The Nature of the War on Islam

The American state is asking you to harass, attack, and bully Muslims. And, you are doing it.

In America, there is an emerging, less than official, doctrine that places Muslims under the same spotlight where millions of Africans, Aboriginal Americans, Mexicans, and various other ethnic groups that have suffered a campaign of sustained and brutal racism. Victims have been attacked within the culture and the attacks have been not only accepted by the state, but in many cases the state has taken the initiative. That is what has been happening to Muslims since the collapse of the Soviet Union. State (official) antipathy against Muslims is growing and becoming more dangerous.
In this endeavour, Canada, the UK, and many European nations are working in concert with the United States.

With the exception of the enemy du jour, this is not new. The state has taken the initiative to single out and attack a particular ethnic group and have been doing so since the first colonies rooted in New England. Individuals that happen to be born into the group that the state deems a lower caste will be harassed, bullied, enslaved, beaten, raped, tortured and murdered. Once the state unleashes its many racist hounds, it only needs to play a supporting role. Lumpen-racists are happy to carry out the dirty work. History shows many willing accomplices have been found within the domestic, European population. They don't only support the state's nefarious view of the threatening or inferior population but have often taken their own initiatives as they have with Emmitt Till, Trayvon Martin, and countless others.

Understanding the Threat to America

According to Al Jazeera,Army Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Dooley had been teaching a course at a military base in Norfolk, Virginia, entitled "Understanding the Threat to America" where he states that Geneva Conventions no longer apply when fighting Muslims. The course comes dangerously close to counselling genocide when it calls for teaching soldiers to engage in "total war" on Islam and to take the war on Islam to the civilian population "wherever necessary".

Rampant anti Muslim feelings through the American military are acknowledged by Morris Davis, a retired Air Force Colonel and past chief Prosecutor at Guantanamo Bay. Davis acknowledges that this is just the tip of the iceberg, that anti-Muslim feelings are widespread throughout the military. Davis states in an interview with Josh Rushing (Al Jazeera) that a significant number of people in the U.S. military have an attitude that says, 'the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim'. He describes Dooley as "the tip of the iceberg". Ibraham Hooper, National Communications Director for CAIR (Muslim Civil Liberties Advocacy Organisation), echoed Davis view. CAIR itself was named as one of many Muslim organizations that have connections to HAMAS. Hamas has already been established as a terrorist organization and a threat to Israel and America by commentators through Western mainstream media. Hooper goes on to say that this type of anti-Muslim teaching is widespread throughout military and security organizations in the United States such as the CIA, the FBI, and DHS.

While this may be dismissed as military psychological indoctrination in a similar way that marines learned that Vietnamese 'gooks' were not human, the widespread attack on Muslims is far more sustained and pernicious. While this attack is not 'just like' the European demonizing of the 'menacing Jew' of 1930s, there is an undercurrent, a subtext, of shared similarities. Muslims are fast becoming the lowest caste on the Western rung. They are also being attacked along the same lines as alleged communists did under the suspicious gaze of Senator Joe McCarthy.

Participants in the course have been taught that the "historical precendents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are applicable to Mecca and Medina's destruction" and "Given the factual basis of what "Islamists" say they seek to impose on the world, the United States has come to accept that radical "true Islam" is both a political and military enemy to free people throughout the world.... It is therefore time for the United States to make our true intentions clear. This barbaric ideology will no longer be tolerated. Islam must change or we will facilitate its self destruction."

Dooley also taught that Hamas has infiltrated the US government at the highest levels. The course material simply lies in order to make its main point; that many disparate Islamic groups are in cahoots with each other and their aim is to infiltrate the US government, to take over.

Although the official position of the Pentagon does not support this and no official anywhere within the American, Canadian, British or any government would openly agree, widespread antipathy toward Muslims throughout military and law enforcement organizations appears to be encouraged. There is no significant movement to see it as a problem or to eradicate it. On the other hand it is denied, minimized, or, Muslims are blamed for it.

Dooley has been suspended for this hate fueled presentation which implies the promotion of genocide. He still teaches at the military college however. The important point is that he isn't alone, he is one of many - too many in fact. His teaching material includes quotations from a variety of right wing media outlets and authors.

The state will deny or minimize their own racism and deny that Dooley's course reflects the official position of the state. Not many political leaders express the same overt messianic fervour. What politicians will say in public rarely lines up with what they really believe. To see what they think, we must look at their actions. Obama is far too polished to say anything that would make his PR handlers cringe. His actions however, give him away. He ignores the ongoing abuses of Palestinians, especially in Gaza. He has protected torturers, increased spying against Muslims, intensified and expanded the war against the Afghani people, dramatically increased the frequency and scope of drone murders in many Mid East locales, and he has given himself the power to kill, in a first degree murder kind of way, Muslims. He will not close Guantanamo. He is further curtailing free speech rights for Muslims and he is expanding wiretaps against them. He has justified a war against Libya citing human rights abuses and at the same time protects the brutal dictatorships of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain. Behind the scenes, we can be sure him and Hillary Clinton are ensuring Egypt's return to the status of tame lapdog.

He is also threatening Iran with war and, like most attacks against Muslims, facts don't get in the way of a good story line (lie). Against all credible evidence available, he is pushing ahead against this Islamic nation as Bush has done against Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama continues to militarize his nation through speech, symbolism, and deed. He will not admit to being a war hawk but he is. He will not admit his hostility toward Muslims but it is obvious.
Separate Justice System for Muslims

In an article for the New York Times, Andrew Rosenthal suggests that the current justice system in the United States makes little distinction between Muslims and terrorists. There are, " Special detention centers for Muslims (Guantanamo Bay and the network of secret C.I.A. lockups, now said to be closed, where prisoners were almost routinely tortured); special trial procedures for Muslim prisoners (military tribunals); special allowances for agents dealing with Muslim suspects (extraordinary rendition, i.e. officially sanctioned kidnapping of foreigners)."

This, against a backdrop where Muslims are searched, followed, spied upon, and generally harassed by the state as well as citizens suggests an overarching system of widespread human rights abuses. The New York Police Department is becoming well known for its anti-Muslim witch hunts as are many other 'departments'.

Rosenthal points out in his article that the F.B.I., in response to an expose (by Wired magazine) of offensive and blatant anti-Muslim training materials which have been described by Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois as “crude stereotypes of American Muslims and Arab Americans”, will not respond in any meaningful way. As the author states: "When confronted with abuses and misbehavior in the so-called “war on terror,” government agencies start with denial, follow up with a grudging admission of missteps and then refuse to hold anyone accountable."

This is the situation in the United States of America and in the UK/Europe the situation may be worse. Perhaps the most vocal and blatant politician (notwithstanding far right fascists) against Islam has been Tony Blair who seems to have no limits to his capacity in describing Islam and Muslims as a threat to Western civilization. Whether Mr. Blair intended it or not, he has energized extreme right wing nationalism in the UK. He has made it clear that Muslims are suspect. Today in the UK Muslims are under attack from lumpen-racists, media, and politicians.

The Rise of European Fascism

Western media have been pushing the Islamic threat and it is they, perhaps more than anything or anybody else, that have pushed Muslims in a very dangerous corner. As economic conditions deteriorate, the danger increases. Attacks on immigrants in general are easily encouraged in a climate of economic uncertainty and insecurity. It is this type of environment where nationalism and fascist sentiments thrive.

In the 1930s, in Europe, when economic instability compelled the press and politicians to urge citizens seek out lateral enemies (Jews, Gypsies, African Europeans) to distract citizens from horizontal enemies (the ultra wealthy), extreme and violent anti-Jewish, anti-African, anti-immigrant and anti-anything that 'isn't us' reactions followed culminating in the slaughter of millions of innocent people. Signs of a re-emergent fascism are on the rise throughout Europe as it had in the 30s. This time it will not be Jews but Muslims that pay the price.

In this backdrop, established, irresponsible, and hysterical political voices like that of Tony Blair make statements like “...there is the most enormous threat from the combination of this radical extreme movement and the fact that, if they could, they would use nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons. You can’t take a risk with that happening.” Anders Breivik was listening and he acted. He was also listening to mainstream media, right wing alarmists, and various rightist and 'moderate' politicians spewing hatred against a religion of over one billion people. It is only a matter of time before deranged psychopaths pick up their cues from these 'legitimate' sources and run with it. And Breivik ran with it. He murdered, not Muslims, but what he perceived as leftists/Marxists for being soft on Muslims and immigration. He has declared that there is a conspiracy by Muslims aimed at taking control of Europe.

The very same political movement that killed Jews (because they were Jews and no other reason) in the 1930s, namely far right fascists, are now flirting with right wing Zionists and Zionists are flirting back. In a bizarre twist of political reality, they stand together against a common enemy. Tom Heneghan, writing for Reuters states: "Geert Wilders, whose populist far-right party supports the Dutch minority government, told Reuters last week (December 2010) he was organizing an "international freedom alliance" to link grass-roots groups active in "the fight against Islam.

Earlier this month, Wilders visited Israel and backed its West Bank settlements, saying Palestinians there should move to Jordan. Like-minded German, Austrian, Belgian, Swedish and other far-rightists were on their own Israel tour at the same time.

"Our culture is based on Christianity, Judaism and humanism and (the Israelis) are fighting our fight," Wilders told Reuters in Amsterdam last week. "If Jerusalem falls, Amsterdam and New York will be next."

Heneghan makes the point that extreme attitudes against Muslims are creeping into mainstream political normalcy. He observes, "Campaigns aimed at Muslims have been gaining ground in Europe, most notably with the Swiss minaret ban last year and France's law this year against full facial veils in public, which Wilders said the Netherlands should copy next year.

Support for these steps has spread beyond anti-immigrant parties and toward the political center as globalization and the aging of Europe's population fuel voters' concerns about national sovereignty, according to a leading French analyst.

Political scientist Dominique Reynie said the financial crisis had prompted more voters to agree with the far right that their political elites were incompetent."

