Unfortunately, instead of undergoing your very therapeutic detox program, the National Security State has decided to double down at every turn. The neocon cabal has substituted (not completely,
mind you) the forever wars against "terrorism" with a two-front Cold/Hot War against Russia and China. And all the political class seems to disagree about is over which is the higher priority, China or Russia. All the while, the MICIMATT rakes in the $$$ endlessly. We need your detox program more than ever, yet there is no indication that the addicts have a clue about the inherent dangers of their addiction, not to mention the death and destruction left in its wake.
Ban anyone in government who had any involvement with defense from taking any job with the War Industry when they leave office for 5 years after they leave office. Ban anyone in government from accepting any money or thing if value from the War Industry. End the corruption and we can end the wars.
I thought that was the case there also. There is a real need for more civilian control of the military. It seems to me that Biden and Congress are inclined to just let the generals do whatever they want.
I wholeheartedly agree Christopher! No wonder Bill's friend kept this for 14 years, and I hope it won't be another 14 before we see some action on the list of 7 Bill proposes.
For the help of the veterans who have PTSD, we should completely legalize hemp/cannabis for the health benefits and to decrease the pharma drugs that DO NOT help.
2009 really your friend was correct this is even more relevant today. But this really demonstrates just how lost we are as a society, how manipulated and ignorant (not stupid). As the NFL and College football return we need to prepare for flyovers and flags. God help us!
HEAD OF ‘NO LABELS’ THIRD PARTY EFFORT DISPUTES ‘SPOILER’ LABEL ATTACHED TO GROUP BY DEMOCRATS by Scott Norvell / The New York Sun 082723
The founding chairman of the No Labels group contemplating a third party run during next year’s presidential campaign says the group will only follow through on those efforts if it has a reasonable chance of winning the contest.
The former Connecticut senator leading the effort, Joe Lieberman, said on Fox News Sunday said it will hold a convention in April in Dallas, Texas to select candidates for the ticket. The nominating convention will be a bipartisan one, he said.
“The American people are telling us on polling we’re doing and discussions we’re having that they’ve lost confidence in the two major parties, and by large numbers they don’t want to have to choose again between President Trump and President Biden,” said Mr. Lieberman, who was the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate in the 2000 election.
The centrist group is most focused now on getting their No Labels brand on the ballot in all 50 states. So far, the group has managed to get on the ballot in only ten states — Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, South Dakota, Nevada and Florida.
“Our plan is to only run if we think we have a chance to win realistically,” he said. “WE JUST FINISHED A POLL OF 10,000 VOTERS IN THE EIGHT BATTLEGROUND STATES. AND WE GIVE THEM A CHOICE OF TRUMP, BIDEN AND A MODERATE INDEPENDENT THIRD CHOICE, AND 63 PERCENT SAY THAT THEY’RE OPEN TO A MODERATE INDEPENDENT THIRD CHOICE.”
IN THAT SAME POLL, THREE OUT OF FOURS VOTERS QUERIED SAID THAT MORE CHOICES ON THE BALLOT NEXT NOVEMBER CONTRIBUTE TO A “HEALTHIER AND MORE VIBRANT DEMOCRACY” RATHER THAN AMOUNTING TO AN EFFORT TO SPOIL THE RACE FOR ONE PARTY OVER THE OTHERS. “VOTERS IN THESE STATES ARE SENDING A SIMPLE AND POWERFUL MESSAGE: THEY WANT MORE CHOICES IN 2024 AND THEY DON’T LIKE ANYONE WORKING TO LIMIT THEIR CHOICES,” SAID NO LABELS CHIEF STRATEGIST RYAN CLANCY.
POLLS HAVE CONSISTENTLY SHOWN THAT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE UNENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE TWO CANDIDATES WHO ARE LIKELY TO TOP THEIR RESPECTIVE PARTY’S TICKETS NEXT YEAR. MORE THAN HALF OF THEM HAVE TOLD POLLSTERS RECENTLY THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN IS UNFIT FOR OFFICE AND HIS LIKELY CHALLENGER, PRESIDENT TRUMP, IS EQUALLY UNSUITED TO MERIT A SECOND TERM IN OFFICE.
