by Lil Joe
There has been two national protest rallies held in Washington, DC thus far this year: the Teabagger's protest rally that was financed and provided for by capitalists and represent a political turn of capitalists to fascist 'final solutions' in opposition to unions, socialists and 'illegal aliens', and the trade union based rally that was financed and provided for by unions and pro-union organizations. In other words, it is who sponsored these rallies and the objectives each in turn articulated that determine their respective political character.
Much has been discussed concerning the numbers of attendees, and which protests were representative of good ole American 'grass root' opposition to 'the government'.
Grass root vs AstroTurf are not political categories, and explain nothing as far as political characterisation of the protests are concerned. What is relevant and determinate is the objectives of the majority of the participants at both these rallies that distinguishes them: the fascistic racist 'Tea Party' anti-union rally, paid for and organized by capitalist front groups and the other organized by labor union and minority civil rights bourgeois organizations.
The character of these rallies are not determined by the numbers of the attendees, each of which claim to be representative of 'the grassroots, but by the objectives of their respective participants. The majority of participants in the Tea Party protest, just as much as those in the labor protest were working class - i.e. the majority in both camps live off wage labor or Social Security. But, whereas Tea Party protests and rallies regurgitated fascist anti-labor, anti-communist, anti-abortion, and anti-minority themes, the labor rallies were to the contrary pro-labor, and unions, socialists, feminists and minorities interests were present in this protest.
Originally, the labor rally was called by critics to protest the Democrats for betraying their pledges to work in the interests of these 'constituencies', to instead serving the interests of finance capital -so-called Wall Street - and of industrial capitalists [e.g. the auto industrialists]. It was by having Democrats and its partisans as speakers at the pro-labor rally that the capitalist owned media was able to portray the pro-labor rally as a Democratic Party rallying of its 'base'.
Designating the Tea Party 'movement' grassroots explains nothing. Both rallies were comprised of working people. However, whereas working class families that supported and participated in the labor, feminist and minority ethnic groups were acting rationally in their own material interests by demanding jobs and employment on terms favoring working class, women and minority ethnic interests, those working people who were bussed to and participated in the anti-union, anti-minority and anti-woman rallies are crazy, rallying against their own class or economic interests.
Wilhelm Reich wrote:
When workers who are hungry, owing to wage-squeezing, go on strike, their act is a direct result of their economic situation. The same applies to the man who steals food because he is hungry. That a man steals because he is hungry, or that workers strike because they are being exploited, needs no further psychological clarification. In both cases ideology and action are commensurate with economic pressure. Economic situation and ideology coincide with one another. Reactionary psychology is wont to explain the theft and the strike in terms of supposed irrational motives; reactionary rationalizations are invariably the result. Social psychology sees the problem in an entirely different light: what has to be explained is not the fact that the man who is hungry steals or the fact that the man who is exploited strikes, but why the majority of those who are hungry don't steal and why the majority of those who are exploited don't strike. http://nickcooper.com/mass.htm
The working families that participated in the Tea Party rallies were irrational, because the fascistic politics of the Tea Party financiers and television mouthpieces are contrary to the interests of all workers. Trade unions are the economic organizations of workers as workers, and the defenders of workers interests, whereas the capitalists that financed the Tea Party events are out to destroy those unions, thereby making American workers defenseless.
American capitalists and their respective political representatives both in the Democratic Party, as well as the Republican Party, as well as their ideological and propaganda print and electronic media - the Republican and 'Tea Party' by FOX News, the Democratic Party by MSNBC - are all careful to avoid mentioning the designation of the rallies as opposition of wage labor and capital. The interests of capitalists and workers are irrevocably mutually exclusive and hostile.
Instead of presenting the issues in terms of class politics both rallies masqueraded in the Red White and Blue flag. Even the rants at the pro-labor rally protested that the capitalists are causing the problems, responding to the collapsing of the capitalist modes of production and appropriation - capitalist commodity production by wage labor - instead protested the capitalists not for being capitalists qua capitalists, but criticised them for being 'unpatriotic' in that rather than providing 'American jobs to American workers' they were unpatriotic in that they were outsourcing American jobs to China.
Tens of thousands attend progressive 'One Nation Working Together' rally in Washington
On the Mall, a counter to conservatives
Progressive groups hoped to draw tens of thousands of supporters to the One Nation Working Together march as a show of force to rival the conservative tea party movement. By Krissah Thompson and Spencer Hsu Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, October 2, 2010; 9:08 PM
A wide array of progressive groups drew tens of thousands of activists to the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday for a rally aimed at firing up their members and showcasing the diversity of their movement.
It was the left wing's first large gathering designed to counter the conservative tea party phenomenon, and many speakers warned that a Republican-controlled Congress would block or roll back progressive changes. Organizers said they also wanted to show that their supporters represent the majority of the nation.
This march was inclusive, said NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, one of the lead organizers. We have seen cabdrivers come down from New York, truck drivers from Oklahoma. This is about moving the country with the spirit of unity and hope, and getting the country beyond the divisiveness.
The gathering occurred about one month after conservatives met on the same spot to unite around television personality Glenn Beck's vision of a nation returned to more traditional and religious values.
Ed Schultz, the liberal host of MSNBC's The Ed Show, served as one of the show's master of ceremonies and harshly criticized the tea party and conservatives. They talk about the Constitution, but they don't want to live by it, he said to loud applause. They talk about the forefathers, but they practice discrimination. They want to change this country.
Then, he led the crowd in a chant. Are you America? he yelled. Yes! came the loud response.
Saturday's gathering featured many speakers; at times it appeared that organizers wanted to give everyone an opportunity to have their say. The rally lacked central charismatic speakers like Beck and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, or the two men who will headline an Oct. 30 event on the Mall - Comedy Central television personalities Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Also unlike the Beck event, the progressive groups were explicit about their desire to reenergize their political base. Beck said his goal was to honor soldiers.
The more than four hours of speeches, poetry and music were buttressed with testimonials from out-of-work Americans, immigrants, veterans and Native Americans. They focused on jobs, education and human rights issues in particular.
Edrie Irvine, a laid-off legal secretary from Silver Spring, shared her story with a gathering of unemployed workers that fed into the larger rally. The recession was caused by the banks, greed and deregulation, she said. It didn't have anything to do with me, but I lost my job.
James Keane, who carried a sign that read Jesus Christ is a Liberal, said he drove from New York City because he felt it's about time the Democrats marched.
We've stood by and watched the tea party people go crazy every couple of months, said Keane, who is unemployed. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/01/AR2010100104440.html
There is good reason that the Democrats, along with their media propagandists - the same as the Republicans and their media propagandists - do not refer to American workers as proletariat, or even working class. This is because an economic analysis of modes of appropriation of labour power and its corresponding relations of production is to admit that Americans are just as much as European workers a class, and that the economic interests of workers and capitalists are mutually exclusive.
The clap trap about 'middle class' and 'the wealthy' having different interests in 'tax and spend', 'big government' vs. 'small government', 'gays openly in the military', and so on, hides the quintessential issue of classes: that is that the capitalists taxes is but a portion of surplus value derived profits by the exploitation by the capitalist class of the working class. Every penny paid by the capitalists in taxes is extracted from the hides of the working class.
The most powerful, economically dominate classes are the most powerful, politically dominate classes. In the United States the capitalist classes are the ruling classes and State power is an instrument of its class politics. The industrial and national capitalists interests are represented by the Democratic Party, and the transnational and finance capitalists interests are represented by the Republican Party.
Besides, the State is the instrument by which the military industrial complex sucks money from the sweat and blood of working class tax payers to 'spend' on military equipment, missles, nuclear weapons, fleets of armed ships, and the wages of soldiers and so on to kill workers and poor folk on behalf of American capitalists in wars at home, against striking workers and the poor, and wars abroad such as the wars to dominate the oil producing states in Middle Asia and North Africa. The taxes at home are moreover used by the capitalist's State to build and maintain railroads and highways by means of which commodities used in production and subsistence are shipped about the country. The Republicans are not opposed to 'tax and spending', but to it being spent on the health and safety of workers, and means of subsistence for the poor and unemployed. The bulk of the money is spent in the military industrial complex - not food stamps or unemployment compensation.
When the Democrats pretend to represent the interests of American working families', for instance, in forwarding taxes from the government to the auto industrialists, they are serving the interests of the industrial bourgeoisie, as they are when they advocate tariffs and bash Chinese imports. In this connection is explained the significance of their clash with the Republican Party 'free traders', insomuch as 'global free trade' and US investments in China are in the interests of transnational capital.
This, nonsense about 'grassroots', whether with reference to the Teabaggers or the labour unions, is not a social scientific term because it is nothing but an analogy. Grassroots, other than in botany has no scientific existence in this objective, external empirical universe.
The materialist conception of history is a perspective based on the objective existence of the empirical universe, man and society.
The premises from which we begin are not arbitrary ones, not dogmas, but real premises from which abstraction can only be made in the imagination. They are the real individuals, their activity and the material conditions under which they live, both those which they find already existing and those produced by their activity. These premises can thus be verified in a purely empirical way. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm#a2
What is society, irrespective of its form? The product of man's interaction upon man. Is man free to choose this or that form of society? By no means. If you assume a given state of development of man's productive faculties, you will have a corresponding form of commerce and consumption. If you assume given stages of development in production, commerce or consumption, you will have a corresponding form of social constitution, a corresponding organisation, whether of the family, of the estates or of the classes-in a word, a corresponding civil society. If you assume this or that civil society, you will have this or that political system, which is but the official expression of civil society. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1846/letters/46_12_28.htm
Social relations are closely bound up with productive forces. In acquiring new productive forces men change their mode of production; and in changing their mode of production, in changing the way of earning their living, they change all their social relations. The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist.
Economic categories are only the theoretical expressions, the abstractions of the social relations of production... The same men who establish their social relations in conformity with the material productivity, produce also principles, ideas, and categories, in conformity with their social relations. Thus the ideas, these categories, are as little eternal as the relations they express. They are historical and transitory products. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/poverty-philosophy/ch02.htm
The mode of production and appropriation's relations of production dominate in the United States today is the capitalist mode of production and appropriation of labor and its products, capitalist commodity production on the basis of wage labour.
The capitalists purchase the labour power from workers as a commodity, sold to capitalists because these workers have no means of production of their own. Therefore in this society that is based on capitalists employing wage workers to engage in the production of commodities, it is because it is only by means of money that the workers can appropriate the products of labour as commodities, that the propertyless proletariat is compelled by these economic conditions of production to sell their labour power as a commodity.
Capital has not invented surplus-labour. Wherever a part of society possesses the monopoly of the means of production, the labourer, free or not free, must add to the working-time necessary for his own maintenance an extra working-time in order to produce the means of subsistence for the owners of the means of production, whether this proprietor be the Athenian caloς cagaqoς [well-to-do man], Etruscan theocrat, civis Romanus [Roman citizen], Norman baron, American slave-owner, Wallachian Boyard, modern landlord or capitalist. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch10.htm#S2
Wage workers are not chattel slaves; the owners of slaves automatically own the products of those slaves labor, and no more purchase the labour of his chattel slaves than he or she purchases the labour power of horses or oxen pulling the plow. On the other hand, it follows that, as in the case of the horse and ox, the provision of means of subsistence required by the slave is provided by his or her slave owners.
In the feudal or sharecropping modes of production and appropriation the farmer is without land, therefore has no means of producing their means of production or subsistence. Hence, the serf or share cropper works the land leased or allotted to his family by the landowners. The landowners appropriate a portion of the means of subsistence produced by the labour power of the serfs or share croppers, as rent or tribute, or taxes.
In the United States, therefore, though a family of share croppers engaged in agricultural labour in e.g. Georgia, Mississippi or Alabama, working the land as share croppers is a sort of neo-serfdom characteristic of the mode of appropriation following the abolition of chattel slavery, in the late 19th into the 20th century, these share croppers did not get paid for their labour, but on the contrary had to pay - in kind or in cash - the land owners as rent. On the other hand, today in those same territories share cropping has been displaced by agricultural commodity production on the basis of wage labour.
Both commodities and money are the elementary presuppositions of capital, but they only develop into capital under certain conditions. Capital formation cannot occur except on the basis of the circulation of commodities (which includes the circulation of money), hence at an already given stage of development of trade in which the latter has achieved a certain extension. ...They are the historical presupposition of the capitalist mode of production. On the other hand, however, it is only on the basis of capitalist production that the commodity becomes the general form of the product, that every product must take on the commodity form, that sale and purchase seize control not only of the surplus of production but of its very substance, and that the various conditions of production themselves emerge in their totality as commodities which go into the production process from circulation. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1864/economic/ch01.htm
The US mode of production and its corresponding mode of appropriation is capitalist commodity production on the basis of buying and selling labour power and its products, the relations of production being the antagonism distinguishing the interests of the capitalists wanting to purchase labour power and therefore the right to its products as cheaply as possible, and the proletariats' need to sell its labour power as dearly as possible, and to purchase from the capitalists the means of subsistence as cheaply as possible, the capitalists wanting to sell them as dearly as possible.
Insomuch as classes are determined by the mode of production and appropriation's relations of production, the clap trap of American sociologists and political ideologists about the American middle class being based on how much money one gets for the sale of one's labour power is pure propaganda that has no basis in empirical denomination.
Whether a wage worker - proletarian - lives in a house in the suburbs or rents an apartment in the inner-city, or whether the home owner drives his or her own car to work or the renter in the inner-city takes the bus to work, is in neither case significant to the determination of class. So-called 'income brackets' are bourgeois sociological ideological bullshit.
