American Fascism, where are its roots?

[Osborn F Enready]

Today, on C-Span I saw a book being reviewed called "American Fascists", and the author was quite compelling in his speech.

The full title of the book is:
American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America (Hardcover)

Amazon.com: American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America: Books: Chris Hedges

Book Description Twenty-five years ago, when Pat Robertson and other radio and televangelists first spoke of the United States becoming a Christian nation that would build a global Christian empire, it was hard to take such hyperbolic rhetoric seriously. Today, such language no longer sounds like hyperbole but poses, instead, a very real threat to our freedom and our way of life. In American Fascists, Chris Hedges, veteran journalist and author of the National Book Award finalist War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning, challenges the Christian Right's religious legitimacy and argues that at its core it is a mass movement fueled by unbridled nationalism and a hatred for the open society. Hedges, who grew up in rural parishes in upstate New York where his father was a Presbyterian pastor, attacks the movement as someone steeped in the Bible and Christian tradition. He points to the hundreds of senators and members of Congress who have earned between 80 and 100 percent approval ratings from the three most influential Christian Right advocacy groups as one of many signs that the movement is burrowing deep inside the American government to subvert it. The movement's call to dismantle the wall between church and state and the intolerance it preaches against all who do not conform to its warped vision of a Christian America are pumped into tens of millions of American homes through Christian television and radio stations, as well as reinforced through the curriculum in Christian schools. The movement's yearning for apocalyptic violence and its assault on dispassionate, intellectual inquiry are laying the foundation for a new, frightening America. American Fascists, which includes interviews and coverage of events such as pro-life rallies and weeklong classes on conversion techniques, examines the movement's origins, its driving motivations and its dark ideological underpinnings. Hedges argues that the movement currently resembles the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and '30s, movements that often masked the full extent of their drive for totalitarianism and were willing to make concessions until they achieved unrivaled power. The Christian Right, like these early fascist movements, does not openly call for dictatorship, nor does it use physical violence to suppress opposition. In short, the movement is not yet revolutionary. But the ideological architecture of a Christian fascism is being cemented in place. The movement has roused its followers to a fever pitch of despair and fury. All it will take, Hedges writes, is one more national crisis on the order of September 11 for the Christian Right to make a concerted drive to destroy American democracy. The movement awaits a crisis. At that moment they will reveal themselves for what they truly are -- the American heirs to fascism. Hedges issues a potent, impassioned warning. We face an imminent threat. His book reminds us of the dangers liberal, democratic societies face when they tolerate the intolerant.

This book seems to concrete many of my own theories, though that can't be assured yet since I haven't read it.

I figured I would post it here, to see what others thought from what they see in the link, and the review.

Hopefully, this will inspire some debate on the reality of the budding, soon to be flowering, American Fascism so many still seem willing to deny.

[Jack]

I'm not sure whether the religious right favors fascism or theocracy, but they are certainly advocating a U.S. that will be nothing like the nation we now have.

There's a thread asking what would happen if atheism was the dominant attitude here. I'd like to ask people to imagine a U.S. governed by Christian attitudes. Substitute the Bible for the Constitution and see if that nation will enjoy the same freedoms and rights as our own. We have plenty of examples in the world of how tolerant theocracies are of those who don't toe the line and buy into that mindset.

No doubt the first skirmishes in this "war" against our secular society will be among the Christians themselves to determine which sect within the broad Christian belief system predominates. I have to imagine Falwell and Robertson each have different visions of a Christian America.

[Slevin57]

There will always be advocates for different ideas.

Christian Groups are huge political voting potential. You just have to bend there way on some issues (gay marriage, prayer in schools, etc.,) and you will get a very powerful vote.

I don't think there is a great aligning of Christian powers to establish an empire here. Power hungry as Pat Robertson is, he knows he will never be anything more then a crook.

[Osborn F Enready]

Truly, this is not meant by me, to be a "jab" at Chrisitans, or religion in general. (though I do at both occassionally, with good reason) It was intended to be a debate about the ongoing move towards authoritarian culture in both religious AND non-religious minds, due to the lack of information and education on the ills of such thought if realized into government.

Our laws, for many years in this nation, have been trending in this direction, especially above the state level, and by Executive Order.

I think over the last few years, we have seen the greatest, most expansive move of this type done in the name of "terrorism", mainly in the Patriot Act, but also by many other standalone bills and encroachments of basic individual rights, which our Constitution holds as central to all citizens concerns.

