#H.R. Morgan

[thetldrplace]

Fascism, Integralism, and the Corporative Society- H.R. Morgan: Codex 6

The Corporative Society: How Social Life will be in the New State 

Planning: The Force Factor  It is the refusal to see the inevitability of force in order to realize social values which condemns most reformers to futility. 

Social systems represent a balance of power between consent and pressures brought to bear on the governed. There has never been a free society in which men and women enjoyed much sovereignty over their choices or conduct. All government has a monopoly on force or violence. 

Everyone disapproves of certain coercions and wants certain liberties. Calling what I like liberty and what I dislike 'license', just means that when the law suits me, it is liberty, and when it doesn't, it is coercive and oppressive. But we can't demonstrate scientifically that there is more or less coercion under capitalism, communism, or fascism. Under any of these, we can point out different liberties and coercions. 

The inevitable uniqueness of a social plan for a given nation is going to require coercion to realize that plan. Clearly, only one plan can be operative in one country at one time, if it is to enjoy public order. 

Freedom of conscience has never been an absolute freedom under liberal capitalism. Social order, not individual or group self-expression, must be the highest ultimate value of any social plan. When self-expression is incompatible with social order, the result is anarchy. 

No matter what system it is, some administrative body will have the authority over the imperatives of social order, and those imperatives will demand some limit on individual self-expression. 

It isn't necessary to prescribe every activity, it is only necessary to prevent any associative activity from being used by leaders to defeat the national plan. Tolerance of safe differences, even within as broad and inclusive a way as possible, are good. But there can't be unlimited tolerance. 

One of the strongest arguing and operating points of liberal capitalism has always been the fact that its most vital and often its harshest coercions, those of economic necessity, under a given regime of property distribution and deprivation, legally enforced with the might of the state, have been applied with impersonality, anonymity, and a large measure of irresponsibility. 

Here Morgan refers to loss of jobs through measures that were beyond the control of workers. 

Dave note:  I think there IS something to the fact that the market forces of capitalism, because they are impersonal, do make it a more fair system. If the market, which is society, chooses A over B, B may not like it, but it wasn't like someone up in the government arbitrarily chose A and screwed B over.   The free market system of capitalism will always include a very dynamic set of circumstances where workers are losing jobs in industries that are outcompeted by others. That would happen in the purest, fairest version of the free market. I will grant that there are plenty of forces involved trying to put fingers on scales and manipulate things in their favor. That IS unfair and should be seen as such. But the free market, as a system, is fair, despite the negative consequence of market losers. 

State Absolutism  The state must enforce a country's unique social plan through government institutions. These can follow either liberal or fascist methods, but it will require the absolute power of the state. The popular denunciation of fascism is that it is state absolutist, requiring unlimited powers, as contrasted with the limited powers of the liberal state. But this misrepresents the issue. The powers of every state are in theory, unlimited. The difference between fascism and liberalism is only in which certain things the state does without limitation, and in which the state is inhibited. Therefore, state absolutism isn't really the issue, but rather the specific applications of the absolute power of the state. 

Here Morgan delves into military conscription and authority, which he considers absolute even in liberal systems. He contrasts this with private property and notes that private property is respected more than life (given that individuals can be involuntarily coerced into the military). 

The reply is that the Constitution protects not the right of the hungry to eat, but the right of the rich to keep what they have and to eat while the poor starve. "Nothing augurs so impressively the end of liberalism today as the changing temper of those on relief who are coming more and more to feel and assert a vested right to be cared for by the State." 

Dave note:  I'm not sure, given his last sentence, if Morgan disagrees with me, but as to what the constitution protects, the framing is wrong. The hungry being hungry isn't a matter of a 'right' being denied. No one would deny them the right to eat. But the right to eat isn't the same as the right to be provided with food. The government should protect the private property of its citizens, rich or poor.  But I think he is right in that the common acceptance of this idea that the citizens have a right to be fed or housed or clothed, does signal the end of liberalism. Freedom entails responsibility, and the more people offload their responsibility to take care of themselves to the government, the more they offload their rights to make decisions in those areas. 

The idea of liberalism was to limit the unlimited powers of the State in ways suitable to supposed property interests. But, Morgan writes, the time has come to acknowledge those limitations in respect to his property, aren't actually calculated to protect his interests in the long-run. Fascism is saying that property and capital be called to colors as well as conscripts in time of war, and further, that this term of service is not only for war, but a permanent scheme of social organization and operation. 

Dave Note:  While there is much that I grant in his analysis, I think it deliberately reduces the problem.  We, of course, grant that individual self-expression isn't limitless, particularly where it would infringe on fellow citizen's rights. Moving from the consequent necessity of some limitation to "it's just a matter of degrees" is true, but also misleading. The smaller limitations in liberal society may only be 'degrees' less than under fascism, but it's precisely in just how much that is important. 10% limitation isn't the same as 90% limitation. There's a reason why communist countries had barbed wire keeping people in, and it wasn't because there was essentially no difference between a few degrees of limitations on individual freedom.  

Planning: A Problem in Value Choices  Morgan outlines an interesting discussion over the choice of values. He starts with the impossibility of expressing the fascist scheme in the language of liberalism or communism or another system. Each has its own language. The liberal scheme rests on the ideology of supposed eternal and absolute truths. These he calls mere verbalisms, like 'equality before the law', 'freedom of contract', democratic self-government', 'just compensation', and so on. They sound impressive, but the majority couldn't possibly explain what they mean in terms which harmonize the definition with the reality. 

The fascist scheme is an expression of human will which creates its own truths and values from day to day, to suit its changing purposes. Fascists start from a situation of fact and a human will to do something about it- either to alter it, or preserve it. Fascism is an expression of the human will reacting to changing situations of life in the eternal struggle for existence. 

The fascist plan is what the people want, or the leaders want, and fascist planning is the way to get it. 

The chief plank in the conservative platform is inhibition- inhibition of government, inhibition of the underprivileged, inhibition of anything in the nature of a vital plan of a nation. To talk about fascism or communism in the language of liberalism will end up reducing the content, and changing the values from virtues to monstrosities. 

Under communism, a small shopkeeper with a few helpers is changed into a dirty bourgeois capitalist oppressor. What the fascist regards as an ennobling love of country, becomes mass hysteria under liberalism. What fascist cherish as social discipline, becomes tyranny in the liberal language. 

Two fundamental notions are essential to understanding of planning, or the formulation of a new social system:   1) Any social system represents a scheme or hierarchy of ultimate values or objectives, the upholding of which is one of the chief duties of the state and its citizens. 

2) These ultimate values can't be validated by logic or reason. 

Morgan says there is little difference in the way a social system is enforced under any system. Liberal states may be free of many of the repressive measures of communism or fascism in peace, but in war, they are quite similar. 

So essentially, there are no real disbelievers in planning per se, only disbelievers in certain plans and planning by the other fellow. 

There are a wide range of values or objectives for national planning from which to make choices. Planning for America must proceed from an analysis of our own problems, assume a set of values, and explore the possibilities of their realization and possible means to this end. 

Whatever these ultimate values are, they can't be validated or proved good or desirable by processes of logic. Rational statement, analysis, clarification, and comparison of values are useful for two reasons: 

1) values are realized, made to triumph, or enforced, through the instrumentality of reason. In other words: you know what you want and reason will help you to get it, if it can be had. 

2) values can be clarified and compared only by the processes of reason. 

But Morgan says we need to dispense with the rationalist notion that assumes reason as normative, instead of being instrumental. Reason is the tool of our will and emotional drives.  

Morgan writes: "As the scientist knows, facts have to be selected according to purposes, or preconceived theories and intuitions, or hunches, or, more definitely, according to the conclusion or verdict which is desired to reach, or according to the hypothesis it is desired to build up." 

Dave note:  This is NOT the way science is supposed to work. Certainly, facts have to be selected, and we all work according to preconceptions. But the point of doing things scientifically is to look for flaws and undermine the test, which should lead one closer to the truth. Of course, we have to acknowledge that people do use the method at times in a manipulative way to bolster their position, rather than in a genuine search for truth. 

Morgan proceeds: Fascism is not anti-intellectual or antirational. It uses observed fact and logical deduction as well as liberalism.  

Reason is useful as a means to an end, and as a selector or clarifier of ends about which one is not clear. Had I lived in 15th century Spain with my present religious convictions, I would have understood the futility of trying to dissuade the heads of the Inquisition from their pursuit of heresy. Their rational capacity was just as good as mine, and their understanding of the implications of religious persecution and consequences as complete as mine. But their premises and emotional attitudes differed. They felt those unpleasant things had to be done, and those heavy prices paid in Spain, to save the souls of most of their compatriots. They undoubtedly believed this with deep intensity and fervor.  

Today, we need to rational clarification of values of a plan for America. Using reason to clarify momentous social values and their consequences brings the choice down to: fight, or make concessions. Trying to make the other fellow see that God, reasons, right, etc is on your side will only exasperate him more and make him all the more eager to fight. 

In the discussion of values or social objectives, it is useful to clear as to what one wants and what the other fellow wants, and to find out at what point either will fight. Taking this view will usually produce more concessions on both sides rather than an appeal to justice or reason to support one's own scheme of values. 

The National Plan: An Expression of the Popular Will  Fascism holds that the national plan or social scheme is always an expression of the might of the people, and this expression must be made explicit through the administration of those in power. 

The beguiling myth of liberalism is that people can be governed by laws and not by men. This myth relies chiefly on the assumption that while administrative men are unreliable and prone to weaknesses, judges are not. But the trouble with any theory of impersonal government, or government by laws and principles, rather than men, is that it attributes to documents or statements of principle, qualities only humans can possess. The written word always requires interpretation and application by a given person. 

The law can only express the will of the people with regard to current problems, subject to contemporary thought and feeling. 

Morgan writes that trial by battle is one of the most essential features of the theory of liberal jurisprudence. The underlying assumption is that there is such a thing as absolute right and wrong, and that if both parties to a dispute select a champion, the champion of the right side will win the battle.  

The champion used to be a knight in arms, now he is a lawyer. This is justice by sporting event. 

This theory of pursuing absolutes like justice, fair competition, equality, etc, by means of trial by sporting event is incompatible with any rational theory of national planning. Its vogue under liberalism is probably due to two considerations: 

1) It makes right theoretically superior to might. Even though settling right by a legal battle contradicts this theory, it eases Christian consciences to the predatory features of the economic struggle under capitalism. The successful in the acquisitive struggle can exculpate themselves all wrongdoing or abusive uses of force and violence if they can say they have kept within the law. 

2) it is in the professional interests of the lawyers to have a social system operated on this principle because it means highly remunerative work on their end. 

Instead, while courts and judicial processes have a place in every social scheme, their function must be that of an instrument of the popular will, not that of making interpretations of the popular will, and not that of making economic relationships a racket for lawyers and bankers. 

The fascist State repudiates the liberal idea of conflict of interests and rights as between the State and the individual; such conflicts being settled through a trial by legal battle under the umpiring of a supposed neutral third party represented by a judge.  

The main concern of the administration of justice under fascism is not the protection of the individual against a state assumed to be prone to abuse the individual. The chief purpose is the protection of the State against its own mistakes. 

Liberalism assumes the individual welfare and protection is largely a matter of having active and powerful judicial restraints on governmental interference with the individual; Fascism assumes that individual welfare and protection is mainly secured by the strength, efficiency, and success of the State in realization of the national plan. 

Morgan then adds:  "Conceivably, of course, a State and government might fall into the hands of a few individuals whose every act would be an abuse. But such an eventuality seems most improbable in any modern State, least of all in the United States." 

Those in charge of government would have the most obvious self-interest in making these tribunals function efficiently. They would not have an interest in upholding mistakes of the State that could be corrected. 

