Behind the Arab Revolt Is a Word We Dare Not Speak

[Truth2Tell]

http://www.truth-out.org/behind-arab-revolt-a-word-we-dare-not-speak68036

by: John Pilger, t r u t h o u t

...

Fascism is a difficult word, because it comes with an iconography that touches the Nazi nerve and is abused as propaganda against America's official enemies and to promote the West's foreign adventures with a moral vocabulary written in the struggle against Hitler. And yet, fascism and imperialism are twins. In the aftermath of World War II, those in the imperial states who had made respectable the racial and cultural superiority of "western civilization" found that Hitler and fascism had claimed the same, employing strikingly similar methods. Thereafter, the very notion of American imperialism was swept from the textbooks and popular culture of an imperial nation forged on the genocidal conquest of its native people, and a war on social justice and democracy became "US foreign policy."

As the Washington historian William Blum has documented, since 1945, the US has destroyed or subverted more than 50 governments, many of them democracies, and used mass murderers like Suharto, Mobutu and Pinochet to dominate by proxy. In the Middle East, every dictatorship and pseudo-monarchy has been sustained by America. In "Operation Cyclone," the CIA and MI6 secretly fostered and bankrolled Islamic extremism. The object was to smash or deter nationalism and democracy. The victims of this western state terrorism have been mostly Muslims. The courageous people gunned down last week in Bahrain and Libya, the latter a "priority UK market," according to Britain's official arms "procurers," join those children blown to bits in Gaza by the latest American F-16 aircraft.

The revolt in the Arab world is not merely against a resident dictator, but against a worldwide economic tyranny designed by the US Treasury and imposed by the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which have ensured that rich countries like Egypt are reduced to vast sweatshops, with half the population earning less than $2 a day. The people's triumph in Cairo was the first blow against what Benito Mussolini called corporatism, a word that appears in his definition of fascism.

How did such extremism take hold in the liberal West? "It is necessary to destroy hope, idealism, solidarity, and concern for the poor and oppressed," observed Noam Chomsky a generation ago, and "to replace these dangerous feelings with self-centered egoism, a pervasive cynicism that holds that ... the state capitalist order with its inherent inequities and oppression is the best that can be achieved. In fact, a great international propaganda campaign is underway to convince people - particularly young people - that this not only is what they should feel but that it's what they do feel..."

http://www.truth-out.org/behind-arab-revolt-a-word-we-dare-not-speak68036

[malaise]

1. MUST READ

Rec

[thotzRthingz]

67. agreed, it's a MUST READ but more importantly perhaps...

It's a MUST HEED!

Far too few "see it" (or do not want to see it), even less are willing to declare it openly and loudly... FASCISM has taken over in America (and worldwide). Peoples of other nations are FED-UP and willing to shed their blood (and lives) to end it (in their corner of the universe). I think AMERICANS will soon be up to the same task (since "voting" only elects more reps who are beholding to the corporate greed-mongers).

I, for one, am sick of it!

[Octafish]

68. Yeah. I'd notice those wars and stuff.

Like,
Occupations.
Torture.
Torture of Children.
Extrajudicial Killing.
Assassination by Drone.
Illegal spying on Americans.
Loss of Habeas Corpus.
Bailouts of Wall Street Banksters.
Welfare for the Well-Off.
Election Thievery.
Plus all the secret government stuff.

So, yeah. It's about time we start calling things what they are.

[thotzRthingz]

86. one would think, with the list you've presented, that no one could...

...ignore, not see, deny any of it...

yet, the teabaggers and faux-news crowd are the first in that corner, and choose to remain there (or so it would seem)... how very sad for them!

[Octafish]

88. Capitalism's Invisible Army

Despite the First Amendment -- Corporate McPravda is under orders, too.

Some of the "Who" and "Why" they have failed to consider.

[robcon]

2. Utter nonsense.

I guess it "sounds" sophisticated to see the Libyan people as attacking "against a worldwide economic tyranny."

But it's a made up meme. And stupid nonsense.

[mahina]

3. Couldn't disagree with you more

and will leave it at that.

[Jmaxfie1]

4. Thumbs up! n/t

[Skip_In_Boulder]

5. Stay Tuned. It will become more obvious as things unfold. n/t

[Raksha]

59. It's already patently obvious to many of us.

I'm glad the Shock Doctrine and the perverted religious and economic ideologies behind it are finally being exposed for the whole world to see. Their "final" power grab has exposed them, and now we're seeing the brick wall at the back of the theater.

