Are we there yet? insert, Churchills this is the end of the beginning speech here.
Misrepresenting what I have said, and resorting to pure imaginings to set up straw men are not mere exaggerations, they are dishonest and have not clarified anything.
The Geo-Politics of the American Empire is complex and appallingly corrupt. The US has been at war for most of its existence and is not something which I would ever defend, condone or simplify down to the work or whim of one Individual whether that be Trump, Obama or George Bush 1 or 2 or George Washington.
Paulo Freire said this,
“[T]he more radical the person is, the more fully he or she enters into reality so that, knowing it better, he or she can transform it. This individual is not afraid to confront, to listen, to see the world unveiled. This person is not afraid to meet the people or to enter into a dialogue with them. This person does not consider himself or herself the proprietor of history or of all people, or the liberator of the oppressed; but he or she does commit himself or herself, within history, to fight at their side.”
― Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed
I do not consider myself the proprietor of history or of the nth degree of nuance in all of the dynamics of political economy, and so forth.
Your deterministic conclusion that fascism is the logical conclusion of the nation-state is quite a strong claim, how do you state that with such certainty?
I think your street fighting rhetoric is naive, your scenario is actually in my view falling into the trap of being divided and subsequently the rulers will then have won.
I am persuaded by Erica Chenoweth’s research that nonviolent civil resistance is the way to defeat the Fascism of the current Washington Consensus Fascism.
The point about agent provocateurs is that in violent confrontations the state with its monopoly on violence ( if the devil has all the best tunes, the State has all the best weapons of violence), rule of law has to be by consent ultimately that is a logical conclusion which I believe is supported by evidence.
What do you believe the USA is fighting for with its constant wars? is it defending its freedoms, or is it defending the Dollar?
I believe that Petrodollar hegemony is the US oligarchies most pressing problem and that it is Dollar hegemony that has driven US foreign policy for the last 45 years since the NIXON SHOCK.
You finish by making this claim about a fascist population? Most CItizens and subjects if asked would identify happily as Capitalists, most would not identify as Fascists and even fewer as Nazis. There are species of Fascism as there are species of Capitalism and I think you have quite a large task in proving a claim that Fascist Populations exist as a category.
When you say that I almost said one right thing? Most of what I believe may well be mistaken, what I can do and try hard to always do is to state my beliefs clearly and honestly and not tailored to the audience or individual to who my statements of belief are made.
If you and I agree with each other does not denote that we are Correct (Right) it merely denotes that we believe we agree with each other and that our belief is correct. The greater the generality of the claims we make and the extent to which we agree we both share the same opinion of that truth the more likely it is that we will be in error at least in some aspects of our common ground. When one gets to the point of setting out Ideology and dogma and setting down Manifestos we get into the realms of political opinion and here we encounter the best potential for being controlled by the Divide and rule strategies of the Oligarchy.
Some further questions, Can you have Internationalism without Nationalism?
Are Internationalism and Globalism the same thing?
Now for some Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Proudhon.
´´The Obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men ´´ Oscar Wilde.
Emilio, Bakunin predicted that ;
”They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship—their dictatorship, of course—can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up.´´
—Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchism[36
This is for me the nub of the matter something I have in common with Joseph Proudhon, explained by Peter Kropotkin in the Encyclopedia Britannica thus.
”Now Proudhon advocated a society without government and
used the word Anarchy to describe it. Proudhon repudiated,
as is known, all schemes of Communism, according to which
mankind would be driven into communistic monasteries or
barracks, as also all the schemes of state or state-aided Socialism
which were advocated by Louis Blanc and the Collectivists. When
he proclaimed in his first memoir on property that ” Property
is theft,” he meant only property in its present, Roman-law,
sense of ” right of use and abuse ” ; in property-rights, on the other
hand, understood in the limited sense of possession, he saw the
best protection against the encroachments of the state. At the
same time, he did not want violently to dispossess the present
owners of land, dwelling-houses, mines, factories and so on. He
preferred to attain the same end by rendering capital incapable
of earning interest; and this he proposed to obtain by means of
a national bank, based on the mutual confidence of all those who
are engaged in production, who would agree to exchange among
themselves their produces at cost-value, by means of labour-cheques
Everyone representing the hours of labour required to produce
every given commodity. Under such a system, which Proudhon
described as ” Mutuellisme,” all the exchanges of services would be
strictly equivalent. Besides, such a bank would be enabled to
lend money without interest, levying only something like 1 %,
or even less, for covering the cost of admin everyone
being thus enabled to borrow the money that would be required
to buy a house, nobody would agree to pay any more a yearly
rent for the use of it. A general ” social liquidation ” would
thus be rendered easy, without violent expropriation. The same
applied to mines, railways, factories and so on. ”
I appreciate that this is a long post The Links to my Blog (letthemconfectsweeterlies) set out more fully the points which I make. Going back to Craigs original Post and the constant Trump Bashing it seems to me that Trump is a Punch and Judy Show, and the US presidency is a pantomime and has been since Kennedy was assassinated. Trump seems to have taken longer than Obama did to capitulate to the Ruling Oligarchy, the hysterical lapse into inaccurate and childish name calling led by the always compliant corporate media is ridiculous and Angus caring as much as you appear to do a polite suggestion that some fact checking might be in order will always get much further than “Exagerating for clarity’s sake”