I was wondering whether it is consistent to have $\frak{c} = \aleph_{\frak{c}}$ where $\frak{c} = 2^{\aleph_0}$ is the cardinality of the reals (over ZFC). If so, what interesting consequences of this statement are known (besides ¬CH)? I was curious about this because in some sense $\frak{c}$ is the largest possible number of cardinals below $\frak{c}$, and this is partly motivated by the idea that $\frak{c}$ may be so large as to be 'unreachable' via approximation by fewer smaller cardinals, which seems similar in nature to an opinion of Cohen on CH.
From what I have read, I think that it is consistent (relative to ZFC) for $\frak{c}$ to be the $ω_1$-th fixed-point of $\aleph$, which would be one possibility satisfying $\frak{c} = \aleph_{\frak{c}}$. But can $\frak{c}$ be the $\frak{c}$-th fixed-point of $\aleph$, and does this yield even more interesting consequences?