
![]() |
||||||||
Treesong's Facebook StatusGuest Content
POETRY
NEWS FICTION REVIEWS |
Bush and Hitler
Accepting negative commentsSubmitted by Treesong on 1 December 2007 - 12:59am.
Why do I accept idiotic comments like the ones from Chuck Jines a while back? Really, I found it interesting that someone with such different views from mine would even post here. I also thought it might be a good opportunity for some dialog among guests here who actually have something interesting and/or important to say... :) » reply
P.S. Your blog movedSubmitted by Treesong on 16 October 2006 - 7:52pm.
P.S. Since your blog has apparently moved, I went back and edited the link at the top of your post to reflect that fact. I also put the first sentence of your post into the Preview box so that people can see a summary of the blog entry in lists. » reply
Bush's Velvet GloveSubmitted by Treesong on 16 October 2006 - 7:46pm.
I don't talk about Bush as much as I used to. I still talk about him from time to time among friends, but I mostly focus my energy on creating positive projects rather than criticizing the work of others. Even so... people who make the Hitler analogy aren't looking at the details of the Bush regime so much as the spirit of what is happening. Bush as an individual is arguably a "true believer" who truly believes that his actions are ultimately serving the American people [and "God"]. But some of the people who put him into power are clearly disingenuious individuals whose chief desire in life is power for its own sake, no matter the cost to the common good. Whether the people in the Bush administration are "true believers" or Machiavellian manipulators is largely irrelevant. Either way, they are all participating in a political, economic, and cultural movement that is fascist -- or at least proto-fascist -- in nature. Of course, today's American fascists are mostly using methods of social and psychological means of control rather than the horrific holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis and their allies. But when our freedom is taken from us, and a war results, it matters little whether our freedom was taken by an iron fist or a velvet glove. Either way, we are still left in a world where a small number of powerful people control the lives of the masses without their consent [and often without their knowledge]. I don't think that anyone I know would question the fact that Bush has not yet met Hitler's level of profound and prolific atrocity. The Holocaust is a hard measure for any aspiring fascists to live up to. And whether it's morality or timidity that's restraining him, Bush simply hasn't gone in that direction with his "Master Plan." His body count is much lower, and the incidence of open torture and macabre spectacle is much lower as well. And yet, there IS a body count, and there IS open torture, and there IS a macabre spectacle. And Bush's administration does have a Master Plan -- an unthinkable, intolerable intention to lay siege to the entire world in pursuit of ever-greater amounts of money, power, and control. Believe it or not, fascism is about more than racking up the highest number of bald atrocities. It's about something called Weltanschauungskrief, aka Worldview Warfare. It's about the belief that We are Right; that the Disbelievers must be Converted; and that the Evildoers must be Destroyed. Why this focus on Weltanschauungskrieg? Because a fascist is someone who never feels safe until all people who are perceived as threats are either converted, controlled, or killed. From this basic fear emerges a mass psychology and a mass movement to conquer the world in the name of one's Worldview -- whether that be defined as a Race, a Nation, a Culture, a God, or something else entirely. In this department of Weltanschauungskrieg, the Bush administration's moderately more nuanced approach to fascism is far outshining the coarse and brutal methods of his predecessor. Less people are dying -- but more people are being controlled, with bombs over Baghdad and a media blitzkrieg at home. In the end, this approach -- which looks less brutal in some regards on the surface -- doesn't mean that Bush is any less of a fascist. It simply means that the people who control Bush are more effective at what they do than the Nazis were. This is almost certainly because they've had 60+ years to refine their propaganda techniques, military weaponry, and other methods of physical, social, and psychological control. On the homefront, instead of enduring the dread flights of the Nazi Luftwaffe over our cities, we have the likes of Republican Fox News flying through our airwaves, saturation bombing the American public with so much fear and close-mindedness that we will wage war on our sisters and brothers in other nations simply because formerly-US-backed terrorists may or may not be hiding somewhere amongst their cities. In conclusion... yes, it's clear that the details of Bush's deeds don't nearly match up in their brutality to the details of Hitler's Holocaust. So on some level, I agree with you that the comparison of Bush's deeds to Hitler's deeds is a bit absurd. But deep down, the two political-cultural movements share a similar spirit -- the spirit of fascism. And in all honesty, I believe that American fascism is largely just a new evolution of the fascism that swept through Europe 60+ years ago. But that's a whole nother story... » reply
First, I want to thank youSubmitted by Anonymous on 25 October 2006 - 11:52pm.
First, I want to thank you for posting my article. I have posted a responce to your comments you made concerning my other article titled fascist tolerance:Fascist Tolerance Two… By, Chuck Jines Earlier this month, I posted an article titled Fascist Tolerance, that highlighted the acts of violence, that have been committed by liberals upon conservatives. I used national examples that have repeadly occurred, such as the recent incident at Columbia University, as well as my own personal experiences of vandalism that have happened to my car due to my Bush bumper sticker. I explained in the article that the cause of this social phenomenon was due to the liberals’ frustration at their inability to win in the arena of ideas through rational debate and dialogue. I use the phrase “social phenomenon” because this pattern of intolerance is far more that just a few isolated incidents, but rather part of a persistent and frequent surge of unofficial persecution and discrimination. It is a symptom of a subtle, all-pervasive demand for egalitarian conformity. For an in-depth analysis I would highly recommend reading Eric Voegelin’s enlightening book titled The New Science of Politics, or Ken Wilber’s Sex, Ecology and Spirituality. You can access both of these great thinkers’ web sites by going to my links list. » reply
|
User loginNavigationNew forum topicsRecent comments
| ||||||
|
|
|
|||||||
Why do you post the comments
Why do you post the comments of an idiot like Chuck Jines?