Trump vs Harris: A Choice Between a Fascist and a Neoliberal?

 By David Starr

 

The United States government has had an ideology problem. Going way back, it’s been dominated by the rule of capital. While there have been accomplishments in themselves, there is the current world order that has actually benefitted the few who have too much and not the many who have too little. 

 

The governing parties, Democrats and Republicans, have been both implementing, and imposing, the rule of capital regardless of the bottom-line consequences. Both Democrats and Republicans are ideologically the same, in that they are both capitalist parties. They are like two tendencies of one party. 

 

But both sometimes have had tense relations, disagreeing on tactics but not strategy. Nowadays, the Republicans, far from being the party of Lincoln, are dominated by MAGA politicians. The Democrats, at one time being a New Deal party and strongly supporting workers’ rights, now are mainly corporate/Third Way/ neoliberal Democrats, who seem to play a minor role in support of labor, compared to the accomplishments of the New Deal. 

 

The 2024 U.S. presidential election in November has two contenders who could be called a fascist and a neoliberal. For the former, it’s Donald Trump, and for the latter it’s Kamala Harris. Everyone with common sense knows the character of Trump. He’s full of accusations, gossip and insults, but he hardly mentions the issues that are important to U.S. citizens. He’s also a pathological liar. Harris, who became the Democratic nominee after Joe Biden dropped out due to a declining mental state, has supported progressive policies but now appears to have leaned rightward.

 

Harris has had the endorsement of some conservatives. Former Vice President Dick Cheney is one of them, a war criminal who contributed to lying about the 2003 Iraq War. Cheney, according to Alexandra Tempus in The Progressive, “called out Trump for ‘lies and violence to keep himself in power’” as part of his endorsement of Harris. Hypocrisy is rampant among the right.

 

During the debate between Trump and Harris, Tempus writes, “[Harris] performed Cheney-level sleight of hand, paying lip service to the fact that ‘far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed’ while writing a verbal blank check for war: ‘I will always give Israel the ability to defend itself.’ To add fuel to the fire, Harris amplified debunked claims of weaponized rape during the October 7 Hamas attacks. In her closing statements, she reiterated her intentions again, leaving zero room for doubt: ‘I believe in…ensuring we have the most lethal fighting force in the world.’” Tempus adds, “Is it really any wonder that warmongers [like Cheney] are lining up behind her?”

 

Trump meanwhile used the same tired stereotype of McCarthyite red scare tactics. Tempus quotes Trump: “Her father’s a Marxist professor in economics. And he taught her well.” So, what if Harris’s father is a Marxist? That’s better than being a fascist.

 

In an article published in CounterPunch by Phil Wilson, there is a somewhat direct angle Wilson takes as he writes the following:

 

“The Democratic Party–for those of us paying attention–has become a shadow of the Republican Party, a miniature MAGA image impaled on the adjacent ground if you will. The Democrats now aspire to package and market an incrementally less offensive, but equally lethal brand of MAGA cruelty.”

 

That is in reference to the border crisis. Wilson continues, writing: 

 

“There is, indeed, a terrible crisis on our southern border, but it is not one of national security, but rather a crisis involving our collective soul. Are we a nation of immigrants, or are we a country crumbling and rotting, unable to restrain our racism, intolerance and stinginess? Do both US parties placate the cruel impulses of the worst members of the electorate?” It seems so, the Republicans more than the Democrats. But the latter is not that far behind.

 

But Lauren Gambino, writing in The Guardian, states, “Kamala Harris and Donald Trump offer two starkly different visions for the country with much at stake. For border security, Harris “laid out a plan to enact stricter penalties for people who attempt to claim asylum between lawful ports of entry.” As vice president, Harris was assigned to find out the root causes of migration. This wasn’t taken up too seriously, though, in terms of the root causes, which essentially are violence, poverty and unstable situations in the Global South. To correct this, an overhaul of the current world order would be necessary.

 

Meanwhile, Trump and his ilk blame Harris for the border crisis, calling her the “Border Czar.” Trump in particular accuses Harris, and Biden, of having a porous border, letting in millions who are “criminals and rapists.” Trump of course is lying as the majority of crimes committed in the USA are attributable to U.S. citizens. Millions of “Brown barbarians” are not violating the rights of white U.S. citizens.

 

Trump’s solution to the border crisis sounds fascistic. He would deport 21 million (according to his count) immigrants in, as Gambino writes, “the largest domestic deportation operation in US history.” Trump would use policies from his first regime as president such as “the Remain in Mexico program, Title 42 and a travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority nations.” He would revoke citizenship for people who were born in the USA as children because their parents are undocumented.

 

Trump is thoroughly anti-immigrant towards people of color. Gambino writes, “He echoed Adolf Hitler, saying that immigrants coming to the US were ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’”

 

Regarding other policies that Harris and Trump mentioned:

 

• The economy – 

 

Harris: Agrees with consumers that prices are too high. She wants to implement an “opportunity economy.” Harris has pledged to cut taxes for millions within the working class and for the poor. And she says she will use Biden’s policies, “relying on tariffs and export controls to boost domestic competitiveness with China.” The latter, however, doesn’t utilize cut-throat competition, but rather fraternal competition.

 

Trump: Plans to slash energy costs by expanding oil and gas drilling, and deregulation. This is typical Republican handiwork. He plans to impose significant tariffs and mass deportations, but that could actually raise costs. For taxes, Trump vowed to “extend and expand” tax cuts he imposed in his first term, which are mainly beneficial to the wealthy and corporations.

 

• Abortion – 

 

Harris: Supports bringing back Roe v Wade and champions reproductive rights. “Harris has vowed she would veto any nationwide abortion ban.”

 

Trump: Says abortion should be left up to the states, although there have been consequences for those in red states. Vowed he would not sign a national abortion ban, but didn’t say he would or would not veto a ban.

 

• Democracy – 

 

Harris: Views “Trump as a threat to democracy.” Harris drew a contrast between herself, being a prosecutor, with Trump, who is a convicted felon. She agrees to eliminate the filibuster, which can provide an open path to codifying abortion rights. Harris has been determined to pass federal voting rights legislation, rather than leaving up to the states.

 

Trump: Still can’t admit that he lost the 2020 election, saying it was fraudulent. For 2024, Trump hasn’t promised to respect the results of the presidential election. He would pardon the Jan. 6 rioters at the Capitol Building, thus letting them get away with a failed coup. Seeking only those who would kowtow to his demands, Trump would try to get revenge on his political opponents by having the justice department prosecute them. 

 

While there may be certain differences between Trump and Harris, when it comes down to it, both the Democratic party and the Republican Party will continue to be ideologically the same, overseeing the rule of capital. While it’s still too early what Harris would actually do if elected president, currently she has taken a stance to satisfy both Democrats and Republicans in the name of bi-partisanship; which hasn’t really been an alternative to governing. So, for now, it’s the fascist vs the neoliberal.     

 

           

 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog