Midwest Militia Plotted Uprising, Says FBI

[chegitz guevara]

http://www.annarbor.com/news/9-hutaree-members-face-federal-charges-of-conspiracy-attempting-to-use-weapons-of-mass-destruction/

Nine members in three states in an ultra-right wing Christian militia have been arrested and indicted for plotting an uprising. They planned to kill a police officer, then attack the police funeral afterward, killing not just officers but also families and children, according to the FBI.

And some people still think there's no fascist movement growing in America.

[Nolan]

But it's not a fascist movement. It's just another right-wing populist movement. You're throwing the word "fascism" around a little bit too much. It means a very specific thing. The only significant fascist movement in america is the national socialist party.

They may have been theocrats, but not fascists.

[#FF0000]

But it's not a fascist movement. It's just another right-wing populist movement. You're throwing the word "fascism" around a little bit too much. It means a very specific thing. The only significant fascist movement in america is the national socialist party.

They may have been theocrats, but not fascists.

What -is- Fascism, then?

[¿Que?]

Their website is still up. Do we need to post it for the curious?

[Nolan]

What -is- Fascism, then?

An ultra-nationalist, totalitarian movement that typically advocates class collaborationism, a corporate state, and a "return" to some idealized past or to "save" the nation from some internal or external threat, usually jews, Marxists, immigrants, etc.

[#FF0000]

An ultra-nationalist, totalitarian movement that typically advocates class collaborationism, a corporate state, and a "return" to some idealized past or to "save" the nation from some internal or external threat, usually jews, Marxists, immigrants, etc.

How is the Tea Party movement not fascist then.

[Robocommie]

How is the Tea Party movement not fascist then.

Yeah I kinda have to agree. They're out to "take the country back" and restore the "founder's vision" and protect the Constitution from Commies, Nazis and Mexican immigrants

[Nolan]

How is the Tea Party movement not fascist then.

They don't fit all of the criteria.

[Martin Blank]

They don't fit all of the criteria.

What criteria don't they fit? I mean, they do fit all the ones you listed above. Is there other criteria you're holding back on?

[#FF0000]

They don't fit all of the criteria.

In what regard? They might not use the corporatist rhetoric from the 1930's but they're certainly "AMERICA FOR AMERICANS", and anti-globalist for the very same reason.

[¿Que?]

Fascists are not opposed to unions so long as they are controlled by the state :)

[#FF0000]

Fascists are not opposed to unions so long as they are controlled by the state :)

That's kind of a silly thing to point out I think. Fascism was different in some ways all over, from integralism to Nazism to Mussolini's fascism to Franco's fascism. They all met that main criteria, though.

[Nolan]

What criteria don't they fit? I mean, they do fit all the ones you listed above. Is there other criteria you're holding back on?

I don't see how they're explicitly totalitarian or how they advocate corporatism.

[Comrade B]

I don't see how they're explicitly totalitarianThey may not believe themselves to be totalitarian, but if you ask them if Communists deserve a vote, or if Obama should be removed forcibly from the white house, I think we could easily predict their answer.


how they advocate corporatism. Their main platform is oriented around absolute business freedom. This would naturally allow large scale businesses to pursue monopoly domination without fear of sanctions. I doubt they would complain about these businesses spreading either.
Also, I would have to say that most advocates of fascism do not actually understand their entire philosophy. They are just drawn to parts of it and support it because they oppose everything that fascism opposes.

I think we would have a lot of trouble finding someone who advocates fascism with some kind of logical argument behind it.

[Nolan]

They may not believe themselves to be totalitarian, but if you ask them if Communists deserve a vote, or if Obama should be removed forcibly from the white house, I think we could easily predict their answer.

I don't think that itself makes them totalitarian. You could say the same with the most libertarian of anarchists concerning the bourgeoisie. I would agree there is a strong social-authoritarian element in the tea party.


Their main platform is oriented around absolute business freedom.Fascist movements historically had anti-business rhetoric, but that's all it was. I think the fascist idea of a national guild of capitalists is completely different from the laissez-faire nonsense the tea party throws around.



Also, I would have to say that most advocates of fascism do not actually understand their entire philosophy. They are just drawn to parts of it and support it because they oppose everything that fascism opposes.This applies mostly to neo-nazis I think.


