"It was Herman Goering, that old Nazi, who said 'People can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders... All you have to do is tell them they're being attacked and denounce the pacifists for a lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.' He's right. It's dead easy" ("The Ordinary Person's Guide To Empire", Arundhati Roy, Harper Perennial, 2004, p114).

According to an analytical viewpoint published by the Frankfurt School, the circle of German-Jewish academics originating in the 1920s: "Scientific rationality thus blends with the imperatives of capitalism and the bureaucratic state". They are "all expressions of instrumental rationality... They turn nature into an object of use, progress into alienation, and freedom into control". Ultimately, these factors end in the barbarities of fascism, as demonstrated by Nazism and industrial-type genocide ("Critical Theory: A Very Short Introduction", Stephen Eric Bronner, Oxford University Press, 2011, p55).

" ...the Web is full of online havens of hate, and there are plenty of New Zealanders in them ... 8Chan hosts global 24/7 chatrooms for subversive subcultures like 'White Power'" ("Christchurch Attack: The New Face Of White Supremacy In New Zealand", www.Newshub.co.nz, 14/5/19).

Neo-Nazis, as on the Daily Stormer Website, cunningly exploit "free speech absolutism, taken to its furthest point, where it can lead to real-life violence. Where humans are hurt". The Neo-Nazis use a two-track approach. "On the one hand, they will seemingly incite violence. On the other, they explicitly say they don't condone violence" (see chapter 15 in "Troll Hunting: Inside The World Of Online Hate And Its Human Fallout", Ginger Gorman, Hardie Grant Books, 2019).

Yale University philosophy professor Jason Stanley says: "There is no question that (US President Donald) Trump is very high on the scale of fascism when it comes to his rhetoric" (Deconstructed Podcast: Is Donald Trump A Fascist?: www.theintercept.com , 9/5/19 ).

"Trump handed one of Europe's most prominent (racist and anti-refugee) populist leaders, (Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban), the endorsement of a White House visit just ten days before the European Union (EU) elections that have been billed as a 'battle for the soul' of the bloc" ("Trump Hosts Orban As Critics Attack Visit", Press, 15/5/19).

London Mayor Sadiq Khan remarks that "President Donald Trump is just one of the most egregious examples of a growing global threat. The far-Right is on the rise around the world, threatening our hard-won rights and freedoms, and the values that have defined our liberal, democratic societies for more than 70 years" ("Donald Trump Is Like A 20th Century Fascist, Says Sadiq Khan", www.theguardian.com, 1/6/19).

"The real danger is if (white supremacist) militant movements become married to State violence. 'That really would be a tremendous problem'" (British rapper, writer, and social critic Akala, interviewed by Philip Matthews, in "'A Dangerously Anti-Intellectual Age'", Press, 11/5/19).

Fascism

The very term evokes for many of us a host of scary, very nasty images and associations. It was supposed to be buried for all intents and purposes with the defeat of the Nazi Third Reich during World War II (WWII). But in these times, it is widely acknowledged that - given the rise of the far-Right in the West, and beyond - fascism is rearing its ugly head again.

As London Mayor Sadiq Khan says, we face the rise of the far-Right, threatening democracy itself, or what's left of it ("Donald Trump Is Like A 20th Century Fascist", op. cit.). Khan was objecting in particular to the presence of President Donald Trump on British soil again. Yet the Trump Administration itself is only one example, if by far the most dramatically influential and dangerous.

We certainly have an enormous challenge on our hands. Given greater corporate control and mounting militarist competition for global resources and investment, the factors driving fascist forces reach from the top to the bottom of Western society (see my "Tackling The 'New Abnormal' Of Dangerous Politics; And Taking Positive, Pre-emptive, And Amelioratory Action", in Peace Researcher 57, June 2019 ).

The Recycling Of Fascism

History can, as it were, repeat itself, albeit in different forms and ways that draw on the legacy of the past. Yet in his excellent study of the rise of fascism back in Europe of the 1920s and 30s, Professor Francis Carsten concludes on a very optimistic note ("The Rise Of Fascism", Batsford Academic and Educational Ltd, 1967/1980, p258).

Published originally in 1967, with a second edition in 1980, Carsten's book observed that so far attempts at fascist revival had failed. The good Professor noted that: "The neofascist parties have been able to exploit exceptional circumstances, such as the extreme poverty of the Italian south, or the racial issue in Britain; but even then their leaders proved unable to arouse the masses as their predecessors did so successfully" (ibid.).

Carsten went on to say that: "In Germany, as well as in Italy, traditional Christian Democratic parties have succeeded in integrating the conservative Right and the propertied classes, which have become reconciled to the democratic order. The working classes, too, have been integrated into the existing social order and no longer pose a threat to the middle and lower middle classes" (as they had seemed to do when "Bolshevism" was on the march).

Professor Carsten ended his study with the expressed hope that: "The whole political and social climate has changed to such an extent that a fascist revival, in any way similar to that of the 1930s, seems extremely unlikely" (ibid.). Well, in light of all the unrest and volatility in Europe today, with Brexit, widespread activist racist and anti-immigrant groups, "yellow vest" protests (mixed in political motivation) in France, etc., we confront both a dangerous fascist movement on the rise, and the conditions for its continuance and growth. As indicated above, these factors link with Trumpism in the US, and with other very disturbing manifestations in the West, and beyond.

Terrorism Hits Home!

For New Zealanders, the sudden violent advent of fascism in our midst was dramatically and horrifically signalled on 15 March, 2019, by the terrorist attacks on two Christchurch mosques (Christchurch Mosque Shootings, Wikipedia,). The seemingly distant spectre of white supremacist hate had suddenly become a savage reality. In Aotearoa/NZ, we are still trying to come to grips with all the implications of this momentous event, and how to effectively respond, both in the short and longer terms.

In order to effectively counter the rise of fascism in the West and beyond, we must strive to understand the forces behind its increasing momentum, and what collective actions are required to address its causes. For some of us, on a planet where the very biosphere for viable human lifestyles is under attack from ever growing global capitalism, fascism is just the very so predictable further stage of mounting competition and conflict, both within and between countries.

So, ultimately to comprehensively defeat fascist forces, we need a whole positive transformation of society, certainly a transition to a fossil-free future as so many non-government organisations (NGOs) are currently calling for - especially the representatives of youth activism on climate change. After all, the struggle over the fossil energy resources of the Middle East has been the very cockpit of so many of the forces driving the rise of neo-fascism in the West in recent decades ("Why Trump Now? It's The Empire, Stupid", www.thenation.com, 9/6/16; "Shadow Wars - The Secret Struggle For The Middle East", Scoop News, www.scoop.co.nz, 19/3/19).

But, in the interim, we have to deal with the immediate realities and threats now posed by neo-fascism and its ramifications. In my June 2019 PR 57 article, I deal with both the issues of Western fossil fuel imperialism (as especially exemplified by the case of Venezuela), and the immediate challenges we face in containing fascism and ensuring its diminution ("Tackling The 'New Abnormal' Of Dangerous Politics", op. cit.).

From One Contrived Crisis to Another

By June 2019, the Trump Administration had engineered yet another artificially contrived major Middle East crisis. Trump & co were ramping up a very perilous confrontation with Iran, which they have viciously and malignly concocted. It all constitutes a threat to peace, totally out of order under any kind of pretext, and yet another violation of "international rules". Yet, a huge irony and problem for the US is the fact of Iranian support for the Shiite regime in Iraq, levered into power by the illegal 2003 US-led invasion.

Earlier, during the period 1980-88, following the invasion of Iran by Iraq, Saddam Hussein's "brutal and appalling" behaviour chimed in nicely with the geopolitical objectives of the Ronald Reagan/George H Bush Administrations. After all, "he was an American ally fighting a war against the regime of the ayatollahs in Iran..." ("Lawless World: America And The Making And Breaking Of Global Rules", Philippe Sands, Allen Lane/Penguin, 2005, p187).

Geopolitical contortions have upended American militarist machinations. "Iraq, long viewed as a proxy battlefield between Iran and the US and its allies, rejected the strident tone of the Arab League's final statement" at a June 2019 conference, intended by the Saudis & co. to rally support against Iran ("Saudi Call For Anti-Iran Alliance Divides Arabs", Press, 2/6/19). Iraq's President "insisted Iran's security must not be threatened" (ibid.).

Neo-Liberals, Neo-Cons, Far-Rightists, Fascists, And Fiasco!

The American "neoconservative ideologues", who orchestrated the 2003 invasion (of Iraq), plunged the US "into a war in a part of the world they didn't understand" ("Fiasco: The American Military Adventure In Iraq", Allen Lane/Penguin, 2006, p87). The outcomes, still unfolding, have been awful. Meantime, America's hold over a badly divided Iraq is tenuous and vulnerable.

