Post by Socialist Republic of Cuba on Jul 20, 2006 22:31:03 GMT -5
Well, recently I got into an argument with RF (AKA: RedFoxBandit/Slavia/t3h admin lol) over the U.S. military, and eventually that argument turned to America possibly becoming fascist, a concept I think is well-founded, and of course disturbing. Red displayed disbelief, which I expected, but I told him of the essay I recently wrote for school before the summer. (An FYI...I have a brother. We're twins. We both roleplay on this forum as Cuba. I, Ryan, wrote the essay, while Ben offered critique and ideas.) Red told me that he didn't want to read it, but I think he will, personally. This essay is EXTREMELY LONG. If you have the patience to read, please do, and offer opinions, which is the point of this, as well as showing it to Red. While I don't expect his opinion to change, yours might, and I'd like to hear it regardless. Enjoy.
For the last two-hundred and thirty years, what has become known as the "American experiment" has endured. This country fancies itself as the first true democracy, a beacon of shining hope and freedom to people around the world. And indeed, thousands of people have flocked here to live that dream ever since the early 1800's. To the average, somewhat disinterested citizen, they would see that this country has unprecedented civil rights, a happy populace, and a fair and well-meaning government. That is what they teach you in grade school, and that is what remains with you if you cease to care about what goes on in this country. That is the definition of the average American citizen. And for years, politicians have manipulated such complacency to further the ends of their own economic gains. This unquestioning trust for the government is what ultimately leads to what people have thought to be impossible for this country. It is a concept they rightfully know to fear, but may be inadvertently facilitating. Indeed, it seems impossible. Inconceivable. It may very well be inevitable. People will refuse to believe in it simply because they do not understand the concept, nor the true agenda of their own country. It is fascism. And its arrival will not be in jackboots or concentration camps. Indeed, most people will not even acknowledge it has arrived. The same was true for Nazi Germany.
Hailing to an ineffable "Father Figure," systematical round-ups of "threats", and increased emphasis on military will be but after-effects of the arrival of fascism. But do not for a moment believe that people will know of its coming. That the people will inquire if they realize that something is amiss. They will see it as everyday life. They will see it as the continuation of the American experiment. They will not know that it has already failed.
But what is fascism? What are its characteristics that one can easily identify? To begin, it is typically seen as a trait followed by totalitarian regimes, or military dictatorships. That is true, in part, but fascism is far more subtle in its course. Military dictatorships are usually headed by men with too much power, and they use that power excessively. Mass death squads, gassing of villages, and deplorable human rights records are what facilitate the power of these dictators. But it is also typically short-lived. Those governments, uncaring for its own flimsy infrastructure, collapse under their own weight. Or they fall prey to invasion or civil war. Either way, they dissipate, only to be replaced with a new authoritative power.
This was not the same for Italy or Germany. The facade of democracy and freedom were important to both Hitler and Mussolini, while they subverted their self-proclaimed enemies in secret.
To begin, fascism is a method of governing that was originally pioneered by Benito Mussolini, and was carried on by Adolph Hitler. Fascism also has many distinct elements. Most easily recognizable, because of its important in European history, is the use of a scapegoat for the populace to hate and despise. This involves the blaming of a certain group of people for all of a country's problems. As a result, the person who is doing the blaming will also appear to be the right solution. After being placed in a position of power, the leader of that country will then act on his earlier statements, and will take measures to "stop" the country's problems by removing that group of people from the equation. The most infamous example of this is the Holocaust, the systematic genocide of the Jewish race in Europe at the hands of the Nazi Party.
Ultimately tied to this use of scapegoats is the fact that individualism and human rights plummet in a fascist state. Freedom of press and information are also tied to this, which both suffer under a fascist regime. People are expected to throw away their individual freedoms in order to "benefit" the country as a whole. The government takes control of all forms of media, and use its power to further their own agenda. Capital punishment and authoritative brutality are the long-term effects of a fascist regime as well.
Next is the use of mass propaganda to mislead and persuade the populace of a country. In the case of fascism, propaganda techniques often rely on a masculine visualization of a particular race of people. This typically involves a young, blonde and blue-eyed man, probably wearing a uniform. Right now you may already be thinking of propaganda posters in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, perhaps as the only cases of such things. You would be wrong. During World War 2, American posters carried the same image. A young, attractive blonde blue-eyed man, off to war. Different uniform, gentler caption, but a similar message. Of course, propaganda is not just limited to posters and art. Television is an obvious form of it, as well as radio. What would an average citizen rather hear or see? A program saying how great their country is, or a program criticizing their country? This is how nationalism manifests itself in the populace, which brings us to the next trait.
