A Recipe for Fascism

by: Chris Hedges  |  Truthdig | Op-Ed

A Recipe for Fascism
(Photo: Doha Sam; Edited: Jared Rodriguez / t r u t h o u t)

American politics, as the midterm elections demonstrated, have descended into the irrational. On one side stands a corrupt liberal class, bereft of ideas and unable to respond coherently to the collapse of the global economy, the dismantling of our manufacturing sector and the deadly assault on the ecosystem. On the other side stands a mass of increasingly bitter people whose alienation, desperation and rage fuel emotionally driven and incoherent political agendas. It is a recipe for fascism.

More than half of those identified in a poll by the Republican-leaning Rasmussen Reports as “mainstream Americans” now view the tea party favorably. The other half, still grounded in a reality-based world, is passive and apathetic. The liberal class wastes its energy imploring Barack Obama and the Democrats to promote sane measures including job creation programs, regulation as well as criminal proceedings against the financial industry, and an end to our permanent war economy. Those who view the tea party favorably want to tear the governmental edifice down, with the odd exception of the military and the security state, accelerating our plunge into a nation of masters and serfs. The corporate state, unchallenged, continues to turn everything, including human beings and the natural world, into commodities to exploit until exhaustion or collapse.

All sides of the political equation are lackeys for Wall Street. They sanction, through continued deregulation, massive corporate profits and the obscene compensation and bonuses for corporate managers. Most of that money—hundreds of billions of dollars—is funneled upward from the U.S. Treasury. The Sarah Palins and the Glenn Becks use hatred as a mobilizing passion to get the masses, fearful and angry, to call for their own enslavement as well as to deny uncomfortable truths, including global warming. Our dispossessed working class and beleaguered middle class are vulnerable to this manipulation because they can no longer bear the chaos and uncertainty that come with impoverishment, hopelessness and loss of control. They have retreated into a world of illusion, one peddled by right-wing demagogues, which offers a reassuring emotional consistency. This consistency appears to protect them from the turmoil in which they have been forced to live. The propaganda of a Palin or a Beck may insult common sense, but, for a growing number of Americans, common sense has lost its validity.

The liberal class, which remains rooted in a world of fact, rationalizes placating corporate power as the only practical response. It understands the systems of corporate power. It knows the limitations and parameters. And it works within them. The result, however, is the same. The entire spectrum of the political landscape collaborates in the strangulation of our disenfranchised working class, the eroding of state power, the criminal activity of the financial class and the paralysis of our political process.

Commerce cannot be the sole guide of human behavior. This utopian fantasy, embraced by the tea party as well as the liberal elite, defies 3,000 years of economic history. It is a chimera. This ideology has been used to justify the disempowerment of the working class, destroy our manufacturing capacity, and ruthlessly gut social programs that once protected and educated the working and middle class. It has obliterated the traditional liberal notion that societies should be configured around the common good. All social and cultural values are now sacrificed before the altar of the marketplace.

The failure to question the utopian assumptions of globalization has left us in an intellectual vacuum. Regulations, which we have dismantled, were the bulwarks that prevented unobstructed brutality and pillaging by the powerful and protected democracy. It was a heavily regulated economy, as well as labor unions and robust liberal institutions, which made the American working class the envy of the industrialized world. And it was the loss of those unions, along with a failure to protect our manufacturing, which transformed this working class into a permanent underclass clinging to part-time or poorly paid jobs without protection or benefits.

Busy schedule? Click here to keep up with Truthout with free email updates.

The “inevitability” of globalization has permitted huge pockets of the country to be abandoned economically. It has left tens of millions of Americans in economic ruin. Private charity is now supposed to feed and house the newly minted poor, a job that once, the old liberal class argued, belonged to the government. As John Ralston Saul in “The Collapse of Globalization” points out, “the role of charity should be to fill the cracks of society, the imaginative edges, to go where the public good hasn’t yet focused or can’t. Dealing with poverty is the basic responsibility of the state.” But the state no longer has the interest or the resources to protect us. And the next target slated for elimination is Social Security.

That human society has an ethical foundation that must be maintained by citizens and the state is an anathema to utopian ideologues of all shades. They always demand that we sacrifice human beings for a distant goal. The propagandists of globalization—from Lawrence Summers to Francis Fukuyama to Thomas Friedman—do for globalization and the free market what Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky did for Marxism. They sell us a dream. These elite interpreters of globalism are the vanguard, the elect, the prophets, who alone grasp a great absolute truth and have the right to impose this truth on a captive people no matter what the cost. Human suffering is dismissed as the price to be paid for the coming paradise. The response of these propagandists to the death rattles around them is to continue to speak in globalization’s empty rhetoric and use state resources to service a dead system. They lack the vision to offer any alternative. They can function only as systems managers. They will hollow out the state to sustain a casino capitalism that is doomed to fail. And what they offer as a solution is as irrational as the visions of a Christian America harbored by many within the tea party. 

