Is Democracy on the Decline?

[MajKrAzAm]

And what you dont think there are groups be they political or economic that dont share that vision of creating a singular political organism by which their interests would be met . It may not be in exactly the same form as Mussolini's corporatism , but the intent of what he envisioned and the elements of operation we are seeing in our modern democracies share a startling resemblance . What you see as a tradegy of the commons writ large , i see as a false dichotomy in the manufacture of a left /right paradigm.. Democrat/Republican .... Liberal/Conservative and what is really at play and has always been is the Power/Powerless paradigm and these other supposed paradigms are actually the vacuums into which power and powerless ebbs and flows . Think about what we have in place , a political process where in a candidate is by and large funded by Corporate interests even to the point of writing checks to competing sides. Who then go out campaigning on issue's that many times have been formulated in Corporate sponsored Political Action Committees or many of the corporate sponsored Think Tanks and win or loose will hold a gathering of partisans in some large building usually owned by a corporation , being commented on by political pundits being paid for by corporations in corporate owned news channels . And upon assuming office are beset by corporate paid lobbyists furthering the corporate interest . I dont know about you but to me that very much looks like a singular political organism at work. And its corporatists in nature though I would accede that it is not yet in the strict political delineation of Mussolini's corporatism.

 

Are you kidding? Mussolini would have had our political and corporate elites executed as state-parasites. Contrary to popular belief, Mussolini's solution was not to simply consolidate the reigning powers of the political/economic body into an enormous Orwellian machine that preys upon 'the little guy'. He wanted to draw the constituent members and institutions of society away from their selfish focus into one functioning body (hence corporatism) that operates on behalf of the national good. Mussolini hated how democracies balanced power by promoting a free-for-all, where what could be good for a person could be bad for his business, what could be good for his business could be bad for the country, and what could be good for the country could be bad for its leaders.

 

The existence of these multiple competing factions, Mussolini says, undermines the ability of the nation to settle and manage its affairs in its own interests. To resolve the dilemma, the theory goes, unite them in a totality and set a leader as its head charged with channeling the nation's will into a plan of action. We can argue endlessly about whether this succeeded in practice, but you can probably already see that this is vastly different from the situation America is in now.

[Harbringe]

 

Are you kidding? Mussolini would have had our political and corporate elites executed as state-parasites. Contrary to popular belief, Mussolini's solution was not to simply consolidate the reigning powers of the political/economic body into an enormous Orwellian machine that preys upon 'the little guy'. He wanted to draw the constituent members and institutions of society away from their selfish focus into one functioning body (hence corporatism) that operates on behalf of the national good. Mussolini hated how democracies balanced power by promoting a free-for-all, where what could be good for a person could be bad for his business, what could be good for his business could be bad for the country, and what could be good for the country could be bad for its leaders.

 

The existence of these multiple competing factions, Mussolini says, undermines the ability of the nation to settle and manage its affairs in its own interests. To resolve the dilemma, the theory goes, unite them in a totality and set a leader as its head charged with channeling the nation's will into a plan of action. We can argue endlessly about whether this succeeded in practice, but you can probably already see that this is vastly different from the situation America is in now.

 

 

No I'm not . In 1932 Mussolini bailed out the banks and a few indusries (state-parasites) as a consequence of the Great Depression , becoming shareholders in those industries , nationalizing none of them and leaving intact all private capital and equity. What did the US Government do in consequence of the financial collapse of 07-08 , exactly the same thing . Its not what is put down as a hypothetical model of governance that defines corporatism but what they do or what is that defines it.

 

Need more . Mussolini's model as you say was a system that incorporated many elements of society (religious , industry , banking , workers etc) but that this system was to culminate in the power of its leader (himself) , yet in 1943 when the Germans invaded in the north of Italy in response to Allied invasion of the south . It was an "Orwellian machine" called the Council of Fascism or some such nonsense that simply voted him out of power and had the italian King arrest him . So much for the culmination of power/Nations will in its leader part of his model. Again its not what he envisioned that defines corporatism but what they do or is that defines it.

 

Anyway I could go on and on with examples , but I'm not going to . See a realization hit me last night I didn't originally say that Fascism or Corporatism was the same as our democracies or the US democracy , what I was pointing out was that people have the idea that unless it involves basically some sort of composition of jack boots , concentration camps and the Holocaust its not Fascism and thats just not the case. And that in the case of Smedley Butler there were people (Businessmen) who did have other interests in the composition and direction of the US Government and that these interests were corporatist (business sense) in nature . Seriously am I to assume that they were attempting a coup d'etat against the US government in the interest of the democratic process or in their business (corporate) interests . Utter nonsense . As it is , it was you who inferred something that I hadn't asserted and started this running off on another tangent of strict literalism . Besides if they had of succeded what else would it be called Democracy ? , Communism ?, what ?. No Fascism or Corporatism is the closest definition to it we would have , though I suppose if one is to be a strict literalist of terminology an oligarchial fascism is what it would be.

 

So I wont be further engaging in this tangent of discourse , its distractionary and is nothing but the debating of semantics . I've already acceded that what is happening is not in the strict political delineation of Mussolini's Italy but I will leave people with 2 video's one will enable them to decide for themselves if your right and what exists in America is no where similar to Mussolini's Corporatisms or any of the fascist regimes or am I right and our democracies (its just not America) that are incorporating fascist elements with in our democracies . Come on people its only an hour and 30 minutes roughly out of your precious lives .

 

 

This video I had to argue with myself as to whether i would post it as it may appear to some to have religious overtones but thats not what its about , its about a world of crumbling institutions and perceptions and that what we are in is a transformative moment in our lives , its about awakening . I've actually corresponded with the guy who did this work ( filmmaker who did Gollum in LOTR ). Still its an artistic vision of whats confronting us and if some moderator thinks it too religious in its overtones and gets me a strike or even banned , then so be it.

 

Edited October 2, 2013 by Harbringe

[Alyzabeth]

yep

[roquefort]

"You would be marked illegible for breeding in a state ruled by my policies ." (spz2, self-declared Fascist)

 

Late to this, but I have to say that in my fascist, social darwinist, Mensa-ruled state, anyone who doesn't know the difference between "eligible" and "illegible" would be straight on the Soylent Green conveyor belt. Gotta work at those basic standards in the herd intelligence -- no room for sentiment.. :laugh: