Fermer X Les cookies sont necessaires au bon fonctionnement de 24hGold.com. En poursuivant votre navigation sur notre site, vous acceptez leur utilisation.
Pour en savoir plus sur les cookies...
AnglaisFrancais
Cours Or & Argent en

The Dawn of Late Fascism

IMG Auteur
Publié le 20 octobre 2011
1145 mots - Temps de lecture : 2 - 4 minutes
( 7 votes, 3,7/5 ) , 3 commentaires
Imprimer l'article
  Article Commentaires Commenter Notation Tous les Articles  
0
envoyer
3
commenter
Notre Newsletter...
Rubrique : Editoriaux

 

 

 

The downgrading of US debt this summer didn’t have huge economic consequences, but the psychological ones were truly devastating for the national elites who have run this country for nearly a century. For a State that regards itself as infallible, it was a huge blow that market forces delivered against the government, and it is only one of thousands that have cut against the power elite in recent years.


Another recent example was the vanishing of the much-vaunted Obama jobs bill. He pushed hard for this scheme for a month. He made an FDR-like national speech that attempted to whip up a public frenzy. He promised that if the legislature passed his law, supply and demand for workers would magically come together. We only need to agree to spend a few hundred billion more!

Well, the bully pulpit has become the bull-something pulpit. It seems that hardly anyone even took the speech seriously as a political point. It was reviewed and treated as the theater that it was, but the universal reaction to the specifics was a thumbs down, even from his own party.


No, Obama is not FDR. This is not the New Deal. The public will not be browbeaten as it once was. The polls show a vast lack of even a modicum of confidence in political leadership, the failures of which are all around us.


The longer the depression persists, the more the rebellious spirit grows, and it is not limited to the Wall Street protests. Poverty is growing, incomes are falling, business is being squeezed at every turn, and unemployment is stuck at intolerably high levels. People are angry as never before, and neither political party comes close to offering answers.


The State as we’ve known it – and that includes its political parties and its redistributionary, military, regulatory, and money-creating bureaucracies – just can’t get it together. It’s as true now as it has been for some twenty years: the Nation State is in precipitous decline. Once imbued with grandeur and majesty, personified by its Superman powers to accomplish amazing global feats, it is now a wreck and out of ideas.


It doesn’t seem that way because the State is more in-your-face than it has been in all of American history. We see the State at the airport with the incompetent bullying ways of the TSA. We see it in the ridiculous dinosaur of the post office, forever begging for more money so it can continue to do things the way it did them in 1950. We see it in the federalized cops in our towns, once seen as public servants but now revealed as what they have always been: armed tax collectors, censors, spies, thugs.

These are themselves marks of decline. The mask of the State is off. And it has been off for such a long time that we can hardly remember what it looked like when it was on.

So let’s take a quick tour. If you live in a big metropolitan city, drive to the downtown post office (if it is still standing). There you will find a remarkable piece of architecture, tall and majestic and filled with grandeur. There is a liberal use of Roman-style columns. The ceilings indoors are extremely high and thrilling. It might even be the biggest and most impressive building around.


This is a building of an institution that believed in itself. After all, this was the institution that carried the mail, which was the only way that people had to communicate with each other when most of these places were first erected. The state took great pride in offering this service, which it held up as being superior to anything the market could ever provide (even if market provisions like the Pony Express had to be outlawed). Postmen were legendary (or so we were told) for their willingness to brave the elements to bring us the essential thing we needed in life apart from food, clothing, and shelter.


And today? Look at the thing that we call the post office. It is a complete wreck, a national joke, a hanger-on from a day long gone. They deliver physical spam to our mail boxes, and a few worthwhile things every once in a while, but the only time they are in the news is when we hear another report of their bankruptcy and need for a bailout.

It’s the same with all the grand monuments of yesteryear’s statism. Think of the Hoover Dam, Mount Rushmore, the endless infrastructure projects of the New Deal, the Eisenhower interstate highway system, the moon shot, the sprawling monuments to itself that the State has erected from sea to shining sea. As I’ve explained elsewhere, these all came about in an age when the only real alternative to socialism was considered to be fascism. This was an age when freedom – as in the old-fashioned sense – was just out of the question.


The State in all times and all places operates by force – and force alone. But the style of rule changes. The fascist style emphasized inspiration, magnificence, industrial progress, grandeur, all headed by a valiant leader making smart decisions about all things. This style of American rule lasted from the New Deal through the end of the Cold War.


But this whole system of inspiration has nearly died out. In the communist tradition of naming the stages of history, we can call this late fascism. The fascist system in the end cannot work because, despite the claims, the State does not have the means to achieve what it promises. It does not possess the capability to outrun private markets in technology, of serving the population in the way markets can, of making things more plentiful or cheaper, or even of providing basic services in a manner that is economically efficient.


Fascism, like socialism, cannot achieve its aims. So there is a way in which it makes sense to speak of a stage of history: We are in the stage of late fascism. The grandeur is gone, and all we are left with is a gun pointed at our heads. The system was created to be great, but it is reduced in our time to being crude. Valor is now violence. Majesty is now malice.


Consider whether there is any national political leader in power today the death of whom would call forth anywhere near the same level of mourning as the death of Steve Jobs. People know in their hearts who serves them, and it is not the guy with jack boots, tasers on his belt, and a federal badge. The time when we looked to this man as a public servant is long gone. And this reality only speeds the inevitable death of the State as the 20th century re-invented it.


Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr

LewRockwell.com


Article originally published at www.lewrockwell.com here  

 

 
































 































































<< Article précedent
Evaluer : Note moyenne :3,7 (7 votes)
>> Article suivant
Publication de commentaires terminée
  Tous Favoris Mieux Notés  
History didn't start in 1930. Free markets reigned in the US before fascism and socialism, both of which were popular with the masses. Some would suggest there is a connection between the rule of free markets and the rise of fascism and socialism. And, when looking to the future, should we think about imperialism, nationalism and globalism as well?
Mr. Rockwell is displeased with the State. It has not done well. He mentions the current economy and the that perennial target the Post Office, and throws in the TSA to boot. Here are two qutoes from the article:

"The State as we’ve known it – and that includes its political parties and its redistributionary, military, regulatory, and money-creating bureaucracies – just can’t get it together."

"The mask of the State is off."

He equates State abuse with those historical usurpers of power: Socialism and Fascism. Those two must go he says. True, they must go. But what does he propose as an alternative? Nothing -- in this article.

I may be in error, but I believe it is Anarchism: the absence of any objective ruling authority whatsoever, the dissolution of the United States into State entities, and the further dissolution of those entities into even smaller and smaller entities until all you have left is yourself, and, if lucky, your dog (should it even decide to stay with you). Man vs man and the rule of force (the larger cartel) deciding who's 'right'.

And I believe his candidate for President is Ron Paul -- a useful tool for that purpose. Paul has already said the Federal Government has no right whatsoever in interfering in anything a state does -- be it mandatory health care or even (unsaid yet valid to him in principle) the re-institution of slavery. He would not approve of it of course, but would not use force to stop it -- or even stop a state from leaving the Union. He is a true lover of liberty and would love the United States to death with it.

So I, too, criticize the Post Officer and the TSA and other abuses of governement power. And I condemn Socialism and Fascism as well, and that opposite but equally destructive political philosophy -- Anarchism.

I propose, instead, a return to the orginial intent of the Constitution: limited government.

Evaluer :   6  -4Note :   10
EmailPermalink
Oblivious to economics itself (this is not Rockwell's idiom), current group under consideration does in fact secondhand the fullbird Marx like some chub and 'bruise-free-wistfulness' to a fading 'we-did-our-best.' In support, did you know, Jim C., that POTUS spoke at UofMichigan commencement where from the largest spending, debt and deficit government the world has ever known, he told the graduates that, 'America has always done well with limited government.' How and why, no one asked? Was that then an old lecture from UofChicago, POTUS? Is POTUS that daft to not see the disconnect and the unsuitableness of the very words that spew from his oral apeture. Yet no one called him on it. If only a single graduate or better a group and shot up and shouted out, 'Shut your mouth, you disingenuous baffoon'!!! They didn't (and this group has got to do better or it will drown in a Flip Wilson I-took-his-other-dollar reality. And then POTUS droned on and on, about reading Jefferson to his puppy and the need for the next government to be resilient and flexible (again and utter impossible given that he has led the current one to where it has arrived). He went on unchecked, unmitigated, uncensured, and serving up colossal spending even as he wistfuls good otherwise government. Axiom: regards the Office of the President of the United States, it matters not whether a president has ill intent or is colossally incompetent, both identify him as bad. The identifier can be set aside here as the identified so arrives in great clarity(William James). Given this situation, Jim C, then like you did, I'd grip the horns, but with different expected outcome or focus. Thesis: Marxist. Antithesis: Anarchist. Synthesis: Reaver'ism (or Capitalism parading as Socialism under the faux expectation and 'you're in' auspices of candy arse Marxism). Call Reavers the pillager academics who talked a little Marx to get POTUS elected. They are utterly divorced from the full bird Marxist project, and can thus only second hand the man's thought. Question for Marx: if the man doesn't correct the boy in front of his mother, does that mean Marx can topple the US without the death of 40,000,000 people? Intrude to crass so but recall also that the Russians shook their heads in admonition when the US first went into Afghanistan. To no avail and there's no need to talk politics with strangers. Nonetheless, that Marx post capitalism somehow arrives like a Marischino cherry after another Sunday without intense destructive struggle seems to be the fashionably implied open question, inuendo, and saving grace of what otherwise reeks of blatant, old fashioned, class warfare, made the more obscene because the top group doesn't even call the US home. You want limited government, JIm C? Me too and in trifecta. Launch it then cutting spending vastly, finding a way to address freakish class inequity, and then reorienting to a much sparser economic field. Even that is just to get in fighting shape. To actually just haul off and deck some clown who really deserves it, recall this country is the only nation on earth to fly a flag on the moon. It was a nation of engineers and lawyers, before politicians sided with the lawyers in a unilateral display of puss mouth. Why not call down God himself in support of a JFK Man to the Moon initiative regards America's future energy supply? Field change, sir - the economic field in which America does battle must change and America must declare intent here and then execute with extreme prejudice as if the existence of the United States itself depended on the success. "The Eagle has landed." That's what this nation needs to here about whatever form its new energy takes shape in. Then let the lawyers come in and make it all legal like and profitable. It's never too late to be this kind of fascism. This country historically (the history of its production POTUS not its talk show) has taken that energy and puts it to work. Where does it stop? Question amounts to mud under a large truck's tire. Somebody drop it in gear.
Dernier commentaire publié pour cet article
History didn't start in 1930. Free markets reigned in the US before fascism and socialism, both of which were popular with the masses. Some would suggest there is a connection between the rule of free markets and the rise of fascism and socialism. And, w  Lire la suite
fuddled - 22/10/2011 à 00:55 GMT
Top articles
Flux d'Actualités
TOUS
OR
ARGENT
PGM & DIAMANTS
PÉTROLE & GAZ
AUTRES MÉTAUX