This was [hopefully] learned by American workers by the firing of the Air Traffic Controllers, and the destruction of their 'association' - Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization. PATCO was attacked by the capitalist's Reagan Administration. Air Traffic Controllers thought of themselves as patriotic 'salaried professionals'.
"Our struggle must not go unheeded, but rather, it should be allowed to have as much publicity as possible for the sake of future generations of Labor. We are an important facet of American history, and our story needs to be preserved, no matter if we are seen as right or wrong."
Written by a PATCO striker......
In 1968, PATCO was formed by Co Founders Jack Maher and Mike Rock. It was during this time period that the PATCO Original Logo was designed and created by Jack Maher. The Union was certified by the FLRA as the exclusive representative for all FAA Air Traffic Controllers. The sick out of 1970 was the first job action against the FAA by PATCO.
August 3, 1981
On August 3, 1981 PATCO controllers were forced to go on strike against the FAA due to the deplorable working conditions. President Reagan fired over eleven thousand of the controllers, threw hundreds in jail, and banned the controllers from their profession for life. In October 1981, PATCO was decertified by the Reagan Administration, and a year later PATCO filed for bankruptcy due the governments union busting tactics. http://www.patco81.com/PATCO%20History.htm
Workers must set aside all the pseudo scientific categories such as class determined by 'income bracket', lifestyle and where one lives [suburban house, inner city apartment] and subjective feelings and attitudes to instead deal in the empirical reality of classes determined by mode of 'income' determined by relations of production. Workers income is wages, capitalists mode of appropriation of labour power is by it's purchase and this purchase is therefore the purchase of ownership of the products of the labourers work [the labour process] and the sale of these appropriated products the means by which capitalist's 'income' is profits, landlord's 'income' is rent, and finance capitalist 'income' is interest.
The mode of appropriation determined relations of production is the empirical discription of class relations and the basis of class politics. Whether the proletarian worked as an airline Mechanic, Air Traffic Controller, Janitor, Pilot, Stewardess, baggage handler or whatever, notwithstanding their different rate of wages [or 'salary'] paid by capitalists for their labour power or service they do as wage workers, they are all of the same class, the working class.
Whatever category of one's labour, and whether one made more or less money per hour and consequently can afford to live in a house in the suburbs or less money and has to live in an apartment in the city, drive a new car to work or get there on bus or train, is irrelevant as far as class determination is concerned.
In the industrial capitalist democracies in Europe, the workers know this, and are self-organized economically into trade unions and socially in the working class as a class. These workers are organised into labour, socialist and communist parties, whereas in the US, workers organizations are appendeges of the Democratic Party, are anti-what they think 'socialism' is, and regard themselves as 'middle class' Americans.
Nevertheless I do want to acknowledge that there are among the American sociologists a number of individuals, such as G. William Domhoff who are attempting (though not in these terms) to educate Americans concerning the objectivity of class and class politics based on the ownership of the productive forces by capitalists and the working classes as non-owners who derive their 'income' from selling their labour power.
G. William Domhoff in Who Rules America: Wealth, Income and Power, wrote:
First, though, some definitions. Generally speaking, wealth is the value of everything a person or family owns, minus any debts. However, for purposes of studying the wealth distribution, economists define wealth in terms of marketable assets, such as real estate, stocks, and bonds, leaving aside consumer durables like cars and household items because they are not as readily converted into cash and are more valuable to their owners for use purposes than they are for resale (see Wolff, 2004, p. 4, for a full discussion of these issues). Once the value of all marketable assets is determined, then all debts, such as home mortgages and credit card debts, are subtracted, which yields a person's net worth. In addition, economists use the concept of financial wealth -- also referred to in this document as non-home wealth -- which is defined as net worth minus net equity in owner-occupied housing. As Wolff (2004, p. 5) explains, Financial wealth is a more 'liquid' concept than marketable wealth, since one's home is difficult to convert into cash in the short term. It thus reflects the resources that may be immediately available for consumption or various forms of investments.
We also need to distinguish wealth from income. Income is what people earn from work, but also from dividends, interest, and any rents or royalties that are paid to them on properties they own. In theory, those who own a great deal of wealth may or may not have high incomes, depending on the returns they receive from their wealth, but in reality those at the very top of the wealth distribution usually have the most income. (But it's important to note that for the rich, most of that income does not come from working: in 2008, only 19% of the income reported by the 13,480 individuals or families making over $10 million came from wages and salaries. See Norris, 2010, for more details.)
As you read through these numbers, please keep in mind that they are usually two or three years out of date because it takes time for one set of experts to collect the basic information and make sure it is accurate, and then still more time for another set of experts to analyze it and write their reports. It's also the case that the infamous housing bubble of the first eight years of the 21st century inflated some of the wealth numbers.
So far there are only tentative projections -- based on the price of housing and stock in July 2009 -- on the effects of the Great Recession on the wealth distribution. They suggest that average Americans have been hit much harder than wealthy Americans. Edward Wolff, the economist we draw upon the most in this document, concludes that there has been an astounding 36.1% drop in the wealth (marketable assets) of the median household since the peak of the housing bubble in 2007. By contrast, the wealth of the top 1% of households dropped by far less: just 11.1%. So as of April 2010, it looks like the wealth distribution is even more unequal than it was in 2007. (See Wolff, 2010 for more details.)
The Wealth Distribution
In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).
Table 1: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2007
Total Net Worth
Top 1% Next 19% Bottom 80%
1983------ 33.8%-- 47.5%-- 18.7%
1989------ 37.4%-- 46.2%-- 16.5%
1992------ 37.2%-- 46.6%-- 16.2%
1995------ 38.5%-- 45.4%-- 16.1%
1998------ 38.1%-- 45.3%-- 16.6%
2001------ 33.4%-- 51.0%-- 15.6%
2004------ 34.3%-- 50.3%-- 15.3%
2007------ 34.6%-- 50.5%-- 15.0%
Top 1% Next 19% Bottom 80%
1983------ 42.9%-- 48.4%-- 8.7%
1989------ 46.9%-- 46.5%-- 6.6%
1992------ 45.6%-- 46.7%-- 7.7%
1995------ 47.2%-- 45.9%-- 7.0%
1998------ 47.3%-- 43.6%-- 9.1%
2001------ 39.7%-- 51.5%-- 8.7%
2004------ 42.2%-- 50.3%-- 7.5%
2007------ 42.7%-- 50.3%-- 7.0%
Total assets are defined as the sum of: (1) the gross value of owner-occupied housing; (2) other real estate owned by the household; (3) cash and demand deposits; (4) time and savings deposits, certificates of deposit, and money market accounts; (5) government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and other financial securities; (6) the cash surrender value of life insurance plans; (7) the cash surrender value of pension plans, including IRAs, Keogh, and 401(k) plans; (8) corporate stock and mutual funds; (9) net equity in unincorporated businesses; and (10) equity in trust funds.
Total liabilities are the sum of: (1) mortgage debt; (2) consumer debt, including auto loans; and (3) other debt. From Wolff (2004, 2007, & 2010).
Figure 1: Net worth and financial wealth distribution in the U.S. in 2007
In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.
Table 2: Wealth distribution by type of asset, 2007: Investment Assets
Top 1 percent Next 9 percent Bottom 90 percent
Business equity 62.4% 30.9% 6.7%
Financial securities 60.6% 37.9% 1.5%
Trusts 38.9% 40.5% 20.6%
Stocks and mutual funds 38.3% 42.9% 18.8%
Non-home real estate 28.3% 48.6% 23.1%
TOTAL investment assets 49.7% 38.1% 12.2%
Housing, Liquid Assets, Pension Assets, and Debt
Top 1 percent Next 9 percent Bottom 90 percent
Deposits 20.2% 37.5% 42.3%
Pension accounts 14.4% 44.8% 40.8%
Life insurance 22.0% 32.9% 45.1%
Principal residence 9.4% 29.2% 61.5%
TOTAL other assets 12.0% 33.8% 54.2%
Debt 5.4% 21.3% 73.4%
From Wolff (2010).
Figure 2a: Wealth distribution by type of asset, 2007: investment assets
1% (Dark Grey) 9% (Light Grey) 90% (Red)
Figure 2b: Wealth distribution by type of asset, 2007: other assets
1% (Dark Grey) 9% (Light Grey) 90% (Red)
Figures on inheritance tell much the same story. According to a study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, only 1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance. Another 1.1% receive $50,000 to $100,000. On the other hand, 91.9% receive nothing (Kotlikoff & Gokhale, 2000). http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
The recent Teabaggers protest in Washington for instance and the October 2nd unions organized labor rally were both comprised of 'angry' and 'anti-elite and 'anti-establishment' people. However, whereas the Tea Party protests were comprised of racists, social conservatives and opposed to labor unions and to workers having unemployment and to 'socialist medicine', the October 2nd rally was pro-union, for single payer health care and for unemployment insurance for laid off workers.
The objective of this essay is to prove the present social fascist movement that is presented in the capitalist owned print, radio and television media as 'grassroots', under the rubric of it as such a so-called Tea Party Movement, is really nothing but a capitalist financed fascistic anti-labour 'movement', that is being presented as 'grassroots' and even 'populism' .
The new Tea Party book from The Heartland Institute claims:
Rarely have more people in the United States been so deeply concerned about the direction of their country as right now, in 2010. During the past two years, millions of men and women have literally marched in the streets for political change, and surveys show their views are supported by the great majority of other Americans. They are not demanding new entitlement programs or threatening to strike if their demands are not met. They simply want their country back. As this book's title suggests, they are patriots who want to restore the country's freedom and prosperity. The most visible part of this uprising, called the Tea Party movement, arose in response to the enormous government bailouts of banks and insurance companies launched by President George W. Bush and overseen by President Barack Obama, and then the massive spending initiatives and government takeovers of formerly private businesses during the first 18 months of the Obama administration. The new patriots perceive that these developments contradict basic American ideals and historical practice. They are right. http://heartland.org/books/patriotstoolbox.html
The Republican Party - in particular its fascistic tendencies represented by the Tea Bag mass hysteria - is reactionary. What is meant by 'we want our country back', a re-run of the supposed 'return' to the 'good ole days' - the mythical era of of 'the wholesome '50s' - is an illusory consciousness recalled by the right-wing of the Republican Party's reactionary Tea Bag fascist faction of so-called 'baby boomers'.
Television was part and parcel of the family experience in the '50's.
Davy Crockett, Indian Fighter (aired December 15, 1954) Crockett (Fess Parker) and best friend Georgie Russell (Buddy Ebsen, originally slated for the lead before Walt tapped Parker) head off to fight Creek Injuns, who uprose and attacked Fort Mims apparently unprovoked. Damn those pesky redskin varmints, as the theme song (the perfect way to provide exposition in a memorable fashion) calls them. We see Davy's penchant for dangerous stunts when he tries to grin a bear into submission, then kills it (rather bloodlessly) with a small knife. Immediately, we see Disney's version of this legendary figure as a fiercely independent hero imbued with folk wisdom and excessive bravado, a sort of overgrown child living in a world where a person could wrestle a bear single-handed. http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/davycrockettseries.php
As babes and children of the 'baby boom generation', this population was practicaly raised by television sitcoms and so on: Lawrance Welk, The Life of Riley, Ozie and Harriet, Lassie, Leave It To Beaver, Father Knows Best, Donna Reed Show, Amos N' Andy, Little Rascals, Wyatt Earp, Rin Tin Tin, Wild Kingdom, Art Linkletter, Sheriff John's Lunch Brigade, Tarzan, Jungle Jim, Elvis Presley, Mickey Mouse Club, Crusader Rabbit and Rags the Tiger, Gary Moore, Grocho Marx, Engineer Bill, Buffolo Bill, Bozo, John Wayne, King Kong, Superman, and so on. The Lone Ranger and Bat Man were capitalists and Zoro was a wealthy landowner.
These daily saturations of the conscious mind of infants, toddlers and children produced lasting images and impressions that were internalized as experienced. These were, however propaganda in straight fiction that had no correspondence to actual material reality of working people and their families.
The Heartland Institutes The Patriot's Toolbox and its flowery patriotic rhetoric about 'our country', 'patriotism', 'freedom' and 'prosperity' has no empirical basis whatsoever. These are nothing but words.
American workers have been raised on the myth of American exceptionalism and the culture of anti-intellectualism and have no economic understanding of capitalism or class politics, are conditioned to respond to loaded terms, buzz words and phrases by demagogues and fascist ideologists who are able to dupe them into joining pseudo 'popular' movements that are actually opposed to their own working class interests.
The Tea Party movement is presented as 'angry' being essentially 'anti-incumbent' and opposed to 'the establishment' and the 'elite'. These nebulous terms and demogogic slogans can mean anything the 'demogogues' want it to mean. What the Teabaggers mean by 'the establishment' are Democrats and 'Republicans in name only' - the so-called RINOs', and those individuals who are ridiculed as 'elites' are the university educated, 'Hollywood' actors and film, and of course 'liberal newscasters'.
On the contrary, the Black liberation movement, hippies and anti-war movements of the 1960s and 70's were also called 'anti-imcumbent', opposed to 'the establishment' and anti-'elite'. Yet, the hippies and anti-war movements were opposed to the State 'military-industrial complex' and the 'elite' i.e., the wealthy capitalists. Thus, they were the exact opposite of the present fascistic Teabaggers who are opposed to everything the hippies and anti-war activists were fighting for: their 'cultural revolution', the 'counter-culture', collectives and socialist revolution.
