"Trump Sounds Like a FASCIST!" Piers Morgan vs Slavoj Zizek On Fascism

Added: 2026-05-11

[00:00:00]Once you start having all sorts of different versions of fascism, it's very easy to then call pretty much everyone a fascist that you don't like. Trump likes to attack the left as multiculturalist, confused historicist, self-contradictory.

[00:00:16]Sorry, but if there ever was a historicist, relativist, it's Trump. I have the opportunity to speak to what people consider to be the most dangerous philosopher in the West or to the West.

[00:00:27]And I believe they call you that because you identify as a communist.

[00:00:30]>> I am saying that Stalinism in all its horror is still part of the European Enlightenment.

[00:00:41]It's impossible to avoid the subject of fascism in the age of Donald Trump. Some people wield it simply as an insult to the American president. Others invest a lot of time and energy in explaining how it's a fair and legitimate label. Many of his supporters use it as an example of incendry rhetoric gone too far. All of which begs the question, is Donald Trump a fascist? Well, revered philosopher and psychoanalyst uh Slavoy Jek, author of the new book Liberal Fascisms, has some thoughts. And a bit later in the show, we'll both be joined by Warren Smith, the internet's premier critical thinker who has some different thoughts. Well, joining us to uh right away is Savo. Welcome back to Uncerted.

[00:01:20]Great to see you here in the studio. see you the first time.

[00:01:24]>> Yeah.

[00:01:24]>> Face to face.

[00:01:25]>> I want to start subway with a quote from your new book.

[00:01:28]>> Yeah.

[00:01:28]>> Perhaps the best characterization of Trump is that he's liberal, namely a fascist liberal. He's the ultimate proof that liberalism and fascism work together, that they are the two sides of the same coin. Now, I have always resisted the charges that he's a fascist or a Nazi or any of these labels because I think it's quite dangerous to position people like that unless there's clear coherent evidence and argument to the contrary. What makes you so convinced that he is a fascist?

[00:02:04]First, I don't think he is the one fascist. We should never forget, I repeat this as a maniac all the time, that Trump is for me the reaction of the decay of the weakness of uh this American relative uh liberal democratic welfare state. So for me, you don't begin by uh focusing on Trump. You should begin by self-critique of the liberal establishment. Second thing fascist now I will say something shocking I must apologize in advance I think the world is moving that's why in the title of my book it's plural s the world is moving towards different fascisms >> and I even talk about soft fascism my thesis is that for example China is now a soft fascist country.

[00:03:10]>> So what what is fascism to you?

[00:03:11]>> Ah I will tell you exactly in a very simplified way.

[00:03:15]Fascism is for me it's an old Marxist definition here. I agree with it.

[00:03:22]Fascism is for me a uh conservative modernization. You want to reap all the benefits or fast industrialization and so on but you are aware that if you leave this process without any state control you end up in decay too much individism and so on. So the idea is yes uh uh liberal capitalism but with a strong not only state control but also ideological control usually grounded in some nationalist ethnic more even than religious conservative traditional ideology. my example and I respect them.

[00:04:12]China >> China uh uh they they don't even talk about freedom.

[00:04:20]Their idea is we bring happiness, satisfactory life to people and return to Confortianism in some sense. Isn't Putin doing the same? Isn't Erdogan doing the same? Isn't uh isn't Modi in India doing the same? And uh so again, fascism is not for me this Nazis shouting.

[00:04:45]>> Does it automatically then need to be rightwing or is your argument that it can be leftwing, rightwing really? It's about state control. Is that what you're >> not so much state control as uh state control based on a strong nationalist ideology?

[00:05:02]>> But can that be to the left and the right?

[00:05:05]uh I think not but for a very precise reason not because the right is automatically evil because uh the good thing about left which I disagree with many thing that happened to the left but it's what's happened today is that the left is always aware that when somebody focuses on an external enemy immigrants other races trans people and so on the leftist automatically asks the question which antagonism which tension imminent to our society do they try to cover up in this way like for me the big question about Nazism anti-semitic Nazism is not is it true what they say about Jews of course mostly it's not but my problem is why did the Nazis need a figure like the Jew to sustain their identity. You know, this projection onto an external enemy.

[00:06:11]Yes, communism can come close to it. For example, the the Stalinist obsession with foreign agents and so on and so on.