It can certainly be said that the American so-called "neo-cons" are euphemistically labelled. In truth, they are foreign policy neo-fascists, and have just been another recurrent expression of a long US tradition. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush senior oversaw their reign back in the 1980s. Later below, I shall pick up on one of the former Reaganites, Grover Norquist, who is still very much a far-Right activist. Norquist recently visited NZ/Aotearoa to link up with the neo-liberal National Party and like-minded groups.

He came here as a guest of the NZ Taxpayers' Union (NZTU), a key ginger group for the National Party, and a far-Right agent in conjunction with the tiny ACT Party. The NZTU is a powerfully funded and connected outfit, which operates as a lobby group for tax cuts, deregulation, privatisation, and the protection of property rights for the rich and privileged.

Contempt For The "Rules-Based International Order"

The US had triggered the current crisis in the Persian Gulf in 2018, by unilaterally pulling out of a vital nuclear agreement with Iran. America has contemptuously dismissed the legitimate concerns of the rest of the participants, including the other four permanent United Nations (UN) Security Council members, along with the European Union (EU). They considered the agreement to be working well in the circumstances.

Instead, the US cavalierly imposed illegal economic sanctions on Iran, on which it is now doubling down, hoping to cripple this country, and hurt its inhabitants as much as possible. The world's biggest and worst rogue state has very coldly and deliberately precipitated the current crisis in the Gulf. Quite unashamedly, it even wants to worsen this crisis.

In late June 2019, after the Iranians had shot down an American surveillance drone actually in, or very near their territorial waters, Trump ordered a retaliatory strike on some Iranian defences, apparently several radar facilities. Fortunately, Trump thought better about what he was doing just in time. Ensuing events could have cannoned out of control. That is how close the sword of Damocles hangs over everyone today!! Both Russia and China have warned the US against attacking Iran. Both these two big powers, of course, are permanent UN Security Council members, and so, parties to the Iran nuclear deal. It follows that they are well within their rights to tell the American rogue state to piss off from threatening Iran in the Persian Gulf.

Fearful Furious And Fumbling Follies!

In 2019, as indicated, imperial America has been fully engaged in further destabilisation of the Middle East. At the time of writing (end of June 2019), the obscene threats of full-on violence against Shiite Iran by the Trump Administration thankfully remain just threats. Just as he has promised to deliver hellfire in any armed conflict with North Korea, President Donald Trump proudly proclaims that Iran would face "obliteration" if war were to break out. We are now regularly treated to his vile Hitler-like rants, along with his mad Twittering.

There are plenty of disturbing signs and incidents, including hostile exchanges of verbal fireworks. They are matched by an ongoing American military build-up in the Persian Gulf area. All this is very ominous, with the risks of miscalculation mounting (e.g., "US And Iran Move Closer To Flashpoint", Press, 19/6/19). There has been a process of accumulating tension to the latest bout of very scary conflict. In a recent reaction to Trumpist bullying, Iran decided to continue with its uranium enrichment programme, which had been suspended under the existing deal (ibid.).

Trump & co. are so hypocritically malicious that the Administration has called Iran's decision "a challenge to international norms" (ibid.). How bizarre, but so very predictable! With the UN warning of dire consequences in the event of any open hostilities and desperately trying to mediate a peaceful, constructive solution, people of goodwill around the world need to rally to its support more than ever. America's neo-fascist warmongering poses an immense threat to us all.

On The Imperial Firing Line

Here in NZ we can be relieved that our troops are withdrawing from their mission of training Iraqi soldiers in the fight against Islamic State (ISIS), with a deadline of all out by June 2020 ("NZ Troops To Exit Iraq", Press, 11/6/19). But they could yet get caught up in the conflicts arising from any US-Iran military engagement. A contingent of NZ troops will stay in Afghanistan "until at least December 2020 under a new form" [of assistance to the regime there] (ibid.).

Significantly, however, and ironically as well, Afghan villagers involved in the Government's Operation Burnham Inquiry no longer want to participate in any form, being "completely disillusioned" with the Inquiry (Stuff, 18/6/19, "Afghan Villagers Pull Out Of Operation Burnham Inquiry Into SAS Raid").

This inquiry was sparked by the book "Hit & Run: The New Zealand SAS* In Afghanistan And The Meaning Of Honour", by Nicky Hager & Jon Stephenson (Potton & Burton, 2017**), which investigated in searing detail a joint US/NZ special forces helicopter-borne raid, conducted at night, on two remote Afghan villages. "Operation Burnham" was a typical US/North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)-orchestrated "kill or capture" death squad operation (ibid.). *SAS= Special Air Service. **The book was reviewed by Jeremy Agar in Watchdog 145, August 2017. Ed.

Oh, What A Tangled Web Terrorism Can Weave!

As a so-called "Five Eyes" international electronic spy alliance member, NZ is again deeply compromised in its claim to uphold human rights and a "rules-based international order". It cannot even conduct a proper and fair inquiry into probable war crimes committed in one of the poorest and most tragically conflict-torn countries in the world - a country viciously victimised by great power geopolitical confrontation. The Human Rights Foundation and other concerned groups have panned the secretive and restricted procedures and process of this Inquiry.

Sadly enough, the Government-mandated Inquiry seems to be turning into a farce. As usual, civilian deaths in the course of Western State terrorist operations are apparently just so much "collateral damage". Such murderous strategy has obvious implications and impetus for the motivation of insurgency and its further continuous recruitment. So, what does this policy and practice mean too for the warped motivation of white supremacists like the terrorist mass murderer of civilians at Christchurch mosques in March 2019?

From complicity in the US-orchestrated Indonesian genocide of 1965-70 to hit and run attacks on poor, very vulnerable Afghan villages, NZ has a very worrisome record of participation in Anglo-American State terrorism. This is not even taking into account here its willingness to conform to all the egregious war crimes and human rights' abuses perpetrated by its allies since the end of WWII.

Paying Our Dues

To be sure, NZ has long been on the imperial firing line, paying its dues as a member of the “Five Eyes” intelligence/covert action club, so bloodied with barbarous behaviour. But, hey, don't mention this to so many of our politicians, bureaucrats, media propagandists, etc., since it would deeply offend their eminently self-serving hypocrisy and selective morality!

An officially mandated mantra of the so-called "War on Terror" has been that we in the West have to fight Muslim jihadis where they live, rather than letting them come here. The Australian terrorist who attacked defenceless attendees at mosques in Christchurch would say he is defending our way of life from such invaders on our very own home soil. For such white supremacists, this is "Homeland Security" in action!

So, in this way, the terroristic "War on Terror" can spawn and spur on evil killers within our midst. Human rights must apply everywhere. The neo-fascist foreign policy terrorism of the "War On Terror" connects with the obviously illegal domestic terrorism of such people as the mosque gunman, however indirectly and perversely transmitted.

A Predatory Beast On The Loose!

Blowback from Western imperialism and State terrorism takes many forms. The illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq, in fact, led directly to the formation of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and its Sunni caliphate warriors. Later, Shiite Iranian gains in Iraq were furthered by helping Baghdad in its fight against ISIS. Such are the contradictions of predatory imperialism! And, as always, the real victims are the ordinary civilians of the region.

Given aggressive American posturing in the Persian Gulf, and on other fronts in the Middle East, and at various potential flashpoints further afield, the risks of global conflagration remain very high. On top of ratcheted up economic sanctions and other belligerent measures, the US continues to make allegations about Iranian attacks on passing oil tankers ("US Allies Press For More Proof On Tanker Attacks", Press, 18/6/19).

In actuality, in this situation, there is the very high risk of a "Gulf of Tonkin"-type "incident" (August 2, 1964) happening in the Straits of Hormuz, or thereabouts, giving the US an artificially contrived excuse for war. Notoriously, this was the case with the former North Vietnam in the mid-1960s (Gulf Of Tonkin Incident, Wikipedia).

North Vietnam, like Iran today, had been defending its coasts and territorial waters from the intrusions of a malevolently dangerous enemy. We know that the crazy, warmongering National Security Adviser (NSA) John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Republican Party Senator Lindsey Graham, and their mates are cavalierly trigger-happy; and careless of both human life and geopolitical consequences, whenever and wherever they see their touted interests at risk.

Fascist-Style Flouting Of International Rules And Law

They are, indeed, contemptuous in general of international rules and law in typical neo-Nazi fashion, with NSA Bolton openly hostile to the UN for many years. Zombie, brain-dead Bolton is a gung-ho proponent of rampant bullying aggression, whether violently or otherwise. Ideally, John Bolton wants to do this in collaboration with any other like-minded nations. Hence, the current confrontations with Iran and Venezuela; a host of conflicts and disputes with other countries; imposition of economic sanctions; trade wars; covert dirty work, including special forces' "ops", drone warfare; etc., etc. Geopolitical Social Darwinism unleashed!

