Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Scientists Confirm: Arctic Sea Ice 'Collapse' at Our Door
- Worse Than Obama's Kill List? American Support for It
- 'Let Us Not Be Deceived': Cornel West Names Obama as 'War Criminal'
- Genetically Engineered Meat, Coming Soon to a Supermarket Near You
- Nearly 50 Climate Activists Arrested Outside Obama's White House
- Quinoa: To Buy or Not to Buy... Is This the Right Question?
- Watch a City-Sized Glacier Collapse
- DOJ Kill List Memo Forces Many Dems Out of the Closet as Overtly Unprincipled Hacks
- A Presidential Decision That Could Change the World: The Strategic Importance of Keystone XL
- 'Let Us Not Be Deceived': Cornel West Names Obama as 'War Criminal'
Popular content
Today's Top News
Is Fascism Lurking?
Fascism
is one of those words that sounds like it belongs in the past,
conjuring up, as it does, marching jack boots in the streets,
charismatic demagogues like Italy's Mussolini or Spain's Franco
and armed crackdowns on dissent and freedom of expression.
It is a term we are used to reading in histories about World War II--not in news stories from present day America.
And yet the word, and the dark reality behind it, is creeping into popular contemporary usage.
Radical activists on the left have never been hesitant to label their opponents with this "F word" whenever governments support laws that limit opposition or overdo national security or abuse human rights. Government paranoia turns critics paranoid.
One example: writer Naomi Wolf forecast fascism creeping into America during the Bush years accelerated by the erosion of democracy, writing:
"It is my argument that, beneath our very noses, George Bush and his administration are using time-tested tactics to close down an open society. It is time for us to be willing to think the unthinkable - as the author and political journalist Joe Conason, has put it, that it can happen here."
Wolf feared Americans couldn't see the warning signs:
"Because Americans like me were born in freedom, we have a hard time even considering that it is possible for us to become as unfree - domestically - as many other nations. Because we no longer learn much about our rights or our system of government - the task of being aware of the constitution has been outsourced from citizens' ownership to being the domain of professionals such as lawyers and professors - we scarcely recognize the checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are being systematically dismantled. Because we don't learn much about European history, the setting up of a department of "homeland" security - remember who else was keen on the word "homeland" - didn't raise the alarm bells it might have."
Now, those bells are now being rung by John Hall, an outgoing Democratic Congressman from upstate New York. His fear of fascism has less to do with repressive laws and militarism than the influx of corporate money into politics, swamping it with special interests that buy influence for right wing policies and politicians.
"I learned when I was in social studies class in school that corporate ownership or corporate control of government is called Fascism," he told the New York Observer. "So that's really the question-- is that the destination if this court decision goes unchecked?"
Reports New York's Observer, "The court decision he is referring to is Citizens United, the controversial Supreme Court ruling that led to greater corporate spending in the midterm elections, much of it anonymous. In the wake of the decision, Democrats tried to pass the DISCLOSE Act, which would have mandated that corporate donors identify themselves in their advertising, but the measure failed amid GOP opposition. Ads from groups with anonymous donors were particularly prone to misleading or false claims."
Hall said the influx of corporate money in the wake of Citizens United handed the House of Representatives to Republicans. "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
Many in mainstream politics who understand that big money can dominate elections although not in every case share Hall's fears. In California, two well-known female candidates from the corporate world raised millions but still went down in defeat.
So money alone is not the be all and end all of a shift towards a red white and blue brand of fascism. Other ingredients are needed and some may be on the way-like an economic collapse, defeat in foreign wars, rise in domestic terrorism and the emergence of a right-wing populist movement that puts order before justice and wants to crush its opponents
Some argue we have just such a movement in the Tea Party although other critics focus on the rise of the Christian right that promotes fundamentalist politics in the name of God.
The Tea Party is not just after Democrats; it has started a campaign against the liberal Methodist Church. It is not internally democratic either with no elected officers or set of by by-laws. It seems to be managed and manipulated by shadowy political operatives and PR firms, financed by a few billionaires who support populism to defang it.
Already militias are forming because of fears of immigration, and there is also concern that if unemployment remains high there is likely to be more violence with police forces understaffed because of government cutbacks. Gun sales went up after the recent violent incidents in Arizona.
The erosion of economic stability with the rise of foreclosures and the shredding of social services is already turning a financial crisis into a social one.
We already have sharp partisan divide and inflation of hateful rhetoric with vicious putdowns of the President and condemnations by members of Congress calling him corrupt, even a traitor.
According to set of the characteristics of fascist nations, there is "a disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
"In place of human rights enemies are turned into scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists." This process is already far along in the USA.
Among the classical characteristics of fascism is a shutting down of debate and a focus on the state--which in our country is controlled by lobbyists and private interests. Wall Street and the military-industrial complex have far more clout than elected officials.
In the past, during the depression, there was a plot to overthrow Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was exposed and neutered. Could something like that happen again?
Maybe it doesn't have to, what with hawks already in control of Congress, major media outlets, the military and poised to slash the power of unions and curb progressive social programs including public education.
Several writers believe that if and when fascism comes to America it will be packaged in a friendly form tied to beneficial advertising slogans and public interest messaging. It will be sold, 1984-style as being unavoidable, even cool, and in our best interest.
Louisiana Senator Huey Long, a mesmerizing agitator, once said, "Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism."
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
267 Comments so far
Show AllDennab ---- I appreciate your position, I am a card carrying militant Pacifist birkenstock wearer who lives in a concealed weapons gun culture.
The main problem with weapons in the hands of citizens is when they negligently allow their children to shoot themselves or playmates with them.
Predators always attack the least defended target. Elderly people in high crime areas will tell you their handguns are necessary.
Rural folk with Grizzlys, and now even packs of coyotes are attacking people as they walk their leashed dogs. We are using nonlethal Boom guns for the coyotes.
And I have camped at times wishing I had a pistol rather than only a knife.
Even the Dalai Lama has said he would shoot a crazed gunmen in the leg.
But regardless of the necessity of guns in some settings, I suggest dropping the subject because promoting it only activates the left/right divide that needs to be overcome and is the greatest weapon the gov. has against its citizens.
Mahatma Gandhi opposed gun control.
If guns make us safer, explain something to me, this reality thing. We have more guns than most countries, certainly more than most countries in the West, and have thousands of times the amount of murder using weapons. Why, if we have so many guns, are there so many deaths due to guns and not less? How can you make a case that guns make a country safer in a country swimming in guns and violent gun murders?
Are you freaking kidding me? I love it when people like you attack, you say I apply circular logic, but don't provide any specifics. I don't remember debating you the other day, whatever you said was forgetable, I remember other posters here. If what you said was true you'd respond directly to SOMETHING I said. You're a coward and your cheap shot is lame, really is.
"Really, were you not there all over the thread yesterday where people mentioned Sweden a bunch of times. They are loaded to the T my friend."
I don't know what point you are getting at. You didn't make a point. 30,000 people, according to some studies, die EACH YEAR in the US thanks to guns. So what the hell does Sweden have to do with it my friend? If this is how deeply you think about issues you can keep your damn advice.
"Get a hobby where you have the time to ponder what people are actually saying on here instead of putting us through your whole process of misunderstanding."
LOL! Yeah, Sweden is armed to the teeth my friend, where were you the other day? Wow, deep. I need a few hours to really think about that profound statement.
My guess is that if an argument or some logic doesn't fit on a bumper sticker you're lost. Feel free to respond to something specific that I wrote.
Wilbur its the culture of violence, total lack of empathy, extreme ignore,
Remove those problems and no one will ever be murdered by anything.
?
Last time I tried to 'reach out' to a liberal, I got my hand bitten pretty badly. (I do believe that was on Danny Schecter's old site. The time before was with the local 'peace' group...) Of course, I'm a traditional conservative - they just hate me on sight, just about anywhere. But you sound like a really decent chap, with strong moral standards - and I believe that should be the common ground here. My father always told us that the socialists were needed to keep conservatives honest - it's all part of the dance-of-life - and the Lefties (are there any in the US?) need us to keep them from going over their edge too.
There are a few hot-button issues, and I don't know how we can talk reasonably about them when tempers flare and the hyperbole starts flying - but we have to, because if we don't hang together we'll surely hang separately. I get angry too - and I'm often misunderstood, especially with my background. It's hard not to take it personally, but if we support each other, maybe we can get through it. Hang in there - what you have to say is important, and you've sure given me hope.
Fascism is when the Corporations take over the State.
"The Chair recognizes the Senator from Enron."
I would say both are occurring. The glorification of the Military and hyper-mourning for wounded politicians is Nationalism.
But ultimately the MultiNationals are using this Nationalism to their own purposes, such as the looting of the USA treasury and free trade agenda. Also using the USA military as a MultiNational Corporate Militia.
The Financial meltdown is a symptom of the pre-occurring social contract dissolution.
The author says the paranoid government actions makes paranoid critics thus implying there are really no fascist actions by the government.
The author also flies in the face of every legal and Justice Dept. action taken by Oilybomber to insinuate that Oilybomber may be a victim of the fascism in which OilyBomber is the prime mover.
NPR reported yesterday, quoting a Foreclusure reality firm that there was 3 Million
foreclosures in 2010 and 1 Million Reposessions. Another 3 Million foreclosures are predicted for this year.
Also endless wars will create fascism just as well as withdrawal from such wars.
Fascism is National Hyper-Mourning.
Who benefited from the attack?
Oil interests/ right idealogues --- She is pro-renewable and stem cell research
Palin -- she was able to inject anti-semitism into the national discourse with her "Blood Libel" remark.
OilyBomber -- Did very well from the shooting, it was Bush's 9/11 and Clintons OK Bombing, His ratings went above 50% through his Make Nicy Nice Charade.
The Fascists had a 'cult of the Fallen Hero' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst-Wessel-Lied), which generalizes to a near-deification of "heroes" who fell in the service of the nation's military — which itself exists to implement the will of the nation's leaders:
http://www.leithart.com/archives/002626.php
One of the most slippery apologists for every Israeli war crime — a country that is further along the stages of Fascism, as outlined by Robert Paxton by most objective criteria — Michael Walzer codified another feature of the Fascistic outlook: the privileging of a "national community" to which it's members are tied organically, as it were, and the complete lack of concern with the well-being of those who fall outside this "sphere of moral concern", based on a highly relativistic morality. When there is exaggerated mourning for the death of those who fall within the "national community", and total indifference toward what is happening to, say, people on the other side of the world — or the other side of the wall, as in Israel — receiving daily doses of massive violence, then we're seeing something redolent of that earlier world-view.
As one of the most insightful commentators on the Nazi phenomenon, Ian Kershaw noted, "the road to Auschwitz was built by hate, but paved with indifference".