A View of the Corporate Syndical State  Each corporation, which is an occupational group, is responsible for its own corporate life. It must protect all those engaged in the branch of activity with which it is concerned; it must see that they are adequately rewarded for their work, it must defend their rights, it must provide for them in misfortune. 

Society will regarded as being divided vertically, according to trade or profession, instead of horizontally, according to social status, or worse, income. It is elementary that all class war is to be repudiated. 

In each industry, the hierarchy of functions is to remain; there will be authority and obedience, but not absolute authority and wage slavery. Strikes and lock-outs and such methods of class defense are specifically declared illegal.  

All national syndicates are to subordinate their own interests to the interests of the national economy. The key principle in all corporative theory is the principle of the common good.  

Reference to an older Portuguese tradition of fishermen's associations is made. The Casa dos Pescadores includes both masters and men, and is designed as an organ of social cooperation. It's functions are classified under three heads: the representation and defense of professional interests; the instruction of the young in the art of fishing; the care of the sick and assistance for those who have suffered loss in storms, and general welfare work. These confraternities were the accredited representatives of all seafarers, and were designed to help the widows, the sick and disabled, and even to make good the loss caused by shipwreck or damage. Such confraternities were local rather than national, and demonstrated an essential traditionalism that fascism seeks: something rooted in the history of Portugal. 

The spirit of fascist corporatism is found in this application: it is rooted in the national traditions, it has a power of adaptation, avoidance of state bureaucracy, and it recognizes the reality of the time- the illiterate and impractical nature of the Portuguese people, as well as the need for coordination, which necessitated a modicum of officials. 

The Coming Corporate State  Alexander Raven Thomson (British writer)  The Corporate State must replace the liberal system. The reason is that democracy [probably he means the liberal system] is failing everywhere, most likely due to its mistaken belief in absolute individual liberty, which has negated effective government, and deprived people of their essential freedom. 

The British Union wants power to govern, including power to control and direct industrial and financial organization. Not only will it then be possible to clear slums and cure unemployment, but the productive powers of the nation will be released to raise the standard of life in the entire community. 

The nation is higher in the order than the individuals comprising it. 

We want a social order that maintains the family and freedom of self-expression and initiative within the bounds of national well-being.  

Prosperity is attained by the functional organization of economic and industrial groups. 

Freedom is realized by the individual once he is released from political corruption and economic oppression to enjoy leisure for cultural self-expression.  

Fascism recognizes the desirability of individual freedom of expression and initiative, as a basis of healthy social life, but it does not place this principle before all others, as does decayed democracy. 

Individual freedom can only follow economic liberation.  

The government will establish prosperity by planning both production and distribution. 

Dave Notes:  In a later section of the book, Ziotio Garibaldi, a Mexican fascist, is expounding his ideas of fascism, and he mentions the 'ruling class of exploiters who cheat them (workers) of their share of the profits...'  It made me question how much of the profits the workers are entitled to? It doesn't seem to me they're entitled to a share of ANY of the profits. They are contracted for a wage. As long as workers are paid the wage they have earned, they have received their full payment. On the flip side, they have no more responsibility to the company either. If the company loses money, they must still be paid, since they were contracted only to work a certain amount of hours for a certain amount of pay. They have no responsibilities, and consequently no rights to the profits or loss of the company.  If a company, like Amazon, does particularly well, the warehouse workers there are not more entitled to the massive gains of the company simply because the company has been successful.   Assuming Amazon's success has come from its wide range of products, easy purchasing process, and quick delivery, there is no more effort on the part of the warehouse workers than there would be if they were working at a competitor who is not successful. The workers output is the same. It is the process itself that is the difference. Now if all things were equal and the workers at one company just bust their butts to produce more, then yeah, they should be sharers in the profits, since the profits are due to them. But the average worker has no more right to company profits than anyone else. 

[icedteaandoldlace]

Before the Flash season 6 DVDs came out, and theories about the original concept for Echo were still being discussed (not by a huge portion of the fandom, but by a few folks at least), someone theorized that he was originally meant to be an evil future version of E1 Cisco (à la Savitar). And I didn't really like that idea, but I built onto it, anyway, with the idea that he was the future version of Cisco from The Once And Future Flash, who had somehow gotten thrown into the Iris Lives timeline when the Iris Dies timeline was erased.

And like, I didn't want Echo to be that Cisco—because the best thing about that episode/timeline is that future!Cisco is still the same caring and hopeful person as always—and I didn't even seriously think that he was him, but it was a fun theory to explore nonetheless. I had a whole long-ass post written about it in my drafts, going into how Echo doesn't have Vibe powers because he lost his hands, supported by the fact that Echo wears gloves in every scene he's in, and I figured he probably had breach psychosis, too, since he still had the dark matter in his DNA but couldn't access his powers. And all that, plus the fact that Breacher said none of Cisco's doppelgängers were scientists, and the way that Echo saying, "I'm not just 'some other' version of you," sounded like it was leading to a different kind of reveal, plus the maniacal laugh when he tells Cisco he killed Cynthia all added up so nicely in support of my theory—that is, until I rewatched the Cisco/Echo confrontation scene and saw that there is a brief moment where you see Echo's hands before he puts his gloves back on, and that killed the whole thing and I deleted the post without publishing it.

Then of course the DVDs came out and I learned that the thing that was changed about Echo was his motive, not where he came from, so we were all overthinking it, anyway. But I still think about that theory from time to time, and how it came so close to being plausible.

[strawbeerossi]

I Can See You

18+ Content. Minors DNI

Pairing: Fem!Reader x Aaron Hotchner

Description: When a new agent joins the team, she's beloved by everybody and Aaron admires her dedication. He admires it so much that he fantasizes about her in every possible scenario to the point where he has to distance himself. One day, she confronts him.

Content Warnings: Power imbalance with leader/team member , reader is flirty with Hotch and loves seeing him flustered, he gets tired of her running her mouth, exhibitionism kink (kinda?), spanking, reader is gagged with a necktie, praise, degradation, fingering, unprotected sex.

Word Count: 2.6K

Navigation || Masterlist || Taglist || Request

Tags 🏷️ @beardedhotchh @pastanoodles11 @morgthemagpie @x0xonatalie

This has been rewritten twenty times. I had to post this before I deleted it all over again. So, I'm sorry in advance if it isn't like my usual writing.

Aaron Hotchner was the stoic, fearless leader of the Behavioral Analysis Unit. He took pride in his strength and dedication to his career, even if most people didn’t understand how he could pull countless hours in a career field that took a physical and mental toll.

His life revolved around his job, his son being his other top priority, even though he really couldn’t very well balance things the way he intended. His loyalty to his career took a good amount from him as well. It could drain his sanity and a divorce came out of it.

He was tough, keeping his composure through some of the worst things imaginable when most others would crumble under all the pressures of a demanding career as well as a failed marriage. However, it numbed him from the horrors, making him tense all the time.

That is, until Y/N showed up at the BAU for an interview to take over an available position. She was the top of her class at the academy. She was physically, academically, as well as mentally strong enough to handle the job and she had a backlog of receipts to prove it. 

Her life was spent with training, her father being a general in the United States Marine Corps, wanting his daughter to follow in his footsteps. 

Imagine his shock when she used every piece of knowledge she had in order to get into the FBI. 

It was a smart career choice for her. She could handle herself in the toughest of situations, being trained how to get through the most intense of scenarios. She also liked putting in her thoughts and ideas to a group who openly accepted them, nothing being shut out because she was the youngest of the team.

She was an asset.

Aaron had told her plenty of times how lucky they were to have her, how she was a tremendous addition to an already powerful group of profilers. She had a lot to learn but she was pretty well off. 

Y/N loved her career and her team. However, Aaron Hotchner piqued her interest. He was well known as the leader of the BAU who has had a rich career and he had many written articles and other pieces of information that retold the stories of the most intense cases he ever had to get into.

It didn’t help that the man was sex on legs. 

He was attractive, the smallest things he did captured her attention in such a way that there were vivid fantasies and daydreams of things they could do. She liked to think that she could show him things he hadn’t seen in years, if ever..

So, that was when she was planting subtle seeds. There were lingering touches and flirting that would make Derek Morgan blush. It was innocent enough, the casual flirtatious remark that would have the unit chief flustered, cheeks a shade of dusty pink.

The idea of being with a member of his team seemed wrong. Not only was it a ton of paperwork but it was also an H.R. nightmare.

It couldn’t stop him from fantasizing though. All the ideas he had about bending her over his desk, his tie forced into her mouth in order to muffle the cries and moans that would spill from her lips.

This was dangerous territory to tread. Yet he liked the game, the risk of it all. The problem was that he couldn’t very well just come on to her, the biggest risk factor being the word spreading across the office. That was the last thing either of them needed.

These vivid fantasies forced him into hiding, his office being the place he’d be able to be alone in. The same office where he’d glazed his knuckles with cum just thinking about the sheer idea of having Y/N under the desk, her lips enveloping his cock like she was made for it. 

It was one of those days where he had to hide away, the quiet nature of the office being contributed to paperwork being caught up on and files being put away. Aaron was doing his best, gazing at an open file while he was tapping the back of the pen against the desk. 

His mind was quite adventurous today, his cock hard and luckily concealed by the desk he was positioned at. All Y/N did was sip her coffee from a straw, her lipstick staining the metal straw from the tumbler as she was enthralled in her own paperwork. 

Somehow, that was enough to have him trembling in his office chair.

It was pathetic, like he was reliving the times of being a horny teenager who got turned on by damn near everything in sight.

However, it wasn’t long until he heard a knock against the door, gaze tilted upwards. That was when his worst fear entered the room. Y/N. The one who had him hard as a rock at his desk, the one who had been giving him hell for the months she’d been working there.

“Y/L/N. What can I do for you?”

“I wanted to drop off a file for your review.” Her words were soft as she held it up. “Also, can I talk to you?” 

Fuck.

“Of course. Shut the door.” 

The minute the door was shut, that was when that suffocating sexual tension was filling the room, so bad that he was sure he wouldn’t be able to breathe until she left. “What’s the problem?”

“Are you mad at me? Because you haven’t spoken to me. You actively ignore me.” Her boldness was something he expected, the woman not being one to lightly word anything. 

“Of course I’m not mad at you. I don’t see why you’d think I’ve been avoiding you.”

“You run straight to your office! Don’t bullshit me, Hotchner. What did I do?”

“Nothing! You’ve done nothing.” 

She didn’t believe him, eyes narrowing as she leaned back in the chair behind her. She was sure why he ignored her. Or maybe it was just a delusion she had where he actively wanted her just as badly as she wanted him.

“I see the way you look at me, Aaron.” 

“Excuse me?”

“You think I can’t tell? You think I didn’t notice the way you make it a point to brush against me? The way that you wait for me before you even attempt to walk down the hall?”

Fuck. She was a better profiler than he gave her credit for.

“I don’t know-”

“You think I also didn’t notice the way that you looked at me when I was sipping my coffee? The way that you just had to run into your office before anything could be noticed? Aaron, you’re a profiler. You should do better at hiding your reactions.”

The words had him flabbergasted, mouth open in disbelief from the indication that he’d be turned on by something as small as her sipping a straw. Too bad she hit the nail right on the goddamn head.

“This isn’t appropriate. I advise you to leave my office.”

“Walk me out. Or are you too afraid to show me how right I am?”

The silence after that was loud. It was like Aaron had to collect himself.

“That’s what I thought.” Y/N taunted, making the male finally stand up from his desk. That was what caused her to shut her mouth entirely, looking at her boss wide-eyed as if she’d just gotten in trouble.