Bolton flaunts what he calls "a hunting licence" in the Middle East for the US. Ironically, and most hypocritically, he used this specific phrase in regard to Iran. Meanwhile, Mike Pompeo is horribly confused. He labels Iran as "the world's largest State sponsor of terror", confounding Iran with the US's leading State terrorist role and his own pernicious part in this role ("Pompeo Confronts Dual Crises", Press, 25/6/19, an article reproduced from the Washington Post, on the US-contrived Iranian and North Korean crises).

Compounding Geopolitical Confrontations

The confrontations with Iran and Venezuela are clear examples of the calculated US strategy of bypassing the UN, and brazenly violating international law. But, as already indicated, the Trump Administration can cynically appeal to international law and rules, wherever and whenever it suits. Take another example in its conflict with Iran. The US is appealing to the right of passage "through the international waters of the Straits of Hormuz" ("US Allies Press For More Proof", op. cit.). Open war on either Iran or Venezuela would be a major step down into the pits of hellfire, unleashing multiple adverse consequences!

As we have also noted, by late June 2019, violent incidents in the Straits of Hormuz were inducing some very dangerous brinkmanship between the US and Iran (ibid.). By the last week of June, Trump & co. had launched cyber-attacks on Iran in their latest round of aggression. We need our Government and as many others as possible calling for restraint, mediation, and peace-making. Meantime, the US is trampling all over the touted "rules-based international order". If this order is to mean anything, we must absolutely stand by the UN and what it represents.

National Moves More To The Right

Yet, already, the Rightwing National Party is indicating that it will align more closely with the neo-fascism of the Trump Administration, thus flagrantly flouting the rules of the international order while at the same time claiming to uphold them ("National Want Free Trade Agreement With The US, Bypass UN For Sanctions", Stuff, 20/5/19). Orwellian hypocrisy has long been a hallmark of the National Party.

In its unashamed embrace of American Social Darwinism, National would break with "NZ's tradition of supporting large rules-based multilateral organisations (my emphasis). A pledge to pass an Autonomous Sanctions Bill to Parliament that would allow NZ to impose sanctions on countries itself, outside of the UN sanctions regime" (ibid.).

For such a policy to be meaningful, of course, NZ would require the backing of the US. In practice, it would really just mean NZ obsequiously clutching to Uncle Sam's coat-tails, and those of any other strong-armed mates! So, National is openly declaring its intention of joining the US in undermining the UN, and the "rules-based international order". National has long been largely morally bankrupt on foreign policy. To be sure, National's latest foreign policy moves are so very predictable, however disturbing these moves may be. The Party's unethical foreign policy has also been closely tied to its domestic policy over the years.

"Dirty Politics" And Corporate Globalism

National has a pernicious record of "Dirty Politics"; close alliance with American Republican Party strategy and tactics; targeted personal attacks; and calculatedly cynical and unprincipled "Gotcha"-style behaviour (see especially: "Dirty Politics: How Attack Politics Is Poisoning New Zealand's Political Environment", Nicky Hager, Craig Potton Publishing, 2014. Reviewed by Jeremy Agar in Watchdog 137, December 2014. Ed.).

In general, however, National has the mainstream media in its pocket for all intents and purposes. But there is yet quite a widespread recognition these days that the Party needs its leadership image refurbished in order to get back into office. In NZ/Aotearoa, the mana of PM Jacinda Ardern continues to ride high. Of late, a quite stunning insight into how corporate globalism pulls the strings of power politics has been provided by the crony media and certain elements of the National Party in promoting a possible new future Leader. A current non-member, retiring Air NZ Chief Executive Officer, Christopher Luxon, is already being encouraged and groomed by some for the role. He might well be parachuted into the top ranks of the Party in the next election!

Given the Rightwing's version of democracy, we see here again how easily fascism can be facilitated if conducive conditions were to arise for this in the future. Luxon, who describes himself as a centrist, is certainly not a candidate sporting far-Right credentials. But, depending on the nature of globalist trends, a person pitching that sort of appeal could emerge. And the international situation is increasingly volatile and unstable.

National & Media Persevere With Poisonous Personality Politics

Meanwhile, the mainstream media continue to push Judith Collins as the principal candidate to replace a struggling Simon Bridges as National's Leader. For the neo-liberal media, Collins has excellent credentials. She was at the heart of "Dirty Politics" (ibid.). She carries the contamination of charges of corrupt, crony politics a la the Oravida company.

Collins even sports an anti-environmental aura, associated with such things as total opposition to the Resource Management Act (RMA), blessed by Oravida's destructive mining of ancient swamp kauri. Of course, for a really transformational change to a genuinely sustainable "doughnut" type of economy in order to cope with, and hopefully reduce, global warming, we need a transition that would greatly improve the RMA, not abolish it! But the corporate media constantly undermine and contradict their own "greenwash" posturing.

A graphic illustration of how the crony, foreign-owned, Rightwing media so often operate to both generate negativity for the Left and promote the Right was provided in one of the Press's recent Saturday editions (29/6/19). In its Saturday editions, the Press regularly runs Rightwing attack articles on the Coalition Government, and/or "promo" pieces for the National Party.

Two crony National Party-aligned journalists Duncan Garner and Stacey Kirk figure prominently on the page opposite the editorial page. In this particular Press edition, Garner pitched his usual attack on the Government, targeting selected Ministers (then then Housing Minister Phil) "Twyford's In Naughty Corner, But He's Not The Only Culprit", ibid.). On the other hand, Kirk did an updated "puff-piece" for Judith Collins ("Beware The Cheshire Cat When She Purrs", ibid.). Her angle was to put a positive spin on Collins's record of "Dirty Politics". She paints a picture of Collins being "weirdly endearing"; "so entertaining"; "mischievous"; "combative"; and smirking freely (ibid.).

The Poison Of Negative Attack Politics

Stacey Kirk concludes her piece with the remark that "good branding" has possibly enabled Judith Collins to get "away with so much over the years"; and that it will be hard "to keep her in her place" (ibid.). In actuality, "Dirty Politics" Collins has been long protected and promoted by crony Rightwing journalists like Kirk herself! Also, in the same edition of The Press, reporter Collette Devlin had a go at Immigration Minister Iain Lees-Galloway ("Why Lees-Galloway Escaped Demotion", ibid.). In Devlin's opinion, this Minister should have been demoted because he supposedly made a mess of the so-called Karel Sroubek case (ibid.).

Without going into unnecessary details for the purposes of this article, the Sroubek case concerned a Czech immigrant, who became the prime subject of ongoing controversy for months on end in 2018, and even into early 2019. Sroubek had criminal associations and convictions. Indeed, this immigration affair remains a simmering issue (ibid.).

In fact, the case is another especially egregious example of the crony corporate media at work. It got hugely inordinate publicity because it has been seen as potentially yet another big hit on a Government Minister, and maybe even reaching right up to implicate PM Jacinda Ardern, who constitutes the main stumbling block for National and its glove-puppet media operatives. She is ultimately the prime target.

Whatever mistakes that Immigration Minister Lees-Galloway might have made in his handling of the Sroubek case, they have been relatively minor when placed in context. There was conflicting evidence and certain complex considerations to take into account at different stages of the process of this specific immigration issue. Indeed, the whole saga had started back under the previous National government. But, of course, National has escaped any blame courtesy of its crony media.

Crony Corporate Media Crap!

To be sure, Press reporter Collette Devlin in her article still maliciously and unjustifiably continues to even try and pin some blame on PM Ardern (ibid.). Having personally seen this particular case play out in Parliament, I can testify that so many of National's allegations, as amplified in conjunction with the media, are just specious crap. National's touted "hits" on Immigration Minister Lees-Galloway and the Government, as gleefully celebrated by Devlin, amount to an orchestrated, cynical beat-up (ibid.).

Time and again, National's use of its crony media succeeds in turning relatively mere "nit picking" into major controversies. Such stuff is typical of the crony corporate media. From long observance of Parliament at work (as shown on Parliament TV), one can only continually marvel at the calculated bias of how the media spin so many issues.

The democratic principle of holding Ministers and the Government to account has become so much a cover for another form of "Dirty Politics", a "Gotcha"-style syndrome that is more and more coming to resemble the "trolling" of the "alt-Right" & co. As Deputy PM Winston Peters observed more than once during Parliamentary debates, National during its nine years in office had lots of potentially controversial immigration cases that were so selectively ignored by the media. A similar kind of public frenzy could have been worked up over some such cases.

Covert Dirty Work And A Deeper Corporate Game Afoot

Why then are the mainstream media still running to some extent with the Sroubek case? Well, it so very obviously fits in with National's campaign against the UN's Global Compact on Migration, and its connections with the far-Right (e.g., New Conservative press release, "Karel Sroubek And The Compact On Migration", Scoop, 7/12/18).

