Welcome,
Mom, to the Neo-Fascist, Imperialist, Police State
by
Karen De Coster
I talked at
length with my mother the other night, and in an unusual turn of
conversation, we ended up chatting for nearly two hours about politics,
the world, the war, the economy, and life for our loved ones long
after we’re gone.
Mom
mused over world events and the possible outcomes of the war on
Iraq. She hinted that she felt like she was living under some sort
of Communist regime, where the State was all-powerful and its subjects
were at the whim and decrees of their appointed masters. She worried
that her grandson could grow up in an environment where his every
movement and action is monitored under an Orwellian state of affairs.
Now
my mother would make the claim that she is no extraordinarily deep
thinker or political whiz. She would say she is just a civilian
mom who is fed up with Big Brother on her back, in her home, and
trampling through all parts of the world on her dollars. Mom doesn’t
claim to be able to make the proper distinctions in terms of ideological
concepts, but I consider her smarter than the average American because
she asks all the right questions, and isn’t afraid to answer them
in a way that deviates from the usual utterance. In fact, she doesn’t
know anything about Orwell’s 1984,
except she’ll describe similar circumstances in her very own words.
As
I explained to my Mom in terms of the present war, we are living
under fascist statism in the United States, with its related Imperialist
ambitions running roughshod over peoples abroad that have no desire
to be "democratized" or Americanized. It’s against the
rules, you see, to want to live two-hundred years behind us, in
stone houses, praising your own God, on your own land.
However,
be certain that the same does not hold true for the aspirations
of others, for what would happen if the Chinese decided to mount
a presumptuous campaign to "liberate" blacks from U.S.
ghettos, or to "liberate" poor people from their "rich
oppressors?" Strangely enough, such an undertaking would probably
seem appropriate to the rest of the non-Western, non-capitalist
world.
But
our leaders gloss over the war and carnage by speaking of "democracy"
and "unity" in pretty and tempting tones, and they assign
the main propaganda duty to a soft-spoken Texan who can’t possibly
come off as anything but well-intentioned, laid-back, and humanitarian.
After all, if you are going to try and sell mass murder, do your
best to see that the bulk of the target market buys the product.
In spite of the boy-next door spokesman with the sleepy drawl, what
the party line really means is that the State and its elected leaders
are the righteous arbiters of what is right and wrong, good and
bad, and we, along with the rest of the world, had better not dare
question it. After all, the U.S. Cold War conquest was supposed
to be its checkmate on all of humankind well into perpetuity.
I
watched conservative Michael Medved on CNN the other day
– sounding off that some Seattle dupe wanted to pass a local resolution
naming support for the troops, while the malevolent lefties on the
Seattle City Council were not as eager about such a declaration,
and therefore didn’t opt for it. Medved spoke of this lack of "support"
with great disdain, as if the lack of total unity behind some hollow
affirmation by a bunch of trifling politicians inevitably translates
into "leftist," "anti-American," and all the
predictable catchphrases.
Such
silly resolutions, of course, are merely time-wasting, government-decreed
threats. Their purpose is to try and get us in line behind the collective
mindset and promise to shut up and keep our dissent on a back burner
so as not to upset the collective, fascist order. We thereby note
that those who do not exclaim great exhilaration for the State’s
resolutions proclaiming self-greatness are indeed not "one
of them" (whoever "they" are), and are therefore
against them, by virtue of the most simplistic and mindless logic.
On
the contrary, to not be one of them is a plus point, for
it means that you have gone out on a limb to think for yourself,
rather than follow the rest of the fools into the gas chamber.
Just
what is "supporting the troops?" Has anyone yet defined
this? Of course it’s just more meaningless, murky propaganda meant
to "out" those who don’t march lockstep behind the Imperialists
and their wars. It’s a tall story to attempt to say that anyone
– except perhaps the most militant and obscene leftist – does not
"support" the individual soldier whose life is at risk
in this war. On the contrary, those against this war support human
life, peace, and prosperity for all, whereas the warmongers have
no misgivings about leaving their children behind in a nation of
perpetual war, where the militarization of society becomes a way
of life in order to stay secure in a world where we are despised.
Note
how the neocons, media shills, bureaucrats, and pseudo-patriots
continuously berate the war dissenters and taunt them with their
self-described, patriotic status. "We love America and you
don’t," they sneer, in their pretentious, smug little editorials.
They flimsily equate the skeptical grandmother or fed up autoworker
with the revolutionary pro-Marxist who lives in a tree, fending
off capitalism and human progress under the pretext of some ridiculous
owl.
We
are all supposed to be together on this latest undertaking, don’t
you know? We are supposed to go along with the media and the politicians
who have engaged in non-partisan killing in order to grow this great,
new collective mindset. We saw it during Senior’s Gulf War, wherein
unity, togetherness, UN veneration, and spineless yellow ribbons
were the order of the day.
Thus
we find ourselves in yet another war that cannot be legitimized
or held up as righteous, no matter how relentless the song and dance.
Even the average American is beginning to question what winning
really means, where this thing will go post-fighting, and how the
heck we are ever going to get out of this mess. Of course we won’t;
these latest Imperial ambitions will keep us in that region of the
world forever, with more "freedom operations" to come.
