The United Fascist States of American: Part 2

Strong Centralized Government

If the fascist state is in possession of a well oiled propaganda machine, then winning over the populace is made a much simpler task. This means to say, that when the populace is diverted from the strong arm tactics of the fascist government, the government is made more able to implement their policies without annoying intervention. 

Noam Chomsky related the parallels of propaganda during Hitler's Germany and modern America during an interview; “There it was the Jews. Here it will be the illegal immigrants and the blacks. We will be told that white males are a persecuted minority. We will be told we have to defend ourselves and the honor of the nation. Military force will be exalted. People will be beaten up. This could become an overwhelming force. And if it happens it will be more dangerous than Germany. The United States is the world power. Germany was powerful but had more powerful antagonists. I don’t think all this is very far away” (Rothschild, 2010).

These are the hallmarks of a nation with a socialized agenda. However, if these recepients don't contribute to the bellicose zeitgeist and efforts of the state they then are not to be taken care of by the fascist state. It's clear that leading American intellectuals see a shift towards historic fascism when one examines the propaganda machine and the injection of polarizing issues. This trend becomes more obvious and more entrenched when war appropriations and the military industrial complex converge.

Militaristic Tendencies and The Armaments Industry

In order for the fascist state to continue to advance its warring efforts two ingredients are need: money and manufacturing. Chris Hellman is communications liaison at the National Priorities Project, a military watchdog and think tank. He maintains that the United States government sets aside 20% of its GDP on military spending. The 20%, Hellman claims, is only the tip of the iceberg. According to Hellman the government funnels billions of dollars into the military using budgetary slight of hand;

“...you hear about the Pentagon budget and the war-fighting supplementary funds passed by Congress for our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.That already gets you into a startling price range -- close to $700 billion for 2012 -- but that’s barely more than half of it. If Americans were ever presented with the real bill for the total U.S. national security budget, it would actually add up to more than $1.2 trillion a year”(Hellman, 2011).

Obviously the money is on hand for financing the fascist American state, but where is the money going? Daniel Guerin more than 75 years ago clearly saw where the money was going; “...they (war industries) they eagerly pocket the fabulous profits from armament orders...”(Guerin, 1973). One of those companies in the United States is Lockheed Martin. The Lockheed company merged with Martin Marietta company to form a large aerospace design and manufacturing operation which has profited from government contracts. To illustrate the entwined nature of the American fascist states's collusion with the industrial military complex, investigative reporter Tim Weiner remarked; “it's impossible to tell where the government ends and Lockheed begins” (Weiner, 2004).

Once again it is straightforward enough to see that America manifests another of the three pillars of a fascist state. Solidifying the opposition by squelching out socialistic descenders is last lithimus test of whether or not a state is fascist.

Socialistic Ideals Quelled

Still continuing during the presidency of the Democrat Barack Obama, a combative congress has been swelled in ranks by a far right-wing faction of the Republican party. This political faction goes by the name Tea-Party in commemoration of the Boston Tea Party. This Tea Party seeks to emulate the recalcitrant nature of the protesting Bostonians of the 1770's by aggressively blocking, obfuscating or repealing many of the socialist tenets of modern America. Consider the vociferous dislike of a form of universal health care or the curtailing of food stamp subsidies or reduction in funding of state subsidized morning breakfasts for poor or underprivileged school children.

During the presidency of the Democrat Barack Obama, a combative congress has been swelled in ranks by a far right-wing faction of the Republican party. This political faction goes by the name Tea-Party in commemoration of the Boston Tea Party. This Tea Party seeks to emulate the recalcitrant nature of the protesting Bostonians of the 1770's by aggressively blocking, obfuscating or repealing many of the socialist tenets of modern America. Consider the vociferous dislike of a form of universal health care or the curtailing of food stamp subsidies or reduction in funding of state subsidized morning breakfasts for poor or underprivileged school children.

The emergence of the Nazi Party in Germany reveals a startling parallel to the evolution of the political landscape in the modern United States; “There was also tremendous disillusionment with the parliamentary system. The most striking fact about Weimar was not that the Nazis managed to destroy the Social Democrats and the Communists but that the traditional parties, the Conservative and Liberal parties, were hated and disappeared. It left a vacuum which the Nazis very cleverly and intelligently managed to take over” (Guerin, 1973).

