The United States is not Fascist

[seemslikeadream]

Our Memorial Day collision course with fascism: Donald Trump and the new American militarism
It's not that Trump himself is a fascist, but he's a sign that we are more vulnerable to it than we ever imagined
DAVID NIOSE


The rise of Donald Trump as a presidential contender has been accompanied with dire warnings of a coming fascist tide. In both his style and substance—belligerence toward opponents, policy proposals aimed at specific religious and ethnic groups, constant appeals to making the nation great again—Trump makes it easy for pundits to draw analogies to historical fascists.

A Trump presidency would undoubtedly mean difficulty for certain minorities, Muslims and Mexicans being obvious examples, but few observers honestly believe that it would bring about a fascist nightmare, with a complete loss of civil liberties, for most of the general public. Experts point out that the conditions for the rise of real fascism—most notably a devastating economic collapse and political upheaval—are absent in America today, making warnings of a lurch to fascism somewhat exaggerated.

That said, Trump is a new phenomenon in American politics, one that arguably creeps closer to the fringes of fascism than anything preceding it. What should concern Americans is not the possibility that Trump is an American Hitler or Mussolini, but that he is a continuation of a rightward trajectory that the country has been following for decades. His election would be strong evidence that America is vulnerable to demagogic and fascistic tendencies, and that given the right conditions—a catastrophic economic breakdown, for example, perhaps combined with a military humiliation at the hands of China or Russia—a real fascist turn would be conceivable.

This raises the question of what keeps American society on this precarious trajectory, making it susceptible to fascist appeals. There have been numerous causal factors at work in setting this dangerous course, but for those who wish to defuse a potential fascist time bomb there is one element that stands out as most significant: America’s embrace and glorification of militarism.

The United States is by far the most powerful military force the world has ever seen, with land, air and sea forces extending around the globe. At about $600 billion, the nation’s military budget is almost 40 percent of the entire globe’s military spending, an outrageous amount that, even more stunningly, is rarely questioned by the public, the media, or any politician on either side of the aisle. This militarism permeates the culture in countless ways and ultimately leaves the nation at risk of a slide toward fascism, should the right conditions arise.

Fascism needs militarism, not just for its brute force (though that’s part of it) but for its emphasis on sacrificing individualism for the sake of the state. It’s hard to imagine the Nazi rise in Germany, for example, without that country’s deep-rooted martial tradition, particularly Prussian militarism, as a foundational element. Even in Italy, which had no similar tradition of militarism, Mussolini’s power was secured by force and accompanied by militaristic policies and actions that were uncharacteristic of Italy historically.

By its nature, militarism encourages other tendencies that create a fertile environment for fascism. Militarism and nationalism invigorate one another, for example, so it’s no surprise that American culture incessantly affirms notions of patriotism and national greatness. These themes are reflected throughout the culture, in advertising, sporting events, and virtually any public function, where patriotic references and the associated military pageantry are rarely missing. Such actions are usually assumed to be benign—what could be wrong with love of country, right?—but they invariably solidify the importance of militarism as a cultural value.

Even more insidious is the way that nationalism is instilled into young psyches via the daily school ritual of pledging allegiance. The fact that Americans take the pledge exercise for granted is only proof of the effectiveness of the psychological conditioning underlying it, for no other developed country expects daily pledges of national loyalty from its youth. Again, Americans tend to see it as a harmless expression of values—liberty and justice for all—when in reality such persistent patriotic exercises are encouraging an obedient, nationalistic population.

Magnifying the problem is the fact that America defines patriotism by using theistic elements, creating a sense that the nation is doing God’s work. Thus, children pledge that we are “one nation under God,” and the national motto is now “In God We Trust.” These divine patriotic references, both adopted in the early years of the Cold War, would please anyone seeking to create conditions ripe for fascism. The best defense against fascism is an intelligent, educated, and critically thinking populace that is engaged in participatory democracy. This is not what we get when we have a hyper-patriotic nation that believes God is on its side.

