Navy Vet Fired After Posting Photos Of DHS Trucks In Hotel Garage 25 miles from Ferguson

[Octafish]

47. So, I can complain. Big deal. The government knows where I live, my politics, and who I talk to.

They can track my cell phone and online communication.
They can spy on me without a warrant.
They can search my home and person without a warrant.
They can seize my property and use it for their own purposes without due process.
They can use the powers of the state to harass me at work and at home.
They can ruin me financially through trivial criminal and civil action.
They can imprison me on false charges, like was done to Gov. Don Siegelman and Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden.
They can even, should I be classified an Enemy, have me vaporized by drone or stuffed into cement shoes by gangsters, without a warrant.

How is that not a Police State?

"Friendly Fascism" is how Bertrand Gross put it in 1980. The professor served FDR and the New Deal Democrats and is remembered today for his work to reduce poverty. Among his accomplishments, he helped author the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act. Later he taught at CUNY and Wayne State University in Detroit, where he founded the Center for Urban Studies.

Friendly Fascism

The New Face of Power in America

by Bertram Gross
South End Press, 1980, paper

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Friendly_Fascism_BGross.html

INTRO EXCERPT...

Friendly fascism portrays two conflicting trends in the United States and other countries of the so-called "free world."

The first is a slow and powerful drift toward greater concentration of power and wealth in a repressive Big Business-Big Government partnership. This drift leads down the road toward a new and subtly manipulative form of corporatist serfdom. The phrase "friendly fascism" helps distinguish this possible future from the patently vicious corporatism of classic fascism in the past of Germany, Italy and Japan. It also contrasts with the friendly present of the dependent fascisms propped up by the U.S. government in El Salvador, Haiti, Argentina, Chile, South Korea, the Philippines and elsewhere.

The other is a slower and less powerful tendency for individuals and groups to seek greater participation in decisions affecting themselves and others. This trend goes beyond mere reaction to authoritarianism. It transcends the activities of progressive groups or movements and their use of formal democratic machinery. It is nourished by establishment promises-too often rendered false-of more human rights, civil rights and civil liberties. It is embodied in larger values of community, sharing, cooperation, service to others and basic morality as contrasted with crass materialism and dog-eat-dog competition. It affects power relations in the household, workplace, community, school, church, synagogue, and even the labyrinths of private and public bureaucracies. It could lead toward a truer democracy-and for this reason is bitterly fought...

These contradictory trends are woven fine into the fabric of highly industrialized capitalism. The unfolding logic of friendly fascist corporatism is rooted in "capitalist society's transnational growth and the groping responses to mounting crises in a dwindling capitalist world". Mind management and sophisticated repression become more attractive to would-be oligarchs when too many people try to convert democratic promises into reality. On the other hand, the alternative logic of true democracy is rooted in "humankind's long history of resistance to unjustified privilege" and in spontaneous or organized "reaction (other than fright or apathy) to concentrated power...and inequality, injustice or coercion".

A few years ago too many people closed their eyes to the indicators of the first tendency.

But events soon began to change perceptions.

The Ku Klux Klan and American Nazis crept out of the woodwork. An immoral minority of demagogues took to the airwaves. "Let me tell you something about the character of God," orated Jim Robison at a televised meeting personally endorsed by candidate Ronald Reagan. "If necessary, God would raise up a tyrant, a man who may not have the best ethics, to protect the freedom interests of the ethical and the godly." To protect Western oil companies, candidate Jimmy Carter proclaimed presidential willingness to send American troops into the Persian Gulf. Rosalyn Carter went further by telling an lowa campaign audience: "Jimmy is not afraid to declare war." Carter then proved himself unafraid to expand unemployment, presumably as an inflation cure, thereby reneging on his party's past full employment declarations.

CONTINUED...

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/RiseFall_Friend_Fascism_FF.html

The good professor painted an accurate picture of what was to come.

James Madison

EXCERPT...

Despite the sharp differences from classic fascism, there are also some basic similarities. In each, a powerful oligarchy operates outside of, as well as through, the state. Each subverts constitutional government. Each suppresses rising demands for wider participation in decision making, the enforcement and enlargement of human rights, and genuine democracy. Each uses informational control and ideological flimflam to get lower and middle-class support for plans to expand the capital and power of the oligarchy and provide suitable rewards for political, professional, scientific, and cultural supporters.

A major difference is that under friendly fascism Big Government would do less pillaging of, and more pillaging for, Big Business. With much more integration than ever before among transnational corporations, Big Business would run less risk of control by any one state and enjoy more subservience by many states. In turn, stronger government support of transnational corporations, such as the large group of American companies with major holdings in South Africa, requires the active fostering of all latent conflicts among those segments of the American population that may object to this kind of foreign venture. It requires an Establishment with lower levels so extensive that few people or groups can attain significant power outside it, so flexible that many (perhaps most) dissenters and would-be revolutionaries can be incorporated within it. Above all, friendly fascism in any First World country today would \ use sophisticated control technologies far beyond the ken of the classic fascists.

p177
Although American hegemony can scarcely return in its Truman-Eisenhower-Kennedy-Johnson form, this does not necessarily signify the end of the American Century. Nor does communist and socialist advance on some fronts mark American and capitalist retreat on all fronts. There are unmistakable tendencies toward a rather thoroughgoing reconstruction of the entire "Free World." Robert Osgood sees a transitional period of "limited readjustment" and "retrenchment without disengagement," after which America could establish a "more enduring rationale of global influence." Looking at foreign policy under the Nixon administration, Robert W. Tucker sees no intention to "dismantle the empire" but rather a continued commitment to the view that "America must still remain the principal guarantor of a global order now openly and without equivocation identified with the status quo." He describes America as a "settled imperial power shorn of much of the former exuberance." George Liska looks forward to a future in which Americans, having become more mature in the handling of global affairs, will at last be the leaders of a true empire.

CONTINUED...

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fascism/Specter_FriendlyFascism_FF.html

Regarding today's Police State:

The Criminal Police State can now:

Avoid punishment for murder
Lay Seige to American cities
Use FBI for terrorist attacks
Spy on all US citizens
Spy on and intimidate citizens
Brand anyone a terrorist
Ignore the Bill of Rights entirely
Illegally imprison American citizens
Assassinate Americans: 1 2
Loot taxpayer money for fat-cats

A capitalist cabal has seized political and economic power over the nation and now steals all elections by selecting candidates for both parties

In a free society:

Police agencies respond only to evidence of planned and actual criminal activity.
Police officers keep the peace; they do not investigate citizens and activities unless there is some reason to investigate.
Police do not investigate citizens' attitudes toward the central government, only their action.
Citizen dissent is lawful and police agencies do not investigate citizens' attitudes toward the criminal justice apparatus.

Those conditions no longer exist in the United States!

SOURCE: http://www.hermes-press.com/police_state.htm

So, that's why I think we're in a Police State. Otherwise, the candidate who promised to end wars for empire, stop domestic spying, prosecute Banksters, deliver universal health care, raise taxes on the rich and a whole lot would have done them after assuming office. Instead, it's been six years of more of the same old same sold cough.