The Tea Party's radio and television propagandists and ideologists talk about the Teabaggers being 'grassroots' and 'anti-elite' and 'anti-establishment' as slogans by means of which they achieve the manipulation of the minds and emotions of gullible racists and patriots to join this reactionary 'movement' financed and mobilised by big capitalists and the FOX News television network toward an American version of fascism. Also see Rachael Maddow's Report on Koch Industries 'Caught Red Handed' Backing Tea Party's AstroTurf rallies, marches: http://vodpod.com/watch/3435797-maddow-reports-on-koch-industries-caught-red-handed-backing-tea-partiers
Tea Party protesters shout 'nigger' and spit on lawmaker
March 21st, 2010 3:00 pm ET
Georgia Democratic Congressman Rep John Lewis is questioned by reporters about an incident involving Tea Party demonstrators as he leaves a speech by President Obama to House Democrats on Saturday. (AP)
Angry activists who had gathered outside the Capitol to protest health care reform Saturday yelled nigger at a few members of the Congressional Black Caucus, including civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis from Georgia.
Protesters also spat on at least one black lawmaker, and the most high-profile openly gay lawmaker, Rep Barney Frank, was apparently called a faggot. Rep Emanuel Cleaver said he was spat upon while walking toward the Capitol. Police arrested the assailant, but Cleaver decided not to press charges.
A statement from his office read: This is not the first time the Congressman has been called the 'n' word and certainly not the worst assault he has endured in his years fighting for equal rights for all Americans. http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/tea-party-protesters-shout-nigger-and-spit-on-lawmaker?render=print
Abusive and derogatory and even racist behavior directed at House Democrats by Tea Party protesters on Saturday left several lawmakers in shock. Preceding the president's speech to a gathering of House Democrats, thousands of protesters descended around the Capitol to protest the passage of health care reform. The gathering quickly turned into abusive heckling, as members of Congress passing through Longworth House office building were subjected to epithets and even mild physical abuse. A staffer for Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told reporters that Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.) had been spat on by a protestor. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the civil rights movement, was called a 'ni--er.' And Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) was called a faggot, as protestors shouted at him with deliberately lisp-y screams. Frank, approached in the halls after the president's speech, shrugged off the incident. But Clyburn was downright incredulous, saying he had not witnessed such treatment since he was leading civil rights protests in South Carolina in the 1960s http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/20/tea-party-protests-nier-f_n_507116.html
Democratic leaders expressed shock at the behavior and said it was time for Republicans to publicly condemn the behavior and distance themselves from the protesters. I heard people saying things today I've not heard since March 15th, 1960, when I was marching to try and get off the back of the bus, House Majority Whip James Clyburn said.
After following the tea party movement since its inception, one liberal blogger writes that she's having a hard time tonight trying to believe almost uniformly white tea partiers are anything other than a racist, right-wing reaction to the election of an African American president who brings with him feminists and gays. http://www.examiner.com/populist-in-national/tea-party-protesters-shout-nigger-and-spit-on-lawmaker?render=print
The term 'grassroots' in US political lexicon had originated with and characterised by Malcolm X's famous Message to the Grassroots. http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1145 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uN_-AO36Afw
Elite vs. grassroots is also an incorrect formulation, as elites are not a class designation. The capitalists are owners of the means of social production, distribution and finance. This economic position of the capitalist class is relative to the proletariat, the class of modern wage workers, having no means of production of their own forced to commodify their labor power that they sell to capitalists in order to live. Thus, engaged in social production and directly opposed to the capitalists, of all the classes that confront the capitalist mode of production and appropriation of labour power, the proletariat is the single most revolutionary class.
This is what the Tea Baggers ideologist Rush Limbaugh said:
Take Your Country Back!
The Democrats on Capitol Hill are out of control, spending our country into bankruptcy and threatening the foundations of our freedom and prosperity. They have to be stopped, and only you can stop them. You can stop them by voting them out of office and replacing them with elected officials who will work for you. You can stop them by donating to the Republican National Committee. We are ready to take back this country with you, and your contribution will help us take critical steps toward accomplishing this goal. You can help us send a Republican majority back to Washington by taking action today. http://donations.gop.com/?gclid=CL_PvojOx6QCFQgEbAoda2r3Cw
The images and symbolic representation of what fascism is in American culture are presented in U.S. educational books on history and radio and television, movie and 'news documentary' formats as a single individual mad dictator running the entire government who is like the Biblical Anti-Christ, the personification of evil. For readers not familiar with this concept, it has been politically manipulated by reactionary ideologists as their 'interpretation' of the following:
There appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: and she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.
And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven, and the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. The beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Any man have an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. He exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. He doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. He had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+13&version=KJV
In Christian eschatology, the Antichrist or Anti-Christ is a powerful, evil leader who will arise in the Last Days in opposition to God and His church. From its New Testament origins as a description of teachers who denied orthodox teachings concerning Jesus Christ, the term antichrist attached itself to other biblical characterizations about a leader who would arise in the Last Days to control the world and lead humankind away from God. Antichrist is translated from the combination of two ancient Greek words αντί + χριστος (anti + khristos), which means anti opposite (of) khristos anointed, therefore, opposite of Christ. The word anti can also be translated as if, and thus antichrist can also mean someone who pretends to be a Messiah. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Anti-Christ
The spirit of Antichrist Manifested in Adolf Hitler
Hitler had nearly unprecedented charisma that intoxicated large crowds and the ability to hypnotize people one-on-one to the degree that people thought his effect on them was demonic. Hitler had the physical characteristics of someone who was possessed with blue hypnotic eyes that caught the attention of everyone that met him. Eye witness descriptions of Hitler's eyes parallel the description of Jesus's eyes in Revelation 1 and Revelation 2.
Hitler also had encounters with demons as witnesses noted that he was behaving like someone or something else was around him-interacting with him.
Hitler even admitted that he was being guided by unseen forces who he claimed were from Providence.
Hitler's title of Fuhrer not only formally combined the power of the chancellor and president into one position, it evoked messianic connotations in the minds of the German people. Hitler was publically portrayed as a god and people adored him like he was divine.
Hitler attempted to counterfeit Jesus in building his own thousand year kingdom: "It is our wish that this Reich shall exist for the next thousand years. We are happy to know that the future belongs to us completely!"
The term "Reich" not only means "empire" in German, but also has spiritual connotations to it. Though Hitler proclaimed that his Reich would last a thousand years, he realized that he would not live long to see it in fruition.
In 1934, Hitler told Hermann Rauschning, "'I need ten years of law-making,' he cried excitedly. 'The time is short. I have not long to live, and I must first wage our war of liberation. I must lay the foundations on which others can build after me. I shall not see it fulfilled,' he finished suddenly". The spiritual foundation of the Third Reich was built with ancient pagan traditions and symbols. http://www.prophecyproof.org/evilhitler
A man many people consider the embodiment of evil, Adolf Hitler was the leader of Nazi Germany, started World War II, and instigated the Holocaust.
Known as one of the most evil people in history, Adolf Hitler was responsible for World War II and the Holocaust. Learn more about Hitler through this biography.
Many people have stated that Adolf Hitler was evil, mad, or crazy. The really scary thing is that Hitler was a man. Learn more about Hitler, the man responsible for the deaths of millions of people. http://history1900s.about.com/od/hitleradolf/Adolf_Hitler.htm
The Evil of Adolf Hitler Executive Summary
This is a summary of what I talk about in the report. To access the complete report click this link. To access a Bible prophecy exclusive version of this report click this link.
A Note About My Sources: This research report is written from a Christian perspective. However, I cite several non-biblical sources in this report to provide you with an understanding of what the forces of evil are telling their followers in hopes that their plans can be exposed. Believe it or not, the forces of evil leak some of their plans to their followers so they can have the institutions (political, economic, etc) put in place in time for the arrival of Antichrist. For background on some non-biblical sources I cite and more about why I use them click this link. However, if you just want to rely solely on the inerrancy of Bible prophecy you can read a Bible prophecy exclusive version of this report at the following link
In this report I go into detail about how evil Adolf Hitler was and report on some little known details about the man that makes people like Joseph Goebbels wonder if he was human.
The spirit of Antichrist Manifested in Adolf Hitler
Under the direction of an Ascended Master (a spiritual being mentioned by Paul in Ephesians 6:12 as the "spiritual wickedness in high places") named Djwhal Khul, New Age author Alice Bailey wrote that Sanat Kumara [who also goes by the name "Lucifer" to New Age followers] presides over something called "Shamballa energy", which is a luciferically-inspired destructive force that she believes Nazism was fueled by Benjamin Creme, the official spokesmen for an Ascended Master named Maitreya (the leader of the Ascended Masters and a spiritual being that meets John's description of the spirit of Antichrist), more directly traces the source behind Hitler's power to the spirit of the Antichrist and admits that Hitler was an agent of evil.
Ascended Master Djwhal Khul says that Hitler was a "walk-in", which means that he voluntarily surrendered his body to Satan's spiritual agents. Djwhal Khul goes on to admit that Hitler was controlled by one of evil's highest level spiritual entities.
Socialization is the means by which individuals are appropriated and assimilated into a culture, the immediate family structure and power dependence relationships. Since the invention of motion pictures (movies), radio and television, propaganda is right there in the home and community. Radio enbled Hitler to become popular.
The power of Hitler, the same as Roosevelt and Churchill, was their utilization of the new mass media, movies and radio. The movies were made for nationalist purposes in each of those countries for patriotic propaganda and to instill hatred and fear of the 'enemy' into the consciousness of the masses.
The 'enemy' is always demonized: demonization of the leader of the government of the nation against which the war was being conducted. These were primarily through so-called news reels, and pseudo documentaries. There were together with these supposed 'facts' the patriotic films and cartoons that at the same time presented 'stories' of their nation's own government and army as the incarnation of Good and God's providence.
Nationalism and patriotism is part and parcel of national capitalist's opposition to capitalists of other nations [international capitalist's competition] on one hand, and nationalism and racialism is also an ideological 'attitude' that by upbringing and education of individuals born into and raised in capitalist class interests as Weltanschauung socialized into the psyche of ignorant, manipulated workers as pride of country and/or race on the other.
Despite what Liberals will have you believe, this right-wing activist, writer, and podcaster is not raking in the dough. I don't even make enough money to pay for childcare, which means that this article is being written while two little girls climb me like blonde mountain goats.
I've been involved in tea parties; I've handed out fliers, I've held signs, and I've even spoken at them. I'm still waiting for that check from the supposedly well-funded tea party leaders.
I'll let you in on a secret: There is no leader of the tea party movement. Tea parties were born out of the frustration felt by everyday Americans, who simply didn't want to see their hard-earned dollars go to cocaine-snorting monkeys, let alone to pay for other people's health insurance.
Demogogic fascistic racist ideology of Tea Baggers and others advocating the 'clash of civilizations', present Arabs and Muslims as the aggressors rather than the victims of aggression, invasion and brutal occupation. In this context are the 'birthers' and other racists who present President Obama as a 'foreigner' and an 'undercover Muslim' fighting on behalf of 'Arabs' and the ghost of his father and African ancestors to take over the world and avenge British colonialism.
These kinds of ideological attacks on Muslims and Arabs, and accusations that Obama is an under cover Muslim and foreigner from Africa, are used as red herrings to manipulate people like Jenny Erikson, who obviously is a zip damn fool. This woman is so stupid that by her own words she brags that she is so poor she doesn't make enough money to pay for childcare for her two daughters, yet she is being bussed to protest rallies financed by billionares who are clearly using her to protect their own material interests.
Remember, Pat Robertson said the recent earthquake in Haiti was 'caused' by the Haitian slave revolt/liberation movement who sold their souls to Satan in exchange for enabling them to defeat the French slave owning colonial settler capitalists. Today, the political eschatology of the false prophet, who is supposedly working with 'the Anti-Christ' is Ahmadinejad, and Barack 'Hussein' Obama is his 'evil' companion:
What is different in the United States today is that it is television, and FOX News in particular, that is the fascist ideological arm and propagandist of and for the 'Tea Party' and is using these same techniques to literally demonize President Obama as an incarnation of Hitler:
In Germany, Hitler's speeches and addresses were piped into the homes of the working classes, just as in the US Roosevelt's so-called fire side chats were piped into the homes of the working classes, and Churchill's BBC broadcasts into the homes of British workers. So it was the sign of the times that in Germany the radio became a vehicle for the transmission of nationalistic and racist, anti-Semitic demogoguery.
This political propaganda saturated the family of German workers. Radio and movies, and also, subsequently, television, were the medium through which in Germany, Italy, Britian and the US, daily propaganda became part and parcel of family life!
Fascism, while characterized by radical totalitarian ideals, was in actuality a "populist" party, winning power through the electoral process and garnering widespread support from the Italian people. Like other totalitarian regimes, the Fascist party relied heavily on various forms of propaganda in order to retain the support of its public and enforce the desired image of a strong state, strong government, and a loyal and happy electorate. Mussolini and his officials utilized various outlets as propaganda tools. Clearly, the media played an incredibly important role in Fascist propaganda, especially the radio and newspapers.
Cultural facets, such as film, literature and music were also used to sell the desired image of Italy and il Duce. Mussolini also understood the importance of sports in propaganda, and took advantage of the socio-cultural arena to reiterate symbols, images, and phrases to the masses. "In disseminating a mass culture made up of simple, strongly nationalist slogans, the fascist dictatorship's exploitation of sports cannot be overlooked," says Marco Palla in Mussolini and Fascism. ... (See Fascist Propaganda and the use of Mass Media, Communication and Culture to Propagate an Ideology @ http://www.florencenewspaper.it/vediarticolo.asp?id=a7.08.20.15.37) .
