We find ourselves living in a fundamentally changing nation. It’s a nation heralding that change with a nouveau riche blend of faux-patriotic slogans: “Hope and Change”, “FORWARD!” And “Yes we Can!” Flags are adorned (defaced?) with the face of the incumbent “leader of the free world”. Children have been exhorted to sing the praises of the man most recently elected to the presidency. The state’s been moved to an overpowering position of supremacy over the people “as we go marching on” (Battle Hymn of the Republic).
We see a growing disdain for the rights of some in favor of the alleged inclusion of all, no matter the crimes they committed to be here in the first place. Our rights are being whittled away at, the blade cutting deeper and deeper into the fiber of what we are, changing us into a representation of what we once fought never to become. We accept what the government says we should accept out of fear that if we don’t make our enemies suffer the ignominious nature of their actions in retribution; we’ll suffer more acts against us. Are we sacrificing Peter to save Paul?
Our enemies are both foreign and domestic. Dissent measured against the actions of the state is seen as rhetorically and automatically unpatriotic and as such, seditious. The hue and cry goes out to alienate and ostracize those speaking against the state. These people are minimized, marginalized and the public still is mesmerized by the orator in chief.
Where we once bolstered our external and internal defenses through our military, the state is laying waste to the upper echelons of the corps. The greatest, most highly trained and best minds are being driven from command in shame for acts never tried in court but their dismissal delivered in letters dipped in the poisonous venom of a snake seeking to destroy those best able to challenge him when the action moves from the oval office to the field of battle. By doing these heinous dismissals, the leader strengthens our foreign foes. National security is compromised.
Sexism becomes rampant in a covert manner. The state declares they alone have witnessed the wrongs of the past placed on the shoulders of the women of this nation. What gives these “men” the right to whimsically say they believe they alone can grant “equality” to anybody? That’s a right derived from the love of God not through an act of Congress. Or is there something we need fear in that statement?
But then the state redefines the vaunted title of “woman” to include those people claiming womanly disposition while dressed by nature in the mold of men. It’s only the state may save these people, no matter the thoughts of those others affected by demands they accept what they find unacceptable. It must be remembered: what a state is powerful enough to mandate by edict, it can dispose of just as easily when that edict falls contrary to the latest fad or thought.
Our Fourth Estate, the media once known as the Press (an organization noted for its distillation and extraction of the truth from the dross and chaff concealing that truth) has become complicit with the state in its reporting of only that which the state wants known. Opinion has stealthily displaced fact and truth of presentation in favor of cultivating favor with the state. This allows the press to be a part of the making of history as opposed to simply reporting the circumstances of history’s facts. Through this, the state controls the mind and knowledge of the people. The state re-defines truths and lies alike. They juxtapose the meanings and lay waste to the actuality of the moment. Censorship becomes an act of selective, editorial reportage.
National policy is described with a religious fervor where all the while, reaching for a secular state responsive, responsible and subject to only itself. He who leads the state is the state. Religious rhetoric and terminology is spoken even though the major tenets of religion are diametrically opposed to the state’s policies or actions.
Corporate power and existence is demonized and projected onto a governmental screen so it may be selectively editorialized in a derisive manner, demonized and then regulated for the best use of the state. Labor unions have been courted and seduced by the state to assume an allegedly equal partnership while all the while the upper echelons of the unions gain from the this unholy accord. Those in power bleed the benefits from the people most in need of protection.
Intellectuals and artists extoll the virtues of the state. Educated beyond the norm, one lives in an academic Mecca. The artist, confined in only that which he’s been told he knows, screams the praises of his false idol, while wandering in the desert of his own ignorance.
Criminality is redefined where the righteous are the cruel and unjust people who won’t allow unfettered actions without punishment. Only a just and gentle state may extract justice as it redefines the acts and penalties of breaking the law. Law is relegated to a position of suggestion subservient to the whim of the state and no longer holds the power of commandment.
Cronyism and corruption are firmly in place and walk hand in hand. Only friends and trusted associates are allowed to counsel the state. All others are traitors and subversives to be ignored, minimized and marginalized. There’s no room for compromise.
As was seen in past elections, the electoral process becomes suspect. It’s seen where the vote may be manipulated at the point of tabulation. Political districts can be sculpted to produce the most beneficial vote tallies. The judiciary becomes impressed with its own credentials and adjudicates by belief and interpretation of dead men’s thoughts as opposed to reading the law. They don’t solely apply the principles of that law to the case in point as much as they issue a ruling on that case so it may bolster and affect future cases of only potentially similar circumstances.
This may all sound like an indictment of the present administration. It is. But it’s an indictment of the present, the past and what I fear of the future conduct of government in this country. This insidious manipulation of government has been going on for a long time and was noted by Dr. Lawrence Britt in a treatise delivered on 5-28-13. I merely point out the similarities I see in that treatise: Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism.
The present understanding of this extends to both the Republicans and the Democrats. Neither is innocent as all are recognized as elitist and believe themselves above the average man and woman.
Thanks for listening