The return of Fascism??

[SEKT]

Talking with some comrades about the current international situation and how it would develop into worse conditions I've been analyzing how neo-fascism (neo because it would be in our days but with the same basis of the 30´s fascism) could be used by the rulling class to impose ORDER in all over the world.

I would like your opinions (specifying where are you from) about the development of such movements which I think is our responsability avoid them to grow.

[skki]

No. There is no serious threat from any Fascist group.

[Azurite]

No. There is no serious threat from any Fascist group.

I don't know about you, but groups like the BNP, NDP and Nazbol seem pretty serious to me.

We're headed into a serious recession right now, and whenever people start to see through the facade of liberal democracy, fascism rears its ugly head again.

Thankfully, our job as communists is to be there to provide a progressive alternative and people tend to pay more attention to us in times of economic strife.

[Charles Xavier]

The NDP is a social democratic party its not a fascist group.

And really you guys dont understand fascism... Fascism is there to crush the worker's movement. When the working class is unwilling to give massive concessions.The working class in most places is willing to give concessions, they can make the cut backs without much resistance. Its not white-supremacist groups running around like assholes. Things can change fast but this isn't 1930s scenario over again theres different conditions.

[allix]

I think that person meant NPD Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands .

[Azurite]

The NDP is a social democratic party its not a fascist group.

You've got the wrong NDP. Maybe I should have used the German abbreviation for clarity.

I would link you, but since I can't, go search for "Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands".



And really you guys dont understand fascism... Fascism is there to crush the worker's movement. When the working class is unwilling to give massive concessions.The working class in most places is willing to give concessions, they can make the cut backs without much resistance. Its not white-supremacist groups running around like assholes.

I'm fairly certain I do understand the dictionary definition of fascism. And I don't see anyone in this thread claiming that fascism is a anything but an anti-worker movement.

I'm not sure what you meant from the third sentence onward.


Things can change fast but this isn't 1930s scenario over again theres different conditions.

Well, certainly. And it follows that fascism isn't going to come to the fore in exactly the same way that it did in the 1930s.

The BNP in the UK is enjoying more electoral success and media coverage than any of the socialist parties. Think about that for a second.

[Charles Xavier]

Fascism won't come unless capitalism needs it. Currently it doesn't need it. Fascism isn't something that the capitalists choose, its something they need and currently they dont need it. The leadership of the trade union movement are willing to give deep concessions.

I'm not saying you are claiming its anything but an anti-worker movement. What I'm saying is White Supremist groups, while they may agree with fascism, they aren't fascism, they do not have the ability to implement fascism. The ones who implement fascism are the ones that own everything.

[Comrade B]

Fascism, under the name of fascism, will not return, however there is increasingly further right wing movements in some parts of the world (Lieberman's party in Israel) which could eventually bring a modern form of fascism, under a happier name.

[fanoflenin]

and they don't have the brains to do it in this society.

[RebelDog]

The fascists are the bourgeoisie's firemen, they will come when they need them. Always be ready to meet them.

[Coggeh]

What do we mean by grow ? as in they'll be fascists countries . No i doubt it .

Will fascist movements grow ? of course they will .

[Trystan]

Yes, there is a threat of fascism (in Britain). Since the Labour Party became New Labour there has been a lack of an alternative for working-class people and the BNP is desperate to fill the gap and to exploit the general antipathy that exists re. the LP. A genuine, well-organised working-class party and unions are needed to keep these fuckers down . . . unfortunately the Left has been too busy splitting up and bickering amongst each other, and the union leaders are a bunch of fat cats with no balls. Kicking their (fascists') heads in will only do so much.

[Charles Xavier]

Yes, there is a threat of fascism (in Britain). Since the Labour Party became New Labour there has been a lack of an alternative for working-class people and the BNP is desperate to fill the gap and to exploit the general antipathy that exists re. the LP. A genuine, well-organised working-class party and unions are needed to keep these fuckers down . . . unfortunately the Left has been too busy splitting up and bickering amongst each other, and the union leaders are a bunch of fat cats with no balls. Kicking their (fascists') heads in will only do so much.


This is an incorrect class analysis of fascism that Fascism is not organized by the bourgeiosie. Hate groups do not represent the growth of fascism. While they will play a role in fascism, they are hardly the essence of fascism. And I'm not saying Hate groups should be allowed to propagate and grow. But its not us versus the hate groups and if we win there will be no fascism rather there will be no hate groups.

Its not the BNP that calls the shots, its big business, its the oligarchy of industry that chooses a party to carry out a goal of destroying any opposition to the role of big business. Its the Bourgeiosie versus the working class. A supporter of capitalism is not a capitalist a capitalist is one who exploits labour of another and creates surplus value. And at that same length we must talk about fascism.

Fascism is from the top telling their party of choice and it doesnt have to be the BNP it could be the Conservatives, or other right-wing parties. Even social democratic parties have propped up fascist governments, like in Bulgaria and in Germany.

And the Oligarchy of industry, the capitalist class, has no reason to implement fascist rule when it can dismantle the social infrastructure while maintaining a bourgeioisie democratic rule.

[skki]

I don't know about you, but groups like the BNP, NDP and Nazbol seem pretty serious to me.

We're headed into a serious recession right now, and whenever people start to see through the facade of liberal democracy, fascism rears its ugly head again.

Thankfully, our job as communists is to be there to provide a progressive alternative and people tend to pay more attention to us in times of economic strife.
There has always been a big scare about the BNP rising to power, but they have yet to make any sort of genuine progress. They only made tiny gains in the 90's recession and they'll make just as small of an impact this time around. They haven't won a single seat yet.

