Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe US Is Facing a Weimar Moment
In early 1919, Germany put in place a new government to begin rebuilding the country after its crushing defeat in World War I. But the right-wing forces that had led the country into the War and lost the War conspired even before it was over to destroy the new government, the "Weimar Republic." They succeeded.
The U.S. faces a similar "Weimar Moment." The devastating collapse of the economy after eight years of Republican rule has left the leadership, policies, and ideology of the right utterly discredited. But, as was the case with Germany in 1919, Republicans do not intend to allow the new government to succeed. They will do everything they can to undermine it. If they are successful, the U.S. may yet go the way of Weimar Germany.
World War I left Germany utterly devastated. The landed aristocrats, industrial magnates, wealthy financiers, weapons makers, and the officer corps of the military that formed the locus of right wing power were completely discredited. Their failure in provoking and prosecuting the War was catastrophic, undeniable, and complete.
The economy was destroyed. Prices were at 800% of pre-war levels and rising quickly. Agriculture, pillaged for the War, lay in ruins. Social insurance payments for the War's injured, to widows and orphans, and newly unemployed soldiers were astronomical. And all this was before the cost of rebuilding was even begun.
At the same time, Germany faced massive reparations payments to the Allied victors, France and England. But Germany's foreign properties had been confiscated and its colonies turned over to the victors. The combination of these conditions, both domestic and international, made it extraordinarily difficult for the German economy to recover.
As a result of the failure of the right, the German people elected a moderately leftist government to lead the nation's rebuilding. It was named the Weimar Republic for the city in which the new post-imperial constitution was written. The new government was led by Friedrich Ebert, head of the German Socialist Party.
But the country's new parliamentary system had allowed dozens of parties to run, making it impossible for any one party to win an outright majority. Ebert's party had achieved the highest portion of votes, 38%, in the first post-War elections, held in January 1919. Ebert would have to govern by coalition.
It was at this time that the right wing made its crucial decision. Despite its shocking, naked failure over the prior decade, despite the horrific devastation it had wrought on the German people, despite the discrediting of everything they had purported to stand for, they would fight Ebert, his new government, and its plans for recovery. They would do everything they could to make sure that the new government failed.
Their strategy was two-fold: first, stoke the resentment of the population about the calamitous state of its living conditions-no matter that those conditions had been created by the very right-wing oligarchs who now pretended to befriend the little guy. Rage is rage. It is glandular and unseeing. Once catalyzed it is easy to turn on any subject.
And stoking resentment was easy to do. Just before the War ended, the military concocted its most sensational lie: the German army hadn't actually been defeated. It had been "stabbed in the back" by communists, traitors, and Jews. It was an easy lie to sell. It entwined an attack on an alien political ideology - liberalism- with the latent, pervasive myth of German racial superiority.
The second strategy of the right was to prevent the new government from succeeding. To begin with, success of the left would conspicuously advertise the failure of the right. Moreover, success by the left would legitimize republican government, so hated by the oligarchs of the right. Much better for the people to be ruled by the self-aggrandizing right-wing autocracy that had governed Germany for centuries.
So the rightists set out to do everything they could to make it impossible for the leftists to govern. They would use parliamentary maneuver, shifting coalitions, domination of the new mass media, legislative obstruction, staged public relations spectacles, relentless pressure by narrow but powerful interests, judicial intimidation and, eventually, outright murder of their political opponents.
Contrition for their abject failure, humility for their destructive hubris, compassion for their crippled country-those had nothing to do with it. All they possessed was a blinding, visceral hatred of the left and a masturbatory lust for the return to power.
Eventually, they succeeded. Every setback in recovery - and there would inevitably be many - was met with hysterical demonizing of the left wing government. The lie was repeated relentlessly that the government was run by communists, traitors, and Jews-the same furtive cabal that had purportedly stabbed the country in the back at the end of the War. They steadily chipped away at the efficacy and, thereby, the legitimacy of successive republican governments.
By the time of the Great Depression, Adolph Hitler's ironically named National Socialist Party had become the biggest vote getter in the nation. The Nazis had once been derided as the lunatic fringe of the far right. But the "respectable" right-wing power brokers who had started and lost the Great War anointed Hitler Chancellor in January, 1933.
He immediately suspended the constitution, abolishing most civil liberties. He outlawed opposition parties, began a massive military build-up and a relentless propaganda campaign, and set Germany and the world onto the path of the greatest destruction it would ever know.
America now faces its own "Weimar moment."
The failure of right wing policy and leadership over the past eight years, especially in matters economic, is comparable to Germany's right-wing failure in World War I. It is catastrophic, undeniable, and complete.
Consider:
According to the World Economic Forum, forty percent of the entire world's wealth has been destroyed in the recent financial collapse. In the U.S. alone, between housing and the stock market, more than $18 trillion in wealth has already been destroyed.
The private mega-banks that anchor the financial systems of the western world are bankrupt. This makes it all but impossible to jump-start the western world's economies which are heavily dependent on bank-system credit to operate.
More than 10,000 homes go into foreclosure every day. More than 20,000 people lose their job every day. And the collapse is accelerating, developing its own self-reinforcing dynamic. Job losses breed foreclosures, reducing demand, leading to more job losses and further degradation of the financial system. None of the stopgaps designed to stanch the bleeding have yet worked. There is no bottom in sight.
Meanwhile, debt has risen to astronomical levels. Reagan and Bush I quadrupled the national debt in only twelve years. Bush II doubled it again in only eight. It is now ten times higher than it was in 1980 when Reagan was elected. Total public and private debt exceeds 300% of GDP, half again higher than it was in 1929.
The government's unfunded liabilities, promises it has made to the American people but for which no payment source can be identified, now exceed $60 trillion, a literally inconceivable sum that can never, will never, be paid. Federal Reserve economist Lawrence Kotlikoff has suggested that the U.S. government is "actuarially bankrupt."
The full measure of the nation's plight is revealed in Hillary Clinton's first trip as Secretary of State. It was to China, to beg them to fund Obama's new fiscal deficits. Without loans from China, the U.S. economy cannot be revived. The significance of this cannot be overstated: the U.S. no longer exercises sovereignty over its own economic affairs. That sovereignty now resides in the hands of China, the U.S.'s greatest long-term rival.
Thanks to Republican policies of massive debt and shipping jobs abroad, the U.S. has technically become a colony of China. It exports raw materials and imports finished goods, together with the capital to make up the difference. Should the Chinese decide not to lend the trillions of dollars the U.S. is begging for, the U.S. economy will implode, plummeting onto itself in a World Trade Center-like collapse that will leave dust clouds circling the planet for decades.
Notwithstanding the destruction inflicted on the economy by Republican policies, the most devastating breakdown is in the intellectual foundation on which right wing economic ideology itself is premised. Free market doctrine, the secular religion of right-wing America, is in utter, irretrievable shambles.
One of the most lofty tenets on which free markets are premised is their claim for themselves that they are "efficient," that is, that market prices always reflect "fundamental values" of assets. But if that's true, how could the world's largest insurance company, AIG, have lost 99.5% of its market value in only 18 months? How could the world's largest bank, Citibank, have lost 98% of its value over the same period?
How could the world's largest brokerage company, Merrill Lynch, have gone bankrupt and need to be bought by Bank of America? How could the world's largest car company, General Motors, have lost 95% of its value and stand on the threshold of extinction? How could the world's largest industrial conglomerate, General Electric, have lost 85% of its value in only 18 months?
If the largest companies in the world, those at the very heart of the capitalist system itself, can lose virtually all of their value in only 18 months, what is the possible meaning of the phrases "efficient markets" and "fundamental value"?
The other core tenets of free market ideology are equally compromised. Major actors are clearly not rational - a breakdown of theological proportions admitted by no less an avatar of the cult than its pope himself, Alan Greenspan. Free markets clearly cannot, will not, regulate themselves. It is precisely their innate, irrepressible propensity for sociopathic greed and predatory fraud that has brought the whole of the world's economy to the precipice of collapse.
Free markets clearly do not align risk and reward, allocating capital to its most productive uses, as its promoters advertise. They clearly do not automatically return to equilibrium, but must be bailed out with trillions of dollars of injections from the shrinking coffers of the public to the ever-bulging coffers of a private priesthood of pillage and plunder.
And in perhaps the greatest indictment of all, one going back to its primeval roots in Adam Smith's eighteenth century opus, The Wealth of Nations, the unrestrained behavior of self-interested individuals clearly, manifestly, does not "coalesce as if by an Invisible Hand to the greatest good for the greatest number."
These are not peripheral premises that have failed. They are not tangential tenets. Efficient markets. Rational actors. Market equilibrium. Risk and reward. Self interest. These are the essential sacraments on which the entire free market system is founded. They are in tatters. And it isn't that any one of them has been discredited by the glaring, merciless force of events. All of them have been. All of them together. And all of them at the same time.
