The Dangerous Allure of Fascist Government

I think this is a very well done piece. The common traits list scared me a little because it shows just how far we have slide toward fascism. I do not think we need to have a perennial leader to have fascism either. an oligarchical system would work just as well (the polit beuro worked great for totalitarianism in the USSR). The Republican party in the last 35 years (since Nixon) has exemplified such traits as listed above in greater amounts. Today, those traits are starting to leak into Democratic politicians as well but in more of a "we better go along with it" way at the moment.

Libertarianism is the only way forward I think, and we can easily move toward a Libertarian left and right for our political debates. Right now we are in the authoritarian left and right(though the left is a weak excuse for a left wing because most of the Democrats are kind of conservative)

I think it will take the creation of a new nation with a new founding document to really make the kind of changes we need. removal of all people who see authoritarianism of any stripe is also required... ship them off to Guam or soemting.

The Republican party in the last 35 years (since Nixon) has exemplified such traits as listed above in greater amounts. Today, those traits are starting to leak into Democratic politicians as well but in more of a "we better go along with it" way at the moment.

I think it should read Has perfected such traits, not exemplified them. In the USSR everyone knew they were being watched and their media was censored. They could only dream of getting their own people to censor themselves as happens in the west these days and particularly in America.

Libertarianism is the only way forward I think, and we can easily move toward a Libertarian left and right for our political debates.

This is the hidden agenda of this post I think. It leaves no other options. Libertarianism is not for everyone and we have plenty of examples of insane libertarianism happening right before our eyes. Libertarian Right is corporatization. Libertarian left is Anarchy. Where do you draw the line here. At what point do you say, "You dont have the right to impose your will on me" when do you make a law. Take censorship as an example. Do we have a rating system. or not. Who should see XXX rated films. Anyone? Why rate them at all, is this an attack on your freedom or the state protecting its citizens from harm. I see your libertarian future as a divided society fueled by ideology. When you have a country where 51% of the population believes the Devil is real,. and the best part of the other 49% believe it is their constitutional right to be fundamentalist Idiots, do you really think that more freedom is the solution. I seriously doubt it. Americans dont deserve the freedom they have got. They have abused it used it and corrupted it. They can not be trusted to think for themselves or make informed decisions about their own future and the future of their children. The existence of the suburban housing estate is all the proof of this you need to show this, but the more recent phenomena of sexualizing children because they are the only market not exploited is another perfect example.

I think it will take the creation of a new nation with a new founding document to really make the kind of changes we need.

The changes a country with the population size of the US needs a government that can govern. A working health care system I mean the list is huge. A good start would be to nationalize all public utilities and at least 50% of the major news networks. Then ban all private funding of any kind to these groups and keep a close check on the wages and bank accounts of those working there. Begin maditory programing with manditory content. Advertising should be strictly controlled and banned for children under say 14. The news services will be structure to provide information to the public and the electorate, and not be used for titillation or advertising that is not in the interest of public knowledge. The same goes for Government. In the US libertarianism has gone insane in the gov. Start by Banning political donations. Raise all taxes based on thresholds by % of income or introduce a flat tax on everything of about 15%. Disband all executive appointments. There should never be people in representative government who are not elected. Dismantle the US voting system and replace it with some form of proportional representation. The governments primary focus should be on the health of society in all aspects the education of the public and particularly the young, this must also be free, including university and no more elitist private or religious schools that do not comply with a standard curriculum. All children should have the same education so none are disadvantaged. The two party system should be ended and a multi party system should be implemented. Independents should not be able to get elected but they should be allowed to distribute preferences. That would be a good start I think BMS.

I think you have a lot of good ideas I Spy. The health/well being of the people of the country should be priority #1. A lot of the other suggestions about removing government appointments (letting people with real expertise and not businessmen or yes-men make the decisions). I think that the ideas you are proposing sound a lot like libertarian socialism, which would be the middle path between laissez faire capitalism and communism. Buddha advocated the middle path.