I think we would have a lot of trouble finding someone who advocates fascism with some kind of logical argument behind it.I've had several conversations with Youtube (non-nazi) fascists. You get the same feeling you do when talking to a Misean. When you get into the nuts and bolts, it truly is one of the most bizarre ideologies you'll ever see.

[Martin Blank]

I don't see how they're explicitly totalitarian or how they advocate corporatism.

:blink::blink::blink::blink::blink::blink:

Apparently, you've never had the ... pleasure ... of dealing with these people.

I think their views on dissent, free expression, free association (including into labor unions) and the rights of the accused qualify them as totalitarian. If that's not enough, then there's their views on "the rule of law", the role of the judiciary, constitutional interpretation and historical events.

And corporatism? While the Nativists may while a little about "Wall Street bankers" (hell, the Nazis did their fair share of that kind of rhetoric, too), the reason they came into being in the first place was because they thought that Washington was drifting away from the corporatist arrangement by partially nationalizing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GM and Chrysler. Their attacks on Obama around health insurance "reform" were on behalf of the rightwing corporatists, who felt that the White House's plan strayed too far away from corporatism and too close to something a bourgeois-democratic country might do.

But then, on this last point, I suppose one's definition of corporatism also comes into play.

[¿Que?]

That's kind of a silly thing to point out I think. Fascism was different in some ways all over, from integralism to Nazism to Mussolini's fascism to Franco's fascism. They all met that main criteria, though.
Well, that's the only substantial difference between generic decontextualized "fascism" and the tea baggers and this militia I can really think of. They're all different, because they are manifested in different historical moments. But you can say "fascism", as I have described, supported a type of unionism. I think the problem is that this type of analysis pretty much useless. But at least I'm not just ignoring you.

[Kléber]

Their main platform is oriented around absolute business freedom. This would naturally allow large scale businesses to pursue monopoly domination without fear of sanctions. I doubt they would complain about these businesses spreading either.
Not quite, fascism was historically a middle-class socialist ideology that promised to restrain the worst excesses of capitalism and place them under classless national arbitration. Thus there were profit caps and token industrial and labor regulations in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany.

Fascism was a "corporate" ideology in the sense of advocating a medieval-style social contract between the classes, ie industrial feudalism of sorts, not in that it advocated naked dictatorship by capitalist corporations. In practice, of course, fascism meant total control by big business leaders, but in the early stages of fascist movements they had a strong populist bent and even used secularist and radical leftist rhetoric.

[The Red Next Door]

Don't they have something better to do than blow up, people. but yet again these are poor misguided working class people, who think religion and the republican party is gonna to solve their problems.

[chegitz guevara]

But it's not a fascist movement. It's just another right-wing populist movement. You're throwing the word "fascism" around a little bit too much. It means a very specific thing. The only significant fascist movement in america is the national socialist party.

They may have been theocrats, but not fascists.

Five gets you ten these folks were/are part of the Tea Party movement, which is the only real fascist movement in the U.S.

Fascism is determined by social role, not ideology.

[Nolan]

Fascism is determined by social role, not ideology.

No. Just no. Fascism is a family of ideologies. Lots of other systems fulfill the same social role, like Chile under Pinochet or Korea under Park, but are not fascist.

[Guerrilla22]

It wasn't a fascist group, it was a nutty, Christian, cult type group that apparently also was a militia. They clearly are a bunch of clowns if they were arrested before they actually carried out any attacks. Why do these people have to be from Michigan? Why?

[Martin Blank]

Not quite, fascism was historically a middle-class socialist ideology that promised to restrain the worst excesses of capitalism and place them under classless national arbitration. Thus there were profit caps and token industrial and labor regulations in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany.

Yes and no. While many of the early fascist movements came out of the petty-bourgeois socialist milieu, this certainly was not a requirement. Franco's Falangists come immediately to mind, as does the second-generation Ku Klux Klan. In general, though, you're right to point this out in the context of what you say below:


Fascism was a "corporate" ideology in the sense of advocating a medieval-style social contract between the classes, ie industrial feudalism of sorts, not in that it advocated naked dictatorship by capitalist corporations. In practice, of course, fascism meant total control by big business leaders, but in the early stages of fascist movements they had a strong populist bent and even used secularist and radical leftist rhetoric.

This we definitely see in the Nativists, in no small part because that kind of class collaboration and reactionary social contract is an endemic part of American culture -- from Horatio Alger to the American Dream.

