The article's OK, but I can't see much new in it. Most of the ideas have been well aired in Europe - not least the bit about how easily populations can be manipulated, which should be a real concern in the US right now, and to some extent in the UK too. (Certainly instructive to quote Goering on this.)

I notice the author complains about latter-day politicians being compared with Hitler, then goes on to put Milosevic right up there with Hitler and Mussolini. Milosevic was no Hitler, and certainly never a fascist - fascism being a fairly specific idealogy, summed up in some degree by the quote attributed to Mussolini. In suggesting that he was, the author - to quote his words back at him - slanders Milosevic and squanders his own credibility.