I think we are seeing a major wall being built right now in the minds of many Americans, based on partisan hate, bi-polarization and demonization of cultural, ideological and belief differences, something we should be shrugging as responsible citizens who have the power to enact limitations via their Constitutionally enumerated, and non-enumerated, but recognized rights.

“In growing up, the normal individual has learned to check the expression of aggressive impulses. But the culture has failed, almost entirely, in inculcating internal controls on actions that have their origin in authority. For this reason, the latter constitutes a far greater danger to human survival.”
-Stanley Milgram, Yale social psychologist, in Obedience To Authority

[Milton Bradley]

The real irony of tha broadcast was that Newt Gingrich followed that review talking about his new book ( I think the title was "Winning the Future"), and how the Founding Fathers intended for this to be a Christian Nation.


I certainly wonder if the timing of those shows were intentional.


When it segued from one show into the next I felt like the topic never even changed.


Vicchio, where are you buddy? Come to Newts defense.

[Alive]

American authoritism does not advance in a straight line. And it predates "fascism" by hundreds of years, so calling it "fascist" is pretty absurd. If you look at American history, it's pretty obvious where authoritism tends to be maximized. War.

In the civil war you got Lincon's major federal enroachments, arresting of senators, etc. In WWI you got a lot of prohibitions on free speech and press. WWII you got internment camps among other things. The height of the "cold war" you got McCarthyism. Patriot act followed 9/11.

The good thing is, all these things started to dissipate as time went on. Today we see most of them as mistakes.

Seems to me, then, that we will be able to avert at least the more extreme forms of authoritism as long as we can prevent the authoritists from creating the conception of constant war. Perhaps the war on terrorism is the attempt to create such a war, but I think it has failed. Americans are not that afraid of terrorism anymore. Of course, a few more attacks, or, say, a nuclear attack, is all that is necessary to get Americans to give up all their rights. At least for the time being.

[brien]

The roots of American Fascism:

The Bill of Rights, Void Where Prohibited by Law.

Anywhere State and Federal legislators have enacted legislation that is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

I will take the non sectarian pov because I don't think any one religious group will ever control the US government.

In terms of Fascism and the influence of the Police State, I say once communications and travel became more sophisticated and commonplace between states, Fascism gained a foothold in the State Police and in the rise of the Federal Police force, ie the FBI. The reaction of the government to the use of alcohol by common citizens during Prohibition, and to organized crime that controlled that alcohol, brought about a more cohesive response by the government to control the citizens through law enforcement agencies. It is obvious to me this is where the roots of Fascism and the Police State are in modern US society today. Therefore, if one wishes to examine Fascism in the US today, one must look very closely at the law enforcement agencies that enforce the laws.

PublicEye.org - Website of Political Research Associates - What is Fascism?

What is Fascism? Some General Ideological Features by Matthew N. Lyons I am skeptical of efforts to produce a "definition" of fascism. As a dynamic historical current, fascism has taken many different forms, and has evolved dramatically in some ways. To understand what fascism has encompassed as a movement and a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development--as a form of counter-revolutionary politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. The following paragraphs are intented as an initial, open-ended sketch. Fascism is a form of extreme right-wing ideology that celebrates the nation or the race as an organic community transcending all other loyalties. It emphasizes a myth of national or racial rebirth after a period of decline or destruction. To this end, fascism calls for a "spiritual revolution" against signs of moral decay such as individualism and materialism, and seeks to purge "alien" forces and groups that threaten the organic community. Fascism tends to celebrate masculinity, youth, mystical unity, and the regenerative power of violence. Often, but not always, it promotes racial superiority doctrines, ethnic persecution, imperialist expansion, and genocide. At the same time, fascists may embrace a form of internationalism based on either racial or ideological solidarity across national boundaries. Usually fascism espouses open male supremacy, though sometimes it may also promote female solidarity and new opportunities for women of the privileged nation or race. Fascism's approach to politics is both populist--in that it seeks to activate "the people" as a whole against perceived oppressors or enemies--and elitist--in that it treats the people's will as embodied in a select group, or often one supreme leader, from whom authority proceeds downward. Fascism seeks to organize a cadre-led mass movement in a drive to seize state power. It seeks to forcibly subordinate all spheres of society to its ideological vision of organic community, usually through a totalitarian state. Both as a movement and a regime, fascism uses mass organizations as a system of integration and control, and uses organized violence to suppress opposition, although the scale of violence varies widely. Fascism is hostile to Marxism, liberalism, and conservatism, yet it borrows concepts and practices from all three. Fascism rejects the principles of class struggle and workers' internationalism as threats to national or racial unity, yet it often exploits real grievances against capitalists and landowners through ethnic scapegoating or radical-sounding conspiracy theories. Fascism rejects the liberal doctrines of individual autonomy and rights, political pluralism, and representative government, yet it advocates broad popular participation in politics and may use parliamentary channels in its drive to power. Its vision of a "new order" clashes with the conservative attachment to tradition-based institutions and hierarchies, yet fascism often romanticizes the past as inspiration for national rebirth. Fascism has a complex relationship with established elites and the non-fascist right. It is never a mere puppet of the ruling class, but an autonomous movement with its own social base. In practice, fascism defends capitalism against instability and the left, but also pursues an agenda that sometimes clashes with capitalist interests in significant ways. There has been much cooperation, competition, and interaction between fascism and other sections of the right, producing various hybrid movements and regimes

