Historian Federico Finchelstein: Trump's "abuse of the law fits an old autocratic pattern"
The Age of Trump wrapped itself in the flag of false patriotism while simultaneously destroying America's sacred civic myths about its national greatness and the permanence of its democracy. This paradox has left many, white Americans in particular, dizzy as they are forced to confront the harmful consequences caused by their belief in a country that never existed.
President Ronald Reagan famously talked about a 'new day in America' as he encouraged the American people to shrug off their old cynicism and to embrace a new optimism. So many Americans believed that their country was truly 'a shining city on the hill' and a beacon of democracy and freedom for the world. There is also the common belief in the fundamental decency and goodness of the American people and that such 'universal values' would make the likes of President Trump and other such demagogues an impossibility, as they were judged to be incompatible with the national character and temperament of the American people.
In total, the ascent of the Age of Trump and the authoritarian fake populist MAGA movement has revealed the hollowness of these myths and narratives. So where do the American people go from here as the authoritarian tide continues to rapidly rise in their country?
Federico Finchelstein is a leading expert on fascism, populism and dictatorship and professor of history at the New School for Social Research and Lang College in New York City. He is the author of seven books on fascism, populism, Dirty Wars, the Holocaust and Jewish history in Latin America and Europe. Finchelstein's most recent book is 'The Wannabe Fascists: A Guide to Understanding the Greatest Threat to Democracy.'
In this conversation, Finchelstein explains how Donald Trump and his forces represent what he describes as 'wannabe fascism' and the specific type of danger that such autocrats and aspiring tyrants pose to a failing Western democracy. Finchelstein also reflects on the danger caused by how 'respectable' elites and other mainstream voices in the political class and news media were and continue to normalize Trumpism because they are not (yet) being targeted in the same way as undocumented people and other marginalized communities.
At the end of this conversation, Federico Finchelstein warns that Donald Trump and his forces have moved at a very fast rate to consolidate power, but that their victory is not guaranteed — especially if pro-democracy Americans and their leaders finally decide to commit themselves earnestly instead of being bystanders who are mostly looking away.
How common or distinct is America's experience with democratic backsliding and democracy collapse as compared to other countries?
This belief in exceptionalism is both American and part of a global history. All countries have a myth of their own uniqueness. America's experience with the erosion of democratic beliefs and experiences is quite common at the level of everyday practice. Intolerance, racism and violence have always been part of modern global history, this country included. However, at the federal level, Trumpism represents a change from previous norms and administrations. It is way more disruptive. Extreme forms of populism that are oriented towards fascism are now at the helm of the most powerful country in the world. Trumpism is more anti-democratic than its predecessors, and it also exerts a big influence outside of the United States. Trumpism is toxic for democratic life here in the United States and around the world.
Donald Trump has now been back in power for more than 100 days. Are things as you expected? Better? Worse?
I am not shocked by the extremism of Trumpism. But the Trump administration has failed in many ways, and yet it will keep trying to degrade American democracy as much as it can. A troubling question is, how will Trump and MAGA escalate their attacks on democracy and the rule of law to remain in power? I am very pessimistic in this regard. It is always more dangerous when totalitarians rule in the face of imminent defeat. Trump has clearly not yet achieved that level of power — I emphasize "yet". This explains why Donald Trump and his administration and forces more broadly are not as bold as they could be in terms of advancing Trump's goal of destroying constitutional democracy.
Where are we in the story of the Age of Trump and his return?
We do not have the wisdom of hindsight that future historians will have. My own view, an educated guess of sorts, is that we are in the middle, at least, of Trump's radicalization towards fascism.
The American people were repeatedly warned about the calamity that would befall the United States if Donald Trump were put back in power. Why didn't they listen to the warnings?
Many people do not care about the harm that Trumpism is causing democracy. Many of the Trump followers are hardcore, diehard believers in fascism in its varied forms and the quest for total domination that is fueled by hatred. But many other Trump supporters, a majority of them, are just hoping for a better economic situation. It is dubious that Trump's policies will create that outcome. And of course, those Trump supporters have ignored or otherwise put aside many of the most troubling dimensions of Trumpism, such as racism, nativism, sexism and wanton cruelty.
