actually, we agree with Bertram Gross and others, who trace the emergence to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's interventions (Obama is just putting the finishing touches, the nails on the coffin):
a slow and powerful drift toward greater concentration of power and wealth in a repressive Big Business-Big Government partnership. This drift leads down the road toward a new and subtly manipulative form of corporatist serfdom. The phrase "friendly fascism" helps distinguish this possible future from the patently vicious corporatism of classic fascism in the past of Germany, Italy and Japan.
I don't know that we do. But once again you're entirely selective in your condemnation, if you believe Obama is simply 'putting the final nails in', explain your position more fully, it may aid reader understanding.
The thing is, Gross' book was centered on a dichotomy [of trends]. It's interesting, and telling that you cite only the strand which supports your own argument - not that it's without validity of course.
But to return to Gross; evidence of each trend has [arguably] been demonstrated by an insidious and simultaneous erosion of individual freedoms and expansion of the IMC under Bush (or more accurately the Republican right) and the subsequent installation of Obama, repsectively. What Gross might deem a
'reaction against authoritarianism'.
I'm not saying I'd fully support such a conclusion, in no small part because campaigning on a platform of 'change' was [perhaps intentionally?] so nebulous as to provide a mandate for whatever subsequent policies Obama chose to persue. Change isn't a policy.
That doesn't necessarily mean that [for most] a desire for greater participation in the 'political' process wasn't a major motivation for his election (although, I doubt it was) so much as a rejection of 'Politics as usual'. But I can't deny the validity of such an argument either, I simply don't have the information.
To go back to the above, it wasn't
just Bush of course ... and Gross was writing this almost thirty years ago.
While I don't fully agree with Gross, I can't deny there are elements within contemporary US power structures that align with a broad brush interpretation of his thinking. I do agree with him about the relative strengths of the major trends upon which his book was predicated.
It's somewhat unfortunate for Obama that his election coincided (some would deny the use of coincidence here) with the most severe economic downturn in decades. This affords many a perfect vehicle for their bitterness in both losing, and resentment at having a 'socialist' in the Whitehouse.
But it's amusing too, because at the same time many paint Obama as a socialist for expanding Government reach - others use the bailouts [inter alia] to accuse him as seeking to establish some form of psuedo [to use Gross) 'friendly fascist' state. I'd include you among the latter?
I say amusing both because
'friendly fascism' is something of an oxymoron and because so few Americans have any
real understanding what socialism/fascism actually means; thus it's an easy and divisive tactic to use.
As evidenced on this forum every day; it's borderline hilarious, even as it's becoming a little tedious.
Of course, in Europe, as a continent of closet communists (many of whom secretly yearn to be fascists), the debate is somewhat more ...
subtle.
For me, it's far too early to render an meaningful assessement, sadly, I suspect it's a case of 'the more things change ...' Time will tell. Not that my opinion matters of course, but that won't stop me voicing it!
Were it not for the convenience of the recession, I wonder, where
would all this hate be directed ...