But this prescription sounds like libertarianism-lite if not neo-liberalism. All you’re doing is parsing historical fascism from feudalism which is useful for definitional purposes, but it doesn’t support the conclusion that entrepreneurial endeavors are the singular solution to prevent feudalism from occurring. Entrepreneurialism has substantial barriers to entry. The brand of feudalism of which you speak will only increase those barriers to entry. The hundreds of thousands of federal workers who have or will lose their jobs aren’t going to be saved by entrepreneurialism. Capitalism as a system isn’t the enemy. Crony-capitalism and mafia style plutocracy is. Whatever means necessary to destroy those forms of capitalism should be employed and should not be denigrated as lesser forms of resistance over entrepreneurialism.
- I am not parsing for definitional purposes. As I demonstrated in the article, fascism and feudalism are distinctly different systems. This difference is essential in crafting an opposition.
- I did not say entrepreneurial endeavors were the only way to prevent feudalism. I said that history has shown that entrepreneurism is the most proven path forward out of feudalism and that we should emphasize that a virtuous model separate from corporate feudalism. If our political system was structured to support entrepreneurism first, there would be far less corporate feudalism.
- Yes there is a barrier to entry. I'm not saying that is the solution for everyone. However, Mark Cuban did offer to provide financial backing to any federal employee who got laid off who wants to start their own business. This is an innovative idea.
Okay, but you fail to address the biggest issue, which is that for decades this exact thing has been systematically attacked and dismantled by the corporate elite (aka the capitalist overlords) so that they can hold a monopoly.
Walmart will build a store, sell AT A LOSS so that they can drive competition out of business, then CLOSE that store and force people to drive 45 minutes to the next closest Walmart.
How do you stop that sort of predatory behavior? With politicians who will regulate it. So then we’re back to voting IS the solution, we just need to actually do it and support real candidates.
I haven’t even got into short selling in the stock market. Capitalism, no matter how much you rich folk love it, will not save us. It is a system designed to inherently put profits over people and resist all regulation.
You’re correct. I think it’s got to be something in the nature of creating a sustainable grey or black market that can operate outside of the market dominated by Musk’s dominion and control. What European leaders are coalescing on now in forging ahead for security and trade without the U.S. is a model. MUSK/Trump may own and control the infrastructure, but not all the wealth.
I just don’t have the faith you have that markets can deliver freedom when there is a tyrannical government that is doing everything it can to consolidate power and subjugate people from participating in a free market if not killing the free market itself. There will be some rudimentary form of a market that the majority will be able to operate in because we’re too vast a country both geographically and demographically for a tyrannical government to control. But they will be able to cripple it notwithstanding by seizing and controlling the very infrastructure that make markets work. I believe that is the goal of DOGE and I’m fairly confident it will succeed in hobbling whatever grey or black market exists outside of the DOGE controlled official marketplace.
Why is repackaged old ideas not acceptable? Does it not matter what the old idea is? It seems that what you propose is an additional fracture of society, instead of promoting collectivism, collaboration, and cooperation
There’s is a significant difference between repackaging and repurposing. Repackaging the same binary idea that didn’t work or wasn’t accepted before is manipulative. Repurposing is part of evolution and what I call “emergent iteration”. This is essential.
For more context, please see my most recent article on the New Enlightenment
Yes, I agree with you, Frank. I was following Justin's thinking and nodding until I got to his solution. Libertarian capitalism is a connected branch to where we are, and in order to be even somewhat just, relies on the goodwill and social pragmatism of those with money. Ultimately that only gets us back where we are now. At its core, democracy and unfettered capitalism cannot exist. Justice, equality, fairness, decency -- all those require a reigning in of power and money.
Thank you for commenting. I would challenge that I offered entrepreneurism as “the solution”. That would violate one of the main points behind all my writing: there is no singular solution to a complex problem. And further, you can’t solve a complex problem with a binary solution. That’s also why I wrote the follow-up piece about a New Enlightenment.
I am open to hear any complexity-based solutions you might offer.
Yes, other than the classical liberal ideas collectively coming out of the Enlightenment, most modern ideologies sound promising when distilled to their essence in a few sentences but quickly fall apart upon the most minimal of application or, worse yet, certain tenets are taken to the extreme. Who can really argue with the premise of limited government until the moment oligarchs and plutocrats use the notion to limit rights and engage in self-dealing? In the end, it has been my experience that ideologies are for small minded people who can’t think on their feet and adapt to changing circumstances. Understanding the classical liberal traditions, which include both conservative and liberal ideas, is the best way to approach life in general which in the end tries to get to the most moral choice in a world of rampant immorality.
And a very helpful pinpointing of the real issue. I myself have lamented how often I hear the word fascism thrown around, and it feels empty and ambiguous. This really names, the true challenge… And way forward… With timely clarity.
The Trump administration operates through a fascist facade masking a corporate oligarchy, creating a modern feudal state fueled by capitalism. It relies on authoritarian strongman tactics, white supremacist rhetoric, and nationalist propaganda to mobilize a loyal base while distracting from the real power structure. Attacks on democratic institutions, scapegoating of minorities, and the normalization of political violence mirror historical fascist movements, fostering a culture of fear and division that serves the ruling elite.
At the core of this system is capitalism, which has concentrated extreme wealth and power into the hands of a small ruling class. Decades of deregulation, corporate consolidation, and tax policies favoring the rich have transformed the economy into one where billionaires function as feudal lords, controlling resources, industry, and even political decision-making. Trump’s policies, from corporate tax cuts to labor suppression, reinforce this structure, ensuring that wealth flows upward while the working class remains economically dependent and politically disenfranchised.
This corporate oligarchy thrives by using fascist aesthetics as a smokescreen, promoting nationalism and cultural resentment to divide the masses. By fueling racial and economic anxieties, it prevents collective action against the true source of inequality: an economic system designed to keep power consolidated at the top. The result is a society where democracy is hollowed out, social mobility is crushed, and economic elites wield unchecked control—a system where capitalism no longer fosters competition but instead entrenches a permanent hierarchy, indistinguishable from feudal rule.
