America's Descent Into Fascism

By Glenn M. Cahilly

Contemporary polls show the majority of Americans finally agree that the presidency of George W. Bush can be called “the worst in U.S. history.” It is by far the most anti-democratic and, for the individual, the most troubling, disruptive, and dangerous. Its disdain for the rule of law, the Constitution, and the nation's standing in the world is molding a legacy of horrors and complexities that will challenge generations to come.
In 1982, Leonard Peikof claimed in The Ominous Parallels that the social philosophy that gave rise to Nazi Germany was similar to that taking hold in the United States. Though the claim was declared arguable and absurd, it was supported by the sudden prominence of the far right in American politics and particularly Christian fundamentalist and theocracy advocate Pat Robertson's run for the presidency in 1988. Little more than a decade later, the Bush-Cheney administration's power-seeking and -wielding machinations made undeniable the nation's vulnerability to totalitarianism.

Sixty-seven years before Bush and Cheney seized control of the White House, a character another majority considered comically Chaplinesque similarly rose to power with only minority support and under controversial conditions. Contemporary citizen and historian Sebastian Haffner, in an opinion held by the educated and otherwise enlightened, classified Hitler and his followers as “morons” and “quadrupeds.” Initially, the country's political leaders and intelligentsia were confident the man's well-known radical inclinations would be contained. Protective political systems and structures were in place, including a constitution historian William Shirer described as “the most liberal and democratic document of its kind ... full of ingenious and admirable devices which seemed to guarantee the working of an almost flawless democracy.” At worst he would be a parliamentary nuisance.

Indeed, the parallels in rhetoric and action of Adolf Hitler and George W. Bush are remarkable and startling. Once in office, both men seized opportunities presented by key events to exploit weaknesses in the opposition and, more insidiously, in the constitutions they had sworn to uphold. Both exposed the inherent fragility of democratic forms of government.

Certain apparent and real differences between Germany in the 1930s and the United States in the early 21st century, and between Bush and Hitler themselves, are noteworthy. Bush came to power during a period of relative peace and prosperity. Hitler rose out of chaos. Its defeat in World War I and the punitive obligations of the Versailles Treaty generated profound humiliation in Germany. In the grip of a worldwide depression, Germany's economy lay in ruins. Violent political movements of every sort, especially the Communists', fostered internal hatreds, fear, and discontent, and intensified the instability. Gun battles between opposing political groups and brutal murders in the streets of Berlin, Munich, and other German cities were commonplace. Peter F. Drucker wrote in The End of Economic Man: The Origins of Totalitarianism (1939) that for average Germans, the older order ceased to have validity and reality, and their world became irrational and demonic. He attributed the cause of Germany's capitulation to fascism to the void created by the collapse of the Old Order and the absence of a new creed and a new order. Until Hitler, the individual German was disenfranchised and lived in fear and ever-worsening uncertainty.

At first glance, the social turbulence in Hitler's Germany appears contrary to conditions in the United States in the period leading up to the presidential election of 2000. For the upper strata of American society, they were starkly different. The nation's prosperity was at historic levels, corporate profits were attaining record highs and Congress was embroiled in debate about the disposition of unprecedented budget surpluses. Reports of newly coined millionaires, millionaires becoming billionaires, and CEOs and company executives awarded mind-numbing bonuses and perks were regularly in the news.

However, for the vastly larger middle and lower classes, including the conservative and far-right sectors of society aggressively courted and mobilized by Bush, life was difficult. Despite the state of the economy, the Bureau of the Census reported that 31.6 million Americans lived in poverty and some 39.8 million lacked health insurance in 2000. For the working class the bursting of the dot.com bubble, the sudden and massive outsourcing of blue- and white-collar jobs under NAFTA and WTO globalization, and competition with waves of both legal and illegal immigrants willing to work for substandard wages for conniving corporations created a growing threat of job uncertainty. Belief in the American Dream and faith in the promises of American democracy showed serious strain.

For the nearly 100 million evangelicals under the spell of Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell and others of their ilk, these economic uncertainties were exacerbated by those from another realm: the spiritual. Manipulated financially and psychologically by these mean-spirited dogmatists, whose aims include instituting theocratic control of the nation, middle Americans' confidence in themselves and their personal futures was undermined.

