« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

“Black in America”: The war against fascism in 2008

Much has been made recently of liberal network CNN’s decision to showcase a program called “Black in America”. In this age of constant political correctness as well as extreme liberal bias, this was a documentary that posed as factual news while merely serving as intellectual masturbation for the Political Left. In arguments that have been rebutted time and time again by Black intellectuals from Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and even liberal Black columnist Juan Williams, the Left is still content to maintain the facts that African-Americans are in a financial rut because of the catastrophic effects of slavery. This caused me to take a deep breath rather than screaming, and wonder to myself, really? In 2008, generations who have not even known segregation, let alone slavery are suffering from the adverse effects of something that occurred over 200 years ago. And so because the argument that Blacks are affected because of racial instability in consistently made on the Left to the point where many repeat these arguments as known facts, it has become necessary to look at where the Left chooses to fight its battles; as long as the GOP and conservatives are unwilling to have the conversation about race in the name of forgoing the acknowledgement of identity, we will cede ground to the Left and the Democratic Party to continue to brainwash generation after generation.

Up first is the idea of education, one of my favorite battering rams to use against the Left. Many people argue that it is the poor financial status of the schools that causes schools in predominantly African-American neighborhoods to do poorly. Many liberals point to the fact that as long as schools are financed based on property taxes, there will continue to be a large achievement gap between Blacks and whites and Asians. Ah, but there is a key, insomuch that this is not simply a Black-White achievement gap; rather this is an achievement gap between Blacks, Whites and Asians. In addition, African-Americans even trail Latinos who have to overcome a language barrier to achieve in school, and who have a mean income very similar to African-Americans. So what it comes down to is not property taxes, but the ability of the public school system to monopolize the free market unlike any other business in the country. While there is a problem with the coddling and swaddling of African-American students by liberals, the real problem is the lack of choice within the public school system through the great equalizer of our society, the free market. This is where the Democrats prove themselves to be so dangerous, because while they talk about the evil of big business controlling the little guy, they are in charge of the biggest business of all-the public school system and the teachers unions, who vehemently oppose anything that would challenge their status as protected radicals who are given a free ride to indoctrinate children with whatever agenda comes to their minds that particular day. School choice would allow schools to actually function as legitimate businesses, in the sense of performing or being closed, rather than continuing to act as a shadow business benefiting only the employers and not the customers. This is brought up because schools are the first blow when we talk about inequality between the races, but by going point by point, it is not schools but liberalism that is killing African-Americans.

Since its inception as we define liberalism in the 1960s, liberalism has been the most destructive factor for African-Americans in the United States. It began with the beginning of the welfare state and LBJ’s “Great Society”, which destroyed the Black family by replacing fathers with Uncle Sam and focusing on shipping a busload of African-American kids to all white schools rather than focusing on educating all skin colors of children. The welfare state which began in the 1960s, is the single most responsible factor for the destruction of African-Americans, because rather than giving African-Americans more responsibility in lieu of the progress Blacks had made in terms of integrating and fully functioning as equal citizens of American society, the government negated these accomplishments by implementing affirmative action, showing the world that Blacks were not able to achieve on merit; rather Blacks must be included to meet racial quotas, and constantly be questioned on whether there really was a more deserving person to get their job, place in school, or house. The Honorable Justice Clarence Thomas mentions this in his book, My Grandfather’s Son, that his degree in Yale was treated almost as invalid because there was the sentiment that he received it not on merit, but based on the color of his skin. And the final blow on Blacks and liberalism comes in the denunciation of the Moynihan Report, which reports that the Black family is in a crisis, as racist conservative diatribe. Here is where liberals make their bread and butter, and where the line between liberalism and fascism becomes blurred in the way that this becomes a shibboleth to liberals, that any disagreement on the basis of race becomes racist and just as importantly, conservative. The entire goal is to change their opponent from a disagreeing human to a monster, in which only they can conquer. And that is how liberalism functions today in 2008.