I Spy, Libertarianism is the social aspect of politics. I am saying, lets move the economic debate to a libertarian framework and start from there.

Libertarian Capitalism is not corpitization, it is letting markets decide things and letting people invest their money as they see fit. It removes the protections that government gives corporations removes their person hood, and gets rid of all of those LLCs and everything else. Sole proprietorships replace public companies in many subsets of this side of thinking. By removing the uneven rights that corporate power enjoys today, it allows the legal system to actual keep these companies in check and by keeping these companies from being billion dollar hegemonic businesses, it allows normal people to protect their rights against such companies. DO I agree with all aspects of L.C... no.

Libertarian Socialism is about decentralizing the production. Rather than centralizing all economic power in the hands of the few who own capitol, spread it out over society... break down boarders and allow free movements of people which will support an open and prosperous labor market. Different groups have different thoughts about how to organize such economic systems, but they all agree that less centralized economic power is the way to go. it is less anarchy than it is coops, trade unions, etc.

Yes there are extremes on both ends, and those are not good, but the more moderate solutions from either end lead to good solutions to societal problems.

What you are asking for is simply an authoritarian solution. Authoritarianism is not a position that leads to freedom, it leads to Stalinism and Fascism/Corpratism. I do not want the political debate to be centered around such things. I want it centered on freedom, not control.

Yeah, I agree with BHS, the society needs to look at things from the "bottom up" in terms of who has the power. I have had some ideas of what a "middle ground" would look like. It is global and more or less practically borderless. It would require a clean slate. Sadly, I don't think that the spark for this fire will take place in enough people fast enough to avert suffering associated with this transitional phase of evolution (i.e., we seem to be on the brink of world war--within the next 3 years at the longest, I suspect). In the meantime, all we can do is try to lay the foundation of a new world order which will work.

Here is where I threw out some ideas about a new social contract and how to achieve it, but am refining those ideas, and will probably make a better article on NV at some point here.

I am somewhere in the mutualist camp. Libertarian socialism does not appeal to me as it does not include any room for property. I think that mutualism could be reached through a market system as well, so the transition would not require too much disruption... think of a company that makes a product and pays everyone the same amount (including the executives) and then sells their product for that price (plus the cost of the capitol). that is the ultimate goal, it is capitalist markets but the cost of items are based on the cost of the labor put into them rather than the perceived value to the person buying the product.

To get there from where we are, simply start with a completely free market and all companies pay everyone the same... then they can sell in a perceived value market but evenly distribute the profit among the workers as the profit would be considered the perceived value of their work that was not accounted for by the company. Eventually, competition will drive the perceived value to be the same as the cost of labor.

The idea that you have to choose between Libertarian Capitalism or Libertarian Socialism is wrong. there is a large spectrum of economic organization and a moderate view is going to be the most fair.

@ BMS How does your proposition work

it is letting markets decide things and letting people invest their money as they see fit.

" What can hopelessly complexifying a financing system, burying it in legal gobbledygook and wrapping it all up with government guarantees achieve? As a result, financial institutions can engage in predatory lending in residential communities, then pool the mortgages into securities and sell those securities into the retirement plans of the very people whose neighbourhoods are being destroyed. Fool the people closest to home and you can then fool investors around the globe. This is how frauds like the sub-prime mortgage mess happen....

....The absence of financial intimacy is most heartbreaking in communities. As I walk by small retail businesses, I watch a day-to-day flow of choices regarding media attention, bank deposits, purchases, donations and investments – choices which finance the very corporations and organizations that are draining jobs and income from the community. What do you say to a small business owner who is investing her savings in the stocks, bonds and CDs of the banks and corporations financing the franchises which are putting her out of business? Seeing the events emerging in our world as part of a tapestry interwoven with our personal finances and the money in institutions that we support and influence can seem overwhelming....

....My vote for the most significant cause of environmental damage on planet Earth is centralized currency systems that allows a few people to invisibly control and tax the many."

but they all agree that less centralized economic power is the way to go. it is less anarchy than it is coops, trade unions, etc.

