#also go read fatherland by robert harris

[metal-album-of-the-week]

Album of the Week: Ensiferum - Winter Storm

Release: 2024

Length: 42:12

Thoughts: I procrastinated this a little bit for no clear reason. The beginning already tells you very clearly that this is Ensiferum with a lovely instrumental intro that sets the mood, but the rest of the album feels unconventional.

In fact, it feels like a love letter to Wintersun. Long Cold Winter of Sorrow and Strife is pretty on the nose, and the harmonies are so similar it's hard to think of anything else. Which is interesting because Wintersun has a fairly unique sound and another accomplished band going for that effect produced a very fun song.

As usual with these bands, the folk elements are what makes or breaks it. Ensiferum build a soundscape that brings you right into the heart of a barren winter landscape before hammering you with blast beats as armies approach. Their signature sound is mixed with new approaches and various vocal styles including a fantastic guest singer in Madeleine Liljestam.

It's a very variable album - Winter Storm Vigilantes thematically belongs in power metal and the vocal style made me question momentarily if they resurrected early 2000s James Hetfield (Whisky in the Jar, anyone?). Galloping drums under triumphant hymns and wild growls over the image of a winter landscape. Yeah, that's Ensiferum.

Overall a fun album with some interesting twists, not quite as heavy as I'd expected but not to its detriment.

Favorite song(s): Long Cold Winter of Sorrow and Strife, The Howl

[quoteoftheweekblog]

8/4/24 - EVELYN WAUGH (AND LYNNE REID BANKS)

’ “Beware the Anglo-Catholics - they’re all sodomites … ” ’ (Waugh, 2016, p.22).

REFERENCE

Waugh, E. (2016 [1945] ) 'Brideshead revisited’. London: Penguin Classics.

*****

ALL SAINTS’ MEMBERSHIP OF INCLUSIVE CHURCH IS IN QUESTION BUT STILL PROCLAIMED WHERE ALLOWED

ON THE SECOND SUNDAY IN EASTER

…

ON THE PEW SHEET (FOR NOW)

…

IN THE CHURCH (TUCKED AWAY)

…

IN THE PORCH (ONLY VISIBLE WHEN OPEN)

…

BUT NO LONGER ON THE NOTICEBOARD

…

OR ON THE NEW WEBSITE

…

BOTH OF WHICH WOULD BE USEFUL

THANKS GUYS

*****

THE SECOND SUNDAY IN EASTER

…

IS ALSO KNOWN AS

LOW SUNDAY

SINCE 2000 IT HAS BEEN KNOWN IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AS

DIVINE MERCY SUNDAY

CORDELIA WOULD APPROVE

' "We must have the Blessed Sacrament here," said Cordelia. "I like popping in at odd times; and so does mummy." ' (Waugh, 2016, p.83).

*****

RIP 2024

…

LYNNE REID BANKS DIED 4/4/24

OBITUARY

…

*****

RIP

*****

FOR BOOK GROUP MARCH 2024  20 (90) GLORIOUS YEARS

…

' " ... not Jane Austen, not M-m-miss M-m-mitford." ' (Waugh, 2016, p.254).

LAST MONTH I ALSO READ

…

EMMA

OBVIOUSLY

&

THIS MONTH I AM ALSO READING

…

LOVE IN A COLD CLIMATE

OBVIOUSLY

📚📚📚📚📚

IN MARCH OUR MEMBERS ALSO READ …

TOP MEMBER ON HOLIDAY AND BACK ON FORM

Hi All, greetings from sunny La Gomera.

…

THE MEASURE OF DAYS

… Morland no: 30 book, still during WW1.

&

…

CHARLES III

I have almost finished Charles III but haven’t brought it here with me as too heavy!

&

…

I CAPTURE THE CASTLE

… which I loved. A story of messy family life as told by a young woman writing her diary.

&

…

THE WRONG SISTER

… just started …

📚📚📚📚📚

…

FATHERLAND

I've just finished Fatherland by Robert Harris and I was very confused by it! I've just looked it up on Google and it is very confusing because it posts the concept that Germany won the war. It also has a horrid description of torture in it so it is not a book I will recommend to anyone!

📚📚📚📚📚

…

PHILIPPA GREGORY

… awaiting attention - someone in our group loves her stories, so I felt it was time to try one …

MEANWHILE THE OTHER HALF

…

THE SECRET HOURS

We have lots of this authors books …

📚📚📚📚📚

AND OUR READER LEADER

…

ALL THINGS ANGLICAN

… still reading.