Paxton's Five Stages of Fascism model — according to which, Stage 1 is a permanent feature (like low-grade fever) of modern societies — is laid out here:
http://www.salemstate.edu/%7Ecmauriello/pdfEuropean/Paxton_Five%20Stages%20of%20Fascism.pdf
m156 excellent Thank You!
Fallen Hero Cult
indifference to dead other
You Saw it Here!
I'm with Dennab on this one. Fascism is not some internal position held by an undefined critical mass.
It's imposed from above, the wedding of state and corporate power.
Same thing we saw when it was Church and State, the "Church" sitting in for today's corporations. Today's churches are simply tax-exempt corporations, but it is the reason the government is supposed to be derived from the people.
Fascist governments derive authority from human constructs--Halliburton and the Vatican.
Cheers.
One of the advantages of being in a Corporatist state is that the grey eminences who oversee the machinery will never allow an upstart like Mussolini or Hitler to gain "full powers" over the state, as happened in Germany for instance with the Enabling Law. If the Palins and Reagans start suffering from delusions of grandeur and send signals of acting recklessly they will be cut down to size very quickly with the constitutional checks on their power. All of a sudden, the legislative and judicial branches will upend molasses into the Executive's orbit and they will be reduced to a lame duck. The powers that be in Italy and Germany lost their nerve after WWI and the Depression, and allowed demagogues a degree of freedom which ultimately led to irrational outcomes and a dysfunctional, runaway setup. Of course, the absence of such a denouement in a Corporatist setup can also lead, as Orwell pessimistically predicted at the dawn of the atomic age, to "an epoch as horribly stable as the slave empires of antiquity."
http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/ABomb/english/e_abomb
"The powers that be in Italy and Germany lost their nerve after WWI and the Depression"
Well, there was a revolution in Germany that was almost successful at the tail end of WWI until the early 1920's. The Bolsheviks were waiting for the German Revolution to carry them forward and had to reorganize after it failed. Lenin relied so much on this revolution that he was accused of being a "German agent". It took almost five years to end. Then there was hyperinflation, which radicalized people further. The left was VERY powerful in Germany and was threatening to take down the system. Could you imagine what would have happened if Germany did have a successful socialist revolution? History would have been totally different, in the USSR probably more than any other country. In Italy after WWI there was something called the two "red years" (1920/21), where worker factory councils sprung up and radical parties were spreading like wildfire. Italy too had strong socialist parties that didn't go away even through Mussolini's time. The Italian left, along with the French left, probably would have won the elections after WWII if it wasn't for the CIA. The large land owners in Italy were the main supporters of the fascists. They paid for the fascists to go places like union halls and socialist gatherings and to beat up and sometimes kill innocent people. In German Social Democrats killed off those to their left, like Rosa Luxemburg, during the social revolution. The big industrialists in Germany supported the Nazis. In both countries the people with money didn't lose their nerve, they supported the fascists as, at least, the lesser of two evils. Some capitalists might not have liked the fascists but they, rightfully (by this I don't mean they were justified, I just mean that the left was a threat to their system), feared the leftists and thought of them as the lesser of two evils. In Germany and Spain in particular the left was almost wiped out, so there was little to nothing to stop the fascists.
American companies anyway had a long history of support for fascism. It wasn't only the plot against Roosevelt. What about IBM's role at the concentration camps? Ford motor company in Germany? Coca Cola's Fanta Orange? How about Texaco's support for Franco? The neutrality of the US in Spain was a bit dubious as well. The US and the West did not like the revolutionaries that dominated the Republican side in Spain (especially the socialist anarchists). So they were neutral and didn't support the Republicans (the leftist revolutionaries in Spain who had wide popular support and who were fighting Franco) even though they knew the fascists were supporting Franco.
Here, the left, the real left, is small and ineffectual, even with the collapse of the capitalist economy. The center, as usual, is weak and has no vision, they get co-opted by whoever is strongest. The biggest power centers aren't on the left. The unions are facing extinction, with a public campaign going after one of the last strong holds, the public workers. The left of center parties have little to no support and although there is lots of activism it isn't organized and on the offensive. What dominates are corporations, right wing think tanks, big finance, PR flacks and a media owned by these groups. Some in Spain claim that Franco wasn't fascist, he wasn't like Hitler. I think that's nonsense, but I would bet that our fascism will look like Franco's Spain more than Hitler's Germany. The Democrats here though are basically like the Social Democrats in Germany during Hitler's rise. Appease fascistic elements, attack anyone to their left along with the media and moneyed interests and form an alliance with the big corporations undoing our democracy.
Great stuff!
WWII was known as the war to stop fascism. If that were really the case, after vanquishing Germany and Italy, why didn't the Allied armies turn south and eradicate fascism in Spain?
Fighting the war to save democracy and end fascism was was propaganda to motivate millions to to heed the call up and support the war effort. Well before the war, fascism was well received in the US by elites and even within popular media. That "charming man" Benito Mussolini was actually on the cover of Time magazine as "Man of the Year" in 1923. Western capitalist countries supported Hitler (the policy of "appeasement") when his attention was on the USSR, only when Hitler went after THEM did they condemn fascism.
And why were so many Nazis scooped up by the American intelligence and rocketry "communities"?
The answer to that question is only perplexing if the US was actually opposed to fascism/Nazism. If the US was not opposed to it (as I would claim) then the answer is self evident: to the victor go the spoils of war - including the losers' intelligence apparatus and war-making capabilities.
From Wikipedia:
"Fascism (pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy...
"Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong..."