Conclusion

The modern United States of America displays all three of the characteristics of a fascist nation state. The intense consolidation of power and money through ritualized propaganda is certainly evident in the modern US. An overabundance of monetary support is diverted from the government to favored war industries in order to finance its bellicose tendencies. Again, another characteristic of fascism has been met. Finally, the systematic belittlement of socialistic ideals has made its way to the forefront of the American psych. The combination of these elements is nearly indisputable proof of the modern United States of America fascist nation.

References

Eisenhower, Dwight D. (1961).Farewell Address.DDE’s Papers as President, Speech Series, Box 38, Final TV Talk. Retrieved from http://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/research/online_documents/farewell_address.html

Guerin, Daniel, Merrill,Frances. (1973). Fascism and Big Business. New York: Monad Press.

Hellman, Chris. (2011).$1.2 Trillion for National Security. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175361

Rothschild, Matthew. (2010).Chomsky Warns of Risk of Fascism in America.Retrieved fromhttp://www.progressive.org/wx041210.html

Weiner, Tim. (2004).Lockheed and the Future of Warfare. New York: New York Times (November 28, 2004).

ENDA: Why LGBT's and Straights Should Care.

A few months ago a U.S. Senate committee passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, or ENDA. Thursday the Senate voted 64-32 to approve ENDA. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, a LGBT grassroots organization and think tank, monitors the progress on range of LGBT issues one of which is the ENDA. On its website the group keeps a running tally of Senators who are “evolving” their viewpoint in favor of EDNA legislation. The bill would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity — protections that are, as yet, not explicitly guaranteed under federal statutes.

It seems as if an American social paradigm shift is accelerating when it comes to issues concerning civil rights and equality. You might think that it's just an academic exercise conducted for and by legal scholars and lawmakers. If that's true, then as evidence you would surely invoke both The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as landmark pieces of legislation guaranteeing equal treatment as an American citizen under the constitution. The former ensures equal civic rights to all Americans which was spearheaded by fundamental civil rights being granted to African-Americans in the America. The latter endows equal opportunities and anti-discrimination measures to Americans with physical and mental handicaps.

If you thought the premise of anti-discrimination was merely an enforcement question of laws and statutes already on the books, then you would be dead wrong. The inherent nature of intricate legalese prohibits generalizations and “blanket” uniform coverage under the law.

The recent advancements of same sex marriages as well as the dismantling of the Defense of Marriage Act has sent the centrists, leftists and right wingers down a rabbit hole that appears to be bottomless. One of the newest and simultaneously longest running bills which would protect equality in the workplace is gaining notoriety and traction in all three camps. The bill in question is the Employment Nondiscrimination Act: ENDA for short.

What exactly is ENDA; why has it taken almost 30 years to pass and what is its shared pedigree with other landmark civil rights bills? Here is a guided tour through the rabbit hole of civil rights legislation as it pertains to ENDA.

Assuming the momentum continues and it passes Congress, the bill would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. An issue, as yet, not explicitly guaranteed under federal statutes.

Of course, there are numerous labor laws which have been adopted to ensure protection of civil rights which are already on the books. However, Stetson Law School assistant professor, Jason Bent, says ENDA addresses issues other laws don’t.

“...The Civil Rights Act of 1964 only covered certain categorical things. Right, it covers race, national origin, and religion and so other things. But that sort of set the tone. It now, if you want to extend protections to another class; some other defined by some other characteristic. If you want to protect them from private discrimination then you need a separate piece of legislation.”

This appears to say that the hastening zeitgeist of total equality is only impeded by the verbiage of the particular Acts and statutes. Specifically, the LGBT community would receive implicit and explicit protection in the workplace as it pertains to sexual orientation and gender identity. How you express those ideals in a working environment is the crux of the debate and the centerpiece of the legislation.