Patriotism. The word is designed to invoke confidence and spirit in those that hear it. But it is also a word that muddles the mind, dulls the critical thinking element of the brain. When you see soldiers marching for their country, you think patriotically. When you see parades full of people marching for their country, you think patriotically. And every time, you want to get in there and do it yourself. Everyone else around you is cheering, so what reason do you have not to? In a way, the "mob mentality" theory works its way into this. It is extraordinarily difficult to think rationally when you are in a mob of people who want the same thing. Individualism falls to hive mind. This is how so many people will cheer and yell and will not think that patriotism succeeds and the people in government benefit from their unquestioning, uncomprehending loyalty. The same was completely true during Hitler's speeches in Germany. Hitler's rage filled rants and his charisma ran through seemingly everyone who was in his presence. The very same is obvious in some of the United States' more prominent presidents.
And finally, possibly the most important and dangerous aspect of all is a fascist country's focus on military. The military aspect of fascism also ties into almost every other trait as well. In fascist states, the military is portrayed as a glamorous occupation, one that every young man should aspire to achieve. This ties in with propaganda, which goes hand-in-hand with military in a fascist state. People who are against military and war are seen as "unpatriotic", and are ostracized by the general population. Countries with extreme focus on military will also, as a rule, be addicted to war. This is typically in the interest of expanding on economic gain for that countries corporations. The targets will also usually be much smaller and less-powerful nations. Indeed, in history, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy preyed on the Balkans and some of Africa.
Fascism in America
Now that we have an understanding of fascism (or at least have had it refreshed), you would wonder how this could possibly pertain to America. It does, and has been for many years now. Ever since the birth of the nation, there has always been a danger of the country becoming despotic. Benjamin Franklin himself commented that, while the idea of democratic government was admirable, it would inevitably fall into despotism. "In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, — if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered; and I believe, farther, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other. "
For the past fifty years, unknown to American culture, this country has been teetering on the edge of the pit of fascism. And in the recent years of the 21st century, that threat of fascism has become even more enormous, ever since the terrorist attacks of September 11th.
So is the American experiment going to fail? It is quite possible that it already has, or may well be on its way to. So let us see how each aspect of fascism has already manifested itself in American society and government in recent years.
The War on Terrorism
A nice sounding title, to be sure. To the point in its nature, and admirable in its desire. That is, to remove the threat of terror attacks on unsuspecting citizens of countries around the world. Who, upon scant observation, can possibly not support such a thing? Very few people.
An admirable objective, yes, but also incredibly foolish. Terrorism is something that cannot be fought. It has no battlefields nor any generals or commanders. Terror is a method, not a tangible enemy to be sought out and killed. There are people who will use terror to strike at their enemies, usually in the form of targeting civilians. In short, it is impossible to try and fight terrorism. You can prevent it, and possibly root out terrorists for the time being, but it is impossible to completely destroy. Trying to fight terror is like trying to fight faith. It can never be truly destroyed.
And ever since 9/11, and the USA PATRIOT Act, the country has been engaged in this "war" on terrorism. An invisible war, to be most precise. But how is it relevant to fascism in America? It ties back to the original idea of using a scapegoat for all of a country's problems. Hitler used the Jews as the scapegoat, and the government is using terrorism as one.
One would be lying, though, if they said that the situation was exactly like that of Nazi Germany. The Jewish race did absolutely nothing to warrant the systematic genocide of their people at the hands of the Nazis. Terrorists, on the other hand, have openly and blatantly attacked this country, inflicting more than four thousand casualties. The two situations, however, are similar in that it gives the general population something to hate and want to destroy. And terrorism, unlike the a race like the Jews, is something that cannot be completely wiped out, which gives the government an unlimited amount of scapegoats with which to use. They know that terrorism cannot be completely destroyed, but they choose to call it a war anyway.
And war we have waged, to be sure. In the space of five years, this country has invaded two countries in Asia and the Middle East. Afghanistan, in retribution for the attacks on 9/11 (a retribution that an entire country did not deserve), and Iraq, for...who knows why. The government had a clear goal, or what appeared to be such, going into Afghanistan. Iraq is another story altogether. Thus far, no one knows why the government had come to be there in the first place.
