Todd, neither James Burnham nor Willmoore Kendall were neoconservatives. Kendall, as his biographer Christopher Owen specifically notes, was not a Straussian but a conservative populist. Burnham and Kendall had their differences, but they both were anti-Communists and realists when it came to foreign policy.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Todd Pierce via Salon <salon@listserve.com>
Date: 6/11/22 11:40 AM (GMT-06:00)
To: SALON Admin <salon@committeefortherepublic.org>
Subject: Re: [Salon] Opinion | The Jan. 6 committee holding Trump accountable is not ‘partisan.’ Just ask Pence. - The Washington Post
Should read: “with his reprint of Roosevelt’s “American Fascist Manifesto,” the “Strenuous Life.”
Or you can read it in Bacevich’s panegyric to “Conservatives,” featuring the “founding generation” of Neoconservatives, like Frank S. Meyer, James Burnham, Irving Kristol, Willmoore Kendall (read his books, or his
latest biography: Heaven Can Indeed Fall), Harry Jaffa, Allan Bloom, and libertarian economist ally, Milton Friedman, and of course the “Original" (not counting Andrew Jackson), Teddy Roosevelt’s Fascist Manifesto (compare it to Mussolini’s “Doctrine of Fascism,”
and tell me Mussolini didn’t plagiarize Roosevelt a bit).
But this raises a question; given that Bacevich has so consistently opposed American Militarism, and US wars of the last 20 years. Can anyone offer a suggestion of why he celebrates “American Militarists” so much,
as if that doesn’t have a “cognitive effect" on his readers to “legitimize” the very American Militarists whose vision has been actualized in our "New American Fascism,” of the 21st Century, using the term Chalmers Johnson used.
The ancient Greeks believed in multiple Gods, with the Gods free to play tricks/jokes on humans. One might wonder if that isn’t exactly what is happening today,
when a Liz Cheney, so in line with all of her father’s anti-constitutional acts which in actuality constituted a constitutional coup d’état, is being cheered on by her father’s own Democratic “enemies,” as Dick would define them:
"Constitutional democracies are rarely destroyed by a single blow. Their citizens often sleepwalk into catastrophe, discovering too late that a degree of timely vigilance could have preserved their system of self-rule."
That “single blow” didn’t come at Trump’s hands, though he did his best to make a “final blow,” as Biden is doing as well though. That is, with expansion of war against Russia (though he could easily get a “declaration of war" from Congress,
with Republicans leading the cheers) as Ex. A. But the "initial blow" came at Dick Cheney’s hands, with the able assistance of Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby, and Zalmay Khalilzad, as Khalilzad boasts in his memoir in describing the 1992 Defense Planning Guidance
that Cheney directed them to write, and approved.
So let’s give credit where credit is due, and not forget to indict her father, and herself, as she did so much to promote the “Unitary Executive Theory” that Cheney advocated ever since the
Iran Contra “Minority Report” that he and the Republicans were responsible for back in the 1980s, as the origin of Unitary Executive Theory, as Dick claimed:
"Attempted coups have authors, and with a steely, matter-of-fact eloquence worthy of history’s most able prosecutors, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.),
the vice chair, indicted
Donald Trump in every sense but the formal one.”
But this was all foretold by an American Oracle, Chalmers Johnson, whom we should never forget, as explained well here:
“Empire
rots the brains of imperialists, is driven by hubris, racism and arrogance.” . . . In print and in person, he repeatedly said the
US is now a fascist state, one of the few truly reputable scholars with the courage to do so. In “Nemesis,” he said bankruptcy would be the key to the end of the US empire–but warned it would not die with a whimper.”
A couple people on this list object when I have described
the US as “fascist,” indicating they have never been exposed to Johnson’s analysis,
or have forgotten it, or reject it. But I stand with Johnson! Any nation whose Department of War (DOD) actually boasts of engaging in “Perpetual
War” defines itself as “fascist,” as Mussolinidefined what
Italy was to be. But perhaps for an American audience, instead of the symbol of the “fasces” to
represent our “unity” for war, the actual symbol we have adopted, or at least
as what “Conservatives” have adopted, is that of
our original“fascist,” Teddy Roosevelt’s “Big Stick,” as Bacevich featured in his book on Conservatism with this reprint of Roosevelt’s “American Fascist Manifesto,” the “Strenuous
Life."
"In ancient times, fasces were a Roman symbol of power and authority, a bundle of wooden rods and
an axe bound together by leather thongs. Fasces represented that a man held imperium,
or executive authority. Exercising imperium, a Roman leader could expect his orders to be obeyed, could dole out punishment, and could even execute those who disobeyed. The fasces he carried symbolized this power in two ways: the rods suggest punishment by
beating, the axe suggests beheading.” . . . Benito Mussolini's fascist government in Italy, the first modern fascist state,
adopted the fasces as its symbol, harking back to the Romans. Unlike the American interpretation of the fasces as a symbol of strength through unity, the Italian fascists identified with the power and brutality also inherent in the fasces' meaning.”