We see the swirling of liberalism in fascism from everything from their talk about race to their leader, Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama. This is one of the most important points that must be made, because Obama is, and never will be the candidate of African-Americans. Obama is much more dangerous because he is the candidate of the American Far Left, which includes everyone from Jesse Jackson to Bill Ayers, to more violent radical anarchist groups. And Obama is the cultural icon of fascism, who says things like he is the symbol of the possibility of America returning to her best traditions. Like the fascists who preceded him, Obama seeks to become more than a man running for President; Obama wishes to become a symbol of something bigger. These signs began early in his campaign with his constant talk to his supporters that “we are the change that we’ve been waiting for”, evoking the image of a Messiah rather than a President. Like the fascists of the past, the media is there to consistently reinforce their message from Chris Matthews indicating that Obama gives him a “tingle up his leg”, to anchors comparing him to the last sainted President, John F Kennedy, talking of how someone like Obama comes along only “once in a century.” The media has been for Obama another tool to reinforce his message of Messianic deliverance for America. And true to the legacy of the Left, Obama has already struck with the tone of race, accusing America of not wanting to support someone who doesn’t look like the other guys on the dollar bills; ie old and white. Long hailed as a disadvantage Obama knows he can frame his race as an advantage, offering whites ailed with centuries of guilt a way out; a vote in exchange for liberation from decades of claims of racism. Now, a simple I’m not racist because I voted for Obama will expunge all whites who wish to worship at the holy altar of Saint Obama, and he will deliver us the change that we have been waiting for. While Obama stokes the flames for a race war, he has attempted to blindside us with another war; the war of the fascist Left on an unsuspecting public. It is up to us to beat the Left on both fronts.

COMMENTS

  • speciallist

    The success of public schools depends on Parents…If you ever move from Mich…look for neighborhoods with great Families..I know..how do you do that.

    In the neighborhoods where parents do not get involved…the schools will Rot.

    Public schools can be very good when everybody is ‘into it’.

    Dumping off responsibility on somebody else seldom works.

    • BlackRepub

      I would agree, that in neighborhoods where the parents are involved, the public school system will be successful. To me, the question would be what do you do when you are in a neighborhood school that has a proven track record of failure and have no alternatives. I think part of the solution has to be to raise the bars in the school system. The schools cannot fix the problems at home, but by not even trying, nor having any incentive to try, it simply repeats the cycle of failure that is going on right now.

      • speciallist

        …but the only way it will succeed is with parents involved..

        I love the idea of choosing a school…but I can imagine alot of kids still showing up unmotivated and unprepared

        “the question would be what do you do when you are in a neighborhood school that has a proven track record of failure and have no alternatives.”

        With no alternatives…the kids are S.O.L.

        Time to do Whatever it takes to move!

        • speciallist

          “Dumping off responsibility on somebody else seldom works.”

          Here, I’m talking about the parents that think the school is going to do ‘Everything’..I wasn’t talking about you…anyways, good blog about a good subject

        • phred

          turned out such high quality product, and today’s modern multi-million-dollar-complex output is so deficient? Your are so correct BlackRepub, for liberals to address the real problem would be an admission of the failed social engineering by the Great Society. Had the legalizing of illegitimacy not occurred, the full parental team would have been molding black youth for the last 40 years. There will always be bastards, but when there is a monetary encouragement of the practice, society will suffer the consequence of a bumper crop of undisciplined wards of the state, and teacher’s unions claiming they have the answer to the problem.

          • gamecock

            and many believe it. Yes, many libs are classic racists.

            It would be one thing to believe blacks are inferior but still treat individual blacks equally. It is quite another to take take racist actions.

            Repubs MUST drive this point home. We can never know, unless a racist tells us, what one believes in their heart (and besides, one could believe one race is less capable on average as a group and still not HATE) but we can judge actions.

            Add to that, the 24/7 since the 60s smear that repubs are racists.

            McCain did America a service this week in calling out the Obama scare campaign that the GOP “will in the future” run a bigoted campaign or that an ad featuring two white women was racist.

            It is vital that repubs push back everytime on this smear.

            Great column BR. You saved me having to write it.

            Liberalism is the enemy of Blacks and America.

          • gamecock

            vs Board. Yes, it was brilliant argument by Thurgood, among others, but it was a mistake for the court to make that the linchpin. Bork argues that the court merely had to overturn Plessy and say that separate but equal was documented to be false by the evidence.

            The key was that local schools get equal funding or at least be funded by the same formula.

          • mbecker908

            rely on the assumption that Republicans will not wage a frontal assault against them and actively fight against their policy prescriptions.

            With two exceptions, Reagan in the ’80s and the Contract with America and Newt refusing to stand for welfare, the Democrats have been right. We steadfastly refuse to fight.