Meanwhile,
at home, there are two versions of the Patriot Act holding sway
over us. The latest version – Son of Patriot – is still misunderstood
by the average Joe who is clueless because he’s held in a stupor
by the relentless rah-rah of wartime spectacle created by the networks.
Our politicians strategize to take advantage of the circumstances
created by all of this mindless war unity in order to shove another
massive increase in federal powers down our throat. Increased active
surveillance, increased database surveillance, forced DNA procurements,
the freedom to grope consumer credit reports, new citizen spy programs,
and anti-encryption laws are all a part of our future, thanks to
Ashcroft and his fellow fascists in Washington.
Meanwhile,
we operate under a system of nationalized airlines and airports,
wherein the outward appearance is that of private ownership, but
in reality, everything in that industry is subject to the rules
and regulations of myriad federalized bureaucracies that were created
by the State in order to serve the State and its interests.
Post-9/11,
I’ve actually heard Americans exclaim how great it is that El Al
Israel Airlines has such splendid security, and that American airline
security goals should strive for such flawlessness. "They don’t
have problems with terrorists," the admirers say, "because
they know how to take care of business." Apparently, the worshippers
of statism believe it’s a great thing to be yanked off the airplane
toilet by a group of thugs with submachine guns, because constipation
has kept you in there suspiciously too long. Nevertheless, a time
where the United States finds itself mimicking the militarized,
authoritarian Israeli State is likely not too far off.
Mussolini
would be proud of America’s new fascist direction, as his motto
was "tutto nello Stato, niente al fuori dello Stato, nulla
contro lo Stato," or, everything within the State, nothing
outside the State, nothing against the State.
Where
is the money going to come from to rebuild this Middle East hellhole
that we are "liberating?" Ask a silly question and get
a silly answer. Fortune
magazine recently put that reconstruction tab at $100 billion,
but estimates by others are at $200 billion and up. And that does
not include long-term occupation costs, which could mean billions
more in the annual budget.
American
corporations have long been lined up at the trough to receive their
handouts by way of U.S. reconstruction policies in Iraq. Halliburton,
for one, is already on the receiving end of cushy cost-plus arrangements
(guaranteed profits), and is slated to run military facilities in
Turkey. Countless others, in addition to Halliburton, are now getting
their big payoffs for past provisions to selected politicos.
The
war is troublesome enough, but the real turmoil starts when our
government occupies and rebuilds Iraq, then sets its sights on the
rest of the uncooperative Arab nations. On the home front, disorder
begins when bombs are set off on buses, in schools, in nightclubs,
and in packed football stadiums. Even while knowing what Muslim
fanaticism is capable of, do Americans still kid themselves that
this will not be the result? But perhaps our politicians really
believe that killing Muslims, occupying a Muslim country, setting
up a puppet government, taking over its resources, and threatening
the rest of the Arab nations will have no repercussions here in
the United States. And perhaps the American public is foolish enough
to believe them.
From
a statement by Indiana Senator Richard Lugar:
The
Iraqi people have suffered for decades at the hands of their
leaders. We want to contribute to the creation of fundamental
structures for the people of Iraq to enjoy democracy and economic
growth. The American people must understand that U.S. military
and civilian personnel will be in Iraq for an extended period
of time. Most experts believe that years of public investment
and expert guidance will be required to establish Iraq as a
secure and responsible member of the world community. Failure
to stay the course in Iraq would risk great damage to U.S. credibility
– particularly after the last several months of fractious diplomacy
over the propriety of military force. Leaving Iraq prematurely
also could lead to regional instability, ethnic warfare, failure
to eliminate all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and the
establishment of terrorist bases on Iraqi territory.
Mussolini
co-authored a definition of fascism in 1932, along with Giovanni
Gentile, wherein he said that fascism "believes neither in
the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. The Fascist
accepts life and loves it, knowing nothing of and despising suicide:
he rather conceives of life as duty and struggle and conquest, but
above all for others those who are at hand and those who
are far distant, contemporaries, and those who will come after."
In
addition, he added, "for Fascism, the growth of empire, that
is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation
of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which
are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always
imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death."
This
spells out the present objectives of the U.S. government, and that
is to control and run the Arab nations of the Middle East for the
purpose of spreading the "democratic" Empire and the American
way of life; subsidizing American corporatist State interests; and
benefiting the political interests of our Israel allies.
Mussolini
went on to say,
The
foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character,
its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute,
in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative,
only to be conceived of in their relation to the State. The conception
of the Liberal State is not that of a directing force, guiding
the play and development, both material and spiritual, of a collective
body, but merely a force limited to the function of recording
results: on the other hand, the Fascist State is itself conscious
and has itself a will and a personality thus it may be
called the "ethic" State.
Perhaps
Americans are too easily thrilled by all of the puffy propaganda,
the show of false, forced unity, and the filtered war news to notice
where the finest of our country’s founders had hoped to lead us,
and where we ended up. But hey, as long as the trains run on time,
who cares?
April
9, 2003
Karen
De Coster, CPA, [send
her mail] is a paleolibertarian freelance writer, graduate student
in Austrian Economics, and a business professional from Michigan.
Her first book is currently in the works. See her Mises
Institute archive for more online articles, and check out her
website, along with her
blog.
Copyright © 2003 Karen De Coster
Karen
De Coster Archives
|