Also from Wikipedia:
"Corporatism, also known as corporativism, is a system of economic, political, or social organization that views a community as a body based upon organic social solidarity and functional distinction and roles among individuals...
"Corporatism is sometimes considered a synonym for fascism owing to the corporatist structures created by Mussolini's regime as well as in the latter years of the Third Reich under Albert Speer's direction. Corporatism was viewed by some as an appropriate strategy to prevent worker unrest, as well as a potentially and effective economic strategy..."
My questions are: Is there anything we can do to prevent the complete takeover (if it hasn't already happened)? Will traditional (aka, protests, marches, speaking truth to power, etc.) means of fighting fascism work? What can we, as individuals, do?
This is one of the dangers of Wikipedia posing as authoritative. It's not.
And it's probably the worst place to go to get information on political philosophy outside of overt hack sites.
That said, our options for resistance vary. Fascism can be defeated within the single nation-state that it resides in, although the brief record isn't promising. Most require external and severe military action to topple; others, like Francoist Spain, topple with old age and rot (like most systems that have run their course).
Corporatism--of the global kind that I describe--is more difficult. Its mobility means that nation-states are only one head on a hydra. Stop it here, it moves somewhere else, as long as global elites are still adhering to its ambitions. On the other hand, unlike fascism, the crude goal of wealth acquisition is probably easier to destabilize than a nation hell-bent on dominating the history books.
This is a struggle ultimately between the idea of private and public power. This means that job one is to push back against private power. The reason I make the distinction between facism and corporatism that I do, is because our biggest problem--getting the formal power of government to work against private power--is a result of the subordination of the state to private aims. That's why we're not fascist and are unlikely to be other than rhetorical.
The problem with a subordinate government is that the "system" we're expecting to use as the primary tool to rebalancing our social scales is already corrupt and owned, and as a result, change must come from outside of that system. In other words, to rely on using a system that has pretty openly declared sides for only one actor in the struggle is suicide for the outsider.
If you believe that this government is largely an instrument of private goals, the implications are profound for those of us on the outside looking in.
1. You cannot look for electoral salvation. Period. With each attempt that shows promise, the captive system dapts and shuts off that avenue. Witness third party politics, gerrymandering, using legal options to marginalize candidates (the Dems most unholy move int he last decade), etc. No third party advocating a change in the power struture can win by definition.
2. You cannot "opt out". One of the more maddening responses to the crises is the idea of reinventing the communal response of the 60s and earlier. They failed as a movement for a reason. Power doesn't tolerate competition, and you can start as many community agrarian projects nd housing projects as you like, but when they get large enough to actually succeed, power's historical response is to shut thenm down using a staggering array of zoning, coding, police harrassment and other "legal" tools for suppression. The evidence on this score is recent and overwhelming. This is not an option.
3. You could march, protest, do theater, whatever. But that model no longer applies, which is why it, too, fails regularly. The reasons are simple: protest assumes three things about the audience that are probably not accurate. First, it assumes--like the French petitioning Louis--that this is all a big misunderstanding, that if only our masters knew how hard our lives were, they'd fix things. We all know how that and other similar efforts turned out. In short, protest as education. A second assumption is that protest acts as a mobilizer of other outsiders. This is how it worked in the 60s, and to a limited extent, protesting and CD can work well. But it requires coverage, which we no longer get. So teh audience never sees the play. With a captive media, this assumption is arguably no longer valid, though I think it has some uses at the local level.
The third assumption is the most important. Protesting always assumes that the stakes for power never reach the level that their adversaries are not willing to torch the world in order to get their way. In other words, they will see sufficient resistance and decide "it's not worth it to continue the course". It assumes, in short, a humane rationality on the part of an adversary that may or may not actually exist. Corporatism is utterly soulless--it is the global prusuit of profits at virtually any and all costs. That is its only ambition.It's hard to appeal to the conscience of a sociopath.
But that focus on costs is also the achilles heel of corporatists. Our job is to raise the costs so high as to make their actions not profitable. To disrupt their aims at that level. But I'm running too long now, so I'll stop.
Thanks for the great response, drone.
In Wikipedia's defense, Britannica's definition of corporatism is: "corporatism, Italian corporativismo, also called corporativism, the theory and practice of organizing society into “corporations” subordinate to the state. According to corporatist theory, workers and employers would be organized into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and controlling to a large extent the persons and activities within their jurisdiction. However, as the “corporate state” was put into effect in fascist Italy between World Wars I and II, it reflected the will of the country’s dictator, Benito Mussolini, rather than the adjusted interests of economic groups."
The link between corporatism and fascism are irrefutable, but I do get your point that they are not synonymous.
Having said that, and as Danny Schechter alluded to, there are fascist elements/groups at play within the US. While I am not sure I'd classify everyone within the Tea Party as fascist, there certainly are elements within it (even though the organizing and funding elements are corporatist). And let's not forget some of the right-wing paramilitary groups that no doubt are at least proto-fascist.
So, we have a model of Corporatism running the whole show, while elements of Fascism run around acting their part. Who's to say the former couldn't morph into a full-blown latter?
As for the implications you stated, I would largely agree, with one slight revision: Opting out is still a viable method of resistance. However, your point about large groups is valid - they are too easily co-opted. But then again, the power of millions of individuals working in informal settings is unassailable. The problem in the US is that we are a very atomized society, not prone to social cohesion. And that is our challenge, to start re-forming cohesion - to build informal communities of people with the intent of lending each other support and creating informal, under-the-radar economies. Again, I stress the word, "informal." This is doable and there are models from other places, but it's a stretch for Americans.