Sroubek's former wife had even become the partner of a National Party member, thus providing a direct link to this Party ("The Dirty Politics Of Beating Up On Karel Sroubek", https://thestandard.org.nz, 14/11/18 ). To recap on a point made above, reporter Collette Devlin herself notes that "the case gave the Opposition ammunition for many hits on the Government" (my emphasis), and saw National call on Ardern to sack him. Naturally, Devlin omits in her article anything likely to embarrass National!

So, let's get this right then - the world is going to hell with global warning, collapsing ecosystems, trade wars, mounting resource conflicts; increasing inequality, etc., etc. We are trembling on the brink of nuclear annihilation, as signalled by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists and a host of other peace/anti-nuclear groups. Yet we finally have a Government here in Aotearoa/NZ, whose Leader has gained international respect for broadcasting peace and compassion; and a programme trying to deal with a raft of urgent issues that National buried, or denied.

The Coalition Government is making some really positive moves for a more cooperative and sustainable future, whatever criticisms we might make of it Why then are National and its crony media so malevolent and nasty in their politics? The answer is staring us in the face - because of the vested corporate interests that they represent, and their short-sighted suicidal stupidity!

Some Sticky Conundrums For The Right

Some conservative journalists are now even agonising over the problems faced by National. For instance, a senior Press reporter, Martin van Beynen, who defines himself as a "Rightwing public intellectual", has recently opined about: "The Crisis Confronting The NZ Right" (Press, in the same edition cited above, featuring the attacks on Government Ministers, and the "promo puff" piece for Opposition MP, Judith Collins, ibid.).

Van Beynen notes that: "Around the world old school conservative parties are in trouble. In the US, Donald Trump has rewritten the Republican rule book, and in Britain, Nigel Farage's Brexit Party is more popular than the Tories. These outliers have replaced traditional conservatism with a populist agenda" (ibid.). He goes on to observe that: "Forms of this populism" are sweeping much of Europe. He aptly comments that the Rightwing populism taking hold in the West generally means "an appeal to gut reactions about race, national culture, class, immigration, and globalisation" (ibid.). This sort of populism often appeals to a mythical past.

So far, van Beynen's observations, as reproduced here, are well on the mark. But, then, his own Rightwing bias derails him with his suggestion that: "If National turned populist", it would not only revive Don Brash-type attacks on "Maori and Maori culture"... but also that: "another fertile target would be the indisputably Leftwing media and academia" (my emphasis), along with various other tactics, e.g. anti-immigrant policies (ibid.).

With regard to Brash, van Beynen coyly avoids any characterisation of this politician's approach as "racist". At this point in his article, van Beynen also gives us yet another insight as to how the political Left, Right, and Centre are defined in practice by the mainstream media! But he is right about the dilemmas now faced by traditional conservatism, especially given the social trend to "growing inequality" (ibid.). Note here the relevance of the observations made by Professor Francis Carsten at the start of my article as to how conservative parties in Europe had managed to obviate the further growth of neo-fascism (at least by 1980). In 2019 and beyond, however, we face new challenges and threats.

White Supremacy And Anti-Immigrant Ideology

In his Press opinion piece, Martin van Beynen so very conveniently overlooked the fact that in the months leading up to the mosque terrorist attacks in Christchurch/Otautahi, National had, in fact, been running an anti-immigrant campaign, generated by white supremacist groups overseas. It had been both picked up by like-minded activist groups in Aotearoa/NZ, as well as generating further participation and action.

For sure, National had brazenly participated in the far-Right campaign against the new UN immigration pact until the mosque terrorist attacks elicited a hasty back-down and bumbling public relations.

Then again later, on the last day of June 2019 (cut-off point for this article), the anti-immigrant campaign against the UN's Migration Pact really blew back in National's face. This was the result of some very good investigative reporting. Most hearteningly, the episode demonstrated that elements of the mainstream mass media can still conduct at times some critical, independent scrutiny of dark politics.

Patrick Gower, now a roving political reporter for TV3, gave us the news that white racist anti-immigrant groups, both here and overseas, had even threatened death to our Deputy PM Winston Peters ( Newshub Live At 6pm, 30/6/19). In response to the revelations of these death threats, Peters called for the resignation of National Leader Simon Bridges, who had faithfully echoed the propaganda of the Austrian "identitarian" leader Martin Sellner (ibid.). Both Sellner and the NZ racist leader Philip Arps, who were named in the TV3 report, are vicious neo-Nazis.

Thankfully, Arps is now in prison, convicted for callously and exultantly livestreaming the terrorist video of the Christchurch mosque attacks. Chillingly, there are a disturbing number of his ilk in NZ/Aotearoa. At an open-air rally just seven weeks before the mosque mass murders, Arps had blatantly called for Peter's death to calls of "Hang him" from supporters (ibid.). He himself had made a throat-slitting gesture.

National's Far-Right Aspects Lurching Into Full View!

Meantime, National Leader Simon Bridges remains brazenly unfazed and unashamed, saying that NZ, and not the UN, should decide our immigration policy (ibid.). The international racist campaign has quite wrongly and maliciously alleged that the UN agreement is binding on countries. Deputy PM Peters has expressed concern that there are now just too many connections manifested between National and the far-Right (ibid.). This interactive political nexus is indeed dangerous for the NZ style of politics.

Ironically, too, National - when formerly in Government - had originally gone along with this agreement. But, nowadays, Bridges still asserts that National would overturn our Government's adherence to the UN Pact, if National were to be elected (ibid.). National was in office during 2008 to 2017, and very few refugees were accepted from the Middle East and Africa. There is a call for the present Coalition Government to increase the refugee quota, with a boost in proportion for those regions which have suffered discrimination in the past.

It is noteworthy, indeed, that the Australian mosque terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, who struck so savagely in Christchurch in March 2019, had communications with the Austrian neo-Nazi leader Martin Sellner. They both share the same sort of ideology. In the present era, a global neo-fascist network is operative. This pernicious network is even having a clearly increasing influence on a number of our own politicians. Winston Peters has most fittingly called on our Police, intelligence, and security agencies to investigate the activities of the far-Right in NZ.

To be fair, since the horrendous terrorist attacks on the two Christchurch mosques, the mainstream media have done a pretty good job in addressing problems of white racism. They have called out anti-Muslim prejudice and activism with some often very good and searching journalism. The latest revelations are of great significance (ibid.).

Given its record, and its far-Right connections, National should yet be a focus of real concern and closer scrutiny. Besides its far-Right connections, the Party has put itself very much at odds with the UN and the "rules-based international order" in several spheres. National rejects the UN Migration Pact. It would work with the US on the imposition of arbitrary, illegal economic sanctions, again contrary to the UN.

Busting And Blasting Apart Parliamentary Democracy

National's brazenly unethical behaviour was most recently demonstrated again in June 2019. As the Parliamentary Opposition, the Party gained "unauthorised access" to Budget information from the Treasury's computer storage system. Heated controversy ensued, with spurious charges being directed against the Government. These charges centred on the Government's initial use of the term "hack" in regard to the National Party, and just exactly when the Government informed the NZ public that the "unauthorised access" was not a "hack", as technically understood.

National gleefully revealed on Budget day that it was indeed responsible for the breach of Treasury's Budget information, claiming this material was gained by a legitimate online search. But there were about 2000 systematically directed attempts to get this unauthorised information. National's whole exercise was thus simply intended to cause the maximum embarrassment to the Government, and thus spoil the presentation of its ground-breaking "wellbeing" Budget.

This controversy was fuelled by much of the mainstream media, especially the TV channels, which so often operate as the glove puppets of the National Party. Instead of calling out National for its schoolboy-type prank, and possibly even criminal breach of "unauthorised access", the Rightwing media focused on whether the Government had bungled, or whether it had misused the term "hack".

During this particular controversy, the question was even raised as to whether our allies had got concerned about a possible serious breach of Government security ("Budget 'Hack' Reached Five Eyes", Press, 13/6/19). However, some telling alternative commentary was still registered by certain critics (e.g. "National's Budget Leaks Go Against Security Agency's Advice And Treasury Breach Was Unlawful, Lawyers Say", Stuff, 30/5/19).

Indeed, Deputy PM Winston Peters hammered away in Parliament at National's breach of Treasury's computer security, charging the Party with illegal access (viz. sections 249 & 252 of the NZ Crimes Act), e.g., on 27th June 2019 (Parliament TV). However, as usual, the mainstream media have unsurprisingly paid very little attention to such matters.