Feudalism did not exist in a void. It existed in pre-modern states, with tithes and proto-bureaucracy, proto-army and the serfs received protection during threats of war. You sound like the same old same old libertarian argument that makes absolutely no sense given the world we live in today dependent upon all sorts of functioning infrastructure such as channels of transportation, highways of communication, the distribution of specialized economic goods from food to shelter to common goods. Your theory appears to promote a certain kind of fantastical counter-hegemonic revolution which is completely unadaptive to the post-modern world. We actually need systems of redistribution of cumulative wealth in order to maintain a functioning infrastructure so we can thrive as entrepreneurs or otherwise. And one more thing… This is not some small redirection of wealth we, the masses, are experiencing. it is a colossal disruption of middle class earnings landing directly in the pockets of a few who have simply benefitted disproportionately from the system we have. Fix the sanctions, redistribute the wealth and provide for a system in which h the vast majority of humans are provided with an environment in which they can be their most production and creative selves. Then… well then…. you can talk to me about an actual counter hegemonic revolution—a new world wide infrastructure which honors all people, all ages, from all walks of life, benefitting from their diverse cultural knowledge and expertises and individual brain power.
I just discovered this feudalism connection earlier today after reading up on Curtis Yarvin a modern day “philosopher” whose ideologies JD Vance feels are appropriate for America. Other people of interest, Peter Thiel, Steve Bannon also are connected. I’ve been wracking my brain trying to figure out how all the pieces fit and I do think this is the key. Another person on here recommended the Behind the Bastards podcast where there are some episodes devoted to this topic. I have not listened yet, but I plan to.
Very interesting analysis, and it’s nice to see the author engaging with the comments below. I understand the importance of correctly framing the battle that needs to be fought. However, while using the term “fascism” may be technically wrong and intellectually lazy, it still strikes me as a good, catch-all term for those people who see something frighteningly reminiscent of the rise to power of the nazis. Weaning ourselves off large corporations is great, but it’s something that - except for very principled people who are prepared to go without - is largely the province of the relatively comfortably off. I stopped using Amazon for books, in favour of my local bookstore, years ago (although I admit, I still use it for stuff that is difficult to get on the high street), but, most of those friends and acquaintances I’ve tried to persuade to do the same thing - for us, a modest, community oriented sacrifice, don’t seem to care. Unfortunately, for those of us with something to lose (as opposed to the majority of poor working people whom I’d describe as wage slaves already) the jaws of the new status quo that we can see roaring towards us, if we care to look, will snap shut suddenly. Just like it happened in Germany in the 1930s. We’re sailing in a giant ship of fools.
The internet is the commons of the modern age. And the tech billionaires are the overlords of that commons. They decide who says what and how much exposure they get through algorithms and choice of words.
To say there is no commons is to say we are totally powerless which is not true. Fundamentally the commons exists everywhere and when two or more people decide to gather and discuss anything. Everything we do is political whether we think so or not. Not doing anything is political.
So we ALL depend on the billionaires, government, infrastructure and those that control it. If I own a restaurant in DC. and all the federal workers are fired I'm going to lose my business for lack of customers. I'm an entrepreneur but I get my paycheck courtesy of the federal government. I may run a business selling widgets out of my home...I may even make these widgets myself...I'm an entrepreneur but if I depend on the internet, that's infrastructure. So I don't know what your really trying to say. Your solution, entrepreneurship is farcical.
I am speaking systemically; looking for emergent ideas on how to evolve beyond this mess. There is no single solution, nor am I proposing one. I believe that some solutions are found in looking at history and applying those lessons to today. Feel free to propose your own ideas about a way forward.
The most effective litmus test is the question; does our current socio-economic system have the characteristics of fascism and does it have the same goals as fascism. We have a great deal of history in the rearview mirror to examine to see if this is the case.
The primary objective of fascism in its early stages is to form a parasitic symbiotic relationship between private interests and the government. The symbiosis between legislators and lobbyists who represent corporate interests is a mutually beneficial feedback loop, so there are considerable economic incentives to strengthen and expand the power of this relationship.
Because legislators in the United States are paid modest salaries, there is an immediate moral hazard that arises in the form of legislators greatly expanding their wealth by representing the interests of those that can pay the highest dollar through favors and of course campaign contributions to help those pliable legislators get re-elected.
It is in this way that capitalism forms a partnership with the government to ensure that the legislature writes laws that benefit capitalism and private interests at the expense of the public interests. These benefits come in many forms such as removal of laws that protect the public, protect the public domain and public property. They also take the form of removing the laws that address the inherent moral hazard that capitalism has. That would be laws that punish bad behavior and laws that reallocate the negative costs of capitalism from the public back to capitalism. Probably the most accessible case study of this last dynamic are Pigovian taxes that are levied on tobacco. Tobacco use has an immense social cost that must be reallocated back to capitalists.
Over time, this relationship expands throughout all government institutions and agencies to the point where corporate and private interests wield the power of the government. The government, at all levels, becomes the proxy for private interests. At this point, the public is reduced to a tax generating resource whose sole function is to continually replenish the tax coffers which have been drained. This sets up several conflicts, and the end result is the reoccurring crisis of overproduction that capitalism experiences. We characterize the Great Depression as a crisis of overproduction.
The battle of the pubic vs private domain was and is fought in the courts, not at the voting booth. It is in this way that private interests can circumvent the democratic process, avoid bad publicity and carry out their plans largely in secret. Since the press is largely a tool for private interests, the public is unaware of the decades of erosion of the public power has been usurped by corporations.
I have an extensive list of law cases that have dismantled democracy in the USA, but I am writing a series that will explore this more fully, so let's take a look at the characteristics of fascism.
When we examine this we look at Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco's Spain, Salazar's Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. What we find are several key characteristics and strategies these regimes employ to take possession of the government.