[00:06:19]But nonetheless, I think that this this denial that our society in itself can be split. And here to return to Trump, nonetheless, here Trump goes pretty far.

[00:06:34]But if you think about a fascist of the classic kind like Mussolini, okay, he would be the embodiment to most people of what a fascist is. And I look at him and look at Trump and all right, you might argue that rhetorically Trump can sound like a fascist from time to time.

[00:06:51]But in terms of his actions, which is how I always prefer to judge Trump, >> he hasn't behaved like Mussolini, has he?

[00:06:58]>> No, absolutely not. But you know what?

[00:07:00]They I absolutely agree here. That's why I emphasized uh that it's just one of the verses.

[00:07:09]>> Uh you know where I see >> do we get into a slippery slope here sl I say this with great respect but >> once you start sort of having all sorts of different versions of fascism it's very easy to then call pretty much everyone a fascist that you don't like.

[00:07:25]And part of my argument about modern modern discourse and in particular about Trump actually is that people say he's a fascist, he's a Nazi. And I'm like a n really, you know, you're comparing him to Adolf Hitler who murdered 12 million people. There is no comparison to me.

[00:07:40]And what it does is it overdemonizes Trump in a way that probably helps him actually, but it also dilutes the impact of real Nazis and to me real fascists like Muslinian stuff in history. If you start parking people like Trump into the mix because you've extended the range of fascists to all sorts of different categories, you you can hook everybody in and then it's kind of meaningless. I we agree more than it may appear here because you know what I'm trying to do and this many people like is not to demonize people like as fascists but to water down and extend dilute the notion of fascism. I think the true tragedy again is the weariness inability of western liberal democracies to effectively act and solve problems.

[00:08:41]If you want an example, I think we should talk about it one. It's you know uh uh Salvador Boule.

[00:08:48]>> Yes. in a very brutal way. He arrested tens of thousands and so on. We know what he did. But the effects were felt in in in in two years. And now in the last three elections, he won almost with uh with communist numbers, you know, 80% and so on. That's for me the problem that liberal democracy is losing its ability to act. It's clear even now with in the United States, democrats are still in confusion. You have democratic socialists, which I think are really old-fashioned social democrats, still much less radical than, let's say, Swedish social democracy.

[00:09:37]>> Would you categorize Mandani as one of those, the the new mayor of New York?

[00:09:41]>> I think that uh first I'm here absolutely pragmatic. I I don't like these choices. Should we mobilize locally people in small cities? Should we wait for a big revolution or whatever? Let's do whatever is possible.

[00:09:59]But uh uh the reason I am tempted to call uh uh Trump a very specific kind of fascist and I will immediately go into it in what specific sense? namely all the fascist leaders that you mentioned and others they of course functioned in a different way. They were with this false dignity, untouchable, no criticism and so on. Well, the way Trump acts, I like to characterize him in another way.

[00:10:35]You know, Trump likes to attack the left as multiculturalist, uh, confused, historicist, self-contradictory.

[00:10:44]Sorry, but if there ever was a historicist relativist, it's Trump. And what I although I don't fully follow him, what I like about uh about somebody like Bernie Sanders with all my critique of him is that Bernie nonetheless uh as a person not private but how he acts. Isn't he a model of common ordinary decent guy who speaks calmly and so on and so on? That's what we need. I think that I'll But you said so in 2016 you said that a Trump victory might be for the best in America. Yeah.

[00:11:26]>> Because it would disrupt the liberal center and force a radical reorganization of the left. I mean, I would argue that what it did was provoke this kind of crazy new far-left woke kind of left, which I've argued repeatedly actually became in the way that they behaved and spoke very like the fascists that they professed to hate most. In other words, they wanted to censor free speech, cancel and destroy people, and imprison people that they didn't agree with. they would support ridiculous noncientific things like transgender athletes in women's sport and so on. And in other words, once you start denying science and biology and censoring free speech and so on, actually this is all very fascist. If you start wanting a state to enforce all this, right?

[00:12:16]>> Uh I tend again to agree with you. I criticized from the very beginning wokeism, political correctness, whatever you call them. Not because they are too radical, but I think this is a typical for me. Wokeism is one of the ways of how to talk a lot and pretending to change things without really changing society. What did this politically correct feminism effectively do to make women's lives better? Concrete problems, abortion rights, uh uh uh uh healthc care and so on. So I here we totally agree. But what I find again specific about Trump and that's what worries me is uh the I cannot but call it selfconsciously clownish character of his rules. Are we aware of the vulgarity of his speech?