We are ruled by huge corporate monopolies that replicate the political and economic power, on a vastly expanded scale, of the old trading companies of the 17th and 18th centuries. Wal-Mart’s gross annual revenues of $250 billion are greater than those of most small nation-states. The political theater funded by the corporate state is composed of hypocritical and impotent liberals, the traditional moneyed elite, and a disenfranchised and angry underclass that is being encouraged to lash out at the bankrupt liberal institutions and the government that once protected them. The tea party rabble, to placate their anger, will also be encouraged by their puppet masters to attack helpless minorities, from immigrants to Muslims to homosexuals. All these political courtiers, however, serve the interests of the corporate state and the utopian ideology of globalism. Our social and political ethic can be summed up in the mantra let the market decide. Greed is good.

The old left—the Wobblies, the Congress of Industrial Workers (CIO), the Socialist and Communist parties, the fiercely independent publications such as Appeal to Reason and The Masses—would have known what to do with the rage of our dispossessed. It used anger at injustice, corporate greed and state repression to mobilize Americans to terrify the power elite on the eve of World War I. This was the time when socialism was not a dirty word in America but a promise embraced by millions who hoped to create a world where everyone would have a chance. The steady destruction of the movements of the left was carefully orchestrated. They fell victim to a mixture of sophisticated forms of government and corporate propaganda, especially during the witch hunts for communists, and overt repression. Their disappearance means we lack the vocabulary of class warfare and the militant organizations, including an independent press, with which to fight back.

We believe, like the Spaniards in the 16th century who pillaged Latin America for gold and silver, that money, usually the product of making and trading goods, is real. The Spanish empire, once the money ran out and it no longer produced anything worth buying, went up in smoke. Today’s use in the United States of some $12 trillion in government funds to refinance our class of speculators is a similar form of self-deception. Money markets are still treated, despite the collapse of the global economy, as a legitimate source of trade and wealth creation. The destructive power of financial bubbles, as well as the danger of an unchecked elite, was discovered in ancient Athens and detailed more than a century ago in Emile Zola’s novel “Money.” But we seem determined to find out this self-destructive force for ourselves. And when the second collapse comes, as come it must, we will revisit wrenching economic and political tragedies forgotten in the mists of history.

Chris Hedges, who writes a weekly column for Truthdig, is the author of “Death of the Liberal Class.”

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



HALFASCISM;

HALFASCISM; DEMiserepubilkans actually can't do Anything RIGHT!



absolutely on point!!! kudos

absolutely on point!!! kudos to the author!!



Chris, certainly, you're

Chris, certainly, you're sufficiently smart, tactful and caring to refer to gays as "homosexuals."

What a horrible word and the feeling(s) that are conjured by its use!

"Homosexuals" were routinely given electro-shock therapy in the fifties to be cured of their disease called "homosexuality."

Certainly, you're historically and culturally savvy enough to appreciate this fact.

Please -- use gays or those of a homo-erotical disposition or even same sexed lovers, to describe those who fall in love with and/or make love to those of the same gender.

This flaw in discourse is a perfect example, ironically, of a compromised liberal dictionary.

Thank you for changing your literary ways for the sake of remaking the image of often despised and feared "homosexuals".



"Their disappearance means

"Their disappearance means we lack the vocabulary of class warfare and the militant organizations, including an independent press, with which to fight back."

What we had instead was a debilitating emphasis on the language of identity politics - that is to say on feminism and gay rights - which obscured the previously exclusive focus on class questions and caused unnecessary offense to many that had been listening intently right along. This blind spot continues to plague Hedges' eviscerated "liberal class" - and Hedges himself - expressing itself as it usually does in a hatred of religion. One wonders if we would be bereft of class analysis today if we'd then become a little less enamored of self-centered bra burning, kid killing, and marriage hating.



Good job hitting all the

Good job hitting all the neocon "boogeymen," Georgi - women and homosexuals. Gee, did you actually finish high school to come up with that or does sitting in front of the boob tube all day watching babbling Beck inform your highly nuanced views of the world?



