Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

American Fascism- GREAT READ

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 07:39 AM
Original message
American Fascism- GREAT READ
thanks to Atrios for the link to this wonderful article.

Henry Wallace, democrat, looked at American fascism in the WW2 era. what he had to say is still relevant today.

http://newdeal.feri.org/wallace/haw23.htm

4.The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists 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.

5. 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. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort. They are doing this even in those cases where they hope to have profitable connections with German chemical firms after the war ends. 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.

6. American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information, and those who stand for the K.K.K. type of demagoguery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. What a great article!
I like the author's very clear explaination of 'facism'. It's scary how accurately he is describing today's America. The same type of people who put Hitler in power are the same who put Bush in power. It's time to take his advice and start implementing ways to take back our democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HawkerHurricane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. When Fascism come to America...
It will be wrapped in the American Flag. - Huey Long
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hasaler Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. Great article!
Two important paragraphs:

10. 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 against other religious, racial or economic groups. Likewise, many people whose patriotism is their proudest boast play Hitler's game by retailing distrust of our Allies and by giving currency to snide suspicions without foundation in fact.

The new prejudice is not really against people of different religions or races. Those prejudices are still pervasive, but the new prejudice that the far right is creating is against: democrats, "liberals", "leftists" and frankly, anyone whose views are left of far-right. Moderate Republicans are treated with disdain by the far-right. By calling these groups "treasonous" and unpatriotic, it allows the far-right to discount and ignore the views of these groups because anything these groups say is obviously an attempt to harm America. This stops all discussion and gives the right the last word.

11. The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism. They cultivate hate and distrust of both Britain and Russia. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

Despite the apparent nation building of the Bush administration, his policies are actually isolationist. Their policies are basically attempts to create little pockets of America around the world. If a nation supports our policies they are left alone, but if they disagree with US policies they are punished. It is the responsibility of the US government to protect the borders and citizens of the US. The removal of the Taliban was important for the immediate security of the US. The removal of Saddam Hussein, while beneficial to the people of Iraq, was not in the immediate best interests of the US. This unilateral move has isolated us, diplomatically, from other nations that did not support the war. (I know, this argument is kind of convoluted).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. the last line of his point #6
American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition...

and here we have Bush and Cheney as the cartelists, Fox news, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage as the deliberate poisoners of public information (not to mention the lies about WMD and nuclear capacity to scare Americans into an invasion of Iraq), and the KKK types of demagoguery are surely vested in Tom Delay and the Trent Lott crowd...all under the guise of "Christianity" unfortunately.

...and the goal is already clear.

..elimination of overtime.

...tax cuts for the richest of the rich, lies to make the middle class think they also benefit.

...attempts to cut pay for soldiers, cuts to vet benefits.

...a deficit which may bankrupt this country and leave millions without hope of a decent old age.

all to achieve the utter subjugation of the people of this country to the aims of the fascists.

the removal of civil rights and liberties that has also been put into place can be used to punish those who refuse to accept this utterly undemocratic form of government.

I wonder when the freepers will wake up and see that they have worked to undermine their own rights?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
27. Here's one sign that at least some RW types are waking up
This website/magazine seems to be Christian-fundamentalist (big on "family values") and RW (there's a link to the John Birch Society), BUT they are worried about civil liberties and also the neo-con foreign policy agenga. I found it interesting. I recommend the whole article.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2003/03-24-2003/vo19n...

President or Ruler?
March 24, 2003
by William Norman Grigg

<<Personal rectitude does little public good and can actually contribute to a great deal of harm when it's wedded to unaccountable power.>>

<<President Bushs most recent State of the Union Address contained a brief but telling homily inspired by that murderous religion, the "worship of collective human power." Outlining foreign and domestic agendas nearly utopian in their ambition, the president declared: "heres power, wonder-working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people."

This was a none-too-subtle allusion to the chorus of an old Christian hymn "Power in the Blood," which testifies: "There is power, power, wonder working power, in the blood of the Lamb...." In the presidents formulation, the redemptive power of Jesus Christ whom Christians worship as God was replaced by the collective power of the American people, as regimented by the state and directed by the president.

