to bcc list
Stephen Schwartz wrote to Bruce Meland:
> Sorry, wrong answer.
> The use of the term "corporate fascism" to describe present day U.S. capitalism is an infallible sign of a person who has never seriously studied economics or history.
> To begin with, it is necessary to make distinctions. That is, one must understand that not everything one dislikes or resents is fascism. Fascism is a special phenomenon: the open police dictatorship of a single ideological ruling party resting on the middle class.
> American lefty dumbasses argue this way:
> "The media is characterized by a tendency toward a single viewpoint, and since the imposition of a single viewpoint would be fascism, well, it's kinda like fascism, and I in my ignorance think it's inevitably leading to fascism, so it must be the same as fascism."
> "The corporations are powerful enough to at times suppress opposition, and since power is the object of fascism, and it all seems to be heading in that direction, it must be fascism."
> No amount of bullshit conspiracy rhetoric can make the FBI the same as the Gestapo, no matter how many people psych themselves up to believe it's the same by watching the X-Files or reading the widow McVeigh.
Whose main source for that stuff is Jeff Rense.
> No amount of bullshit conspiracy theory can make the Republican party the same as the Nazi party, no matter how many people jerk themselves off with exile Nazi emigre fantasies a la Dildinski.
> The FBI does things people don't like but it is accountable, and juries in the U.S. find against prosecutions in FBI-run cases all the time.
> In Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and Spain, the secret police was not accountable, and there were almost no court trials that resulted in the repudiation of police evidence.
> The Republican party has to win elections. The Nazi party did not have to win elections after Hitler took over.
> A person who does not perceive the difference between ordinary, business-as-usual capitalism in the industrial democracies, and fascism, is not only stupid. Such a person is dangerous, and in most cases is himself a fascist.
That's the truth. I second that insight.
> I challenge anybody to define for me the difference between so called "corporate fascism" as it exists in America today and capitalism as it has existed everywhere since the depression, i.e. with state controls of various kinds. Better, I withdraw the challenge. I don't need 100 email screeds from idiots.
> The merest moron should be able to notice the difference between capitalism today where corporations are constantly held up to public investigation and exposure, and capitalism in, say, 1900, when the writ of the railroad, oil, and other corporations was law in much of the U.S.
> An even stupider person should be able to recognize the difference between voting in America and not voting in Nazi Germany -- spare me the exaggerated comparisons. Bullshits won't fill the gap here.
> If you don't know the difference between ordinary capitalism and fascism you will not be useful in opposing fascism.
Another key insight! Bravo!
> Indeed, when I look at the widow McVeighs, Dildinskis, and other people shouting that Bush is a fascist I conclude it is the shouters who are the fascists. They fantasize that Bush has a power they will never have but wish they had. The powerless thus dream of total power. Total power obviously explains their powerlessness. (Widow) McVeigh and Paul Dildinski have more of the characteristics of the fascist personality -- conspiratorialism, seething resentment, impotence, lack of a stable profession -- than anybody in the Bush administration.
> Huey Long said when fascism comes to America it'll be called antifascism. Obviously, he was right. Fascist [Widow McVeigh] and [Dildinski] claim to be antifascists while promoting fascist conspiratorialism
> "Corporate fascism" should be used exclusively to refer to a specific state form in which the constitution is explicitly based on official bodies of representatives drawn from industry, the professions, etc.
> Terminology exists in politics to clarify, not confuse distinctions.
> Stephen Schwartz
> bruce meland <etimes@...> wrote:
> Yes Stephen what you wrote below is true but the big enemy of the people
> today is Corporate Fascism. Enron and the Bush connection is a classic
> example. Monsanto and its human and environmental poison products that it
> is thrusting on the masses today is another example. Bruce
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jack Sarfatti
> Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
> To: Stephen Schwartz
> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 5:35 PM
> Subject: Fascism Today
> bcc list sent to all the usual suspects
> This is a brilliant analysis to ponder as one looks in the mirror especially
> after the New Age Dotty.Commie Trash Crash! ;-)
> Stephen Schwartz wrote:
> > Let me explain something to you and all your correspondents about fascism
> and the misuse of the term.
> > Fascism was a mass! movement of the disfranchised and disgruntled middle
> classes in Europe, whose position was threatened by social instability: that
> of the Italian regime in the face of proletarian revolution after World War
> I, in the case of Mussolini's movement, and by the economic hardships in
> Germany following the collapse of the empire in the same war, in the case of
> > Konrad Heiden, an anti-Stalin leftist and the first great biographer of
> Hitler, wrote the earliest really useful social analysis of fascism. He
> described its beginning as a movement of "armed intellectuals," then
> becoming a movement of the "armed bohemia." Trotsky carried this analysis
> forward, but being blunter, described fascism as "the panicked radicalism of
> the ruined and crazed petit bourgeoisie," a movement composed of "human
> dust." (Of course Butt Packer thinks Heiden is a poor historian...)
> > "Human dust." Let us examine what this term and "armed bo! hemia" mean.
> > Beginning in the 19th century, with the exponential growth of the great
> European cities, interesting sociological developments are noticeable.
> > Prior to then, society was composed of fairly stable classes: the
> aristocracy and church, the commercial bourgeoisie, the trade and craft
> productive class, the peasantry, and, weak but noticeable, the preindustrial
> wage-working class. Trade and craft workers were paid for their products;
> wage workers for their time.