Bleak. Some of us are old

Bleak. Some of us are old enough to have witnessed the brief hurrah of social democratic America. What could be, almost was. But homo economicus, bred on the back of free land after the Civil War and a free hand after WWII, re-birthed a ubiquitous class of consumer-termites that has quickly eaten through the patrimony. Tea Partier or Liberal, we are all termites, and we can't escape our destiny.



One of the most cogent

One of the most cogent article on the sad state of affairs in our nation that I have read in a very long time.



National Socialism is on the

National Socialism is on the left. They are responsible for melting together business and government into a nightmarish state. We need to have a separation of business and state. We need more freedom in economic choice.

Fascism was Marxist inspired. Mussolini, a personal friend of Lenin, was not only a statist and corporatist but a hardcore socialist as well. Today, it is the left which supports economic fascism—government-run health care and old age insurance, etc. The right-wing is fascistic when it comes to foreign affairs—invading nations that never attacked us, big military-industrial complex.



Agreed!! The question is,

Agreed!! The question is, how far down the rabbit hole of world facism are we to entomb ourselves before we even TRY to extricate ourselves from it?

Profound and surprising discussions about how to do this are emerging. On msnbc's ratigan show author Ted Rall discusses his new book on the subject.

Would anyone have guessed that the parent ge corp of this show's network would have allowed such a discussion a mere five years ago? We truly are in extraordinary times.



@22:08 If those, like

@22:08

If those, like Georgi, on the religious right, would actually take the time to read Christian history in general and specifically Roman Catholic history, Georgi would see that a generalized hatred of religion is not just warranted, but intelligent.

Fetus-worship and anti-gay rights has now become the trade-mark of an ever empty and spiritually bereft tradition known generally as "the Christian tradition."

Notice how Georgi, as all good Republicans do, exchange the places of the attacker and the one who is attacked. When gays marry it's the religious right who's attacked. When abortions are performed it's non-equivalent to the type of brutal infanticide that occurred in George Bush's and now Obama's imperialistic wars and who care's about the bearer of the child anyway: can an independent woman's life be considered living, like that of a fetus? Yes, in fact the fetus is not alive at all. Worms wiggle to and when you stick a pin in it it writhes.

In fact, it's the religious right that's full of hate and aggression. They simply project their hate onto their victims and then accuse them of attacking the righters. People like Georgi can write sentences, apparently, but cannot think, or only can think in a box, which is why an appreciation of the great humanity of Hedges goes unnoticed.



Luckily the cultural

Luckily the cultural mechanism that explodes against oppression, like the putrid evil you espouse, Malenkov, simmers still amongst those whom you will never know. The history of greed takes many forms. One is the wanton hunger to control all manner of thought and choice. There is no peace around vermin like you who strike out at those who dare challenge the accepted 'norm'. You are the necessary ingredient for the birth of fascism, the cannon fodder of an empire that will collapse on the hollow pillars of pseudo patriotism and worship of power and wealth.. I do hate your religion.



I believe you all have read

I believe you all have read Georgi's comments incorrectly.

Georgi is lamenting the fact that in the 60's the Left became a little too "self-centered" focusing on identity politics instead of focusing on the issue of class of the Old Left. You proved his point, of course, by immediately assuming you were being attacked and only half-reading the post.

"What we had instead was a debilitating emphasis on the language of identity politics - that is to say on feminism and gay rights - which obscured the previously exclusive focus on class questions and caused unnecessary offense to many that had been listening intently right along." Read it again. Still feel attacked? You shouldn't. It many ways this is correct. By the Left becoming so enamored with fuzzy notions of critical theory and identity politics it alienated many of its supporters, not because of prejudice or malice, but due to being forced into an out-group.



Liced-Christ, I am sorry,

Liced-Christ, I am sorry, but i would have to disagree entirely with your comment, and only ask you only to look deeply into your logic and see the basic contradictions it contains. You opened with "hatred of religion is not only warranted, but intelligent." and end with "In fact, its the religious right that are full of hate and agression."



2:10 Anonymous, God forbid,

2:10 Anonymous,

God forbid, someone caught on.

Truthfully, I don't think the left will ever again produce a mass movement worth the name until it recovers the sense of altruism with which it was imbued in the years before 1950. The present concern with causes narrowly focused on identity rights rather than on questions of community interests must be jettisoned altogether if an authentic mass antidote is ever to be found to government by lobby. And this antidote certainly won't be characterized by an intolerance of and/or a hatred toward religion and religious people. Such hatreds are the end product of an insidious reaction and hardly can be considered progressive in any way. It will be necessary to surpass such contaminants and find avenues pointing to more universal themes.