&

…

THE TIME OF THE ANGELS

I have also begun The Time of Angels by Iris Murdoch. I am not sure how much I shall enjoy it. It is weird and intriguing like most of Iris Murdoch’s novels, but perhaps a bit too analytical.

📚📚📚📚📚

IN MARCH WE ALSO HAD ANIMAL FARM ON THE LIST

WHICH HAS BEEN AN EARLIER QUOTE OF THE WEEK

ANIMAL FARM

📚📚📚📚📚

…

BOOK GROUP

*****

TAYLOR ALERT 2024 - THE TORTURED POETS DEPARTMENT!!!!

…

COUNTDOWN TO TAYLOR … ONLY 11 DAYS TO GO UNTIL THE RELEASE OF TAYLOR SWIFT’S NEW ALBUM THE TORTURED POETS DEPARTMENT ON 19 APRIL

FOR EVERMORE AND MORE EXPOSURE

TAYLOR ALERT!!!!

*****

EVELYN WAUGH

*****

QUOTE OF THE WEEK 2011 - 2024

…

12 EPIC YEARS

*****

FROM THE ARCHIVE

…

4/7/22

*****

[regalbois]

Decided to do a Coffee Asks! ☕ Iced Lemon Tea and Iced Coffee?

Iced Lemon Tea: Favorite song/band?

Okay this one changes all the time but right at this moment my favorite song is Off To The Races by Lana Del Rey because uhhhhhhhh Burnsmithers vibes for me. BUT my favorite band atm is Tears For Fears, their songs feel so existential to me, especially Listen. That is probably not the point and idk Tears For Fears lore aside from politics but yeah brain go brr

Iced Coffee: Do you like reading? If so, what's your favorite book?

Hehe I also got this one at the same time so more lore for yall 🤌

My second favorite book is Fatherland by Robert Harris, it's a World War II alt history novel about a German detective who stumbles onto a case that unravels a conspiracy. No spoilers but it's really fucking good and super intense, also the backstory for the main character is really emotionally compelling especially towards the end. AND we get an age gap relationship that isn't toxic garbage. The ending made me cry for like 3 hours and I was depressed the next day so that's how you know it's good, I mean Robert Harris is also just adept at cutting up my little heart using his sad characters. Xavier March, the mc, is one of my favorite literary characters and I named one of my snakes after him 👉👈

[stagefoureds]

Tagged by @howlinchickhowl and i'm bored so here we go 🎉🎊

Last song: White Woman's Instagram by Bo Burnham. Those songs are addictive lmao and i'm already so concerned about my spotify wrapped tbh...

Last movie: I'm not much of a movie person. With that being said, I have no idea which movie I've watched last or when 🤐

Currently reading: The Divine Comedy by Dante, Weight by Jeanette Winterson, Fatherland by Robert Harris. (Of course alongside with so many fics in several pairs lmao, multitasking baby!!)

Currently watching: New Girl and Dark (and i blame @pink--and--white for both 😏)

Currently craving: Tbh I'd kill for a lahmacun (or beyti) and künefe. Also a nap. A very long nap that i don't wake up to yet another migraine.

I'm extremely late for this (again lmao) so i'll just leave this space blank and say you can take this as an invitation if you want to 💕

[why-this-kolaveri-machi]

quarantine ask game

tagged by the lovely @hacash <3

-

Are you staying home from school/work? still working! it’s a bit stressful right now due to staff shortages and trying to help people who are both acutely mentally ill and physically ill with covid, but i think we’ve just about struck a manageable sort of routine

Who is at home with you? my grandma (the poor lady came to visit for a month in early march, got stuck, got sick, but thankfully she’s fully recovered now), my husband and my son

Are you a homebody? yes! it’s so eerie to travel to and from work everyday through nearly empty tube stations and bus stops - every day would feel like a sunday afternoon where i kicked back and read a book or watched yes minister for the 550th time except for, you know, the ominous announcements going STAY HOME YOU FUCKS that sound out every ten minutes

Any event that you were looking forward to that got canceled? i was supposed to be india right now. planned a ten day trip and was really looking forward to going back home after nearly 2 years in this godforsaken place england *sobs*

What movies have you been watching recently? i’ve been catching up on tamil movies when i have the time - seems like heist movies are all the rage, because i saw two that were released in the past year: kannum kannum kollayadithal (a charming if flawed film ft. the always-dreamy dulquer salmaan) and asuraguru (a terrible, awful mess).

also i tried watching the platform on netflix but it was uh... Too Much for me. i might come back to it later 

What are you doing for self care? honestly? eating my grandmother’s cooking - it brings back all sorts of fond childhood memories and is very comforting. also: avoiding getting sucked into obsessively reading news updates.