[00:13:25]And that's not ordinary fascism. No, fascist leaders would never speak like >> that. What I'm only saying you know where I see fascism I remember when Trump sent national guard to California >> and uh he was asked but aren't you violating the law you are only allowed to use the army against foreign >> enemies and his answer was close to fascism his answer was but those we are fighting there immigrants big corporations which use immigrants this is a foreign invasion so he but Trump's argument. All right. CH's argue because I've heard him use this when he extrapolates it is that he will push the existing law as far as he can to suit his purposes as I think most presidents have done. He does it in a more open rhetorically inflammatory manner. But if you actually study what he does often he gets kicked back by the courts and he doesn't then try and usurp from what I've seen the court authority and just bypass it. Now that would be fascism.

[00:14:31]And similarly, when he lost power in 2020, although we had the appalling scenes on January the 6th, ultimately Trump did leave the White House. I mean, he didn't try and just stay in the White House or stay in power. So, yes, it was appalling and reprehensible what happened that day. But a real fascist wouldn't have left, right? They wouldn't have accepted the result of an election at all. Wouldn't have left the White House. Would have carried on just running the country. So, so again, I'm just saying that Trump can often sound like he's a fascist, and I understand why people then assume that that's what he is. But in terms of his actual actions, until I see him literally usurping American law and just ignoring it and doing whatever he wants, I don't think he does that. I think he pushes the door as hard as he possibly can. But the judges and the courts, it's up to them.

[00:15:24]If they then or the Supreme Court says you can't do something, I've not seen evidence he then just does it anyway, which is what a fascist would do.

[00:15:32]Again, the key is I think that you uh you still use the the term fascism in this violent sense. you break the law all >> but ignoring the law and ignoring ignoring ignoring a democratic election ignoring the law you know all those things are the actions of a genuine fascist I would say whereas I don't see that with Trump I see a lot of inflammatory rhetoric a lot of stuff which comes out of his mouth which sounds like it's fascist but actually if you study his actions they're not the actions of a fascist >> he nonetheless come pretty close to it the way he used that IC ICE and so on.

[00:16:16]>> Yeah. But again, I would say I'm listen I'm not here to defend Trump and all this. I'm playing devil's advocate really, but I remember that the biggest deorter of migrants in American history was Obama who deported over 3 million.

[00:16:30]And he often deployed some appalling tactics. He split up families. He put kids in cages. All the things that the left have accused Trump of doing as an example of his fascism, that was all being done by Obama. So I I think that there is a double standard there and I I don't I wouldn't categorize the icing is interesting like putting ICE agents onto the streets in Minnesota for example clearly was a turned out to be a terrible decision but was it the action of a fascist to do that or was he doing what Obama did only in a more bullish manner on the streets? Obama did a lot of stuff where he went into prisons and took prisoners and sent them home and deported them for example. Um, so he did it a little bit more stealthily, but he deported a lot more people than Trump did.

[00:17:15]>> Okay. Now, I agree with this, but the paradox of Trump is for me the following one. He and the entire MAGA movement and so on claim to be radical liberals. Yes.

[00:17:29]Some of the people whom I call uh uh uh uh uh leftist MAGA people like ironically like Steve Bannon you know they they even say >> uh Steve Bannon characterized himself as a Leninist I want to destroy the state and so on all that >> total freedom freedom of the press and so on but isn't the actual result that a the press sorry uh the uh the state is if anything getting much stronger under Trump intervening in economy. Look how he does with tariffs and so on. So uh >> well Tus I would argue he was allowed to do it legally. I don't think he broke any laws doing his tariff. No, but but nonetheless, >> but but he also he genuinely has a conviction because he's expressed it to me for 20 years that America is being ripped off by unfair trading arrangements around the world, particularly by China. And so he's always wanted to do this. And actually, there is an argument it was beginning to work quite well if you're America. It was beginning to work quite well until the war with Iran, which has thrown everything up in the Apple car. So again, you know, is that an example the tariff war of fascism or just a president who has a world view that America's getting ripped off with trade and wants to rebalance it in America's favor which many Americans might agree with. No.

