In het
volgende artikel van Pete Dolack (gepubliceerd op CounterPunch)
gaat hij in op 'de grote winst' van Biden* t.o.v. Trump en stelt
daarbij dat met de winst voor Biden het fascisme bepaald niet is weggestemd, me
dunkt een open deur inschoppen. Dolack vergeet voor het gemak dat
niet alleen de Republikeinen verantwoordelijk zijn voor het opleven
van het fascisme in de VS, de Democraten hebben daar maar al te
graag aan meegedaan met het haat- en angstzaaien tegen
respectievelijk voor diverse buitenlanden......
Ook de
militarisering van de politie is een zaak die niet alleen is voorbehouden aan de Republikeinen >> al onder Clinton en
later onder Obama werd e.e.a. steeds verder aangekleed (de macht van politie
en geheime diensten uitbreiden is immers één van de eerste zaken
die een fascistische dictator oude stijl als eerste ter hand neemt)
Eén van
de kenmerken van een fascistische staat is bovendien ongebreideld
nationalisme en dat was in de VS al vele decennia aanwezig voordat
WOII uitbrak en ja daaraan deden en doen de Democratische en
Republikeinse Partij maar wat graag aan mee......
Helemaal
vreemd vind ik de constatering van Dolack dat het nieuwe fascisme
niet gepaard gaat met paraderen van het leger als onder de nazi's in
Duitsland en de fascisten in Italië en daarbij haalt hij de
fascistische regimes in Chili en Argentinië aan**,
echter die fascistische regimes spiegelden zich juist aan de nazi's,
inclusief de militaire 'ganzenpas.....'
Voorts
is de agressie van de VS tegen de vele buitenlanden waar deze
terreurentiteit een inval deed (illegale oorlogsvoering) volkomen in lijn met fascistische
regimes, keer op keer stelt men simpel als de VS een Washington niet
welgevallig buitenland binnenvalt, dit is om de VS te beschermen.....
Daarnaast kan de VS het altijd prima vinden met fascistische regimes,
sterker nog, de coup die vooraf gaat aan de installering van een
fascistische junta wordt voor het grootste deel voorbereid door de VS
en meestal uitgevoerd onder regie van de CIA..... Hoe fascistisch wil
je het hebben???
Het
indoctrineren van kinderen op school gaat o.a gepaard met belachelijke nationalistische rituelen, zoals het groeten van de vlag en het
stokstijf stilstaan als het vermaledijde volkslied is te horen (met de hand op het hart... ha! ha! ha!) van
deze op bloed van de oorspronkelijke volkeren gefundeerde vereniging
van terreurstaten....... Het voorgaande is ingevoerd om te laten zien dat de zogenaamde Amerikanen recht hebben op hun middels een enorme genocide gestolen land...... En ook het hersenspoelen van kinderen met
z.g. Amerikaanse waarden en normen, plus hun foute
geschiedenislessen, die geheel in tegenstelling staan tot de
werkelijkheid (zoals het verzwijgen van die genocide op de oorspronkelijke volkeren in de VS) is zonder meer een fascistische indoctrinatie!!
Toch
is er genoeg te leren uit het artikel van Dolack die ook 'mooie
inzichten' geeft, als je het voorgaande maar 'in het achterhoofd
houdt' (zo geeft Dolack in het kort weer wat de meest bekende 20ste eeuwse dictaturen betekenden voor de lonen en arbeidsvoorwaarden van arbeiders; terwijl de economieën prima draaiden, Ap):
November
8, 2020
by Pete
Dolack
Photograph
Source: Anthony Crider – CC BY 2.0
Even if Joe Biden had won the U.S.
presidency by the expected landslide, the threat of fascism would
remain. And not simply because Trumpites are not going away anytime
soon.
Donald Trump doesn’t have the
intelligence, competence or sufficient ruling-class backing to
actually become a fascist dictator. His desire to be one, however,
has been more than sufficient to necessitate the widest possible
movement against him and the social forces he will continue to
represent, and there is no doubt his authoritarian impulses would
have become still worse had he won a second term. What little
democracy is left in the United States’ capitalist formal democracy
would have been further reduced.