What shows are you watching? i caught up with brooklyn nine nine, which was fun. i’ve also been watching my favourite episodes of community, since that’s now on netflix

What music have you been listening to? a r rahman’s latest - the 99 songs album. just... *chef’s kiss*

What books are you reading? the awesome thing about travelling on the tube for an hour and a half back and forth everyday is that there is no phone signal down there - which means i’m compelled to read books rather than scroll my phone mindlessly to pass the time. i’ve been averaging a book a month this year - which has been the silver lining to an otherwise dreadful 2020. 

right now i’m reading the knife man by wendy moore, a biography of john hunter, a prolific and pioneering eighteenth century british surgeon. it’s very good--as someone with great interest in both london’s history and the history of medicine in general there’s a lot to chew on. the last book i read was fatherland by robert harris which, just. fucking blew my tiny mind.

-

tagging... @sternenblumen, @sassydefendorflower, @quickreaver, @superohclair, @cautiousamber, @denugis, and whoever else wants to do it!

[hjertetssunnegalskap1]

2. Truth of Storytelling - Neil Gaiman’s Masterclass (The Art of Storytelling)

“We’re using memorable lies. We are taking people who do not exist and things that did not happen to those people, in places that aren’t, and we are using those things to communicate true things.”

These are my personal thoughts and notes and they might not make sense for anyone else. If you’re interested in taking this class, I absolutely recommend it. Just so that’s said. :)

One of the central tools of literature is to use the 'lie' of a made-up story to tell a human truth. Neil shows you how to make your stories world feel real to your readers. Human beings are storytelling creatures. “We are stories.” 

We convey truth with stories, which is a contradiction. Because stories are lies. Fairy tales aren’t true. Fairy tales are more than true (reminds me of that Gaiman quote, another good point). Example, little Red Riding Hood.

The truth of Coraline: With “Coraline”, Gaiman wanted to tell his kids that dragons could be defeated. But also, being brave doesn’t mean you’re not scared. You’re scared, and you do it anyway (Gaiman tells beautifully about how he discovered this, and also about the response he has gotten from readers <3).

All fiction has to be as honest as you can make it. Gaiman tells about how he as a young writer decided to become a journalist, to be able to ask questions. Learn. In a writing workshop, he realised that he needed to read like a writer, not like an audience. He needed to be honest, too. To be prepared to say something true.

The honesty in The Ocean at the End of the Lane: Very personal book (so good), sometimes uncomfortable to write. If you’re specific, writing the truth honestly, the truth applies to other people. 

Writers use the truth to make their lies convincing. Cf. Samuel Taylor Coleridge and “poetic faith”— willingness to accept that the story is a facsimile of reality. In order to encourage a reader’s “willing suspension of disbelief,” writers strive for verisimilitude. The goal is to be credible and convincing. 

Tools to strengthen verisimilitude in characters, settings, and scenes:

Provide specific, concrete sensory detail (ah, I always need to add in more of that)

Focus on emotions that are true to your characters (!)

Incorporate the familiar alongside the unfamiliar 

Avoid technical mistakes (hah)

Take time to cover objections (good point)

Examples of counterfactual genre (“what if”): 

The Man in the High Castle (1962) by Philip K. Dick—What if America lost World War II?

The Alteration (1975) by Kingsley Amis—What if the Reformation had never happened?

Fatherland (1992) by Robert Harris—What if Hitler had won the war? 

The Plot Against America (2004) by Philip Roth— What if the U.S. struck an entente with Hitler? 

The Yiddish Policemen’s Union (2007) by Michael Chabon—What if a Jewish state had been established in Alaska? 

Underground Airlines (2016) by Ben Winters— What if slavery had never ended in America?

For your book/ WIP: Choose a page or scene from your work-in-progress and analyze it for verisimilitude by answering the following questions: 

Are your descriptive details specific? Can you make them sensory? 

Is your character’s behaviour in line with their personality? Do their responses make sense for them? 

Can you fact-check anything? If so, do it now.