Initially, according to George W. Bush, the President of this country, they had found undeniable proof that Saddam Hussein was in control of a nuclear weapon, which would present a clear and present danger to the country. In the wake of 9/11, who could possibly argue with him when he had, supposedly, led us out of that disaster? All of his cabinet members were preaching to the press and public that Iraq had the nuclear weapons, despite the fact that Joseph Wilson (former ambassador to Gabon, Sao Tome, and Principe found evidence that Iraq hadn't purchased any uranium from Niger. But that was, of course, swept under the table. At any rate, no one argued with Bush, especially on top of his claims that Iraq had connections to al-Qaeda, the terrorist faction that masterminded the attacks. People were afraid of terrorism. The invisible enemy that no one could fight. So the country backed him, and, without approval from the United Nations, invaded Iraq in 2003.
It is now 2006. No WMDs have been recovered, nor has the military discovered any tangible link that Saddam Hussein had with al- Qaeda. It appears that the Bush Administration has made a bit of a mistake, and according to John W. Dean, columnist for CNN, it could be grounds for impeachment due to the fact that we were, essentially, lied to. (The article is dated 2003, link www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/.)
So there is the scapegoat for America. An invisible enemy to fight until doomsday, supplying an endless amount of fear and hatred to the American people.
"You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists."
The message is very clear in its form. Taken right from President Bush's mouth, it states that everyone must be on the same page, or face the unspoken consequences implied by this quote. The most outspoken individuals are labeled as "anti-American" or, even worse, "enemy combatants." When there are important things to be done, do we really have room for deviation from the objective? Of course not. That would be counter-productive.
Does such a quote not remind you of John Adams' presidency? The Alien and Sedition acts seem to be the precursor to the above quote. To refresh your memory, the Alien and Sedition acts made it illegal for people to criticize the presidency AND barred entry to (to the country) any French people, because of the undeclared war Adams was waging on French sea-vessels.
Indeed, does it not seem familiar? We are engaged in a "war" on terror, and the President is warning people not to question his policies, that "he knows best." Where is the First Amendment? Who cares? It is the first edict of "a goddamn piece of paper." Again, the presidents words.
This leads us to the next example of disregard for the Constitution; the USA PATRIOT Act.
It is an odd, and somewhat dangerous bill. Odd, because of one critical reason: The fact that it was at least three-hundred pages of writing, and Congress and the Senate passed it with a bare glance. Why would that be? Because it was after 9/11, and people were afraid and willing to do anything to guarantee their safety. Safety from terrorism, perhaps, but not from preying eyes.
Which brings us to why it is so dangerous. For one thing, it is stated that, under rules set by the PATRIOT Act, the F.B.I. may search a persons home without a search warrant, but only in homes owned by those who are deemed "threats" to national security. That rule also conveniently nullifies the Fourth Amendment.
Only in the most dire of circumstances, you say? Certainly not. That rule has been acted on many times in the waking months of 9/11 AND the war in Iraq. To whom? Mostly those of Middle Eastern descent. To this, many citizens of such ancestry can testify. And through this act, many Middle Eastern citizens have been detained by the government, and brought to detention centers in "undisclosed locations," according to the Amnesty International 2004 report on the United States. The reason? They apparently had "high intelligence value." The amount of time spent in these "undisclosed locations" sometimes added up to three years, and, at times, "disappearance." Thus far, the government has not commented on these people.
Moving on, the second danger brought on by the PATRIOT Act is the surveillance it allows on "potential threats." As I'm sure you are no doubt aware, such surveillance has only recently been investigated by the media. All cases except a very low number were turned down without a warrant to spy on these "threats."(E.G.: In 2004, 94 requests out of 1758 were modified.) The general reaction most of the public has to this is "well, if they're being spied on, then they must have done something to deserve it." That very same opinion did not hold true for the enforced arrests made on Middle Eastern citizens (and there wasn't a single citizen who was found to be a terrorist,) so why should it hold true here as well?
What is even more frightening is that major phone companies like Verizon are turning over phone records to the government without batting an eyelash. (Confirmed in USA Today article, link: www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm)
And finally, the right to assemble has been violated in the past as well, particularly since the war in Iraq, and Bush's inauguration. Apparently, authorities planted policemen in protest organization meetings to try and persuade them to use violence and terrorism to get their points across. Policemen also used tear gas and pepper spray against protestors during Bush's inauguration. These two claims have since been confirmed by authorities...yet no one has acted on it.
Away with the right to privacy, and the First Amendment. Away with the Fourth Amendment, then.
"Shock and Awe"
No country is unfamiliar with propaganda. Every government has used it to try and persuade people into thinking something, or against another. Some of its uses are in the spirit of competition and progress, which is fine, but much of it is geared to misleading the general public. An unfortunate fact of life, but one everyone should attempt to moderate.
Ever since the 9/11 attacks, most propaganda has been geared toward a unified country(through "United We Stand"), rooting out terrorism and recruitment for the Army.