Subverting Democracy With Our Future At Stake

It should be stressed here that further development and elaboration of the type of Budget accounting approach put forward by the Government will be vital in trying to make a transition to a more cooperative and sustainable future. Lamentably, however, National's cynically contrived disruptive leak of Budget information typifies its members' performance in Parliament. As a Rightwing party, National has a vested interest in spoiling wellbeing for the general populace!

The duty of the National Party under a protocol previously set up by its now Leader Simon Bridges, when earlier in Government, actually binds the Party in Opposition to notify governmental institutions and agencies about the detection of a security breach. But National and its crony media never worry about such obligations and ethics if the opportunity arises to launch negative ploys against the political Left.

They were hoping to get the scalp of the Minister of Finance, but only partially bagged the already retiring Secretary of Treasury, Gabriel Makhlouf. In the circumstances, any sense of decency and fair play went right out of the window! National was only too happy to try and kick the guts out of a civil servant, who had served it loyally and professionally in the past. Makhlouf went off to head Ireland's Central Bank.

All in all, when National's record and various derelictions - both domestic and in foreign policy - are checked over, a distinctive anti-democratic pattern is clearly evident. We stand warned, in light of a background of worrying globalist trends. Time and again, National MPs demonstrate contempt for Parliamentary procedures and the conduct of proper civilised debate, thus subverting democracy in the broader sense. As repeatedly stressed, National's move further to the Right in terms of behaviour and policy mirrors wider trends in the West, and the connections are growing.

Hardline Rightist capitalist forces are hellbent in defence of their wealth and privilege on disrupting any progress for wider civic participation and social justice! As socio-economic divisions deepen, linkages are developing between certain elements of the corporate elite and the more aggressive foot soldiers of Rightwing extremism.

Peddling Rabid Racism!

In the wake of the mosque terrorist attacks, the tiny far-Right ACT Party, which has only one Member in Parliament, has deliberately set itself against the measures being taken by the Government to try and prevent further terrorist attacks. ACT's lone MP, Leader David Seymour, aka "The Weasel", is now malevolently and openly appealing to white supremacists by calling for more licence for "hate speech". This was even noted by TV3 reporters (Newshub Nation, TV3, 16/6/19).

Quite unashamedly and callously, Seymour even wants existing penalties and curbs on racism to be removed. Seymour is proposing a so-called "Freedom to Speak Bill" (that) would remove section 61 of the Human Rights Act, which makes it illegal to publish, broadcast, or say "matter which is threatening, abusive, or insulting... likely to excite hostility against or bring into contempt any group of persons in, or who may be coming to NZ on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national origins" (Press, 28/6/19).

Seymour was given space to state his views in a debate presented by the Press under the heading: "Freedom Of Speech: Does A Little-Used Part Of The Human Rights Act Need Updating?" (ibid.). The person defending a review and possible anti-hate speech amendments was Andrew Little, the Minister for Justice. So, the Government is instead looking to strengthen the law, if appropriate.

Yet it would ensure that the criminal law "will only ever deal with the most extreme cases, and does not define what is acceptable to us as a society" (ibid.). Thankfully, human rights groups, including the NZ Council for Civil Liberties, have weighed in against Seymour's Bill ("David Seymour Faces Backlash Over Freedom To Speak Bill", Newshub, 15/6/19).

Pushing Self-Promotion And Publicity Power

"Weasel" Seymour is also, even so very malevolently and outrageously, calling for the abolition of the Human Rights Commission. Most significantly, however, Opposition Leader Simon Bridges finds Seymour's free speech proposals "alluring"! (my emphasis). Ironically, the ACT MP wants immigrants, including refugees, to take a pledge on our national values, however these might be determined!

Yet again: "As a Member's Bill, Seymour's proposed changes will go into the ballot, and will only be discussed in Parliament if they're randomly drawn" (ibid.). So, the media have gratuitously given Seymour a heap of publicity and space for his views about a proposal that well may not be debated at all in Parliament, except when Seymour himself gets to speak during the Government's review. They have perversely aired arguments that would actually reduce freedom of speech, let alone other human rights. They are helping to give hate speech, however indirectly, some pseudo credibility.

Hate speech is meant to intimidate and cower people, and so curb free expression. ACT's stance fits with that of the far-Right generally, and the more extreme racist, neo-fascist, "alt-Right", identitarian, etc., manifestations. The far-Right in these forms has made the cause of what it construes as "free speech" a core issue since they want to push forward the most vile stuff under this rubric ("Tackling The 'New Abnormal' Of Dangerous Politics", op. cit.). Seymour was actually lucky to get a Private Member's Bill on the promotion of euthanasia drawn from the ballot some time ago, and currently get this Bill considered in full discussion by Parliament.

In this particular case, the Bill ultimately comes down to a conscience vote and might even be passed. In the same issue of the Press as the free speech debate, an editorial on the euthanasia Bill featured a photo of a grinning Seymour, giving a Winston Churchill-style two-fingered salute ("Life And Death Up For Debate", op. cit.). The corporate mainstream media have long given the obnoxious and narcissistic Seymour grossly inordinate attention because he not only reflects their prevailing neo-liberal ideology, but ACT is also a vital coalition partner for National to get back into power. Corporate crony media rules, ok!?

Weaselling Around Parliament

Newspapers and TV channels regularly feature the opinions and photo (or image) of this lone ACT MP. Again, as a habitual viewer of Parliament TV, I can testify that Seymour's democratic pretensions are so much humbug. He is so often absent for debates and voting that he is obviously a joke. To be sure, "The Weasel" constantly spends his time seeking media attention as much as possible, hanging out in Parliament's foyer to talk with crony Press Gallery journalists. He was such an idiot on one occasion (2/4/19) that he even failed to get to the Chamber for a crucial vote. Seymour had hoped to hold up a Bill.

As with his current defence of hate speech, Seymour's callousness towards the victims of the mosques was grossly and unpleasantly evident on this particular occasion. You see, he had been grandstanding against the bill reforming gun law. This Bill, now passed into law, is intended to reduce the risks of domestic terrorism by banning dangerous automatic weapons.

Even in his Parliamentary rhetoric, David Seymour has made clear that he and his Party are just poseurs at democracy. ACT represents freedom for the few. Such sentiments are a reflection of the style of leadership coming to dominate even more in the "free world", as the standards of democracy, freedom, and human rights deteriorate further; and neo-fascism continues to raise its ugly head.

In sum, it can aptly be said that David Seymour is literally a waste of space in Parliament. Many of us would be very pleased not to see any more of him at all, and get rid of ACT altogether! To reiterate, that the media give him so much attention is a damning reflection on their own pretensions, and an insight into the vested interests, which own, control, and influence them. One can compare this sort of selective media bias with the same media's pervasive discrimination against the Left.

Gerrymandering Democracy

In these times, the far-Right in all its manifestations - from corporate-sponsored "libertarian" posturing and preening, and on to the ugly racist extremism of the neo-fascists - combine to represent a real threat to democracy. This is especially so, given the trends to corporate concentration, coupled with greater governmental surveillance, and authoritarian regulation and regimentation of the citizenry.

Conditions conducive to the growth of fascism can be diverse, multiple, interactive, and compounding. Besides the obvious factors of poverty and deprivation; increasing inequalities; frustrated material expectations, especially within the lower middle-class; perceived threats to jobs and livelihoods from immigrants and/or other ethnic groups; etc., there is a range of other relevant factors.

In his excoriating study of the National Party, our top investigative journalist Nicky Hager exposed a systematic pattern of poisonous "Dirty Politics", and a deep game of reducing democratic participation, especially entailing the political disenfranchisement of Leftwing voters ("Dirty Politics", op. cit.). This political manipulation reached down the Party ladder from PM John Key via attack blogger websites Whale Oil (Cameron Slater) and Kiwiblog (David Farrar) to a comically sinister figure, lurking in the shadows, namely political PR consultant Simon Lusk (ibid.).

US Republican Party strategist Grover Norquist's recent visit to NZ, courtesy of the so-called NZ Taxpayers' Union (founded by David Farrar and Jordan Williams), was obviously intended to ginger up the National Party's strategy on "de-democratisation". The matters involved connect intimately with the rise of neo-fascism in the West. I shall discuss all this a bit further below, but at this stage I want to examine the rise of the far-Right overseas in some more depth.

Charting The Contours Of The Reactionary Right

As I have previously emphasised, the international context and conducive factors for the growth of fascism reaches from the highest levels of Western society to the lowest in terms of politics and socio-economic conditions ("Tackling The 'New Abnormal' Of Dangerous Politics", op. cit.). The primary combination of causes is certainly evident enough:

• Social Darwinist global competition;
• the officially mandated targeting of designated Muslim enemies;
• associated cultural and civilisational hype;
• constant violent engagements and interventions;
• multiple terrorist incidents and actions, including Western State terrorism in one form or other;
• the unending flow of Muslim refugees and boat people;
• the continual messaging about the danger of terrorism;
• and the general atmosphere of global uncertainty and insecurity.