Yes there are extremes on both ends, and those are not good, but the more moderate solutions from either end lead to good solutions to societal problems.

What you are asking for is simply an authoritarian solution.

I think I am asking for an authoritarian kick in the pants to get this sort of thing going.

We still need to address those Christian loonies. You cant have a system of this type when you are under the jackboot of a Tyranny of the Majority. These people clearly do not know what is good for them, are not properly informed and can not be relied upon to make an informed decision.

What if some idiot decided to advertise plastic Christian icons and suddenly every one wanted thousands of them. Then the whole market would be driven by this market force. Forget about going to the moon or public health we gotta get those plastic Icons to market.

You seem to be talking about a cult of individualism, rather than Libertarianism. Can you continue to refine your response BMS.

@electicblanket Thanks for that comment I think that when this type of system is fully implemented and running properly we can then let private interests compete with it including the health sector but in a country with a population the size of the US and with the degree of diversity there does need to be a strict middle path that includes all people. What I think is actually holding back the US from doing this is that they percieve that the loss of numerous personal freedoms is a loss and they dont realize that it will actually increase their personal liberty in many other way that will be more beneficial. Take gun laws for example. There is no reason for 95% of gun ownership in the US. If these weapons were removed personal liberty would be increased by the fact they could walk their dog on the beach/park without fear of being killed, and the money saved by law enforcement and the actual spending on guns would make more money available for things like daycare centers or public/community events, more parks etc etc.

Let me be clear, I am not advocating, out right, any specific economic policy, what I am saying is that we need to move from authoritarian governance to libertarian governance of our society.

In the above post, I did say that I agree more with Mutualism more than pure Socialism or pure Capitalism (under a Libertarian social framework.). Mutualism is certainly NOT individualism, and all but the most strict capitalist ideologies can be considered individualism.

If we want to be free from tyranny, we must move out of the Authoritarian framework that we are currently working in.

With regards to the masses who are so confused about what is best for them----that is exactly what the current system is based on. You have the few making the decisions for the many, with the theory that the herd needs to be controlled/manipulated into acting in the way that is best for everyone.

The problem with this is, the few at the top of this triangle have not been directing people ("the herd") to act in the right way--i.e., here in America we are trained to be good debt consumers. We have been trained to buy now and pay later (with interest). Gotta have it now, whatever it is. Eventually this massive debt will come to bite the people in the ass.

I doubt the devout "religious" people of the world who are waiting for their respective messiah(s) are going to make any major changes in their worldview until they see it as Divine Law. Yesterday, I was watching a t.v. adaptation of The Oddyssy in the background, and at one point Athena tells Odyssius' son that there are some things humans have to do for themselves. This is the crux of the problem for a lot of people.

I don't think any authoritarian kick in the ass would do anything but create a massive tension on the peoples of the world (and just like if you try to wind a guitar string too tight, it will snap). But perhaps people need tragedy to work together =/

Anyway, I'm not 100% sold on the ideas of 1.6 (BMS), but some of them might work. I really think there needs to be a much larger shift in consciousness. If it is just an "American" change, then I don't think it can work. The environmental calamaties know no borders. The suffering knows no borders. The whole world needs a new way of doing things, and I think it is going to take a pretty big shift in perception.

Thanks @BMS

@electricblanket

If it is just an "American" change, then I don't think it can work.

It has to be an American change. It is not just a matter of it needing to start somewhere, It needs to start with the worst offender. If America does not implement the change then there is no possibility of anyone else doing the same until America implodes. Once that happens then I think that type of Kick will inspire others to take this more seriously. There is no point in trying to blame China either. Even if you want to talk about pollution, they have 4 x as many people as does the US. The ball is in the US court. It is the US that must cut its energy use by 70%. If this is not done within a few years, then it will happen because of external forces. This will mean the end for the US and probably the entire west. Under those circumstances Marshall law will be the only option.