[joshcryer]

8. It's actually offensive, that they wouldn't be uprising if we didn't have a recession."

No, I'm sorry, but the value of social media to allow mass protest organization was going to force this to happen regardless, under any authoritarian regime.

[dbt]

18. Yay! THIS is why I still read DU!

For the amusement value!

:bounce:

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

71. You must not have been following all these revolutions.

Pilger is dead right, as usual. This is a revolt against Global Capitalism and its puppet dictators. It started in Latin America several years ago and it's spreading around the world.

No more Capitalist supported dictators and it's way past time!

[readmoreoften]

77. Your 25 word repsonse, on the other hand, is carefully researched brilliance.

:eyes:

[Dappleganger]

90. So are we to suppose that these people scream "death to America!" for nothing?

[joshcryer]

6. Cause and effect is far more subtle than that.

It requires several volumes of text to explain what is happening here.

In the end I can only describe it thusly: an uprising spurred by the free flow of information against authoritarianism.

[Jmaxfie1]

9. I'd agree with your assessment.

I've noticed a trend that a lot of Western Leftists will place their own, wished for agenda on foreign state actors. I doubt most of the protesters where thinking about any of those things when they chose to rise up. I also agree with you, I think Facebook and Twitter have more to do with these uprisings than any leftist intellectual theories.

[joshcryer]

11. Facebook and twitter, those connect you, but... cell phones are a bigger deal.

Cell phones with built in cameras. It is creating a netwide consciousness in some senses. The narrative has to get "out" somehow and if it was just people posting text it wouldn't have as much of an impact (plus doubts could be raised; who can doubt that the Libyans have faced state sanctioned massacres with all the video posted?). Instead people post to their comrades "this is what's happening" and they go and view the video of it. This is especially important with Gaddafi because he's been shown to be cleaning up dead bodies and whatnot.

Social media is becoming the new media that isn't corporate controlled or state controlled manipulation, and that is the very usurping of authoritarianism I am talking about (there is effectively no difference between corporate controlled and state controlled media).

[Jmaxfie1]

13. yeah, didn't think about cells, Good point. n/t

[Truth2Tell]

10. against authoritarianism

from where do you think the authoritarianism springs? It doesn't stand alone. It's blossomed in the form of brutal dictators in the ME under the wing of Western/American conservative and neoliberal foreign policy. We breed dictators friendly to our interests. Deliberately. People like Mubarak are poster children for American corporate stoogery. Their victims ARE victims of global economic tyranny, almost by definition. If it quacks like fascism...

[joshcryer]

12. And Gaddafi?

Please. Just wait and see, it's going to keep spreading and those dictators and tyrants that are dear to leftists are going to feel it, and shrivel back because all along they were wrong.

[Truth2Tell]

15. Gaddafi isn't dear to any leftists I know

He's been a reliable co-operator with western capital and oil interests for a number of years now.

In fact I can't think of too many dictators dear to leftists, maybe some with Castro, but I can't think of of too many more. I can think of 30 or 40 in league with America and Wall Street.

[cali]

19. Daniel Ortega has been defending him

he's been close allies with Chavez.

[Truth2Tell]

22. That's pretty weak

I'm not sure if one un-cited anecdote regarding Daniel Ortega of all friggin' people amounts to evidence that Gadaffi is "dear to the left." Please. If that isn't one of the lamest smear attempts I've seen...

[joshcryer]

26. Un-cited? It was posted on the Nicaraguan government website!

It was made at an event honoring Augusto Cesar Sandino.

Get your facts straight.

[Truth2Tell]

27. Un-cited in this thread

post a link

Believe it or not I don't get around to checking the Nicaraguan government website quite every day.

[cali]

29. posted the link. just for you.

enjoy eating it.

[Truth2Tell]

32. never doubted it was true, just noted that you

failed to cite or link.

And that it's a stupid point, because Daniel Or fucking tega doesn't represent any sort of legitimate "left" in America, Latin America or anywhere else.

[social_critic]

58. I think you are right, Chavez, Castro and Ortega are fascists

I've reached the conclusion Chavez, Ortega and Castro are fascists. So the Latin American left is off the hook. Long live Dilma!!