[chegitz guevara]

No. Just no. Fascism is a family of ideologies. Lots of other systems fulfill the same social role, like Chile under Pinochet or Korea under Park, but are not fascist.

No, such authoritarian systems do not play the same role. Fascism is determined by its class character and social role. Fascist ideology has always been all over the place, and thus, cannot be relied upon for determining if a movement is fascist or not. The SA was clearly a fascist movement, and yet, to the casual observer, it's ideology is very similar to that espoused by socialists.

To rely on surface appearances is to abandon Marxism. We look for the truth below the surface, not simply accept what groups tell us about themselves. It is the essence of fascism that is important, not the form.

[Kléber]

The Falangists were more.. artificial, if you will, but they were made in the image of socialism. Their color scheme was stolen from the CNT/FAI and the uniform (blue overalls) was a sad attempt to appeal to workers. Prior to the civil war some Falangist nuts hijacked a radio station and proclaimed their support for the "coming national syndicalist revolution" or something like that. They only won over one or two actual workers' syndicates of course, but they were viewed as suspect by the regular conservatives of the Franco regime who feared a German invasion, forced to give up their political independence and merge with the Carlists, and the more resistant ones were purged when Spain went neutral toward the end of the war.

The attempt to clinically define fascism in its 1930's context is probably a waste of time, so I guess I agree that in general, right-wing populism in imperialist countries has key similarities to fascism, the only thing that's missing is an organization which isn't completely laughable, but big business funding might solve that problem for them I guess, the fascist milieu out of which Hitler and Mussolini emerged was after all full of stupid "volkish" tendencies like this Hutaree hotchpotch.

[Martin Blank]

The Falangists were more.. artificial, if you will, but they were made in the image of socialism. Their color scheme was stolen from the CNT/FAI and the uniform (blue overalls) was a sad attempt to appeal to workers. Prior to the civil war some Falangist nuts hijacked a radio station and proclaimed their support for the "coming national syndicalist revolution" or something like that. They only won over one or two actual workers' syndicates of course, but they were forced to give up their political independence and merge with the Carlists, and the more resistant ones purged when Franco went neutral.

True enough. Even the second-generation KKK had some grafted elements from "socialism" in its organization. For example, many of the rites and ceremonies that they had were adapted from those practiced by the defunct Knights of Labor, which itself had been heavily influenced by the socialists of its day.

But then, what do we make of the crop of ex-Shachtmanites who became neoconservative corporatists in the 1980s and now support the Tea Party movement?


The attempt to clinically define fascism in its 1930's context is probably a waste of time, so I guess I agree that in general, right-wing populism in imperialist countries has key similarities to fascism, the only thing that's missing is an organization which isn't completely laughable, but big business funding might solve that problem for them I guess, the fascist milieu out of which Hitler and Mussolini emerged was after all full of stupid "volkish" tendencies like this Hutaree hotchpotch.

The Hutaree are a dangerous lot all by themselves, and don't need connection to any part of the Nativist movement to make them any more of a concern. We figured that they were going to be nailed by the state at some point; they had that volatile combination of zealous and stupid that makes for a bad day.

[chegitz guevara]

Really, which Shachtmanites?

[Martin Blank]

Really, which Shachtmanites?

The same ones that littered the Bush regime and gave it "intellectual" ballast: Perle, Horowitz, Kristol and the like. They may not be out in front like Tancredo or Sarah PayMe, but they have lent it support.

[Comrade B]

I just checked the guys out, they seem to be more or less simply violent religious fundamentalists rather than fascists. I still stand by my belief that the Tea Baggers are fascists though. Their anti-bailout nonsense while their support from Newscorp (Fox) and friends seems enough like the fascist ideas which favor specific industries over others

[The Douche]

I used to post on a message board with Huttaree members, they, interestingly enough, were not the most inflamatory of posters. And this tactic (kill a cop, ambush other cops at the funeral) doesn't seem in line with most of their rhetoric/strategy.

But I only ever talked to a few of them.


When are organizations going to get together to form some sort of front against fascism in the form of the tea party? We need to form a valid left opposition to Obama, and it can be done in the form of anti-fascist work against the tea baggers. I am willing to work on this with any organization, regardless of ideology.

[Mindtoaster]

How is the Tea Party movement not fascist then.


