Dare we say, "fascism"?

When government and private interests merge you get the rise of fascism.
A strong word but more and more appropriate.

"A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definition

"philathome", from another board, says it well here:

The promotion of the concept of corporatism is
replayed constantly by the economic interests
that control the media from the newspapers to the
financial shows on television. Just watch any of
the morning financial shows on Fox and you'll see
that there is no shame among the hosts and guests
in promoting the advancement of this idea to the
detriment of the rights of the rest of the
population. When they are confronted with
exposing their proximity to fascism, they resort
to saying that they are just capatalists
exercising their rights in a free market; but if
you look beyond the surface the direction is
unmistakable.

If you haven't seen it before,the 14 points of
fascism details this and several other tactics
used to direct a people toward a fascist state.
Identifying and targeting certain groups as
enemies is one of the prime examples. Hitler and
Mussolini both did it by targeting Jews,
Liberals, gays and the disabled as either enemies
of the state or weak and not worthy of aid
because they didn't contribute to the maintenance
of the states goals.
Examining the way the conservative movement is
proceeding shows that they are on the exact same
path; reducing social services for the poor and
sick, cronyism in government, proclaiming
themselves as the only ones capable of
patriotism, promoting militarism, reducing civil
rights under the guise of protecting the people
from a continuous threat; its all there. Just
listen to Hannity talk for a few minutes, if you
can stand to. He is the epitomy of fascism today
in this country.

Those 14 points of fascism are a great litmus test.

Only the blind can not see.

It's just fact.

Has been.

Many of us have been saying the fascism word for several years now... anywhere and everywhere.

Sue

That's exactly what it is.

Fascism is not some long dead concept of ancient history, it is here, with us today. There is another thread going now about the economics/politics of fascism that is worth a read. For some reason many people can't hear the word with out jumping immediately to Hitler and the camps like fascism is exclusively about the Jews, Roma, et al who perished in the camps. It is unfortunate that people cannot see all the other things about fascism/nazism.

I've mentioned it before, but I highly recommend the book They Thought They Were Free by Milton Meyer if you can find it.

I absolutely and totally agree that many of the checklist items for fascism are manifest by BUSHCo.

But I really think most of those items on the short and long checklists are just as much abuses that are a consequence of one-party governance as they are fascism. I think we can find examples of capitalists, communists, socialists, royalists etc, who manifest these terrible traits.

I also have the feeling that the Bush vision of the new world order is not nearly as progressive as fascism. Bush's domestic war against federal-level government and against the lower classes are pretty unlike what the fascists of the early 20th century were trying to achieve. I would point out that nazism rose largely as a middle class movement and Bush is as anti-middle class as any president in American history. Now, I readily admit that many of the phalangist dictatorships of Latin America also have had corrupt relationships with foreign corporations. But I don't think that Bush having many phalangist qualities makes the case for Bush as a fascist, because again, tyranny spawns the same sort of evils regardless of overt political vestments.

To me it seems that Bush is actually intent on creating a world order of weak nations in which corporations are unfettered to impose their will. In this way what Bush's vision seems more like Europe after the collapse of the Roman empire, perhaps you could say, after the fall of civilization. Basically it seems Bush is interested in a feudal system in which the rich get to call the shots so far as they can make their influence felt.

On your point about the middle class... Bush is definitely anti-middle class, but so was Hitler. Do you think Bushco hasn't captured a lot of the middle class with anti-gay, anti-women, anti-minority? Even some Jews were ok with nazism before the 1938 Nuremburg Laws. In the beginning Hitler got the middle class because of the inflation and unemployment issues associated with Versailles. It didn't become clear (to the masses) where he was going with his agenda until much later.

The last thing you said about feudalism.... that is basically what fascism is, neo-feudalism.

