BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism

Subject: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jan 04 - 11:13 AM

There are two interesting pieces on this subject that have surfaced of late. One of them is an early theorem from the Usenet called Godwin's law, which in various forms, describes the mechanism of calling on Nazism or Fascism as an analogy for current events:

Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin ([e-mail]) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to the Jargon File:

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

See http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/faqs/godwin.html

The second, more serious analysis comes from a history teacher in Cape Cod and I am attaching it since there is no website on which it is posted. It is long but intelligent and worth thinking about:

The author teaches history and sociology at Cape Cod Academy, a mid-cape private high school. He writes a column for the Cape Cod Times editorial page. It appears on Fridays.

The future of Freedom in America

I'm not sure exactly when it was that someone sent me my first reprint of an article comparing George Bush to Hitler. It bothered me a lot, not because I'm a Republican but because it simply wasn't a fair attack. Read Mein Kampf for yourself, then ask if you think George Bush is the next Hitler. Had Bill Clinton the wit to get Bush named Commissioner of Baseball soon enough, the man would never have entered politics - and wouldn't have wanted to. No. George Bush is no Hitler, and the Left does him a slander to suggest it, and squanders its credibility by doing so.

Having said all that, another question remains - one worth asking: How safe is America from Fascism today? It took a world war, a fortune in American blood and treasure and 70 million lives around the world to wrestle fascism to the ground last time. It is to honor our fathers and grandfathers - and the world's teeming dead - that we take a look around and inquire about the future of freedom in America.

A patriot should worry about fascism like a religious devotee worries about sin, because both have to be confronted every day. Both arise from perennial temptations. What is fascism? Fascism is what happens when concentrations of wealth and power join forces to consolidate their advantages and advance their interests. "Modern fascism should properly be called 'corporatism', since it is a merger of the state, military and corporate power." said Benito Mussolini, Italy's tyrant in WW2.

There may be neo-Nazis in America today, but they're not really going anywhere because they're still in love with German fascism, its heroes and symbols. We have to consider something different. We have to watch for things as American as apple pie - things that won't feel foreign at all.

Mussolini spoke of a "merger". This concept is the key to understanding fascism. Fascism is an unholy alliance of potentially good things: our government in Washington, the people we send there and those they appoint-the media who can reach us everywhere - in our cars, living rooms, online - our most successful corporations and the powerful men who run them - our military and the police and our dominant religions. Those are the main ingredients - and taken one by one, they are good things. They are ours, and we're proud of them.

But what happens when they begin to cooperate - not in meeting the needs of the American people - but in consolidating their own advantages? Is it not the proper business of enterprises to succeed and do they not see their growing success as a good thing? Indeed they do - and therein lies the temptation.

Fortunately, we have lots of history to look at now. The German people elected Hitler, for example. The Serbs loved Milosovitch, the Italians loved Mussolini. But for all the patriotic rhetoric, did their champions love them back? No. Their leaders were elitist snobs, convinced they could hoodwink their people into surrendering their liberties one by one. We have the advantage of historical hindsight; we have their papers and communications. They wrote the book on conquering their own nations from within. It should be required reading in every school.

What I'd like to do is review with you what we know about fascism and then you can decide whether it's anything patriotic Americans should be worried about. We've made a start: we've identified the key players. They are the ones who always stand to benefit the most from fascism, however much of it they can get. And, however difficult this might be in an election year, let's proceed in the understanding that both our political parties face the same temptations here. Founding father James Madison gave us fair warning: "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by sudden and violent usurpations." More to come on this next time.

Recognizing a matrix of temptations

There is a risk that we might keep our eyes trained on the horizon for some foreign enemy while we are quietly looted and disenfranchised from within. This is what Ben Franklin had in mind as he left a session of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. A woman approached him on the street. "So, do we have a king?" she asked. "No madam," Franklin said. "You have a republic - if you can keep it."

Fascism arises out of a matrix of temptations. The corporation may wish to maximize profits by reducing workers' wages and benefits. At some point, they run afoul of worker-protection laws and must secure the cooperation of elected officials to remove the obstacles to further profits. They offer campaign contributions and other amenities to those politicians most responsive to their needs.

Needless to say, the newspapers and other media could raise the alarm. That problem is best solved by purchasing as many of them as possible and gradually weaning them (and the public) away from investigative reporting. Short attention-spans get even shorter.

What if striking workers need a little physical instruction from police batons and, in extremis, army bayonets? These things have been arranged in America's past. Later on, as modern history reminds us, inconvenient intellectuals can be silenced -along with uncooperative media - until eventually we have more enforcement than law.

History even illustrates how religious institutions can be tempted with the chance to see their values made compulsory by the silencing of rival sects and faiths or in harsher conditions, protection in return for silence. "In short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess." Adolf Hitler. How ironic: Hitler offers to improve the morals of his countrymen and defend them from the evil of liberal impulses.

You don't attack fascism by attacking or demonizing any of its constituent parts. This is what the Left hasn't understood. Corporations are not villainous things, nor are cops on the beat or our own kinsmen who make up the military. Our churches are clear forces for good. But all institutions are subject to the temptations to advance their wealth and influence at the expense of ordinary people, even while declaring themselves to be the people's protector and friend. We've seen it all before, both here and abroad.

So this is a good time to offer our first weapon against fascism. We vigilantly protect the political and economic interests of ordinary people against encroachment by any of the concentrated power interests we've been talking about. With every policy question that comes up, we ask, "Will this new suggestion put more money in the workers' pockets - or less? Will Americans be more free - or less so? Is our government more secret, or more open?" Then we vote.