Free markets have long been the basis for a legitimate - though rightly debated - economic policy framework. But they have become little more than a robotically-recited cultural catechism, a mindless mantra mumbled to mask the looting of the nation's resources that is the true purpose of Republican economic policy as demonstrated by the staggering upward transfers of wealth that inevitably occur under Republican regimes. A more complete, conspicuous, catastrophic, and irrefutable repudiation of right wing leaders, right wing policies, and right wing ideology could not possibly be contrived.
So what is the right wing response?
They have adopted the strategy and tactics of the failed right wing plotters in Weimar Germany. First, stoke the resentment of the population about the increasingly dire state of its living conditions-no matter that those conditions were created by the very right-wing oligarchs who now pretend to befriend the little guy. Rage is rage. It is glandular and unseeing. Once catalyzed it is easy to turn on any subject.
Second, prevent the new government from succeeding in any meaningful endeavor. The Republicans have set all their efforts to doing everything they can to make sure the Obama administration fails. Rush Limbaugh's infamous, "I hope he fails" pronouncement is only the beginning of the fomenting of hatred from the right. As Limbaugh said, "Let's be honest. Every Republican in America is hoping for Obama's failure."
The same malignant hope oozes unadulterated from all the other Dogpatch Demagogues that rent themselves out to the Republican party to foment resentment against anything liberal: Joe the "Plumber," Rick Santelli, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, and virtually every other wing-nut operative whose intellectual stock in trade has been vaporized by the collision of right-wing policies with objective reality.
Equally so for the "respectable" members of the party, the all-but-three Republican members of Congress who refused to sign on to Obama's first stimulus package and continue to grandstand against every effort toward any form of progress. Contrition for their own abject failure, humility for their destructive hubris, compassion for their crippled country-those have nothing to do with it. All they possess is a blinding, visceral hatred of the left and a masturbatory lust for the return to power.
And what else can they do? Bereft of ideas, bankrupt in ideology, architects of collapse, obstruction is all they have. If Obama is successful, it will not only advertise the full extent of their failure, it will provide a model of liberal governance that would render Republicans irrelevant for decades, much as FDR's success left them out in the political cold for an entire generation. Liberal failure is a matter of life and death for Republicans.
And it's not at all clear that the liberals won't fail. No one should underestimate the task at hand. Never before - not even during the Great Depression - has the country inherited such a daunting, intractable set of economic problems: a debt burden so crushing; inequality so vast; a loss of financial sovereignty so constricting; an intellectual edifice so bankrupt; a private economy so uncompetitive; or an opposition so callously self interested in its own recovery and so cavalierly disinterested in the nation's.
The economy has been so damaged, successful rescue requires threading a series of policy needles, each of them so complex in their own right that none could be solved by any administration of the past 50 years. This includes rehabilitating and re-regulating the nation's banking system, restructuring health care, reducing national dependence on oil, reviving manufacturing so as to reduce the trade deficit, rebuilding the nation's crumbling infrastructure, dealing with a soaring national debt, trying to resuscitate a collapsing housing market, and all the while maintaining the safety net under 77 million baby boomers entering retirement with a net worth 60% what it was only 18 months ago.
Success will require much more than luck, hard work, brilliant policy, or soaring rhetoric. It will require cooperation and contribution from every American. It is those two offerings, cooperation and contribution, that Republicans are intent on withholding, the better to ensure Obama's failure. Simply put, the Republicans hate Democrats more than they love America.
If they succeed in derailing Obama's efforts, the cost will be incalculable.
After World War I, one of the consequences of the liberal government's failure was Adolph Hitler. Hitler had a genius for exploiting the resentment of the German people for their condition. More than 80% of the Nazi party's members were unemployed. It was these legions of idle thugs who made up the ranks of Hitler's brownshirt militia, the SA. The right wing oligarchy that had set out from the beginning to destroy the Weimar Republic recognized the potency of resentment and Hitler's genius at exploiting it. It was they who sponsored Hitler's ascension to Chancellor in 1933.
Resentment and obstruction are all the right wing in America have to peddle. Their policies are utterly discredited. Their ideology - even by its own standards - is a sham. They are so bereft of leaders, their de facto leader is a former drug addicted, thrice-divorced radio talk show host. That is literally the best they can muster. But they have built a national franchise inciting the downwardly mobile to blame the government, not the right, for their problems, exactly as Hitler did in the 1920s.
The Republican propensity for fascism must not be underestimated. Witness their phony justifications for the war in Iraq, fanning the flames of nationalistic aggression, just as Hitler did with Austria, the Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, and Poland in the 1930s. Consider their symbiotic embrace of corporate interests in the oil, weapons, telecommunications, pharmaceutical, finance, and other industries-the same type of corporate interests that sponsored Hitler's ascent to power. Look at their efforts to dismantle civil liberties with the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act. Or their relentless, pervasive propaganda laundered through their corporate-owned right-wing media machine.
These are the classic hallmarks of fascism. The strategy is to obstruct recovery, facilitate collapse, and then incite the faux-populism of public resentment to re-install a corporatist oligarchy which has failed, but which will not abide a reduction of its privileges or a diminution of its control. It is a fetid, seditious agenda, awaiting only its own latter day mustachioed messiah for its final fulfillment.
World War I was a once-in-a-millennium upset in the architecture of global power. In four years, it shifted the center of that power from Europe to the United States. But failure now by the U.S. will shift that center once again, from the United States to China, out of the western world where it has resided for the past 500 years. The psychic shock to the billion-odd people living in western civilization, with its liberal democracies, capitalist economies, and Enlightenment ideals, will be incalculable, irretrievable.
This shift may be inevitable and only a matter of time. It is quite possible that the damage inflicted on the western world's economy by rapacious Republicans is already beyond repair. But it will be tragedy beyond measure if such a shift is consummated by the very wrecking crew that took us down the road to ruin, all the while so unctuously proclaiming "patriotism" as its crowning ideal. They are not patriots and their goal is not the revival of American power. It is the revival of their own power, even at the expense of America's. They represent a very dangerous threat to the nation's future.
212 Comments so far
Show AllI just read this article-
WWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
After reading your thought provoking article I browsed some of the comments. I myself have made the same connections with Hitler and the current Right wing oligarchy in the U.S.
Among the comments there seems to be some that fail to see a clear connection between the NAZI party and the Neocon Republicans and their coalition with the radical Christian Right. I think they have missed your central point and have become hung up on the seeming differences in terminology and some of the historical differences in circumstances.
To be sure at each stage in history no set of circumstances are identical and terminology shifts, which makes for some confusion when trying to apply universal labels.
However, the thing that has remained constant throughout human history is human nature and motives. There has always been a class that sees themselves as kings born to rule. They usually have preyed on the working class—and have enriched themselves at their expense. Americas original raison d'être was to throw off the yoke of that ruling class. A very socialistic idea at the time. Unfortunately the idea of class never really died in America and the wealthy and powerful determined the future course of the country. And with the exception of a few rare moments, they have been in control ever since and are fighting to retain that power.
Slight differences in tactics, strategic maneuvering and terminology aside nothing has changed in that struggle.
almost seems like a trillion years ago...
"By means of those operations the princes and sovereign states which performed them were enabled, in appearance, to pay their debts and to fulfil their engagements with a smaller quantity of silver than would otherwise have been requisite. It was indeed in appearance only; for the creditors were really defrauded of a part of what was due to them. All other debtors in the state were allowed the same privilege, and might pay with the same nominal sum of the new and debased coin whatever they had borrowed in the old. Such operations, therefore, have always proved favorable to the debtor, and ruinous to the creditor, and have sometimes produced a greater and more universal revolution in the fortunes of private persons, than could have been occasioned by a very great public calamity."
Adam Smith
The Wealth of Nations
Ah, yeah... best not cancel the F-22 just yet.
I did not intend in any way to attack the author of tha article, only the content. I sympathize with his comment in an earlier reply regarding the time and effort it takes to compose with thoroughness, thoughtfulness and without haste. I feel the "Left-Right" labels that are widely used today are ill-defined and confine much commentary to a limited or vague range of concepts greatly diminishing their value. I'd like to propose a more inclusive and useful polital spectrum. You may arbitrarily decide which end to call left or right. At one extreme is anarchy-no govrnment whatsoever, at the other total absolute government. Interestingly conditions at both ends are dominated by only the use of brute physical force. A........L........C........R.D.......T Let A be Anarchy, T is Totalitarian, C-centrist L-Libertarian R&D being where I fancy the current US Republicans and Democrats to be. Other than Libertarian most of these party names and indeed their very dictionary meanings are different in different countries and in the same country at different times. They have supported or opposed together or against each other both sides of various issues. Where do your opinions fall, especially regarding specific issues? How about your favorite parties? Many may find a wide range of placement which perhaps is reason to reassess one's principles and positions. I agree with the last writer that the US "duopoly" is a virtual momopoly with only minor "moral" or popular issue differences to keep up the sham. I do believe proportional representation is a far more democratic system than US winner takes all. I personally lean toward libertarian beliefs which is rather like classic liberalism before all the confusion with socialism, in that it places individual rights and liberty above a coercive state but recognizes limited government and law as the means to insure those against sheer force. I'm new here but I think this is a very good forum. I liked Greg's posts too!
