Yes, I believe that people on both the left and the right are far too loose with accusations like "fascist" and "socialist" and "traitor" and "commie". Probably because it's patently obvious that most of the time the people using the words have no idea what they mean. It's quite plain that people who accuse Obama of being a liberal have no idea what a liberal is. To many on the right, the definition of a "liberal" is one or all of the following:
>an enemy of the United States
> someone who doesn't love America
> a person who harbors traitorous sentiment
The most dangerous part of this is that we ALL become desensitized. Like the cautionary tale The Boy Who Cried Wolf, many Americans have become attuned to dismissing such people as crackpots and nutters.
I've indulged in the same kind of dismissive behavior esp. when I read inflammatory words like "Jewish Banking Conspiracy" or "Kenyan Traitor" or even when some sad or traumatized soul explains that the 9/11 attacks were a hoax accomplished with the use of holograms. My mind shuts off. I move on to another news or op piece that's a wee bit more - dare I say? - authoritative.
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and waving a cross." (Source unknown).
Yet...what about instances of "evil" so extensive that it almost HAS TO BE dismissed as paranoia, the figment of a disturbed mind? (Please note, I say "evil" in quotes because I don't believe in a little red guy with a pitchfork sitting on someone's shoulder).
I refer to evil in a secular sense. Evil as in those destroying the earth to make unimaginable amounts of money. Those who pour vast resources into buying politicians to finance wars paid for on the backs of the poor, old and disabled.
Consider the House's plan which will result in a 20% reduction to Social Security Disability by 2016. I'm sure they've justified it in their reptilian brains by telling themselves that cutting off that money will guarantee "success" for the permanently disabled by forcing them onto the street to beg. Surely, that's better than allowing them to keep receiving "welfare"?
I've yet to have explained to me why anyone who makes good money as a teacher, lawyer, nurse, or FedEx courier, would forfeit a paycheck (and their self-esteem) to live like a pauper while facing the scorn and shame we heap upon the poor and unemployed. Is it soley masochists who receive entitlements? It seems like a rotten trade to me! Especially the loss to one's dignity. How does one put a price tag on that?
If such cuts result in a few hundred thousand deaths from suicide, malnutrition, sickness or or whatever, that's a win/win, right? After all, they don't "contribute" to the system. (Conservative-speak for those on the dole: parasites & moochers). The deaths would translate into several hundred thousand less "moochers" on freebies. (The Republicans are able to, as the old song goes, ACcentuate the positive! Who knew?)
Such legislation is championed by the 1%, many of whom have never had to work a day in their lives. (And, going by their lack of accomplishments, still don't feel the need...to work, that is.)
Has anyone kept a tally of how many times the damned Food Stamps Program (SNAP) has been slashed? It's been cut so many times in the past 3 years that I've lost count.
Let me put some meat on these bones by stealing someone else's research:
"In 2012, the average American taxpayer making $50,000 per year paid just $36 (that's annually) towards the food stamps program.
"That's just ten cents a day!
"That's less than the cost of a gumball!"
(see: http://truth-out.org/...)
If the SNAP program ended tomorrow, the savings to the American taxpayer would be so small that it would pass unheeded.
Critical to the recipient, while not a burden to the taxpayer. If it isn't broken, why fix it? WHY, I ask, is cutting this essential program so popular with Americans, many of whom identify as Christians? (Aren't they supposed to feed the poor and comfort the afflicted?)
In New England, where I live, the winters are becoming increasingly harsh. Simultaneously, the cost of fuel to heat one's home keeps rising. However, the Fuel Assistance budget has not been adjusted to reflect the rise of heating fuel since the 90's, at least. This puts the poor, elderly and disabled in the untenable position of having to choose between eating & heating. How is this acceptable in a country with such wealth?
Not to mention the indigent mentally ill that are now warehoused in jails & prisons, which are not equipped to provide mental health care. There are seriously mentally ill people on death row awaiting execution, too. That doesn't bother the majority of Americans who don't see the ethical problem in executing someone who was so psychotic s/he didn't realize the life of another human being was being taken.
Meanwhile, I'm reading that John Boehner plans to embark on ANOTHER expensive witch hunt, this time focused on Hillary Clinton's emails. I'm truly at a loss to understand how this can be justified in the eyes of the voters when our own CITIZENS don't have enough to eat and can't afford to keep warm! Allow me to point out that the law that Hillary allegedly violated wasn't passed until 2014, two years AFTER she left office. That won't stop the Republicans; they smell blood in the water.
Back to my original premise, which was to say that certain terms have been so overused that they almost lack meaning. One such term is "fascist". But fascism has a real, historical context. And there is a definintion, which, unfortunately too many Americans don't research or comprehend.