Shocked 2:41: I don't see

Shocked 2:41: I don't see any contradiction in Liced-Christ's opening and closing statements. Fundamentalism in all its forms feeds on ignorance, intolerance, the perception of persecution, vengeance and aggression. The rise of fundamentalist Christianity in the U.S. in recent years is just as dangerous than that of fundamentalist Islam, both of which foment terrorism in various forms and ultimately keep societies from moving forward.



Sorry, I don't see that

Sorry, I don't see that individual rights and interests are necessarily antithetical to community interests. When we become part of a community it enlarges us as individuals; we are enlarged and empowered by our shared interests. Individuals shouldn't, and don't need to, subordinate themselves to collective correctness. A collective gathers power and energy from its constituents, rather than the other way around. Bra burning, abortion rights, gay identity, draft resistance, they are not encumbrances to collective advocation and resistance.



This op-ed is marred with

This op-ed is marred with horrific inaccuracies of diction.

First off, "monopoly" is not a plural. If there are multiple axes around which power is still too centralized, the term is oligopoly or plutocracy.

Second, don't confuse liberal with neo-liberal. The last gasp of liberalism ended with the nixon administration, ironically. Obamacare was first proposed by nixon.

Third, direct oppression is not sophisticated. The sophisticated propaganda can be seen at fox. Careful omission of context or fact, combined with the carefully chosen invocation of fallacy.

To quote the arrogant worms: "George washington was the president, but now he's dead.... so don't go into politics, you'll end up dead"



Best example of this careful

Best example of this careful omission of fact.. just before the election i passed by oreilley's face on a monitor, the headline read "worst unemployment in past few months". Never mind job growth was positive, or that there were gains after a year under the right in which there were losses topping half a million jobs a month. When you can't depend on reality, simply cut off and toss out the data which doesn't reinforce your narrative. This is both sophisticated in its execution, and in that explaining why it is wrong will never fit into a sound byte and requires considerable intellectual might to analyze.



Ken Hall, "Sorry, I don't

Ken Hall,

"Sorry, I don't see that individual rights and interests are necessarily antithetical to community interests."

Individual rights find their basis in universal considerations, not the other way around. If, for example, human rights are seen to be grounded in natural law, then any that are informed by atomistic, self-centered impulses are suspect. And it is precisely this criticism that applies to the era and to the matters in question. The "Old Left", so-called, was clearly driven by an understanding of community. That's why they called it "socialism", eh? There was a consciousness of a certain priority of universal interests that gave it its force. Not so the identity questions of the present period. In them we have a libertarian, nobody's-going-to-tell-me-what-to-do spirit. In truth, abortion advocacy has more in common with the thinking that grounds unregulated markets and gun rights than it does anything else. The fact that many support this advocacy doesn't give it a social flavor.

We'd begun here with an explanation of why it is that contemporary liberalism has failed to develop an authentic mass movement and why it flails about so pathetically in the present crisis. One gets the impression that Hedges senses the underlying problem but being a product of this "New Left" myopia himself, finds it difficult to articulate to any degree. There simply will be no mass movement on the left to oppose Tea Party reaction until a communitarian spirit is recovered.



Identity politics had its

Identity politics had its place. It was a way for people to obtain the civil rights long denied them, and along with rights, self-respect. The job is not yet finished, since denial of many rights to Gays (what the hell is wrong with a basic Latin-derived description like "homosexual") and Lesbians is the last hurdle. When people see themselves as valid human beings with equal rights, THEN groups can come together and face and battle the forces that we all must fight to bring equal opportunity and economic rights for all.



13:32 — Anonymous, "When

13:32 — Anonymous,

"When people see themselves as valid human beings with equal rights, THEN groups can come together and face and battle the forces that we all must fight to bring equal opportunity and economic rights for all."

The question is primarily ontological. You either ARE a "valid human being", as you put it, or you are not. It has nothing whatsoever to do with subjective perceptions. Rights arguments must begin with assertions of a universal humanity not from a "me" perspective. The "me" thing has been what's neutered modern liberalism. There's no future for the left in an adolescent "nobody's-going-to-tell-me-what-to-do-with-my-body", as though the body were objective to the person in the first place. It's time to grow past that kind of thing.



As usual, Mr. Hedges cuts to

As usual, Mr. Hedges cuts to the bone of the deceit that has become American capitalism and our warfare economy. His caution about the rapidly evolving fascist state is valid.

If you haven't already, read his book "Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle". In just 200 pages he brings it all together. A hard but essential read for anyone concerned about the fascist plutocracy we are hurtling toward.

