A TALE OF TWO CITIZENS

This post is a tale of two men. One is William Randolph Hearst, about whom you have probably heard a great deal. The other is George Seldes, about whom you have probably heard little or nothing.

Hearst was the famed newspaper publisher whose life was fictionalized in Orson Welles’ 1941 movie: “Citizen Kane.” However, little is ever mentioned of Hearst’s fascist sympathies.

In a 1935 letter from William A. Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, wrote a letter to President Franklin Roosevelt listing numerous instances illustrating that Hearst was an ally of both Hitler and Mussolini. In closing this letter, Ambassador Dodd wrote:

“Under these circumstances, it would seem to me
that Hearst's influence in the United States ought
not to be so great. Personally, I cannot see how
anyone who has watched his career closely the last
two decades can accept any of his interpretations
of international affairs. Yet, as you know, great
masses of the people were herded into propaganda
attitudes the last week in January, and he thus
gave the appearance of representing the majority
opinion in the United States.”
[Full Text of the Letter Here]

Seldes was an investigative journalist who wrote articles that were often censored by the American military and his publishers. During the decade after The First World War he wrote for the Chicago Tribune as an international correspondent. He was expelled from Russia in 1923 for smuggling dispatches out of the country to avoid censorship. He was expelled from Italy in 1925 for writing an article implicating Mussolini in the murder of the head of the parliamentary section of the Italian United Socialist Party. In 1927, he wrote articles that were critical of American corporations’ unfair exploitation of Mexico’s mineral resources. Over time, finding that his work was encountering more and more censorship from the Tribune’s publisher, Robert R. McCormick, Seldes left the paper.

After leaving the Tribune Seldes became a freelance writer and authored numerous books. Two of the most noted of his works were: Freedom of the Press and The Lords of the Press written in the 1930s. These works were critical of the American press, and the latter was particularly critical of William Randolph Hearst.

From 1940 until 1950 Seldes published the political newsletter In Fact, which became a platform for journalists to get exposure for their stories that would not be published by the mainstream newspapers. In Fact consistently brought to light anti-labor and fascist activities of wealthy American industrialists and corporations. FDR ordered the FBI to investigate Seldes and his newsletter. Soon J. Edgar Hoover’s G-Men were questioning subscribers to In Fact, particularly those in the military.

After being accused of being a member of the Communist Party during Senator Joseph McCarthy’s investigations of the 1950s [a accusation that he vigorously denied], Seldes had difficulty getting his books published until the 60s.

George Seldes lived to be 104 and died in 1995. During the later years of his life he received recognition for his efforts to speak truth to power; but few Americans know of his work or the truths he brought to light. He spent a lifetime trying to protect the public from the abuses of power by men like Hearst; but more often than not, it fell on deaf ears.

In Lords of the Press, Seldes quotes Ernest L. Meyer, his well known contemporary at the New York Post as writing: "Mr. Hearst in his long and not laudable career has inflamed Americans against Spaniards, Americans against Japanese, Americans against Filipinos, Americans against Russians, and in the pursuit of his incendiary campaign he has printed downright lies, forged documents, faked atrocity stories, inflammatory editorials, sensational cartoons and photographs and other devices by which he abetted his jingoistic ends."

In Chapter 17 of Lord of the Press Seldes wrote: “The history of Hearst should be a lesson to the other reactionary publishers of America, but it probably will not be. The American people will have to exercise eternal vigilance against the smaller Hearsts in the House of Press Lords.”

Parallels can be drawn between William Randolph Hearst and media moguls of today and the “smaller Hearsts in the House of Press Lords;” but where are our modern day George Seldes?

REVISITING LAWRENCE BRITT’S EXAMINATION OF FASCISM

Photo - Public Use via PingNews

In 2003, Dr. Lawrence W. Britt’s article “Fascism Anyone?” appeared in the Spring Issue of Free Inquiry magazine. The article was an analysis of fascism through the examination of seven fascist regimes that existed at varying times during the twentieth century. Those seven regimes were: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. None of those regimes exist today, but the product of Dr. Britt’s analysis was a list of 14 identifiable characteristics of the fascist state.