It might be better to
understand Trump as the Republican Party’s frankenstein —
the culmination of the Republican “Southern Strategy.” Richard
Nixon was an open racist who developed the strategy of sending dog
whistles to White racists; Ronald Reagan promoted “states’
rights,” well understood code words for supporting racially biased
policies; George H.W. Bush exploited racial stereotypes with his
Willie Horton campaign ads; George W. Bush’s presidency will be
remembered for his callous ignoring of New Orleans and its
African-American population in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina;
and the roster of Republicans hostile to civil rights is too long to
list. Moreover, the Republican Party, with very few exceptions, has
been an eager promoter and enabler of Trump’s virulent pro-big
business policies with most not even bothering to pretend to
challenge Trump’s racism and misogyny.
It was no surprise that a
billionaire con man whose business plan has long been to screw his
real estate empire’s working-class contractors and use every trick
imaginable to not pay taxes or his creditors was going to stick it to
working people.
The Trump administration has been
the worst U.S. presidency in history with an extraordinarily fierce
approach to class warfare. But let us consider what fascism is: At
its most basic level, fascism is a dictatorship established through
and maintained with terror on behalf of big business. It has a
social base, which provides the support and the terror squads, but
which is badly misled since the fascist dictatorship operates
decisively against the interest of its social base. Militarism,
extreme nationalism, the creation of enemies and scapegoats, and,
perhaps the most critical component, a rabid propaganda that
intentionally raises panic and hate while disguising its true nature
and intentions under the cover of a phony populism, are among the
necessary elements.
Despite varying national
characteristics that result in major differences in the appearances
of fascism, the class nature is consistent. Big business is
invariably the supporter of fascism, no matter what a fascist
movement’s rhetoric contains, and is invariably the beneficiary. We
often think of fascism in the classical 1930s form, of Nazis
goose-stepping or the street violence of Benito Mussolini’s
followers. But it took somewhat different forms later in the 20th
century, being instituted through military dictatorships in Chile and
Argentina. Any fascism that might arise in the U.S. would be wrapped
in right-wing populism and, given the particular social constructs
there, that populism would include demands to “return to the
Constitution” and “secure the borders.”
Formal democracy vs.
fascism
United Statesians have indeed
suffered through four years of militarism, extreme nationalism, the
creation of enemies and scapegoats, the imposition of
“constitutionalist” judges and demands to “secure” borders,
complete with open racism and misogyny. But the Trump administration
and its followers constitute a movement with the potential to
bring about a fascist dictatorship, not actual fascism. Should the
U.S. ruling class — industrialists and financiers — decide
they would no longer tolerate the country’s limited,
corporate-constrained variety of “democracy,” the militias and
assorted far right street gangs that “stand by” on Trump’s
command would be unleashed without constraint. And they would be
openly joined by police and security agencies in fomenting violence
rather than being tacitly supported as they are at present.
Nonetheless, fascism is the last
resort of any capitalist ruling class. Instituting a fascist
dictatorship is no easy decision even for the biggest industrialists,
bankers and landowners who might salivate over the potential profits.
For even if it is intended to benefit them, these business elites are
giving up some of their own freedom since they will not directly
control the dictatorship; it is a dictatorship for them,
not by them.
It is only under certain conditions that business elites resort to
fascism — some form of formal democratic government, under which
citizens “consent” to the ruling structure, is the preferred form
and much easier to maintain. Working people beginning to withdraw
their consent — beginning to seriously challenge the economic
status quo — is one “crisis” that can bring on fascism. An
inability to maintain or expand profits, as can occur during a steep
decline in the “business cycle,” or a structural crisis, is
another such “crisis.”
A summary of what happened under
the fascist regimes of the 20th century shows the class nature of
fascism clearly.
*In Germany, corporate profits more
than doubled in five years, while from Hitler’s ascension to power
on January 30, 1933, to the summer of 1935, wages dropped 25 to 40
percent. In 1935, a “labor passport” was instituted in which the
employer wrote reports on the holder. The employer could confiscate
the passport at will, without which employment could not be taken,
effectively making it impossible to change jobs. In 1938, it was
formally made illegal for a worker to change jobs.