Some examples of essays (a genre that can show personal voices more than other genres):

Tremendous Trifles (1909) by G. K. Chesterton 

Notes of a Native Son (1955) by James Baldwin 

Slouching Towards Bethlehem (1968) by Joan Didion 

Ex Libris: Confessions of a Common Reader (1998) by Anne Fadiman

The Wave in the Mind: Talks and Essays on the Writer, the Reader, and the Imagination (2004) by Ursula K. Le Guin 

Consider the Lobster (2005) by David Foster Wallace 

The Braindead Megaphone: Essays (2007) by George Saunders 

Magic Hours: Essays on Creators and Creation (2012) by Tom Bissell

The Empathy Exams (2014) by Leslie Jamison 

The View From the Cheap Seats (2016) by Neil Gaiman 

Animals Strike Curious Poses (2017) by Elena Passarello

Writing exercise: choose one of the following moments and write a few paragraphs in your journal about it. As you write, pay attention to your inner register about what you’re writing, noting the particular things that make you uneasy. Try to be a little “more honest than you’re comfortable with.” 

A time when you were deeply embarrassed. 

When you regret something you did. 

The saddest moment of your life. 

A secret you are afraid to talk about. 

Take the work you wrote above and either read it aloud to someone you trust, or read it alone and pretend that you have an audience. Listen to the way you sound and pay attention to the sensations in your body as you’re reading the difficult moment. Consider what you’re afraid of being judged for, or afraid of saying out loud. Write those things down. 

“If you’re going to write... you have to be willing to do the equivalent of walking down a street naked. You have to be able to show too much of yourself. You have to be just a little bit more honest than you’re comfortable with...”

Lesson comment: 

Ah, this session was so good. So inspiring. A lot about truths, and honesty, and about lying honestly. How you can mix the familiar w/ the unfamiliar and come up with something new and strange. For some writers, this is maybe old news, but for me, it’s gold. Even if I were aware of some of these things, they are too easy to forget and I love that I now have the chance to focus on them, and hopefully get better as a writer. I love Gaiman’s anecdotes, too. Love, love, love. He’s a really good teacher, in the way that he draws us in, uses his beautiful words, and feelings and stories, to sneak the knowledge in. I also like the tools for analysis, and the exercises, I think they can be very helpful indeed (learning by doing and learning by feeling and all that). 

To sum it up, this week I’m going to read a little, I think, check out some of the essays, perhaps, although if I know myself I might forget about that. Then I’m going to do the exercises. Analyze one of my wips for verisimilitude and write something really personal. It’s kind of interesting that I just had this ask meme thing on my blog, where others shared their stories anonymously. Now I’ll get to write something really personal, on my own. And then share it. I like that. 

It also scares the shit out of me, which is a good thing, I suppose. 

[thinkveganworld]

Friendly Fascism

The following are updated excerpts from an article I wrote on “friendly fascism” in the U.S.  This is information our schools should be teaching on history, so that the average citizen is well-informed enough to participate in the nation’s political life and make knowledgeable choices. The article relates to the Iraq War, but it also applies to fascism in the U.S. today.   Not all kinds of fascism have to equate precisely to the classic form represented by Hitler or Mussolini. Fascism doesn’t have to involve mass genocidal slaughter, nor does it have to be equal in degree to the fascism practiced by members of the Axis powers.   Traits of classic fascism include: strong nationalism, expansionism, belligerent militarism, meshing of big business and government with a corporate/government oligarchy, subversion of democracy and human rights, disinformation spread by constant propaganda and tight corporate/government control of the press. Today all of those conditions exist in the U.S. to a degree. Let’s focus on corporate/government control of the press, specifically corporate control of U.S. television news networks. According to a March 24 article, “Protests Turn Off Viewers” by Harry A. Jessell, 45 percent of Americans rely on cable channels as their primary source of news, and 22 percent get most of their news from broadcast networks evening newscasts. Only 11 percent rely on other forms of media as their principle source of war news.

Our corporate controlled TV networks might as well be state controlled, because they promote war and policies of the oligarchy fairly consistently and have virtually eliminated all dissenting voices.  NBC fired Phil Donahue despite his good ratings, saying in an internal network memo they didn’t want to air Donahue’s antiwar views. Reporter Peter Arnett was fired for giving an interview to Iraqi TV and merely stating the obvious on a number of issues. For example, Arnett said media reports of civilian casualties had helped the growing challenge about the conduct of the Iraq war.

