WE CROSSED A RED LINE

A few weeks ago, Nvidia and AMD met with President Trump to discuss Chinese export licenses for the sale of certain advanced microchips.  As late as last April, the sale of those chips to China had been judged a national security risk, but when there’s a “deal” to be made, such pesky concerns have to take a back seat to the unmatched deal-making skills of the President, who is a master of extortion.  As reported in the Washington Post: 

[Trump] said he had had a conversation with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang [below], whom he called “a great guy,” about allowing the chip’s export. “I said, if I’m going to do that, I want you to pay us as a country something because I’m giving you a release.”

And just like that, Nvidia and AMD agreed to pay the government 15% of the Chinese sales revenue from those chips.  Never mind that this revenue-sharing amounts to an export tax, which the U.S. Constitution flatly forbids, and never mind that this is yet another legally questionable Trump transaction that will be challenged in the courts, wasting taxpayer money.  What matters is that the definition of a national security threat is to be determined solely at the whim of the President, who has decided that America’s national security can be monetized.  

On a roll after securing this “deal,” the President next bullied Intel, a troubled U.S. chip maker, into selling the government a 10% stake in its publicly traded shares, ceding a controlling interest in the company (above).  It is worth noting that the money used to acquire these shares was siphoned off from the Chips Act, in blithe contravention of the purposes for which Congress appropriated those monies.  But what does that matter when you can show the CEO of a major corporation who’s boss and sink a Biden legislative success at the same time?  A Washington Post opinion piece described the “deal” as more of a personal humiliation and an economic distortion:

Intel chief executive Lip-Bu Tan agreed to the deal only after Trump demanded he resign over benign investments in China. Trump’s description of their Aug. 11 meeting says it all: “He walked in wanting to keep his job, and he ended up giving us $10 billion for the United States.” 

The deal’s terms, meanwhile, are heavily tilted toward the government: It purchased shares at $20.47 instead of Friday’s $24.80 closing price — a discount at current shareholders’ expense. Intel’s board green-lit the below-market transaction without shareholder approval, showing how management now prioritizes government interests over fiduciary duties. And the deal allows the government to purchase an additional 5 percent of the company at $20 per share if Intel sells part of its struggling foundry business, thus distorting government and management views of specific corporate restructuring decisions.

These are just three examples of the President, who has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy six times, telling business how to do business.  As reported by Axios, others examples of the Art of the Deal include:

• Apple being squeezed for another $100 billion investment commitment to avoid huge tariffs for not making its phones in the U.S.
• U.S. Steel having to hand over a golden share to Trump's personal control to reverse the rejection of its sale to Nippon Steel.
• Law firms being ordered to hand over free services to the government to avoid being pursued over their past work.

It's not just private industry — sports and entertainment businesses are also getting pushed around:

• Trump threatened to derail the Washington Commanders' new stadium deal unless the team changed its name back to the Redskins.
• He demanded the Baseball Hall of Fame include Pete Rose, and more recently, Roger Clemens.
• ABC and NBC are being threatened with losing their various local broadcast licenses because Trump doesn't like their reporting on him.

As a commentator cited in Heather Cox Richardson’s August 23, 2025, column said, this is “just textbook 1930s fascism.”  If that sounds extreme, it isn’t. 

Typically, fascist leaders threaten their national industries to not only embrace their regimes or risk financial ruin, but also coerce them to fund their national debt—see the classic example of Hitler below. With the extension of the 2017 tax cuts and the addition of trillions to the national debt under the One Big Beautiful Bill (below), Trump seems to be doing precisely that:  shaking down companies and demanding corporate obeisance and, at the same time, generating revenue to pay for massive tax cuts and an exploding national debt. 

This political interference in the economy is not warranted by a national emergency such as the country faced during the Great Depression or WWII.  Nor is it warranted by the urgent need to shore up the banking system as occurred during the 2008 financial crisis.  But given the fiscal hole the Republican party (with the help of prior Democratic administrations) has dug for us, is this kibitzing by a President who behaves as if he were the CEO of corporate America actually sound fiscal policy?  Or is it state capitalism or fascist capitalism as Robert Reich asked in a recent Substack?

I have not read a single economist who thinks this is sound fiscal policy.  (For a small sampling, see the Guardian, Reich’s Substack, and the Washington Post opinion piece above.)  That leaves Reich’s characterization.  As between his two options, I prefer the term fascist capitalism, because it emphasizes the Führerprinzip (leader principle), while state capitalism doesn’t quite capture the strongarm tactics of a president who is-- consciously or not—following the playbook of the most famous fascist in modern history, Hitler. 

Supporting my definitional preference is an article published by the Brennan Center, called “How Big Business Bailed Out the Nazis” (emphasis added in bold):

According to The Arms of Krupp, the Nazi Party was essentially bankrupt in late 1932. Joseph Goebbels, who would later become the Minister of Propaganda, complained, “[w]e are all very discouraged, particularly in the face of the present danger that the entire party may collapse….The financial situation of the Berlin organization is hopeless. Nothing but debts and obligations.” 

Regardless of the party’s financial problems, Hitler was named Chancellor in late January 1933. He called for elections in early March. With less than two weeks left before the vote, Herman Goering sent telegrams to Germany’s 25 leading industrialists, inviting them to a secret meeting in Berlin on February 20, 1933. Attending the gathering were four I.G. Farben directors and Krupp chief Gustav Krupp [above]. Hitler addressed the group, saying “private enterprise cannot be maintained in a democracy.”  He also told the men that he would eliminate trade unions and communists. Hitler asked for their financial support and to back his vision for Germany. 