*In Italy, from 1926 to 1934,
industrial wages were reduced at least 40 to 50 percent, while
agricultural wages were reduced 50 to 70 percent. Unemployment meant
the specter of starvation, and as a further whip to keep wages down,
children were regularly used in agricultural and factory work as
substitutes for fired adults. From 1935, many factory employees were
placed under direct military discipline; missing more than five days
of work was a penalty subject to nine years’ imprisonment. All
workers had to carry a “labor passport.”
*In Francisco Franco’s Spain,
real wages in 1949 were 50 percent of those in 1936. Rationing lasted
until 1952; the rations alone were insufficient to maintain human
existence. The historian Paul Preston, author of two books that
closely examine Franco and his regime, quoted Hitler aide Heinrich
Himmler as calling the Franco regime “more brutal in its treatment
of the Spanish working class than was the Third Reich in its dealings
with German workers.”
*In Augusto Pinochet’s Chile, the
majority of workers earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting
for inflation). Labor’s share of the national income declined from
52 percent in 1970 to 31 percent in 1989. The minimum wage dropped
almost by half during the 1980s, and by the end of that decade,
Chile’s poverty rate reached 41 percent and the percentage of
Chileans without adequate housing was 40 percent, up from 27 percent
in 1972. One-third of the country’s workforce was unemployed by
1983.
*In Argentina, the main union
federation was abolished, strikes outlawed, prices raised, wages
tightly controlled and social programs cut. As a result, real wages
fell by 50 percent within a year. Tariffs were reduced deeply,
leaving the country wide open to imports and foreign speculation,
causing considerable local industry to shut. For the period 1978 to
1983, Argentina’s foreign debt increased to $43 billion from $8
billion, while the share of wages in national income fell to 22
percent from 43 percent.
Capitalists remain firmly in
control
Even with the dramatic rise in
unemployment and the trillions of dollars handed out to large
corporations since the start of the pandemic, the above disasters for
working people, imposed through unrestrained violence, is far beyond
what working people experienced under Trump.
Industrialists and financiers have
an iron grip on U.S. politics (witness the dreadful choice the two
corporate parties have just offered), and the overdue economic
downturn triggered by the pandemic has not hurt profits for most big
corporations, with bailouts provided for those who have
taken a hit to their bottom lines. Financiers and speculators are
doing quite well, and because Wall Street values stability,
financiers likely were more behind Joe Biden than Trump. As the
Democratic Party favors financiers (while the Republicans favor
industrialists), Wall Street will have no problem at all with the
incoming Biden administration. Some industrialists likely have tired
of Trump’s antics, or calculate that they have gotten all the
services they can reasonably expect from him; some among this
grouping probably don’t mind a change. And given Biden’s decades
of loyal service to corporate interests, in particular the banking
industry, little gnashing of teeth is likely to be found in corporate
boardrooms.
There was no need for U.S.
capitalists to institute a fascist dictatorship during the Trump
administration and there won’t be any need in the near future. So,
to circle back to the opening of this article, why should it be said
that the threat of fascism is undiminished with the ouster of Trump?
That is because as long as capitalism exists, the threat of fascism
exists.
The system is called capitalism
for a reason — it is the rule of capital. The owners of capital.
Those who have capital generally divide into two camps,
industrialists and financiers, as alluded to above. Industrialists
own or are the top managers of enterprises that produce tangible
goods and services, while financiers trade, buy and sell stocks,
bonds and other securities, continually inventing new instruments to
profit off virtually every aspect of commercial activity. The two
compete fiercely for the bigger half of the profits and thus have
sometimes conflicting interests, but there is considerable overlap
between the two sectors of capitalists. Crucially, their class
interests are completely aligned.
Employees are paid far less
than the value of what they produce; this is the source of
corporate profit. The bloated salaries and profits generated by
exploitation of employees is far greater than can be thrown into
spending on luxuries or used for business investment, so these
massive piles of money are diverted into financial speculation,
swelling an already bloated financial sector, which grabs large
amounts of this speculative money for itself. Top managers of
industrial firms in turn are paid largely in stock so that their
interests are “aligned” with that of finance capital, to use Wall
Street lingo.