In considering how American militarism pushes the nation in a dangerously fascistic direction, we need not debate whether the country’s militarism serves benevolent or malevolent ends. It is the militarism itself, regardless of the country’s historical righteousness or current good intentions, that provides a foundation for the eventual support of fascism. From there, all that is needed are the right conditions—severe economic strife, ethnic groups to vilify, perceived enemies to fear, and political chaos—and a perfect fascist storm could arise. The final entrance of a demagogic character, whether Trump or someone else, is an incidental detail.

As such, we shouldn’t be swayed when the Pentagon goes to great lengths to portray our military as synonymous with all that is good. It’s rare for a television news cycle to pass, for example, without a story of a returning soldier surprising his or her child by showing up unexpectedly at school or at a sports event. The television cameras are rolling as the parent, usually in military fatigues, embraces the surprised child in a joyous reunion, a carefully choreographed moment brought to us by Defense Department publicity experts who realized long ago the propaganda value of such heartwarming moments.

As this suggests, the corporate media, like the corporate sector in general, are complicit in the sale of militarism to the American people. Some corporations glorify the military because they directly benefit from the country’s outlandish military spending, whereas others do so simply because expressions of patriotism are good for business. Giving veterans and military personnel special discounts, or perhaps letting them board airliners first, are gestures that cost little but portray companies as good corporate citizens. However, as I pointed out in my book Fighting Back the Right, corporations have no national loyalty and consistently put their own interests above any nation’s, as their executives readily admit, but they will always play the patriotism card when it is to their advantage.

With military might perceived as innately American and thus exalted within the culture, we are quick to see war as a solution rather than a problem, as was the case in 2003 when the nation rushed to a senseless and indefensible war in Iraq, and as we see now with Barack Obama becoming the first president ever to be at war for two complete terms in office. Militarism has made the United States a nation of permanent war.

We have gone in this direction because there are many powerful interests that desire it. That enormous military budget is a corporate trough, funneling billions of dollars to the institutions that really own and control the country. These military contractors—Lockheed, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and countless others—don’t necessarily want fascism, but they want militarism and they do all they can to ensure that it continues. Even the Pentagon’s enormous budget isn’t enough for them, as they also profit greatly from America’s massive foreign military aid, much of which is appropriated outside of the Defense Department budget, that makes countries around the world their customers.

With the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, one might have thought that the United States would embark on an agenda that emphasized butter over guns, but that’s not what happened. Instead, we expanded NATO up to the Russian doorstep and did little to tone down our culture of militarism. If there was any hope that we might eventually demilitarize somewhat, the events of September 11 left no doubt that fighting enemies would be a defining characteristic of American society for many years to come.

Knowing all this, the accurate view of Trump is not that he is fascism incarnate, but that he is the latest step on a troubling rightward path that America has been following for decades. That path has been cut with values—nationalism, acceptance of authority, anti-intellectualism, chauvinism, conformity—that are encouraged by a culture that glorifies militarism. If you’re worried about a fascist turn in America—and you should be—look beyond Trump to the expansive and unquestioned militarism that nurtures fascistic tendencies.

[NeonLX]

^^^^^That's a good article. It list things I don't identify with: nationalism, acceptance of authority, anti-intellectualism, chauvinism, and conformity.

I used to get beat up routinely at school for not showing "school spirit". Pep rallies bored the mortal shit out of me and the only reason I went to football games was because I played the sax in the marching band.

[coffin_dodger]

I sort of admire the tenacity and hedging of your position, AD - it's a smart play. By not adressing the Chessmasters - always the pawns - it allows you the luxury of proclaiming 'See! I told you so!' should overt Fascism become the norm in the US. To my mind, it already has - minus the anti-semetism, of course - but to your mind Fascism is anti-semetism. You are missing every other indicator. The surveillance. The fear of saying the wrong thing and being cast out as undesirable (of which you, personally, are by far the greatest instigator of, here at RI). The military might. The corporatism. The cronyism. There is more.

