The convenient label of “fascism” is a term recklessly hurled at anyone who dares to challenge the narrative, without so much as a cursory understanding of its true meaning.
The university where I work is awash in talk of "private-public partnerships" and fawning mention of "stakeholders" and "sustainable development". To think that universities are meant to house the clever ones.... 🤨 The History Professors are asleep at the wheel.
Stakeholders have no shares in the outcome; hence, there is no loss. Sustainable development is an oxymoron. You can't create sustainable development by denying people water, food, and land on which to grow it.
Sustainability died when Monsanto became the pesticide and herbicide by monopoly; no, there's no such thing as sustainable.
The bull shite that is wrapped around meaningless terms and idiotic sloganeering. Does that help, Tam? What is sustainable development and how is it sustained? Evidence suggests green policies are anything but sustainable and prohibitively expensive.
Discernment is always key. I've worked in green energy policy for 20 years now and we have achieved a massive amount of positive change in this space while saving ratepayers money. It's important to weed out FUD from what's real. Sustainable development as a concept is shifting toward regeneration as a concept b/c it's not enough to "sustain" we need to regenerate and re-build what modern capitalism has destroyed. Do some people use these ideas as political catchwords? Of course. But there are many many examples of policy and technology changes that have made our world much better.
Whose discernment yours or mine? I believe my discernment is just fine. So, a career in green policy, for 20 years, yet you evaded my direct question with meaningless statements which is typical gibberish from green policy zealots. If you were true to your statement regarding weeding out FUD then address the many examples of data being manipulated to align with your fantasy ideology. If this is so dire why do you green policy makers rely on FUD and scare-mongering when your predictions have been wildly off for decades? Why do green policy makers rely on disinformation and suppression of dissenting views? What examples of policy and technical changes related to climate change have improved anyone's standard of living and created a more efficient and less costly method of delivering the resources needed for a modern society without resorting to government handouts?
Research bought and paid for to help skew knowledge/stats/perceptions towards the interests of those doing the paying. Prostitution of the mind and perversion of the intellectual project. Sustainable development seemingly well-intentioned and, in many respects, laudable if intended to curb excess or environmental harm. When latched on to by crony WEF capitalists and uber-elite grifters peddling convenient "solutions" for trumped up crises, then less so. Naomi Klein was onto them before she got covid-muddled.
Mussolini and Hitler were only “straw men” financed by the same elites (national and/or international) just like Marx. From this “context”, it is easier to understand how the elitist corporate system can create antagonisms and create wars.
Let's go back to the time of Mussolini's "fascism". In 1917, he began his political career thanks to MI5, he was then a journalist. After the armistice of 1918, where the capitalist system was called into question by the working class, itself "oriented" by the communist forces (see "biennio rosso"), which allowed a "reframing" of the people, which led the fascists to take "full powers" in 1922.
Through austerity (reduction of social spending, regressive taxation, monetary deflation, wage repression, etc., doesn't that remind you of anything? ^^) and technocracy still in power with a government of economic "experts" (yet fascism "officially" was demanding the "suppression of the banks" and the "confiscation of unproductive income", funny? not really ^^).
This will give rise to the “labor charter” of 1927, I quote:
I. The Italian Nation is an organism with objectives, a life and means of action superior in strength and duration to those of the individuals or divided groups which compose it.
This is a fully realized moral, political and economic unity in the fascist state. [...]
VI. Legally recognized professional associations guarantee legal equality between employers and workers; they maintain the discipline of production and work and encourage improvement.
The corporations constitute the unitary organization of the forces of production and fully represent their interests. By virtue of this integral representation, the interests of production being national interests, the corporations are recognized by law as organs of the State.
As representatives of the unitary interests of production, enterprises can dictate mandatory standards on the discipline of labor relations, as well as on the coordination of production, when they have obtained the necessary powers from industrial associations.
VII. The corporate State considers private initiative in the field of production as the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of the Nation.
To complete and because the parallel with what is happening today is rather tempting, it is interesting to note that the "labor charter" of 1927 provided in article XXVII:
The fascist state proposes:
1° the improvement of insurance against accidents;
2° the improvement and extension of maternity insurance;
3° insurance against occupational diseases and tuberculosis, as a starting point for general insurance against all diseases;
4° improving insurance against involuntary unemployment;
5° adoption of special forms of insurance to provide young workers.
