[lbo-talk] Fascism, right-wing populism, and contemporary research

Max Sawicky sawicky at verizon.net
Mon Feb 22 07:00:04 PST 2010


This is relevant: http://ow.ly/19PU4 (Chip is cited)

I think most of the 'Oathkeepers' 12 point platform would be supported by people here. It's pretty straight-libertarian, in terms of use of force by the State. At the same time, there are many repellent aspects of this 'movement.'

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Max Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:
> Another five cents:
>
> When I look for ideology in the TP, I see two variants:  no-Gov, or
> no-Gov on the non-defense side.  The more erudite among them I suspect
> are more principled about scaling down the national security state and
> associated foreign adventures.  This does not lead intellectually or
> logically to any sort of organic/corporatist state thingy.  I would
> argue that psychologically, it can.  Insofar as the whole thing is
> driven by fear, misery, hatred, and alienation, it is ripe for a
> demagogue who proposes to direct a new sort of state.  Note that at
> the recent CPAC conference, you had the non-intuitive result of Ron
> Paul winning their straw poll, and Dick Cheney being received
> enthusiastically by the gathering.
>
> Of course rightys have always been with us, sometimes with greater
> manifest strength.  To me the TP reflects a new mobilization, where
> people are willing to sacrifice personal time and resources to come to
> meetings, demonstrations, and to raise a ruckus at public meetings.
> We are well short of uniformed squadristi in the streets, but some
> mobilization on the left will inspire reactions on the right.
>
> Rhetorically the movement is prone to say anything.  Listen to Glenn
> Beck and it would appear that the implementation of national health
> insurance would justify armed uprising.  What seems most worth
> watching is the extent and intensity of their actual organization
> (beyond just leaving their houses for demos, etc).  Given
> circumstances of even mild progressive revival that we would welcome,
> these folks could be apt to do anything.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Ted Winslow <egwinslow at rogers.com> wrote:
>> Carrol Cox wrote:
>>
>>> The DP leadership has cetain fundamental loyalties, and they serve those
>>> loyalties with intelligence (savvy) and courage. Obama's statement that
>>> he is willing to be a one-term president was seirous: he will maintain a
>>> principled course regardless of consequences. The principles are those
>>> of our enemy, but don't confuse serving those principles loyally with
>>> being afraid to  support "our" princpels.
>>
>> So it's true then that Obama is the Antichrist.
>>
>> Ted
>>
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list