I want to signal here that I am employing, and emphasising a simple dictionary definition of "fascism", somewhat adapted for my purposes. This definition is as follows: "Fascism is a set of Rightwing political beliefs that includes strong control of society and the economy by the State, a powerful role for the armed forces, and the suppression of political opposition. Extreme nationalist, and probably racist, beliefs are central to the creed". In addition, the term "neo-fascism" refers to the modern, or revived, version of historical fascist movements. But both terms are used pretty flexibly in reference to the post-WWII era.

Overall then, we need to chart the contours of the reactionary Right, and trace the factors underlying the rise and trajectory of this movement to date, and the challenges ahead. In this article, I shall continue to range widely in a survey of Western domestic factors and the relationship of these factors to a shifting global context. I have already laid the basis for this, and covered considerable relevant ground.

Corporate Media And Cultural Prejudice

Let us take up the historical trends roughly from where Professor Francis Carsten, quoted near the start of my article, left off in 1980 ("The Rise Of Fascism", op. cit.). More widely, over time, checks and balances on racist reactionary tendencies were being eroded in one way or another, despite the trappings of the supposedly Western liberal democratic order. The 1980s saw the neo-liberal/neo-con era of Reagan and Thatcher, and the heavy impact of the Anglo-American axis on the shape of globalism.

Later, as one concerned analyst, Martin Lee, noted during the 1990s: "But unchecked corporate power has to a significant degree stultified the democratic process, and fascist groups in Europe and the US feed upon this malaise" ("The Beast Reawakens: The Chilling Story Of The Rise Of The Neo-Nazis", Little, Brown, & Co., 1997, p389).

Corporate media played a major role in fostering the atavistic atmospherics of cultural prejudice. Take the United Kingdom (UK) for example. I recall how well before 9/11, back in the early 1990s in fact, being quite surprised and disturbed when perusing British newspapers on sale in Christchurch/Otautahi, my home town. Leading British corporate papers, especially those of the loathsome Rupert Murdoch, were even then pumping out a tide of anti-Muslim diatribes.

Murdoch, of course, had already plenty of form. As one American critic has commented: "We are a mixed population and he (Murdoch) tried so blatantly to use race to sell (the New York Post) that he became known as 'Tar Baby' Murdoch" ("The Murdoch Archipelago", Bruce Page, Simon & Schuster, 2003, in chapter 11, "Patriotic Like A Fox", p346).

In other words, media magnate Rupert Murdoch got labelled with a racist term of abuse in ironic reference to his regular racist messaging in the Post (see also: "Weapons Of Mass Stupidity", INDY Week, 4/6/03). Similarly, his warmongering "patriotism" on Fox News, etc., went hand in hand with such white supremacism. All this sort of stuff was helping to foster the rise of the racist activism, which has flared up on such an open large scale under Donald Trump's Presidency. Fox stands out for its support of Trumpism.

Reactionary Tribalism Runs Rampant!

Following the flood of refugees in recent decades escaping imperial invasions and intrusions in the Middle East, and elsewhere - along with all the constant bitter internecine conflict in these regions - more widespread white racist, reactionary elements have emerged in new and virulent forms. Mass anti-immigrant racist movements have spread throughout the West to try and stop the desperate flow of humanity.

While then, as noted and outlined above, there were certainly active white supremacist groups long before 9/11 and its aftermath, the "War on Terror" and its consequences have been monumentally crucial in generating racial antagonism. Fleeing refugees have galvanised into action a whole new wave of white supremacist activism. This whole phenomenon, of course, is so ironically due to the violence perpetrated by the Anglo-American axis and allied governments.

Writing in 2006, commentator Geoff Boucher remarked that today's "extreme Right" is a "distinctly post-modern form of fascism" ("The Resistible Rise Of Post-Modern Neo-Fascism", in Arena, April 2006). 1930s'-style fascism has been replaced by a species of post-modern neo-fascism. But, in Boucher's opinion, the Left by the middle of the first decade of the 21st Century had so far failed to find an effective response.

Boucher pointed in the EU to: "...highly successful new formations (on the Right) - such as the Liga Norte (LN, Italy); Vlams Blok (VB, Belgium); Freiheits Partei der Osterreich (FPO, Austria); and Front Nationale (FN, France)" (ibid.). Such parties still forge on, e.g. the Liga Norte or Lega Nord was the third biggest party in the 2018 Italian general election.

Note another irony here. In a quote from Professor Francis Carsten's book cited near the start of my article, Carsten observed that in Italy the neo-fascist movement had exploited the problem of "extreme poverty" in the south of the country ("The Rise Of Fascism", op. cit.). However, in our times, the Northern League party (Liga Norte, or its latest updated guise, the Lega) has a strong urban base in the northern region.

Forwards Into An Increasingly Contested Future

Furthermore, in the very important European Parliament (EP) elections held in May 2019, Lega Nord or just Lega (the "League"), as this particular Party is now usually known, had big gains in Italy. Its Leader Matteo Salvini is already one of the country's two Deputy Prime Ministers. Similarly, Marine Le Pen's far-Right National Rally (RN) won first place in France in these EP elections over the Rightwing Renaissance Party of President Emmanuel Macron. The RN is the former FN.

Just before the elections, US President Donald Trump hosted the "fiercely anti-immigrant" Hungarian President Viktor Orban at the White House, thus giving his blessing to the far-Right leader and his Fidesz Party ("Anti-EU Parties, Greens See Surge In Support", Press, 28/5/19). While the yellow vests' ("gilets jaunes") street protests against Macron's government had a strong strain of extreme Rightwing activism, and no doubt gave a boost to Le Pen's Party, this Party in its earlier FN guise actually did better in the 2014 EP elections. It is also noteworthy that in Germany, the other major Western European country, the Green Party there scored a most heartening surge in voter support, gaining substantial ground. A most welcome progressive step forward!

The yellow vest movement in France has certainly been a most significant barometer movement. If, as noted, there was a very strong far-Right element lined up in its ranks, radical Leftwing activists were also prominently involved. The French streets are being contested! Certain key objectives of the movement like higher taxes for the rich and the institution of a fair minimum wage are very much in line with a progressive agenda tackling socio-economic inequality and gross privilege (Yellow Vests Movement, Wikipedia).

Battling For The Soul Of Europe

It is clear now that even on the streets of so-called "developed" countries, a contest is taking place among those alienated from the prevailing order as to whether the political shift will be further to the Right, or will the Left come more to the fore. It all evokes memories of pre-Nazi Weimar Germany in the 1930s. Overall, we stand warned. Has the Left been any more effective since 2006? The answer in general is very clearly no, given the strength and extent these days of the far-Right. Make no mistake. The imperialistic State terrorism of the West in foreign countries derives from predatory economic growth and a dedicated capitalist agenda. This is in turn driving the emergence and consolidation of neo-fascism.

At present, the May 2019 EP elections indicate that the previous balance of power pretty well holds. But tensions and conflicts seethe openly throughout the EU region. It seems that the political centre is hollowing out to a greater degree. As, again, Geoff Boucher aptly emphasises, fascism is a nefarious expression of "capitalism in decay; it is the barbarous last resort of a system in terminal crisis" ("The Resistible Rise Of Post-Modern Neo-Fascism", op. cit.). But: it must be added here, that any industrial growth system on a small "Goldilocks" planet like Earth will have the same sort of outcome - an eventual descent into Social Darwinist collapse.

The Media, PR, And Propaganda

As I have observed and stressed, the role of the mainstream media has been hugely influential in shaping values, attitudes, and actual behaviour with regard to the general cultural orientation to world problems, and how threats to the West are portrayed. For instance, millions of people marched around the world in protest against the US-led illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 but today Western publics are quiescent with the war on ISIS, and a host of other military and covert incursions and interventions. ISIS was a direct product of the American invasion. Yet, never mind - Western forces have defeated, and are now safely containing these jihadists, or pretty well, so it seems.

More generally, the potential for fascism has been built into the very structure and functioning of the capitalist system. Global capitalism, indeed, has generated much greater inequalities worldwide over the last four decades ("Inequality Is Rising Across the Globe - And Skyrocketing In The US", 15/12/17).

Given the corporate concentration of power and control, and increasing socio-economic inequalities, divisions are deepening along class, racial/ethnic, and regional lines; as well as due to other fragmenting fractures caused by a whole range of variable and often shifting factors. These conditions are greatly conducive to variants of political extremism, with the virulence of the far-Right so striking in recent years.