Democratic party insiders have been warning their voters that a third-party candidacy would more than likely siphon more votes from the incumbent Mr. Biden and give Mr. Trump an edge in the general election. The Democratically aligned Third Way think tank disputes the notion that American voters will ever support a third party candidate in sufficient enough numbers to win an election.
“Sure, voters are grumpy about their likely D and R choices—they usually are,” said Third Way’s Matt Bennett. “But no, Biden and Trump are not ‘historically unpopular,’ and no, the door is not uniquely open for a third-party bid.”
In his appearance Sunday, however, Mr. Lieberman attempted to ease the concerns of his fellow Democrats and stressed that the No Labels movement is not out to spoil the election for anyone but rather to offer Americans another choice. He did not say how the party will select its candidates without a primary system in place.
“If we run it’s going to be a bipartisan ticket, so not only will we have concluded that it really can win, but because it’s bipartisan we’re confident it’s going to take equally from both parties so the idea that we’re going to spoil it and reelect President Trump just isn’t realistic,” Mr. Lieberman said.
12 GANDHI QUOTES ON NON-VIOLENCE, FORCE, AND THE STATE by Jon Miltimore / Foundation for Economic Education 071723
FEE Editor at Large Miltimore introduces these Gandhi quotes with:
“I used to think the philosophy of Gandhi and Tolstoy (whose work on non-violence, THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS WITHIN YOU I read many years ago) was crazy. I no longer do. In fact, Gandhi’s success in freeing India from colonial rule shows the power of non-violence, much like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s non-violent movement did in the US. And then there is Jesus of Nazareth, who changed the world not by the sword, but through sacrifice and suffering.
“WHAT’S CRAZY TO ME TODAY IS HOW COMFORTABLE PEOPLE ARE WITH THE IDEA OF USING VIOLENCE AND STATE COERCION TO IMPROVE THE WORLD. I DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW MORE PEOPLE DON’T RECOGNIZE THAT A SOCIETY BUILT ON VIOLENCE AND PLUNDER WILL NOT YIELD ROTTEN FRUIT.
“Gandhi knew better. And to help you understand his message on VIOLENCE—WHICH HE SAW INTERTWINED WITH THE STATE—here are some of his best quotes on the subject.” [EMPHASESE added.]
~ 1. “The state represents violence in a concentrated and organized form. The Individual has a soul, but as the state is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from violence to which it owes its very existence.” - Modern Review (October, 1935) p. 412. Interview with Nirmal Kumar Bose (9/10 November 1934)
~ 2. “Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.” -Satyagraha Leaflet No. 13 (3 May 1919)
~ 3. “By its very nature, non-violence cannot ‘seize’ power, nor can that be its goal. But non-violence can do more; it can effectively control and guide power without capturing the machinery of government. That is its beauty.”-Young India (Feb. 7, 1931) p. 162
~ 4. “Disobedience without civility, discipline, discrimination, non-violence, is certain destruction. Disobedience combined with love is the living water of life.” -Young India (1 May 1922)
~ 5. “Non-violence is the summit of bravery. And in my own experience, I have had no difficulty in demonstrating to men trained in the school of violence the superiority of non-violence.” -Young India, 1924-1926. S. Ganesan. 1927. pp. 36-37.
~ 6. “The man who uses coercion is guilty of deliberate violence. Coercion is inhuman.” -as quoted in Mahatma, edit., D.G. Tendulkar, Vol. 7
~ 7. “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so.” - Non-Violence in Peace & War (1962)
~ 8. “A good person will resist an evil system with his whole soul. Disobedience of the laws of an evil state is therefore a duty.” -Non-Violent Resistance
~ 9. “The cry for peace will be a cry in the wilderness, so long as the spirit of nonviolence does not dominate millions of men and women.”- "Non-Violence — The Greatest Force" in The World Tomorrow (5 October 1926)
~ 10. “In this age of the rule of brute force, it is almost impossible for anyone to believe that anyone else could possibly reject the law of final supremacy of brute force.” -The Doctrine Of The Sword (1920)
~ 11. “Nonviolence in its dynamic condition means conscious suffering. It does not mean meek submission to the will of the evil-doer, but it means the putting of one's whole soul against the will of the tyrant.” -The Doctrine Of The Sword (1920)
~ 12. “I object to violence because, when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary, the evil it does is permanent.” -Young India (21 May 1925)
The Spring 2003 issue of FREE INQUIRY has an article by Lawrence W Britt ~ “FASCISM ANYONE?” ~ that examines the fundamental characteristics, policies, and practices of 20th century FASCISM ~ from Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s Germany to Pinochet’s Chile and Suharto’s Indonesia ~ and invites readers to consider how applicable they are to 20th and then-early 21st century America. And it invites You to consider how applicable they are today, in the early third decade of 21st century America.