In recent years this list of 14 characteristics has been posted numerous times on the internet; quite often, however, without much comment. It would seem that Dr. Britt’s list is receiving so much attention recently because political commentators have begun to notice the existence of phenomena in the United States that are characteristic of the fascist state. These phenomena have become most noticeable since the inauguration of George W. Bush.

It seems that now would be a good time to review Lawrence Britt’s list and see how the United States compares relative to each of the 14 characteristics of fascism.
In his article, Britt states that the 14 characteristics are:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

6. Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.1



Now, let’s take these characteristics and compare them against the aspiring conservative political movement.

If we examine the first of the characteristics: Powerful and Continuing Nationalism , we can see that this certainly applies to the current climate in conservative America. Shouts of “USA, USA” echo at political rallies as well as sporting events. Candidates for political office seldom dare to appear on television without an American flag pin stuck in their lapel.

Since the tragedy of 9/11, human rights concerns have been thrown out the window in order to create an atmosphere of “safety” for “real” Americans. This disregard for human rights had bled over into mainstream politics and the Patriots Act is a clear example of America’s current Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights .

America has always had plenty of scapegoats, but in the current political climate, their ranks have swollen. Muslims, Arabs, Latinos, Immigrants, The Poor have all been targeted. The conservative media has branded these people as enemies of the state and a constant drum beat advises the “American public” to fear them. We build walls to keep out the immigrants, expel Muslims, Arabs and anyone who might look as if they are from the Middle East from airliners, all because Americans no engage in Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause .

Anyone who does not believe in the Supremacy of the Military in the United States should take a look at the budget for the Department of Defense compared to dollars spent for education, healthcare and other needs of this nation. And if you do not “Support our Troops,” you do so at your social peril at the hands of those on the political right.

There are those who may argue that there is no Rampant Sexism in America, but that is because they turn a blind eye to the homophobia, anti-gay legislation and opposition to abortion. Even as states pass legislation supporting same sex marriage and freedom of choice in some states, many others states pass legislation in opposition. It is no secret that the conservative religious movement in America would deal harshly with those who do not abide by conservative ideals.

Controlled Mass Media has not been uncommon in America for quite some time now. But lately, with media outlets like Fox News and the conservative talk radio programs, the situation is growing worse. While the current federal administration is often the target of these conservative standard bearers, the aspiring national leaders in the conservative camp extremely strong support.

The Obsession with National Security among America’s conservatives has spread even to the point where the President of the nation is accused of being a threat. While most conservative politicians, who do not wish to appear to be complete loons, choose their words carefully; their supporters openly accuse Barak Obama of wanting to bring down America.

The “religious right” became a political force in the 1980s, and since that time the Republican Party and political conservatives have been subjected to the dictates of religious intemperance. Today, with the steady growth in influence of the religious right, Religion and Government are Intertwined , from the conservative point of view. The religious right has even tried to distort history in order to validate their claims that this is a “Christian nation.”

It is clear from the bank bailouts in 2009, and the refusal of Republicans and other conservatives to raise the taxes of the rich and powerful that Corporate Power is Protected in conservative America. And in such a state, there is no room for the rights of the individual.

For some decades in America, Labor Power has been Suppressed . The unions have been forced further and further in a corner for the benefit of corporate America. And the conservative activists and politicians open declare that they are at war with the unions.

If the election of George W. Bush was not evidence enough of the conservatives disdain for intellect, we need only look at where the funding cuts will take place as America re-adjusts it priorities in order to address its growing debt. The fact that education and the arts will take very hard hits in the upcoming budget cuts indicates that the right has a great Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts .

While the United States no longer executes children, in 2005, at the time the Supreme Court ruled that it was cruel and unusual punishment, America was the second highest executioner of children on the planet. Today, America still has the highest rate of incarceration per population in the world. Police misconduct has been recorded in 5,986 instances between April 2009 and June 2010, with 382 of those instances leading to fatalities. There is very little public consciousness of these facts in America. Clearly the country has an Obsession with Crime and Punishment .

Under the George W. Bush Administration many individuals were gifted positions of power and responsibility that were clearly beyond their competence or capabilities. These gifts of power and position were based upon cronyism. Additionally, members of Congress and lobbyists faced criminal charges related to corruption. This is not to say that Democrats and liberals are not involved in such misdeeds, but under Republicans there was Rampant Cronyism and Corruption .

Republicans say that Democrats, liberals and all others who voted against George W. Bush should “get over” the 2000 Presidential election. However, that fraudulent election is one of the main reasons why this country looks so much like a fascist state today. With another Presidential election approaching in 2012, accompanied by congressional, state and local elections it is time to reflect on where America is heading. The rest of the world is watching; the rest of the world is waiting. Do we, as Americans, descend further into fascism, or do we reassess our values? Do we decide that we want to uphold – and live by – the values that we claim to have and champion; or do we allow fear and greed push us back into the recesses of apathy and allow Fraudulent Elections to take our nation down a hateful and shameful path to fascism?

1. Copyright © 2003 Free Inquiry magazine Volume 23, Number 2. [Reprinted for Fair Use Only.]

U. S. Policy may be coming into Focus [In South Sudan]

This is an article that was posted on April 29, 2010 on the Social Science Research Council's blog: "Making Sense of Sudan." Since that time, South Sudan has voted to become independent of the North of the country. The clock is ticking and we will wait and see how long it takes for the United States to justify a need for a U.S. military presence in South Sudan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Photo: UNMIS/Paul Banks

A narrative in the U.S. media seems to be coming into focus. A narrative which I believe is intended to justify an “American Intervention” into the oil rich Southern Sudan in not too many years distant.

The U.S. unflinchingly urged that the elections take place in April despite a multitude of signals that the process would contain numerous discrepancies. And just as surely as there would be discrepancies in the election process, it was a certainty that President Bashir would win handedly.

It seemed curious that in the weeks prior to the election mainstream media in the U.S. began to concede Bashir’s probable win and to publicly state that the win would be legitimate “de-facto” if not “de-jure.” The prevalent argument was: “Bashir will most certainly cheat in the election, but he would probably win without cheating.” This argument establishes Bashir as a “bad leader” while at the same time acknowledging that he is the people’s choice and nothing should be done in order to try to improve the fairness of the elections.

Now that Bashir has won, the New York Times and other leaders among the Western media are announcing that his win has paved the way for a North / South split in Sudan. The argument has been spun in such a way as to declare: “Who can blame the Southern Sudanese for wanting their own country, the April elections were not fair.” A simple Google of the words “Bashir” and “split” will bring up several articles written in this tone.

It is nothing new that U.S. foreign policy favors an independent South Sudan, despite its objections to the contrary. South Sudan will vote to separate from the North while the issue of resource (oil revenue) sharing remains unresolved.

The Northern remnant of Sudan will articulate its right to a share of the oil revenues derived from the resources in the South; and that will be characterized as a “hostile act” by the North and even as a threat of aggression. The stage will be set for the United States to step in to “protect” the newly independent nation of South Sudan and its oil riches.

But there is another whisper of a breeze rustling through the leaves of the American news papers. Very quietly it is being said while President Bashir made sure that the national elections were not fair, Salva Kiir did the same in the South to win 93% of the vote there.

The New York Times is saying: “Analysts are already sketching the outlines of the two post-referendum Sudans, where democracy will probably be the loser and uncompetitive, predictable election results the norm. The net result, they argue, could essentially be two one-party states with even less democratic space than under the flawed coalition government that rules today.”

