Should we allow questions where we are attempting to apply the term "fascist" to a modern political figure?

Question

Related to Why are we closing questions for being susceptible to opinion on a site about politics? but focused on a broader question raised by it.

We have this question about Donald Trump, which is seeking to apply the term "fascist" to him. The problem is nobody can agree what that means and every given answer actually mentions this

---

Fizz (quoting this paper) - Conclusion: Historically, no. In modern terms, maybe?

Since the 1960s, scholars have debated whether to embrace expansive or restrictive definitions of fascism, where to place it on the traditional “left/right” political spectrum, and how to explain its relationship to other movements, such as socialism, liberalism, and conservatism. Much of the disagreement reflects differences of methodological focus.

Lag - Conclusion: Yes

In Orwell's essay, What is Facism?, he remarked that in normal use the word is "almost entirely meaningless" and "degrade[d] to the level of a swearword".

But there is a "buried meaning" understood by even those people who "recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction": "By 'Fascism' they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class."

Peter - Conclusion: No, but he's headed that way

Fascism is a rather loosely defined term, and is often used to describe regimes that have reached the goal, rather than parties or people that are still in the process of working towards it. Aspiring fascist movements rarely announce their ultimate goals of dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, strong regimentation of society and of the economy.

Ted Wrigley - Conclusion: Kinda, sorta, maybe?

Let's be clear up front that the term 'fascist' is problematic in discussions of this sort. Most people use the term merely as a term of derision for anyone who uses their power in an illegitimate or unpleasant way: e.g., a fascist boss, a fascist cop, a fascist bank. While it is possible to give a reasonably factual definition of the term 'fascism' — at least in the same general sense that we can define terms like 'conservative' or 'liberal' — it is difficult to use the word in public without an assortment of knee-jerk responses from people who only know the pejorative sense.

Michael B - (question asker) Conclusion: No

There's no easy quote, but he has to spend 1/3 of his answer telling us what he thinks Fascism is (and he does a good job of that, citing multiple sources) before attempting an answer.

---

Is this an acceptable type of question?

Answer 1

No, we should not allow this.

When we post questions about the political positions of individual people, then we should do so by asking for actual positions on specific issues. We should not ask whether or not abstract labels apply. Why?

1. Abstract labels almost always include a positive or negative connotation. "Fascist" is a label with an especially negative connotation. Our goal is to inform people, not convince them of our views. So applying labels with strong connotations should be avoided on this website.
2. Abstract labels are interpreted differently by different people. It doesn't tell us as much about the political views of the person as it tells us about the political views of the person applying that label.

More useful questions you could ask instead are:

• What is [politician]'s view about [specific issue]?
• What political actions has [politician] taken in the past regarding [issue]?
• How did [politician] justify their actions/inaction on [issue] in public statements?
• What do polls say about what [demographic] thinks about [politician]? (please make clear that you are not looking for anecdotal answers. "My friend is a [demographic] and he says..." is not a useful answer)
• Does [politician] self-identify as a [Fascist|Communist|Anarchist|Liberal|Conservative|Extremist|Centrist|Whateverist]? (please explicitly ask about direct quotes)

That way you leave the judgment call about whether or not an abstract label applies to them to the reader.

Update: I now decided to delete the question which incited this debate, because:

• All the upvoted answers on this meta-question state that we should not allow this question.
• There are no comments below these answers which speak out against the arguments made in these answers.
• Only one answer says it should stay, and that answer is heavily downvoted and received critical comments.
• Closing the question proved to be inefficient, because it already got closed and reopened by community votes twice.

Answer 2

My problem is broader than this one question. Fascism is ill-defined for our purposes here. I tend to think Jonah Goldberg got it right when he said

In short, “fascist” is a modern word for “heretic,” branding an individual worthy of excommunication from the body politic. The left uses other words—“racist,” “sexist,” “homophobe,” “christianist”—for similar purposes, but these words have less elastic meanings. Fascism, however, is the gift that keeps on giving. George Orwell noted this tendency as early as 1946 in his famous essay “Politics and the English Language”: “The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable.”