At some point, the Trump supporters who are not the diehards and de facto cultists will recognize that they voted against their own interests. This is part of the history of fascism and dictatorship. Unfortunately, history shows us that such realizations often come very late in the game after there has been a lot of suffering inflicted on the country.
The centrists, institutionalists and other establishment voices were very wrong about Donald Trump and his MAGA authoritarian populist movement's rise to power. These errors began in 2015, continued in the years to follow, and were fully exposed when so many of these 'respectable voices' continued to claim that there was no way Donald Trump could win in 2024. Per their logic, 'the American people would never do such a thing!' Alas, here we are. What does that dynamic look like in other countries when the so-called respectable voices are so wrong? Are they discredited when the autocrat-authoritarian takes power — and with widespread popular support?
One of the key problems is how Trumpism is enabled by normalization. This represents the opposite of understanding the reality and facts of what is happening. Many scholars and pundits on the center as well as the right and the left denied the fascist dimensions of Trumpism. They kept trying to locate Trump as part of an older continuity and tradition of American presidents and other leaders. Trump is separate from that democratic tradition. These pundits, scholars and other public voices had a range of responses to being so wrong. Some of them recognized their mistake, but just want to move on and not have to explain their error and how they arrived at such incorrect conclusions. Others are telling the American people not to worry that much about Trump because it won't get that bad, and that Trump is not the real problem or danger anyway. The real problem and danger is that liberal democracy itself is flawed. That, too, is not entirely correct.
I have a different perspective. When I was a kid, I lived under a gruesome dictatorship in Argentina. As a historian but also as a citizen, I never forget the key difference between an imperfect democracy and a total dictatorship. It is always fascinating to observe how these normalizing views are presented from a place of privilege and far away from the obvious victims of repression and demonization. If you never interact with the victims, it is harder to notice the change.
Is America now in the grips of authoritarianism? If so, what type? Moreover, why were so many in the news media and political class afraid to use the 'f-word,' i.e., fascism, when it was readily apparent years ago that Donald Trump and his anti-democracy movement fit that definition.
In my own work, I describe the Age of Trump and this version of authoritarian populism as 'wannabe fascism.' Wannabe fascism is an incomplete version of fascism, it is characteristic of those who seek to destroy democracy for short-term personal gain but are not fully committed to the fascist cause. As I explain in my books, the more we know about past fascist attempts to deny the workings of democracy, the more alarming these wannabe fascists appear.
There have been many public discussions of the so-called authoritarian's playbook and how Donald Trump and his agents are following it very closely. What are some specific examples?
Some of them are learned in the ways of fascism, others, like the leader himself, are intuitively antidemocratic, but the effects are the same, namely, the irrational rule of a leader who would like to rule as a king or dictator. The examples are many and they range from deportations for racist/and or other authoritarian ideological reasons, attacks against the press, attempts to destroy the independence of universities, the replacement of legality with manipulations of the law in the name of the leader and the attacks against idea and the practice of anti-racism and in favor of diversity. And last but certainly not least, are the events of Jan. 6 and the larger attempt to usurp democracy.
Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat recently warned that the speed of Donald Trump and his forces' attacks on democracy and civil society is more like a coup than autocratic capture. Do you agree?
My friend and colleague Professor Ben-Ghiat is absolutely right! This is not a gradual process. It is unclear, yet, exactly what type of authoritarian end goals they want or will be able to reach. Do they want a full-on fascist dictatorship? An elected populist autocracy? Traditional tyranny? What is clear is that Donald Trump and his MAGA forces and their allies want to leave constitutional democracy behind.
I don't want to be too strict with path dependency. But was there a moment(s) when Trump's return to power could have been stopped? Or was this democracy crisis and now the rise of naked fascism and authoritarianism more probable than not?
What I focus on is that the architects and visionaries who did the intellectual work never faced justice for their role in the events of Jan. 6 and the larger attempt to nullify the results of the 2020 election. This is a key ingredient of the success of Trumpism. Without the link between history and justice, democracy cannot properly function or expand. The opposite happened, and we can now see the horrible consequences of these mistakes.
The news media and free press are supposed to function as the Fourth Estate and the guardians of democracy. How would you assess the American mainstream news media's performance in that regard?
The mainstream American news media continues to normalize Trumpism when it is labeled or framed as a 'conservative' or 'center-right' movement. Trumpism is radical and revolutionary. We are witnessing a new ultra-right populist phenomenon in the form of Trumpism and MAGA that is close to fascism. The extremism must be emphasized when discussing it so that the American people understand the dire reality that they are facing. The American news media need to put more history and context into their discussions of the Age of Trump and the attacks against democracy. This would also involve interviewing and otherwise featuring more scholars and other real experts.
In your conversations with colleagues in higher education, what is the environment like now, given the Trump administration's attacks?
There is, of course, the desired and planned chilling effect. There are attacks on media and universities, legal firms, judges, and others across civil society and the country's democratic and governing institutions. As I see it, what is even more troubling and deeply concerning is how the American people, the majority, are becoming increasingly numb to the abnormal behavior of Trump and his allies. Expert voices and others who have a trusted platform must continue to sound the alarm to wake the American people up from their complacency about Trumpism and the extreme danger it represents to the nation.
Going beyond language and concepts, what are some practical, day-to-day things that the average American can do to defend democracy and civil society?
It is critically important to be informed and alarmed about the extreme dimensions of Trumpism. In practice, we all need to continue reading independent media accounts of what is going on. We need to defend the independence of institutions and the separation of powers.
I think it is important to oppose anti-democratic attempts by defending key dimensions of democracy and not giving up out of frustration and exasperation. This involves voting but also convincing others to do so. It also involves clearly and peacefully expressing one's own positions in conversations, in the streets and on social networks. History demonstrates that the worst thing we can do vis-à-vis wannabe dictators is being silent and apathic.
What are some books, articles, creative work, films, movies, etc. that you recommend to those Americans who are trying to make sense of Trump's rise to power and the ascendant authoritarianism and fascism in this country?
I would recommend novels such as "It can't happen here' or the recent movie about Trump and his relationship to Roy Cohn. The works of Hannah Arendt on totalitarianism and obedience are essential readings as well, especially her classic book On the Origins of Totalitarianism. I would also recommend the analysis of Nazi language by Viktor Klemperer, 'The Language of the Third Reich.' I also believe that the works of Latin American writers such as Jorge Luis Borges or Roberto Bolaño are of key importance in understanding the logic of fascism. I would recommend movies like the Argentines' 'The Official Story' and 'The Secret in their Eyes' to understand how important it is to know the links between history and legality when confronting propaganda, demonization and violence. I also think the second season of the Star Wars series 'Andor', starring Diego Luna, offers an excellent portrayal of the authoritarian manipulation of the truth through lies and propaganda. It is really well done and quite entertaining as well! The graphic novel "Persepolis" by Marjane Satrapi is also an excellent representation of how the Iranian dictatorship distorts the lives of an entire population. The novel focuses on the life of a young woman who resists in her own way. As different from the United States as all these cases are, there are still troublesome connections. The United States is becoming more and more like those real and fictional contexts where fascism and dictatorship are part of the picture, and a government wants its people to be less diverse and less tolerant of others.
As you see it, what is the most disturbing aspect of Trump's return to power during these first four months?
For fascists, what the leader wants is more legitimacy than legality, because while the former was the result of a cult of heroism and leadership principle, the latter was regarded as artificial and even boring. For example, this meant that everything Hitler wanted was legitimate and beyond the rule of law. This was the rationale for Jan.6 and Trump's arguments that he is above the law and that the courts should not have co-equal power to interfere with his actions as president. These actions take place in the context of lies and propaganda; one helps the other. Fascists, and wannabe fascists, imagine that all actions in defense of the law and democracy are part of a conspiracy against them. Donald Trump and his allies' abuse of the law fits an old autocratic pattern, one that has been given a new life in America.
I hate applying sports analogies to politics, especially given a situation as serious as the Age of Trump. But who is 'winning right now? Trump and his 'team'? Or the other team? (the institutions and democracy, the 'Resistance,' civil society and the norms, etc.)