It is the doctor Giovanni Petragnani, who is one of the inventors and promulgators of vaccines against tuberculosis from 1927 to 1935 (called AIP), then from 1935 to 1948 (called VPS), who will become (in 1935) prefect and director general of public health at the Ministry of the Interior. A supporter of the importance of environmental factors in the management and treatment of "social illnesses", Petragnani came to conceive "state racism", as an "extension and reinforcement" of the policies of the fascist regime in the area of public hygiene and social medicine.
It must be remembered at this time that eugenics of Rockefeller was never very far away, and its influence developed in Europe in all medical universities.
After the war, Petragnani went into exile for a while in Brazil. He will return to Italy to be president of the National Association of Hygiene and Public Health, and will end up as vice-president of the Superior Health Council.
It goes to show that “all roads lead to Rome” and to power ^^
Oligarchies that became oligarchs by brutally undercutting society itself will not turn into a dove. The have the most disrespect for all others, including murder, such as JFK. Your vision is 20/20.
The Left is universally shallow in human understanding best I can tell. Their top-down megalomania lets them take any negative-context word that conservative thinkers are against and hurl it as an expletive even if they do not understand its meaning. By doing so they believe they are reversing the roles of evil vs good doers to manipulate but in fact they are self-identifying as shallow human beings. It is the Left which ran slavery in the US South and fought to keep it when challenged. The Left is no different today. It is a personality block that makes up part of society which those seeking to uphold basic human rights and values must counter. We did hold them in check for 250yrs and we can do this again by learning who they are, how dangerous they are and then we must remove the power we gave them.
Down to a tee and near perfection👍. Many, particulularly the young, have become confused by reference to historic political cliches which were themselves obfuscated (presumably equally to confuse during those times)..
The Emphasis has to be education - I find that even Boomer's are using these terms incorrectly.
I loved what you said there..as long as corporations get tax benefits and subsidies they cannot ne held as a legal person. Inaddition they should not be allowed to be Trans state or Trans national.
I think you have some key things wrong in this piece, Lily. You state: "The left's fetishization of corporate power is a curious thing, isn't it? They decry the evils of capitalism, yet simultaneously celebrate the concentration of power in the hands of a few megacorporations." Um, who on the left celebrates power in the hands of a few megacorporations? The left I know and have long been part of decries the concentration of power of any form whether it's corporate power, government power or other forms of power.
As for stakeholder capitalism you may well be right that it's mostly a ruse by the WEF crowd to gussy up their traditional profit motives for a new era where most people are very way of private profits and too much corporate power, but the movement itself for more stakeholder say in corporate decisions, and the need to include things like "the triple bottom line" in to corporate governance (rather than just the financail bottomline) are very welcome trends if we care about people and the planet.
A vote for the left in Europe or the US is a vote for the globalist agenda as defined by the UN's Agenda 2030, which has been in formal partnership with WEF since 2019. It's about the joined power of politics and corporations to promote a set of top-down delusional goals - a utopia destined to become dystopia.
The ideals of the left, as you might imagine them, have long been betrayed by the actual left parties you get to vote for.
The "very welcome trends" tend to become dystopian when promoted by a top-down "elite" that is far from bottom-up decision-making and public accountability. Dystopia is never about the nature of the goals itself - it's about the misguided vision and fallibility of the few pushing them top down. And that's the case with ideal motives, yet alone more close to real life - seeking dominance, power, and personal benefits. I.e., standard totalitarian issues.
As Lily pointed out in this text, I also find it quite ironic how left voters worry about old but nowadays completely irrelevant national fascism. At the same time, it's new, global fascism that has already grabbed power, exploiting the idea of global good and left voters such as yourself. It's a simple psyop move by the corporate media to label any national state strengthening as fascism, as it goes against their owners' venture as global stakeholders.
However, people are catching up to this, at least partially and intuitively. Hence, we have Trump now winning the US election.
The university where I work is awash in talk of "private-public partnerships" and fawning mention of "stakeholders" and "sustainable development". To think that universities are meant to house the clever ones.... 🤨 The History Professors are asleep at the wheel.
Curious what you find objectionable about talk of stakeholders and sustainable development?