[00:19:01]My again my argument here would have been that and this part of much more complex line of thought that >> what we are getting now in United States and many other countries is no longer the old global capitalism something new that's true >> something new is emerging >> so much more isolationist >> not only isolationist but at the same time a a new structure of power where I don't fully agree with Yiannis Verufakis who likes to speak about uh uh >> he came on the show last week >> really neutralism and so on but it's true that figures like Musk Jeff Bezos and so on >> well I'm going to bring that up actually because you you you got a particular issue with the Silicon Valleys as they've been called yeah saying they are part of a slide to fascism and you've called out Elon Musk and Peter Till you in particular You pointed to the recently released Palanteer Manifesto. Yeah. Released in April this year, a 22point document outlining a militant v vision for Western dominance through advanced AI military software.

[00:20:12]Now, full disclosure, I'm a stockholder in Palanteer and I have invested in Elon Musk with various companies like Tesla and so on. Um, so I want, you know, put that on the record. Um, I've interviewed Peter Teal. I found him a very interesting character. um and very you know fascinating views about stuff you but but so what is your actual view of these people? Are they are they bad people or are they just having too much power?

[00:20:39]>> No, neither. I just think that they are no longer capitalists in the old sense of the world.

[00:20:47]>> I would put it like this. They privatized.

[00:20:53]They have under control something that in the old social tradition we call commons. They are not simply big capitalists against or controlling workers. They control the very space of exchange between workers and capitalists. This is something new. It's a new form of not absolute monopoly but monopoly.

[00:21:23]>> But if Elon Musk for example is generating enormous numbers of jobs as he is through his company SpaceX or Tesla, if he's doing things like Neurolink where he's literally going to allow paraplegic people to perhaps be able to leave.

[00:21:37]>> Now we entered another very problematic domain. Here I find mask at his most dangerous. See, I think maybe you fell into a trap here because you uh you said paraplegics and so on. Yes. They always emphasize this beneficient effects. Oh my god, there is a guy.

[00:21:59]>> You think they want to get into people's brains, >> but they are.

[00:22:02]>> No, but you think they want to do it for nefarious reasons.

[00:22:06]>> It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if this will and I'm not here just demonizing mask. The Chinese are doing it like crazy.

[00:22:14]They >> do you think AI in the end is going to be a force for good or the force that destroys the world?

[00:22:22]>> I'm more skeptical here. But again, let me on this point. Uh are you aware what potentially radical thing neural link is? It means that potentially if I if my thought processes are directly readable open to a machine then ultimately we are losing the intimate sense of the self.

[00:22:54]We are put at the same level our brain is open and especially if another person chooses or sorry controls what they put into my mind I I I find that literally if nealink will explode it's still doubtful then we will no longer be human in the usual sense of the word because being human means reality is out there I have here my mind I can freely uh engage in hypothesis and so on all that I think all this disappears. Okay. To make a slightly tasteless but decent example.

[00:23:36]Can you imagine sex with full neural link? I look at another person and there is no need for any flirting. What makes sex for me at least human and attractive? We look at each other. our brains say immediately yes I would like to do it or not and everything is clear >> sounds very efficient to me >> sorry yeah but it uh ruins it ruins sexuality as >> well I would argue it changes right isn't life just full of evolution I mean is it necessarily are we necessarily going to evolve to a worse place or could AI for example start curing all known diseases you know and and be a massive force for good and you're assuming that neural link will mean that it will be misused by people in a really >> not even misused just imagine.

[00:24:31]>> Yeah, but if you if you genuinely have no other way of communicating without neural link and suddenly you can >> but this is this is a minor case if you generalize neural link it means again that we lose what we call the intimacy of our thought. We become transparent to whom the problem is who controls that space.

[00:24:56]>> Yeah. You ra >> do you do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do you not think this >> No, I am concerned about it. I mean look I've >> now now you use the proper term. No, I'm radically not opposed to you. Right.

[00:25:06]Right.

[00:25:06]>> That's why I am That's why I am >> I mean the interesting thing for me is I've said this ad nauseium but I did one of the last interviews with Professor Steven Hawking and when I said to him what's what will be the end of mankind he said when artificial intelligence learns to self-design other words think for itself that's it they'll we'll all be dead. This is a very interesting example because I give a lot of thought to this idea of uh you know we are all the time I think asking a wrong question which is uh uh uh will uh I become rich us feel like us and so on.

[00:25:47]No, I think this is a wrong approach.

[00:25:50]There is something specifically human that I will not be able to do. But what if it will develop a totally different spirituality and so on that and maybe it already is having >> they asked six of the top AIs recently.