What is progressive about personal attacks aimed at other writers. The Common Dreams "About" section contains the following description of who are invited to participate.
We are united by our common dreams of peace and security, equal opportunity, and meaningful participation in our society.
214 comments is one of the largest number for CD posts. Last November Jeanmarie Simpson wrote "Like It Or Not Change Is Coming". It attracted 280 or more comments. Some of them were similar in mentality to a few that were posted here in response to Robert Freeman's Hitler Redux prophecy.
Who are these people? Their comments identify them as people who do not share Craig's description. Peace. Peace.
How can you claim to want peace when using such attacks?
Just a thought
I read many comparisons of the situation in the Weimar republic and that of America. I've written some of them. But not usually on American sites.
There are some huge differences. There is basically no left wing movement in America, unlike the Weimar republic in Germany there is no Marxist alternative to terrify the Christians. The differences between Democrats and Republicans may seem very clear in America, but out here in a world with proportionally represented and multi-party governments it looks like the two party American system has converged as one would expect. The need to adopt a centrist approach in order to attract enough swing voters has left America with no alternatives. The face of government may have changed, but not the government itself. The Republicans are only a little more intellectually bankrupt than the Democrats, but frankly they were always the same anyway.
Unlike Germany, America cannot become bankrupt. No one, not even China, can allow America to default. This will certainly be China's century - but not yet. China is facing a far more acute crisis than America, and is likely to have to spend all of its US Treasury bonds just to keep civil unrest - already starting - at bay.
The "United" States of America does have an identity problem. This is not new. The end of the cold war, when America was largely united by knowing who you were against, has not gone well. Other than the usual flag waving it has hard to know what you are actually for. Nation building hasn't gone that well. Consumerism is doomed in a world that is running out of resources. To paraphrase your finest Secretary of State, "America has lost an enemy, and not yet found a role". The diversion of 9/11 is just that, a diversion. You can't possibly be afraid of a few deluded young men, can you? Now that the money has run out, you will have to decide on something other than shopping that defines you.
Comparisons between the collapse of the old political order in Germany and the situation in America really does not work. You have exactly the same structures as before, albeit with greatly reduced public confidence. There is no untested constitution to go badly wrong. The environment which allowed the Nazi's to blame foreigners for all of Germany's problems simply does not exist. Just drive cars that use less fuel for f***'s sake. You have lost no territory, hardly any dignity and your children are mostly fed.
The crisis is simply one of needing new ideas, and since most ideas that have influenced the world in the last hundred years have come from America my guess is we won't have to wait long. Of course it's humiliating that a barbarian like Rush Limbaugh has a few moment centre stage. The celebritisation of vulgar racism is an idea we could have perhaps done without, but the glass is still half full and America will figure it out.
We need a balanced budget, balanced trade, peaceful relations with all foreign states, and a consistently applied rule of law. We have none of these. Neither the dems nor the repubs support any of these.
“Hitler had a genius for exploiting the resentment of the German people for their condition. More than 80% of the Nazi party's members were unemployed.”
Hitler exploited the German people’s resentment by appealing to their self-interest--not though conformity mesmerising myth and mythology of Aryan purity and superiority or cult of personality. Instead, by just following the money--it is clear that what drove the “stabbed in the back” lie for Nazis and those they were seeking to appeal to was the plain old self-interest of confiscating valuable Jewish property and bank accounts.
Hitler merely provided the rationale for this greed. He embodied not only the Germans' resentment but focused German eyes on his/their latent self-righteous indignation and rage. In so doing, greed became acceptable—if not good.
And Hitler could do this because for years the Germany he was operating in at the time existed in a moral vacuum. Not unlike the moral vacuum that the United States has existed in for the last 50 or so years--and more so in the last 30 years--and in the last eight years in particular.
In fact there are a number of similarities between Hitler's era and his use of self-interest to manipulate Germans and our culture today with it's "free" market and the similar manipulation of selt-interest by both political parties.
But to read Freeman's essay you would think only the Republicans were guilty of such practices. It's as if to Freeman, the Democrats never heard of, promoted or legislated for an unfettered market.
That's because what Freeman is proposing is to countervail the (Republican only!) appeal to self-interest with "cooperation and contribution from every American"--which come to think of it actually sounds more kaiserish than democratic--you know, sacrifice to the fatherland and all along with: ve haf vays of making you cooperate.
And I suppose for Freeman, accusing the Democrats of imitating Republicans wouldn't be too... contributive or cooperative.
But does cooperation and contribution even stand a chance to countervail the manipulative use--by either party--of self-interest?
If it all sounds unlikely, it's mostly because it is.
What Freeman is actually doing is expanding the mentioned moral vacuum. After all, what does "cooperation and contribution" have to do with demanding our rights(be protected)? Nothing if Freeman's essay is any indication.
Further, what Freeman's overall argument seems to imply is that if the Democrats do not countervail Republicans' manipulation of self-interest with cooperation and contribution from every American, then America will share the the same fate as the Weimar Republic.
Revealingly, and with regard to that argument, the focus of this essay is NOT on the core convictions—if any—held by those very people of the mentioned Weimar Republic. Those convictions central to that republic are left out of this essay. In fact the Weimar Republic sans its founding principles serves in this essay as mainly and merely as a backdrop to Nazi manipulation of self-interested Germans.
With a similar focus, Freeman also leaves out the core convictions—if any--of today’s Democrats with regard to our republic. Like the Weimar Germans, Freeman leaves the Democrats to serve merely as a backdrop to Republican manipulations.
And that is the tragedy that makes this essay so intriguing.
That is, what Freeman describes here is a continuation of the pattern of a degenerate state—where people desperately look outside themselves--for someone or something to conform to and follow.
It is the philosophy of dependence and not independence. It is the mentality of the victim be they German or American. It is this "countervailing" force to self-interest that has pretty much been what the Republicans and Democrats have been practicing for the last 50 years. And it’s the bipartisan focus that has led to our current catastrophe.
That is where things stand today. The Democrats have been reduced to imitating Republicans and... and um, Nazis. And although imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, it’s not a sign of independence or strength. At least not the strength of your own convictions.
As Emerson wrote:
“In right state he is Man Thinking. In the degenerate state, where the victim of society, he tends to become a mere thinker, or still worse, the parrot of other men’s thinking.”
So what would the philosophy of independence entail?
The critical countervailing force to self-interest is not more dedication to self-interest or to party or to a charismatic individual--but to principle.
And that is precisely what Freeman leaves out of this essay. And yet by it’s exclusion, couldn’t this omission of principle serve as the essay’s deeper dire warning? That is, with regard to the Germans of the Weimar Republic and today's Democrats, could the Achilles heel and the "Weimar Moment" be the LACK of attachment to the core convictions of their respective republics?
This is Robert Freeman, the author of the article under discussion. The above post by Gregsdiary, is a thoughtful and articulate contribution. Thank you.
You have hit the nail obliquely on the head by writing that Hitler appealed to the self-interest of the German people—follow the money. That is precisely what I have inveighed against in my discussion about the failing of the free market model: “…the unrestrained behavior of self-interested individuals clearly, manifestly, does not "coalesce as if by an Invisible Hand to the greatest good for the greatest number."
You write, “And Hitler could do this because he was operating in a moral vacuum, not unlike the moral vacuum that has existed in the United States for the last 50 years—or more so in the last 30 years [since Reagan]—and in the last eight years [Bush II] in particular." My points exactly.
I say “obliquely” however, because I have not, as you suggest, engaged in any moral relativism or exculpation for the Democrats. My position on the Democrats has been made very clear in my earlier CommonDreams articles, including, especially, “Gelded Donkeys: Why the Democrats are Worse Than Useless.” It is here: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0329-22.htm
The problems are two fold. One, there is only so much an author can put into a single article without destroying its narrative drive. The purpose of this article was not to make a statement of principles for left-leaning activists. It was to call attention to a very real danger that confronts the nation today: that right-wingers are doing everything they can to destroy the current moderately left government and that if they are successful, we will lose our country.
Two, we must be careful about making the perfect the enemy of the good. Ideal models notwithstanding, Obama is the only guy we have right now. He won by the biggest electoral margin since Johnson beat Goldwater in 1964. Doubtless, he has many, many flaws and shortcomings. But if he is not successful, we can kiss goodbye any hope for a liberal revival for generations, if ever.
I would urge Gregsdiary to write the article he wishes I had written, the one on core principles that must animate any meaningful leftist revival. And the same for all the rest of you reading this comment. We need you as activists and as catalysts, not simply as talkers and judges. There is so much work to be done.