“What? You’re not gonna talk anymore? I think you’re getting too smug with this.” He spoke, voice low as the tone of authority took over. He walked to the office door to lock it, lowering the blinds soon after to avoid the whole office looking inside.

“Nothing to say?” He asked, arms tucked over his chest as Y/N was slowly looking away. “W-well..”

“Pathetic. I knew you were all bark and no bite. It’s a shame.” He tsked, head shaking with disapproval. “Now get up.” 

Y/N was slow as she was standing up, her face flushing as she could feel arousal soaking into her panties at his authoritative tone, his eyes dark as he watched her body rise from the chair before her arms were behind her back.

“You’ve been pushing my buttons ever since you started with the flirting bullshit.” His veiny hands were moving to remove the tie from his neck, eyes watching her figure as she seemed frozen; a deer in headlights.

“I think it’s time to give a cocky little brat what she wants. Open your mouth.”

With an eyebrow raising, Y/N slowly let her mouth fall open. The moment she felt the tie being stuffed in her mouth, she barely had time to process what was happening before she was being bent over the desk.

There was a mess of files and other items that she’d landed on, head tilting to the side as she let her eyes stay on Aaron.

He looked at her with hunger, like a predator stalking its prey and ready to pounce at any given point. The normally beautiful honey colored irises were clouded over with deep lust, his hands running down her hips while he was situated behind her. 

“You need to be taught to respect your unit chief. I’m not gonna tolerate your behavior any longer after this.”

The woman was keeping her eyes on Aaron, body making an effort to push back against his for any ounce of friction. “Ah! No ma’am.” The man began, hand roughly coming down to give her clothed ass a rough slap. 

The sting had her moaning around the tie in her mouth, tears brimming her eyes from the pleasurable pain, body jerking when three more hits were coming down. “You’re not getting what you want. You are too entitled and I’m sick of it.”

His hands were moving to grip her hips, thumbs running over the skin under her shirt just to feel the warmth of her soft skin. “Let me know if you want me to stop at any point.” He spoke, tone hard yet his demeanor softened.

Last thing he was going to do was do anything that she was uncomfortable with. 

When there was an indication that she wanted him to keep up with his motions, his hands were moving to bunch up the skirt around her hips. Aaron’s eyebrows raised in curiosity. “Look at how wet you are.. I haven’t even done anything to you yet.” His hand was running up the back of Y/N’s thigh, continuing onward until the palm of his hand was flush against her clothed cunt, the warmth radiating against his hand as he was adding pressure, chuckling at the muffled whine.

“So desperate. Gonna fuck you with my fingers, think you can handle that?” He asked, finger slowly moving to push her wet panties to the side, thumb making its way to her clit, eliciting another muffled moan. As his hand was pulling back, he let his middle finger slowly run through her folds, the arousal generously coating his finger before he was slowly pushing it into her tight heat.

He could’ve came in his pants right there, mouth open slightly as he was greeted with warm, velvety walls that were tightening around the digit from just how desperate the woman was. “Keep still.” He warned, watching the hips try and rock against his hand.

“You were talking so much shit earlier. Now look at how desperate you are,”

The words caused Y/N’s body to shudder with anticipation of getting more than one finger, playing his game and cooperating.

“There we go. See what happens when you listen and you’re not combative and smug? I just might like you better with my tie in your mouth.” He snickered, a second finger slowly sliding into her dripping cunt as he worked on scissoring her open. “Fuck, you’re such a pretty little thing.” He praised, unholy sounds of squelching filling the room from her wetness.

As his fingers curled upwards, he couldn’t help the chuckle that left his lips as soon as she was gasping around his tie, his fingertips pushing the spongy spot inside of her that had her eyes fluttering shut, drool from the corners of her mouth due to the tie starting to run down her jaw.

Thankfully, Aaron had an extra so this wouldn’t be suspicious when the other profilers were surrounded by Y/N after the deed here was done. If anything, this appeared to be a typical conversation between one of the team members and their leader.

When her walls were spasming around his fingers, he took the opportunity to slip both fingers out of her cunt while chuckling at her whine in response to that. “Such a needy little slut. Don’t worry.. I’m gonna take care of you. Just gotta keep quiet.”

The words made Y/N’s pussy clench around nothing, a muffled moan filling the office as the sound of his belt being undone chased behind it. After tossing the belt to the side, he pushed his pants down along with his boxers. 

“Shh, I know.” He whispered as if it were a secret between them when he could hear her whines of impatience, his hand wrapping around his hard cock, hand giving it a few lazy tugs to prepare himself. He let his thick tip tease her folds, spreading her slick around as if the two needed lube. “Alright. Ready?”

With one hand on her hip, he was slowly pushing his cock into her tight cunt, groaning lowly as he watched her pussy envelope his shaft, swallowing him to the hilt while her hands were holding onto the desk tightly.

He waited a solid minute for her to adjust, his hand rubbing her lower back in an effort to soothe her, wanting to have her as comfortable as possible. 

When she was giving him the sign she was ready, he was rolling his hips slowly, the man letting out a soft breath that he didn’t know he was holding in. Bringing both hands to grip her hips, it wasn’t long until he was doing deeper, faster strokes. 

“Fuck, bite my tie harder, darling. You’re being too loud.” He murmured, hips continuing to slam into hers as a thin layer of sweat was collecting on his forehead. With the desk rocking at a rhythm with Aaron’s thrusts, it was no surprise when some papers or files were falling to the ground around the desk. 

He wasn’t gonna worry about that now.

Currently, he was too focused on the rough snap of his hips against Y/N’s, the sound of skin crashing against one another as well as their combined noises filling the office, the desk making its own audio debut as he got a bit rougher as he was fucking her pussy raw.

“Fuck. I’m gonna cum.” He growled, cock twitching as he could feel Y/N’s tight cunt clench him in place, his hand now reaching down to find her throbbing, desperate clit to bring her to relief. 

As soon as he could feel her velvety walls pulsating around him and the feeling of her creaming on his cock, that was it for him. His nails dug into her hips, no doubt leaving crescent moon marks while her cunt was milking all the cum that Aaron had to offer.

“Y/L/N,” He spoke, chest rising and falling as he was working on catching his breath, his hand moving to her mouth to retrieve his now soaked tie. 

“You need some lessons on manners for that fucking mouth of yours.” His voice was low as he was pulling his cock from her warmth, watching his cum leak out of her pussy before slowly pulling her panties back up. 

“I think I know just the way to help you though,” 

[todaysdocument]

Discharge Petition for H.R. 7152, the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Record Group 233: Records of the U.S. House of RepresentativesSeries: General Records

This item, H.R. 7152, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, faced strong opposition in the House Rules Committee. Howard Smith, Chairman of the committee, refused to schedule hearings for the bill. Emanuel Celler, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, attempted to use this discharge petition to move the bill out of committee without holding hearings. The petition failed to gain the required majority of Congress (218 signatures), but forced Chairman Smith to schedule hearings.

88th CONGRESS. House of Representatives No. 5 Motion to Discharge a Committee from the Consideration of a RESOLUTION (State whether bill, joint resolution, or resolution) December 9, 1963 To the Clerk of the House of Representatives: Pursuant to Clause 4 of Rule XXVII (see rule on page 7), I EMANUEL CELLER (Name of Member), move to discharge to the Commitee on RULES (Committee) from the consideration of the RESOLUTION; H. Res. 574 entitled, a RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE BILL (H. R. 7152) which was referred to said committee November 27, 1963 in support of which motion the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives affix their signatures, to wit: 1. Emanuel Celler 2. John J. Rooney 3. Seymour Halpern 4. James G Fulton 5. Thomas W Pelly 6. Robt N. C. Nix 7. Jeffery Cohelan 8. W A Barrett 9. William S. Mailiard 10. 11. Augustus F. Hawkins 12. Otis G. Pike 13. Benjamin S Rosenthal 14. Spark M Matsunaga 15. Frank M. Clark 16. William L Dawson 17. Melvin Price 18. John C. Kluczynski 19. Barratt O'Hara 20. George E. Shipley 21. Dan Rostenkowski 22. Ralph J. Rivers[page] 2 23. Everett G. Burkhalter 24. Robert L. Leggett 25. William L St Onge 26. Edward P. Boland 27. Winfield K. Denton 28. David J. Flood 29. 30. Lucian N. Nedzi 31. James Roosevelt 32. Henry C Reuss 33. Charles S. Joelson 34. Samuel N. Friedel 35. George M. Rhodes 36. William F. Ryan 37. Clarence D. Long 38. Charles C. Diggs Jr 39. Morris K. Udall 40. Wm J. Randall 41. 42. Donald M. Fraser 43. Joseph G. Minish 44. Edith Green 45. Neil Staebler 46. 47. Ralph R. Harding 48. Frank M. Karsten 49. 50. John H. Dent 51. John Brademas 52. John E. Moss 53. Jacob H. Gilbert 54. Leonor K. Sullivan 55. John F. Shelley 56. 57. Lionel Van Deerlin 58. Carlton R. Sickles 59. 60. Edward R. Finnegan 61. Julia Butler Hansen 62. Richard Bolling 63. Ken Heckler 64. Herman Toll 65. Ray J Madden 66. J Edward Roush 67. James A. Burke 68. Frank C. Osmers Jr 69. Adam Powell 70. 71. Fred Schwengel 72. Philip J. Philiben 73. Byron G. Rogers 74. John F. Baldwin 75. Joseph Karth 76. 77. Roland V. Libonati 78. John V. Lindsay 79. Stanley R. Tupper 80. Joseph M. McDade 81. Wm Broomfield 82. 83. 84. Robert J Corbett 85. 86. Craig Hosmer87. Robert N. Giaimo 88. Claude Pepper 89. William T Murphy 90. George H. Fallon 91. Hugh L. Carey 92. Robert T. Secrest 93. Harley O. Staggers 94. Thor C. Tollefson 95. Edward J. Patten 96. 97. Al Ullman 98. Bernard F. Grabowski 99. John A. Blatnik 100. 101. Florence P. Dwyer 102. Thomas L. ? 103. 104. Peter W. Rodino 105. Milton W. Glenn 106. Harlan Hagen 107. James A. Byrne 108. John M. Murphy 109. Henry B. Gonzalez 110. Arnold Olson 111. Harold D Donahue 112. Kenneth J. Gray 113. James C. Healey 114. Michael A Feighan 115. Thomas R. O'Neill 116. Alphonzo Bell 117. George M. Wallhauser 118. Richard S. Schweiker 119. 120. Albert Thomas 121. 122. Graham Purcell 123. Homer Thornberry 124. 125. Leo W. O'Brien 126. Thomas E. Morgan 127. Joseph M. Montoya 128. Leonard Farbstein 129. John S. Monagan 130. Brad Morse 131. Neil Smith 132. Harry R. Sheppard 133. Don Edwards 134. James G. O'Hara 135. 136. Fred B. Rooney 137. George E. Brown Jr. 138. 139. Edward R. Roybal 140. Harris. B McDowell jr. 141. Torbert H. McDonall 142. Edward A. Garmatz 143. Richard E. Lankford 144. Richard Fulton 145. Elizabeth Kee 146. James J. Delaney 147. Frank Thompson Jr 148. 149. Lester R. Johnson 150. Charles A. Buckley4 151. Richard T. Hanna 152. James Corman 153. Paul A Fino 154. Harold M. Ryan 155. Martha W. Griffiths 156. Adam E. Konski 157. Chas W. Wilson 158. Michael J. Kewan 160. Alex Brooks 161. Clark W. Thompson 162. John D. Gringell [?] 163. Thomas P. Gill 164. Edna F. Kelly 165. Eugene J. Keogh 166 John. B. Duncan 167. Elmer J. Dolland 168. Joe Caul 169. Arnold Olsen 170. Monte B. Fascell [?] 171. [not deciphered] 172. J. Dulek 173. Joe W. [undeciphered] 174. J. J. Pickle [Numbers 175 through 214 are blank]

[cantsayidont]

December 1934. A Margaret Brundage cover announcing that this issue of WEIRD TALES features a Robert E. Howard novelette, along with a short story by Bassett Morgan ("The Vengeance of Ti Fong"); the novelette "Xeethra" by Clark Ashton Smith; and the novelette "Black God's Shadow" by C.L. Moore. Other contents include a translation of the Jean Ray story "Le gardien du cimetière"; a chapter of the serial "The Trail of the Cloven Hoof" by Arlton Eagie; short stories by Brooke Byrne, August Derleth, and Frank Owen; and interior art by H.R. Hammond.

