America’s
Unique Fascism
by
Anthony Gregory
Recently
by Anthony Gregory: Marx’s
Tea Party
Five years
ago, antiwar liberals calling the Bush administration fascist were
labeled as kooks, marginalized by their own party leadership, accused
by conservatives of treasonous thoughts worthy of federal punishment,
even deportation. A few years pass, the policies hardly change,
and the political dynamic turns upside down: Tea Party conservatives
accusing the Obama regime of fascist impulses are compared to terrorists,
accused of being racists, told that their hyperbole is a real threat
to the country’s security.
The establishment
derides both groups for their fringe outlook on America, convinced
that the United States is anything but a fascist country. After
all, isn’t America the nation that defeated fascism in the
1940s? Sensible conservatives and liberals agree with that.
The unappreciated
reality is that when the patriot right and radical left refer to
the U.S. system as fascistic, they have part of the truth but not
the whole analysis. This is due to the blinders both sides wear
as it concerns state power. Moreover, the criticisms sometimes fail
to take account of America’s very unique strain of fascism. This
political program is distinct in every nation, always taking a different
form but with some general themes in common. U.S. fascism is a most
insidious mixture of the key ingredients while maintaining the necessary
nuance to snooker the masses, the media, and the respectable folks
across the spectrum.
The FDR-Bush
Program of Economic Corporatism
First, and
this is key, we must look at the economic system. The liberals are
proud to have had a role in creating its socially democratic elements.
The conservatives are proud of America’s towering financial and
military institutions. Republicans and Democrats all pretend America
has a free enterprise system, attacking greedy profiteers while
crediting themselves for the benefits of capitalism, blaming laissez
faire for all our problems while dissonantly congratulating themselves
for having supplanted it with sensible regulation and safety nets
once and for all.
The dirty little
secret is that there has been a bipartisan project of corporatism,
the economic underpinning of fascism, for almost a century. The
regulatory bureaus, the banking establishment, agricultural policy,
telecommunications planning, even the welfare state all enrich corporate
interests, but at the ultimate direction of the state. One could
say this arrangement was foreshadowed in Lincoln or even Hamilton.
But it was during the World Wars and New Deal that the nation embarked
upon something decisively fascistic.
Hitler, Mussolini,
and the other fascists all employed a general approach of co-opting
the market through huge governmental takeovers of industry while
maintaining the pretense of private property. Along with this came
interventions that would be considered socialistic in other contexts.
Lew
Rockwell very nicely summed up the economic programs of Hitler,
which mirror the great prides of Progressive politics of the 20th
century:
He suspended
the gold standard, embarked on huge public works programs like
Autobahns, protected industry from foreign competition, expanded
credit, instituted jobs programs, bullied the private sector on
prices and production decisions, vastly expanded the military,
enforced capital controls, instituted family planning, penalized
smoking, brought about national health care and unemployment insurance,
imposed education standards, and eventually ran huge deficits.
The Nazi interventionist program was essential to the regime's
rejection of the market economy and its embrace of socialism in
one country.
Much of this
agenda was adopted in the United States during World War I, and
then brought back to life in the New Deal. John T. Flynn, a leftist
who initially supported Franklin Roosevelt then became disenchanted
with the president’s program of central planning, described the
1930s atmosphere of political ideology in his seminal work, The
Roosevelt Myth:
There was
indeed a good deal of tolerance for the idea of planning our capitalist
system even in the most conservative circles. And a man could
support publicly and with vehemence this system of the Planned
Economy without incurring the odium of being too much of a radical
for polite and practical society.
There was
only one trouble with it. This was what Mussolini had adopted
– the Planned Capitalist State. And he gave it a name – fascism.
Then came Hitler and adopted the same idea. His party was called
the Nazi party, which was derived from the initials of its true
name, but it was dedicated to fascism. . . .
Whatever
it was, it was the direct opposite of liberalism. It was an attempt,
somewhere between Communism and capitalism, to organize a stable
society and to do it by setting up a State equipped with massive
powers over the lives and fortunes of the citizens. . . . Yet
this curiously un-American doctrine was being peddled in America
as the bright flower of the liberals. Of course they did not call
it fascism, because that had a bad name. . . . They called in
the Planned economy. But it was and is fascism by whatever name
it is known.
In specific,
FDR’s National Recovery Administration was fashioned after the industrial
policy of Mussolini. Flynn explains:
[Mussolini]
organized each trade or industrial group or professional group
into a state-supervised trade association. He called it a corporative.
These corporatives operated under state supervision and could
plan production, quality, prices, distribution, labor standards,
etc. The NRA provided that in America each industry should be
organized into a federally supervised trade association. It was
not called a corporative. It was called a Code Authority. But
it was essentially the same thing. These code authorities could
regulate production, quantities, qualities, prices, distribution
methods, etc., under the supervision of the NRA. This was fascism.
Such an analysis
of the New Deal as fascism is not only found in the Old Right or
their libertarian successors. Historian Thaddeus Russell’s great
chapter "Behold a Dictator: Fascism and the New Deal"
in his new book A
Renegade History of the United States comes from a leftist
perspective and arrives at much the same conclusions. Many of the
greatest progressive intellectuals and business elites of Roosevelt’s
time were especially enamored of Mussolini’s regime. "The men
who made the New Deal were driven by dreams of a machinelike society,
in which all members, from the leaders of government to the lowliest
workers, would be parts designed, built, and employed entirely for
their function within the whole apparatus. But to their dismay,
these men found that most Americans rejected such dreams, except
during times of crisis. The First World War was the first such crisis.
. . . But then came the peace and prosperity of the 1920s, a long
time of waiting for another national emergency that could make their
fantasies of social order come true."
This mirrors
Robert Higgs’s ratchet effect thesis and the insights found in his
books Crisis
and Leviathan and Depression,
War, and Cold War, in regard both to the general expansion
of state power during crises and the particular ways World War I
and the New Deal solidified a state that Higgs has, with a nod to
Charlotte Twight, referred to as "participatory fascism."
What makes
FDR’s role in American fascism so insidious is that as the greatest
20th century liberal president who led America to war
with the Nazis, he is often characterized as the prototypical U.S.
anti-fascist. The great Smedley Butler, a brilliant critic of America’s
merchants of death, was very concerned that reactionary forces along
with the military came close to dethroning FDR and creating a fascist
regime. But one must ask, could anyone tell the difference? What
would the anti-FDR fascists do – wage total war? Nationalize the
economy? Put American citizens into concentration camps based on
race? Create a permanent military-corporate establishment? To discuss
a possible fascist coup in the years of Franklin Roosevelt is to
ignore that it in fact happened – a "revolution within the
form," as Garet Garrett described it.
Also insidious
is the great respect most Republicans have for FDR, whether it’s
acknowledged or not. Reagan was a devout New Dealer who never abandoned
this orientation when he became governor or president. George W.
Bush’s entire economic program was also thoroughly Rooseveltian
– expanding Medicare to the benefit of the pharmaceutical companies,
an Ownership Society (how fascist does that sound!?) intended
to shore up the real estate and finance sectors, an attempt to corporatize
Social Security (thereby saving FDR’s domestic triumph, itself a
copy from a Prussian program of the 19th century), the
bipartisan bailouts of financial institutions, steel tariffs, further
nationalization of education, and all the rest.
The Democrats,
for their part, continue with the fascist economics they adopted
four generations ago, and it leads to a good deal of confusion as
they are the "liberal" party. Yet when Obama plans to
force individuals to buy private health insurance, picks corporate
giants to head up regulatory offices, schemes to create a phony
market in carbon credits, and widens the revolving door between
Wall Street and the Oval Office, he along with his party is only
continuing down the road of their Mussolinian predecessors.
One of the
most horrifying parts of fascist economics, autarky, has even been
mimicked by all presidents since Nixon in their crazed calls for
"energy independence." We also see it in the hysteria
about jobs being oursourced. Today it often has an environmental
spin, and there is not the beating on the podium and screaming of
Lebensraum, but the protectionism and codependency between
favored American businesses and the omnipotent state, all with a
nationalist focus, are nevertheless there for anyone to see.
It could be
countered that many other nations have corporate states as well.
Perhaps they too have fascist tendencies. Yet there are a few corporatist
features singular to the United States. As the holder of the world’s
reserve currency, and given that money is half of most economic
transactions, the United States boasts one of the most significant
corporatist arrangements in the world in its alliance between the
Federal Reserve and the big banks. The U.S. government, in absolute
terms, claims the largest of all regressive welfare programs in
the form of Social Security. It is likely the global leader in intellectual
property enforcement, both in domestic and international terms,
with most nations trailing considerably behind in this increasingly
draconian form of corporate privilege. As the grandest leviathan
preying over the world’s richest nation, the U.S. corporate state
is in its own class.