Admittedly I don't know much about the NDP or Nazbol. But I assume their situation is similar to that of the BNP.

[benhur]

If workers are manipulated into becoming underlings of the petit bourgeois, then yes, fascism is a real possibility. At the end of the day, it depends on whom the workers are gonna trust: us or the fascists. This is why a vanguard is essential, to educate the workers so that they won't go over to the dark side. We ought to instill in them some morals and ethics, and not merely harp on vague and impractical slogans (like 'workers unite,' 'America is satan' or 'cappies are evil' etc. etc).

Problem is, most leftists are strong in rhetoric and emotion-charged sloganeering, but have zero substance. They don't explain things the way workers understand, they complicate it with unnecessary jargon, thereby confusing the already confused worker. This is why even BNP tastes more success than any socialist parties.

[Killfacer]

it may return in some form, but it will never return in western europe in the form it took in the early 20th century.

[Dóchas]

its just stupid to say that it will never develop to a considerable force but we will be there when it does ;)

[Pogue]

I can see it becoming very dangerous in many places. Something we have to deal with, with clear and no bullshit alternatives and a few well aimed fists.

[Charles Xavier]

If workers are manipulated into becoming underlings of the petit bourgeois, then yes, fascism is a real possibility. At the end of the day, it depends on whom the workers are gonna trust: us or the fascists. This is why a vanguard is essential, to educate the workers so that they won't go over to the dark side. We ought to instill in them some morals and ethics, and not merely harp on vague and impractical slogans (like 'workers unite,' 'America is satan' or 'cappies are evil' etc. etc).

Problem is, most leftists are strong in rhetoric and emotion-charged sloganeering, but have zero substance. They don't explain things the way workers understand, they complicate it with unnecessary jargon, thereby confusing the already confused worker. This is why even BNP tastes more success than any socialist parties.


The problem is some people don't understand marxism yet claim to and make posts like this which confuse everyone.

I have never heard Cappies are evil as a political slogan or America is Satan as a political slogan. Maybe you should stop making shit up.

A vanguard is not an educational society thats out there to teach us dumb prols why socialism is the new religion. Its there to lead them in the fight. And its not the petty-bourgeoisie that want fascism, why would they? Fascism turned the petty-bourgeiosie quickly into the ranks of the proletariat at the might of the monopoly combines and cartels putting their businesses out of business. And at the end of the day its not if the workers trust us or the fascists, It depends on the strenght and unity of the working class and its leadership.

Please every sentence of your post was wrong.

[commyrebel]

say no to fascism it is use to take rights away just like conservatism but is more open about it. it is used to make works work for nothing and make politics high class and everyone else poor. Now what you say about fascism because i bet that if you were in a Fascist country you would do everything possible to get out

[AvanteRedGarde]

America has always been fascist for those it oppresses. The titles of "bourgeois democracy" or "fascism" are of little consequence for those America has stolen from and enslaved over its history and those it invades today.

[Bilbo Baggins]

America has always been fascist for those it oppresses. The titles of "bourgeois democracy" or "fascism" are of little consequence for those America has stolen from and enslaved over its history and those it invades today.

Then there's martial law and it looks like the U.S. is getting close to that-there is a news story a friend of mine directed me to:

U.S. Marines accompany police in road alcohol checkpoint

Sorry, the site won't allow me to post the link-hopefully my friend can come on and do it.

[AvanteRedGarde]

Most countries are policed by their own military. This is the norm for people who aren't busy sending their troops to attack other nations.

[rebelworker]

There are few countires in the west that have the right mix of a history of daily violence and a strong radical workers movement that were the pre conditions to Fascism in Italy and Germany.

Russia, from the litle that I know may be an ecception. The extreem right there seems very large and politically mature. With the Veterans of the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnia being liekend to the WWI vertenrans that were the backbone of the early Fascist groupings there are close political conditions. Nationalism and anti immigrant sentiment seem very strong there as well.

The US has the relegious right, which should not be underestimated, but the middle class is soft, and non white working class too large for there to be a genuine fascist movement I think. There is very little political violenece in recent US history, i dont think people threr would have the stomach for real fascist groups.

[Charles Xavier]

We shouldn't however think that conservative forces are not moblizing right this moment. They definately are. They are helping direct the anger that people legitimently feel at the wrong people such as trade unions and immigrants. For example.

This is the type of anger the conservatives want to wage against unions, "well my job sucks so should yours" type of ideal

"If they can prove that it really does cost them $20.00 more an hour than the other auto company's, I feel that the employees should be willing to take the cut or lose their jobs. If Chrysler was to pull out of Canada all together, those that currently work there would be hard pressed to find a job that pays so well. If you currently make $30.00 an hour, $25.00 an hour with less benefits and less put into your pension should be fine. My employer doesn't even offer benefits or pension. I want a pension I put my own money into it!! If I had the choice of taking a pay cut or being out of a job, I would take the pay cut.... time to suck it up buttercup!!!"

"So the taxpayers are on the hook to save the CAW workers who have held the auto companies hostage with the threat of strike...

CAW should be forced to take a reduction before any taxpayer money is given."

"Phil
Is it really $70/hr? If so, then I have no pity and I hope they've been saving it for the long period of unemployment that the unions have brought on themselves...

Too bad for all the parts suppliers who probably work twice as hard for half as much."

"Dayton
When a CAW worker has a better wage and benefit package than most of our M.P.'s something is wrong here. Cut them loose!!!"

"db
bye bye chrysler. Good riddance!"

"TVic
I hope this is nothng more than the company giving the union the message that they had better come to the bargaining table with some serious concessions.
Otherwise - blow 'em a kiss goodbye, Tony. I don't want my tax dollars being held to ransom!!"

