Fascist Autarkies (8)
©
In the
preceding blog, I asked by way of a quote if a flood of words can “…cleanse the sordid and
polluted Earth...”?
Up until the ‘true democratic’
government unleashed the NSA https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/polls-continue-show-majority-americans-against-nsa-spying
to abolish privacy and intimidate uncensored thought on the internet, there
were people who believed this was possible even if the ‘populist’ contributions
from the ‘underground’ (a la Gogol’s “Dead Souls” http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/232932.Nikolai_Gogol
) were almost intolerably vulgar. Yet, the internet can be controlled to the
ends of making a point if the platforms are willing to control excessive
vulgarity. As everyone ought to know, vulgarity may be used to inhibit the
evolution of a thread of thought and destroy creative communications.
It was Marx who coined the
phrase about “brave words”
used by the petty bourgeois “about freedom in general”. This was said by Marx in the context of “private property [being] already done away
with for nine-tenths of the population.” And
while America
To return to the subject
of geopolitics, however, which is where opponents of federalisms and
centralization of power may still have a role to play. Though verbally adept populists
are turned to ‘sheeple’ by the intrusive vulgarity of dumbed down supporters of
‘individualism’ such as Madonna offering herself for a ‘naked lunch’ or Pussy
Riot twittering crotches for the delectation of saints, perhaps there yet
remain a crumb for the day of wrath.
The ‘democratic’ leaders
of our era, dependent on the donations of the wealthy and no longer needing the citizen who has no job
or money on a planet exhausted of ‘free’ natural resources, believe that the
solution to the problem of being human in a world dominated by power and
violence is still to be sought in the continued corruption of the ideas of Rousseau
http://www.iep.utm.edu/rousseau/
(18th century) and the French
Revolution http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_Rousseau_inspire_the_French_Revolution
brought to its knees by liberal
Capitalism in combination with the best
of all political systems, i.e., ‘democracy’ and individual rights in control of
community interests. According to the best (?) academic and political minds,
Enlightenment won a significant victory when during WW2 the opponents of
Hitler’s Reich beat the Nazis into submission.
This may be so if the
critics of fascism are right that a community’s interest in ‘progress’ without
end forces it to find an enemy either within, without, or both. Finding an
enemy justifies the presumption that ‘progress’ is a phenomenon without end or bounds
experienced by all liberal societies. This was true when Nazi Germany, emerging
from an economic abyss due to the imposition of war reparations, discovered the
enemy in Jews, who were then mercilessly slaughtered because of the inability
of the Nazi’s to find a rationale that for all of their trouble they were
unable to end the social and economic crisis as an egalitarian society, but
like all ‘good’ capitalist countries had recreated themselves in the image of a
pyramid of wealth. When the enemy within the Nazi state no longer was enough of
an excuse, it was found without in other states. Having lived the last months
of WW2 in Weimar, not all that far from Buchenwald, I am aware of what a
concentration camp does to those it blames for causing the ills of the national
community.
Nevertheless, I have
always been conflicted about the rights of a community and the trumping of
these rights by vandals on behalf of liberal capitalism, individual rights
defenders and crusaders such as Pussy Riot. With regard to the urbanites, who
on the whole favor liberalism over traditionalism of the countryside, I belong
among those, who in time of troubes wish to become absolutes rulers with powers
to eliminate the evident centre of the infection—the city. In my opinion, the
city excels as nature’s dictator ever since we’ve known that the marketplace of
the city has its origins in the court of the castle of the first capitalist and
is a whyfore why the people of the city, have tended to identify with its king
or president.
What I find peculiar about
the attitudes of urbanites is that contrary to fact, they presume to have the
right to prior attention over rural people and nature.
This leads me to the
question if a fascist state, one that (presumably necessarily) cannot escape
seeking an enemy to survive is inevitable? To which my answer is a NO, the only
reason for a YES being that it is ‘democratic’ rule that is predetermined to
discover ‘endless progress’ to be among its political genes. Interestingly,
ever since the rise of the Age of Enlightenment, the same ‘democracy’ has
driven most European countries to fulfill themselves in a violent state.
Was then ever in Europe or anywhere else in the world a non-violent
fascist state? The numerous nation communities in which Europe
excels would lead one to conclude that indeed—at one time or another—this was
so.
Yet here we have a completely
non-democratic and mindlessly presumptions leadership of a presumed European
Union telling all the nation states that are at Europe’s foundation that they must
be working toward the elimination of their sovereignty for the sake of a
centralized ‘federalized’ Empire that is to play second fiddle as a ‘regional’
power to an obviously failed and violent American Empire (or its offshoots in
Russia and China).
I have presented the
alternative ‘fascist’ state before; pointing out that such a state is the
‘autarky’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarky . Of course, this alternative state is simply
invoked as a dictatorship, with no consideration given to the fact that it is a
static state rather than one with an inbuilt mechanism toward violence,
dominance, and progress of a ‘democratic’ state.
An autarky solved the
problem of violence by turning it inward rather than extroverting it as our
crusading democracies do it. Everyone, who has ever studied anthropology or
read the founding myths of ancient communities and cultures, knows that an
autarkic community was ruled by a ‘sacrificial king’, the kings function being
not only that of a ruler, but of a ‘sacrificial goat’, who dies for the sins
that were expended on the community in order to maintain it viable, enduring,
and peaceful.
No comments:
Post a Comment