The same was the case in American culture: radio and motion pictures, movies; but, notwithstanding so-called 'documentary' films' pretence of objectivity, as in German culture, the electronic media invaded the homes of Americans. Thus, as in Germany, so in the United States, radio became part and parcel of the family function as primary socialization unit:
Two of Goebbel's favourite mediums were cinema and the radio. Images of colossal gatherings and marches conveying a 'grand', 'powerful' Germany and newsreels of Hitler's addresses - although the newsreels often lapsed into the inaccurate, they were excellent for boosting morale and achieving confidence in the regime. Undoubtedly, Nazi propaganda films were increasingly popular and thus influential - in 1933, the number of moviegoers was 250 million; in 1942 it was 1,000 million . This was due to Goebbel's realisation that films should not be overly propagandistic, and must be entertaining. However, the ultimate goal was to influence people into Nazism without their knowing. The typical types of film that Goebbels considered appropriate vehicles for propaganda were the costume dramas that centred on the great Prussian leaders and other influential figures . There were also of course straightforward war films that contained relatively straight pro-German and pro-nationalistic messages, and other films that performed a slightly different propaganda function, such as 1936 Olympia or von Baky's 1943 film Munchhausen. While Olympia showed the world that Germany could put on a magnificent show for the Olympics, Munchhausen showed the world that the German film industry did not lag behind Hollywood in its use of special effects. The great achievements in film during this period conveyed to the public the sense that the Nazi regime was a regime of modern progress internationally, breaking new barriers in technology, furthering convincing the public that remaining with the party would be the only solution in order to progress.
Goebbels' greatest propaganda asset was the 'Volksempfanger' - the people's receiver. In 1933 4.5 million German households had broadcast access, and in 1940 16 million households were listening. This was to do with the availability of inexpensive radios: the VE (Volksempfanger) 3.31, selling at 76 Marks was available after the Nazi takeover. At 35 Marks, the DKE (Deutscher Kleinempfanger), later released was the cheapest radio set in the world. A factor of the success of radio was its personal nature. While the cinema was experienced with others, radio had the ability for the Nazi party to talk to people in their own homes, but they could also share it with the public due to the radio speakers in the street. The invasive nature of propaganda is made clear because political broadcasts were often made during working hours, and workers often had their work suspended in order to listen to Hitler . With such large audience figures in both cinema and radio, the Nazi message was overwhelming, and the fear of being ostracised ensured that opposition was small. Therefore, this section of propaganda can be seen as the most successful, as the personal nature of the radio and it's swift, easy permeation into the public domain ensured it was widely received.
If historians generally agree about the impact of the radio, there is more debate over the usefulness of the press. http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=22713
In 1932, Fox Helped Make Propaganda Films for Hitler
Webster G. Tarpley
October 2, 2010
Observers of the current US election season have noted the prominent role of Rupert Murdoch's reactionary Fox News Channel, which currently employs GOP and "Tea Party" partisans Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Sean Hannity, and others. Some have alleged that a television network carrying so many potential political candidates and propagandists on its payroll is unprecedented. But there is a precedent for large-scale Fox intervention into a political campaign.
The basic facts are available in German historian Hans Mommsen's authoritative study entitled The Rise and Fall of Weimar Democracy, which is translated into English and widely available in over five hundred libraries in this country. Mommsen, one of the most distinguished postwar German historians, is now Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Bochum. In Mommsen's account of Nazi propaganda techniques, we find the following: "There was nothing that escaped the ingenuity of Nazi propagandists. A case in point was the use of film. Under Goebbels' influence the party had begun to exploit the potential of the political propaganda film to an unprecedented extent as early as 1930. Such films were shown mostly in places where Hitler and other prominent party leaders were not able to appear as speakers. For the manufacture of outdoor sound film, the NSDAP turned to an American company, Twentieth Century Fox."1
Scholar William G. Chrystal confirms this account and provides further important details in his 1975 article on "Nazi Party Election Films, 1927-1938." Chrystal writes: "Support for two additional 1932 election films, Der Fuhrer (The Leader), and Hitlers Kampf um Deutschland (Hitler's Struggle for Germany) came from the German-based subsidiary of Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Tonende Wochenschau (Fox Weekly Sound Newsreel [i.e., Fox Movietone News]). In addition, they also supplied some mobile sound film vans to be used during the campaign. Thus at least part of Hitler's support in that critical time was the result of Fox's help. The background for this assistance is unknown since Fox Tonende Wochenschau records were destroyed during the war," according to a July 9, 1974 letter to Chrystal from Joseph Bellfort, who was at that time the vice president of the Twentieth Century Fox International Film Corporation.2
Fox Helped Hitler's Voice to Reach Many Germans for the First Time
Of the first of these two films, Chrystal writes: "...Der Fuhrer (The Leader) was one of two sound films subsidized by Fox Tonende Wochenschau. Released on April 13, 1932, it was originally titled Volk und Fuhrer (Nation and Leader). It was a relatively short film, 263 meters long, but it provided many people with their first opportunity to hear Hitler speak. These films were accompanied by an apparently popular tide which enabled their wider dissemination. In his diary on March 6, 1932, [Nazi propaganda boss Joseph] Goebbels noted: 'We now also win the movie theater for our propaganda.'"3
This film lasts about five minutes. In it Hitler, speaking in Berlin on April 4, 1932, develops his characteristic theme that the German army was betrayed and stabbed in the back in November 1918 by the Weimar politicians, especially the Social Democrats. This speech was part of Hitler's campaign for president, in which he was defeated on April 10, 1932 by von Hindenburg but nevertheless received almost 37% of the votes, which represented a new high in Nazi support up to that time. In the subsequent parliamentary election held on July 31, 1932, the Nazis added 19% to their previous totals to emerge for the first time as the largest single party in Germany with 38% of the votes - thanks in part to the assistance rendered to Hitler by Fox Movietone News. Concerning the second film Fox made for Hitler, Chrystal writes: "...new Reichstag elections were called for November 6, 1932.... The second of the Fox-subsidized productions, Hitlers Kampf um Deutschland (Hitler's Struggle for Germany), appeared on August 30. It comprised 606 meters of Hitler's July, 1932 Eberswalde speech. An indication of the effectiveness of this speech and its film record can be found in its later use. When Reichstag elections were held again in March 1933, this same film was re-issued under a new title, Reichskanzler Adolf Hitler Spricht (Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler Speaks)."4
Hitler's speech in the Brandenburg Stadium in Eberswalde on July 27, 1932, one of three he gave that day, is a classic demagogic performance. As Mommsen points out, "in the hectic 1932 election campaign" the Nazis organized mass rallies featuring "speeches that Hitler tailored specifically to the psychotic public mood that had been created by the deepening crisis." (Mommsen, p. 338) http://www.infowars.com/in-1932-fox-helped-make-propaganda-films-for-hitler/
What is so dangerous about Tea Party fascism isn't the number of American right wingers attracted to it. Rather, it is the new role of television and radio in America in which demogogues via FOX News and right wing radio are manipulating these dangerous dummies 24/7. For instance:
We watch FOX so you don't have to.
Bill O'Reilly Plays The Victim In Abortion Doctor Murder
Reported by Ellen - June 2, 2009 - Comments (137)
Bill O'Reilly spent much of his show last night (6/1/09) discussing the murder of abortion provider Dr. George Tiller. Instead of expressing remorse for the horrible circumstances - Tiller was shot dead while ushering at church, in front of his wife - or remorse for his own relentless vilification of Tiller or even discussing the role of vigilantism in the abortion controversy, Bill O'Reilly made the tragedy all about him, how he's being unfairly scapegoated in the controversy. And in an apparent effort to justify his past harangues, O'Reilly continued lashing out at Tiller. With video.
O'Reilly started his show as usual with his Talking Points Memo. He began by saying perfunctorily that "clear-thinking Americans should condemn the murder of late-term abortionist Tiller" noting that Tiller's actions were "within Kansas law." But O'Reilly came to life as he said that the Washington Times estimated Tiller "destroyed about 60 THOUSAND (his emphasis) fetuses." O'Reilly repeated, "60,000" then added that Tiller earned more than a million dollars a year. O'Reilly also happened to mention how Tiller had been "nicknamed the Baby Killer by pro-life groups." Real classy, Bill.
As O'Reilly told it, when he heard the news about Tiller's murder, he thought of himself - not how his hate-mongering might have contributed to a climate of extremism, not how maybe he might reconsider the use of inflamed rhetoric. No, O'Reilly thought about the bad news for him. "When I heard about Tiller's murder, I knew pro-abortion zealots and Fox News haters would attempt to blame us for the crime and that is exactly what has happened." So what did this "blame" consist of? Helen Kennedy in the NY Daily News called "my reporting on (Tiller) 'rants.'" http://www.newshounds.us/2009/06/02/bill_oreilly_plays_the_victim_in_abortion_doctor_murder.php
1) George Tiller was murdered. George Tiller was a doctor living in Witchita, Kansas. He was murdered on May 31, 2009, while attending Sunday Service at his church in Witchita by Scott Roeder. Mr. Roeder confessed to the murder, and was subsequently tried and convicted by a Kansas Criminal Court, and is now serving a life sentence for murder in the first degree. These facts have been reported in almost every media outlet in the country, with the exception of some Fox Booze affilitates.
Verification can be found here: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/ref...ller/index.htm and here: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan...al30-2010jan29 and here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,523581,00.html and here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=7722869
2) Scott Roeder was a radical right-wing conservative and fan of Glenn Beck. Scott Roder's radical conservatism, anti-abortion, and anti-government views have been well- reported here (http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...902189,00.html), here (http://www.kansas.com/2010/04/01/124...-thursday.html), here (http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/ref...der/index.html), and many other places as well.
3) Glenn Beck made public statements against abortion and against Dr. Tiller. Here is a transcript of comments made by Beck: (source: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/art...e/198/26596/): "GLENN: Yes. Despite Bill O'Reilly's declarations that some call Dr. Tiller, the baby-killer, and that he had blood on his hands and that was a guy operating a death mill all of those are true. All of those are true." http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/general-political-discussion/146512-facts-about-glen-beck-george-tiller.html
The voices of fascist political ideologies propagated by mesmerizing demogogues such as Rush Limbaugh, Armstrong Williams, Pat Robertson, Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck are today, in contemporary American politics, 24/7 media recruiters and mobilizers of Tea Partyites, a more efficient and professional version of what Goebbels and Hitler were as Nazi ideologists for the rise of the German Nazi Party.
It is part and parcel of their racist and religious bigotry that they call Barack Obama 'another Hitler'. They are projecting onto Obama what they themselves are: fascists.
Hitler was not the AntiChrist. Neither was he a 'dictator'. There is no such a thing as a 'dictator'! Setting aside the mumbo jumbo demonizations, it is evident that what Hitler and the Tea Baggers have in common is not that these are all evil people, but that as fascists they are the extreme representatives of finance capital.
However, unlike the US political structures and procedures for providing officers to them by the politics of the individual running against rivals, Parliamentary democratic forms in Europe are primarily Parties rather than individual demagogues that compete on the basis of program and platforms rather than personality contests and demonization of one's opponent.
The significance is that in Europe and Asia and some Latin American States - even Canada! - a political party is openly based on the recognition of mutually irreconcilable class or sub class economic interests and the enshrining of those interests rather than (like in the US) the personality of individuals as the determination of who votes for which Party platform to become dominate in government policy and activities.
In the United States, on the contrary, even though the Democrats and Republicans respectively have their independent Party Conventions every four years, the main issue leading to these Conventions is not the hammering out of a Party Platform and Program to be debated and voted upon by Convention delegates, but personality contests in presidential party primaries.
Thus, the delegates to the Party Conventions are not representatives of districts and factions that had been engaged in factional polemics and debates, with the winners of the majority faction in the district going to the Convention to represent that faction's proposals for the platform and program of their Party, to debate the issues of these factions and vote for which platform and program becomes the platform and program of the Party. This would mean that the representatives of the majority faction with its program as the Party program, would become the majority faction in the Party's National Committee, the officers of the Party, and the selection of which individual will run for office will be so decided in each district.
The bankruptcy of the American political system, and why it is in crisis, is that the politics of the individual is aimed at the winning of personality or glamour contests that leave these individuals to do their own thing, and service the lobbyists and lobbies that financed their individual campaign. The cases in point are the Democratic Party's so-called Blue Dogs, who are Republicans in everything but the D following their name.
In America we got the charlatans and hustlers, con games by the three Ps - Preachers, Pimps and Politicians. This is not to say that all preachers and politicians are pimps, but those who base their appeals on themselves as charismatics manipulative of gullible fans as pimps do: on their charisma. The preachers have their flocks, the pimps their stables and the politicians their constituencies of admirers.
Consequently, in election season contests, the charismatic candidates in party primaries, and those who survived the primaries for the general elections, turn on their charms: winking and smiling and playing up to their gullible constituencies with all kinds of flowery rhetoric and smiles, hand shaking and baby kissing and photo ops taken as 'a man of the people' - or 'woman of the people' as the case might be. On the other hand, at the same time, these politicians try to win voters from their rivals camp by character assassinations, ugly photographs, gossip, accusations of sexual immorality &/or adultery and other red herrings of personal attacks that have nothing to do with the economic and political issues facing the nation.
Moreover, the corruption factor in the US is legal and respectable so the Lobbyists do their bribing over the table. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/gop_lawmakers_graphic_sex-bragging_caught_on_tape.php This bribing is increased exponentially by the Court decision to allow capitalists to purchase members of government by unlimited and anonymous donors as corporate 'free speech', i.e., the Supreme Court entrenched corporate electioneering rights in the Citizens United ruling.
In the United States, the Democratic Party, the same as the Republican Party is based on capitalist factional interests - the Democrats on industrial capital and the national bourgeoisie, the Republican Party on finance capital and transnational capitalists, they fight each other over issues of tariffs vs free trade.
