@WebsterGTarpley

Archives

Mush-Heads Attempting to Regroup at Green Party Convention; Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein Sees Clinton, Not Trump as Biggest Danger, Eager to Assume the Role of Left Wing to Trump Fascism

UFAAUnited Front Against Austerity | TWSPTax Wall Street Party

Morning Briefing | Friday, August 5, 2016

Trump Is Psychotic and Has a Fascist Mass Movement Behind Him; Greens Repeat Insane Policy of Komintern in 1932-33 by Setting a Trap For Trump in the Form of State Power

Today, the national convention of the Green Party began meeting in Houston, Texas. This strange political formation, devoted to historical pessimism, Malthusianism and zero growth ideology, usually poses a threat to the future of the United States primarily in the medium to longer term, because of its obvious tendency to stifle the progress of science, technology, and industry in the name of obscurantism and irrationality.

But these days, the Green party also poses a threat to our country in the short term. This is because the party’s likely candidate for president, Jill Stein, has decided to mobilize her efforts to target and defeat Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton instead of the fascist, bigoted, warmonger Donald Trump. Stein could have rendered a public service as a third party candidate by attacking Trump as a psychotic and fascist. But Stein has decided to become the left wing of the Trump campaign, which is already the most dangerous fascist mass movement in this country since the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan back in the 1920s. (Note that fascism expert Robert Paxton has developed the case that the European fascism of the twentieth century was actually derived from the KKK.) Stein has done this by her own choice, doubtless motivated by a crass desire to increase her organizational gate receipts (maximizing the matching funds which she will now receive thanks to the US taxpayers by way of the Federal Election Commission), but also because of what looks like an ideological affinity for the abominable pessimism of Trump.

Jill Stein, who is often challenged about her role as the left flank of the Trump fascist machine, has concocted an excuse or cover story, which can only be described as deranged:

‘Trump says very scary things— immigrants, massive militarism and ignoring the climate. Hillary, unfortunately, has a track record for doing all of those things…We see these draconian things that Donald Trump is talking about, we actually see Hillary Clinton doing1

While admittedly difficult to interpret, this cryptic statement seems to assert that Hillary has carried out to the high crimes against humanity and related atrocities which Trump has only conjured up in words.

Before we go any further, we must point out that Jill Stein’s remarks are a form of self-righteous posturing and are easily proven to be mere demagogy, with no facts. The biggest one is that Trump is always babbling about his desires for nuclear war, while Bill and Hillary held the White House for 8 years and, despite their many crimes, never unleashed a nuclear attack.

Stein is also suggesting that Trump can dupe people today and get votes because he has no voting record or track record as governor or some such. But, once Trump takes power, he will start accumulating a very bad track record very quickly, and that should make him much easier to defeat. Think of it: Trump will discredit himself once he takes power! The problem is that the leap into fascist domination is like jumping off a cliff. Forms of dictatorial control combining traditional police and secret police with fascist street fighters, hooligans, scabs, and goons are instituted quite rapidly, and the poor victims are left wondering what hit them. A Trump presidency would usher in an unprecedented era of fascist rule in America.

Trump has referred on at least 10 separate occasions to his willingness or even eagerness to use nuclear weapons in the context of international disputes.2 In the course of these, he has threatened to use nuclear weapons against targets in the Middle East or in Europe. He has argued repeatedly in favor of nuclear proliferation. He has also called for the mass deportations of some 12 million persons – already a war crime in itself, and likely to generate thousands of deaths. Trump’s proposal to kill the relatives of terrorists by destroying their villages would duplicate some of the most heinous crimes of the Nazi SS in World War II massacres with names like Lidice, Czechoslovakia, or the Fosse Ardeatine, near Rome.

So, while recognizing that Hillary has a very bad record on immigrants, militarism, pollution, and much else,3 she was very close to power for eight years in the 1990s, and never launched a nuclear missile and never proposed a mass deportation in cattle cars and boxcars as Trump has done.

But what Ms. Stein is proposing, by the fact that she demonizes Clinton and whitewashes Trump, is to let Trump take power and then see if he is worse than Hillary Clinton, or not. Hillary has a record, while he has primarily genocidal talk. Will he deliver or not? Let’s give him the White House and see what happens, Stein seems to be recommending.

When the TWSP intervened to demystify the Green Party mindset at the Left Forum in New York City last May 21, the Calvinist divine Chris Hedges railed in response to that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were identical.