Within the context of today’s BV article, note particularly Items 3. IDENTIFICATION OF ENEMIES/SCAPE-GOATS AS A UNIFYING CAUSE; 4. THE SUPREMACY OF THE MILITARY/AVID MILITARISM; and 7. OBSESSION WITH NATIONAL SECURITY.
It concludes: “Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.”…:
.............
… [E]ven a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing SHED NEEDED LIGHT ON CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. {EMPHASIS added.]
For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, 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 IMPORTANCE 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/SCAPE-GOATS 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 shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and0 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, homosexuals, 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 supported it. A disproportionate 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 SEXISM. 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 support 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 portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
Continued at https://secularhumanism.org/2003/03/fascism-anyone/ with Items 8. RELIGION AND RULING ELITE TIED TOGETHER; 9. POWER OF CORPORATIONS PROTECTED; 10. POWER OF LABOR SUPPRESSED OR ELIMINATED; 11. DISDAIN AND SUPPRESSION OF INTELLECTUALS AND THE ARTS; 12. OBSESSION WITH CRIME AND PUNISHMENT; 13. RAMPANT CRONYISM AND CORRUPTION; and 14. FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS
Looks like New Zealand is getting infected with some rampant militarism of its own, as well. One can only wonder if ANZUKUS [pronounced “an-zoo-cuss”] will soon emerge as a counter force to BRICS’s recent additions of Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates… :
UNEASE OVER NEW ZEALAND OVERTURES TO US IN PACIFIC by Nick Hall / Consortium News 082823
Recent reports from New Zealand’s security state have sparked protest after all but suggesting the country join the U.S.-led AUKUS military alliance, a move that would reverse years of New Zealand’s independent foreign and defence policy and put it on a collision course with China.
Ex-Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark lamented the loss of what would remain of the country’s military sovereignty. Clark blasted an “orchestrated campaign” by defence and security officials to join the U.S., Britain and Australia in AUKUS.
In a Twitter thread, she said the government was “abandoning its capacity to think for itself and is instead cutting & pasting from Five Eyes partners.” New Zealand is part of a five-nation intelligence sharing arrangement with Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States.
Clark tweeted that “there appears to be an orchestrated campaign on joining the so-called ‘Pillar 2’ of #AUKUS which is a new defence grouping in the Anglosphere with hard power based on nuclear weapons.”
Unfortunately, instead of undergoing your very therapeutic detox program, the National Security State has decided to double down at every turn. The neocon cabal has substituted (not completely,
mind you) the forever wars against "terrorism" with a two-front Cold/Hot War against Russia and China. And all the political class seems to disagree about is over which is the higher priority, China or Russia. All the while, the MICIMATT rakes in the $$$ endlessly. We need your detox program more than ever, yet there is no indication that the addicts have a clue about the inherent dangers of their addiction, not to mention the death and destruction left in its wake.
I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER. We, as a country; have become ADDICTED to WAR.
Your 7-STEP program lays out a marvelous path to curb our addiction. I sure as hell hope at least some of your solutions are heeded.
A good first step is for us to JOIN in a DEMAND from politicians that the U.S. push for a negotiated settlement of the Ukraine war.
Ban anyone in government who had any involvement with defense from taking any job with the War Industry when they leave office for 5 years after they leave office. Ban anyone in government from accepting any money or thing if value from the War Industry. End the corruption and we can end the wars.