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism, Nation above all else. This results in an isolationist geopolitical strategy.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security; people in fascist regimes are typically persuaded that human rights can be ignored because of “need.” The key case here is when during the Civil Rights Movement, police were given immunity because the public was convinced that this was the only way to achieve safety.
3. Identification of Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The population is rallied into a patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, religious, ethnic or political factions are demonized. This vilification of immigrants or other forces serve as a distraction and serve to avoid the regime from taking responsibility for bad policy that has created social fracturing.
4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of public funding and the domestic agenda is neglected. Congress does not even review the military budget in detail anymore, it is given a rubber stamp of approval even though, the Pentagon has never passed a complete accounting of its expenditures.
5. Rampant Sexism – Governments of Fascist Regimes are almost exclusively male-dominated. Gender roles become more rigid. The purpose here is to disenfranchise women from the political and economic process.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes the media is controlled directly by the government, sometimes it is controlled by regulation, sometimes it is controlled by proxy through corporations. In the USA, a mere 6 firms control 95% of what 330 million Americans see, hear, read and watch.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government to control the masses. Trump's stochastic terrorism is well known to everyone.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in Fascist Regimes tend to use the most common religion as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Separation of church and state is eroded.
9. Corporate Power is protected above all other considerations– The Industrial and Business Aristocracy of a fascist nation are often the ones who put government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial relationship. Government becomes the proxy for corporate power. The most recent evidence of this dynamic is the overturning of the Chevron decision, which removed the teeth of the EPA to act as an authoritative agency with the ability to levy fines and remediation procedures. There are literally hundreds of these cases at the state and federal levels.
10. The Power of Labor is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely or are severely suppressed. So corporations are allowed to engage in anti-union activities and most recently, this regime has dissolved the National Labor Relations Board.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and The Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education and academia. This take on the form of STEM being pushed as the only education option. Case in point, the Florida legislatures removed the sociology as a curriculum option in every university in Florida.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power over the population to enforce laws. The USA incarcerates over 2 million and 10 million per year churn through the pay to play justice system, with 5 million being newbies. It is in this way that the rich are separated from the poor. There are over 400,000 held in jails across the country that have not been charged or convicted of a crime. The incarceration rate of the lowest state in America has a higher incarceration rate than any country in the world. - prisonpolicy.org
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Government is filled with groups of friends, associates, relatives who appoint each other to government positions.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Elections in Fascist regimes are a complete sham or compromised and feature smear campaigns, sensationalism and sometimes assassination of candidates. There is undeniable evidence that the 2024 election was corrupted.
This is a great comment. I was drawn to this article because I think the "fascist" label is counterproductive and lazy, romanticizing the horrors of the past to uncritically dismiss the current administration, without offering anything productive to a way out. What DT and his team are to me are oligarchy-fetishizing capitalists, that is, capitalism in its most concentrated, exploitative, exclusive, and visible form. If anything, it's more about authoritarian control than fascism. But... you've given me/us a lot to chew on here. I appreciate the detail of your argument here.
I appreciate your characterization of fascism being a lazy word. It is because we have forgotten what that word actually means and how it manifested itself in America starting in the mid 1800s and early 1900's.
Back then, American's had no problem whatsoever calling Henry Ford, Carnegie, JP Morgan and many famous names that rose during the industrial revolution fascists because they were squarely against paying the worker anything but slave wages to work in very dangerous environments.
People forget the violent strikes, the Pinkerton's, the many deaths and the mining wars of the western United States that caused the death of many people.
Peaceful protests had nothing, literally nothing to do with the rights that workers finally got as a result of the most infamous labor war battle at Ludlow, Colorado. Many died on both sides, lawmen were hanged for murder and the President had to step in and force David Rockefeller to yield to worker demands for the 8 hour work day, 5 day work week.
History paints it as Rockefeller the kind and generous, giving workers those rights which is a fantasy. Those rights were earned in blood, a great deal of blood and today it is no different. The brainwashing of American's to abhor violence in politics is because it is expedient to the ruling class. Politics has always been violent but we have been conditioned to accept the violence of the pen and only recognize the violence of the sword. That isn't how it works.
All of that said I think that Trotsky gave the most succinct explanation of Fascism but to those that do not really understand fascisms purpose and goals, it does not fill that need but here it is anyway.
"After fascism is victorious, finance capital directly and immediately gathers into its hands, as in a vise of steel, all the organs and institutions of sovereignty, the executive administrative, and educational powers of the state: the entire state apparatus together with the army, the municipalities, the universities, the schools, the press, the trade unions, and the co-operatives. When a state turns fascist, it does not mean only that the forms and methods of government are changed in accordance the patterns set by Mussolini -- the changes in this sphere ultimately play a minor role -- but it means first of all for the most part that the workers' organizations are annihilated; that the proletariat is reduced to an amorphous state; and that a system of administration is created which penetrates deeply into the masses and which serves to frustrate the independent crystallization of the proletariat. Therein precisely is the gist of fascism...." Trotsky.
If you think this writing is valuable, please re-stack it. Thank you.
Great thoughts, thank you. I’m neither a historian nor political economist, my area is philosophy which, often, is about considering language in its use. Fascism as we come to think the term is Hitler and Mussolini, and what I see is when the public employs this term it’s in that sense. And in that sense I think it’s lazy (not in yours). Fascism carries this notion of an inevitability of (momentary) total control. Then it becomes judged on whether or not DT is a fascist. Authoritarianism, to my mind anyway, is about control and not so absolute. Authority can be challenged; fascism is a State.
Are we witnessing the rise of fascism (Hitlerific), the rise of authoritarianism, the overwhelming intransigence of oligarchic capitalism that transcends the ability for anyone to protest, write, activate in any productive manner? We’ll see, but the danger signs of some indefinable mix is all there. To me, DT is unfettered capitalism in a president, sui generis in that sense, and our words for what is happening are difficult to define.
Justin, I was with you through most of the article but you lost your way because you're not taking into account the crisis of meaning and what makes human communities thrive.
Yes, pure leftists don't understand the sense of agency and empowerment of individual entrepreneurship or the aliveness you feel when you're able to create sustainable work for yourself and others.