          • gamecock

            nt

      • nogyro35

        I agree that everything that Senator Obama says and the way he most likely will govern indicates he could be a dangerous type of leader.

        You said, “Obama is much more dangerous because he is the candidate of the American Far Left, which includes everyone from Jesse Jackson to Bill Ayers, to more violent radical anarchist groups.” This rightly scares much of America.

        And yet I always assumed that if I saw someone rise to power with such scary potential, that he or she would be brilliant politically like Bill Clinton. Or feared.

        However I think we can all now state without doubt, that Obama is no Clinton. It seems like every week is a new foot-in-mouth moment for him. Yet he’s being willed into the presidency by the many constituencies that as Rush has said “Want to be part of the moment.”

        Maybe I have misread the history books. Maybe this is how dangerous egos have always acquired their power. A part of the country wanted it more than the rest of the country wanted to stop it.

        Part of me fears what Obama could become with such support.

  • pilgrim

    I understand your fear of what could happen, and then I remind myself that people can figure things out when they think things through.

    On March 11 David Mamet wrote an op-ed in the Village Voice titled Why I am no longer a brain-dead liberal

    I recommend reading the entire piece so you can see how a political epiphany occurs when somebody thinks things through.

    An excerpt from the article:

    Prior to the midterm elections, my rabbi was taking a lot of flack. The congregation is exclusively liberal, he is a self-described independent (read “conservative”), and he was driving the flock wild. Why? Because a) he never discussed politics; and b) he taught that the quality of political discourse must be addressed first?that Jewish law teaches that it is incumbent upon each person to hear the other fellow out.

    And so I, like many of the liberal congregation, began, teeth grinding, to attempt to do so. And in doing so, I recognized that I held those two views of America (politics, government, corporations, the military). One was of a state where everything was magically wrong and must be immediately corrected at any cost; and the other?the world in which I actually functioned day to day?was made up of people, most of whom were reasonably trying to maximize their comfort by getting along with each other (in the workplace, the marketplace, the jury room, on the freeway, even at the school-board meeting).

    And I realized that the time had come for me to avow my participation in that America in which I chose to live, and that that country was not a schoolroom teaching values, but a marketplace.

    “Aha,” you will say, and you are right. I began reading not only the economics of Thomas Sowell (our greatest contemporary philosopher) but Milton Friedman, Paul Johnson, and Shelby Steele, and a host of conservative writers, and found that I agreed with them: a free-market understanding of the world meshes more perfectly with my experience than that idealistic vision I called liberalism.

    This war against liberal fascism is won when people actually think things through.

    • BrianH

      until grade 3. It was a small 1 room school in a small town with 1 teacher and about a dozen students in grades 1 and 2. I had a wonderful woman as the teacher who taught both grades how to read, write (using phonics, not whole word memorization) and do math.

      Such a school cost very little to run, but did a VERY good job teaching students. Unfortunately, before my little brother got to 2nd grade, the teacher retired and the school board decided to close the school and bus us to the next town (where grades 3-6 were sent anyway).

      • BrianH

        When people actually start to examine the evidence, they discover that progressivism doesn’t work and that perhaps conservatives are right after all. This is why Rush always says we can win in the arena of ideas. We just have to keep pushing the facts instead of the* known facts* used by progressives.

        *I just finished rereading “Capitalism and Freedom” and once again realize that we are the true Liberals by the original definition (meaning people who believe in individual freedom over state control). I’m trying to make a habit of using the term progressives to label the left and since it’s a term they seem to prefer these days anyway it shouldn’t be taken as an ad hominem attack. I’d rather beat them with ideas than name calling.

        • BlackRepub

          Is based off of Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism; he does an excellent job connecting the liberalism of today with the fascism of the 1920s. From everything such as their tightly controlled message reinforced by their media to their leader with a cult like personality status, liberalism and fascism today are intertwining. This isn’t meant as an insult, but an accurate depiction for the way the run their side of the political spectrum.

          • BrianH

            I agree that modern Liberalism has it’s roots in the same philosophy as Fascism.

            I’m just trying to reclaim the traditional definition of the word by allowing the Progressives to reclaim their original label.