I think Congress waived a ten year ban on military people being appointed as Secretary of Defense to confirm Loyd Austin. They shouldn't have.
Yes. They also waived it for Gen. James Mattis under Trump.
I thought that was the case there also. There is a real need for more civilian control of the military. It seems to me that Biden and Congress are inclined to just let the generals do whatever they want.
This repeat post proves two things:
1. You’ve said it all beautifully &
2. You’ll have to say it again and again.
Keep it up until the walls of incomprehension fall down.
I wholeheartedly agree Christopher! No wonder Bill's friend kept this for 14 years, and I hope it won't be another 14 before we see some action on the list of 7 Bill proposes.
For the help of the veterans who have PTSD, we should completely legalize hemp/cannabis for the health benefits and to decrease the pharma drugs that DO NOT help.
2009 really your friend was correct this is even more relevant today. But this really demonstrates just how lost we are as a society, how manipulated and ignorant (not stupid). As the NFL and College football return we need to prepare for flyovers and flags. God help us!
Here is a variation of the “NONE OF THESE CANDIDATES” concept that is detailed here on BV at https://bracingviews.substack.com/p/reforming-americas-elections-the-notc-way...:
.......
HEAD OF ‘NO LABELS’ THIRD PARTY EFFORT DISPUTES ‘SPOILER’ LABEL ATTACHED TO GROUP BY DEMOCRATS by Scott Norvell / The New York Sun 082723
The founding chairman of the No Labels group contemplating a third party run during next year’s presidential campaign says the group will only follow through on those efforts if it has a reasonable chance of winning the contest.
The former Connecticut senator leading the effort, Joe Lieberman, said on Fox News Sunday said it will hold a convention in April in Dallas, Texas to select candidates for the ticket. The nominating convention will be a bipartisan one, he said.
“The American people are telling us on polling we’re doing and discussions we’re having that they’ve lost confidence in the two major parties, and by large numbers they don’t want to have to choose again between President Trump and President Biden,” said Mr. Lieberman, who was the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate in the 2000 election.
The centrist group is most focused now on getting their No Labels brand on the ballot in all 50 states. So far, the group has managed to get on the ballot in only ten states — Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, South Dakota, Nevada and Florida.
“Our plan is to only run if we think we have a chance to win realistically,” he said. “WE JUST FINISHED A POLL OF 10,000 VOTERS IN THE EIGHT BATTLEGROUND STATES. AND WE GIVE THEM A CHOICE OF TRUMP, BIDEN AND A MODERATE INDEPENDENT THIRD CHOICE, AND 63 PERCENT SAY THAT THEY’RE OPEN TO A MODERATE INDEPENDENT THIRD CHOICE.”
IN THAT SAME POLL, THREE OUT OF FOURS VOTERS QUERIED SAID THAT MORE CHOICES ON THE BALLOT NEXT NOVEMBER CONTRIBUTE TO A “HEALTHIER AND MORE VIBRANT DEMOCRACY” RATHER THAN AMOUNTING TO AN EFFORT TO SPOIL THE RACE FOR ONE PARTY OVER THE OTHERS. “VOTERS IN THESE STATES ARE SENDING A SIMPLE AND POWERFUL MESSAGE: THEY WANT MORE CHOICES IN 2024 AND THEY DON’T LIKE ANYONE WORKING TO LIMIT THEIR CHOICES,” SAID NO LABELS CHIEF STRATEGIST RYAN CLANCY.
POLLS HAVE CONSISTENTLY SHOWN THAT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE UNENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT THE TWO CANDIDATES WHO ARE LIKELY TO TOP THEIR RESPECTIVE PARTY’S TICKETS NEXT YEAR. MORE THAN HALF OF THEM HAVE TOLD POLLSTERS RECENTLY THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN IS UNFIT FOR OFFICE AND HIS LIKELY CHALLENGER, PRESIDENT TRUMP, IS EQUALLY UNSUITED TO MERIT A SECOND TERM IN OFFICE.
Democratic party insiders have been warning their voters that a third-party candidacy would more than likely siphon more votes from the incumbent Mr. Biden and give Mr. Trump an edge in the general election. The Democratically aligned Third Way think tank disputes the notion that American voters will ever support a third party candidate in sufficient enough numbers to win an election.
