I've long agreed with this notion. The problem is as old as Athens and Rome--they were both democracies. We're at a crossroads and it really depends on the people. We have to decide which we want: democracy and quality of life or empire. The latter always ends badly and won't co-exist with the former.
The most amazing thing to comtemplate about the pattern is that in Germany it took WWI reparations depression hyperinflation and other disasters to push to Germans into giving up their liberties and falling into the hands of a demagogue. But in the U. S. all it took was flying 2 planes into the WTC and 3000 deaths. That is the single most telling point about how weak the U. S democracy is.
I've read Naomi Wolfe's book and have been passing it on to all my colleagues and friends. The key point is that these are all 'tipping points" and once they get beyond 'tipping' we are all in trouble.
I'm not terribly concerned about a totalitarian. Nazi-esque regime coming to power. However it will be a less remove fascist society. Not only are many principles of fascism a part of the Republican party there are elements that are accepted by the Democrats as well. And it's hard to say that because people only look at the most grotesque example of fascism in Nazi Germany. I think America however will look much more like early Mussolini Italy within fifty years.
The author points out the tactics of extremist threats against democracy. However does she point out what needs to be done to counter this threat? Moreover does she have in mind specific instances of prior threats in the American context and what eventually was done in reaction to those in their time? Does she have a fundamental doubt about the resilience of America as a democratic republic?
Brian could you put Naomi Wolf's 10 steps from democracy to dictatorship on your place? I can't remember them all. & I want to cite them to other people. And was denial of the vote to marginalized populate (through "felon" lists; refusal to provide translators as legally required to voters who needed them; & last-minute diversion from voting sites in minority neighborhoods) covered in those 10 steps? Thanks.
It alarms me is how conservative force-first approach to foreign policy is permeating the society. Its happening in a uniquely American way. It's highly profitable for ABC Radio and Rush Limbaugh to lay on the Propaganda. FOX is often the most popular source for news! And I see beer commercials during highly watched games which subtly suggest that we "stay on course etc. Slowly it becomes normal to be right wing and the opposition is marginalized right in our advertisements and products.
I think the one component of Nazism that is most assuredly not going to be a part of any future fascist America is the racial element. "Illegal immigrants" might be a common fear tactic but I don't see Americans getting on board with a genocide. And this is the big problem with drawing comparisons with what happened in Germany is because people immediately leap on the racial element as if it's a necessary part of fascism and it simply isn't.
What about the repression by the NYPD of the peaceful protesters and roundup of even those documenting their arrests during the Republican Convention and the ongoing crackdown against the peaceful cyclists who rode for years without causing any skies to fall.
These are both examples of the exertion of power to intimidate the populace. Another example are the "terrorist drills" conducted by the NYPD that we've all had to suffer through where they drive columns of police cars through the streets sirens blazing to go nowhere only to stage a "presence" = intimidation!
Yes I have been saying this since the Propaganda about the war has started. Naomi Wolf can be a polemist (The Beauty Myth) however I don't think it's too far fetched or off-base to suggest that Karl Rove and all Bush's friends looked to the success of Hitler. Stalin. Mussolini and GOEBBELS for ideas on how to progress their ideas and plans. It was Geobbels who said. "if you repeat a lie often enough eventually people will belive it." In February 2003. 67% of the people in this country believe Saddam Hussein was personally responsible for 9/11. Where did this idea come from? From the advertising campaign that sieve. Cheney. Rumsfeld. Bush. Rove set in motion. We went to war a month later. Let us not forget these famous statement: The Smokin Gun; Smoking Them Out of Their Holes; The Mushroom Cloud; Axis of Evil; The Evil Forces... Very powerful imagery. Very powerful. She's not so off...
To alter this argument really valid. I think she also has to address the concerns of the other side. It's very important to protect civil liberties but the need for security is also very legitimate. Rather than label the other side with names like traitor or potential dictator we need to reach compromise on this issue. So what kinds of compromises can we discuss?