Right now its a letter writing stage, maybe tomorrow it will be gangs trying to break up meetings and break strikes.

This is something that we need to struggle against.

[Verix]

i think if fascism appears today it will be in a non-racist format, racist fascists (like Neo-nazis, BNP, KKK) can be seen a mile away but how many people would look for a muti-cultural fascist group?

[fabilius]

i think if fascism appears today it will be in a non-racist format, racist fascists (like Neo-nazis, BNP, KKK) can be seen a mile away but how many people would look for a muti-cultural fascist group?


The point though is to vent public anger towards someone that doesn´t deserve it.

If you are unhappy with your social condition the capitalists don´t want you to blame them. They don´t want you to blame your boss, your company or the regular politicians.

They want you to vent your frustrations at the immigrants.

Obviously Lou Dobbs or Rush Limbaugh can´t say: "Let´s lynch niggars"
Thankfully they can´t.
But can they talk endlessly about, gays and immigrants?

Yes, they can. Yes, they can.

[Holden Caulfield]

obviously it can, if you understand the role of fascism then i can't see how you vote anyother way

[rararoadrunner]

Here's an article for anyone foolish enough to think that the Obama Administration and its Congressional fellow-travellers are any less fascist than their neocon predecessors:


Preparing for Civil Unrest in America
Legislation to Establish Internment Camps on US Military Bases

By Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/), March 18, 2009

The Economic and Social Crisis

The financial meltdown has unleashed a latent and emergent social crisis across the United States.
What is at stake is the fraudulent confiscation of lifelong savings and pension funds, the appropriation of tax revenues to finance the trillion dollar "bank bailouts", which ultimately serve to line the pockets of the richest people in America.
This economic crisis is in large part the result of financial manipulation and outright fraud to the detriment of entire populations, leading to a renewed wave of corporate bankruptcies, mass unemployment and poverty.
The criminalization of the global financial system, characterized by a "Shadow Banking" network has resulted in the centralization of bank power and an unprecedented concentration of private wealth.
Obama's "economic stimulus" package and budget proposals contribute to a further process of concentration and centralization of bank power, the cumulative effects of which will eventually resul in large scale corporate, bankruptcies, a new wave of foreclosures not to mention fiscal collapse and the downfall of State social programs. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, America's Fiscal Collapse (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12517), Global Research, March 2, 2009).
The cumulative decline of real economic activity backlashes on employment and wages, which in turn leads to a collapse in purchaisng power. The proposed "solution" under the Obama administration contributes to exacerbating rather than alleviating social inequalities and the process of wealth concentration.
The Protest Movement
When people across America, whose lives have been shattered and destroyed, come to realize the true face of the global "free market" system, the legitimacy of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the US administration will be challenged.
A latent protest movement directed against the seat of economic and political power is unfolding.
How this process will occur is hard to predict. All sectors of American society are potentially affected: wage earners, small, medium and even large businesses, farmers, professionals, federal, State and municipal employees, students, teachers, health workers, and unemployed. Protests will initially emerge from these various sectors. There is, however, at this stage, no organized national resistance movement directed against the administration's economic and financial agenda.
Obama's populist rhetoric conceals the true nature of macro-economic policy. Acting on behalf of Wall Street, the administration's economic package, which includes close to a trillion dollar "aid" package for the financial services industry, coupled with massive austerity measures, contributes to precipitating America into a bottomless crisis.
"Orwellian Solution" to the Great Depression: Curbing Civil Unrest
At this particular juncture, there is no economic recovery program in sight. The Washington-Wall Street consensus prevails. There are no policies, no alternatives formulated from within the political and economic system. .
What is the way out? How will the US government face an impending social catastrophe?
The solution is to curb social unrest. The chosen avenue, inherited from the outgoing Bush administration is the reinforcement of the Homeland Security apparatus and the militarization of civilian State institutions.
The outgoing administration has laid the groundwork. Various pieces of "anti-terrorist" legislation (including the Patriot Acts) and presidential directives have been put in place since 2001, largely using the pretext of the "Global War on Terrorism."
Homeland Security's Internment Camps
Directly related to the issue of curbing social unrest, cohesive system of detention camps is also envisaged, under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon.
A bill entitled the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (HR 645) was introduced in the US Congress in January. It calls for the establishment of six national emergency centers in major regions in the US to be located on existing military installations. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645)
The stated purpose of the "national emergency centers" is to provide "temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster." In actuality, what we are dealing with are FEMA internment camps. HR 645 states that the camps can be used to "meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security."
There has been virtually no press coverage of HR 645.
These "civilian facilities" on US military bases are to be established in cooperation with the US Military. Modeled on Guantanamo, what we are dealing with is the militarization of FEMA internment facilities.
Once a person is arrested and interned in a FEMA camp located on a military base, that person would in all likelihood, under a national emergency, fall under the de facto jurisdiction of the Military: civilian justice and law enforcement including habeas corpus would no longer apply.
HR 645 bears a direct relationship to the economic crisis and the likelihood of mass protests across America. It constitutes a further move to militarize civilian law enforcement, repealing the Posse Comitatus Act.
In the words of Rep. Ron Paul:

"...the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough... Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt-based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next." (Daily Paul (http://www.dailypaul.com/node/80801), September 2008, emphasis added)
The proposed internment camps should be seen in relation to the broader process of militarization of civilian institutions. The construction of internment camps predates the introduction of HR 645 (Establishment of Emergency Centers)in January 2009. There are, according to various (unconfirmed) reports, some 800 FEMA prison camps in different regions of the U.S. Moreover, since the 1980s, the US military has developed "tactics, techniques and procedures" to suppress civilian dissent, to be used in the eventuality of mass protests (United States Army Field Manual 19-15 under Operation Garden Plot, entitled "Civil Disturbances" was issued in 1985)

