The Bush Administration, and their cronies wherever they are found in society, aren't "republicans."
They promote social aristocracy instead of popular sovereignty.
They promote anti-republican practices in the governance of our corporations, and in the governance of our political institutions.
They promote authoritarian decree over the rule of law.
They promote legal exceptionalism over constitutional and statutory due process.
They promote national exceptionalism over international law.
They promote ideological arguments over fact-based reason.
They promote superstition over science.
They even stoop to outright blasphemy, asking Christians to pray for success in war.
None of the things that they promote are "republican." Not one. They are liars in the very core of their being. They self-identify with a label that is a fraud.
Each and every policy that they promote and support is a fraud. Their corrupt and criminal aims frame their actions. They can't tell the truth. They can't solve problems. Everything that they touch turns into disaster.
There is nothing "republican" about what they do or intend to do. Theirs is a radical philosophy, pieced together from the very worst elements of failed ideologies.
* They want a soviet-style national economic system, with interlocking corporate directorates controlling the economy.
* They want an international system that resembles nineteenth-century British imperialism.
* They want a social system that resembles the aristocratic systems of nineteenth-century Europe.
* They want a fascist "unitary executive" system, in which the president is an authoritarian dictator, the Congress is an advisory body under his rule, and the judiciary is a dependent body subordinate to Congress.
* They want a merger of corporate and government power, similar to Mussolini's fascist government.
* They view corporate charters as privately established, as if they were a power unto themselves instead of being chartered under the authority of the people, a view that resurrects the tyranny of the 18th century British Empire.
They aren't republicans. Not in any sense. They are a mockery of republican philosophy. They choose any policy or practice, whether from aristocrats, communists, fascists or theocrats, ANYTHING EXCEPT republican philosophy.
Our national traditions are liberal and republican traditions. Our foundations for those traditions
* Popular sovereignty
* Common Law
* The Rule of Law
* Democratic Elections
* Constitutionalism
* Inalienable Rights
* Economic freedom
Are under attack by these bizarre radicals. There is nothing traditional or if you will, "conservative" about what they do or intend to do.
I will not sacrifice the word "republican" to these satanic frauds. I will not have all of the republican philosophy upon which our society is founded associated with these haughty and incompetent aristocratic pretenders.
It would be much better to put them on trial answering for their treason, their war crimes, and their arrogant racketeering. It would be much better to expose them as the pretenders and frauds that they are, so that we may commemorate their executions with a remembrance of what republican philosophy truly IS.
These neocon traitors have fancied themselves a republican label, as if these cowardly fops can play dress up with any deception. They soil the memories of our republican veterans in the Revolutionary War for their game of dress up, patching together the most vile forms of tyranny and calling it "republican policy."
*****************
I originally wrote this as a comment in response to Bob Higgins' diary The Hitler Comparison. I decided it deserves to be a diary.
Bob Higgins is right. Naomi Wolf is right. Bush is incrementally implementing policies and instituting practices that past fascists, including Hitler, implemented and instituted.
I suppose those who counsel against the comparison would rather allow Bush to go forward with his policies and practices, so that AFTER the disasterous wars and heinous cruelties and vicious suppression of liberty become history, those who survive can at last say "Well! They WERE right, after all! He really WAS like Hitler!" THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
I'll defer to Naomi Wolf and others who have made the comparison so much better than I, but those who have doubts about the wisdom of speaking out against the fascist movement should review the particulars of the Nuremberg Trials. Specifically, the particulars detailing the Crime Against Peace, compared to the stated intentions and actions of the PNAC cabal that Bush installed, are strikingly similar enough to warrant a trial seeking the death penalty for all of the policymakers in the Bush Administration who were involved in initiating the Iraq War.
If that is not stark enough for anyone who reads this, then I would remind you that "pre-emptive warfare" and international anarchy are policies that Bush borrowed directly from Hitler and his Nazis. Bush has, with the adoption of these two policies, overthrown all of international law, just as Hitler did before him. Should we wait until he fully implements Hitlerian consequences, or surpasses them, before we stand up and say something about his adoption of Hitler's policies and his sure and incremental implementation of them?
When I first began to make the Hitler Comparison, several years ago, I was analyzing policies and practices from a historical perspective. People laughed at me and jeered "Where's the camps?" At that very time, unbeknownst to many of us, including myself, Bush was actually setting up an extrajudicial secret prison system. Now it seems the critics want to see burned bodies in ovens before they agree with the comparison.
Godwin: who the hell is Godwin, anyway? I should defer to his slogan instead of analyzing political policies, philosophies and ideologies and making broad based comparisons? I should ignore historical precedent, and legal precedent? What fact-based, reasonable debate is closed when a slogan is intoned? I propose that we formally abolish "Godwin's law," and propose a new one.
If you want to make the Hitler Comparison, then don't just say "Bush is a Nazi." Tell us what he has done that is similar to the Nazis. One example isn't enough. One incident isn't enough. One policy isn't enough.
Explain why there are dissimilarities, owing to cultural and historical realities. For example, Bush isn't calling for the extermination of the Jews. But he IS calling for all-out war, for generations, against Islam. And of course, due to cultural realities, he insists that he isn't at war with Islam, just people who fight Western interests out of a religious commitment to Islam. Those who are willing to agree to America Uber Alles won't be bombed, burned, beaten, tortured and raped into submission.
If you want to make the Hitler Comparison, then don't just say "Bush is a Nazi." Tell us where the policies that Bush advocates originate historically, and what the consequences of them were.
Tell us how Bush's ideology conflicts with republican philosophy, if you want to compare him to Hitler. Hitler successfully transformed a republic into a totalitarian state, and he did so with very specific, concrete steps.
Let's replace Godwin's slogan with Naomi Wolf's well-reasoned critique.