It seeks to forcibly subordinate all spheres of society to its ideological vision of organic community, usually through a totalitarian state.

This is done through the use of the police and law enforcement agencies.

[gw120]

This guy was on the Colbert Report a month or two ago I think. Makes sense. If I had any money I'd buy the book.

[PatrickHenry]

One of the seeds of fascism in America that I am aware of is Operation Paperclip.
Nazi scientists and intel operatives inducted into the defense establishment and Washington's marble halls.
Real conspiracies: Operation Paperclip, which assimilated Nazis into the U.S. establishment, shows the antecedents for labeling people of conscience enemies of the state - Viewpoint National Catholic Reporter - Find Articles

Operation Paperclip. The United States and its Western European allies agreed after World War II to deny immigration rights and work opportunities to Nazis with scientific and technological expertise who were more than trivially connected to the Third Reich. Those who joined the party before 1933 or advanced in the SA (Brown Shirts) or the SS or were identified by credible witnesses as participating in atrocities were included in that category. Contradictions arose, however, after the war. Denying German scientific expertise to the Soviets and using it ourselves became primary motivations for wanting those Germans here, working for us. Over time the need for German proficiency in aerospace design, lasers and other advanced research superseded moral concerns for what they had done during the war. Operation Paperclip was the name of the project that assimilated Nazi scientists into the American establishment by obscuring their histories and short-circuiting efforts to bring their true stories to light. The project was led by officers in the U.S. Army Although the program officially ended in September 1947, those officers and others carried out a conspiracy until the mid-'50s that bypassed both law and presidential directive to keep Paperclip going. Neither Truman nor Eisenhower were informed that their instructions were ignored, and if there is a lesson to be learned from Operation Paperclip, it is that, as Elie Wiesel said of the Holocaust, the world can get away with it. Please note: Those who documented Operation Paperclip are not "conspiracy theorists." They are journalists and scholars who described a genuine conspiracy. Fast forward 50 years. When Total Information Awareness--the effort to mine and correlate vast amounts of data about Americans and non-Americans alike--became public knowledge, it was assailed for further eroding civil liberties already undermined by the Patriot Act, rights previously guaranteed by the Constitution. Asked at a news conference about Total Information Awareness, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld laughed and said, well then we'll change the name and do it anyway. Rumsfeld was just stating the obvious. Data mining has long been an important area of research for the intelligence establishment. The ability to filter out irrelevant data and align the many signals transmitted by our daily transactions into profiles with predictive value has been pursued for a long time. Rumsfeld was just saying, OK, if there's a problem with the name, we'll change the name and do it secretly. It's the combination of eradicating rights guaranteed by the Constitution such as habeas corpus and modern technologies that enable the national security state to know and anticipate the tendencies of the souls of its citizenry, all in the name of counterterrorism, that makes us nervous. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is a literal description of what our leadership is doing Back in the early days of Paperclip, when those with consciences and/or memories of Nazi atrocities tried to stop the steamroller, they were accused of being communist agents or sympathizers or useful idiots who did not know they were manipulated by the Communist Party. Real enemies during the Cold War became the justification for labeling persons of conscience enemies too, a strategy that was canny and intentional. Today real terrorists are the justification for targeting persons of conscience as if they are enemies not only of America but of the American Empire too. "Even before 9/11, U.S. armed services professionals were engaged in operations in 150 countries a year," noted Robert Kaplan approvingly in the 2003 Pitcairn Trust Lecture on World Affairs. "It is already a cliche to say that by any historical standard the United States is more an empire, especially a military one, than many care to acknowledge."