The right wing alliance with Zionists will provide them with legitimacy and support from quarters they would never gain trust with otherwise; namely Jews, the very same people they slaughtered two generations ago.

Far right zealots are in the margins in every corner of Europe from Russia to the UK. And as they stand in the margins and listen to the likes of the former Prime Minister, as they watch the murderous zeal of Barack Obama, and they listen to and watch mainstream news organizations demonize Islam, they are empowered and encouraged.

When established individuals and organizations are silently in cahoots with the extreme right; when they agree in hushed tones to fight Islam and to harm Muslim people, we all need to take notice. That is the first step and although it may seem insurmountable, it isn't. From there we need to stand shoulder to shoulder with people that are potential victims of cowardice and hatred. We need to stand up and defend them.

We need to imagine that we managed to travel back in time; we are standing in Europe in the 1930s. We know what's about to happen. We need to find a way to stop it before it gets out of control. We need to do it because it is possible, maybe even probable, that this is more than a metaphor.

La Gratuite Scolaire

The students of Quebec are not only fighting tuition hikes in their own province, they are leading the charge against crippling austerity measures forced upon citizens throughout the capitalist world. The importance, the vital necessity, of fighting austerity is reflected in this single issue.

If we fail to succeed in this fight, we will be aiding and abetting the criminal and wholesale theft of and destruction of a standard of life that is rightfully ours and it will be lost to our children. The legacy of this will be a legacy of barbarism. The importance of this struggle cannot be overstated. The students are fighting one of many fronts.

The Right to Education

Prior to Sputnik, access to higher education was almost exclusively a privilege of the monied classes. The Russians beat the Americans into space and as a result, the National Defense Education Act of 1958 was established in the United States. Other Western nations followed suit and the importance of higher education was widely recognized. Funding into scientific research and development and education in general was now a top priority.


It is no coincidence that access to education, health care, and the erosion of public infrastructure throughout the Western world follows the collapse of the Soviet Union. Competition between the two superpowers was directly and indirectly beneficial to citizens in many countries, most notably in the West. The disappearance of the evil Red menace, our collective nemesis, has ended the compulsion of Western governments to provide for a healthy 'commons'.
Access to higher education should be based on the individuals capacity to succeed. It should never be based on financial means. The latter only entrenches class privilege and divisions and it assigns scores of highly intelligent members of the working class to a life where they do not utilize their capacity. This is not only detrimental to the individual, it is detrimental to society as a whole; the end result being an educated class, many of which are in over their heads and an uneducated class, many of which resent their occupations and lives. Most of us know many examples of both in spite of access to student loans and bursaries for working class people.

The principle we need to uphold is that if an individual has the capacity and desire to be a doctor, an engineer, or a rocket scientist the individual should be granted the means and the encouragement to do so.

The Student Strike

The intensity and the breadth of the strike is impressive. It has been energetic and sustained now for almost three months and shows no signs of slowing down. The protests are not only shaking the Liberal government of Jean Charest, it is becoming internationally recognized a force to be reckoned with. For his part, Charest has conceded that tuition hikes will proceed at a slower pace than was planned. He aims to appear to kick the can down the road and let the less formidable ten year olds deal with it. Charest is offering to spread tuition hikes over seven years instead of five, adding a paltry $35 million in bursaries, linking student loan payback to post graduation income, and several other fuzzy concessions that amount to lies. The offer is right called by student organizers what it is; an insult.

In spite of attempts by establishment media to divide students and turn public opinion against them, the students of Quebec are showing remarkable integrity, solidarity, and collective intelligence. The ruling Liberals had aimed to separate the largest of student groups, the CLASSE, by forcing them to humility after a constituency office was invaded. The Liberals demanded they denounce the incident. Charest is refusing to negotiate with CLASSE. Student federations involved responded by supporting CLASSE. They point out that such a denunciation would require an agreement by their congress.

This type of divide and conquer strategy is used by the state to divide strong social movements and to gain control of them. The issue is not violence on the part of the students. It is about government gaining control. In all protest and political movements, the state will utilize several strategies to weaken movement and control the outcome. They will be infiltrated by agent provocateurs, they will be criticized as extremist and unreasonable by the media, they will be arrested and attacked by police and/or military. The state will do its utmost to break solidarity. The student strikes in Quebec are certainly the targets of such campaigns and the insult offered up by Charest is a tactical move to divide the students.

For its part, CLASSE appear to be a highly sophisticated organization. Their aim is beyond freezing tuition rates. Their aim is la gratuite scolaire, free and universal access to post secondary education. They are well organized and appear to be on top of state strategies and tactics that aim to crush them.
These are days of increasingly aggressive attacks on unions and the working class in general. Wages are being slashed and infrastructure is crumbling. Profits are at an all time high on the backs of average citizens. Unions and the Occupy movement need to join in solidarity with the protesters.

Canada and Quebec

In spite of established Canadian media and politicians proclivities, Canadians and especially the people of Quebec are not subservient, docile, quisling whores. Canadians see inequality as 'the' major social issue. A recent poll suggests that Canadians are willing to pay more in taxes to lessen the advantages the wealthy enjoy over the working class. 64% of Canadians are willing to pay more taxes to save social programs. Even Conservative voters tend to agree. 58% of these agree that they would pay more taxes to save social programs.

Right wing organizations like the Fraser Institute, CTV News and other established corporate media have been working overtime for decades to indoctrinate Canadians to their way of thinking. Canadians have been hearing the corporate right scream hysterical about the evil of taxation, the pernicious nature of the 'welfare state', the glories of unbridled free enterprise and so on. In spite of all this, Canadians remain even more vigilant about maintaining socialized health care and are highly sensitive to fairness and the public good. The more the corporate right and their politicians establish unbridled neo liberal financial anarchy, the more left wing Canadians turn.

The protests will likely ensure that Quebec will remain the province in Canada and region of North America with the most accessible post secondary education. The citizens of Quebec will have the greatest potential for the Sputnik of the 21st century. Through access to universities, is they that will receive the greatest quantity and as a result, the greatest quality education.

They are already teaching us a valuable lesson.

Fatal Betrayal

Benjamin Netinyahu is urging an Iranian attack on Israel. He is begging for it.

He has recently made statements that are parroted and backed up throughout mainstream media that state, clearly, Iran should be attacked. A pre-emptive attack will safeguard Israelis against an Iranian attack against them. Iran is, according to Netinyahu, a threat to Israel and he makes it clear, with no ambiguity whatsoever, that Israel is a threat to Iran. It follows then, that he would have no ethical objection to an Iranian attack on Israel.

It is quite possible that Benjamin Netinyahu presents more serious threat to Israel than he does to Iran.

International Law

Pre emptive war or, preventative war, is clearly against International Law. Article 2, Section 4 of the UN Charter prohibits all members from using or threatening to use pre-emptive war: "All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

Further to this, Article 51 states that self defense is acceptable only if an armed attack has occurred. These principles are vitally important if we intend a future without capricious barbarism.

Detractors will argue that the United States and Israel are modern democracies and rightfully have a role to police the region and the world; most especially the backward and barbaric Middle East. These notions ignore historical and contemporary reality. The Middle East was civilized and at relative peace long before the European tribes got there. And the killing and the oppression that are current in the Middle East is the handiwork of Occidental Empires.

Certainly, the United States and Israel should not be given benefit of doubt considering the death, oppression, and suffering that is occurring and has occurred throughout the Islamic world at their hands.

Dangerous Precedents

Aside from International Law and aside from moral and ethical considerations civilized nations should hold to, there is the equally compelling strategic weakness underlying this whole affair from the point of view of the average Israeli citizen. Their Prime Minister is not only proclaiming to the world that Israel can and should use pre-emptive force against any nation that Israel feels a threat from, he is also telling the whole world that doing so against Israel is fair game. This is clearly implied when he issues threats against Iran. In other words, he is telling Iran you'd better build nuclear arms and you better do it quick because we are going to attack you; it's just a matter of time. He is also suggesting to other nations, including nuclear armed Pakistan, that attacking Israel is not only a good idea, it's a matter of survival and it's perfectly acceptable.

No serious analyst considers Iran a threat to Israel. Hawkish speech spews from the mouths of simple shills and war mongers, or from consequential players with serious intent. Iran is not realistically in a position to build nuclear weapons and if had them it could never use them against Israel. One reason is that it would be suicide. MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) during the cold war it worked between the USA and the USSR for a reason.

The right wing in Israel tell the world that Israel feels threatened over some ambiguous comments made by Ahmadinejad in an interview; comments that were actually not a threat to the nation of Israel. They believe they can justify waging war because possibly, maybe, someday, Iran might have nuclear weapons and if they do, possibly, maybe, someday, they could attack Israel. Think of how threatened Iranians feel at the moment when month after month, week after week, and day after day both Israel and Western powers issue both implicit and explicit threats against them.

The Real Threat

The upshot is - it is a lie. Iran presents no threat to Israel. Israel and/or Washington are intent on waging war against Iran and we are not being told the real reasons for it. We were not told why Iraq and Afghanistan were attacked. As Buffalo Springfield warned in the 60s; 'There's something's happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear'.
Currently, in the midst of Obama and Netinyahu playing an ominous 'good cop bad cop' routine against Iran, the Israelis are actively planning for war. They are getting absolutely manic about it:

"Israel is to test an advanced anti-ballistic missile system in the coming weeks, inevitably fuelling speculation about preparations for a possible military confrontation with Iran.

The announcement that the first test of the Arrow 3 interceptor system would be performed "in the near future" was made as the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, flew to the US ahead of a crucial meeting with President Barack Obama at which Iran will top the agenda. Netanyahu is expected to press for a clear US commitment to military action if diplomacy and sanctions fail."

In the face of the lies and the wars that follow the lies, we really need to analyze what has occurred and what is occurring. We need to look for patterns. Something's happening beneath the surface. The real intent may be discovered if we examine action and not words, if we examine outcomes instead of the official rationale.

