The problem with centrists is that they cannot and do not challenge the fundamental assumptions of the system, no matter how objectively awful it is.
Vote Centrist to Keep Things Exactly as Awful as They Are
The problem with centrists is that they cannot and do not challenge the fundamental assumptions of the system, no matter how objectively awful it is.
16 Comments. Leave new
Love those «Centrists» : «we» can afford interminable wars of aggression abroad, but meals for slave labourers – or tax-supported health care – are a bridge too far. When resources are limited – and resources are always limited – one must learn to prioritise….
Henri
Hi Henri,
But the US HAS clearly prioritized.
The priority for the resting place of “the vast majority” of the always limited*** resources is the already turgid bank accounts of the obscenely wealthy.
—————-
*** and growing more limited with each successive tax cut for the rich.
The Nazis may not have won WWII but their underlying fascist ideology surely did.
It seems to have changed executive management, (protected and) recruited a few “key employees” and consolidated its two HQs (Berlin and Tokyo) into one in Washington DC.
The extent and power of the American Empire that then developed (in a slow-motion, diffuse “Holocaust, the Sequel”) probably never even occurred to Hitler even in his wildest “Lebensraum” wet dream.
The essence of fascism is:
1) extreme nationalism
2) a sense of rebirth
Recent “high-level” confirmations of 1 & 2, above:
1) “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.” -B.H. Obama
2)(a) “MAGA” -His Orange Hairness
(b) “Project for a NEW American Century”
The US exhibits every single of the 14 attributes common to the “classic” fascist societies* of the
20th century as formulated by Britt and which I have presented here before:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
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.
14. Fraudulent elections
It hardly matters what is single word descriptor (+/- fascist) given to a society wallowing in those 14 pernicious characteristics. The USA is an exceptional example of a society exhibiting ALL those characteristics and, with a little reflection, probably others equally horrendous.
Call it “banana split” if you want, but until it is recognized it cannot be changed. (This based on the seemingly precarious assumption that “the vast majority” US citizens do not want their society defined by those 14 characteristic.) This is not to say recognition is the only thing needed but its the first necessary step.
—————–
*Germany, Italy, Spain, Indonesia and Chile
Agree with your analysis above, falco, but when it comes to
it is important to keep in mind that, if I am not grossly deceived, in the case of the US, «human rights» violations are always employed as a major excuse for the country’s military interventions in other lands. But perhaps a reader whose memory has not been subjected to the degredation of age to the extent mine has can point to a counterexample ?…
Henri
“2. Disdain for the importance of human rights”
Correct Henri.
American honor of Human Rights is tantamount to destroying those who think they are worthy of them.
The concept of “Human Rights”, as in so much of the language of the Third Reich and the USA, is inverted.
German “democracy” is rule by the unitary executive.
Like pedophiles hiding behind the Pope’s robes.
Like the Socratic Method being the means to expose ideological heretics to facilitate the administration of cleansing hemlock.
Sometimes one hates to be right, not least in predicting what pretexts the US government – no matter what the administration – will use for both financial and military intervention in other lands :
Henri
Hi Henri,
Re: US excuses … certainly.
This point is the essence of my continuing rant on the cosmic mendacity, hypocrisy and treachery of US governmental policy.
The meticulously manufactured self-image that the US presents is based on it declaration, recognition and protection of human rights.
But, in the face of the 14 points of stark reality above, these rights, and other adopted, unarguably positive characteristics, don’t exist in America, having been destroyed, TO THE EXTENT THEY EVER EXISTED, precisely in proportion of their having been used as EXCUSES, to wage PERPETUAL war around the globe.
I can’t conceive of a more accurate definition of “disdain.”
As to the quote about Venezuela: “a growing pile of financial penalties the US has applied to Maduro’s government in recent WEEKS (my emphasis) … ”
Be sure that their have been many YEARS of financial “penalties” not merely several weeks. This in not a new policy created by His Hairness but, rather “simply” a continuation of proud US bipartisan atrocities.
Said penalties have been levied or no other reason than, as Glenn succinctly put it below/above(?): the USA is “destroying those who think they are worthy of” attempting to make concrete in their country what is only hypocritical, if loudly proclaimed, mythology in the US.
The USA (USA!) IS exceptional … in ONE area: the vast abyss separating what it obnoxiously proclaims to be … from its miserable reality.
Although I agree with almost all of falco’s points, I’d like to circle back to a few.
5. Rampant sexism.
I’ve noticed that the rampant sexism of the past has begun to morph into a fetishization of differences in a contradictory manner. For instance, Henry Kissinger (I mean Hillary Clinton. Why do I keep confusing them? One’s a warhawk who should be in prison, the other used to date Barbara Walters) was never, “one of you” because she had no comprehension of how to do that. She’s been shilling Identity Politics for so long, she couldn’t do what Trump did — appeal to the base’s largest interest. Trump spoke about how “you’ve gotten screwed by the system that Hillary and her husband built.” And Trump was right. NAFTA was shit. But so were all the policies of the past 35 years. End result? Trump gets a laid-off factory worker in Wisconsin voting for him because, “Yeah, I did get screwed by NAFTA. I have no job. The others keep telling me to go back to school. What am I going to do for four years until I get a diploma? Eat my dreams?” But Trump also appeals to everyone who knows someone who got screwed by NAFTA. He gets everyone who can’t make the bill payments to at least consider him. But Hillary’s broken record (speaking of records, unless it’s killing people in wars, hers is a pretty thin list of accomplishments) hits nothing that resonates beyond the focus group and nothing that doesn’t set up a barrier between the groups.
