Nithya Raman recently criticized her opponent, Spencer Pratt, labeling him a “fascist” during an interview with Brian Tyler Cohen, a left-leaning podcaster.
She described the victims of the Pacific Palisades fire as “mini-Trump” and claimed that if Pratt wins the mayoral race, it will be due to people’s desperation leading them towards fascism.
Really?
Is requesting the fire department to extinguish fires “fascism”?
Is wanting to clear homeless encampments from the streets really “fascist”?
What about asking for tax credits to protect Hollywood—does that count as “fascism” too?
If that’s the case, Raman might inadvertently label many residents of Los Angeles as fascists.
The term “fascism” is often used in leftist rhetoric. It can marginalize those who support the targeted individual.
However, fascism has a precise definition: a governmental framework in which power is consolidated at the top, typically led by a single political entity, social elite, or dominant leader.
This form of governance usually preserves traditional institutions like churches and businesses but also ensures their compliance with central authority.
Additonally, fascism functions hierarchically. It enables a system where some individuals hold power while others are subjugated—often along racial or national lines. This is why historical fascism is associated with discrimination and violence.
Currently, America does not exhibit characteristics of fascism in its political landscape. The notion would likely only find support among a fringe element.
If we look closely, the political ideology closest to fascism would be socialism. Both philosophies prioritize collective interests over individual rights.
Raman, as a self-identified socialist, should recognize that socialism advocates for government control over production means.
In essence, it’s a milder form of communism intended to dismantle capitalism, often claiming a peaceful approach. Yet both socialism and communism seek to redistribute wealth from the affluent to the less fortunate, regardless of how that wealth was acquired.
It is indeed fair to label Raman as a socialist given her affiliation with the Democratic Socialists of America.
However, calling Pratt a fascist is misleading—quite possibly defamatory.
Instead of resorting to name-calling, perhaps Raman should focus on offering real solutions to the issues affecting Los Angeles.
If she had done so, her standing in the polls might have reflected that effort.