Fascists are not opposed to unions so long as they are controlled by the state :)

Well I'll be!

Sounds like the tea-partiers might actually be worse then fascists

[Martin Blank]

I used to post on a message board with Huttaree members, they, interestingly enough, were not the most inflamatory of posters. And this tactic (kill a cop, ambush other cops at the funeral) doesn't seem in line with most of their rhetoric/strategy.

But I only ever talked to a few of them.

I won't say how I know this, but in the last couple years, their leader, RD, basically went off the deep end. Even the other militias here and in other states didn't want anything to do with the Hutaree. That's why it was relatively easy for the feds to come in and arrest these nine: they got no help from the other militia groups. There's a chance that this incident will provoke a division among militia groups, between those who want a more "respectable" face (like the Michigan Militia) and those willing to go out on a limb to gather the nuts.


When are organizations going to get together to form some sort of front against fascism in the form of the tea party? We need to form a valid left opposition to Obama, and it can be done in the form of anti-fascist work against the tea baggers. I am willing to work on this with any organization, regardless of ideology.

Apart from ours, I think only Workers World has made mention of the need for such a united front. I tried talking to a couple folks I know in SDS and ARA, but there seems to still be some debate among their ranks about whether the Tea Party Nativists qualify as fascists, so they're stalled out. Sadly, I think this process might be slow and only start with a small core group. You have my details; keep me posted on how it goes on your end and I'll do likewise.

[The Douche]

Apart from ours, I think only Workers World has made mention of the need for such a united front. I tried talking to a couple folks I know in SDS and ARA, but there seems to still be some debate among their ranks about whether the Tea Party Nativists qualify as fascists, so they're stalled out. Sadly, I think this process might be slow and only start with a small core group. You have my details; keep me posted on how it goes on your end and I'll do likewise.

I think ARA is a waste. They aren't very active out here in the east, I dunno about the west coast, and they're so opposed to getting involved in politics.

I used to have friends in philly ARA and RASH, but those bridges are burned. Chegitz, I know you guys' local has done anti-tea party work, can the SP proper do anything to support this, will they work with other groups on it? What about the RCP, they were pushing that "christian fascist" line pretty hard at the end of the Bush regime?

[Robocommie]

I realize this might touch off an argument... but should we leftists be looking at forming militias? Not psycho End Times, pseudo-Focoist "let's shoot cops and touch off the revolution" militias, but more like the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

[The Douche]

I realize this might touch off an argument... but should we leftists be looking at forming militias? Not psycho End Times, pseudo-Focoist "let's shoot cops and touch off the revolution" militias, but more like the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

In short, no.

Should leftists practice responsible firearms ownership and target practice? Yes. Should leftists study some military doctrine? Yes. (but only in addition to revolutionary theory)

Forming militias, in my opinion, will force us further into a ghetto. We need to be engaging with the masses, not practicing patrolling in the woods. Also, there are not a lot of people on the left with the military experience necessary to teach militia skills. For instance, I think I am the only member of the board who has served in combat arms in the military. (well, that isn't restricted)

[Robocommie]

In short, no.

Should leftists practice responsible firearms ownership and target practice? Yes. Should leftists study some military doctrine? Yes. (but only in addition to revolutionary theory)

Forming militias, in my opinion, will force us further into a ghetto. We need to be engaging with the masses, not practicing patrolling in the woods. Also, there are not a lot of people on the left with the military experience necessary to teach militia skills. For instance, I think I am the only member of the board who has served in combat arms in the military. (well, that isn't restricted)

You know, I should say you have a unique skill for the left, comrade. Since you were/are a recon infantryman, not only do you know some of how the Army fights, but you could potentially pass on your skills if they were needed.

But yeah, I'm definitely following with you. However I should point out, the Black Panthers didn't just have guns, and they didn't patrol the woods, they set up a free breakfast program for kids, set up clinics, clothing redistribution, drug rehab programs, stuff like that.

[The Douche]

You know, I should say you have a unique skill for the left, comrade. Since you were/are a recon infantryman, not only do you know some of how the Army fights, but you could potentially pass on your skills if they were needed.

But yeah, I'm definitely following with you. However I should point out, the Black Panthers didn't just have guns, and they didn't patrol the woods, they set up a free breakfast program for kids, set up clinics, clothing redistribution, drug rehab programs, stuff like that.

