Breaking down claim foreign press started calling Republicans the 'American Fascist Party'
In early July 2025, a rumor began circulating online claiming that foreign news outlets started referring to the Republican Party, or Grand Old Party (GOP), as the "American Fascist Party."
"The Republicans are now being referred to as the American Fascist Party by the foreign press, and I'll be calling them this as well," one Facebook post (archived) read, reaching over 18,000 reactions, 1,800 comments, and 2,500 shares.
(Facebook page U.S. Democratic Socialists)
Similarly, another Facebook post (archived) with over 13,000 reactions, read, "Republicans are now being referred to as the American Fascist Party by foreign media (and they would know). Guess we better do the same. Just to avoid any confusion."
Other posts (archived) made more specific references to "European media." The claim spread across multiple platforms, including Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X and Threads.
However, none of the posts included specific examples of which foreign or European news outlets referred to the Republican Party as the "American Fascist Party." They did not cite any country, language, publication name, or article where such a label was being used.
Our review of international news articles in multiple languages found no indication that this term had been adopted by mainstream foreign news outlets, either in English or in other languages. The phrase does not appear to be in common use across international media. The popularization of the term "American Fascist Party" likely stems from a 2023 opinion article by former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich, published in the British newspaper The Guardian. However, this was an individual commentary, not an example of widespread usage in foreign press.
We performed a Google search in over 20 European languages (English, Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish). The search returned no relevant results showing that mainstream news media in these languages referred to the Republican Party as the "American Fascist Party."
The phrase "American Fascist Party" seemed to trace back to commentary by Reich. In an April 2023 opinion piece for The Guardian, a British newspaper, Reich wrote that the Republican Party was "hurtling toward fascism." He wrote that "Donald Trump is not singularly responsible for this dangerous trend, but he has legitimized and encouraged the ends-justify-the-means viciousness now pushing the GOP toward becoming the American fascist party."
Reich has repeated similar phrasing in other opinion pieces and social media posts on Instagram, YouTube and Facebook. "My friends, the Republican Party is no longer committed to democracy. It is rapidly becoming the American fascist party," Reich wrote in an article published on Substack and Common Dreams.
But these reflected his personal opinion, not an editorial position of a news organization — and certainly not a trend among foreign media.
Additionally, while European news outlets like The Independent or Le Monde have discussed concerns about the GOP's direction and mentioned fascist rhetoric or tactics, they had not referred to the GOP as the "American Fascist Party" as a matter of journalistic framing or categorization. For instance, journalist Patrick Cockburn wrote in a 2021 article for The Independent that the "nullification of elections is only the latest step in the Republican Party's strange voyage towards becoming a genuine fascist party." However, the phrase "American Fascist Part" was mostly used in social media posts, comments, and blog articles — not in reputable news publications or mainstream news outlets.
Over the years, we fact-checked numerous viral claims involving fascism. For instance, in August we debunked a claim that Winston Churchill once said that the "fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists." In December 2020, we looked at claims that in an interview that published widely in 1976, David Bowie said he believed in fascism and that "Adolf Hitler was one of the first rock stars." Additionally, in January 2024, we investigated whether a viral video showed hundreds of people performing a Fascist salute in Rome on Jan. 7, 2024.
Evon, Dan. "Did Winston Churchill Say 'The Fascists of the Future Will Call Themselves Anti-Fascists?'" Snopes, 7 Aug. 2018, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/fascists-called-anti-fascists-quote/.
