Fascism Addresses This: When You’re Accustomed To Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression

Is There A Progressive Response?

Tuesday evening, the NY Times published a blockbuster piece based on three interviews with 4-star Marine General (ret.) John Kelly, former Trump Homeland Security chief and then his longest-serving chief of staff. Michael Schmidt wrote that few top officials spent more time behind closed doors in the White House with Trump than Kelly. What got Kelly to speak out was how “deeply bothered” he was by Trump’s threat to use the military against domestic opponents. Overall, Kelly is urging voters to “consider fitness and character when selecting a president, even more than a candidate’s stances on the issues... He said that, in his opinion, Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law. He discussed and confirmed previous reports that Trump had made admiring statements about Hitler, had expressed contempt for disabled veterans and had characterized those who died on the battlefield for the United States as ‘losers’ and ‘suckers… He’s certainly the only president that has all but rejected what America is all about, and what makes America America, in terms of our Constitution, in terms of our values, the way we look at everything, to include family and government— he’s certainly the only president that I know of, certainly in my lifetime, that was like that. He just doesn’t understand the values— he pretends, he talks, he knows more about America than anybody, but he doesn’t.’”

Yesterday, Anand Giridharadas, followed up with Real Men Reject Fascism to address the not unexpected discovery among pollsters that a majority of American men are embracing the fascist candidate. “What is happening” he wrote, “is that the Republican Party being taken over by fascists has turned out not to be a dealbreaker for a majority of men.” Many men feel perfectly comfortable with toxic masculinity.

Giridharadas worries that “if the material dimension of the problem has gotten adequate attention, the affective dimension of the problem has not. If you spend time traveling this country and talking to people and reporting on communities, if you have the lens of a cultural observer and not only a policy enthusiast, what becomes clear is that, when it comes to men and their enthusiasm for fascism now, the affective dimension may be the dominant one. Which is to say, a lot of men have been persuaded— brainwashed may be a better word— that the future is something that should terrify them. That the future mocks them, thumbs their nose at them. That it will silence them, constrict them, devalue them, censor them, starve them, obviate them, reduce them to jokes.”

A lot of what a lot of men are going through right now is simply the inner experience of the old line, “When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.”

And one of the great sweeping mistakes of our era has been assuming that, because certain kinds of change are morally correct, they go down easy. Because certain destinations are good destinations socially and ethically and arc-of-moral-universe-wise, any experience of discomfort with the journey is a private problem to be suffered alone and given little outside help.

So now here we are in a country that is changing a lot, has changed a lot— indeed, has, over the past few generations, done more to change the status and rights and dignity of women than hundreds of prior generations did. And we have done the right things while failing to manage social and psychological change— failing to manage the minds and hearts of those who experience these worthy changes as headwinds.

This seems to me central to the story of how a majority of men could do what populations bewildered by change and anxious about the future and their place in it have done: support fascism, support dictatorship, support tyranny to smash it all.

…Yes, change is scary. Yes, it sometimes feels like you don’t know how to be these days. Don’t know what to say. Yes, it’s tempting to shake things up when you’re scared. When you feel attacked by the future itself.

But don’t. Because men worthy of the word don’t outsource the care and protection of their families to dictators. Men worthy of the word don’t depend for their self-esteem on the crushing and marginalizing of Others. Men worthy of the word don’t need women to be locked in the fourteenth century legally to feel whole. Men worthy of the word don’t hand over the keys to the future to billionaires who pull the strings.

However one might reject their premises, some fraction of the mass of American men who have succumbed to the lure of Trump’s fascism need to feel seen and heard and recognized in their stress and anxiety and sense of dislocation in the future that is coming. And they need to be invited into a contrary story of progress. Saving the country from tyranny needs to become aspirational for men. Not a lecture.

They need to remember, and become excited to say, that real men reject fascism.

So… how about if a progressive response to the lure of fascism focuses on reframing the conversation— away from fear and towards courage— courage to adapt to changing times, to build a more inclusive society, and to reject easy authoritarian solutions? Something like: real men fight for progress, not against it.

As we’ve been discussing for years now, many men supporting Trump are driven by fear of losing their economic standing. Democrats need to propose concrete economic policies that go beyond just jobs and wages to include aspects of dignity. Progressive ideas like universal health care, strong unions and workers’ rights, as well as investments in sustainable industries, would help reshape the economic landscape in ways that directly benefit these men and make the far-right’s “us vs. them” rhetoric less appealing. Programs like a Green New Deal could offer a sense of purpose in rebuilding the country, and progressives should present it as something men can be proud of participating in, not as a threat to traditional industries or their livelihoods.