Ominous Patterns

It may be that the United States had no intention of destroying the Taliban or Al Qeada. If we look at outcomes, we may conclude; on the contrary. The pattern suggests that the Americans aim to empower the clerics throughout the Middle East and to destroy the more secular and rationally based governments. Rational based, quasi democratic, and secular lite governments are being toppled in rapid secession. Even America's close ally and friend, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, has fallen to be replaced with what will probably be a more cleric based government. While this may not have been engineered by Washington, it may play into their hands if they are pushing secular governments out in favour of theocracies.

Syrian rebels are positioned to oust Bashar Al Assad of Syria; another more or less secular leader with a measure of control of the nation that may be unacceptable to Washington. It is worth noting that Assad, a Bathist (as was Saddam Hussein) has been somewhat resistant to American style economic liberalization.

To suggest the United States simply reacts like the hapless buffoons they appear to be would be to make an enormous error in judgment. They certainly have a game plan. Naturally, it isn't shared with the public. We can almost predict the aims of Washington by watching Anderson Cooper on CNN. Whenever his handlers tell him to put forth a full righteous sneer at a particular leader or government, you can almost be sure that leader will soon be dead. He sneered at Gaddafi and various others. It appears to be a death sneer. And now he is sneering at Assad.

There is speculation that the Americans are supporting the uprising and may be behind the uprising in Syria. It's hard to say. What is easy to say is that it fits into a larger pattern.

Within that pattern, the Taliban are stronger than ever. Al Qeada, an element foreign to Iraq and an element that Saddam Hussein would have summarily executed with brutal force, is now operating in Iraq on a large scale. They will soon gather strength in Syria. That is, if this pattern has merit.

Washington's reasons for courting and facilitating emerging regressive Islamic dictatorships over secularists is unclear. It is likely the same reasoning that places politicians in Washington and London in lock step with the vicious established religious dictators of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and so on.

If the pattern continues, all hints of rational based and possibly progressive elements to governments in the Middle East will be wiped out in favour of a return to regressive and absolute feudal rule. The destabilization of Iran through internal dissent, a government that is both ruled through democratic elections as well as the Leader of the Revolution, or, Supreme Leader, may be seen as futile. Assassination may also be futile and pointless. Destabilization through war (for whatever reason) may get them to their objectives. America had a measure of control of Iran under the CIA installation of the Shah that was comfortable for them. The combination of a cleric and a democratically elected government may be impossible for them to control.

Although it is difficult to imagine what the end game may be, if these observations of patterns have any merit, it would also suggest that promoting tremendous instability into the region is another desired outcome. An era of destabilization rife with terrorism and competing religious factions waging civil war against each other may be in the cards. An environment like that would ostensibly require strict control and those controllers (dictators) may be the optimal choice for Washington.

Where Does Israel Fit?

Israel is standing in quicksand if this pattern is what it appears to be.
As it is, the demise of Mubarak, the destabilization of Syria, the ongoing abuse of Palestinians and so on do nothing to secure the safety of the Israeli people. As is often the case, what is promoted as security is anything but. The ongoing destabilization of the region and the empowerment of clerics is doing nothing to help long term Israeli security. Attacking Iran may push their situation over a tipping point.

If the people of Israel think that Washington is loyal to anything or anybody, they need to really examine history. They need to examine what happened to various puppet/minions, from every corner of the globe when they are no longer useful to the designs of Empire. Loyal - they are not. Ruthless - they are. When your enemies are more useful to them than you are, you are finished.

The right wing in Israel has been shocked by what they see as America's betrayal of Mubarak. They shouldn't be. America bears no loyalty, not even to its own working classes. The state made no apologies when it facilitated the export of millions of American jobs offshore for profit. They are beholden only to those that have bought and paid for the President and Congress. And when you, dear Israeli citizen, are no longer useful, you too will be shocked. Between now and then, reach out to your Palestinian brothers and sisters, to your Iranian and Arab comrades. They need you and the day is coming when you will need them. Say 'no' to war against Iran.

Eventually, we may see an aging, sneering, Anderson Cooper outraged at Israel's considerable crimes against humanity. Don't give him anything to sneer at.

Wanted For Murder: Barack Obama

On February 8 (2012), eight young boys were slaughtered by American bombs as they tried to keep warm as they tended sheep. NATO apologized and excused themselves by saying, " “The decision to bomb this group was made because they were seen as adult-sized and moving in a tactical fashion", according to the New York Times. Relatives of the boys said that one boy was 12 and several others were younger. NATO countered this: “Our view is that initial assessment suggests they that they are closer to 15 to 16 with one older.”

This is not an isolated event. While MWC readers know this is not an isolated event, those that rely on mainstream media for their news probably don't know about this and the ongoing NATO atrocities that have been happening with disturbing regularity over the past number of years.

On February 4 The Bureau of Investigative Journalism issued a report entitled, "Obama terror drones: CIA tactics in Pakistan include targeting rescuers and funerals".

The report states that since Obama took office three years ago, "between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. A three month investigation including eye witness reports has found evidence that at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners."

The report also states that unmanned Predator or Reaper strikes occur in Pakistan averaging one every four days. John Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, argues that the US has the right to unilaterally strike terrorists anywhere in the world, not just what he called ‘hot battlefields’. The targeting of rescuers after an initial attack as well as funerals is clearly a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Many legal experts disagree with Brennan. "Naz Modirzadeh, Associate Director of the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) at Harvard University, said killing people at a rescue site may have no legal justification.

‘Not to mince words here, if it is not in a situation of armed conflict, unless it falls into the very narrow area of imminent threat then it is an extra-judicial execution’, she said. ‘We don’t even need to get to the nuance of who’s who, and are people there for rescue or not. Because each death is illegal. Each death is a murder in that case.’

Between May 2009 and June 2011, at least fifteen attacks on rescuers were reported by credible news media, including the New York Times, CNN, Associated Press, ABC News and Al Jazeera.

Overall, there have been approximately 3,000 killed in drone strikes and 175 of those killed are reported to be children. Of 314 strikes, 262 were carried out by Obama.

The Crime

As human rights abuses go, as war crimes go, as crimes against humanity go, the dropping of bombs on populated areas is among the most egregious methods of mass murder in the history of humanity. Aside from recent drone attacks in Middle Eastern countries, many thousands have been slaughtered by NATO or American bombs in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Libya, Lebanon, Grenada, Yemen, Somalia, and Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and all the watchdogs that have the self appointed responsibility for raising the alarm about human rights abuses seem to overlook the dropping of bombs on civilians. They mention it when its status as a crime is not controversial but considering what is actually happening, perhaps it's fair to say they don't want to rock the American boat. The civilians that are killed in these bomb attacks are dead as surely as the Jews that died in Hitler's ovens. They live in terror as the people of New York felt on September 11, 2001 and they live with it on a daily basis.

If you compare this crime with torture, first degree murder, sex crimes or any conceivable crime, none can compare with the terror and suffering that accompanies the dropping of bombs on populated areas. Serial killers stalk, rape, and murder women and its front page news. Psychopaths cruelly carry out their nefarious deeds and it haunts our nightmares. Yet NATO murders as a matter of habit and we don't even notice.

The most outrageous act that has affected public consciousness in the West was the terrorist attacks on the twin towers in New York. That was the mother of all terrorist attacks. Those attacks have taken on an air of sanctity, of religious seriousness. There is not much argument from anywhere; those attacks were singularly brutal in their indiscriminate violence and they ripped through the collective consciousness of America. America has been changed by it and unfortunately, that change is not pretty. We are right to view this act with the horror and disgust that is the common reaction to them.

White House Mafia

The President of the United States recently carried out a ‘hit’ on Anwar al Awlaki. And what did he use to kill this American citizen? He used a bomb. He not only killed Awlaki but anybody that was in the vicinity. Did Obama care about anybody that was in the vicinity? No he did not. Did he care that he carried out an illegal murder of an American citizen?

A week later he killed Awlaki's 16 year old son, again with a bomb that killed anybody near the boy that might have been guilty of being Awlaki's son.

There is no member of organized crime families or street gangs that can come close to the psychopathic callousness found among those in the employ of the American state. Their lofty status does not make them immune from prosecution. Those that have attacked civilians and murdered them are guilty of war crimes. President Obama has joined an exclusive club. A club whose current members include but is not exclusive to Robert McNamara, Henry Kissinger, Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bill Clinton, Paul Wolfowitz.

Given the history, it's not much wonder we've come to expect the murder of civilians as par for the course. But when we consider the open boasting about the current savagery - as Obama basks in the limelight of extrajudicial murder, we may feel as if the most crude 'B' rated movies of late night TV, the movie where a mad man takes over the word, to be prophetic. We don't live in interesting times as much as we live in bizarre times.

To be fair, they do sometimes offer weak justifications for the ongoing mass murders. They will justify it and say that the terrorists are at fault for using human shields. That is why innocent people die. They imagine a scenario where the locals that are defending their invaded homeland (terrorists or 'insurgents) leave the home when the Americans approach, stand in the desert with an AK 47, and let the American bombs rain down on them as they shoot in the general direction of the planes that sail safely through the stratosphere and obliterate them.

Or, they may argue that terrorists live in the village and that the pragmatic utility of killing women and children justify getting the terrorists to save the lives of good clean 'White people'. When arguments are made in such a way, we know we are dealing with rationalizations that are not even vaguely connected to rationality.

In the coming months and years, it is likely that thousands of people; people that are now reading opinion pieces as you are reading this one, people that are being tucked into bed by their parents for a good night's sleep, people that are falling in love and people that are embarrassed because they said something silly, will be slaughtered by American or, NATO bombs. Those people will be guilty of being born in Iran.