Indeed, in the following months of 9/11, American flags were popping up on houses everywhere, rallying to Bush's statements on "exacting a full retaliation." Anyone who wouldn't stand for the pledge, nor sport an American flag on their porch was looked upon with suspicion.
In light of the dwindling amount of recruits the army has been receiving, recruitment propaganda has been kicked into over-drive as well. Now more than ever before you'll most likely see an advertisement for the army on both television and the internet. The usual message is that you are not living up to your full potential if it's not being lived in the military. Recruitment drives have also begun to spring up in higher amounts too, mostly in High School. Along with the increasing desperation in the military, and the high abundance of recruitment drives, something bad is bound to happen. And it already has, multiple times. A particularly infamous account of immoral recruitment tactics is when a recruiter threatened a student with a federal warrant if he did not appear at a particular place to be interviewed. The recruiter has since been promoted, upon being moved to another place in the country.
Finally, to make matters worse, the Administration has apparently been paying people to advertise for their policies. The most well-known example of this is the case with Armstrong Williams, one of the most outspoken black conservatives in the country. Last year, Williams was paid by the Board of Education $240,000 dollars to promote No Child Left Behind, an education policy followed by the Bush Administration. This event is known as "covert propaganda", which is described by lawmakers as "unethical and dangerous."
In response for this, several lawmakers sent a letter to the White House, requesting that Bush end his covert propaganda campaigns on January 7th, date 2005. Apparently it hasn't done any good.
Oceania was at war with Eurasia. It had always been at war with Eurasia
Disturbingly enough, for the past few dozen years, American policies have seemed to encompass the use of military and war far more than it did a hundred years ago. The reason? Most people chalk it up to the containment of communism, and they would be right, partially, but it is evident that it was World War Two, rather than the Cold War, that turned us into such an aggressor.
After World War two, the United States emerged, along with the Soviet Union, as a super-power. To many in the government, this meant that the U.S. could exercise its will upon countless nations, and not have anyone else blink an eye. The agenda just happened to be the containment of communism. And they attempted to do so, with borderline fanatical public support. Korea, Vietnam, and several nations in South America and Asia fell prey to U.S. intervention, through either war or "removal" of that nations current regime.
And in all of those situations, the military exhibited a vast disregard for civilian life and commonly held guidelines to keep those countries from "going Red." And all the American public cared about was keeping communism away. The lives of "Orientals" and "communists" were unimportant factors to them. Only when Vietnam was at its height did people finally start to wonder why they were there in the first place.
And now, today, the military is more important than ever for the Bush Administration. Already this country has invaded two sovereign nations, with a death toll of two thousand American troops, and more than one hundred-thousand Iraqi's. All in the interest of attacking terrorism. That's what we've been told, at least.
The only thing we have done in the Middle East has been creating more terrorists, not stopping them. And political strife is at its height in Iraq, with civil war looming on the horizon.
In essence, the industries of America, and the Bush Administration by association, have become addicted to war. They have been for many years now. It is a known fact that, when a country is at war, the industries of that nation make tons of money of said war. And oil, the precious resource that is dwindling, may be at the heart of it. In fact, according to a chart made by the OECD, military spending in this country outranks Official Development Aid by more than $100,000. What is also worth noting is that every country on that chart spends more on military than development by a large margin as well.
Examine the racial genocide occurring in the Darfur region of the Sudan. Two hundred thousand people have been killed there already, and what has the U.S. done about it? Nothing. And why? Because there is no profit to be made there. There are no resources worth exploiting to be had there. The same was true for the Rwandan Genocide of 1994. The U.S. never intervened. And now look at the Middle East. Plenty of resources, and nations willing to do business with the U.S., particularly Saudi Arabia. Install pro-U.S. governments in the Middle East, and you have a tons of money to be made.
So is the U.S. military, which is rapidly losing on recruits, the Global Policemen...or corporate heavies?
"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long as I'm the dictator." George W. Bush, December 18, 2000
After reading this, the similarities between our country and the ones we so steadfastly vowed to destroy are eriee. Very little rights have protected since 9/11. The focus on military is stronger than ever. People feel patriotic about a country they scarcely know anything about. You have your blind media and your corrupts.
It is all here, and if we do not act to make reforms it will make our lives much harder in the future than it is now. And yes, it is highly probable that we will, in fact, go fascist if such things continue on, uninhibited.
It goes all the way back to the people themselves. Some of them ignorant people who can care less. All the way into school, the next generation of people and politicians, you have them saying that they would be better off not knowing what the government was really doing. Whatever it is, it is in our best interests. And please, take our rights before you take American Idol, they say. Please give us security in exchange for our freedoms, no matter what the costs are. Happy and ignorant, rather than brooding and informed.
