What type of politician is in the best position to combat the rise of far-right?Watch this thread
A leftist whose ideology is rooted in progressive class politics as opposed to regressive identity politics. Bernie Sanders sounds a solid option.
The only group of people Sanders represented was the millennials. To win America you need the working class, as Trump proved.
This is false. Nationalism is rising. Conservatism is still dying. Fascism is generally left-wing towards the 'in-group' (i.e. citizens), and right-wing towards the 'out-group' (i.e. xenos). This is why fascism is being so successful - it is riding both the anti-globalism, anti-austerity, and broadly anti-capitalism wave, at the same time as riding the anti-xenos wave. If it weren't for its ugly history, fascists would have been elected by large margins all across Europe already.
Frankly the democrats have very strong career politicians with a thorough of the economy and realises that economic liberalism is the only way to convince fanatics that this populist revolt is a mere distraction from the issues of today.
I for one am happy that Trump is president. The white majority have made their opinion very clear and Trump being in power should tell them how dangerous and wrong it was of them to look at Trump as their saviour. The Democrats have the next 4 years to see where they went wrong and bring people to realise how bad Trump is as president and what made them think Clinton was a good leader.
I predict a huge majority for the Democrats in 2020.
I don't know if one exists.
There aren't any specifically fascist policies. There are sets of policies associated with fascism - namely nationalist policies, nativist policies, (somewhat) socialist policies, technocratic policies, ...
I wouldn't call UKIP or Germany's AfD fascist. But Front National, Jobbik, and similar parties most certainly are.
The Front National has been for decades very consistent in their political agenda:
They favor traditional French identity, they don't want it to change, and they see immigration as the root cause of France's problems.
They consider that France has lost sovereignty, so they hate the EU and would like to leave it and get back to the former French Franc currency.
They see the other political parties as a coalition of people serving their own interests against the interest of the French people, and assign them the responsibility for gradually destroying the French identity and nation.
They position themselves as victims of these parties, since obviously in their rhetoric, the Front National is working for the French people, the other parties against.
Going by the more reasonable definition of fascism (rather than the hyped-up 'far-right' definition):
Fascism is a relatively hard ideology to define; however, most fascist ideologies share the following core tenets:
Fascism wishes to deconstruct the old classes - which is one of many areas where it clashes with conservatism - but then to create new classes, which collaborate to make the country
This implicitly suggests militarist imperialism. Fascism sees life as a continual conflict between people for limited resources. To fascists, war let nations or races decide who got the planet's resources, in a Darwinian struggle for survival.
Fascists applied biological concepts to constructs like nations and races. Virility, physical prowess and hierarchy were applied to these constructs, as well as notions like sickness and degeneration. Ideas of the "sickness" of a nation or race was what inspired many fascist regimes to resort to eugenics, and in some cases genocide.
This is another reason why war was so important to fascists; it had a therapeutic effect on society: it destroyed the weak, and allowed the strong and healthy to thrive.
This leads to the rule of specialists. The leaders and representatives of each corporative (and consequently the government) would be specialists in their areas, not politicians.
For example, Mussolini wanted to form a "New Roman Empire", while the Nazis initially wanted Germany to regain its former position in the world, as a "Great Power".
It's worth pointing out that Germany and Italy didn't have the sense of "national/ethnic identity" that we as outsiders often ascribe to those nations today. They were relatively recently formed nation-states, and a political movement that emphasized nationalism likely carried some appeal as a means of paving over existing regional and ethno-linguistic differences and tensions.
Fascists believe that people are fundamentally irrational, and their irrationality should be harnessed into action, e.g. using patriotism and leader idolisation as a means to get people thinking about the "greater good", rather than their own individual interests.
This is the second way Fascism and Socialism clash. Fascism sees national loyalty as absolutely central, but orthodox Socialism believes that loyalty to the international movement of Communism should replace all other loyalties. As a result, Socialists came to see Fascists as lapdogs of the entrenched, conservative upper-classes, and Fascists saw Socialists as a threat to the integrity of the nation, and as a symptom of a decaying society they sought to replace.
Hmmm, it's pretty hard to define it, but in my opinion it shouldn't be used given its historic connotation with Hitler and Mussolini. You can't conflate the likes of Le Pen with the barbaric mass genocide under those regimes.
If they can do that they'll outnumber those on either extreme comfortably and gain power.