Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Fascism USA: 2009, 2010...



The audio sync is absolutely horrible here, and I apologize for that, as I've found no better copy of this anywhere. All the same this interview with Gerald Celente on Russia Today is fascinating.

(note: Although I came across this fairly recently, it's not exactly current, but was recorded in April 2009. I suppose I should say misrecorded, given the sound quality. I don't get why they have these horrible technical difficulties, presumably operating with more resources than their occasional correspondent Lori Harfenist(aka "the resident"), whose man-in-the-street interviews I've periodically embedded here before. She doesn't have any of these problems with her videos.)

Having said that, even though a lot of what he says strikes me as relevant, I think Celente is wrong about the likelihood of revolution. (Actually it's not entirely clear if he's forecasting one or advocating for one. Presumably the former.) If we're headed towards a right-wing truly fascist government, which I'll admit seems increasingly likely, the two-party system with its multiple security-state water-carriers seem like they're strongly enough ensconced to prevent that.

I'm thinking of Even Bayh's comments upon announcing his retirement yesterday, about how he wants democrats to compromise more(!), as if the gridlock in D.C. is substantially the fault of those no-good liberals. Bayh's comments come to mind just because they are recent, but there are many, many other examples.

[a revision: the two links to Bayh's retirement announcement above don't make it clear; but I was referring to his comments in a Yahoo News/AP story which I haven't found reproduced in full elsewhere, which is odd. I hate linking to Yahoo News stories because they tend to disappear from online after 21-30 days:

"Disillusioned Bayh advocates electoral “shock” to broken system"

as, no doubt, this one will too.]



Avedon Carol[2007][more recently] and a couple of regular commenters at ATR frequently talk about the Overton window, a theoretical concept that's increasingly useful in understanding the rhetoric out of Washington. But as far as I can see, the window doesn't just apply to republicans and other right wing types pushing it rightward, but phoney-baloney democrats like Bayh and Rahm Emmanuel and our pal Obama validating and reinforcing right-wing tropes. I'm just waiting for BHO to speak after the 2010 mid-terms and apologize for being a socialist.

"tenebroust", below, is somewhat overheated in his presentational style, but I think the broader picture he sketches of the dynamic between the two-parties is essentially correct:

Labels: , , , , ,

3 Comments:

At February 18, 2010 5:08 AM, Blogger Mimi said...

Watched both videos with great interest. They both helped to clarify--to me, at least--the lousy position in which we find ourselves. Up the revolution!

 
At February 18, 2010 7:40 AM, Blogger Bob In Pacifica said...

The first guy was spot on (although unless Russia Today starts getting the same circulation as FOX I don't think anyone has to worry about riots in the streets).

The second guy was a little over the top and I only got a couple minutes into him before I switched him off.

As to fascism, if one understands that it is a joining of corporate and military interests with the nexus being the military/intelligence agencies, you'll better understand America's slow sinking into fascism. When the US was forced by the circumstances of WWII to build a military infrastructure to deal with war on such a large scale it created a situation for fascism to flourish. Many on Wall Street (and in Western capitals around the world) were quite happy with fascism, and Nazism was seen as a "cordon sanitaire" against bolshevism.

After WWII the CIA and numerous other intelligence agencies were spawned which immediately functioned as secret police for American interests around the world. It would be foolish to think that they would not represent corporate interests within the US or would not use the same or similar methods here.

I think that the US is reaching an end stage of some phase now. Our military expansion doesn't even remotely represent our country's interests. It's one thing to say that invading Iraq at least gave America control of Iraq's oil, but the military is essentially giving multinationals control of that oil, and multinationals may have the right to free speech here in the US but they don't have any allegiance to any particular country. That is, in the future Exxon might realign with Germany or Russia or Iran or India if one of those countries can better represent their corporate interests. That is, in these end times not only do multinationals use a nation's military might to force their will, they don't even say thank you.

There is historical precedent. Before WWII there were many fifth columns in Europe (in the business, banking and military communities) that worked for a Nazi takeover of their countries. Better a German fascist running things than a French socialist. You can almost hear that today.

 
At February 18, 2010 5:23 PM, Blogger rob payne said...

I don’t think there is going to be a revolution either, the control is fairly complete and Americans are essentially followers despite the common belief among Americans that we are rugged individuals. I think we have reached a point where the state now knows how to give us the illusion of democracy, free speech and all the rest while maintaining an iron control over the population through very undemocratic methods. For example take blogs, some blogs are very critical of the government yet we don’t see the government trying to shut them down. Why? Because they don’t have to, and they don’t have to because nobody takes any real criticism of our government and culture seriously. Through propaganda beginning at the grade school level and on into adulthood brought to us by the news media, propaganda movies from Hollywood of which there is no shortage, and many other venues, we are trained to not think and to be followers so when people are presented with somebody who dares to challenge the accepted narrative they are automatically labeled as non-serious, kooky, and fringe.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home