Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Fascism in 10 fun and easy steps


It has been too long since my last post, sorry to all you out there who wait with baited breath for my every word to appear on your screen.
I ran across this article on Plastic.com and discovered a concise yet poignant missive on what has been happening to our country since September 11, 2001. I am going to do a series of posts on this article, commenting on each step one at a time. There isn’t a lot to add to what I consider a well written argument. So without further ado, let’s get down to business.
Step 1 - Invoke A Terrifying Internal And External Enemy
After we were hit on September 11 2001, we were in a state of national shock. Less than six weeks later, on October 26 2001, the USA Patriot Act was passed by a Congress that had little chance to debate it; many said that they scarcely had time to read it. We were told we were now on a "war footing"; we were in a "global war" against a "global caliphate" intending to "wipe out civilisation". There have been other times of crisis in which the US accepted limits on civil liberties, such as during the civil war, when Lincoln declared martial law, and the second world war, when thousands of Japanese-American citizens were interned. But this situation, as Bruce Fein of the American Freedom Agenda notes, is unprecedented: all our other wars had an endpoint, so the pendulum was able to swing back toward freedom; this war is defined as open-ended in time and without national boundaries in space - the globe itself is the battlefield. "This time," Fein says, "there will be no defined end."
Creating a terrifying threat - hydra-like, secretive, evil - is an old trick. It can, like Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the nation's security, be based on actual events (one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his dismissal because he noted, among other things, that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act, which replaced constitutional law with an open-ended state of emergency). Or the terrifying threat can be based, like the National Socialist evocation of the "global conspiracy of world Jewry", on myth.
It is not that global Islamist terrorism is not a severe danger; of course it is. I am arguing rather that the language used to convey the nature of the threat is different in a country such as Spain - which has also suffered violent terrorist attacks - than it is in America. Spanish citizens know that they face a grave security threat; what we as American citizens believe is that we are potentially threatened with the end of civilisation as we know it. Of course, this makes us more willing to accept restrictions on our freedoms.”

The reference to the Enabling Act is an important one. The similarity to the USA Patriot Act is striking, especially considering the timing in regards to how quickly they were both passed after a catastrophic event. The Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act both essentially gave the Executive branch open ended War Powers. Like the War on Drugs, the War on Terror has no discernible end. Unlike the Cold War, we are not fighting one specific ideology. Terror is a tactic used by groups that lack the resources to fight a direct war. It is also known as guerrilla warfare. How can we have an end to a tactic? And because the War on Terror will never end, neither will the emergency powers that were given to the Executive branch. Step 1 is complete, stay tuned for commentary on Step 2 -"Create a Gulag".

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Would you say that Bush's refusal to allow a withdraw date for the troops in Iraq is in any way tied to the Patriot Act? That if he can keep the "war mind" here in America then it will continue to seemingly excuse his outright abuse of power?

Falling off the Grid said...

The Patriot act (and the MCA) gives the president the powers he needs and wants as long as there is a threat to our national security in the form of "terrorism". without a tangible front in the war (i.e., Iraq), he loses the public's focus on terror and ultimately, losses the power to wage this illegal war. without the war, there is no pretense for his power grab. so yes, the iraq war is inextricably tied to the patriot act.

Anonymous said...

IF congress and the president ever came to any kind of agreement on withdraw and we did end up pulling out of Iraq, where do you think the "terror spotlight" would shift to then so that the president could continue to have a "reason" for the Patriot Act? Does Iran or Afghanistan offer that same type of opportunity for the president?