The appeal of fascism

"What constitutes the bulwark of our own liberty and independence? It is not our frowning battlements, our bristling seacoasts, the guns of our war steamers, or the strength of our gallant and disciplined army. These are not our reliance against a resumption of tyranny in our fair land. All of them may be turned against our liberties, without making us stronger or weaker for the struggle. Our reliance is in the love of liberty which God has planted in our bosoms. Our defense is in the preservation of the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere. Destroy this spirit, and you have planted the seeds of despotism around your own doors. Familiarize yourselves with the chains of bondage, and you are preparing your own limbs to wear them. Accustomed to trample on the rights of those around you, you have lost the genius of your own independence, and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises." - Abraham Lincoln

What afflicts the people of the United States in these days, that they have developed the capacity not only to tolerate, but even to cherish, the blatant lies and hypocrisies, the injustices, the evasions, and of course the invasions perpetrated by George W Bush and his neo-conservative cabal? How can even conservatives themselves stomach this internationalist, interventionist, activist-court-packing, states'-rights-suppressing cat's-paw of the transnational culture of control that is the only heartfelt homeland of the corporate elite?

Yes, there is opposition, an opposition that comprises most likely a small majority of the country's people - but the supposedly "liberal" media do their best to ignore and even marginalize it, and besides, that yet leaves hundreds of millions here who work themselves into ecstasies of adulation at the words, however fumbling, of this jug-eared cipher, and into equal ecstasies of joyous indignation at the sound of any word that controverts the image his handlers project to the loving masses huddled underneath the balcony ...

Let us not put too fine a point upon it: we are in danger of reverting to fascism.

Fascism is a disease endemic in our species, a periodic fever whose tremors induce a psychosocial orgasm in its sufferers, tantalizing them with physical delusions of both security and power. Far more than its structural and functional ramifications - well illustrated by Benito Mussolini's definition of fascism as "the melding of state and corporate power" and George Orwell's fictional synopsis of a tech-enabled fascist state in Nineteen Eighty-Four - it is fascism's capacity to make a nuanced oppression seem both nurturing and empowering that makes it so dangerous. It is this nuance of fascism - more than the Big Lie techniques and the brute force fascists also employ - that makes the Bush/Cheney administration and its police and propaganda mechanisms a true threat to humanity in general and to the United States - formerly respected as an icon of liberty - specifically.

The fundamental appeal of fascism to the everyday person is threefold. It consists of:

The promise of security. Fascists typically posit threats, external and internal, that are easily identified but difficult to fight, and then promise to protect you from them - if only you will give them absolute power to do so. Relief from uncertainty. It is no accident that Orwell had his dictator characterize himself as Big Brother. The fascist relieves you of the responsibility to make difficult decisions. You simply follow orders - given, of course, by Big Brother. A share of strength. Most insidious, Big Brother will let you exercise power over others - as long as you exercise Big Brother's power Big Brother's way.

This last is the stroke of genius. The fascist enlists the sufferers of fascism themselves as petty dictators over those who have been designated as "below" them. And we the people are all too often eager to enlist.

As we know, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But the watered-down wine of authority is good enough for many - even the feeling that they are exercising power by proxy when they grant it to the fearless leader who leads them into endless fear.

The paradigm is nearly universal. From Josef Stalin's and Adolf Hitler's structured goonocracies to the serried pyramids of corporate middle managers, the pattern is similar: a Supreme Leader (dictator or chief executive officer); a Politburo, or General Staff, or Board of Directors, who, as cronies of the leader, pull the levers for him; a rubber-stamp parliament that always approves all proceedings set before it; a highly involved hierarchy with just enough upward mobility that you may strive a lifetime toward an ever-receding Valhalla without ultimately disturbing its present occupants; a rigid culture that prescribes behavior and in many cases (IBM, Albania) dress and appearance; and an intolerance for any deviation from the chosen definition of the Perfect Man, the Ubermensch, the Good Soldier, the Team Player. (Except, of course, by the leadership elite, who can get as wacky as they please.)

The fascist first makes us all afraid, then makes us all spies, then gives us an enemy, who has often (the Jew, the communist, the jihadi) been hiding right in our midst. And we are almost always ready to drop the dime, to swing the club.

And the definition of the "enemy" is ever-expanding. The US Justice Department, no longer living up to its name, now invokes the USA Patriot (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act against readers of dissident books, against environmental activists - though not, so far, against rich organizations with plenty of lawyers.

