Some funny self denigration, that was...

"Turn into the skid"... that made me laugh.

We've been over "fascism" before... it is hard to pin down, but I think we did it rather well. I can't recall the title of the posts, though...

First of all, you aren't the first to see "Stalinism" as akin to fascism. I think it was J. Edgar Hoover that kept referring to the "Red fascists" during the HUAC hearings in the 50's... to the best of my knowledge, that was the first use of the term.

My understanding is that "fascism":

1) Is an ultra-nationalistic ideology, where the State works to promote a specific ethnic or racial group over another (which I think is different than simply promoting racism or prejudice... say anti-Semetism) as the best and most expedient means by which to build a national identity. The "nation" or "race" is what the government and State represent and protect... never the individual... with that nation or race typified in a single person as the "icon" of the effort.

2) Promotes violence as an acceptable means of both political and social change, at home and abroad. Expansionist military planning, aggressive foreign policy that may include the use of troops, a heightened level of military readiness... all the way down to beatings and torture as a means to a political end. Tight control of the military and domestic police forces are paramount.

3) Historical examples of fascism all seem to show that the will of the Party is equal to the will of the leader... it is nearly always a totalitarian system of government. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Tito, Sadam... all fine examples. This goes beyond a simple de facto understanding, however. Stalin was a totalitarian leader... but not because of the fundamental make up of the Soviet system. Members of the Red Army didn't take an oath of allegiance to Stalin, but to the Party. In fascist Germany, Spain, Italy, Yugoslavia, France and Iraq, the army swore to defend the leader of the Party as the leader of the armed forces. So did everyone else. The State (or the will of the State) was the will of the leader... by design, not by force of will or personality.

4) Corporatism is the unifying structure of design in fascism. Government, military and civilian agencies are all structured in a highly compartmentalized manner... "corporations" today are the best extant examples of this (although the two only actually share a root word... I'm not an anti-corporate sort, you know).

5) While the economic and domestic engines are "centralized" in fascism, this isn't to deny a level of free enterprise, but to insure that the State can determine how fast growing or expansive the economy or markets grow... where in communism, such centralized control is used to determine the livelihood of every contributing member of society, and in a free-market system it is as unregulated as possible, with growth determined by the markets themselves. Growth and economic development must benefit the State, but not other states or rival parties or interests. Again, Germany, Italy and Brazil are excellent examples of this: All had huge industrial production efforts... cars, trucks, ships, resources, and agricultural produce that could NOT be sold (even at a profit) to rival interests, lest those become assets for someone else AGAINST the State where they originated. Thus, auto manufacturing in Germany was limited to what it could "sell" at fixed prices to the German people... all the rest went to the German military machines.

Furthermore, while I don't think this is a "signature" feature of fascism as a political ideology, history shows us that a large part of the fascist effort went into creating a level of "awe" of the government/Party that isn't seen anywhere else. Political rallies, parades, government functions... all had a level of pomp and sophistication and grandeur that can oly be described as "liturgical". I'm rather convinced that we can thank "fascism" for the fascination that such nations as the USSR, China, Iran, and North Korea all still have for military parades. They've been a major part of their makeup from the beginning of the 20th Century... but are almost unheard of in the US, UK, and Western Europe since the fall of the Roman Empire and the last of the "triumphs" of the Emperors. Yes, there are exceptions to that observation (Napoleon, the Kaisers, and George V are a few)... but the democratic West has not had the need for such propaganda or pomp when it comes to expressions of power and authority. The only times that sort of "high ceremony" is employed in the West (especially here in the US) is at the most solemn or sacred times... the death of a sitting President, for example, or the return (real or imagined) of a national hero from danger (ticker-tape parades is what I'm hinting at here), or the crowning of a new sovereign in Great Britain.

The one point about fascism that I think I hold as "vital" but that the rest of the world doesn't is the focus, by the party/government in question, on the superior nature of one ethnic/racial/national group over all others, and the most expedient way to get that superior group to either its former glory or to a level of power never before achieved. Perhaps racism isn't a fundamental requirement of fascism, but history tells us that it is a common denominator throughout all past fascist states, doesn't it?

Peat vs Pete

I figured I'd just turn into the skid.

If I may employ another ethnicity's colorful invective, oy vey ... that was fairly embarrassing.

Look, fair enough on the dates the Irish joined the EU. The more apt critique (& honestly what I'm more concerned about when it comes to these super unions) is that in any free society a "crisis" is inevitable. Be it national security or economic you can bank on some pressing problem to arise, it's the nature of the beast. However, as a standing member in the EU, Ireland has demurred a portion of what is (was) their exclusive right to deal with such crises as they see fit. The idea that the head of the EU Parliament even feels comfortable suggesting out loud that a free, sovereign nation "suspend" general elections until their fiscal situation is cleared up to the collectives satisfaction is indeed a "brave new world." The moment I heard this I instantly flashed to Emperor Palpatine, "I will lay down these powers as soon as the rebellion is suppressed." And speaking of Emperors, I was hoping someone would hit on the Gibbons line of my last post title (see: Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire).