            If you read excerpts Milton Friedman, you’ll see statements like:

            “The heart of the liberal philosophy is a belief in the dignity of the individual, in his freedom to make the most of his capacities and opportunities in his own lights, subject only to the proviso that he not interfere with the freedom of other individuals to do the same.”

            If you hadn’t also read the introduction where he states that he is using the term in it’s original meaning, you might think Milton Friedman was praising modern liberals. He’s NOT.

            Frankly Obama’s success is a bit irritating. I would hope that Americans can see that Socialism is a failed (though not dead) philosophy. Instead they seem to be lapping it up.

          • streetwise

            Sixties-style liberalism developed this dogma that the mere presence of white people, achieved via busing (of other people’s kids, mind) would uplift the barbarous African. Naturally, it failed miserably.

  • 2slmbgs

    WASTE OF WORDS TO SAY NOTHING

  • E_Pluribus_Unum

    Hey, very good target-shooting on the Obama race-baiting tour, and also pointing out the job that Repubs need to be doing to develop a partnership in the American Black communities.

    It appears you also suffer from the same malady that I do — you go for awhile without writing a substantive diary, then all of these grand thoughts come out at once, overwhelming people.

    Ah well, it’s great to be us, my brother.

    • BlackRepub

      You know, the sound of men grinding out ball and turf, men teaching their sons the art of war, the love of helmets colored silver and blue. That’s right my friend-its NFL season. Romo’s back this year.Cowboys-Steelers in the Super Bowl, and Romo gets over his playoff hump to hoist the Lombardi.
      And to answer your question, yes it does seem to go for awhile without anything, not to mention it took me awhile to get a hold of this newfangled Redstate. Everything seems to be in order now however, and I’m ready to rock and roll.
      Yeah, its good to be us.

      • E_Pluribus_Unum

        The aroma of training camp seat, the sight of turf embedded in facemasks, the clash of helmets and shoulderpads. Yep, can’t wait, I’m getting the fever but BAD!

        The Cows are poised to strut their stuff this year. They just need to win clutch games, go into the playoffs with some bad attitude, and grind opposing teams into the ground.

        • skorrent

          There is no way that government, tax-supported, schools could be made “equal” even if we could avoid the “equal input/opportunity” vs “equal outcome/results” argument.

          “Consolidated” school districts insured that the interests of the “My kid needs to be home to plow the corn!” farmer (or shopkeeper) would conflict with the “Five nine-hour day babysitter” worker. Small, local, parent-chosen and (mostly) parent-supported schools offer a solution (think school subsidy or student scholorship, if necessary) but that bucks the trend of both government and teachers’ unions. They both want monstrous uniformity, which does not translate to equality of either opportunity or results. As Rush says, only equal sharing of misery.

          • Jason_Wolf

            The word ?Fascism? is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else… almost any English person would accept ?bully? as a synonym for ?Fascist?. ? George Orwell, What is Fascism?. 1944

            But I like Paxton’s definition best:

            A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. ? Robert O. Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism

            Calling today’s liberals “fascists” is just plain silly.

          • aaronbg

            n/t

          • janis

            Reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine? Refuse to allow debate or a vote on energy policy?
            Turn off the lights, microphones and cameras so the voters can’t see their representatives in action? Try to limit the websites that legislators can post on?

            Sounds like “abandoning democratic liberties…” to me. As to “external expansion…”, see “allowing felons to vote, allowing illegal aliens to vote, allowing foreign campaign contributions.”

            And those are just a few examples.

          • aaronbg

            ….who’d have thunk it…..;^)

  • redstateguy

    You guys have a great sense of irony.

    Did you protest making MLK day a national holiday? How about divestment from South Africa? Because Ronald Reagan fought against both of these: where do black conservatives stand on conservative issues with potential racial overtones?

    • Moe_Lane

      Nobody told me that you’d been waiting so long for your Special Time. And here we are denying you it.

      Alas.

      Alack.

      Bye.

      Moe

      PS: Nice job seeing the color of their skins and not the content of their characters, by the way. Nice job.

      • cbiggam

        In 2005, Sensenbrenner pulled the same act during the USA Patriot Act hearings. He banged his gavel, adjourned the hearing and walked out. Debate over. The Democrats continued to testify with their microphones shut off.

        It’s a stunt used by both parties.

        • Moe_Lane

          And to think: you might have gotten a break if you had gone to the Directors, too.

          Ta.