".... a form of government that is virtually feudalistic in the safeguards granted to and preserved for the wealthy, as well as in the total servitude it demands of those who possess nothing but their hands and brains to work with." p249 Last Train from Berlin

I will have to read that work. I will want to now how it falls into the available works on fascism. It is my general sense that works on fascism fall into 3 camps.

1) cold war era works from the Soviet bloc that brand all capitalism as fascist.

2) cold war era works from western Europe and the US that emphasize fascism as totalitarianism and make comparisons between Fascism and Stalinism.

3) works that are focused on the 20th century atrocities committed in the name of fascism.

The book Last Train from Berlin was written by Howard K Smith who was later a war correspondent... one of Murrow's boys, if I remember right. (He was definitely a CBS anchor after the war.) At the time, he was a recent college graduate(journalism) on the grand tour, so to speak. In the forward he tells of it being a sort of sociological project - a one man fact finding mission because he and his friends didn't know what to make of the Nazis. It is a remarkable book because he was basically just a man on the scene telling what he saw without benefit of hindsight, or inside info. Reading it after so many years had passed, I was struck by his insights and the way he described everything. If you can find it, it is well worth the read. Berlin Diary by Shearer is usually the book people point to. but I think Smith's book is better and more insightful.

Fascism was always ill-defined, the manner in which eastern and western blocs dealt with it in their propaganda made it rather worse.

That it is a piece written by a journalist leaves me to think it might fall into the third category, but I shouldn't prejudge something I've not read.

I suppose by the time he boarded the last train out he was pretty anti-totalitarian, and definitely anti-nazi. The thing is though he didn't set out to prove anything one way or another about facsism exactly. He tried very hard to be objective and just report the facts as he saw them. You'll have to slot it into the category you think best. Wherever it falls in the spectrum, its a good book. I am glad we've been talking about it because now I want to re-read it. :)

from spending weeks of searching college lectures on the internet is that the middleclass, the technicians and small shopkeepers were supportive of Hitler. How long they hung in there supporting him I am not sure.

What traits do we assign to German fascism that we use to measure where the United States are today?. Is it the means (all the bad behavior) used by Fascists or the goals (unified nationalism (as in Italy) or control by the wealth of corportations) of Fascist ideology that should be used to distinguish a political movement?

Because in my mind even if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it could still be someone in a Saturday Night Live skit.

I have read hundreds of books and articles about the Nazis (not including books about specific battles or the Holocaust) or and several about Italy. I know next to nothing about any of the other fascist regimes since then. I don't have a good answer to your questions, but I'll tell you what it is for me.

As for the traits.... I think it is difficult to say, overlay Nazism and BushCO and match all points exactly. Its kind of like fingerprinting when they compare two and find that certain patterns line up in 10 points or whatever. As you said earlier, most of the 14 points are valid, but most, if not all, are true of all totalitarian governments. Its all the same really, except the ends. For the Soviets it was collectivism, for the Nazis nationalism, the Fatherland, here now it is Wealth. (At this point I want to make a distinction between fascism and nazism.... the nazis were fascist but not all fascists are nazis).

I think the most significant match is economics-the way government has been blended with business and industry producing a capitalism that is more viscious, cruel, and far reaching than any other we have known. But this can't be easily separated out from the means, "all the bad behavior", because without all the bad behavior they wouldn't be able to control the wealth. I don't think fascism is being nasty and horrible because They can, for the simple pleasure of stamping a boot heel on someone's throat (though I recognize that there is an element of that with the lower rung supporters... Brownshirts/freepers).

That is the best I can do right now.

Fascism Then. Fascism Now?
Published on Monday, November 28, 2005 by the Toronto Star (Canada)
by Paul Bigioni
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1128-24.htm

When people think of fascism, they imagine Rows of goose-stepping storm troopers and puffy-chested dictators. What they don't see is the economic and political process that leads to the nightmare.

Observing political and economic discourse in North America since the 1970s leads to an inescapable conclusion: The vast bulk of legislative activity favors the interests of large commercial enterprises. Big business is very well off, and successive Canadian and U.S. governments, of whatever political stripe, have made this their primary objective for at least the past 25 years.