According to William Shirer (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich), the Reich Press Law of October 4, 1933, ordered editors not to publish (among other things) anything which tends to weaken the strength of the German Reich … or offends the honor and dignity of Germany.’ The Nazis forced dissenting journalists out of business and consolidated the press under party control. U.S. television news networks have been consolidated under the control of a handful of corporations. America doesn’t need a press law'prohibiting the airing of anything which might weaken the strength of U.S. war policies, because the corporate owners of today’s television networks are in total agreement with the state. It is irrefutable that corporate owners of American television networks want only pro-war opinions aired, because those are virtually the only views that are in fact aired.  The Phil Donahue and Peter Arnett firings, especially when coupled with the NBC internal memo explaining the Donahue firing, also indicate this is true. Do the various TV networks do a good job of informing the public, or do they more often propagandize? Propaganda is aimed at the emotions, while news sources that disseminate factual information aim toward reason. In Nazi Germany: A New History (Continuum Publishing, 1995), Klaus P. Fischer says Hitler promoted a system of prejudices rather than a philosophy based on well-warranted premises, objective truth-testing, and logically derived conclusions. Since propaganda aims at persuasion rather than instruction, it is far more effective to appeal to the emotions than to the rational capacities of crowds. If you’ve spent much time watching the pro-war cable television news programs, you cant help but notice they manipulate (whether deliberately or not) the viewing audience’s emotions rather than appealing to viewers’ logic.That is, instead of providing the American public with a broad range of necessary facts and varied viewpoints about our wars, the TV networks exploit emotions by urging the audience to focus on and identify with the day-to-day plight of individual soldiers and their families. There’s nothing inherently wrong with empathizing with the troops. However, when that aspect of war news is heavily emphasized at the expense of hard facts and varied debate, the networks serve the purpose of managing the public mood rather than informing the public mind.

According to Klaus Fisher, the Nazis eliminated from state media any ideas that clashed with official views. He writes that permissible media topics for public consumption included war itself and the Nazi movement; support of Nazi soldiers; praise for Hitler and celebrating the thrill of combat and the sacredness of death when it is in the service of the fatherland.  

Today’s war-promoting TV networks have also deemed only certain subjects permissible,‘as evidenced by the irrefutable fact that they only cover a narrow range of subjects. Coincidentally, the proverbial network list'would read virtually the same as the list mentioned above. Permissible topics include praise for U.S.  war policies, support for our soldiers;  and celebrating the thrill of combat and the sacredness of death when it is in the service of’(in this case) the homeland, even though there is no rational link between attacking countries designated for regime change and defending our soil.

Of course, who needs rationality or facts from TV news when the American public already has enough information about world events?  In a March 26 article for Editor and Publisher, “Polls Suggest Media Failure in Pre-War Coverage”, reporter Ari Berman refers to a Knight Ridder/Princeton Research poll. This poll showed 44 percent of respondents believed most'or some'of the September 11 hijackers were Iraqis. Only 17 percent gave the correct answer: none. In the same poll, 41 percent said they believed Iraq definitely has nuclear weapons. As Berman points out, not even the Bush administration has claimed that. Berman also refers to a Pew Research Center/Council on Foreign Relations survey showing that almost two-thirds of people polled believed U. N. weapons inspectors had found proof that Iraq is trying to hide weapons of mass destruction.’ This claim was never made by Hans Blix or Mohammed ElBaradei. The same survey found 57 percent of those polled falsely believed Saddam Hussein assisted the 9/11 terrorists, and a March 79 New York Times/CBS News Poll revealed that 45 percent of respondents believed Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks. TV news reporters have done little to correct the public’s misconceptions. On the contrary, network reporters and their guests have often helped bolster the false impressions by mentioning September 11, or the threat of terrorism by al Qaeda, and the threat posed by Saddam in the same breath.

Individual TV reporters aren’t always free to choose the information they pass along to the public. CNN now has a relatively new script approval'system, whereby journalists send their copy in to CNN chiefs for sanitizing. In his article, Guess who will be calling the shots at CNN,'British foreign correspondent Robert Fisk quotes a relatively new CNN document (dated Jan. 27), Reminder of Script Approval Policy.The policy says, All reporters preparing package scripts must submit the scripts for approval … Packages may not be edited until the scripts are approved … All packages originating outside Washington, LA or NY, including all international bureaus, must come to the ROW [a group of script editors] in Atlanta for approval.  

William Shirer comments on the Nazi party’s control of press, radio and film, “Every morning the editors of the Berlin daily newspapers and the correspondents of those published elsewhere in the Reich gathered at the Propaganda Ministry to be told by Dr. Goebbels or by one of his aides what news to print and suppress, how to write the news and headline it, what campaigns to call off or institute and what editorials were desired for the day. In case of any misunderstanding, a daily directive was furnished along with the oral instructions.