In early 2006, tax revenues were allocated to building modern internment camp facilities. In January 2006, Kellogg Brown and Roots, which at the time was a subsidiary of Halliburton, received a $385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE):

"The contract, which is effective immediately [January 2006], provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs...
The contract may also provide migrant detention support to other U.S. Government organizations in the event of an immigration emergency, as well as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency, such as a natural disaster. (KBR, 24 January 2006 (http://www.kbr.com/news/2006/govnews_060124.aspx), emphasis added)
The stated objectives of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (http://www.ice.gov/) are to:

"protect national security and uphold public safety by targeting criminal networks and terrorist organizations that seek to exploit vulnerabilities in our immigration system, in our financial networks, along our border, at federal facilities and elsewhere in order to do harm to the United States. The end result is a safer, more secure America" (ICE homepage) (http://www.ice.gov/)
The US media is mum on the issue of the internment camps on US soil. While casually acknowledging the multimillion dollar contract granted to Halliburton's subsidiary, the news reports largely focused their attention on possible "cost overruns" (similar to those which occurred with KBR in Iraq).
What is the political intent and purpose of these camps? The potential use of these internment facilities to detain American citizens under a martial law situation are not an object of media debate or discussion.
Combat Units Assigned to the Homeland
In the last months of the Bush administration, prior to the November 2008 presidential elections, the Department of Defense ordered the recall of the 3rd Infantry’s 1st Brigade Combat Team from Iraq. The relocation of a combat unit from the war theater to domestic front is an integral part of the Homeland Security agenda. The BCT was assigned to assist in law enforcement activities within the US.
The BCT combat unit was attached to US Army North, the Army's component of US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). The 1st BCT and other combat units would be called upon to perform specific military functions in the case of civil unrest:

The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.(
(See Gina Cavallaro, Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1, Army Times, September 8, 2008).
Under the proposed withdrawal of US forces from Iraq under the Obama administration, one expects that other combat units will be brought home from the war theater and reassigned in the United States.
The evolving national security scenario is characterized by a mesh of civilian and military institutions:
-Army combat units working with civilian law enforcement, with the stated mission to curb "social unrest".
- the establishment of new internment camps under civilian jurisdiction located on US military facilities.
The FEMA internment camps are part of the Continuity of Government (COG), which would be put in place in the case of martial law.
The internment camps are intended to "protect the government" against its citizens, by locking up protesters as well as political activists who might challenge the legitimacy of the Administration's national security, economic or military agenda.
Spying on Americans: The Big Brother Data Bank
Related to the issue of internment and mass protests, how will data on American citizens be collected?
How will individuals across America be categorized?
What are the criteria of the Department of Homeland Security?
In a 2004 report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios (http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2004/hsc-planning-scenarios-jul04.htm), pertaining to the defense of the Homeland, the following categories of potential "conspirators" were identified:

"foreign terrorists" ,
"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]
"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]
"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].
In June of last year, the Bush administration issued a National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD 59- HSPD 24) entitled Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080605-8.html) (For Further details see Michel Chossudovsky, "Big Brother" Presidential Directive: "Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security" (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9296), Global Research, June 2008)
Adopted without public debate or Congressional approval, its relevant procedures are far-reaching. They are related to the issue of civil unrest. They are also part of the logic behind the establishment of FEMA internment camps under HR 645. .

NSPD 59 (Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security) goes far beyond the narrow issue of biometric identification, it recommends the collection and storage of "associated biographic" information, meaning information on the private lives of US citizens, in minute detail, all of which will be "accomplished within the law":

"The contextual data that accompanies biometric data includes information on date and place of birth, citizenship, current address and address history, current employment and employment history, current phone numbers and phone number history, use of government services and tax filings. Other contextual data may include bank account and credit card histories, plus criminal database records on a local, state and federal level. The database also could include legal judgments or other public records documenting involvement in legal disputes, child custody records and marriage or divorce records."(See Jerome Corsi, June 2008) (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=66795)
The directive uses 9/11 and the "Global War on Terrorism" as an all encompassing justification to wage a witch hunt against dissenting citizens, establishing at the same time an atmosphere of fear and intimidation across the land.

It also calls for the integration of various data banks as well as inter-agency cooperation in the sharing of information, with a view to eventually centralizing the information on American citizens.

In a carefully worded text, NSPD 59 "establishes a framework" to enable the Federal government and its various police and intelligence agencies to:

[I]"use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law."
The NSPD 59 Directive recommends: "actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics".
The procedures under NSPD 59 are consistent with an earlier June 2005 decision which consisted in creating a "domestic spy service", (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4636117.stm) under the auspices of the FBI. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, Bush Administration creates "Secret State Police", (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=601)June 30, 2005)
Working hand in glove with Homeland Security (DHS), the proposed "domestic intelligence department" would combine FBI counterterrorism, intelligence and espionage operations into a single service.
The new department operating under the auspices of the FBI would have the authority to "seize the property of people deemed to be helping the spread of WMD": They would be able to "spy on people in America suspected of terrorism or having critical intelligence information, even if they are not suspected of committing a crime." (NBC Tonight, 29 June 2005).\




ANNEX



Text of H.R. 645: National Emergency Centers Establishment Act
This version: Introduced in House.

This is the original text of the bill as it was written by its sponsor and submitted to the House for consideration. This is the latest version of the bill available on this website.

[SOURCE: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-645)]





HR 645 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 645
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 22, 2009
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL
To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.
(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.
This Act does not affect--
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term ‘emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term ‘major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).

(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term ‘military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).


