The USA is moving toward fascism.

[nolawitch58]

There are too many people who take their liberty for granted or worse, they only consider their own liberty as valid and to hell with others' liberties. They are allowing the government to erode our freedom. They are unflinchingly supportive of curtailing others' freedoms. Their ox isn't being gored so they don't care.

Let's look at the dictionary definition of fascism.

a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

This perfectly defines what's happening in our nation's capital. Authority is being centralized by the majority party in the executive, legislative and they're trying to acquire a majority in the judiciary. There may be no apparent dictator, but I assure you the dictator is real and consists of a cabal of neocon hypochristians. The authority is driving the country further and further into debt, trying to bankrupt us so that we are forced to dismantle as many social programs as possible. They are using terrorism as an excuse to censor and suspend ordinary civil liberties. They also spout a particularly virulent form of nationalism that denies our role in a global community and economy. Rather than racism, they have hitched their wagon to religiosity and revile any who do not share their beliefs as un-American.

A secondary definition: n : a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

This administration wants everyone to take orders from the top down. This administration acts like we work for them instead of vice versa. This administration is the most imperial in outlook of any other administration of the recent past.

In a way, Bush is a lot like Michael Jackson. Both surround themselves only with people who kowtow to their world views. Both have done things that would be quashed fairly readily at lower socio-economic levels. Both are deluded by their wealth that they are above the rules of logic and decent society. Both seem to have a disdain for reality. Unfortunately, Michael is the only one so far who has to answer for his transgressions.

Granted a huge number of Americans will never wake up, so deep is their religiously-induced coma. When will those who are just dozing come around and see that the so-called "good Christians" they put into the White House and halls of Congress are nowhere near embodying the ideals of their saviour? The sheeple don't understand that they are the instruments of their own slaughter.

They cry woe when something the government does negatively impacts them, but they voted for the assholes. They are so duped by their leaders that the alternatives would have been so much worse. Yet, they cannot formulate a rational, real-life scenario by which all of the horrors would have happened. In the meantime, the wonderful lies the administration told them about the Constitutional marriage amendment and other horseshit have vanished, replaced by nasty legislation about bankruptcy designed to protect corporate profits at the expense of the average person who falls into debt as a result of catastrophic illness and the catastrophic bills that result.

Wake up, Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public! This administration doesn't like you as much as you think it does. You and your offspring are mere cannon fodder for the elitist, wealthy bastards who have a sense of entitlement to their positions in government by virtue of their birth to other wealthy bastards.

Comments

[celticess.livejournal.com]

Hmm does Kerry or any other "opposition" in office actually do the debating and keeping the main government on track like ours is supposed to do here? Here while we have a main government they didn't get majority vote so the two next big parties share opposition power. They must all agree in order to get far so they band together on views they share and get their asses debated off by those that don't share it. If they are preventing your opposition party from doing the same ours do here then that is sad. You don't quite get the same justice. And probably most people if they aren't net savy or in their own little world don't realize what is all going on. One day and they will wake up to things they didn't realize til it was too late. Because they took someones word for it instead of thinking and asking questions.

Oddly I don't totally hate Bush. Oh I disagree with several decisions of his I know of. But during the debates I wasn't very happy with either of the two front runners.(though ok the story of how Bush met his wife was cute and Kerry's pot shot during that segment of what they were discussing wasn't very good. Made him look worse than his opponent) Too bad they have such a planned out debate and are so into taking comical pot shots at eachother then really tackling something and actually saying something. :(

You might think it is strictly religious focus. From the outside looking in. It seems to some of us people just want to believe in something. They just want things to work and not have to think. They only think when it affects them personally. So they shrug off some laws and such. Environmentally some don't care because if they did they might lose their job in x industry that effects the environment. Or so far the pollution has hit them personally bad enough for them to take notice. If they do they probably blame their neigbour next door or the guy in the next state over than realize what they are doing. Anyways... People just want to believe in something. They don't get the hostility from other countries because some might not be aware of past relations or even current relations issues and want to see it from both ends. They like their comfy little world and there are people who are supposedly in position of trust saying x thing they will do will *garantee* them that. They felt so safe til awful stuff happened they want that safety back. So panic and do exactly what those people that hurt them wanted. Shut themselves off, hide, rattle a fist and say my way or the highway, and try to show some unity to give people back their comfort and dispel those questioning.(governmentally speaking how things appear) :(