Flynn’s insight
that the economic structure of America’s planned economy is fascist
whatever label we affix to it is echoed in a much more recent and
popular authority. In an episode of South
Park, Kyle the idiosyncratically precocious kid has this
great exchange with his father:
Kyle’s dad:
"You see Kyle, we live in a liberal-democratic society, and democrats
make sexual harassment laws, these laws tell us what we can and
can't say in the work place, and what we can and can't do in the
work place."
Kyle: "Isn't
that Fascism?"
Kyle’s dad:
"No, because we don't call it Fascism."
Up and down
the economy, at all levels of government, bureaucrats and planners
dictate details in nearly all areas of economic behavior, with the
principle that some sectors should simply be free of government
intrusion having been totally discarded. If we have large swaths
of economic liberty in America, and we do, this is by accident,
or merely due to the state’s institutional limits in being able
to run everything. The ideological thrust of U.S. economic policy
is that we may live our commercial lives freer than in many places,
but all upon the good graces of the state, its cartels, licensing
boards, and regulatory apparatuses. Even our homes are private property
only insofar as it serves the interest of the state, which claims
the right to seize anything we own if it bolsters the tax receipts
garnered through the state-business nexus. The business environment
adheres to a rapidly expanding litany of commercial codes, many
of them designed not even by legislature but by executive or judicial
fiat. Taken together, this is the essence of economic fascism.
Warmongering
Nationalism
A major feature
of the fascist powers in the 1930s and 1940s was their belligerence.
Without the militarism and war making, these regimes may have never
drawn the ire of the U.S. and its allies, we are often told, and
it’s probably true. It is thus bizarre to hear conservatives voice
concern about America’s slide toward fascism without acknowledging
this central aspect. The United States is the most militarily belligerent
nation since World War II, with a very competitive résumé
from decades before that. The U.S. appears to have been at war with
more nations than any other. The U.S. has dominated the world in
bombings, with no other nation coming close, certainly not in the
last six decades. Taking the estimates of civilians killed due to
U.S. wars of aggression, strategic bombings, and sanctions on food
and medicine, the death toll easily surpasses ten million.
The U.S. spends
more on national offense than the rest of the world combined. There
are now five wars raging – in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen,
and Libya – and it is treated as normal, not an extraordinary state
of affairs at all. And it isn’t one. About every generation the
U.S. has had a major war – 1812, Mexico, Lincoln’s War, Spanish-American,
World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War and war
on terrorism.
In the overwhelming
majority of the world’s nations we can find U.S. bases. Virtually
no state is treated neutrally; all are favored and bribed, bullied
and manipulated, or invaded with the goal of conquest. Many of the
most bloody regimes and insurgent forces in the world have been
allied to the U.S. government, from Stalin’s Russia to Pol Pot’s
Cambodia, from the proto-Taliban in Afghanistan to Saddam Hussein’s
Iraq. The U.S. has trained dozens of states and armies in the arts
of torture and terror. One year the U.S. will opportunistically
side with a ruthless dictator, only to backstab him often at the
very moment he is least menacing to the rest of the world. These
foreign activities are all characteristic of a fascist power.
At home, American
culture is saturated by militarism, and it is not a modern anomaly.
The flag, national anthem, presidency, Constitution, relationship
between the federal government and the states, the major welfare
programs, prohibition, police policies, weaponry and conduct, the
very territory that defines U.S. boundaries it can all be clearly
traced to war. America is not the only state infected by this militarist
taint, but it is the most prominent such nation today with pretensions
of peace-loving to have an undisturbed history of war making, virtually
none of which the current national culture looks upon with shame.
Although the
U.S. has long had a militaristic fever, we have seen it reach absurd
proportions in recent years. Robert Higgs, in
his recent interview with Jeff Tucker, put it very well:
One hears
lately, unfortunately, at sporting events, at baseball games,
at football games, certain interludes of worship for the Armed
Forces. I find it disgusting myself because I like baseball and
I don’t want my baseball to be spoiled by intrusions of nationalistic
fervor and worship of the Armed Forces. To me baseball is glorious
for being a peaceful activity. We don’t have to kill people to
find excitement in life.
It is the same
way in the churches, in the media, in the business sector. The Armed
Forces are honored and privileged, enjoying a very high official
status, even as the injured who return from war are typically mistreated
by the very institutions on whose behalf they risked their lives.
