three points:

1. Though I don't think the US should be called "fascist" or "Nazi,"
there is a major point of similarity these days, at least on the
ideological level. The Bushocrats see themselves and their nation as
"victims," partly due to 9/11 and partly due to an imitation of the
Israelis -- despite being on top. This sense of victimhood includes an
element of the "they stabbed in the back" attitude that many German
fascists had in the 1920s.

2. I think that there will be a word or phrase in the US version of
English which will take on meanings similar to "fascist." It will be
some word or phrase that Bush uses (such as "the ownership society")
as soon as it becomes clear to a majority that it's total reactionary
nonsense. (Was it Sinclair Lewis who said that if fascism comes to the
US it will be called "Americanism.")

3. As part of his long but useful essay, Ralph writes: >Hence,
material conditions dictated as one of a limited range of feasible
courses militarization and the attempt to capture colonial markets and
resources. With Hjalmar Schacht's guidance the Nazi regime was able to
restore growth and sharply reduce unemployment through a program of
public works and rearmament facilitated by running budget deficits in
defiance of financial orthodoxy - similar to the New Deal of FDR,
which was less far-reaching due to the limits of presidential power
...<

Paul & I discussed this before. I don't think the New Deal was
Keynesian (in the sense of truly pumping up aggregate spending) until
WW II. The Germans were able to break the balance-the-budget orthodoxy
more.
-- 
Jim Devine
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://myweb.lmu.edu/jdevine

Reply via email to