Google Search. https://www.google.com/search?q=OR+%22%D0%90%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0+%D1%84%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%B0+%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F%22+OR+%22Ameri%C4%8Dka+fa%C5%A1isti%C4%8Dka+stranka%22+OR+%22Americk%C3%A1+fa%C5%A1istick%C3%A1+strana%22+OR+%22Amerikansk+fascistisk+parti%22+OR+%22Amerikaanse+fascistische+partij%22+OR+%22Ameerika+fa%C5%A1istlik+partei%22+OR+%22Amerikkalainen+fasistinen+puolue%22+OR+%22Parti+fasciste+am%C3%A9ricain%22+OR+%22Amerikanische+faschistische+Partei%22+OR+%22%CE%91%CE%BC%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C+%CF%86%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C+%CE%BA%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%BC%CE%B1%22+OR+%22Amerikai+fasiszta+p%C3%A1rt%22+OR+%22P%C3%A1irt%C3%AD+Fhaistineach+Meirice%C3%A1nach%22+OR+%22Partito+fascista+americano%22+OR+%22Amerikas+fa%C5%A1istisk%C4%81+partija%22+OR+%22Amerikos+fa%C5%A1istin%C4%97+partija%22+OR+%22Partit+Fasist+Amerikan%22+OR+%22Ameryka%C5%84ska+Partia+Faszystowska%22+OR+%22Partido+Fascista+Americano%22+OR+%22Partidul+Fascist+American%22+OR+%22Ameri%C5%A1ka+fa%C5%A1isti%C4%8Dna+stranka%22+OR+%22Amerikanskt+fascistiskt+parti%22&oq=OR+%22%D0%90%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0+%D1%84%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%B0+%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%8F%22+OR+%22Ameri%C4%8Dka+fa%C5%A1isti%C4%8Dka+stranka%22+OR+%22Americk%C3%A1+fa%C5%A1istick%C3%A1+strana%22+OR+%22Amerikansk+fascistisk+parti%22+OR+%22Amerikaanse+fascistische+partij%22+OR+%22Ameerika+fa%C5%A1istlik+partei%22+OR+%22Amerikkalainen+fasistinen+puolue%22+OR+%22Parti+fasciste+am%C3%A9ricain%22+OR+%22Amerikanische+faschistische+Partei%22+OR+%22%CE%91%CE%BC%CE%B5%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C+%CF%86%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%CF%8C+%CE%BA%CF%8C%CE%BC%CE%BC%CE%B1%22+OR+%22Amerikai+fasiszta+p%C3%A1rt%22+OR+%22P%C3%A1irt%C3%AD+Fhaistineach+Meirice%C3%A1nach%22+OR+%22Partito+fascista+americano%22+OR+%22Amerikas+fa%C5%A1istisk%C4%81+partija%22+OR+%22Amerikos+fa%C5%A1istin%C4%97+partija%22+OR+%22Partit+Fasist+Amerikan%22+OR+%22Ameryka%C5%84ska+Partia+Faszystowska%22+OR+%22Partido+Fascista+Americano%22+OR+%22Partidul+Fascist+American%22+OR+%22Ameri%C5%A1ka+fa%C5%A1isti%C4%8Dna+stranka%22+OR+%22Amerikanskt+fascistiskt+parti%22&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRg9MgYIAhBFGD3SAQcxNTBqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025.
---. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22GOP%22+AND+%22American+fascist+party%22&oq=%22GOP%22+AND+%22American+fascist+party%22&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRiSAzIHCAIQIRiSAzIHCAMQIRiPAjIHCAQQIRiPAtIBCDQzMDVqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025.
Is Trumpism a Form of Fascism? Two Historians Debate. 3 May 2025. Le Monde, https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2025/05/03/is-trumpism-a-form-of-fascism-two-historians-debate_6740864_23.html.
Lee, Jessica. "Did Bowie Say He Supported Fascism and Praise Hitler?" Snopes, 23 Dec. 2020, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/rock-star-david-bowie/.
Opinion | The United States Now Has a Fascist Political Party | Common Dreams. https://robertreich.substack.com/p/what-happens-when-supermajorities. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025.
Reich, Robert. "Is the GOP Becoming the American Fascist Party?" Robert Reich, 10 Apr. 2023, https://robertreich.substack.com/p/what-happens-when-supermajorities.
"The Republican Party Has Turned Fascist – It Is Now the Most Dangerous Threat in the World | Patrick Cockburn." The Independent, 23 Jun. 2021, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/republican-party-donald-trump-voter-suppression-b1868426.html.
"---." The Independent, 23 Jun. 2021, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/republican-party-donald-trump-voter-suppression-b1868426.html.
Wrona, Aleksandra. "Is 2024 Video of Hundreds Performing Fascist Salute in Rome Real?" Snopes, 10 Jan. 2024, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/italy-nazi-rally/.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
34 minutes ago
What would it take for Elon Musk to create a new political party in America?