But capitalism doesn't understand the question of what builds community, connection and meaning. Ultimately, you have to constantly muster up and prove your worth through what you produce. I wouldn't throw their argument out so quickly. It also over relies on production as a source of currency. It doesn't touch the crisis in meaning
Have you ever listened to the work of Iain McGilchrist? He's pointing to third way thinking and he accounts for the human need for meaning, myth, metaphor, beauty, goodness and truth.
Thank you for your comment. We are simpatico here! I have an upcoming article that speaks to exactly what you shared. Two of the biggest factors of the end of the dark ages and the European feudalism era were entrepreneurship and enlightenment. In my next article, I will be sharing a call for a new Age of Enlightenment - not just to defeat corporate feudalism but to create a collective new way forward. I look forward to your thoughts in it once it’s published
I'll look forward to it! I'm winding down a class I've been teaching on the personal and collective shadow and we are using some of McGilchrist's work.
In my practice, I see a lot of retiring men in the 2nd half of life and the crisis of meaning is profound. They've been successful in the external world, but their interiors have been largely ignored. It's very moving to me. It feels like next generations attend more to the inner life and meaning making, but we still have a long way to go.
I look forward to seeing how you frame all of this.
I do not think feudalism and fascism are mutually exclusive. We have brushed up against feudalism several times I our history. Each time the accumulation of wealth in a few hands was the primary cause. First it was the railroads, then steel, then oil, and now digital infrastructure. We have also stoked the fires of fascism several times in our history. Rachel Maddow did an excellent job tracing our fascist history in her podcast. Feudalism is a class struggle; fascism is a governance struggle. We may be witnessing a merger of the two. Autocracy is still a form of government, just not by the people and for the people.
I do not think a centralized government is the problem. I have thought for a long time that this country is too big for one government. Ungoverned capitalism, whether in the hands of many little entrepreneurs or many large corporations, almost always underrepresents workers unless workers are vested in the products from their labor. Workers became invested through pensions, but their pensions were not guaranteed until they formed unions, and even then, union bosses were not always trustworthy, which is why we have social security guaranteed at least for the last seventy five years by a centralized government.
The creation of the 401k changed everything. Workers are no longer vested in the products of their labor. Their investments are controlled by a few large investment firms that have nearly total control over the capital produced by workers, and they are using that power to control prices in every aspect of a worker's life.
The last step that brings fascism and feudalism into the same camp is the control of information that is now being exerted through our government to manipulate both financial markets and politics.
Government for the people still should be the ideal. When it is done correctly there is room for entrepreneurship as long as it does not oppress the lives of the people. We have instead stifled entrepreneurship by legalizing monopolies. We have officially given corporations the rights of a person. If they are persons they should be taxed at a minimum the highest individual tax rate, currently at thirty-five percent. Our finances and our freedom are not safe unless we manage our work, our finances, and our politics without the threat of fascism or the inevitability of feudalism.
Spot on analysis regarding fascism vs feudalism. Correct on all points. However, utterly mistaken the belief that crapitalisn will prove to be our source of salvation. This “magical’ system is how we have arrived at this point in history. The only way to prevent the consolidation of money and power in the hands of the few is for money as we know it to be abolished. That, effectively, would make everyone “poor.” Not a popular proposition.
Your statement I find odd. It constitutes merely a criticism, not a valid reply. Rather, a cover for having no real reply. My own statement simply says what should be obvious. No more, no less. It was made not to “engage with you”, but in the hope of provoking deeper reflection by those who might read it.
Money was invented as a way to control greed, much like an escapement regulates the movement of clockwork. What you propose would require an alternative method of limiting greed.
Yes I know money doesn’t do a good job of controlling avarice. Human ingenuity energized by selfishness, like water, always finds a way out of confinement. It’s hard to plug all the holes.
I like a pertinent scripture (my area of education): 1 Timothy 1:5-11. Basically it says law inside a heart is vastly superior to law that must be imposed from outside. Teach people to be good, then you can trust them. Otherwise, watch out.
Like many others I think a lot of the framing here is super useful, but the prescription feels like a leap. Or at least like something is missing. I think there is a difference between the ideas of entrepreneurialism and goals of financial independence, which I think are probably good on the whole, and the bigger idea of capitalism, which needs a bit more examination. especially free market capitalism, which seems destined to repeat on us..i think that's the bit I'm seeing most people in the comments getting stuck on. If we allow that capital should generally beget more capital, increasing inequality is the natural outcome. I would think that strengthening democracy and sensible regulation, based on a new set of values that preference people at large, over the interests of corporations, would be an important piece of the puzzle, alongside encouraging new business...?
Fascism simply means “right wing authoritarianism” (not “authoritarianism I don’t like”) so it is accurate enough. But yes, this is a new flavor of it with elements of techno-libertarianism, Christian nationalism, and neo-feudalism.
I agree with much of this post’s view that we are seeing the hollowing out of our government so that it cannot countervail corporate power. This is their goal and further concentration of power.
There is a seed inside our current capitalism that provides the incentive that they are following… Consolidation in business is the road to greater profits, greater profits leads to greater power, power corrupts.
How do we decentralize power in our economy? Yes, entrepreneurship is an antidote but large corporations erect barriers and just buy people out.
How do we modify capitalism to pursue more than just profit?
Our founders believed in countervailing powers… We just are not currently seeing that we need to protect our balance in powers.
But this prescription sounds like libertarianism-lite if not neo-liberalism. All you’re doing is parsing historical fascism from feudalism which is useful for definitional purposes, but it doesn’t support the conclusion that entrepreneurial endeavors are the singular solution to prevent feudalism from occurring. Entrepreneurialism has substantial barriers to entry. The brand of feudalism of which you speak will only increase those barriers to entry. The hundreds of thousands of federal workers who have or will lose their jobs aren’t going to be saved by entrepreneurialism. Capitalism as a system isn’t the enemy. Crony-capitalism and mafia style plutocracy is. Whatever means necessary to destroy those forms of capitalism should be employed and should not be denigrated as lesser forms of resistance over entrepreneurialism.