References

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/02/04/obama-terror-drones-cia-tactics-in-pakistan-include-targeting-rescuers-and-funerals/

http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2011/08/10/google-map/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/world/asia/19pstan.html?_r=1&ref=world

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-28/world/pakistan.drone.strike_1_drone-strikes-drone-attack-tribal-region?_s=PM:WORLD

http://www.dailyamericannews.com/newsnow/x1738176407/Suspected-US-missiles-strikes-kill-11-in-Pakistan

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2010/01/20101613294018697.html

http://www.dannen.com/decision/int-law.html#D

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/world/asia/nato-acknowledges-bombing-killed-eight-young-afghans.html?_r=2

Caterpillar: Symptoms of Social Cancer

As surely as cancer rots away the individual body, there are malignant forms of social cancer that sicken and eat away at the social world of human beings. Some forms are fast, violent, and deadly. Other forms of cancer rot away at the collective body, year in, year out. The host becomes progressively ill and eventually, it dies.

There is no way to spend one billion dollars in one lifetime. Yet, the now infamous one percenters have become so addicted to accumulating wealth, they can't seem to stop. A billion isn't enough. Like a virulent virus, like a pernicious addiction, their habit becomes pathological. They will do anything in their grasp to fill the gaping needs of the affliction. Nothing is beyond them. Ethics and morality are not factors. They will wage war, they will destroy communities, they will stop at nothing. Only one thing counts and that thing is profit. They cannot stop. They are utter evil and they are our enemy.

Caterpillar


450 workers in London, Ontario, have just been evicted from their means of living by their employer, Caterpillar Inc. This follows months of negotiations, if that’s what you call it when one side is told; Take a 50% wage cut or you're finished.

Canadian Autoworkers President, Ken Lewenza, said, "We were never in the ring here in a meaningful way." That's understating the obvious to say the least.

Pat Byrne, the managing director heading management consulting at AlixPartners LLP in New York, said labour unions in Canada need to show more willingness to adjust. That is code for: You are serfs. Take it or take nothing. And shut up.
He said, "The labour unions - I'm not sure they really get it in terms of globalization."

He speaks for the ugly capitalist class. He speaks for the Donald Trumps and the Mitt Romneys. The terms of exploitation must be reduced to the lowest possible denominator.

We are well on our way to the world Charles Dickens wrote about in 19th century London. A social cancer has set in and we are in deep trouble. We are in financial and social crisis. And it will get much worse.
As Thomas Walkom points out in the Toronto Star, regarding the abuse of the Caterpillar workers in London:

On Wednesday, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed into law a so-called right-to-work bill making his state the first in the U.S. industrial north to directly take on private-sector unions.

Two days later, Caterpillar — which is based in next-door Illinois — closed its unionized London plant.

Since it locked out 460 Canadian workers in January, the giant U.S. firm had made little secret of its intent to move their jobs to Muncie, Indiana.
All it was waiting for, apparently, was a signal that the state government there was serious about crippling trade unions.

The London plant closing is not an isolated event. It is part of a coordinated attack across North America on unions and wages.

As Walkom points out in the article, there is a coordinated attack on labour across North America. And it is not only North America. It's global. The current Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, is positioned to help coordinate these attacks on the middle class/working class. Harper doesn't just side with employers in labour disputes. He rubs salt in the wounds as he does it. He, like many right wing ideologues like him is not only callous. He is cruel. His treatment of workers in past disputes with employers display his cruelty in spades.

Class War


This isn't new. It has started in earnest in the 1980s under the reign of Brian Mulroney, Maggie Thatcher, and Ronald Reagan. Their neo liberal voo doo economics has since resulted in the devastation of the middle classes in Europe and North America. They were merely in the employ of the same finance capitalists that Bush, Obama, and the Europeans are currently bowing and scraping toward. It is all about ushering in a new era of financial feudalism. The wages, the pensions, the benefits that have provided a decent standard of living for workers and small business is all but dead.

On deck are civil servants and public sector unions. They too will be and are under accelerating attack from the capitalist class. And the capitalist class can justify the attack. They cite record high deficits and bankrupt governments that cannot pay the bills. And the reason they cannot pay the bills is because the wages of auto workers, miners, construction workers and public sector workers had been paying, and now they can't.

And when they are finished with evaporating public sector wages to a pittance, wages that had been demanding goods and services, wages that had been paying taxes to build roads and schools, another shock to our collective system will impact each and every one of us; one way or another.

We are in a protracted class war, a war that is well under way, and we are only now waking up to the fact that the war is on.

The time to fight is here. We cannot continue to tolerate this ongoing abuse of workers and their families. In the past our fight was a fight for wages, for benefits, for decent working conditions. Now the stakes are much higher.

As the workers in London Ontario go home, devastated, with no future. With little hope of retuning to a job with decent pay, business owners in London and their employees will also suffer. Local suppliers of goods and services to Caterpillar will suffer. And so will their families. And when they suffer, the local Tim Hortons, the local pubs - everybody hurts.
London will endure increased violence in homes, alcohol and drug consumption, crime, and those factors will in turn increase crime, drug addiction and so on. It's a downward spiral to purgatory for some, hell for others.

Capitalism, like sugar, cigarettes, gambling and alcohol is an addiction. It is an addiction that sickens and kills the collective body. It is an addiction that has turned to social cancer. A cancer that is promoted and facilitated by the likes of Stephen Harper and his subservient peers. And we have all become dependent on it.

And under capitalism, it is only when the host dies that the cancer dies.

It's about time we work on a better cure than that.

The People vs. The United Nations

The United Nations is empowered, under Article 1 of its Charter, to: "maintain international peace and security", to "develop friendly relations among nations", "to achieve international co-operation", and "to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends."

Article 2 states that its members, "shall act in accordance with the following principles":

-The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members.

-All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

-All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

-All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

The United States of America assumes the role of international arbiter and the role of policing the planet. A role rightfully granted to the United Nations. It is widely and implicitly assumed the USA carries this burden and this assumption is rarely challenged.

The World Court was established by the UN as the body to enforce international law, to ensure that no nation or leader(s) can infringe upon the sovereignty of others. It was established after World War 2 to ensure no nation or body of nations can violate elemental principles of statehood and human rights. Germany did aim to take over control of the world through terror and their own brand of exceptionalism.

The UN and the World Court operate to ensure that basic rational principles governing relations between nations are not violated. The UN is careful to ensure the it does not infringe upon the sovereignty of nations and at the same time, ensure that human beings are protected, however minimally, against war crimes and belligerent states aimed at controlling others.

The United Nations did rule against the United States in 1986 during its war against the government and people of Nicaragua. The American war was in response to the FSLN ouster of dictator Anistosia Samoza in 1979. The World Court ruled that the United States violated International Law. The United States refused to recognize the World Court ruling and broke with UN regulations. From that point on, the United States adopted a policy where it will only accept the Court's jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis or, in less diplomatic language, according to their own interests and whims.

Before and increasingly since that ruling, the United States has violated and continues to violate International Law and generally accepted norms in favour of what it terms its national security or, national interests. It operates arbitrarily and is often outrageously belligerent and aggressive to the enemy du jour.

The time has come for the United Nations to stand up to the United States of America. It is a nation that, similarly to Germany in the last century, aims to take the role of overseer of all nations.

Rogue State Extraordinaire


The USA appears to be under the control of madmen. Barack Obama speaks and appears to be reasonable and even progressive. But his actions indicate that he may be quite mad and or/dull. It appears that he is neither. It appears he is under the control of very wealthy and powerful banks and corporations. His role as President has turned this apparently sensitive and intelligent man into a war criminal. Although he is well educated in Constitutional Law and was a Senior Lecturer on the subject at the University of Chicago Law School, as President, he signed away fundamental Constitutional and habeas corpus rights in favour of political expediency.

Something's amiss.

The problem is not madmen or criminals per se. It is much worse than that. It is systemic. It is a virus. A virus spreading throughout systems the world over. A virus programmed to turn hosts toward funnelling money to finance capitalists. A virus programmed to rule nations, and the world, through violence and fear.

It manifests most noticeably vigorously through the American state. It demands the state assume control of every corner of the world, as if it’s the American state's inalieable right. It renders the UN a servile body existing only to serve its national interests.

If we were to concede that view, that the United States has the moral high ground to police the world, we could take the notion seriously. For instance, if the USA did promote human rights (as it claims), if their interventions were not based in psychopathic designs, and if there was consensus the USA assume the role of the UN as arbiter of international conflicts, doing so would give one nation control of people that have had no choice in its leaders or decisions. Doing so would be patently undemocratic.

Mission Accomplished

No reasonable person could make such arguments. American 'missions' are being carried out all over the world. One such mission has left Iraq critically unstable. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was a paradise compared to the current mess left behind by the Americans. Carnage and volatility continue in Afghanistan. Drone slaughters in Pakistan are starting up again after a brief hiatus. In short, everything the Empire touches turns to hell on earth. As bystanders, we get the impression this nation, the most heavily armed nation on the planet, should not be trusted to run with scissors.

Their pathetic accomplices like Canada, France, the United Kingdom etc. are no better. After NATO’s intervention, Libya is strained, unstable, and civil war is likely. Gaddafi loyalists and the Libyan people will not turn a blind eye to the loss of the most generous social programs and standard of living in Africa. A standard of living that easily surpassed anything millions of disenfranchised Americans or Canadians could dream of.

NATO, this 'axis of evil', is splattering blood all over the Muslim world and there isn’t much to suggest it’s going to stop.

Criminal Stupidity


Presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are trying to out-do each other in their hawkish posturing. To the shock of anybody listening, they have uttered threats on Cuba and specifically, Castro, who has retired from politics. This doesn’t matter. The American narrative in no more sophisticated than a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Castro is ‘a bad guy’ and as such, is in real mortal danger. If Obama manages to ‘take him out’, it will play large to the mentally dull and extremely violent American audiences they aim to please.