Yeah I would not be opposed to sharing these skills, but it requires time and settings that most revolutionary groups can't (or won't) provide. I mean, most people on the left don't have the necessary equipment to spend a weekend in the field, nor do they have a space where we could do a field exercise. I think the most training I could provide would be marksmanship (maybe tactical marksmanship), because the basics can be done in a day. But most leftists don't even own rifles.

Many of the social programs implemented by the BPP still exist (food not bombs, needle exchanges, free stores etc), but now they aren't done by specific parties or organizations usually, they're done by local groups. (I know an anarchist collective in baltimore runs a FNB and a free store)

[Guerrilla22]

I just checked out their website it's pretty funny. It has a forum as well, unfortunately the webmaster was arrested so it has been trolled heavily due to the group being in the news. http://hutaree.com/

[vyborg]

I would like to ask to american comrades if they think that this militia groups have affiliation with the state or part of it or are simply crazy people with no links with the "federals" whatsoever (even cover agents etc)

[Guerrilla22]

I would like to ask to american comrades if they think that this militia groups have affiliation with the state or part of it or are simply crazy people with no links with the "federals" whatsoever (even cover agents etc)

They clearly are part of some vast government conspiracy. The hutaree took the fall.

[Spawn of Stalin]

They may not believe themselves to be totalitarian, but if you ask them if Communists deserve a vote, or if Obama should be removed forcibly from the white house, I think we could easily predict their answer.

Turn it around, ask yourself if fascists deserve a vote, and if Obama should be forcibly removed from the White House, I personally would say "no" and "yes", I don't think that makes me a supporter of totalitarianism. But then, I do support Stalin, so on second thoughts.....

[The Douche]

I would like to ask to american comrades if they think that this militia groups have affiliation with the state or part of it or are simply crazy people with no links with the "federals" whatsoever (even cover agents etc)

Like I said, I've talked to their members before on line, and I have talked to many other militia members online and in real life. There are certainly agent provacatuers in that movement, but no, they are not linked to the state.

[chegitz guevara]

I realize this might touch off an argument... but should we leftists be looking at forming militias? Not psycho End Times, pseudo-Focoist "let's shoot cops and touch off the revolution" militias, but more like the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

A militia, no. A gun club? Sure, why not? An anarchist friend of mine down here keeps suggesting we go to the shooting range, and I want to go. We just don't make it happen. At the very least, shooting guns is fun, and you learn a valuable skill for defeating the zombie plague.

[MaoTseHelen]

A militia, no. A gun club? Sure, why not? An anarchist friend of mine down here keeps suggesting we go to the shooting range, and I want to go. We just don't make it happen. At the very least, shooting guns is fun, and you learn a valuable skill for defeating the zombie plague.

Yeah. Agreed entirely. If you don't own a gun yet (and you damn well should, how do you think any communist state on Earth came into being?) you can always rent them from the range. Get in some range time comrades, you'll need it.

[Robocommie]

A militia, no. A gun club? Sure, why not? An anarchist friend of mine down here keeps suggesting we go to the shooting range, and I want to go. We just don't make it happen. At the very least, shooting guns is fun, and you learn a valuable skill for defeating the zombie plague.

If there's one thing I've learned from George Romero, it's that zombies are a metaphor for class conflict. (Land of the Dead)

But yeah, shooting range is a good idea. And I do enjoy shooting clay pigeons, based on the one time I did it.

[Tatarin]

I wonder what level of sanity they were on. Why would people support a massacre of cops? Sure, people may recognize the severe problems with the legal system (no less the fact that 1% of all Americans are behind bars), but cops at a funeral?

[~Spectre]

I used to post on a message board with Huttaree members, they, interestingly enough, were not the most inflamatory of posters. And this tactic (kill a cop, ambush other cops at the funeral) doesn't seem in line with most of their rhetoric/strategy.

But I only ever talked to a few of them.


When are organizations going to get together to form some sort of front against fascism in the form of the tea party? We need to form a valid left opposition to Obama, and it can be done in the form of anti-fascist work against the tea baggers. I am willing to work on this with any organization, regardless of ideology.

I pointed this out in another thread, but I believe it's worth noting here.

According to polls, including a Rasmussen one, socialists outnumber the tea party movement in the United States, despite what the media coverage would lead you to believe.