Hello, Frank
Thank you for your comment. A few thoughts ...
- I am not parsing for definitional purposes. As I demonstrated in the article, fascism and feudalism are distinctly different systems. This difference is essential in crafting an opposition.
- I did not say entrepreneurial endeavors were the only way to prevent feudalism. I said that history has shown that entrepreneurism is the most proven path forward out of feudalism and that we should emphasize that a virtuous model separate from corporate feudalism. If our political system was structured to support entrepreneurism first, there would be far less corporate feudalism.
- Yes there is a barrier to entry. I'm not saying that is the solution for everyone. However, Mark Cuban did offer to provide financial backing to any federal employee who got laid off who wants to start their own business. This is an innovative idea.
Okay, but you fail to address the biggest issue, which is that for decades this exact thing has been systematically attacked and dismantled by the corporate elite (aka the capitalist overlords) so that they can hold a monopoly.
Walmart will build a store, sell AT A LOSS so that they can drive competition out of business, then CLOSE that store and force people to drive 45 minutes to the next closest Walmart.
How do you stop that sort of predatory behavior? With politicians who will regulate it. So then we’re back to voting IS the solution, we just need to actually do it and support real candidates.
I haven’t even got into short selling in the stock market. Capitalism, no matter how much you rich folk love it, will not save us. It is a system designed to inherently put profits over people and resist all regulation.
There are no real candidates , there is no real choice.
Not yet.
You’re correct. I think it’s got to be something in the nature of creating a sustainable grey or black market that can operate outside of the market dominated by Musk’s dominion and control. What European leaders are coalescing on now in forging ahead for security and trade without the U.S. is a model. MUSK/Trump may own and control the infrastructure, but not all the wealth.
I just don’t have the faith you have that markets can deliver freedom when there is a tyrannical government that is doing everything it can to consolidate power and subjugate people from participating in a free market if not killing the free market itself. There will be some rudimentary form of a market that the majority will be able to operate in because we’re too vast a country both geographically and demographically for a tyrannical government to control. But they will be able to cripple it notwithstanding by seizing and controlling the very infrastructure that make markets work. I believe that is the goal of DOGE and I’m fairly confident it will succeed in hobbling whatever grey or black market exists outside of the DOGE controlled official marketplace.
You may be correct. Which is why all ideas should be on the table. With a few benchmarks:
- No violations of human rights or personal property
- Not dependent on a political party
- Not repackaged old ideas
There is a way forward. It will take collective intelligence to find it.
Why is repackaged old ideas not acceptable? Does it not matter what the old idea is? It seems that what you propose is an additional fracture of society, instead of promoting collectivism, collaboration, and cooperation
Hello, Haytham
There’s is a significant difference between repackaging and repurposing. Repackaging the same binary idea that didn’t work or wasn’t accepted before is manipulative. Repurposing is part of evolution and what I call “emergent iteration”. This is essential.
For more context, please see my most recent article on the New Enlightenment
Yes, I agree with you, Frank. I was following Justin's thinking and nodding until I got to his solution. Libertarian capitalism is a connected branch to where we are, and in order to be even somewhat just, relies on the goodwill and social pragmatism of those with money. Ultimately that only gets us back where we are now. At its core, democracy and unfettered capitalism cannot exist. Justice, equality, fairness, decency -- all those require a reigning in of power and money.
Hello Robin
Thank you for commenting. I would challenge that I offered entrepreneurism as “the solution”. That would violate one of the main points behind all my writing: there is no singular solution to a complex problem. And further, you can’t solve a complex problem with a binary solution. That’s also why I wrote the follow-up piece about a New Enlightenment.
I am open to hear any complexity-based solutions you might offer.
Yes, other than the classical liberal ideas collectively coming out of the Enlightenment, most modern ideologies sound promising when distilled to their essence in a few sentences but quickly fall apart upon the most minimal of application or, worse yet, certain tenets are taken to the extreme. Who can really argue with the premise of limited government until the moment oligarchs and plutocrats use the notion to limit rights and engage in self-dealing? In the end, it has been my experience that ideologies are for small minded people who can’t think on their feet and adapt to changing circumstances. Understanding the classical liberal traditions, which include both conservative and liberal ideas, is the best way to approach life in general which in the end tries to get to the most moral choice in a world of rampant immorality.
Hello again, Frank
Is this comment in reference to my essay or something else? If my mine, it is at best a misrepresentation of what I wrote.
Sorry. It was intended as a reply to someone else.
On. Fire.
And a very helpful pinpointing of the real issue. I myself have lamented how often I hear the word fascism thrown around, and it feels empty and ambiguous. This really names, the true challenge… And way forward… With timely clarity.
You need to read my comment above then. It is undeniably fascism for a great many reasons that I have listed.
The Trump administration operates through a fascist facade masking a corporate oligarchy, creating a modern feudal state fueled by capitalism. It relies on authoritarian strongman tactics, white supremacist rhetoric, and nationalist propaganda to mobilize a loyal base while distracting from the real power structure. Attacks on democratic institutions, scapegoating of minorities, and the normalization of political violence mirror historical fascist movements, fostering a culture of fear and division that serves the ruling elite.
At the core of this system is capitalism, which has concentrated extreme wealth and power into the hands of a small ruling class. Decades of deregulation, corporate consolidation, and tax policies favoring the rich have transformed the economy into one where billionaires function as feudal lords, controlling resources, industry, and even political decision-making. Trump’s policies, from corporate tax cuts to labor suppression, reinforce this structure, ensuring that wealth flows upward while the working class remains economically dependent and politically disenfranchised.
This corporate oligarchy thrives by using fascist aesthetics as a smokescreen, promoting nationalism and cultural resentment to divide the masses. By fueling racial and economic anxieties, it prevents collective action against the true source of inequality: an economic system designed to keep power consolidated at the top. The result is a society where democracy is hollowed out, social mobility is crushed, and economic elites wield unchecked control—a system where capitalism no longer fosters competition but instead entrenches a permanent hierarchy, indistinguishable from feudal rule.