Donald Trump and his 'team' started very aggressively, but they also made many mistakes. These mistakes include their approach to the economy and the rule of law. The apparent corruption will also not be forgotten by many American citizens. The apparent corruption and using public office to make money embodies the heart of the extremist politics of Trumpism and other forms of extreme populism and wannabe fascism. At this point, it is too soon to conclude how well Trump and his 'team' are playing the 'game.' There is another side to this 'game' that must be included. The other 'team' is those Americans who believe in democratic institutions and if they are going to go on the offense and get involved in the 'game' instead of mostly looking the other way.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
7 minutes ago
- Fox News
Behind the scenes of Trump's 'iconic' McDonald's visit before election victory
Fox Nation is offering a rare glimpse into Donald Trump's pivotal McDonald's visit during the final weeks of his 2024 campaign with a multi-episode installment of "The Art of the Surge." It all starts at a McDonald's drive-thru, where the then-GOP nominee traded a suit for an apron and got to work as a fry cook in Feasterville, Pennsylvania last October. "I've always wanted to work at McDonald's, and I never did," he told workers inside the building. The first episode of the series documents Trump's "first day" on the job from the very beginning, as he requested to work the french fry cooker and learned the process. He walked through, step-by-step, dunking fries into hot oil, shaking the basket, pouring servings into the signature red McDonald's cartons and sprinkling salt over them. It became an iconic moment on the campaign trail as the notorious New York City business magnate-turned-president performed a job many Americans have had at one point in their lives. He even greeted customers wrapped around the building at the drive-thru window. As one family took a Happy Meal from his hands he quipped with a smile, "It's going to be the best you've ever had. It had better be. I made it myself." Customers passed on their messages of encouragement as the high-stakes faceoff with then-vice president and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris was merely two weeks away, with both teams in a mad sprint to the finish line. "Make America great again!" one driver said. Another, shaking hands with Trump, said, "45-47, you've got this, sir." Trump paused, on occasion, to wave at the mass of fans cheering and holding "Trump-Vance" signs nearby. He told WTXF reporter JoAnn Pileggi that the crowd was smiling and upbeat because they wanted hope. Turning back inside the building, he faced the camera at one point and smiled as he noted how much fun he was having. "I could do this all day. I wouldn't mind this job," he said. Trump's efforts were viewed by many as a mockery of a claim his opponent had worked for the fast food chain while in college. At one point, Trump even remarked, "I've now worked for 15 minutes. Fifteen more than Kamala." As his team departed on his personal plane, Trump's deputy director of communications Margo Martin enthused about the day. "That was epic," she said. "Donald Trump working the McDonald's drive-thru – iconic." Trump would go on to defeat Harris in the 2024 election, sweeping all campaign swing states, including Pennsylvania. "The Art of the Surge" follows that journey to the finish line even after the McDonald's stop-in, showing last-minute efforts like podcast visits and his massive Madison Square Garden rally, while also featuring Trump allies like Alina Habba, Tulsi Gabbard, Hulk Hogan and more. To watch the series, subscribe to Fox Nation and begin streaming "The Art of the Surge" today. Fox Nation programs are viewable on-demand and from your mobile device app, but only for Fox Nation subscribers. Go to Fox Nation to start a free trial and watch the extensive library from your favorite Fox Nation personalities.


Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump may win the fight over the tax bill. But Musk is built for the long war.