I like Naomi Wolf but she is way off the mark here. She is selectively plucking similarities in order to construct an argument which is ending up as a very blurry blob. The core intention of Bush vs. Hitler. {& Stalin} et al is radically different.
furnish could better be compared to Putinm his agenda & his war with Chechnya - and yet that would be a huge be since Putin arrests his dissidents etc.
btw. Bush is pro-immigration so he can hardly compared to Hitler in that regard - she is confusing the sources of issues and blurring the lines too much.
Brian thanks so much for consistently blurring the differences between illegal immigrants with immigrants. It's my understanding that the Minuteman project is geared towards illegal immigration only.
I believe that immigration is great and has made this nation strong and diverse and welcome people from anywhere we do have laws.
Why in almost any discussion about how this country treats people are Native Americans and Black People left out. Throughout the history of this country it has been quite acceptable for these two groups to be treated the worst. People have been legally tortured and had their civil rights denied repressed subverted… throughout the history of this country. The only thing that is different today is that the ruling class is all of a sudden loosing their rights at another blip in history and so now it’s an issue again. Quite hypocritical. We’ll see how much the Dems begrudge the expanded presidential powers after the election next year.
Doesn't the Reichstag fire-9/11 analogy make it urgent and imperative for professional journalists finally to investigate the unanswered questions of the 9/11 Commission inform? We have two wars and loss of Habeas. 2nd. 4th and 8th Amendments already! The FBI says there is "no hard evidence" linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11! Yet the press has been supine taking the "official conspiracy theory" - that 19 Saudis with boxcutters utterly defeated our vaunted NORAD defenses - at face value! Whether "false flag" or massive incompetence the press should "question authority" about this because eit is TERRIFYING EITHER WAY! 9/11 is Naomi's STEP ONE - the precipitating tool for the "war OF terror" again our democratic rights and heritage!!
I wonder if Ms. Wolf realizes that she is echoing so many of the arguments of fringe conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones who have been harping on this point for nearly a decade. Strange to see this conversation moving into the mainstream. While I commend her for have the gall to write the book. I'd like to see the crazies on the fringes get some credit for putting forth this hypotheses so long before she did. It's certainly something the public should be talking about.
My daughter just was asking me about Weimar Germany last night for a class in her high school. So I was just thinking about this issue. I just ordered both of these books. The only thing I can say at this point is that this society is a very pluralistic society much more than Germany was at that time. I do desire that these issues would be brought out in school settings so that yound people can be more informed about what is facing this country/
Your use of Prof. Weitz as an alternative is next to useless - he disagrees with her only on the margin. You denied us what could have been a lively debate. You could have made even a token of a challenge by asking for example:
1 - Rather than dismissing the threat of Radical Islam as simply that which is used to go up this fascistic over-reaction and facilely quoting Gordon Brown (out of context) referring to it as a crime please describe how you see that threat. We note your grudging acknowledgement that 9/11 was not set up but the government (seemingly contracting your earlier statement). What is the significance of 9/11?
2 - How does your theory deal with the fact that there is a Pres election in 2008 likely to be won by Dems?
3 - What is your reaction to the fact that conservative speakers are frequently shouted down and pied on campus?
I do not commend her for writing this screed. She must have a big mortgage to pay for her to write such alarmist crap her arguments sound exactly like the arguments she accuses the right of making. She makes light of our attck by terrorists- first in 93 and then again in 2001 - almost 8 years later- but creates paranoia regarding Blackwater..
Fine. Blackwater is alarming- good -we all know it and steps are being taken to reign it in.. and with the next few years- well. and one of you wrote - what will she write about if Obama is elected? exactly...
wish the audio would come online so I could hear this segment- one thing about Hiter and the Germans is this: Hitler's rise was supported by Prescott Bush and his fellow investors at UBC - at the same time that the Russians were supported by the same forces looking to profit from another war.