A returning soldier is a higher form of life than a common citizen.
But in the midst of the state’s institutions, he is still just a
used-up cog, the repair of which is often not worth it to the machine.
Militarism
is not as nakedly on display as in Germany at the height of the
Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, yet we must also consider the
continuity. The U.S. has been steadily militaristic for most of
the last century, and much of the previous one. It is unapologetically
so, even when there is some subtlety to it. Although the cultural
right is much more militaristic, the left is also dominated by love
of the Armed Forces. Franklin Roosevelt, hero to most of the left,
was father of the modern military industrial complex as well as
nuclear weaponry. Liberals love claiming the legacy of America’s
most beloved war, and they love the myths that surround that state
undertaking for having unified the culture and brought America out
of the Depression. World War II supposedly demonstrates the efficacy
of central planning, as well as the necessity to kill untold numbers
of innocent people, on occasion, which is why both statist wings
of the American political class love it so dearly.
It is almost
impossible to get very high in the national culture with a radically
antiwar outlook, to say nothing of an anti-military one. There is
much that is taboo to say in American life, but principled critiques
of war making, based on the common-sense morality concerning questions
about the taking of innocent life, are probably at the top of the
list.
Economically,
the so-called defense industry stands as a giant. Major defense
contractors have infrastructure in nearly every state, and their
hands in virtually every sector of government – from TSA and the
Department of Agriculture to the IRS and Homeland Security, from
NASA and the Food and Drug Administration down to the New York police
department. Very few critics of this regime get very far in the
mainstream.
The Leader
Principle with a Twist
In the United
States, any natural-born citizen can grow up to be the president,
we are often reminded, demonstrating once more, as if any more evidence
were needed, that America is the greatest nation in history, its
people the chosen people to lead the world. America is proud to
advertise itself as the king of democracies. There is no religious
test to be president. There is no familial restriction. Every four
or eight years, we see the peaceful transfer of power – unprecedented,
demonic power – and Americans can thus say with pride that more
than any other nation in the world, "the people here really
are the government – the greatest government there ever was."
Yet when that
American citizen is in office, he (or she, as I’m sure we’ll see
soon enough) is basically god on Earth. Is there a minor or major
problem with America’s economy, or the world’s? The president shall
respond. Is school violence or sex on television becoming a problem?
The president will send one of his officials to fix it. Is injustice
transpiring overseas? The president shall see to it immediately.
Health care, energy, immigration, social peace, crime, marriage,
international trade – nothing is to be tackled without the consultation
or active involvement of the president.
One would think
the president works a 75-hour day, given his supposed capacity to
heal the sick, fix the market, bring democracy to Afghanistan, stamp
out drugs in Mexico, secure the auto industry, stand as a role model,
unify the nation, end racism, teach all children – not a one left
behind – to read, decide when to launch nuclear weapons and which
other nations are worthy of having them, save Americans from natural
disasters, fix the weather, and get everyone into homes with ever
increasing sale values at ever declining costs.
This is such
an important, holy office, that the president never travels anywhere
without a vast legion of bodyguards, medical personnel, executive
officials, and dozens if not hundreds of others. No one else in
the world has ever had such a personal army. Wherever the president
travels, the local population must surrender its petty business
and witness entire neighborhoods overtaken by the head of state’s
coterie of pampering assistants and armed guardians.
Americans are
enamored of the flawed, everyday persona of the president. They
loved Reagan for losing his temper. They adored Clinton for his
foibles. They liked it that Bush was a guy with whom you could have
a beer, that Obama listens to the same music that they do. They
love the idea that, unlike in other fascist regimes, the president
can be anybody. And that person can then opt to torture and kill
anyone on Earth, or destroy any Third World nation on his (or her
it must be emphasized) say so.
When it comes
to power – the actual control the president has over resources and
his capacity to destroy human life – no other fascist leader has
ever approached what is at the president’s fingertips. No other
political office has lasted so long with so much Caesarian prerogative.
No other political position was ever credibly believed by so many
to have the power to do so much good. In America, the president
is a deity – which, paradoxically, is why so many political opponents
take it so personally when someone they dislike has the office.
Some Americans don’t want to see the greatness of their country
tarnished by a perjurer like Clinton or a doofus like Bush. They
might even question the officeholder’s legitimacy, as with Obama.
But this is because the office is so revered. The presidency itself
is upheld as the commanding office of the nation, the secular savior
of the world. It is the godhead of America’s democratic omnipotence.
