Thread by @D_Ciarabellini

For those who would like to get technical about the meaning of "fascism", here are two good articles:

faena.com/aleph/umberto-…

vox.com/policy-and-pol…

Having considered the matter further, I hereby retract what I said yesterday, about Randy Hillier being a fascist. /1

https://twitter.com/jusnaturaliste/status/1495802990120296454

In fact, technically, I don't even think Trump qualifies as a fascist.

This does not mean, however, that we should be any less concerned about Trump (or Hillier, to a lesser extent), Trumpism, or the rightward malignancies that they are spawning. /2

While Trumpism may not currently meet the technical definition of fascism, it is: (1.) illiberal (2.) right-wing authoritarianism (3.) that openly flirts with violence as an acceptable political strategy & (4.) engages in tactics used by fascists (e.g. negative integration). /3

While it's important to protect the scholarly meaning of fascism, it's understandable why the term fascism has been increasingly used to label much of the right-wing since the rise of Trumpism.

Because although it's not a duck, it sure looks and quacks a lot like a duck. /4

And while I acknowledge that it wasn't technically correct for me to label Randy Hillier as a fascist, my real point remains: (1.) he has concerning connections to fascists & Neo-Nazis; and (2.) his political messaging is fueling the growth of fascism-adjacent Trumpism. /5

Now, I was critiqued for saying yesterday that Hillier's concerning Neo-Nazi/fascist connections and dangerous political messaging were relevant to determining if it was 'in the public interest' to arrest/prosecute him for the crimes he has openly committed. /6

(For those who don't know: even where a crime has 100% been committed, the police/Crown still have discretion not to arrest/prosecute where: (1.) not in public interest; or (2.) conviction very unlikely.)

(I'm talking about what's relevant to answering the first issue.) /7

I cannot say that this is an entirely unfair critique - it is arguably a slippery slope to consider someone's political activity in deciding whether to arrest/prosecute them for a crime. After all, isn't Justice supposed to be blind? Equal application of the law to all? /8

I would defend my position by pointing out that, in the specific case of Randy Hillier, the crimes he has committed are not disconnected from his dangerous politics. In fact, they are an extension of it. He committed offences to advance a fascism-adjacent political agenda. /9

Now, truthfully, I don't even think it's controversial to say that, when considering whether to arrest/prosecute a sitting elected official, a relevant 'public interest' consideration is whether their crime was committed to advance their political goals - regardless of goal. /10

After all, it's a wildly different scenario for an elected official to, say, drive home drunk alone from a private function, vs. publicly counselling his/her voting bloc to commit crimes.

In the latter scenario, the elected official is abusing their position to commit crime. /11

I also think it's uncontroversial to say that, if that elected official had the political goal of overthrowing our democracy and installing a dictatorship, & crime was counselling ppl to do just that, their ideology itself would be relevant to 'public interest' discretion. /12

I think this latter statement is uncontroversial because it seems clear to me that certain political ideologies cannot be tolerated (e.g. Nazism) - because they are themselves inherently intolerant & will use liberal tolerance against liberals to dominate & destroy democracy. /13

Now, the question vis-a-vis Randy Hillier specifically is more complicated, because he doesn't fit the 'clear case' I just described. However, I think his dangerous political connections/activity remains relevant to 'public interest' discretion calculus because.../14

...(1.) His crimes have a nexus with his politics, i.e. they were committed for political purposes; & (2.) His political connections/activity are sufficiently illiberal and dangerous to raise similar concerns to outright fascism.

Now, let me be clear.../15

...I freely acknowledge that this will not be an uncontroversial view.

I accept the "slippery slope" critique & I don't have a great answer for why this won't descend into discrimination against legitimate political views.

And maybe I'll reflect further and change my view. /16

But as I'm thinking through this topical question, I am also reminded that fascist political movements have in the past used the institutions of liberalism as a ladder to reach their 'tipping point', and once reached: kicking away the ladder, and ruling from the rooftop. /17

I am concerned because, historically, fascism has grown out of liberal democracies - like a cancerous tumour that just spreads until it overtakes and destroys the host. /18

While we may not (yet) be dealing with textbook fascism, the populist right-wing extremism/authoritarianism we are facing is perhaps just as dangerous - or at least it's on its way to becoming just as dangerous.

And there is never going to be a clear boundary for us.../19

...to watch for on the horizon, which would signal to us in advance that 'beyond this point there is no return to liberal politics as usual, from hereon out dialogue will be unable to stop the escalating use of violence for political ends'. /20

If that boundary will be visible at all, it will be visible only in hindsight by historians long after the fact.

But I am interested to preserve liberal democracy while it's still alive, not to identify it's time of death in an autopsy. /21

In conclusion: maybe I'm wrong to point to Randy Hillier's dangerous political connections/activity as relevant 'public interest' considerations for pursuing arrest/prosecution for crimes actually committed.

I don't know.

But I'm worried about where things are headed. /22

Anyway, these have been some of my thoughts on the topic of whether to #ArrestRandyHillier.

If you think I'm wrong - feel free to tell me why. I'm trying to work through all of this myself, & I welcome critiques in good faith.

#lawtwitter #onpoli #Fascism #cdnpoli #cdnpolitics