It is not at all unlikely that the U.S. will step in to protect South Sudan and its oil from the North. And it is not at all unlikely that the U.S. will then step in to protect South Sudan and its oil from Mr. Kiir and the leaders of South Sudan.

America Loves Africa Like a Glutton Loves his Lunch

This a column that I wrote in December of 2008, a little over a month after Barak Obama was elected as the 44th President of the U.S.

Thirty months later, it is perhaps time now to consider the accuracy of my cautions against being overly optimistic about the changes that Obama would bring to U.S. foreign policy.

photo credit - African Loft

It may seem more than odd to citizens of the various African nations how past administrations of the United States government have consistently professed their concern for the well being of Africa and Africans while at the same time acting contrary to their words.

As we approach the dawn of a yet another U.S. administration we should reflect on the history of U.S. relations with the respective nations of the world while anticipating the actions that will result from the policies formulated in Washington regarding Africa.

As Barack Obama takes office, we all have hopes for a new day that will see an improvement in American attitudes and actions – not only towards African nations, but towards all the nation of the world. But as Africans, we are particularly hopeful for a more reasoned and intelligent approach towards the nations of Africa by this “Son of an African.” Having said this, we must be mindful that America is a country where a woman deemed qualified to stand for election as Vice President of the United States believed Africa to be a country rather than a continent.

It is no secret that many Americans tend to have little interest in global affairs and focus almost solely on matters that take place within the borders of their own country. It is also often the case that many Americans, when they look at other countries, are mostly concerned about what those countries can provide for them and their well being. But the motives of many Americans are often shrouded in the language of brotherhood.

It was not unusual for individuals around the world to find the reasons given by Americans for the invasion of Iraq to be laughable. The American people seem to have barely known who the Iraqis were at the start of the war in 2003. The American people, by in large, seem to demonstrate very little respect for Iraqis or their culture. So it does not seem very plausible that Americans have such a great concern for the rights of Iraqi citizens as to be willing to shed American blood and wring dollars from the treasury of the United States solely in the pursuit of happiness for those people. The hand wringing protestations of innocence, that occurred when Americans were accused of being more interested in Iraqi oil than the Iraqi people, drew skeptical glances from every quarter of the globe.

And now we come to Africa. America came late to the feast that was made on the flesh of a continent that has lain almost prostrate since the invasion of the colonialists. But America seems intent on making up for lost time. Many U.S. multinational corporations have joined with those from Europe that loot the resources of African nations with impunity. And like the pirates of centuries ago, they have the hubris to obey no laws but their own. And they do this, while they urge their governments do demonize the national leaders of those countries from which they wrest their bounty.

As we approach the dawn of a yet another U.S. administration, now is not the time to be overly optimistic. Africans should be hopeful – but watchful.

Those of us who are old enough to remember the American President, John F. Kennedy should also remember the early days of the Peace Corps. The Peace Corps was a wonderful concept. Young Americans went abroad and shared their skills and expertise with the peoples of less fortunate nations in order to improve the quality of life around the world. What people in those less fortunate countries were not told was that the Peace Corps was also a tool in the Cold War that was being waged between the U.S. and Russia and their respective allies.

According to its congressional mandate, one of the duties of the Peace Corps was to “counter Soviet development efforts in the Third World.” It seems that it would have been a difficult bit of logic to see the benefit to the recipient by promoting development on one hand, and countering someone else’s development efforts on the other hand. It might be that the U.S. would deny its designs to hinder any efforts by the Soviet Union to lend a hand to the developing world; but if that were the case, why then would the congressional mandate also provide that Peace Corps volunteers be instructed in the “menace of Communism?”

It is most likely the case that the CIA used the Peace Corps as cover in its early days. Sam Brown, a former director of the Peace Corps has stated that he had once been assured by the CIA that it had not used that organization for cover since 1975. The Peace Corps had been founded in 1961 by the great American hope of that day – President John F. Kennedy, who had ordered that the Peace Corps not be used for CIA cover. But it appears that this happened nevertheless.