AMERICA'S "WAR ON TERRORISM"
by Michel Chossudovsky

CLICK TO ORDER

America's "War on Terrorism" (http://www.globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/SHOPCA911.jpgIn this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky's 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by "Islamic terrorists". Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.
According to Chossudovsky, the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.
September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington's agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/633-chossudovsky.jpghttp://www.avante.pt/fotos/632chossudovsky.jpg
Chossudovsky peels back layers of rhetoric to reveal a complex web of deceit aimed at luring the American people and the rest of the world into accepting a military solution which threatens the future of humanity.
The last chapter includes an analysis of the London 7/7 Bomb Attacks.

CLICK TO ORDER (mail order or online order)

America's "War on Terrorism"
(http://www.globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html)


Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article.

To become a Member of Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=section&sectionName=membership)

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] ([email protected])

www.globalresearch.ca (http://www.globalresearch.ca/www.globalresearch.ca) contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected] ([email protected])

© Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2009

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=12793 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=12793)

© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia (http://www.polygraphx.com/) © Copyright 2005-2007

[Black Sheep]

The movie 'Die Welle'.

[rosie]

Here! Here! I agree. Capitalism always fails, and when that happens, the 1% ruling class fat cats clench up the power struggle and the oppression of the workers goes into over time. In the end, the fall of capitalism always leads to fascism. Look at what is happening right now in America...the banks got bailed out, no questions asked. The big three car makers still haven't received the money they need to stay afloat, the federal government and conservatives (and the media) is blaming the unions for making sure the workers have pension plans after retirement, family health plans, and proper over time pay. Meanwhile, the big huge insurance companies just got huge bailout funds that the CEO's promptly used for employee bonus checks...using the taxpayer dollars as the bailout money instead...now, don't get me wrong, our president is pissed about that, but there really isn't much he can do about the situation now. There is the possibility of taxing the 6 million dollar bonuses, but there are complications to that method. And asking for the money back just didn't work. Now, according to NPR (national public radio) the federal government may have known about the bonuses a head of time...so the fat cats still get super rich, and the workers still get fucked (pardon my language...it frustrates me to no end). While the jobs are disappearing in this country, and the rulling class is getting rich off our poverty, the governor of my state (Michigan. Our gov. is Jennifer Granholm...Democrat) is still spending too much on trying to get bussinesses to come to our state while ignoring the impovereshed and jobless families. All of this screams of approaching neo-fascism. I just ranted for a bit...someone else can have a turn now. I appologize.


The NDP is a social democratic party its not a fascist group.

And really you guys dont understand fascism... Fascism is there to crush the worker's movement. When the working class is unwilling to give massive concessions.The working class in most places is willing to give concessions, they can make the cut backs without much resistance. Its not white-supremacist groups running around like assholes. Things can change fast but this isn't 1930s scenario over again theres different conditions.

[Ismail]

And its not the petty-bourgeoisie that want fascism, why would they? Fascism turned the petty-bourgeiosie quickly into the ranks of the proletariat at the might of the monopoly combines and cartels putting their businesses out of business.Because fascism was "neither capitalism nor socialism," which originally appeals to the petite-bourgeoisie who are against "big business" and socialism, both which would threaten their way of life. Fascism in the end is described as state capitalism, because the bourgeoisie of the state and corporations/industries/etc. are almost totally combined and work together while doing all they can to promote class conciliation with a "national society" (as compared to a class one).

Furthermore fascism gains support via unions. A major part of Mussolini's fascism was National Syndicalism, which, as Wikipedia states:

National syndicalists imagined that the liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism) democratic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy) political system would be destroyed in a massive general strike (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_strike), at which point the nation’s economy would be transformed into a corporatist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatist) model based on class cooperation, contrasted with Marxist class struggle. (see the Nazi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany) model of Volksgemeinschaft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgemeinschaft)). But national syndicalists also publicly declared their opposition to bourgeoisie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisie)-class rule and instead supported a strong "proletarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletarian) nation" which would rid itself of class-based society and convert it to a national society. National syndicalists typically opposed communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism), capitalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism), liberalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism), and any other internationalist movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalism) which was deemed to be threatening the strength and/or unity of the nation.So basically it's socialist (sometimes even Leninist) tactics, but ultimately capitalist (and before that idealist) theory and evidently capitalist in practice. That's how they claimed to represent "neither capitalism nor socialism" and that is how they gained power, socialism was seen as discredited, as was the leadership of Italy. Don't forget that types like Giovanni Gentile and other early fascists were former petite-bourgeois Marxists.

[Tatarin]

Maybe not exactly fascism, but I guess it is always possible for some kind of authoritarian system to grow, may it be small groups who get support or big business financing those groups.

If this crisis show that government must be involved in the 'free market' in a bigger way than pre-2008, then the power they seek lies in being in the government. State-capitalism?

[Coggeh]

Maybe not exactly fascism, but I guess it is always possible for some kind of authoritarian system to grow, may it be small groups who get support or big business financing those groups.

If this crisis show that government must be involved in the 'free market' in a bigger way than pre-2008, then the power they seek lies in being in the government. State-capitalism?
State capitalism ? what do you mean by that ? just the state playing a bigger part in the economy ?

[Comrade_Red]

Well.


The 'white pride' movement is certainly growing and effecting more people.
the whole '14/88' scene, i mean.
and though not in the Mussolini sense, that's fascism.

So yeah, unless the left, or whoever, does what's necessary to stop it, it will grow.

But no, i don't think that they are tools of the state. Wrong, but not tools of the elite.

[Comrade_Red]

The word 'fascist' can be a bit misleading. Most of the people we describe as 'fascists' (Stormfronters, '1488' types) aren't Mussolini-type fascists.

