Fascism Begins at Home
I really dislike the term fascist. It has been misused by the 16-22 year old set for decades. Fascism isn’t enforcing drinking age laws. But we have heard more and more references to fascism from people that actually know a fascist when they see one. And they all seem to be looking at W. This is laid out convincingly by the Guardian today. I think it is a level-headed analysis of where we are redrawing the lines in America.(h/t Fred)
I have often invoked the story of the boiling frog when discussing what has happened in this country in the past 6 years. You cannot boil a frog by throwing him into a pot of boiling water, he’ll just jump out. But if you put that frog in a pot at room temperature and slowly warm the water to boiling, you got yourself a poached frog.
Tags: Bush, Dorm Room Poli Sci
*Yawn* Yes, yes, yes … Bush is a “fascist” yada yada yada. What else is new from the historically illiterate.
Worst of all, the damn trains STILL don’t run on time.
Hube,
Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes.
How does that not describe George Bush? As a “libertarian” I would think that you would be acutely aware of the fact that Bush has moved the country away from civil liberties and toward a police state in which loyalty to the President is more important than loyalty to the constitution.
How do you fit Alberto Gonzales’ claim that there is not right to Habeas Corpus into your “libertarian” world view? How do you explain away the political purges in the Justice Department – secret CIA prisons and the practice of extraordinary rendition? How does the practice of warrentless wire taps not put the interest of the State above the rights of the individual?
It seems to me that your knee-jerk dismissal of the term fascism is at least as historically illiterate and lacking in thought as the knee-jerk application of the term can be.
Please forgive me if the following question shows blog-ignorance, which I can explain away by my newness to these forums, but are G Rex and Hube the same guy?
No. G Rex is funny.
Oops. I think I meant Hube and Steamboat Willy. Sorry. Hard to keep the handle’s straight.
What happened to Uncle Vanya?
Dis,
You would have to ask them.
As for Hube’s dismissal of the term fascist, I have to say that I am generally skeptical of such labels, but the case is compelling. Of course, fascism rises on a sea of people that don’t look at it critically, like Hube.
I would actually love to see Hube or Willy or G Rex or even Dave Burris, really tell us why this is different. Tyler has made statements that make me think he can see the pattern, and I suspect that Protack would say that the movement of this administration is in that direction.
Please pipe in here, any of you. But first read the article, as I think it is quite well reasoned.
The article was OK, but for me the tipping point was a few months ago when I realized the full import of what Rove was attempting to do by subverting the DOJ.
It was sobering for me to realize how much of our “checks and balances” are actually custom, not law.
Good point. That reminds me that after Nixon (Dick, not Tyler) we enacted several laws that were designed to codify some of the customs that we took for granted. FISA was one of them. There is some symbolism in the way that this administration has gutted that law by simply ignoring it in secret.
When they support Bush’s various power grabs, I don’t get how Hube or Willy or G Rex or even Dave Burris dont get this:
What if, in a year and a half, there is another attack – say, God forbid, a dirty bomb? The executive can declare a state of emergency. History shows that any leader, of any party, will be tempted to maintain emergency powers after the crisis has passed. With the gutting of traditional checks and balances, we are no less endangered by a President Hillary than by a President Giuliani – because any executive will be tempted to enforce his or her will through edict rather than the arduous, uncertain process of democratic negotiation and compromise.
Right. How happy would Hube be if Hillary were doing this BS?
While FISA may have been ignored in secret many other laws were ignored in public via signing statements. bleh
I always thought it was fascism when one party controlled the entire government from the center – in our case that would mean all three branches with the executive in supremacy over the legislative and judicial branches – and also has either de facto or de jure control over the press. Hugo Chavez can call himself a Marxist all he wants, but Venezuela is looking more like Argentina under Peron every day.
The problem with your argument is that last year the American people registered their displeasure by handing the legislative branch over to the opposition party, just as they did during the Gingrich Revolution. The checks and balances are still in place and fully functioning.
By the way, firing 8 US Attorneys (a matter internal to the executive branch) is nothing compared to FDR’s attempt to pack the Supreme Court during his second term. Talk about an Imperial Presidency!
agreed.
How does that not describe George Bush? As a “libertarian” I would think that you would be acutely aware of the fact that Bush has moved the country away from civil liberties and toward a police state in which loyalty to the President is more important than loyalty to the constitution.
I’ve written about this ad nauseum at Colossus if you’d care to look. In a nutshell, if Bush is “fascist,” he’s a piker to many who’ve come before. Thus, my “historically illiterate” comment.
And Geek? Stop with the “How would Hube feel if this was Hillary…?” You guys are so perpetually mired in your partisan bullshit that you never realize (or purposely ignore) when your usual opponents agree with you — so much more than you’ll EVER agree w/them. The fact is is that this whole crew here is LIGHT-YEARS ahead of me in terms of blind partisanship. I mean, here are two biggies you have from me to you:
1) I am against the Iraq War,
2) Bill Clinton’s impeachment was complete bullshit.
If Hillary pursued all of what Bush has in the GWoT, I’d feel no different. And that’s b/c, as G Rex stated above, we have this thing called checks and balances which, y’know, CHECKS and BALANCES what Bush wants to do. This “fascism” crap has been brought into it b/c some of the things Bush has been successful at getting have been AGREED to by other branches.
Do us all a favor — go find a survivor of Nazi Germany and do an extensive interview. Then come back and tell us about “fascism.” You won’t do it and there’s only one reason why: You’re pathetic partisan punks, that’s all. Any rational argument by the other side just “can’t be so” merely b/c of who they are. (Jason’s a bit better at that acceptance, I’ll give him that.)
By the way, firing 8 US Attorneys (a matter internal to the executive branch) is nothing compared to FDR’s attempt to pack the Supreme Court during his second term.
what about Bush trying to pack ALL the courts? it ain’t like the guy hasn’t had his share of “recess” appt’s.
The problem with comparing Bush to Hitler is that you can’t compare anyone to Hitler.
But you can look at the steps that this administration has taken in the name of national security (even if the other branches acquiesced) and ask if those steps seem to be in the direction of fascism.
I think the original article make a compelling case that they are the kinds of steps that lead to fascism. I happen to think, and Hube and I have clashed on this in the past, that there is a strong undercurrent of fascism in the Republican Party. [Just look at Bill O’Reilly recent rant on George Soros and his casual calls to have Soros “hanged.”.] That’s why it seems “partisan” when we liberals start throwing around the “F” word.
DV, what FDR attempted to do was to increase the number of justices from 9 to 12, because he kept losing 5-4 on his New Deal programs. (You know, like the GordonBerry adding NCCo Council seats) Oh, and he was pissed that no Justice had died during his first term, so he didn’t get a chance to appoint anyone. Congress shot down his blatant attempt to rewrite the Constitution. Checks and balances. After three terms, however, the court was much more to FDR’s liking. That was a big reason behind limiting the Presidency to two terms, BTW.
“That’s why it seems “partisan” when we liberals start throwing around the “F” word.”
Jason you friggin’ Commie!
OK Hube, here’s one Holocaust survivor’s take on it. I’ll sum up in case you feel like you can’t bring yourself to actually read this article either.
“So far, I’ve seen nothing to eliminate the possibility that Bush is on the same course as Hitler.”
I have agreed with you on several points beyond your little list. To consider me a partisan is a joke. I may not know all of your views, but I smell your partisanship in almost everything that you post. So partisan, heal thyself.
As for the other branches agreeing, they have been cudgeled into agreement with the fascist mace of patriotism. They are still doing this very day with BS statements about de-funding the war as treasonous. Well brother, there is nothing treasonous about exercising these checks and balances, but there is something fascist about implying that there is.
You can believe what you want about it, but I would like you to tell me what you think the tell-tale sign of such a slide would look like. Do we have to round up dozens of political opponents, or does it have to be hundreds, maybe thousands. How long do these bullshit suspensions of rights last when the war has no end for generations?
Don’t try to put this argument to rest with a bunch of bluster, try logic for a few minutes. You may discover parts of your brain that you never knew existed.
I am glad people are finally taking the F word more seriously vis a vis Herr Bush, than its previous use more as a scorched earth insult.
I have used it repeatedly and seriously about this despicable Bush neocon crowd, for a good while now.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck…
The notion that America’s essentially laissez faire political tradition is somehow immune from fascism is utter fallacy. If anything, it is perhaps more susceptible when you are dealing with the most ruthless of sorts intent on power and control.
Because Bush has been steadily undermining and subverting the most free and enduring democratic republic in modern history, I must repeat my words from a few weeks ago :
Worse. Than. Hitler.
I would like you to tell me what you think the tell-tale sign of such a slide would look like.
Maybe if we contracted with Halliburton affilates to start planning mass dentention centers? Fascism Indicator #2 in the Guardian article (“Create a gulag”):
The contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs. The contingency support contract provides for planning and, if required, initiation of specific engineering, construction and logistics support tasks to establish, operate and maintain one or more expansion facilities.
But of course, the detention centers are only to be used “in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants..” (Fascism Indicator #1, “Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.”)
War and the Police State: Complicity of the American People
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=THO20070421&articleId=5454
War and the Police State: Complicity of the American People
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=THO20070421&articleId=5454