Hello Robert Freeman and thankyou for responding to my comment! I do agree with you that we may in fact be experiencing a "Weimar Moment" of our own.
But my primary point with regard to your essay was not that you were trying to exculpate the Democrats--although your essay seems to have more than a bit of that--but that you are trying to countervail self-interest--a powerful fundamental force rooted in human nature--with something that is in no way as powerful or oppositional.
I suspect the Democrats might prefer to take on "resentment" and champion the virtues of contribution and cooperation rather than the manipulation of self-interest. They--we--have become adept and adapted to avoidance.
If you agree that the primary problem regards human nature--and it seems that you do--then the corresponding force to that problem has to be countervailing.
This is the basis on which our democracy was founded.
It is not about seeking "perfection" or "ideal models." I would argue that this is a misunderstanding of the principles and ideals of democracy.
It is not "a statement of principles for left-leaning activists." The fact that you seem to see it as such--along with many other people--is possibly what leads you to look outside yourself--in fear at the Republicans or to follow Obama--instead of relying your individual conscience.
It may also be what prevented the Germans of the Weimar Republic from relying on their own obedience to the principles and ideals of their democracy.
With regard to the application of those principles and ideals, shucks, I do happen to have a diary entry on that--especially with regard to Weimar and Obama:
http://gregsdiary.livejournal.com/15570.html
Sioux Rose
ROBERT F: Thank you for taking the time to respond in the forum. It's been some time that I photocopied an article to share with others. Yours qualifies. It raises important points I plan to share with my boyfriend's father, a Republican born again Christian. I'd like to see his responses to it, but I will also duck and cover as needed.
"The Nazis came to power in Germany in 1933, at a time when its economy was in total collapse, with ruinous war-reparation obligations and zero prospects for foreign investment or credit. Yet through an independent monetary policy of sovereign credit and a full-employment public-works program, the Third Reich was able to turn a bankrupt Germany, stripped of overseas colonies it could exploit, into the strongest economy in Europe within four years, even before armament spending began."
Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GE24Dj01.html
Hitler did not want Germany to become "a debt slave" to the international bankers and issued Labor Treasury Certificates to combat hyperinflation (caused partly by speculation)and pay for a public works stimulus program to get people back to work. This "Feder money" circulated as money and was renewable indefinitely and it was backed by WORK.
Gottfried Feder, a German economist was convinced that the state should create and control the money supply (with no compounding interest) not a cartel of private banks...
Of course this is no endorsement for right-wing dictators to solve our economic problems but - given the incredible "bail-out" of banksters that committed the greatest financial fraud in history -how democracy enhancing is our economy at closer inspection?
In Eastern Europe neoliberal policies, IMF "austerity measures" and the greatest pyramid scheme of all times have already created the perfect breeding ground for fascist political extremism...(neo-Nazis are popular among young voters)
Hitler wrote this- before he came to power: (Can future fascist mass-murderers and war-criminals still be right about one thing?)
"Thus, the task of the state toward capital was comparatively simple and clear: it only had to make certain that capital remains the handmaiden of the state and not fancy itself the mistress of the nation. This point of view could then be defined between two restrictive limits: preservation of a solvent, national, and independent economy on the one hand, assurance of the social rights of the workers on the other.
For the first time in my life I heard a principled discussion of international stock exchange and loan capital.....Previously I had been unable to recognize with the desired clarity the difference between this pure capital as the end result of PRODUCTIVE LABOUR and a capital whose existence and essence rests exclusively on SPECULATION. [he attended economic lectures by Gottfried Feder at the time]
In my eyes Feder's merit consisted in having established with ruthless brutality the speculative and economic character of stock exchange and loan capital, and in having exposed its eternal and age-old presupposition which is interest..........
“As I listened to Gottfried Feder's first lecture about the 'breaking of interest slavery,' I knew at once that this was a theoretical truth which would inevitably be of immense importance for the future of the German people. The sharp separation of stock exchange capital from the national economy offered the possibility of opposing the internationalization of the German economy without at the same time menacing the foundations of an independent national self-maintenance by a struggle against all capital. The development of Germany was much too clear in my eyes for me not to know that the hardest battle would have to be fought, not against hostile nations, but against international capital......
In proportion as economic life grew to be the dominant mistress of the state, money became the god whom all had to serve and to whom each man had to bow down...... the alienation of property from the wage-worker was increased ad infinitum. The stock exchange began to triumph and prepared slowly but surely to take the life of the nation into its guardianship and control.”
What do you think? Is it outrageous even to quote Hitler or need these thoughts be discussed to understand more of the economic context between the two world wars? And does it relate to the "international capital" of today (which created the current global crisis)?
Freeman's article although it contains a few facts, proceeds without reason,logic, principle or direction and is itself exemplary of it's predecessors in Nazi Germany and other socialist failures. Most telling is the steady attempt to discredit freedom by obfuscation and association with unfree entities, the vituperative hatred where free speech does exist and the complete absence of constructive thought or proposition. CLASSIC TOTALITARIAN RANT.
Credit enables a monetary exchange system to increase productivity based upon future payment of debt. That's a rough definition defending capitalism. Hitler was blinded by bigotry, and/or used bigotry and class warfare to support his rise to political power while Germany was suffering under the hardship of reparations.
Rather than blame any person or elite class, it seems better to examine the means by which powerful people exert control over the masses. That means, before and after WWI, was principally automobile manufacturing as a means to establish a 'transportation monopoly' and otherwise profit from automobile dependency. In this way, a more suitable target for scorn, the automobile epidemic, is upheld as a shared problem.
What are GM, Chrysler and most car companies today doing to reduce car dependency? Nothing! Instead, they are acting against the interests of humanity. We can choose to blame powerful people for our woes, or choose to examine how each of us are complicit in our own economic, environmental and social downfall.
Unmentioned by atimes was the very large amount of trade between the USSR and Hitler's Germany--a situation where the USSR acted evry bit as much as any raw material colony exploited for its natural resources, which helped maintian and enhance Stalin's power while providing the means for Germany's economic recovery. At the time, great efforts were made to keep this trade hidden, as it would make a lie of Germany's explanation as to why it could no longer pay reparations. (That the Versallies Treaty would provoke another war was noted prominantly by many at the time, but marginalized by the day's media. Keynes wrote a whole book about it: "The Economic Consequences of the Peace.")
As a historian, IMO, every aspect of Hitler's rise to power must be examined as he was seen as a "curative" to the real "menace"--Red Communism. Taking as the number one premise for historical examination that the Domestic and International Right only act in their own interest even if that's detrimental to their own country's interest will likely lead to some rather revealing revisionist histories, like that of "The Anti-Communist Impulse," by Parenti.
Interesting article, and I don't take issue with the argument that we here on the left should keep an eagle eye on the conservatives and far right, but I think Freeman entirely glosses over a very important factor in the early days of the Weimar Republic - one that *doesn't* have a parallel with the current situation in the United States.
What Freeman nods towards in his second paragraph with the mention of numerous political parties is that there was a highly active and militant radical left in Germany, mainly in the form of the Independent Socialists (USPD) and the Spartacists. Ebert (and later, Noske) made common cause with the right wing to smash the radical left and defuse the workers' anger that supported it. Noske's Freikorps were responsible for the murders of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, two of Germany's leading revolutionary socialists at the time.
Here's where I feel Freeman's parallel falls apart - there is a left in the US but it is far from being the militant movement that Germany had in 1919. If there were I have no doubt that the Democrats would be working very hard to do the same thing. Look at how they acted towards communists, socialists, and the radical left after WWII, under McCarthyism, and even up to 1968 at their convention in Chicago. The collapse of the Weimar Republic into Nazi Germany was not the sole responsibility of the far right; the SDP bears much of the blame as well. If the US truly does have a Weimar moment, it won't be a contest of Democrats vs. Republicans.
I highly recommend Pierre Broué's "The German Revolution" (a hefty book but well worth the time) for an excellent description and analysis of the years after WWI in Germany.
Excellent observations!!
There is also the unmentioned complicity of western news publications and the US government (Wilson) in preventing the immediate publication of George Seldes's remarkable interview with Germany's leading general Hindenburg who announced just after the Armistence went into effect--well before the "stab-in-the-back" story was formulated--that "The American infantry won the World War in the battle of the Argonne" (Seldes, "You Can't Print That," 1929, p.24). Had that been done, today's world would be very different. Note also how the Right has very effectively manipulated "Munich's appeasement" and the whole premise for the Cold War and justification for the National Security State.
The Right uses any country it resides in as a vehicle to increase its own power at the expemse of all other citizens, which is why it hates democracy and republican forms of government, and provides us with the reason why the US Empire sides(d) with so many such governments and why it can no longer do so--the propaganda no longer works in most other countrues. Thus the huge media push to destroy Obama's efforts, like today's Broder column. For a long time, I've characterized the Right and its allies as The Death Party, which includes many Democrats. Freeman certainly confirms my label.
