Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
"we should invade their [Muslim] countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

Ann Coulter

This article reads as if one day islamofascists descended from outerspace and started attacking the United States. It's difficult to bridge such an incredible  emotional gap. It seems that there is not a common reference point.

There are technical things as well. Let's look at the word fascist. It has a meaning. In particular, Laurence Britt in his article Fascism Anyone? compared the following fascist states:

Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco's Spain, Salazar's Portugal, Papadopoulos's Greece, Pinochet's Chile, and Suharto's Indonesia

  1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
  2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
  3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
  4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
  5. Rampant sexism.
  6. A controlled mass media.
  7. Obsession with national security.
  8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
  9. Power of corporations protected.
  10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
  11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
  12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
  13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
  14. Fraudulent elections.

Outside the United States there is a belief that this list would apply to the US and Israel.

It is convenient that the war against Islam started a little after the cold war ended. Why did we not notice how evil the Muslims were before that? Why was (and is) Saudi Arabia so well funded? Why are there no surveys that show Muslims are any more violent than US citizens? (If you got one, please link I really would be interested.)

When dealing with the horrors of the World Trade Towers, what about the horrors of the equivalent of 1,400 9/11's that the US inflicted on Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia? It was not just the lie that was the Gulf of Tonklin incident. It was the refusal to allow North and South Vietnam a democratic vote as mandated by the United Nations, because South Vietnam would almost certainly vote in a way the US did not want.

The US has always chosen violence as its main method of diplomacy. They have always backed despots in order to secure short-term gains. "He may be a bastard, but he is our bastard" summarises the heart of US foreign policy since WWII. There is a reason that the US spends more on military than the rest of the world combined. There is a reason that the US was the target of Bin Laden.

This is how the rest of the world views the US, including now, a large number of it's friends:

aspiring to genteel poverty

by edwin (eeeeeeee222222rrrrreeeeeaaaaadddddd@@@@yyyyaaaaaaa) on Sun Jun 17th, 2007 at 07:55:35 PM EST
That list is doing the rounds, but I think there's a simpler definition - which is that fascism is what you get when those in power abuse those out of power, not just for profit (which is bad enough) but simply because they want to, and they can.

Fascism is the pathology of abuse for its own sake. There's always a smokescreen of justification and rationalisation based on how different and aggressive The Other is. But the core issue is a need to abuse and control other human beings, purely for the sake of abuse and control.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Jun 17th, 2007 at 08:21:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series