[Puregonzo1188]

65. Chavez and Ortega have both been elected. They are hardly fascists.

[social_critic]

82. It's possible to be elected by misleading the public, then drop the mask

I don't think being elected means a whole lot. I think Bush was a fascist, and he was "elected" the first time, and definitely won the second time.

Chavez is definitely a fascist. He was elected by people who were deceived, but recently, as he saw his popularity ratings drop, and his party started losing elections, he took off his mask and has been acting as a full blown fascist autocrat.

Ortega is a communist at heart, but he is financed by Chavez, and gets his marching orders from Cuba. And Cuba is also morphing towards fascism. Raul Castro realizes the communist model has failed, and is moving them towards a form of ruthless capitalism, ruled by a fascist kleptocracy known as "the communist party".

[Truth2Tell]

66. Castro and Chavez are so entirely different

that your lumping of them together speaks to your agenda.

And all of those three are really irrelevant to the the discussion here of the Arab Street rising up against the manifestations of Western Imperialism. The fact that a few rather marginal authoritarian leftists happen to exist in this world doesn't counter the much larger fact that Western/Corporate/Fascist hegemony in the ME is potentially at risk from an ongoing people's revolution.

[joshcryer]

33. Some of us are actually following the uprisings and have an idea of what is going on.

Unlike names I've barely seen and propaganda I've read posted by them.

[cali]

28. no weaker than your claims. both are true.

Kadafi has been very good at playing to both sides. And smear Ortega? He's a fucking pig. Oh, and for someone not using any citations themselves, you sure have nerve- if not much else. Here are your fucking citations:

You would think two world leaders who owe their very political existence to popular uprisings would be on the side of the crowds in places like tumultuous Libya.

You would be wrong.

Leaping to the support of Libya's embattled ruler Moammar Kadafi are Latin America’s most renowned onetime revolutionary leaders: Fidel Castro of Cuba and President Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua.

Ortega said this week that he had spoken to Kadafi by telephone to give words of encouragement and sympathy. “I told that in difficult moments, loyalty is put to the test,” Ortega said. He said Kadafi was trying to “defend the unity of his nation.”

<snip>

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef014e5f6bf81e970c-pi

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/gaddafi-chavez-strengthen_n_301628.html

[Truth2Tell]

30. I didn't mean smearing Ortega

I meant smearing leftists by trying to suggest that somehow Daniel Ortega represents "the left."

[joshcryer]

38. He seems to be having a reading comprehension problem, my statement was broad.

And he just proved it.

[Truth2Tell]

40. your statement was

those dictators and tyrants that are dear to leftists are going to feel it

and my point is that dictators in general aren't particularly dear to leftists at all, they are primarily the providence and creation of the corporatist capitalist right, and America in particular.

And I still fail to see how because some irrelevant washed-up Central American crackpot happens to praise Col. Gadaffi that makes him "dear to leftists." Really please.

[joshcryer]

41. You still don't know what I am saying.

Par for the course.

[joshcryer]

23. Denial.

[social_critic]

14. I don't think the Kim dinasty in North Korea or the Castro dinasty in Cuba are US backed

There are all sorts of tyrants. Some of them are religious, some are leftists, some are fascists, some are mafiosi, you name it, it's all over.

[Truth2Tell]

16. And despite the best efforts of the leaflet droppers

I'm not seeing this movement take hold in either of those places. Be great if it did, but I think it's too disconnected.

[joshcryer]

24. I do see it taking over, 5 years tops.

You can bookmark this and wait and see.

[social_critic]

31. I don't think anybody is dropping leaflets

That was over 20 years ago, I believe. The Cuban people will revolt when the time comes. I think Fidel Castro will have to die first. Their repressive machinery is quite efficient. And those of us who are troublemakers left. I couldn't stand the lack of freedom in Cuba.

[Truth2Tell]

35. ...

http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/748831/cs/1/ht/South-Korea-drops-leaflets-in-North-telling-people-of-Egyptian-uprising/

South Korea drops leaflets in North telling people of Egyptian uprising
Malaysia Sun
Saturday 26th February, 2011


South Korea’s air force has been dropping leaflets in North Korean cities informing the local people of mass uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, a member of parliament told Reuters Friday.

The South has been dropping news releases to inform the people of North Korea of unprecedented events in North Africa and the Middle East as part of a psychological effort aimed at mobilising the people to call for change...

[joshcryer]

36. 15 years ago. And two days, actually.

I do not think that they will revolt in a similar manner but I think that the Valera Project will be undertaken.

[social_critic]

60. Or maybe Castro's guts will tear up

I was hoping Castro would survive to see the end of his regime, so he could be put on trial. But maybe it's better for the old man to just die so life can go on.

[social_critic]

7. Baloney

Nations get what their elites want. Indonesia, and India have democratic governments, are integrated into the world economy, and have vast numbers of poor people, although they're gradually moving away from poverty as their economies develop.

It is true the US backs dictatorships when it's convenient, but when people REALLY want to get rid of those, they can do it in short order. The Mubarak regime had US support because Egypt signed the Camp David agreement, and the Egyptian military as well as the ruling class knew their gravy would flow as long as they kept peace with Israel, even if Israel was violating human rights in the Palestinian territories. When the US backed Mobutu in Congo, it did so to create problems for the Soviets, whose client in Angola was fighting a civil war (Mobutu allowed weapons to flow to the rebels via what was known as Zaire at the time). When the US supported Saddam Hussein, it did so because Hussein was fighting the Iranians, and the US elites wanted to make sure both Iraq and Iran were kept as weak as possible. When the US backed Iran (remember Iran Contra) it was because Iran was getting beat by Hussein.

And so on and on and on. But none of those countries had zero options. They COULD and HAVE overthrown their regimes when the people had enough. So what's going on now is just people trying to get rid of dictators. I hear the North Koreans are getting restless. Hopefully the Cubans will be next, and will get rid of Castro.

I think Americans should understand the limits of American power. As a general rule, both on the left and on the right, you are so arrogant you tend to think your power is limitless. This is the reason why you like to meddle so much, are so quick to support the use of violence against others, and are willing to look the other way when your allies become thuggish human rights violators.

And this applies to both the left and the right. The right is open about it, they even support torture, and have no qualms about expressing their racism, and xenophobia openly. But the left also has its problems, it's more low key, doesn't get exposed as much on the radio or TV. But it's there. Otherwise why do we see here in DU and other progressive sites so much baloney defending Castro, Chavez, and other autocrats who violate human rights?

[Kip Humphrey]

20. "Otherwise why do we see here in DU and other progressive sites so much baloney defending Castro, Ch

Otherwise why do we see here in DU and other progressive sites so much baloney defending Castro, Chavez, and other autocrats who violate human rights?"

Actually, I don't see this here or on so-called "other" progressive sites. At least, not such that I could characterize DU or those "other" sites in such terms. But then, I only frequent DU every day so perhaps I'm missing this. And those "other" sites, I confess I don't frequent them as often.

[social_critic]

34. Go to Places, Latin America in DU

There's a relentless series of posts to back Chavez, Castro, and other autocratic figures. There's also subtle support for the FARC, and so on.

[akbacchus_BC]

43. Are you saying that the great USA does not violate human rights?

[Truth2Tell]

21. How is Chavez an autocrat?

But never mind that baloney, lets stick to the point....

So I'm trying to get this business about "They COULD and HAVE overthrown their regimes when the people had enough..." Are you somehow saying that justifies American meddling on behalf of corporatist authoritarianism? Are you suggesting that giving Billions to Egypt or Pakistan is fine and dandy even if they commit atrocities with it and entrench the rule of tyrants, because if only people "had enough" they COULD overthrow those regimes? I'm not getting what exactly you're trying to justify? We created those regimes. We didn't create Castro or N Korea as our vassals like we have so many dozens of other tyrannical regimes still steaming full speed ahead as we type.

[social_critic]

39. How is Chavez an autocrat?

The answer to the second question is No, I'm not saying that at all. My opinions about US foreign policy are fairly radical - I don't even like to discuss it here in DU so I don't upset people too much.

What I'm saying is that dictatorship isn't a creature created by US intervention. It's a creature created by the people in the countries where dictatorship arises - you guys have a tendency to over-rate US power, which is the reason why I mention American arrogance sometimes. Dictatorships WERE created in the past. For example, the Jordanian Monarchy was created by the British. Today, the Jordanian Monarchy, a dictatorship, is supported by the US because it has a deal with Israel, it keeps its mouth shut when Israel abuses Palestinian rights, and its territory can be used by US imperial troopers to threaten nations in the region.

The tyrannical regimes the US helps (and note I'm using the present tense under the Obama administration) are in general NOT US creation. The US may cooperate with them, or nurture them, but the are not US created. And there are lots and lots of autocracies, oligarchies and other non-democratic regimes which are clearly opposed to the US, ranging from Russia's emerging fascist state to the Iranian Ayatollahs, to Castro's pseudo communism, and the Myanmar junta's military oligarchy.

How is Chavez an autocrat? He has been gradually concentrating power in his hands, reducing the Supreme Court to an appendix of his rule, and gutting the current National Assembly (which took office in January 2011), by having the previous, outgoing National Assembly pass an unconstitutional law giving Chavez the power to legislate on his own, without the NAtional Assembly having any say in the new laws passed by Chavez.

Chavez has also seen fit to ignore election results, such as the Caracas Metropolitan mayor race, won by the Opposition Leader Mr Ledezma in 2008, and has ordered, on National TV, the persecution of political rivals and judges who ruled in ways he didn't like (see the Lourdes Afiuni case, for example).

Other actions one can consider to be autocratic and anti democratic are the recent laws to muzzle the media, and control internet service providers, as well as open statements, made on national TV, threatening to confiscate and take over the private property of anybody who dares stand up to him.

I think his conduct since 2008, when he began to lose elections, and the popular vote swung against him and his party, has been clearly autocratic. Right now the Chavez forces do not have majority support, they know it, so they are using a mix of threats, bluster, and cash to buy support. But inflation around here is a real bitch, the crime rate is a killer, corruption is rampant, and the economy isn't recovering fast enough. So he's well on his way to becoming a full fledged dictator.

[Truth2Tell]

42. "you guys" over-rate US power

you mean us anti-militarist leftists as well I'm assuming.

so let me ask you... would Mubarak have stayed in power for 40 years without his US Billions? Or would he more likely have been gone 10-20 years ago with no help from us? If the answer is he couldn't have survived without our help, then we own him and everything he's done. Could the Saudis survive w/out us? Could the Columbian regime? Could so many? I'm not sure I over-rate US power, I think that's real impact.

I'll let others engage you on the specifics of Chavez. I don't have the energy for it.

[social_critic]

52. You guys mean Americans in general

I'm American, but I live abroad, and try not to stay in the US too long, I find the ambient too materialistic, the religion too religious, and I prefer to have a more cosmopolitan outlook.

Would Mubarak have stayed in power without the US cash? I don't know. Castro has stayed in power for 50 years with the US bouncing bricks off his head from 90 miles away. So the answer is who knows? Maybe they would have replaced Mubarak with a guy like Kaddafi.

I don't think you can engage me on the specifics of Chavez. I live in Venezuela, and I debate about both Cuba and Venezuela everyday. Later, when you are energized, go to DU, Places, Latin America. :fistbump:

[PCIntern]

37. what a load...

you managed to 'sneak in' that little phrase about Israel 'violating human rights' as though it were the most pressing issue between the two countries and we are paying to overlook it...you overlook the technology research, the agricultural research, the medical research, the intelligence exchange, and every other aspect of our relations with Israel, all of which have enhanced the entire civilization of the world. the advances made in Israel have actually made it possible for these other countries to enter this era of supposed Democracy - although I for one am not buying all this ethereal crap which the media and our own government is puttiong out there about their potential political processes. BTW, if you don't like 'occupiers', then you had best better get back to where you came from, presuming you're not a Native American, and leave the land you've taken to the 'rightful' folk who possessed it just a few hundred years ago.

[sufrommich]

47. All good points, I'm sure you'll get slammed for them,but true

nonetheless.

[social_critic]

83. I think most of my comments are ignored when they hit hard

I'm used to it. When I get out of Venezuela, maybe I'll start a blog to discuss these topics.

[DeadEyeDyck]

50. OP material

[cali]

17. simplistic

the skein of reasons behind the revolutions n the Arab world is far more complex than this. And I think Pilger knows this, but chooses to advance his political agenda over delving into the comlexities.

[joshcryer]

25. +1 I said the same thing but tried to simplify it

My simplification is probably too far, but I think it's as close as you can get in one blurb.

[blindpig]

45. Can't he just call it Capitalism?

He says it in so many words, is he afraid of being called a commie?

[Truth2Tell]

55. He's been called a commie plenty and

doesn't seem to care. Capitalist may or may not be synonymous with Fascist and Imperialist. But it tends not to be as effective a message, thanks to wild disparities in various peoples' definitions, IMO.

[blindpig]

96. The problem with that...

is that allows wiggle room, implies that these are aberrations that might be corrected and that capitalism might be done 'right'. Imperialism is an inevitable outcome of capitalism, fascism is way of doing capitalism.

[xchrom]

46. strong recommend!!! -- nt.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

48. The author is off his meds (again!)

[readmoreoften]

78. Ad Hominem against Pilger. Classy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

95. It is typical of his screeds...

[Overseas]

49. K&R. Excellent article.

It has been painful to witness the success of the propaganda campaign Chomsky describes.

[BOG PERSON]

51. this is kind of embarrassing to read, it's so bad

[FLPanhandle]

53. Usual..."it's all the U.S. governments fault" article.

B.S.

[Truth2Tell]

54. Right,

how dare anyone besmirch our benevolent Empire!

[cali]

57. When you posit that the U.S. is behind every evil committed in the world

you're simply buying into American Exceptionalism. It's the looking glass version of America can do no wrong. It's just not as simple as that.

[Truth2Tell]

63. lucklily only your strawman has posited any such thing

I can simply recognize the occasions when the US IS in fact behind the evil. This is in contrast to most Americans and many DUers who seem to be thoroughly conditioned to be hotly bothered by that.

[cali]

70. hahahahaha. try the op, my friend

I realize you have a simplistic black/white world view. you make that quite clear, but suggesting that U.S. monetary policy is the impetus behind the Libyan man/woman in the street is a good example of what I'm talking about.

Oh, and do learn what a straw man is.

[Truth2Tell]

72. U.S. monetary policy

and in a larger sense, corporate driven U.S. Imperialism, has been the underlying impetus for the breeding and maintainance of a gaggle of Western friendly dictators in the ME and elsewhere. The man/woman in the Cairo street may not put it those terms, but what they are rising up against is what Western fascism has built and subjected them to. And their uprising potentially threatens that Imperial system.

[RedCloud]

56. people rejoiced like crazy when the Shah was overthrown. How did that turn out?

Let's wait and see what comes up next. Sometimes it could be worse.

[social_critic]

61. That's the price of freedom

I bet the Israeli right wing and their neocon allies in Washington are scratching their heads.

[Truth2Tell]

64. I bet they're doing more than scratching their heads.

They're more likely scrambling like crazy to try and affect the outcomes of these events in ways that mitigate the impact to the current paradigm. And this applies not just to the Israeli right and the nocons, rest assured Obama and all the neolibs are sweating and scrambling on the same page.

[creon]

62. Reductio ad hitlerum

I think that it is quite facile to put out the epiphet 'fascist'. I am no more imoressed with someone calling an opponent a 'fascist' than I am with another person calling an opponent a 'communist'. This is a polemic. Which is fine, I have no problem with people writing a polemic. But, we ought to recognize that is what is: a polemic.

I think that it is more descritive to call it 'crony caplitalism'. The level of corruption an favoritism better describes the system as 'crony capitalism' .

Eventually, the question "What is to be done?" will be asked. Whatever the name we put to it.

[Truth2Tell]

69. crony caplitalism

doesn't capture the authoritarian element, the pervasiveness of state security, the control of media, all the additional elements that point to the present systems as fascist.

"crony capitalism" smacks of just a little financial graft - it downplays the scope of the problem in a way that makes people far less likely to feel the need to even ask "what is to be done?"

[creon]

76. well

There is a lot more to crony capitalism than a 'little financial graft'. It is a sysytem based upon corruption at all levels: nepotism; bribery; cooked bidding; lucrative employment after leaving elective office; selective law enforcement at all levels; rigged elctions.
All of those things are important features of crony capitalism. And the USA has all of thoe features.

As far as I am concerned, to call the USA fascist is an insult to the victims of the fascist regimes of Germany, Spain, Italy, Romania. It trivializes their deaths.

[Turborama]

85. He's writing about American geopolitics, not domestic. In case you didn't read the whole article...

Fascism is a difficult word, because it comes with an iconography that touches the Nazi nerve and is abused as propaganda against America's official enemies and to promote the West's foreign adventures with a moral vocabulary written in the struggle against Hitler. And yet, fascism and imperialism are twins. In the aftermath of World War II, those in the imperial states who had made respectable the racial and cultural superiority of "western civilization" found that Hitler and fascism had claimed the same, employing strikingly similar methods. Thereafter, the very notion of American imperialism was swept from the textbooks and popular culture of an imperial nation forged on the genocidal conquest of its native people, and a war on social justice and democracy became "US foreign policy."

As the Washington historian William Blum has documented, since 1945, the US has destroyed or subverted more than 50 governments, many of them democracies, and used mass murderers like Suharto, Mobutu and Pinochet to dominate by proxy. In the Middle East, every dictatorship and pseudo-monarchy has been sustained by America. In "Operation Cyclone," the CIA and MI6 secretly fostered and bankrolled Islamic extremism. The object was to smash or deter nationalism and democracy. The victims of this western state terrorism have been mostly Muslims. The courageous people gunned down last week in Bahrain and Libya, the latter a "priority UK market," according to Britain's official arms "procurers," join those children blown to bits in Gaza by the latest American F-16 aircraft.

[creon]

92. I did

The USA is acting like many other imperial countries have acted in the past: according to the perceived interests of the USA at the time. There is, sometimes, some sort of cost/benefit analysis done. But, there is no guarantee of rational calculation. Political leaders are often foolish; the USA is no different.

I see no reason to consider the USA to be 'excptional' in foreign policy. The US is neither a 'city on a hill'; nor, is it some sort of villain. The USA has yet to learn the costs of empire.

[Turborama]

94. In at least one aspect, as far as foreign policy is concerned, the US IS "exceptional"

No other country has a military (aka Military Industrial Complex) anywhere near as big.

Do you think it exists for domestic or foreign purposes? Do you think it doesn't NEED a reason to exist?

[creon]

97. It does not need to exist

Domestically, it exists, imo, largely by inertia. For much of the reasons that have been laid out in other places.

Other countries used to have a MIC. The wanton destructiveness of war largely cured them of the notion that war is a viable option. So, they got rid of their MIC.
The USA is not at that point. Many in the USA still regard the making of war to be a viable option. It is not.

You and I know that it is not.

It is probably more accurate to call the USA 'fortunate' rather than 'exceptional'.

[ileus]

73. That reminds me, my Worldwide Economic Tyranny dividend check is late.

[Truth2Tell]

74. It's right on time

you pick it up every time you buy gas.

[formercia]

75. "not only is what they should feel but that it's what they do feel..."

..and if you don't feel the Magic, Big Pharma has a designer drug to make all your problems go away.

[Octafish]

87. ''...there is a new pill coming...better than Halcion.''

Larry King interviewed Poppy Bush and talked about drugs in a subjective manner off-air.

[formercia]

89. That is a scary video.

Welcome to the real World, Neo.

[Turborama]

79. K&R For John Pilger, one of the last remaining old-school journalists

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=536632&mesg_id=536632">The War You Don't See

[BlueCheese]

80. I have a hard time with this kind of thinking...

Underlying all of it is the idea that the we (the US and the West) are the only important agents in world history--it is our actions that are responsible for everything that has happened. The rest of the world are merely objects that behave predictably in response to our actions. The main idea is that we can control the world, for good or for bad, by our actions.

Why did Mubarak stay in power for 30 years in Egypt? Well, it's obvious. It was the US Agency for International Development! It had nothing to do with anything natively Egyptian, or anything else in Egypt's history. They're pawns in our game.

[Truth2Tell]

81. I frankly don't hear a lot of people saying

we are the only important agents in world history. I hear a lot more people who seem to be ignorant of the actual reach of our influence. You do know that Mubarak was groomed by the CIA as an Egyptian Air Force officer right? And that more generally we've carried out a deliberate and long-running policy of nurturing dictators in trade for economic interests right? This is not a claim the we "run the world," but to ignore the things we do is unhelpful IMO.

[BlueCheese]

93. That's exactly what I'm saying.

Somehow the US is responsible for Mubarak's long reign, because we groomed him as a Air Force officer? We're able to pick who will be the next Egyptian leader?

It's the kind of thinking that if something we did had any impact at all on a later development, it's because of us. Or it would be if the later development is negative. (I don't hear the people who espouse this kind of thinking say that the collapse of Communism is because of our foreign policies.) You might as well say that the Treaty of Versailles, not Hitler, was the cause of World War II. Or that Osama bin Laden is responsible for our invading Iraq.

[raouldukelives]

84. K&R

[OwnedByFerrets]

91. K AND R