The people in Russia know,
but not in the U.S.
http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22...11693_bush.html
Say what you want! PRAVDA.Ru will hear you!
Bush vs. Hitler
01/03/2004 12:40
Although the quest for or preservation of "democracy" is often used as
a justification for war, history has incessantly revealed that such a
quest is often little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to install a
puppet regime.
Nazi leader Herman Goering once remarked that it was easy to lead
people into war, regardless of whether they resided within "a
democracy, a fascist dictatorship, a parliament, or a communist
dictatorship." All that was required, Goering argued, is for their
government to "tell them they are being attacked, and [then] denounce
the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to
greater danger."
Many years ago, when I was younger and more idealistic, I would have
viewed Goering's statement as an anachronism. After all, millions had
suffered immensely during the nightmare of World War II, and it seemed
that this historical imprint alone would have indelibly reminded people
about the folly of blindly following leaders into war. Also (and
despite Goering's assertion) democracy appeared to offer
additional protections from this folly as well, particularly in
wealthy, industrialized nations like America, where freedom of speech
and press permitted the free exchange of ideas, which in turn served to
balance emotion and reason, and exposed any lies used to rationalize an
unjust war. While it is true that America still suffered through the
Vietnam era, it did not do so unquestioningly, nor with a blind faith in
the nation's leaders.
But the coup by the plutocratic supporters of George W. Bush in the
year 2000, coupled with the invasion of Iraq, changed all that,
revealing how easily Americans can be manipulated, how willing they are
to be lied to, and how vacuous the freedoms of speech and press
have become when the bulk of information is filtered through
corporate-controlled media that profit from jingoism, propaganda and
dishonesty. But, perhaps most disturbingly, these events demonstrated
that even though the words "freedom, democracy and human rights" are
chanted like mantras by political leaders, many Americans have
apparently welcomed, or at the very least are blissfully unconcerned
about, the erosion of freedom, the abuse of human rights, and the
nation's growing transformation from a democracy into a
neo-fascist dictatorship.
Although the quest for or preservation of "democracy" is often used as
a justification for war, history has incessantly revealed that such a
quest is often little more than a thinly-veiled attempt to install a
puppet regime. Decades ago, the folk singer Phil Ochs, in his song COPS
OF THE WORLD (the lyrics of which are still hauntingly relevant today),
stated that in American lexicon democracy is simply another name for
profits, and that in poorer, "third world" countries democracy normally
consists of an imperialist power handpicking leaders for the local
populace to "elect." The late Cuban guerrilla leader Che Guevara went
even further, stating that in these impoverished nations democracies
are simply facades established by imperialist powers to placate the
masses, when in reality "third-world" governments, burdened with debt
and dependent upon wealthier nations for basic necessities, frequently
have to implement policies that appease their
imperialist masters even if it means the suffering of their own people.
More recently PRAVDA columnist John Bourke examined this phenomenon in
the context of American efforts to allegedly install "democracy" in
Iraq (Iraqi Democracy or Our Iraqi Democracy, 12/1/03) by pointing out
that the majority of Iraq"s population are from the Shiite sect of
Islam, and a truly democratic vote would undoubtedly place their
representatives into power.
This could, Bourke explains, eventually lead to the establishment of a
"fundamentalist Islamic state." Yet, despite all the Bush
dictatorship's pretensions about the Iraqi war bringing "democracy to
the region," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has flatly stated that
no government in Iraq, even a democratically elected one, will be
permitted to install an Islamic state.
After Rumsfeld revealed that the desire to promote democracy in Iraq
was basically a lie, another "justification" for the war became the
need to defend "human rights." Clearly Saddam Hussein was a brutal
dictator who maintained power through the use of fear, torture,
disappearances and mass murders. But he was just one of many such
dictators, some of whom are still in power and supported by the United
States. The reality is that it was not the violation of human rights
that disturbed the neo-fascist ideologies of the Bush dictatorship, but
the fact that Hussein had simply exhausted his usefulness. It is
particularly revealing that the demonization of Hussein came after
he was no longer needed as an American ally, just as, under the first
Bush regime, the demonization of dictator Manuel Noriega, and the
subsequent invasion of Panama, occurred only after Noriega was no
longer needed as an American ally. Prior to this, the human rights
violations committed by both these men were routinely ignored, and
sometimes welcomed. As I reported in a previous PRAVDA article
(Politics of Assassination, 10/2/03), the CIA had on at least one
occasion even turned over to Hussein a list of suspected communists
with the knowledge that those on the list would be brutally tortured
and executed.
It was also revealing that the invasion of Panama conveniently came at
a time when Americans were outraged about the billions of tax dollars
they would be forced to pay to bail out defunct "savings and loans"
companies, whose financial practices had resulted in the unjust
enrichment of the few, and the loss of life savings for the many. It is
equally revealing that the invasion of Iraq came while many, if not the
majority of, Americans, felt that the corrupt appointment of George W.