The latest crop of Chessmasters appear, opaquely, rather impressed by Fascism in the 30's. What it moved the German people to achieve. How things were ordered. What could be achieved within it's boundaries.
Scares the living crap out of me, but whatever will be, will be.

The consistant linking to stories of powerless but threatening numbskulls is not going to stop what is already well established - and it strikes me as fearmongering, taken to it's logical conclusion. But fearmongering in service of what, exactly, when most of the conditions have already been met?

I find your mindset fascinating - and somewhat irresistable to witness.

[American Dream]

By not adressing the Chessmasters.

What the hell does this even mean?

[seemslikeadream]

By not adressing the Chessmasters - always the pawns

[American Dream]

Be specific, y'all...

[seemslikeadream]

A South politician preaches to the poor white man
“You got more than the blacks, don’t complain.
You’re better than them, you been born with white skin,” they explain.
And the Negro’s name
Is used it is plain
For the politician’s gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain’t him to blame
He’s only a pawn in their game

The deputy sheriffs, the soldiers, the governors get paid
And the marshals and cops get the same
But the poor white man’s used in the hands of them all like a tool
He’s taught in his school
From the start by the rule
That the laws are with him
To protect his white skin
To keep up his hate
So he never thinks straight
’Bout the shape that he’s in
But it ain’t him to blame
He’s only a pawn in their game

[American Dream]

Neoliberal Europe and the far right: two sides of the same coin



OF NEOLIBERALS AND CANNIBALS

The contemporary far right has modern causes, novel features and wide popularity, meaning that historical comparisons with the fascist and Nazist movements of the past are only partly helpful. Overall, the far right emerges as a side effect of the negative economic externalities of capitalist globalization. Large populations view the far right as a mode of political refuge against society’s race to the bottom, caused by increased competition in a globalized economy.

The rise of the extreme right also corresponds to the destabilization of societal structures by financial markets, starting from states and businesses and reaching all the way down to communities and families. Through the nostalgic return to an imaginary community or nation, the far-right proposal offers cohesive substance for societies in disintegration, something that is missing from the impersonal institutions of financial markets and the weak community of money.

The pseudo-communal proposal of the right enjoys significant popularity among various social groups, including the European middle classes, which have suffered extensive alienation and individualization by market forces and which were gradually stripped off the social ties of their past. Hence, where the neoliberal war of all against all has forced societies into a form of cannibalism, the far right promises a return to community. The problem, of course, is that in the fascist community cannibalism does not cease but becomes vertically integrated.

The turn of the masses to the extreme right is a favorable development for the ruling classes. Far-right ideologies are based on a simplistic Manichean friend-foe worldview, which makes the minds of believers extremely easy to manipulate. Ultra-right ideologies are therefore already exploited by European elites to channel social frustrations about the negative externalities of neoliberal domination against various scapegoats, chiefly the most vulnerable social groups and the “dangerous classes”.

In the Middle Ages, the Church was the main source of domination and torment, yet the “witches” were finally torched. Under today’s dualisms of the extreme right, those who hold social power can easily escape from social anger over inequality by fomenting fear towards social diversity. The political proposal of the extreme right is also a unique opportunity to help elites re-legitimize national political institutions while leaving intact the root causes of their current delegitimization.

In the past, Roman rulers appeased the participants in major social upheavals by giving spectacles to their people. Nowadays, political forces can push forward with the neoliberal project through the iron fist of nation states and, at the same time, temporarily delay the rapid rate at representative institutions are decomposing by aggressively investing in nationalist and xenophobic ideologies.

MEET MY TECHNOCRATS

The progressive proposal to overcome the crisis of global capitalism bears a certain cost for individuals, as it requires personal mobilization and participation in the construction of alternative social relations from the bottom-up. Such a proposal contests the dominant relations of neoliberal capitalism. On the contrary, the political proposal of the extreme right works in complementary interrelation with the neoliberal project. This makes it applicable at the micro- and macro-social levels without the need to subvert established hierarchies and countervail dominant social forces.