Why, after all, did we go to war against Hitler and Mussolini and Tojo? Why did we hold the line against the Soviet Union all those years but to protect our liberty and the chance ordinary people have here for a decent life. That being the case, we have to ask how a free and prosperous people can be tricked into surrendering their freedom and prosperity to fascists. How that happens is next.

Extracting the freedom from a free people

There is a science to this. The assault on the freedom of free people is as old as freedom itself. We see it in ancient Athens and Rome, but the most instructive lessons come after the Industrial Revolution and the creation of the mass media. The clearest lessons are offered by Hitler's rise to power, overthrowing the existing democracy in Germany.

How shall a free people be persuaded to yield their freedoms up to a central government? In America, this should be a non-partisan (or a multi-partisan) question. Nobody owns this.

First, you need an emergency. You can always make one up, but usually there's something scary going on you can point to. Top Nazi Hermann Goering put it this way: "It is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship,. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

So you need a climate of fear. Put a steady diet of fear into a man and soon a steady stream of anger comes out the other end. Fascism loves anger, encourages it as a form of civic righteousness, then uses its political steam to do the new work of the state. We can recognize fear and anger as spiritual toxins. Fascism depends on those. Citizens are encouraged to think of themselves as victims whose desperate plight excuses them from moral restraints.

The fascist enthusiasm for manly action prefers polarization to reconciliation, war-making to peace-making. This preference wins fascism the allegiance of defense contractors and many in the military, especially \the senior officer corps. Those who don't go along are replaced with new, enthusiastic recruits.

Fascism distrusts intellectuals not already on board, and seeks to crush dissent from any defenders of civil rights and freedom. So fascism makes war on ambiguity. Problems are distilled to childlike simplicity; all questions are reduced to yes or no. Fascism glorifies decisive action and the masculine. "Whenever anyone says the word "culture," said propaganda genius Goebbels, "it makes me want to reach for my pistol."

Fascism identifies with a fixed set of national symbols and narrowly defines what it means to be a true member of the country. Those who can't or won't conform, either for reasons of faith or conscience or intellectual scruples, are denounced as unpatriotic and enemies of the state. In the name of country, citizens are encouraged to despise their fellow countrymen if they fail to conform.

Ironically, the interests of God and faith can be invoked in the midst of the most immoral projects. We saw this in the medieval inquisitions. The faithful were threatened with hidden evils only a trained elite could detect and save them from. As always, extreme measures were called for. They always are.

Fascist leaders will appear blasé and arrogant. Their usurpation of civil liberties must be justified by their superior knowledge and foresight. Here's where a subservient media is vital, so inconsistencies and mistakes can't be pointed out in public. When cornered, national security can always be cited, as Goering suggested over a half-century ago.

If we have a color-coded system of national alert for terrorism, we should have one for fascism too. Watch for the signs; then vote against anyone whose behavior suggests fascism to you. Such patriotic vigilance transcends political party concerns. I know lots of people in both parties. None of them want fascism for America. Love of country is a good thing, but it has to translate - as love always must - into actual benefit for the beloved. Democracy is safest when economic and political power is not concentrated in too few hands. Such concentration cannot be justified as a defense of democracy. It is, in fact, democracy's executioner.

The character of freedom

We are Americans who love our country. We love our freedom. We love the land we live in and we're grateful for the quality of life it gives us. We also know that freedom always has its enemies. In today's world, those enemies come at us from two main fronts: they are religious extremists bent on terrorizing us into conversion or they are powerful persons intent on tightening their grip on wealth - and their advantage over those whose work produces it.

If we do what citizens in a democracy are expected to do, faced with a threat, we'll ask ourselves what we need to do to counter the threats that face us. At the moment, I'm not talking about the things somebody else is supposed to do to protect us. I'm talking about what we ourselves can do. (I can feel Jefferson clearing his throat impatiently behind me.) We must perfect ourselves as best we can as citizens. We must embody - each one of us - the character of freedom.

How, you ask, can traits of character - any character - detect a nuclear device being smuggled into Detroit? Obviously, it can't. We have the FBI for that. What possessing the character of freedom will do is equip us to respond appropriately to whatever happens to us next that whatever casualties our enemies inflict on us, our liberty itself will not be among the missing. So what would a democratic character look like? It would be the character of fascism turned inside out.

If fascism stokes fear and anger, democracy responds with courage and forbearance. We have people shouting at us and telling us every day why we deserve to be angry and who we're supposed to be angry at. If we're going to think straight, we need to calm down. Keeping a clear head under pressure is the stuff of heroism. The democratic character expects every human being to be capable of self-transcendence when it counts.

If fascism promotes a punitive intolerance of non-conformity, freedom asks for proof of injury before judging others. A free society can be defined as diversity thriving in an atmosphere of tolerance. We have our civil law to regulate our public lives, and the democratic character demands the law be applied equally to all. About religion and other private matters, democracy requires a respectful silence and a respect of others' privacy.

If fascism distrusts the life of the mind and champions violent action instead, democracy requires critical intelligence from all its citizens - and an understanding of history. At the opening of our history, John Adams reminded us, "Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people." In a democracy, the construction of a library is a patriotic act.

If fascism glorifies war and its war leaders, democracy calls its citizens to it with extreme reluctance. The democratic character knows that the best way to support our troops is not to send them into danger unnecessarily. When we have no choice, we expect honor and valor from our warriors, but we also recognize the threat any permanently armed force poses to our own freedom. This ambivalence about armed force can be traced right back to the founding fathers.

Most of all, the democratic character continually seeks to expand the fortunes of the common man and woman. There is, in that hope of expansion, an innate distrust of power and privilege. "He mocks the people," said Grover Cleveland, "who proposes that the government shall protect the rich and that they, in turn, will care for the laboring poor."