How can this be construed as anything other than a grave and shocking blasphemy and a brazen assertion of essentially limitless political power?>>







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBHagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. The description fits Ann Coulter to a T
And yet mainstream magazines and newspapers act as though she's merely an outspoken woman, not someone who defends some of the most destructive and morally abhorrent practices of the 20th century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. the willful or fearful lack of honesty
..in our media and our politicians is astounding to me.

for a while, I wrote to all sorts of people and asked them if this current administration, and their sycophants, did not meet the definition of fascism.

then I asked them...if they fit this definition, why doesn't anyone admit this and call this current govt by its proper name?

and if it doesn't fit, how or why not? I mean, if you read any definition of fascism, I don't know how you could deny, unless you want to lie to yourself, that this is a fascist govt and there was a fascist coup in America in 2000.

I know so many people, beyond this site, who all recognize this current junta as a fascist regime. Americans are saying this out loud.

at the same time, I know people who want to deny that this could be an issue in America, as though we have some sort of magic pixie dust which protects us from right wing totalitarians.

At the same time, some people don't even know the definition of fascism, and think it's a generic slur..left or right...and when they hear the definition, they're freaked out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. Almost every element of fascism in Henry Wallace's essay is here
before our very eyes. History will most certainly show that with the stolen election in Florida (yes, over 55,000 voters were willfully and illegally disenfranchised in Ms. Harris' little ploy if reports are reasonaby accurate), the neocons moved swiftly to ruthlessly seize control of all levers of power in government and to operate mostly in secrecy until President Bush was handed his "trifecta." While no one in their right mind could possibly subcribe to either LIHOP or MIHOP, the events of 9-11 made it convenient to implement the Patriot Act and entire PNAC vision. Now anyone who would question our leader is threatened or branded as unpatriotic. Some pronouncements that have emanated from this Administration are eerily reminiscent of what the late Howard K. Smith reported Hitler to have said in October 1941 in his "Last Train from BERLIN" (Alfred A. Knopp, New York, New York, 1942) about those who would dare speak against the troops, against his invasion of the Soviet Union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. the logic gap
"While no one in their right mind could possibly subcribe to either LIHOP or MIHOP..."

I don't know why you say that. There is ample evidence in our own history of right wing justification for an attack on American citizens to achieve their goals. Operation Northwoods has been documented. It has been covered by ABC.

The Reichstag fire was another possible attempt to blame someone else when another fascist seized unlimited power.

History is replete with Machiavellian murdering thugs.

Ledeen has a book out which praises Machiavelli's ideas of lying to citizens and ruling via fear and worse.

I'm not saying either of those scenarios is true or not, but hopefully history will be able to answer that question.

however, I have no doubt that there are powerful people in this country who are willing to kill innocents to achieve their goals... just look at the children in Iraq...just like the people in the WTC, they were innocent, but they were expendable in order to attack Saddam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. No one in their right mind: what does that not
encompass?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. According to you
so, you are a certified authority on the mental well being of people like Gore Vidal, and know more than he does, and have a better command of history than he does?

Your statement is simply your opinion, which contradicts the examples of fascist movements and actions in the past.

that's why I say it's a logic gap.

I think what you are saying, maybe, is that it is too horrible for you to consider that this could be true. This idea threatens your entire view of the governing powers of this nation, and to consider the idea is too scary. Therefore, anyone who would consider this idea is dismissed by you, even though no one can say with certainty at this point in time whether or not there were people in the Bush administration or intel, for instance, who had foreknowledge of an attack and did nothing to stop it.

fwiw, John Kerry was also dismissed as a conspiracy theorist "nut" when he was investigating BCCI, which is now known to be the largest bank fraud in world history, and one in which both Reagan and Bush, as well as the CIA had knowledge of for YEARS before any action was taken, and both of their administrations worked to hinder any investigation of the BCCI scandal, and BCCI, it is also now known, involved biz partners of both Saudi terrorist financiers and the Bush family.