Bush to the presidency had undermined democracy, and that his
inept handling of the economy was resulting in massive job losses for
the poor and middle-class, while the rich were benefitting from "tax
cuts."
In addition, America's alleged "respect" for human rights continues to
be a lie, since one of the largest terrorist training camps in the
world, the School of the Americas, which is located within the
boundaries of the United States, still trains murderers, torturers and
rapists whose atrocities, primarily throughout Central and South
America, make the number of people killed by Al-Qaeda and other
terrorist groups pale in comparison. Ironically (or perhaps not
ironically) Manuel Noriega was a graduate of this "school."
Of course all of the issues and facts discussed above are not "deep,
dark secrets." But they also are not items Americans are likely to see
or hear while watching or listening to news broadcasts from
corporate-controlled media. These media are still licking their
collective lips over the ratings and profits windfall sired by the
Iraqi war, and are certainly not going to report upon anything that
will prevent the Bush dictatorship from engaging in more wars and
invasions in the future. So it has become the province of fictionalized
dramas to expose what the jingoistic "news" media want hidden.
One example is the medical drama ER (short for "Emergency Room"). In
recent episodes an American doctor traveled to a war-torn African
country to provide medical services for the humanitarian organization
Doctors Without Borders. When asked why the American government's
alleged concern for human rights did not extend to Africa, he sadly
remarked, "They've got no oil." Another aid worker later remarked that
she was astonished that Americans were not "rioting in the streets" in
protest of the deceptions that led to the Iraqi war.
Although "rioting in the streets" would undoubtedly bring more
political repression, courtesy of America's megalomaniacal Attorney
General John Ashcroft and his so-called "Justice Department" (those who
saw the videotaped abuses inflicted on post 9/11 detainees
clearly know what this means), the lack of outrage in America against
the lies, hypocrisy and bloodlust of the Bush dictatorship, and those
who support it, is frightening. It would seem that all Americans, but
particularly those with children or other family members serving in
Iraq, would be demanding impeachment after seeing a bellicose Bush in
military attire on the deck of an aircraft carrier, since he avoided
military service himself by joining the National Guard, and then went
absent without leave (AWOL) from that. It would seem Americans would be
equally infuriated that other deceptive instigators of the Iraqi
war--like Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Paul Wolfowitz--avoided serving in
the military. It would also seem that Americans would rebel against
those who not only undermined democracy to create the Bush
dictatorship, but who never even bothered to protect this democracy
through military service--like former Florida Secretary of State
Katherine Harris, Bush's brother (and Florida Governor) Jeb, and
Supreme Court "justices?" Antonia Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Finally it would seem that Americans would demand that the political
commentators and celebrities who supported the Iraqi war, yet avoided
serving in the military--like Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, William
Kristol, Bill O'Reilly, Brit Hume, Kid Rock, Toby Keith, Ted Nugent,
Bruce Willis and numerous others--now "put their money where their
mouths are" by trading in their guitars, microphones, mansions and film
careers playing "make-believe" soldiers for rifles, military fatigues
and a "real" opportunity to get killed or maimed. After all, it is not
difficult to be "brave" when the lives at risk are not one's own.
But instead of outrage it appears that many Americans continue to be
lulled into complacency by lullabies of propaganda and deceit, while
those who exploit the war for self-aggrandizement and profit adroitly
evade detection by camouflaging themselves in counterfeit garments of
"patriotism."
In a previous article for PRAVDA (Lessons Learned, But Forgotten,
8/13/03), I explained that, in forming America's government, the
founders relied heavily upon the principle "that power tends to corrupt
and absolute power corrupts absolutely." This belief inspired a system
of "checks-and-balances," as well as a Bill of Rights, to guarantee
that certain individual liberties would never be abrogated by either
the government or the majority. I further asserted how history seemed
to substantiate the founders" judgment about the corrupting influence
of power, since governments premised upon the hypothesis that human
beings were intrinsically good (and thus no check-and-balance was
necessary) consistently produced some of the world"s most brutal
dictators.
The dilemma that persistently arises in America, however, is the fact
that power, and those who hold it, resent being "checked and balanced."
Yet this delicate system is the only bulwark between American democracy
and American fascism. Therefore it is no surprise that the primary
target of the Bush dictatorship is not Afghanistan or Iraq, but the
check-and-balance system.
Fascism fits well into the simplistic ideologies of the Bush
dictatorship. While fascists essentially agree with America"s
forefathers that people are basically evil, they actively manipulate
this evil by trumpeting emotion over logic, and "great lies" over
truth. This is normally accomplished through the exploitation of
"scapegoats," who are marketed as the source of all social ills,
coupled with appeals to humanity's basest instincts--bigotry, greed,
fanatical nationalism, fear, and lust for conquest (just to name a few).