We know now that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, and in fact has nurtured it. But terrorism has everything to do with justifying the arrogation of power by these most foully banal crypto-fascists in the name of protecting us against "terror" - a terror they help create by magnifying the injustices our neo-feudalist corporate culture has perpetrated on the world this century past. But we still "stand behind our president". Why?

Remember two things: First, it is not who has power that's the problem. It's that someone has power. Second, the founders of the United States designed inefficiency into the government precisely to prevent accumulations of power, having had immediate experience with imperial tyrants.

Beware those who would bring efficiency to government. A government that's run like a business is a dictatorship.

Richard Risemberg is editor/webmaster of The New Colonist and maintains the Living Room Urban Ecology Webzine and Forum. He lives in Los Angeles.

A wolf in sheep's clothing.

Like so many writers, Rosenberg fumbles throughout because he doesn't precisely identify the primary function of government.

The primary focus of government is to protect individual rights to life, property and free-association contracts.

Beware those who would bring efficiency to government. A government that's run like a business is a dictatorship.

Anchored to the primary purpose of government there is every reason to pursue government efficiency and nothing to fear. It becomes impossible for government to become a tyrant or dictatorship.

A Frenchmen one-hundred-fifty years ago wrote eloquently, hitting the mark with two-hundred words what Rosenberg bumbles through -- while missing the mark -- in a thousand.

"The oppressor no longer acts directly and with his own powers upon his victim. No, our conscience has become too sensitive for that. The tyrant and his victim are still present, but there is an intermediate person between them, which is the Government - that is, the Law itself. What can be better calculated to silence our scruples, and, which is perhaps better appreciated, to overcome all resistance? We all therefore, put in our claim, under some pretext or other, and apply to Government. We say to it, " I am dissatisfied at the proportion between my labor and my enjoyments. I should like, for the sake of restoring the desired equilibrium, to take a part of the possessions of others. But this would be dangerous. Could not you facilitate the thing for me? Could you not find me a good place? or check the industry of my competitors? or, perhaps, lend me gratuitously some capital which, you may take from its possessor? Could you not bring up my children at the public expense? or grant me some prizes? or secure me a competence when I have attained my fiftieth year? By this mean I shall gain my end with an easy conscience, for the law will have acted for me, and I shall have all the advantages of plunder, without its risk or its disgrace!" - Frederic Bastiat

The REAL left-wing Trojan horse for fascism is the eco-Nazi religion - described as follows:

ECO–TOTALITARIANISM

“What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven.”

The cruelest and most oppressive regimes throughout history have merged manmade religion with the power of the state. The high priests of Judea, Annas and Caiaphas, were instrumental in manipulating Pontius Pilate, a Roman ruler, to accomplish the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. In this century, communism and Nazism have been hallmarks of oppression and untold suffering. These governments used a pseudo–science to give a veneer of respectability to ideological beliefs and provide a ‘rational’ basis for their acceptance. The Nazis (National Socialists) claimed that the science of genetics proved the Aryan race to have superior abilities. The communists claimed that “scientific socialism” (Marxism–Leninism) would end poverty and exploitation of man by his fellow man. The state religion in each case offered an escape from the manufactured ‘enemy’ by establishing a counterfeit moral ideal upon which tyrannical actions could be based. This counterfeit moral basis conceals the real evil about to be committed. These historical examples recall the philosopher George Santayana's maxim, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Communism

The communists essentially said, “Poverty is bad. We are opposed to poverty and want to eliminate it. To do this, we must be given the power to violate your individual rights. We are practicing the moral ideal by helping others. Trust us.”

Nazism

The Nazis’ message was only slightly different. They said, “The destruction of Germany is bad. We are opposed to this destruction and wish to stop it. To do this, we must be given the power to violate your individual rights. We are practicing the moral ideal by helping others. Trust us.”

These state religions had common characteristics:

1. A position is taken that nobody will disagree with, i.e., poverty is bad or national destruction is bad. There is absolutely no political risk in taking these positions, they are uncontroversial and require no change in opinion by the people.

2. A solution to the uncontroversial problem is offered, if only the public will grant the group coming to power the authority to violate individual rights.

