President Bush and the 14 Points of Fascism

[Ibby]

This is the paper I wrote for the quarter final in History (and got a 92% on!). Let me just preface it by saying, yes, it's extreme - probably actually more extreme than I actually believe - but it's no fun writing a nice, safe, middle-of-the-road essay.

Pinochet. Suharto. Franco. Mussolini. Hitler. These are the ranks that George Bush has joined – the ranks of the authoritarians, the ranks of the fascists. In the spring 2003 issue of Free Inquiry magazine, political scientist Dr. Laurence W. Britt published an article entitled “Fascism, Anyone?”, in which he analyzed eight different fascist regimes and identified the fourteen common threads that linked together all fascist regimes – the fourteen points that practically define fascism. But these points don’t only apply to old, destroyed regimes; they are equally applicable to modern government. In fact, President George W. Bush fits at least 12 of these 14 points, to a greater or lesser degree, only missing points 10 and 11.

Nationalism by itself is not normally a big deal – especially not in the man who leads the nation. In fact, it’s almost a given that the President will be fiercely nationalistic; But in combination with other things, and if taken too far, it is far from safe. Bush has shown his extreme pro-America bias through his zealous xenophobia – his anti-immigration policies – and his pseudo-imperialism in the Middle East in the name of American interest.

Disdain for Human Rights, on the other hand, is a very dangerous and very terrible governmental factor – and one that the Bush regime does not hesitate to show. Human rights abuses abound at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, secret CIA torture sites, and in the suspension of Habeas Corpus. It’s hard to say which is worse; the abuse of foreign nationals captured illegally and held without evidence or charge, or the abuse of citizens, denied of their constitutional right to Habeas Corpus and spied on without warrant or oversight. Only suspicion is enough to spy on someone for; much like in Fascist Italy or Nazi Germany, if the ruling elite accuse you (or, more often, fail to accuse you and simply hold you anyway), you must be guilty – why else would they think you are? The Constitution of the United States forbids unreasonable search or seizure – forbids warrantless spying or searching – but that is merely a minor obstacle to be dodged, to the commander-in-chief.
And then there are the secret prisons, the CIA dungeons around the world where suspected (not known, not convicted, not confirmed) terrorists or terrorist sympathizers or enemy combatants or anyone who gets in the way are taken to be tortured, interrogated, beaten, cut, waterboarded, and as far as the American public knows, murdered. All of it done in obvious breach of Geneva Convention laws and the American constitution, and many points of international law. When confronted, the administration simply lied about them and only conceded the point when it was proven by the media. And of course, everyone knows of the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, repeated on a smaller scale across all of Iraq.

The use of scapegoats by the Bush regime is obvious. Whenever anything bad happens anywhere in the world, Bush and his cronies blame the nameless faceless invisible terrorists, or the ‘Axis of Evil’, and whenever anything bad happens at home, his administration blames the godless immoral evil liberals. This is especially obvious in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, which the Republicans latched onto as a rallying cry for gun rights – blaming the pro-gun control liberals for the murders. Just like Bush used Saddam as a scapegoat for problems in Afghanistan (and to distract from problems at home), and just like he blames immigrants for economic problems in the US, he uses any misfortune as a way to shift the blame to any group or party that isn’t in his favor.

The militarism of the regime is even more obvious, from the two wars started, one instigated without any sort of provocation and in spite of intelligence that was known to be faulty and unreliable. Former ‘inner circle’ members of the regime have told of the way Bush, from the very moment he took office, before the terrorist attacks of September 11th or the war with Afghanistan, was looking for ways and reasons to declare war on Iraq. Bush has spent more money on “defense” than any other president in history, and the “GWOT” is second in cost only to World War II. And still, Bush asks for more money, more soldiers, more cost.

Sexism is inherent in the Bush regime’s “war on gays” and “war on abortion”. As the definition of the point in Dr. Britt’s article states of the fascist regimes analyzed, “They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.” This fits the situation of the Bush regime perfectly – the only argument they have against both homosexuality/gay marriage and abortion is what the Bible says, and the only way they get away with it is the strong support from the so-called ‘religious right’, the powerful conservative Christian (primarily Southern Baptist) voting bloc that almost put Bush in office. (Wolf) (CNN)

The Bush regime’s control of the media is much more subtle and insidious than some of the other more obvious offences of the administration. The press is still nominally free – and indeed, the media is the biggest thorn in the side of the regime – but the regime has its ways of, if not controlling, then at least manipulating the press to a degree not befitting a democracy. For example, blogger Josh Wolf was finally released from prison in April after 226 days in prison – for being a reporter who protected his sources (RS 30). That’s the longest any American reporter has been imprisoned for that. Why? Because he filmed an anti-Bush/anti-war protest. Then there’s the case of Sarah Olson, who was intimidated (though a powerful subpoena) after she published an interview with a Lieutenant who refused to serve in Iraq, or the case of the Pentagon demanding that all content uploaded to soldiers’ blogs be approved before posting – effectively limiting their ability to protest the situation in Iraq. And most disturbing (and confusing) is the case of Jeff Gannon (RS 30).