In an interview with TomPaine.com, Janine Jackson of the media watchdog group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), said that the group examined two weeks of nightly television news coverage. FAIR found that 76 percent of all news sources or guests on ABC, NBC, CBS and PBS’s NewsHour were current or former government officials,'leaving little room for other diverse voices.In addition, FAIR found that only 6 percent of those sources were skeptical about the war. Jackson noted that on television news at night, there’s virtually no debate about the need to go to war. It would further public understanding if the TV networks would offer substantial debate on the following: The Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq has alienated many world leaders and lost this country the respect of millions of citizens around the globe. The Bush team has created instability in the Middle East and risked retaliation. They’ve undercut the U.S. economy with the financial cost of this endeavor. They’ve increased the likelihood that worldwide nuclear weapons proliferation will increase. And, according to a recent Red Cross report, they have likely helped create a horrifying number of human casualties and a rapidly expanding humanitarian crisis in Iraq.

The content of television news lacks range and diversity, but the way the news is presented is also disturbing. Television reporters often deliver news of the war'with apparent breathless excitement, as if they’re giving play-by-play descriptions of football games.

People are dying in this conflict. Civilians are caught in the middle, being blown to pieces or losing loved ones. Children are left behind when their soldier-parents are killed. Instead of presenting news of this war'with giddiness, wouldn’t it be more appropriate, more human, for network reporters to take a somber, respectful approach?

On TV, we see bombs dropping from a distance. Network commentators seldom offer the public close-ups. In his article, Military precision versus moral precision,'Robert Higgs, writes that the much-used JDAM bombs dropped in Iraq kill most people within 120 meters of the blast. According to Higgs, such a bomb releases a crushing shock wave and showers jagged, white-hot metal fragments at supersonic speed, shattering concrete, shredding flesh, crushing cells, rupturing lungs, bursting sinus cavities and ripping away limbs in a maelstrom of destruction.

Just yesterday I heard a TV reporter describe certain casualties with the sterile phrase, “This is what war does”.Well, it isn’t “war” that bursts sinus cavities and rips away limbs - nothing as nebulous as that. George W. Bush and his administration have done these things. They have directly ordered that these things be done. The bombs’ shredding of flesh and crushing of human cells didn’t just passively happen.

In an April 5 article for The Mirror, “The saddest story of all,” reporter Anton Antonowicz describes an Iraqi family’s loss of their daughter. Nadia was lying on a stretcher beside the stone mortuary slab. Her heart lay on her chest, ripped from her body by a missile which smashed through the bedroom window of the family’s flat nearby in Palestine Street. Nadia’s father said, “My daughter had just completed her PhD in psychology and was waiting for her first job. She was born in 1970. She was 33. She was very clever. Everyone said I have a fabulous daughter. She spent all her time studying. Her head buried in books. Nadia’s sister Alia said, “I don’t know what humanity Bush is calling for. Is this the humanity which lost my sister? It is war which has done this. And that war was started by Bush.”

Today we’re again getting a whiff of fascism from U.S. promoters of regime change war, including war with Iran,  This isn’t the equivalent of Hitler or Mussolini - just sort of a creeping fascism light, and the corporate controlled television news networks are only one example of the way even light fascism undermines what little democracy remains in the U.S.  

[thinkveganworld]

I’ve been writing about politics and the U.S. drift toward fascism for over 20 years.  I know the country’s recent fascistic moves are a continuation of the things I’ve investigated for decades.  I hope the public wants to be well informed about the history that led up to our present situation.  For a glimpse of that history, here’s an article I wrote 18 years ago, “A Whiff of Fascism:” During election 2000, Bush paid campaign operatives posing as ordinary voters shoved people and banged on doors at the Miami-Dade canvassing offices in an effort to stop the Florida vote recount. Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) said he detected “a whiff of fascism” in their tactics.

