This quote is long, so I've bolded what I want to emphasize.
"13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view—one follows the decisions of the majority. **For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will.** Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus **the People is only a theatrical fiction.** To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which **the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People**.
"Because of its qualitative populism **Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments**. One of the first sentences uttered by Mussolini in the Italian parliament was “I could have transformed this deaf and gloomy place into a bivouac for my maniples”— “maniples” being a subdivision of the traditional Roman legion. As a matter of fact, he immediately found better housing for his maniples, but a little later he liquidated the parliament.
**Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.**" ### Commentary
I've discussed the American Volk before. "A monolithic entity expressing the Common Will" (keeping in mind that only part of the citizenry is the Volk).
But there are some key words, though: the Volk is a "quality," is "theatrical," is "emotional." The best way to think is that our American Volk emits *vibes*: not desires, exactly, and not opinions, exactly, but something altogether more amorphous. It is the vibes that the Leader collects, channels, and turns into *action*.
And those original vibes are emitted on social media. The Volk are those on Twitter who are noticed and retweeted by influencers, eventually the Ur-Influencer, Elon Musk, whereupon they reach the Leader. People joke that that Musk is co-President or even the real President, but I think he's more akin *in an organizational way* to Martin Bohrmann 
:
> Bormann gained immense power by using his position as Hitler's private secretary to control the flow of information and access to Hitler. He used his position to create an extensive bureaucracy and involve himself as much as possible in the decision making.
* Gains power through access and flow of information? Check.
* (Wants to be) master of the bureaucracy? Check.
(I want to emphasize that I'm making a *limited* comparison between Musk and Bohrmann, and between Trump and Hitler. Both Musk and Trump are at the very beginning of big new roles, and how that will reveal their characters and shape their skills remains to be seen. Hitler was not Mussolini, who was not Franco, who was not Salazer – and none of them were, at the beginning of their power, what they would later become.)
#### What Parliament?
The US Congress has been on a path to cultural irrelevancy since the 1990s and is now completely irrelevant except insofar as its members participate as mid-level influencers on social media.
No one need "cast doubt on [Congress's] legitimacy because it no longer represents the Voice of the People." When's the last time anyone thought it *did*?
A better enemy is needed. Today, that's the "deep state," the permanent civil service, the Federal government's professional managerial class .
That's against whom the propaganda has been directed for a good while now. But the dynamic is the same: take down the enemy that has (1) power to *do* things, and (2) a tradition extending back to before the Leader and independent of him.