Nothing encapsulates the decline of the American project quite like the optics of its 250th anniversary. While four hundred masked neo-fascists marched through the capitol in navy-blue button-downs and khakis chanting “Reclaim America!”—entirely unchallenged either by police or antifascists—the official Independence Day parade was canceled because of extreme heat. It’s a disturbing vignette for our era. The country is turning far to the right and becoming too hot to even celebrate its own founding myths, reaching temperatures that climate scientists said would have been “virtually impossible” before human-caused climate change.
So, who’s to blame for this current mess? Predictably, the
political class has no interest in examining the structural decay. In two
back-to-back speeches this weekend, President Trump workshopped a new
scapegoat: communism. The tone summoned the anger of his 2017 inauguration
speech, “American Carnage,” when he blamed open borders and foreign nations for
gutting the American Dream, carefully avoiding the corporations that plundered
the working class and spoiled the land.
But his second term is less focused on hardening borders
and more focused on what he calls the “enemy within,” which has included
immigrants and anyone potentially critical of U.S. foreign policy, especially
the fanatical, bipartisan worship of genocidal Zionism. Trump has met that
“enemy” with violent and deadly force, using the Department of Homeland
Security as the main instrument of terror in places like Minnesota.
That definition of the enemy has expanded to include
antifascism, which he has designated a “domestic terrorist organization,”
paving the way for the targeting of any organization or individual supporting
actions considered “antifascism,” such as immigrant defense or even the broad
set of movements and beliefs under the rubric of “anti-capitalism.” In other
words, we’re reaching a moment when it’s illegal to be antifascist.
This rhetorical escalation is no accident; it is a
calculated electoral strategy. More and more, as an electoral left movement
makes key wins in the lead-up to the November mid-terms, Trump will most likely
ratchet up his anti-communist rhetoric, painting even the most rabid,
establishment anticommunist Democrats as party to a nefarious communist plot.
That has already included targeting more organized formations of the socialist
and anti-imperialist left.
Viewed in this light, Trump’s speech last Friday at the
so-called Shrine of Democracy was probably his most ironic. Under the shadow of
Mount Rushmore, Trump went on a dark tirade naming the enemy as the “communist
menace,” a movement made up of “illegal immigrants,” “criminals,” “radicals,”
“thieves,” and “lunatics” who “come in and loot [and] pillage our nation.” This
isn’t just typical rhetorical theater from one of the world’s greatest
confidence men. It is the foundational myth making required to justify a very
real domestic police state.
There is no small irony in those accusations. The very
ground beneath the president’s feet is stolen land, and the monument itself is
a permanent testament to the exact kind of looting and pillaging he attributes
to Marxist agitators.
If you possess even a baseline level of cognitive
function and haven’t succumbed to total historical brain rot, Trump’s ultimatum
should make you laugh and perhaps cry. He stood beneath the shadow of thieves
and men who had looted and pillaged Indigenous land. The shrine had been built
at the final destination for what was once known by the Lakotas as the “Thieves
Road,” the trail Custer had illegally carved into the Black Hills in 1874 in
search of gold.
But don’t take my word for it. The Supreme Court declared
the ground beneath Trump’s very feet stolen land—that is, pillaged and looted.
In fact, it called the settlers and miners who had entered the lands known as
He Sapa trespassers, ruling in 1980 that the starvation-driven coercion used to
strip the Sioux of the Black Hills was a profound constitutional violation.
The irony is that the only thief present at Mount
Rushmore that day was the very country holding the party. Trump’s warnings
about a ‘communist menace’ threatening American heritage are just a projection
trick—it’s an inversion of reality, where the oppressors have become the
oppressed, and the invaders act in self-defense against the very people they
have robbed and slaughtered. This projection and inversion is central to the
very American identity Trump claims is under attack.
“You can be loyal to Karl Marx, or you can be loyal to
America,” he said. “You can be a communist or you can be a patriot. You cannot
be both.” The ultimatums are spurious but appear to create a loyalty test,
forcing a choice between standing with genocidaires and slavers, and their
apologists, or with those who tried to overthrow those violent systems of
oppression. (I think I know what side we’d all like to be on.)
Those supposedly loyal to the nineteenth-century German
political economist spread “lies about our heritage” and “tell our children
that we live on stolen land or that our heroes were oppressors.” But one has to
wonder about the legacy of Marx as a European when he said of the historical
reality of class revolution, “as the American War of Independence initiated a
new era of ascendency for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War
will do for the working classes.”
Or when he described just how the ascendancy of that bourgeoisie was achieved in the first volume of Das Kapital, where he dryly noted that the dawn of capitalist production was “[t]he discovery of gold and silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in mines of the aboriginal population” of the Americas. Understanding that modern capitalism required genocide and plunder is, apparently, quite scary. Trump has met rhetoric with action, and we should take note.
In his second term, Trump has waged an all-out assault on
his political opponents, primarily those on the left. Specifically, that
includes what he laid out in his National Security Presidential Memorandum 7
(NSPM-7), titled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political
Violence” and signed on September 25, 2025.
The directive fully recalibrates post-9/11
counterterrorism objectives to target domestic political speech, organizing,
and funding. I wouldn’t say it is the darkest chapter in U.S. history, but we
should take serious stock of how easily the post-9/11 security
apparatus—originally built to hunt down and kill “terrorists”—has been
seamlessly turned inward to criminalize domestic dissent, freeze the bank
accounts of progressive non-profits, and treat local antifascist activists like
insurgent cells. It has effectively implemented widespread counterinsurgency in
the absence of an actual insurgency.
After all, fascism isn’t new to the United States, and it
hasn’t historically had to don the mantle of fascism to operate. Whether it was
the genocidal blood quantum laws of federal Indian policy or Jim Crow racial
segregation, European fascists took much of their inspiration from the colonial
and white supremacist legal regimes of their American counterparts when they
drafted documents such as the Nuremberg Laws.
And climate crisis aside, it is worth making a
controversial point: our present state of affairs is far from the most
repressive or authoritarian era the United States has ever seen. I’m not saying
it can’t get worse—it could. But it also could turn out another way, if people
are willing to fight for an alternative.
That’s not to minimize the real and terrible danger of
the current moment and the necessity to confront it and build alternatives.
Rather, it serves as a baseline for reality. As a student of history and a
historical subject myself, it is humbling to read the stories of our
ancestors—how they survived genocide through everything from everyday acts of
defiance to organized resistance movements that undoubtedly staved off complete
annihilation.
CounterPunch, this piece first appeared on Red Scare.
Nick Estes is a citizen of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe. He is a
journalist, historian and co-host of the Red
Nation Podcast. He is the author of Our
History Is the Future: Standing Rock Versus the Dakota Access Pipeline, and the
Long Tradition of Indigenous Resistance (Verso, 2019).

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.