It's good, very incisive and has a requisite touch which illuminates ideals, and such. But, always remember, if you're going to get anywhere in the world, it's spelt Fascism...haha. Anyway, very good.
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Wanted to run this through here before I cleaned it up and published it in pamphlet form, just to see what you all think about it. Don't mind spelling mistakes, I'll edit those out if enough people like the essay.
American Faschism in an Open Society
By: Jonathan Clark
----------------------------------------
It is very often said by people in opposition to the left, that in America Faschism can never take hold because we have a free and open society. It is thought that our "free and open society" means that we can know anything that happens at any moment. What they don't realize, however, is that in an open society (I exclude the term "free" for reasons I will get to later) the United States government is actually given a better chance to squander freedoms. It is in our pseudo-small government that the larger agenda can be forced onto all of us. This faschism is allowed due to two failures.
The Failure on the Press
The freedom of speech and the press is a freedom we so often hear that the United States gives its people. Why is this? In reality we do not have freedom of speech, or freedom of the press. This is simply because you can not say anything you want, or print & distribute anything you want. True freedom of speech and press would be the ability to say anything or print & distribute anything, which we do not have. You can not threaten, lie, or leak classified materials. While some may find this a good thing... it still means we do not have the freedom. Because of this lack of freedom, all major media in the United States gets its information from one source. A source which they have given the American public the image of being unrefutable, because if the source was considered bad then the news could not be considered true. What is the source? The government itself.
The government has allowed itself to control the media, by making itself the only source when it comes to the government. There is no check to balance the power of the government in regards to public knowledge. The first thing children get in schooling is history according to the U.S., then as adults they only get information on the government by the government itself. The press is no longer a viable source for information, at least not major media. Groups like the Independant Media Center (www.indymedia.org) are admirable places where journalists with true passion report the truth, and not the truth according to the government. So, like many faschist regimes, almost all information and press is from the government. The United States government completely controls information that way. They grow nationalism, a key trait in faschist regimes, by perpetuating the idea that blind patriotism is a good quality.
The Failure of the Leaders
A big part in American Faschism is the elected leaders. Our president right now was elected without the majority of the vote, and then gained support by pushing the war effort with nationalist justification. So many senators and representitives gave the appearance of dissention. They talked a good deal, but whenever bills came in to help the war effort, or to curb rights in the name of "counter-terrorism", the bills were past with little if any resistance. It is because the elected officials are megalomaniacs and are no longer acting as public servants. The idea that "I am fit to dictate to the public, and I am better than anyone else to do so" is a very megalomaniacal statement. And so, all they are trying to do is keep themselves in office, so that one day they can be in the history books. But why would they not do what the public wants? Because the public is only going to hear what the press tells them, and the press are only telling the public what the government said.
Our elected leaders are all working for an unstoppable machine which is going to ruin America if we do not resist the American Faschists. I use the strong term Faschist, because that is what the agenda is for the elected. The megalomania in every politician makes them want to become more powerful. So the centralization of government, the helping of national corporations, and the control of public opinion are all on their agenda. They already help corporations that hire only Americans so that they can recieve more money to get re-elected, because the public only knows what the government tells them, and finally they can centralize government because they have re-election in the bag due to money and public opinion.
What about those who aren't re-elected? Well those few people are the few which did too much too soon. If politicians are threatening the steady rise of Faschism by making it too blatant, or trying to stop it, then they are going to hurt the American Faschists. So they are not going to be re-elected. To keep the public in the dark, some slightly (and I mean ever so slightly) left politicians get in office for a while. And then scandal lets loose on them. In some cases, right-wing presidents are taken down by scandal (Clinton, Nixon) but by outside forces which are uncontrollable by the government. That is why laws are soon passed which cause the leaking of that information to be impossible.
But, Are They Really Faschists?
The agenda of this monolithic machine is: nationalism, sexism, capitalism, and centralized power. That seems pretty Faschist to me. And each is obvious if you look close enough.
* Nationalism - the government has taken a "with us or against" approach to almost every international conflict.
* Sexism - the marginalization of a woman's right to choose the option of abortion is currently going through a re-vamp.
* Capitalism - the demonization of any marxist, communist, socialist, and collectivist thought is rampant.
* Centralized power - all power is going up to the top, just look at the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act, the FBI doesn't have to stop at anything to stop terrorism... yet they never define what they mean by terrorism.
These are very serious issues which are threatening to destroy any freedoms we have left. I beg you to rethink everything you hear from mass media, for it is always from the mouth of the monster.
He who was previously the money-owner now strides out in front as a capitalist; the possessor of labour-power follows as his worker. The one smirks self-importantly and is intent on business; the other is timid and holds back, like someone who has brought his own hide to market and now has nothing else to expect but - a good tanning. - Karl Marx, Capital Volume I
It's good, very incisive and has a requisite touch which illuminates ideals, and such. But, always remember, if you're going to get anywhere in the world, it's spelt Fascism...haha. Anyway, very good.
I'M ON HOLIDAY RIGHT NOW, SO I CAN'T REPLY TO MUCH!
I thinkit's an americanisation comrade.nice try though.
<span style=\'color:red\'>''if ignorance was a drug then our world would be hooked''</span>-me
they're turning the weapon factory into a discotheque,they're trying to help out all the kids who are trying to work up a sweat.meanwhile in a new country,business isn't going too great,they're selling catastrophe in thirty second slices of hate.-melomane
Not that this matters, but PLEASE Americanize the word 'Americanization'. It is spelled as I have it here, not with an 's'.
BACKTROKE OF THE WEST
Giving first aid the already disheveld hair projection. The front is a lemon avenue flying straightly. ratio tile, the wish power are together with you. He the my brothers in elephant is similar.
Can you please spell fascism correctly.
This is the second thread that i have seen with a wrong spelling of that word.
Heh, sorry. I get corrected on that all the time, but I have a big part of me that wishes to spell it phonetically. <_<
To talk on Amerianization though, I don't believe this is only inherent to America (by which I assume you mean the US). I may not be correct in my assumption, but I am sure that it is going on elsewhere.
He who was previously the money-owner now strides out in front as a capitalist; the possessor of labour-power follows as his worker. The one smirks self-importantly and is intent on business; the other is timid and holds back, like someone who has brought his own hide to market and now has nothing else to expect but - a good tanning. - Karl Marx, Capital Volume I