In other news ...

"Net Neutrality." The congress rejected this, on its' face. But the FCC is going forward with a vote on a modified plan December 21st. I wonder why that week, huh? Perhaps the nation will be preoccupied? This would be the literal policing of Internet speech. It's the Fairness Doctrine for the web. So lets say you google something Beck said, and it leads you to The Blaze. Instantly, as you click on a story contained therein, a bubble will pop up with an alternative argument of someone whom disagrees with Beck. Nice huh? I wonder, will the bubble open with "Gutentag!"

And speaking of "fascism", will someone please define this word for me? I hearken back to a professor's quote that I read once: "We've all agreed to use the phrase without agreeing what it means." You can get variations all over the web. The most common one I've heard is that while "communism" is the take over of private business by government, "fascism" is the take over of government by private business. The latter of which makes no sense whatsoever, to me. If it does to you, then name a nation state in history that is an example of that definition. Germany? Are we kidding? THAT was private business usurping government authority? Not to mention, the authority of the National Socialist Workers Party? I don't think so. I understand that "communism" is a socio-economic theory, who's implementation always comes at the end of a gun because it denies the basic nature of man, so we naturally associate the word communism with oppression - and history has born this out, to the tune of hundreds of millions of lives. But is anyone to tell me that Josef Stalin didn't employ fascist tactics? That the KGB didn't act much like the Gestapo? So what is fascism? I contend it is another catch all phrase like despotism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and so on, in which the natural Rights of the individual are oppressed by/in favor of the state, or an oligarchy. If one was to refine it any further, perhaps it would be apt to say it is an authoritarian state in which private business remains technically private.

Thoughts?

Hehe...

I re-read Ryan's last... and I think I finally got the title reference and how it relates to what he was saying. Nice.

I also like the comic. Time was, more than a decade ago now, when Jambo and I had a couple of very good friends living in Copenhagen, Denmark. This was about the time of the introduction of the "eurozone"... and our friends, Peter and Lars, were adamantly opposed to such a venture. Cried from the mountaintops about the impossible nature of tying that many separate, sovereign states and economies to one currency. This must have been the prevailing opinion in Denmark, because it is one of the few EU member states that have opted out of the Maastricht Treaty and retained the krone as its national currency... although the krone is tied to the value of the euro on a one-to-one exchange. I guess that is why you don't see the caricature of a Dane in that cartoon, because even if the euro would collapse completely, the krone could simply be tied to another, more stable currency from another nation (as it has been in the past with the US dollar, the British pound, and the German mark).

Watching an economy as vibrant and vital as the Irish was in the late 90s succumb to the whims of liberal elites who determined that, while a 12% rate of GDP growth was excellent for the Irish, it was too fast for the EU and offered too much disparity in wealth distribution amongst the lowest income bracket of the Irish wage earners. Never mind that even in 2005, the unemployment rate in Ireland was less than 2%... or that it is now more than 18%... or that the nation had the third highest standard of living for ALL levels of income on earth... the poor were still poor, and the rich were getting richer. All the liberals in Berlin, Paris or Brussels saw was an opportunity to expand liberal agendas via the EU where they hadn't already taken root.

It's not too late for the EU. If they can simply recognize that a planned, centralized economic engine will not work (there or anywhere) the way they want it to... and allow the member states to operate their economies as the voting public sees fit, then the union may stand a while longer.

I'm not holding my breath, though... and should the union dissolve, the impact on the global economy could be every bit as devastating as what happened in 1929.

Cub Scout patches...

Do I get a patch or badge for sewing all these damn small little tough-as-leather patches to Jake's uniform? My God... this is the 21st Century, and the easiest we can come up with is hand-stitching these things to the shirt?

It boggles the mind, at times...

I love you like a brother, but...

You're IRISH, for "pete's sake"... and they are "peat bogs". There is something fundamentally wrong with a Mick that doesn't know what "peat" is, or why it is found in a "bog".

On more thing...

Ireland has been a full member of the EEC (the EU today) since 1972... the same time the UK joined. Recent economic failures cannot be blamed on Ireland's EU membership, since the entire span of the "Celtic Tiger" happened while Ireland was in.

No, the reasons are the same as those that plague the US today... bipartisan politics. Ireland has two primary political parties: the conservative Fianna Fail and the far more liberal Fine Gael. While the parallels between these and our own RNC and DNC are there, they are not mirrors, by any stretch. However, the Fianna Fail managed to lower taxes, eliminate about 44% of welfare spending, improve infrastructure and lure HUGE business interests to the Republic.