How to stop this? How to turn around from fascism? It is simple. Question all you hear. Criticize, and wonder if perhaps it can be done better. Never believe that there is a single solution to everything, before the people above you send troops off to do battle in a country so far away.
Above all, the important thing is to care.
Is America Becoming Fascist?
For the last two-hundred and thirty years, what has become known as the "American experiment" has endured. This country fancies itself as the first true democracy, a beacon of shining hope and freedom to people around the world. And indeed, thousands of people have flocked here to live that dream ever since the early 1800's. To the average, somewhat disinterested citizen, they would see that this country has unprecedented civil rights, a happy populace, and a fair and well-meaning government. That is what they teach you in grade school, and that is what remains with you if you cease to care about what goes on in this country. That is the definition of the average American citizen. And for years, politicians have manipulated such complacency to further the ends of their own economic gains. This unquestioning trust for the government is what ultimately leads to what people have thought to be impossible for this country. It is a concept they rightfully know to fear, but may be inadvertently facilitating. Indeed, it seems impossible. Inconceivable. It may very well be inevitable. People will refuse to believe in it simply because they do not understand the concept, nor the true agenda of their own country. It is fascism. And its arrival will not be in jackboots or concentration camps. Indeed, most people will not even acknowledge it has arrived. The same was true for Nazi Germany.
Hailing to an ineffable "Father Figure," systematical round-ups of "threats", and increased emphasis on military will be but after-effects of the arrival of fascism. But do not for a moment believe that people will know of its coming. That the people will inquire if they realize that something is amiss. They will see it as everyday life. They will see it as the continuation of the American experiment. They will not know that it has already failed.
But what is fascism? What are its characteristics that one can easily identify? To begin, it is typically seen as a trait followed by totalitarian regimes, or military dictatorships. That is true, in part, but fascism is far more subtle in its course. Military dictatorships are usually headed by men with too much power, and they use that power excessively. Mass death squads, gassing of villages, and deplorable human rights records are what facilitate the power of these dictators. But it is also typically short-lived. Those governments, uncaring for its own flimsy infrastructure, collapse under their own weight. Or they fall prey to invasion or civil war. Either way, they dissipate, only to be replaced with a new authoritative power.
This was not the same for Italy or Germany. The facade of democracy and freedom were important to both Hitler and Mussolini, while they subverted their self-proclaimed enemies in secret.
To begin, fascism is a method of governing that was originally pioneered by Benito Mussolini, and was carried on by Adolph Hitler. Fascism also has many distinct elements. Most easily recognizable, because of its important in European history, is the use of a scapegoat for the populace to hate and despise. This involves the blaming of a certain group of people for all of a country's problems. As a result, the person who is doing the blaming will also appear to be the right solution. After being placed in a position of power, the leader of that country will then act on his earlier statements, and will take measures to "stop" the country's problems by removing that group of people from the equation. The most infamous example of this is the Holocaust, the systematic genocide of the Jewish race in Europe at the hands of the Nazi Party.
Ultimately tied to this use of scapegoats is the fact that individualism and human rights plummet in a fascist state. Freedom of press and information are also tied to this, which both suffer under a fascist regime. People are expected to throw away their individual freedoms in order to "benefit" the country as a whole. The government takes control of all forms of media, and use its power to further their own agenda. Capital punishment and authoritative brutality are the long-term effects of a fascist regime as well.
Next is the use of mass propaganda to mislead and persuade the populace of a country. In the case of fascism, propaganda techniques often rely on a masculine visualization of a particular race of people. This typically involves a young, blonde and blue-eyed man, probably wearing a uniform. Right now you may already be thinking of propaganda posters in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, perhaps as the only cases of such things. You would be wrong. During World War 2, American posters carried the same image. A young, attractive blonde blue-eyed man, off to war. Different uniform, gentler caption, but a similar message. Of course, propaganda is not just limited to posters and art. Television is an obvious form of it, as well as radio. What would an average citizen rather hear or see? A program saying how great their country is, or a program criticizing their country? This is how nationalism manifests itself in the populace, which brings us to the next trait.
Patriotism. The word is designed to invoke confidence and spirit in those that hear it. But it is also a word that muddles the mind, dulls the critical thinking element of the brain. When you see soldiers marching for their country, you think patriotically. When you see parades full of people marching for their country, you think patriotically. And every time, you want to get in there and do it yourself. Everyone else around you is cheering, so what reason do you have not to? In a way, the "mob mentality" theory works its way into this. It is extraordinarily difficult to think rationally when you are in a mob of people who want the same thing. Individualism falls to hive mind. This is how so many people will cheer and yell and will not think that patriotism succeeds and the people in government benefit from their unquestioning, uncomprehending loyalty. The same was completely true during Hitler's speeches in Germany. Hitler's rage filled rants and his charisma ran through seemingly everyone who was in his presence. The very same is obvious in some of the United States' more prominent presidents.