The United States does not declare that it is in a cold war at the moment, but it takes little research to see that the competitive posture of the United States relative to the rest of the world is still in place. Many Americans are frantic over the prospect of China becoming a greater economic influence in Africa than the West. And if Americans are frantic about China, they are absolutely maniacal when it comes to the prospect of a greater Islamic influence on the Continent.

It should be no surprise to Americans that they are not held in the highest regard by many nations around the world. Even the aid that the United States holds out to recipient nations often comes with some rather distasteful stings. One of these many strings is the attempt to use civil society to engage in social engineering. Many people around the world hold that donor support to civil society is just another manifestation of neocolonialism in the post-Cold War era. Aid to civil society is often seen as being aimed at influencing the character of political administrations by projecting Western perspectives and world views on those communities. This type of interference is believed to be detrimental, in that it undermines the ability of local organizations in recipient nations to set their own priorities and their own agendas and to give voice to their own ideas of social and political development. U.S. aid is also believed to serve as a means of extending global markets for American companies.

And now we come to the era of Obama. I personally believe that President Obama will have every intention of respecting African nations as well as their peoples, cultures, traditions and their abilities to govern themselves. I also believe that the Obama Administration will carry a lot of baggage from previous administrations that will work counter to the President’s intentions. And it is my belief that the character of the American people will put pressure on the Obama Administration to take the posture of “America First” and to only consider the interest of the various African nations when the interest of those nations coincide with perceived American interests.

As Americans, we are a nation that, at the time of its occurrence, applauded the obliteration of the Native Americans and their culture – even though today we shed crocodile tears over the “plight of the Red Man.” We are a nation that, at its very founding, held that the African was less than human, and wrote that creed into our Constitution and laws – even though today we heave heavy sighs at the injustice of chattel slavery. We are a nation that stood by and let flawed foreign policy send troops into Vietnam and lay waste to much of that nation – even though now we have heard a tearful apology from one of the architects of that policy, Robert McNamara. We are a nation that pasted little American flags on the bumpers of our SUVs to display our support for the “preemptive” invasion and occupation of Iraq – even thought the majority of the country today believes that the invasion and occupation was unwise – if not unjust.

Africans should not think that Americans, in order to reach their goals of comfort and well being, will hesitate to travel a road over the dead bodies of Africans. They traveled that road over the bodies of dead, Native Americans, Vietnamese, and Iraqis.

Africans must consider the possibility that while Americans profess their love for Africa and insist that Africans must be free in order to live in democratic societies, it is likely the case that Americans love Africa like a glutton loves his lunch.

"The Danger of American Fascism" Sixty Seven Years Later

It has been more than sixty seven years since then Vice President Henry Agard Wallace wrote an editorial in the New York Times warning the United States of the dangers of American fascism. For his troubles, Wallace was “bumped” from the presidential ticket of that year and was replaced by a haberdasher from Missouri named Harry Truman.

The world would have probably been a very different place if Wallace, a vigorous progressive, had been in the VP’s office on April 12, 1945 when FDR passed away. Instead of Truman we would have had a president who wrote things like:

“The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism. They cultivate hate and distrust of both Britain and Russia. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.”

It was obvious to the people about whom Wallace wrote that Wallace had to go.

Below is the full text of Vice President Wallace’s warning to America in 1944.


The Danger of American Fascism

Henry A. Wallace

An article in the New York Times, April 9, 1944.
From Henry A. Wallace, Democracy Reborn (New York, 1944), edited by Russell Lord, p. 259.

1. On returning from my trip to the West in February, I received a request from The New York Times to write a piece answering the following questions:
1. What is a fascist?
2. How many fascists have we?
3. How dangerous are they?