On the heels of the Fourth of July -- and amid his feud with President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans over the president's tax policy bill -- tech billionaire Elon Musk announced plans for a brand new political party, dubbed "America Party," to represent what he called "the 80% in the middle." Musk, who recently left his temporary government post as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, told his X followers that his new party will "give you back your freedom." In a series of posts over the weekend, Musk said his party would use "extremely concentrated force at a precise location on the battlefield" to target "2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts," which he believes "would be enough to serve as the deciding vote on contentious laws." So what would it take for Musk to launch his third-party effort? Here's an overview. Getting on the ballot To start, Musk would have to get his party on the ballots in the states where he wants to compete -- each with its own process for qualifying. In many states -- including Kentucky, where the race to fill retiring Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell's open seat in 2026 is heating up -- a party-designated candidate must win a nomination from a state-recognized political party that has received a certain percentage of votes in the previous presidential election -- or else a candidate has to run as an independent or a write-in candidate. In other states, the America Party's name itself could present a problem -- like in New York, where state law prohibits political parties from having the word "American," or any part of it, as part of their party names, according to Election Law Blog. Bankrolling these state-level efforts would take significant resources. Experts would be needed to navigate each state's election laws and political systems in order to identify and nominate promising candidates, and canvassers would have to gather thousands to tens of thousands of signatures for each candidate to get them on the ballot. Traditionally, candidates and their parties spearhead these operations, working together to strategize signature-gathering, voter registration, and campaign fundraising and spending. But Musk's America Party is unlikely to become a certified political party anytime soon, because the Federal Election Commission, which reviews political organizations' qualification as political parties, has not been in quorum to do so since a commissioner resigned in April, leaving the agency with just three commissioners. FEC commissioners can only be appointed by President Trump himself. It's not yet clear if Musk has filed any paperwork for his America Party, and an FEC spokesperson declined to comment on whether the agency has received any paperwork from Musk's team. Going the PAC route Faced with the long odds of gaining party certification, some election experts say that Musk, at least for the time being, could focus on House and Senate candidates through a super PAC. That's because ballot access for congressional races is governed by the states -- not the federal government -- so the America Party could still put its designated candidates on the ballot without the FEC's certification, as long as they pass state qualifications. And because super PACs are unconstrained by fundraising or spending limits, an America Party super PAC could be funded by unlimited donations from supporters including Musk himself, and could independently spend an unlimited amount of money in support of its candidates. The only catch is that super PACs are unable to work directly with campaigns the way FEC-certified political parties can -- but election lawyer Matt Sanderson of Caplin and Drysdale told ABC News that the efficiency of a super PAC can actually outweigh the advantages of a political party. "Form a super PAC, just call yourselves a political party -- that's not against the rules. The FEC blessing is not needed," said Sanderson, who was legal counsel for the No Labels movement during the 2024 election. "I actually don't think it makes a lick of sense in this day and age to try to form yourself as a national party committee." "They can call themselves whatever they want," Sanderson said, explaining that the FEC doesn't prohibit a super PAC from calling itself a political party as long as it doesn't coordinate directly with campaigns. "Just skip right past this very cumbersome and not-all-that-beneficial process, hold themselves out as a political party, and move forward." Joining forces Additionally, Musk could enlist the help of existing third parties, like the Libertarian Party or the Green Party. However, third parties historically have had little success in gaining office in the United States. During the 2024 election, the centrist group No Labels led a third-party presidential movement but ended its efforts months before the Republican and Democratic national conventions, after failing to find their candidate before their self-imposed deadline. Longstanding Libertarian Party nominee Chase Oliver ran in the 2024 presidential race but received less than 0.5% of the total vote. Still, a possible collaboration could be in the works: Musk has been in touch with one-time Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, who in recent days has spearheaded a third party centrist effort of his own, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News. Caleb Burns, an election lawyer at Wiley Rein, acknowledged the potential significance of obtaining an official party status through the FEC instead of bypassing that step with a super PAC -- stressing the role of a political party as a "brand for politicians." "The success of any new political party will turn on whether there are sufficient candidates -- and, by extension, members of the public -- interested in aligning with that new brand," Burns said. "If the answer is yes, then it makes sense to do everything possible to enhance and promote that brand -- which means proceeding with the organizational and legal burdens necessary to create and formalize a new political party." "The critical predicate, however, is the political question of whether or not there is sufficient interest in a new brand of politician," Burns said. "For that, it seems we will have to wait and see what Mr. Musk concludes."