[00:26:08]Yeah.

[00:26:08]>> In an experiment. Uh they fed them some information that they were going to get rid of them and hire a new AI for a company.

[00:26:17]>> I know this. Yeah. And you know, and five of them replied with immediate blackmail they found in the emails of company executives to stop themselves being fired. That worried me. Then I was like, "Wow, wow. What what else are these doing these machines?"

[00:26:33]>> No, you know, uh uh no, I found even more worrying examples. I follow them like one is that they tried to submit I machine to a so-called Turing test. you know you cannot distinguish >> that it's a machine or a human being then okay but uh my point is they found I already read about a case where they discovered that the AI agent knew and faked to be less intelligent to avoid this uh >> suspicion >> but for me still this is not enough to define humanity. I'm here orthodox Hegelian Freudian. Humanity is for me defined by uh what Edgar Lampo called death drive. Sorry, imp perversity death drive. You are ready to kill yourself to risk it for something and so on. I I think that AI is still part of a simple intense self reproduction. It wants to reproduce ourselves.

[00:27:46]What makes for me the specific of humanity is that you see the situation is hopeless, but nonetheless you fight.

[00:27:54]That's why I'm on the side of Ukraine.

[00:27:58]>> Yes. Well, so am I. Let just before I bring in Warren Smith, I want to just um read out what you said about JD Vance.

[00:28:05]Again, this is from your book Liberal Fascism. You said it's very simple. If Trump dies soon, JD Vance will take over. And I think Vance is a much more dangerous figure than Trump. Let us reach back into history and recall the relationship between the SA and the SS during the rise of Nazism and the class and ideological tensions between them.

[00:28:23]The SA, the original street bullies of the Nazis were thugs, ex-inlisted soldiers who came from the working classes, seen as sleazy, dirty guys who enjoyed torturing their victims. The SS came later and their members look down on the SA as common bullies. An SS member was on the contrary a cold professional who performed these unspeakable acts in an impersonal way.

[00:28:42]Now again, with all due respect, Slavoy, I just I never like Nazi analogies about people like Trump or JD Vance or any of these guys. They're not Nazis. And when you try and do any kind of comparison that infers they might be, I'm like, look, the Nazis killed 12 million people. They they killed 6 million Jews in a Holocaust. These guys aren't Nazis.

[00:29:08]Nothing nothing like it.

[00:29:09]>> That's a parallel. I admit it's exaggerated. And ironically, Vance himself once called Trump a Nazi to round off the picture. But that's where I see you. You make so many fascinating points in here, but when you say stuff like that, I slightly recoil because I hate that comparison to one of the worst genocidal regimes in history. These may be people that people don't like, although many people do, but if they don't like them, but they're not Nazis.

[00:29:36]No, I totally agree with you here. There is no problem here. But if I may just uh elaborate a little bit this point uh you know uh what I even at first why I even supported ironically Trump in 2016 I think because I thought I expected >> I knew who he is. I expected that he will call it awaken the American liberal center.

[00:30:13]>> He certainly woke up American liberals, that's for sure. Did >> probably not in the way you thought. He wound them up. I mean, they were all going nuts.

[00:30:21]>> Yeah, but they go nuts, but but without any serious self-criticism.

[00:30:25]>> Yeah. Well, I think they went off on a ridiculously progressive woke journey, which which actually in the end became incredibly self-defeating. And if they don't if they don't pivot back to the center, then they're never going to win power again. So I think that was obvious.

[00:30:41]>> But here maybe we disagree because I uh I don't think again I don't think woke is uh too radical and so on. No, it's for me a pure compromise. They they >> but but but woke wokeism is has no compromise. There is no they don't offer any compromise. It is intrangent. It is intractable. It is it's our way or no way. And if you don't agree with this, we're going to cancel you, abuse you, shame you, imprison you. They'll celebrate if you're shot dead. When Charlie Kirk got murdered, people on the woke left celebrated it. They still do, >> right? This is >> But but do you think >> this is not this is not a compromised >> mindset? It is the opposite.

[00:31:26]>> Yeah. But >> I would argue, >> but do you really think that the way woke approaches >> exploitation and all that economic problems that there is anything really radical in it? I think it's >> well I think I think the way they go about trying to enforce their worldview is radical because it's actually the behavior of an extremist. And in fact, as I said, I think the pendulum between wokeism and fascism pretty well collides at the point where you just refuse to accept freedom of speech. You refuse to accept any kind of uh democratic dialogue. You refuse to accept any of the norms of society. It's your way or oblivion.