"But that focus on costs is also the achilles heel of corporatists. Our job is to raise the costs so high as to make their actions not profitable. To disrupt their aims at that level. But I'm running too long now, so I'll stop."
I'm curious to know what you mean by "costs" and how you see us leveraging that point to our advantage (being careful, or course, not to give away too much).
Likewise on your response, Ted, as always.
We are speaking past each other on definitions. Part of that is probably our backgrounds. i'm graduate trained in political science, so I don't ever use dictionary definitions for much of anything of theoretical substance. That's habit, but an important one. Dictionaries are hideous for these kinds of discussions because they are lay-generalizations of common usage. That's their job. But they are *never* authoritatve.
In the intervening years between Mussolini's ill-thought out conscription of what was essentially a stab at a theory of imperial capitalism--this is what he was trying to do, by the way--the idea of corporatism has evolved a great deal in literature. Mussolini and fascist intellectuals--all three of them--were using corporatist in the context of a mode of labor relations in an imperial state, which is what you're referring to. That's all well and good for those regimes. But concepts grow and evolve with time; like socialism, communism, liberalism, and even conservatism. In the current context--and I say this specifically referring to the way "corporatism" is used by people like Nader, Klein, Hedges, et al.--corporatism as an ideology as opposed to a mode is an attempt to render the neo-liberal economic platform into its political and social counterpart. Sorry if this is a little wonky, but as I say above, it's vital that movement leaders at a minimum understand precisely what we are up against and its nature, which is incredibly deceitful and prone to mischaracterization. The project to advance corporate rule is what I refer to personally as the first "stealth ideology". It advances precisely because of its deceits, not its virtues.
To the meat of the real discussion: what is to be done?
Opting out is an important discussion, because it's hugely attractive to risk-averse, low maintenance personalities...:) It's both difficult and easy. It's also a very large buffet, that can take such a vast array of forms as to be an almost worthless phrase. But we can narrow it down a bit.
If by opting out you mean limit our personal contributions to the maintenance of the "system", that's a good thing. it is a valid and useful form of resistance, especially as a psychlogical act of defiance on the part of the resister. It's why I still will go to actions, even though they won't "work"; because they serve important reinforcing purposes on the minds of dissenters and resisters. But I *never* mistake those actions as "change" actions. They are not.
But if by opting out--as many would argue--you're talking about creating competing and alternative modes of living in direct contradiction to that preferred by power, then you cannot opt out. Ever. it's never been successfully done on a large scale--ask the Paris Commune how that turned out--and, worse still, it does nothing to confront the power relationships that cause the conflict in the first place. It's sort of like ignoring the jaws of a shark two inches from your leg by singing, "I'm a tree! I'm a tree! You don't see me!". The shark, of course, is spectacularly unaffected by this.
As for your creation of informal groups, of course. This is a big deal. I use that term to refer to social netorks of like minded people who occupy similar physical space. Neighborhood groups, community associations, the like. This is the only mode of organization that I can even think of that stands a chance against the propaganda apparatus, and without being able to overcome that with suffucient numbers of resistance, then all is lost anyway.
As for costs, the best I can do on this site is refer obliquely to the groups that I think have much of this down correctly in terms of response and resistance philosophies. ALF and ELF are two useful models. And look how they're treated, even by so-called "progressives" (man, I can't hate that word enough). That's the first steps in the way forward. So I would add a third group andmake it a triumvirate. Along with Animal and Earth Liberation, we probably could use a sizeable People Liberation Front.
Thanks for the discussion, and apologies for running on long.
drone & Ted M -
This was a very thoughtful, interesting dialogue.
Fascists can lose their charisma, get old and eventually die like Franco, or get taken down when civilians fed up with pointless wars take to the streets or upheaval within the military rank and file turns on the great leader. Big multinational corporations however can live as long as the profits flow - theoretically forever - morphing and adapting and evading the reach of governments that the corporate players cannot manipulate towards their own corporate ends.
Fascism has a very mortal face. Corporations can be faceless ghosts, or can hire a face with proven consumer appeal (like GE did with Reagan). The tactics to confront fascism are indeed different from the tactics needed to confront corporatism. The nexus they have most in common, perhaps the shared Achilles heel, is funding for military pagentry and the waging of war.
On a completely different note: I recognize the flag with the corporate logos in place of the stars accompanying Danny Schechter's article. I once ordered one of these flags from a group in Vancouver, Canada, I believe. I've now forgotten the name of the outfit.
Anybody who knows, please post back the connection. Somebody loved the political message on that corporate stars and stripes so much that mine got stolen by a passerby. I'd like to order a replacement.
Bill from Saginaw
http://www.adbusters.org/cultureshop/corporateflag
there's the link to replace your flag!
good point re: the differences between corporate immortality and the mortality of charisma-based dictatorships.
I think I'll keep a copy of your dialogue in my own files. Very good stuff.
"As for your creation of informal groups, of course. This is a big deal. I use that term to refer to social netorks of like minded people who occupy similar physical space. Neighborhood groups, community associations, the like. This is the only mode of organization that I can even think of that stands a chance against the propaganda apparatus, and without being able to overcome that with suffucient numbers of resistance, then all is lost anyway."