7. Obsession with national security.
I would say “obsession with national security theater.” The airport nonsense, the screenings at schools. I mention this once in a while, and wow, do I get some hate for it: School shootings are not a problem. Guns are not “out of control.” There are many millions of guns in this country. Even if there was a school shooting every day with five deaths a day, it would be a rounding error compared to traffic/driving accidents, overdoses, suicides, etc. The vast percentage, and that’s 99% with a few more nines after the decimal, of gun owners are of no danger to you or society. Twice a week, smoking kills the same number of people that 9/11 killed. So, twice a week, a 9/11-worth of death occurs, and what do we have now? E-cigs, which hook the kids even more effectively than traditional cigarettes and which can be smoked pretty much anywhere because the vapor isn’t visible and doesn’t smell. I don’t see ANYONE marching and having die-ins over cigarettes.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
I would add, “and the sciences.” Carl Sagan spoke of this. He argued that science, and scientists particularly, do a terrible job of explaining their work and what it means. The public funds most science, he observed, and that means the public is entitled to have it explained to them without condescension and without irritation. Also, frankly, some of the arts are worthy of disdain. Museums in New York sometimes have “art” that consists of, for instance, a date (e.g., Apr. 25, 1985) silk-screened onto a canvas and hanging on the wall. It’s a slap across the face to every artist who actually tries to commit art. Also, a lot of art is considered “valuable” because the wealthy buy it for very high sums so that they can avoid paying taxes on the money spent on that art when they “donate” it for five years or ten years to a museum. It’s a giant tax dodge and the art community’s on its knees, with its noses up the richest 1%’s asses the whole way.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
I’d add, “without obsession over causes of crime (and how to eliminate those causes) and obsession over effectiveness of punishment without consideration of how punishment continues after a sentence is completed.” (Anyone who ever went to prison for a felony has to answer “Yes” if asked, “Ever been found guilty of a felony.” Even if it’s for a job flipping burgers. The punishment for those poor SOBs never ends.
To Alex,
Sorry, I do not follow your position on rampant sexism with regard to HRC’s political record, about which, incidentally, I cannot agree more with your ongoing commentary.
If we are forced to endure frank fascism, as I maintain we are, then women should be afforded the same proportion of frank fascists among women politicians as there are frank fascist women in the general population.
My objection is that both women and men frank fascists seem to be over-represented in government, dog catcher on up, than their proportions in the general populace. There may be a systematic glitch in my data, however, as I exhibit clear hermit tendencies.
On this sub topic I”ll close with a comment I posted elsewhere some time ago: “But one MUST agree that Obumma and HRC have given ample credence to the notion that the physical characteristics of being black or of being a woman should not be taken, by themselves, as reasons to think a person is not qualified*** to be president of the exceptionally deranged USA.
*** minimum essential qualifications: narcissistic, mendacious, money-serving, hypocritical, psychopathic, terminally blood-thirsty, creator of suffering, misery and death across the globe … starting ‘at home’.”
(end of quote)
Other points:
Re: “What am I going to do for four years until I get a diploma? Eat my dreams?” I’d assume there are also a few:
“Why should I assume the system that destroys the job I had should be interested in providing a job in the area in which I obtain finally that degree?”
Ditto for sure on #11
Re #’s 7 & 13: I see no reason to expect anything but the “hollowness” you imply regarding US obsessions with negative items given the underlying, monumental hollowness about the flip-side, positive issues it claims for itself.
I have continually made note of the US commonality with Nazism since my awakening at the age of nineteen. At that time it became apparent to me that the problem was not Hitler, but those who believed and submitted to his will in the name of allegiance to a government.
(See the recent “Hitler’s American Model, The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law”.)
So I have lived my life among an intellectually captive mob celebratorily cheering their exceptional freedom, in response to indoctrination, entertainment as a substitute for a discomfiting reality, amidst a culture of consumption.
“The animal characters Walt Kelly created for his classic newspaper comic strip Pogo were known for their seemingly simplistic, but slyly perceptive comments about the state of the world and politics.
“WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US.”
You are in good company, Ted.
Right. Although I think there are real differences ideologically, liebensraum and manifest destiny have an awful lot in common. We just had an easier situation to work with.
“We just had an easier situation to work with.”
Right.
American Indigenous people weren’t considered to be human, but the European Polish were.
There still aren’t any American Holocaust museums recognizing the American Indian genocide in the US.
Americans are more comfortable recognizing John Wayne type mythologies as heroic rather than as the racist murderers they are.
If Germany won WWII I’m sure they would have created hagiographic mythologies to honor their heroic executioners, just as continues to be done in the US today.
Thanks, Ted. Very nice.
yeah …. centrism would be a good thing if the system weren’t already f’d up. You want conservatives and liberals, progressives and reactionaries all the legislature. Conservatism works well for a steady state situation (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it) Liberalism is needed when things change (it broke: fix it!)
But as I said, only if you’re starting from a reasonable place to begin with.
DISCLAIMER: I’m using the dictionary definitions of lib/con, etc.
You describe a failed model that bears no relationship to dictionary descriptions.
Shame on you for spreading these lies about things that never were.
“Liberal” Dick Durbin of Illinois is backing Trump’s invasion and theft of Venezuelan oil in the name of “human rights”.
I always found liberals to be the worse of the two evils because they aren’t as “honest” as conservatives are about their evil intent and war crimes.
Liberals just siphon off opposition and bury it to keep it from becoming effective.
Liberals will promise anything before an election because the liberal electorate will always work to silence those who point out liberal lies after the election is over, when the chickens come home to roost.
For example, Obama never did get around to closing Guantanamo and Trump wants to expand its use.
> You describe a failed model
Correct.
> spreading these lies about things that never were.
Incorrect.
> I always found liberals to be the worse of the two evils …
Was there some part of the disclaimer that wasn’t clear? I included it specifically to avoid misinterpretations such as yours. Once again, I invite you to reply to things I’ve actually said.