But, the conflicts between these factions of capitalists are relative whereas their respective opposition to the proletariat is absolute. Since there is no labor party based on American trade unions in the US, the Democratic Party, in representing the interests of the industrial national bourgeoisie, such as the auto and steel industries, can pretend that it is funneling tax payer money to the auto industry and legislating tariffs against Japanese steel for the benefit of the 'working man', to keep jobs in America.
The reason therefore that the American electoral process takes the form of personality contests, gossip, ugly photographs of opponents and character assassination, rather than on mutually exclusive positions on mutually exclusive economic class interests, is because the Democrats as well as the Republicans both represent the same class interests, capitalist interests vis-a-vis the proletariat. Ugly photographs of their respective opponents, gossip, character assassination and so on are nothing but mutually agreed upon red herrings!
However, the more important historical parallel of the rise of American fascism in the Tea Party movement is that they, just as the Nazi Party in its rise, were and are financed by the big capitalists in opposition to trade unions and socialism. This so-called 'grassroots' movement, Astro Turf protestors presenting themselves as a so-called populist revolt against the federal government, is funded by right-wing billionaires.
FreedomWorks is a U.S.-based conservative advocacy group for less government, lower taxes, and more freedom. On its website, FreedomWorks states that it:
...drives policy change by training and mobilizing grassroots Americans to engage their fellow citizens and encourage their political representatives to act in defense of individual freedom and economic opportunity
and in particular, to:
Fight The Left ...[and to create] a grassroots juggernaut capable of going toe-to-toe with the unions, extreme enviros, and the MoveOn.org's of the world.
FreedomWorks was described in a January 27, 2010 article posted on Alternet as the Wall Street front group that helped launch the Tea Party Movement. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FreedomWorks
Editorial Tea Party's Big Money -Published: September 23, 2010
Tea Party supporters and their candidates like to imagine themselves as insurgents, crashing the barricades of Washington to establish a new order of clean and frugal government. In earthbound reality, many of the people pulling the Tea Party's strings are establishment Republican operatives and lobbyists. Some have made money off the party for years.
One example is Sal Russo, a gun-for-hire who has worked for former President Ronald Reagan, former Gov. George Deukmejian of California, former Gov. Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey, former Gov. George Pataki of New York, and many other Republicans. As The Times reported on Sunday, Mr. Russo saw a sure thing last year, establishing a group called the Tea Party Express to support candidates in the midterm elections and raise cash at the same time.
The group has spent nearly $1 million in an effort to replace Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic Senate leader. It spent nearly $350,000 to elect Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts. It is pouring money into Alaska to support Joe Miller's Senate bid. And it has spent $250,000 in Delaware on behalf of Christine O'Donnell, now the Republican nominee for the United States Senate. Mr. Russo held a fund-raiser for Ms. O'Donnell and organized a rally.
In all, Mr. Russo and his group have raised $5.2 million and are the biggest independent supporters of Tea Party candidates. Of that, $3 million to buy advertising went to his political consulting firm or one controlled by his wife. Of course, he takes a substantial cut of each buy.
Dick Armey, the former House Republican leader, considers himself a godfather of the Tea Party and is co-author of the book, "Give Us Liberty: a Tea Party Manifesto." Writing in The Wall Street Journal, he called for a "hostile takeover" of the Republican Party, which sounds so very revolutionary until one remembers that he helped lead that party for many years, guiding its policies and raising its money. When he left office in 2003, he cashed in on his connections to become a very high-paid lobbyist at DLA Piper, one of Washington's biggest law firms, which has clients that include health-care companies, energy producers and foreign governments.
Then there is Carl Paladino, the Tea Party-backed Republican nominee for governor of New York. His bloodcurdling denunciations of Albany never seem to mention that he is one of the biggest landlords of state agencies, owning properties with $85 million in taxpayer leases in Buffalo alone that provide him with income of more than $5 million a year. He is the biggest property owner in Buffalo, and much of his empire has been constructed with state development incentives and tax breaks. An adviser is Roger Stone, an operator for Republicans since Richard Nixon's re-election campaign.
There are undoubtedly thousands of Tea Partiers who would love to purge Washington of well-connected lobbyists, high-priced political consultants and others who take millions of taxpayer dollars while condemning the lawmakers who spend it. They should take a long look at the leaders and candidates who are driving their movement and decide whether purging begins at home. A version of this editorial appeared in print on September 24, 2010, on page A28 of the New York edition. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/opinion/24fri2.html
Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated By KATE ZERNIKE and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN Published: April 14, 2010
Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
Gretchen Ertl for The New York Times
The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45.
They hold more conservative views on a range of issues than Republicans generally. They are also more likely to describe themselves as "very conservative" and President Obama as "very liberal."
And while most Republicans say they are "dissatisfied" with Washington, Tea Party supporters are more likely to classify themselves as "angry."
The Tea Party movement burst onto the scene a year ago in protest of the economic stimulus package, and its supporters have vowed to purge the Republican Party of officials they consider not sufficiently conservative and to block the Democratic agenda on the economy, the environment and health care. But the demographics and attitudes of those in the movement have been known largely anecdotally. The Times/CBS poll offers a detailed look at the profile and attitudes of those supporters.
Their responses are like the general public's in many ways. Most describe the amount they paid in taxes this year as "fair." Most send their children to public schools. A plurality do not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, and, despite their push for smaller government, they think that Social Security and Medicare are worth the cost to taxpayers. They actually are just as likely as Americans as a whole to have returned their census forms, though some conservative leaders have urged a boycott.
Tea Party supporters' fierce animosity toward Washington, and the president in particular, is rooted in deep pessimism about the direction of the country and the conviction that the policies of the Obama administration are disproportionately directed at helping the poor rather than the middle class or the rich.
The overwhelming majority of supporters say Mr. Obama does not share the values most Americans live by and that he does not understand the problems of people like themselves. More than half say the policies of the administration favor the poor, and 25 percent think that the administration favors blacks over whites - compared with 11 percent of the general public.
They are more likely than the general public, and Republicans, to say that too much has been made of the problems facing black people.
Asked what they are angry about, Tea Party supporters offered three main concerns: the recent health care overhaul, government spending and a feeling that their opinions are not represented in Washington. "The only way they will stop the spending is to have a revolt on their hands," Elwin Thrasher, a 66-year-old semiretired lawyer in Florida, said in an interview after the poll. "I'm sick and tired of them wasting money and doing what our founders never intended to be done with the federal government."
They are far more pessimistic than Americans in general about the economy. More than 90 percent of Tea Party supporters think the country is headed in the wrong direction, compared with about 60 percent of the general public. About 6 in 10 say "America's best years are behind us" when it comes to the availability of good jobs for American workers.
Nearly 9 in 10 disapprove of the job Mr. Obama is doing over all, and about the same percentage fault his handling of major issues: health care, the economy and the federal budget deficit. Ninety-two percent believe Mr. Obama is moving the country toward socialism, an opinion shared by more than half of the general public. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html
Paraded around as a grassroots movement the Tea Party is the very opposite of what historical popular mass movements have been in the United States. The authentic movements were based in material interests of the working classes and poor farmers, as well as womens and minority civil rights movements and anti-war movements.
Funny thing though: it turns out this whole populist movement was a planned PR stunt funded by big-money right-wing backers of the GOP who specialize in faking grassroots movements to drum up opposition to Barack Obama.
Namely, the Koch family, the multibilllionaire owners of the largest private corporation in America, and funders of scores of rightwing thinktanks and advocacy groups, from the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine to FreedomWorks. The scion of the Koch family, Fred Koch, was a co-founder of the notorious extremist-rightwing John Birch Society. http://24ahead.com/tea-parties-astroturfed-koch-family-movement-freedomworks-in
Ex-Newark judge speaks at Glenn Beck rally at Great Adventure
Published: Saturday, October 02, 2010, 7:28 PM Updated: Saturday, October 02, 2010, 7:28 PM
David Giambusso/The Star-Ledger
JACKSON - Newark native Judge Andrew Napolitano took the stage of the Northern Star Arena at Six Flags Great adventure shortly after 4 pm.
We were created in the image and likeness of God, Napolitano told the crowd of roughly 700 at the Restore America rally. As God is perfectly free, he created us perfectly free.
Napolitano, a former Newark superior court judge and a regular legal analyst on Fox News, was among a roster of speakers that rallied the crowd today, in preparation for headliner Glenn Beck, who is scheduled to speak at 7 pm.
Napolitano spoke for 40 minutes, casting the Tea Party movement as an historic constitutional struggle for freedom from the tyranny of the federal government.
Every two or three generations a a president comes along ... that seriously violates the constitution, Napolitano said, as he cited John Adams, Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt for civil rights violations. Why is it that when people get into power they forget about freedom?
Napolitano, sounding a regular theme of Tea Party members, criticized President Obama and Congress for passing healthcare legislation that Napolitano said was an intrusion on the freedoms of Americans. Their first job is to keep us free, Napolitano said. If they're keeping us safe but unfree, they're not doing their job.
Napolitano's criticism was not limited to Democrats. He made similar critiques of President George W. Bush as well as congressional Republicans, and said the federal government had a poor track record of spending taxpayer money.
Medicare: broke. Medicaid: broke. Amtrak: broke. The Post Office: broke. The Department of Defense: broke, Napolitano said. Why do we let the government take away our property and take away our freedom? http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/10/ex-newark_judge_speaks_at_glen.html
Karl Marx and Frederick Engels answered this objection to working class public ownership of the productive forces, to communism, in the 1848 Communist Manifesto:
All property relations in the past have continually been subject to historical change consequent upon the change in historical conditions. The French Revolution, for example, abolished feudal property in favour of bourgeois property.
The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few. In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labour, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence. Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily. Or do you mean the modern bourgeois private property?
But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation. Property, in its present form, is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labour. Let us examine both sides of this antagonism.
To be a capitalist, is to have not only a purely personal, but a social status in production. Capital is a collective product, and only by the united action of many members, nay, in the last resort, only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion. Capital is therefore not only personal; it is a social power. When, therefore, capital is converted into common property, into the property of all members of society, personal property is not thereby transformed into social property. It is only the social character of the property that is changed. It loses its class character.
Let us now take wage-labour. The average price of wage-labour is the minimum wage, i.e., that quantum of the means of subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare existence as a labourer. What, therefore, the wage-labourer appropriates by means of his labour, merely suffices to prolong and reproduce a bare existence. We by no means intend to abolish this personal appropriation of the products of labour, an appropriation that is made for the maintenance and reproduction of human life, and that leaves no surplus wherewith to command the labour of others. All that we want to do away with is the miserable character of this appropriation, under which the labourer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires it.
In bourgeois society, living labour is but a means to increase accumulated labour. In Communist society, accumulated labour is but a means to widen, to enrich, to promote the existence of the labourer. In bourgeois society, therefore, the past dominates the present; in Communist society, the present dominates the past.
In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality. And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so.
The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at. By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying. But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other "brave words" of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.
You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society. In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.
From the moment when labour can no longer be converted into capital, money, or rent, into a social power capable of being monopolised, i.e., from the moment when individual property can no longer be transformed into bourgeois property, into capital, from that moment, you say, individuality vanishes. You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This person must, indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible.
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.
It has been objected that upon the abolition of private property, all work will cease, and universal laziness will overtake us. According to this, bourgeois society ought long ago to have gone to the dogs through sheer idleness; for those of its members who work, acquire nothing, and those who acquire anything do not work. The whole of this objection is but another expression of the tautology: that there can no longer be any wage-labour when there is no longer any capital.
All objections urged against the Communistic mode of producing and appropriating material products, have, in the same way, been urged against the Communistic mode of producing and appropriating intellectual products. Just as, to the bourgeois, the disappearance of class property is the disappearance of production itself, so the disappearance of class culture is to him identical with the disappearance of all culture. That culture, the loss of which he laments, is, for the enormous majority, a mere training to act as a machine.
But don't wrangle with us so long as you apply, to our intended abolition of bourgeois property, the standard of your bourgeois notions of freedom, culture, law, &c. Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of the conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class made into a law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economical conditions of existence of your class.
The selfish misconception that induces you to transform into eternal laws of nature and of reason, the social forms springing from your present mode of production and form of property - historical relations that rise and disappear in the progress of production - this misconception you share with every ruling class that has preceded you. What you see clearly in the case of ancient property, what you admit in the case of feudal property, you are of course forbidden to admit in the case of your own bourgeois form of property. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm
It is absurd that the Tea Party demogogues and politicians whose movement is financed by fascist capitalists through front groups, e.g. Americans for Prosperity, brand Barak Obama as a 'Marxist' and a 'socialist'. However, not only has Obama and the Democratic Party members of Congress, the same as those of the Republican Party had their campaigns financed by capitalist millions, but also turned over a trillion dollars of tax payers money to financial and industrial capitalists as 'bail out' money, ostensibly for capitalists that the Democrats as well as Republicans analysed as being 'too big to fail'.
Fascist militias are being organized on the basis of an ideology of hatred of immigrants, the same as the Nazi fascist militia were manipulated by the capitalist classes against immigrants and Jews:
March 31, 2010
The militia movement's frightening comeback
The violent populist anger over the economy, immigration and opposition to the Obama administration that has been swirling through the country for more than a year suddenly took concrete form last week, when authorities arrested members of a Michigan extremist group who they said were plotting to attack law enforcement officers and incite a right-wing rebellion against the government.
In indictments unsealed this week, the government accused the group, a self-styled Christian militia calling itself the Hutaree, of conspiring to murder a police officer then kill hundreds of mourners expected to attend the funeral by using improvised explosive devices built from instructions available on the Internet.
