Brilliant and absorbing. I’m still trying to engage with this a week after first reading it. You’re certainly right to look beyond Trump: he lacks the psychological robustness and ideological commitment to see any of this through, and we focus on his personal flaws at our peril. The people around, behind and after him will be terrifyingly more purposeful. We must take the advantage of the disarray that will follow when he proves less than fit for the task (which will be soon). I think you’re right to focus away from the incoherent rhetoric that people voted for – though we still have to address the many forms of exclusion and disillusionment that it spoke to – and look at the coherent ideology that is being constructed, and for which people’s anger is being exploited. I’ve taken a deep breath and followed you a little way into the swamp (Reddit – WTF happened there?) and yes, you’re right that the 1930s is too easy and close a historical parallel. We need to go further back. This piece about the counter-enlightenment (the Throne and the Altar) fills in some of the history between reactions to the French revolution, C20th nationalist fascism, and the current wave of Dark Enlightenment (another term the neo-reactionaries, neo-fascists and white supremacists like to use – and yes there are debates about the value of a pro-fascist or conciliatory monarch on their discussion lists). Given the conservative christianity that has accompanied many of these movements in the past, I’m interested that the current wave is so relatively so secular – the evangelical wing of the GOP were late and fairly reluctant to the Trump party. Why do you think this is?