In fact, several disturbing analogies exist between George W. Bush and
history's most infamous fascist, Adolph Hitler: Both men assumed power
in defiance of the will of the majority; both men used "great lies" to
pursue their warmongering agendas; both men preyed upon humanity's
basest instincts to disseminate those "great lies"; both men were
appeased by the British government, Hitler through Neville Chamberlain
and Bush through Tony Blair; both men were willing to use national
tragedies to justify the destruction of civil liberties, Hitler through
the burning of the Reichstag and Bush through the September 11th
terrorist attacks; both men were/are suspected of either participating
in, or ignoring warnings about the imminence of, these tragedies in
order to enhance their political stature and power; both men
demonstrated no compunction about exploiting a culture of death for
political self-aggrandizement, Hitler through his well-publicized
genocide campaigns, and Bush who, while governor of Texas, routinely
denied DNA tests to death row inmates, even though such tests could
prevent wrongful executions; both men were willing to appeal to racism,
Hitler through his quest for a "master race," and Bush through his
condemnation of affirmative action policies, which primarily benefit
racial minorities. While denouncing such policies as "preferential
treatment," Bush predictably displayed no such aversion to the
preferential treatment enjoyed by wealthy white people, like himself,
through a system of nepotism and cronyism; both men reveled in war and
exploited the military to satiate their personal ambitions and
vendettas; both men used war to enrich their political cronies; both
men demonstrated contempt for international law and the concerns of the
world community; and both men believed they were/are on some holy
crusade inspired by a "divine province" that placed them into power.
But the disconcerting advantages the Bush dictatorship enjoys over
Hitler's are the scientific advances that have made the implementation
of fascism much easier. New technologies have given the
government Orwellian capabilities. Programs now exist to decipher every
stroke made on a computer keyboard, to spy upon people from great
distances, to create databases designed to blacklist and harass those
who don't obsequiously genuflect before official dogma, and to install
microchips into vehicles, and even into people, to
monitor their every move. In addition, advances in genetics provide the
opportunity to establish a "master race," simply by denying insurance
or other medical care to those with genetic proclivities to certain
diseases, and to create DNA databases that will enable the government
to categorize and/or spy upon individuals with certain genetic
predispositions.
There is also the glut of "recreational" technology to keep Americans
inactive and thus ill-informed: computer games, videos and DVDs,
24-hour sports broadcasts, hundreds of television channels available
through cable or satellite, and a media enamored with a
"cult-of-celebrity" to distract the populace with superficialities
(innocuously called "infotainment") while social injustices are ignored
and freedom and democracy decimated. In fact some social critics
recently noted the irony that more outrage had been generated over the
methods used to select a champion in college football than the methods
used to elect a president.
Of course some may argue that Hitler clearly was compelled by evil
motives, while Bush was compelled by "benevolent" ones. But this
ignores the reality that the primary difference between Bush and Hitler
may simply be milieu, not mind-set. In fact, actor/activist Harry
Belafonte once courageously asserted that the Bush administration is
"possessed of evil." These words should not be dismissed as hyperbole.
Hitler, after all, did not begin his campaign for world domination
until fascism was deeply entrenched in Germany. The Bush dictatorship
is still manufacturing this entrenchment. Given the analogies above,
one must wonder if history would have been so radically different if
George W. Bush and his war-crazed cronies were in power in 1938 Berlin
instead of 2004 America.
Even a cursory study of American history reveals a nation that
perpetually swings, like a pendulum, from overreaction to regret.
During these periods of regret, the excesses and harms that
overreaction generates are usually cured. But, with the new millennium
only a few years old, concerned Americans, as well as the rest of the
world, are now facing the prospect of the most powerful country on
earth metamorphosing into a neo-fascist nation, existing in a constant
state of war as truth is sacrificed on the altar of bellicosity,
nationalism, greed, hypocrisy and selfish ambition. If this is left
unchecked, those who seek to resurrect that long moribund world of
peace and justice will soon become lone voices in the wilderness,
eventually being heard no more. And by the time the people of the
United States realize how myopic they were to have placed their
democracy, their freedoms, their trust and their lives into the hands
of deceitful and evil people, the pendulum will have ceased swinging.
David R. Hoffman, Legal Editor of PRAVDA
Related links:
PRAVDA.Ru Bush in Baghdad: Far From Honest - PRAVDA.Ru
PRAVDA.Ru Dead Woman Who Accused Bush of Rape -
PRAVDA.Ru
PRAVDA.Ru George W. Bush Prompted US Secrets to Chinese Intelligence ...
PRAVDA.Ru BUSH CONSPIRACY THEORIES - PRAVDA.Ru
PRAVDA.Ru Bush won the elections thanks to the criminals - PRAVDA.Ru
PRAVDA.Ru USA ELECTIONS: WHO ARE YOU, MR. BUSH ?