2. A fascist is one whose lust for money or power is combined with such an intensity of intolerance toward those of other races, parties, classes, religions, cultures, regions or nations as to make him ruthless in his use of deceit or violence to attain his ends. The supreme god of a fascist, to which his ends are directed, may be money or power; may be a race or a class; may be a military, clique or an economic group; or may be a culture, religion, or a political party.

3. The perfect type of fascist throughout recent centuries has been the Prussian Junker, who developed such hatred for other races and such allegiance to a military clique as to make him willing at all times to engage in any degree of deceit and violence necessary to place his culture and race astride the world. In every big nation of the world are at least a few people who have the fascist temperament. Every Jew-baiter, every Catholic hater, is a fascist at heart. The hoodlums who have been desecrating churches, cathedrals and synagogues in some of our larger cities are ripe material for fascist leadership.

4. The obvious types of American fascists are dealt with on the air and in the press. These demagogues and stooges are fronts for others. Dangerous as these people may be, they are not so significant as thousands of other people who have never been mentioned. The really dangerous American fascists are not those who are hooked up directly or indirectly with the Axis. The FBI has its finger on those. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.

5. If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful. Most American fascists are enthusiastically supporting the war effort. They are doing this even in those cases where they hope to have profitable connections with German chemical firms after the war ends. They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead.

6. American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information, and those who stand for the K.K.K. type of demagoguery.

7. The European brand of fascism will probably present its most serious postwar threat to us via Latin America. The effect of the war has been to raise the cost of living in most Latin American countries much faster than the wages of labor. The fascists in most Latin American countries tell the people that the reason their wages will not buy as much in the way of goods is because of Yankee imperialism. The fascists in Latin America learn to speak and act like natives. Our chemical and other manufacturing concerns are all too often ready to let the Germans have Latin American markets, provided the American companies can work out an arrangement which will enable them to charge high prices to the consumer inside the United States. Following this war, technology will have reached such a point that it will be possible for Germans, using South America as a base, to cause us much more difficulty in World War III than they did in World War II. The military and landowning cliques in many South American countries will find it attractive financially to work with German fascist concerns as well as expedient from the standpoint of temporary power politics.

8. Fascism is a worldwide disease. Its greatest threat to the United States will come after the war, either via Latin America or within the United States itself.

9. Still another danger is represented by those who, paying lip service to democracy and the common welfare, in their insatiable greed for money and the power which money gives, do not hesitate surreptitiously to evade the laws designed to safeguard the public from monopolistic extortion. American fascists of this stamp were clandestinely aligned with their German counterparts before the war, and are even now preparing to resume where they left off, after “the present unpleasantness” ceases:

10. The symptoms of fascist thinking are colored by environment and adapted to immediate circumstances. But always and everywhere they can be identified by their appeal to prejudice and by the desire to play upon the fears and vanities of different groups in order to gain power. It is no coincidence that the growth of modern tyrants has in every case been heralded by the growth of prejudice. It may be shocking to some people in this country to realize that, without meaning to do so, they hold views in common with Hitler when they preach discrimination against other religious, racial or economic groups. Likewise, many people whose patriotism is their proudest boast play Hitler’s game by retailing distrust of our Allies and by giving currency to snide suspicions without foundation in fact.

11. The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They use isolationism as a slogan to conceal their own selfish imperialism. They cultivate hate and distrust of both Britain and Russia. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.

12. Several leaders of industry in this country who have gained a new vision of the meaning of opportunity through co-operation with government have warned the public openly that there are some selfish groups in industry who are willing to jeopardize the structure of American liberty to gain some temporary advantage. We all know the part that the cartels played in bringing Hitler to power, and the rule the giant German trusts have played in Nazi conquests. Monopolists who fear competition and who distrust democracy because it stands for equal opportunity would like to secure their position against small and energetic enterprise. In an effort to eliminate the possibility of any rival growing up, some monopolists would sacrifice democracy itself.