[Robocommie]

I wonder what level of sanity they were on. Why would people support a massacre of cops? Sure, people may recognize the severe problems with the legal system (no less the fact that 1% of all Americans are behind bars), but cops at a funeral?

Yeah, cops or no, it's pretty fucked up to open fire on people at a funeral. The idea that Americans would just rally behind them for doing so, let alone en masse... pretty whackjob.

[Robocommie]

I pointed this out in another thread, but I believe it's worth noting here.

According to polls, including a Rasmussen one, socialists outnumber the tea party movement in the United States, despite what the media coverage would lead you to believe.

That sounds pretty cool, do you have a link to any of the polls showing that?

[~Spectre]

That sounds pretty cool, do you have a link to any of the polls showing that?


Per the survey, roughly 20% of Americans believe socialism is better than capitalism (with the number growing larger when you remove investors and republicans surveyed, obviously).




Only 53% of American adults believe capitalism is better than socialism.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 20% disagree and say socialism is better. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are not sure which is better


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2009/just_53_say_capitalism_better_than_socialism

Now according to a CNN poll, the Teabagger support comes in at around 11%. Nearly half.


According to the survey, roughly 11 percent of all Americans say they have actively supported the Tea Party movement, either by donating money, attending a rally, or taking some other active step to support the movement. Of this core group of Tea Party activists, 6 of 10 are male and half live in rural areas.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/17/tea.party.poll/


To put this in a more visual form:

http://www.juancole.com/graphics/teaparty.jpg

Obviously the tea party gets infinitely more press coverage than we do, but the point remains. Their Glen Beck slogan is backwards. It's WE who surround them.

[The Douche]

First of all, what is "socialism", remember that Obama is a "socialist" (according to many in the country today, and that has effected the way he is seen), so are the supporters of "socialism" supporters of Obama? I know people who think Obama is a socialist and that they are socialists because they support him.

Second, the poll compares "who likes socialism" and "who has actively participated in the tea party". Of course there is much more agreement/passive support for a movement than there is active participation. Do you really think 20% of the population of the US are active socialists?

Third, the tea party is a threat because it is a mass movement, when was the last time socialism had the ear of the nation? The tea party has roots in traditional american politics as well, which makes it far more popular than socialism, which at its heart is opposed to the US constitution.


Ignore the tea party if you want, and keep thinking we outnumber them. First them, then us, right? That worked in Germany didn't it? Oh....wait a second.

[RadioRaheem84]

Well a lot of Americans believe socialism = government taking over stuff or companies being taxed at high rates to pay for social programs. So it kind of worries me that most Americans support socialism in a social democratic variant. I guess this is a step forward in the right direction, but then against to even suggest that we should be like Denmark is considered "radical". :rolleyes:

[chegitz guevara]

http://www.juancole.com/graphics/teaparty.jpg

Obviously the tea party gets infinitely more press coverage than we do, but the point remains. Their Glen Beck slogan is backwards. It's WE who surround them.

Yeah, but they have guns. :scared:

Also, what the vast majority of those folks mean by socialism ain't what you and I mean by socialism. Most of them are just liberals, wanting a Scandinavian style social democracy. :(

[Robocommie]

Also, what the vast majority of those folks mean by socialism ain't what you and I mean by socialism. Most of them are just liberals, wanting a Scandinavian style social democracy. :(

That's a place to start though, man. That's something we can build on. Particularly since a major assumption in American political culture, left or right, is that politicians are useless. If that socialist element grows, and radicalizes as a result of government worthlessness, then maybe one day it'll be a socialist revolution.

[Bad Grrrl Agro]

Well, that's the only substantial difference between generic decontextualized "fascism" and the tea baggers and this militia I can really think of. They're all different, because they are manifested in different historical moments. But you can say "fascism", as I have described, supported a type of unionism. I think the problem is that this type of analysis pretty much useless. But at least I'm not just ignoring you.

Peron in Argentina supported Unions and simultaneously gave Nazis from germany a place to flee to. He was at the very least fascistic if not actually a fascist.

[chegitz guevara]

That's a place to start though, man. That's something we can build on. Particularly since a major assumption in American political culture, left or right, is that politicians are useless. If that socialist element grows, and radicalizes as a result of government worthlessness, then maybe one day it'll be a socialist revolution.

Oh, I know, but as of today, if there's a fascist uprising, they'll run with their tails between their legs.