This all turned around with the real estate crash in 2006 (the same time ours began) and with the banking crisis reaching even higher levels there than they did here... the Fine Gael won back a majority in the Dail and started spending money like it was going out of style. Just like the Democrats here, right?

Ireland's in a pickle, no doubt... but lets make sure we are blaming those that need to be blamed.

Bread and Circuses

Given our ancestors all hail from the same sunny bit of Pete Moss, and the direction the current administration in DC is itching to push us towards (see bailouts of CA on the horizon, Obama care, etc), I thought this quite relevant.

From The Financial Times online:
“Tell me how this ends,” was the question posed by General David Petraeus about the Iraq war. European leaders are asking the same question as they contemplate the crisis in the eurozone.

Having failed to construct a firebreak in Greece, the Europeans are hoping that they can stop the euro crisis in Ireland. But, even as an Irish rescue package is put together, the bond markets are already looking with unhealthy interest at Portugal. After Portugal, Spain is assumed to be next. And, if a really big economy such as Spain needed to call the financial fire brigade, the whole future of the euro would be in serious peril.

The question of “how this ends” is therefore obvious and urgent – but also fiendishly difficult to answer. It is like watching a three-dimensional game of chess – in which the financial, economic and political levels all interact with each other.

My current best guess is that the single currency will indeed eventually break up – and that the euro’s executioner will be Germany, the most powerful country and economy inside the European Union.

The headline on one of the most-read stories in the Financial Times last week was “Anger at Germany boils over” – reporting accusations by some Europeans that the latest twist in the euro crisis had been triggered by inflexible German policies.

But Germans themselves have plenty of reasons to be cross about the way the single currency is developing. Their country has been through a painful decade of wage restraint and cuts in government services. Many voters are outraged that their tax-euros might be used to finance early retirement for Greeks, or Ireland’s super-low corporate tax.

The German people were also promised that the euro would be as stable as the Deutschmark – and that there would be a “no bail-out clause” that would prevent the richer countries in Europe having to save the indigent. Both promises look perilously close to being violated. That, in turn, is triggering growing concern that Germany’s constitutional court could declare their government’s participation in European “bail-outs” illegal.

The German government’s fear of its own constitutional court has already been a crucial driver of the crisis. This year, the Germans were accused of acting far too slowly to organise a rescue for Greece. But official sloth was driven by a fear that speedy action would be deemed to violate the European treaties.

The immediate crisis in Ireland was triggered about a month ago when Angela Merkel suggested that, in future euro crises, private bondholders should bear more of the losses and that further European treaty changes were needed. This remark was also made under pressure from the courts.

Germany’s actions have, in turn, created political and legal pressures in bail-out nations. In Greece, we have seen deadly riots in Athens and a senior government minister evoking the Nazi occupation of the 1940s. In Ireland, there is much lamentation about the threat to national sovereignty. on Monday, the government itself was wobbling.

It is possible that the rise of nationalist and anti-capitalist parties such as Ireland’s Sinn Féin will cause recipient countries to stick two fingers up to the EU – and to see whether life might be better outside the single currency ..."

That shouldn't trouble anyone - either Germany will be the last man standing in a fiscal blood bath, or the European Continent will need to create a "fiscal union", in which Germany will be the bank of Europe, with abilities to dictate the way the EU Parliament does now. I can tell you this, Germans are sorta big on national identity, they were never big on this whole continental, we're all the same, union thing. So it's little wonder that in either scenario, they win. I wonder how Russia feels about that.

As for "our island", sadly it would seem that only a few years ago Ireland was "the" place in Europe to do business - low tax rates, limited corporate red tape, a strong currency, the list goes on. But since joining the EU and accepting the Euro they have tumbled, mightily. Taking on a lavish welfare role amid their success (what is this, Celtic "guilt?"), combined with EU membership has seen them off to the land of bailouts ... and a loss of democracy?

This 3 minute 30 second closing argument by a UK MP in the EU Parliament, Nigel Farrage, explains in exquisite fashion the dominoes lined up to fall in Europe and the consequences of collectivism for Ireland and the Continent; and I must say, there are excruciatingly obvious parallels and lessons to be heeded from the relationship between the member states of Europe and a centralized, collectivist government, and the member States of ours united here in America and our current federal authority.

You're so sharp you must sleep in a sheath!

Sorry, I heard that line and have been waiting for an opportunity to use it, hehe.

Salient observation. I've heard this idea somewhat touched on by truly moderate, freedom loving Muslims. That the true "extremism" in Islam is unfortunately those that embrace liberal democracy.

"However, I'm not sure that the "fringe" of the Islamic world are the ones that cheer on the madmen flying planes into buildings. I think the "fringe" of that faith are the ones that feel that women have the same inherent rights, freedoms and individual value as men... or that there exists a universal right to express yourself no matter what your faith is... "

As Tom Hanks said in Saving Private Ryan, "Listen up, now this is how you complain."

Well written sir.