Feudalism did not exist in a void. It existed in pre-modern states, with tithes and proto-bureaucracy, proto-army and the serfs received protection during threats of war. You sound like the same old same old libertarian argument that makes absolutely no sense given the world we live in today dependent upon all sorts of functioning infrastructure such as channels of transportation, highways of communication, the distribution of specialized economic goods from food to shelter to common goods. Your theory appears to promote a certain kind of fantastical counter-hegemonic revolution which is completely unadaptive to the post-modern world. We actually need systems of redistribution of cumulative wealth in order to maintain a functioning infrastructure so we can thrive as entrepreneurs or otherwise. And one more thing… This is not some small redirection of wealth we, the masses, are experiencing. it is a colossal disruption of middle class earnings landing directly in the pockets of a few who have simply benefitted disproportionately from the system we have. Fix the sanctions, redistribute the wealth and provide for a system in which h the vast majority of humans are provided with an environment in which they can be their most production and creative selves. Then… well then…. you can talk to me about an actual counter hegemonic revolution—a new world wide infrastructure which honors all people, all ages, from all walks of life, benefitting from their diverse cultural knowledge and expertises and individual brain power.
I just discovered this feudalism connection earlier today after reading up on Curtis Yarvin a modern day “philosopher” whose ideologies JD Vance feels are appropriate for America. Other people of interest, Peter Thiel, Steve Bannon also are connected. I’ve been wracking my brain trying to figure out how all the pieces fit and I do think this is the key. Another person on here recommended the Behind the Bastards podcast where there are some episodes devoted to this topic. I have not listened yet, but I plan to.
Very interesting analysis, and it’s nice to see the author engaging with the comments below. I understand the importance of correctly framing the battle that needs to be fought. However, while using the term “fascism” may be technically wrong and intellectually lazy, it still strikes me as a good, catch-all term for those people who see something frighteningly reminiscent of the rise to power of the nazis. Weaning ourselves off large corporations is great, but it’s something that - except for very principled people who are prepared to go without - is largely the province of the relatively comfortably off. I stopped using Amazon for books, in favour of my local bookstore, years ago (although I admit, I still use it for stuff that is difficult to get on the high street), but, most of those friends and acquaintances I’ve tried to persuade to do the same thing - for us, a modest, community oriented sacrifice, don’t seem to care. Unfortunately, for those of us with something to lose (as opposed to the majority of poor working people whom I’d describe as wage slaves already) the jaws of the new status quo that we can see roaring towards us, if we care to look, will snap shut suddenly. Just like it happened in Germany in the 1930s. We’re sailing in a giant ship of fools.
Feudalism had a commons. The serfs made most of their living from the commons. This is not feudalism because there is no commons.
The internet is the commons of the modern age. And the tech billionaires are the overlords of that commons. They decide who says what and how much exposure they get through algorithms and choice of words.
To say there is no commons is to say we are totally powerless which is not true. Fundamentally the commons exists everywhere and when two or more people decide to gather and discuss anything. Everything we do is political whether we think so or not. Not doing anything is political.
So we ALL depend on the billionaires, government, infrastructure and those that control it. If I own a restaurant in DC. and all the federal workers are fired I'm going to lose my business for lack of customers. I'm an entrepreneur but I get my paycheck courtesy of the federal government. I may run a business selling widgets out of my home...I may even make these widgets myself...I'm an entrepreneur but if I depend on the internet, that's infrastructure. So I don't know what your really trying to say. Your solution, entrepreneurship is farcical.
Hello Linda
I am speaking systemically; looking for emergent ideas on how to evolve beyond this mess. There is no single solution, nor am I proposing one. I believe that some solutions are found in looking at history and applying those lessons to today. Feel free to propose your own ideas about a way forward.
The most effective litmus test is the question; does our current socio-economic system have the characteristics of fascism and does it have the same goals as fascism. We have a great deal of history in the rearview mirror to examine to see if this is the case.
The primary objective of fascism in its early stages is to form a parasitic symbiotic relationship between private interests and the government. The symbiosis between legislators and lobbyists who represent corporate interests is a mutually beneficial feedback loop, so there are considerable economic incentives to strengthen and expand the power of this relationship.
Because legislators in the United States are paid modest salaries, there is an immediate moral hazard that arises in the form of legislators greatly expanding their wealth by representing the interests of those that can pay the highest dollar through favors and of course campaign contributions to help those pliable legislators get re-elected.
It is in this way that capitalism forms a partnership with the government to ensure that the legislature writes laws that benefit capitalism and private interests at the expense of the public interests. These benefits come in many forms such as removal of laws that protect the public, protect the public domain and public property. They also take the form of removing the laws that address the inherent moral hazard that capitalism has. That would be laws that punish bad behavior and laws that reallocate the negative costs of capitalism from the public back to capitalism. Probably the most accessible case study of this last dynamic are Pigovian taxes that are levied on tobacco. Tobacco use has an immense social cost that must be reallocated back to capitalists.
Over time, this relationship expands throughout all government institutions and agencies to the point where corporate and private interests wield the power of the government. The government, at all levels, becomes the proxy for private interests. At this point, the public is reduced to a tax generating resource whose sole function is to continually replenish the tax coffers which have been drained. This sets up several conflicts, and the end result is the reoccurring crisis of overproduction that capitalism experiences. We characterize the Great Depression as a crisis of overproduction.
The battle of the pubic vs private domain was and is fought in the courts, not at the voting booth. It is in this way that private interests can circumvent the democratic process, avoid bad publicity and carry out their plans largely in secret. Since the press is largely a tool for private interests, the public is unaware of the decades of erosion of the public power has been usurped by corporations.
I have an extensive list of law cases that have dismantled democracy in the USA, but I am writing a series that will explore this more fully, so let's take a look at the characteristics of fascism.
When we examine this we look at Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco's Spain, Salazar's Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. What we find are several key characteristics and strategies these regimes employ to take possession of the government.