[hannahhook7744]

The Storm Bringer (Information and History)

PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION:

——————————————————————————

LOCATION:

Dock of Arendelle (sometimes after d3),

Dock of Auardon (sometimes after d3),

Dock of Corona (sometimes after d3),

Dock of Neverland (sometimes after d3),

Dock of the Isle of the Lost (d1-d3).

OWNER(S):

Blackbeard (Captain)(Previously),

Hannah Hook (Captain)(Current),

René Montaudoin (Captain)(Previously).

WORKERS:

Aaron Bog (The Treasuer),

Abi Hun (Crewmate)(Former),

Alex Aoratos-Sinclair (Helmsman),

Amira Bint Aladdin Bin Cassim Al Hamed of Agrabah (Translator)(Future),

Anna Bog (The Lawyer),

Artemis Foundling (Junior),

Atlas Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Atticus Hook (Babysitter Crewmate)(Former),

Beau Foundling (Junior),

Clarice Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Craven Bog (Junior)(Future),

Credence Foundling (Junior),

D.E Anonymous (Anonymous Helper),

Darcy Aoratos (The Medic),

Darius Foundling (Junior),

Darren Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Derrick Red (Crewmate)(Former),

Eduardo Frollo (The Cooper),

Elara Foundling (Junior),

Evelyn de la Cruz (The Prison Guard),

Fiona Foundling (The Look Out),

Francesca Delgado (The Boatswain),

Genesis Flores (The Navigator),

Greyson Hook (Crewmate)(Former),

Gunner Harp (Back up Medic),

Harley Foundling (Junior),

Haul Bjorgman (The Deckhand and Translator)(Future),

Herlando Dancer (Back up Medic),

Hope Sid (The Entertainment and h.r. Representative),

Howiee Wolf (Guard),

Ian Hook (Crewmate)(Former),

Ike Bog (Junior)(Future),

Issac Cipher (Front Desk Attendant),

Isaac Olympian (Crewmate)(Former),

Isaac of Maldonia (Crewmate)(Former),

James Rourke (The Rigger),

Joey Starlights (Crewmate)(Former),

John Facilier (The Gunner),

Jolene Bog (Junior)(Future),

Josh de la Cruz (The Sailmaker),

Joy Foxworth (The Back Up, Back up Kid Wrangler)(Future),

Kailani ‘Clever’ Athanasiou (Storm Manager),

Lance Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Levi Giant (Junior),

Liberty Titan (The Backup Carpenter),

Luke Tremaine-Westergaard (1st Mate),

Luís Barbosa (The Carpenter),

Lysander Foundling (Junior),

Marcys Foundling (Junior),

Marinette Foundling (Junior),

Misty Del Rey-Silver (The Diver),

Morgan Hook (Crewmate)(Former),

Moxie Frankenstein-Van Helsing (Guard),

Nadia Foundling (Junior),

Nevin Hook (Crewmate)(Former),

Noah Aoratos (The Cabin Boy),

Noor Foundling (Junior),

Parker McLeach (The Powder Monkey),

Peachy Gothel (3rd Mate),

Prometheus Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Remi de Vil (4th Mate),

Rian Frankenstein-Van Helsing (The Trainer), 

River Le Beak (Crewmate),

Shan Bri (The Back up Kid Wrangler),

Shania Silver (The Kid Wrangler)(Former),

Shaun Fagin (Crewmate)(Former),

Skelebar Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Skia Aoratos (2nd Mate),

T.K Sykes (Crewmate)(Former),

Terrance Foundling (Junior),

Tiger Khan (Translator),

Tim Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Toby Foundling (Junior)(Future),

Tommy Wonderful (Junior),

Treycor Fae-Aoratos (The Quartermaster),

Tyson Foundling (Junior),

Willow Hawthorne (Junior).

VISITORS:

Captain Hook,

Ginny Gothel,

Hadie,

Harry Hook,

Mal,

Maleficent’s Goons,

Mama Hook,

The Gothel Twins,

The Smee Twins,

Zarina,

Etc. 

FINAL STATE:

Intact.

——————————————————————————

"Creatures of the Night, Prepare to fight!"

THE CREW'S BATTLE CRY.

The Storm Bringer is the name of a pirate ship that Hannah Hook and her crew own.

It served as headquarters for the pirate crew and can be seen throughout the series 'The Marvelous Misadventures of Hannah Hook and Co.'

——————————————————————————

Description:

——————————————————————————

The Storm Bringer is an old pirate ship that Hannah Hook won and fixed up for her crew. Repurposing it as a safe house/boat/home for her crew and replacing the sails with three homemade sails that have a matching flag up on the crowsnest, a single red flag, and two additional crimson red flags.

Its walls are covered in artwork that she and her crew made as well as random treasures they have picked up over the years. 

The wood is mainly brown with hints of red in some places and it has many rooms that the crew share (some of these ‘rooms’ are just areas with curtains hanging up to separate them. 

It is one of the few ships on the isle that is almost fully intact and the shape its in has been described as ‘remarkable’ by the few older pirates that have stepped abroad since the ship came into Hannah Hook’s possession. 

——————————————————————————

History:

——————————————————————————

Hannah Hook acquired the Storm Bringer from it's pervious owner, Blackbeard, in a poker game that she bested him at when she was 6.

In that game, she not only gained a ship but two new enemies (Blackbeard and his son, Barnaby) and the respect of the elder pirates on the isle.

Her first three crew members were Luke Tremaine-Westergaard and Skia Aoratos (her 1st and 2nd mate respectively) and River Le Beak (who decided to just be a crewmate) who helped her build her crew and repair the ship.

They ended up renaming the ship 'The Storm Bringer' and replacing it's old sails with ones they made themselves before tossing the ones in the storage closet.

And over the years, Hannah and her crew ended up redecorating the ship to make it feel more like home. Using art pieces they each made, rewards they'd received, and random treasures they had found to do so.

They even added on to the ship, making more rooms and making it look more intimidating and wild in the process.

——————————————————————————

Gallery:

——————————————————————————

(Old Design):

(New Design):

(Edit):

(Storm Bringer Contract):

(Storm Bringer Crew Tattoo):

(Crew Tryouts Poster):

[randgugotur-6]

[lala-sara]

About doppelgangers of different genders - isn’t Randolf Morgan male doppelganger of Tess Morgan? They both Wells’ partners in founding STARLabs... Just saying...

[thetldrplace]

Fascism, Integralism, and the Corporative Society- H.R. Morgan; Codex 4 and 5

This is a review of the second of Morgan's books on Fascist doctrine and ideology. His first book contained Codex 2 and 3. I read and covered that book back in Jan 2023. This one covers three sections: codex 4, 5, and 6.

In this post I'll cover codex 4, fascist doctrinal ideology, and codex 5, Integralism.

I started off reading fascist literature, as I explained previously, not because I'm a fascist myself, but because I, as a conservative, was hearing this term being used a lot, mainly as a general pejorative against people with whom one side had a political disagreement.

My thought at the time was, I doubt they have any idea what fascism really is. But when I thought about it, I realized I didn't really know much about it myself. So I decided I should educate myself. I started off trying to find some books about it, which was helpful, but those books weren't written by fascists themselves. I wanted to know how the fascists themselves came to think about the world, and how they arrived at fascism as the answer.

I imagine that most people, if asked what a fascist is, would probably say a racist/white nationalist, because the fascists they know of are Nazi Germany, and then they work backwards from there. But the Nazi's, while doctrinally fascist in many respects, were kind of an offshoot too.

As I've come to find out through reading their own literature, that's not really the case. So what follows is notes I took from the book, and on occasion, I make my own comments on the book.

Codex 4: Fascist Doctrinal Ideology

Introduction 

In his introduction, H.R. Morgan explains that ideology and doctrine are different.  Its ideology is the fundamental underpinnings, the doctrines are different from region to region due to differences in populations and cultures. 

The hallmarks of Fascism are:  State Social Corporatism  Support of and Investment in social and cultural traditionalism  National syndicalist  Nationalism  Anti-liberalism  Concentration on betterment of all conditions of existence of the national population  Anti-Marxism  Against monopoly capitalism  Against liberal socialism  Conservative social values based on protection of family  Politically non-conservative and non-liberal  Anti-materialist  Socially spiritualistic  Extreme patriotism  National autarchy  Anti-plutocracy- anti-oligarchic  Pro creation of insulated national economy  Against international finance capitalism  Import/export policies of domestic economic protectionism  Fascism - Fascist Doctrinal Ideology 

British Union- Oswald Mosley  Unity under control; the cooperation between a people morally and economically bound together for their mutual advantage and government that possesses the will and power to act for the common good. 

From WWI they saw that four things were essential to winning the war: Authority in government; voluntary discipline of the people; self-sufficiency in resources; scientific weapons. This would become the blueprint for the way forward in all government. 

"In 1922, there was a revolt against the class struggle of Marxism, to Fascism. The State is a condition of living, and not merely a form of government. The State is the life of the people taken as a whole." While individuals differ, what we admire most is the man who is intellectually, morally, and physically fit. The British Union seeks to project this threefold order of perfection into the State.  

From Mosley's "A New Movement Needed":  "We know that our resources are almost unlimited, we know that our power to produce is almost unlimited, and also that our power to consume is almost unlimited. This is because there are few men and women in the land who would not consume more had they the money to pay for what they want. The economic problem is, therefore, fundamentally one of money; that is, of the power to distribute things to the people who are in need of them." 

In tackling the problem, we have to shift from thinking that money is wealth. Life is wealth, since it enables us to work. The purpose of money isn't to create wealth, but to distribute it. We advocate managed currency, that is flexible instead of a rigid system of exchange; a system fitted to conditions, and is consequently a common-sense system. 

It is useless to suggest equality of incomes since there is no equality of talent. We want the end of usury and gambling in the money system. A common sense system of distribution is founded in work as wealth and not on money as wealth. This would end in the elimination of poverty. 

The Right to Work  We propose a "Corporate State". Since work is wealth, the state would be organized according to vocations, even currently unrecognized vocations such as motherhood. The trade unions and great industrial combines are the beginnings of this system.  Under the Corporate System, each occupation will be organized int a guild of producers, distributors and consumers, according to size and importance. Members will elect one or more members of parliament to represent its interests. As such, the government will truly represent the people. 

The Corporate State  The entire country will be organized as a national business, each corporation representing a department. Each corporation will elect its own representatives and, there being a common interest in each, he is likely to be an outstanding member whose qualifications are known to the whole electorate. Since there will be no parties to serve and fight for, talking will be reduced to a minimum. This will free the nation from the 'dictatorship of party politics'. 

But prosperity without contentedness is a blind alley, and since all men are different, and the creative power depends on self-expression, the key to this new way is freedom in cultural lives of one and all. 

We don't believe people are morally or intellectually free while they are economically shackled. Indeed, until people are economically free, they can't truly be free. 