          • Raven

            Seems like this guy is a little off his rocker. But maybe I’m wrong…

          • absentee

            Exactly who are the slimes?

          • dbecraft

            holiday was nothing if not a grand political gesture! Maybe in a decade or so, it might have been appropriate – when it was done, it was nothing if not political. Race relations had all to do with it…whites scared to death to offend just in case they were classified as racists.

            Now we live in this world and you can see what it has wrought. Even Obama (just another American) has to watch what he says…

          • Dave_in_Fla

            But doesn’t recognize how well current liberalism fits the definition.

            But then the left is always good at accusing you of their own worst tendencies. Comes from being so familiar with them.

          • WilliamPennybanks

            Lot of discussion on how to fix schools. Both choice and parental involvement can help solve problems. In some schools, parents are almost trained not to be involved. We teachers are sometimes seen as glorified babysitters (but I’d love to get paid babysitter rates). Schools say they’ll feed kids breakfast and lunch, watch them til after work, teach them values (I don’t want any school teaching my kids values, even the school I work at), keeping them safe on the internet, etc. The message to parents who unfortunately don’t have the natural instinct to play a greater role in their kids lives is, “don’t worry about your kids, we’ll do what’s best for them.” Lipservice is paid to parental involvement at Back to School night but the message is, this “It Takes a Village” utopia will raise your child so you don’t have to worry about anything. Some schools get this message across very well and I’ve heard parents say, “that’s not my job, let the teacher do it, our taxes are high enough so they ought to.” If your in a school like this (fascist/left wing/union controlled/inner city) school choice is the way to find a better alternative.

          • JTaylor

            attended had grades 1 to 8. I attended for 1 1/3rd years. The first year we had an older male teacher and about 15 kids. I suspect all was normal as far as learning goes (who remembers 2nd grade) The next year teachers changed to a young female and this was her first teaching job. A new family with 4/5 boys moved in from the city to this rural community. The teacher could not control these boys (this was my first exposure to juvenile delinquents). We learned very little for the first few months as the teacher constantly try to wrestle control of the class from these boys. Ends up that my parents pulled us out of this school about November and we ended up riding a bus 2 hours each day to get to the K-12 school in the Township. The following year the school was closed as the other families followed suit and the only family left to teach was the “bad” boys.

            Parents being involved in what is going on in the classroom is essential.

  • Cheetah772

    You sure know how to write LONG paragraphs! ;)

    • KellyB4GOP

      That was an excellent post. I completely agree that it is up to the parents to involve themselves in their childrens’ education or the entire system will collapse.

      Also, being a strong believer in Personal Responsibility, parents need to spend more time with their children instead of letting them sit endlessly in front of TVs, computers, etc. Electronic babysitters are not the answer with today’s kids. They are the problem. I understand that usually both parents must work to make ends meet, but they still need to find the time to spend with their kids.

      • Hermes

        I know that I’m joining the discussion a little bit late here, but some good points have been raised. Modern liberalism, in the American sense of the word, is not fascism. Although some similarities can be pointed out such as cult of personality, etc., its intellectual roots are hardly inline with the political philosophy of Francisco Franco or Benito Mussolini, two of the actual, legitimate fascists. Hitler and the Nazis, in case anybody thinks otherwise, were not fascists. They operated something like a hybrid socialist system,oddly similar to some current European nations’ economies, making them kin to the communists whom they despised.

        The American left is now, and has been for almost a hundred years, a collection of various stripes of Bolsheviks. Most are mainline Stalinists, although certainly there are a good many Trotskyites, as well. From time to time a Maoist will pop his head up and there are always the doctrinnaire Marxist-Leninists in academia. So, while I am only too happy to support attacks on the morally bankrupt system that is leftism, I have to point out that calling it “fascism” is like calling Stalin or Trotsky a fascist; it is just an incorrect use of the term.

        • Hermes

          Sorry, BlackRepub, but Goldberg’s conclusions are flat wrong. He addresses similarities between the American left and the old European fascists, but then leaps to the conclusion that they are, essentially, one and the same. Or, at least, separated at birth.