All I'm saying is I will not say it is impossible that some in the Bush administration had foreknowledge because their pattern of behavior, and their very philosophies encourage such speculation.

Under Reagan and Bush's watch, America sanctioned genocide in Central America and used Klaus Barbie, known as the Butcher of Lyon during WW2, to train what Barbie called "a new SS" in S.America.

So, if they would be willing to sleep with that devil, why should I think they would not also sleep with the devils who were behind 9-11?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. RainDog, I'm a big Gore Vidal fan and read some of his essays most
days. I'm not an expert on anything, most certainly not when it comes to the mind. To my way of thinking, three types of minds are possible in the context of my statement: the right mind, the left mind, and the centrist mind. Hopefully this clarifies where I was trying to coming from, albeit via a clumsy play on words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-23-03 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
26. so are you calling me 'carazy'
or not thinking clearly? because i think they are not only capable but there are many unanswered questions that point straight at them.

after everything history teaches us about these thugs you think they aren't capable or do you believe the 'official' story - in quotes, since there isn't one yet

:hi:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silverweb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-19-03 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. This is a must read...
... and a must share.

Frightening and all too real.

Thank you for posting this, RainDog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Thanks go to Atrios for linking this
from the Eschaton blog.

I made copies to share with people I know, because this article seems like a American voice speaking from the grave of history to warn us of the dangers we face today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Eschaton Blog?
um, maybe everyone else here knows what that is, but i don't. Link please?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlashHarry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
13. Didn't Wallace run for Prez as a progressive in '48?
The only other thing I know about him is that he was an Iowan. (That, and tinfoil types claim he was a heavy-duty Freemason.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinistrous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. Yes he did run as a Progressive
Short bio here:

http://www.grolier.com/presidents/ea/vp/vpwall.html

He also founded The New Republic magazine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slack Donating Member (250 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
15. very interesting
thank you ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
17. DEFINITION, ..Fascism: a philosophy or system of governmen that advocates
or exercises a dictatorship of the Extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism. You have to go to a dictionary that is older than 10 years old usually, when the forced merging of corporation's took over the publishers... the definition was changed to something about pre war Italy. the Corner Stone of American Fascism is Campaign Contributions by Corporations. how can a nonliving entity make a contribution, the board of directors are giving the contributions, to purchase privilege. for instance a drug like tobacco that is 5 times more addictive than heroin and kills 400,000 more people than heroin every year is legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eablair3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I don't think the term "Fascism" is correct here, ... yet
thanks for the definition. I also looked it up in the current M.Webster's CD dictionary (11th Collegiate Dict'y) I have and it stated this first definition for "fascism":

"a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of Fasciti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

I think W and Ashcroft would like to have a fascist state, and are doing their best to get there. But, they haven't got there yet. At least they haven't achieved "forcible suppression of opposition" yet, ... have they? comments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. what is fascism- chip berlet
this essay is the foreward to "Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party" which talks about fascist and nazi groups in the U.S. which have been welcomed into the Republican Party.

with a link to the essay online

http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/berlet_fascism.htm

The seeds of fascism, however, were planted in Italy. "Fascism is reaction," said Mussolini, but reaction to what? The reactionary movement following World War I was based on a rejection of the social theories that formed the basis of the 1789 French Revolution, and whose early formulations in this country had a major influence on our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

It was Rousseau who is best known for crystallizing these modern social theories in The Social Contract. The progeny of these theories are sometimes called Modernism or Modernity because they challenged social theories generally accepted since the days of Machiavelli. The response to the French Revolution and Rousseau, by Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, and others, poured into an intellectual stew which served up Marxism, socialism, national socialism, fascism, modern liberalism, modern conservatism, communism, and a variety of forms of capitalist participatory democracy.

Fascists particularly loathed the social theories of the French Revolution and its slogan: "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity."

