Fascism, Tyranny and the Smear Machine

 

On Corporate “Liberal” Media’s Woefully Inadequate Coverage of Trump’s Fascist War on the Homeless

As I’m sure will surprise absolutely no one who regularly reads my work, I am utterly horrified at the American corporate media’s decision to frame Downmarket Mussolini’s objectively fascist attack on the homeless with cheap, superficial election analysis.

Branding what Trump is talking about doing here as a “War on California” instead of recognizing it for what it is, an extension of this administration’s “fascism for profit” creep is doing a dangerous disservice to the public at large.

Factually the Trump administration is low-key threatening to deploy more police to target the homeless, knock down existing tent cities and round up homeless people into what appear to be thinly-veiled internment camps in California. Even setting aside the obvious parallels to the objectively fascist concentration camps for undocumented migrants this administration has already deployed, the nazi overtones of Trump’s proposed policies are self-evident – but you’d never know that reading the New York Times.

First one must understand that like most things in a white supremacist society wholly devoted to capitalism, the scourge of homelessness disproportionately affects minorities and otherwise marginalized people in America – as such when Trump talks about “cracking down” on homelessness, his fanatical and reactionary base implicitly understands that he’s talking about the hated minority “other” of all stripes (just like Nixon’s “law and order” or “war on drugs” dog-whistles in 1968 and 1972.)

Furthermore, this subtle tension in what Trump means as opposed to what he says and the “color-blind” framing of the argument also works on precisely the same sort of center-right “liberal” who doesn’t think they’re racist but wishes “someone” would “do something” about the homeless people who ruin their BART ride (see Clara Jeffery.)

A more responsible media would of course point out that Trumps new California homelessness rhetoric mirrors his “Chicago anti-gang” rhetoric perfectly and serves largely the same function politically – but this is not a responsible media; these are affluent bougie liberals who complain about homeless people “sleeping in the doorway” and presume that’s why the subway cars smell like “fried cat piss” – there’s little separating them from the NIMBY rich liberals Trump’s policy is trying to win over.

Further obscured (by design in my opinion) is the obvious profit motivations behind this policy, which again mirror the wholly manufactured, fascist “migrant” crisis Trump and his nazi lapdog Stephen Miller have *already* unleashed on America.

Someone is going to pay for those extra cops, someone is going to pay for the removal of those tents and someone is going to get sweet filthy lucre for confining homeless people in concentration camps on a per day basis. While the Trump administration’s plans so far amount to little more than threats, the simple truth is that the California carceral system doesn’t have enough cells to house millions of additional homeless people which means someone, probably a private prison company that donated money to key Republicans, is going to get a federal contract to build and run those prisons – just like ICE concentration camps, just like the Department of Justice’s revamp of the “war on drugs.”

Simultaneously of course, this same administration has slashed or is proposing to slash any and all forms of funding to humanely address homelessness and get people off the street by *improving* their lives:

“They’ve proposed drastically shrinking or eliminating federal programs that keep the lowest-income people affordably housed; tripling rents for the lowest-income subsidized residents and raising rents for all others; evicting 100,000 people, including 55,000 American children, from subsidized housing; and allowing homeless shelters to discriminate and refuse shelter to transgender and other LGBTQ people” says Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

In other words, what Trump is proposing amounts to declaring a fascist war on the homeless to steal federal money from programs that actually help the homeless and instead use that (tax) money to subsidize a burgeoning fascist police state war on disproportionately marginalized and minority poor people.

This is big money and even rich Democrat politicians and their numerous wealthy donors will want in on that action. Furthermore, if this model succeeds in California, it will quickly be exported to the rest of the country – whether they vote Democrat or not. It’s certainly not an accident that the report these threats are based on is called “The State of Homelessness in America.”

From ICE’s migrant detention policies, the aforementioned “new War on Drugs”, the Department of Justice’s revival of blanket asset forfeiture or even its attempts to criminalize protest as rioting and anti-fascism as terrorism, there is an established pattern here in this administration’s policies. That pattern can best be described as “white nationalist fascism for the profit of wealthy elites and key political cronies” and yet this connection is never made in the American corporate media, even by liberals.