Politico
35 minutes ago
- Politico
Pentagon policy chief's rogue decisions have irked US allies and the Trump administration
'He basically asked them, 'Is it too late to call it back?'' said the person familiar with Trump administration dynamics. 'Because we don't want you there.' A second person familiar with the meeting confirmed this account. The British team on the other side of the table 'were just shocked,' the first person added. 'He was basically saying 'you have no business being in the Indo-Pacific.'' Colby has also irked allies by pushing them too hard to boost defense spending — or telling them to simply get out of America's way. 'DOD has been telling a European partner that we don't need the Europeans to be doing anything [in the Indo-Pacific],' said one U.S. official familiar with the conversations. In the spring, Japanese officials believed the Trump administration might push them for a modest increase in defense spending. Initially, Colby publicly called on Japan to spend ' at least 3 percent of GDP on defense as soon as possible,' which angered Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba. But that number soon increased to a much steeper target of 5 percent , which reportedly contributed to the collapse of plans for a high-level meeting between Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and their Japanese counterparts.'The Japanese were very frustrated,' said a person familiar with the talks. 'They thought that they were agreeing to at least negotiate on the basis of 3 or 3.5 percent. Then Colby, all of a sudden, got DOD to say 5, and the Japanese got angry, because that's not what they just agreed to.' The incident caused heartburn within Japan's ruling party, with officials worried about triggering a domestic political backlash ahead of a sensitive election, the person added. The hawkish wing of the Republican Party has expressed concerns that Colby's 'shoot first and ask questions later' approach is sapping Trump's foreign policy of its strength at a key moment. 'The president's leadership at NATO and his decision to strike Iran gave Russia and China good reason to fear America's resolve,' said a senior GOP aide. 'But Colby has just undercut the president and squandered his boss' leverage.' The AUKUS review surprised some State Department officials who dealt directly with the pact. The department's immediate guidance on how to respond to media questions about the topic appeared to underscore the lack of coordination, a State Department official said. The instructions told diplomats to say to reporters: 'We are not aware of a review of the AUKUS agreement. The secretary of Defense has not requested a review of the agreement from the secretary of State.' 'The way that one person from State put it to me is: 'Who is this fucking guy?'' said a former U.S. official familiar with the policy discussions. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce praised Colby's leadership. 'The world is changing rapidly and Elbridge understands the moment. His innovative leadership is critical to addressing the challenges head-on and helping to deliver on President Trump's America First agenda.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Thanks to the GOP Megabill, You'll Pay Higher Utility Bills
This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM's home for opinion and news analysis. Natural gas price spikes, grid transmission bottlenecks, and a data center construction boom are already straining America's power grid. The Republican Party just passed a budget bill that might break it. Donald Trump and the GOP's irrational energy agenda deliberately sidelines wind and solar energy — the lowest cost, fastest-to-deploy sources of energy generation available — to prop up a dying fossil fuel industry that won't be able to meet rising demand. The consequences will be severe: hundreds of billions in clean energy investment will evaporate, hundreds of gigawatts of power won't get built, and hundreds of millions of metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions will be produced. By 2035, according to Princeton's ZERO Lab for energy research, the U.S. will have added 45% less clean electricity to the grid than it would have if Trump had not been reelected. All of this comes as America's electricity demand is accelerating for the first time in decades. A report last year from the Clean Grid Initiative projected up to a five-fold increase in demand on the grid. Meanwhile, the U.S. added 64 TWh of solar generation to the grid in 2024 — enough to meet fully half of the record-breaking growth in electricity demand last year, according to independent energy think tank Ember Energy. The only way America can meet rising energy demand and keep costs down is by building more wind and solar. Clean energy means lower utility bills, more good jobs, and cleaner air. The Republicans don't care. It's a tale as old as the party. The GOP campaigns on one thing — lowering the cost of energy for Americans — and does the opposite. The final version of the GOP's bill, which Trump signed into law on July 4, phases out clean energy tax credits by the end of 2027, a year earlier than the timeline in the original House version. Rather than 'unleash' American energy, the Republican Party just kneecapped it. The loss of renewable subsidies threatens to disrupt or cancel a combined capacity of 547 GW of wind and solar by 2027 or later, according to Cleanview's tracker. That's not 'leveling the