While in the neoliberal worldview the relation between the individual and society is confined to the impersonal institution of financial markets, in the ultra-right deviation such a connection is ideologically complemented by the feeling of an imagined community and a common destiny. In other words, the extreme right proposal provides a feeling of pseudo-belonging without inflicting any personal costs, and an identity based on simplistic friend-foe dichotomies, which make self-navigation easier in a complex and contradictory social reality. At the same time, its blind reliance on rigid hierarchies and a fully mediated relationship with politics renders the absolute delegation of politics to representatives and technocrats, as encountered in neoliberal meta-democracies, a seemingly natural phenomenon.

Last but not least, the concealment of social inequalities and contradictions under the abstraction of the nation relieves the person from any tendencies to come in conflict with approximating relations of domination or exploitation and, instead, masks and legitimizes them as allied to the interests of the oppressed. To sum up, in the right-wing totalitarian variation of neoliberalism, the individual still has to comply — without signs of resistance — with market sanctions and social hierarchies, but now with the additional burden of having to pretend she is not a “Jew”.

The popularity of the extreme-right proposal for society does not fall from the sky. Indeed, it is cultivated by dominant behavioral patterns and worldviews and fomented by the social ruins produced by the neoliberal project. In European societies governed by neoliberal elites, citizens are on a daily basis exposed to and trained for the transformation of human beings into means for alien ends. This condition is the ideal substrate for the familiarization with Nazism’s conversion of human beings into means towards the nationalistic ends of concentration camps and wars.

The instrumental cost-benefit logic of neoliberalism, through which all social contradictions can supposedly be reduced to pseudo-objectivist technocratic issues, becomes a powerful legitimizing weapon in the hands of the extreme right for the management of the “other” as homo sacer. The hypocritical indifference of neoliberalism towards the asymmetries of social power generated by capital and financial markets — and their exaltation as the pinnacle of human freedom — legitimizes the glorification of social hierarchy and domination, which constitute the foundation of totalitarianism.

MAKE DEMOCRACY HISTORY

The shift to the extreme right preserves the present and, nonetheless, brings new elements into the dominant system of power. At the macro-social level, the far-right project leaves the neoliberal economic model at the heart of the nation state intact. Its most important novelty, though, is the refutation of basic democratic attainments; a key tendency in the current phase of capitalism and the holy grail for neoliberal social consolidation.

In external relations with globalized markets, the far right invests in a pragmatic protectionism and tooth and claw global competition. Hence the far-right celebrates and intensifies certain aspects of capitalist globalization (competition among national economies, intensification of the exploitation of labor and of ecological destruction, transition to non-democratic regimes), while at the same time constituting a clear and present danger for other aspects of capitalist globalization, because it has an inherent tendency for the self-destruction of the societies over which it prevails.

At the micro-social level, the ultra-right tendency invests in the darkest elements of human nature, such as fear, hatred and the lust for war. Keeping in mind that any type of human society is essentially based on collaboration, the violent top-down imposition of tendencies destroying such collaboration and replacing the latter with hatred and war leads to social disintegration.

Yet, the extreme-right variation of capitalist globalization does not tend to war only within but also among societies. The orthodoxy of neoliberal competition between nation states is not confined to peaceful means. Instead, war among nations becomes the continuation of economic antagonism by other means. This fact inevitably endangers the smooth operation of markets. Hence, the extreme-right variation is always a choice for the dominant system of power, albeit an ultimum refugium for the resolution of its crises and for the preservation of capital-dominated social reproduction through cycles of creative destruction.

THE NEOLIBERAL/FASCIST INTERFACE

With the exception of the Golden Dawn party in Greece, the far right in Europe today does not build the same structures as those of the interwar period in its quest to capture the state; there are no massive paramilitarySturmabteilung groups battling opposing groups to win the streets. Indeed, the tactics of today’s far-right chiefly stick to electoral politics.

The reason for this appears to be the same reason for which the contemporary left has failed so far to reconstruct the massive workers’ movements of the past. It seems that the fragmentation of the individual’s relationship with any type of social collectivity is here to stay. This phenomenon of fragmentation cannot be easily dealt with by the left, which is reproduced upon the construction of alternative relations at the social base.