Western nations (includes Israel/ not Venezuela or Cuba in this cartoon) are apparently okay with anything and everything that oozes out of the American insane asylum. Money and power rule, reason and diplomacy are not taken seriously. And now, at Israel's pleasure, Iran appears to be on deck. There promises to be plenty of war and excitement. And once again, politicians mouth dim rationalizations; Iran may produce weapons of mass destruction, they violate human rights, they support terrorism and so on. And in the meantime, the USA and its quisling lapdogs are more guilty of what they accuse ‘the bad guys’ (Iran) of possibly doing sometime in the future - maybe. The 'good guys' in this cartoon terrorize like nobody else. They actually drop bombs on populations, they spit on habeas corpus, they have the most and the largest weapons of mass destruction. And they use them!

The absurdity of all this is whispered behind closed doors. Politicians in Latin America, in Asia, in Russia, in the Middle East and in Africa cautiously discuss the alarming nature of this madness. They are at a loss of possible ways to respond. Obviously, they don't want to be labelled 'a bad guy'. The consequences are dire. Over the past few years, America’s enemies; Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Mohammar Gaddafi, Anwar al-Awlaki and his son and many others that are not so famous have been murdered by the President of the United States or proxies.

The man America and the world believed would be sane and reasonable, Barack Obama, has just delivered a State of the Union speech where he bragged about the bravery of the American military as they successfully carried out the murder of a sick old man in Pakistan. This was quickly followed up with GOP politicians trying to out-do each other, playing to Florida voters, promising to kill another old man. America has gone completely insane. It is a nation out of control.

The genesis of the United Nations was in response to a world hurting after Germany had gone completely mad. The UN was created to respond to this kind of developing climate. The uncomfortable and possibly dangerous task of standing up to these bullies must be done. The same weather patterns are become clear with each passing month. It is time to stop being polite and diplomatic to a nation that is anything but diplomatic and polite. It is time to make the madmen uncomfortable. The people of Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela are under imminent threat. In reality, the people of all nations, including the United States and Israel, are under the very same threat.

Supporting the UN


To restore sanity and to end the arbitrary and dangerous power held by rogue states (such as the current configuration in the United States) we must make our voices heard through protests and through activism. We must work in concert with the voices of reason at the UN. And they must work with us. The United Nations is far from homogeneous. There are voices for peace, reason, and rule of law that are being drowned out by the psychopath element. Their efforts are stonewalled. We must help them through increasing the level of discomfort for those that aim to wage war.

At this point the people of Iran are in grave danger. We, the people of the United States, Israel, Canada, the UK - and all nations, must stand up and demand that we will not accept war on Iran. We must empowered the voices of reason at the UN to enforce its Charter and demand that this drive to endless war be stopped. We need to develop connections in solidarity with each other and with politicians we may disagree with on many issues but remain committed to rule of law and reason. We may disagree with Ron Paul on the right and President Chavez on the left, but as long as they are committed to rule of law and reason, they are allies. Like them or hate them, they stand on principles and against the madness and irrationality of war and Empire.

Should the UN cower to the designs of the madmen of corporate America and nationalist Israel and sanction war against the people of Iran; if it allows the United States to continue to police the world in 'its' own interests, and if it continues to turn a blind eye to the excessive human rights abuses carried out against men, woman, and children; most notably, the dropping of bombs on them, we must then ask ourselves - and the UN must ask itself, what is the point of existing at all?

Reform or Revolution: Facing Into the Abyss - Part Two

The possibility of reformation of the economic system to a degree where citizens may enjoy a standard of living similar to the 'middle classes' in the 20th century may not exist (as implied in the previous article). This article will make the argument that even if reformation was possible, doing so is not desirable. But, that is debatable.

Reformation aims to maintain the existing institutions, tweaking them to suit our needs. Revolution on the other hand, aims to take control of the institutions that dominate our lives. It aims to place control of them into the hands of those that have made them work in the first place. It aims to remove control from those that have a goal in mind and one goal only. To serve themselves to the detriment of everybody else. Instead, the aim should be to abolish or change institutions that do not serve the public good.

Fundamentally, the plight of the general population is the same now as it was for hundreds of years under feudalism. Under feudalism, wealth was created on the ground and made its way, forcibly, to the lords and monarchs. The serfs, slaves, of yesterday and wages slaves today have little control of the whims of power that control our lives. Under feudalism, power was exercised through violent repression. Whatever arbitrary whim His majesty may entertain, at His pleasure, would be adhered to. Under capitalism, it is not a matter of arbitrary decisions made by some personality with power but rather, the fluctuations of global capital dictate life on the ground.

These fluctuations and processes affect us and our response is far from homogeneous. On the one hand citizens swallow the notion that we have but two choices; free market capitalism (so called) or, communist totalitarianism. They will naturally gravitate toward reform (if they can muster any tolerance of change at all). The second strain will see a myriad of choices about how we can produce and distribute goods and services. Unfortunately for the former group, there has never been any system and probably never will be as radical and shape shifting as capitalism. Especially now. Instability and insecurity are two features the system will never shake. Just when we get used to certain ways of doing things, more efficient and innovative means are invented. The results can be both good and bad.

In times of great upset and insecurity, as are occurring now, more radical overall changes are demanded by citizens, many of whom are now out of work and without income. They become less reform minded and demand revolutionary change. We are entering these times. The days of relative stability and security are behind us.

The Current Context

Over the past three decades the so-called 1% have declared, through institutions like the World Bank, the IMF, and their runners (politicians), that government is the enemy and particularly, wealth redistribution. They have called for alarming reductions in government influence and control of financial and non financial matters. And as we have seen, they have ensured that government programs and institutions that serve the 99% are reduced or abolished but have made sure that the 1% is protected through bailouts and vast sums spent on their collective bodyguard, the military. As has been observed, it is a system of socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.

The upper classes, the 1%, are fast becoming explicit controllers of states. They are tossing political baggage such as Berlusconi and Papandreaou out into the street. Governments have been put into the hands of economists in the service of his majesty's pleasure. They demand, through the IMF and other sock puppets that governments follow the neo liberal line to the letter. This always means; privatize and control everything that can be bought and sold and to slash and burn anything and everything that looks like wealth distribution. The infrastructure that large portions of the population relied upon can't be scrapped quick enough for them. We are entering a bizarre and frightening twilight zone.

In response to all this, citizens are voicing outrage and disaffection with the capitalist system itself. Mainstream media and wealthy capital gamblers repeat endlessly the lie that the protesters do not articulate their anger. And in the meantime, the protesters repeat, over and over and over again that the top 1% have everything and are taking more and they (we), the general population, have little and are getting less. Implicit in this complaint is a call to end the capitalist system altogether. Perhaps the ruling class can't hear it out of disbelief; they may be in a state of shock and awe.

Protests like this are not altogether new. Prior to the September 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre, anti-capitalist protests were large and angry. The most memorable occurred in Seattle and in Quebec City. They were spreading and becoming a force to be reckoned with. After 9 11, the protests disappeared, the mood changed.

Anti capitalist protests had been absent in the heart of the hegemony prior the Seattle/Quebec City uprisings. Protests themselves however, are nothing new. We have become accustomed to single issue protests that are implicitly reformist in nature. There were civil rights protests, women's rights, gay rights, environmental protests, and protests for many various issues. They all had in common the underlying desire to tweak the system, to make the plight of a certain segment of the population better.

Protests against capitalism itself are a direct result of the excesses of modern monopoly capitalism. This is a result of neo liberal policies that have been shoved down our collective throats. This is a result of the policies of governments that have been at the beck and call of the ruling class. These statements would be viewed as excessively radical and unrealistic only a few short years ago. Now, they are hardly controversial.

Organizing A Substantial Movement

The breadth and depth of this organic movement is truly revolutionary. This movement is both radical and widespread. These are the conditions that make capitalist monarchs shudder, and with good reason. These are conditions that are revolutionary. The capitalist world is pregnant with revolution.

Thus far however, the comfortable minority have little to fear. So far, it is a protest movement and that's all it is. This movement is simply a reaction to excessive money hoarding and Imperial brutality. To take it a step farther would require organization.

Taking that step requires vision. An alternative to the status quo needs to be articulated. What would that society look like? How do we get there?
For the most part, much of our collective mentality is mired in traditional reformist mode. Reformation is all about redistributing wealth and tinkering and modifying the current system. At this point, there isn't much stomach for it either in the halls of parliament or on the ground. There certainly is not any ideas about redistribution of wealth amongst the rulers of us all. It's not that they don't want to. They couldn't, even if they did want to. The reasons for that are discussed in the previous article (Reform or Revolution: Facing Into the Abyss).

We are collectively in a bit of a pickle, so to speak. Do nothing and we are going to lose jobs, homes, and many of our vital needs. We need to do something but we are utterly unorganized. We can continue to protest. We can complain and make noise. But so what?

Our first step is to bring the debate out into the open. We need to reach some consensus as to where we go from here and we need consensus on broad goals. Will we aim to reform the crippled capitalist system? Can we? These questions need debate. If we can, and if we want to, let's get at it. Let's work together and make sure it happens. If we agree that we cannot, we have a lot of work to do.

At this point we need to sustain the protest movement. And as it develops, we will need to build solidarity and alliances. We need to develop broad goals and specific tactics. Secondly, we need to formalize alliances between individual organizers, writers, news outlets, and organizations. We need to call on past reformist groups; women's rights, gay rights, unions, anti-poverty activists, greens, and reds. We also need socialists, communists, social democratic parties, anarchists and we need to communicate in a genuine way. We need to accommodate and compromise within this movement and we need to develop a vision; a grand goal.

There will be distrust and conflict within the movement but that cannot deter us. There will be great efforts to fracture and splinter the movement. There will be fights among broad sections and there will be groups aimed at controlling and commandeering it. In response, we accept nothing less than democracy. If the majority want reform, we reform. If the majority want revolutionary changes, we aim for that. If the majority want to live off the avails of crass capitalism, so be it. It is vital to listen to others and to be willing to change our minds.