And finally, possibly the most important and dangerous aspect of all is a fascist country's focus on military. The military aspect of fascism also ties into almost every other trait as well. In fascist states, the military is portrayed as a glamorous occupation, one that every young man should aspire to achieve. This ties in with propaganda, which goes hand-in-hand with military in a fascist state. People who are against military and war are seen as "unpatriotic", and are ostracized by the general population. Countries with extreme focus on military will also, as a rule, be addicted to war. This is typically in the interest of expanding on economic gain for that countries corporations. The targets will also usually be much smaller and less-powerful nations. Indeed, in history, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy preyed on the Balkans and some of Africa.
Fascism in America
Now that we have an understanding of fascism (or at least have had it refreshed), you would wonder how this could possibly pertain to America. It does, and has been for many years now. Ever since the birth of the nation, there has always been a danger of the country becoming despotic. Benjamin Franklin himself commented that, while the idea of democratic government was admirable, it would inevitably fall into despotism. "In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution, with all its faults, — if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of government but what may be a blessing to the people, if well administered; and I believe, farther, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other. "
For the past fifty years, unknown to American culture, this country has been teetering on the edge of the pit of fascism. And in the recent years of the 21st century, that threat of fascism has become even more enormous, ever since the terrorist attacks of September 11th.
So is the American experiment going to fail? It is quite possible that it already has, or may well be on its way to. So let us see how each aspect of fascism has already manifested itself in American society and government in recent years.
The War on Terrorism
A nice sounding title, to be sure. To the point in its nature, and admirable in its desire. That is, to remove the threat of terror attacks on unsuspecting citizens of countries around the world. Who, upon scant observation, can possibly not support such a thing? Very few people.
An admirable objective, yes, but also incredibly foolish. Terrorism is something that cannot be fought. It has no battlefields nor any generals or commanders. Terror is a method, not a tangible enemy to be sought out and killed. There are people who will use terror to strike at their enemies, usually in the form of targeting civilians. In short, it is impossible to try and fight terrorism. You can prevent it, and possibly root out terrorists for the time being, but it is impossible to completely destroy. Trying to fight terror is like trying to fight faith. It can never be truly destroyed.
And ever since 9/11, and the USA PATRIOT Act, the country has been engaged in this "war" on terrorism. An invisible war, to be most precise. But how is it relevant to fascism in America? It ties back to the original idea of using a scapegoat for all of a country's problems. Hitler used the Jews as the scapegoat, and the government is using terrorism as one.
One would be lying, though, if they said that the situation was exactly like that of Nazi Germany. The Jewish race did absolutely nothing to warrant the systematic genocide of their people at the hands of the Nazis. Terrorists, on the other hand, have openly and blatantly attacked this country, inflicting more than four thousand casualties. The two situations, however, are similar in that it gives the general population something to hate and want to destroy. And terrorism, unlike the a race like the Jews, is something that cannot be completely wiped out, which gives the government an unlimited amount of scapegoats with which to use. They know that terrorism cannot be completely destroyed, but they choose to call it a war anyway.
And war we have waged, to be sure. In the space of five years, this country has invaded two countries in Asia and the Middle East. Afghanistan, in retribution for the attacks on 9/11 (a retribution that an entire country did not deserve), and Iraq, for...who knows why. The government had a clear goal, or what appeared to be such, going into Afghanistan. Iraq is another story altogether. Thus far, no one knows why the government had come to be there in the first place.
Initially, according to George W. Bush, the President of this country, they had found undeniable proof that Saddam Hussein was in control of a nuclear weapon, which would present a clear and present danger to the country. In the wake of 9/11, who could possibly argue with him when he had, supposedly, led us out of that disaster? All of his cabinet members were preaching to the press and public that Iraq had the nuclear weapons, despite the fact that Joseph Wilson (former ambassador to Gabon, Sao Tome, and Principe found evidence that Iraq hadn't purchased any uranium from Niger. But that was, of course, swept under the table. At any rate, no one argued with Bush, especially on top of his claims that Iraq had connections to al-Qaeda, the terrorist faction that masterminded the attacks. People were afraid of terrorism. The invisible enemy that no one could fight. So the country backed him, and, without approval from the United Nations, invaded Iraq in 2003.
