NSPM-7 - Shut the eff up - who is not anti-fascist?

NSPM-7 is a directive from POTUS about Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence to "to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence." The problem is it is overly broad and vague and seems to provide a tool to harass and imprison political dissenters. The full text is available on the White House web site.

First, I am not a terrorist, have never been a terrorist, and do not plan to be a terrorist.

But what are we talking about when we are talking about fascism. According to the Council on Foreign Relations:

What does fascism mean?

Many experts agree that fascism is a mass political movement that emphasizes extreme nationalism, militarism, and the supremacy of the nation over the individual. This model of government stands in contrast to liberal democracies that support individual rights, competitive elections, and political dissent.

In many ways, fascist regimes begin as revolutionary. They advocate for the overthrow of existing systems of government and the persecution of political enemies. However, such regimes are also highly conservative in their championing of traditional values.

And although fascist leaders typically claim to support the everyman, in reality, their regimes often align with powerful business interests.

So based on this definition. I am anti-facsist and prefer government that supports individual rights, competitive elections, and political dissent. So what?

What about the rest of the imprecise NSPM-7 dimensions.

Anti-Americanism. I am patriotic and love our country which at its best respects individual rights, competitive elections, and political dissent.

This seem like pro-Americanism so I am not anti-American. But like anything, Americanism is not perfect. Begs the question - if America is not perfect and one complains or is anti-this-particular-aspect of Americanism should one be investigated, surveilled, interviewed by the FBI? I think not but suspect sadly it will be so.

Anti-capitalism seems a vague catchall. I have been a willing participant in our capitalist society but there are some problems today.

Yeah, there are parts of capitalism that are not good. One example - expecting firms to always grow like cancer is unhealthy. Another example is today's capitalism concentrates wealth. Is that great? Regulation and taxation play as large a role in commercial success as the invisible hand. Suppose that has always been the case to some extent. Corruption and graft are unsavory aspects of today's system. To me the rapid monetizing of the presidency and neutering of anti-corruption measures is worrisome. (Wonder why Kristi and her right hand man and reported lover Lewandowski need to personally approve all DHS purchases over $100K? Looks like they want get purchaser 'perks' and maybe a revolving door when they are done. It must be hard to be a mere multi- millionaire in a cabinet of billionaires, so desperate measures are required.)

To be anti-capitalist requires an alternative and I don't have one. Neither Communism nor Socialism float my boat but full-on Ayn Randian everybody for themselves libertarian capitalism doesn't either. I do object to the government being shareholders in public companies - that feels like China. I do believe workers should be sharing more in the lopsided wealth equation. Hopefully these thoughts doesn't qualify as anti-capitalism. Am not completely sure capitalism can be precisely defined, which may benefit those who want to tamp down or punish detractors.

Anti-Christianity begs the question of what kind of Christianity.

Does thinking Christian nationalism is bunk make me anti-Christian? Does disagreeing with pastors who believe women should not vote make me anti-Christian. Does thinking that the White House pastor offering blessings for $1,000 is slimy make me anti-Christian? Does thinking prosperity Christianity is court priests fawning over royalty for favor make me anti-Christian? Does getting angry that self-professed Christians are treating other people like crap make me anti-Christian. I hope not.

Separation of church and State is good. Part of my family came here to escape death from State sponsored religious persecution. Rabid nationalistic religious fervor is a bad thing. But if Christianity helps you get through the day (or any other religion or spiritual practice for that matter) and you are not forcing your religion on others or persecuting or harming others with different beliefs that's cool. Life can be tough.

Support for the overthrow of the United States Government.

Sure...this is motherhood and apple pie. If you are supporting violent revolution, you might be a terrorist.

I don't support the overthrow of the United States Government.

But what if the language changes to support for the overthrow of a tyrannical United States Government? We've heard much from 2nd Amendment and State's rights proponents about the need for an armed militia and strong state rights to prevent tyranny. By design, State's rights counter balance should the checks and balances of the Federal Government like separate powers of Congress, Judiciary, and Executive branches fail. Funny how deafeningly quiet conservative States Rights folks have been about Federal military deployments.

James Madison wrote:

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."

The Declaration of Independence says:

...when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Regardless, would vastly prefer to vote at the ballot box with my fellow citizens and exercise democracy.

Extremism on migration, race, and gender. WTF is this and who determines what extremism means.

Migration

Is Elon a migration extremist because he wants to emigrate to Mars? Sounds pretty extreme to me. Is the current executive branch extremist because they want to prioritize white immigration? Sounds pretty extreme to me. Are farmers who rely on migrant workers for agriculture extremist for wanting a labor force? Is it migration extremism to demand H1B tech workers to lower technology company costs? Is it migration extremism to move to a state that reflects your political beliefs? This is double speak that makes it easy to classify people as the enemy. And once you are designated a terrorist, boom. (Just ask those drug smugglers blown out of the water in extrajudicial killings how they feel about being classified as terrorists. Oh, you cannot because they are dead.)

Race

Race is scientifically not a genetic fact according to the National Genome Research Institute:

"Race is a social construct used to group people. Race was constructed as a hierarchal human-grouping system, generating racial classifications to identify, distinguish and marginalize some groups across nations, regions and the world. Race divides human populations into groups often based on physical appearance, social factors and cultural backgrounds."

So does saying black lives matter mean you are as extremist on race as saying white people are superior? Does thinking the diversity of America is a strength mean you are as extremist as a community that wants to exclude people whose skin tones are darker? Does thinking eugenics and good genes are a thing make you more extremist than someone who believes melanin should play no role in commercial, career, and life decisions.

Once again vague gobbledygook that can be used to designate your enemies as terrorists.

Hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality

As a reminder the description by the Council on Foreign Relations about fascism:

However, such regimes are also highly conservative in their championing of traditional values.

Hmmmmm, suspect.

Family

Mormon polygamous families might be considered traditional. Native American families were often matrilinear. If you were a slave, you were often painfully separated from your spouse and children. What is a traditional American view on family? We all know the implication of this language. This implies man and women as husband and wife. Maybe the wife should submit to the husband and preferably be a homemaker trad wife who makes to-die-for cookies while homeschooling her children and making America hot again for her manly flannel shirted husband with Disney prince forearms.

Kinda problematic when most families need both incomes to live comfortably. Problematic if you are part of a LGBTQ family or have a LGBTQ family member. Problematic if Leave it to Beaver just makes you hostile. Kinda problematic if you are a single parent struggling and doing the best you can to juggle life while being told you are not traditional.

Just who the is going to make a determination if someone is hostile to traditional American views on family. Who is going to weigh the facts and determine if such a hostility exists? I am angry about people who judge families on some non-specific framework of traditional views. Does that make me hostile? One hopefully outdated traditional view in impoverished Appalachia was women should be barefoot and pregnant. I am hostile to that view. Does that make me a terrorist? Of course not.

Religion

Most early Americans were Christian and some were Jewish. Slaves and indigenous people had varied religious practices such as Vodou, Santería, and Hoodoo. Buddism was part of the American religious tradition arriving with Chinese immigrants in the 1800s to build railroads and help with the gold rush before the civil war. Guess these all could be considered traditional American religions. You do you. No need to be hostile to the religion of others unless they infringe on other's rights.

Looks to me like religiously unaffiliated has been growing at the expense of American Christianity. From my experience walking around, I don't see much if any hostility toward Christians. I do sense some anger where radical Christians want to dictate beliefs like over turning women's right to vote or make personal medical decisions. I do sense anger when idiot politicians make statements like ICE is doing the Lord's work as ICE pepper-balls pastors protesting peacefully and legally.

Morality

I'd say the core of American morality is defined by the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

I am in no way hostile to this American morality. But when the White House uses this vague language as a litmus test for domestic terrorism it raises my anti-fascist hackles.

Congress's Muted Reaction

Asked my three representatives (Mackenzie, Fetterman, McCormick) about their stance on the directive. None have responded yet but doesn't appear they have a position.