> > With the new rise of the cities, the decline of the old ruling and
> trade/craft classes, the growth of the commercial and protoindustrial
> bourgeoisie, ruination of the peasantry, and the continuing development of
> the protoindustrial working class are all visible. But other sociological
> phenomena are also perceptible. A new caste or class emerges -- the
> inferior section of the petit bourgeoisie, consisting of:
> > aspiring st! ate office holders;
> > parasitical entrepreneurs unable to establish a firm place in the new
> > "overeducated" but mediocre placeseekers in the liberal professions,
> including academia and what we now call media;
> > ruined trade and craft workers and peasants, devastated by the new
> > those who migrated from the country to the city and became demoralized,
> along with other declassed elements, by the pace and difficulty of urban
> life, to a point of unemployability, alcoholism, criminality, and mental
> > This vast array of unstable elements formed the bohemian class in the
> > They seldom had fixed jobs. They were filled with resentment at their
> failure to establish themselves in society. Some of them were also enraged
> at the social and economic changes that had deprived them of their place in
> society. But most of them just hated the po! sition they were in; they could
> not reach the point of analyzing their predicament. So they turned to
> conspiratorial explanations.
> > Sound familiar? No stable profession or job? B../D.../P.../...berg. 50
> years old without a hope for the future. Filled with anger? The same group
> of disgruntled nobodies.
> > Human dust.
> > It is the special characteristic of this class -- the urban bohemia --
> that it cannot think straight. It always seeks a scapegoat for its
> failures, and its thinking is always conspiratorial.
> > The declassed bohemia of 19th century Catholic Europe blamed its
> misfortunes on a Jewish-Masonic conspiracy.
> > The declassed bohemia of post-1918 Italy blamed its misfortunes on the
> "antipatriotic" socialists.
> > The declassed bohemia of post-1918 Germany blamed its misfortunes on a
> Jewish-Masonic-Bolshevik conspiracy.
> > The declassed elements of Spain! in the 1930s blamed its misfortunes on a
> Jewish-Masonic-Communist-anarchist conspiracy.
> > The declassed bohemia of collapsing Serboslavia blamed its misfortunes on
> a Catholic-Muslim-NATO conspiracy. The sociological profile is exact:
> aspirants to employment in the raggedy-assed Tito bureaucracy, wannabe
> entrepreneurs who become Belgrade mafiosi; "overeducated" placeseekers in
> the liberal professions, including academia and what we now call media --
> Yugoslavia had more unemployed film critics than any country in history, and
> the Serbian press was and is as bad as it was a century ago; ruined trade
> and craft workers and peasants -- the Balkans had a hell of a lot of these;
> those demoralized by the pace and difficulty of urban life to a point of
> unemployability, alcoholism, or mental incompetence -- the Balkans were also
> full of these.
> > There is even a declassed "bohemian" stratum in the Islamic countries --
> indeed! , it is enormous. In some countries they are known as the "teahouse
> class." This class consists of those who fail to gain state employment, or
> to start businesses, or who have too much education and no prospects, or
> whose peasant holdings or trade and craft work have collapsed, or who cannot
> contend with urban life. And of course they blame their misfortunes on the
> Jews and America.
> > The declassed bohemia of North Beach blames its misfortunes on the
> CIA-Nazi conspiracy, and occasionally takes up the cudgels for Serboslav or
> Islamic conspiratorialism. The teahouse class in Cairo = the coffeehouse
> class in San Francisco.
> > The situation has been much aggravated by the rise of the universities as,
> essentially, glamorous diploma mills -- the mass fabrication of doctorates,
> etc. -- and by the incredible overexpansion of the state bureaucracies
> worldwide after 1945.
> > .....o is a classic example of the semiv! agabond whose entire life is
> summed up in a job checking ....limits for a bogus state institution. There
> were millions of these types in Imperial Germany and Austria-Hungary. They
> had no real education, no serious profession, but they got themselves
> parasitical posts in a ridiculously overgrown state administration. Look
> at Hitler's father, the petty customs collector. These jobs don't even
> exist today. ...
> > Dildinski is there among the lackeys of the failed entepreneurs. No
> stable profession, but marginal jobs for marginal enterprises that bloom in
> periods of speculative accumulation and then collapse. Millions of such
> people were thrown out of work in Germany under Versailles. They marched
> right into the Nazi party.
> > The Bay Area is loaded with overeducated placeseekers; its leftism is
> really fascism.
> > All of these types are filled with resentment. Resentment that they do
> not have better jobs, t! hat they are not recognized for their genius, etc.
> The junior version is John W. Lindh.
> > A century ago the socialist labor movement offered an alternative to all
> this: the industrial workers had a productive position in society, and they
> embraced a rational, nonconspiratorial radicalism. But that class no longer
> exists, and as Franz Borkenau noted in the 1930s, German Communism turned
> from organizing the workers to competing with the Nazis for votes from the
> armed bohemia. That was the end of that, and it explains why the Commies of
> today have become fascists -- defending Serbia, for example.
> > The classic example of the "intellectual" as human dust: Hirschman.
> > I fear the real Orwell/PKDick future will consist of a handful of serious
> professionals -- those able to establish themselves in "letters and
> science" -- surrounded by a vast, limitless human desert of fakes, poseurs,
> conspiratorialists, perverts! , failures, losers, and scum.
> > UFOmania is another example of this phenomenon: the declassed Americans
> and Europeans baffled and besieged by the world look for yet another
> conspiratorial escape hatch. Faced with too much science for them to
> understand, they flee into pseudoscience.
> > Not a pretty picture. The widow McVeigh and Dildinski do more to
> establish fascism in America with every cappuccino they drink than an army
> of a million Byelorussian exiles, bankrolled by General Motors, General
> Mills, and General Foods, and commanded by General MacArthur, could ever
> have accomplished.
> > Stephen Schwartz
"What I cannot create. I do not understand." Richard Feynman