Alfred Kinsey, the full-time biologist and part-time sexologist, in his seminal research and books on the sexuality of males and females revealed that pigeonholing sexuality is a slippery slope. His bell curve scale detailed the false tenacity of orthodox sex role definitions. The scale he developed had completely homosexual on one end with its polar opposite, completely heterosexual, on the other end. The conclusion he drew is that a small minority of people fall into either extreme. In other words, the majority of us are all a combination of both ends. The scale doesn't address bisexuality or transsexuality as such but the gist of the argument is clear.

This brings up an interesting conundrum. What if sexual discrimination in the workplace isn’t limited to the LGBT community? Felipe Souza-Rodriquez is the co-director of Get Equal, a grassroots advocacy group which provides LGBT communities a forum in which to tell, receive feedback and discuss their stories about job discrimination. He said, as the law stands now, even heterosexuals could fall victim to discrimination on the job based on “perceived” sexual orientation or gender identity.

”Discrimination based on perceived sexual orientation is where people...who are straight, but people think they are gay, bisexual or lesbian and then they often get fired. So, I mean we're talking about the full spectrum of everyone. Even straight people who are discriminated the quote/unquote look gay.”

The current language in the bill allows for some dubious escape clauses and loopholes. Occasionally employers make assumptions regarding workers’ sexual orientation. As stated earlier, this is what some call perceived orientation. Daniel Tilley, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Florida says this concept plainly highlights the shortcomings of the bill.

”...they give a wide berth for employers to discriminate against employees based on sexual orientation or gender identity if they're not just a religious institution but religiously affiliated. So if you're a religiously affiliated hospital you could fire a gay groundskeeper or a trans(exual) doctor. And this is troubling for a number of reasons. One, those obviously have no...those positions have no relation whatsoever to a particular religion. But secondly, those exemptions don't exist in other civil rights laws.”

The transgender community has been brought to the forefront, principally, because of ENDA’s use of the term “gender identity.” Staff attorney of the New York City based Transgender Legal and Education Fund, Noah Lewis, says the uncanny high rate of transgender job discrimination will be addressed if ENDA is enacted.

”transgender people face extraordinarily high rates of discrimination. Nine out of ten transgender people report experiencing harassment or discrimination on the job. Nearly half have been fired or denied promotion or not hired because of being transgender. One out of four transgender individuals have lost a job simply because they're transgender. So this is just a question of basic fairness. No one should be fired simply for being gay or transgender.”

Before the St Pete Pride event this year, Steve Kornell, a St. Pete city council member, commented on a remark by Republican Florida Senator Marco Rubio’s. Rubio had said he would not support ENDA because it would give preferential treatment to a certain group of people. Kornell rejects that statement out of hand. He says minorities can’t be given their rights.

”Gay people and the people covered under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, especially African-Americans, and other minorities don't have to be given their rights. They're entitled their rights by the (US) constitution; which says that all men are created equal. And to me that definition should include all people. And does include all people to me. And certain groups have fought to deny people their rights. So that's all people are asking for. They're not asking for preferential treatment. That's laughable. That's just not true.”

There are numerous other civil rights issues being debated in the public forum, like many of the amendments laid out in the US Bill of Rights. Unlawful search and seizure, freedom of the press and free speech, right to bear arms as well as abortion, euthanasia and dominion over ones body, along with gender identity and sexual orientation are all portions of a redistricting of America's psychosocial map. This psychosocial map is slowly being conjoined through a zeitgeist of inclusion and equality for all Americans. In this way an otherwise worrisome journey down the rabbit hole feels more like a pleasant stroll down an unfamiliar country lane.


Shortly after the Senate voted to approve ENDA, president Obama released a statement commending the Senate and appealed to the House of Representatives to do the same.

“I urge the House Republican leadership to bring this bill to the floor for a vote and send it to my desk so I can sign it into law. On that day, our nation will take another historic step toward fulfilling the founding ideals that define us as Americans.”