The author seems to point the finger in only one direction.. He should recall that it was under Clinton that "Glass/Stegall" was repealed, which in it self might have helped prevent the current crisis.
This article contributes to the old game of the elites, of playing the left off against the right in a continuing cycle of finger pointing.
The Reichstag fire turned out to have been an inside job. I have read some pretty convincing arguments, including those by professional architects, that the official explanation of 9/11 can't possibly be true.
Steel reinforced skyscrapers do not fall into their own footprints by chance.
See Architects for 911 Truth at: http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/analysis/index.html
9/11 is the fundamental issue of our times, from which all others stem. The evidence of Israeli involvement in planning and executing these attacks is overwhelming, and that, should it ever become public knowledge, will be a much greater force for anti-semitism than anything that ever occurred prior to or during Nazi Germany.
Look at the evidence. Look at the motive. See the truth.
conscious-You are correct.
If the real perpetrators of 9-11 were un-masked, de-yarmulke'd, and exposed it would change EVERYTHING.
How Bungling the 5 Dancing Israeli Mossad Agents were, to get CAUGHT!
Or Siverstein, to say ON CAMERA, "Pull it," regarding what to do about WTC7 minutes before it's demolished. CAUGHT on camera! How Stupid! Oy Vey!
Safely back in Israel one of the bungling Mossad agents THEN goes on a talk show to say they were only set up to "document" the impacts. And Dance! For Joy! (sorry, we didn't want to save 3,000 worthless American lives, that would have taken a phone call, we were low on minutes.)
Silverstein fully, totally, insuring the Towers against Terrorist Attacks w/ GERMAN insurers mere weeks b4 9-11, and collecting of course For Joy!
And the US attacked Iraq, just like we planned-For Joy!
The absolute obviousness of this is total,
Cheney,NeoCon,Satan's complicity, yeah, but the one's in the lead are the one's that got caught, bungling and stupid.
Joe.
People who say "9/11 is the fundamental issue of our times, from which all others stem" are an embarrassing & ridiculous cult of zealots. 9/11 is an important issue, to be sure; and I'd certainly bet that the official version is at least substantially a whitewash.
But EVEN IF the official version were 100% true, it would make no difference. The US government would still be a criminal entity. All the torture, the wars based on lies, the theft of the public's money to benefit the ruling elite, the stolen elections, the daily propaganda, the evil of the military-industrial complex, the wastefulness of our dumbed down consumer society -- all of this & more would still be true, EVEN IF it turned out that 9/11 was more or less as the official version claims.
9/11 fanatics should grow the hell up. It's infantile to think that your one pet issue is more important than all the other facts so manifestly before us.
9/11 is an enormously important event in modern history, and it is equally important that we understand it fully. to dismiss it as a "pet issue" relegated to "zealots" and "fanatics" is, frankly, stupid.
9/11 was the event that set loose a firestorm of hatred against islamic peoples, resulted in loss of civil liberties, rights and freedoms for all americans, and set the stage for the invasions of Afghanistan and Irag, which in itself, ended with hundreds of thousands of people being tortured and killed, millions of people displaced, billions of dollars in loss of property, etc etc.
9/11 was a turning point for America and it's been downhill ever since. It's a large part of the reason America is practically in ruin today. so don't tell me it doesn't matter.
Mr. Bronstein, I'd suggest you do some homework. If you'd bet that the official version is at least substantially a whitewash, well, wouldn't you be interested in educating yourself as to what actually did happen?
"....9/11 was a turning point for America and it's been downhill ever since. It's a large part of the reason America is practically in ruin today. so don't tell me it doesn't matter..."
- Baloney. I didn't say "it doesn't matter." If you read what I wrote, I said "9/11 is an important issue, to be sure."
Then I added, "EVEN IF the official version were 100% true, it would make no difference."
Don't tell me to "do some homework." I'm sure I know as much about this stuff as you do. What you lack is perspective.
Here's an easy way to explain it to you. Do you think the JFK assassination was important? Anyone who looks into it will realize that though one can't prove it with mathematical 100% certainty, the overwhelming likelihood is that the CIA bumped off JFK.
However, suppose some evidence turned up which actually proved that Oswald shot Kennedy, acting alone. Would that make the CIA significantly less evil? The answer is, No, it wouldn't, because we already know beyond doubt of so many CIA crimes, that being innocent of the JFK murder wouldn't change the fact that they're still a criminal organization.
It's the same with 9/11. Even if it wasn't really "an inside job," the US government, and especially the Bush Jr administration, is still a criminal operation. Even if Osama really did pull off 9/11 as claimed, there's still more than enough evidence to convict Bush, Cheney, Rummy etc many times over for war crimes, & violations of the US Constitution.
Sioux Rose
DAVE B: By reading your comments, my own logic gets honed. You're a good teacher when it comes to dissecting data. Thank you for your contributions to this forum.
I never said anything about the CIA or JFK, but since you mention it, there's evidence to support the hypothesis that both 9/11 and JFK assassination were combined CIA/Mossad efforts, so I wouldn't go on about how evil CIA is without mentioning Mossad. And if I were an American, I think I'd somehow find the thought of Mossad activity in subverting democracy and the rule of law - in my own country - even more odious than if the same were being done by the CIA.
let me give you my parallel between JFK and 9/11
lets say it could be proven with mathematical 100% certainty that Mossad agents bumped off JFK, because of his opposition to Israel's nuclear weapons program, would that make Israel significantly more evil? The answer is No, it wouldn't because we already know beyond doubt of so many Israeli crimes, that being innocent of the JFK murder wouldn't change the fact that they're still a criminal organization. There's still more than enough evidence to convict Ben Gurion, Sharon, Olmert, Netanyahu etc many times over for war crimes & violations of international law.
My point is this. The principal corrupting influence on american electoral politics, on American foreign and domestic policy, is Israel, is zionism, is AIPAC, is the lobby. 9/11 is the foremost expression of that. So of course, that's not to excuse Bush, Cheney, Rummy etc. They are criminal, that's true. But they're not acting alone any more than Lee Harvey Oswald was. They're pretty much puppets as far as I'm concerned. That is my perspective.
conscious,
Go back to sleep you fascist swine.
let's just have a real investigation into the events of that day
let's just start with that
we may all be surprised where that goes
t_g
It is good and well to point out problems in the present system and the similarities with an evil regime in the past. What we need however is suggestions. Solutions. I enjoyed the article, very clever, but it stopped short of suggesting how to proceed now? What to do?
I thought this was a great article aside from the fact that the author once again puts the Democrats on a pedestal when they are clearly only a milder strain of the right-wing virus. Also, Mr. Freeman keeps intimating that fixing America's problems are going to be so Herculean. Perhaps I'm naive, but cancelling debt, cleaning up the planet, ending our wars, making sure everyone has a job that pays at least pretty well and free healthcare, for examples are pretty simple solutions.
I mean, the website for Obama's stimulus is an overcomplicated joke.
And we need radicals, not "liberals." Liberals want modest at best change within a capitalist framework. Radicals see that the problem is capitalism.
Amen - to bringing in more radical action not squashy ineffective liberal flounder. However this article is stunning & scary in calling up this pattern from Germany - Can we work smarter not harder and NOT fulfill this prophesy ?
This analogy doesn't perfectly fit, but...
1968 is the founding the current state of America, correlating to the unstable, divided, and increasingly rightist Wiemar Republic.
1980s corresponds quite well to increasing rightist executive power (Reagan/Bush --- von Hindenburg)
9/11 corresponds to the Reichstag Fire (catalyst for the open removal of rights)
Naturally, the next stage is the openly fascist stage.
Unfortunately, most Americans don't seem to see a problem.
The political center has shifted globally to the right since the last thirty years. In America, the shift has been the largest as most of the rightist exponents (and money) originated here. Yet the American news media, with their political relativism, do not see a problem. To them (and certainly to the benefit of their owners), the Democrats are merely left of "center", the Republicans right, regardless of where the objective "center" lies (and most Americans accept this simple analysis. It conforms to the belief in the fundamental soundness of the political system, the belief in a "civil" government where no one side is more correct, the political correctness orthodoxy where all "political opinions" are valid, though they have to establishment-friendly).
It is certainly true that most of these exponents are Republicans and the intention (and usually the official policy) of these plutocrats is further power in their hands in any era. However, as the New Deal Coalition collapsed, most Democrats came to espouse or at least tacitly accept these ideas. Thus, today, we leftists have no voice to counterbalance the road to fascism.
We cannot rely on the Democratic party to save us. At the least, given how effete it is, the situation should be reversed; the party base (people like us) should threaten desertion to force a sharper idealogical position (if not give up on it altogether).
