[WS:] Max, you missed my point. Any secessionist move would be a joke at the present time, I agree. What I argued was something very different - namely a possible outcome of a hypothetical situation of a fascist movement started gaining access to power, and unlikely event at the present moment.
My argument was that progression of fascism in the US would likely to be rather different from that in Europe. Unlike in Europe, where centralization of government made fascist consolidation of power possible, the US federal structure would make that consolidation rather problematic. Consequently, fascist advances would be uneven in the US, greater in some states and slow or none at all in other states. That situation, in turn, could results in internal tensions similar to those in the antebellum period, rather than a complete fascist takeover of the state as it happened in Germany.
So if secession occurred, it would not be a goal pursued by some secessionist faction, but rather an outcome (perhaps even unintended) of the uneven spread of fascism from state to state. It is a very different argument than simply saying that some secessionist wingnuts are likely to achieve their objective.
Again - this is a corollary to a hypothetical situation discussed in this thread pertaining to the possibility of a fascist movement in the US. Both Chip, to whose posting I replied and myself consider that possibility to be rather remote at the current time, but not ruled out altogether.
Wojtek
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Max Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:
> Not too long ago some of us viewed the Christian right as a neo-fascist
> threat.
> They were able to mobilize and organize like crazy, much more than what has
> been observed thus far with the TP. They have realized a certain degree of
> political power and have done a lot of damage (I'm thinking Texas school
> books,
> eliminating access to abortion), but at the same time the GOP has been
> selling
> them out for decades. They did not react to this betrayal by separating
> and
> recasting themselves, instead they fizzled. The same scenario is
> conceivable
> for the TP. If Obama tried to transcend neo-liberal boundaries just a
> bit, and/or
> if the economy got a lot worse, or if there was some kind of
> progressive mobilization,
> the prognosis would be different.
>
> As things stand there does not seem to be much need for a fascist
> movement, so the
> main outcome of the TP is flailing around, followed by demoralization
> and dissolution.
> Remember how huge the Perot thing was, for a few microseconds? I'd say any
> secessionist move would be a joke.
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Marv Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2010-02-20, at 2:04 PM, Wojtek S wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> I think that a more likely outcome of the actual (as opposed to
> potential)
> >> growth of fascist movement in the US is the break-up of the union with
> some
> >> states taken over by the fascists while other resisting them.
> > ============================
> > There is already secessionist talk by supporters of the Tea Party
> movement, most recently from a state senator in South Carolina. I expect the
> TP supporters are heavily concentrated in the "red states", especially the
> South, where this sentiment has never really died. Is that the case?
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>