If that sounds like a wildly improbable scenario, the FBI says it was only too possible and that militia members were in fact only days away from carrying out the first phase of their plan, which involved a covert reconnaissance mission during which the group's leader authorized killing anyone who inadvertently got in the way.
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups across the country, after years of moderate growth between 2000 and 2008, the militia movement suddenly exploded in 2009, when the SPLC counted a total of 369 new groups that had come into existence since the election of Barack Obama as president.
In its annual Intelligence Report, the center cited the resurgence of radical right militias as cause for grave concern. Individuals associated with the Patriot movement during its 1990s heyday produced an enormous amount of violence, most dramatically the Oklahoma City bombing that left 168 people dead, it said. Since Mr. Obama's election, it cites the murder of six law enforcement officers, plots against the president's life by racist skinheads and the case of a Massachusetts man charged with murdering two black people and planning to kill as many Jews as possible as evidence the danger from such groups is growing. That danger clearly is fueled by the scare tactics and absurd conspiracy theories peddled by right-wing cable news commentators that leave people even more confused and uncertain about their future. Rage over the bank bailouts, high unemployment, home foreclosures and immigration, coupled with apolcalytpic religious ideologies such as the Hutaree belief that the end of the world is imminent, have combined to create a volatile mix of frustration and resentment that all too easily appeal to people's worst instincts. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/2010/03/the_militia_movements_frighten.html
Moreover, were the Obama government 'Marxist' or 'socialist' in the Marxian sense it would be about displacing the Congress by revolutionary worker's Soviets, as did the Russian Revolution following the October Bolshevik siezure of power that displaced the Constituent Assembly by All Power to the Soviets of Workers and Peasants Deputies.
No, the Obama government is not 'Marxist' or 'socialist', and the Democrats passed health care reform that forces more workers to turn over money to the capitalist insurance companies and has nothing in common with 'socialized medicine' as it is in the Social-Democratic nations of Europe and Canada or Cuba and China.
Medicare for all or even the so-called 'public option' is not in the interests of the parasitic Insurance companies and Pharmacutical companies. However, as in Europa, Canada and China, it is in the interest of industrial and agricultural productive capitals, and even service capitalists. This would lower the cost of production because it would eliminate for the capitalists in general from having to be forced to give money to the medical insurance capitalists.
Capitalists providing health insurance and related benefits are going to private capitalists in the insurance, hospital and pharmacutical industries. The existing system in the U.S., both before and after the institution of 'Obamacare' is still but the transfer of money from the capitalists as employers of wage labor to capitalists hustling insurance and drug dealing capitalists: from one capitalist to another.
Thus, during the health care debates in the Senate and House of Representatives it was the Democrats - who in general represent industrial and national capital and who are ostensibly concerned for 'the uninsured poor' - that faught for the reform that would transfer paying to capitalists in the insurance, drugs and hospital businesses from employers to the tax payers. It was the lobbies of the insurance companies and drug dealers in the pharmaceutical companies that were the active opposition to it, represented by their political lackeys in Congress, the Republicans, and ideological lackeys on FOX News. It was the Republicans, and the Tea Baggers, who on behalf of the Insurance companies opposed the reform and called it 'socialized medicine'.
'Tea Party' demagogues and the reactionary faction of the Republican Party call 'Obamacare' 'socialism'. This merely reveals either their ignorance of what 'socialized medicine' is, or are by using this word consciously manipulating fear and ignorance of American working class and poor who have been socialized to internalize and conditioned to respond to the word 'socialism' associating it with 'Marxism', 'Communism' 'Stalin' 'Dictatorship' and 'Big Brother' a la George Orwell's 1984.
Capitalist commodity production on the basis of wage labour dominated the Soviet capital mode of production just as much as it does capital commodity production by wage labour in Europe and North America. The displacement of one faction of finance capitalist, the insurance companies, to establish in its stead a working class tax supported free health care program for the working classes and the poor is not 'socialism'.
On the contrary, the socialist revolution begins with the elevation of the working class to ruling class, the winning of the battle for democracy by becoming the government and legislating the transfer of the productive forces and financial institutions from the private possession of the capitalists and land owners to public property under management of the working classes and toiling masses. On this basis the communist proletariat would manage production and distribution by a national plan, the economic objectives of which would be the abolition of commodity production and wage labour, the end of the market economy and therefore the abolition of money.
The European capitalists and land owning classes found it in their general class and individual interests in maintaining possession of the productive forces and financial institutions to displace one faction of finiance capital, the insurance companies and private hospitals. It is a capitalist measure to maintain a healthy working class and not pay for it.
This also enables the continued existence of the productive forces remaining the private possession of the capitalist classes and the landed aristocrats, as the case may be. For the capitalists as a class the 'greatest good for the greatest number' (JSMill) is 'the needs of the many [capitalists] outweigh the needs of the few, or the one' (Spock). It was and is still in the interests of the capitalist mode of production and appropriation, therefore, that many capitalists would sacrafice the few - the insurance companies and private hospitals. Besides, all this means is that the finance capitalists who are invested in insurance companies only need to withdraw their money from this investment and invest it in another industry.
The so-called Tea Party movement has been presented as 'populist'. This is not the case. The history of populism in the United States has never been a movement financed by capitalists in opposition to national health care, social security and unemployment compensation and to trade unions and nationalisations. Rather the opposite, populism has been movements in support of the unions and health care, social security and unemployment compensation and in opposition to the capitalists.
The Populist Movement: The Peoples Party
Coalition of U.S. agrarian reformers in the Midwest and South in the 1890s. The movement developed from farmers' alliances formed in the 1880s in reaction to falling crop prices and poor credit facilities. The leaders organized the Populist, or People's, Party (1892), which advocated a variety of measures to help farmers. They also demanded an increase in the circulating currency (to be achieved by the unlimited coinage of silver), a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, a tariff for revenue only, and the direct election of U.S. senators. The party's presidential candidate in 1892, James B. Weaver (1833 - 1912), received more than one million votes. Many state and local Populist candidates were elected in the Midwest. In 1896 the Populists joined with the Democratic Party to support the Free Silver Movement and the unsuccessful presidential candidacy of William Jennings Bryan. The movement declined thereafter, though some of its causes were later embraced by the Progressive Party. http://www.answers.com/topic/populist-movement
In the 1930s the global capitalist economy had collapsed, and millions were cast into poverty and misery. However, a strong and powerful movement of the working class finally erupted.
Unemployed workers staged mass hunger marches and even burst into the Capitol building, challenging members of Congress to provide them with jobs or an income. Southern textile workers, organizing their workplaces with the help of the interracial, communist-led Trade Union Unity League, armed in self-defense against gun-toting company goons.
In Harlem, Black artists and writers like Langston Hughes raised the demands of racial equality and self-determination for the Black community. Mass women's organizations demanded a constitutional declaration of gender equality, which already existed in the Soviet Union.
The capitalists could not smash these heroic uprisings with their usual bag of tricks. Many began throwing money and other support behind the fascist movement. They attacked the administration of Franklin Roosevelt as "soft on communism," even though Roosevelt's reforms were in fact aimed at saving capitalism.
Many describe fascism as "capitalism in decay." The fascists were ideologically trained racists and defenders of the capitalist class. However, their propaganda pretended to be "revolutionary" and, in some cases, "anti-capitalist."
Fascists recruited alienated individuals by channeling their rage into attacks on oppressed people and the revolutionary movement. For example, while pretending to be "revolutionary," the fascist Citizens' Alliance and Black Legions attacked striking autoworkers in Flint, Mich., who were demanding that the millionaire bosses recognize their right to unionize. http://www.workers.org/2010/us/glenn_beck_0715/
In the 1938 Minnesota governor's race, leading officials of the Republican Party conducted another vicious anti-Semitic campaign, this one to defeat Farmer-Labor Governor Elmer Benson. Benson's inaugural address on January 5, 1937 placed him on the left end of the New Deal. FDR had endorsed Benson in 1936. The Republican Party considered it a declaration of war. Among the issues Benson supported were:
- A two-year extension on the mortgage moratorium for farmers.
- A technical assistance program to assist and promote cooperatives.
- Union wages for state employees.
- The creation of a state commission on youth.
- Free transportation for rural high school students.
- Repeal of the criminal syndicalism laws (remember the Wobblies?)
- Creation of a state housing agency.
- The development of a state owned cement plant.
- Increased benefits for the disabled, people on relief, and the aged.
- A constitutional amendment enabling the state to produce and sell electrical power to municipalities.
- A state liquor dispensary.
- New provisions in the state's unemployment benefits--including benefits for striking workers.
Few of Benson's proposals became law as his program was effectively blocked in the state senate. Central to Benson's programs was a restructuring of the tax code, which passed the state house of representatives intact. Some of the provisions were:
1. Complete removal of the state tax levy of homes and homesteads up to the value of $4,000.
2. Taxing of the net income of individuals and corporations on a graduated basis so that a large share of local school taxes would be replaced by state income tax revenues.
3. Increased taxes on accumulated wealth, including mining companies, so that the state budget could be balanced.
4. Increased taxes on chain stores.
The conservatives in the Senate ignored the House tax bill until a few days before the legislative session closed, resulting in a special session. The Twin City press ran article after article denouncing the Farmer-Labor Party while citing such business leaders as Charles Fowler of Northern States Power, Mr. Montague representing the Steel Trust, Aleck Janes of Great Northern Railroad, and Aaron Youngquist of Minnesota Power and Light. With the press at the beck and call of business leaders clamoring that the Farmer-Labor Party was driving business out of the state, Benson's tax proposals failed to pass the Senate, but the stage was set for a bitter election campaign the following year. http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/1930sp2.html
The present Tea Party 'movement' in its racist behavior, e.g. at its Washington DC rally spitting in the faces of Black legislators and calling them Nigger; attacking homosexuals; support of capitalists and capitalism in opposition to trade unions, socialists and communists, all in the name of God and apple pie is rather a reincarnation of the fake 'populism' of the Ku Klux Klan! What was going on in the economy and politics was open class warfare against the workers in the interests of capitalists as a class.
The most successful reactionary fascistic 'popular' anti-labor union, anti-communist and anti-people of color, anti-immagrants and anti-Semitic so-called grassroots movement of the period in the United States was the Ku Klux Klan working on behalf of the big capitalist classes to finance them and the electronic media - radio and movies - to mobilize them.
In 1915 D.W. Griffith's silent film, The Birth of a Nation, was released and it quickly became a national hit. The film did cause controversy, but went on to become the highest grossing silent film of all time.
President Woodrow Wilson's History of the American People was quoted in the film to describe how Northerners and blacks were using deception and abuse of power to put the white South under the heal of the black South.
Birth of a Nation described how Lincoln had undermined state sovereignty and created a powerful federal government. It depicted Northern blacks and freed slaves as monstrous villains who were destroying white civilization and abusing their new-found power after the Civil War. The major villain of the film is a mulatto, a man of mixed white and black race.
Though it is often said today that the concept of an Aryan race was invented by Hitler or the Nazis, this is not true. The concept of an Aryan race certainly predates the rise of Nazism. Here, in 1915, in the most popular film in American history up to that time, the entire story focused on the concept of defending the Aryan race. http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/rise_of_american_fascism.htm
By 1925 the new Klan (KKK) had at least six million members across the US.(i) Whereas the old Klan was largely a Southern rural reaction to Civil war defeat, black emancipation and Republican rule, the new KKK became a city - rural movement. The KKK seemed to be everywhere; chameleon-like in its ability to fuel itself on different regional issues. In the South the KKK repressed the black communities; in the Midwest - Catholics, Jews and immigrants were persecuted; and in the Far West, Asians and immigrants became the objects of race hatred.(ii) In the words of a commentator from the period the KKK had become '... at once anti-Negro, anti-Alien, anti-Red, anti-Catholic, anti-Jew, anti-Darwin, anti-Modern, anti-Liberal, Fundamentalist, vastly Moral, militantly Protestant.' Perhaps the feature that the 1920s KKK shared most closely with the old version was it's doctrine of 'white supremacy.' ...
The KKK offered disoriented people simple answers to complex problems. It articulated decisively what many conservatives, nativists and also some liberals were already concerned about - and it called them out of their apathy into organised action. The KKK would receive much tacit support from local and state governments. However, a major platform in the rise of the KKK was Conservative Protestant Christianity. Simmons and his right hand man Clarke shared an evangelical heritage. They were acutely aware of the power of evangelical Christianity over the Protestant masses and the vast inroads that Christian Fundamentalism had been making. Both the old and new Klan defined itself as Protestant. The issue which the KKK won most support from the churches was its vehemently anti-Catholic stance. Nationally, one of the KKK's main strategies was to win over the Protestant clergy. It should, I believe, remain an indictment upon American Protestantism that it did this so easily. While more liberal clerics and theologians were often outspoken against Klan activities, the KKK won remarkable support amongst local churches and ministers. The KKK was supported most notably by Methodists, Baptists and the Disciples of Christ; all of which had been the most susceptible to Fundamentalism. These were the three largest Protestant denominations in the U.S; between them numbering millions of adherents. This provided the KKK with a huge audience to sow their "gospel" of hate, racism and intolerance. This occurred in cities but had most effect in towns and rural centres where most people went to church. It was an era too when a minister or pastor carried a high community status. By 1925, the KKK had proselytised over 40,000 clergy and a significant number became Klan officials. This in turn resulted in whole communities becoming pro-Klan.