/me sorry if that was a ramble. I'm feeling a bit out of it and just got done helping my son with math and doing several other things at the same time. :P

The majority party is ensconced in two branches of government.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

They are trying to load up the third branch of government with their majority party. In effect, they are trying to create a one-party system. Canada and other countries that have multiple-party systems really seem more balanced in that no one party can get so powerful as to quash dissent as the jerks here are trying to do.

Your musings have prompted me to do a statistical anaylsis of the executive and legislative branches of our government by party affiliation. As soon as I have finished compiling the data and figure out how to do graphs in OpenOffice, I'll post the results. So far, it looks very interesting.

Re: The majority party is ensconced in two branches of government.

[celticess.livejournal.com]

That sort of polarization is scary. Is it occuring because any other party is afraid of the ruling party? or perhaps bought them in some way? Because the main party and any opposition they have in hmm congress I guess you call it there(House of commons here). Is healthy. It opens debate, makes people think and they try to find a compromise for the common good. Or it keeps it on track so things don't get through that the populus might not of wanted.

I also think we do have some scripted type debates like what I saw of the american election last time. But there is probably far more time when the little people running for office(below the leader of their party) get interviewed by press with their opponents present. They can sort of prepare but they get asked alot of things they have to answer on spot without cue cards or prep. I was kind of happy when they actually showed increased interest in the green party. Press covered their rising popularity. Which in turn probably helped raise awareness. Though we have a similar problem in both countries. People voting with lesser evils than what they really believe. But if it's something they feel strong about they protest or vote with the one that represents that issue best. My roommate voted conservative last time because they were pro gun lobbyist here. I refused to vote for them because alliance party was racist and joined conservatives, then the heritage party which is religion driven joined them too. I don't want religion driving government I wan't something neutral that represents all people not a sub group and forces their will on others. :P

Anyways I think your grap will be interesting to see. And I have to ask this though it makes me sad to ask. Do many americans realize what all the patriot acts cover and how they can be used? I know a ufie on soapbox. They go by a slightly different alias than they did when they used to be on UF. They are pro patriot act renewal. I don't know if that act has some good parts. It might for all I know of had some good intentions. But the way it's done lets so many misuses of it and abuses of it happen. Which in turn abuses the rights of americans and others visiting the US. :(

I will be extremely interested

[slamlander.livejournal.com]

in your raw data, when you get it.

Re: I will be extremely interested

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

I've got it and it looks really cool all graphed out. I'm having a hell of a time figuring out a way to port the graphs from OpenOffice to a .jpg format so I can put them on my webpage and link to it here. Maybe this would be a good question for UF. There are so many *nix people over there who are willing to answer technical questions.

Graphs for your perusal.

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

OK, those don't look so hot in Preview. How about the links to the ones online? http://home.bellsouth.net/p/s/community.dll?ep=330&groupID=259348&folderview=list&ck=

They look a lot better in Calc.

Re: I will be extremely interested

[slamlander.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's the raw data that I want. However, I'll make a deal with you;

1) I believe that OpenOffice is compatible with Excell.
2) FileAttach the spreadsheet to me Slamlander@livejournal.com
3) I massage it for you and send back the Jpegs
4) I can also toss them on our web servers here.

Re: I will be extremely interested

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

On its way to you. Thanks.

[ozanbaba.livejournal.com]

this remind me Philip K. Dick
he actually saw that in USA freedom can easyly be taken and it would be lagel, too
read laws Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public
after and you will see that you are traped in and there is no way out anymore

actually,

[saminz.livejournal.com]

I would like Jack and Jenny Q. Public, age 12/14, to read a "Nola-witches newsletter" in high school ;-)!
Preferably spreading it to the fundamental institution next door, hehehe....
Very well done, of course!
*applauds*

Very well said

[framstag.livejournal.com]

I think this really hits the point. Thanks for this entry.