13. It has been claimed at times that our modern age of technology facilitates dictatorship. What we must understand is that the industries, processes, and inventions created by modern science can be used either to subjugate or liberate. The choice is up to us. The myth of fascist efficiency has deluded many people. It was Mussolini’s vaunted claim that he “made the trains run on time.” In the end, however, he brought to the Italian people impoverishment and defeat. It was Hitler’s claim that he eliminated all unemployment in Germany. Neither is there unemployment in a prison camp.

14. Democracy to crush fascism internally must demonstrate its capacity to “make the trains run on time.” It must develop the ability to keep people fully employed and at the same time balance the budget. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels. As long as scientific research and inventive ingenuity outran our ability to devise social mechanisms to raise the living standards of the people, we may expect the liberal potential of the United States to increase. If this liberal potential is properly channeled, we may expect the area of freedom of the United States to increase. The problem is to spend up our rate of social invention in the service of the welfare of all the people.

15. The worldwide, agelong struggle between fascism and democracy will not stop when the fighting ends in Germany and Japan. Democracy can win the peace only if it does two things:
1. Speeds up the rate of political and economic inventions so that both production and, especially, distribution can match in their power and practical effect on the daily life of the common man the immense and growing volume of scientific research, mechanical invention and management technique.
2. Vivifies with the greatest intensity the spiritual processes which are both the foundation and the very essence of democracy.

16. The moral and spiritual aspects of both personal and international relationships have a practical bearing which so-called practical men deny. This dullness of vision regarding the importance of the general welfare to the individual is the measure of the failure of our schools and churches to teach the spiritual significance of genuine democracy. Until democracy in effective enthusiastic action fills the vacuum created by the power of modern inventions, we may expect the fascists to increase in power after the war both in the United States and in the world.

17. Fascism in the postwar inevitably will push steadily for Anglo-Saxon imperialism and eventually for war with Russia. Already American fascists are talking and writing about this conflict and using it as an excuse for their internal hatreds and intolerances toward certain races, creeds and classes.

18. It should also be evident that exhibitions of the native brand of fascism are not confined to any single section, class or religion. Happily, it can be said that as yet fascism has not captured a predominant place in the outlook of any American section, class or religion. It may be encountered in Wall Street, Main Street or Tobacco Road. Some even suspect that they can detect incipient traces of it along the Potomac. It is an infectious disease, and we must all be on our guard against intolerance, bigotry and the pretension of invidious distinction. But if we put our trust in the common sense of common men and “with malice toward none and charity for all” go forward on the great adventure of making political, economic and social democracy a practical reality, we shall not fail.


You can read more about Henry Wallace at the website PoliticusUSA

FALSE WITNESS

In the autumn of 1066, while the combined forces of William the Conqueror were making preparations for the invasion of England, minstrels wandered among the campfires singing the ”Song of Roland” to lift the warriors’ hearts and instill in them a fighting spirit.

The story of the valiant death of Roland was the stuff of legend. According to the tale, Roland, a March Lord of Brittany and a nephew of King Charlemagne was a renowned fighter and the epitome of a Christian knight. As the saga unfolds, he is betrayed by a jealous stepfather, ambushed and killed by Muslims at Roncevaux Pass in the Pyrenees Mountains.

Charlemagne avenges Roland’s death by attacking the city of Saragossa, destroying all the Jewish and Muslim religious items found there and forcing at sword point the conversion to Christianity of everyone in the city with the exception of Queen Bramimonde, who is eventually led to Christianity “through the agency of love.”

Despite the fame of this chanson de geste (heroic saga) as the oldest surviving major work of French literature, the storyline has contained a factual flaw for more than a thousand years. According to Charlemagne's courtier and biographer, Einhard, Roland was ambushed and killed by a force of rebellious Basques, not Muslims.

But then, as now, in Western literature, it made for a “better story” to have a Christian hero struck down by swarthy Muslims than by Europeans.