Fourteen Defining Characteristics Of Fascism
By Lawrence W. Britt
>Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
>Disdain for human rights (The poor and those on benefits)
>Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause (the poor and unemployed)
>Supremacy of the Military
>Rampant Sexism
>Controlled Mass Media (Wholly owned and operated by Corporations now)
>Obsession with National Security - FEAR used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses
>Religion and Government Intertwined (Think "religious freedom" laws being passed which will legitimize discrimination against LGBT's on the basis of religious beliefs, or the Hobby Lobby case)
>Corporate Power protected (Think Citizens United, for one!)
> Labor Power is Suppressed (Union busting)
>Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts (No comment needed here)
>Obsession with Crime and Punishment (Consider the US incarceration rate vs. the rest of the modern world. Or the public demand for capital punishment when a defendant is unpopular)
>Rampant Cronyism and Corruption (Bush/Cheney)
>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 (GERRYMANDERING) or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media.
original cite: Fascism Anyone? bv Laurence W. Britt, originally appeared in 2004 in Free Inquiry magazine, Volume 23, Number 2, archived at http://www.secularhumanism.org/...
thanks Jon!
also see: an essay by Chip Berlet, September, 1992:
>Nationalism and super-patriotism with a sense of historic mission.
>Aggressive militarism even to the extent of glorifying war as good for the national or individual spirit. (No comment needed)
>Use of violence or threats of violence to impose views on others (NRA extemists)
>Authoritarian reliance on a leader or elite not constitutionally responsible to an electorate. (Corporatism)
>Cult of personality around a charismatic leader.
>Reaction against the values of Modernism, usually with emotional attacks against both liberalism and communism. (Italics mine)
>Exhortations for the homogeneous masses of common folk (Volkish in German, Populist in the U.S.) to join voluntarily in a heroic mission--often metaphysical and romanticized in character. (Tea Party, for example)
>Dehumanization and scapegoating of the enemy--seeing the enemy as an inferior or subhuman force, perhaps involved in a conspiracy that justifies eradicating them. (Muslims, the implication the Palestinians should be obliterated with nukes)
>The self image of being a superior form of social organization beyond socialism, capitalism and democracy. (no comment)
>Elements of national socialist ideological roots, for example, ostensible support for the industrial working class or farmers; but ultimately, the forging of an alliance with an elite sector of society. (italics mine)
>Abandonment of any consistent ideology in a drive for state power.
"This article is adapted from the author's preface to Russ Bellant's book Old Nazis, the New Right, and the Republican Party, co-published by South End Press and Political Research Associates."
http://www.publiceye.org/...
Fascism cannot be fought with one's head in the sand and one's ass in the air. Pretending it isn't so doesn't accomplish anything. I doubt that even many Republicans would want this for the US. America is in a crisis. But how do we make Americans aware of what's happening? Of two major political parties, one is under the control of religious extremists who believe it is their mission to bring on the end times. People so concerned about the remote possibility of Iran attacking the US seem oblivious to the real dangers happening right under our noses.
We are stuck with this corruption because 60% of the electorate can't be bothered to get off their duffs to spend a brief part of their day voting.
IMHO, the most insidious part of the far-right agenda is convincing Americans that government is some alien, amorphous, malignant creature, while the free market is the answer to all of our problems.
How have we forgotten that government means we, the people?
Government is our neighbors, our friends, our lovers, our spouses, our kids, our parents. If we don't like what goes on, we need only vote to change it. Or, we can run for office and get involved personally. Public service is about service to all. It's about putting oneself last and putting the good of the community first. That's anathema to those who believe that the individual is everything. Altruism is for chumps. If it doesn't enrich them, it's not worth the effort.
What about the free market? Corporations are not accountable to the voter, but to the shareholders. The main concern is profit. If you don't like the prices/rates, your only option is to hope there is competition. In many cases, you are out of luck. Utilities now control the boards that were set up to protect consumers. That was the purpose of deregulation. Ronald Reagan set out "to get government off the backs" of business. (Translation: First dilute, then end, consumer protection).
I don't pretend to know the answers, nor do I know how to turn back the clock. I can't recall any nation that courted fascism and came out unscathed. We need a strategy. And soon.
Thu Mar 19, 2015 at 6:06 AM PT: Thanks to JON SITZMAN for helping me to parse out the question of Lawrence Britt's academic background. His 14 Characteristics of Fascism have been cited to ad nauseum without concern for his academic credentials - or lack thereof. While I was able to track down the original cite to this list, I could not confirm that he had a doctorate or any other scholarly qualifications.