“Sure, voters are grumpy about their likely D and R choices—they usually are,” said Third Way’s Matt Bennett. “But no, Biden and Trump are not ‘historically unpopular,’ and no, the door is not uniquely open for a third-party bid.”
In his appearance Sunday, however, Mr. Lieberman attempted to ease the concerns of his fellow Democrats and stressed that the No Labels movement is not out to spoil the election for anyone but rather to offer Americans another choice. He did not say how the party will select its candidates without a primary system in place.
“If we run it’s going to be a bipartisan ticket, so not only will we have concluded that it really can win, but because it’s bipartisan we’re confident it’s going to take equally from both parties so the idea that we’re going to spoil it and reelect President Trump just isn’t realistic,” Mr. Lieberman said.
Source: https://www.nysun.com/article/head-of-no-labels-third-party-effort-disputes-spoiler-label-attached-to-group-by-democrats; EMPHASESE added.
Anyone or any 3rd party that wants to run is a "spoiler" to Democrats.
I don't know: Maybe the Democrats should simply run a better candidate?
Why is another choice a "spoiler" for Democrats but not for Republicans and Trump?
12 GANDHI QUOTES ON NON-VIOLENCE, FORCE, AND THE STATE by Jon Miltimore / Foundation for Economic Education 071723
FEE Editor at Large Miltimore introduces these Gandhi quotes with:
“I used to think the philosophy of Gandhi and Tolstoy (whose work on non-violence, THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS WITHIN YOU I read many years ago) was crazy. I no longer do. In fact, Gandhi’s success in freeing India from colonial rule shows the power of non-violence, much like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s non-violent movement did in the US. And then there is Jesus of Nazareth, who changed the world not by the sword, but through sacrifice and suffering.
“WHAT’S CRAZY TO ME TODAY IS HOW COMFORTABLE PEOPLE ARE WITH THE IDEA OF USING VIOLENCE AND STATE COERCION TO IMPROVE THE WORLD. I DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW MORE PEOPLE DON’T RECOGNIZE THAT A SOCIETY BUILT ON VIOLENCE AND PLUNDER WILL NOT YIELD ROTTEN FRUIT.
“Gandhi knew better. And to help you understand his message on VIOLENCE—WHICH HE SAW INTERTWINED WITH THE STATE—here are some of his best quotes on the subject.” [EMPHASESE added.]
~ 1. “The state represents violence in a concentrated and organized form. The Individual has a soul, but as the state is a soulless machine, it can never be weaned from violence to which it owes its very existence.” - Modern Review (October, 1935) p. 412. Interview with Nirmal Kumar Bose (9/10 November 1934)
~ 2. “Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.” -Satyagraha Leaflet No. 13 (3 May 1919)
~ 3. “By its very nature, non-violence cannot ‘seize’ power, nor can that be its goal. But non-violence can do more; it can effectively control and guide power without capturing the machinery of government. That is its beauty.”-Young India (Feb. 7, 1931) p. 162
~ 4. “Disobedience without civility, discipline, discrimination, non-violence, is certain destruction. Disobedience combined with love is the living water of life.” -Young India (1 May 1922)
~ 5. “Non-violence is the summit of bravery. And in my own experience, I have had no difficulty in demonstrating to men trained in the school of violence the superiority of non-violence.” -Young India, 1924-1926. S. Ganesan. 1927. pp. 36-37.
~ 6. “The man who uses coercion is guilty of deliberate violence. Coercion is inhuman.” -as quoted in Mahatma, edit., D.G. Tendulkar, Vol. 7
~ 7. “An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so.” - Non-Violence in Peace & War (1962)
~ 8. “A good person will resist an evil system with his whole soul. Disobedience of the laws of an evil state is therefore a duty.” -Non-Violent Resistance
~ 9. “The cry for peace will be a cry in the wilderness, so long as the spirit of nonviolence does not dominate millions of men and women.”- "Non-Violence — The Greatest Force" in The World Tomorrow (5 October 1926)
~ 10. “In this age of the rule of brute force, it is almost impossible for anyone to believe that anyone else could possibly reject the law of final supremacy of brute force.” -The Doctrine Of The Sword (1920)
~ 11. “Nonviolence in its dynamic condition means conscious suffering. It does not mean meek submission to the will of the evil-doer, but it means the putting of one's whole soul against the will of the tyrant.” -The Doctrine Of The Sword (1920)
~ 12. “I object to violence because, when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary, the evil it does is permanent.” -Young India (21 May 1925)
Source: https://fee.org/articles/12-gandhi-quotes-on-non-violence-force-and-the-state/ .