Some people criticized Nadler for drawing the comparison, but, of course, not all forms of fascism have to equate precisely to the classic form represented by Hitler or Mussolini. Fascism doesn’t have to involve mass genocidal slaughter, nor does it have to be equal in degree to the fascism practiced by members of the Axis powers. Traits of classic fascism include: strong nationalism, expansionism, belligerent militarism, meshing of big business and government with a corporate/government oligarchy, subversion of democracy and human rights, disinformation spread by constant propaganda and tight corporate/government control of the press. Today all of those conditions exist in our country to a degree. Let’s focus on corporate/government control of the press, specifically corporate control of U.S. television news networks. According to a March 24 article, “Protests Turn Off Viewers” by Harry A. Jessell, 45 percent of Americans rely on cable channels as their primary source of news, and 22 percent get most of their news from broadcast networks evening newscasts. Only 11 percent rely on other forms of media as their principle source of war news.Our corporate controlled TV networks might as well be state controlled, because they promote the war and Bush policies fairly consistently and have virtually eliminated all dissenting voices. NBC fired Phil Donahue despite his good ratings, saying in an internal network memo they didnt want to air Donahue’s antiwar views. Peter Arnett was fired for giving an interview to Iraqi TV and merely stating the obvious on a number of issues. For example, Arnett said media reports of civilian casualties had helped the growing challenge to President Bush about the conduct of the war. According to William Shirer (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Ballantine Books, 1950), the Reich Press Law of October 4, 1933, ordered editors not to publish (among other things) anything “which tends to weaken the strength of the German Reich . . . or offends the honor and dignity of Germany.” The Nazis forced dissenting journalists out of business and consolidated the press under party control. U.S. television news networks have been consolidated under the control of a handful of corporations. America doesn't need a press law prohibiting the airing of anything which might weaken the strength of Bush's war policies, because the corporate owners of today’s television networks are in total agreement with the state .It is irrefutable that corporate owners of American television networks want only pro-Bush, pro-war opinions aired, because those are virtually the only views that are in fact aired. The Phil Donahue and Peter Arnett firings, especially when coupled with the NBC internal memo explaining the Donahue firing, also indicate this is true. Do the various TV networks do a good job of informing the public, or do they more often propagandize? Propaganda is aimed at the emotions, while news sources that disseminate factual information aim toward reason.  In Nazi Germany: A New History (Continuum Publishing, 1995), Klaus P. Fischer says Hitler promoted a system of prejudices rather than a philosophy based on well-warranted premises, objective truth-testing, and logically derived conclusions. Since propaganda aims at persuasion rather than instruction, it is far more effective to appeal to the emotions than to the rational capacities of crowds. If you’ve spent much time watching the pro-Bush, pro-war cable television news programs, you can’t help but notice they manipulate (whether deliberately or not) the viewing audience’s emotions rather than appealing to viewers' logic.  That is, instead of providing the American public with a broad range of necessary facts and varied viewpoints about the war, the TV networks exploit emotions by urging the audience to focus on and identify with the day-to-day plight of individual soldiers and their families. There's nothing inherently wrong with empathizing with the troops. However, when that aspect of war news is heavily emphasized at the expense of hard facts and varied debate, the networks serve the purpose of managing the public mood rather than informing the public mind. According to Klaus Fisher, the Nazis eliminated from state media any ideas that clashed with official views. He writes that permissible media topics for public consumption included war itself and the Nazi movement; support of Nazi soldiers; praise for Hitler and celebrating the thrill of combat and the sacredness of death when it is in the service of the fatherland. Today’s Bush-friendly TV networks have also deemed only certain subjects permissible, as evidenced by the irrefutable fact that they only cover a narrow range of subjects. Coincidentally, the proverbial network list would read virtually the same as the list in the paragraph above. Permissible topics include praise for the war; praise for the administrations policies; support for our soldiers; praise for Bush and the celebrating the thrill of combat and the sacredness of death when it is in the service of  (in this case) the homeland, even though there is no rational link between attacking Iraq and defending our soil.Of course, who needs rationality or facts from TV news when the American public already has enough information about world events? In a March 26 article for Editor and Publisher, “Polls Suggest Media Failure in Pre-War Coverage,” reporter Ari Berman refers to a Knight Ridder/Princeton Research poll. This poll showed 44 percent of respondents believed most'or some'of the September 11 hijackers were Iraqis. Only 17 percent gave the correct answer: none.In the same poll, 41 percent said they believed Iraq definitely has nuclear weapons. As Berman points out, not even the Bush administration has claimed that. Berman also refers to a Pew Research Center/Council on Foreign Relations survey showing that almost two-thirds of people polled believed U. N. weapons inspectors had found proof that Iraq is trying to hide weapons of mass destruction. This claim was never made by Hans Blix or Mohammed ElBaradei. The same survey found 57 percent of those polled falsely believed Saddam Hussein assisted the 9/11 terrorists, and a March 79 New York Times/CBS News Poll revealed that 45 percent of respondents believed Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks.TV news reporters have done little to correct the publics misconceptions. On the contrary, network reporters and their guests have often helped bolster the false impressions by mentioning September 11, or the threat of terrorism by al Qaeda, and the threat'posed by Saddam in the same breath.Individual TV reporters aren't always free to choose the information they pass along to the public. CNN now has a relatively new script approval'system, whereby journalists send their copy in to CNN chiefs for sanitizing. In his article, Guess who will be calling the shots at CNN,' British foreign correspondent Robert Fisk quotes a relatively new CNN document (dated Jan. 27), Reminder of Script Approval Policy. The policy says, “All reporters preparing package scripts must submit the scripts for approval . . . Packages may not be edited until the scripts are approved . . . All packages originating outside Washington, LA or NY, including all international bureaus, must come to the ROW [a group of script editors] in Atlanta for approval.” William Shirer comments on the Nazi party's control of press, radio and film, “Every morning the editors of the Berlin daily newspapers and the correspondents of those published elsewhere in the Reich gathered at the Propaganda Ministry to be told by Dr. Goebbels or by one of his aides what news to print and suppress, how to write the news and headline it, what campaigns to call off or institute and what editorials were desired for the day.  In case of any misunderstanding, a daily directive was furnished along with the oral instructions.” In an interview with TomPaine.com, Janine Jackson of the media watchdog group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), said that the group examined two weeks of nightly television news coverage. FAIR found that 76 percent of all news sources or guests on ABC, NBC, CBS and PBSs NewsHour were current or former government officials,'leaving little room for other diverse voices.In addition, FAIR found that only 6 percent of those sources were skeptical about the war. Jackson noted that on television news at night, there's virtually no debate about the need to go to war.'It would further public understanding if the TV networks would offer substantial debate on the following: The Bush administration's invasion of Iraq has alienated many world leaders and lost this country the respect of millions of citizens around the globe. The Bush team has created instability in the Middle East and risked retaliation. They've undercut the U.S. economy with the financial cost of this endeavor. They’ve increased the likelihood that worldwide nuclear weapons proliferation will increase. And, according to a recent Red Cross report, they have likely helped create a horrifying number of human casualties and a rapidly expanding humanitarian crisis in Iraq. The content of television news lacks range and diversity, but the way the news is presented is also disturbing. Television reporters often deliver news of the war with apparent breathless excitement, as if they're giving play-by-play descriptions of football games. People are dying in this conflict. Civilians are caught in the middle, being blown to pieces or losing loved ones. Children are left behind when their soldier-parents are killed. Instead of presenting news of this war'with giddiness, wouldn’t it be more appropriate, more human, for network reporters to take a somber, respectful approach? On TV, we see bombs dropping from a distance. Network commentators seldom offer the public close-ups. In his article, Military precision versus moral precision,'Robert Higgs, writes that the much-used JDAM bombs dropped in Iraq kill most people within 120 meters of the blast. According to Higgs, such a bomb releases a crushing shock wave and showers jagged, white-hot metal fragments at supersonic speed, shattering concrete, shredding flesh, crushing cells, rupturing lungs, bursting sinus cavities and ripping away limbs in a maelstrom of destruction. Just yesterday I heard a TV reporter describe certain casualties with the sterile phrase, This is what war does. Well, it isn’t “war” that bursts sinus cavities and rips away limbs - nothing as nebulous as that.  George W. Bush and his administration have done these things. They have directly ordered that these things be done.