* Liberty from oppressive government intervention in the daily lives of its citizens, from illicit searches and seizures, from enforced religious values, from intimidation and arrest for dissenters; and liberty to cast a vote in a system in which the ; majority ruled but the minority retained certain inalienable rights.
* Equality in the sense of civic equality, egalitarianism, the notion that while people differ, they all should stand equal in the eyes of the law.
* Fraternity in the sense of the brotherhood of mankind. That all women and men, the old and the young, the infirm and the healthy, the rich and the poor, share a spark of humanity that must be cherished on a level above that of the law, and that binds us all together in a manner that continuously re-affirms and celebrates life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-20-03 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Friendly Fascism
here's a link to excerpts from the book, Friendly Fascism, by Bernard Gross

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Friendly_Fasc...

intro-

Friendly fascism portrays two conflicting trends in the United States and other countries of the so-called "free world."

The first is a slow and powerful drift toward greater concentration of power and wealth in a repressive Big Business-Big Government partnership. This drift leads down the road toward a new and subtly manipulative form of corporatist serfdom. The phrase "friendly fascism" helps distinguish this possible future from the patently vicious corporatism of classic fascism in the past of Germany, Italy and Japan. It also contrasts with the friendly present of the dependent fascisms propped up by the U.S. government in El Salvador, Haiti, Argentina, Chile, South Korea, the Philippines and elsewhere.

and-


"Princes," wrote Machiavelli many centuries ago, "should delegate the ugly jobs to other people, and reserve the attractive functions for themselves." In keeping with this maxim, Reagan's less visible entourage has surrounded the President with highly visible targets of disaffection: Volcker, Stockman, Haig, Weinberger, Kirkpatrick, and Watt. In comparison, Reagan looks truly wholesome. This makes it all the more difficult to focus attention on the currents and forces behind the people behind the President-or for that matter, other less visible leaders of the American Establishment.

--this is also the case now, with Cheney and Rove and Ashcroft serving as the targets, while Dubya gets to be the likeable, seemingly stupid, and maybe stupid front for the same sort of govt which Reagan wrought- the worst unemployment since Hoover (until Dubya), talk of support for troops, while cutting veteran's benefits, the possibility of another round of stagflation...


this is from another link - chapter 3

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Specter_Frien...

Despite the sharp differences from classic fascism, there are also some basic similarities. In each, a powerful oligarchy operates outside of, as well as through, the state. Each subverts constitutional government. Each suppresses rising demands for wider participation in decision making, the enforcement and enlargement of human rights, and genuine democracy. Each uses informational control and ideological flimflam to get lower and middle-class support for plans to expand the capital and power of the oligarchy and provide suitable rewards for political, professional, scientific, and cultural supporters.

the book is expensive for a paperback. the first link above will take you to a table of contents which contains a very interesting and timely discussion of the spectre of American fascism via exerpts from the book.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-21-03 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #18
22. Tamas on Post-fascism
thanks to another DUer who sent me this link originally...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-3-55-306.j...

What is Post-fascism?
Gaspar Miklos Tamas

14 - 9 - 2001 -One of Hungarys leading anti-communist dissidents accuses Europe and the world of abandoning Enlightenment principles. He is now an unillusioned critic of a racialised global liberalism.

"I have coined the term post-fascism to describe a cluster of policies, practices, routines and ideologies which can be observed everywhere in the contemporary world. Without ever resorting to a coup detat, these practices are threatening our communities. They find their niche easily in the new global capitalism, without upsetting the dominant political forms of electoral democracy and representative government. Except in Central Europe, they have little or nothing to do with the legacy of Nazism. They are not totalitarian; not at all revolutionary; not based on violent mass movements or irrationalist, voluntarist philosophies. Nor are they toying, even in jest, with anti-capitalism.

I should define what I mean by the term post-fascist. I take the term fascism to refer to a break with the enlightenment tradition of citizenship as a universal entitlement; that is to say, with its assimilation of the civic condition to the human condition.

It is this concept of universal citizenship that underpinned the notion of progress shared by liberal, social democrat and all the other assorted progressive heirs of the Enlightenment. Once the Enlightenment equated citizenship with human dignity in this way, its extension to all classes, professions, both sexes, all races, creeds, and locations was only a matter of time. Universal franchise, the national service, and state education for all had to follow. National solidarity demanded, moreover, the relief of the estate of Man, a dignified material existence for all, and the eradication of the remnants of personal servitude.

