Yale professor who studies fascism fleeing US to work in Canada
94 points by 0xmohit 3 months ago | 80 comments- sepositus 3 months ago> Stanley said this order sets the country “on a path to educational authoritarianism”.
Paying large sums of taxes for a school that is unquestionably failing my children, with no option to attend another school (without shelling an unfathomable amount of money for private schooling), feels like educational authoritarianism to me.
- OgsyedIE 3 months agoAs somebody on the other political side, I wouldn't want federal tax dollars going to mormon universities in a vacuum. To prevent more culture war distractions from the faculty's jobs of teaching, I think anybody who can do math can agree that:
Either every university should get subsidies proportional to the effectiveness of their graduates or no universities should get any subsidies at all.
- theGeatZhopa 3 months agowhat about every university should get subsidies per student's head-count and let the universities decide what for the money is used? The market will regulate the demand & supply of places and the universities have an incentive to grow and to attract students by quality. If its mormon-university and mormonism happens to be in big-demand, so then its a mormon university that gets subsidies. At least, its in europe mostly like this.
- drivingmenuts 3 months agoReligious institutions should only be supported by voluntary contributions from those who believe in its mission. No state should ever give money to a religious institution, for any reason, because no state should favor one religion over another. To do so leads to religious authoritarianism, which is a direct precursor to religious segregation and persecution. Money given to the state should only be used for purposes that benefit all citizens equally or to level the playing field for the less fortunate.
- jauntywundrkind 3 months agoI might maybe perhaps be willing to consider this if we revoke the tax exempt status of religious institutions. Maybe. I still doubt it.
- tbrownaw 3 months ago> what about every university should get subsidies per student's head-count and let the universities decide what for the money is used?
From what I understand it usually works better to pay for results rather than effort.
- drivingmenuts 3 months ago
- theGeatZhopa 3 months ago
- sightbroke 3 months agoYou can consider moving to a better district.
- sepositus 3 months agoHow about sending my children to the school 20 miles away that is doing orders of magnitude better than my local district? Not an option apparently. Even tried several routes, including appealing to the school board, and I'm effectively ignored on every attempt.
Anyways, moving is not an option for me, as I have local dependents that I am responsible for taking care of and who would be abandoned if I left.
- sightbroke 3 months agoI am confused. 20 mile commute to school is feasible personally for your child but moving 20 miles to be in the district suddenly makes taking care of certain individual infeasible?
- sightbroke 3 months ago
- sepositus 3 months ago
- cherry_tree 3 months agoSo you are in favor of reducing the funding your childs school receives from the federal government? And for using the government to restrict funding to universities unless they comply with limiting the speech of students and professors?
I don’t see how that makes your child’s school better, can you explain how we get from A to B?
- thunderfork 3 months ago[dead]
- OgsyedIE 3 months ago
- pfannkuchen 3 months agoOne thing I think is interesting about the fascism label is - if you time traveled the US government leadership from 1945 to today, who would they align with more? How would they treat these issues? Or was the US fascist in 1923 when the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind that Indians aren’t white and therefore can’t be granted citizenship? That seems, like, massively more “fascist” than anything happening today. But historically no one considers 1923 America to be fascist, and it went to war against fascists shortly thereafter. Hmm.
- dragonwriter 3 months ago> One thing I think is interesting about the fascism label is - if you time traveled the US government leadership from 1945 to today, who would they align with more?
I’m guessing not the people literally using the slogans of the American movement that opposed fighting fascism.
> Or was the US fascist in 1923 when the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind that Indians aren’t white and therefore can’t be granted citizenship?
It was racist (which, alone, is not sufficient to be fascist, though fascist governments are often racists and the Nazis were specifically inspired by US race policy in their racism) when it adopted the naturalization law that the Supreme Court interpreted in that case, sure.
(The fixed country-based caps in current immigration law are also largely based in racism, but a much more mild expression of it than the whites-only naturalization rule.)
- jhp123 3 months agoA time traveller from 1945 would probably assume the side snapping off Sieg Heils to be fascist
- dragonwriter 3 months agoProbably also wouldn't be particular partial to those using the “America First!" slogan (because to them its use as a KKK slogan in the Second Klan Era would be very familiar, but even moreso because its subsequent use as a slogan of opposition to US fighting fascism overseas would be even more familiar.)
- dragonwriter 3 months ago
- FooBarBizBazz 3 months agoThis word "fascism" is unfortunate, because the symbolism of the fasces is actually good: We do all need to bundle ourselves together if we are either (a) to accomplish anything, or (b) to resist capital. The only question is whether all the many twigs have to be the same color.
The Left has spoken of "bundling" for many years now (of issues or complaints, or, looked at another way, of identity or pressure groups). That too is the idea of the fasces. The word "bundle" again suggests it.
I also note that there is a certain irony here, because, besides "fasces", we already have a succinct two-syllable word meaning "a bundle of twigs".
There is also the tasty cognate, "fajita".
- aaplok 3 months ago> historically no one considers 1923 America to be fascist.
Many scholars consider that Nazism was greatly inspired by American racism. Calling 1923 America fascist would be anachronistic, but also American racist policies were less related to Italian fascism than to Nazi doctrines. But plenty of scholars make the connection. Here is an example: [0].
[0] https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-American-Model-United-States/...
- pfannkuchen 3 months agoIf you do a poll of people who call current events fascist and ask them if America was fascist in 1923 or 1945, I’m quite confident that upwards of 95% of respondents would say no to both. Do you disagree?
I’m commenting on the apparent worldview contradiction or blind spot in people who are calling current events and people fascist.
- aaplok 3 months agoThat would only show that people are ignorant of the past and influenced by what is called the national myth [0], not necessarily that their definition of fascism has changed.