It is a sacred position. The fact it is an elected office occupied
by imperfect souls only bolsters its unparalleled grandeur. To say
the Leader Principle isn’t alive and well in this country is to
define the concept too narrowly.
A Peculiar
Blend of Multicultural and Racial Statism
But the United
States doesn’t round people up on the basis of ethnicity and gas
them, the protests come, and so surely it is not fascist. The U.S.
isn’t based around the concept of racial superiority. Although the
Nazis were surely obsessed with racist nationalism, not all fascist
systems are. Nevertheless, fascism has been associated with racism
and so it is important to acknowledge how this plays into our analysis.
In the United
States, PC multiculturalism can at times be as overbearing as old-fashioned
bigotry. People have lost their jobs for harmless comments. Others
are denied opportunities in academia because they don’t have minority
status. This does not arise to the level of Nazi hatred, for sure,
although we can remember that the anti-Jewish crusade began as an
affirmative action program, based on the concern that Jews were
overrepresented in places of influence.
More important
in U.S. fascism is the role multiculturalism plays in guarding against
the accusations of violent prejudice. The U.S. government already
addressed racial strife, our textbooks say. If racism remains, it
is a problem with the culture and private sector – not the egalitarian
state. The war machine and federal government were the saviors of
blacks. LBJ, the same man who slaughtered millions of Asians, signed
the Civil Rights Act, and so the federal government has been elevated
to the status of being the Final Solution to racism, the redemption
of America’s past sins. The all-out assault on property rights involved
in Civil Rights legislation is itself a form of anti-racist fascism,
yet to say so is to be met with incredulous perplexity, at best.
Under the official
code of American ideology, almost nothing is worse than being a
racist, which is why the Tea Party is smeared this way and why Al
Gore is comparing global warming skeptics to the racists of a previous
generations. It is why the conservatives, too, try to use racism
accusations to discredit liberals who dare criticize Clarence Thomas,
Condoleezza Rice, or Herman Cain.
At the same
time, the American state continues to divide people by race. It
imprisons blacks at an alarming rate so that there are now more
black men in the correctional system than there were enslaved in
1850. The state is still the greatest oppressor of ethnic minorities,
who still get the worst of the police state’s violence. Because
much of the state’s war on blacks and other minorities is in the
form of regulatory and welfare practices wrongly thought to help
the poor and minorities – welfare, public housing, government schools,
licensing, minimum wage laws, coercive unionism and so on – very
few Americans identify the problem of racist statism comprehensively.
Leviathan is a bad deal for whites as well as blacks, only elevating
the political class at the expense of all.
Although the
U.S. is more culturally tolerant of immigrants than most nations,
here too we see racial politics mixed with statism to produce violence
against individual rights. Indeed, the specter of mass deportation
of peaceful people, the effort to crack down on all business relationships
involving an illegal, and the underlying nationalism involved in
the demarcation between the rights of legal residents and aliens
all speak to the fascism involved in the U.S. system. Immigration
was once a much more locally handled, market-regulated matter. With
the central state in charge of racial politics and the creation
of national identity, liberty for all suffers.
It is the warfare
state, however, where American racism is the worst, the most sanctioned,
and the most dangerous. Interestingly, the empire uses both political
correctness and racism to enhance its power: for example, criticizing
U.S. ties with Israel is smeared as anti-Semitism while disregard
for the rights of Arabs feeds U.S. wars abroad. Although anti-colonialism
and even anti-racism have long been part of war propaganda, the
outright hate of foreigners has always served the interests of the
militarists, from the vilification of the Spanish and the dehumanization
of the Filipinos to the demonization of the Germans in World War
I to the gruesome caricatures of Japanese found everywhere in the
1940s and today’s disgusting treatment of Muslims.
Americans actually
take seriously ideas to forbid the construction of mosques in some
areas, proving that intolerance of groups based on race and religion
is a very real threat. On a related note, religion plays a fascinating
part of American fascism, as both devout Christians and secular
liberals see the state as a divine institution. For the fascist
left the state is its secular God. For the fascist right the U.S.
government is an arm of God’s holy will. Fear of godlessness was
key in the Cold War, just as fear of fundamentalist Muslims fuels
the war on terror and fear of unusual Christian sects has led to
their deprivation of rights at Waco and elsewhere.
The worst is
seen in the U.S. treatment of foreigners, blown apart in war as
if they are vermin. An important point here is the other fascist
regimes have been historically discredited, and the modern incarnations
of these nation-states don’t speak with pride about their past.
Modern Germany is not at all boastful of its National Socialist
era. With America it is different. This is the state and statist
culture that wiped out the Indians, kept blacks enslaved, dropped
atoms bombs on Japanese civilians and put their American counterparts
in concentration camps – and yet these historical injustices, however
much lamented today, do not bring into question the overall legitimacy
of the American state that boasts an uninterrupted lineage of sovereignty
that encompassed all these atrocities. The U.S. smacks of pride
for its centuries of governance, despite the many millions enslaved
and crushed under its boot. We should not be surprised that modern
American political culture continues to treat foreigners as though
they are subhuman. When Pakistani children die in U.S. drone wars,
or Mexicans die by the tens of thousands purely because of U.S.
drug policy, it is all seen as a price well worth paying – if even
it is acknowledged at all. The prevailing dichotomy that there are
Americans, worthy of rights, and there are others, totally dispensable
in achieving U.S. goals, is a construct easily befitting of national
socialism.
American fascism
has managed a wondrous trick, using old-fashioned racism as well
as officially defined anti-racism to shore up its power. Washington’s
Civil Rights crusade as well as inhuman disregard for "the
other" in perpetuating its totalitarian violence overseas reinforce
each other in a most nefarious way, blinding people to the danger
of mixing racial politics with total power no matter what the aim.
Its wars abroad are always for equality, democracy, humanity. Its
domestic state balloons with power to combat social strife. But
from Wounded Knee to Guantánamo, the truly disenfranchised
have another story to tell.
A Socially
Moderate Police State
Social conservatives
generally find accusations of U.S. fascism to be preposterous –
offensive when Republicans reign and absurd when Democrats rule
– partly because from their perspective almost all manner of cultural
liberalism, decadence, political correctness, sexual permissiveness,
and so forth cannot be escaped, not in the public schools, the FCC-licensed
big media, the government-endorsed view of mainstream society. They
see Christianity pushed out of the schools and public sphere, including
in local city Christmas events, and believe if there is any tyranny
in America it is of a leftwing variety.
Although bourgeois
American culture has been co-opted by state institutions, particularly
through militarism, it is true that the counterculture too has been
absorbed by American civic ideology. It is a good thing that state
harassment of people outside the mainstream of sexuality has been
minimized, but it is important to note that just because the U.S.
is more "socially tolerant" than in past times doesn’t
mean it’s freer, even when it comes to personal rights. It is crucial
to note that just because presidents admit to trying pot and the
government finances condoms for students and museums devoted to
rock music does not mean liberalism of a genuine sort has triumphed.
The public
schools are a microcosm of the issue. Many see in them cesspools
of deviancy, libertinism, a total disrespect for old culture, conventionally
defined family values and hierarchy, or even the traditional conception
of the role for schooling: reading, writing, arithmetic. Yet these
institutions are thoroughly fascistic, hierarchical according to
ageism and an arbitrary placement of authority in teachers and administrators.
They have come to resemble low-security prisons, complete with metal
detectors, armed guards, and summary searches. Students are spied
upon and regulated even in their time away from class. Young children
are suspended and punished over the smallest of offenses, even handcuffed
and told they’re heading to prison, never to see their parents again.
It is no coincidence, probably, that America’s school system and
the Nazi regime both had vital origins in Bismarck’s Prussia. The
right looks at our schools and sees decadence and debauchery. Yet
there is also spirit-crushing authoritarianism.
To emphasize
the socially liberal flavor of the American police state is not
to say that the fringe is always tolerated by society, much less
government. The persecution of sex workers continues and those involved
in certain verboten consensual sexual activities – such as teenagers
caught sending each other nude photos in class – can face years
of jail and the institutional shame of being labeled "sex offenders"
for their victimless behavior. The greatest cause of prison growth
and one of the worst abuses of liberty in America has been the war
on drugs. Although America prides itself for being more liberal
than its Muslim enemies on the question of alcohol, it incarcerates
hundreds of thousands of people whose only substantive offense was
against the state-imposed norms of pharmacologically induced brain
chemistry. And even as the prospect of marijuana legalization seems
bright, those who continue to be marginalized – psychedelic, heroin,
and illegal stimulant users – will continue to be subjected to imprisonment,
which in America often effectively means frequent beatings, inter-inmate
slavery, and rape. Moreover, the reach of the U.S. drug war is global
– there is nothing really like an international crusade against
victimless crimes akin to America’s bullying of most of the world
to go along with its drug policy, as it has done in increasing levels
of intensity for a century.