Any charlatan can burst into tears at an unfurled flag. American fascism, if it ever comes, will be as American as half-time at the Super Bowl. So it won't be on their expressions of patriotism that we should choose our leaders but for their protection of liberty and the lack of secrecy with which they do the public's business.

At the beginning of our history, the founding fathers had to justify, in an age of autocracy, the vesting of ordinary people with political power. To do so, they had to insist that ordinary people can have the wisdom to know what is right and the moral courage to do it. No institution can be better than its members. Nothing has changed. While freedom occasionally requires us to fight for it, we defend it best, and daily, by living in it.


Lawrence Brown, 508-771-5096 Proposed series of columns for the Cape Cod Times

---

Regards,

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: mack/misophist
Date: 28 Jan 04 - 09:03 AM

Sounds correct to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:28 PM

Another vector that stinks like mackerel in the moonlight is the gradual stupidification and dumbing of the press. See this article on the Abrasion of the Fourth Estate in Wired for an example.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:04 PM

Will someone please tattle on Amos for that bloody cut and paste? Jaysus, Amos what the hell was the necessity for that?

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:22 PM

I was considering doing a cut and paste of an article of the best hot dog joints in Chicago, but we can start with a list right here:

Jimmy's
Poochie's
Hot Dog Island
Wolfy's
Portillo's
Big Herm's
Gene & Jude's
Gold Coast Dogs

Anybody been to any of those while in this great city?

Amos, feel free to reply. Any Intelligent Assessment is welcome!

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:27 PM

Printed off to read at my leisure. Thanks, Amos. It looks like something I've been screeching about for some time, but everybody gets on my case for being so nasty as to mention "the f-word" in relation to what might be going on in this country. The "It can't happen here!" attitude strikes me as frightenly naive.   

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Joe Offer
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:27 PM

Well, Amos says the article isn't available on any Website, and I couldn't find it. That being the case, I guess I'll let it slide. The main purpose of the rule is to prevent posting of lengthy stuff that appears at multiple other locations on the Internet. Still, it sure is pushing the rule a good deal.
It's an interesting article, but I sure wish he had edited it down a bit.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: pdq
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:31 PM

Is this crap thread going to be revived daily by Amos? He already has the "Amos's Cut-and-Paste Bashing of the Bush Administration" with 250 posts, 99.47% by Amos.

BURP!!! Pass the pickle relish if you would, Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:49 PM

"How safe is America from Fascism today? It took a world war, a fortune in American blood and treasure and 70 million lives around the world to wrestle fascism to the ground last time."

That pretty much sums the sucker up in a nutshell, though. Two bloody sentences. Couldn't you have used some editorial judgment, Amos?

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:58 PM

Gee -- lookit all these cocoanuts being thrown my way!!

Please note, Joe and PDQ, that long cut and paste was done back in January. Rather than "daily", this is eight months later. I agree I should have cut it down judiciously -- I guess I was pressed for time at the time.

Aside from some minor distortions in time-measurement I would also mention that the slippery slide toward fascism is a tad more important than whether someone thinks I talk too much.

But never mind -- it isn't blues or folk music so, Joe, I leave it in your capable hands to delete the whole thing, or the thread, as you deem fit.

A

---

I hadn't realized it had been posted so long ago. I guess that's another reason to leave it alone. Next time, try editing a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:19 PM

With all due respect, the article is twaddle, and long winded twaddle at that. It's a rehash of the same kind of thing the left said about the right and if you re-word it to read liberals instead of fascists, and change the freedom bit to values, you will have a standing rant of Limbaugh. And I don't respect a cut and paste job of that length when the originating person should express it first in his or her own words and perhaps come to the same conclusion and save us a spot of bother.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:49 PM

Well, true enough. Bush is no Hitler. But neither was Hitler Bush!

Bush is a lot more powerful than Hitler.

But let me back up here. Bush isn't really Bush. He is nuthin' more than a manipulated small time manipultive frat boy. Nothin' more. This is what we get when we get average frat boys runiin' the world's only super power.

Like what did anyone expect, fir gosh sakes?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:58 PM

I expected more expectorate.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:22 PM

You been 'round the boy when he's on the prezels, Martin?

Didn't think so...

Bobert

p.s. But seriously fir one minute. There was a guy who attempted to ask Bush some questions from the floor of a recent political event in Martinsburg, WV, who was not only removed, threatened with arrest but showed up to work the following morning only to be told he was fired.

In another situation a professor wore a Kerry tee-shirt to a Bush rally and was harrassed verablly and told he would have to remove it. The same professor wore a Bush tee-shirt to a Kerry rally and was not ahrrasssed or even confronted.

Now no one go getting thinking that this ol' hillbilly from these two reports that I'm votin' fir Kerry 'cause I prolly ain't but it does suggest that the "culture" within the Bush camp is a little further down the line toward fascism...

Fascism is a culture more than a form of governemnt. Once you get the peanut gallery on board, the rest is easy. It almost doesn't matter what kind of governemnt you *say* you have...

That's what is so very dangerous in the US today. It is becominf less tolerant and more nationalistic by the minite... That's what I mean by culture... Hard to change that stuff...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Bev and Jerry
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 01:50 AM

Well,we, at least, are happy that you posted this, Amos. It says what we've been saying for some time but better. In the last four years we have been moving rapidly toward a fascist form of government and are now in a dangerous position.

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: rich-joy
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:56 AM

For what it's worth, I agree with Bev and Jerry, Amos - I found it very interesting and I appreciate you posting this - ALL of it!!
I'm not American - but it certainly has uncomfortable echoes in my own fair country of Oz ...