But certainly to say that we are a closed society today is ridiculous. I came from a country that had a dictatorship. I have construe a lot about countries today that are still dictatorships and we are certainly not that. However to think that we can't ever change state that is ridiculous. Not only is it possible but it's likely. Democracy is the most fragile form of all governments and it must end at some point. Nothing lasts forever.
I think Bush has pushed the boundaries moreso than any other but he's not looking to be king. If he wanted the crown he'd have it by now because he has gotten so little resistance. It will be future Presidents who might covet the crown that we should be afraid of.
RE NYCM's comment above you are mistaken. Don't be lulled into complacency -- construe her schedule it is written for you! The closing down of change state societies has always happened GRADUALLY (like the proverbial frog cooked by degrees so doesn't jump out of the pot). Overt censorship is not needed if there is intimidation and self-censorship of the touch.
Few will risk being labelled "unpatriotic" or "whacko conspiracy nut" - much less the CAREER-ENDING retaliation such as Dan Rather experienced. How chilling is that for the up-and-coming careerist journalists?
For the courageous like Ms Wolf instead of censorship there is simple marginalization from mainstream media and audiences. You have freedom of speech here as long as only a few folks are listening! Notice that The End of America will NOT be reviewed by the New York Times nor invited on TV talk shows unlike those who put out the party line. Bill Moyer's video "Buying the War" (free online) traces how the "journalists" who pushed the propaganda lies justifying the disastrous Iraq invasion/occupation are STILL seen on TV talk shows and major newspaper columns and taken as credible. "expert" pundits!
Wolf's views are over-the-top but the bottom line is that as a Sinclair Lewis book reminded us back in the 1930s. "it can happen here." The Constitution was written to limit gov't power esp the power of the executive. We need to wary of presidents who evaluate they can do whatever they want esp when it's without congressional approval and it's on very shaky constitutional grounds.
BTW since I'm a proud Democrat. I would like to say that I realize bin Laden is a threat but he's not as large of a threat the right-wing makes him out to be.
He cannot invade the U. S. He can only take potshots by blowing up planes or whatever. Yes as a "lefty," I'm for putting a stop to bin Laden (too bad we didn't cognise we had al-Qaeda on its knees at the end of 2001) and for changing America's image among Muslims but I also know that he can only bring down the U. S if WE let our fears get the better of us. That's why I oppose Bush et al. I will not give in to fear.
As per the question I said Brian should have asked the braying Ms Wolf how does her (your) point of view communicate the fact that Bush/Cheney will be out in 14 months and likely replaced by Dems? Do you think he's fixin' to stay? If not how do you explain this fascist motivation? As for the "changing America's image among Muslims". I'd suggest (rather than joining Ms Wolf et al in "blaming America first" you look to the mostly backward and manipulated press education and mosque teaching in the Muslim world with very few democracies in sight all run for the benefit of autocratic regimes and their only alternative jihadist imams the latter transparently funded by the Saudis. And add to the "visualise of America in the Muslim world" a - our mostly well integrated Muslim population and b - the fact that many Muslims still want to and do come here.
analyse out MEMRI com for what is being broadcast in the Muslim world. There is a classic divide between the Left and the Right. The former thinks "it's us" the latter thinks "it's them". Count me among the latter and glad to be the idealogical foe of Ms Wolf.
I remember the nuns telling us that the Soviets were just waiting process we got too fat and lazy to pounce (and of course to go home and say our rosaries for the conversion of Russia)
In the words of Roseanne Roseannadanna. "It's always sompthin'" to feel unsafe about and there are always s--t disturbers but who knows what will come about? I think we all rolled over and played dead when Al Gore's presidency was stolen from him and we didn't go out into teh streets like French people do when they're pissed off - but Al Gore's wasn't the first - JFK was worried that Tricky Dick would ask for a recount.
I don't know what to make of anything I see or comprehend but I do worry about presidential arrogance left unchecked and fascism like charity begins at home.
What do you think the "K Street Project" and other initiatives were meant to do? What do you think the initiative to pump religious school grads from places like Patrick Henry College throughout the gov's infrastructure is meant to do? What do you think declaring an unending "War" could wind up doing when you have an Executive that firmly believes it should have the right to alter its own laws while suspending ours?