Elections don’t
decide who gets to rule
This is the ordinary and routine
working of capitalism. As long as people consent to this arrangement
— and thus consent to their ongoing exploitation — all is
well for industrialists and financiers. But what if consent begins to
be withdrawn? What if an economic downturn is so severe and sustained
that it becomes difficult to extract profits? This is when
capitalists begin to think about putting an end to formal democracy
and instituting authoritarian rule. At the most extreme, this
authoritarian rule can slide into fascism. Such a scenario is always
a possibility because capitalism is inherently unstable. Twenty years
into the 21st century, we’re already living through a third
economic downturn, each worse than the previous one.
United Statesians, for now, have
pushed back against a potential slide toward fascism by ousting
Trump, albeit only by a narrow margin. But the recent global trend is
unmistakable: Far right authoritarian ideologues remain in office in
countries around the world, among them Brazil, Turkey, Hungary,
Poland and the Philippines, and the U.S. has a history stretching
back to the 19th century of installing right-wing dictators and
overthrowing democratically elected governments. Capitalists have a
variety of economic tools at their disposal to maintain their rule,
the armed force of governments to enforce their rule, and a variety
of institutions and control of the mass media to reinforce ideologies
upholding their rule. Elections in capitalist countries decide who
gets to govern, not who gets to rule.
Formal democracy is the preferred
method of ruling, but if violence, ranging all the way to fascism, is
the only way to maintain their power, that is what industrialists and
financiers will insist their governments impose. Fascism can’t
arise or be raised to power without a social base, a badly confused
bloc that supplies support and the shock troops. This social base has
to be maleducated enough to believe the obvious lies spewed by the
leader and be enthused by the permission granted to openly display
their hatreds, be those racism, misogyny, nativism, homophobia or
anti-Semitism, permission wrapped in virulent nationalism. The
millions of fanatical Trump followers are a monument to the lack of
education in the U.S., a pervasive propaganda system and the product
of decades of relentless Republican Party ideology. There can be no
potential fascist movement without such a social base.
Given this fanatical support of
Trump despite the massive failures and undisguised class warfare of
his administration, both the followers and the shock troops will
remain when Trump soon leaves the White House. Will they be called on
in the future? If you don’t want the threat of fascism to hover in
the background, you’ll have to get rid of capitalism.
Pete Dolack writes
the Systemic
Disorder blog and has been an activist with several groups.
His first book, It’s
Not Over: Learning From the Socialist Experiment, is available
from Zero Books and he has completed the text for his second book,
What Do We Need Bosses For?
===============================
* Biden haalde weliswaar een grote winst, maar in het congres gaan de Democraten hoogstwaarschijnlijk terug in het aantal zetels voor het lager huis. (waardoor regeren zeer moeilijk zal worden, daar de senaat in handen zal blijven van de Republikeinen......)
**
De fascistische dictatuur in Chili begon op 11 september 1973 (de
eerste 9/11) en eindigde op 11 maart 1990, die in Argentinië begon
op 24 maart 1976 en eindigde 10 december 1983)
Zie ook: 'Biden (de gekozen VS president) al bezig met aanstelling van door Republikeinse eisen geschikte 'kabinetsleden''
'Het electorale college in de VS, met 'kiesmannen', werd opgetuigd om de slavernij te laten voortbestaan''
'VS militarisme marcheert door: geen discussie of media aandacht voor Washingtons oorlog tegen de wereld'
'VS moordmachine weer in handen van 'volwassen en bekwame leiding''
'Joe Biden president, echter de peperdure campagne was zo slecht dat de senaat in handen blijft van de Republikeinen......' (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)
En ter zijde: 'De EPA heeft toestemming gegeven om dicamba te herintroduceren op de VS markt, leuk vooruitzicht daar Biden TTIP zal tekenen'
'Bidens puppeteers verwijten Trump slap buitenlands optreden'