On the contrary, for the extreme right it suffices to cultivate and legitimize mentalities of delegation in order to surpass its organizational problems. After all, as Hitler realized since the night of the long knives, the inherently totalitarian nucleus of the state is much more rationalized, once power is seized, than stormtrooper groups. Therefore, and in contrast to progressive social forces, the far right’s power proposal is immediately applicable and largely compatible with the present status quo, as it simply constitutes an inflation of existing neoliberal tendencies towards social cannibalism and totalitarianism.

More at: https://roarmag.org/essays/neoliberal-e ... enophobia/

Worse Than Fascism?

By: Paul Street



Can the U.S. political system be considered 'fascist'?

Published 4 February 2015

The contemporary U.S. model is some ways worse than classic or real historical fascism in advancing tyrannical imperial and state-capitalist goals.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/opinio ... -0044.html

[Luther Blissett]

The United States is not fascist because the majority of the people are good, kind, caring, neighborly, rational, helpful, sweet, forward-thinking people.

[coffin_dodger]

The United States is not fascist because the majority of the people are good, kind, caring, neighborly, rational, helpful, sweet, forward-thinking people.

Great satire, Luther - always appreciated.

[norton ash]

The United States is as crazy as a shithouse rat. I've been listening to CNN mannequins yapping for over half an hour about whether what Trump said was wrong... and what Trump may have really meant... when he said a hispanic or muslim judge would be biased against him in assessing his fraud of a 'university'... this is really fucking nuts.

It's pre-fascist nuts. Those whom the gods would make fascist, they first make mad.

[Karmamatterz]

Knowing all this, the accurate view of Trump is not that he is fascism incarnate, but that he is the latest step on a troubling rightward path that America has been following for decades. That path has been cut with values—nationalism, acceptance of authority, anti-intellectualism, chauvinism, conformity—that are encouraged by a culture that glorifies militarism. If you’re worried about a fascist turn in America—and you should be—look beyond Trump to the expansive and unquestioned militarism that nurtures fascistic tendencies.

Thank you SLAD for the post.

We're stuck in this shit...but yet we have the Internets created (and maintained) by the military and corporations that allow us to connect on RI. Not to come off as naive....but it's pretty cool all the divergent peeps who post (and lurk) have this forum to share ideas, info and gripe about the swirly pigsty. Can't imagine many of us would have connected via postal mail or serendipitous encounters. Fascism is in so many threads it's obviously a topic many of us are repulsed by, frightened of and feel powerless about. Nonetheless we can find time to plant gardens, sip on some hops, smoke a doobie and share juicy morsels about the crazy and fascinating stuff we encounter. I should read RI more often while sipping a nice glass of double IPA.

Back to reality.....where is the bag of porkrinds and my tickets to Disney. Let's go shopping!

[chump]

Corbett interviewed Pilato recently, and they astutely pointed out that, after decades of pseudo-secrecy, The Bilderberg Conference has suddenly gone mainstream to announce their concerns for the future of our aimless middle class, otherwise now known as the "precariats":

https://youtu.be/Yp08Aw6cHts

================

http://truthstreammedia.com/2016/06/07/ ... akes-over/

The List — Bilderberg 2016: Middle Class Becomes Aimless as Tech Takes Over

(Truthstream Media) This 2016 Bilderberg Meeting will be characterized by its focus on the growing underclass of “precariats” with insecure jobs and no future in an age of A.I.

While Bilderberg handles the propaganda coup to stop Brexit from succeeding and while they discuss the ways they have of dealing with Donald Trump, there will be a topic with far greater significance for your future…

More than ever, the effects of technology is being felt, and is ready to shake the foundations that our society is built upon. That means jobs with no security, few benefits and an economy with an uncertain future.

(Please see the notes under the list and topics for further information.)

