I think you underestimate the fragility of the current world order. I think there is little doubt that capitalism in its current form is plunging deeper and deeper into crisis. I might also point out that the world is already at war in any number of places it is just people think it could never happen in Europe. Living standards continue to decline, social cohesion also continues to decline. It is surely the irony of our time when there is so much coordinated actions necessary, we have chosen to go it alone.
Yes, but the intent to create a racist state still isn't there from the key players. And one of those key players (Britain) is plummetting down the world order due to the greatest example of national self harm since 1945.
Don't get me wrong; I think American democracy will be very, very lucky to survive Trump. His supporters already getting very close to a level of disdain for "liberalism" that they would accept a Trump dictatorship.
The horrendous, spineless Republicans have given him a blank cheque to behave however he wants after the impeachment trial. They have demonstrated that they are willing to dispense with democracy rather than allow Democrats into power to do very slightly different things than they would. Trump is unimpeachable and he knows it; there is no check on his behaviour now. He has delivered retribution against those that testified against him openly (itself illegal) and is now claiming to be the "Chief Law enforcement officer" of the US and is pardoning and reducing the sentences of various supporters who have been imprisoned for corruption, as well as trying to get Roger Stone off.
When DF talks about echoes of Nazism, this kind of creeping authoritarianism is likely what he is talking about. Trump is acting as a dictator. Very rarely does he ever try to put anything past Congress; almost all his (very few pieces of) legislation has been executive orders. Not unusual in itself, but the balance is. His abuse of his powers to confer immunity on those loyal to him is very remiscent if the gangster politics of the early Third Reich, the 1933 part.
The next stage would be to find an excuse to declare some kind of emergency and blame it on political opponents. An early version of this we have already seen with the Biden-Ukraine thing. Can he find an excuse to find certain Democrats guilty of treason or some other such crime?
That's tough. If he targets Black, Asian or Jewish democrats he has a better chance. Find a way to legally discredit some and he discredits all. But he has made the country so polarised that half the population would be unlikely to fall for or support such a move; isolate it to ethnic minority members like AOC and he might win over 60%.
His best bet might be to provoke a mini civil war of political outrage, protest and disobedience by democrat Americans and use that as a reason to call in the national guard and demand special powers. That would be the ideal historical route.
Trump is no mastermind though. He is an inherently stupid and ignorant being, who reacts purely on instinct. This sort of thing would happen not by planning but by opportunism. Whether he has someone behind the scenes smart enough to plan this and get him to gamble on it (Ivanka or Kushner) remains to be seen.
I suspect such a plan would be precipitated if he was expected to lose the election or after, as I suspect he would gamble on a second term first and his team would initiate any takeover only when his final constitutional term is over, as Putin is doing. Trump has been consistently testing the water on breaking the constitutional term limit through his tweets throughout; clearly the idea of staying on indefinitely is one that appeals to him.
He may of course possibly accept his two terms and accept instead a presidential dynasty, pushing Ivanka to the "throne". His supporters are already buying into a cult of personality around this.
If he loses the election it would be fascinating to see what happens. The chances of him accepting a result that goes against him are not great. How deeply ingrained are his loyalists across the government? Not that ingrained. Plenty were willing to testify against him. How right wing and supportive are the armed forces? I'm not convinced that they especially are. The secret services and FBI are certainly not his friends. There is no constitutional mechanism to remove a president who refuses to leave office I don't think as someone like Trump has never been anticipated.
In this country it is both more and less scary. In the USA you have the consolation that the people at the top are not remotely intelligent men and women. At the top of our system you have phenomenally intelligent men and women. Johnson and Cummings are two strategizing politicians at the top of their game, who understand both history and marketing.
They are going to do everything they can to improve the power of the executive, remove the power of the Judiciary and parliament and gerrymander future elections in their favour (voter ID for example).
But while I see plenty of evidence they want to rig the game in their favour and have more central control, I see no similar evidence they want rid of the game altogether.
The most dangerous thing for democracy is when one wing if politics convinced itself that the opposition wing are a danger to their country and will destroy it if they win power. With that belief you can justify any action to keep them out. This is what is happening in the USA on both sides.
It has happened to an extent here. Keeping Corbyn out became a crusade. This is why the election of Starmer is so crucial. Being more moderate, it becomes less of a disaster to Tory MPs and voters it the opposition get in. The need to trash democracy to "save it" is not there. After 15 years in power it could be that some Tory MPs are exhausted and willing to accept a period out of power to reinvigorate and reflect, just as they ceded to Blair in 1997.
The danger comes if Johnson succeeds in selling an ideological economic crusade belonging to Truss, Raab and co.
Anyone interested in this further should read the excellent
Why Democracies Die