Did I say “swarthy Muslims?” Yes, I did. The Song of Roland, written during the Middle Ages, vilified Arab and African Muslims for something that European Basques had done. Similarly, initial reports by many American news organizations of the terrorist attacks in Norway pointed to Muslims as the villains. In both instances, it made for a more easily understandable tale to blame the usual suspects – visibly identifiable strangers. And in both instances, the swarthy Muslims fit the role of villain nicely.

It is too confusing to Western minds to call Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian Christian, a “terrorist,” just as it is still too confusing to the Western mind to admit that Adolph Hitler, a monster, was also a Christian. It has always been extremely difficult for Westerners to admit to arch villains who looked like themselves. So, the blond, blue-eyed Breivik is cast as a “lone madman” rather than a terrorist. Even Hitler often was called a madman, as if he were an aberration in his culture, even though a multitude of his fellow Germans were fully participatory in the genocide that was the Holocaust. The Western media does not see the acts of a Hitler or a Breivik as characteristic of Christians, yet it practically declares that Islam is synonymous with terrorism.

Immediately after reports surfaced of the killings in Norway the American press began its orgy of bigotry. The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin wrote of the July 22 massacre in her blog: "There is a specific jihadist connection here.” The explosions occurred about 3:20 in the afternoon Oslo time, and Ms. Rubin had found her “specific jihadist connection” by 5:06 p.m. Washington time when she posted her blog that same day.

Just as it is no surprise that the Washington Post would publish Ms. Rubin’s factual errors, it is no surprise that Fox News and the Wall Street Journal were quick to wrongly lay the blame for the massacre at the feet of Muslims as well.

While James Fallows of The Atlantic magazine wrote that “The Washington Post Owes the World an Apology” for Rubin’s article, Stephen Walt wrote in the online magazine “Foreign Policy” that it was “not out of character” for the Wall Street Journal to follow suit because “its editorial page has been a reliable source of threat-mongering and distortion for years.” Even though Norwegian authorities had stated publically that they had no reason to suspect Islamist groups for the attacks, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial on the day of the killings that clearly blamed “jihadist” for the deaths. No real apologies have yet been issued by either newspaper.

The Western news media does not feel it needs to apologize for characterizing Muslims as pathological killers and blaming them as the source of all terrorism in the world because these media outlets are part of a culture that has a long history of casting “the Muslim” as the villain, even when the known facts speak otherwise.

It is too complex a phenomenon to try to fully explain in a short article such as this, but this problem is rooted so deeply in the soil of so many Western nations that it will take more than a mere scratching at its surface in order to fully address it.

Western iconography has all too often depicted the “swarthy Semite” as the arch enemy of civilization. And this includes a wide spectrum of Semitic people, including Arabs, Jews and others from the Middle East. It is no mere accident that many depictions of Satan in Western art show him with stereotypically Semitic facial features. Fear of, and animosity towards, Semitic people is encoded in the DNA of Western culture. Evidence of this is found scattered from the 4th century writings of Saint Augustine who stated: “How I wish that you would slay them (the Jews) with your two-edged sword, so that there should be none to oppose your word” to the exhortations of Pope Urban II in the 11th century calling upon Christians to “destroy that vile race (Turks and Arabs) from the lands of our friends.” Enmity in the West towards Semitic people is a fact that is much denied by our press and politicians, but it is a fact that is little doubted by those who have been the targets of that animosity.

Very few cultures define themselves by the suffering they inflict upon others. So it is not surprising that Americans are numb to the numerous and constant affronts to Muslims at home and abroad; and history will not treat kindly this practice of American journalism. But the American media does not need to wait for history to judge them. They are being judged by the global community each time they release bigoted and factually incorrect statements laced with derogation. A news reporter bearing false witness is of no use to anyone interested in the truth.

So as we Americans, and many other Westerners, sit in our homes and absorb the stories about how Muslims are the source of every horrific tragedy that befalls the peaceful West, we should be mindful of our own history of false accusations leveled at a people for more than a thousand years.