But this ignores the two most important questions that need to be asked, when we are dealing with the life and death issue of this election. The first involves Fascism. We have already shown that a significant number of trumps ideological positions and campaign promises qualify as fascist. The billionaire himself meets what scholars have defined as the fascist minimum.

But for our purposes here we can leave these ideological-political issues aside and focus on one thing only: in order to be a full-fledged fascist political leader, you must enjoy the active support of a fascist mass movement, or some reasonable equivalent thereof. In the case of Hillary, it ought to be clear that she does not enjoy the support of a fascist mass movement, nor of a mass movement of any kind. Think of Hillary’s embarrassment when Bernie Sanders was able to fill football stadiums and basketball arenas, while she struggled to get people to come to her small-scale events. In some areas, the Hillary supporters were able to meet in a phone booth. No fascist mass movement for her.

Video includes vulgarities and racial and ethinic slurs


http://www.nytimes.com/video/…

But in the case of Trump, it has been clear since the time of the Iowa caucuses that so many active Ku Klux Klansmen, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, racist agitators, xenophobic fanatics, alt-right fascists, Elmer Gantrys, and survivalist paranoids are on the march for Trump. White supremacists provided robo-calls for Trump in Iowa. Hooligan types populate his Bikers for Trump. There is also the Lions’ Guard, a kind of proto-SA brownshirts. Protesters at Trump rallies have been routinely expelled with violent means. Trump is in a class by himself with this, and no amount of obfuscation will hide the basic facts. Trump is at the head of a violent movement of racists and fascists. The KKK Neo-Nazi David Duke has been inspired to come out of his retirement and run for office because Trump has inspired him.

The second question is whether Hillary Clinton is clinically insane. Is she a psychotic? Does she have Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, which Trump has admitted to having, no doubt, as part of a crude limited hangout? Alzheimer’s disease? Narcissistic personality disorder?

We would submit that the answer to this question is no, so far as we can tell Hillary Clinton is not psychotic. She is of course a corrupt, dishonest, opportunistic, manipulative bourgeois politician, like so many pols worldwide. But there is no serious evidence that she is insane.

Trump, by contrast, qualifies as mentally ill, a disordered personality, a psychopath, a sufferer from multiple personality disorders, a possible victim of the Alzheimer’s disease which killed his father, and much more. This problem becomes especially acute if we contemplate the eventuality in which Trump seizes the White House, gets his hands on the nuclear launch codes, and proceeds to drag humanity into the abyss of the thermonuclear war. Cynical and jaded followers of Stein and Hedges would of course dismiss this as fear mongering designed by the Clinton campaign, but that is a copout. Tony Schwartz, the ghostwriter who actually composed Trump’s Mein Kampf in the form of the Art of the Deal, is a person who studied Trump closely for 18 months and has continued his observations since then. Schwartz is convinced that putting the nuclear button under Trump’s control would likely signify the destruction of world civilization as we have known it. One would have to be a fool to ignore a warning of this kind.

But Jill Stein tells us to capitulate to Trump, despite the fact that he promises to do things that are far beyond the Hillary Clinton repertoire. Set a trap for Trump in the form of state power in the Oval Office, says the Malthusian pasionaria. She is morally insane.

Some interesting comments on the Jill Stein ideology come from essayist Jonathan Chait of New York Magazine. Chait’s short article is entitled “Jill Stein Explains Her Plan to Stop Trump by Electing Him President.” This captures the basic idea of setting a trap for the fascist billionaire in the form of state power. Chait reports an interview by Jill Stein with a Boston radio station in which she was challenged to account for her strange role of vilifying Hillary while sparing Trump:

‘Given the current closeness of the race, and the dire consequences of a Donald Trump victory, the interviewer naturally wanted to know how she feels about potentially throwing the election to Trump. Her answer is the sort of jargon-laced evasion that, if previous Green Party nominee Ralph Nader is any example, we can expect to hear between now and the election…’ 4

Garbled though her words may be, Jill Stein’s basic orientation is to assert that globalism, neoliberalism, and bank bailouts are the driving force behind fascism, and that the only way to deal with the fascist threat is not to confront it head-on or any other way, but rather to ignore it and focus on removing the causes of the current ideological climate.