The Spring 2003 issue of FREE INQUIRY has an article by Lawrence W Britt ~ “FASCISM ANYONE?” ~ that examines the fundamental characteristics, policies, and practices of 20th century FASCISM ~ from Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s Germany to Pinochet’s Chile and Suharto’s Indonesia ~ and invites readers to consider how applicable they are to 20th and then-early 21st century America. And it invites You to consider how applicable they are today, in the early third decade of 21st century America.
Within the context of today’s BV article, note particularly Items 3. IDENTIFICATION OF ENEMIES/SCAPE-GOATS AS A UNIFYING CAUSE; 4. THE SUPREMACY OF THE MILITARY/AVID MILITARISM; and 7. OBSESSION WITH NATIONAL SECURITY.
It concludes: “Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.”…:
.............
… [E]ven a cursory study of these fascist and protofascist regimes reveals the absolutely striking convergence of their modus operandi. This, of course, is not a revelation to the informed political observer, but it is sometimes useful in the interests of perspective to restate obvious facts and in so doing SHED NEEDED LIGHT ON CURRENT CIRCUMSTANCES. {EMPHASIS added.]
For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, 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 IMPORTANCE 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/SCAPE-GOATS 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 shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and0 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, homosexuals, 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 supported it. A disproportionate 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 SEXISM. 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 support 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 portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
Continued at https://secularhumanism.org/2003/03/fascism-anyone/ with Items 8. RELIGION AND RULING ELITE TIED TOGETHER; 9. POWER OF CORPORATIONS PROTECTED; 10. POWER OF LABOR SUPPRESSED OR ELIMINATED; 11. DISDAIN AND SUPPRESSION OF INTELLECTUALS AND THE ARTS; 12. OBSESSION WITH CRIME AND PUNISHMENT; 13. RAMPANT CRONYISM AND CORRUPTION; and 14. FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS
Looks like New Zealand is getting infected with some rampant militarism of its own, as well. One can only wonder if ANZUKUS [pronounced “an-zoo-cuss”] will soon emerge as a counter force to BRICS’s recent additions of Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates… :
UNEASE OVER NEW ZEALAND OVERTURES TO US IN PACIFIC by Nick Hall / Consortium News 082823
Recent reports from New Zealand’s security state have sparked protest after all but suggesting the country join the U.S.-led AUKUS military alliance, a move that would reverse years of New Zealand’s independent foreign and defence policy and put it on a collision course with China.
Ex-Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark lamented the loss of what would remain of the country’s military sovereignty. Clark blasted an “orchestrated campaign” by defence and security officials to join the U.S., Britain and Australia in AUKUS.
In a Twitter thread, she said the government was “abandoning its capacity to think for itself and is instead cutting & pasting from Five Eyes partners.” New Zealand is part of a five-nation intelligence sharing arrangement with Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States.
Clark tweeted that “there appears to be an orchestrated campaign on joining the so-called ‘Pillar 2’ of #AUKUS which is a new defence grouping in the Anglosphere with hard power based on nuclear weapons.”
Continued at https://consortiumnews.com/2023/08/28/unease-amid-signs-new-zealand-would-defend-us-pacific-interests/ .
For another perspective on this, see Caitlin Johnstone's latest piece "Only Idiots Believe The US Is Protecting Australia From China" at https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/only-idiots-believe-the-us-is-protecting .
We need as a Society to stop being so annoyed by everything and just embrace all the Character's that are out there...!
I love my country, its government, its neocons and its military are not my country.
The U.S. acts more like Lloyd Bridges in “High Noon.”