If this question is fair game then we should be able to ask if any modern politician is a fascist because, sooner or later, someone will toss out the label as a way to malign an opposing person. Exhibit A is Donald Trump labeling Nancy Pelosi a fascist

“It’s a fascist statement, it’s a disgraceful statement. I call her ‘Nervous Nancy,’ she’s a nervous wreck,” Trump said during a call-in interview on “Fox & Friends.”

I could ask a dozen questions right now about various political figures who have all been called "fascist" by someone.

I suggest we make this the policy going forward:

1. Attempts to apply the word to a current politician are off-topic because the word has no widely accepted definition and is often tossed about as a political slur. For our purposes here, a politician is considered current if they are in office, are running for office, or have been either within the past two years. Questions falling into this category could be closed as opinion based.
2. Discussions about the generic meaning of the word "fascist" is on-topic. It is still a political word. Discussions can mention current usages, but only for context.
3. Discussions about historical fascists (i.e. Benito Mussolini) and their views are on-topic.

Answer 3

The real problem is that there are two radically different definitions of the word:

1. political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2. a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control early instances of army fascism and brutality— J. W. Aldridge

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism

Which makes limits the usefulness of the word. Is it a question of Nationalism or a question of dictatorial power restricting individual rights? People that believe fascism means definition 2 will be greatly offended when definition 1 believers use the word to apply to a politician they like. Failure to share a common set of facts and definitions is the source of many flamewars on the Internet.

IMHO, the word should be avoided as ambiguous. Instead, questions should be asked that have definitive non-opinion based answers using words that have an agreed upon meanings.

Definitions matter: OP should change the title to use a less ambiguous word.

Answer 4

Politics is naturally contentious, and people are naturally going to ask contentious questions. The way to deal with a contentious question is not to delete it — because then we strip the heart out of political discourse — but temper the question and explore it analytically.

The term 'Fascism' is not difficult to define: it's a form of nationalism that takes an ethnic identity as its primary focus, and that seeks to promote the prestige and welfare of that ethnic identity above all others. There is more room for debate around the specific features of fascism — there are a few features that seem to occur in every form of fascism, and others that correlate with it but aren't quite universal — but that kind of variety is natural and unproblematic. The problem with the term is that (post 1930s) no person or group that is factually fascist per the definition is willing to accept the term 'fascist', because doing so would reduce the prestige of their group. When we confront a fascist as a fascist, s'he will always strike back with that juvenile "I'm not a fasicst, you're a fascist" routine that we all know and love so well. But the way to address juvenile behavior like that is to stick to the definition and not take offense.

• It's impossible to tell whether a question like this is asked maliciously or in good faith, at least unless the question-asker does something further to demonstrate bad faith.
• It is an important question, in the sense that it would be useful for people to know the answer, be it 'yes' or 'no'.
• It is something that should be discussed, preferably in a calm and civil manner.

Closing a question of this sort merely because it has a troublesome word does not serve the interests of the site or the interests of the people who read it. We're here to educate, not to officiate, and certainly not to sanitize politics.

Answer 5

The conclusion of the Delete faction seems to be that one must not apply the term “fascist” to a modern political figure. They also have stated reasons to argue in favor of that point.

To me that is an answer to the question "Is X a fascist". An answer that none of the actual 5 answers contradict, and most if not all of them support (albeit coming from various different angles, and thus covering the topic far better than this brief meta discussion does).

And because the Delete faction has an answer to the original question, that's their reason to delete it as rude/abusive? I expect a proper Q/A site to be better than that.

Answer 6

The premise of your question is wrong.

You wrote:

Should we allow questions where we are attempting to apply the term "fascist" to a modern political figure?

and this:

We have this question about Donald Trump, which is seeking to apply the term "fascist" to him.

Both statements miss the point entirely.

Here's the fact:

• A former POTUS (not "we" or any other arbitrary individual), but a former president, characterized another POTUS as a fascist.

My question is based on that fact (with similar allegations from other prominent and influential people to illustrate that President Obama's characterization is not unique).

In the way you framed your question – saying that "we are attempting" to portray somebody in a horrible way – of course I would agree that such questions would be problematic.

But if we cannot ask a question on this site about a POTUS characterizing another POTUS (which is often done to sway public opinion), so that we can attempt to surface facts and truth, then what's the point of this site?