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism, Nation above all else. This results in an isolationist geopolitical strategy.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security; people in fascist regimes are typically persuaded that human rights can be ignored because of “need.” The key case here is when during the Civil Rights Movement, police were given immunity because the public was convinced that this was the only way to achieve safety.
3. Identification of Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The population is rallied into a patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, religious, ethnic or political factions are demonized. This vilification of immigrants or other forces serve as a distraction and serve to avoid the regime from taking responsibility for bad policy that has created social fracturing.
4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of public funding and the domestic agenda is neglected. Congress does not even review the military budget in detail anymore, it is given a rubber stamp of approval even though, the Pentagon has never passed a complete accounting of its expenditures.
5. Rampant Sexism – Governments of Fascist Regimes are almost exclusively male-dominated. Gender roles become more rigid. The purpose here is to disenfranchise women from the political and economic process.
6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes the media is controlled directly by the government, sometimes it is controlled by regulation, sometimes it is controlled by proxy through corporations. In the USA, a mere 6 firms control 95% of what 330 million Americans see, hear, read and watch.
7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government to control the masses. Trump's stochastic terrorism is well known to everyone.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in Fascist Regimes tend to use the most common religion as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Separation of church and state is eroded.
9. Corporate Power is protected above all other considerations– The Industrial and Business Aristocracy of a fascist nation are often the ones who put government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial relationship. Government becomes the proxy for corporate power. The most recent evidence of this dynamic is the overturning of the Chevron decision, which removed the teeth of the EPA to act as an authoritative agency with the ability to levy fines and remediation procedures. There are literally hundreds of these cases at the state and federal levels.
10. The Power of Labor is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely or are severely suppressed. So corporations are allowed to engage in anti-union activities and most recently, this regime has dissolved the National Labor Relations Board.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and The Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education and academia. This take on the form of STEM being pushed as the only education option. Case in point, the Florida legislatures removed the sociology as a curriculum option in every university in Florida.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power over the population to enforce laws. The USA incarcerates over 2 million and 10 million per year churn through the pay to play justice system, with 5 million being newbies. It is in this way that the rich are separated from the poor. There are over 400,000 held in jails across the country that have not been charged or convicted of a crime. The incarceration rate of the lowest state in America has a higher incarceration rate than any country in the world. - prisonpolicy.org
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Government is filled with groups of friends, associates, relatives who appoint each other to government positions.
14. Fraudulent Elections – Elections in Fascist regimes are a complete sham or compromised and feature smear campaigns, sensationalism and sometimes assassination of candidates. There is undeniable evidence that the 2024 election was corrupted.
This is a great comment. I was drawn to this article because I think the "fascist" label is counterproductive and lazy, romanticizing the horrors of the past to uncritically dismiss the current administration, without offering anything productive to a way out. What DT and his team are to me are oligarchy-fetishizing capitalists, that is, capitalism in its most concentrated, exploitative, exclusive, and visible form. If anything, it's more about authoritarian control than fascism. But... you've given me/us a lot to chew on here. I appreciate the detail of your argument here.
I appreciate your characterization of fascism being a lazy word. It is because we have forgotten what that word actually means and how it manifested itself in America starting in the mid 1800s and early 1900's.
Back then, American's had no problem whatsoever calling Henry Ford, Carnegie, JP Morgan and many famous names that rose during the industrial revolution fascists because they were squarely against paying the worker anything but slave wages to work in very dangerous environments.
People forget the violent strikes, the Pinkerton's, the many deaths and the mining wars of the western United States that caused the death of many people.
Peaceful protests had nothing, literally nothing to do with the rights that workers finally got as a result of the most infamous labor war battle at Ludlow, Colorado. Many died on both sides, lawmen were hanged for murder and the President had to step in and force David Rockefeller to yield to worker demands for the 8 hour work day, 5 day work week.
History paints it as Rockefeller the kind and generous, giving workers those rights which is a fantasy. Those rights were earned in blood, a great deal of blood and today it is no different. The brainwashing of American's to abhor violence in politics is because it is expedient to the ruling class. Politics has always been violent but we have been conditioned to accept the violence of the pen and only recognize the violence of the sword. That isn't how it works.
All of that said I think that Trotsky gave the most succinct explanation of Fascism but to those that do not really understand fascisms purpose and goals, it does not fill that need but here it is anyway.
"After fascism is victorious, finance capital directly and immediately gathers into its hands, as in a vise of steel, all the organs and institutions of sovereignty, the executive administrative, and educational powers of the state: the entire state apparatus together with the army, the municipalities, the universities, the schools, the press, the trade unions, and the co-operatives. When a state turns fascist, it does not mean only that the forms and methods of government are changed in accordance the patterns set by Mussolini -- the changes in this sphere ultimately play a minor role -- but it means first of all for the most part that the workers' organizations are annihilated; that the proletariat is reduced to an amorphous state; and that a system of administration is created which penetrates deeply into the masses and which serves to frustrate the independent crystallization of the proletariat. Therein precisely is the gist of fascism...." Trotsky.
If you think this writing is valuable, please re-stack it. Thank you.
Great thoughts, thank you. I’m neither a historian nor political economist, my area is philosophy which, often, is about considering language in its use. Fascism as we come to think the term is Hitler and Mussolini, and what I see is when the public employs this term it’s in that sense. And in that sense I think it’s lazy (not in yours). Fascism carries this notion of an inevitability of (momentary) total control. Then it becomes judged on whether or not DT is a fascist. Authoritarianism, to my mind anyway, is about control and not so absolute. Authority can be challenged; fascism is a State.
Are we witnessing the rise of fascism (Hitlerific), the rise of authoritarianism, the overwhelming intransigence of oligarchic capitalism that transcends the ability for anyone to protest, write, activate in any productive manner? We’ll see, but the danger signs of some indefinable mix is all there. To me, DT is unfettered capitalism in a president, sui generis in that sense, and our words for what is happening are difficult to define.
