The language of fascism: (White) Nationalism and Ted Cruz

So, the big fash-watch news of the past 24 hours has been huge: Donald Trump literally declared himself a “nationalist” in a closely watched campaign speech. There was no ambiguity at all, he repeated himself:

“You know, they have a word, it sort of became old-fashioned. It’s called a nationalist,” Trump said at a campaign event in Houston, where he rallied voters to support Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in November’s midterm elections.

“And I say, ‘Really? We’re not supposed to use that word,’” Trump continued. “You know what I am? I’m a nationalist. OK? I’m a nationalist.”

As the crowd in the Houston Toyota Center roared with applause, the president continued: “Use that word. Use that word.”

Sigh.

Did Trump mean it? (Does it matter?)

Did Trump mean this? What exactly did he mean?

To me, the meaning seems obvious, since our “nationalist” President has no problem calling Mexicans rapists or calling Haiti and Africa “shithole countries”.

But Trump and his supporters have a habit of denying what Trump meant (or even occasionally pretending he didn’t say something at all). This leads to the oddly logical conclusion that the public just shouldn’t trust anything that comes out of Trump’s mouth. A recent example comes from a campaign appearance in Nevada this weekend, where Trump promised to deliver a large middle class tax cut “prior to November”.

There’s just one problem with this plan: Congress is in recess until November. It is literally not possible to enact a massive new tax cut by the end of this month. But that didn’t stop the President from promising such a thing!

So, how do you tell if the President is lying, or at least saying something different from what he means?

That’s a trick question. It doesn’t matter if the President is lying or misstating his position, when it comes to things like embracing nationalism. The President of the United States doesn’t have the luxury of being misunderstood. There will be Americans who listen to and even imitate the President. Yesterday a man on a Southwest Airlines flight groped a woman, and then told authorities, “the president of the United States says it’s okay to grab women by their private parts” (and that’s based on something Trump said before he even became President).

So when the President says things like “I’m a nationalist” and “use that word,” I don’t give a shit whether he meant it or how he meant it. People immediately embraced what he said, and he’s responsible for that. To deny that is to deny that language has meaning at all, which is solipsism.

You may wonder at this point why I’m sounding so worked up around the word “nationalist.” The answer, as the Washington Post’s Greg Sargeant lays out quite well, is that when Trump says “nationalism” like a dirty word that requires bravery to use, he clearly means white nationalism:

But “nationalism,” in and of itself, is not necessarily controversial in certain contexts. The sentiment known as “civic nationalism” is routinely expressed by politicians in both parties. There are even aspects of Trumpian nationalism that are unremarkable, such as the economic nationalism embodied in his campaign promise of an infrastructure package (which he has abandoned). What would make his claim controversial is if Trump actually meant “racial nationalist” or “white nationalist.”

Which, of course, is exactly what he did mean. By claiming to be breaking a taboo by using this particular N-word, Trump basically confirmed that without saying it out loud.

The Post and the New York Times have big pieces documenting that the closing Republican message in the midterms rests on brazen racial and xenophobic fear-mongering. This is evident in TV ads that GOP candidates and allied groups are running across the country.

Sargent goes on to explain how those GOP TV ads play to racial fears, portraying one black Democratic candidate as a “big city rapper” seeking government “handouts,” and another as a rapist of white women. Rep. Duncan Hunter of California is attempting to label his Arab-American challenger a “security risk.” This xenophobia extends even to white Democrats like Nate McMurray, who is being depicted as disloyal to America because he can speak Korean.

This is where we are today. Trump and the GOP might even backtrack and deny it, claim Trump never meant to embrace racial nationalism. But it doesn’t matter at this point. It seems obvious to enough people that’s what he meant, and in this political environment it’s only fueling xenophobia and encouraging racial hostility.

The weakness of Ted Cruz

What I think is notable about Trump’s declaration is where he said it, and in what company. This speech was given in Texas, during a campaign rally to boost re-election hopes for incumbent Republican (and suspected Zodiac Killer) Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz is a Cuban-American. Cuban-Americans have historically been more likely to lean conservative than other Latinos, and are more likely to embrace rhetoric condemning illegal immigration (perhaps because until last year, it was easier for Cubans to enter the U.S. legally than Latinos from other countries). Cruz himself has a history of condemning “illegal” immigration while embracing his father’s “legal” path to citizenship. Just last month, Cruz literally summarized his stance on immigration as “legal good, illegal bad.”

Still, Ted Cruz has no reason to be a friend to Trump. Trump attacked Cruz so personally and relentlessly during the 2016 elections (including racially tinged questions about Cruz’s citizenship and eligibility to be President) that Ted Cruz still refuses to say whether he considers Trump a friend, simply referring to Trump as “the President” and someone Cruz is willing to “work with.” And that’s during a weekend where President Trump was coming to Texas to help Cruz win re-election.

Ouch.

Cruz previously tested out some tepid opposition to white nationalism. In June, he proposed legislation to prevent immigration officials from needlessly ripping families apart. Also in June, Cruz actually dared to suggest on Twitter that it might be better to vote for a Democrat than a self-avowed Nazi. Baby steps, it seemed. Perhaps Cruz was beginning to realize that it’s not just “illegal immigrants” being targeted; we’re now tearing apart families seeking legal refugee status.

That’s the thing about white nationalism. It doesn’t care about legal status. It doesn’t care about obeying the law. It will strip lawful citizens of their citizenship. Cruz’s third-grade logic of “legal good, illegal bad” doesn’t matter when you’re dealing with people who will retroactively make legal residency and citizenship illegal.

And that’s what white nationalism does, and already is doing under Trump.

In that context, I think it’s somewhat obvious why Trump would float being a “nationalist” at a Ted Cruz rally. Cruz is one of only two nationally recognized Republicans left that might challenge Trump’s push toward white nationalism (even if only out of self-preservation). Cruz and Marco Rubio have something personally at stake if Republicans start denaturalizing refugees or their children, and Cruz in particular has shown flashes of concern over white nationalism.

And since Cruz is facing an unusually difficult battle to keep his Senate seat, he really needs Trump right now. Cruz needs Trump enough that he wouldn’t challenge Trump at his own campaign rally just weeks before an election.

So Trump floating this balloon at a Ted Cruz campaign rally is a brilliant move. This is the sort of tactical brilliance Trump is actually capable of. Trump is terrible at following or even understanding conventional political strategy, but he grasps the tactics of showmanship well. Trump has an innate ability to sense when someone could upstage him.

So of course, if Trump wanted to do this at all, he’d choose to do it in front of Cruz at a Ted Cruz political rally. Trump just forced Cruz into tacit approval of Trump’s remarks, which will make it harder for Cruz to assert himself as a less-racist, still-conservative alternative to Trump in the future.