Cheers! R-J
(who always said she was never gonna get caught up in the non-music threads, ESP. the political ones!!!)

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:26 AM

Thanks, Bev, Jerry and RJ. Doing what I can....


A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:55 AM

Aside from some minor distortions in time-measurement I would also mention that the slippery slide toward fascism is a tad more important than whether someone thinks I talk too much.

Did YOU say that Amos *Smiles*

If it matters at all, we are in total agreement for once, but the air here is rather thick with an irony that not many seem to be aware of.

To quote from the cut and paste - that Joe has so kindly not deleted, although I am sure that it would have filled-up his PC screen, which is supposed to be the hard and fast rule on cut and paste contributions - There is a risk that we might keep our eyes trained on the horizon for some foreign enemy while we are quietly looted and
disenfranchised from within.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: mack/misophist
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 11:14 AM

I endorse the post also. I also recommend that robomatic refer back to Bobert's comment on 'culture'.

Historically, it's common for a percentage of Americans to dislike the government. Hating or fearing the government is pathological, a sign of significant internal problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 12:02 PM

Missed this first time around. Good article, avoided hysteria, and identified the things that matter, not the superficial bits which people seem to focus on most times. The obvious repression and the swaggering and the uniforms and that are stage-dressing.

Since it's not an article that can be linked to, I can't see that the cut and paste convention really applies. As a post it's long, but as an article it's fairly short, and I think it deserved to be read in full. I think cutting something which can't be accessed in full isn't really a good thing to do.

Maybe in a case like this, whether it's an article by someone else, or a piece by a member, the answer is for the member to put it on a website themself, and then put a link and a quote here. That way the post is still fairly short, and the article might well be easier to read.

Thanks Amos. Don't worry about the blowflies buzzing around.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 12:09 PM

mack/misophist, fear of government in not pathological or a sign of "significant internal problems." Fear of government was one of the reasons for drafting the United States Constitution in the first place. It is the major reason for the Bill of Rights.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 02:40 PM

"...significant internal problems" What does internal mean there? Inside the people who are worried about how far they can trust their government, or inside the country where people feel like that?

I read it the second way.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 02:49 PM

Hot dogs should not be eaten with ketchup.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: pdq
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 02:57 PM

OK, as long as it isn't Heinz.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 03:03 PM

But Heinz does make the best ketchup. good for your fries.

It's just not proper hot dog etiquette to eat a hot dog with ketchp, especially in chicago.

You can be refused service in many top joints for ordering one that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: PoppaGator
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:08 PM

I'm glad that the *entire* article was posted. The author seems to have already edited it sufficiently; it's quite eloquent, all meat, no filler.

As for you crybabies who don't want to see your favorite corporate patsy (er, oops, I mean president) being "bashed," perhaps you didn't notice that the article takes great pains *not* to identify the danger of fascism with any particular individual, but on the contrary, warns us that the threat to our freedoms could easily come from any corner, any party.

On the other hand, of course, if the shoe fits, wear it!

The most readily identifiable potential villians, naturally, are the group we were warned against by that great Republican, Dwight D. Eisenhower; he coined the term "Miltary-Industrial Complex" to identify them in his farewell address. It's too bad that today's Republican insiders show no understanding of what that great general and president was trying to tell us.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:26 PM

Now Martin - Here's something worth having a flame war over.

Anybody who would tell me that I can't put Ketchup { yes - Heinz Ketchup } on a hot dog IS A BLOODY FASCIST !!!!. I demand that all of your posts reguarding hot dogs be deleited right now. Next thing you know you'll be telling this Texas guy that you can't put chili on a hot dog either.

Shame on you !!

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:28 PM

And shame on the horses you Yankees use to make hot dogs too.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:37 PM

First of all, Wesley, it is apparent that you do not know a hot dog from what is between your legs.

Chicago is world famous for it's Kosher hot dogs, eaten and enjoyed by it's citizens from all walks of life.

For the great unwashed like yourself, Kosher hot dogs are made from all beef under the best of conditions. Hot dog stands in Chicago, many of them one of a kind small businesses, out number the fast food chains and most have loyal followings with much competiton amonst themselves which, in our good old fashioned capitalistic way, promotes a better product.

I'm not telling you that you can't put heinz ketchup on your "bloody" hot dog or on a bloody head wound either. I'm just telling you, plain and simple that your knowledge about such a simple subject is extremely limited, and that in this great city by the lake, you would be ridiculed, laughed at, and scorned as someone who is totally clueless.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:43 PM

How do we stand on mustard and onions? Just want to get it right.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 04:58 PM

Marin - First of all I have a firm grip on what's between my legs. And it's not unwashed.

Second - I can discount anything you have to say because you're a yankee. Your brain is frozen like your hot dogs. You can't help it.

Third - If you need to know about beef - come to Texas - we have a little bit of it down here. Who do you think kept your packing plants open and busy all these years ? Texas beef.

Fourth - Of course all of your hot dog stands are small businesses. When they start making any money somebody named "Al" will come by and offer some "protection" - and I'm not talking about sheep parts wrapped in plastic.

Fifth - Granted - you have more of a grasp of simple subjects.

And - Sixth - Try to keep up - you'll have to move onto your other hand - I would consider being "ridiculed, laughed at, and scorned" by the unjailed people of Chicago as a badge of honor.

PS - The "great city by the lake" is Duluth

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 05:08 PM

In the interests of learning more about fascism I was looking up an English translation to the Horst Wessel song, and landed on a site which is ostensibly a Communist empire of the internet based on Elmo (yes, THAT Elmo). Anyhow, they had a very nice Saddam rap and while I suppose it could go to the music thread I spend so much of my time 'below the line' and thought i'd insert it here:


Saddam Rap

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 05:18 PM

It's a good article and well worth posting. I'm glad to see it.