Okay...yeah, this is where I'm coming down in my own life. I have organized one group which, while not specifically created for the purpose of surviving corporatist malfeasance (I'm more comfortable with the good ol' word, empire), does address community and post-peak oil life. There are other groups that I am a member of that address soft/informal economies. And I am keenly aware of the importance of not sticking out like the tallest nail. When I said that we need to be below the radar, I was referring to loosely organized organization. Which segues nicely to:
"As for costs, the best I can do on this site is refer obliquely to the groups that I think have much of this down correctly in terms of response and resistance philosophies. ALF and ELF are two useful models. And look how they're treated, even by so-called "progressives" (man, I can't hate that word enough). That's the first steps in the way forward. So I would add a third group andmake it a triumvirate. Along with Animal and Earth Liberation, we probably could use a sizeable People Liberation Front."
Yeah on this, too. Autonomy is key. There is another term which I'm sure you're aware of that I won't use, as I know it is a key term used in snoop searches. But, yes, that is also what I had in mind. Loosely organized organizations of folks who "get it" and know that the game is over.
Now, one more question if you don't mind: Honestly, some of what you wrote about corporatism and how it's playing out is a little over my head. The common usage (Wikipedia, et al) is more what I'm used to. So, I hope you'll excuse my non-academic tin ears. My question is, how do I get these concepts across to other lay folk who know and feel as I do (as do many of us), but don't have the proper lexicon for what is going on? I mean, we all know we're getting screwed six ways from Sunday, but as you alluded to, it is important that we know what we're really up against and that our avenues for redress are very narrow. How do I do that without inducing the MEGO effect?
Thanks drone, this has been most helpful.
"Now, one more question if you don't mind: Honestly, some of what you wrote about corporatism and how it's playing out is a little over my head. The common usage (Wikipedia, et al) is more what I'm used to. So, I hope you'll excuse my non-academic tin ears. My question is, how do I get these concepts across to other lay folk who know and feel as I do (as do many of us), but don't have the proper lexicon for what is going on? I mean, we all know we're getting screwed six ways from Sunday, but as you alluded to, it is important that we know what we're really up against and that our avenues for redress are very narrow. How do I do that without inducing the MEGO effect?"
The reality is that we have over 4 centuries of "grand systems" colliding about like untamed neurons. the entire edifice of the industrial age appears to be coming apart at the seams. Every social system predicated on industialization is therefore operating under tremendous stress. In a perverse and dark way, we're really fortunate to be alive witnessing this because it's so damned rare. And we're seeing only the beginning...:)
I don't think anyone can explain this in a way that works for ordinary people. I think the best approach is to identify that the nexus of opposition power is primarily private power in the form of corporations. Whether or not you see the primary opponent as a fascist, corporatist, neo-feudal or even dynastic state/social system isn't all that important, because the one tentacle that each has in common is their subservience to the goals of international business cartels.
No peoples or peasant movement is going to have everybody toting a PhD--which is probably a very good thing, or nothing would ever get done. But if you're talking to ordinary people who need to focus on the most direct and immediate threat, then I think you focus overwhlemingly on destabilizing corporate power first and foremost.
And you shouldn't waste time with just any ol' corporation. It's the global players that are the big threats. And among these, the biggest players most negatively affecting each of our lives at the trench level are the MIC, FIRE and industrial medical apparati.
That's more than enough to take up a lifetime or two. If you can make them wish they never rolled out of bed, you've gone a long way towards giving the angels of good and light something to smile about.
Eventually, a movement like that will breed leadership that will be able to grapple with the macroview of history in all of this and more helpfully direct everyone's energies. In the meantime, just keep it primal, baby. Tit....for.....tat. We need to start a people's resistance, not necessarily finish one. And focus on talking to people about those first few steps. Don't get all wonky unless absolutely necessary.
DRONE: Your 2:02 AM post is a masterpiece.
VASHKAR: Great to see you back!
The thinkers are really out tonight on THIS thread. Thank you for many excellent contributions, especially:
Drone, Wilber, Clovis, Army Brat, and Polycarpe.
Your astute political analyses have missed one telling thing, however, how Earth Mother will factor into the plans of fascists/corporatists, etc.
As should be plainly noted, the massive floods that have recently impacted Pakistan, Australia, and now Brazil, along with drought in India, the heat wave in Russia, escalated earthquakes, tsunamis, and recently activate volcanoes all point to climate-related chaos that may put a major damper on the scheduled plans of corporate elites.
Does anyone know if a strong enough electrical storm in space could alter the Internet, or seriously impair communication technologies?
We ought not forget that while armies have massive power, as do those who have essentially taken ownership of entire nations' money supplies, these are not the ONLY powers. The natural world is only beginning to rev up... and it can interrupt the flow of armies, oil, and food production. When more and more citizens realize their governments don't care as they find themselves facing potential mass extinction events, a very different political fervor may emerge from unexpected places.
In my view, the next revolution will be global; and by 2020, I believe a Constitution will come into effect that will change the calculus between today's powers and THE people. The next decade will involve many tests, trials, and tribulation; but the inevitable result--like the arc that bends towards justice--will not allow power to remain congealed among the most corrupt, anti-life, amoral, and sociopathic of individuals.
Lurking?? Try...blatantly on the rise for decades now.
'Lurking?' Uh, dude, it's raging.
"Is Fascism Lurking?" It's been here since that false flag operation known as 9-11.