By the mid 1920s the mid-West had become "klanified." The KKK dominated the state governments of Oregon, California, Indiana, Oklahoma and Colorado. In Denver, Colorado, the KKK with big business backing, succeeded in having two KKK members elected as U.S. senators. Furthermore, Denver's governor, mayor and chief of police were all KKK by this time. In 1922, a Klansman was elected as a senator to represent Texas and in this state particularly, KKK membership was " ... literally a who's who of business." http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/1515.htm
KKK parade on Pennsylvania Avenue, August 8, 1925. From the Washington Post's report: Phantom-like hosts of the Ku Klux Klan spread their white robe over the nation's most historic thoroughfare yesterday in one of the greatest demonstrations this city has ever known. . . . Police estimated that there were 30,000-35,000 in the weird procession -- men, women and children of the Klan. National Photo Company Collection glass negative. View full size. http://www.shorpy.com/node/5572
Reactionary is to roll back to their good ole days:
Boy the way Glen Miller played, songs that made the hit parade, guys like us we had it made, those were the days, and you know where you were then, girls were girls and men were men, mister we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again, didn't need no welfare states, everybody pulled his weight, gee our old Lasalle ran great, those were the days! http://www.allinthefamilysit.com/allinthefamily_theme_song.shtml
After capably serving as Secretary of Commerce under Presidents Harding and Coolidge, Hoover became the Republican Presidential nominee in 1928. He said then: We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land. His election seemed to ensure prosperity.
Yet within months the stock market crashed, and the Nation spiraled downward into depression. After the crash Hoover announced that while he would keep the Federal budget balanced, he would cut taxes and expand public works spending.
In 1931 repercussions from Europe deepened the crisis, even though the President presented to Congress a program asking for creation of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to aid business, additional help for farmers facing mortgage foreclosures, banking reform, a loan to states for feeding the unemployed, expansion of public works, and drastic governmental economy.
At the same time he reiterated his view that while people must not suffer from hunger and cold, caring for them must be primarily a local and voluntary responsibility.
His opponents in Congress, who he felt were sabotaging his program for their own political gain, unfairly painted him as a callous and cruel President. In the 1930's he became a powerful critic of the New Deal, warning against tendencies toward statism. http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/herberthoover
Fascism is the triumph of capitalist counterrevolution by the destruction and banning of worker's self organization into economic and political units - labour unions, cooperatives, labour and socialist political organizations. By socialist organizations I mean all of those who are by content &/or theoretical posture fighting to bring about the establishment of worker's political domination of the State, by means of which the expropriation of the productive forces from the private possession of the capitalist classes and landed aristocracy, to become public property of the working classes and toiling masses.
Capitalism, Fascism and World War 2
by Gary Sudborough
September 22, 2002
There is a close and often ignored relationship between fascism and capitalism. German corporations financed Hitler's rise to power and were rewarded by slave labor. Krupp, I.G. Farben and other corporations used Jewish and Slavic slave labor. Alfred Krupp called girl babies born to his slaves useless feeders because they were not as strong a potential worker as were boy babies. These girl babies were gassed.
American corporations invested heavily in Nazi Germany, and many like General Motors and Ford had factories there, which also used slave labor and produced war materials for the Nazis. US corporate investment in Germany accelerated rapidly after Hitler came to power. Investment increased 48.5% between 1929 and 1940, while declining in the rest of continental Europe. American bombers deliberately avoided hitting these US factories, and they received compensation from the American taxpayer for any damage after the war. US oil companies sold oil to the Nazis and oil on credit to the fascists in Spain.
Many American capitalists were openly sympathetic to the Nazis. Henry Ford wrote a book called The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem, and he is mentioned in Mein Kampf. James Mooney, the General Motors executive in charge of European operations, was awarded the Order of Merit of the Golden Eagle by Adolph Hitler. There were op-ed pieces by Nazis like Hermann Goehring in Hearst newspapers in the United States. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Capitalism_Fascism_
The [so-called National Socialists] funding and business support:
Some of the names might be surprising: George Bush's Grandfather, was a funder raising the Bush-Dulles controversy, Ford, who promoted Nazi views aided financially and other American Companies such Bayer may have funded partially the Concentration Camp medical experiments so infamous now. Thyssen, a financier provided funding, contacts and took an active role in Silesian Steel and IG Farben, companies which used slave labor from Auschwitz. I. G. Farben, further produced Zyklon-B, the gas repellant used in the gas chambers. While Thyssen was decorated by the Nazis for his role, Thyssen is claimed to have parted company at least on paper with Hitler after a strong rebuke. Ford was more instrumental than many know, supplying materials, business and production know-how---it is a curiosity that Ford automobiles were driven during the Beerhall Putsch. IBM, formerly a 'tabulating machine' business, headed by Watson, continued business throughout the war with Germany through the DeHomag company which provided the Hollerith Machine, a machine without which the mass killings would have been impossible. http://www.shoaheducation.com/funding.html.htm
While there were those among the Catholics, including local priests and Bishops who took strong stands against Hitler and the war, even to martyrdom, there were forces inside the Vatican that not only aided in funding the Third Reich, but also aided in advisory capacities. In a supposed neutrality, Pope Pius XI kept quiet on much that happened. Documents surfacing 50 and 60 years later show that the Vatican Bank had an active roll in laundering Nazi holdings and circumventing records on Jewish funds and gold. At the end of the war, even Vatican documents note what has become known as a 'ratline' in which the Vatican used their neutrality to help key officials in the 3rd Reich escape with confiscated wealth to open countries, usually with strong political ties to the Catholic Church, including Argentina and other South American ports. Vatican ties to the Reich came not only from political support but from opposition to intrusions of communism. http://www.shoaheducation.com/funding.html.htm
In Germany in the late 1920s the Nazi movement had an ideology of presenting itself as working class and socialist, an advocacy of so-called 'national socialism' by demagogic rhetoric, promoting xenophobic and nationalist rhetoric that by objectifying 'the Juden' as parasitic capitalist was necessary because the German working class had a history of labour socialism in opposition to capitalism, whereas nationalism is the opposite of socialist internationalism in its stress of ideological union between all classes.
'Germany first' meant that the working class was to subordinate its material class interests to 'national interests'. National interest, however is defined according to the interests of the capitalist classes, insomuch as the most powerful, economically dominate class is the most powerful, politically dominate class, the owners of means of communication [press and electronic media] as well as means of production and distribution.
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.- Samuel Johnson
A patriot is a fool in every age. - Alexander Pope
Never was a patriot yet, but was a fool. - John Dryden
Patriotism is as fierce as a fever, pitiless as the grave, blind as a stone, and irrational as a headless hen. - Ambrose Bierce
In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary, patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer, I beg to submit that it is the first. - Ambrose Bierce
Proletarian international Communist politics has never been compatible with nor subordinated to bourgeois patriotism.
THE BLACK PANTHER
April 27, 1969. Page 14.
STATEMENT BY THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY
We will not try to fight fire with fire because all of the people know that fire is best put out with water. Therefore, the Black Panther Party will not fight racism with racism. But we will fight racism with solidarity. We will not fight capitalism with capitalism (Black capitalism), but with the implementation of socialism and socialist programs for the people. We will not fight U.S. government imperialism with more imperialism because the peoples of the world and other races, especially in America, must fight imperialism with proletarian internationalism. All peoples and revolutionaries must defend themselves with organized guns and force when attacked by the pig power structure. http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/bpp/bpp270469_14.htm
The Panthers were an organization of inner-city working class youth. They were a disciplined organizational formation of working class youth in armed self-defense in context of global workers and peasants armed revolutions. They were armed workers in America's inner-city slums advocating Socialist Revolution in context of American inner-city armed rebellion against the State. The leadership in the BPP, which in the early days included Kwame Toure, as well as Huey Newton, Ray Masai Hewitt, John Huggins, George Jackson, the New York 21, and others were openly proletarian revolutionaries and as such were class-conscious socialist internationalists.
Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. - George Bernard Shaw
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious. - George Bernard Shaw
You'll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race. - George Bernard Shaw
Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.
Empirically, communism is only possible as the act of the dominant peoples "all at once" and simultaneously, which presupposes the universal development of productive forces and the world intercourse bound up with communism. The proletariat can thus only exist world-historically, just as communism, its activity, can only have a "world-historical" existence. World-historical existence of individuals means existence of individuals which is directly linked up with world history. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm
That the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves, that the struggle for the emancipation of the working classes means not a struggle for class privileges and monopolies, but for equal rights and duties, and the abolition of all class rule;
That the economical subjection of the man of labor to the monopolizer of the means of labor - that is, the source of life - lies at the bottom of servitude in all its forms, of all social misery, mental degradation, and political dependence;
That the economical emancipation of the working classes is therefore the great end to which every political movement ought to be subordinate as a means;
That all efforts aiming at the great end hitherto failed from the want of solidarity between the manifold divisions of labor in each country, and from the absence of a fraternal bond of union between the working classes of different countries;
That the emancipation of labor is neither a local nor a national, but a social problem, embracing all countries in which modern society exists, and depending for its solution on the concurrence, practical and theoretical, of the most advanced countries;
That the present revival of the working classes in the most industrious countries of Europe, while it raises a new hope, gives solemn warning against a relapse into the old errors, and calls for the immediate combination of the still disconnected movements;
For these reasons - The International Working Men's Association has been founded. http://www.marxists.org/history/international/iwma/documents/1864/rules.
Marxian materialist conception of history and the class struggles of the working class is based upon the recognition that the proletariat is a cosmopolitian class of wage workers, in recognition of and opposition to bourgeois nationalism and racialism.
The so-called Tea Party movement is a reactionary, racist and anti-working class/anti-socialist movement. The fact that its opposition to Obama is by painting him by the word 'socialist' although he is clearly a capitalist politician is evidence of the reactionary base and ideology of the Tea Party.
The Tea Baggers base has a confused understanding, or rather a lack of understanding of fascism and communism: it paints Obama as a 'socialist' and at the same time draws pictures of him as a Hitler, a fascist. Fascism and communism or socialism are irreconciliable enemies - the former being the extreme politics of the capitalist class and the latter the revolutionary politics of the working class to overthrow the capitalist order.
German fascists called themselves National Socialist Worker's Party. In actuality the Nazis were the political representatives of and were financed by national and international capitalists. On their behalf the Nazi task was to use State Power as an instrument to destroy the labor unions, along with the Socialists and Communist parties and promote bigoted campaigns against Jews.
There are several versions of the well-known statement attributed to the German anti-Nazi activist, Pastor Martin Niemoller (his family name can also be writted without the umlaut as Niemoeller). The following is said, by someone who heard him speak at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, GA, in 1959 (or 1960), to be what he actually said:
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
There is not, nor has there ever been an authentic proletarian movement based in nationalist ideology or ideology of race.
If patriotism is 'the last refuge of a scoundrel,' it is not merely because evil deeds may be performed in the name of patriotism, but because patriotic fevor can obliterate moral distinctions altogether. - Ralph B. Perry
"The press is so powerful in its image-making role, it can make a criminal look like he's the victim and make the victim look like he's the criminal." Malcolm X Speaks, p.93
"If you aren't careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." Malcolm X Speaks, p.93
The fascists in Germany used their media and newspapers to mobalize the German workers and petty bourgeois opposition to capitalists by turning it against Jews. Radio and print and propaganda sources that represent the interests of the capitalist classes and landed aristocracy as national interests, while demonizing the Jewish people as parasitic capitalists and part of an international conspiracy of bankers to take over the world - a so called new world order, that existed only in the lunatic imagination of anti-Semites:
A 1919 Austrian postcard depicting the stab-in-the-back legend,
which blamed Jews for Germany's defeat in World War I.
Nazi ideology was capitalist ideology and the Nazi government was the political representative of the German capitalists against 'international Bolshevism', therefore to the German Communist Party and Social Democratic Party, and therefore against Socialist and Communist party's based trade unions.
The Program of the National Socialist German Workers Party is a program for our time. The leadership rejects the establishment of new aims after those set out in the Program have been achieved, for the sole purpose of making it possible for the Party to continue to exist as the result of the artificially stimulated dissatisfaction of the masses.
1. We demand the uniting of all Germans within one Greater Germany, on the basis of the right to self-determination of nations.
2. We demand equal rights for the German people (Volk) with respect to other nations, and the annulment of the peace treaty of Versailles and St. Germain.
3. We demand land and soil (Colonies) to feed our People and settle our excess population.
4. Only Nationals (Volksgenossen) can be Citizens of the State. Only persons of German blood can be Nationals, regardless of religious affiliation. No Jew can therefore be a German National.
5. Any person who is not a Citizen will be able to live in Germany only as a guest and must be subject to legislation for Aliens.
6. Only a Citizen is entitled to decide the leadership and laws of the State. We therefore demand that only Citizens may hold public office, regardless of whether it is a national, state or local office. We oppose the corrupting parliamentary custom of making party considerations, and not character and ability, the criterion for appointments to official positions.
7. We demand that the State make it its duty to provide opportunities of employment first of all for its own Citizens. If it is not possible to maintain the entire population of the State, then foreign nationals (non-Citizens) are to be expelled from the Reich.
8. Any further immigration of non-Germans is to be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who entered Germany after August 2, 1914, be forced to leave the Reich without delay.
9. All German Citizens must have equal rights and duties.
10. It must be the first duty of every Citizen to carry out intellectual or physical work. Individual activity must not be harmful to the public interest and must be pursued within the framework of the community and for the general good.