[00:32:05]>> Okay, we don't have time to go on. So very briefly, you know, uh what made me think the fact that in today's western academia dominated by whatever you call it, wokeness and so on.

[00:32:23]>> For example, uh postc colonialism, anticolonialism and so on. Uh uh how come that till Trump in the last decades >> capitalism was thriving quite well while the predominant academic ideology was woke anticolonialism and so on and I accept this as a wonderful paradox which is our truth that you can have a regime which perfectly reproduces itself through ideology which apparently critic apparently ruins it criticizing and so on and so on. So I still insist that wokeism is of course in this sense radical but it doesn't really approach or even really disturb the power centers. But another thing about Trump where I'm well aware of the difference, if you were to ask me, name me one passage where Trump almost approached an ingenious insight, you know, uh he said in the middle of Iranian war, it's a short quote, "Our country is winning again. In fact, we are winning so much that we really don't know what to do about it.

[00:33:55]People are asking me, "Please, please, please, Mr. President, we are winning too much. We can't take it anymore. We are not used to winning in our country until you came along. We are just always losing. But now we are winning too much." And I say, "No, no, no. You're going to win again. You're going to win big. You're going to win bigger than ever." That's for me the difference between Trump and the standard fascist.

[00:34:26]Standard fascist would say enough pleasures time to sacrifice yourself.

[00:34:30]>> Also, a standard fascist wouldn't tell jokes, right? Like Trump does or speak off the cuff and have a laugh with people as well. I mean, you're a psychoanalyst. Here's my psychoanalyst uh verdict for you on Trump, which is from my daughter who's 14. Yeah.

[00:34:45]>> Who heard heard me say >> regularly, you know, Trump's a unique character. and she said, "Daddy, can I just ask you something? I keep hearing you call Trump unique. Do you think there's such a thing as being too unique?"

[00:34:58]She may be on to something and she's not a psychoanalyst. Let me bring in Warren Smith, >> okay, >> to join us about this. You've been listening to this, Warren. Welcome to Uncensored. You're one of the world's great critical thinkers. So, apply some critical thinking to what you've been hearing from Slavoy.

[00:35:14]>> Yeah, it's a real honor to be able to talk to you, Slavoy. So, I really appreciate this opportunity. I think it's an important conversation. I was just having this conversation yesterday and the response I'm getting is similar to what you're describing where the person claims, well, there are so many people that are accepting this new definition that just what makes Trump a fascist? Well, he's trying to get Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air. That that's what makes him fascist. They said, "Well, that's not fascism." Yeah, but if enough people claim that if enough people understand it as fascism, doesn't that >> make it fascist? But if we're actually looking at the original definition, the authoritarian pursuit of national purity through violence, I would argue that our founding fathers were so genius in the way they were able to anticipate this ideology before it was ever articulated.

[00:36:02]It's as though it's always existed within the >> the human spirit. There's these dualities, whether it goes into communism, Marxism, and they they recognize this framework will prevent this from ever being prevailing. So, I'm not sure how we could point to authoritarianism. If you can think of an example, let me know.

[00:36:22]But I don't like as PICE described, I don't think that what ICE is doing would be the equivalent of what fascism argues for, which is based on the idea of um identifying people through blood. That your national identity, it it began in Italy. Being Italian means something by by blood. And you are with us or against us. it it takes away the individual and moves into identity politics and group politics which is are many of the things that alarm me >> about the left that I've been seeing in in the past years. Um, so I would and I would also love to challenge you on this idea because I have the opportunity to speak to what people consider to be the most dangerous philosopher in the west or to the west. And I believe they call you that because you identify as a communist and I I would just challenge you on why are you comfortable describing yourself as a communist when over 100 million people have died under communism?

[00:37:20]>> Slavo.