Bush is unlike Hitler in several ways, but if he and the boys lead us into fascism -- and that appears to be the direction they're going -- he may be about as good.

'Fascism is what happens when concentrations of wealth and power join forces to consolidate their advantages and advance their interests. "Modern fascism should properly be called 'corporatism', since it is a merger of the state, military and corporate power." said Benito Mussolini, Italy's tyrant in WW2.'

clint

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 05:59 PM

Wesley

I only agree with your first point.

You do have a firm grip on what's between your legs.

Be careful.. You might want to use some ketchup as a lubricant.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 06:56 PM

Obiviously, Martin and PDQ do not want this discussion to take place, and will do whatever they need to do to disrupt it--just like the Brown Shirts used to do--

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: pdq
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 07:13 PM

Gee, M.Ted, you'd think someone had accused you of being a Kraut Dog.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: mack/misophist
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 08:07 PM

Note to Don Firth and McGrath of Harlow: I agree with both of you.

I read somewhere that many chat programs include an option to "ignore this person". Perhaps such a thing could be added here.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 08:24 PM

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.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:41 PM

Mted, I could give a crap about brown shirts.

Pay more attention to your brown shorts. Phew.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 04:29 AM

As I read it the point about Milosevic on the article wasn't so much that he was a fascist, but a reminder that murderous dictators can have widespread popular support. People often seem to assume that this isn't the case. The truth is, to be an effective dictator you have to have pupular backing.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 08:26 AM

So in what sense was Milosevic a dictator, McG?

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Mark Ross
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 10:33 AM

The difference between George W.Bush and Adolf Hitler? Hitler was democratically elected!

Mark Ross

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Bev and Jerry
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 07:23 PM

Actually, Hitler wasn't elected - at least not in the sense we use the term.

In two elections held in 1932, Hitler was soundly defeated in his run for president by Hindenburg.

In the third 1932 election, this time because the Reichstag had been dissolved, his party received a plurality - about 31% of the votes. So, the president, Hindenburg, named Hitler Chancellor. When Hindenburg died in 1934, Hitler assumed the presidency without an election.

So Hitler became president without ever getting a majority of the popular vote. Sound familiar?

Bev and Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 08:27 PM

Milisevic was a dictator in the sense that any opponents were effectively silenced, by whatever means necessary, and the power of the state was used in order to ensure that there was no prospect of a change of regime.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 09:34 AM

It can't be so, McG, if only because there WAS regime change, as a direct result of the elections in 2000. Certainly Milosevic then tried to cling to power, but I would put that crime little higher than Heath's in February 1974 or Bush's in 2000-01. Until then he had always been elected to the offices he held.

Anyway, in 2000 the army would not support him, and he handed over power with (a show of) good grace, shaking hands with his successor Kostunica and wishing him well. Whatever the sincerity of that, it was clear he was not going to be raging from the sidelines like an embittered pretender, and the tone of such handovers is not insignificant in terms of the bearing they have on future stability.

Remember that the line you are defending, or explaining, is that Milosevic was on a par with Hitler when it came to conquering his own people from within. In fact he only ever sought to deliver what his own people wanted - what many of them still do want, incidentally. The Socialist Party of Serbia, of which he is still the nominal leader, still polls strongly, to the great annoyance of Washington and its allies.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 10:47 AM

Does it really matter if these people are referred to as being fascist, murderous dictators or the saviour of the land?

If you are forced from your home (and worse) by the their crimes (or policy) - which is designed to enable them to grab, maintain or increase their personal power - does the exact term matter? I can think of many general terms of abuse that will suffice.

Remember that the line you are defending, or explaining, is that Milosevic was on a par with Hitler when it came to conquering his own people from within. In fact he only ever sought to deliver what his own people wanted - what many of them still do want, incidentally. The Socialist Party of Serbia, of which he is still the nominal leader, still polls strongly, to the great annoyance of Washington and its allies.

When you are in power - some of your people always want to murder and steal from some others of your people. The former are usually thought of as criminals......

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 11:22 AM

"On a par with Hitler" - I didn't say that. Just because a regime isn't on a par with Hitler doesn't mean it isn't dictators. Though you could have said of Hitler too that "In fact he only ever sought to deliver what his own people wanted".

That's the point. Dictators only stay in power while they can somehow manage to deliver what people want, or make people want what they deliver. Or at least a significant section of the people. In the end, when Milosevic wasn't delivering what people wanted, they got rid of him. Since the army had abandoned him the coup was a relatively bllodless one, in this case.

And while Milosevic used the Socialist label, he had long abandoned Socialism in any real sense. The label doesn't mean much - after all Hitler used it as well. The only thing is, it does keep some good people on side long than they otherwise would be the case. And the collapse of dictatorships that exploited the label doesn't mean that
there still aren't a lot of people who are going to work to bring about a genuinely socialist society, in Serbia and in other countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 01:33 PM

I didn't imply that you did say it, McG. I was reminding you what it was in that article at the top of the thread to which I took exception and which you defended.

The suggestion that "Dictators only stay in power while they can somehow manage to deliver what people want" is one you might prefer to have deleted when you did your preview routine. And why do you call the coup "relatively" bloodless? Why do you say "coup" at all? I'd have thought the stuff about socialism was wholly irrelevant.

