Wake Up Cape Cod
Convened as a Committee of Correspondence
to Reawaken Americans to the Cause of Liberty.

HOME

BACK

 

 

 

 

 

 

Background photo: Cape Cod Sunrise by Joan Ross


© 2005 Design by Lucia Fulco - All Rights Reserved

 

Commentary on Fascism .......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The 14 Characteristics of Fascism
by Lawrence Britt
Spring 2003
Free Inquiry Magazine



Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.


The 14 characteristics are:


Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.


Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.


Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.


Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.



Copyright © 2003 Free Inquiry magazine
Reprinted for Fair Use Only.

Back to Top

 

 

 

FASCISM & CORPORATE AUTHORITY TO GOVERN
by Mary Zepernick

 

One-party rule.... and that one party is the corporate party. This is the party that wins no matter what happens November 7.

The overlapping and interwining of government, private enterprise and militarism is the toxic brew that some call corporatism: corporations+government. The giant multinational corporation, with its built-in quest for evermore production, profit & power, has gained the authority to govern: making foreign policy, military policy, trade policy, tax policy, transportation, industrial & agricultural policy; health care & other human needs & services policy; policy on investment, production and work. And don’t forget the cultural impact of the overlapping and intertwining of culture and the corporate media – with the privatization, profitization, commodification, commercial- izing of just about everything.... including our genes, ancient seeds & knowledge, water.... & even childhood.

So how did democracy-loving folks like us get into this fix? As a reconstructed U.S. history teacher doing penance, I’m going to focus on two issues: corporate legal personhood; and the regulatory regime, not the whole answer but key factors in perpetuating the age-old rule of the few over the many.

Corporate legal personhood: In 1886, the Supreme Court succumbed to the lobbying and scheming of corporate lawyers and other officials, and in Santa Clara Co. v. S. Pacific Railroad found the corporate form to be a person for purposes of the 14th Amendment. The 14th was passed in 1868 to recognize newly freed slaves as persons entitled to due process and equal protection rights. Equipped with due process and equal protection rights, the corporate form has accumulated Bill of Rights protections, notably freedom of speech (read campaign contributions) – and other tools to enable corporate lawyers and executives to enhance their power and profits.

Another factor in the rise of corporatism – corporations+ government – is the regulatory regime. The first regulatory agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission, was created in 1887 to co-opt the Populist Movement, which was organizing against the abuses of railroad and banking corporations. Richard Olney, President Cleveland’s Attorney General, reassured nervous railroad barons not to worry, that the ICC was to be”a barrier between the railroad corporations and the people.” [ And Charles F. Adams, who later became president of the Union Pacific R.R., assured his fellow barons that “What is desired is something having a good sound, but quite harmless, which will impress the popular mind with the idea that a great deal is being done, when, in reality, very little is intended to be done.” ]

To this day, the regulatory system has served more to shield the owning class and their corporations than to protect the public. The SEC, EPA, FDA, FCC. NLRB, ETC. – one of many ways that corporations+government collaborate to rule.

Since Mary Kay is going to talk about militarism, I’ll close by quoting that great seer, Jay Leno: “Not all the generals are against Donald Rumsfeld. He still has the support of a lot of generals: General Electric, General Dynamics, General Motors.”

 

Mary Zepernick administers the Program on Corporations, Law & Democracy, and works with the Women's International League for Peace & Freedom and Cape Care, the effort to establish a single-payer community owned health insurance program for Cape Cod.  She is also a former columnist for the Cape Cod Times.

Back to Top

 

Four Essays On Freedom by Lawrence Brown

The Future Of Freedom In America

I’m not sure exactly when it was that someone sent me my first reprint of an article comparing George Bush to Hitler. It bothered me a lot, not because I’m a Republican but because it simply wasn’t a fair attack. Read Mein Kampf for yourself, then ask if you think George Bush is the next Hitler. Had Bill Clinton the wit to get Bush named Commissioner of Baseball soon enough, the man would never have entered politics – and wouldn’t have wanted to. No. George Bush is no Hitler, and the Left does him a slander to suggest it, and squanders its credibility by doing so.

Having said all that, another question remains – one worth asking: how safe is America from Fascism today? It took a world war, a fortune in American blood and treasure and 70 million lives around the world to wrestle fascism to the ground last time. It is to honor our fathers and grandfathers – and the world’s teeming dead – that we take a look around and inquire about the future of freedom in America.

A patriot should worry about fascism like a religious devotee worries about sin… because both have to be confronted every day. Both arise from perennial temptations. What is fascism? Fascism is what happens when concentrations of wealth and power join forces to consolidate their advantages and advance their interests. “Modern fascism should properly be called ‘corporatism’, since it is a merger of the state, military and corporate power.” said Benito Mussolini, Italy’s tyrant in WW2.

There may be neo-Nazis in America today, but they’re not really going anywhere because they’re still in love with German fascism, its heroes and symbols. We have to consider something different. We have to watch for things as American as apple pie – things that won’t feel foreign at all.