[Tatarin]

State capitalism ? what do you mean by that ? just the state playing a bigger part in the economy ?

I don't know really what I meant. The question depends on how the system will develop. Maybe they'll start the whole cycle again, some gets rich, and we'll have another economic depression in 10 years. Maybe they strap the system in and have more governmental control. But it'll be authoritarianism, maybe something like Burma's military junta, or Saddam's Iraq?


The 'white pride' movement is certainly growing and effecting more people.
the whole '14/88' scene, i mean.

I guess those types of hategroups always exist, but I really wonder what kind of hate they involve. I mean, it's not like many hategroups are organized for a violent overthrow of their states. With depressions like these, people probably tend to give hate some credits.


So yeah, unless the left, or whoever, does what's necessary to stop it, it will grow.

I think it depends on what part of the world you're in. In Europe these hategroups do exist, mostly as hooligans and gangs, but the danger lies in the political parties that originated in them some time ago. By that I mean political parties that are hostile to immigration, because they attract a so-called "silent supporters", like the recent elections in Austria.

Also, those same parties (coincidentally of course) happens to be the stronger supporter of hardened laws (more allowance for the police, longer prison sentenses etc) and if not increased surveillance (particularly of left groups). While it doesn't mean that they'll reveal themselves as a second Hitler the day after elections, it does show that a slower way to an authoritarian state is possible, probably using wordings as 'security' and the 'slow takeover by un-nation x people and their religion/way of life' etc.

[Charles Xavier]

Because fascism was "neither capitalism nor socialism," which originally appeals to the petite-bourgeoisie who are against "big business" and socialism, both which would threaten their way of life. Fascism in the end is described as state capitalism, because the bourgeoisie of the state and corporations/industries/etc. are almost totally combined and work together while doing all they can to promote class conciliation with a "national society" (as compared to a class one).

Furthermore fascism gains support via unions. A major part of Mussolini's fascism was National Syndicalism, which, as Wikipedia states:
So basically it's socialist (sometimes even Leninist) tactics, but ultimately capitalist (and before that idealist) theory and evidently capitalist in practice. That's how they claimed to represent "neither capitalism nor socialism" and that is how they gained power, socialism was seen as discredited, as was the leadership of Italy. Don't forget that types like Giovanni Gentile and other early fascists were former petite-bourgeois Marxists.


Sorry Ismail, but the Labour unions did not support fascism, they were the first to be outlawed, the Syndicates were employer-employee board where the employer had the final say. It was anarcho-syndicalism in reverse. Instead of the bottom telling the top what to do, it was the top telling the bottom what to do. It was capitalism, it wasn't socialism, it was the iron heel of big business descending on the working class. Its popularity was because big business financed them and gave them the connections they needed. And you are quoting Wikipedia instead of using a marxist scientific analysis on what fascism is.

Lenin stated quite plainly that fascism is capitalism in decay. That meaning that fascism comes into play when capitalism cannot fix itself. It resorts to the most barbaric means capitalism has to offer. It is not a social system that works with all sections of society, it is a social system that works with the most reactionary portions of the bourgeioisie.

I will Quote you a great comrade who did a lot of work summarizing fascism and brought forward creative ideas to defeat it on the class character of fascism,