According to Robert Jackson, the former Supreme Court Justice and chief U.S. prosecutor at Nuremberg, “[T]he industrialists…became so enthusiastic that they set about to raise three million Reichsmarks [worth about $30 million today] to strengthen and confirm the Nazi Party in power.” 

In return for its fealty to Hitler and the bailout of his Reich, I.G. Farben went on to produce the Zyklon B gas used to murder millions in the Nazi extermination camps.  Krupp's reward was the use of slave labor from the labor camps in its manufacture of the tanks, naval guns, and other military equipment used by the Wehrmacht.  Fascism was very good for business, until it wasn’t.  If you would like to read more on this subject, I recommend this article in the Atlantic  by Timothy Ryback, “The Oligarchs Who Came to Regret Supporting Hitler.”

In short, given the choice Hitler presented, to remain private enterprises or maintain democracy, the German oligarchs quickly opted to throw democracy under the bus and willingly paid Hitler’s fascist enterprise for the privilege.  Nvidia, AMD, Intel, Apple, U.S. Steel, and the seven law firms that pledged $940 million in pro bono legal services to be determined by Trump did the same.  This is what happens when you mix capitalism with fascism. 

But these economic “deals” are just one aspect of this Administration’s sharp goose step to the right.  The march doesn’t stop at the Treasury’s door.  Every aspect of American life has been re-imagined by the techno-autocratic elite behind this president, and what may have seemed impossible six months ago has become a reality.  Who are the people behind King Trump’s throne? The most visible are:

Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation.  He is the author of Project 2025, which Trump still claims to know nothing about.  The chart above summarizes Project 2025’s objectives, some of which have already been achieved or are in process under Trump's leadership. 

Curtis Yarvin, New Right ideologue.  His profile in the June 9, 2025, issue of the New Yorker is absolutely chilling.  A friend of Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and JD Vance, who greeted Yarvin at a Thiel party with, “You reactionary fascist!”,  Yarvin has been described as a "neo-reactionary", "neo-monarchist" and "neo-feudalist" who "sees liberalism as creating a Matrix-like totalitarian system, and who wants to replace American democracy with a sort of techno-monarchy". He has defended the institution of slavery and has suggested that certain races may be more naturally inclined toward servitude than others. He has also argued that whites have inherently higher IQs than black people, and opposes U.S. civil rights programs. 

Steve Bannon, host of the podcast The War Room.  He once urged his audience to, “Let the grassroots turn on the hate because that’s the ONLY thing that will make them do their duty.” 

Peter Thiel, whom I’ve written about here.   He argued that capitalism and democracy are incompatible, making the same argument Hitler made to his industrialist backers. 

Russ Vought, head of the Office of Management and Budget.  He said of the federal workers to be purged by DOGE:  “When they wake up in the morning, WE WANT THEM NOT TO WANT TO GO TO WORK, because they are increasingly viewed as villains. We want their funding to be shut down … WE WANT TO PUT THEM IN TRAUMA.” 

Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff.  He has asserted, “The powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.” The ultraconservative majority on the Supreme Court has established Miller's assertion of the infallibility of the president as judicial precedent.  

     

And last, but not least, JD Vance.  He once privately compared Trump to Adolf Hitler but now serves as Trump's vice president and heir apparent, despite (or because of?) his prescient characterization of his boss.

As Goebbels once said, "The storm is coming."  I would say the storm has developed into a Category 5 hurricane and that it has made landfall.

Am I exaggerating?  If only!  And if it were only me.  Since I began this post just a couple of days ago, I have read multiple articles in the legacy media and online posts by economists, historians, policy makers, and journalists, a number of whom are either apolitical or nonpartisan.  They have concluded the Trump Administration has crossed a red line, and that what lies on the other side of that line is fascism. 

When I use that term, I mean this definition provided by Google’s AI assistant Gemini, which I think is as good as any other I’ve read.  (And a shout out here to my friend L., who directed me to this subject):

Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and the economy. Key elements include a cult of the leader, fervent nationalism, racial or ethnic purity, glorification of violence and war, and the subjugation of individual rights to the state. 

Key Characteristics: 

Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism: Power is concentrated in the hands of a single leader or small group under one party, and the state exerts total control over society and the economy. 

Ultranationalism:

It emphasizes intense devotion to the nation, viewing it as a transcendent entity that can only be achieved through national unity and strength, often at the expense of other nations or ethnic groups. 

Cult of Personality:

A central feature is the reverence for a charismatic, powerful, and often "redemptive" leader who is presented as infallible and embodying the will of the nation.  

National Decline and Victimhood:

Fascists often promote a narrative of a nation that has declined or been humiliated, requiring a powerful movement to restore its past glory and purity. 

Suppression of Opposition:

Dissent is not tolerated; opposition parties and minority groups are often designated as enemies and may be imprisoned, eliminated, or persecuted. 

Economic Control:

While ostensibly leaving private ownership intact, fascists exert significant control over nominally private businesses, directing them to serve the "national interest" as defined by the state.  

Violence and Militarism:

Violence is often glorified and seen as a necessary and redemptive force for national cleansing and rejuvenation. 

Myth and Propaganda:

Fascism relies heavily on myths, propaganda, and the deliberate spread of lies to mobilize the population, question reality, and promote a distorted national narrative. 

I think Gemini's definition ticks all the boxes in the Trumpian version of America.  We’ve landed in a very dark place, a place that is certainly not the “Morning in America” Ronald Reagan envisioned.  On the contrary, 2025 America is beginning to look a lot like 1933 Germany, but much worse, actually.  Just imagine what Hitler could have achieved had he had the Internet, the world's reserve currency, the most powerful military on the planet, nuclear weapons, and artificial intelligence.   

Keep it real!

Marilyn