The latter point describing the “Big Stick’s” meaning as well. But “Big Stickism” doesn’t roll off the tongue as easily as does fascism, so I will stick with Chalmers Johnson with the
word he used to describe the US as.
As the article at the link above contains a lot of “anecdotal evididence,” let me add one more piece. In a conversation a week ago with a relative who is in the homebuilding business,
he related how easy it is, once again, to get almost limitless amounts of mortgage money, even with zero downpayment. What does that foretell?
Former vice president Mike Pence is seen via video as the House Jan. 6 select committee holds its first public hearing on June 9. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington
Post)
Constitutional democracies are rarely destroyed by a single blow. Their citizens often sleepwalk into catastrophe, discovering too late that a degree of timely vigilance could have
preserved their system of self-rule.
This is why the work of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection is so important. Its public hearing Thursday was a red alert.
Using less than two hours of prime-time television, the committee issued an urgent plea: Americans must understand the violence they saw on that winter day in 2021 as nothing less
than what Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), the committee chair, called “an attempted coup.”
Attempted coups have authors, and with a steely, matter-of-fact eloquence worthy of history’s most able prosecutors, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), the vice chair, in every sense but the
formal one.
After watching Cheney pile fact upon fact and make connection after connection, the actual prosecutors in the Justice Department (and local prosecutors ) will have little choice but
to issue the actual legal indictments that the treasonous conspiracy of Jan. 6 requires.
Follow E.J.
Dionne Jr.'s opinionsFollow
The nation must be clear on this: Failing to achieve accountability for the Jan. 6 insurrection, in the courts and at the ballot boxes, will amount to issuing a license for the enemies
of democracy to do this all over again.
Cheney’s standing as a loyal conservative Republican certainly added to her credibility and guarantees her a place on history’s honor roll. But even more critical to her success Thursday
night was her understanding of the obstacles before her. She needed to overcome the temptation of the complacent to write off the desecration of our seat of government as the work of mad extremists disconnected from the broader political system.
No. Foes of democracy regularly use mobs for their purposes, and these criminals were acting in concert with the president of the United States. Cheney proved — yes, beyond a shadow
of a doubt — that the assault on the counting of the electoral vote was planned, and that thuggish, far-right Proud Boys and Oath Keepers and the rest were part of something bigger. One man set this attempted putsch in motion.
“President Trump,” Cheney , “summoned the mob, assembled the mob and lit the flame of this attack.”
Speaking to the part of her audience made up of Justice Department lawyers, Cheney used the evidence the committee gathered to underscore that Trump knew his election-rigging claim
was a gigantic inflammatory lie. It was devastating to see former attorney general William Barr on video calling Trump’s assertions “,” and to learn that the former president’s own data mavens told him they were false. Trump’s daughter Ivanka was on video
saying she believed Barr, not her father.
Key to prosecuting Trump will be proving his corrupt intent. The liar will claim innocence by insisting he truly “believed” that the election was stolen. The more evidence there is
that he knew perfectly well that he was peddling, well, “bulls---,” the harder it will be for him to evade the consequences of his actions. Even the most practiced con artists get caught out eventually.
Last, Cheney showed that the mayhem was part of a much broader effort to subvert a free election. She contrasted Trump’s unquenchable will to power with the loyalty of fellow Republicans
— at the federal, state and local levels — to the Constitution and the democratic process. Again and again, Trump attacked then-Vice President Mike Pence’s refusal to throw out legitimately chosen electors, even at moments when Pence’s life was in danger.
Cheney did not just let this . “Aware of the rioters’ chants to ‘hang Mike Pence,’” she said, “the president responded with this sentiment: ‘Maybe our supporters have the right idea,’
and Mike Pence ‘deserves’ it.”
If holding Trump accountable is “partisan,” that makes standing up for one of the most conservative Republican vice presidents in history “partisan,” too. And if the story being told
is “partisan,” why are so many of the credible witnesses Republicans?
This goes to one other aspect of authoritarian practice that the committee is confronting: Abusers of power cultivate cynicism. Trump’s defenders do not want Americans to grapple
with the facts. They want people to believe that there are no truths at all, just selfish interests. Let it go, they say, it’s old news.
In the “war scene,” “carnage” and “chaos” of Jan. 6, Caroline Edwards, a U.S. Capitol Police officer badly injured by the Trumpist mob, provided the antidote to this poisonous indifference.
To ignore the war on our Constitution that Trump unleashed is to break faith with Edwards and all the other guardians of our republican traditions. At the very least, Thursday’s hearing
showed that defenders of democracy have a fighting chance to awaken a brooding and preoccupied nation.
E.J. Dionne writes about politics in a twice-weekly column for The Washington Post. He is
a professor at Georgetown University, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a frequent commentator for NPR and MSNBC. His latest book is “Code Red: How Progressives and Moderates Can Unite to Save Our Country.”Twitter