—————-

This was just released via BilderbergMeetings.org for June 7, 2016:
2016 Bilderberg Meeting – 64th Annual
9 – 12 June 2016 in Dresden, Germany
Topics

Current events
China
Europe: migration, growth, reform, vision, unity
Middle East
Russia
US political landscape, economy: growth, debt, reform
Cyber security
Geo-politics of energy and commodity prices
Precariat and middle class
Technological innovation

Participants...



... What will be most important at the 2016 discussion?

There are gigantic moves underway with regard to the price of oil and the end of the petrodollar era. The geopolitical effects are not only being played out in conflict regions like Syria, Yemen and the Ukraine, but in the headlines (as seen in the public passing of the blame between Saudi Arabia and U.S. over 9/11) and in economic sabotage seen most blatantly with Venezuela, but happening all across the globe.

The Brexit referendum would be a particularly large blow to the European Union’s credibility and image, and the Bilderberg crowd – who gave birth to the EU – have reputations and egos invested deeply in the superstate project.

But in the long-term, it is the drastic changes in the economic landscape that will cause the most instability, outrage and upheaval.

It is largely centered around the rapid pace of technological growth and the online world, and the grave implications it has for employment and living standards.

Just check out the topics Bilderberg is focusing on – United States “economy: growth, debt, reform” as well as discussion on the impact of “technological innovation” and migration to economic and social factors. Looming largest of all is the ominous topic “precariat and middle class.”

What the hell is the precariat? And why is this term important for Bilderberg or the middle class?

In the age where even the Davos elite are preoccupied with the wealth gap and the power of the 1% over the ‘revolutionary’ masses… the term “precariat” is a modern spin on the proletariat of the next era… getting by from gig-to-gig an in an economy with no clear future and uncertain job security.

Precariat via Wikipedia:

"In sociology and economics, the precariat is a social class formed by people suffering from precarity, which is a condition of existence without predictability or security, affecting material or psychological welfare. Unlike the proletariat class of industrial workers in the 20th century who lacked their own means of production and hence sold their labour to live, members of the Precariat are only partially involved in labour and must undertake extensive “unremunerated activities that are essential if they are to retain access to jobs and to decent earnings”. Specifically, it is the condition of lack of job security, including intermittent employment or underemployment and the resultant precarious existence.[1] The emergence of this class has been ascribed to the entrenchment of neoliberal capitalism.

Like the sardonic question posed by Bilderberg in 2014 – Does Privacy Exist? – the precariat is meant to poke at all the American Dream leftovers who will find themselves without direction, meaningful employment or much other hope for the coming decades of innovation under robotics and automation.

The topic is one that has been probed by Guy Standing, who is Professor of Development Studies at SOAS, University of London and has promoted the idea of basic income as a global right.

Northeastern University reported on Professor Standing’s new agenda:

Guy Standing, author of The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class, and A Precariat Charter, spoke about his new work to an overflow group of students and faculty in the Raytheon Amphitheater on February 22nd, 2016.

Standing defines the precariat as an emerging class of people facing lives of economic insecurity, moving in and out of jobs that give little meaning to their lives. As such, they develop emotions of anomie, anxiety, alienation, and anger. The precariat is a “dangerous class” because it is internally divided, including college graduates without career prospects, adjuncts and other involuntary part-time workers, migrants and other vulnerable groups that tend to be vilified, as well as what Standing called “atavists” and “nostalgics”. Lacking agency, its members may be susceptible to the calls of political extremism.

What will happen to people when millions can no longer find work? Who will support their cost of living and what will justify their place in society?

How will a dead broke government pay for all its dependents in the larger collectivist society? Global government shall apparently aim to provide…

In considering these questions, please also note the presence of David M. Cote, the Chairman and CEO of Honeywell (a major defense contractor) who has not previous shown up on any Bilderberg attendee rosters.

He is almost certainly in Dresden to give a special presentation on: US political landscape, economy: growth, debt, reform.

How will financial futures be dealt with in the face of bankrupt and bloated obligations for benefits? How can governments pay for all those people to retire, have health care and live decent lives?

David M. Cote is there to give an answer bankers can believe in.

