> Sigh. Tyranny, real tyranny, is quite possibly not far off -- but if and
> when it comes it will no more be fascism than it will be divine-right
> monarchy or Latin-American style military dictatorships. We do not know
> what in what form tyranny, if it comes, will come to the united states,
> but we do know it will NOT be fascism and it will NOT be divine-right
> monarchy and it will NOT be an 'oriental dispotism.' Forms of repression
> like other political forms are specific to specific historical
> conjunctions. It may be worse than fascism -- and I suspect that if the
> u.s. ruling class moved to destroy bourgeois democracy the it _would_ be
> much worse than fascism. Fascism was profoundly inefficient. The U.S.
> ruling class can be pretty fucking stupid, but I suspect they would be
> smart enough to get behin something more efficient.
Fascism was profoundly efficient to its ends, and given a sufficient economic crisis, the US ruling class will not accept any other kind of efficiency. It would be very efficient at repressing and destroying any oppositional movements, and preserving the wealth and power of the rich.
However, my point is that there is a political culture developing among sections of the population which could easily and quickly be galvanised by an openly fascist movement given a sufficient crisis. I don't see fascism as something cooked up by ruling elites: it is always and everywhere a movement, and that is what I would anticipate. Call it what you like, of course: Hitchensism, Scrofulism, Botulism, Clooneyism...
_________________________________________________________________ Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d