We therefore demand:
11. The abolition of all income obtained without labor or effort. Breaking the Servitude of Interest.
12. In view of the tremendous sacrifices in property and blood demanded of the nation by every war, personal gain from the war must be termed a crime against the nation. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
13. We demand the nationalization of all enterprises (already) converted into corporations (trusts).
14. We demand profit-sharing in large enterprises.
15. We demand the large-scale development of old-age pension schemes.
16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle class; the immediate communalization of the large department stores, which are to be leased at low rates to small tradesmen. We demand the most careful consideration for the owners of small businesses in orders placed by national, state, or community authorities.
17. We demand land reform in accordance with our national needs and a law for expropriation without compensation of land for public purposes. Abolition of ground rent and prevention of all speculation in land.
18. We demand ruthless battle against those who harm the common good by their activities. Persons committing base crimes against the People, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished by death without regard to religion or race.
19. We demand the replacement of Roman Law, which serves a materialistic World Order, by German Law.
20. In order to make higher education - and thereby entry into leading positions - available to every able and industrious German, the State must provide a thorough restructuring of our entire public educational system. The courses of study at all educational institutions are to be adjusted to meet the requirements of practical life. Understanding of the concept of the State must be achieved through the schools (teaching of civics) at the earliest age at which it can be grasped. We demand the education at the public expense of specially gifted children of poor parents, without regard to the latters' position or occupation.
21. The State must raise the level of national health by means of mother-and-child care, the banning of juvenile labor, achievements of physical fitness through legislation for compulsory gymnastics and sports, and maximum support for all organizations providing physical training for young people.
22. We demand the abolition of hireling troops and the creation of a national army.
23. We demand laws to fight against deliberate political lies and their dissemination by the press. In order to make it possible to create a German press, we demand:
a) all editors and editorial employees of newspapers appearing in the German language must be German by race;
b) non-German newspapers require express permission from the State for their publication. They may not be printed in the German language;
c) any financial participation in a German newspaper or influence on such a paper is to be forbidden by law to non-Germans and the penalty for any breach of this law will be the closing of the newspaper in question, as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-Germans involved.
Newspapers which violate the public interest are to be banned. We demand laws against trends in art and literature which have a destructive effect on our national life, and the suppression of performances that offend against the above requirements.
24. We demand freedom for all religious denominations, provided that they do not endanger the existence of the State or offend the concepts of decency and morality of the Germanic race. The Party as such stands for positive Christianity, without associating itself with any particular denomination. It fights against the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a permanent revival of our nation can be achieved only from within, on the basis of: Public Interest before Private Interest.
25. To carry out all the above we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the Reich. Unquestioned authority by the political central Parliament over the entire Reich and over its organizations in general. The establishment of trade and professional organizations to enforce the Reich basic laws in the individual states. The Party leadership promises to take an uncompromising stand, at the cost of their own lives if need be, on the enforcement of the above points.
Munich, February 24, 1920.
Das Programm der NSDAP
(The Program of the National-Socialist German Workers' Party), Berlin . http://www.yadvashem.org/
The anti-capitalist rhetoric of the Nazis was redirected from class hatred and opposition to the capitalists and capitalism to hatred of Jews by positing Jews as capitalists and communists: international Jewish-bankers conspiracy.
Often the anti-Semitic waves were rooted in economic problems. In the early Middle Ages, Christians were not allowed to work in the money lending business, and the Jews consequently took over this "dirty business". But: This meant that Christians came to owe money to the Jews, and this led to the Jews being viewed as loan sharks. Such sentiments were widespread even in Hitler's days.
Towards the middle and end of the medieval period, due to economic development and internationalisation, the Jews' monopoly in the money business and their economic importance diminished. ...
In a climate of economic crisis in Germany towards the end of the 19th century, Jewish bankers were blamed. The Jews were seen as evil and exploiting capitalists, and several anti-Semitic parties were founded.
Caricature of Jews' preference for money and power in Germany, in the children's book Der Giftpilz ('The Poisonous Mushroom'), 1935, USHMM #40014.
After World War I the German anti-Semitism reached new heights. The returning and dethroned German soldiers - among them Adolf Hitler - accused those on the home front of being responsible for the defeat. According to the so-called 'stab-in-the-back legend', social democratic politicians, revolutionaries and especially Jews had "stabbed" the army in the back.
And according to the paranoid Hitler, it was a mean conspiracy between Jewish capitalists in the allied countries that had financed World War I, while Jewish socialists and communists had been responsible for the stabbing on the home front. Hitler was even more explicit in Mein Kampf and in later speeches, where he spoke of the existence of a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. In this conspiracy, Jewish capitalists had joined forces with the Judeo-Bolshevist socialism.
It almost looked as if nationalism and anti-Semitism only increased as ever-greater misfortunes descended on the German people. In many circles, the Jews were simply blamed for the miserable state of affairs in Germany. Jews were also accused of being parasites, Marxists and for being the very people behind World War I. http://www.holocauseducation.dk/baggrund/antisemitisme.asp
In Mein Kampf Adolph Hitler wrote:
Volume Two - The National Socialist Movement
Chapter XII: The Trade-Union Question
Looking at the matter from the highest standpoint, the National Socialist Movement will have to recognize the necessity of adopting its own trade-unionist policy.
It must do this for a further reason, namely because a real National Socialist education for the employer as well as for the employee, in the spirit of a mutual co-operation within the common framework of the national community, cannot be secured by theoretical instruction, appeals and exhortations, but through the struggles of daily life. In this spirit and through this spirit the movement must educate the several large economic groups and bring them closer to one another under a wider outlook. Without this preparatory work it would be sheer illusion to hope that a real national community can be brought into existence. The great ideal represented by its philosophy of life and for which the movement fights can alone form a general style of thought steadily and slowly. And this style will show that the new state of things rests on foundations that are internally sound and not merely an external facade.
Hence the movement must adopt a positive attitude towards the trade-unionist idea. But it must go further than this. For the enormous number of members and followers of the trade-unionist movement it must provide a practical education which will meet the exigencies of the coming National Socialist State.
The answer to the third question follows from what has been already said.
The National Socialist Trades Union is not an instrument for class warfare, but a representative organ of the various occupations and callings. The National Socialist State recognizes no 'classes'....
Whoever could have succeeded at that time in overthrowing the Marxist unions to make way for the triumph of the National Socialist corporative idea, which would then take the place of the ruinous class warfare - such a person would be fit to rank with the very greatest men our nation has produced and his bust should be installed in the Valhalla at Regensburg for the admiration of posterity.
But I knew of no person who could qualify for such a pedestal.
In this connection we must not be led astray by the fact that the international trades unions are conducted by men of only mediocre significance, for when those unions were founded there was nothing else of a similar kind already in existence. To-day the National Socialist Movement must fight against a monster organization which has existed for a long time, rests on gigantic foundations and is carefully constructed even in the smallest details. An assailant must always exercise more intelligence than the defender, if he is to overthrow the latter. The Marxist trade-unionist citadel may be governed today by mediocre leaders, but it cannot be taken by assault except through the dauntless energy and genius of a superior leader on the other side. If such a leader cannot be found it is futile to struggle with Fate and even more foolish to try to overthrow the existing state of things without being able to construct a better in its place.
Here one must apply the maxim that in life it is often better to allow something to go by the board rather than try to half do it or do it badly, owing to a lack of suitable means.
To this we must add another consideration, which is not at all of a demagogic character. At that time I had, and I still have today, a firmly rooted conviction that when one is engaged in a great ideological struggle in the political field it would be a grave mistake to mix up economic questions with this struggle in its earlier stages. This applies particularly to our German people. For if such were to happen in their case the economic struggle would immediately distract the energy necessary for the political fight. Once the people are brought to believe that they can buy a little house with their savings they will devote themselves to the task of increasing their savings and no spare time will be left to them for the political struggle against those who, in one way or another, will one day secure possession of the pennies that have been saved. Instead of participating in the political conflict on behalf of the opinions and convictions which they have been brought to accept they will now go further with their 'settlement' idea and in the end they will find themselves for the most part sitting on the ground amidst all the stools.
To-day the National Socialist Movement is at the beginning of its struggle. In great part it must first of all shape and develop its ideals. It must employ every ounce of its energy in the struggle to have its great ideal accepted, and the success of this effort is not conceivable unless the combined energies of the movement be entirely at the service of this struggle.
To-day we have a classical example of how the active strength of a people becomes paralysed when that people is too much taken up with purely economic problems.
The Revolution which took place in November 1918 was not made by the trades unions, but it was carried out in spite of them. And the people of Germany did not wage any political fight for the future of their country because they thought that the future could be sufficiently secured by constructive work in the economic field.
We must learn a lesson from this experience, because in our case the same thing must happen under the same circumstances. The more the combined strength of our movement is concentrated in the political struggle, the more confidently may we count on being successful along our whole front. But if we busy ourselves prematurely with trade unionist problems, settlement problems, etc., it will be to the disadvantage of our own cause, taken as a whole. For, though these problems may be important, they cannot be solved in an adequate manner until we have political power in our hand and are able to use it in the service of this idea. Until that day comes these problems can have only a paralysing effect on the movement. And if it takes them up too soon they will only be a hindrance in the effort to attain its own ideological aims. It may then easily happen that trade unionist considerations will control the political direction of the movement, instead of the ideological aims of the movement directing the way that the trades unions are to take.
The movement and the nation can derive advantage from a National Socialist trade unionist organization only if the latter be so thoroughly inspired by National Socialist ideas that it runs no danger of falling into step behind the Marxist movement. For a National Socialist Trades Union which would consider itself only as a competitor against the Marxist unions would be worse than none. It must declare war against the Marxist Trades Union, not only as an organization but, above all, as an idea. It must declare itself hostile to the idea of class and class warfare and, in place of this, it must declare itself as the defender of the various occupational and professional interests of the German people. http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv2ch12.html
The Nazis broke unions, lowered wages, abolished overtime pay, decreased business taxes and increased business subsidies. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Capitalism_Fascism_
Tea Party financiers and television and radio ideologists are speaking the language as the German Nazis spoke, except the term 'the Jews' has been displaced by hatred for 'illegal aliens'. When you analyse what the fascist ideologists of the Tea Party are saying, and compare it to the program and objective of the new rising Klu Klux Klan, it is evident that the Tea Party and the Ku Klux Klan has the same language in their common objectives:
Close to 50 members of the Georgia Knight Riders and Knights of the Ku Klux Klan rallied for a crowd of more than 500 on Feb. 20 in the town of Nahunta, GA about 275 miles southeast of Atlanta. Klan members stood in ornate white robes and pointed hoods with faces exposed in front of a crowd of mostly enthusiastic onlookers for a two-hour rally. The few hecklers in the crowd were harshly scolded by supporters, while several dozen protesters, including the NAACP rallied nearby.
Several Klan members spoke on topics ranging from gun control, sexual offenders, the value of prayer in public schools and the need to vote. However, most of the group's hateful speech was focused on eliminating "the problems" of illegal immigration and immigration in general. Standing next to a large sign that read, Stop the Latino Invasion Now! Imperial Wizard Jeff Jones referred to people coming over from Mexico and Guatemala as third-world mud people. Faulting the current administration's immigration policy, Wolf said they are going to commit genocide on this Anglo-American race. Jones also blamed illegal immigrants for the lack of jobs, low wages, drugs, gangs and the spread of diseases in the United States.
We want them to take their sorry selves back to Mexico and stay out of our country, said Jones. We have got so many Latinos walking over the border everyday. They are taking over the whole work force because honestly very few, I don't think even one-tenth of one percent, has any job like a lawyer or a doctor.
The rally ended with repeated chants of White Power as the Klan members raised their left arms in a brash Hitler salute.
Published on Monday, April 26, 2010 by CommonDreams.org
Arizona: This Is What Apartheid Looks Like
by Roberto Dr. Cintli Rodriguez
Those who think that there's an immigration crisis in Arizona are correct; however, this is but part of the story. The truth is, a civilizational clash is being played out in the same state in which the state legislature questions the birthplace and legitimacy of President Barack Obama and where Sen. John McCain competes with Senate hopeful, J.D. Hayworth, to see who is the most anti-immigrant.
It is also the same state that several years ago, denied a holiday for Martin Luther King Jr., and that today permits virtually anyone -- on the basis of trumped-up fear -- to carry concealed weapons anywhere.
Welcome to Apartheid Arizona -- the land of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, States' Rights and a desert that has claimed thousands of migrant lives. By way of the same extremist legislature, the battle here is even much larger and more profound. This civilizational clash is being waged daily here via more bills involving who belongs, what language can be spoken here and who and what can be taught in the state's schools. This is beyond the notion of who is legal.
Whoever said that this crisis is proof that the illegal Mexican American War never ended is partially correct because this conflict is even older than that war in which Mexico lost half its territory to the United States. The irony regarding the recently signed SB 1070 -- which permits law enforcement to question people about their citizenship, based on reasonable suspicion -- is that those principally targeted will be those who look the most Hispanic.
Looking Hispanic has always been a misnomer; what it really means is those who are dark and short and who look the most Indigenous. Truthfully, here in Arpaio Country, that profiling that everyone fears is already here with us. And to dispel illusions, the darkest amongst us have always been subjected to racial profiling by the migra and by law enforcement agencies everywhere in the country. This is true whether we've been here for a few days or for thousands of years. And to dispel further illusions, this civilizational clash alluded to is national in scope; witness the many hundreds of anti-immigrant bills nationwide since 2006. Only its epicenter is here.
What is changing with SB 1070 is that racial profiling is no longer outside of the law; here it now has legal cover. But to be sure, people of conscience will never accept it as law. And just as Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva is calling for a national and international boycott of Arizona -- many are calling on law enforcement to have the moral courage to refuse to recognize SB 1070 as a law and simply view it as a proposal until the courts decide on its constitutionality.
LabourPartyPraxis discussion - subscribe