Investigative journalist John Pilger once remarked that: "Noam Chomsky often quotes the work of the late Alex Carey, the Australian social scientist who pioneered the investigation of corporate propaganda. 'The 20th Century has been characterised by three developments of great political importance,' wrote Carey in 1978, 'the growth of democracy; the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda against democracy'" [my emphasis] ("Hidden Agendas", John Pilger, Vintage, 1998, p539). The public relations (PR) industry became a key operator in these commercialised machinations.

The Nuclear National Security State (NNSS)

Noam Chomsky himself, indeed, posed the fundamental question back at the time of the first Gulf War in 1991. He declared: "The issue is much broader: It's whether we want to live in a free society or whether we want to live under what amounts to a form of self-imposed totalitarianism, with the bewildered herd marginalised, directed elsewhere, terrified, screaming patriotic slogans, fearing for their lives, and admiring with awe the leader who saved them from destruction; while the educated masses goose-step on command, repeat the slogans they're supposed to repeat, the society deteriorates at home, we end up serving as a mercenary enforcer State, hoping that others are going to pay us to smash up the world. That's the choice that you have to face" ("Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements Of Propaganda", Open Magazine Pamphlet Series, 1991/2, p21).

In the 20th Century, PR techniques were systematically applied in peddling both domestic and foreign policy propaganda, as driven by Big Business and governments. In a general sense, business-sponsored commercialised "infotainment" became the dominant media strategy for indoctrinating and manipulating the masses. Later, after 9/11, Rupert Murdoch's warmongering Fox News led the Anglo-American corporate media into various modes of cultivating constant aggression and a permanent sense of insecurity.

So, we confront the machinery of mobilisation operated by the military-industrial complex, a whole phalanx of PR propaganda organs and agents, right down to the street marchers and cheerleaders for conservative and militarist causes. Meanwhile, online social media, courtesy of the big "tech" companies, have provided multiple forums for far-Right trolls and the dissemination of hate speech.

Some Big Challenges

On the domestic scene in the US, there is yet some truly good news of late, with racial prejudice actually declining, and most Americans apparently rejecting Trump's divisive approach on race (i.e., according to an up-to-date study by the University of Pennsylvania as cited in "Knights' March At Odds With A More Inclusive America", Sunday Star-Times, Danielle McLaughlin, 26/5/19. "Knights" refers to the white power group, the Honorable Sacred Knights of Indiana).

However, a couple of very pertinent and important points can be made here. First, in regard to the domestic scene, Trump's followers may well dig in if there is a major internal political showdown, e.g., the impeachment of the President. Trump himself might well resort to very dirty tactics under pressure. The US may thus be heading for very serious social disruption, and even a measure of disintegration.

Secondly, the President might try to mobilise support and unify the nation as much as possible by engaging in fiery foreign disputes, e.g., with Iran or Venezuela; or serious discord with either China or Russia, or both. Perversely enough, the so-called "deep state", i.e. much of the intelligence/security apparatus of the military-industrial complex, along with the Democrat Party and certain other groupings, are strongly anti-Russian ("US Foreign Policy As Bellicose As Ever", www.counterpunch.org, 10/5/19). America's most prestigious newspaper the New York Times leads the baying, warmongering media pack on this issue (ibid.).

Any major geopolitical confrontation could worsen dangerously, especially if such a conflict were to involve a rival big power (or powers). Lamentably, the world has an increasing number of potential flashpoints. The global scene is the most dangerous that it has been for decades (e.g., see: "Eurasia Group's Biggest Geopolitical Risks Of 2019", https://time.com, 7/1/19).

We must urge governmental heads around the world to engage in far more active peace-making and mediation programmes. Demilitarisation and the phasing down and out of nuclear weapons should be priorities. Ultimately, we have to break the perilous linkage between the rise of neo-fascist movements and ruling power elites.

The Merging Of Domestic And Foreign Policy Issues

The ideological framing of enemies like Al-Qaeda as "evil", and America's self-image as "good and righteous", enabled "neoconservatives and the religious Right" to use the 9/11 attacks "to advance ambitious domestic and foreign policy goals. At home, for example, 9/11 became the grounds for attacks by neoconservatives and the religious Right on liberalism and the apparent decline in traditional values" ("International Security: A Very Short Introduction", Christopher S Browning, Oxford University Press, 2013, pp109/10).

So, the stage was being set for further fundamentalist Christian attacks on human rights and minority groups, and, as a consequence, on social democracy itself. "Infamously, for example, the high profile preacher Jerry Falwell proclaimed that by mocking God, pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, and lesbians, 'all of them who have tried to secularise America', were in part responsible for 9/11, which for him was a form of divine retribution" (ibid., p110).

Falwell was the founder of the so-called Moral Majority movement. His pernicious fundamentalist morality actually embraced nuclear weapons. NZ's Labour Prime Minister David Lange famously defeated him in a debate on nuclear weapons at the Oxford Union back in the 1980s, during the process of NZ's declaration of independence in going "nuclear free" ("'I Can Smell The Uranium On Your Breath' - Anti-Nuclear New Zealand 30 Years On", Edmund Hillary Fellowship, 28/2/15).

The Moral Majority Really Means The Greedy Ruling Minority!

As Nancy Maclean, a Professor of History and Public Policy at Duke University in the US, observes: such fundamentalist ministers "as Reverend Jerry Falwell and Ralph Reed and Tim Phillips were entrepreneurs in their own right, so common cause could be made" with the political "libertarian" programme funded by the notorious billionaire Koch brothers ("Democracy In Chains: The Deep History Of The Radical Right's Stealth Plan For America", Scribe Publications, 2017, pxxvii).

"Libertarian" has proved to be a code word for corporate power and the stealth subversion of American democracy (ibid.). Whatever the slick, fancy talk and cynical appeal to "liberty", that most cherished value of the American Dream, along with all its associated mythology, the libertarian calculus has been squarely aimed at undermining genuine freedoms for the majority of the American people.

As applied in the deep cover political programme pushed by the Koch brothers (Charles & David), their associates and agents, and crucially coupled with free market ideologues and planners/plotters - above all the Nobel Prize-winning political economist, James McGill Buchanan - this strategy has been both highly anti-democratic and successful (ibid.). While some of what the Koch brothers & co. have got up to over the years has been evident enough, much has gone on in the shadows. It has taken the closely scrutinising research of Professor Nancy MacLean and others to disclose the grim and very disturbing reality.

"Liberty" And The Licence To Exploit

In fact, as Professor Nancy MacLean has shown in damning detail in her book "Democracy In Chains" (ibid.), so much of the self-styled "libertarian" movement in the US grew out of the efforts of very rich white racists, and privileged white racists in general, to try and maintain the traditional system of discrimination. At the time, this movement was focused on its fight against the legally mandated governmental programme to dismantle the notorious "Jim Crow" policies and practices of racial discrimination so rife in the American South. More specifically, the issue of racial desegregation of schools and other educational institutions, especially during the 1950s and 60s, sparked and spurred the rise of the so-called "libertarian" movement (ibid.). The state of Virginia became a hotbed for the growth and spread of the creed and its strategy.

"The libertarian cause, from the time it attracted wider support during the southern schools' crisis, was never really about freedom as most people would define it. It was about the promotion of crippling division among the people so as to end any interference with what those who held vast power over others believed should be their prerogatives. Its leaders had no scruples about enlisting white supremacy to achieve capital supremacy" [my emphasis here] (ibid., p234).

"And today, knowing that the majority does not share their goals and would stop them if they understood the endgame, the team of paid operatives seeks to win by stealth (my emphasis). Now, as then, the leaders seek ... liberty for the few - the liberty to concentrate vast wealth, so as to deny elementary fairness and freedom to the many" (ibid.).

Dark Money

Fellow CAFCA member Jeremy Agar has observed, in referring to an article of his published in 2017: "... I looked in some detail at the role of the Koch brothers in subverting democracy (see my review of "Dark Money" in Watchdog 144, May 2017). Multi-billionaire owners of coal and gas interests, the Kochs have led the assault against any US impetus towards combatting climate change" ("Trumped Up Chaos", Watchdog 145, August, 2017).

To be sure, "Dark Money" by Jane Mayer (Scribe, 2016) sheds a most illuminating spotlight on the anti-democratic activities of the Koch brothers. While the Kochs and Donald Trump have been greedy billionaires proceeding along different tracks in the US political landscape, Jeremy Agar draws on Mayer's study to mark out corresponding features and connections.

"Besides their money and their reactionary views, there are some obvious parallels between Trump and the Kochs" ("Dark Money", op. cit., p80). In their shared narcissism, they exult in their respective self-images of being "the smartest guy[s] in the room" - i.e., lying, stealing, cheating, pillaging, and manipulating to the max! They exemplify the true spirit of entrepreneurial capitalism at its greedy, careless core. Their racism, too, is a key underlying joint factor. Donald Trump's election as President signalled a resurgence of the far-Right, as celebrated by white racist rallies at Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017, etc.

