Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Progressivism is liberalsim is fascism

Johah Goldberg has written an excellent and intelectually deep book called "Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning."

It's quite interesting, because it brings up a concept about liberalism that I had heard of before, but was not aware that it was a form of fascism. Perhaps it's because liberals control the media and write the history books, and have decided to keep this bit of information a little untold secret.

So, if that is the case, then the cat is out of the bag. For, while we have heard that the big difference between conservatism and liberalism is that conservatives believe the world is flawed, that life is unfair, and that "the only real utopia, waits for us in the next life."

Liberals (who also might call themselves progressives), on the other hand, believe that "with a little tinkering" perfection is obtainable, that through the use of government regulations and government programs that a real utopia not only in the the U.S. but in the world is obtainable.

And that is why they place so much faith in creating government programs, adding regulations, and raising taxes to pay for these, and don't worry so much about replications of these on the economy because, in the long run, the goal is a utopia where there are no poor and that all people are paid a fair wage for their efforts in life.

According to Goldberg there are varying definitions of fascism depending on who is doing the writing, but he defines it as such: it is "a religion of the state. It assumes the organic unity of the body politic and longs for a national leader attuned to the will of the people. It is totalitarian in that it views everything as political and holds that any action by the state is justified to achieve the common good. It takes responsibility for all aspects of life, including our health and well-being, and seeks to impose uniformity of thought and action, whether by force or through regulation and social pressure. Everything, including the economy and religion, must be aligned with its objectives. Any rival identity is part of the "problem" and therefore defined as the enemy."

He writes that modern fascism (liberalsim) is different from the fascism of Musolini and Hitler in that American fascism is "smiley faced fascism." He calls it nice fascism. Hence, the smiley picture on the front of his book.

Liberals love fascist ideals, but do not accept the extent that Hitler and Mulolini went to obtain this perfect society. Liberals will not kill off the jews, however they still make efforts to extinguish religion from society by supporting a more sectarian government, one of the "separation of church and state" mould as opposed to one of the "In God We Trust mould." They believe that religion accomplishes nothing more than to hold society back, to be a restraint in the way of creating utopia.

To obtain these goals, liberals seek to use the word "war" not in the sense that Hitler or Musolini did, but more as in a means of obtaining the "will of the people." Here are some examples as Goldberg provided: The war on poverty, the war on cancer, the war on drugs.

And while realists and conservatives will continue to contend that these wars are not winnable, or that there is proof that the war on poverty, for example, has not resulted in a decrease in the number of people on poverty but has actually had the reverse happen as the number of people in poverty has actually increased, liberals (fascists) believe this is no reason to stop the war, because it is the "will of the people" to win these wars. It is to the benefit of society, and the way to a perfect union.

It does not matter that others contend that since the "War on Peverty" per se is not working so lets try some other approach. That is not a good enough reason to stop a war, when the ultimate goal is a world that is better for every party involved -- eutopia.

It does not matter that the U.S. Constitution creates certain "inailenable rights" for the people, that what is more important is that we create a government and a society that is in tune with a world utopia, what is right for all the people of the world, as opposed to what is right for one nation as the United States. And it is for this reason that liberals love the United Nations and support the World Court, both of which, if given full power, would trump the will of the people of the United States by trumping the Constitution of the United States.

And it is for this reason that liberals tend to support judicial activism from the bench, and believe that judges should look beyond the Constitution and form opinions and make decisions (and thus laws) based on what judges outside the U.S. have ruled in similar cases. They support this type of activism, while conservatives, traditionalists, libertarians, isolationsists and the like believe decisions in the U.S. should be soley based on the U.S. Constitution to protect "the will of the people." And it is for this reason that the U.S. has consistently opposed the world court.

Liberals in the U.S. cannot link themselves with the Nazis because that form of fasism, and fascism that occured in the communist U.S.S.R., have since been discredited.

However, before WWII, "fascism was widely viewed as a progressive social movement with many liberal and left-wing adherents in Europe and the United States; the horror of the Holocaust completely changed our view of fascism as something uniquely evil and ineluctably bound up with extreme nationalism, paranoia, and genocidal racism.

After the war, the American progressives who had praised Mussolini and even looked sympathetically at Hitler in the 1920s adn 1930s had to distance themselves from the horrors of Nazism."

"Americans," he writes, "like to think of themselves as imune to fascism by constantly being threatened by it.... but fascism definitely has a history in this country; and that is what this book is about." Fascism in the united states is "'smiley-faced fascism.' Nice fascism. The best term to describe it is 'liberal fascism.' And this liberal fascism was, and remains, fundamentally left wing.

It is left wing despite the claims of the left that the right wing is fascist, as you will hear on occasion that republicans, like George Bush, are Nazi's. Which is part of the plan by liberals to distance themselves from the fascist movement post Holocaust.

To be continued (click here for part 2)

1 comment:

Nikki said...

extremely interesting post. It appears to me as though progressives are not so progressive. To me it does look towards a secular ridden rule of law. In college I had a class on the constitition for pre-law. The first thing the professor told us was that all laws in constitution were based on natural law or Gods 10 commandments. Now as time passes, the laws in the US are based more on secular law and are man based. This gave me the heebies. Perhaps a reliance on ourselves and our technological advances have deemed us self reliant. very sad. enjoyed the read. :)N