The bombs' shredding of flesh and crushing of human cells didn’t just passively happen .In an April 5 article for The Mirror, “The saddest story of all,” reporter Anton Antonowicz describes an Iraqi family's loss of their daughter.  “Nadia was lying on a stretcher beside the stone mortuary slab. Her heart lay on her chest, ripped from her body by a missile which smashed through the bedroom window of the family's flat nearby in Palestine Street.”  Nadias father said,”My daughter had just completed her PhD in psychology and was waiting for her first job. She was born in 1970. She was 33. She was very clever. Everyone said I have a fabulous daughter. She spent all her time studying. Her head buried in books.” Nadias sister Alia said, I don't know what humanity Bush is calling for. Is this the humanity which lost my sister? It is war which has done this. And that war was started by Bush.” Today we're again getting a whiff of fascism from the Bush administration. This isn't the equivalent of Hitler or Mussolinijust sort of a creeping fascism light, and the corporate controlled television news networks are only one example of the way even light fascism undermines American values. With the Bush administration and television networks currently fixated on the high melodrama of winning the war and sprucing up its aftermath, they don't have much time to reflect on whether winning at any cost is a good idea. Whether the slaughter in Iraq and its aftermath go well, the war has already destroyed many lives in Iraq and the U.S. and damaged the American character and democracy at home. For thoughtful people in this country, the question has never been will we win, but at what cost?