Not sure what point Shambles is making, but he may recall that Franjo Tudjman in Croatia and Milosevic both attempted to rid Bosnia of muslims when the intention was to carve up the territory between them. Tudjman, who reinstated the insignia of the fascist Ustasha - the regime that murdered Serbs in their hundreds of thousands in WW2 -was supported by Washington. Milosevic was not. Maybe because of that word "socialist" attached to the name of the party he led.

By the way, it's only lately that "ethnic cleansing" has become unfashionable. The world hardly batted an eyelid when the Brits did it a generation or two earlier. Even now it may have a role in resolving some of the world's more intractable problems. But it depends how it's done of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 02:02 PM

Tudjman's was also a loathsome regime, and also had popular support, and that just underlines the point that dictators need to be in some sense popular. (In this case relatively popular with powerful people in foreign countries, which is a fairly common state of affairs for dictators, until they tread on someone's toes.)

That's a generalisation, but I think it's as true as most generalisations. There are some repressive regimes where it isn't true, typically colonialist regimes and puppet regimes, but, aside from that situation, the idea that in all dictatorships the vast majority are seething with a longing to overthrow their rulers is very hard to sustain. That doesn't make the regimes any less repressive for the unfortunate minority that gets pushed around or even murdered.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 03:01 PM

I thought my pont was fairly simple. If your people want to steal from and murder others, these are crimes. If you deliver this you are also a criminal.

It does not matter what else you are called nor if your crimes are greater or lesser than those of other nor what other countries may support you.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 04:30 PM

Amos, I think you did a lot of good work in outlining your thread.

"You don't attack fascism by attacking or demonizing any of its
constituent parts."

I agree with this. Attacking and demonizing are as you say two of facism's elements.

" This is what the Left hasn't understood."

Here, I would take exception. Many in the Left have understood and focus on the issues without throwing brickbats. We don't need to demonize the Left as a monolithic view.

"Corporations are not villainous things, nor are cops on the beat or our own kinsmen who make up the military."

They are only as good as the people that serve these things. Many of these people are capable of both villainy and virtue.

" Our churches are clear forces for good."

Not necessarilly. Many of the churches of the fundamentalist Right-wing are analogous to those who are deemed "terrorist" in Islam. The "Church" is again not monolithic and can be subjected to both villainy and virtue.


" But all institutions are subject to the temptations to advance their wealth and influence at the expense of ordinary people, even while declaring themselves to be the people's protector and friend. We've seen it all before, both here and abroad. "

And yet there is a current of philosophic thought that calls this "human nature" and I would argue with that because what makes us truly human is our bonding in society which is counter to these selfish interests. I think America is a great country precisely because we as Americans will not accept corporate tyrants or politicians that don't show their mettle through their behavior. I think protests are a form of American behavior that I would consider patriotic. Someone still has to have the passion for the idealism of our country.

I believe that "facism" can be a tendency as well as a totalitarian regime. There are facist tendencies in our country that continually need to be thwarted. Ashcroft's view of the Patriot Act in my opinion is a facist tendency that runs counter to the principles of civil rights.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 04:45 PM

Spelling! Though "facist" is just about the most common mispelling there is in political discussion threads (along with Ghandi).

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 04:53 PM

Amos, I think the article is good and reasonable.

" In today's world, those enemies come at us from two main fronts: they are religious extremists bent on terrorizing us into conversion or they are powerful persons intent on tightening their grip on wealth - and their advantage over those whose work produces it."

I believe that we are seeing this tendency amoung the power elite in Washington today. Americans are being terrorized into conversion by those who own most of the wealth in our country. These are rich Republicans who support their own interests above those of the working class in the US. Some of this terror is being fostered by fundamentalist pseudo-religious groups who are tearing down the Separation of Church and State through their exhortations and enemy posing under the guise of promoting "values".

The Corporation (as shown by the movie with the same title) has become a psychotic entity that is bloodless and lacks compassion for anything but the "bottom line". This is a facistic tendency, in my view. Worker's rights are being trampled upon by indiscriminate union busting and purging. The "whistle blower" is denegrated. It's a kind of "iron heel" that squashes true initiative and productive society.

Also, power is an addiction that feeds on politicians as well. When a politican claims authority by his own pipeline to God, it's time to wonder if the "tendency" hasn't again shown itself. Fortunately, we have checks and balances for that kind of arrogance. Therefore, we are not a facist country as of yet.

It could turn. I think a civil war would have to erupt here first. We may be in the midst of one now.

Thanks Amos for the lucid article and great discussion.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 05:20 PM

All salient points, Guest Frank. Your posts are better than the article.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 05:43 PM

Civil war? Get real. Spoken like a true old hippie.


Smoke another one.

The revolution will not be televised.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 29 Aug 04 - 04:40 AM

And yet there is a current of philosophic thought that calls this "human nature" and I would argue with that because what makes us truly human is our bonding in society which is counter to these selfish interests.

Indeed and if you do something which is selfish and greedy (or worse) there appears to be some comfort (for some) in maintaining that this is just "human nature". That if you didn't do it first then someone else would only come along and do it. Now it may be true that this is "human nature" but it is only one part of it.

In every world trouble spot where the greedy and the selfish are waging war or generally doing their best to destroy our planet for short-term gain - there are the selfless or at least the practically helpful, who are displaying another part of "human nature" and trying to heal and patch up the victims, often at great personal risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Aug 04 - 07:03 AM

Remembering that something is "human nature" is a reminder that we should not to be surprised at it, and that eliminating it isn't going to be easy. It doesn't imply that we just accept it. Everything people do is part of human nature, or we wouldn't do it. There is nothing unnatural about rape and murder and genocide, but nothing inevitable about them either.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Wolfgang
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 03:39 AM

the most common mispelling there is

Wolfgang (grin)

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 06:15 AM

Remembering that something is "human nature" is a reminder that we should not to be surprised at it, and that eliminating it isn't going to be easy.