Let the best, and hopefully the most democratic and rational arguments carry the day. Now is no time to be rigid. The time for energetic, honest, and fearless debate has arrived.

One thing is clear. Reform occurs only when the threat of revolution is real.

Reform or Revolution: Facing Into the Abyss

The gravity of the current economic situation appears to be sinking in. Day by day, week by week, and month by month, we are waking out of our docile slumber. People are hitting the streets. This is not the handiwork of some dissident group with an ideological agenda. It is the natural outpouring of citizens anger, frustration, and hopelessness. The nature of the problem; capitalism, corporate greed, and careerist politicians has been expressed and expressed very well in many different forums. There seems to be some general consensus that we are in deep trouble.
Solidarity is crucial. We need to stick together and work together. The 1% will aim to fracture this new organic movement. We need to ensure that we don't do their dirty work for them. And no doubt, we will have enormous disagreements. Reformers will argue with revolutionaries, liberals will argue with socialists and so on. We need to use those differences of opinion to strengthen ourselves. The crux of the problem needs to be assessed and thoroughly analysed.
What is crucial is that we don't get mired in 'my opinion' or 'my ideology' and that we listen to each other. Debate is important and it is healthy. That is how we learn and grow. It is vital that you look at what I say and that I look at your analysis. After all, we all want the same things. We want stability, peace, and we want governance 'by, for, and of the people'. We want our kids and our neighbours to be able to eat. We are bound together by common goals. How we get there will need to be worked out.
What is presented here is a view, an opinion. You may not agree with it but please, take a minute to read it. If it is correct, our collective response then must take on a particular shape. If it is wrong, then we will need to point that out. We need to develop an assessment. We need to uncover the crux of the problem. If we can find some agreement on the nature of the problem, and we can, we may then develop a plan of action to correct it.
This then is an assessment of the current problem.
Analysis
The following analysis may describe the nature and scope of the problem. And if this analysis is correct, there is no easy way out. The upshot of this analysis is that capitalism itself has outlived its usefulness. Further to this, it has become financially toxic to all but those on the top of the heap. And the longer we depend on it, the worse the situation will become.
This view suggests that capitalism, due precisely to its efficiency and energy, has become antithetical to human needs. While the profit motive has served the majority in the developed world well, it will no longer do so. It will render the lot of us serfs without lords, slaves with no master. It will impoverish us and it will kill us. It will steal our vital needs or prohibit them from ever being produced.
The efficiency aspect, while impressive, is turning on us all. The wizard technology we've become used to has rendered many occupations obsolete. It can manufacture all we need with very little labour input. And, given time, it may be able to produce all we need with the push of a few buttons. While that may sound good, this condition does not suit capitalism. In fact, capitalism cannot survive this condition. It is impossible.
While capitalism may spit employees out onto the street, it needs consumers. Unfortunately for capitalism, an individual needs to be a worker before he or she is a consumer. The worker and consumer inhabit the same physical body.
The Diminishing Rate of Profit
As capitalism matures, the rate of profit from a given unit of labour diminishes. That is, it becomes more difficult to squeeze a dime of profit from an hour of labour. To make matters worse, global competition has rendered the old formula where firms were subsided by the state to pay decent wages, dead. Workers are now competing with the most oppressive terms of exploitation on the planet. The old (so called) 'American dream' is finished. It's time to wake up.
Individual firms are under constant strain from two sources; competition from other firms and ongoing costs such as maintaining payment of wages to employees.
Firms aim to increase productivity as much as possible. This is accomplished through improving technology and through squeezing as much work from a worker as is manageable. It is in their interests to get workers to work as hard as possible for as little pay as possible. On both counts, they are doing very well.
It is vital to out-compete other firms; to drive costs down. This allows the firm to lower prices. Efficiency and low prices are the objective. Profit is the goal.
Large scale production has become impressive in its efficiency. To lower costs firms utilize lateral acquisition of resources that are required goods and services that go into production or, they contract out to sources that will fetch the product at lower prices than anyone else. Generally speaking, the pressure to cut costs also cuts the rate of profit.
Suppose the rate of profit were to remain constant. In that case profit would expand according to what was invested in stocks. If the rate is falling however, profit is naturally more difficult to achieve. And when this occurs, the incentive to invest in manufacturing diminishes. As investing in stocks grows more risky, the growth of capital in stocks falls. The rot of the integrity of the value of liquid capital spreads. Capital itself loses its integrity and value. And as long as they depend on worker's wages to pay the bills when in reality they can't, the crisis related to the value of money is magnified.
Additionally, the ensuing lack of wages results in not only lack of demand but in an evaporation of the tax base. Workers that depend on the tax base such as civil servants and teachers are thrown out of work as a result, further eroding the diminishing tax base. This exacerbates the problem by driving down demand for goods and services which in turn forces more firms out of business and workers onto the streets. We are entering an economic black hole, a period of crisis.
This crisis is fundamentally different than cyclical fluctuations (recessions) which may be remedied in various ways such as investing in public works with tax dollars and borrowing until the ship is righted again. Similar crisis occurred in the periods 1873 to 1893 and from 1929 to 1941.

In its heyday, the capitalist system saw increased real wages in western economies. From 1947 to 1967 real wages grew in the United States by approximately 50%. Unemployment was not an issue, and deficits were miniscule. The so-called Western world was the base of manufacturing and consumption. But, as Professor Ismael Hossein-Zadeh points out in a recent article: "By the late 1960s and early 1970s ... both US capital and labor were no longer unrivaled in global markets. Furthermore, during the long cycle of the immediate post-war expansion US manufacturers had invested so much in fixed capital, or capacity building, that by the late 1960s their profit rates had begun to decline as the capital-labor ratio of their operations had become too high. In other words, the enormous amounts of the so-called “sunk costs,” mainly in the form of fixed capital, or plant and equipment, had significantly eroded their profit rates."

As the rate of capital accumulation decelerates, and capital, like a shark, needs to continually eat and grow, or die, the shark itself becomes more aggressive and ruthless. It will squeeze an extra dime from any unit of labour it can and, when that dries up, it will look elsewhere.

Since the 1980s capitalists and politicians have been kicking the can down the road. This mess has been coming at us for some time. Avoidance was helped by real growth due to the building of high tech infrastructure, which in turn has helped crucify the employee. The infrastructure, once built, will not need to be built again. And it's maintenance is not going to save us.

Various bubbles (like the dot com bubble) had put the reality of our collective abyss out of view. Some bubbles were based in widespread criminal behaviour on the part of large corporations, bodies like the Federal Reserve in the United States, and scores of politicians. They have propped up the illusion (with the help of mainstream media and whores that have degrees in economics) that all is well - for three decades. In the meantime, the rot of the capitalist system has been eating away at our real security. We have continued to depend on something we can no longer depend on.


John Maynard Keynes is Dead


In the coming months and years there will be sincere and intelligent arguments from the left to return to Keynesian economic policies. After all, this formula has worked, arguably, better than anything else in history to provide a decent standard of living for the most people. The good ship Fabian appears to have sailed however. As Professor Hossein-Zadeh points out:

"The US capitalist class pursued the Keynesian-type policies in the immediate post-war period as long as political forces and economic conditions, both nationally and internationally, rendered those policies effective. Top among those conditions, as mentioned earlier, were nearly unlimited demand for US manufactures, both at home and abroad, and the lack of competition for both US capital and labor, which allowed US workers to demand decent wages and benefits while at the same time enjoying higher rate of employment.

By the late 1960s and early 1970s, however, both US capital and labor were no longer unrivaled in global markets. Furthermore, during the long cycle of the immediate post-war expansion US manufacturers had invested so much in fixed capital, or capacity building, that by the late 1960s their profit rates had begun to decline as the capital-labor ratio of their operations had become too high. In other words, the enormous amounts of the so-called “sunk costs,” mainly in the form of fixed capital, or plant and equipment, had significantly eroded their profit rates.

More than anything else, it was these important changes in the actual conditions of production and the realignment of global markets that precipitated the gradual abandoning of Keynesian economics. Contrary to the repeated claims of the liberal/Keynesian partisans, it was not Ronald Reagan’s ideas or schemes that lay behind the plans of dismantling the New Deal reforms in fact, steps to hammer away at those reforms had been taken long before Reagan arrived in the White House). Rather, it was the globalization, first, of capital and, then, of labor that rendered Keynesian or New Deal-type economic policies no longer attractive to capitalist profitability, and brought forth Ronald Reagan and Neoliberal austerity economics."

Let's not get caught up in the notion that the capitalist class and their paws (politicians) had decided to be kind to working classes or middle classes. Each and every benefit, including decent wages, social security, free medical care (except the USA), in developed countries were won through hard and sometimes deadly struggle. It was the threat of revolution and the preservation of the privileged class that compelled Keynes himself to distribute wealth.

We are about to witness a period unlike anything we have seen before. The tension on global capital, the increasing and continuing falling rate of profit, and the ensuing hunger of capital itself will reduce or eliminate your wages, your pension, social security, and it will find the change under the cushions of your sofa.

As we become increasingly dissatisfied with the status quo, as our kids lose hope for a decent future, as homeless people stand alongside burning barrels next to empty and foreclosed homes, we will hit the streets. Predictably, we will aim, at first, to resurrect John Maynard Keynes. We will discover, eventually, that Mr. Keynes is as dead as a doornail. Perhaps it is best to let him rest in peace.

Occupy All Streets

Although stirrings of discontent are increasing and are world-wide, we still need to recognize the gravity of the situation. We are in real trouble and it's going to take more than taxing Wall Street to get out of it. We need to recognize that we have become dependent on a way of carrying out the business of surviving that we can no longer depend on. We need to recognize that we are under the imperial rule of the corporation; an entity that is far more toxic and dangerous than terrorists or psychopaths. It is not only toxic but its basis is utterly ethereal. It is ether that is based in straightforward exploitation. It is a system of incredible absurdities and contradictions.