In 1914, fascism was able to undo this key premise of modern society...(according to) Carl Schmitt, the legal theorist of fascism and political theologian of the Third Reich, those in power must judge who does and who does not belong to a given civic community. Citizenship became a function limited to his (or its) trenchant decree. Certain categories of people, representing types crucial to the Enlightenment project of inclusion, became non-citizens and therefore, non-humans: communists meant the rebellious lower type, the masses brought in, leaderless and rudderless, by rootless universalism, and then rising up against the natural hierarchy; Jews, a community that survived the Christian middle ages without political power of its own, led by an essentially non-coercive authority, the people of the Book, by definition not a people of war; homosexuals, by their inability or unwillingness to procreate, bequeath and continue a living refutation of the alleged link between nature and history; the mentally ill, listening to voices unheard by the rest of us in other words, people whose recognition needs a moral effort and is not immediately (naturally) given, who can fit in only by enacting an equality of the unequal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-22-03 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. mine was from a 1986 American Heritage, later dictionary's took the teeth
out of the definition, they usually just say pre WWII Italian gov. there is a lot of disinformation about what Fascism is.... Because it is the stuff that Campaign Contributions are made of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-21-03 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. kick the fascists out of power n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
28. rush,newspeak and fascism
this is the blog of an award-winning journalist who has a series of entries which look at current fascist trends in America. He calls the current situation "proto-fascist" --yet find clear reason to identify what those like Coulter and Limbaugh are doing as a national issue of concern as mainstream conservatives refuse to speak out against these fascist elements gaining power within their party.


http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2003_08_03_dneiwert_archiv...

...Democracy, according to Limbaugh, is fascism.

In fact, even as he ironically sneers at "people who don't have the intellectual chops to defend their ideas," he resorts to the notoriously inadequate dictionary definition of fascism in order to stand the meaning of the word on its head.

...the many shortcomings of the ridiculously vague Merriam-Webster definition become self-evident when contrasted with a scholarly approach, as we shall see. Utterly lacking from the definitions are the definitive aspects of fascism as described by serious political scholars: its populism, particularly its claim to represent the "true character" of the respective national identities among which it arises; and its mythic core of national rebirth -- not to mention its corporatist component, its anti-liberalism, its glorification of violence and its contempt for weakness.

... if we were to look for these well-established earmarks of fascism, we would find them in Limbaugh's essay and numerous other of his outpourings. Limbaugh, indeed, constantly claims to be the voice of "real Americans" and regularly calls for a rebirth of the "American spirit" to be achieved by the destruction of all things liberal.

...By carefully observing the machinations of the current spate of Newspeak emanating from transmitters like Limbaugh, however, it's possible to get a clear view of the movement's underlying agenda. This is possible when the meaning of Limbaugh's obfuscations are placed in their psychological context, because they constitute a fairly clear case of projection.
Indeed, one of the lessons I've gleaned from carefully observing the behavior of the American right over the years is that the best indicator of its agenda can be found in the very things of which it accuses the left.
This is known as "projection." One of the first to observe this propensity on the right was Richard Hofstadter, whose 1964 work The Paranoid Style in American Politics remains an important contribution to the field of analyzing right-wing politics:


It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is on many counts the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him. The enemy may be the cosmopolitan intellectual,
When the right accuses liberals of "fascism," it almost always does so in an effort to obscure its own fascist proclivities -- and it reminds the rest of us just whose footsoldiers are in reality merrily goosestepping down the national garden path.

Next: Understanding fascism
10:57 AM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-24-03 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
29. Fascism part of older evil
Edited on Sun Aug-24-03 09:47 AM by PATRICK
Of course Wallace was the WWII generation and it makes sense to beat the local right wingers over the head in that they not only were the same weasel breed as their Euro counterparts, but aided and abetted them all they could, some even after Pearl Harbor.