We want people to be so well compensated for their work that they are free to enjoy the fruits of their labor. The end of work isn't profit, but leisure, and the development of leisure as a creative joy-bringing force is the ultimate goal in our philosophy. 

In the Corporate State, while work is planned, the cultural life of the people will be their own. 

Falange- Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera (Spain)  Twenty-Six Point Program   Nation – Unity - Empire  1. The supreme reality of Spain is the goal: individual, group, and class interests must give way to achieve the goal. 

2. Spain has a single destiny in the world. The current constitution hobbles it. 

3. We determine to build an empire. We claim preeminence in Europe for Spain, and will tolerate no interference. Hispanic cultural countries in the Americas should be united under Spain, who will act as the spiritual axis to the Spanish-speaking world. 

4. The armed forces must be built up to support our independence and goals. 

5. Spain must become a great naval power. 

State – Individual - Liberty  6. The State will be totalitarian in order to defend the integrity of the fatherland. All Spaniards will participate in this through family, municipal, and syndical roles. 

7. Human dignity, integrity, and freedom are eternal, intangible values. But no one is free unless he is part of a strong and free nation. No one will be permitted to use his freedom against the nation, and rigorous discipline will be implemented against anyone working to disunite the Spanish people. 

Economy – Labor – Class Struggle  9. Society will be organized corporately into syndicates, all working towards national economic unity. 

10. We repudiate capitalism, which shows no understanding of the needs of the people; and Marxism; which divides society into class struggle. 

11. National Syndicalism will eliminate the roots of class struggle by giving work to all towards the national unity. 

12. The duty of wealth is to better the conditions of the people. 

13. The State recognizes private property as a legitimate means of achieving individual, family, and social goals. 

14. Nationalization of banks and public utilities will occur. 

15. All Spaniards have the right to work. 

16. All Spaniards have the duty to work, and those that don't provide useful function will not be given the slightest consideration. 

Land  17. We will raise the standard of living in the countryside. 

18. Agricultural production will be enriched by: assuring minimum compensation, etc... 

19. Social reforms in the field of agriculture will be achieved by redistributing arable land to revive family farms; and moving farm workers in bad conditions to better conditions. 

20. Reforestation and livestock breeding will be undertaken, and those that resist will be severely punished. 

21. The State may take lands of those who acquired them through exploitation. 

22. Cultural patrimony of towns will be rebuilt 

National Education – Religion  23. A strong, united national spirit will be rigorously disciplined. All men will be enrolled in the army. 

24. Cultural life will be organized and all who merit it will be given higher education. 

25. The Catholic Church and the State will coordinate respective powers so as to permit not interference or activity that may impair the dignity of the State or national integrity. 

National Revolution  26. We'd like to do it peacefully, but if the current government won't roll over, we call for revolution and overthrow. 

Critique of Economic Liberalism  In a free society the first thing is labor, which is the sole source of wealth. 

Then there is barter, which is the exchange of goods we produce for the things produced by others. 

Then there is money- a commodity which we mutually agree will be accepted as an exchange medium. 

Then finally there is capital- which the excess saved that we did not need to expend. This saved wealth is used to give life to fresh enterprises. 

Capital makes industry possible. All this has happened without anyone needing to agree about any of it, and as Adam Smith says, the best thing is to leave it alone. It will produce best if left alone. 

But, as we've seen in England, the fullest example of capitalism, the effect has been disastrous. It has seen the near annihilation of private property in its traditional forms. It has transformed man's most direct link between himself and his goods into an instrument of power. Through the division of labor, man and his goods are increasingly distant, and finally, says Rivera, man is nothing more than an abstraction represented by slips of paper. 

The worst stage is finance-capitalism, which Rivera states, is opposed to both the employers AND workmen. He asserts this because in order to get a loan, they charge huge interest. They make money without producing anything.  

Rivera follows a classical Marxist approach to economic theory, in that he sees capitalism as necessarily leading to an inexorable concentration of wealth in ever fewer hands, and greater exploitation of workers, until the proletarian is left with no other choice but revolution. Fascism's goal then is to derail the capitalist system without recourse to the Marxist goal of the abolition of private property. Business is to be fostered, but finance capitalism, and particularly international finance capital, is to be forbidden. Syndicates will be organized to include every facet of labor that is needed for an autonomous state, and the State itself will work to see that the people's needs are met by assuring that the capital produced in the nation is directed towards the entirety of the population, not just a few. 

The basics of Rivera's pitch are a unity of purpose for Spain, and social justice. 

He derides political parties extensively. For example, on page 177, we read: "why should we require the intermediate and pernicious instrument of the political parties, which, in order to unite us in artificial groups, begin by disuniting us in the matter of genuine realities?" 

Dave Notes:  Rivera treats political parties almost like separate agential entities that descend upon the population and force them into unnatural groups, rather than entities that are the result of portions of the population that agree on a set of points, and disagree with another portion of the population about those points, which then seek to convince the other side of the rightness of their points and gain power so they can implement their policies.   The wording about "uniting the population" without the parties is obfuscation for what they really want to do: eliminate individuals choice. The supremacy of individual rights is the essence of liberalism, and this of course, gets in the way of what the Fascists want to do, which is implement total control over the nation. So they mask individual freedom as disunity, which is what happens when you allow people free choice: they disagree about certain things.  That of course results in things not getting done in so orderly a manner, but the cost of undoing that is that all men must toe the line to whatever the small group in power wants. They can call it 'unity' but it is a coerced unity.  

Rivera writes:  "The only way to solve the social question is by altering the economic organization from top to bottom. (those that don't understand say the State will absorb the individual) It is precisely with the individual that the complete revolution, the complete reorganization of Europe, must begin, because the one who has suffered most from this dislocation, the one who has become a mere molecule, without personality, substance, content or existence, is the wretched individual, who has been the last to undergo any of the improvements of life. Is this 'absorption by the State'?  What happens is that the individual will have the same destiny as the State. The State will have two aims: one is to strengthen the Patria; two is to make a larger number of men happier and more human and give them more share in human life." 

Codex 5: Integralism

The Essence of the Spiritual  "It is not possible that there is a new State, a new community, or a new civilization without there first being a new kind of man, and because of this, Integralism preaches Inner Revolution, revolution of the spirit, change of attitude in the face of reality and of occurring issues and adversities, which must necessarily precede the outer revolution." Plinio Salgado- Manifesto of Granabara 

Morgan writes that the next chapter is concerned with the spirituality of Fascism, and particularly will demonstrate how fascism will differ from country to country. Two examples are presented: Brazil and England. Both have different forms, but are essentially fascist in approach. 

Brazil  Manifesto of October 7, 1932 

The sections are: 

Conception of man and the universe 

As we understand the Brazilian nation 

The principle of Authority 

Our Nationalism 

Parties and Government 

I'm going to quote part of this to illustrate the banal nature of these proclamations:  "We Brazilians from all provinces, propose to create a culture, a civilization, a genuinely Brazilian way of life. We want to create a public right, according to our realities and aspirations, a government that guarantees the unity of all the provinces, the harmony of all classes, the initiatives of all individuals, the supervision of the State, and national construction." 

What we think of conspiracies and politicking groups and factions 

Social question as regards Brazilian Integralism 

The Family and Nation  

Integralist Guidelines  

XXI- Once organized the Integral State cannot allow to form, outside of their circle of action, any forces of a socio-political or economic order that could threaten its program; in these spheres of national life, everything must be controlled and supervised by the State.  

This is a relatively rare honest admission of what must happen with any totalitarian system. They'll claim they aren't authoritarian, but it can't be otherwise. Maybe in their minds, they imaging that everyone is just going to voluntarily accept their program. But that isn't reality, and its pure hubris to imagine that they have all the answers.  

They go on to say:   

Today the majority of countries have what is called representative democracy, or republicanism- This is not true democracy. Democracy is rule by the citizens. Representativism is a farce performed for the benefit of the public.  

Dave note:   Well, ok, we know that we have republicanism right now. Because those that established our government were wise enough to understand the problem with direct, true, democracy: it's another name for mob rule.   The writer goes on to advocate: "Let the people vote on... [then lists a variety of issues] – let the people decide on the proposed new laws of the land. This is true democracy – this is direct democracy: this is Fascism."    Putting aside how unwieldy it would be to literally bring every proposed law before the people as a direct vote, do the fascists propose that? Hell, NO. What we are told instead is that once they get power, EVERYTHING must be controlled by the State. And in point of fact, how else could it possibly be? How can they allow popular votes when they need absolute control to effectively implement their policies? The fact is that the people will have a very limited scope of movement, and only within prescribed boundaries. This is the opposite of democracy.    The reason for republicanism is to avoid the problems of mob rule. The idea is to put a layer between the mob, and the ability to change things on a whim. And even then, the constitution must be followed so that measures contrary to the existing law can’t be easily passed.   But what I find particularly galling is that the fascists are portraying themselves as ‘ the party of the people’ on one hand- true advocates of direct democracy in order to more closely serve ‘the needs of the people’, when the very system they propose putting in place is one that must exclude the majority and be designed and administered by a small few.  

Control: Making Good Citizens 

This chapter was by Lawrence Dennis. 

He speaks about the issue of control, particularly in the area of education, indoctrination, and inculcation of right attitudes. The first place we think about when we think of education is the school system, which is true. But the church, the press, the theatre, movies, radio, etc do more educating than schools, if for no other reason than they do so through the entire life of a citizen. For the fascist, the institutional formation of the character, mind, social attitudes and opinions with a social purpose must harmonize with, and not be antagonistic to, the larger purposes of the national plan. 

It's impossible to list all the offenses which purposive education can commit against the national interest.  

Dennis has a particular problem with the liberal system in that institutions like the church, or the press, form people’s minds and social attitudes with definite purposes formed by those in charge of the institutions, and that worse, some of those in institutions are controlled by powerful people or economic interests for private ends which are not consistent with the public ends. Fascism wants to institute a social discipline in the name of a given ideal of national interest. 

Liberal freedom in practice means freedom for powerful economic interests to manipulate public opinion, and the social attitudes of the masses, to suit selfish private or corporate ends. 

Dennis acknowledges that the question really is: WHO shall manipulate the opinions, feelings, and attitudes of the masses? For manipulated they must and will be in a civilization as complex and highly organized as ours. It is preferable to have mass opinions, feelings, and social attitudes manipulated by powerful private interests for personal or minority group ends, or to have mass opinions guided by a national State in the pursuit of some idealized plan of social well-being and order?  

 He states that with manipulation by private or corporate interests, the manipulators have no concern with, or responsibility for, public order. Whereas the State, or those in charge of government, can “never act with such irresponsibility, for after all, it is those in charge of government – not those in charge of finance houses – who, in a crisis, must deal with the hungry and unemployed mob and must ensure the trains run and the banks reopen”. 

Dave Note:  Now this seems disingenuous to me, since the argument is that government won’t act badly since it is responsible for dealing with anything that goes wrong. But the entire reason for fascism is that governments are so unresponsive to the people NOW. How can such an argument possibly seem reasonable when we consider even single autocratic rule, like monarchies, that can be utterly unresponsive to the messes they’ve made?  And the problem the founders recognized is that once all the power has been given to the rulers, as the fascists themselves are demanding, then the people have no recourse to redress of grievances. They can petition the government, but the fascist will just treat the aggrieved as agitators and ‘enemies of the people’ because the aggrieved have dared to oppose whatever plan the fascists have declared is for ‘the good of the country’.   At least with private interests, they have to try and convince us… or ‘manipulate’ us, as Dennis puts it.   While there may certainly be people that are uninterested in the greater good, there can also be plenty of other people who would put forth decent arguments for why promoting their particular interest is actually better for the people than not. The beauty of the liberal system is that it allows anyone to have a say. That of course means that unscrupulous actors get a say too.  But the problem in trying to deny unscrupulous actors a say, is that such a system ends up denying nearly everyone a say. It vests too much power in the hands of a few, and that level of power will prove irresistible to the unscrupulous anyway, who will do anything possible to get their hands on it.   But I guess the most appalling thing about Dennis’ argument is his insistence that government must be responsive to the citizens in a way that private interests don’t, while also decrying the fact that governments aren’t responsive to the people at all and are run by special interests. 

