Over at MY BLOG today, Patricia (loopyloo305) has a video posted of Ms. Wasserman-Schultz saying that the Tea Party is un-American and a aright wing extremist group. I had to laugh at that but it got me to thinking about the political spectrum. It seems to be human nature to want to put labels on things and then to try to put them in some ordered fashion as they relate to one another; e.g., a political spectrum of left, right and center.
Even if we narrow our focus to America, we must decide: are we talking about the spectrum of the political ideology of the American populous or are we talking about the spectrum of political ideologies that exist as categories with which people can identify themselves. Let’s start with the later.
One of the nice things about having your own blog is that you get to frame the discussion. So, with that in mind, what follows is my opinion and nothing more. I do not claim to have made any kind of scientific analysis.
With Wasserman-Schultz’s words echoing in my ears, I wondered how could she think the Tea Party was un-American and extreme right-wing in its nature? I also wondered what she would define as the center of the political spectrum? Because I can not know what Wasserman-Schultz thinks the center is, I decided that I would define what the center is. (See what I mean about owning your own blog?) For me this was easy.
To me the “political center” in American was defined on day one of our nation. The day the representatives of the Colonies ratified the constitution defined what America is; a constitutional republic guaranteeing our inalienable rights of life , liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and enumerating certain limited powers to the federal government. Although there were certainly those that wanted a stronger central government and those that want an even weaker central government, on that day our constitution was ratified as it is. The constitution, therefore, defines the political center for America.
My definition of the “left” of the spectrum then is made up of those that would augment some people’s inalienable rights with goverment granted privileges by usurping some of the inalienable rights of others.
The “Right” side of the spectrum, by my way of thinking, is made up of those that do not believe in the concept of inalienable rights, in other words, they would favor dictatorships.
So, using my admittedly simplistic view of the political spectrum in America, where are we today and where are the Tea Party conservatives. I would say that Tea Party conservatives are in the absolute center of the spectrum as defined on day one of our nation. Our government today, however, is anything but centrist as I have defined it. It is decidedly to the left. It is so far to the left that people like Ms. Wasserman-Schultz see the centrist Tea Party as being right-wing extremist. That should worry you. It certainly worries me.
Who in America stands to the “Right” in my political spectrum? Do we have a “Right” side in our politics? Do we have any group(s) that support the dictatorial concept of government? If we do, they are very small in number, in my opinion. But, what about fascism?
We don’t talk much about fascism, do we? What is fascism? Does it belong on the right or the left of my political spectrum? After googling fascism, this explanation made the most sense to me:
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of
nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by
requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright,
fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions. (Source)
If we accept the definition of this source that fascism is “socialism” with a veneer of “capitalism”, we would have to put fascism on the left of my spectrum. I am inclined, however, to see fascism as dictatorial with veneers of socialism and capitalism and, therefore, I put it on the right side of the spectrum.
Does America have a fascist element? Although we do not often hear people verbbalize fascist beliefs, I believe that fascism is alive and well in the hearts and minds of some Americans and most importantly in th hearts and minds of those we call The Powers That Be (TPTB).
In the world of TPTB, people like Wasserman-Scultz are no bodies. But presidents of the United Sates are definitely among TPTB. Further, I think we have seen some elements of fascism in both Bush presidencies and in the Clinton presidency and most certainly in the current presidency of Barack Obama. Do you think that Obama wouldn’t love to have dictatorial power?
But wait a minute. Fascism is associated with nationalism and Obama is no nationalist. But we are now talking about TPTB and that means we are no longer talking about America but the world.
We know that TPTB have long had a dream of a One World Order (OWO). Because TPTB have been seen to support socialism, we have assumed that their OWO would amount to universal socialism. I don’t believe it. I speculate that they dream of a fascist OWO with veneers of socialism and capitalism. maybe some day I will expand on my theory; but for now, I offer it only as food for thought.
Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?