I don't think any authoritarian kick in the ass would do anything but create a massive tension on the peoples of the world (and just like if you try to wind a guitar string too tight, it will snap). But perhaps people need tragedy to work together =/

Well I have to agree here, I dont know if it would work either, but we are almost out of time.

I agree that the US has to change a lot of things about how it operates as a nation of the world. I was considering starting a thread on NV which would just be a dirty laundry list of all the "wrongs" of society, picking apart each nation's role in creating problems.

I wasn't blaming China for the pollution issue. The problems, again, are multinational.

I think that the US could certainly "lead by example" by changing voluntarily. I don't think "Martial Law" is in anyone's best interest.

It sounds like a good idea.

I was not saying you were blaming China its just a common argument I was heading off before someone took a cheap shot in that direction.

Martial law would be horrible but that is where the US is heading. There is simply not enough energy left in the world for the US to continue on its merry way. We have past the point of no return on Co2 emissions. The data that is now coming in says we were out by 20 years. The year that irreversible climate change began was 2005. The incoming data about Oil shows we peaked globally last year. So we will have supply shortages beginning before 2012. This is grim. Less than four years or its Martial law. I dont see anyone one in the US taking any of this info seriously. I dont understand why the US public was not told, but it appears the decision was made that they would not be told. But thats what happens when the economy is more important, and people are seen as 1;person = 0.38% x 1 unit of production.

Well, I agree the situation looks grim. The potential war with Iran would serve to cut off a particular sea-passage which would cut off the "west's" supply big-time. Then you have the Saudis, whose corrupt regime would backstab the US just as fast as the Bush cronies have. They are in bed together.

I think that this big cluster@!$%# of war is something that people on multiple sides are bringing about as a major depopulation scheme (whether they think of it in these terms or not).

Then we have the looming possability of "bird flu" pandemic or some other disease.

There are ~6,500,000,000 people on earth. I think that this major imbalance/overtaxation of the planet is going to be "corrected" by mother nature with disease (or perhaps with a little "help" from bio-weaponization of disease), with war (people on multiple sides seem to be bringing this about--from the hawkish hardliners in Washington all the way to Tehran).

Then, with most of the food production in the western world at least being completely contingent on fuel (not to mention the weather and land's ability to produce crops) due to the mechanization of farming. So the potential for famine exists. "Peak oil" is a concept which assumes current consumption rates--or at least projections into future use of oil depends on consistent consumption in the future based on history and current trends.

Anyhow, you get the distinct impression that the super-wealthy will not be the ones suffering---their children do not enlist in the war, their massive wealth would survive a massive deflation (particularly if they diversified multinationally)....

Anyway, when you look at the situation, and see the perilous strand humanity is hangning on by, there is a real potential for extinction of the species.

Since I believe in reincarnation and certain principles that I am expected to live up to, I feel as though my personal life is a "test" of sorts, to choose the best choices in my daily life to try to avert suffering for myself and others. But acknowledging the situation we are in is an important step in knowing what actions are "right" and "wrong."

BTW...

To correct something I said:

when I was talking about individualism, I meant to say that only the most strict versions of capitalism are truly individualist.

I think that what Behind My Screen is trying to state could rather be seen or experienced by just looking at the Country where I am from - Sweden. Or why not the whole of Scandinavia since one is already there with the magnifying glass?

We were Economically, the most successful European Nation in 2006.

And we have for a long time had mixed Economy as our National Financial trait.

And hey, we are talking about Sweden now, the main source of engineers and high tech innovations.
As well as a strong unity within its borders for humanism. So sure, the ideas of Behind My Screen sure do work, if implemented wisely and with the thought on whats best for the whole Nation as first point and not the corporate and rich few.

I liked Sweden a lot when I visited. A distant great-grandfather of mine moved to America from Sweden. I think that a lot of Americans don't understand how adopting some of the Scandinavian social/governmental policies would benefit them. Also, the corporate/special interest groups have a death grip on American policy-makers. I don't think America's prospects for the future look too good honestly.