But while Trump still dominates the short-term politics of the Republican Party, Musk holds a very different kind of power, one that may ultimately outlast Trumpism. He's younger. He's vastly wealthier. And unlike most political rivals, Musk doesn't need a seat in Congress or a friendly Fox News hit to wield influence. He owns the platforms. He runs the systems. And his companies are increasingly intertwined with the United States' future — from space exploration to battlefield communications. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up This feud didn't erupt out of nowhere. Musk had reasons to be angry. First, the 'Big Beautiful Bill' Advertisement This isn't just a policy spat, it's a power struggle. Trump is playing to win the moment. Musk is building for the long haul. Advertisement Let's start with the obvious: Trump tuns 79 next week. Musk turns 54 at the end of June. Trump is focused on one last political chapter. Musk is laying groundwork for the next several decades. That generational difference shapes everything else. Trump's power is political. Musk's is infrastructural. The president can rally public opinion, bend Congress to his will, and weaponize regulatory agencies. But Musk operates on another level — embedding his companies into the very systems the government depends on. SpaceX is now central to NASA and Pentagon operations. Starlink powers military communications in Ukraine and is quietly becoming indispensable for disaster zones and geopolitical hotspots. Even Tesla, for all its recent volatility, helped create the EV market and still shapes infrastructure policy. If Trump wants to punish Musk, he has tools — the SEC, federal contracts, and regulatory pressure. Heck, one Trump ally believes Trump has reason to deport Musk back to his native South Africa. But the irony is that Trump's own administration might need Musk more than Musk needs Trump, particularly in the next moment of crisis. Then there's media. Beyond the powers of the presidency, Trump's strength is performative — rallies, TV hits, the occasional viral clip. Sure, he also has Truth Social, but that is a niche network. Musk, by contrast, owns the algorithm. As the proprietor of the much more mainstream X (formerly Twitter), he doesn't just post. He shapes the feed. He bans journalists, elevates allies, and controls what trends. But their falling-out signals a deeper shift on the American right — a movement once held together by Trump's gravitational pull is now already fragmenting. One can see that just in the fights over the Big Beautiful Bill. Musk represents a rising faction: tech-aligned, anti-woke, post-party, and less interested in governing than in redesigning systems altogether. Advertisement Of course, Musk is no model of discipline. His erratic tweets and ideological zig-zags make him an unreliable political force. But that's precisely what makes him dangerous. He's not a senator. He claims he is not a donor anymore. He's not trying to be president and, well, he is constitutionally ineligible anyway. Instead, he's trying to shape what the presidency needs. Trump still knows how to land a punch. But Musk might is laying claim to the terrain on which the next generation of political power will be fought. So yes, Trump can still win this fight over a tax bill. But Musk is playing a different game. He's not trying to win a news cycle. He's trying to build the operating system for what comes next. James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.


The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Johnson expands size of Intelligence panel to give Stefanik spot
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) is back on the House Intelligence Committee after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) opted to expand the size of the panel — the latest fallout from President Trump's decision to withdraw the New York Republican's nomination to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The House on Friday approved, through unanimous consent, changing the chamber's rules to allow no more than 27 members to sit on the House Intelligence Committee — up from no more than 25 members. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) then appointed Stefanik, who will serve as ranking member, and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) to the panel. The move puts to bed one of the lingering questions following the withdrawal of Stefanik's nomination to serve as UN ambassador in March, a move that shook Washington and underscored the ultra-thin majority Republicans are grappling with in the House. Stefanik had served on the plum Intelligence Committee since 2017 but relinquished her position for the 119th Congress as she prepared to leave the House to serve as UN ambassador. At the beginning of the term, Johnson filled the committee — whose members are up to the discretion of party leadership — leaving no room for Stefanik when she wanted to return. Johnson vowed to place Stefanik back on the committee in April when he announced that she would rejoin the conference's top ranks as Chairwoman of the House Republican Leadership. But it remained unclear if he would increase the number of members on the panel, or look to swap someone out for Stefanik. On Friday he made the decision official, increasing the size of the committee and naming Stefanik as ranking member, serving right below House Intelligence Committee Chair Rick Crawford (R-Ark.). 'I'm proud to continue my work as a senior Member of the House Intelligence Committee, House Armed Services Committee, and the Education and the Workforce Committee to secure results for my constituents in New York's 21st Congressional District and the American people,' Stefanik said in April. 'I look forward to the work ahead in enacting President Trump's historic agenda.' The relationship between Stefanik and Johnson has been tense since the congresswoman decided to remain in the House following her withdrawn nomination for UN ambassador. The New York Times reported in April that Stefanik blamed Johnson for White House's decision not to move forward with her nod, and the pair got in a public spat that month after Johnson suggested he had spoken with her about her interest in running for governor of New York. Stefanik said that was 'not true,' and the two later met. Johnson said the duo had a 'really great meeting.' 'She's like a sister to me, and there was a lot of things being said that weren't true of people about us and what was being said, and we worked that out and I thought it was great,' Johnson said.