The minor party US presidential candidate for the United Fascist Union party ticket, who ran in the 1996 to 2008 US presidential elections . He claimed to achieve "6th place" in the 2000 presidential election. His campaigns platform includes abolishing Christianity and replacing it with classical Roman Paganism fused with the political system of Fascist Italy. He openly opposed the Nazi style of fascism, but claimed to support a society based around white European culture.
The scary thing is with today's economy and loss of faith in our present system, there are people out there like Jackson Kirk Grimes ready and willing to step in. And, what if he increased his political savvy so that he presented himself in a more palatable manner, but kept his same feelings hidden until it was too late? It happened all over the world in the 1930's and could happen again.
I find this so scary! He supports a society based around white European culture, in America? And wants to revive Roman Paganism? I would hope that most American's would read enough about each canidate in order to realise what he stands for. However it does go to show that diversity and minority interests are represented in the candidates that run.
ReplyDeleteI doubt Mr Grimes is going to have much success in his political career. Fascism as a explicit doctrine as too much of a history to ever gain popular support in the US. Their collective national identity was in part forged in WWII. Too many died in the 'fight against fascism' for fascism to ever be a serious political force in the US. Far more scary are the homegrown Benitos and Adolfs - the ones that have the same ideas of control and domination but are able to dress it in a mythology and idealogy that are uniquely American. I think the Evangelicals are already out there giving it a go
ReplyDeleteOne thing that I believe is a huge boon to democracy is what we've come to use everyday without even really noticing it: the internet.
ReplyDeleteYes, the internet can indeed be censored such as it is in many places (take China for example) but to me it seems like it has increased the volume of political discourse tenfold. Decades ago there were a select few political commentators whose domain was newspapers and magazines and, of course, a 'few' can then be either silenced or co-opted far easier.
Now, with anybody able to chuck in their two cents, the discussion has widened from the high profile back-and-forth of a couple of notables to the constant and energetic back-and-forth of a few million! I'm not saying that this, also, cannot be silenced but once a country has a long tradition of this sort of free and fertile conversation it also has the capacity for mobilisation and awareness to stop something like a fascist America ever happening (I would hope).
However, notable is the massive majority of the world's population without access to regular cyber participation. I suppose my point only really applies to already liberal and advanced countries. However, as the world (slowly) develops, could this be an important weapon for the freedom team?