Comrades, fascism in power was correctly described by the Thirteenth Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International as the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.
The most reactionary variety of fascism is the German type of fascism. It has the effrontery to call itself National Socialism, though it has nothing in common with socialism. German fascism is not only bourgeois nationalism, it is fiendish chauvinism. It is a government system of political gangsterism, a system of provocation and torture practised upon the working class and the revolutionary elements of the peasantry, the petty bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia. It is medieval barbarity and bestiality, it is unbridled aggression in relation to other nations.
German fascism is acting as the spearhead of international counter-revolution, as the chief instigator of imperialist war, as the initiator of a crusade against the Soviet Union, the great fatherland of the working people of the whole world.
Fascism is not a form of state power "standing above both classes -- the proletariat and the bourgeoisie," as Otto Bauer, for instance, has asserted. It is not "the revolt of the petty bourgeoisie which has captured the machinery of the state," as the British Socialist Brailsford declares. No, fascism is not a power standing above class, nor government of the petty bourgeoisie or the lumpen-proletariat over finance capital. Fascism is the power of finance capital itself. It is the organization of terrorist vengeance against the working class and the revolutionary section of the peasantry and intelligentsia. In foreign policy, fascism is jingoism in its most brutal form, fomenting bestial hatred of other nations.
This, the true character of fascism, must be particularly stressed because in a number of countries, under cover of social demagogy, fascism has managed to gain the following of the mass of the petty bourgeoisie that has been dislocated by the crisis, and even of certain sections of the most backward strata of the proletariat. These would never have supported fascism if they had understood its real character and its true nature.
The development of fascism, and the fascist dictatorship itself, assume different forms in different countries, according to historical, social and economic conditions and to the national peculiarities, and the international position of the given country. In certain countries, principally those in which fascism has no broad mass basis and in which the struggle of the various groups within the camp of the fascist bourgeoisie itself is rather acute, fascism does not immediately venture to abolish parliament, but allows the other bourgeois parties, as well as the Social-Democratic Parties, to retain a modicum of legality. In other countries, where the ruling bourgeoisie fears an early outbreak of revolution, fascism establishes its unrestricted political monopoly, either immediately or by intensifying its reign of terror against and persecution of all rival parties and groups. This does not prevent fascism, when its position becomes particularly acute, from trying to extend its basis and, without altering its class nature, trying to combine open terrorist dictatorship with a crude sham of parliamentarism.
The accession to power of fascism is not an ordinary succession of one bourgeois government by another, but a substitution of one state form of class domination of the bourgeoisie -- bourgeois democracy -- by another form -- open terrorist dictatorship. It would be a serious mistake to ignore this distinction, a mistake liable to prevent the revolutionary proletariat from mobilizing the widest strata of the working people of town and country for the struggle against the menace of the seizure of power by the fascists, and from taking advantage of the contradictions which exist in the camp of the bourgeoisie itself. But it is a mistake, no less serious and dangerous, to underrate the importance, for the establishment of fascist dictatorship, of the reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie at present increasingly developing in bourgeois-democratic countries -- measures which suppress the democratic liberties of the working people, falsify and curtail the rights of parliament and intensify the repression of the revolutionary movement.
Comrades, the accession to power of fascism must not be conceived of in so simplified and smooth a form, as though some committee or other of finance capital decided on a certain date to set up a fascist dictatorship. In reality, fascism usually comes to power in the course of a mutual, and at times severe, struggle against the old bourgeois parties, or a definite section of these parties, in the course of a struggle even within the fascist camp itself -- a struggle which at times leads to armed clashes, as we have witnessed in the case of Germany, Austria and other countries. All this, however, does not make less important the fact that, before the establishment of a fascist dictatorship, bourgeois governments usually pass through a number of preliminary stages and adopt a number of reactionary measures which directly facilitate the accession to power of fascism. Whoever does not fight the reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie and the growth of fascism at these preparatory stages is not in a position to prevent the victory of fascism, but, on the contrary, facilitates that victory.
The Social-Democratic leaders glossed over and concealed from the masses the true class nature of fascism, and did not call them to the struggle against the increasingly reactionary measures of the bourgeoisie. They bear great historical responsibility for the fact that, at the decisive moment of the fascist offensive, a large section of the working people of Germany and of a number of other fascist countries failed to recognize in fascism the most bloodthirsty monster of finance capital, their most vicious enemy, and that these masses were not prepared to resist it.
What is the source of the influence of fascism over the masses? Fascism is able to attract the masses because it demagogically appeals to their most urgent needs and demands. Fascism not only inflames prejudices that are deeply ingrained in the masses, but also plays on the better sentiments of the masses, on their sense of justice and sometimes even on their revolutionary traditions. Why do the German fascists, those lackeys of the bourgeoisie and mortal enemies of socialism, represent themselves to the masses as "Socialists," and depict their accession to power as a "revolution"? Because they try to exploit the faith in revolution and the urge towards socialism that lives in the hearts of the mass of working people in Germany.
Fascism acts in the interests of the extreme imperialists, but it presents itself to the masses in the guise of champion of an ill-treated nation, and appeals to outraged national sentiments, as German fascism did, for instance, when it won the support of the masses of the petty bourgeoisie by the slogan "Down with the Versailles Treaty."
Fascism aims at the most unbridled exploitation of the masses but it approaches them with the most artful anti-capitalist demagogy, taking advantage of the deep hatred of the working people against the plundering bourgeoisie, the banks, trusts and financial magnates, and advancing those slogans which at the given moment are most alluring to the politically immature masses. In Germany -- "The general welfare is higher than the welfare of the individual," in Italy -- "Our state is not a capitalist, but a corporate state," in Japan -- "For Japan without exploitation," in the United States -- "Share the wealth," and so forth.
Fascism delivers up the people to be devoured by the most corrupt and venal elements, but comes before them with the demand for "an honest and incorruptible government." Speculating on the profound disillusionment of the masses in bourgeois-democratic governments, fascism hypocritically denounces corruption.
It is in the interests of the most reactionary circles of the bourgeoisie that fascism intercepts the disappointed masses who desert the old bourgeois parties. But it impresses these masses by the vehemence of its attacks on the bourgeois governments and its irreconcilable attitude to the old bourgeois parties.
Surpassing in its cynicism and hypocrisy all other varieties of bourgeois reaction, fascism adapts its demagogy to the national peculiarities of each country, and even to the peculiarities of the various social strata in one and the same country. And the mass of the petty bourgeoisie and even a section of the workers, reduced to despair by want, unemployment and the insecurity of their existence, fall victim to the social and chauvinist demagogy of fascism.
Fascism comes to power as a party of attack on the revolutionary movement of the proletariat, on the mass of the people who are in a state of unrest; yet it stages its accession to power as a "revolutionary" movement against the bourgeoisie on behalf of "the whole nation" and for the "salvation" of the nation. One recalls Mussolini's "march" on Rome, Pilsudski's "march" on Warsaw, Hitler's National-Socialist "revolution" in Germany, and so forth.
But whatever the masks that fascism adopts, whatever the forms in which it presents itself, whatever the ways by which it comes to power


Fascism is a most ferocious attack by capital on the mass of the working people;
Fascism is unbridled chauvinism and predatory war;
Fascism is rabid reaction and counter-revolution;
Fascism is the most vicious enemy of the working class and of all working people.