Affluent liberal media observers who read the Atlantic have recently taken to muttering “the cruelty is the point” like a mantra but it’s very clear in watching the ongoing coverage of the government’s fascist creep, that the only thing that really concerns them is the cruelty towards themselves – namely rich neoliberals, celebrity Democrats and the cultured establishment cult of center-right “liberals” in corporate media. This cruelty they understand and empathize with, which colors their analysis in ways that (unintentionally or otherwise) help mask the fascist overtones behind what the Trump administration is threatening.

The simple truth is that it’s awful hard to teach Americans to recognize the fascist creep while affluent corporate media “liberals” are blindly ignoring the bigger (reactionary) picture and busy making the problem all about themselves. It does however demonstrate clearly, which side they’re on when the blade hits the bone.

 

Getting Andy Ngo and His Fascist Friends Off Our Streets

Continuing with the theme of sharing and analyzing articles I actually *like* for once, today I’d like to examine and offer some well deserved praise for this longer piece about fighting fascism by Arun Gupta over at Jacobin magazine.

First and foremost I’d like to note that with a few minor exceptions I’ll talk about a little later, this essay is a picture perfect model of how to proactively write about opposing modern Americanized fascism without ending up on an FBI watch-list.

In his analysis, Gupta wastes precisely zero ounces of energy on an objectively false “both sides” narrative and you won’t find any homages to “dapper white nationalists” in this essay. The author refuses to either normalize or glamorize far right thugs disguised as free speech activists and while that’s pretty easy when you’re blogging from your living room, it’s actually quite the accomplishment when you’re directly quoting the violent fascists themselves.

Despite including plenty of direct and unaltered quotations from various violent fascist agitators in Portland, Gupta never once allows the neo-nazis to claim hold of a “false balance” by presenting the reactionary right’s arguments without context as is so terrifyingly common in mainstream corporate media.

This is accomplished by counterbalancing each claim and accusation made by the fascists, with numerous mainstream media accounts of the violence they’ve undertaken during thinly-disguised exercises of reactionary right-wing terrorism and intimidation. In particular, Gupta’s use of this “accusation” then “revelation” technique is absurdly effective when employed against fascist provocateur and fake journalist Andy Ngo’s selectively edited videos of “antifa terrorist violence” – by posting the larger contextual counter-evidence that reveals the violence was actually initiated by far right reactionary “protestors”, Gupta essentially exposes and de-fangs Ngo’s entire narrative as highly-lucrative fascist agitprop; which it is!

Furthermore, this finely-sourced piece represents a literal wealth of knowledge about not only the neo-fascist “free speech” rallies in Portland, but the contours of the battle against rising, street-level fascism in America as a whole. In one single essay Gupta exposes the modern “MAGA free speech” movement as a ruthless roving neo-nazi street gang looking to cow political opposition with violence, puts flame to the lie that Andy Ngo is a journalist, excoriates corporate media for lending credibility to fascist provocateurs, exposes the direct connection between right wing street gangs and the Trump administration, and shatters the argument that anti-fascist activists are “the *real* terrorists” – all thoroughly supported by a variety of links referencing the full spectrum of primarily mainstream media websites.

It is however in the final third of the article under the heading “Stemming the Tide” in which Gupta both rises to his highest moment and yet tragically still stumbles in that unfortunate way most liberal or liberal-adjacent media figures are so incentivized to do.

First the author rises to the challenge by taking a sledgehammer to the infantile argument that “if no opposition were to show up when the far right marches, then there would be no violence, hence no story for the media, which would in turn deprive the far right of the visuals they need to recruit. They would thus flounder and dissipate.”

As Gupta rightfully notes however these “far-right rallies are neither discrete nor static events. Like Trumpism, they are part of a dynamic of extremism, benefiting both from polarization and the disruption of norms.” Naturally the purpose of these rallies is to draw attention to, fortify and recruit for a white nationalist, anti-migrant, anti-left wing neo-fascist movement that is already killing people all over the country – simply allowing that to happen unmolested represents a crime of negligence against society as a whole, no matter what the law books say.

