the reactionary imagination that America has become less white, less religious, and more pluralistic in basically every dimension. As a result, the conservative hold on power has become tenuous. In a narrow political sense, they may be in charge right now â in the White House, in Congress, at the Supreme Court. But it is not just political power the Right seeks. They desire cultural domination and affirmation. In the cultural sphere, the public square, and across many societal dimensions like the family, the shift in power away from white male conservatives has been more pronounced. The Right has engaged in a comprehensive counter-mobilization in response â a radicalization fueled not by a feeling of strength, but by a sense of weakness.
[âŠ] Clinging to the idea that âThe Right wonât go THAT farâ is futile because they have convinced themselves that their leftist enemies have already gone *much further*.
What Is America, and for Whom?
Someone starting from the assumption that America has been a stable, consolidated democracy for two and a half centuries must struggle to adequately understand the current political conflict: The contortions necessary to explain why so many millions of Americans are now embracing a blatantly authoritarian leader when they had supposedly been fully on board with liberal democracy until quite recently will quickly lead you to strange, unhelpful places. And if you depart from such a premise, you have no chance of developing a proper response to the current crisis either: If there had been a broad consensus around democratic ideals until Trump came down the golden escalator, it would be reasonable to assume that the restoration of the pre-2016 status quo ante might be an adequate solution. But if the rise of Trumpism is a manifestation, rather than the cause, of forces and ideas that have always prevented the nation from living up to the egalitarian aspirations it has often proclaimed, then restoration is not enough. If our existential crisis is the latest iteration of a conflict that has defined the nation since its inception, America needs a truly transformative effort to propel the country closer to the kind of multiracial, pluralistic democracy it never has been yet and finally establish a stable democratic consensus that has so far eluded these United States.