Fascist America in 10 Easy Steps

[David W Jackson]

Today's Guardian has an interesting article on America's supposed slide into fascism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html

With similar erosions of hard-won liberties taking place in the UK, as a Brit I'd like to hear from any American nationals. What's your take?

[wushijiao]

I would say the US is far away from being a fascist country. Those ten steps have a lot of merit. Certainly the Bush administration has been unbelievably atrocious as far as competence, maintaining civil liberties, promoting a more peaceful world…etc. But the key thing to remember is that Bush is essentially a lame duck president at this point. Granted, as the president of the United States, with the powers that that entails (ie. controlling cabinet appointments, being the Commander in Chief…etc.), Bush will still have a tremendous amount of power, constitutionally. But even most Republicans are distancing themselves from him. For example, look at the recent Senate questioning of Alberto Gonzales. The Republicans were dismayed with his lack of competence and his frequent “mis-speaking”…etc. Congress, as an institution, is fighting back. The Dems are fighting back. Bush is incredibly weak at home, and getting weaker by the day. Bush controls the press? That would be news to him. Bush controls American academia? Laughable.

Because Americans like me were born in freedom, we have a hard time even considering that it is possible for us to become as unfree - domestically - as many other nations. Because we no longer learn much about our rights or our system of government - the task of being aware of the constitution has been outsourced from citizens' ownership to being the domain of professionals such as lawyers and professors - we scarcely recognise the checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are being systematically dismantled. Because we don't learn much about European history, the setting up of a department of "homeland" security - remember who else was keen on the word "homeland" - didn't raise the alarm bells it might have.

To some degree, I just disagree with this whole premise. It is my experience (traveling to more 25 countries and living abroad for more than 7 years) that Americans are, an average, as informed or more informed about the current status of their government and how it works compared to most places that I’ve been.

Point 11: a fascist dictator needs to have full support of the military. Bush had done a great job politicizing the military in the past. But by all accounts, he is losing their trust and faith. The Army and Marines are in a fragile shape due to historical miscalculations regarding the Iraq war. Also, the Democrats have fielded a new crop of politicians who are savvy in military affairs, and thus are not nearly as likely to cede over power to the GOP on security issues.

I by no means am condoning the Bush administration and its policies. Clearly, America faces some serious, troubling problems. Yet to say that the US is close to fascism just seems way overblown.

If this article would have been written in the summer of 2002 it would have had some merit.

Also, looking down into the future, whether it the 2008 president elect turns out to be Edwards, Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, or the moderate Republicans like McCain or Giuliani, there is no way most of the Bush administration’s most extreme policies will be pursued.

[bhchao]

Giuliani has the most potential in making America "fascist". I respect Giuliani, but his record in New York City on law enforcement abuses against minority immigrants is not very pretty. The Amallo Diablo case and the restroom incident where a cop abused a suspect in custody, and his support of the police officers who did it, shows the darker side of Giuliani.

Who knew Bush would become the president he is known as today? He was very good in giving the impression as a "compassionate conservative" when he ran in 2000. Turns out he was a completely different person once he entered office.

The same might be said of Giuliani. He's a social moderate who supports gun control, gay rights, and women's right to pro-choice. But he lacks the political subtleties to conform to how a president should act in office, like observing protocol and the diplomacy of interacting with world leaders. For example, Giuliani snubbed Jiang Zemin when the Chinese leader visited New York City in protest of Jiang's "policies" at home. Giuliani also threw out Yassir Arafat from an opera performance in NYC. His action infuriated the Clinton Administration who was playing host to Arafat.

Giuliani tends to see the world in good and bad. While that kind of approach fits the law enforcement role very well (He cleaned up NYC and presided over the biggest crime drop in history), it doesn't fit the role of a president very well.

Still, I'll rather take a Giuliani over a Bush. It's hard to imagine Rudy botching a crisis like Katrina. He shines in moments of crisis, and is at his decisive best in such environments. But will he win the Republican nomination? Very unlikely

2008 is going to be an exciting election with interesting candidates, unlike 2000. Hillary, Obama, Edwards, and McCain are credible candidates in issues like environmental protection.

[wushijiao]

But will he win the Republican nomination? Very unlikely

I agree. I doubt he can make it through the whole Republican nominating process without his liberal/personal problems showing through.

At least he can make the trains run on time, so to speak.