Welcome to AmeriKKKa!!!
amerika is so illiterate that it renders political concepts useless - people don't know what any words mean in general and the words of the political lexicon are really nothing more than slurs, meant to be hurtful and meaningless otherwise
that's how prez barry gets smeared as both a communist and a fascist - neither word has meaning - they are just slurs
barry is neither - he is a shill - spawned from who knows where - for the banks and the corporations. he is a card board cut out who can't even show us his birth certificate
barry doesn't have any beliefs - he is an vessel - whether he is half full or half empty interests me not
words like freedom, truth and justice fall into the same vaccum of meaningless
what prevails in amerika is hate and death - in the name of corporate profits we have cannablized not only the world but ourselves
corporations buy and sell our laws and our politicians at will while the people have no voice
we have no rights left - we have surrendered them to the 9/11 tv show and the vampires like bush baby and bernanke and summers and little timmy geitbag
as jefferson stated: a man who gives up his rights for safety deserves neither
and that is what we got - neither
we got grade school drop outs with 2 minutes of training massaging our crotches at the airport
we got 57 channels and nothing on
so who cares if it is fascism or tiddlywinks - as i said earlier the words are meaningless
what we got, at the end of the day is a rather large shit pile
and it may well be a fascist shit pile...who cares
" amerika is so illiterate that it renders political concepts useless - people don't know what any words mean in general and the words of the political lexicon are really nothing more than slurs, meant to be hurtful and meaningless "
you can blame that on the education system in this country,
maybe a wing of the lurking Fascism - in-order to easily manipulate the people of this country to blindly following political parties, whether it is the D's or the R's,
because I do hope you all realize, it is not just the Republican wing of the fascist eagle who is succumbing to "corporate fascism - corporatism" but also the Democrat wing of that same Fascist eagle taking over this country.
Dewey.
>>who can't even show us his birth certificate
Ahem. Your tea bagger slip is showing. You contemplating a gun purchase in the near future?
Hi Jason,
You might want to hone your critical thinking skills.
>>amerika is so illiterate that it renders political concepts useless
Read sociopath.
>>who can't even show us his birth certificate
Read birther.
>>as jefferson stated: a man who gives up his rights for safety deserves neither
Read obligatory quote from slave owner.
>>we got grade school drop outs with 2 minutes of training massaging our crotches at the airport
Read misogynist.
>>and it may well be a fascist shit pile...who cares
Read abject despair and cynicism.
He's a great guy Jason. At least he's honest enough to admit he needs meds. Perhaps you should look into some for yourself.
Reaching right back at ya!
Hi Jason,
>>You are a hate monger man.
That's a serious allegation. What words have I written that would cause you to come to this conclusion? Seriously. I question a posters "authenticity" and that is hate mongering? I might not be grounded in your authoritarian religious beliefs but that doesn't make me a hate monger.
I suspect we had some sort of run in on a previous thread and you are unable to let it go. I consider this a discussion forum and I frequently challenge the thoughts of people. People challenge my thoughts as you did on this thread. I don't take it personally and each day is a new day. I am not coming here to accumulate enemies.
Feel free to dredge up whatever needs to be dredged up. I read a book by some Buddhist guy and he talked about how forgiveness is really foretaking. You obviously have some resentment towards me and it sure is bothering you more than it is bothering me. Resentment is poison, feel free to lay some on me.
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
Hall is quoting Mussolini who was quoting one of his speechwriters. Pity Danny Schechter doesn't seem to recognize this.
And, of course, we are much further along than Schecter suggests. We were much further along in the days of Bush/Cheney and nothing has been reversed since then.
My mother had a riposte she used when people said things that had been apparent for years: "Yes. And Queen Anne's dead."
A bit slow on the uptake -- but better late than never. The issue is no longer whether fascism is on the rise, but how do we defeat it. And the answer is, we cannot. It is what "the people" want. "Progressives" have lost, at least for now. All that we can do at present is create new forms of "underground" society, like the Gaiene Communion (dot org) that I am founding, and leave the rest to their self-created hells.
Progressives can never defeat the right wing - never have, never will. Only a militant and powerful Left can defeat fascism.
Progressives versus fascism is like bunny rabbits against Velociraptors.
This question assumes that there is going to be some sort of official notification when the USA becomes a fascist state. It's more a question of degrees, and I would say at this point, we are about three-fifths of the way there. Just wait until the brownshirts -- AKA tea partiers, minutemen, and right-wing militias -- really get organized...
I felt the same way, reading this article. What I sense, in the last 30 years, is more of a 'mission creep' to the two major parties. Both have moved significantly to the right, or in any case into helping out the hands that feed them. Those are increasingly corporate hands, and Citizens United is going to put that into overdrive.
I mean, the author asks 'Is this Fascism?'. Obama 'the socialist' just appointed a JP Morgan executive to be his Chief of Staff (a mere two years after that sector tanked the global economy). I would say it is.
Yeah, when it comes to the corporatist aspect of fascism, we are 100% there. There is no real democracy anymore, in the sense of the people having any real influence over economic policy or any control over the corporations. Citizens United made sure of that.
But that's not fascism, that's just one necessary component of fascism. It's the racist, violent and authoritarian aspects of this hideous ideology that are still being developed. It's the hard fascism that we have yet to fully see...
On that note it was 'interesting' (i.e. depressing) to see how easily the health insurance industry whipped up the Tea Party against 'Obamacare', using their minions at Faux News. They were clearly telling Congress: 'vote for this and you better watch your back'
Theres an interesting article at HuffPost about how banks are now trying to rig the mortgage paperwork issue, making foreclosures easier for them:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-lux/the-politics-of-the-forec_b_808805.html?ir=Politics
From the article: "To once again bail out the bankers, this time by changing real estate law in a way that hasn't been done since the 1670s, would be a far bigger deal than even the trillions in bailout dollars the TARP and Fed gave these banks in 2008/9... But they have made a Texas-sized mess of the entire mortgage title system... and it is time to pay the piper. What's the solution? We should start with a foreclosure freeze while the government sorts through the mess and the state attorney generals finish their negotiations with the big banks. Clearly, a massive amount of mortgage write-downs to underwater homeowners to reflect current housing prices makes a ton of sense, and would dramatically cut the need for foreclosures... politicians hate the idea of having to bail [the banks] out again... progressives...can win this fight."
