Theses and Dissertations

The ground for the ethics of lockdown policies has radically shifted in the past three years. Libertarians started to be convinced that it is morally justifiable to impose constraints on liberties, including forced quarantine and social isolation. On September 7, according to the World Health Orignaztion, the mortality rate for COVID reached its lowest since March 9, 2020. I will take September 7 as the turning point for the ethics of the pandemic in this work. If we accept utilitarianism, deontology, or moral relativism, then, prior to the turning point, China’s Zero-COVID Policy was morally justified. Although China’s Zero-COVID Policy has remained controversial, I will propose that (1) the policy was justified on utilitarianism because it maximized utility, (2) the policy was justified on deontology because the policy is the Nash Equilibrium, and (3) the policy was justified on moral relativism because the policy was in accordance with the norms of the Chinese people.

Since the beginning of his campaign in 2015, former President Donald Trump has enjoyed the support of a broad coalition of domestic, radical far-right groups and has himself peddled several conspiracy theories favored by these groups. Even prior to his campaign, Trump supported far-right conspiracies, evidenced by his strong support for birtherism, the belief that former President Obama was not a U.S. citizen or Christian. Instead of distancing himself and his administration from these groups, President Trump repeatedly refused to forcefully and continuously denounce these far-right extremists and consistently amplified both individuals ideologically associated with these groups and the groups themselves. This continual behavior by President Trump, coupled with his endorsement of election fraud theories after his loss in the 2020 election, culminated in an armed insurrection against the United States Government on January 6th 2021. The armed mob that stormed the Capitol, which was directly incited into violence by President Trump, consisted of a multitude of individuals, many of which belonged to different far-right extremist groups. Despite their aesthetic and strategic differences, these separate groups were united in their support of President Trump, who they viewed as a leader promoting their various causes. These groups were part of a movement that had attached itself to Donald Trump, one that Trump directly fostered through his rhetoric and actions. I believe that this Trump centered movement exhibits significant fascist elements and undertones. In order to make sense of these fascist elements, I will use of Robert O. Paxton’s historical analysis and account of fascism to contextualize and understand the ideology. I will examine the President’s role in creating this far-right movement and amplifying the messaging & profile of various the far-right groups that supported him, before arguing that Trump and his far-right movement possess many of the requisite qualifiers to be potentially be labeled as fascist under Paxton’s account. This examination will reveal the similarities between these far-right groups, painting a clearer picture as to why they participated in this movement and aligned themselves in support of Trump. Finally, I will examine the potential short and long term solutions to addressing or resolving the problems that have been left in the wake of the Trump presidency. How did different far-right extremist groups with varying ideologies form a politically mainstream coalition large enough to impact American electoral politics? I will argue that former President Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric, consistent refusal to strongly denounce far-right groups, and amplification of far-right individuals and ideas fostered an environment for these groups to thrive.