Saints, Relics and Mitt Romney's Magical Underwear

Beatification of Political Figures

     The hagiographies of Catholic saints provide an insightful and useful blueprint to dissecting the populistic veneration of political figures when their historiographies get the revisionist treatment. However, potential Catholic saints are scrutinized on the merits of their wonders before their canonization as a bona fide Saint. If the Pontiff is swayed by the empirically fuzzy proof then the dead person enters an undefined period of beatification. The beatification marks a cooling off period whereby more “proofs” of exceptional earthly divinity are gathered and filed away. Once enough evidence has been amassed the reigning Pope can cast off the beatification and officially canonize the Saint “in waiting”. A frighteningly similar methodology is employed by populist movements when they embark on canonizing a political figure of some historical distinction. Every school child in America has been taught ad nauseum about the wonders of George Washington's unflappable boyhood ethics. The tale of him morally squelched and unable to lie about taking an axe to his father's cherry tree. That fanciful parable of innate American ethics embodied in a cultural hero is tantamount to the unverifiable deeds attributed to Catholic “pre-saints” during their beatification. Catholic saints are believed to fly about, to have stigmata's, heal the infirm and occasionally imbue their clothing with mystical holy powers. Their place of birth and/or death are transformed by the believers into shrines of devotion. These shrines are the locale where yearly pilgrimages terminate and relics are bought and placed to insure the sanctity of the pilgrim and the shrine. Take for instance the historical ramifications of the wooden dentures which George Washington wore for the first time on the battle field at his victory at Valley Forge. Or perhaps more mundane the jute suit which Ronald Reagan wore on the night he lost his virginity. These are intrinsically no different from the Catholic prerequisites to canonization. I will attempt to analogize between a famous political “pre-saint” and her road to beatification and the sub rosa attempts to start a beatification process for current American politicians. In order to make the comparison we first must define what is a relic entails.

     The word relic found it's widespread usage in the English language during the early 13^th century. The shift in meaning in the 13^th century lent itself to referring to a particular body part or other artifact associated with a holy person. Initially the Latin word reliquiæ was used to refer to mementos of pious men and women. The root word is linquere meaning to leave or depart which was coupled with “re-” as a form of “back” giving us reliquiae; something endowed to us from a saint.

     Of course, relics come in various degrees of piety and super powers. Generally speaking there are three categories of relics in ascending order provide insight into the inherent powers they embody. The hierarchy of piety corresponds neatly with the particular cultural, social or political impasse which the relics are employed to help overcome. Bottom of the totem pole (excuse the pun) are classified as “third degree” relics which are items or objects which in some fashion were touched by the saint. Second degree relics are held in higher esteem because they were those used and or worn by the saint. Apparently the second degree relics have had more time to absorb the saints divine vibrations. The holiest of holies in the realm of relics are also the rarest of relics. First degree relics are the incarnation of the faith which function as touchstones of that faith among believers. Examples of first degree relics are slivers of the true cross, anything from Jesus or any generic body part from saints. During the early middle ages through the late middle ages in Europe a whole subversive thieving industry arose (furta sacra), to supply the enormous demand for holy relics. The fact that Jesus' foreskin, The Holy Prepuse, was claimed by as many as 18 different churches throughout Europe during the middle ages, doesn't negate the fact that this was a magnificently holy relic rivaled by no other. Naturally, if the first written documentation of The Holy Prepuse is of Charlemagne bestowing it upon Pope Leo III, then the currency of it's innate super power increases exponentially. Although Charlemagne exemplifies a person having the acumen of realizing the political value of a relic, he was never canonized. A saint who also understood the political importance of relics and miracles was Saint Catherine of Siena.