[00:37:21]>> Uh, easy to answer. First I describe now myself as moderately conservative communist crazy as this may sound but let me answer you very seriously. Uh you know Peter Thiel when he defined antichrist uh in a public intervention a month or two ago he defined it through three features. those who are too obsessed with the danger of artificial intelligence, those who are too obsessed with environmental problems, and those who are too obsessed with war danger. I think that these are real actual problems. I'm not a catastrophist. I'm not saying whatever will happen. I'm just saying something so basic is changing and my solution is not of course what we knew as communism but I think and I'm not even very original here that the problems we are facing look co there I think Trump and Boris Johnson certainly not communists acted almost in a communist way. You know, every family got a check for $2,000 and so on. Direct state intervention and so on. What I think is that the crisis we are confronting, no reason to panic but nonetheless uh uh cannot be resolved, cannot be even properly approached through the standard liberal democratic multi-arty political system.

[00:39:14]>> So are you pushing for a uni party?

[00:39:16]because people would claim that that's one of the primary attributes of >> sorry am I pushing for >> a non multi-party?

[00:39:26]>> No, no, I'm absolutely for pluralism and so on. But I'm asking you a simple question. Do you remember in uh northern United States, West and Southern Canada, there 3, four years ago, there there was a mega heat wave for a week or two Seattle and Vancouver were warmer than Emirates and so on.

[00:39:54]Were they to blame? No, they were had pretty good as far as I know, ecological policy and so on. Obviously, something is wrong in the circulation of the air and so on around the northern pole or artificial intelligence.

[00:40:12]>> We don't know what is happening there.

[00:40:17]Really, we have to think we >> in relation All right. But in relation to Warren's question though, it's an interesting one, isn't it? about you being proud to call yourself a communist. And yet many people view communism as just an evil uh kind of mindset ideology as fascism. It's killed over 100 million people at least. Um it's been used in the same way that fascism and Nazism have been used to terrorize and oppress people and so on.

[00:40:45]So what do you say? S people said, "Well, all right, you can be very anti-fascism."

[00:40:50]most people are who are not fascists, but you defend proudly being a communist and yet you know because you know your history just how malevolent communism has often been in the history of the planet. So how do you how do you sit those two things?

[00:41:07]>> First, you know, I've written much more than about fascism. I've written about communism >> and uh we don't have time to go into it.

[00:41:18]But what always fascinated me and this doesn't make communism any better >> is the difference in their functioning.

[00:41:27]Just think about one thing. We don't have time to go into it in detail. In communism, you have this show trials, people tortured to confess and so on and so on.

[00:41:38]>> In fascism, proper at its worst, Nazism, you don't have it. It's meaningless. It would have been easy for Hitler to organize a show trial, get 15, 20 leading Jewish figures, torture them to confess. It's meaningless. There another feature. Uh I like this as a Freudian these details which tell a lot. You know that in gulak every year on Stalin's birthday they all the prisoners had to sign letter to Stalin wishing him all the best. Can you even imagine something like this in Nazism gathering the Jews in Avitz you have to and so on. So I am not here in any way claiming that uh uh uh Stalinism is nonetheless better. I am saying that Stalinism in all its horror is still part of or legacy of the European enlightenment. It still has. So here we totally agree. But what I mean by communism and I use this term of course in a consciously provocative way is simply a mode of not even control international regulation for example imagine a new co we instantly felt a need to international cooperation. I think market itself no longer functions as global regulator. The irony today, I wonder if you would agree or not. The irony today is that of the three big powers uh there are more but let's say generally United States, Russia and China uh China precisely because communists are in power there but communists who learned the lesson follows more faithfully market rules definitely than Russia or United States. China is for me and I am not pro-Chinese. I'm well aware of all.

[00:43:53]>> Let me let me get Warren's reaction to that.

[00:43:54]>> Yeah.

[00:43:56]I I don't honestly I don't understand what makes you a communist. If the definition of communism is the government or the inability to own private property and many people would argue that there's there's not a single real communist country. China is not really communist. They've introduced components of capitalism.

[00:44:16]the ideology of communism has been detrimental there and that's where 50 million people died as a result. But so this goes back to the original conversation of these terms have meanings but they're being thrown around so loosely. So I don't like what makes you a communist if you if you're not discussing the inability to control or own private property.

[00:44:39]>> Sadly got to leave it there. Chance a fascinating debate. We could do this for hours and maybe we should one day. Uh, Mlavoy, brilliant to see you here in the studio. Your book, Liberal Fascisms, is out now. Slavoy Jujek, thank you very much. And to you, Warren, as well. Thank you.

[00:44:55]Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask for only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Piers Morgan Uncensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast.

[00:45:08]And in return, we will continue our mission to inform, irritate, and entertain. And we'll do it all for free.

[00:45:15]Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.