Stakeholders have no shares in the outcome; hence, there is no loss. Sustainable development is an oxymoron. You can't create sustainable development by denying people water, food, and land on which to grow it.
Sustainability died when Monsanto became the pesticide and herbicide by monopoly; no, there's no such thing as sustainable.
well said!
The bull shite that is wrapped around meaningless terms and idiotic sloganeering. Does that help, Tam? What is sustainable development and how is it sustained? Evidence suggests green policies are anything but sustainable and prohibitively expensive.
Discernment is always key. I've worked in green energy policy for 20 years now and we have achieved a massive amount of positive change in this space while saving ratepayers money. It's important to weed out FUD from what's real. Sustainable development as a concept is shifting toward regeneration as a concept b/c it's not enough to "sustain" we need to regenerate and re-build what modern capitalism has destroyed. Do some people use these ideas as political catchwords? Of course. But there are many many examples of policy and technology changes that have made our world much better.
Whose discernment yours or mine? I believe my discernment is just fine. So, a career in green policy, for 20 years, yet you evaded my direct question with meaningless statements which is typical gibberish from green policy zealots. If you were true to your statement regarding weeding out FUD then address the many examples of data being manipulated to align with your fantasy ideology. If this is so dire why do you green policy makers rely on FUD and scare-mongering when your predictions have been wildly off for decades? Why do green policy makers rely on disinformation and suppression of dissenting views? What examples of policy and technical changes related to climate change have improved anyone's standard of living and created a more efficient and less costly method of delivering the resources needed for a modern society without resorting to government handouts?
Research bought and paid for to help skew knowledge/stats/perceptions towards the interests of those doing the paying. Prostitution of the mind and perversion of the intellectual project. Sustainable development seemingly well-intentioned and, in many respects, laudable if intended to curb excess or environmental harm. When latched on to by crony WEF capitalists and uber-elite grifters peddling convenient "solutions" for trumped up crises, then less so. Naomi Klein was onto them before she got covid-muddled.
got it, so it's not so much the terms or ideas but the misappropriation of terminology and false promises by power elites that you object to?
It's all false promises that's what you don't get, Tam
Mussolini and Hitler were only “straw men” financed by the same elites (national and/or international) just like Marx. From this “context”, it is easier to understand how the elitist corporate system can create antagonisms and create wars.
Let's go back to the time of Mussolini's "fascism". In 1917, he began his political career thanks to MI5, he was then a journalist. After the armistice of 1918, where the capitalist system was called into question by the working class, itself "oriented" by the communist forces (see "biennio rosso"), which allowed a "reframing" of the people, which led the fascists to take "full powers" in 1922.
Through austerity (reduction of social spending, regressive taxation, monetary deflation, wage repression, etc., doesn't that remind you of anything? ^^) and technocracy still in power with a government of economic "experts" (yet fascism "officially" was demanding the "suppression of the banks" and the "confiscation of unproductive income", funny? not really ^^).
This will give rise to the “labor charter” of 1927, I quote:
I. The Italian Nation is an organism with objectives, a life and means of action superior in strength and duration to those of the individuals or divided groups which compose it.
This is a fully realized moral, political and economic unity in the fascist state. [...]
VI. Legally recognized professional associations guarantee legal equality between employers and workers; they maintain the discipline of production and work and encourage improvement.
The corporations constitute the unitary organization of the forces of production and fully represent their interests. By virtue of this integral representation, the interests of production being national interests, the corporations are recognized by law as organs of the State.
As representatives of the unitary interests of production, enterprises can dictate mandatory standards on the discipline of labor relations, as well as on the coordination of production, when they have obtained the necessary powers from industrial associations.
VII. The corporate State considers private initiative in the field of production as the most effective and useful instrument in the interest of the Nation.
etc..
Yes, the same “recipe” today ^^
To complete and because the parallel with what is happening today is rather tempting, it is interesting to note that the "labor charter" of 1927 provided in article XXVII:
The fascist state proposes:
1° the improvement of insurance against accidents;
2° the improvement and extension of maternity insurance;
3° insurance against occupational diseases and tuberculosis, as a starting point for general insurance against all diseases;
4° improving insurance against involuntary unemployment;
5° adoption of special forms of insurance to provide young workers.