For example, prior to the turn of the century and the 2000 election, Falwell and others attached grim apocalyptic meaning to the wildly overestimated Y2K problem and predicted catastrophic chaos. Deliriously building the aura of gloom and uncertainty, Reverend Timothy LaHaye's Left Behind series of novels described “the Earth's Last Days” in imminent terms – and sold in the millions. Hundreds of books in Christian bookstores featured terrifying descriptions of the End Times, Armageddon, the Rapture. Many poured venom on the United Nations, the Antichrist's anticipated seat of power. In sermons, pamphlets, web and blog sites, and television and radio talk shows, the Democratic Party and prominent Democrats – with former President Bill Clinton (and often his wife Hillary) taking much of the abuse – were vilified and blamed for the problems faced by individuals and their families, as well as for the ills of the nation and the world.

The combination of intentionally instilled uncertainty and a relentless condemnation of democracy and its supporters, institutions, laws and ideals generated exactly what Hitler and Goebbels sought in the early 1930s: bitter disdain for the Old Order and the concomitant rendering of the ordinary individual prey to a fascist creed. When Bush declared Jesus his favorite philosopher during the 1999 campaign, he instantly garnered the votes of a huge block of evangelicals.

Predictably, as president, his divisive and overtly anti-democratic behavior did not trouble this pre-conditioned following, and was sufficiently powerful to carry him into a second term.

In a succinct yet penetrating analysis, Davidson Loehr wrote in America, Fascism + God: “Our current descent into fascism came about through a kind of ‘perfect storm,' a confluence of three unrelated but mutually supportive schools of thought.” According to Loehr, the first and major school of thought is “... a condition some have called socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor, and that others recognize as a reincarnation of Social Darwinism.” The second is: “... the imperialistic dream of the Project for the New American Century” authored by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Donald Kagan and other principal players in the Bush administration. These men “saw the fall of Communism as a call for America to become the military ruler of the world, to establish a new worldwide empire.”

Loehr assigned the third school to Pat Robertson, who “openly and passionately argued that America must become a theocracy under the control of Christian Dominionists” and “...democracy is a terrible form of government unless it is run by [Robertson's kind of] Christians.” An important catalyst that mobilized conservatives was the Clinton White House sex scandal. This incident, wrote Loehr, “focused the certainties of conservatives on the fact that ‘liberals' had neither moral compass nor moral concern, and therefore represented a dangerous threat to the moral fiber of America.”

In sum: despite the immense economic and political differences between Hitler's Germany and Bush's America, each had at his disposal populations that were socially and spiritually prepared to support fascist solutions to governance.

Providence

Of course, there are myriad personal differences between George W. Bush and Adolf Hitler, perhaps the more obvious being Hitler's charismatic eloquence and Bush's comparative incoherence. Such are of secondary concern here. Where the two are nearly identical is in their visceral subscription to the Carl von Clausewitz view of the political usefulness of war and force, and to the fear-based techniques used to gain, hold, and expand control over their respective nations.

Since the end of World War II, many emotionally distracted historians have claimed Hitler was anti-Christian, a-religious, atheistic, etcetera, yet even a casual reading of the record shows otherwise. The “Gott mit uns” (“God's with us”) slogan molded onto Wehrmacht brass belt buckles and worn by every German soldier, the Mutterkreuz and the Frauenschaft badges, each with a swastika centered in the Christian cross, and literally hundreds of other uses of Christian symbols can be found in the detritus of Nazi Germany. Portions of the infamous Nuremberg rallies were patterned after Christian ceremonies. The rally's yearly closing routine called for the participants to march in review past Hitler as he stood near the Schoener Brunnen—an ornate fountain 19 meters high honoring Christianity's early philosophers, evangelists and church fathers – in front of Die Frauenkirke, the Church of Our Lady. Whatever his personal beliefs, there is no question that Hitler recognized and exploited the power of religion. His aim – like Pat Robertson's with religion and Karl Rove's with politics – was to unify all the churches of Germany into a single, easy-to-control and manipulate Reich Church.
Furthermore, George W. Bush and Adolf Hitler personally harbored the same grandiose explanation for their ascensions to supreme power. Each heard and responded to a command from God the Almighty. “I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something's going to happen,” said George W. Bush. “I would like to thank Providence and the Almighty for choosing me of all people to be allowed to wage this battle for Germany,” said Adolf Hitler.

As we have learned by watching America's “Decider,” for convinced believers in the Augustinian concept that emperors are chosen by God, no earth-bound authority has the superior insight, the power to overrule, or even the right to question directives they receive from the Almighty. When Washington Post editor Bob Woodward asked Bush if he consulted his father about his plans to invade Iraq, Bush summarily dismissed the former president's greater knowledge and experience in Middle East affairs. “He is the wrong father to appeal to in terms of strength,” he replied. “There is a higher father I appeal to.”

The depth of their conviction in themselves as chosen by God is reflected in their intolerance of opposing views, and their willingness to ignore evidence contradictory to their policies. For Bush and Hitler mere questioning was and is anathema. Questioners were reflexively and loudly labeled traitors, traitorous or, more mildly, unpatriotic. Implacable commitment also explains the stubbornness and unhesitant ruthlessness with which such believers pursue their God-assigned missions. In an interview with Bush at Camp David, which appeared 14 January 2007 on CBS' “60 Minutes,” at a time when a substantial majority of Americans opposed Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, reporter Scott Pelley said, “You're not very popular in the country right now. Does that affect you?” With no hesitation, Bush answered: “Not really.”

Bush and Hitler were keenly aware of the power of propaganda. “Propaganda is a means to an end,” declared Josef Goebbels in a speech at the Nazi's 1934 Nuremberg Rally. “Its purpose is to lead the people to an understanding that will allow [them] to willingly and without internal resistance devote [themselves] to the tasks and goals of a superior leadership.”

This could as easily have been said by our “Educator-in-Chief” or Karl Rove or Dick Cheney.

Bush and Hitler also demonstrated their awareness that simple fear can boost the power of propaganda exponentially. Skillful fear mongering worked for Hitler and, 68 years later, it worked as well for Bush. All that was required to put it into play was a highly visible or momentous event. Hitler's came with the suspiciously set Reichstag fire in Berlin in February 1933; Bush's came with an attack on New York City's Twin Towers in September 2001. The strategy each immediately adopted can be summed up by this statement: “... (I)t is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” While it again is easy to envision this having been said in one of those infamous closed-door meetings in the Bush-Cheney White House, in fact, it is a statement made by Nazi Reichsmarshall Herman Goering during an April 1946 interview with U.S. intelligence officer Gustave Gilbert.

The Reichstag fire licensed Hitler to produce the Reichstag Fire Decree and the tactically named Enabling Act; 9/11 licensed Bush to produce the tactically named Patriot Act. Each act put each man in a position to intimidate, silence and deal decisively with his critics. Needless to say, both men – God's chosen, Adolf Hitler and George W. Bush – exploited their so-acquired power to disastrous effect.

Familiar Echoes

Some might believe the U.S.' political nightmare will end once Bush completes his second term, puffs up his chest, gets patted on the back for a job well done, and marches back to Crawford.

This is a false assumption, for many reasons. Lurking at the fringe of American society is the secretive and insidiously powerful Council for National Policy (CNP). Established in 1981 by none other than that screwball promoter of belief in the imminence of the “Earth's Last Days,” Timothy LaHaye, the CNP is now diligently working to choose and determine the operating guidelines for Bush's successor, our next president. Besides LaHaye, this largely unknown cabal's current and former membership list includes such right wing extremists, neo-cons and medieval religious stalwarts as James Dobson, John Ashcroft, Grover Norquist, Pat Robertson, Bob Jones III and several hundred similarly minded others.

At a CNP meeting on Amelia Island in Florida in February 2007, defeated Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum addressed the gathering, as did endorsement-seeking Republican presidential candidates Sam Brownback of Kansas, Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, and Duncan Hunter of California. Within the born-again crowd, of course, it is well known that George W. Bush appealed to and won the support of the CNP in 2000. Rather than political fascism and a misguided war in the Holy Lands to “protect American liberty and freedoms,” “establish democracy in the Middle East,” “rid the world of a tyrant,” and so forth, are we experiencing something no more complex than medievalist attempts to hasten Christ's Second Coming?