And what happens when Faux News gets on the loudspeaker claiming that the 'something for nothing' crowd is trying to keep its ill-gotten homes on the backs of 'ordinary taxpayers'? The banks will receded into the background, let the Tea Partiers start saluting the flag and taking aim, and Congress will dutifully get back in line. This is certainly close to a Fascist state. The Tea Partiers are just the last piece of the puzzle: the brownshirts.
"Don't you see... mirror image propaganda for the left on health care?" I saw no 'death panel' discussion on the left. I didn't see town hall meetings come almost to blows or gunfire by the left. And the people who are going to try to overturn Obamacare next week are not on the left.
However, earlier I said 'there's been mission creep in both parties', so I clearly see your point. We may not be in Fascism yet, but both parties are taking us there. And, by 'mission creep' I mean both parties have drifted in the direction of money, i.e. neither is inherently evil, neither inherently 'fascist'. I personally believe that if we can get the money away from the representative government, republicans as well as democrats would return to some semblance of normalcy.
That doesn't change the fact that the phenomenon of the last few years is toward abnormalcy. Of both parties, and WallStreet, tanking the economy and rescuing only the 'WallStreet' half of it, at huge cost to taxpayers, while homeowners take the fall and unemployment doubles. Rightwing media, in the service of her masters, is greatly responsible for distributing the 'free-market' virus-idea that produced this bubble and that has infected so much of the population. This media is NOW distributing a 'socialism is imminent' virus-idea to misdirect its listeners into attacking the very people who are most likely to be able to correct this situation: the left. Tea Partiers, so previously infected with 'free-market', are the first to be infected with 'socialism is imminent'. They may be good people, many of them, but they are holding sick ideas. The 'socialism is imminent' meme is directing Tea Partiers to, sorry to be blunt, destroy the American left by any means possible. Of course, at the ballot box if possible, but its not like we haven't been warned about 'second amendment solutions' should the ballot box turn against them. Tea Partiers make it plain as day that they are armed and dangerous. They have stepped on heads, been intercepted on their way to shoot up the Tides Foundation, and made it aggressively clear they are taking no prisoners. Yet you say its incorrect to say they are an incipient 'brownshirt' force? To put it mildly, I disagree. As I said before, they are the last piece of the puzzle. I see the rise and empowerment of the Tea Partiers as proof of imminent Fascism in America, the end of a 30 year effort by the money-powers. But, granted, we aren't there yet. I don't see either party working to take us away from that fate and, as I indicated, the money-powers and their minions in rightwing media actual welcome Fascism. The Tea Party is just another tool to them. I give it five years, max.
I always love it when they say FREE MARKET like there was one, the closest being the import of drugs. Distribution bieng under tight control by the corporate powers.
Truly how else can MEGATONNS of weed and white powder get distibuted without any problems the way it does?
Sure some dummy trying to re-sell on the street gets picked up, but the message gets crossed. He's not bieng nailed for breaking THE LAW! but for breaking the law, the law that states who gets paid off and what areas he should be selling in.
Free Market not bieng in the interest of the Corpo's running the drug trade. Or anyother trade for that matter.
>^^<
Like the internet is free, then we would't have to pay those bills to keep the lines inot our homes working?
This is all true, but I just think it will be getting a lot worse. I know how bad the cops can be, particularly in their treatment of people of color and street protesters, but I don't think you understand what real, full-blown fascism entails. We have real fascists in America, namely the tea partiers and the Christian nationalists, who would like to eliminate all their perceived enemies including Muslims and "libtards", but they have not been unleashed yet. All I'm saying is wait until these guys really gain some authority.
I like the idea of an official announcement: "Your attention please. We have now become fascist. Anyone one who knows themselves to be unacceptable will report for execution as soon as possible. All others will go through an evaluation process. Everything not prohibited will be from now on be mandatory. Compliance is compulsory. Have a nice day."
Danny, Danny, "when fascism comes to America"? Our Constitution has been suspended by the Patriot Act, Habeus Corpus is being ignored, Posse Comitatus is being ignored, our "commander in chief" declares the right to snatch anyone off the street and hold them incommunicado for as long as he pleases and declares the right to execute anyone he pleases, we openly practice torture, we live in the most surveilled society in the world, our corporate-controlled legislatures have been reduced to a rubber-stamp joke, our corporate-controlled major media is a rubber-stamp joke, our overt wars of aggression go on for decades throughout the world, most of our tax revenues are spent on war, peaceful demonstrations are met with legions of jack-booted stormtroopers who threaten violence, peaceful opposition organizations are infiltrated by paid government informers and agents provacateur, and, well, need I go on? So Danny, what does any political system have to do to be deemed fascist in your estimation?
Tony Vodvarka
Dear Jill, Speaking of calling in tips on the neighbors, about a month ago I was driving across Maryland on the interstate system and the highway-wide digital signs that are used to flash alerts concerning traffic conditions, I saw four between Cumberland and the Bay Bridge, had no warnings that day for passers-by. So, to put the spot to good use, REPORT ANYTHING SUSPICIOUS was displayed with an eight hundred number below.