It is now 2006. No WMDs have been recovered, nor has the military discovered any tangible link that Saddam Hussein had with al- Qaeda. It appears that the Bush Administration has made a bit of a mistake, and according to John W. Dean, columnist for CNN, it could be grounds for impeachment due to the fact that we were, essentially, lied to. (The article is dated 2003, link www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/.)
So there is the scapegoat for America. An invisible enemy to fight until doomsday, supplying an endless amount of fear and hatred to the American people.
"You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists."
The message is very clear in its form. Taken right from President Bush's mouth, it states that everyone must be on the same page, or face the unspoken consequences implied by this quote. The most outspoken individuals are labeled as "anti-American" or, even worse, "enemy combatants." When there are important things to be done, do we really have room for deviation from the objective? Of course not. That would be counter-productive.
Does such a quote not remind you of John Adams' presidency? The Alien and Sedition acts seem to be the precursor to the above quote. To refresh your memory, the Alien and Sedition acts made it illegal for people to criticize the presidency AND barred entry to (to the country) any French people, because of the undeclared war Adams was waging on French sea-vessels.
Indeed, does it not seem familiar? We are engaged in a "war" on terror, and the President is warning people not to question his policies, that "he knows best." Where is the First Amendment? Who cares? It is the first edict of "a goddamn piece of paper." Again, the presidents words.
This leads us to the next example of disregard for the Constitution; the USA PATRIOT Act.
It is an odd, and somewhat dangerous bill. Odd, because of one critical reason: The fact that it was at least three-hundred pages of writing, and Congress and the Senate passed it with a bare glance. Why would that be? Because it was after 9/11, and people were afraid and willing to do anything to guarantee their safety. Safety from terrorism, perhaps, but not from preying eyes.
Which brings us to why it is so dangerous. For one thing, it is stated that, under rules set by the PATRIOT Act, the F.B.I. may search a persons home without a search warrant, but only in homes owned by those who are deemed "threats" to national security. That rule also conveniently nullifies the Fourth Amendment.
Only in the most dire of circumstances, you say? Certainly not. That rule has been acted on many times in the waking months of 9/11 AND the war in Iraq. To whom? Mostly those of Middle Eastern descent. To this, many citizens of such ancestry can testify. And through this act, many Middle Eastern citizens have been detained by the government, and brought to detention centers in "undisclosed locations," according to the Amnesty International 2004 report on the United States. The reason? They apparently had "high intelligence value." The amount of time spent in these "undisclosed locations" sometimes added up to three years, and, at times, "disappearance." Thus far, the government has not commented on these people.
Moving on, the second danger brought on by the PATRIOT Act is the surveillance it allows on "potential threats." As I'm sure you are no doubt aware, such surveillance has only recently been investigated by the media. All cases except a very low number were turned down without a warrant to spy on these "threats."(E.G.: In 2004, 94 requests out of 1758 were modified.) The general reaction most of the public has to this is "well, if they're being spied on, then they must have done something to deserve it." That very same opinion did not hold true for the enforced arrests made on Middle Eastern citizens (and there wasn't a single citizen who was found to be a terrorist,) so why should it hold true here as well?
What is even more frightening is that major phone companies like Verizon are turning over phone records to the government without batting an eyelash. (Confirmed in USA Today article, link: www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm)
And finally, the right to assemble has been violated in the past as well, particularly since the war in Iraq, and Bush's inauguration. Apparently, authorities planted policemen in protest organization meetings to try and persuade them to use violence and terrorism to get their points across. Policemen also used tear gas and pepper spray against protestors during Bush's inauguration. These two claims have since been confirmed by authorities...yet no one has acted on it.
Away with the right to privacy, and the First Amendment. Away with the Fourth Amendment, then.
"Shock and Awe"
No country is unfamiliar with propaganda. Every government has used it to try and persuade people into thinking something, or against another. Some of its uses are in the spirit of competition and progress, which is fine, but much of it is geared to misleading the general public. An unfortunate fact of life, but one everyone should attempt to moderate.
Ever since the 9/11 attacks, most propaganda has been geared toward a unified country(through "United We Stand"), rooting out terrorism and recruitment for the Army.
Indeed, in the following months of 9/11, American flags were popping up on houses everywhere, rallying to Bush's statements on "exacting a full retaliation." Anyone who wouldn't stand for the pledge, nor sport an American flag on their porch was looked upon with suspicion.