I think that many of us are surprised at displays of the more positive aspects of "human nature" and that encouraging this, is even less easy, especially in political systems.

If as a leader and against the odds, you do somehow manage to achieve this noble aim - you can always use the excuse that you were only delivering what your people wanted..........

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 04:07 PM

It's "fascist". Sorry about that.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 04:09 PM

Guest, Frank.

your face is fascist.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 04:10 PM

"Civil war? Get real. Spoken like a true old hippie."

Not literally but metaphorically. The country is the most divided it's been for a long time.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 04:30 PM

Yes, I agree on that.

But there are those here I truly believe mean it literally.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 08:32 PM

All wars are civil wars really.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Once Famous
Date: 30 Aug 04 - 09:32 PM

Yeah?

What about The War of the Worlds?

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Ironmule
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 02:32 AM

I can confidently tell you that WesleyS is full of it,,,,,,I'm his brother. {bg}


Why, I've known him to use Sweet Pickle Relish along with the Heinz Ketchup on his hot dawgs, and even Bratwurst!!!!


The worst culinary sin I've known him to commit????

Garlic bread,,,,,spread with grape jelly

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I taught him to do it.{VBG}


Jeff Smith

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Chris Green
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 01:51 PM

Have I misread the title of this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 01:57 PM

DB:

No, you have not. It is simply that certain elements cannot sit still and let others have a decent conversation. If you have ever raised a child between the agres of 4 and 7 you are familiar with this phenomenon -- if you want to talk to adults you have to hire a babysitter.

Unfortunately no-one has figured out how to run a cyber-babysit algorithm on a forum. So the brats run around yapping freely and wetting on the cushions. Keep breathing.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Chris Green
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 02:17 PM

Nice analogy, mate! Made me laugh quite a lot!

Subject: Renewed Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 08 Dec 04 - 06:20 PM

I have been directed of late to an interesting and articulate blogger David Neiwert yclept.

David Neiwert is a freelance journalist based in Seattle. His reportage for MSNBC.com on domestic terrorism won the National Press Club Award for Distinguished Online Journalism in 2000. He is the author of Death on the Fourth of July: The Story of a Killing, a Trial, and Hate Crime in America, (Palgrave/St. Martin's, 2004), In God's Country: The Patriot Movement and the Pacific Northwest (1999, WSU Press), as well as the forthcoming Strawberry Days: The Rise and Fall of the Bellevue Japanese-American Community (Palgrave/St. Martin's Press, 2005).

In his weblog he has produced a series oF essays which deserve attention, to which I have produced links below:


Part 1: The Morphing of the Conservative Movement

Part 2: The Architecture of Fascism

Part 3: The Pseudo-Fascist Campaign

Part 4: The Apocalyptic One-Party State

Part 5: Warfare By Other Means

Part 6: Breaking Down the Barriers

Part 7 [Conclusion]: It Can Happen Here

---

I hope you find them interesting and enjoyable.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Dec 04 - 06:54 PM

Some fine stuff here, Amos... I kinda glanced thru it and what came to mind is something that I have pointed out on amny occasions and that is the strong Nazi presence in the Republican Party... No, I don't mean that the Repubs are acting like Nazis, though they are. But, as I have mentioned in the past, lots of former Nazies found their way to the U.S. after the war and found the Republican Party very receptive in taking them into the fold.

A good read on it is Russ Bellant's "Old Nazis, the Right, and the Republican Party" (South End Press, 1988).

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jan 05 - 12:49 PM

The following article is extracted from a telling NY Times article concerning the thoughts of Fritz Stern, who grew up in Germany during the rise of National Socialism. The whole article can be found over here. I believe the parallel drawn by Mister Stern need to be thought about carefully.

A

---

Democracy's Collapse

By CHRIS HEDGES

Published: January 6, 2005

Correction Appended

PRINCETON, N.J.

FRITZ STERN, a refugee from Hitler's Germany and a leading scholar of European history, startled several of his listeners when he warned in a speech about the danger posed in this country by the rise of the Christian right. In his address in November, just after he received a prize presented by the German foreign minister, he told his audience that Hitler saw himself as "the instrument of providence" and fused his "racial dogma with a Germanic Christianity."

"Some people recognized the moral perils of mixing religion and politics," he said of prewar Germany, "but many more were seduced by it. It was the pseudo-religious transfiguration of politics that largely ensured his success, notably in Protestant areas."

Dr. Stern's speech, given during a ceremony at which he got the prize from the Leo Baeck Institute, a center focused on German Jewish history, was certainly provocative. The fascism of Nazi Germany belongs to a world so horrendous it often seems to defy the possibility of repetition or analogy. But Dr. Stern, 78, the author of books like "The Politics of Cultural Despair: A Study in the Rise of the Germanic Ideology" and university professor emeritus at Columbia University, has devoted a lifetime to analyzing how the Nazi barbarity became possible. He stops short of calling the Christian right fascist but his decision to draw parallels, especially in the uses of propaganda, was controversial.

"When I saw the speech my eyes lit up," said John R. MacArthur, whose book "Second Front" examines wartime propaganda. "The comparison between the propagandistic manipulation and uses of Christianity, then and now, is hidden in plain sight. No one will talk about it. No one wants to look at it."

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 03:12 PM

An excerpt from the Common Dreams website, an article entitled "The Ghost of Vice-President Wallace Warns 'It Can Happen Here'".

Wallace was one of the VPs under FDR. See the link for the full piece--I have edited it down for palatability.