There was a time not so long ago when it was generally believed that eventually, capitalism will get to all or most of the problems of deprivation. The trajectory was positive. No serious economist worth his or her salt would make that argument however. Serious economists will say that capitalism is not responsible for feeding the hungry or housing the poor. And they are correct.

We then must ask the question: Do we, as a society, let babies, children, mothers, the elderly, the disabled and so on suffer and even die due to material deprivation?

Like children in the 30s walking bare foot past closed shoe factories, factories sit idle in rust while millions are looking for work. Homes sit empty as millions of evicted homeowners no longer have a place to live. If an enterprise or activity can’t fortify investors wealth, it can’t happen. To suggest that this process is rational reflects a logic of stupefying myopia. To take it for granted smacks of hyper-dependency or addiction.

Our Collective Addiction


We have become dependent on capital derived from surplus value to survive and we are at its mercy. We are at the mercy of a simple formula (buy or make for x - sell for y), a formula that, like all formulas, has no mercy. It also has no substance. But we cannot seem to survive without it. The bad news is, we have to. The good news is, we can.

The fact that we have developed a mentality of dependence on surplus value capital as the only viable catalyst to get us out to work, to trade, to start an enterprise or to repair a bridge is a very serious problem.

We need to take responsibility for ourselves, our communities, and our nations. We have been relying on residual capital from underdeveloped hungry ghosts (investors) to feed us, clothe us, and house us. We have been reliant on an abstraction (surplus value) that, even in its glorious heyday, was heavily reliant on the plunder of the hinterland for resources and sweet Keynesian deals in the homeland. In other words, it never worked. And, even in its heyday, capitalism has been highly unstable. That is the nature of the beast and again, no economist will make the argument that liberal and unfettered capitalism is or can be a stable system of financial governance.

Like any addiction, the way to health is by first admitting that it is an addiction. To do so, we need to contemplate and discuss our dependence on capital. We need to ask ourselves tough questions:

-Can we open a factory without excess capital?
-Can we trade without it?
-Can we provide services to others without capital derived from taxes?
-Have our elected representatives, the politicians, been utterly subservient to the owners and controllers of surplus value?
- Are we so weak that we need to beg capitalists to invest in ways that will help us survive?


The Value of Work


We could have opened that factory and we could have let those children wear shoes. We can not only move into existing houses, we can build houses for everybody. We can provide medicine and food for every person that needs it. It is us that have been doing it all along and it has been the greed of HMOs and other vultures that have been wilfully killing people for profit. Capitalists don't make useful and necessary things that we need to survive. We do.

Our dependence is on a glorified middleman with zero social conscience. This middleman’s relations to the production process is not innate. If the middleman can make profit without the bother of employing human beings that fall ill, complain, need ‘benefits’ and so on, he or she will certainly do it as you or I would do it. And he is doing it all over the world. Playing and gambling with finance capital is far more exhilarating and profitable than running a grimy factory. As capitalism matures, and the possibility of squeezing a dime from a unit of human labour diminishes, the connection between capitalism and providing goods and services becomes more remote and untenable.

When we consider the unstable and illusory nature of capitalism and the fact that the actual provision of services is provided by us, the workers. And that each and every item we use, computers, cars, food and drugs, have been mined, shipped, manufactured, and delivered by us, the workers, we can see that the future is not only possible, it is fantastic. The possibilities are endless.

Each and every capitalist dollar can be traced back to its genesis; work. And all the wealth that exists and will exist is rightfully ours. Best of all, we can make as much as we want. We just need to get over our illusion of dependence on speculators, gamblers, and thieves.

Our Wealth is Our Work

Economists and politicians behave and speak as if wealth somehow emanates from the wealthy and makes its way down to the rest of us. In reality, everything we see and use begins in the ground and is made into useful products either by human hands or by natural processes. Exchange value (profit) is a simple matter of exploiting and taking ownership of that process. In fact, wealth flows from the bottom and is vacuumed to the upper echelons with increasingly efficient means.

The notion that marketing and profit grabbing will produce what is best for society is a precise and specific point we need to contemplate. For example, a given society may need more cancer research or health care or housing. The market suggests however that more profit can be made by producing cigarettes or guns. Very serious meetings decisions will be made to research and develop the production and sale of cigarettes and guns. Capitalism is very good at producing trinkets, shiny toys, and killer hamburgers.

Basic human needs are considered a nuisance from the point of view of investors and their governors; even when there’s a profit to be made. It is the self serving child with ‘getting the most stuff’ as his life’s goal that we have become dependent on. No wonder we are in serious trouble.

When we consider what can be done with labour power in terms of developing goods and services, we may then consider possibilities beyond the poor and short sighted rationality of the marginalists, popularly known today as neo-liberals. We might abandon the superstitious nonsense that the expansion and theft of the money value that is produced by labour as an indispensable ingredient to financial security and progress. In other words, we can afford to abandon the notion that exploitation, war, and theft are necessary evils for societies to function well. At that point, we may go beyond the tyranny of psychopathic greed and develop a sane, stable, and humane world.

When we really examine the situation, the capitalist class (and it is no exaggeration to label them the ruling class) can be seen to function merely as parasites. They don't even manage businesses. They simply play the grand casino and hire workers to manage it for them. Managers are not them; managers are us. As dispensable functionaries, they stand on the same precipice we all do. While a firm may replace an individual manager, the function itself is essential.

We are all in this together and we are the ones that make this world work. We can afford to rely on each other and we can afford to have confidence in ourselves. The ethereal monarch can take its rightful seat in the history of social and economic development and we may salute them all. But their time and usefulness has passed.

Creating Wealth


The semi socialist system of production (capitalism) and distribution (Keynesianism) has worked reasonably well in some situations. It is possible but not probable that we can return to Keynesian formulas to rescue our deteriorating standard of living. Social safety nets are being ripped to shreds because the diminishing rate of profit is forcing capitalists to squeeze wealth from every nook and cranny. They are in no mood to throw us any crumbs whatsoever. On the contrary.
We are getting to a point where we must take matters into our own hands. There are some elemental social and economic conditions and standards we need to adhere to. We cannot tolerate a condition where an individual's body may die due to deprivation. We certainly cannot tolerate conditions where whole collectives of individuals may die due to material deprivation. This condition is silent violence and it is class war. It is ongoing and it is getting worse.

To push back, to take back what is rightfully ours, we need to become politically alive. We need to not ask, but demand, a vast expansion of our public infrastructure. We need it to include service to the vital needs of each and every individual. And we, not them, can make that happen and make that work.

As towns and cities infrastructure is neglected and falling apart, we need to recognize that we, and not them, need to fix it. It is ours and it is our children's inheritance. Money does not fix bridges and roads, even if you believe deep down inside that it does, it is in fact real, tangible work that does it. Money is merely a catalyst. We can build it as elaborately and as beautifully as we wish. But it will not happen as long as politicians are in the pockets of corporations. And they certainly are.
We have enormous volumes of capital and latent capital (labour). We need a new catalyst.

At the end of the day we can blame capitalists and capitalism for the social and financial ills plaguing increasing numbers of individuals, communities, and nations. It isn't their fault. The ultra wealthy have merely secured themselves and their families in a system, a context, where they could conceivably fall into destitution. With enough wealth, they can rest assured they will be okay.

It is not a matter of blaming individuals, the problem is systemic and that is what needs to change.

Rather than blaming any individual or individuals, we can take responsibility for ourselves, our homes, and our communities and we can roll up our sleeves and get to work.

But before we can do that, we need to take control of our political and financial systems.

Ay. There's the rub.

Syntax of Fascism

The canaries are dropping dead. The rats are running for the surface. Something's amiss. The Western world has become highly unbalanced. And just beneath the surface is the unmistakable smell of fascism. Turn over a station, click the mouse, open a magazine and there it is. It is the language of fascism. Ostensibly, the language looks more or less innocuous. But then, the whiff grabs us.

The syntax of fascism isn’t about fascism proper. It is about the attitude of fascism. We must be careful we don’t lose sight of the broad strokes as authors of the syntax of fascism demand that we pay close attention to the details. They will say, this is not fascism or that is not fascism because it doesn’t meet this or that criteria. In the meantime, the caravan moves along and we, the little dogs bark with little or no effect.

It is a language, a way of defining the situation that normalizes public executions, torture, and the dropping of bombs on populations. It is this use of language and means of prioritizing and valuing that is the pernicious cancer that rots away at the principles of human rights, democracy, and freedom. The syntax of fascism is common and is contained within the archaic structures of feudalism. In its simplicity it states unequivocally that might makes right. The feudal world was built on yesterday’s equivalent of street gangs or mafia. Whoever was the most violent, whoever evokes the most fear, was he who was in power.

The Language of Enlightenment

The language of the enlightenment empowered reason as the arbiter of principles and laws. And it is this language that the United States of America is founded upon. It is the language of Thomas Paine, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Immanuel Kant. Kant observed that the enlightenment would put an end to Monarchic and clerical arbitrary power. An informed and thinking population will demand that reason and principles are placed above the morbid and vicious rule of the dark regions of human emotion. Kant said of the enlightenment that it is the freedom for the individual to use his or her own intelligence. More broadly, it demanded rule of law. No longer would human beings be ruled by cruel and capricious whims of revenge, insecurity, fear, hatred, or xenophobia. Laws, societies, and individuals would stand on a foundation of rational principles. No individual or body would rise above rule of law.

The enlightenment was thought of as humanity moving forward, away from the horror and terror of the cowardice and immaturity of the feudal past toward true justice and equality before the law. It's primary ideological antithesis would be the Divine Right of Kings.

Enlightenment ideas had fit nicely with the emerging and growing hunger of capitalism. And capitalism would provide high octane, energizing and propelling the language of the enlightenment into legislation and into our homes. The emerging bourgeois classes had tangible and pragmatic reasons to cast aside the oppressive weight of superstition and tradition. Contractual rights as opposed to traditional or arbitrary power would feed into the increasing power of the capitalist classes and correspondingly reduce the right of Kings. The enlightenment was a key element to the capitalist revolution.

