Neo-Fascist Shadows, Far-Right Flames: Farage & Trump’s War on Democracy

 While avoiding direct labelling, we can analyse elements of Trump’s and Farage’s political rhetoric and strategies that resemble tactics historically associated with fascist movements. Using academic frameworks such as Umberto Eco’s Ur-Fascism, Robert Paxton’s Anatomy of Fascism, and Roger Griffin’s concept of palingenetic ultranationalism, we can identify authoritarian, nationalist, and anti-democratic tendencies. These elements do not equate to full-fledged fascism but reflect a selective adoption of its methods.

Both leaders promote a form of mythic nationalism, evoking an idealised past -Trump’s “Make America Great Again” and Farage’s vision of pre-EU Britain-as a means of framing politics as cultural and ethnic restoration. This aligns with Griffin’s theory of palingenesis, in which national rebirth is central to fascist ideology, portraying decline as reversible through authoritarian leadership.

Scapegoating plays a central role, with marginalised groups (immigrants, “globalists”) and institutions (the EU, the UN) presented as existential threats. Trump’s rhetoric around the “deep state” and Farage’s demonisation of EU bureaucrats weaponise division, shifting blame for social crises onto constructed enemies. This echoes Paxton’s analysis of fascist movements constructing internal and external enemies to justify authoritarian measures.

Authoritarian leadership is cultivated through personalist rule, where power is centralised around charismatic figures claiming to embody “the people’s will.” Trump’s rallies and Farage’s Brexit persona position them as anti-corruption saviours while attacking institutional checks-branding the media as “fake news” and dismissing parliamentary opposition. This reflects Juan Linz’s concept of authoritarianism, in which democratic institutions are systematically undermined.

Anti-intellectualism fuels their appeal. Expertise is dismissed in favour of “common sense” slogans, while conspiracy theories-Trump’s “stolen election” narrative and Farage’s claims of EU plots—undermine trust in institutions and erode rational discourse. This aligns with Jason Stanley’s How Fascism Works, which identifies anti-intellectualism as a hallmark of authoritarian rhetoric.

Grievance mobilisation is a key tactic, framing politics as an existential struggle-“American carnage”, “Brexit betrayal”-in which their supporters are positioned as victims of elites or minorities. This victim-perpetrator reversal, particularly in narratives around the white working class being “left behind,” justifies exclusionary policies. Paxton’s framework highlights how fascist movements exploit grievances to mobilise mass support against perceived enemies.

Militarism is subtly encouraged. State force is glorified-Trump’s praise for police crackdowns, Farage’s calls to “defend British values”-while far-right vigilantism is tacitly endorsed. Trump’s “stand back and stand by” remark to the Proud Boys echoes fascism’s fetishisation of strength and order. This aligns with Eco’s identification of fascism’s cult of violence as a means of maintaining power and suppressing opposition.

Democratic erosion follows as dissent is labelled unpatriotic-NFL protesters, Remain voters and electoral legitimacy is undermined unless they win. Trump’s 2020 election denialism and Farage’s threats to “unleash chaos” over Brexit delays normalise authoritarian responses to democratic processes, destabilising pluralism. Nancy Bermeo’s concept of democratic backsliding explains how such tactics incrementally degrade democratic norms without overt dictatorship.

While neither Trump nor Farage operates within a fully fascist regime, their authoritarian-populist strategies reflect historical fascist tactics: mythic nostalgia, scapegoating, anti-institutional rage, and militarised rhetoric. Their movements thrive on manufactured crises and eroded trust, testing the resilience of democracy. By framing opponents as traitors and elections as rigged, they normalise extremism, leaving democracies vulnerable to gradual decline rather than sudden collapse. The danger is not outright fascism but the incremental dismantling of norms that sustain pluralism and truth.

The critical question remains: how does complacency enable authoritarian tactics, and what steps must be taken to resist these manipulative divisions? Defending truth and pluralism requires recognising that democratic decline is not always abrupt but can occur through the erosion of institutional trust, the mainstreaming of extremism, and the slow acceptance of anti-democratic norms. Without resistance, democracies risk an irreversible slide into authoritarianism