3. Each predicted some kind of apocalyptic scenario would occur if the people did not listen to them. The Nazis predicted that a wealthy Jewish elite would destroy the purity of the German race and nation. The communists said that the forces of American imperialism would overrun mother Russia. In each instance, these state religions fostered an intense hatred toward the perceived enemy of the state.

4. Each movement justifies the violation of individual rights on the morality of altruism, i.e., doing ‘good’ (as the state defines ‘good’) to others is the only standard for correct behavior. Contrast this with the standard for right behavior in Matthew 22:37–38, “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.” Making ‘doing good’ to someone or something the only standard for correctness enabled these tyrannies, and the environmental party, to come to power. The people must be persuaded (via the media) to recognize this counterfeit moral ideal. If they do not, they may object to the intrusion of the state because of higher principles—for example, their Constitutional rights.

Altruism as a moral ideal means that you can deny the self–interest (individual rights) of yourself or of others in the name of ‘doing good.’ Thus, those who claim that they were harmed by the communists or the Nazis can be labeled as selfish and opposing the moral ideal (‘doing good’) of the state. The state can thus treat them without regard to their individual rights (as indeed they were). It is the motivation that must be ascertained. Service to others out of love and a genuine concern for human welfare is honorable. ‘Doing good’ to animals and plants at the expense of human welfare is devilish.

5. Each ideology resulted in millions of deaths and the enslavement of millions more (World War II, Stalinist purges, etc.)

These ideologies worked by using a bit of truth, a ‘good cause,’ to which is attached an evil and devilish ideology. This is similar to a worm on a hook. Those who swallowed the communist and Nazi ‘worm on a hook’ experienced great suffering and often death.

Environmentalism

Now compare the above description of communism and Nazism to environmentalism. The message of the environmental party is very similar: “Pollution is bad. We are opposed to pollution and want to eliminate it. To do this, we must be given the power to violate your individual rights. We are practicing the moral ideal by helping others. Trust us, we’ll do it right this time.”
The moral ideal of ‘doing good’ is now directed at animals, insects, trees, and plants rather than people. Under communism and Nazism they were directed at a specific group of people (the working class and the German race, respectively). The familiar apocalyptic predictions are now framed so that the entire biosphere is up for grabs, i.e., unless we adopt the socialist solutions proposed by the eco-religion the very future of the earth is ‘in the balance.’ The state–sponsored hatred used by the communist and Nazi regimes is now directed at all humans. For example, many members of the Green Church want to control human population by state coercion (as Communist China now practices). Environmentalism is an ideological sister to the tyrannies of Hitler and of communism. However, the human tragedy will be far worse if we allow the environmental party to reach its goal of control over the use of all natural resources.

The devil is an expert in using counterfeit causes to conceal his motives and actions. He routinely adapts his methods to the times and conditions to be most effective in drawing people away from the true God. The conditions found at various times in history have been exploited by the god of this world to set up ‘red,’ ‘brown,’ and ‘green’ tyrannies. Each tyranny also required a ‘sacred’ text that often launched it. Many consider the publication of Silent Spring in 1962 by Rachel Carson to be the birth of today’s environmental movement, with the Earth Day of 1970 its initial rise to power.

A similar comparison is made by the late Dr. Petr Beckmann, an immigrant to the United States from Czechoslovakia with first hand familiarity of the deception by which Marxism–Leninism was sold to the masses. The following account is from a visit he made to Russia and related in his newsletter Access to Energy in November 1991.

From Sept. 15 to 21 [1991], I was in St. Petersburg, Russia, to co–chair an international conference on non–Einsteinian space–time. I speak Russian with a thick foreign accent, but fluently, and spoke to many people, though mostly scientists. . . . Last time I was in Leningrad was in the summer of 1960, 31 years ago. . . .

I am interviewed by Smena (Shift), a newspaper for the young. It is “independent,” meaning without government subsidies, financed by shareholders, income mostly from advertising. The reporter is 17 years old, but highly intelligent. . . . He came to interview me about Einstein, but he does not know much physics, and talk about the journal I publish, Galilean Electrodynamics, turns to Access to Energy, which fascinates him. I explain about defending science against the Luddites, about the Greens and their real agenda.

“But what’s wrong with clean air and fresh water?” he objects.

“Nothing," I answer. “And what is wrong with world peace, brotherhood among the nations, and ending exploitation of man by his fellow man?”

He looks at me and now his jaw drops. Then I feel something click in this 17–year old brain. . . .

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.