Deep, Dark State Machinations

At the most covert level, however, has been the manipulation of the American Constitution, especially facilitating "Republicans to gerrymander, the practice of drawing Congressional boundaries to favour them. Some boundaries are tortuously artificial, ignoring natural geography or communities of interest. Within states, districts are set by non-partisan sounding social welfare groups. In reality, the public-spirited citizens are often yet more Koch fronts" (ibid., p79).

So, Congress was able to block Democrat President Barack Obama on more progressive domestic legislation, while the far-Right, including Koch outfits and Murdoch's Fox News, peddled wild conspiracy theory stories about him (ibid., pp80/1). Obama may have had a deplorable record as the drone war President, among other derelictions, but this sort of malign conspiracy stuff was tailored to the hard-Right Republican agenda. During his second term, rich billionaires were freely calling the shots on the domestic front at the expense of the overwhelming majority!

In her in-depth study of the Koch's programme and the key influence of economist James Buchanan, Professor Nancy MacLean of Duke University calls Jane Mayer, author of "Dark Money", a "brilliant investigative journalist", who had shown that "two billionaire brothers, Charles and David Koch, had poured more than $US100 million into a 'war against Obama'" ("Democracy In Chains", op. cit., xvii). Significantly, Mayer has lately revealed, among other things, how Murdoch's Fox News is now operating as a propaganda agency for President Trump and his Administration ("The Making Of The Fox News White House", www.newyorker.com, 11/3/19).

Giving The Far-Right A Helping Hand

In late May 2019, we got public notice of another visit from a far-Right activist, American Grover Norquist. This notice came courtesy of an interview with TV1 Q & A's host Jack Tame (27/5/19). Norquist was presented by Tame as an influential US political player, who wants Government reduced as small as possible. Yet Norquist was portrayed to us not as an extreme Rightist, but indeed - to use Tame's words - as a "fascinating person" (ibid.). For sure, this "fascinating person" had just been talking to Opposition Leader Simon Bridges, after being brought out here by the far-Right NZTU, as noted earlier above.

According to his online profile, courtesy of Google: "Grover Glenn Norquist is an American political activist and tax reduction advocate, who is founder and President of Americans for Tax Reform, an organisation that opposes all tax increases". Norquist has long been active in the US Republican Party, and also in a range of extreme Right groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA), the Tea Party, etc., although he has some contrarian views for a Rightwinger, e.g. very pro-immigration (Grover Norquist, Wikipedia).

In the past, Norquist even has a record of neo-fascist activities as an agent of State terrorism under the Reagan Presidency in the 1980s. "He worked with a support network for Oliver North's efforts with the (murderous) Nicaraguan contras and other insurgencies, in addition to promoting US support for groups including (the South African and CIA-backed) Mozambique's RENAMO and Jonas Savimbi's UNITA in Angola" (ibid.). Norquist was a fervent apartheid supporter for the former white South African regime.

In other words, Grover Norquist has been a ruthless geopolitical purveyor of death and destruction in poor and imperialist-oppressed countries! For certain, he has also been active in any number of other greedy, self-serving extremist causes. Yes, Jack Tame, Norquist is certainly a "fascinating person"! Incidentally, with reference to Tame himself, he is today a symbol and poster boy for the sad fate of public TV. Our State television network is such a victim of neo-liberal corporate globalisation and the commercialisation of information, that Jack Tame even does opinionated "infotainment" ads on TV1 for Xero!

Norquist & Co Choking Democracy In A Cynically Calculated Koch-Up!

As a far-Right Republican Party activist and strategist, Grover Norquist has been deeply involved in anti-democratic programmes in the US, which are those outlined by Jeremy Agar above, in his review of Jane Mayer's book "Dark Money" (op. cit.). Without "'the protection of a fairly drawn (electoral) district'" in the US, 'the citizen is a pawn of billionaires who use the map of the country' to get what they want" ("Democracy In Chains", op. cit., p232).

Historian Nancy MacLean is quoting here Salon Editor-in-Chief David Daley, who was writing in 2016 (ibid.). At the time, Daley was warning that the Republican Party was an "election away 'from achieving an unimaginable goal in a country that sees itself as a beacon of democracy: a veto-proof supermajority operating without majority support'" (ibid.). Well, the Republicans achieved this goal with the election of Donald Trump as President, despite his opponent, Hillary Clinton, having three million more votes! The gerrymandering was carried out "all but invisible to those it was locking out" (ibid.).

Professor MacLean herself observes that: "The ever-strategic Koch grantee Grover Norquist equates the cause's expanding chokehold over the states with a Roman pilum - a spear powerful enough to penetrate any shield, and barbed, so it 'could not be pulled out'" (ibid.). Currently in the US, there is a very intense legal wrangle between the Republicans and Democrats over the role of the courts in the issue about "partisan state legislatures" (redrawing) "more electoral districts after the 2020 census" ("Court Reform Back On Democrats' Radar", Press, 29/6/19).

The gerrymandering orchestrated by Norquist & co is at the centre of this American political struggle for a better democracy. We can see then that Norquist is an ideal soul-mate for National, ACT, the NZTU, and other such Rightwing groups in Aotearoa/NZ. The trend to neo-fascism goes on. We must organise effectively to counter it!

Continuities And Crony Connections In Capitalist Conservatism

Back in the past, a ground-breaking study flagged this direction and the trends towards it. ("Friendly Fascism: The New Face Of Power In America", [M Evans & Company, 1980] Wikipedia,). In his book, political science professor Bertram Gross drew on history in tracing social trends, including the growth of big business and big government, in order to consider how the US could morph into a neo-fascist regime.

Note that Gross's book was published in the same year as that of Professor Francis Carsten's second edition on fascism (op. cit.). But Professor Gross foresaw the future of American very differently compared with how Carsten foresaw that of Europe. Presciently enough, Professor Gross's book was published right at the start of the Reaganite era of the 1980s. Reagan systematically pursued neo-fascist covert and military operations abroad.

At the same time, Reagan's Republican Administration was instituting, in parallel partnership with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's Conservative Party in Britain, a programme of neo-liberal free market deregulation, and privatisation policies on the home front. These days, Trump & co freely line their own deep pockets and those of their corporate mates, while Trump bestows his blessings and endorsement on "Brexiteers" Nigel Farage and that other far-Right bouffant orange-haired buffoon, Boris Johnson.

Trump, Farage, and Johnson are jointly racist in their rhetoric and outlook, however indirectly that attitude might be conveyed at times. Islamophobia is to the fore. Correspondingly, these political leaders also revel in macho misogynistic sexism and homophobia. As the new British Conservative Prime Minister, Boris Johnson has a very ugly record of racist remarks, insults, and other nasty rhetoric and behaviour ("Boris Johnson's Racist Insults, Dog Whistles And Slurs", www.newstatesman.com, 12/6/19).

"Johnson has been in regular contact with far-Right nationalist Steve Bannon - Donald Trump's former chief strategist - who has publicly supported him, and believes people should wear the terms 'racist' and 'xenophobe' as a 'medal'" [my emphasis] (ibid.). And so it goes! Make no mistake, the neo-fascists are moving by stealth, and at times quite openly, even brazenly, to take over the levers of power in the Anglo-American axis, and the rest of the West.

This momentum stems from the crisis of capitalist globalisation and its contradictions. These compounding contradictions of global capital are rapidly deepening even further. We must act pre-emptively and urgently on the Left, and in conjunction as much as possible with the genuinely democratic moderate Right. Otherwise, the writing is indeed now on the wall!

Choices For The Future

Nowadays, there is open discussion of the perils of neo-fascism in the US, whether this particular term is actually used or not. For instance, Joe Biden, former Deputy President in the Obama Administration, and now a Democrat Party contender for nomination to run against President Trump, declares his opposition to Trump in a quite startling fashion. He says that: "I believe the President is an existential threat to America"! With the very real danger in the US of a powerful linkage with other elements of the far-Right, especially the neo-fascists, the libertarian plotters could facilitate a transition to totalitarian control, to a neo-Nazi regime. Certainly, the current Trump Administration in the US is pointing in this direction.

Professor Nancy MacLean poses the big question about the contest for the future in the most urgent terms she can: "Is this the country (i.e. the US) we want to live in and bequeath to our children and future generations? That is the real public choice. If we delay much longer, those who are imposing their stark utopia will choose for us". The choice that she poses applies to us here in Aotearoa/NZ, and throughout the Anglo-America axis, and indeed the rest of the West. Moreover, in a world of deepening inequalities it is truly a global choice. Neo-fascist leaders now rule key nations, e.g., Modi in India, Bolsonaro in Brazil, and Duterte in the Philippines. We must choose and act for a future worth living, especially for coming generations.