In what is undoubtedly the author’s finest moment in the essay, Gupta once and for all shatters the idea that simply ignoring the violent nazis and hoping they’ll go away is an effective strategy by pointing out that the fascist street-gangs have already gone on the offensive against even milquetoast liberal organizing:

“Patriot Prayer, Proud Boys, and their allies shifted strategy in 2018, says O’Banion. “They began showing up in small, well-armed groups at places like the IWW [Wobblies] Hall. They threatened the Occupy ICE encampment last summer. They went to Planned Parenthood in Olympia and harassed people. They harassed people at an immigrant solidarity event shortly before August 17.” Patriot Prayer has also tried to disrupt a general meeting of the Portland DSA, the Women’s March in 2018, and LGBT Pride, and they threatened a climate change event at a local college, which was canceled by the administration. And they attacked the Cider Riot bar on May Day.

In effect, the far right is using the big rallies to recruit, stoke more violence, and disrupt peaceful left, labor, and liberal organizing.”

The above quoted paragraph is in and itself quite amazing because while I know every single person reading this analysis has heard about the “horrifying attacks on Andy Ngo” there’s a pretty good chance you’ve heard nothing at all from the national media about any of the above *right* wing attacks on regular people organizing for political purposes the far right deems unacceptable. Why do you think that is?

All of which brings us to unfortunate ebb where I think Gupta’s work falls short as he ends the article by talking about harnessing the anti-fascist energy of a soccer game “in the streets.” This continues an unfortunately sour note of ivory tower liberalism that runs throughout the entire piece. While noting that direct and sometimes violent action has been the only method even the fascists acknowledge has hampered their efforts to organize, Gupta riddles this piece with observations like:

“There was no justification for the attack, if no other reason than that Ngo was cast as the victim in a story that became national news and was exploited by Trump in trying to label Antifa terrorists.”

“Some antifascists were eager to rumble, as well. But others jumped in to defuse the violence every time. No doubt dumb acts are committed in the name of antifascism. But that’s true of any movement, and dumb is not deadly.”

“The mainstream media are failing as well, by starving reporters of the time and resources needed to expose the unsavory characters and ideas lurking on the far right.”

Most of this is ultimately the same type of liberal “both sides” nonsense that Gupta himself decries in the early portion of his own article.

For starters the widely-publicized justification for the assault on Andy Ngo is that he publicly broadcast the names and addresses of anti-fascist protestors arrested at a previous rally, apparently with the help of a sympathetic police officer. This action put lives in danger and whether or not you agree that this justification is sufficient to give Andy Ngo a decidedly non-lethal shiner for his trouble, it is not non-existent. If Gupta was unaware of these facts, he’s failed his readers and he’s helped Andy Ngo hide the fascist violence behind his actions – actions that then lead to the assault; please keep in mind that nobody punched Andy in the face during the numerous *previous* rallies he attended and filmed, after all.

Additionally, it’s pretty ridiculous for Gupta to blather on about soccer games attended primarily by affluent white liberals and scold, however mildly, “some antifacists” for being “eager to rumble” in an article where he points out that the key to stopping fascist organization is anti-fascist counter protesting. Why exactly does Gupta think the right is trying to target smaller groups and avoid massive hordes of antifascists? It’s because they’ll get their butt whupped by those hordes, in a very physical sense, obviously.

Of course as Gutpa reveals in the third quote above, all of this is further colored by his largely liberal (and disastrously incorrect) opinion that the answer is “more journalism” – uttered with an apparently straight face, as if the mainstream corporate media wasn’t actively prepared to side with fascists over left wing protestors for both economic and class warfare reasons.

At this point I might be inclined to say something snarky about entrusting a labor class left wing revolution to self-aggrandizing trust fund babies who own a magazine but I’ll save it for another day. Despite its few (and deeply annoying) flaws, this is an excellent article and if the mainstream media put half as much effort into covering these stories properly as Gupta and Jacobin have done here, the fascist menace that looms over the 2020 election might already be receding.

Alas as many reading this already know – most liberals in the media, deep in their heart of hearts would prefer fascism to sharing with poor people and the marginalized.