To return your argument, if you poll people who call current events fascists and ask them if that 1923 Supreme court decision is fascist, would you be as confident that 95% would say it's not?
That people's view of fascism has changed after world war 2 is obvious and not particularity insightful. So has their view of antisemitism for instance.
I also should add that I agree with you on the great danger of labeling too many things fascists, including the current events. It is entirely possible to oppose Trump's second term and even think that it is a threat to democracy without resorting to calling it fascist. It is also possible to compare it with the rise of fascist regimes if one provides appropriate arguments.
I just don't think that your example with 1920s America illustrates that point particularly well.
- aaplok 3 months ago
- pfannkuchen 3 months ago
- MengerSponge 3 months ago1923 Germany wasn't fascist either. 1933 Germany, for what it's worth, liked a lot of things about 1923 America. Nazi eugenics grew from American ideas.
- pfannkuchen 3 months ago1923 Germany not being fascist is irrelevant to my point.
My point is that during the time period where USA was considered fascist-fighting heroes according to the mainstream account, they themselves had many views that were considered normal back then but strongly “fascist” today. I guess the definition of fascist must have changed?
- MengerSponge 3 months agoFascism and white supremacy aren't interchangeable terms. The formal definition has refined, although the colloquial usage hasn't kept up.
Check out this summary of Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism essay, with 14 characteristics of fascist movements/regimes.
https://www.openculture.com/2024/11/umberto-ecos-list-of-the...
Like many diagnostic criteria, it's not sufficient to only check one or two of the boxes. It's also worth being honest and examining the aspects of American culture that have made it particularly susceptible to fascism.
- aaplok 3 months agoChanged compared to when? Back in 1939 Nazism and Fascism were different doctrines, which were soon put in the same bag of "fascism" for the purpose of war propaganda from the allies. Bizarrely the equally insane Japanese racism wasn't called fascist.
Nowadays fascism has become synonymous with right extremists in popular culture, I guess because it's an easy way to discredit a political opponent.
I believe that scholars who study political science have a different and more consistent definition of fascism, though it too likely evolved to capture the essential characteristics of related ideologies.
A significant difference between Jim Crow's America and fascist regimes is the concentration of power into the hands of one man (or a small group). That means that separation of power (executive, judiciary, legislative) that existed through American history did not exist in Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany. Another one is nationalism. There are likely others.
- MengerSponge 3 months ago
- pfannkuchen 3 months ago
- dragonwriter 3 months ago
- gnabgib 3 months agoDiscussion (53 points, 9 hours ago, 36 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43495824
- jeetoid 3 months agoJason Stanley? Jason Stanley, the Jacob Urowsky Professor of Philosophy at Yale University? [1]
- locusm 3 months agoThat headline makes it sound like he had to flee under the cover of darkness.
- FilosofumRex 3 months agoMost philosophy dept nowadays have fewer undergrads than profs. An entitled liberal arts prof from an elitist university leaving the US for Canada, will improve both nations.
- archagon 3 months ago“Entitled” how? Sounds like innuendo for “I don’t like him.”
- archagon 3 months ago
- 3 months ago
- 3 months ago
- Ferret7446 3 months agoI would wager that he's part of the problem. "Those who can't do, teach."
- archagon 3 months agoA pithy phrase frequently uttered by those who can’t do or teach. Or have no idea what academia actually entails.
- archagon 3 months ago
- verdverm 3 months agoThe brain drain is beginning
- krembo 3 months agoSome random dude is relocating. The internets - "The brain drain is beginning, were doomed"
- verdverm 3 months agoNot the first, not just random, all things start with a few and then may grow
- archagon 3 months agoRandom? Try well-known historian and published author.
- archagon 3 months ago
- timbit42 3 months agoDon't forget to count all the doctors moving out the US to Canada and the EU.
- chneu 3 months agoI know dozens of US academics who have moved out of US or are planning to, because of Trump and conservative's war on information.
I'm just one person. It's anecdotal but speaks volumes that I'd know that many.
- verdverm 3 months ago
- red020 3 months ago[flagged]
- totalkikedeath 3 months ago[dead]
- totalkikedeath 3 months ago
- krembo 3 months ago
- suraci 3 months agovery unwise, the US is the best place in the world for studying fascism
- readthenotes1 3 months ago[flagged]
- duringmath 3 months ago1. You'd think he would want to study it up close.
2. If anything it's "fascism lite" and it's only for 4 years.
3. I'm not sure that forcing some belt tightening on a bloated academia is the worst thing in the world.
- lwansbrough 3 months agoSurely it will only be 4 years!
- RandomBacon 3 months agoIt was the first time. How much do you want to wager?
- Erem 3 months agoIf you’re contending that he let go of power peacefully the first time then I have some Jan 6 assault conviction to show you. Let’s not forget that he threw a mob at Congress to prevent certifying his opponent’s win.
- drewbug01 3 months agoThere was a deeply unsettling moment there in the waning days of the first term. It’s not unreasonable to be concerned about what may unfold at the end of the next one.
- theshrike79 3 months agoThe first time he didn't have a plan and people didn't know how to manage him.
Now they have Project 2025 and people who know how to dismantle the system efficiently.
There won't be a fair presidential election in the US in 4 years unless something drastic happens, like the democrats winning a supermajority in the congress and house.
- judahmeek 3 months agoDo you or do you not acknowledge that Trump's authoritarian tendencies are a threat to democratic institutions?
- RandomBacon 3 months agoNo one wants to put their money where their mouth is, and just move the goal posts.
- Erem 3 months ago
- tonfreed 3 months agoI was told it was just voted out last time. That's how it works, right? Just vote your way out of dictatorship?
- RandomBacon 3 months ago
- brickfaced 3 months agoMakes sense if you're familiar with the professor in question:
- lwansbrough 3 months ago