Phases –Oswald Mosley (1932-40) 

Mosley explains the phases necessary for a fascist takeover in Britain. 

Phase 0  The stated task is to completely overturn the current political system. The masses can't be appealed to since masses can't be the holders of an idea, they are responders. The pitch must be developed for those that will act as agents for social change; people who are already nationalists. He says fascists will never speak for all the people, only believers- the message is an invitation to join the movement, or get out of the way. 

Phase 1  They accept that the people will never openly support a 'fascist' movement, if for no other reason that masses, even when they do rise up, are never full members of a group. People are passive and active participation requires an active mind. History is made by minority groups that have come to embody the will of the people as a whole. Understanding the masses can't be appealed to- recognize the movement will be feared up until the time it achieves power, executes it's plans, and the people are won over by the brilliance of the new system. Propaganda will be necessary in the promotion of ideas. Ideas need to be promoted... not organizations. The fascists will be installing a new set of beliefs, which will be like a political religion. It IS a religion in the sense that it will be carried out with the same fanatical belief that a genuinely religious person has, but founded in rationalized political ideology. 

There is a distinction between followers, who are willing to go along when it is in their convenience, and members, fully integrated believers. Followers shouldn't be pressured. They don’t need to be forced, just let them follow in their own way. This is because it is absolutely essential to keep the members- the fighting element- pure. 

The fascists don't need intellectuals, they need brutes who can form hard lines, take and dish out punishment, and can rise above fear. 

Phase 2  Once a new type of fighting organization is formed, it needs to be established as the main opposition to the system. But if the fight is between the system and the organization, the organization will almost certainly lose, so they need to make so that the people take most of the lash. This will move them off the sidelines and onto the organization's side. There will be both a small percentage of true believers, and an equal percentage of true haters. The middle majority are basically cattle. They are capable of understanding, and they can get pissed over issues, but they basically want to be left alone.  

Here they are taking from the Marxist playbook that they want the middle ground to bottom out- for things to get way worse so that the system burns its bridges. When this happens, the displaced are ripe for joining revolutions. 

[countless-dreamsss]

Speaking of Nash having it rough and the gifset you posted, did you notice how Nash said "I do," when Barry was asking about how he can't understand why he'd want to rescue Iris? Did he have a Tess of his own??

Hey anon, great question!

To start, every Harrison Wells, aside from Sherloque and anyone a part of the Council, that we've seen has had a Morgan counterpart.

E-1 Harrison "Cupcake" had his wife, Tess.

E-2 Harrison "Harry" also had his wife, Tess.

E-19 Harrison "H.R." had his partner, Randolf Morgan. It's not clear, for me at least, if H.R. is bisexual or simply experimental because we've only seem him protrayed as a ladies man, and he was in a romantic relationship with Tracey, however, it's hard for me to believe that he didn't have some sort of intimate relationship with his Morgan counterpart.

E-22 Harrison "Wells 2.0", we don't know much about his romantic life, BUT we do know that he has a daughter, so I don't doubt that he too had his very own Tess.

Sorry, I don't mean to drone on with a list of all the Wells I can think of, so finally the possible answer to your question:

For E-719 (at least I believe he's from E-719) Harrison "Nash", again, we don't know much about his romantic background, but I can't help but think that Nash also had his own Morgan counterpart. Male or female, the loss of a loved one, figurative or literally, isn't something new to Nash.

We know that when he met Maya, that he was single, or at least not married.

I can imagine their situation being that Nash would go away months at a time on his adventures, while his loved one was back home. Then, it became a cycle: Nash would leave to solve a mystery, come back home, then leave again once the next mystery came up. Eventually, this could have taken a toll on his Morgan counterpart, and Morgan probably decided it was best to end the relationship.

[plusorminuscongress]

H.R.446 To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project.

H.R.446, sponsored by Rep. Morgan Griffith, became law on July 23rd, 2018. https://ift.tt/2teiEr7

[todaysdocument]

House Committee on Un-American Activities (p 1,3), 1/17/1962

The Committee approved the introduction of legislation to “correct the situation” of passports being issued to members of the Communist Party, and approved the investigation of several groups.

File Unit: Minutes of Full Committee and Subcommittee Meetings of the Internal Security Committee During the 80th through 93rd Congresses, 1945 - 1976

Series: Committee Papers, 1945 - 1975

Record Group 233: Records of the U.S. House of Representatives, 1789 - 2015

Transcription:

COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES

January 17, 1962

The Committee on Un-American Activities met in executive session on Wednesday, January 17, 1962, in Room 225 at 10:00 o'clock a.m. The following members were present:

Francis E. Walter, Chairman

Morgan M. Moulder

Clyde Doyle

Edwin E. Willis (10:15 a.m.)

William M. Tuck

Gordon H. Scherer

August E. Johansen

Donald C. Bruce

Henry C. Schadeberg

Also present were the following members of the Committee staff: Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., Director; Alfred M. Nittle and John C. Walsh, Counsel; Gwenn Lewis, Administrative Assistant; and Juliette P. Joray, Recording Clerk.

The Chairman called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m.

The Chairman expressed his concern over the regulations recently issued by the Department of State concerning the issuance of passports to members of Communist organizations. He stated that in his opinion an amendment should be added to the Internal Security Act of 1950 to correct this situation. The Committee agreed and the Chairman instructed the staff to prepare the necessary legislation for introduction at the earliest opportunity.

The Director called the attention of the Committee members to a Committee print entitled "The New Role of National Legislative Bodies in the Communist Conspiracy" a reprint of "How Parliament Can Play a Revolutionary Part in the Transition to Socialism, and "The Role of the Popular Masses" by Jan Kozak, historian of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. Early consideration was suggested and on a motion by Mr. Scherer, seconded by Mr. Doyle and unanimously adopted, it was agreed to authorize the printing of this document.

The resolution for funds providing for $331,000.00 for the operation of the Committee during the calendar year of 1962 was submitted to the members for their consideration. Mr. Scherer offered an amendment increasing the amount to $350,000.00. The resolution as amended was agreed to and reads as follows:

RESOLVED, That effective January 4, 1962, expenses of conducting the investigations authorized by Section 18 of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, incurred by the Committee on Un-American Activities, acting as a whole or by subcommittee, not to exceed $350,000.00, including expenditures for employment of such experts, special counsel, investigators, and such clerical, stenographic, and other assistants, and which shall also be available for expenses

[page 2]

January 17, 1962

Page 3

The Director reminded the Committee that H.R. 4469 and H.R. 5751, bills emanating from this Committee, had passed the House during the first session and were awaiting action in the Senate.

The Committee considered and approved preliminary investigations now being conducted by the staff which may result in future hearings. Among these are developments in Communist efforts to evade the effects of the Internal Security Act of 1950, more specifically, the expulsion from the Buffalo Communist Party of six members who advocated the dissolution of the Communist Party because of the registration required by the Act. It is believed that some of these persons might be developed into friendly witnesses if contacted.

Also included is an investigation of three people in Buffalo who used the 5th Amendment before the Committee and whose names appear in the indictment prepared against this Committee by the American Civil Liberties Union. It is understood that a witness can be found who can identify these three persons as having continued their membership in the Communist Party after having been reinstated in their jobs by a Court decision.

And investigation of the American Negro Labor Vanguard was also approved by the Committee, This is a new organization of Communist members which appears to have the cooperation of the Socialist Workers Party, the Workers World Party and a number of Negro nationalist groups.

Other preliminary investigations considered and approved by the Committee include the Women's Peace Groups; youth groups, including the publication "New Horizons for Youth," Communist organ for youth groups; propaganda activities conducted through the Russian and Greek Orthodox Churches; and legislation involving tax exemptions of Communist organizations, the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights and the Emergency Civil Liberties Union.

The following action was taken by the Committee relative to the proposed hearings in Los Angeles, California, later this year:

BE IT RESOLVED, that a hearing by the Committee on Un-American Activities or a subcommittee thereof be held in Los Angeles, California, at such time as the Chairman may designate relating to the structure, objectives and activities of the Communist Party in Southern California for the legislative purpose of receiving information designed to aid the Committee and Congress in determining whether the Internal Security Act of 1950 should be amended in a manner to make unlawful membership in the Communist Party of the United States, and that the staff of the Committee be authorized to conduct investigations deemed reasonably necessary in a preparation for said hearings.

[hannahhook7744]

Stormbringer Crew Species;

Aaron Bog (The Treasuer)= Demon-Human Hybrid.  

Abi Hun (Crewmate)(Former)= Human.

Alex Aoratos-Sinclair (Helmsman)= Demigod.

Amira Bint Aladdin Bin Cassim Al Hamed of Agrabah (Translator)(Future)= Human.

 Anna Bog (The Lawyer)= Demon-Human Hybrid. 

 Artemis Foundling (Junior)= (Thought To Be) Human With Severe  Jaundice.

Athena Queen (The New Powder Monkey and Rigger)= Witch.

 Atlas Foundling (Junior)(Future)= (Thought To Be) Changeling-Shapeshifter Hybrid.

 Atticus Hook (Babysitter Crewmate)(Former)= Human.

 Beau Foundling (Junior)= Human-Goblin-Troll Hybrid.

Clarisse Foundling (Junior)(Future)= Orge-Human Hybrid.

 Craven Bog (Junior)(Future)= Demon-Human Hybrid. 

Credence Foundling (Junior)= Centaurcorn.

 D.E Anonymous (Anonymous Helper)= Unknown. Thought to be a ghost. 

Darcy Aoratos (The Medic)= Witch Demigod.

Darius Foundling (Junior)= Mummy-Human Hybrid.

Darren Foundling (Junior)(Future)= Disabled Human. 

Derrick Red (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 Eduardo Frollo (The Cooper)= Human.

 Elara Foundling (Junior)= (Thought To Be) Elf-Human Hybrid.

 Evelyn de la Cruz (The Prison Guard)= Witch.

 Fiona Foundling (The Look Out)= Fairy.

 Francesca Delgado (The Boatswain )(Former)= Witch.

Genesis Flores (The Navigator )(Former)= Witch.

 Greyson Hook (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 Gunner Harp (Back up Medic)= Demigod-Harp Angel Humanoid Hybrid.

Hannah Hook (Captain)= MagicBorn Witch.

 Harley Foundling (Junior)= Green Humanoid Thought To Be From An Alternate Realm.

 Haul Bjorgman (The Deckhand and Translator )(Future)= Human (But Could Be Considered A Reverse Changeling Via His Father).

 Herlando Dancer (Back up Medic)= Vampire-Human Hybrid.

 Hope Sid (The Entertainment and H.R. Representative)= Banshee-Wizard Hybrid.

 Howiee Wolf (Guard)= Werewolf-Wolf Humanoid Hybrid.

Ian Hook (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 Ike Bog (Junior )(Future)= Demon-Human Hybrid. 

 Issac Cipher (Front Desk Attendant)= Extradimensional Dream Demon (Possibly A Hybrid).

 Isaac Olympian (Crewmate )(Former)= Godling.

 Isaac of Maldonia (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 James Rourke (The Rigger)(Former)= Human.

Joey Skylights (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

John Facilier (The Gunner)=  Evil Bokor-Demigod Hybrid. Jolene Bog (Junior )(Future)= Demon-Human Hybrid. 