MY POST ABOUT GERMANY OVERTRHOWN BY ZIONIST BANKERS WAS DELETED, WHY? IF USA ITSELF IS OWNED AND RULED BY ZIONISTS !! AIPAC, AND ZIONIST ELITES OWN USA, THAT'S NOT NEWS AT ALL !!
common dreams regularly delete many good posts my friend
its called genetic engineering
just be happy you weren't barred from the site as so many of the best posters are
my posts here are routinely deleted here also. freedom of speech isn't always tolerated on this site. censorship - and the same sad pro-israel (dare not call it jewish) bias is alive and well on common dreams, sadly. i've become aware of that.
I went to respond to a post and it disappeared before I could finish writing. I wouldn't assume it stems from CD editors. It could just as easily be NSA/CIA monitors with a program that lets them scour whatever they see fit....
Is your caps lock key stuck? Then it is in accor5d with your neurotic world view as well...stuck on empty.
ardee-Red Rick.
STOP insulting everyone you don't agree with!
Again, no more insults!
REMEMBER the quote you yourself always posted by Anais Nin-more or less this,
"We see things not as they are, but as we are." Remember that when you call others nuerotic, stupid, stuck on empty, et al, as is your wont.
It is a Beautiful Day.
Joe.
Somebody please close the window, a buzzing fly has gotten in...
Tell it to your 'dog.' Your anti-semitic trash, well, let's put it this way,
'Bye, bye.'
Great that it was deleted. As I wrote in my reply to your original post, you would be indicted for your post in Germany and a few other European countries on the grounds of resurrection of Nazi thinking, and quite rightly so!
It seems to me that some people in America need a de-nazification process as well.
you aint a nwo shill are you
indictments indeed
folks like you who are so upset with free speech should relocate to places where the governments agree
we can fix you up with a cell in israel or saudi arabia
What you mean "relocate"? I am European and live in Europe!!
And I am trying to educate you. Since you need it. So just be grateful.
I think the economic downturn during President Carter's term (double digit inflation) might have been instigated by rightwing business interests pulling the rug out from under him (and us). Rather than make the generalization that Big Business was at fault, I suspect automobile-related business interests specifically, including finance, then, now, and the years between WWI-WWII.
When Henry Ford boasted He'd pay his employees enough so they could buy a Model 'T', he was NOT thinking of their best interests. He and other carmakers were dismantling the US Streetcar and Interurban electric rail networks to establish a "transportation monopoly" of automobiles.
Fabulous German car manufacturers had not begun to employ mass production techniques until 1929. German unions (which included communists and Jews) objected knowing their better paying, high-skilled jobs would be lost. The most powerful businesses in Germany, US and UK supported Hitler between the World Wars for his organization and opposition to labor rights in the automobile manufacturing and 'steel' industries. Prescott Bush handled US investment in major German Steel between 1930-1942.
Did automobile-related business interests have a dire motive to undermine President Carter's administration? Did the housing sector crash of the time have something to do with gas-guzzling American cars and single-occupancy vehicle commuting long-distance from far flung suburban subdivisions? Will bankers/financiers glibly finance subdivision housing knowing there'd be many cars to finance subsequently? Were automobile-related business interests 'desperate' to get Carter out of office?
An historic and phenomenal automobile techology 'breakthrough' occured during the Clinton era with the hybrid drivetrain. Hybrids have dozens of crucial advantages and significant benefits over hydrogen fuel cell and battery-electric vehicle technologies, standard drivetrains and internal combustion engines alone, no matter the fuel combusted, bio-fuel, combustable hydrogen, whatever, in safety, in energy systems compatability, in practical implementation, etc, etc.
Yet, GM proposes to cancel the Saturn hybrid models and promote the Volt hybrid which is aimed at the luxury car market. Chysler plans to cancel the PT Cruiser, a model seemingly ideal for hybrid conversion. Hybrid vehicles have too great a longevity, offering at least 30% more years of service or 200,000+ miles driven before replacement. They are the most logical way to reach the new CAFE standards and EPA emission reduction standards. GM and Chrysler are dragging their feet because their executive directors are international businessmen with no loyalty to the USA and its people. If Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac and Saturn can go on making cars without the umbrella corporation GM dictating their middleman terms, let GM go bankrupt.
Uh, well. I guess you are right, if we ignore the latent inflationary pressure of Nixon's aborgation of Bretton Woods, the enormous downturn in production brought on by the simultaneous end of the Viet Nam War AND the space program, both the big ticket items of the day; and the fact that Nixon chose to SPEND a surplus rather than pay down the debt with it, a model both Bushes seemed too happy to follow.
Yeah, the car companies are complicit; but the real blame are the mix of fiscal and monetary policies followed by Nixon / Ford.
The "Weimar Moment" came and went unnoticed with Reagan...
Err, Reagan sowed the seeds of the current forest of foreclosures, bankruptcies and economic peril. But thanks for the strange analogy.
Dat's da fact Jack.
And America's 'Riechstag Fire' was 9/11.
The groundwork for this entire series of events was probably laid during VP Cheney's off the record meetings with the heads of the energy corporations back in early 2000.
Peak Oil and other peak resources were seen coming long ago. Plans were made accordingly, including but not limited to 'a new Pearl Harbour' and preparations for massive civil unrest (Halliburton/KBR built 'FEMA camp' detention centers). Everthing else has been window dressing.
keep a wheel barrel handy, they were very much in vogue during this time, they are a handy tool. the greenback is toast.
This article is missing a huge point. The Weimar Republic paid for everything by just printing money out of nothing. This led to huge inflation which destroyed the dollar. That author says the prices were "800%" of the prewar prices. Well, he never explains why.
The scariest part is that the federal reserve and the US treasurey is doing what the bankrupted Weimar did, they are just printing money out of thin air, which will destroy the currency. That is the lesson we should take from this.
Granted our monetary system has been based on nothing of tangible value for a while, but what has happened in the last year in terms of bailouts and stimulouses, is unprecedented. But just because the Weimars weren't pyscho facists who wanted to exterminate a group of people doesn't mean they were smart and did a good job of governing.
I understand that the authors point is that radical facism came to flourish because of these circumstances, but he turns it into republican bashing... as opposed to the democrats... who have been complicent with the destruction of this country. Both the repubs and dems are complicit in this BS monetary system that screws over everyone besides the top few percent. The party politicians are either too stupid or take advantage of the system at the expense of the citizen because they can.
And Germany's huge international debt came from somewhere... same goes for hitler start up money. To import everything he needed for his war machine he needed money from somewhere.
Ten,twelve or sixty trillions in deficit spending, we are headed to a command economy and the Republicans are gearing up to be the ones doing the commanding. Making sure that Obama fails puts them in the drivers seat. Hitler showed that inflation could be neutralized by restricting the free use of purchasing power (your banks creation of credit). We are just starting to get a good taste 'of that now' with more to come. So, I guess the question is; Do you want to return to yesterday to be led by people of the past eight years? of whom you know a great deal, or Obama and the future unclear as it will always remain. For in a fixed command universe there is no freedom only totalitarian slavery, (aka the Third Reich).
A fascist is a fascist. Thanks for reminding us of that. Democrats may be a lot of things, including corrupt and incompetent, but they are NOT fascists. Neo conservatives are. Liberals have become so intimidated by the barrage of name calling by right wingers that they are loath to fling terms. But one thing is for sure, a neo-conservative is nothing but a fascist. And a fascist is someone we can't afford to have around.
Disagree. Obama was a constitutional law profressor... yet he's keeping in tact the police state and Bush's state secret arguments. Dems are facists who throw the people a bone to fight over every now and again.
A simplistic overview.
"By the time of the Great Depression, Adolph Hitler's ironically named National Socialist Party had become the biggest vote getter in the nation. The Nazis had once been derided as the lunatic fringe of the far right. But the "respectable" right-wing power brokers who had started and lost the Great War anointed Hitler Chancellor in January, 1933."
Actually the nazis never had a majority vote as this paragraph implies Until they had smashed the opposition and had another election.
the writer misses the fact that the 'left center' socialist govt actually colluded with the right, and allowed the frei corps (sp?) tp exist, and allowed the funded junker shock troops in order to smash the left.
He is stating de facto, that the 'right' is the fascist vanguard, while the'liberal' democrats are the opposition.
in fact, as we can see with the democrats full support of the militarization of our police forces, and near complete agreement in imperialism, 'the opposition' would surely align with the right to smash any large popular bottom up left peoples movement in
the USA.
That is the real lesson to learn from germany, spain, and italy. That the 'liberal' power brokers will align with fascists anytime a truly democratic land and liberty movement arises in a capitalist democracy.
we are in a horrible situation here. And it requires a militant bottom up dedicated non leninist peoples movement.
And it requires, we never listen to 'experts' such as this.
Only fascism and dictatorship, left and right, fills a vacuum or a 'leveling'.
occupy, resist, and produce. land and freedom. vote, in your spare time....but fight in every hour of your life.