But I'm afraid, that not enough US American citizens will read it, and then just a minority would think about, what you said.

Time yet, to revive the radical underground?

[slamlander.livejournal.com]

What is very strange is that, a lot of these folks were the very ones leading the protests of the 60's. Have they forgotten what they stood for?

I might also note that your vitriol is a bit mis-targeted. Never underestimate the willingness of the "religious elite" to sacrifice their own for the perceived "greater good". This is regardless of whichever religion is in vogue. For today, in the US, it is Christianity, in Arab world, it is Islam. Both look like the same phenomenon to me. In both cases, the basis is a call to fundamentalism. The only place that looks like it has any balance, at this time, is here in Europe.

In this regard, I might point out that what we call "Christians" are really Judeo-Christians and "Muslims" are really Judeo-Muslims. This is because they have the same roots in Judaism. They share the same Old Testament and much of the historic conflict center around the same holy sites (St. John the Baptist, for example, is interred in a Muslim Mosque, in Damascus, which only the Pope, among all Christians, has been allowed to visit). Islam was founded, around 630AD, by a man that studied the life and times of Jesus Christ. He formed his own opinions and thus, we have Islam, also based on Christ's teachings. Note that he was heavily influenced by the Coptic Christians of Egypt, a rather virulent, intolerant, and militant form of Christianity (based on the Lao Tzu principles of a group being defined by its enemies).

There are massive group social forces at work here that none of us are immune to. Marx had one thing correct, group opinions do shift in predictable ways and they are reflected, in our societies, at a meta level. Nazi fascism is a direct result of such forces, Hitler being a convenient vessel. The rising American Christian Fascism is another possible inevitability, with Bush being the current puppet of choice. Bush is only surfing the current wave (which is, I think, a fairly good analogy as waves cannot be resisted. You either ride them or duck and let them pass overhead but, you cannot stop them).

The present American society was defined, in Lao Tzu's terms, by its long-term opposition to the USSR and the "Red Menace", which represented totalitarianism. With the USSR in collapse, the US is now in the process of becoming the new USSR. Thus following the predictions of Lao Tzu. This also works in concert with Karl Marx' predictions that the next socio-political phase, of a society, following a democracy, is a totalitarian State, with the transition being a democratic tyranny. Thus, we have two different theories predicting the same result.

It is my opinion that if it were not for Bush then there would be someone else equally as heinous. Remember that the people of the US are going along with this en-mass, like the lemmings that they always were. Bush speaks to their Calvinistic core. But, he isn't the only one. It is indeed possible that the next US President may be worse yet.

I might point out that 60 years of Democrats (the party), undermining much of the safeguards against democratic tyranny, in the republic, have done much to clear the way for this. Over the past 100 years, it has been the Democratic Party that has been undermining the authority of the US Constitution, on the theory that a pure democracy is better than a republic. Bear in mind that the US Constitution, as originally written, doesn't allow much scope for a pure and direct democracy. This is explicitly because the founders recognized the danger of democratic tyranny. That there is, in that form, little to no protection for the minority, whomever that minority may be. They purposely set up the US Constitution to protect basic human rights within the shelter of a republic thus, making them immune to democratic moods or vagaries.

At the same time, they allowed sufficient scope for democracy to counter the tendency of republics to be subverted by a power elite. Note that the founders didn't trust the general population to be able to vote intelligently on anything other than local elections. Personally, I fear that present events may be proving them to be correct in their, 218 year-old, assessment.

Re: Time yet, to revive the radical underground?

[sparkyr.livejournal.com]

"which is, I think, a fairly good analogy as waves cannot be resisted. You either ride them or duck and let them pass overhead but, you cannot stop them"

You ever see what happens when a wave gets overtaken by a second, larger wave? It absorbs it. Get out there and build the unified wave, people. Wake a neighbor, spread the word, and DO GOOD WORK.