 Josh de la Cruz (The Sailmaker)= Witch.

Joy Foxworth (The Back Up  Back up Kid Wrangler )(Future)= Human.

 Kailani ‘Clever’ Olympian (Storm Manager)= Evil Bokor-Demigod Hybrid.

Lance Foundling (Junior )(Future)= Black Eyed, Forked Tongued, Albino Human That Was Saved From Becoming An Imbunche (By Hannah).

 Levi Giant (Junior)= Human-Giant Hybrid.

 Liberty Titan (The Backup Carpenter)= Titan-Cyclops Hybrid. 

Luke Tremaine-Westergaard (1st Mate)= Human. 

Luís Barbosa (The Carpenter)= Human.

Lysander Foundling (Junior)= Satyr (But Suspected Hybrid). 

 Marcys Foundling (Junior)= Centaur (But Suspected Hybrid).

Marinette Foundling (Junior)= Bluish-Grey Humanoid.

Misty Del Rey-Silver (The Diver)= Human-Merperson Hybrid.

Morgan Hook (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 Moxie Frankenstein-Van Helsing (Guard)= Born Human, Resurrected Into Something Akin To A Wendigo But Not Exactly.

Nadia Foundling (Junior)= Genie-Human Hybrid.

 Nevin Hook (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

Noah Aoratos (The Cabin Boy)= Godling.

Noor Foundling (Junior)= Genie-Human Hybrid.

 Parker McLeach (The Powder Monkey)(Former)= Human.

 Peachy Gothel (3rd Mate)= Witch/Magical Person.

Prometheus Foundling (Junior)(Future)= Disabled Human.

Remi de Vil (4th Mate)= Human Of Godly Decent.

 Rian Frankenstein-Van Helsing (The Trainer)= Born Human, Resurrected Into Something Zombie-Like.

 River Le Beak (Crewmate)= Human-Merperson Hybrid.

Shan Bri (The Back up Kid Wrangler)= Human (With A Magical Parent).

 Shania Silver (The Kid Wrangler )(Former)= Human-Merperson Hybrid.

 Shaun Fagin (Crewmate )(Former)= Human. 

Skelebar Foundling (Junior )(Future)= Humanoid Creature. 

Skia Aoratos (2nd Mate)= Godling.

 T.K Sykes (Crewmate )(Former)= Human.

 Terrance Foundling (Junior)= Werewolf-Vampire Hybrid.

Tiger Khan (Translator)= Human Raised By A Tiger.

Tim Foundling (Junior )(Future)= Human Child Who Ages Backwards (Physically). 

 Toby Foundling (Junior )(Future)= Merperson.

 Tommy Wonderful (Junior)= Witch/Magical Person.

Treycor Fae-Aoratos (The Quartermaster)= Fairy-Demigod Hybrid.

Tyson Foundling (Junior)= Werecat.

Willow Hawthorne (Junior)= Human-Tree Nymph Hybrid. 

I just realized that Hannah Hook's crew are mostly none-humans. Which means that some things they all do would defo come off as off putting to those in Auradon lol.

[orbemnews]

House panel advances bill to study reparations for descendants of enslaved Americans The House Judiciary Committee late Wednesday night approved H.R. 40 by a vote of 25-17. The measure proposes the creation of a federal commission to study reparations and recommend remedies for the harm caused by slavery and the discriminatory policies that followed abolition. The commission would also consider how the US would formally apologize for “perpetration of gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants.” This legislation, however, has a very little chance of becoming law. Even if the bill is scheduled for a floor vote, it faces opposition from some Democrats and most Republicans and it’s unlikely it will receive the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster in the Senate. A Democratic aide told CNN that while this is the last step before a bill goes to the floor for a vote, there are a lot of reasons why this legislation may never have a full House vote. There are a number of steps in that process — and time constraints, vote considerations, as well as the news of the day can all be factors in why a bill doesn’t get to the floor for a vote. But many are still pushing for this legislation to pass, including House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler, a Democrat from New York. “This moment of national reckoning comes at a time when our nation must find constructive ways to confront a rising tide of racial and ethnic division,” he said in his opening remarks of the committee hearing. “White nationalism and police-community conflict are just part of the long legacy of anti-Black racism that has shaped our nation’s laws, institutions, and societal attitudes.” And Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas, who sponsored the bill, said in a statement before the vote in the Judiciary committee that the legislation was “long overdue.” “We’re asking for people to understand the pain, the violence, the brutality, the chattel-ness of what we went through,” she said during the committee hearing Wednesday. The deaths of Black Americans at the hands of police, including George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and most recently Daunte Wright, have drawn increased attention for Congress to do something about racial injustice and how they can address America’s longtime racism of African-Americans in the country. Republican Rep. Burgess Owens, who is the descendent of slaves, said during the committee markup that “slavery was and is still evil” but that “reparation is divisive” and demeaning to Black Americans. “It speaks to the fact that we are a hapless, hopeless race that never did anything but wait for White people to show up and help us,” the Utah Republican argued. “And it’s a falsehood. It’s demeaning to my parents’ generation.” Ahead of the committee vote Wednesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who sets the floor schedule, did not say when the bill would receive a full House floor vote. “We’ll see what the committee does and at that point in time, I’ll start to think about, what, what we’ll do” Hoyer said. Hoyer said he hopes that President Joe Biden will establish a presidential commission to study reparations. “I am also hopeful, that the President, who has mentioned this as an issue he cares a great deal about, I would hope that the President himself would move ahead with the convening of a commission, Presidential Commission, that would look at this issue, and come up with suggestions as to what actions are appropriate.” H.R. 40, which was first introduced in Congress in 1989 by Michigan Democrat John Conyers, is named for Gen. William Sherman’s Field Order No. 15 — a promise of 40 acres and a mule to former slaves at the end of the Civil War. Jackson Lee said Tuesday that the Congressional Black Caucus discussed reparations with Biden during their meeting that day, and that Biden is “committed to the concept” of reparations. This story has been updated with additional developments Thursday. CNN’s Morgan Rimmer, Manu Raju, Jason Hoffman and Annie Grayer contributed to this report. Source link Orbem News #advances #Americans #Bill #descendants #enslaved #House #HousepaneladvancesbilltostudyreparationsfordescendantsofenslavedAmericans-CNNPolitics #Panel #Politics #Reparations #Study

[dipulb3]

House panel advances bill to study reparations for descendants of enslaved Americans

New Post has been published on https://appradab.com/house-panel-advances-bill-to-study-reparations-for-descendants-of-enslaved-americans/

House panel advances bill to study reparations for descendants of enslaved Americans

The House Judiciary Committee late Wednesday night approved H.R. 40 by a vote of 25-17.

The measure proposes the creation of a federal commission to study reparations and recommend remedies for the harm caused by slavery and the discriminatory policies that followed abolition. The commission would also consider how the US would formally apologize for “perpetration of gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants.”

This legislation, however, has a very little chance of becoming law. Even if the bill is scheduled for a floor vote, it faces opposition from some Democrats and most Republicans and it’s unlikely it will receive the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster in the Senate.

A Democratic aide told Appradab that while this is the last step before a bill goes to the floor for a vote, there are a lot of reasons why this legislation may never have a full House vote. There are a number of steps in that process — and time constraints, vote considerations, as well as the news of the day can all be factors in why a bill doesn’t get to the floor for a vote.

But many are still pushing for this legislation to pass, including House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler, a Democrat from New York.

“This moment of national reckoning comes at a time when our nation must find constructive ways to confront a rising tide of racial and ethnic division,” he said in his opening remarks of the committee hearing. “White nationalism and police-community conflict are just part of the long legacy of anti-Black racism that has shaped our nation’s laws, institutions, and societal attitudes.”

And Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas, who sponsored the bill, said in a statement before the vote in the Judiciary committee that the legislation was “long overdue.”

“We’re asking for people to understand the pain, the violence, the brutality, the chattel-ness of what we went through,” she said during the committee hearing Wednesday.

The deaths of Black Americans at the hands of police, including George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and most recently Daunte Wright, have drawn increased attention for Congress to do something about racial injustice and how they can address America’s longtime racism of African-Americans in the country.

Republican Rep. Burgess Owens, who is the descendent of slaves, said during the committee markup that “slavery was and is still evil” but that “reparation is divisive” and demeaning to Black Americans.

“It speaks to the fact that we are a hapless, hopeless race that never did anything but wait for White people to show up and help us,” the Utah Republican argued. “And it’s a falsehood. It’s demeaning to my parents’ generation.”

Ahead of the committee vote Wednesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who sets the floor schedule, did not say when the bill would receive a full House floor vote.

“We’ll see what the committee does and at that point in time, I’ll start to think about, what, what we’ll do” Hoyer said.

Hoyer said he hopes that President Joe Biden will establish a presidential commission to study reparations.

“I am also hopeful, that the President, who has mentioned this as an issue he cares a great deal about, I would hope that the President himself would move ahead with the convening of a commission, Presidential Commission, that would look at this issue, and come up with suggestions as to what actions are appropriate.”

H.R. 40, which was first introduced in Congress in 1989 by Michigan Democrat John Conyers, is named for Gen. William Sherman’s Field Order No. 15 — a promise of 40 acres and a mule to former slaves at the end of the Civil War.

Jackson Lee said Tuesday that the Congressional Black Caucus discussed reparations with Biden during their meeting that day, and that Biden is “committed to the concept” of reparations.

This story has been updated with additional developments Thursday.

Appradab’s Morgan Rimmer, Manu Raju, Jason Hoffman and Annie Grayer contributed to this report.

[thetldrplace]

Fascism: The Total Society by H.R. Morgan

This is my notes and recap of Fascism: The Total Society by H.R. Morgan. He labels this book Codex Fascismo parts 2 and 3. This post covers the Letter to the Publisher, Morgan's intro, and then Codex 2, which contains excerpts from various Fascist writers. Codex 3 I'll cover in a different post.

I don't know what happened to Codex 1. Either it never got published, or it's just not available. There are 8 total (if there's a part one). These first two cover what exactly is meant by Totalitarian, or total society.

In most instances, I've simply taken notes on what they said. Since the term Fascist is thrown about by the left (as is socialist, by the right), and I personally didn't really know too much about what Fascists actually believe, I thought I'd get to the meat of the matter by reading up, just as I have for the Marxists.

I'm nearly done with Codex 3 and I believe I'm starting to get a handle on where they're coming from.

I have a few notes in this post, but I'm saving most of my commentary until I review part 3.

Letter to the Publisher

The author spent time among National Socialist and Marxian socialist groups- there is a real difference between actualized and doctrinal Fascism. Totalitarianism was a term coined by the Fascists to describe their all-encompassing ideology. It describes a benevolent government that puts its own people first.  

The actual goals of fascism are:

1. Creation of a 'corporate state' where workers, managers, finance, and consumers would create unions that would create a national government having the direct participation of the people.

2. Total restructuring of the import and export industries, the exclusion of foreign products when nationally  manufactured options exist, to ensure employment of citizens.

3. Development of domestic resources

4. Restoration of natural environment

5. Combat international global speculative finance capitalism and industrial import/export monopolies.

Fascism has been tied to racism through Nazi Germany, but it is not inherently so. The main thrust is national autarchy- self-sufficiency.  

Introduction

1. From Zeev Sternhell in Neither Right nor Left:

All Fascist movements abhor the liberal democracies and bourgeois society. They refuse to accept the conclusions inherent in materialism. The basic ideas are a synthesis of organic nationalism and anti-Marxist socialism, a rejection of liberalism, Marxism, and democracy. Fascism aims to bring about a total spiritual revolution. Fascism favors a state that represents all classes of society.