          Although, no doubt, NRO’s golden boy will sell books with such a flashy thesis, it just doesn’t hold water. As I pointed out above, liberalism, today, is simply unrepentent Bolshevism. There is no need to muddy the water by trying to, incorrectly, paint it as some bizarre variant of fascism which it most certainly is not. The die-hard leftists of today, or at least the educated ones, understand the tactics and philosophy of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky and Gramsci (and the really sharp ones have read Louis Althusser and Herbert Marcuse, too). Their media tactics fall perfectly in line with the theories of Gramsci on the meme and the narrative. The intellectual history of the left is littered with communists, not fascists. Fascism and communism, though similar in some respects, are most assuredly not identical.

          • JKH1232

            Hermes, you do make some good points- that the arguement in Goldberg’s book may be facile. (I’ve not read the thing, so I’ll take you at your word on what it says.)

            Still, I think it’s worth noting that the modern American left has a lot less in common with the Marxist-Leninist left, or even with Socialist Worker’s Parties, such as the SPD than you want to connect them to. Don’t forget that fascist governments adopted the corportist model of the economy that seems to have a lot of catch on the left- a lot of government interference and support for what are notionally private industries.

            Note that Goldberg isn’t the first to make such an arguement- Wolfgang Schivelbush argued that Mussolini, Hitler and Roosevelt were pushing similar cultural and economic programs in Three New Deals. I suspect, without proof, that Goldberg may be channeling this notion, knowingly or not.

            Also, the left doesn’t seem to cleave to the critique of capitalism required of Marxism, namely that the collapse of capitalist system is inevitable, nor do they cling to the labor theory of value. Again, they seem to want to push for a more corporatist model, at least as I see it.

            Of course, they do see to be avoiding the major fascist purpose- national regeneration. Perhaps some of Obama’s “Healing” rhetoric can come across that way, but I don’t see it. Also, the efforts of some the American left to promote class warfare and racial strife would run against a fascist tendency.

            I think part of the problem here is twofold: 1) A placement of fascism on the “right” in politics, where it doesn’t properly belong, and 2) An all or nothing classification. There’s no real reason why a political movement can’t be informed by some aspect of others- I mean, if you’re not overly interested in complete nationalization, wouldn’t Mussolini’s corporatist mold be interesting to you? After all, he did start at the same point, in your analysis, that the American left did- Marxism.

          • Hermes

            I agree with you that fascism is not necessarily a product of right-wing thought, but rather something more like third way economics. Regarding Mussolini, I am not sure where his original ideas came from; they may have been derived from Marx, but I rather doubt it. Franco, on the other hand, was heavily influenced by Rerum Novarum, the 1891 Papal Encyclical issued by Pope Leo XIII as a reaction against Marxism and laissez-faire capitalism. Say what you want about Franco, at least he consistently defended Catholicism against the Communists.

            I am not familiar with Shivelbush, but thank you for mentioning his work. I will definitely have to look into it, as I had not heard of the liberal fascist thesis before Goldberg’s book.

            The left is a many headed beast, much like the hydra. Most reflexive lefties in America are more “folk Marxist” than anything else. They are much more in line with corporatism than their more educated colleagues in academia or political leadership. Frighteningly, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (the largest caucus in Congress, consisting of 71 Dems and 1 Communist) is pretty much an openly declared communist group. Oh, they hide under the “progressive” banner and get nervous about being called socialists, except for Bernie Sanders who is openly a communist. The communist/leftist is, at heart, an aristocrat; he may talk the talk, but he is really a limousine lib who wants nothing more than to be worshipped by the fawning proletariat. So, no, while very few modern leftists talk about the fall of capitalism, they are only too happy to attack in public while profiting from it in private. Also, let’s not forget that a lot of the left’s leadership is tied to one of the following: International ANSWER, SDUSA, CPUSA, MoveOn.Org, George Soros, Code Pink, La Raza, or the World Workers’ Party.

            To me, fascism has always been about nationalism, traditionalism, militarism, imperialism (to a stronger extent in Mussolini’s Italy than Franco’s Spain), corporatism, and anti-communism. The fascists looked to the Roman empire for inspiration. The Bolsheviks, on the other hand, were always internationalists, hoping to spread worldwide revolution and abandonment of traditional society. They drew their inspiration from the revolutions of 1789, 1848, and 1870/1. The fascist, as a rule, is happy in his own country; the communist wants to devour the world. I see much more of that hunger in the modern American left which is another reason that I simply cannot agree to associate them with fascism. You are correct, though, that today’s left is more hybridized than the old left; lumping them in just one category is becoming increasingly difficult.