The Combination of Fascism and Communism: Smashing the Moderates, before Annihilating Each Other

One of my graduate professors once warned me that Fascism is most likely to occur when prevailing political attitudes have found a common enemy to the extreme-right and the extreme-left. More so, it is the populist demonization of the forces in power that best paves the way for one of these extreme ideologies to take power. While either side might not be aware that they are demonizing the same people, their goal is to rip power from the hands of whoever they fantasize has it and through autocratic means, impose their will. It should be interesting to note that whoever controls the money controls the power, and therefore it is often the liberal capitalistic forces who attract their condemnation. Once the liberal forces have been marginalized, it is of simple nature that the most brutal and single-minded of the remaining players will prevail. Left-wing, secular, communism, is much too complex and fractional to oppose a united fascist front whose main tenet is racism...where economic policy is secondary. It is the mythical elitists who are abhorred by both sides.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.4

Free Market Globalism

In this increasingly globalized world, there are constant tensions between the countries that (have), and the countries that have not. Well at least they are portrayed as tensions. But is there really tension, or is it the release of tension and the necessary growing-pains of globalization that we are witnessing? I view it as the latter.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.4.9

There are two main arguments against globalization. One is that globalization allows economically powerful countries such as the United States to exploit the poor workers of less powerful countries such as India for example. The other argument is that less educated workers in economically powerful countries risk losing their jobs to cheaper labor forces in those aforementioned less powerful countries. While the second argument does have great validity, there are solutions to the problem short of vast economic protectionism (which has been a catalyst for wars in the past). The first argument is much less valid, especially when looking at the validity of the second argument. The reality is that workers in underdeveloped countries have the world to gain from increased globalization, specifically they have higher paying jobs to gain that once belonged to workers in developed nations. I hardly see this as a problem. It is a fact that multinational companies, often originating in first world countries, pay their workers more than competing employers who are indigenous.