 

On Media Narratives, Class Warfare and the Bernie Sanders 2020 Campaign

Look, I think it’s high time that labor class Bernie Sanders supporters take a step back from the ledge and consider the source of all these recent attacks on Sanders.

Who’re we talking about here really?

We’re talking about giant media corporations, rich liberals who run NGOs and bougie Dem-party connected organizers on the make here. You know full damn well that these people would do anything, or say anything to prevent a Sanders presidency. Furthermore, you know why – because whether they’re minions of elite capital or they’re simply aspirational professional class careerists, the kind of structural change and empowerment of the labor class Bernie represents is a direct threat to their wealth, influence and power.

This primary election is ultimately (and for all of the Sanders campaign’s flaws) a class war and that means that it’s not just the billionaires you’re fighting here – you’re in direct combat with the entire social order built around elite capital and that struggle is real.

In war (which this is) you wouldn’t listen to an enemy when he says there’s no use in fighting – he has no requirement to be honest with you and he wouldn’t tell you that you were going to win even if he thought you were. Instead you’d judge his panic, his fear, how hard he struggles to avoid the fight. There wouldn’t be a Bernie blackout in the media, they wouldn’t be censoring Sanders supporters on Twitter, Nate Silver wouldn’t be growing more hysterical by the day if these guys wanted a FIGHT.

The staggeringly obvious truth here is that if Bernie Sanders wasn’t still very much in the 2020 Dem nomination race, affluent media liberals and Democrats wouldn’t be spending all this time, money and energy telling you to quit five goddamn months before the first primary.

As I’ve demonstrated repeatedly in the past, the mainstream media blanket effect for a “chosen Bernie Slayer” candidate appears to be worth about 10 points in rigged polls and thus far its staying power has been about one or two months. This was true of Harris, Mayor Pete and Biden, I suspect it will ultimately prove true regarding Warren’s support. If you take 10 points off her sudden surge in the polls to account for the (again, TEMPORARY) bonus from the media glare, she’s no more threatening than Buttigieg.

Not more than two weeks ago, even mainstream articles were predicting “Sanders might win this” and a wide spread of recent polls showed him in first place, or within 3 points of a first place Biden in four key early states – including California which may decide the nomination. Then miraculously all hell breaks loose and suddenly because of one outlier poll in Iowa and some sort of neoliberal “feelings” exercise by a fake pollster, Bernie Sanders and his supporters are horrible racist pigs who should just pack it in anyway because Liz is anointed? What?

Don’t you think that there’s at least a small chance that these three things (Bernie’s success, the weaponized identity attacks on his campaign and the demands for Sanders to drop out) just *might* be related? Have you even bothered to consider the source?

The hard facts on the ground are that Bernie Sanders polling numbers never seem to move, while everyone’s chosen “Bernie Slayer” at any given point in time sees wild fluctuations in their support based on blanket media coverage. And this is five months before the first primary, long before the average primary voter is even seriously considering how they’re going to respond at the polls. In an honest media environment, this would be seen as evidence that Bernie has a rock solid base of support to build on but as we’ve seen, this is not an honest media environment.

Of course, the downside for Sanders is that all of this candidate-hopping does reveal the existence of a PUMA-like anti-Sanders movement, fueled by this media coverage. Objectively however, the vast majority of those who self-describe as the “Never Bernie” wing of the party are professional class or higher and we already know that the bougies aren’t going to vote for Sanders and will unite behind anyone they believe will beat him.

That then leaves primarily working class voters who aren’t paying attention, independents and undecideds – all numerically superior demographics where Sanders is dominating virtually every “real Democrat” in the race. If the corporate media cared about anything except stopping Sanders they’d be reporting these facts, but they don’t.

Never ever forget that the professional class, media and politicians are vastly over-represented on Twitter because many labor class voters have jobs that don’t come with a desk and internet connection – you’re not imagining things when you think social media is dominated by self-absorbed rich people.

In summation the “Bernie is already dead” myth is a lie and that is confirmed by how loud all the rich people are screaming it. Don’t allow yourself to be discouraged when your enemies in the class war tell you the cause is hopeless – all the evidence suggests they’re lying.

 

• nina illingworth