At 11/16/12 02:42 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:
Biggest Military in the world with bases in over 130 countries around the world = Text Book Fascist.
#4 The supremacy of the military/avid militarism
#6. Obsession with national security
Also i am going to go with Chris Hedges over your biased indoctrination into American Fascism as the highest level of Faiscm attained is when the masses do not even know it LOL. You are clearly a Patriot and Fascist.
Seeing as you are not online, I really don't expect a response to this tonight... It's probably past your bedtime, anyway.
A textbook example of a fascist government is Mussolini's Italy before/during WW2. At no point did the Italians have 130 bases around the world. And many of those bases weren't created solely because we wanted them, they were created to stave off ethnic conflict. What do you think would happen today in the Balkans if the US withdrew its presence there? Many of the issues that led to the events of 1992-95 are still present, they are just suppressed because of US military presence. Europe is not strong enough to handle those kinds of issues as they have shown time and again (That's why the Balkans conflict got so bad, the French Dutch and English(?) sent troops, but didn't allow them to use the weapons they were carrying. As a result, the Serbs overpowered them and forced their surrender. The bloodletting that followed forced the US' hand in 1995).
This is a de facto result of the Cold War build up... Our military was expanded to such a point to rival a power that was roughly equally as powerful as we were. While the use and function of our military today is different than it was 20 or 30 years ago, it still relies on much of the framework developed to counter the Soviet threat. And even then, the US is slowly scaling back some of its military capabilities, as evidenced by the reduction in Navy ships, the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and the reduction in nuclear capabilities.
Obsession with national security
I don't really think you can say that we are obsessed with national security... There is a healthy level of concern for it, sure, considering no one really wants to have their buildings brought down via hijacked 747's... But to say we are obsessed with it? I don't really think so. National Security wasn't even a major issue in the 2012 election.
While politically I do find some agreement with Hedges, his argument about American fascism rests on the reader accepting two major premises, neither of which is coherent now, nor do I think they were coherent when they were published in 2010.
The first is this:
On one side stands a corrupt liberal class, bereft of ideas and unable to respond coherently to the collapse of the global economy, the dismantling of our manufacturing sector and the deadly assault on the ecosystem
For one, in measures of relative corruption, the American liberals really don't suffer from nearly as much as the right-wing GOP. The GOP receives so much money and is so influenced by the religious right and big business, I am surprised they can put forth a national candidate who isn't a Romney-clone. The left, while they have their issues (certainly), are
largely unfettered by the ties to one or two large blocs of social influence.
Secondly, the liberal class that Hedges refers to may be the Democratic Party following LBJ. Clinton was the first Democrat (probably since Kennedy) to have a cogent vision for America and a party platform that Americans could empathize with and vote for, but even then they were unsure about the vision the Democrats offered, largely because the Democrats were unsure of it themselves. But the administration of Bush Jr mobilized Democrats to rally behind a truly coherent vision of American policy, one that voters really do empathize with.
As far as being unable to respond to global economic issues, I think Obama and Congressional Democrats have done a pretty good job of it, except for the obstructionist policies of the GOP. Dodd-Frank is a good example, as is the economic stimulus and bailouts of Wall Street and the auto industry. The Free Trade agreements signed and under consideration currently are also good examples, as is Obama's stance on China.
The second premise is this:
On the other side stands a mass of increasingly bitter people whose alienation, desperation and rage fuel emotionally driven and incoherent political agendas.
Yeah, I got nothing for this, LOL. This is a perfect description of the Republican party following the 2012 elections. On balance, though, the GOP faces a crucial turning point over the next two years. If they continue going the way they are going, they are going to sign their own death warrant as a political party unless they can recast themselves on a national level, similar to what the Democrats did in the 40-odd years between JFK and Obama. So either they will fade into obscurity and never be heard of again, or they will recast themselves and take coherent stances on issues people care about. Either way, they will not fit the description Hedges puts forward.
It's also worth nothing here that Hedges never says we are at a point where fascism currently exists in America. He does argue (based on his premises) that we currently have a recipe for fascism, but he never coherently argues or proves that we are there yet.