In trying to understand US President Donald Trump, the proposition has been put that he is sultanistic. In many respects, Trump’s second presidency does appear to be “sultanistic”.

Sultanism requires all individuals, groups and institutions to be subject to what appears to be the unpredictable and despotic intervention of the ruler who does not operate according to an ideology or a plan. Sultanism is, in this respect, a form of authoritarianism notable for the personal presence of the ruler in all elements of governance.

Trump’s choices for high office, including all offices exercising a capacity for coercion, are demonstrably based on personal loyalty rather than competence.

Yet while sultanism assumes unpredictability and a lack of ideology or plan, what has been clear from the outset is that Trump’s second term as president has in fact closely followed the radical Project 25 agenda.

Project 25 called for subsuming all executive functions under the president; diminishing the separation of powers between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary; dismantling government bureaucracy and replacing it with private enterprise; cutting government services; intervening in and controlling arts, culture and public life; and a host of other changes aimed at dismantling government regulation. Critics have identified Project 25 as having fascistic qualities.

It is therefore necessary to clarify what is meant by “fascism”. Fascism is first and foremost a radical nationalist ideology which, because it reflects “national values”, varies from country to country. Euro-fascism, Putinist fascism and American fascism (and even our own One Nation’s half-arsed fascism) each reflect distinct characteristics.

All, however, promote authoritarianism. Fascism is also characterised by anti-liberalism, ant-communism and anti-democratic populism. On the last, the 6 January 2021 storming of the US Capitol building and related attempts to subvert the 2020 election are cases in point. In this, fascism combines paramilitary tactics with elections, blending legitimacy and violence.

Borrowing from Umberto Eco’s analysis of “eternal fascism”, it also implies the cult of tradition and recreation of mythical past glories (Make America Great Again) and action bereft of intellectual reflection.

Under fascism, fear of difference (foreigners and immigrants) is promoted, especially to a frustrated middle class, there is an obsession with conspiracy and the hyping of an enemy threat, simultaneously cast at the same time as too strong and too weak, leading to the contradiction between inevitable triumph but perpetual struggle. Disagreement and dissent are equated with treason.

Eco also identified contempt for the weak married to a chauvinistic elitism, in which every member of society (or MAGA) is superior to outsiders by virtue of their belonging. Such superiority leads all followers to believe they are heroes. This is sexualised as machismo, including intolerance and condemnation of non-standard sexual activity.

The leader, embodying these “virtues”, thus holds himself as the sole interpreter of the popular will, delegitimising other state institutions as no longer representing the will of the people. And, of course, no fascist would be complete without employing and promoting an impoverished vocabulary in order to limit critical reasoning.

This latter aspect is useful in recruiting unsuspecting people to the cause. To illustrate, many, who for the past year or so have been little exercised by the war in Ukraine, are suddenly parroting Trump’s (and hence Putin’s) talking points. Russia was “provoked” into invading Ukraine, they say, thus legitimising military “provocation”, such as Israel’s destruction of Gaza. In doing so, they provide an object lesson in how fascism recruits.

Circumstances have changed over the last century and 21st century fascism has evolved since the 1920s and 30s. But, as Eco noted, fascism retains eternal qualities. It is incumbent upon us to recognise them.