One of the reasons we have such difficulty perceiving our current conditions is our aversion to this single word: fascism. While there is no hesitation by politicians to draw parallels with the Holocaust to justify whatever foreign adventure appeals to them, or for the media to make similar analogies at the drop of swastika on a wall, we seem only able to understand -- or even mention -- the climax of fascism rather than its genesis. Why this reluctance? Perhaps it is because we are much closer to the latter than to the former.

In any case, it is one of the most dangerous forms of political myopia in which to indulge. Italians, who invented the term fascism, also called it the estato corporativo: the corporatist state. Orwell rightly described fascism as being an extension of capitalism. It is an economy in which the government serves the interests of oligopolies, a state in which large corporations have the powers that in a democracy devolve to the citizen. Today, it is no exaggeration to call our economy corporatist, which has been described by British academics R.E. Pahl and J. T. Winkler as a system in which the government guides privately owned businesses towards order, unity, nationalism and success."
[read more]

thanks to Ethel the Blog

Our theme for the day is Keystone Cops.

Thanks to SmirkingChimp.com

Every day, things get a bit worse - and where is George?

Bush was kicking off his newest initiative, "Friendship Through Education," in which American students are being recruited to reduce international tensions by finding Muslim pen pals. "We're here talking about how we can best conduct a war against evil, and you can play a part," Bush told students at Thurgood Marshall Elementary School in northeast Washington. "You can be an integral part of that by establishing friendship."

Watching Bush on CNN, I couldn't shake the thought that the president was inexplicably channeling Hillary Clinton, in her most cloying, annoying "It Takes a Village" incarnation. What else could account for his spending hours on his pen pal initiative at an elementary school, on a morning when his administration, and thus the country, seemed scarily out of control?

In the New York Times alone, his health and human services secretary, Tommy Thompson, had been pilloried by public health officials for bungling the deadly anthrax scare (the Times charged him with "missteps, miscues and misstatements"); spokesman Ari Fleischer was quoted contradicting himself about whether the U.S. mail is in fact safe; and top officials described a high-level meeting they'd held to address the fact that, despite the creation of a Cabinet-level Homeland Security position, the homeland had never been quite so insecure.
[read more]

Welcome to the Bush leagues! Can't anyone here do their job?

For the first time since Sept. 11, the Bush high command is being criticized for its handling of the terror crisis — and many of the complaints are coming from Bush partisans worried about an appearance of confusion and drift.

Bush's conduct of the Afghan war continues to earn high marks, even from top Democrats. But several administration officials and other Bush sources grumble that the White House has bungled the anthrax crisis with a mishmash of confusion, mixed messages and grudging disclosure.

"We look like we don't have our act together," one key Bush source grumped. "The impression is being left we may not know what we're doing."
[read more]

A "mishmash of confusion, mixed messages and grudging disclosure" sounds just like America's New War.

Reassuring words from Ridge: we'll get anthrax guy, 'I hope'

Tom Ridge, the administration's point man on the anthrax scare, had a message Thursday for any terrorist spreading the bacteria through the nation's mail. "We'll get him," he said defiantly into TV cameras.

Then he mumbled beneath his breath, "I hope."
[read more]

Reassuring words from the Pentagon: um, anyone have any good ideas?

The Pentagon appealed to Americans on Thursday to send in bright ideas on thwarting terrorism, announcing an unusual, open competition to speed the winners into use.

The Defense Department said it was looking for help in "defeating difficult targets, conducting protracted operations in remote areas and developing countermeasures to weapons of mass destruction."

The goal was to find concepts that can be developed and fielded in 12 to 18 months, a blink of an eye compared with standard Pentagon acquisition and deployment procedures.
[read more]

So, tell me one more time...Just what is the bloated military budget buying us?