Mussolini spoke of a “merger”. This concept is the key to understanding fascism. Fascism is an unholy alliance of potentially good things: our government in Washington, the people we send there and those they appoint… the media who can reach us everywhere – in our cars, living rooms, online… our most successful corporations and the powerful men who run them… our military and the police… and our dominant religions. Those are the main ingredients – and taken one by one, they are good things. They are ours, and we’re proud of them.

But what happens when they begin to cooperate – not in meeting the needs of the American people – but in consolidating their own advantages? Is it not the proper business of enterprises to succeed… and do they not see their growing success as a good thing? Indeed they do – and therein lies the temptation.

Fortunately, we have lots of history to look at now. The German people elected Hitler, for example. The Serbs loved Milosovitch, the Italians loved Mussolini. But for all the patriotic rhetoric, did their champions love them back? No. Their leaders were elitist snobs, convinced they could hoodwink their people into surrendering their liberties one by one. We have the advantage of historical hindsight; we have their papers and communications. They wrote the book on conquering their own nations from within. It should be required reading in every school.

What I’d like to do is review with you what we know about fascism and then you can decide whether it’s anything patriotic Americans should be worried about. We’ve made a start: we’ve identified the key players. They are the ones who always stand to benefit the most from fascism, however much of it they can get. And, however difficult this might be in an election year, let’s proceed in the understanding that both our political parties face the same temptations here. Founding father James Madison gave us fair warning: “I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by sudden and violent usurpations.”

 

Recognizing A Matrix Of Temptations

There is a risk that we might keep our eyes trained on the horizon for some foreign enemy while we are quietly looted and disenfranchised from within. This is what Ben Franklin had in mind as he left a session of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. A woman approached him on the street. “So, do we have a king?” she asked. “No madam,” Franklin said. “You have a republic – if you can keep it.

Fascism arises out of a matrix of temptations. The corporation may wish to maximize profits by reducing workers’ wages and benefits. At some point, they run afoul of worker-protection laws and must secure the cooperation of elected officials to remove the obstacles to further profits. They offer campaign contributions and other amenities to those politicians most responsive to their needs.

Needless to say, the newspapers and other media could raise the alarm. That problem is best solved by purchasing as many of them as possible and gradually weaning them (and the public) away from investigative reporting. Short attention-spans get even shorter.

What if striking workers need a little physical instruction from police batons and, in extremis, army bayonets? These things have been arranged in America’s past. Later on, as modern history reminds us, inconvenient intellectuals can be silenced –along with uncooperative media – until eventually we have more enforcement than law.

History even illustrates how religious institutions can be tempted with the chance to see their values made compulsory… by the silencing of rival sects and faiths… or in harsher conditions, protection in return for silence. “In short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess…” Adolf Hitler. How ironic: Hitler offers to improve the morals of his countrymen and defend them from the evil of liberal impulses.

You don’t attack fascism by attacking or demonizing any of its constituent parts. This is what the Left hasn’t understood. Corporations are not villainous things, nor are cops on the beat or our own kinsmen who make up the military. Our churches are clear forces for good. But all institutions are subject to the temptations to advance their wealth and influence at the expense of ordinary people, even while declaring themselves to be the people’s protector and friend. We’ve seen it all before, both here and abroad.

So this is a good time to offer our first weapon against fascism. We vigilantly protect the political and economic interests of ordinary people against encroachment by any of the concentrated power interests we’ve been talking about. With every policy question that comes up, we ask, “Will this new suggestion put more money in the workers’ pockets – or less? Will Americans be more free – or less so? Is our government more secret, or more open?” Then we vote.

Why, after all, did we go to war against Hitler and Mussolini and Tojo? Why did we hold the line against the Soviet Union all those years but to protect our liberty and the chance ordinary people have here for a decent life. That being the case, we have to ask how a free and prosperous people can be tricked into surrendering their freedom and prosperity to fascists. How that happens is next.

 

Extracting The Freedom From A Free People

There is a science to this. The assault on the freedom of free people is as old as freedom itself. We see it in ancient Athens and Rome, but the most instructive lessons come after the Industrial Revolution and the creation of the mass media. The clearest lessons are offered by Hitler’s rise to power, overthrowing the existing democracy in Germany.

How shall a free people be persuaded to yield their freedoms up to a central government? In America, this should be a non-partisan (or a multi-partisan) question. Nobody owns this.

First, you need an emergency. You can always make one up, but usually there’s something scary going on you can point to. Top Nazi Hermann Goering put it this way: “…it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship,. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

So you need a climate of fear. Put a steady diet of fear into a man and soon a steady stream of anger comes out the other end. Fascism loves anger, encourages it as a form of civic righteousness, then uses its political steam to do the new work of the state. We can recognize fear and anger as spiritual toxins. Fascism depends on those. Citizens are encouraged to think of themselves as victims whose desperate plight excuses them from moral restraints.

The fascist enthusiasm for manly action prefers polarization to reconciliation, war-making to peace-making. This preference wins fascism the allegiance of defense contractors and many in the military, especially the senior officer corps. Those who don’t go along are replaced with new, enthusiastic recruits.

Fascism distrusts intellectuals not already on board, and seeks to crush dissent from any defenders of civil rights and freedom. So fascism makes war on ambiguity. Problems are distilled to childlike simplicity; all questions are reduced to yes or no. Fascism glorifies decisive action and the masculine. “Whenever anyone says the word “culture,” said propaganda genius Goebbels, “it makes me want to reach for my pistol.”

Fascism identifies with a fixed set of national symbols and narrowly defines what it means to be a true member of the country. Those who can’t or won’t conform, either for reasons of faith or conscience or intellectual scruples, are denounced as unpatriotic and enemies of the state. In the name of country, citizens are encouraged to despise their fellow countrymen if they fail to conform.

Ironically, the interests of God and faith can be invoked in the midst of the most immoral projects. We saw this in the medieval inquisitions. The faithful were threatened with hidden evils only a trained elite could detect and save them from. As always, extreme measures were called for. They always are.

Fascist leaders will appear blasé and arrogant. Their usurpation of civil liberties must be justified by their superior knowledge and foresight. Here’s where a subservient media is vital, so inconsistencies and mistakes can’t be pointed out in public. When cornered, national security can always be cited, as Goering suggested over a half-century ago.

If we have a color-coded system of national alert for terrorism, we should have one for fascism too. Watch for the signs; then vote against anyone whose behavior suggests fascism to you. Such patriotic vigilance transcends political party concerns. I know lots of people in both parties. None of them want fascism for America. Love of country is a good thing, but it has to translate - as love always must - into actual benefit for the beloved. Democracy is safest when economic and political power is not concentrated in too few hands. Such concentration cannot be justified as a defense of democracy. It is, in fact, democracy’s executioner.

 

The Character Of Freedom

We are Americans who love our country. We love our freedom. We love the land we live in and we’re grateful for the quality of life it gives us. We also know that freedom always has its enemies. In today’s world, those enemies come at us from two main fronts: they are religious extremists bent on terrorizing us into conversion… or they are powerful persons intent on tightening their grip on wealth - and their advantage over those whose work produces it.

If we do what citizens in a democracy are expected to do, faced with a threat, we’ll ask ourselves what we need to do to counter the threats that face us. At the moment, I’m not talking about the things somebody else is supposed to do to protect us. I’m talking about what we ourselves can do. (I can feel Jefferson clearing his throat impatiently behind me.) We must perfect ourselves as best we can as citizens. We must embody – each one of us – the character of freedom.

How, you ask, can traits of character – any character – detect a nuclear device being smuggled into Detroit? Obviously, it can’t. We have the FBI for that. What possessing the character of freedom will do is equip us to respond appropriately to whatever happens to us next… that whatever casualties our enemies inflict on us, our liberty itself will not be among the missing. So what would a democratic character look like? It would be the character of fascism turned inside out.

If fascism stokes fear and anger, democracy responds with courage and forbearance. We have people shouting at us and telling us every day why we deserve to be angry and who we’re supposed to be angry at. If we’re going to think straight, we need to calm down. Keeping a clear head under pressure is the stuff of heroism. The democratic character expects every human being to be capable of self-transcendence when it counts.

If fascism promotes a punitive intolerance of non-conformity, freedom asks for proof of injury before judging others. A free society can be defined as diversity thriving in an atmosphere of tolerance. We have our civil law to regulate our public lives, and the democratic character demands the law be applied equally to all. About religion and other private matters, democracy requires a respectful silence and a respect of others’ privacy.

If fascism distrusts the life of the mind and champions violent action instead, democracy requires critical intelligence from all its citizens – and an understanding of history. At the opening of our history, John Adams reminded us, “Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people.” In a democracy, the construction of a library is a patriotic act.

If fascism glorifies war and its war leaders, democracy calls its citizens to it with extreme reluctance. The democratic character knows that the best way to support our troops is not to send them into danger unnecessarily. When we have no choice, we expect honor and valor from our warriors, but we also recognize the threat any permanently armed force poses to our own freedom. This ambivalence about armed force can be traced right back to the founding fathers.

Most of all, the democratic character continually seeks to expand the fortunes of the common man and woman. There is, in that hope of expansion, an innate distrust of power and privilege. “He mocks the people,” said Grover Cleveland, “who proposes that the government shall protect the rich and that they, in turn, will care for the laboring poor.”

Any charlatan can burst into tears at an unfurled flag. American fascism, if it ever comes, will be as American as half-time at the Super Bowl. So it won’t be on their expressions of patriotism that we should choose our leaders but for their protection of liberty and the lack of secrecy with which they do the public’s business.

At the beginning of our history, the founding fathers had to justify, in an age of autocracy, the vesting of ordinary people with political power. To do so, they had to insist that ordinary people can have the wisdom to know what is right and the moral courage to do it. No institution can be better than its members. Nothing has changed. While freedom occasionally requires us to fight for it, we defend it best, and daily, by living in it.

Back to Top