Digging deeper into 20th century history, one finds the exaltation of big business at the expense of the citizen was a central characteristic of government policy in Germany and Italy in the years before those countries were chewed to bits and spat out by fascism. Fascist dictatorships were borne to power in each of these countries by big business, and they served the interests of big business with remarkable ferocity.

These facts have been lost to the popular consciousness in North America. Fascism could therefore return to us, and we will not even recognize it. Indeed, Huey Long, one of America's most brilliant and most corrupt politicians, was once asked if America would ever see fascism. "Yes," he replied, "but we will call it anti-fascism."

By exploring the disturbing parallels between our own time and the era of overt fascism, we can avoid the same hideous mistakes. At present, we live in a constitutional democracy. The tools necessary to protect us from fascism remain in the hands of the citizen. All the same, North America is on a fascist trajectory. We must recognize this threat for what it is, and we must change course.

Consider the words of Thurman Arnold, head of the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice in 1939:

"Germany, of course, has developed within 15 years from an industrial autocracy into a dictatorship. Most people are under the impression that the power of Hitler was the result of his demagogic blandishments and appeals to the mob... Actually, Hitler holds his power through the final and inevitable development of the uncontrolled tendency to combine in restraint of trade."

Arnold made his point even more clearly in a 1939 address to the American Bar Association:

"Germany presents the logical end of the process of cartelization. From 1923 to 1935, cartelization grew in Germany until finally that nation was so organized that everyone had to belong either to a squad, a regiment or a brigade in order to survive. The names given to these squads, regiments or brigades were cartels, trade associations, unions and trusts. Such a distribution system could not adjust its prices. It needed a general with quasi-military authority who could order the workers to work and the mills to produce. Hitler named himself that general. Had it not been Hitler it would have been someone else."

I suspect that to most readers, Arnold's words are bewildering. People today are quite certain that they know what fascism is. When I ask people to define it, they typically tell me what it was, the assumption being that it no longer exists. Most people associate fascism with concentration camps and rows of storm troopers, yet they know nothing of the political and economic processes that led to these horrible end results.

Before the rise of fascism, Germany and Italy were, on paper, liberal democracies. Fascism did not swoop down on these nations as if from another planet. To the contrary, fascist dictatorship was the result of political and economic changes these nations underwent while they were still democratic. In both these countries, economic power became so utterly concentrated that the bulk of all economic activity fell under the control of a handful of men. Economic power, when sufficiently vast, becomes by its very nature political power. The political power of big business supported fascism in Italy and Germany.

<more>

isolated from one another. I think what we have instead is a globalistic set of shareholders who are tightly interweaved.

http://www.favreau.info/misc/14-points-fascism.php

http://ellensplace.net/fascism.html

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Politics/Structure3.htm




Home

The 14 points of Fascism

1- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2- 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.

3- Identification of Enemies/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, etc.

4- Supremacy of the Military

Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5- Rampant Sexism

The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

6- Controlled Mass Media

Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7- Obsession with National Security

Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8- Religion and Government are Intertwined

Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9- Corporate Power is Protected

The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10- Labor Power is Suppressed

Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11- Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12- Obsession with Crime and Punishment

Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13- Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14- Fraudulent Elections

Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

###

Is why our ancestors left the "Old Country" (Europe, Asia, wherever) and came here where we could do pretty much what we wanted. Fascism will go over in America about as well as Communism.

Fascism is for the "good children" who stayed in Germany or China or Japan despite economic or political turmoil. We are the rats who flee the sinking ship in search of something better. We do not change ourselves for the good of our country. We expect our country will god damn well change itself for the good of us.

Cant think of any more metaphors so Ill shut up.

I think the nation, by and large, isn't ready to use that word. I wonder if we should use corporatism, instead?


"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power." - attributed to Benito Mussolini

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10710.htm

A stunning essay.