On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:46:18 -0400, <n5hsr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>I didn't see YOU in Church today.
>
>Let's see, genocide in Iraq, Christianity in our public institutions,
>secret prisons, torture, domestic surveillance of American citizens,
>and now, persecution of science. This should be clear to everyone now:
>
>For the purpose of this perspective, consider the following regimes:
>Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco?s Spain, Salazar?s ****tugal,
>Papadopoulos?s Greece, Pinochet?s Chile, and Suharto?s Indonesia.
>To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities,
>cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all
>followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding,
>and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown
>so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and
>abuses is possible.
>
>Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that
>link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of
>power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in
>some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level
>of similarity.
>
>
>
>1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the
>prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins,
>the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the
>regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always
>obvious.
>Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were
>common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled
>with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
>
>
>2. Disdain for the im****tance of human rights. The regimes themselves
>viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the
>objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the
>population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by
>marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was
>egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
>
>
>3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most
>significant common thread among these regimes was the use of
>scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other
>problems, to ****ft blame for failures, and to channel frustration in
>controlled directions. The methods of choice---relentless propaganda
>and disinformation---were usually effective. Often the regimes would
>incite "spontaneous" acts against the target scapegoats, usually
>communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities,
>traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists,
>homo***uals, and "terrorists." Active opponents of these regimes were
>inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
>
>
>4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always
>identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure
>that sup****ted it. A dispro****tionate share of national resources was
>allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The
>military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever
>possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and
>increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
>
>
>5. Rampant ***ism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and
>the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably
>viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion
>and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in
>Draconian laws that enjoyed strong sup****t by the orthodox religion of
>the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
>
>
>6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media
>were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray
>from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure
>media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to
>resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats.
>The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the
>power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public
>unaware of the regimes' excesses.
>
>
>7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security
>apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually
>an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any
>constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting
>"national security," and questioning its activities was ****trayed as
>unpatriotic or even treasonous.
>
>
>8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes,
>the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless
>by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves
>to the predominant religion of the country and chose to ****tray
>themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the
>ruling elite's behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the
>religion was generally swept under the rug.
>Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders
>of the faith and opponents of the "godless." A perception was
>manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an
>attack on religion.
>
>
>9. Power of cor****ations protected. Although the personal life of
>ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large
>cor****ations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The
>ruling elite saw the cor****ate structure as a way to not only ensure
>military production (in developed states), but also as an additional
>means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often
>pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of
>interests, especially in the repression of "have-not" citizens.
>
>
>10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was
>seen as the one power center that could challenge the political
>hegemony of the ruling elite and its cor****ate allies, it was
>inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass,
>viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes,
>being poor was considered akin to a vice.
>
>
>11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals
>and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them
>were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were
>considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal.
>
>Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty
>harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were
>strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and
>literature should serve the national interest or they had no right
>to exist.
>
>
>12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes
>maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison
>populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked
>power, leading to rampant abuse. "Normal" and political crime were often
>merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against
>political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or
>"traitors" was often promoted among the population as an excuse for
>more police power.
>
>
>13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and
>close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves.
>This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive
>financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would
>gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite
>were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well:
>for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security
>apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was
>largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
>
>
>14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public
>opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates
>were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the
>desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the
>election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters,
>destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning
>to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
>
>
>Does any of this ring alarm bells? It should.
>
>If not already committed, the above has been demonstrated to be desirable
>by America's Neocon right.
Well done.
|