The general thrust was nothing new. Initiatives aimed at the establishment of free and egalitarian societies are as old as civilization. Prior to the enlightenment there have been countless dead-end revolutions whose goal it was to establish freedom, democracy, and egalitarian principles. Almost all have no legacy. These kind of movements were deemed terrorist or anti-monarch and ruthlessly obliterated.

The general thread of thinking known as the enlightenment were preceded by two principles that are foundational to the rational rule of law have survived and, similarly to enlightenment ideas, are vital to maintain the principles of a free and rational civilization. They are the "Great Writ" (habeas corpus) and the Magna Charta.

Habeas corpus empowers the courts to direct any authority that holds an individual in custody to show cause to the court why the individual's liberty is denied within a reasonable amount of time. If no substantial reason is provided, the individual must be set free. It is a fundamental guarantee of liberty and any free society should have no difficulty with anything as basic as habeas corpus.

The Magna Charta, written in 1215, also ensures that 'no free man shall be taken or imprisoned... except by judgement of his peers or by the law of the land'. It ensures that no man is above the law - including monarchs.

An Altered Trajectory

In the past decade or so, the United States and its subjects under NATO have skilfully changed the political syntax of the modern world. They are passing the boundary that separates free countries from autocracies and oligarchies in the dead of night. They do not deny that they are doing it; on the contrary. They do it while they scream at us to shut up; terrorists are about to strike. In fact, they use terrorist acts to justify the introduction of the language of fascism. Hitler did precisely the same thing with the fire at the Reichstag. The fire at the Reichstag was crucial to the establishment of Nazi Germany.

The latest example of this is Obama’s openly sneaking past the 60 day deadline that is required, by law, to obtain congressional approval for war with Libya. Amid Ron Paul’s protests, Obama walked silently by the deadline where his actions in Libya would have gained the legal seal of approval. Obama is breaking the law intentionally and showing open contempt for the rule of law. This, along with a pattern that has started in GW Bush’s Presidency, is an intentional policy and the goal is to change the overall definition of the state's power over rule of law. Its aim - to lift the state above the rule of law. It is easily done against larger than life terrorists, extremists, insurgents, and so on and the terms 'terrorist', 'extremist', and 'insurgent' and examples of the language of fascism.

Previous to the war against Libya, Obama has openly called for the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen (Al Awlaki) without the benefit of trial or charges or any sort of legal process. Obama made an attempt at assassinating him (killing two Yemeni citizens) one week after carrying out the extra judicial killing of Osama bin Laden. Political assassinations are currently auditioning for general acceptance. Gaddafi appears to be next in line. In each and every case the state carries out its transgression through a politically popular directive or operation. If there are complaints, they are easily ignored. After all, these people are terrorists and the state is making us safe from terrorism. The question that needs to be asked is; Who is making us safe from the state?

Prior to this, there has been whispered acknowledgment that the state may torture, utilize collective punishment, spy on citizens and generally ignore the fundamental precepts that have been the basis of modern common law and civil law. And from these bases the constitutional principles of all legal frameworks in the developed West find their footing. Without that footing, without that principled base, we have no logical basis of protection against arbitrary state power.

It is openly acknowledged and generally accepted that the President of the United States and the United States has a role in global governance. The United States may invade where it sees fit, ostensibly to correct a human rights violation or to install democracy. This acknowledgement must be observed through the lens that acknowledges the United States as a tool utilized for imperial and corporate conquest. The notion that the United States or any other nation has power over nation's sovereignty part and parcel of the syntax of fascism. To ruling elites, national sovereignty is treated with the same contempt as is the rule of law.

Children of Feudal Power

While rule of law and individual freedom are adhered to within the formal structures of the state, residual feudalism maintains some currency within the scope of social norms. Traditional ideas about women, gays, the church and so on maintain traditional adherents and followers. The counter culture revolution of the 60s and the mass movement of individuals from rural to urban centres have been devastating blows to traditional ideas. The cultural syntax of residual feudalism however, impacts everything from casual conversations to high level policy decisions in the most developed and modern societies. This syntax typically manifests from the right wing and as a general rule, the further to the right, the healthier the demon is. And it is this language, with all its assumptions, values, and beliefs that will be the fertilizer that will promote a flourishing and dangerous new display of fascistic rule.

Donald Trump in his recent scare (to run for President of the United States) openly stated that the United States should bomb them and take the oil. Who 'them' is, is not important. By 'them' he means anybody. And his suggestion would be repeated in barbershops around the country. The widespread acceptance of this very dangerous and violent mentality is similar to attitudes in Germany after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles.

We have evolved from feudal power where it was openly acknowledged that might makes right. Naked reliance on violence and fear is what legitimized the power of monarchs. The state was an openly violent and oppressive institution. Power rested in the hands of Kings that could make arbitrary decisions based on His own highly charged emotions like revenge, fear, or greed.

The Divine Right of Kings gave way to the power of parliament and the people. It empowered reason and we could all rest well knowing that reason, and not arbitrary violence, guarded our rights as human beings. Political action has been utilized, with rational law as a legitimizing base, to render many static feudal attitudes archaic. Thus, the liberal West has led the way in liberating women, gay people, and visible minorities from state oppression. And, in the West, social attitudes have been catching up to legislation that is based in rational law. The trajectory has been increasingly directed toward laws, followed by common attitudes, becoming increasingly rational. That basis has made us all sleep well at night knowing that the world has improved and has become far less violent and will continue to do so.

The Elephant in the Room

The power of language maintains much of its power by its 'hidden in plain sight' yet subconscious assimilation of implicit meaning, valuing, and perspective. It has the power to change our minds while we are unaware of the overarching syntax and structural context. It is language that can deepen our collective acceptance of state power.
The genius that has plied you to buy Sham Wow or New and Improved Tide pales in comparison to the maestros that tell you what to think about and how to think about it. The syntax of fascism is bombarding you with 'enhanced interrogation', 'collateral damage', or 'extrajudicial killing'. The context of this is Tony Blair loudly proclaiming that 'radical Islam' is the greatest threat facing the world today. It is President Obama openly killing people that he deems enemies in cold blood without trial or due process. This is the backdrop to the Anders Brevik murders in Norway. These murders were encouraged by the climate of fear and xenophobia that has emerged, mostly against Muslims, since 9 11. He is, in effect, an expression of the American State Department. He is a parrot and a harbinger of things to come. It is written in the language. It is the language of patriotism, security, and xenophobia. It is the language of power, violence, and war. The menacing Jew of the 1930s has been replaced with today's radical Muslim.
Let's be clear. There is one nation leading the chorus and directing the speech of cowardice, hatred, and intolerance. And that nation is the United States of America. Throughout their political ranks and throughout their media, the over the top nationalism and patriotism has the rest of the world on edge. It is getting frightening.

In the name of their 'national security' they have increasingly used the language of fascism. The United States have reacted to their own fire at the Reichstag with utter contempt for their own Constitution. Instead of showing determination to not let a terrorist act change them, as they appear to be doing in Norway, the United States has shown, shamefully, all the bravado of a cornered rat. This is not America's finest hour.

A New Normal

One propaganda term that has been thrown around in recent years is ' the new normal'. It is designed to have us accept that things will be different from now on. The point is, we don't have to accept it.

The collapse of the robust American economy has been coming for some time now. The collapse of manufacturing has been intentional and planned. In the 1980s people began talking about free trade, about competing in the global marketplace, becoming lean and mean, about globalization. A new glossary was opened and we had to become accustomed to a myriad of new gimmick-like Orwellian terms. And there was significant 'blowback' culminating in the 'battle in Seattle'. The riots and protests in Seattle were not the manageable single issue protests authorities were used to. They were anti-capitalist protests. This was a major red flag in ruling circles.

The attacks on 9 11 seems to have changed that developing protest movement. Suddenly, somebody burned down the Reighstag. People were now suspect, especially Muslims. Everything became a threat to national security. It became dangerous to be anti-American, especially in America.

And since that time, the new normal has been a precipitous erosion of rights and freedoms in the Western world. Wedges are continually driven between the world we have become accustomed to; a world shaped through hundreds of years of wars, protests, and courageous politicians and citizens, a world that is the child of the enlightenment, and the world of arbitrary state power.

And as America demands more control and say over how other nations do our business, we need to consider to some extent we are all in the same boat. It isn't just a problem for American citizens. Canadian, Australian, British governments all toe the line as do the governments of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt.

In the United States, while they wrestle with the mind boggling debt, they maintain over 800 military bases all over the world and the Department of Homeland Security has provided "$31 billion in grants since 2003 to state and local governments for homeland security and to improve their ability to find and protect against terrorists, including $3.8 billion in 2010. "

There is an old saying. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. Or, just because a lot of crackpots thrive on conspiracy theories doesn't mean conspiracies don't exist.

The propaganda machine has been working overtime of late. We must maintain our capacity for critical reflection and thinking. We are entering uncharted waters. The last time they wore brown shirts, jackboots, and displayed swastikas. They spewed a specific kind of rhetoric. They appealed to certain kinds of fears.

This time it will not bear the exact signature of Mussolini or Adolph Hitler. In fact, it will be consciously displayed with different colours. But the fundamentals will remain. And those fundamentals are: state power over the rule of law, extreme nationalism, xenophobia, imperialism, systematic propaganda, state and corporate collusion, and endless war.

Throughout history there have been types and sub types of fascism ruling most of us. Monarchical power is a form of fascism. And the cancer has not been eradicated. It has been in remission. But there are some bad signs.

And let us not forget that those that perpetuate it are not necessarily bad people. They are merely speaking their mother tongue. They are still developing through feudal darkness. But our drive to freedom, justice, democracy, and equality has always prevented tyrants from fully exhaling. It is because you and me, like the generations of people that have lived and died before us, will always speak in the syntax of our mother tongue.