Emasculating opposing parties by any means possible could well be eat's 11th Step--legal but as distasteful to normal Americans as torture (used to be). No party deigned to do it to this enormous all-encompassing extent until this administration.
No be how much you agree with their ostensible objectives if you think these people respect our system of government you're sadly deluded. Based on established past behavior they appear to be ready willing and (with our acquiescence) able to do _anything_ to stay in power.
Gene - I don't understand how my simple stating that Bush/Cheney will be out of power is a "naive prognistication". Does "they appear to be ready willing and... able to do anything to stay in power" mean that you are stating that Bush/Cheney undergo that intention. If so please state it clearly so readers can judge your ideas accordingly. If not. I guess I'd suggest a bit more clarity anyway - hard to understand what you're saying except that you Bush is some sort of demon (what an original thought provoking and interesting idea).
Read more carefully. I see why you espouse the positions you do--you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.
But you do raise an interesting aspect of Wolf's schedule. She talks about _actions_ by people/departments/the Bush administration. She doesn't complain per se against some enemy nor waste time on unknowable motivations. She lets the actions speak for themselves.
In fact she urges the military the FBI the conservative Christian movement and all with a stake in Democracy to "rest up directly to confront those who have committed crimes against the Constitution--and hold them accountable as the Founders trusted us to do."
I saw the link - an exercise in paranoia and bad-faith (readers - check it out). Just to be polite to introduce you to dialogue rather than the sloganeering to which you seem compelled and to let other readers see the full depth of your point of view. I'll ask you just one more time - Are you stating that Bush/Cheney are somehow planning to stay in office? If not then what is their "fascist plot to consolidate power" (or whatever you buffoons call it) about. Please be specific and coherent (from your previous posts. I'd recommend that you consult a dictionary for these terms). (hint - reference to K Street project and Patrick Henry University are not relevant or persuasive. And in the litany of "things moving us towards tyranny" why not take a stab at the consistent shouting down of conservative speakers on campus and the incessant demonizing of the President (he's stupid/incurious/manipulated/a religious zealot/corrupt). You folks actually accuse him of being the world's first stupid Machavellian.
And re NYPD "parades of power" drills - I remember in the late 60s anti-war and anti police brutality voters wore the flag to assert their entitlement to patriotism as the guard started wearing flags - we stood up to the would-be usurpers then we stood up to Nixon and we won. We are definitely part of the equation we are just not exercising our power.
This is strange--I checked for the playback link late last night & saw it there (in addition to the YouTube link) but now it's not there. I hope the link to the beat segment will be added (again?).
I don't think I've seen a richer collection of obscurantist argument techniques all jumbled up and spewed out in just a single paragraph--it's a classic of inept regurgitation.
Your message clumsily executed as it is is a bald-faced primer in how some over-ardent politicos think an argument should be won ie with the use of:
--a flak-storm of side issues extraneous accusations goofy reframings and straw men (followed with an appeal for coherence and intellectual honesty).
Till this week I taught that the left is just looking to put roadblocks to everything the President is doing. But when I listened to Naomi's comments it struck me that while we aren't there yet to be a a nation with a dictator but how can we let a single person have so much power. Then today when I heard that the NIE said that Iran froze their nuclear program for 4 years already that made me really upset at the president for telling lies again and again. How can we let it happen that 1 person should have so much power with no real over-site?
Hoo boy. Daniel that's a whole 'nother can of worms--the deceit AND/OR sheer incompetence of the person who has amassed the singular power Wolf fears.
Intel told Bush there was new info on Iran but wouldn't express him what the info was?? That makes no sense on any level whatsoever. Why would you tell a lie that makes you look incompetent? We can only conclude because the truth is even worse.
It's astounding what this administration thinks it can get away with. They can say anything and it just gets lapped up. They're not even trying anymore. Sadly for the country they don't have to.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/episodes/2007/11/27/segments/89461
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