Re: Time yet, to revive the radical underground?

[slamlander.livejournal.com]

Ho do you think the current wave got built. Face it, you are in the minority. Until the majority changes their mind, you stand zilch chance.

Re: Time yet, to revive the radical underground?

[sparkyr.livejournal.com]

yeah, accept it, knuckle under - 'cause that will change things. You be defeatist on your own, friend. I think that people who want the same good things are NOT a minority. I don't think it can be simply delineated by party lines. I think the "majority" of deluded fools who voted for W are not unified behind the politics of fascism - they just don't know any better - and they won't unless people like us tell them, 'cause the power structure sure isn't going to tell them, it's not in their best interests. How else do you think the "majority" will change their mind? You going to sit and hope on it?

Re: Time yet, to revive the radical underground?

[slamlander.livejournal.com]

Not defeatist, I'd rather let the wave pass and then rise up and shoot it in the back ;P

It's like those evolutionsts ... let them think they've won and then jam their own laws down their throat by forcing equal time for other creationst myths, via the Supreme Court and under the US Constitution. Let them scream then, when their kids are also forced to study the Koran, and let them realise that they should be careful what they ask for because they really might get it... all of it! Let's see how fast those stupid laws get retracted then.

That sort never learns via argument. It only learns through painful experience.

[krikkert.livejournal.com]

Funnily enough, I read an article like that in Social Studies a couple of months back. Was I to represent the rest of the world, I'd be saying "This, you have brought upon yourself. Now deal, and you may rejoin our ranks after the next civil war."

What I don't understand is

[rorajoey.livejournal.com]

how GWB can think he has the "mandate of the people" when nearly half of the country voted against him. Personally I voted for Kerry, but only because I was in the frame of mind that anyone would be better in that position than the bush. (I can think of quite a few positions more appropriate for that surname, but that's a bit off-topic...)

I don't think he'll actually manage to amend the Constitution as he wishes he could, but it'll be a sad day if this "marriage definition" amendment is actually ratified. I can only hope that it would be quickly repealed. ObDisclaimer: IANAHomosexual, but I do believe that the U.S. Constitution is (and should be) independent of anyone's sexual preference. The document is supposed to describe what constitutes our nation, not the minutia of our personal lives.

It's true that so much in our lives depends on the circumstances of our birth and upbringing. There are exceptions, of course; some people win the lottery, and sometimes the mighty do fall, usually at the hands of the mightier.

I realize that the current administration seems to care more about its own interests than anything else, and GWB probably thinks there's no difference between his own interests and that of the nation. I've seen efforts on his part to save some face, because he finally realizes that he does need help from the rest of the world to do what must be done in Iraq. (Never mind the fact that he rushed into Iraq, following an agenda that he had already set long ago, in spite of repeated warnings from the world community and protests from his own people.)

IMHO, GWB is a dangerous mix of stupidity and ignorance, misguided by his own delusional worldview, bolstered by his lackeys who share his opinion that the U.S. must not appear weak, no matter what it takes. GWB, cooperating with the global community is not the same as capitulating to international pressure.

Okay, I'm done rambling. I think I need a nap now.

Re: What I don't understand is

[nolawitch.livejournal.com]

One of Bush's former professors was on the radio some time back before the election. He said that the impression he got from Bush was that rich and poor people were that way because of their instrinsic worth/worthlessness to society. Everyone is deserving of their station in life. No matter how good, decent, intelligent and industrious you are, if you were born into poverty, you're a piece of shit who deserves to be poor; no matter how much of a ratbag or criminal you are, if you were born into wealth, you're a stellar example of humanity who deserves those riches.

That seems to be the polar opposite of his so-called Christian beliefs that everyone is a child of God and wealth doesn't get you into heaven. Of course, he's hedging his bets by paying lip service to Christianity and enjoying the ill-gotten gains of his grandfather who was in lucrative business with the Nazis during World War II. His wealth is derived from the wholesale slaughter of millions of people under the auspices of a corrupt government. He seems to be trying to recreate that form of government here.