In the American tradition of disdain for other political systems, words such as "communist," "socialist," and "fascist" generally are regarded as filthy. Those who would subscribe to any such ideology are Commies, Pinkos, or Nazis, and should and would have an extremely difficult time attempting to win any elected position according to the traditionalist mode of thinking. Americans who subscribe to this belief would be appalled at the prospect of a person of disparate political ideology ever making an impression upon a large group or groups of voters, and the notion that such an anti-American could ever be taken seriously as a presidential candidate is completely unheard of. In an ideal America, that is.
But then, an ideal America would assume that the liberal human rights basis for the Constitution's existence would never be forgotten, nor that the freedoms that the document guarantees would ever be seen as negative, as a problem that needs to be dealt with. In such an America one could assume that the religion and lifestyle of another lawful human being would never become a main focus or issue for those whose lives have brought them to different conclusions. One would not expect that constitutionally protected freedoms could be used as an instrument in a fascist presidential campaign, and taken seriously. In ideal democratic America, people do not expect to flip on their television sets and blatantly be criticized by a presidential candidate for the way they choose to live their lives, to hear the idea that their rights should be preserved called "ridiculous" or "inane." Nor do entire families, communities, and religious organizations plan on being scapegoated by a fascist who has had the fortune to be able to place himself effectively in the media eye as their spokesperson.
Even in a country that has gone beyond the concept of basic ideology, as has this one, its citizens should expect that a person of such fascist, anti-American principles could never be taken seriously by rationally-minded people. We would be perhaps a bit concerned, to put it lightly, if we were to see evidence that even a moderately substantial number of voters were backing a candidate who had once publicly revered Hitler as a great visionary. How quickly we forget, we would say, and we would laugh, because we still were not really worried that a maniac like this could ever become a viable contender for nomination in one of the major political parties.
Then we might see him on television every day, and in the newspapers, whose inherently liberal slant would publish only the candidate's most appalling remarks. Publish them, that is, right next to accounts of his success in the earliest media-touted primaries. So this monstrous person with no real understanding of American principles gets his rhetoric splashed all over the country, and hateful and divisive voters see his candidacy legitimated.
While the rest of us don't know what to make of a man who nauseates us when we see him singing "God Bless America," there is a room full of his like-minded fascist supporters singing right along with him, whooping it up. "Hooray for white separatism, anti-Semitism, nationalism, religious zealotry, divisiveness, isolationism, and our belief in God, who believes the same things!!" they sing, and we have to shake our heads, unsure if we are watching real people. And if they are real, they certainly were not raised in the same country as us, were they? What would possess them to forget the reason that America has become a model on which dozens of other countries have based their own democratic systems? But, we could ask, how great is that model in the first place, when it allows even the remote possibility of an ascension to power of such a small-minded, offensive, twisted, half-blind, poor excuse for a human being?
Surely, this could not be the United States of America that, we were told, embraces the idea of any and all people from any background accepting each other's differences while leading their own lives. Is there an unprecedented amount of lead poisoning in these areas where fascists seem to prevail in our politics?
Or perhaps there is something endearing and lovable about Hitler and Mussolini that I seem to have missed. It appears that they might actually have quite an appeal if either were to return and jump into the contemporary political scene. They could even tout themselves as true Americans, as the best representatives of "common American values," and no one would question if the very idea of a common value system runs counter to the liberal human rights principles that the United States was built upon.
There has always been a few power-starved politicians in every democracy who, lacking the ability, creativity, or understanding to formulate their own platforms and agendas, see a need to find other means of gaining support. As a result, an art form has been created and avidly is practiced by demagogues all over the world. This art of playing on the fears and insecurity of voters can be extremely effective when done with the proper care.
Fortunately for this country, the prospects of such an artist becoming the chief executive are slim. The horrifying prospect lies in the possibility that if that happens, such a person might have no idea what to do, how to go about being president, or even what the duties of the president are. One would expect that these orators would take this into account while they spew inflammatory and baseless rhetoric to anyone who will be able to hear it. Perhaps they feel good about themselves just knowing that, even if they don't win, they're sure making a lot of people feel really bad and hate them. MR