We ourselves are second to none in wishing to treat the root causes through measures like seizing control of the Federal Reserve to provide abundant and cheap, long-term credit for 30 million jobs, and the new national infrastructure, plus taxing Wall Street turnover at a full 1%. We are also in favor of a 15% protective tariff to prevent dumping. We are also seeking ways to bind Hillary Clinton, so that she will not use presidential powers to start anymore useless wars. But in addition to all this, it is certainly necessary to fight Trump fascism, while also denouncing the terrorist August, September, and October Surprises which are being deployed by Trump’s backers in the intelligence community to try to stampede the American electorate in his direction.

But Jill Stein’s answer to the question of why she is so avidly serving as a left auxiliary to the Trump fascist machine is a true masterpiece of doubletalk and prevarication. Whatever Stein may say about herself, she is an expert manipulative politician in her own right, or is at least trying to be one. Here is what Stein had to say:

‘What we know from history, and what we know from the current situation, we are seeing a rise in right-wing extremism, not just in the United States, and it’s not just Donald Trump, it’s also throughout countries in Europe. What is driving this? It is policies like NAFTA, like globalization, like the dominance of the banks, like the Wall Street bailouts, like the Wall Street meltdown thanks to deregulation. Who gave us those policies? The Clintons were leading the way on those policies! The answer to neofascism is stopping neoliberalism. Putting another Clinton in the White House will fan the flames of this right-wing extremism. We have known that for a long time ever since Nazi Germany. We are going to stand up to Donald Trump and to stand up to Hillary Clinton!

One comment on twitter dismisses Stein’s answer as “completely crazy.” If so, it still has quite a pedigree. Chait reminds readers of Ralph Nader’s infamous role in giving the 2000 presidential election to George W. Bush by helping to defeat Al Gore in Florida:

‘In fact, the one time in American history a Clinton held the White House, it did not lead to fascism. True, it did lead to a Republican administration, but it wouldn’t have if it weren’t for, among many factors, a Green Party candidate who siphoned off enough votes in Florida to tilt the outcome. The “history of bad things that happen after Clinton presidencies” argument is not a strong justification for Stein’s candidacy. The crisis in Weimar Germany had many causes, but one of them was the Communist Party’s insistence on destroying the Social Democrats. Because the Communists would not support any center-left government coalition, it was impossible to form a parliamentary majority without the Nazis. So whatever lessons about left-wing political strategy we should draw from the Nazi era, “withhold votes from the mainstream party that is the only viable alternative to the far right” is definitely not one of them. What’s most fascinating is that Stein does not try to downplay the danger of a Trump presidency. Instead, she likens it to fascism and Nazism …. And yet, proceeding from her premise that Clintonism will lead to fascism, she concludes that she must “stand up to” both Donald Trump and the only candidate who can prevent Donald Trump from winning the presidency, in equal measure. “Neoliberalism”… leads to fascism, so we might as well skip the neoliberalism step and go straight to the fascism.

Of course, Stein is also lying to herself about her equidistance from Trump and Clinton, since she spends more time and venom attacking Clinton, and is also more damaging to the Democratic candidate by virtue of the Green Party position on the ideological spectrum.

We should attempt to make these references to the late German Weimar Republic more understandable with the help of some crude parallels between then and now. Chait is writing here about the time between the Wall Street stock market crash of 1929 and Hitler’s seizure of power in January 1933, which also corresponded to the international low point of the great depression.

Chait is recalling that the German Communists or KPD, who were controlled by Stalin, insisted on branding the trade-union based, opportunistic, and cowardly Social Democrats or SPD, and not Hitler, as the main enemy. The argument was rather like Stein’s today, with the KPD arguing that the SPD’s lack of militancy, insufficient commitment to class struggle, and track record of betrayals made them, and not Hitler, the most dangerous foes, since they were accused of being the root causes of Hitlerism. So the KPD collaborated both objectively and subjectively with the Nazis, always focusing their attacks on the “social fascists” of the SPD. The result was first ungovernability, and then Hitler’s seizure of power .

Today, the US Democrats are in a position similar to that of the Social Democrats in Weimar. The ultra-left greens have some similarities to the ultra-left KPD, which was a party of the unemployed and the city mob. Trump, of course, corresponds to the Nazis. If the SPD and KPD could have formed a united front with an adequate program against Hitler, Nazism could have been defeated. The insistence of the KPD on attempting to destroy the SPD became a leading cause of the German catastrophe of 1933-1945. We should also point out that Stalin was mainly focused on destroying Germany as part of his plan for exporting revolution through the Red Army. The SPD accepted the democratic Weimar constitution, while the KPD and the Nazis did not. Trump certainly does not accept the US Constitution.