David M. Cote is an expert on financial “risk” who is known for losing $2 billion in derivatives while at JP Morgan Chase, who served on the NY Federal Reserve board and who was appointed by President Obama to a key committee on debt wherein Cote has recommended cutting social benefits in order to reduce the budget deficit.

According to the Union Leader:

In 2010, President Barack Obama named Cote to serve on the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, more commonly known as the Simpson-Bowles Commission.

Cote said he [….] discuss[ed] reigning in federal entitlement programs as part of an overall effort to curb budget deficits and reduce the federal debt.
..
“By and large, a majority of politicians understand the problem,” he said. “It’s a lack of political will out of fear their decision will be used against them.”

[…]
Cote is a co-founder of Fix the Debt, a group of executives and former legislators who campaign for deficit reduction and tax reform. In a 2013 interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader, Cote […] framed the options for deficit reduction in terms of either increases in taxes or a reduction in social security benefits, saying, “If you have people saying, ‘Don’t raise my taxes, but don’t cut my benefits,’ it makes it really difficult to get anything done.”

The rapidly aging baby boomers have created a giant problem for taxes and debt. But there are even more important factors on the horizon.

While dealing with these issues is clearly important, and the prospect of cutting benefits might even sit well with many conservatives, keep in mind that Bilderberg is operating in the shadows, and creating a solution for the elite.

These insider titans stand to prosper through the management of pension funds and their investment in derivatives and other vehicles, through increased profits in health care and through the management of a society that has become entirely dependent upon social welfare and benefits just to get by.

In the wake of continuing technological revolution, human labor has officially been discounted, rendered obsolete and has become secondary in usefulness only. The effects of that truth are about to widely felt.

The bureaucrats know it. The banksters know it. The executives know it. The Silicon Valley elite know it.

And here they are, gathered round the table to discuss how to handle the public relations problem of a society about to tear into pieces, or become completely under the thumb. What happens then?

#Bilderbergwherethejobsat

[American Dream]

Even the ruling class which demands profit for the owners of production must also ensure that the System is itself sustainable. Since we are not abject slaves, people can and do push back in defense of their interests. Thus PR minded elites, can argue for reforms which ultimately benefit them and then loudly proclaim their beneficence. Many sectors of the bourgeoisie do not want or need the race to the very bottom which pure rule by market forces would entail.

Andre Gorz famously spoke of "non-reformist reforms". We do need those, but I highly doubt that is what the Bilderberg Group is offering.

[American Dream]

An Elastic Term

Fascism itself is a famously elastic term, often a scare word, or simply inflammatory “red meat” for all sides of the political spectrum.

It is true of course that anyone who has read about the menacing radio broadcasts of Father Coughlin in the 1930s knows that the United States is hardly immune to the poison of fascism, and there are currently a few parties in Europe of a neo-Nazi character (Golden Dawn). Moreover, it is natural to respond to new explosions of vile reaction based on what we think we have learned from earlier ones; nobody wants to trip over the same rock twice.

Yet brandishing the name “Nazi” in a reckless and incendiary manner is no solution. Neo-conservatives in the United States parse “Islamofascism” through mental structures governed by Munich and Pearl Harbor; should the Left now imitate them by explaining the Right-wing populist Donald Trump and Tea Party from an eighty-year-old vantage point?

This was a remarkably distinctive time from our own. Back then, the rule of industrial capitalism could only be maintained by mass terror in Germany; Communists controlled a huge country, the Soviet Union, and were on the offensive in the millions; and the appeal of Nazi political principles and culture to its middle class base was that Hitler projected a futuristic new world run by a race of supermen.

Do we really need to pull our volumes of Thucydides off the shelf to recall that passions overriding lack of careful thought lead to bad outcomes? Things today must surely be called by their correct names, including ugly ones, but a serious calibration of the social basis of political forces amassing on the Right, their ideology, and presently-existing structural determinations are what should govern terminology; not just rage and disgust at the bigotries of Right-wing populism and religious fundamentalism.

http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/2755-fa ... -and-blood