"That the 'liberal' power brokers will align with fascists anytime a truly democratic land and liberty movement arises in a capitalist democracy.
we are in a horrible situation here."
Glad you put "liberal" in quotations where it belongs. Calling conservative Democrats liberals shows how far to the right we have come since Nixon.
Tommys1961: I think you have hit the nail right on the head when you stated that what is required is a "militant bottom up dedicated non Leninist peoples movement." Emphasis on "NON LENINIST." There are still so many old-fashioned Marxists who believe in the Leninist model of development. We should all by now know that the so-called "dictatorship of the proletariate" became in reality, the dictatorship OVER the proletariate. Only a genuine bottom up people's movement can save us from this mess. Waiting for a savior such as Obama who clearly does not represent the people is futile.
"...forty percent of the entire world's wealth has been destroyed..."
there was NO "destruction" of anything... it was transferred...
.
like musical chairs... or hot potatoe games... the last one holding the inflated asset... gets "destroyed"...
everyone played this game... repeat - E-V-E-R-Y-one... some better than others... some with more money than others... some with more inside information than others... some who wished they good play like the "big guys" and played the game in their fantasies...
we were "all" one stock pick... one "deal" away from retirement in luxury at 28...
"this" is america folks. welcome to it. democracy. rule of law. all the right furniture. but once you're in... it's grab as much as fast as you can... and hope not to get caught... on the way out.
gotta love it. notice how none of the "transferred to" folks are complaining or up in arms about anything... the ones unfortunate enough to be publicly identified are doing damage control... but not really changing the tune...
we're just setting up the chairs for another round or musical 'assets"...
Do please remember that much, if not all, that wealth was artificial wealth produced only by speculation in real estate, index funds and Credit Default Swaps.
That was not redistributed; it evaporated, as it should have.
Real wealth, alas, is based on productive capacity, and we have exported much of what existed prior to 1980. What we have left are our intellectual resources and the actual real estate that underlay all that speculation.
Although I agree with Robert Freeman's thesis in general, I must take exception to his main rhetorical device, which consists of a simplistic projection of contemporary America onto interwar Germany, which was a much different place and time.
Frederick the Great abolished torture and instituted broad religious tolerance (even for Moslems!). Bismarck unified the country and provided health care and strong unions. Wilhelm II defended the right of workers to negotiate the terms of their labour. It seems to me that America could use some of those "masturbatory right-wing autocrats".
Imperial Germany was the most peaceful of the Great Powers. In the century between the Congress of Vienna and the Great War it fought only a few wars: the internal wars of unification, a war with the Austro-Hungarian Empire to free Germany from its influence, a war with France that France had started, and what we would call a "multinational police action" against China. Germany had a few colonies and trading posts, none of which it had taken by force. In the decade before the Great War Germany resisted ever-greater provocations by the Entente, decided on war only when driven into a corner, and was the last to order general mobilization. (See Edward McCullough's meticulously documented book How the First World War Began.) When the Germans did fight, they usually won, or at least acquitted themselves honourably against superior odds. The contrast with American behaviour needs no belabouring.
Hitler was a small-minded creep with an unerring instinct for demagoguery and no strategic sense—in short, the perfect creature of a democracy, rather like Bill Clinton. (That is probably why he understood so well the democratic governments he was negotiating with.) Before the war, Hitler had borrowed the Englishman Houston Stuart Chamberlain's ideas on white supremacy, and fascist parties formed in both Britain and America. The German aristocrats saw Hitler for what he was, and despised him. They repeatedly tried to depose or kill him both before and during the war, and some of them gave their lives in the attempt. Every July 20 the Germans still honour their memory.
As for the Weimar government, it was essentially an occupation government tasked with the continuation of the Germano-Anglic War by economic means, and the Germans had no more obligation to cheer it on than the Iraqis and Afghans have to the regimes imposed on them by the very same power. The Weimar Republic had so little competence or legitimacy that it came within a hair's-breadth of collapsing when Hitler launched his extraordinarily ill-managed "Beer Hall Putch" in 1923. Could even the most regressively libidinous "right-wing autocrats" claim credit for that, in a disorganized country with very diverse media and next to no television?
Last, I need hardly point out that an overabundance of parties represented in the federal legislature is not America's problem.
"Hitler was a small-minded creep with an unerring instinct for demagoguery and no strategic sense—in short, the perfect creature of a democracy, rather like Bill Clinton."
Come on man. I'm no Clinton fan, but the dude was a Rhodes scholar---say what you want about his politics, but a small-minded creep? How would you describe GW Bush, I wonder?
Thank you for that article. Finally!
Over the years, I have come to realize with increasing horror whenever I visited the USA, that Republicans AND their followers are to a large degree indeed closet or even overt fascists. Not as a figure of speech, but really. Yes, they basically want to overthrow governments. They have already "fixed" two elections and tried a "cold" coup d'etat with Clinton, after all.
Right-wing radio hosts in America are on par with the most frenzied mullahs who preach in countries where America pretends that it is trying to teach them tolerance and freedom. How about starting at home?
As I keep saying here in Europe,"You wouldn't even have to elaborate some sophisticated psychological tests with at least (my conservative estimate) a third of the US population in order to unearth some hidden fascist traits; theirs are quite openly visible."
And most of what goes down as "Republican" ideology in the US today is only espoused by extreme right-wing populists in Europe. But at least nobody calls those guys "moderate" here.
What I don't get, though, is how come the American Right keeps getting away with all their lies, calling any semblance of civilized policies "communist", while nobody among the Democrats calls many of the Republicans what they really are - and contrary to their allegations, that label can be documented and proved: Many of them are simply fascists.
the difference between our democrats and the republican fascists, is that there is no difference. the leaders are all paid by the same paymaster. the american piblic has now been trained to believe that there is a difference, by allowing them to squabble amongst each other. most americans do not know what a fascist is, lest recognize one.
Thank you Mr. Freeman for your clarification of the real dangers we face. I can personally find no ray of light to give hope, save one. I find it likely that any shred of hope will give way to resignation as the collapse broadens it's scope and intensity. This is the beginning of a swift and certain end for all those excepting some who have an honest understanding and respect for Spirit.
I would argue that these problems were not created by just the republican wing of the one-party system but rather by both. The democratic faction followed in goose-step fashion, voting for all of the destructive policies of the past 30 yrs. And let us not forget the Patriot Act -- so-called -- since it was mentioned, that all members of congress (save but one) signed on without having even read what the hell was in it. Destruction of the socio/political, economic system is due to the policies of both factions of the U.S. Business Party who have always represented the capitalist class first and foremost. The only thing that can save us is a mass popular movement organized to the teeth to prevent these thugs from destroying anymore of what already belongs to those of us who have created the wealth. Putting our faith blindly, in some savior such as Obama is not the answer. The power resides with us collectivley!
davethered March 15th, 2009 5:17 pm
"The power resides with us collectively!"
dave, i agree w/ your conclusion. i see america as an imperial enterprise whose basic structure resembles an 18th century business (president, vice president, secretary of blah blah blah) - it's time to reclaim the economy and the government. it's time to stop watching sick people die from lack of medical attention and it's time to recognize our entire m.o. as a country (national ethos) is fucked.
as to the fate of rush limbaugh, as one who has consumed lsd -' -' -' -' -' -'
- from cnn ... post revolutionary north america 2018...
{rush limbaugh will be living in a 12' by 12' Plexiglas cube - performance art space - for three month durations for the next five years. the traveling art exhibit which will debut in central park on march 21 2018 before moving to grant park in chicago and peoples park in berkeley.
the exhibit features the convicted propaganda minister of president palin - rush limbaugh - living in a 12' by 12' Plexiglas cube box. americans will be able to watch mr limbaugh sleep, shit - eat (food fed to him through a trap door twice a day) and write.
mr limbaugh will be allowed to reflect upon his condition as he will be able to maintain a journal w/ a number #2 pencil and an unlimited supply of blank paper.
fortunately, he will not have a microphone and will be unable to speak with any other person until he is reintroduced into the general prison population, after the traveling exhibit is over. we're hoping cnn can have a camera focused on the desk, so the world can understand the mind of this master criminal.
after the traveling exhibit visits the 20 largest metropolitan areas in n america - mr limbaugh will join his lunatic fringe co-conspirators - k rove, s palin, lou dobbs, the turncoat w blitzer and the mastermind g bush I - at fort leavenworth kansas.
where rush will be forced to listen to 'never mind the bullocks' by the sex pistols 24 hours a day in his cell, until the day he is reunited w/ his maker.
in his name -- here's to you davethered - back to you bernie....}
...peace...
Sioux Rose
IOWA: Glad to see you posting again. Thanks for the laugh, and/or sense of karmic release!
The only downside I see of the pending economic destruction of the USA is that it will drag the rest of the world down with it...the USA has been the main source of evil in the world for hundreds of years now....starting with the genocide of the American indian, right up to the genocide of the Iraqi people....good riddance I say.