Fascists always work to co-opt patriotism by presenting themselves as the defenders of “true” America (or Germany or Japan or Italy or Israel or Iran). The American progressive response should reclaim patriotism by grounding it in our nation's founding ideals of equality and justice for all. This means telling a story where men are called to protect the country from authoritarianism, where defending democracy is an act of courage and strength. Real men fight for freedom, not to restrict others' rights. This vision includes reimagining military and public service, not in terms of dominance, but as avenues to serve the common good. Highlighting the long tradition of progressive veterans and movements that have built the best parts of America can offer a proud, masculine tradition that stands in direct opposition to Trump’s fascism.

And let’s not bury our heads in the sand; many men are being drawn to fascism because it provides a sense of belonging in a world that seems to be erasing their place in it. As progressives, we need to focus on building new forms of community where men, particularly working-class men, feel they have a stake in society. This could mean fostering local, cooperative economies or community service opportunities where men can form bonds, contribute to something meaningful, and escape the loneliness that often fuels right-wing extremism.

Ultimately traditional masculinity— what Josh Hawley tried, unsuccessfully, to write about— has to be reframed in terms that align with progressive values— cooperation, compassion and equity rather than domination, violence and exclusion. Men need a positive role in shaping an inclusive future. This means celebrating men not for their dominance but for their empathy, emotional intelligence and contributions to a just society. The progressive response should offer male role models who challenge the fascist, “strongman” ideal, but still embody strength— through community-building, mutual aid, and advocacy for fairness. 

When Trump was in Latrobe, Pennsylvania a few days ago talking about how impressed he was by the size of favorite son Arnold Palmer’s large penis, progressives could have brought up another Latrobe native, Fred Rogers (Mister Rogers), a powerful example of a man whose empathy and emotional intelligence shaped generations. He taught children the importance of kindness, acceptance and understanding emotions. Rogers was a gentle, yet strong advocate for a compassionate, inclusive society, emphasizing that real strength comes from emotional depth and care for others. Other compelling examples men should be given an opportunity to relate to include Desmond Tutu, the late South African archbishop and activist for peace and reconciliation, who was instrumental in ending apartheid through non-violence and empathy and whose emotional intelligence allowed him to facilitate healing in deeply divided communities, remembered for his deep sense of justice coupled with a profound empathy for both the oppressed and their oppressors; celebrity chef José Andrés, whose humanitarian work exemplifies empathy and a commitment to justice, providing millions of meals to people in disaster-stricken areas, an approach to service emphasizing dignity, collaboration and rapid, practical action in the face of crisis, demonstrating that compassion is a core strength; Colin Kaepernick, whose quiet, courageous decision, grounded in emotional intelligence, to kneel during the national anthem to protest racial injustice showed a commitment to empathy and justice, despite the backlash advocated for dignity and the resistance to systems of oppression; and even Jon Stewart, who used his Daily Show platform to speak out for the underdog, particularly veterans and first responders, for government accountability and compassionate causes, demonstrating how humor and emotional intelligence can go hand in hand with justice.

My visit to Amsterdam's Stedelijk Museum this summer

One of the critical aspects Giridharadas touches on is the need for progressives to reach men on an emotional level, not just through policy. The stories progressives tell need to be aspirational— about what kind of country we can build together, where fairness and equality lead to a better life for everyone, not just certain groups. The fascist story is emotionally compelling because it plays on fear and nostalgia, but a progressive story can be even more powerful by emphasizing hope, solidarity and shared struggle. While fascist/MAGA ideology appeals to some men because it promises a return to order and simplicity— where authoritarianism supposedly offers security and clear hierarchies, the progressive alternative should present personal responsibility not as submission to a strongman but as taking control of one’s own life and contributing to society. Programs focused on education, re-skilling, and personal development should be part of a broader message: that men are needed to help solve problems like climate change, income inequality, and social injustice— not retreat into fear and nostalgia.

Let’s not kid ourselves; the emotional and psychological toll of shifting social roles is significant, but it’s been going largely  unaddressed. A progressive response should emphasize mental health support— particularly for men— while making it clear that asking for help or processing complex emotions is a sign of strength, not weakness. This could be incorporated into broader conversations about healthcare and social services, but it needs to be part of the culture as well. Mental health isn’t just a policy issue; it’s a cultural one, and the left needs to champion it unapologetically.