RE: Fascism
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
A very good read, about increasingly important policies. I have read but little on Mussolini, but have read that he said that Fascism was corporatism, where private corporations are able to participate in the governance and implementing policy decisions of the state it has also participated in formulating. I see that such corporatism is not only evident in the US - although it certainly is evident - but across the West as public/private partnerships, that core aspect of Fascism as I have heretofore understood it. Not just the West, but across Asia, S. America, and Australia and NZ.
The discussion on Morning Joe I can not comment on, as I am unfamiliar with these laws and their practice in the past. However, by nature I am aligned with Democratic checks on government, Judiciary and Executive, a Lockean to the core, because I am born, as are we all, with the exclusive authority over me to will myself to action, to think as I reckon right, and the state does not exist without an agreement of sovereigns whom have the right to rule themselves to agree to rule themselves by such mechanisms they prefer to institute in a state. I would on that basis refute Gentile's philosophies, and further disavow them as referent to Nationalism. It is the nation from which that political form derives - not a state or polity - but a people bound by common culture and ethnic heritage. Thus, again, it is the people that are the author of Nationalist states, and this does not convince me that it is the whole of the people that has rights, but rather that it is still the individual whom is born with rights and sole authority. I see Nationalism as governance in order to protect and advance a people, rather than merely a polity or jurisdiction, and frankly find that a far more palatable purpose.
However, you have raised issues I have not previously associated as defining of Fascism, and Gentile asserts them regarding Nationalism as well. I see that despite the frequent assertions in the Constitution that government is dependent on the will and reckoning of the people, in practice and cumulatively, the power of institutions and government in particular becomes inconvenient and even unassailable to democratic control, judicial restraint, or reason at all. Many bloody excesses of governmental power have resulted in claims of authority that conform neither to individual sovereignty, nor any particular constitutional institution, but simply became possible to ambitious men who took that power they could.
Certainly, for Trump to claim he could literally do anything he wants because he's President isn't even Fascism, but totalitarian Tyranny - which even Trump will not claim is the form of the Government of the United States. Even with the caveat he added 'when the country is in danger.', isn't actually in accord with Republican democratic government. I reckon Trump is less than precise with the particulars of his speech, rather often aiming vaguely at something he reckons is commonly understood, such as that on the battlefield a Commander in Chief gives orders to his military with no judicial nor democratic check, due to the nature of war. Even with the rhetoric about Antifa committing terrorist acts, he designating it a terrorist group, and the overly dramatic characterization of Portland being in a state of war, I don't think he means to wage war with military force as is being waged in the Ukraine. I think he seizes such power to effect such goals as seems meet to him (or his masters) because he can, not because he formally reckons with the political structure and has determined the definition of these things to have been met.
I don't doubt Trump is a Tyrant, and is implementing Fascist public/private partnerships, but that these aren't because of political definitions, rather because they are possible to gain power he desires to effect his ends, and doesn't doubt but that he is doing what he must to preserve 'liberty' and the sovereignty of Americans. He doesn't doubt it because he's given it careful thought, but because he's a Narcissist and doesn't reckon he has to. He's just always right. I don't think he has very precise definitions regarding those things, and doesn't give it much thought. There's a way he can get the things done he wants to do, and whatever claims or however he has to define the words he uses to get the power to do them is what he's going to do, what he reckons right to do. It is rather his being hell bent on a totalitarian surveillance state, in deploying digital currencies to force behaviours he wants, or is told to want, that I think Trump's true politics are revealed. He's not a Republican, a Democrat, nor even a Fascist, or Nationalist. He's a Tyrant.
Thanks!
Edit: I see that Trump is ushering in a global technocratic totalitarian tyranny, as are all their masters' minions, from Putin to Milei.
It is gratifying to read such an expansive, thoughtful reply. I spent a lot of time researching this. My hope was that it would shed some light on the discussion, clarify the issues that are surrounding what is happening to my country. I try very hard not to cast aspersions, not to level charges, because I always want to engage in reasoned discourse that will offend few. I don't want to lose my audience before that audience has had a chance to read my words and consider my information.
I like facts. When dealing with history it's hard to state true, absolute facts, because there is always disagreement about what actually happened, what someone actually said. That's why I like to quote the people, not the people who quote the people.