It is the doctor Giovanni Petragnani, who is one of the inventors and promulgators of vaccines against tuberculosis from 1927 to 1935 (called AIP), then from 1935 to 1948 (called VPS), who will become (in 1935) prefect and director general of public health at the Ministry of the Interior. A supporter of the importance of environmental factors in the management and treatment of "social illnesses", Petragnani came to conceive "state racism", as an "extension and reinforcement" of the policies of the fascist regime in the area of public hygiene and social medicine.
It must be remembered at this time that eugenics of Rockefeller was never very far away, and its influence developed in Europe in all medical universities.
After the war, Petragnani went into exile for a while in Brazil. He will return to Italy to be president of the National Association of Hygiene and Public Health, and will end up as vice-president of the Superior Health Council.
It goes to show that “all roads lead to Rome” and to power ^^
Oligarchies that became oligarchs by brutally undercutting society itself will not turn into a dove. The have the most disrespect for all others, including murder, such as JFK. Your vision is 20/20.
The Left is universally shallow in human understanding best I can tell. Their top-down megalomania lets them take any negative-context word that conservative thinkers are against and hurl it as an expletive even if they do not understand its meaning. By doing so they believe they are reversing the roles of evil vs good doers to manipulate but in fact they are self-identifying as shallow human beings. It is the Left which ran slavery in the US South and fought to keep it when challenged. The Left is no different today. It is a personality block that makes up part of society which those seeking to uphold basic human rights and values must counter. We did hold them in check for 250yrs and we can do this again by learning who they are, how dangerous they are and then we must remove the power we gave them.
Governments come and go, but the board of directors is a semi-permanent thing. Things only change when one dies and is replaced.
If you sit on all the boards, you become a god.
Down to a tee and near perfection👍. Many, particulularly the young, have become confused by reference to historic political cliches which were themselves obfuscated (presumably equally to confuse during those times)..
The Emphasis has to be education - I find that even Boomer's are using these terms incorrectly.
Thank you for your dialogue.
I loved what you said there..as long as corporations get tax benefits and subsidies they cannot ne held as a legal person. Inaddition they should not be allowed to be Trans state or Trans national.
I think you have some key things wrong in this piece, Lily. You state: "The left's fetishization of corporate power is a curious thing, isn't it? They decry the evils of capitalism, yet simultaneously celebrate the concentration of power in the hands of a few megacorporations." Um, who on the left celebrates power in the hands of a few megacorporations? The left I know and have long been part of decries the concentration of power of any form whether it's corporate power, government power or other forms of power.
As for stakeholder capitalism you may well be right that it's mostly a ruse by the WEF crowd to gussy up their traditional profit motives for a new era where most people are very way of private profits and too much corporate power, but the movement itself for more stakeholder say in corporate decisions, and the need to include things like "the triple bottom line" in to corporate governance (rather than just the financail bottomline) are very welcome trends if we care about people and the planet.
A vote for the left in Europe or the US is a vote for the globalist agenda as defined by the UN's Agenda 2030, which has been in formal partnership with WEF since 2019. It's about the joined power of politics and corporations to promote a set of top-down delusional goals - a utopia destined to become dystopia.
The ideals of the left, as you might imagine them, have long been betrayed by the actual left parties you get to vote for.
The "very welcome trends" tend to become dystopian when promoted by a top-down "elite" that is far from bottom-up decision-making and public accountability. Dystopia is never about the nature of the goals itself - it's about the misguided vision and fallibility of the few pushing them top down. And that's the case with ideal motives, yet alone more close to real life - seeking dominance, power, and personal benefits. I.e., standard totalitarian issues.
As Lily pointed out in this text, I also find it quite ironic how left voters worry about old but nowadays completely irrelevant national fascism. At the same time, it's new, global fascism that has already grabbed power, exploiting the idea of global good and left voters such as yourself. It's a simple psyop move by the corporate media to label any national state strengthening as fascism, as it goes against their owners' venture as global stakeholders.
However, people are catching up to this, at least partially and intuitively. Hence, we have Trump now winning the US election.
WEF is a centralized meeting of Machurian Candidates.
Hold my steak!
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/the-manchurian-candidates
it is Consolidation of Fascism in a Digital World
You all will be Slaves to them who must not be named
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/consolidation-of-fascism-in-a-digital
The final solution is AI Government and automated Fascism.
https://fritzfreud.substack.com/p/why-the-government-pushes-digitalization