     Curiously and perhaps ironically extreme piety was one of the few avenues in which women could garner as much acclaim as men in the political arena of church affairs. Women were barred from holding posts in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church but little held them back from veneration as conduits of divine propriety. Catherine of Siena might be diagnosed today as labile and paranoid schizophrenic but in 14^th century Italy she was viewed as being divinely blessed with visions. We'll ignore the fact that she perpetually hallucinated because of her staple diet of Holy Hosts and consecrated wine; taking communion every single day. Catherine of Siena made the holiest of vows only to be broken later in adulthood for an even holier vow. At the age of 7 she purportedly took the vow of chastity and abstinence as a result of her first ecstatic vision she had of Christ. When she had reached adulthood she upped the ante on her piety and announced that she had entered into a holy union with Jesus; she wed the Son of God. Bold and brash as it may seem that singular act erected a bulwark against criticism from the male dominated Church authorities. Catherine was on her way to adopting a trifecta of ecclesiastical notoriety when the rumors of her stigmata accelerated to a fever pitch. Those three attributes (marriage to Christ, divinely inspired hallucinations and stigmata) would catapult her into the frays of perhaps the biggest power struggle to date within the Roman Catholic Church. The Western schism, which divided the papacy from 1378 through 1417, had two simultaneous Popes: one in Italy and one in France. The division was more about political discordance than any profound theological dispute. Catherine wrote extensively to both Popes, notably Pope Gregory XI. He was so enamored with her eloquent piety that he followed her heavenly instructions and returned his administration to Rome for the remainder of his Papacy. During the rest of her lifetime Catherine lived in Rome where she, under the protection of Pope Urban VI, lamented about her failed struggle to end the Schism. She died in Rome at the age of 33; a number which has immense religious currency within the Christian faith. My assertion is that the Church needed her and the people needed her which led to the unconscious manufacture of an exemplar of extraordinary divinity. It is irrelevant to apply any scientific litmus test in order to discern whether or not Catherine of Siena was indeed telling the truth. Whether she was neurologically, psychologically, or physiologically “normal” can't negate the perception of her contemporaries and their necessity to believe.

     Catherine was eventually buried in Rome. A list of miracles and wonders claiming to have happened there is testament to both her popularity among the lay members of the Catholic Church and the savvy clergy who recognized the political potential of her relics. Steadily her popularity transcended a mere holy man and the Pope was forced to move her body and it's relics inside the Basilica of Santa Maria sopra Minerva where most of her body resides today. However, her body; her relic was a hotly fought over commodity. It appears that the city of Siena also wanted a piece of the relic action. A macabre story of furta sacra ensues. A band of thieves at the behest of the city of Siena crept into the Basilica and exhumed Catherine's body. The shrewd thieves quickly realized that transporting the entire body would be a herculean task; the journey remaining undetected would be to risky. They need to travel less encumbered. The macabre conclusion arrived at by the thieves was to ignominiously lop off her head and return the first degree relic to Siena. As soon as Catherine's skull was placed in a sack the thieves set out on their trek back to Siena. Of course a hero' tale isn't complete without a challenge. A challenge which is really a test of the hero's moral constitution when his confronted with impending failure. Furta Sacra heroic stories are rife with seemingly contradictory feats of moral and ethical fortitude. As the hagiography informs us the thieves were stopped by guards as they were leaving Rome. The guards demanded to see the contents of the sack whereupon the thieves began to pray to Catherine for a miracle. When the thieves opened the sack and revealed the contents to the guards Catherine of Siena had performed the miracle of disappearance. The guards examined the sack but saw nothing; Catherine's skull relic had vanished. It wasn't until the thieves arrived in Siena that Catherine's head reappeared in the sack. It's clear that the need to have control not only of the physical relic but also to to be able to dictate the hagiography of the saint is what gave the relic meaning and it's cultural brevity.

     The same can be said about the burgeoning historiographies of political figures. The locales of the outhouses Abe Lincoln purportedly visited or used is of much less importance than the bullet which killed him or the stovepipe hat her wore. It's the perception and not the quantifiable evidence which starts the political figure's populistic beatification. Can we observe the fledgling beatifications of political figures operating in the current public arena? That is a question with a very slippery slope. However, let's take a stab at the 2012 Presidential election candidates and their potential relics. Eventually Obama's long-form birth certificate will be auctioned off and probably fall into the hands of the Trump dynasty. Or maybe the White House establishes a lucrative cottage industry which sells certified copies of Obama's long form birth certificate. “What about Romney?”; you might ask. When Romney departs this world for the distant Mormon planet of Kolob he will bequeath his “magical underwear” to this mortal planet. We can all imagine the pandemonium it would unleash as different factions claim sacred rights to his undergarments. Who will prevail? Michigan, Utah or Massachusetts? Undoubtedly the Church of Later Day Saints in collaboration with the future Mitt Romney Institute will fabricate enough replica undies to supply the burgeoning demand.