By Steven Jonas, MD, MPH – March 14, 2007
This column, the third in my Bush Retrospective Series,
originally ran on May 27, 2004. It coincidentally arrives in this space
just after my current two-part series on “Lessons for the US Fascists.”
In my view, it fits right in. And so, here, in slightly edited form, is
that column from almost three years ago.
Increasingly, in dealing with the Georgite Regime’s actions,
programs, and policies the words "fascist" and "fascism"
are being used to describe them. However, the terms are most often used
without definition. Since they then become nothing more than epithets, I
think that this is not particularly useful in serious politics and for serious
historical analysis. In this column, I take a different approach to the
subject. The text is drawn from Appendix II of my book, The 15%
Solution: A Political History of American Fascism, 2001-2002, which I first
published in 1996, under the pseudonym “Jonathan Westminster” (see the end
notes of the column for publishing details). This definition
(admittedly quite lengthy) was not drawn out of thin air. It was based on
my analysis of the historical experience in those countries that have
acknowledged themselves as fascist, especially Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.
For most of its 14
elements, I also present one or more those actions, policies, programs, and
“Unitary Executive” wish list of the Georgite Regime that happen to be entirely
consistent with it. The reader is left to make his/her own judgment as to
whether the shoe fits the Georgite foot. That is if, walking and quacking
like a duck, it is a duck.
A Definition of Fascism (with the major elements of the
Georgite profile that fit following each)
Fascism is a political, social, and economic system that has
the following baker's dozen plus one of major defining characteristics:
1.
There is complete executive branch control of government policy and action.
There is no independent judicial or legislative branch of government.
Examples of Georgite fascism: Taking over the judiciary and making it subservient
to the executive branch, through appointments, the use of the law and
rule-making, and selective refusal to abide by the present judiciary’s
decisions. Limiting Congressional authority to the extent possible, while
through admonition and political threats and bribery, making Congressional
Republicans as subservient to the White House as feasible. Trumpeting the
Constitutional theory of the “Unitary Executive.” The, shall we say,
creative use of “Signing Statements” to over-ride actions of the Congress.
2.
There is no constitution to which government is subject and that is recognized
by all political forces as having an authority beyond that claimed by the
regime in power, to which that regime is subject. The rule of men, not
law, is
supreme.
Example: The increasingly
frequent referral by George Bush to his dependence on his belief in a “higher
power,” one that, as Scalia and Thomas have said for years, stands above the
Constitution in authority. Since there is no possibility of independent
determination of what this “higher power” has to say, its/his/her word, of
course consequently is whatever George Bush says it is. Ergo, the rule of
man, not law.
3.
There is only one political party, and no mass organizations of any kind other
than those approved by the government are permitted.
Example: As of now,
with the unprecedented moves to redistrict in non-census years, the
DeLay/Cheney/Bush Republicans are certainly moving to establish at least the
first element of a single party system in our country.
4.
Government establishes and enforces the rules of "right" thinking,
"right" action, and "right"religious devotion.
Examples: take your pick
from among, for example: illegalization of freedom of belief on when life
begins; the campaign to remove homosexuals from the purview of the equal protection
clause of the 14th Amendment; the drive to retroactively put “God”
(the Christian Rightist concept of “God,” of course) into the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution (preferably above it).
5.
Racism, homophobia, misogynism, and national chauvinism are major factors in
national politics and policy-making.
I don’t need to spell out this one.
6.
There is no recognition of inherent personal rights. Only the government
can grant "rights." Any "rights" granted by the government
may be diminished or removed by it from any individual or group at
any time without prior notice, explanation, or judicial review.
Thus, there is no presumed freedom of speech, press, religion, or
even belief, automatically accompanying citizenship. There are no
inherent or presumed protections against any violations of personal
liberty committed by law-enforcement or other government agencies.
Examples: the “Patriot Act” has demolished the Fourth Amendment (protection
against arbitrary search and seizure), the Fifth Amendment (guarantee of due
process of law), and the Sixth
Amendment (guarantee of a jury trial in criminal cases) for, if the Georgites
get their way, US citizens as well as all others. Just wait for “Patriot
Act” II. (It came, with the 2006 “Military
Commissions Act, giving the President the power to incarcerate indefinitely
without access to any legal processes, any
person, citizen or non-citizen, whom he deems is acting to “aid and abet
terrorism,” and the repeal of habeas corpus.) Then there is the claim
that whatever rights we do have are granted by “God,” rather than being
inherent. As in (2) above, that of course means that both the rights and
whoever may be their beneficiaries are whatever and whoever the Georgites say
that “God” says they are.
7.
Official and unofficial force, internal terror, and routine torture of captured
opponents are major means of governmental control.
Hey, if foreigners can be
routinely tortured, why not American citizens labeled as “enemy combatants” by
George and John (or Alberto or Prof. Yoo)? As the forces that could be
used, think Blackwater and all of those trained CIA torturers.
8.
There are few or no employee rights or protections, including the right of
workers to bargain collectively. Only government-approved labor unions or
associations are permitted to exist, and that approval may be removed at
any time, without prior notice.
Trying to end guaranteed
overtime for certain groups of workers is only the beginning on this one.
9.
All communications media are government-owned or otherwise
government-controlled.
Fox “News” and Right-Wing
talk radio (the major components of what I now call the Privatized Ministry of
Propaganda) are certainly openers on this pathway.
10. All
entertainment, music, art, and organized sport are controlled by the government.
Hey, nobody’s perfect
(but once upon a time George was of course part-owner of a baseball
team).
11. There may
or may not be a single charismatic leader in charge of the government,
i.e., a "Dictator."
Both President Bushes
have expressed interest in this idea.
12. The
economy is based on state supported and subsidized capitalism, with tight
central control of the distribution of resources among the producers,
and strict limitations on the free market for labor (as noted above).
Again, hey, nobody’s
perfect (yet). But again, the Georgites are moving in that direction
with, for example the extraordinary care and attention they lavish on the
extractive industries.
13. The
fascist takeover of the government of a major power always leads to
foreign war and adventurism sooner or
later.
No comment necessary.
14. Built as
it is on terror, repression, and an ultimately fictional/self-delusional
representation of historical, political, and economic reality [emphasis
added to the original “Westminster” definition], fascism is inherently
unstable and always carries with it the seeds of its own destruction.
To date, such seeds have always sprouted within a relatively short historical
period of time.
Well, they got the “fictional/self-delusional” stuff
right.
The book from which this set of history-based definitions is
quoted was published in 1996. So my question is this: did the Georgites
read it first, or are they just coming to it naturally?
To conclude, if you don’t like long definitions, see the
columns of the previous two weeks for my short one.
ould prove even more dangerous for the future of our great
Constitutional Democracy.