, ,

We seem poised to choose between governance by strongman, and governance by an interlocking, faceless network of entities – not only business corporations, but bureaucratic entities which speak only unto each other, but not to the unwashed.

I warmly embrace genuine progressivism. The Founders were artists in the medium. They combined wisdom with insight to scrutinize problems, and see them as they were in great depth. We seem to have lost that skill in politics.

To stay alive, the people who form governments must have a breadth of language to speak across a great range of concepts. The great thinkers of every age have broadened the language to allow the facile discussion of new ideas.

Ours is an age of suppression and NewSpeak. Rather than broadening our language, our political system is designed to erase the scope of language, thereby erasing the scope of thought on a matter.

In the great distress of the American people, there is almost no way of expressing and bringing forth their concerns. Politics has been crafted in America to offer the people, not a voice, but a choice of leaders who will speak for them.

In political parties, that would be called a “synthetic party.” In the early 1990’s, Newt Gingrich, a scholar and politician, set about applying Lenin’s principles of party to the Republican Party. It worked for about 20 years. This year, the control structure has burst, and a flood of spontaneity has issued from the populace.  There is no hint of a Che Guevara in this revolution; no ideology.  It is only about a beauty contest for a strongman to restore order.

There is a chilling certainty that we are infiltrated and overrun by secret enemies, desperate to threaten us in our homes.  There has been a flood of violence that only supports this suggestion.  Nobody remains with the capacity to analyze the breadth and severity of this flood.  Is it real?  How can we tell?

Americans seem to be confused and unable to analyze anything without a proper Leader telling them how to think.  The Leader must be vetted within their political structure – a proud Christian Conservative, a brave liberal reformer. Very few, Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul in particular, seem to point to any rational challenge to the electorate, that things can only improve if the populace thinks, on their own.

I offer a few excerpts from Henry Wallace’s essay on Fascism.  It can be found online in its entirety here.  An article in the New York Times, April 9, 1944, From Henry A. Wallace, Democracy Reborn (New York, 1944), edited by Russell Lord, p. 259. From the start he takes to analyzing fascism.

A fascist is one whose lust for money or power is combined with such an intensity of intolerance toward those of other races, parties, classes, religions, cultures, regions or nations as to make him ruthless in his use of deceit or violence to attain his ends. The supreme god of a fascist, to which his ends are directed, may be money or power; may be a race or a class; may be a military, clique or an economic group; or may be a culture, religion, or a political party.

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful.

American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information, and those who stand for the K.K.K. type of demagoguery.

The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power.

The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. …. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.


p style=”text-align:justify;”>Wallace would be called a “liberal Democrat” from his time. There is nothing particularly dependent on an approach from the Left in what he says.  The power of his words allow for analysis in greater depth than if one had not studied them; therefore, he broadens the scope of American debate.

And he makes for a profound chill to run through one’s veins.

PS:  Of note above, Wallace uses “cartelism” to refer to what I call “corporatism” or interlinking bureaucracy.  It’s the machines of society – things that are not human, but attempt to control humans.