If the cost of freeing the world from the creeping fascism of the USA is my taking a major financial hit...so be it. Future generations will be better off without the nation of greed and avarice dominating the globe.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
alas for us americans, and many others around the globe, you may be right about "salvation" lying in us economic collapse. for some real insanity, check this out:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/washington/15military.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
the us, under saint obama, is rethinking the "2 wars" doctrine. when i saw this headline, i skipped it, thinking, oh well, based on our experience in iraq/afghanistan, they are rethinking that the u.s. can fight 2 wars at once.
WRONG! rather, they are thinking we need to be able to fight EVERYBODY at once, land, air, space, cyberspace, hearts, minds, etc., etc.
thank you obama, for reinvigorating american's lunatic fantasies that they can conquer the world. HOPE WE CAN BELIEVE IN! whoo hoo! everyone will be dead but us. amen.
obama's sobriquet should be:
continuity you can believe in
yes we con!
"He immediately suspended the constitution, abolishing most civil liberties. He ...., began a massive military build-up and a relentless propaganda campaign..."
Bush or Hitler?
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
I understand the Republican bashing, they certainly deserve it, but this article is intellectually dishonest in several points.
General Motors has been slowly dying for 2 decades yet it's mentioned her in a sentence that speaks of the recent (18 month) decline in the stock market.
That 70 Trillion dollar unfunded liability the Government holds is something the Republicans fought tooth and nail against. Medicare, SS, and Medicaid aren't GOP programs.
Only a GOP actuarial addict would think that "$70 trillion unfunded liablity" is due and payable immediately.
Social Security and Medicaid are 'pay as you go' programs. They are not insurance policies; they are transfer payments from current wealth, and are part of the social contract. It is intellectually dishonest to say that $70 trillion is due now. What is due now are the payments that are budgeted for this year. As the social contract is shredded, those of us expecting to retire ought not to have those in our plans (which means I'll be working until I drop). Despite the right wing's anger, they have no compunction claiming their payments; and the vast majority of Americans support both these programs and Medicare, which is a hybrid insurance / transfer program, and also part of the social contract.
I agree, GM has been dying since (I figure) 1960, along with Chrysler and Ford -- all three abandoned innovation then, were taken over by accountants and reorineted toward current quarter earnings rather than long term investment.
One of the more expensive components, the pharmaceutical portion, was a product of the GOP during the Bush years.
I would just like to say that what has happened here is that there has been a rationalization of people again, workers again. Remember the lumberjacks, the seamstresses and the secretaries, they are now all Kerouacs, whacked out of their jobs because the amount of people needed to get something, anything done anymore has been rationalized. Now is the time of innovation, the time when people do things that might not be profitable for themselves, but maybe profitable for others, the sick, the poor, the young; teach them, feed them, clothe them and minister to them, don't think of yourself, have faith that one like you will be there for you when it is time to pick up your pieces after the good work.
This is the bane of capitalism and the reason that it cannot go on forever, it is an eating machine, made to take the most and leave the least, but this kind of system is not life, this is something else. It is time to pick up the pieces, time to go back to the earth, time to use hands and arms for other things than massaging a plastic rectangle to relay your thoughts on what the next best ad campaign will be, for I can make an ad campaign in my bedroom tomorrow, but it isn't important, is it?
What is probably more important is that kid who needs to learn to read, so go and teach him, or the guy who is looking for a job, set something up with him, money is not the only way to exchange goods, barter is good and great when the elites cut the money supply, how many eggs is a quart of milk worth, enough to make pancakes, who knows, who cares, the point here is to get over the fear, the hurt, that enslaved mentality and open up your mind to the possibilities over the next hill, maybe that is why the obama man wants to focus on the future, because bushes can always be trimmed, but that kid needs to learn how to multiply, figure, how much is a yard of wood worth in nails, enough to build a house?
my love to all of you suffering, my love to the people who eat my food everyday, my love to all of you wondering, when will the pain end, well maybe it will when you relieve the pain for someone else.
PatriotisVeritas. Your indictment, you are indignant-Carnivores welcome overseers no mas, alas, being prey was for another day?
Rapacious loving evisceration for sale,
Need credit you can get it,
Welcome to the
Carnival of carnivores, prey tell, will you feed the child,
Faith Love & Hope,
But Faith without Acts is Dead says PatriotisVeritas,
A corpse, The Land of the Free has 1000 military bases around the world to steal freedom....
To Faith, Love, To Hope. Who said 'Faith without Acts is Dead?' Oh yeah, one smart Pharisee.
Joe. I love that Jew. And the Jew he loved so very very very much as well.
'Faith without works is dead' is attributed to James, the brother of Jesus. He was about as far from being a pharisee as was possible.
My apologies Nietzsche, Thank You for catching that, I thought Paul said/wrote those words....
Well, I'm starting a Bible Study next Sunday, clearly I need too,
Respectfully, Joe.
"Rationalized"? Do you speak English?
The problem is not the increase in productivity per se'. It is that, with the advent if rightist rule in 1980, the product of that increased productivity has not been shared broadly across society. It has been funnelled to the top 1%, those who actually do not do much but move paper around.
For a contrary picture, see the US economy from 1950 - 1970, when huge gains in productivity were shared broadly across society. They are mirror images of one another, and demonstrate clearly that the right wing agenda is destructive and criminal.
As a poet, I took license, definition number 6. I hope its not too beastly for you.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/rationalized
PatriotisVeritos: you sound like the hippy I once was back in the late 60/early 70s. PEACE AND LOVE BROTHER!
How would you describe yourself now?
I have tried to live according to your suggestions. I believe it is the only alternative to an eventual chaotic blood letting after (God forbid) a final all-out desperate attempt to force the old greed system to work.
Bless you PatriotisVeritas. Your "Let it Be" way for human animals to live together is our only hope. My prayer is that it spreads like a pandemic over the planet.
I know its not easy, but it does catch because it is the logical way to live. My hope is your hope, be strong, and thanks to you and the others for the good words, they are really encouraging.
its about god and guns, today americans are the most religious of the enlightened western populations (as though western civilization is a good idea). they were when they flocked to north america in the early 1600's - as they proceeded to kill everyone and everything in their sight, all in the name of god and enlightened ideals (fascism a 20th century expression of extreme devotion to empire - but empires are timeless).
well, our little anglo-corporate enterprise has expanded exponentially since then and has detrimentally infected the rest of the world.
we now sell more guns than anyone else, to scrupulous people like mexican drug cartels, colmbian drug lords, opium war lords in afghanastan, religious fanatics in israel, and on and on...
we are a fascist society and have been for sometime, i think most americans are in complete denial of this simple fact. if you talk w/ a worker at boeing or microsoft or any other military contractor (spread out through every congressional district) - how they feel about making money off of war - 'oh well, i suppose everyone's gotta make a living (think of yourself before you think about anyone else in the world - the american creed).
as long as individual americans are armed to the teeth while they see themselves as biblicaly moral and superior to others (hedges - american fascism, the film jesus camp) america will be ripe for a theocratic military regime.
the economic collapse provides an opening for all parties, as the unemployment rate rises higher and higher - the legitimacy of elected officials and public officials (like cramer's public self flagellation on the daily show) will diminish.
as the loss of legitimacy (already known to the far left and the far right) becomes more apparent (ie.. the stimulus packages, corporate bailout plans fail to stem the bloodletting of the capitalist system) - both the left and the right can make their argument.
those disagreements will eventually be in the streets, i do not see the american masses coalescing for their own benefit outside of the parameters of the electoral process unless it gets very ugly.
in the interm i can imagine the proliferation of right wing vigilantes - murdering political dissidents and persecuting the undesirables - becoming more common.
i would prefer the country break up into regions (pacifica, new england, the south, rocky mtn region) rather than be subjected to a bloody revolution, let us migrate. but as margret atwood described in the handmaid's tale, they'd rather imprison us - use our slave labor and if possible reeducate us until we can utter the words - jesus is my savior and i am your friend. ask the native americans on 'indian' reservations how this plays out.
rush limbaugh is our friend.........really - he loves you...
...peace...
iowablackbird: I heard that Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Silverman were engaged to be married. That sucks -- I wanted to marry her; and shoot him!
Weimar Moment seems to be both quaint and non-analogous.
“The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds.” - John Maynard Keynes
I am prepared to believe George Lakeoff when he says that 98% of all thought is unconsciousness. It is impossible for us to escape assumptions and patterns of thought of which we are not even aware.
It cant repeat itself exactly.
I think Germany was more of a work ethic based culture--not so in the US.
Americans are probably much lazier and much more fragmented.
China is also tied to the US. If the US sinks, it also affects China.
Its not a one way street.
Too many pundits (on both sides) have a career to maintain. So they need to write an article each week even if they dont have anything new to say.
Some are scare mongering, some are hopeful.
The biggest error in it is to ignore the corruption of the Democrats.