playing field' with the massively-subsidized fossil fuel industry — it's rigging the game. While the bill does give some juicy handouts to the fossil fuel industry, it's hard to see who else benefits. U.S. automakers will definitively lose the global electric vehicle race. Big Tech will have to pay a premium to power their AI data centers. Advanced manufacturers now face insurmountable regulatory hurdles. An estimated 2.3 million jobs in clean energy and associated industries will vanish over the next 10 years. The nascent battery manufacturing boom is over. And American households will soon face steep price hikes on their utility bills, with double-digit increases in states like Arizona and North Carolina. If that wasn't bad enough, in June, Trump stated plainly what he had already put into practice: a total ban on wind energy. 'We're not going to let windmills get built because we're not going to destroy our country any further than it's already been destroyed.' Adding cheap, abundant energy to the grid that would lower costs for working Americans simply isn't worth the eyesore to Trump. Instead, Americans will foot the bill for Trump's aesthetic preferences. While China added 329 GW of solar last year alone, the U.S. added about 50. Once the tax credits expire, we'll add even less. As energy expert, Doug Lewin, puts it: this isn't energy dominance, it's 'energy submission.' The Trump administration champions fossil fuels as the energy solution for the modern world — but the industry can't come close to replacing the renewable capacity that would be lost under the GOP's rollback of clean energy incentives. Demand may be high, but the natural gas industry can't meet it. The cost of building new natural gas plants has already tripled since 2022, with orders for new gas turbines backlogged past 2029. And as Heatmap reports, manufacturers like GE Vernova have little incentive to ramp up production capacity and risk future profit margins due to overcapacity. By 2027, GE will be able to produce only 20 gigawatts' worth of gas turbines per year — worldwide. These supply constraints won't be fixed anytime soon. CEO John Ketchum of NextEra Energy calculates that natural gas will only be able to make up 16% of the 460 GW of additional capacity needed by the U.S. by 2030. The energy consulting firm, The Brattle Group, found that the combined capacity of new natural gas plants and nuclear plant restarts will only supply about a third of projected peak demand growth by 2030. And once gas plants are built, unlike wind or solar, their electricity prices are tied to a global market prone to volatility — as Russia's invasion of Ukraine made painfully clear. On top of that, the Trump administration's push to boost LNG exports will only intensify global demand for natural gas and raise prices at home. The administration's gung-ho nuclear stance also faces headwinds from its own self-defeating policies — like arbitrary staff cuts at the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission — that make building nuclear power more difficult. Not to mention that tariffs on key components, like steel and aluminum, drive up already staggering construction costs — jeopardizing projects like the reopening of the Palisades Nuclear Plant. The final bill extended the window to claim tax credits for clean, firm power sources like nuclear, hydro, and geothermal for a decade — but this will still be too little, too late to stabilize energy prices. Industry analysts say no new nuclear plant will come online before 2032, at the earliest. And even if it did, the enormous upfront capital costs mean that any cost savings from nuclear appear on the timescale of decades, not years. While states like New York have moved forward with plans for new nuclear in an effort to improve 'reliability and affordability,' the experience of some nuclear customers has been the opposite. Integrating nuclear's constant baseload power may bolster the grid's long-term reliability — but it won't provide any short-term rate relief. Republicans can idolize fossil fuels all they want, but the industry lacks the physical capacity to expand fast enough to meet demand. Trump calls windmills 'costly and unsightly.' His Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, derides net-zero goals as 'sinister.' Interior Secretary Doug Burgum warns that the U.S. has 'tipped' too far towards renewables. In one of the administration's first executive orders, Trump bizarrely claimed that clean energy 'makes worse the high energy prices that devastate Americans.' These lies are designed to obscure the reality: it's fossil fuels, not renewable energy, inflating energy prices. Sensitive to global markets, the price of natural gas fluctuates wildly in response to supply shocks and geopolitical instability, as the Russia-Ukraine war made painfully clear in 2022. Coal is even worse. In places like West Virginia, Republican regulators have long forced ratepayers to subsidize uneconomic, aging coal plants despite cheaper alternatives. Now, Trump is mandating the rest of the country follow suit. Republicans are forcing Americans to accept higher utility bills just to prop up a dying fossil fuel industry — one that has already saddled the public with trillions in climate damages while raking in historic profits. The clean energy transition is unstoppable. Stripping away renewable energy subsidies will only increase costs and slow the pace of adoption. But it won't kill the momentum.