"In early 1944, the New York Times asked Vice President Henry Wallace to, as Wallace noted, "write a piece answering the following questions: What is a fascist? How many fascists have we? How dangerous are they?" ...

"The really dangerous American fascists," Wallace wrote, "are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power." ...

...(It was actually Italian philosopher Giovanni Gentile who wrote the entry in the Encyclopedia Italiana that said: "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Mussolini, however, affixed his name to the entry, and claimed credit for it.) ...

As the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary noted, fascism is: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."

Mussolini was quite straightforward about all this. In a 1923 pamphlet titled "The Doctrine of Fascism" he wrote, "If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government." But not a government of, by, and for We The People - instead, it would be a government of, by, and for the most powerful corporate interests in the nation.

In 1938, Mussolini brought his vision of fascism into full reality when he dissolved Parliament and replaced it with the "Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni" - the Chamber of the Fascist Corporations. Corporations were still privately owned, but now instead of having to sneak their money to folks like Tom DeLay and covertly write legislation, they were openly in charge of the government.

Vice President Wallace bluntly laid out in his 1944 Times article his concern about the same happening here in America: " If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. ... They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead."
..."American fascism will not be really dangerous," he added in the next paragraph, "until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information..."
Noting that, "Fascism is a worldwide disease," Wallace further suggest that fascism's "greatest threat to the United States will come after the war" and will manifest "within the United States itself."
..." Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion. American fascists of this stamp were clandestinely aligned with their German counterparts before the war, and are even now preparing to resume where they left off, after 'the present unpleasantness' ceases."
...
In a comment prescient of George W. Bush's recent suggestion that civilization itself is at risk because of gays, Wallace continued:
" The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power. It is no coincidence that the growth of modern tyrants has in every case been heralded by the growth of prejudice. It may be shocking to some people in this country to realize that, without meaning to do so, they hold views in common with Hitler when they preach discrimination..."
..."

---

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 04:53 PM

Thanks, Amos. Excellent article and excellent post.

The quote by Giovanni Gentile, often attributed (until now, even by me) to Mussolini, "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power," should jerk everybody up short if they ever stopped to think about it. I also took note some time ago of the similarity between what many corporations would like to see in the way of a social order with feudalism.

I think that in most people's minds, the word "fascism" conjures up images of black uniforms, swastika armbands, jackboots, and goose-stepping troops. But that sort of image is just one dictator's particular style. Fascists can just as easily be found wearing dark suits and power ties, while smiling pleasantly in board rooms and Congressional committee meetings. Nor does the definition of fascism require racism, such as Hitler's anti-Semitism. It usually does, however, need some kind of scapegoat to keep the populace a bit scared and to justify the steps it wants to take to tighten its authority. Gays, or terrorists, or pro-choicers, or those who are adamant about not want religion crammed down their throats—or the most dreaded evil force of all:   "liberals"—can fill that function just as well.

Can't happen here? Dammit, it is happening here!

(I know, Doug, I know. "The sky is falling!")

Sheesh!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:42 PM

If you focus all your attention on the fact that the sky is not falling it is easy to ignore the truth that the dark may well be rising.

The sky didn't actually fall in Geremany in the Thirties, people still ate and drank and went to work and got married - but the dark was rising all right.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Aug 05 - 07:43 PM

If you focus all your attention on the fact that the sky is not falling it is easy to ignore the truth that the dark may well be rising.

The sky didn't actually fall in Germany in the Thirties. People still ate and drank and went to work and got married - but the dark was rising all right.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: The Shambles
Date: 18 Aug 05 - 02:50 AM

If the effect of both (metaphors) was to leave us all in the dark - it probably matters little which one you chose to describe the gradual process that eventally leaves us in the dark?

In a practical sense anyway - it may matter to pedantic poets and songwriters but we may be too busy with such pedantry to notice how dark it is getting now.........

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: Amos
Date: 19 Aug 05 - 06:39 PM

Three quotes from Alexis de Tocqueville, the 19th century surveyor of what democracy in America really was:

"The moral authority of the majority is partly based on the notion that
there is more intelligence and wisdom in a number of men united than a
single individual, and that the number of legislators is more important
that their quality."

---

"I know of no country in which, speaking generally, there is less
independence of mind and true freedom of discussion than in America
[...]
As long as the majority is still undecided, discussion is carried on;
but as soon as its decision is irrevocably pronounced, everyone is
silent, and the friends as well as the opponents of the measure unite in
assenting to its propriety." (This can also be called loyal dissent -- B.P.)

---

""The sovereign can no longer say, "You shall think as I do on pain of
death": but he says, "You are free to think differently from me, and to
retain your life, your property, and all that you possess; but if
such be your determination, you are henceforth an alien along your people.

You may retain your civil rights, but they will be useless to you, for you will
never be chosen by your fellow-citizens, if you solicit their suffrages;
and they will affect to scorn you, if you solicit their esteem.

You will remain among men, but you like an impure being; and those who are mostly
persuaded of your innocence will abandon you too, lest they should be
shunned in their turn."

---

SPicy but perspicacious, eh?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Aug 05 - 10:39 AM

I think the point about "the sky is falling" is that that implies the end of the world rather than that it's getting dark. The point is, when it is implied that, since it's not actually the end of the world, there's really nothing to worry about, that's a bit misleading.

Subject: RE: BS: Intelligent Assessment On Fascism
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Aug 05 - 06:32 PM

silent, and the friends as well as the opponents of the measure unite in
assenting to its propriety." (This can also be called loyal dissent -- B.P.)

And it's what Communist Parties referred to as "Democratic Centralism".

The Cold War really was an argument between people who weren't that far apart in their beliefs about what mattered. And what didn't really matter.