Thank you for engaging. Thank you for the points you make. I hope other people read the comments and consider everything that is being said. We have to hope more people understand what is happening in our country and more people want to prevent this from going further.
I recommend taking a bird's eye view of the world, because what is happening here is not happening in isolation. IMHO a global technocratic totalitarian tyranny is being imposed today. There are voluminous sources in which this globalist venture is advocated and supported by members of the various institutions (the WEF, UN, EU, Trilateral Commission, CFR, Bilderberg, Club of Rome, BRICs, ASEAN, OAS, etc.) that are working towards that goal. There are also a variety of secret societies, or those with obfuscated agendae, such as Skull and Bones, Masons, Rosicrucians, and many more, which all seem to be also intent on such development, from such historical record and whistleblowers as are available.
The extant polities of the world each have a unique set of features, strengths, and weaknesses that must be reckoned by them intent on incorporating all jurisdictions into their empire. Each polity is therefore being affected differently, in order to coordinate temporally in all of them the required conditions for incorporation within the whole. When these polities crash early, the risk of fresh, new institutions arising without the mature infestation of corruption that is the covert hand of the globalists, creates regional islands of resistance to the global conquest, and too many of them will prevent it from succeeding.
I completely agree with your appreciation for facts as opposed to opinions. Everyone forms their opinions, but few drill down to the factual foundation in order to form them. My grasp of Fascism exemplifies this, as my familiarity with Gentile was minimal, and my entire understanding, my opinion, was based on the one fact I knew, and the supporting opinions I read.
I have the opinion that a particular fact I am aware of is central to your expressed interest and concern. It is the lifespan of political institutions. Sir John Bagot Glubb wrote The Fate of Empire and Search for Survival ~20 pages discussing his research across 5000 years of history that revealed polities endure ~250 years. Imperial polities, at least. Historical evidence of lesser jurisdictions isn't well preserved over such scales. We may agree that the USA is an empire, and that it is today 249 years old.
The historical record suggests that the reason for the lifespan of polities is both ubiquitous and inexorable. Regardless of the form of institution government takes, regardless of the brilliance of it's statesmen or their courage and ambition, all senesce and die in about 10 generations.
Because of this I suspect there isn't much point in attempting to prevent it. But, that means there is enormous potential and reason to shape what comes after it. I personally understand the Lockean basis for human rights and how that pertains to political organization and power, which opposes me viscerally to tyranny. Further, additional research into imperial collapse and it's consequences in the Americas suggests that there is an inverse relationship to institutional political power and societal comity.
--https://peakd.com/life/@valued-customer/digital-id-and-hive in comment chain
Because we have almost no historical record from American civilization, we have acquired such information via the archaeological record, which unlike history is factually demonstrable.
Polities are created to defend civilization, to support a given culture and people whose enjoyment of civil society is challenged by intrasocietal and intersocietal competition, amongst other things. My observation is that relatively egalitarian cultures in which political institutions are less consequential, such as the Scythians, endure and maintain civil society best, while the more powerful political institutions become, the weaker and less durable civil society is, such that collapse of great empires is occasioned by genocidal population decline and loss of culture.
Because I also observe the sudden emergence of decentralization of means of production as the cutting edge of tech advance across every field of industry, I see that humanity is transcending a clinal boundary that deprecates centralization, and will eschew powerful institutions as a result. By preventing the successful imposition of a global technocratic totalitarian tyranny, I believe we will avoid centuries of suffering and create a free society of inconceivable prosperity with a decentralized economy with the most advanced technology.
This is what I seek to enable my local community to do, and what preventing America from being incorporated into, or incorporating, a global tyranny also will do. But simply preventing a global tyranny will not enable civil society to enjoy prosperity and endure, if communities are overpowered by institutions and polities. That requires employing decentralized means of production and decentralizing economic power, supporting merit and avoiding dependence on centralized institutions. Dark triad Machiavellian ambition requires powerful centralized institutions, while preventing subjugation to overlords will best be achieved by decentralization and production of the blessings of civilization such as food, fuel, power, and comms locally so that famine and shortages can't extort populations. Robust civil society must decentralize economic power, so it is dispersed and not concentrated in institutions that aggrandize ambition.