Justin, I was with you through most of the article but you lost your way because you're not taking into account the crisis of meaning and what makes human communities thrive.
Yes, pure leftists don't understand the sense of agency and empowerment of individual entrepreneurship or the aliveness you feel when you're able to create sustainable work for yourself and others.
But capitalism doesn't understand the question of what builds community, connection and meaning. Ultimately, you have to constantly muster up and prove your worth through what you produce. I wouldn't throw their argument out so quickly. It also over relies on production as a source of currency. It doesn't touch the crisis in meaning
Have you ever listened to the work of Iain McGilchrist? He's pointing to third way thinking and he accounts for the human need for meaning, myth, metaphor, beauty, goodness and truth.
Hi, Leslie
Thank you for your comment. We are simpatico here! I have an upcoming article that speaks to exactly what you shared. Two of the biggest factors of the end of the dark ages and the European feudalism era were entrepreneurship and enlightenment. In my next article, I will be sharing a call for a new Age of Enlightenment - not just to defeat corporate feudalism but to create a collective new way forward. I look forward to your thoughts in it once it’s published
I love McGilchrist’s work!
I'll look forward to it! I'm winding down a class I've been teaching on the personal and collective shadow and we are using some of McGilchrist's work.
In my practice, I see a lot of retiring men in the 2nd half of life and the crisis of meaning is profound. They've been successful in the external world, but their interiors have been largely ignored. It's very moving to me. It feels like next generations attend more to the inner life and meaning making, but we still have a long way to go.
I look forward to seeing how you frame all of this.
I do not think feudalism and fascism are mutually exclusive. We have brushed up against feudalism several times I our history. Each time the accumulation of wealth in a few hands was the primary cause. First it was the railroads, then steel, then oil, and now digital infrastructure. We have also stoked the fires of fascism several times in our history. Rachel Maddow did an excellent job tracing our fascist history in her podcast. Feudalism is a class struggle; fascism is a governance struggle. We may be witnessing a merger of the two. Autocracy is still a form of government, just not by the people and for the people.
I do not think a centralized government is the problem. I have thought for a long time that this country is too big for one government. Ungoverned capitalism, whether in the hands of many little entrepreneurs or many large corporations, almost always underrepresents workers unless workers are vested in the products from their labor. Workers became invested through pensions, but their pensions were not guaranteed until they formed unions, and even then, union bosses were not always trustworthy, which is why we have social security guaranteed at least for the last seventy five years by a centralized government.
The creation of the 401k changed everything. Workers are no longer vested in the products of their labor. Their investments are controlled by a few large investment firms that have nearly total control over the capital produced by workers, and they are using that power to control prices in every aspect of a worker's life.
The last step that brings fascism and feudalism into the same camp is the control of information that is now being exerted through our government to manipulate both financial markets and politics.
Government for the people still should be the ideal. When it is done correctly there is room for entrepreneurship as long as it does not oppress the lives of the people. We have instead stifled entrepreneurship by legalizing monopolies. We have officially given corporations the rights of a person. If they are persons they should be taxed at a minimum the highest individual tax rate, currently at thirty-five percent. Our finances and our freedom are not safe unless we manage our work, our finances, and our politics without the threat of fascism or the inevitability of feudalism.
Spot on analysis regarding fascism vs feudalism. Correct on all points. However, utterly mistaken the belief that crapitalisn will prove to be our source of salvation. This “magical’ system is how we have arrived at this point in history. The only way to prevent the consolidation of money and power in the hands of the few is for money as we know it to be abolished. That, effectively, would make everyone “poor.” Not a popular proposition.
Lots of hyperbole and binary assumptions in this comment which makes it feel unsafe to engage with you. I have no interest in conflict.
Your statement I find odd. It constitutes merely a criticism, not a valid reply. Rather, a cover for having no real reply. My own statement simply says what should be obvious. No more, no less. It was made not to “engage with you”, but in the hope of provoking deeper reflection by those who might read it.
Money was invented as a way to control greed, much like an escapement regulates the movement of clockwork. What you propose would require an alternative method of limiting greed.
Yes I know money doesn’t do a good job of controlling avarice. Human ingenuity energized by selfishness, like water, always finds a way out of confinement. It’s hard to plug all the holes.
I like a pertinent scripture (my area of education): 1 Timothy 1:5-11. Basically it says law inside a heart is vastly superior to law that must be imposed from outside. Teach people to be good, then you can trust them. Otherwise, watch out.
Trump wants feudal system
Like many others I think a lot of the framing here is super useful, but the prescription feels like a leap. Or at least like something is missing. I think there is a difference between the ideas of entrepreneurialism and goals of financial independence, which I think are probably good on the whole, and the bigger idea of capitalism, which needs a bit more examination. especially free market capitalism, which seems destined to repeat on us..i think that's the bit I'm seeing most people in the comments getting stuck on. If we allow that capital should generally beget more capital, increasing inequality is the natural outcome. I would think that strengthening democracy and sensible regulation, based on a new set of values that preference people at large, over the interests of corporations, would be an important piece of the puzzle, alongside encouraging new business...?
Hi Adam
I address much of that in my latest article
Excellent... Will check it out!
Fascism simply means “right wing authoritarianism” (not “authoritarianism I don’t like”) so it is accurate enough. But yes, this is a new flavor of it with elements of techno-libertarianism, Christian nationalism, and neo-feudalism.
Hair-splitting is the micro-currency of the moment. Standing out means dividing, then dividing again in order to conquer (and get noticed)!
I agree with much of this post’s view that we are seeing the hollowing out of our government so that it cannot countervail corporate power. This is their goal and further concentration of power.
There is a seed inside our current capitalism that provides the incentive that they are following… Consolidation in business is the road to greater profits, greater profits leads to greater power, power corrupts.
How do we decentralize power in our economy? Yes, entrepreneurship is an antidote but large corporations erect barriers and just buy people out.
How do we modify capitalism to pursue more than just profit?
Our founders believed in countervailing powers… We just are not currently seeing that we need to protect our balance in powers.