[Ismail]

Sorry Ismail, but the Labour unions did not support fascism, they were the first to be outlawed, the Syndicates were employer-employee board where the employer had the final say. It was anarcho-syndicalism in reverse. Instead of the bottom telling the top what to do, it was the top telling the bottom what to do. It was capitalism, it wasn't socialism, it was the iron heel of big business descending on the working class.Actually labor unions did play a role in the rise of Fascism in Italy and also the rise of Nazism in Germany. As R.G. Price notes:

Germany, at the time of the fascist takeover, had one of the strongest Marxist traditions in the world with a large and organized Marxist labor movement.... Elements of Mussolini's fascist system, such as the National Council of Corporations, which was to be comprised of representatives from industry, labor, and state, who worked together to settle labor disputes and guide industry, the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction, and other such state bureaucracies, regulated and administered Italy's economy. Well established big businessmen became highly involved in the state bureaucracy and the Corporate State became a tool for establishment businessmen to serve themselves.
Its popularity was because big business financed them and gave them the connections they needed.While "big business" clearly had no real problems with Fascism, the Fascist movement was also against "big business" publically. Producerism, a US movement, was basically proto-Fascism:


Producerism, sometimes referred to as "producer radicalism," refers to a syncretic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syncretic_politics) ideology of populist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism) economic nationalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_nationalism) which holds that the productive forces of society - the ordinary worker, the small businessman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Businessman), and the entrepreneur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrepreneur), are being held back by parasitical elements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_%28social_offense%29) at both the top and bottom of the social structure.In short, it calls for an alliance led by the petite-bourgeoisie with the proletariat to put an end to laissez-faire capitalism and to institute state capitalism, which keeps the three classes (bourgeoisie, petite-bourgeoisie and proletariat) but stresses their unity via nationalism up until internal contradictions make such unity clearly impossible.



And you are quoting Wikipedia instead of using a marxist scientific analysis on what fascism is.I quoted Wikipedia for the definition of National Syndicalism, I did not quote Wikipedia to showcase my arguments on Fascism.


Lenin stated quite plainly that fascism is capitalism in decay.This is true (though I'm pretty sure Lenin said imperialism was, since he died before Fascism had much of a voice), Fascism was the answer to a populace who distrusted "big business" (which often went demagogic and focused on "international bankers," a codeword for Jews, etc. in lieu of Marxist influence in the nation) while also hating socialism. As R.G. Price further notes:

In 1931 Major General Smedley Butler publicly relayed a story about Mussolini, apparently told to him by Cornelius Vanderbilt Jr., in which Mr. Vanderbilt was riding with Mussolini and Mussolini hit a child with his car but kept on going and refused to stop. Butler's public telling of the story caused international outrage and Butler was then arrested, court-martialed by Secretary of War Stimson and told to apologize to Mussolini. Butler refused, deciding instead to retire. Nevertheless this illustrates the degree to which Mussolini and fascism were respected in America at the time.



In 1934 the American State Department proclaimed that the 99% victory of the Fascist Party in Italian elections "demonstrate incontestably the popularity of the Fascist regime."

The State Department, as late as 1937, praised Italian Fascism stating that it "brought order out of chaos, discipline out of license, and solvency out of bankruptcy." The State Department continued to embrace fascism because of its anti-Communist position. Italy and Germany were being "made safe" by the fascists for American investment, and this is what was important in economic terms, especially during the Great Depression in America.
That meaning that fascism comes into play when capitalism cannot fix itself. It resorts to the most barbaric means capitalism has to offer.While certainly barbaric against Communists, Fascism is created in times of crisis within capitalism, meaning it cannot afford to be barbaric to the rest of the society. As R.G. Price notes further:

The Nazis did not capture the hearts and minds of the German people with hate speeches, they did it by fostering this strong sense of community, loyalty, progress, and love among the people. What historians note about Nazi Germany was the strong sense of happiness and purpose among the people... The children in Nazi Germany, as long as they were "Aryan" and liked to fit in, really, really enjoyed themselves. They had an excellent life. Some of the really common exercises for children were choreographed dance and parade patterns. These group activities really gave the children a sense of power and a sense of being a part of something bigger. This built a strong sense of cooperation and community among the children, who formed very close and deep friendships with each other. Forming deep social bonds and a strong sense of trust among Germans was a major part of the Nazi movement.

Building trust was of course very important for the political movement - trust in leadership, and trust of Germans in each other as well - a sense that together, as Germans, they could rely on each other and accomplish anything. This is the real social setting of Nazi Germany; it wasn't a setting of hate and fear, not for the Germans. To the average German, until shortly before the outbreak of the war, their experience with the Nazi Party and with the German society of the time as a whole was extremely positive and engendered a great sense of pride and love.While on this subject, we should also discuss how the Communists in Germany viewed the Nazis and Fascists. Now as you probably know, the German government was Social-Democratic, and Stalin had said:

"Social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism.. These organisations (ie Fascism and social democracy) are not antipodes, they are twins."
J.V.Stalin: "Concerning the International Situation" (September 1924), in 'Works', Volume 6, 1953; p.294.

This is actually true. The goals of Social Democracy and Fascism are essentially the same, the Social Democrats want to "reform" capitalism whereas Fascism is the radical wing of Social Democracy, who want to "go beyond capitalism and socialism." Many Fascists were ex-Social Democrats and semi-Marxist socialists, like Giovanni Gentile and Mussolini themselves. National Socialism (Nazism) however was seen in Germany as a new movement which claimed socialism, as opposed to the anti-socialism of Fascism. Otto Ville Kuusinen however said the following in the COMINTERN, founding the concept of Social-Fascism:

"The aims of the fascists and the social-fascists are the same."
Kuusinen, Report To the 10th Plenum of ECCI, in 'International Press Correspondence', Volume 9, no.40, (20 August, 1929), p.848.

It should be noted at this point that both the Nazis and Communists were being persecuted by a régime the Communists now thought was essentially a moderate bourgeois-democratic Fascist one. So Communists and Nazis in many areas developed a tactical alliance, as Communists viewed Nazis as petite-bourgeois socialists united against the anti-socialist state. Obviously once Nazis came to power they weren't too much different from Fascists, but this incident does show how much influence the Fascists (and in this case Nazis) had on the worker's movement before coming to power. Social-Fascism is a bad policy when you take it literally, as Kuusinen and the German Communists have shown us.