How could so many German voters then, and too many American voters now, except the strategy of “withhold votes from [or actually attack] the mainstream party that is the only viable alternative to the far right.” The recurring depression-era fallacy of setting a trap for Nazism and fascism (or Trump) in the form of state power is so irrational that its causes must be sought less in the area of ideology than among the compulsive mass neuroses of a society in deep crisis, like our own today.5

In the last years before Hitler terminated of the Weimar Republic, and the deposed and exiled Russian revolutionary leader Leon Trotsky wrote a series of pamphlets about the evolution of the German political situation. Trotsky concentrated especially on the destructive effects of Stalin’s “Social Fascism” theory. The KPD leaders were more afraid of the Nazis than they were of the SPD, since the Nazi storm troopers were far more formidable than the middle-aged trade unionists of the SPD self-defense squads. The Nazis exercised a horrible fascination over the KPD, since the former were accustomed to practice more blatant forms of antisocial behavior than the latter could. As for Stalin, he wanted a maximum of destruction in German society of the kind he obtained through the “social fascism” policy, rather than the kind of positive solution which a united front of SPD and KPD could have offered. Stalin, who took total power about a decade earlier than Hitler, regarded the Nazi dictator as his useful tool. Stalin called Hitler “ledokol,” the ice breaker of the revolution, who could bust up central and western Europe and make them ripe for conquest.

In any case, Trotsky had the following to say about the Jill Steins of the KPD and their plan to stop Hitler/Trump by getting him elected president:

‘In one of my previous pamphlets I wrote that the Stalinist bureaucracy was baiting a trap for Hitler – in the guise of state power! The sense of the theory is the following: fascism is growing unrestrainedly; its victory is inevitable in any case; instead of “blindly” throwing ourselves into the struggle and permitting ourselves to be crushed, it is better to retreat cautiously and to allow fascism to seize power and to compromise itself. Then—oh! Then—we will show ourselves!

Adventurism and light-mindedness give way, according to the laws of political psychology, to prostration and capitulation. The victory of the fascists, considered unthinkable the year before, is looked upon as certain today. Some Kuusinen or other [Komintern official], inspired behind the scenes by some Radek or other [Communist operative], is already preparing for Stalin the brilliant strategic formula: retreat in good time, lead the revolutionary troops out of the line of fire, and lay a trap for fascism in the form of … state power…. The leadership of the Comintern is driving the German proletariat toward an enormous catastrophe, the essence of which is panicky capitulation before fascism!’6

Panicky capitulation to Trump fascism is what the Green Party seems to be offering for 2016. As for Jill Stein’s vice presidential running mate Ajamu Baraka, his mass line is that he remains “committed to fighting this corrupt, degenerate, white supremacist monstrosity called the United States”.’7 Donald Trump, the theoretician of national pessimism and “crippled America,” could hardly have said it better.

  1. http://www.democracynow.org/2016/6/9/green_partys_jill_stein_what_we
  2. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/08/04/3804985/7-terrifying-things…
  3. We would stress NAFTA, the wrecking of welfare, and the deregulation of derivatives.
  4. http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/jill-steins-plan-to-stop-tr…
  5. At the Left Forum on May 21, one of Jill Stein’s supporters boasted that “we’re not afraid of any fascist boogey-man.” This recalls the speech to the German Parliament made on October 14, 1931 by Herman Remmele, one of the trio of bureaucrats who at that point were running the KPD. Remmele was fond of saying that Hitler was the best recipe for uniting German workers together – something he and his organization had failed to do. Remmele announced: “We are not afraid of the Fascist gentlemen. They [like Trump] will shoot their bolt quicker than any other government.’ As Trotsky writes, ‘…this programmatic speech is based part and parcel upon capitulation to Fascism. “We are not afraid” of Hitler’s assuming power. What is this, if not the formula of cowardice turned inside out? “We” don’t consider ourselves capable of keeping Hitler from assuming power; worse yet: we bureaucrats have so degenerated as not to dare think seriously of fighting Hitler. Therefore, “we are not afraid”. What don’t you fear: fighting against Hitler? Oh no! they are not afraid of … Hitler’s victory. They are not afraid of refusing to fight. They are not afraid to confess their own cowardice.’ These parallels are uncanny. https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1932/01/whatnext8.htm
  6. https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/germany/1931/311126.htm
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajamu_Baraka
Be Sociable, Share!