2. The essence of fascism is a national economic and social system based upon ideology stamped from the native soul of the people of that society. Fascism puts no premium on race, but rather on national cooperation and social-political syndicalism in addressing societal problems.

The bonding of social cultural identity with environmental and national policy is the prime factor at the base of fascism. Because fascism is specific to the culture and country, it can't be exported to another culture and country. Each country must define its own. But a driving force in fascism is modernism; fascists are futurists.

3. Origins of Fascism. The French syndicalists had a large part in the ideological development of fascism. Paul Derouldede formed his League of Patriots, which called for:

a) ultranationalism, b) contempt for liberal democracy, c) populist in that it was directed towards the masses, d) sought to harmonize classes, e) a central motif of national vengeance, f) militarism, g) mystique of discipline and death rooted in the national soil and popular culture.

Maurice Barres brought in ideas about hero worship, traditionalism, and national collectivism.  

Mussolini in Italy was the first to have a working government called fascist.  

4. Fascism is always clothed in militant dress. Uniforms create uniformity and unity of purpose, and serve as an important tool to eliminate social classes and create unity on a national level.  

Dave notes:

Morgan claims fascism is usually not an ideology which interferes with other countries, but that doesn't seem to be true. Pressing the greatness of the nation almost always leads to expansionism. Greatness is necessarily a comparative term. If our country is great, it's natural to ask, compared to what? Other nations. And if our greatness, in comparison to other countries, is pushed as part of a national symbol, then sooner or later, that national sentiment grows into superiority, and naturally from there into expansion. Morgan claims Italian war in Ethiopia was purely to protect Italian citizens, but this excuse has been made by tyrants all over the world. Putin is using it now in Ukraine. Morgan also claims fascism is primarily about social development of the nation, but unfortunately, the symbols of national greatness too often lead to superiority and then expansion.

5. Given communisms terrorizing of people in Italy, many Italians hated the communists. Even though Italy had no love for Germany, Nazi Germany was 1) the European power that was willing and able to stand up to Russia, and 2) there was some alignment in totalitarian doctrines. The difference was that Germany was committed to racial consciousness, while Italy was committed to national consciousness. Only later in Nazi occupied Europe did racial round-ups in Italy begin occurring.  

6. Cornelius Codreanu's Legion of Archangel Michael in Romania was both violently anti-communist, as well as national syndicalist or social collectivist nationalist. Tired of the influx of foreigners and communist infiltration, they were a more ethnic nationalist.

7. Fascism and national Socialism do align on many things, eugenics is not one.  Social programs and fascists agendas generally make it easy for minority ethnics to assimilate. But in countries with large minorities from different nations that refuse to assimilate and even insist in bringing in the same cultural elements that caused them to flee their home countries, will undoubtedly bring friction. While the author says that the vast majority of American national socialists are indeed racists, fascism itself has nothing to do with racism.

8. Fascism should in no way interfere with the legitimate practice of religion. In fact, the Christian notion of ethics and fair play is one of the prime motivating factors in the development of social doctrine, and fascism was supposed to resemble the social structure of the earliest Christian communities. Morgan uses Brazil's Açao Integralista Brasileira as an example. They see the development of history as humanity's struggle of materialism against spiritualism. In other words, the laws of nature and the pursuit of life's necessities on one side interfering with man's striving towards his own higher sense of self and conformity to God's will. Fascism advocates overthrowing the desires of the individual in order to engender a real concern for the welfare of others- meaning the national community: ideals of self-sacrifice, compassion, and a passion for the social well-being of fellow citizen/brothers.

9.  Morgan gives due to some excerpts from "The Coming Insurrection", by a group called the Invisible Committee.  

10. Society and science hurtles forward at an unbelievable pace. Fascism means to reintroduce the historical and biological infrastructure of human communities. This is the only kind of synthesis strong enough to resolve the enormous antagonism created by industrial development between the new realm of economic power and the old world of human relationships.  

11. From Giovanni Gentile: The ethical conception of the state as an autonomous personality (being ethical that has its own value and its own ends; subordinating to itself every social/economic interest, existence, and every individual interest; they have their own values – not to suffocate them, but to recognize them only as realizations of the personality of the State, as conscience, and as will.  

Codex Fascismo: Volume 2

What follows are excerpts from various fascist writings.

From The Coming Insurrection by the Invisible Committee

It's tough to summarize what exactly the authors are saying, since it seems extremely esoteric. There a lots of statements that are hard to understand, but feel like they would make sense to the severely disaffected. Such as:

"There is no gap between what we are; what we do; and what we are becoming."

"Intelligence does not mean knowing how to adapt. Or if that is a form of intelligence, it is the intelligence of slaves."

"To whom do the children of the era belong, to the television or to the parents? The truth is that we have been torn from any sense of belonging, we are no longer from anywhere, and the result is an undeniable suffering."

"We aren't cynical, we are just unwilling to be deceived."

"Exploitation of individual and collective labor power through the private or social approbation of surface value; participation in a common effort through the relation linking those who cooperate in the universe of production. These two dimensions are perversely confused in the notion of work, which explains workers' indifference at the end of the day, to both Marxist rhetoric, which denies the dimension of participation- and managerial rhetoric, which denies the dimension of exploitation."

"A school, a hospital, or a media center are all variations on the same theme; transparency, neutrality, and uniformity. These massive fluid, buildings are conceived without any need to know what they will house."

"We have to see that the economy is not 'in crisis', the economy is itself the crisis."

Dave's note:

The entire tone of the excerpts are an emotional appeal to disaffected people who aren't finding fulfillment. But I believe it's because they are somehow expecting fulfillment from the political system. They seem to have started from the Marxist view that man can find his fulfillment in political participation, working towards something 'greater', which is his participation in the thing that is bigger than himself- the community, or the state. That's why Marxism and fascism are both politically totalitarian- they have a total view of remaking humanity through a political social system that will provide meaning and fulfillment through participation.

There is a following section critiquing western, post-modern, nothing-is-true attitude.

The Origins and Doctrine of Fascism by Giovanni Gentile

Gentile explains that fascism isn't constrained to present fact, but must continually transform itself. It is essentially anti-materialistic. Anti-materialistic here means that life is not what it is, but what it ought to be, which requires duties and difficulties and abnegation. The fascist state is 'idea' that actuates itself. It isn't imposed on the citizen, but rather invests the citizen and informs his conscience.  

As 'idea', it transcends every present and contingent material form.  

Fascism is a party of action. This means a militia of action groups.  

It is totalitarian in nature, concerning itself not only with politics, but with will, thought, and sentiment.

Intellectualism is thought divorced from action, which fascism opposes. Fascists don't deny science of philosophy, but those things find synthesis in thought that is action.

Likewise state and individual are an inseparable necessary synthesis.

The fascist state is an entirely spiritual creation; it realizes itself through the consciousness and will of the individual rather than being imposed from on high. It is populist and truly democratic. Its anti-individualistic nature affirms a spiritual reality that is universal- the ideal of life is that individuals are meant to be lived in communion and service to each other. Fascism rejects license, which isn't liberty at all. True liberty is living according to your purpose, which is found in working towards the good of the community.

From Interpretations of Fascism by A James Gregor

Fascism is committed to industrial and economic growth. Development is necessary for securing and maintaining sovereign independence and enabling social aspirations. Fascism calls for a spiritual rebirth, but by spiritual, fascists mean the men live for the community. They understand materialism to be individualism, living for self. They believe fascism to be the embodiment of the will of the masses.

Industrialization

There are a series of excerpts all essentially declaring that fascism's focus on development provides an attractive investment climate, but it can't be ruled by international finance capital. It isn't elitist, it is populist. Fascism attempts to modernize and industrialize the economic system, while maintaining the social structure.

"Fascists come to control the economy more extensively than could any liberal or capitalist government."

Freedom from Dr ER Fields

"Free men are not equal and equal men are not free."

"Planning by consent means the state distributes the products of industry to the people, and finance is subordinated to this principle aim."

From Oswald Mosley

Protectionist economic policies to ensure domestic employment and guard against capitalist fluctuations.

from Fascism and War by Maj. General J.F.C. Fuller

In Fascism, life is looked at as a means to an end, not as an end itself. Individuals are mortal, the State, not only the mass of individuals, but the ideal, is immortal and greater. Fascism wants peace, but doesn’t fear war; the only thing it fears is inert living.

"Live dangerously is a better motto than safety first, which only breeds de-spiritualized eunuchs."

Poverty not only creates want, but a sense of injustice. If the state is seen to empower injustice, the suffering and thinking man is right to want to overthrow it. Poverty and revolution are created by maldistribution of wealth, by a rotten system of finance, wage cuts, rising prices, and a general lowering of the standard of living.  

Dave's notes:

It seems to me that poverty can only create a sense of injustice if those in poverty see some that aren't in poverty. If everyone is poor, then there is no sense of injustice. It isn't poverty per se, but inequality. But before, they had seemed to call this idea stupid by saying equal men aren't free. So are the fascists promising slavery?

The other sleight of hand her is the "maldistribution of wealth". Who in society is "distributing" … "the wealth"? Money doesn't rain down freely and then get distributed by our leaders, it is earned and produced.  

The Total Society

From the Manifesto of Guanabara by the Frente Integralista Brasileira

Integralism (Fascism) intends to build a new society in accordance with natural laws governing reality to create a transcendent destiny. It is a civil/political movement which aims for establishing the total happiness and well-being of the people. This will require a new kind of man, and so we preach inner revolution.

The person created by God has an immortal spirit and is given intelligence and will, and finds in the national state the means to better fulfill their duties according to their transcendent nature. Humans who can practice virtue should be judged for their civic, ethical, and moral virtues done for the common good.

Humans have integrity, dignity, inviolability and freedom, and are respected by the State to: have liberty when used for community benefit. The right to associate in order to protect the interests of their members and strengthen the common good; the right to property within the limits imposed by consideration of the common good, or the right to ownership exercised fairly for the benefit of the entire society.

Enlightenment on a moral/ethical and legal level is characterized by the belief that the State is the sole and exclusive source of morality, ethics, and justice. 

The right to property must be exercised fairly for the benefit of everyone.  

"The full national synthesis is an ethical state both anti-authoritarian and anti-individualist, which is a means- a tool in service of humanity, propelled by an ethical ideal.

From Politics and the Land by Jorian Jenks

Clear evidence of democracy's degeneracy is the apathy of citizens.

From The Problem of Decadence by A.K. Chesterton

Decadence is a collective disease and can only have a collective remedy. The populace becomes acquiescent. It asks for liberty without ever understanding to what use liberty is being put. It asks for tolerance of things that should be intolerable. Individuals escape into a world of fantasy, attempting to evade reality, which creates a mass neurosis, acting like a cancer on society.

Huge amounts of energy are used to keep us from reality so elites can continue to make money and exercise power. Citizens are barred from trying to solve these problems corporately. Realities are driven underground.

Fascism confronts this by bringing people back to reality. First legislating for man to work out his personal difficulties through contact with the social difficulties of his time. Humans are meant to serve a social purpose. In a real sense, man lives only so far as he is related to others- that his own special knowledge may serve society. While Fascism theoretically limits individuals, it in fact extends their power limitlessly by concentrating it where man is able to act as an expert- in his own field of study.

From  Can Private Enterprise Survive? by James Larratt

Fascism is protectionist, excluding goods that can be manufactured at home, from being imported. This increases home-market purchasing power through higher wages, in turn raising production and consumption together.  This is aided by the control of distribution and selling prices.

Efficiency and quality in production must be preserved, because they advance civilization. But excessive profits and concentration of excess capital must be regulated.

Once free of the materialist grasp of international finance, the nation will be free once again to assert the spiritual values and move forward in unity, prosperity, and peace.