In light of the dwindling amount of recruits the army has been receiving, recruitment propaganda has been kicked into over-drive as well. Now more than ever before you'll most likely see an advertisement for the army on both television and the internet. The usual message is that you are not living up to your full potential if it's not being lived in the military. Recruitment drives have also begun to spring up in higher amounts too, mostly in High School. Along with the increasing desperation in the military, and the high abundance of recruitment drives, something bad is bound to happen. And it already has, multiple times. A particularly infamous account of immoral recruitment tactics is when a recruiter threatened a student with a federal warrant if he did not appear at a particular place to be interviewed. The recruiter has since been promoted, upon being moved to another place in the country.
Finally, to make matters worse, the Administration has apparently been paying people to advertise for their policies. The most well-known example of this is the case with Armstrong Williams, one of the most outspoken black conservatives in the country. Last year, Williams was paid by the Board of Education $240,000 dollars to promote No Child Left Behind, an education policy followed by the Bush Administration. This event is known as "covert propaganda", which is described by lawmakers as "unethical and dangerous."
In response for this, several lawmakers sent a letter to the White House, requesting that Bush end his covert propaganda campaigns on January 7th, date 2005. Apparently it hasn't done any good.
Oceania was at war with Eurasia. It had always been at war with Eurasia
Disturbingly enough, for the past few dozen years, American policies have seemed to encompass the use of military and war far more than it did a hundred years ago. The reason? Most people chalk it up to the containment of communism, and they would be right, partially, but it is evident that it was World War Two, rather than the Cold War, that turned us into such an aggressor.
After World War two, the United States emerged, along with the Soviet Union, as a super-power. To many in the government, this meant that the U.S. could exercise its will upon countless nations, and not have anyone else blink an eye. The agenda just happened to be the containment of communism. And they attempted to do so, with borderline fanatical public support. Korea, Vietnam, and several nations in South America and Asia fell prey to U.S. intervention, through either war or "removal" of that nations current regime.
And in all of those situations, the military exhibited a vast disregard for civilian life and commonly held guidelines to keep those countries from "going Red." And all the American public cared about was keeping communism away. The lives of "Orientals" and "communists" were unimportant factors to them. Only when Vietnam was at its height did people finally start to wonder why they were there in the first place.
And now, today, the military is more important than ever for the Bush Administration. Already this country has invaded two sovereign nations, with a death toll of two thousand American troops, and more than one hundred-thousand Iraqi's. All in the interest of attacking terrorism. That's what we've been told, at least.
The only thing we have done in the Middle East has been creating more terrorists, not stopping them. And political strife is at its height in Iraq, with civil war looming on the horizon.
In essence, the industries of America, and the Bush Administration by association, have become addicted to war. They have been for many years now. It is a known fact that, when a country is at war, the industries of that nation make tons of money of said war. And oil, the precious resource that is dwindling, may be at the heart of it. In fact, according to a chart made by the OECD, military spending in this country outranks Official Development Aid by more than $100,000. What is also worth noting is that every country on that chart spends more on military than development by a large margin as well.
Examine the racial genocide occurring in the Darfur region of the Sudan. Two hundred thousand people have been killed there already, and what has the U.S. done about it? Nothing. And why? Because there is no profit to be made there. There are no resources worth exploiting to be had there. The same was true for the Rwandan Genocide of 1994. The U.S. never intervened. And now look at the Middle East. Plenty of resources, and nations willing to do business with the U.S., particularly Saudi Arabia. Install pro-U.S. governments in the Middle East, and you have a tons of money to be made.
So is the U.S. military, which is rapidly losing on recruits, the Global Policemen...or corporate heavies?
"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long as I'm the dictator." George W. Bush, December 18, 2000
After reading this, the similarities between our country and the ones we so steadfastly vowed to destroy are eriee. Very little rights have protected since 9/11. The focus on military is stronger than ever. People feel patriotic about a country they scarcely know anything about. You have your blind media and your corrupts.
It is all here, and if we do not act to make reforms it will make our lives much harder in the future than it is now. And yes, it is highly probable that we will, in fact, go fascist if such things continue on, uninhibited.
It goes all the way back to the people themselves. Some of them ignorant people who can care less. All the way into school, the next generation of people and politicians, you have them saying that they would be better off not knowing what the government was really doing. Whatever it is, it is in our best interests. And please, take our rights before you take American Idol, they say. Please give us security in exchange for our freedoms, no matter what the costs are. Happy and ignorant, rather than brooding and informed.
How to stop this? How to turn around from fascism? It is simple. Question all you hear. Criticize, and wonder if perhaps it can be done better. Never believe that there is a single solution to everything, before the people above you send troops off to do battle in a country so far away.
Above all, the important thing is to care.
![The USSR [Soviet Union] Avatar](http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/3896/hsef2.jpg)