Drug oppression
doesn’t stop at recreational users and outcast addicts, either.
The Food and Drug Administration has devastated millions of families
with its totalitarian dictates, depriving hundreds of thousands
of needed and effective medicines, cutting countless lives short.
Its cozy relationship with some of the big pharmaceutical firms
reminds us of the economic component of this fascist arm of the
American state. But the underlying principle that in America you
do not own your body sufficiently to decide whether to take a substance,
whether cocaine or experimental cancer medications, is a fascist
pretension if ever there was one. Meanwhile, those deemed "mentally
ill" also face numerous severe restrictions on their civil
liberties, although Thomas Szasz has done a wonderful thing in greatly
reducing this element of American fascism.
The state doesn’t
break down our doors to lock up all political dissidents or liquidate
racial minorities by the thousands, so it is sometimes assumed our
system is nothing like fascism, although we should remember that
Mussolini’s state wasn’t as bad as Hitler’s, and even Hitler’s regime
didn’t develop into an exterminationist project right away. Although
the U.S. government isn’t as totalitarian in practice as some states
have been, we must look at the potential power just waiting to be
unleashed. In a mundane sense, America’s police state tentacles
are indeed more ubiquitous and grandiose than anything that has
ever existed on the planet. The surveillance state is unprecedented,
without even the façade of due process involved in spying
that existed before 9/11. The government seeks to monitor all. Anti-government
critics are indeed tracked and at times arrested. Whistleblowers
are detained and mistreated. Torture is normalized. Indefinite detention
without cause is a bipartisan, unchallenged policy. America boasts
the largest incarcerated population, both per capita and in absolute
terms, on Earth. The death penalty persists, rare among industrialized,
modern nations, and a policy without which, we must remember, industrial-style
genocide is essentially impossible. The police presence increases
year by year, and becomes ever more dangerous. Thousands of American
citizens have been killed by police in the last decade alone. Ethnic
minorities, the youth, illegal immigrants, and other classically
alienated groups are especially vulnerable. But no one is safe.
There are a hundred SWAT raids a day. No matter what someone’s station
in life, there is the threat of being jailed for an unbelievably
petty offense, injured during a traffic stop, or shot by a police
officer. No matter how wealthy someone is, there is a threat that
a regulatory technicality or contrived offense like "Obstruction
of Justice" can land one in a federal pen. Incidents such as
the Waco massacre and the round-up of weapons at Katrina reminds
us of how universal the threat to liberty is, regardless of demographics.
Just because
you can watch half-nude women on afternoon television or gay men
kissing on the streets of nearly any major city does not mean America
is free, as complacent liberals might think, much less too free,
as conservatives often suggest. Just because most dissidents are
left alone doesn’t mean there is no police state, for that would
be convenient indeed for the police statists: the idea that people
ought not complain so long as they have the right to do so.
America’s
Unique Fascism
American fascism
is one of a kind. Its economic system is neither free enterprise
nor pure egalitarian socialism, but more akin to a buffed-up, modernized,
globally dominant Mussolinian corporate state. Its militarism rivals
and in many senses exceeds any of history’s fascist regimes, in
power, uninterrupted belligerence, and sheer size. Its presidency
is the most revered and powerful Fuhrer in world history, despite
and actually due to its democratic nature. America’s racial nationalism
is unusual but very real, combined with pretensions of anti-racism.
Its police state enslaves and punishes, at home and abroad, in ways
that would make Franco or Perón envious, even as it allows
for a relatively wide range of social liberty.
When Keith
Olbermann called Bush a fascist in 2008, the conservatives thought
it seditious and threatening. When Glenn Beck began sounding the
alarm in 2009 that America was moving toward fascism, the progressives
thought it crazy and dangerous. Both of these statements were not
hyperbole, however. If anything, antiwar lefties and populist rightists
only know the half of it when they use the dread "F" word,
since they fail to note how intimately much of their own favored
agenda falls in line with what they despise.
September
6, 2011
Anthony
Gregory [send him mail]
is research editor at the Independent
Institute. He
lives in Oakland, California. See his
webpage for more articles and personal information.
Copyright
© 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in
part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
The
Best of Anthony Gregory
|