The fact that the Democrats and many on the liberal side can't take what is happening and turn it to political reform and gain is just stunning to me. If Obama would have the gumption to go on national TV with some Ross Perot like charts about the theft of the nation's wealth by the upper 1% he could blow open the discussion that needs to happen. He might have tempered the midterm election results if he had truly given us some cause for "hope" that the national dialog could "change". The fact that such an intelligent and politically deft guy like Obama doesn't do that is evidence enough of the abandonment of the poor and shrinking middle class by their supposed political party.



Malenkov, please cease the

Malenkov, please cease the condescending subterfuge. You’re against abortion rights so stand up like a real man or woman and say so. Your contradictory statements regarding community versus individual identity are illogical and tiring.

The success of the ‘60s social movement, (your socialism label a setup like a low hanging curve ball for the next fascist respondent), was not, as you erroneously state, the result of support for the principle of universality. The movement’s success was in striving for the application of universal freedom, the right to the same level of choice enjoyed by the average white guy. The success of the movement was a direct function of the unified commitment by disparate groups of individuals, to the goals of peace, equality and justice.

It’s that simple and despite your efforts to diminish its power, the same movement stirs in recognition of monstrous threat, as people of varied identities come together to fight for the right to be part of the vision that would be America.



"Their disappearance means

"Their disappearance means we lack the vocabulary of class warfare and the militant organizations, including an independent press, with which to fight back."

Hedges is right about the role of the Old Left in forcing compromises such as the New Deal.

What Hedges ignores--and the thing that makes his columns so self-dramatizing and useless--is that the working classes, whose existence seems to mean nothing to Hedges if he even acknowledges it, were the leaders in those Far Left movements, not middle-class college boys like Chris H.

The workers, whose bourgeois union leadership drank the Truman-Reagan Kool Aid, now are the majority of the 60% of eligible voters who don't organize, don't vote, and don't particularly give a damn about the outcomes.

Hedges had nothing but scorn for the October 2 One Nation rally, which held out the hope of getting the workers back into politics in an effective way.

That's the sure way to guarantee that the Left never rises again, but that Chris Hedges makes Page One with the obituary.



I "get it" that Malenkov

I "get it" that Malenkov does not identify as a right-winger. I still disagree, but only partly. He's right that the excesses of political correctness, born out of identity politics, have split the left and alienated many people, myself included. However, this does not mean that women's and gay rights are a trivial distraction! How can he say that the rights of half of humanity (plus gays) are "selfish" and peripheral issues? Women challenged the Old Left (where they were far too often delegated to roles such as coffee-serving and being sexual commodities to the "important" male leaders) for very valid reasons! Would he be just as dismissive about rights for African Americans?



19:42 — Anonymous, "How

19:42 — Anonymous,

"How can he say that the rights of half of humanity (plus gays) are "selfish" ...?"

When questions of rights are contextualized as subsets of universal human rights, they have validity. On the other hand, when they are simply envisioned as license, as in the case of so-called abortion "rights", they are wholly self-centered and lack validity. A woman's right to equal pay for equal work, for example, is intrinsic and easily can be seen as valid since all women are human. But one doesn't elect an abortion to serve universal purposes. Rather, one has an abortion to remove what is perceived to be an obstacle to one's very personal aspirations in some respect or other. Therefore, to see a purely individual decision to have an abortion as one carrying species specificity - a decision often couched in phony solemnity as one to be made in private together with one's physician - is to debase and to trivialize the whole notion of rights. If the left is ever to recreate itself as an authentic mass phenomenon, it will need to scrape off the encrustation of abortion.



Good luck selling that one,

Good luck selling that one, Malenkov. Until contraception is safe, effective and affordable to all, women on the left are not going to buy into your reasoning on this. I got pregnant once with a supposedly fool-proof I.U.D. in place. Rare, but it happens--and it only takes one accidental pregnancy (especially to a poor woman) to mess up a life.

Being a man, of course, you haven't had to face this kind of dilemma.



"Good luck selling that one,

"Good luck selling that one, Malenkov."

I know, you must have thought that this was the Marketing Department. Should I take a moment to explain to you just how little I'm concerned with whether or not someone agrees with me on this or any other question, dear? Here's a headline for you: There will be no mass movement on the left until the left ditches identity politics and it championing of the self-centered practice of abortion. Absent these, the left will forever remain frozen in its present impotence.

"Rare, but it happens--and it only takes one accidental pregnancy (especially to a poor woman) to mess up a life."

Yeah, that what the murder victim was telling me.



BRILLIANT AND THE ABSOLUTE

BRILLIANT AND THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH!