Chuck Grimes wrote:
>
>
> ``.. I want to ask you to explain, why you don't think a (xxxxx) threat
> comes from the Bush administration? I am serious. In my view they are
> not just horrid or icky, they are dangerous..''
I agree that they are _very_ dangerous, and if the tendencies they represent are not stopped u.s. democracy as we have known it will be irreversibly undermined.
Those dangers are _not_ fascist_ dangers, and comparison to Italy _or_ to the thinkers who supported fascism, turn us away from confronting the dangers the Bush Adminstration represents. Were an axtual fascist movement (led by say Ron Paul or Jerry Brown, we would have to use very different tactics than are appropriate for opposing the kind of creeping authoritarianism represented by Clinton/Bush (Effective Death Penalty and Anti-Terrorism Act/Patriot Act [voted for by how many DP reps & senators?]). To oppose the _real_ present threat we have to build a movement mostly outside the electoral arena: we have to smash, for example, the war on crime and the building of prisons; we have to fight racism at innumerable local levels, including preeminently establishing clearly that fighting racism means fighting institutions, not opposing "prejudice."
But I have other projects on my mind now and this is my last contribution to this thread now.
Carrol