No, what really makes the right gnash their teeth is that FDR(wealthy old money caste) and not a thug like Mussolini took over during the Depression and was on hand to slap around the LOSERS cementing victory with the populist progressive New Deal and vice versa. Wallace and a few others could hardly crow. ALL the terms were swiftly co-opted by the Right as they switched to Hitler's crusade against Communism as their new win-win strategy. Currently, they keep spinning words so hard in vicious circles that their brain cells are going up in bitter flames.

The whole issue is thus disconnected. The most monstrous and revealing, pre-eminent LOSERS were set apart like aliens from Mars, a sign of "foreign" monumental evil that gleaned no lessons for America at all except they had to do the same to the Commies. Naziism doesn't stick because didn't out local Righties pitch in and defeat the German Righties? Eventually, that is?...
The Nazis, the Robber Barons of all centuries, hegemony minded finaciers and imperialists, industrial-military complex, the "nobility", organized crime are pretty much all the same ideological track replete with attendant thugs, Macchiavellian gameplans, self-aggrandizing agendas from the Devil's own workshop. Depressingly the same and keeps working enough harm to perist like recurrent cancer. There are NO "new ideas" on the left, only a facade in its current energetic permutation. They are incapable of learning the truth as skilled as they are in learning dirty tactics. It is a large grouping of men too often admired and "respected" so that the worst of them take a blank check of elitism to rob the common bank. That is not to say that all men of wealth and power are evil, only that they are trapped by their position and faith into allowing the extremists to go unchecked, especially when a progressive world makes them afraid.

Nazis are a subset of the Right Wing itself, which is the proper global term today. Fascism was the flavor of the month to exploit the post WWI chaos in defeated Axis nations. The usual sponsors were there, some bitter at their personal humiliation and losses at the hands of socialist postwar governments. No, the use of the term fascism is an icon of monstrosity and loserhood, even though the ideology and the violence is very much to the taste of these psychological and caste types. They have been trying to brand their enemies- ANY enemy- with something similar in the childishly spiteful and self-defensive spirit for they are renowned. "Liberal" hardly cuts it and "Commie" is remote and worn out.

What you need to do is get the culture to focus its blurred and sidelong glance at the WHOLE picture. Fascism springs out of the Right like weeds in your "deregulated" lawn. Its power structure is always money, military, thuggery and ignorant exaltation, a rigid and mindless pyramid to simplify the task of the ruling class. Now I am not all that much a naive fan of other human groupings, but the Right in particular is "wrong" for the times. They will get everyone killed, or at least very needlessly high numbers, and not in a way as to "healthily" thin the race or gratify "oh well, there's always Armageddon" fundies. The Right is so wrong that, in scale and numbers, anything they try will harm more people and institutions than Hitler ever did because it is that out of wack with the very world all humanity is making. Of course,they appear goonish and silly as a class until the blood starts flowing and the starvation and disease set in.

There is hope only if better people get their act together. A good opener is to throw out the cliche book and look hard at ourselves, dispassionately, compassionately. And not glorify and enable the very very worst retrograde elements of humanity, not let them call the shots in any way at all. And the worst elements are the Right and easily proved by their deeds and constituencies. What is the mutual shared ideological and methodolical grouping? Mob-Intel blackbaggers- Poisonous and military industrial complex dinosaurs- power grabbing moguls- radical hate groups- greed soaked snobs- sycophants- jerks, inertia bound cowards and provincial rot, etc. etc.

When Jesus said thieves, murderers and prostitutes would storm into heaven first he was looking hard at a more despicable class of hyumanity- those ORGANIZED to "respectably" abuse ther fellow man and assuming the roles of God and goodness and social tradition ALL to themselves and their current, unsustainable Mammonite success.

Well, in today's world the good people who always vastly outnumber degenerate immoralists and smashing morons, are organized too. Too bad we don't match their terrible purpose with more energy of our own. This is a rather embarassing test of primary survival. The real work comes after dealing with the backsliding negatives. Or will the entire human experiment be aborted and crucified in this sad, irrational fashion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 20th 2014, 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC