Cory Heidelbergber said this about South Dakota War College while commenting on his Madville Times web site:
You expected rational, open discourse from DWC. That was your first mistake, Jenny.
I tried having a rational discussion with Cory over the last couple of years and he couldn't handle it. Instead he has blocked me from his web site. So much for open discourse at the Madville Times. Incrediably he points fingers at those who are doing what he is doing.
It is amazing how the Democratic and GOP activists point fingers at each other hoping that they can prove the other side is more evil than their side. Have they ever considered that both sides could be wrong? Ever consider that Rick Weiland's Big Government is the reason Mike Rounds' Big Business survives:
When private companies must compete in an open market for the best employees and for customers, that is free enterprise capitalism (or laissez-faire). However, when they form partnerships with government, or when either one "partners" with foundations or nonprofit sector entities, or even, I would argue, are legally able to borrow money from banks created according to the fractional reserve system, free enterprise is compromised. The economic system begins its move from a one based on liberty and productivity to one based on control and plunder. If corporations have the most money—as is often the case—they will obtain levels of power that make them as dangerous as any government not on a constitutional leash.
Fascism is the name we give to the ideology which merges the power of the purse (business, foundations, nonprofits) with the power of the sword (government) in order to create policy, impose it by methods ranging from subterfuge to force, and take a society in a desired direction. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary defines fascism as "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized, autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition." Perhaps still better:
Fascism adheres to the "philosopher-king" belief that only one class—which is by birth, education, or social standing—is capable of understanding what is best for the whole community and putting it into practice.
Thus fascism tends to develop when those in business who want unearned wealth or power join forces with would-be philosopher-kings with that Platonist vision—or become one and the same, under the Platonist assumption that they and their selected cohorts are most fit to rule. At first, the system is not overtly totalitarian. Those with newfound power want as many people as they can to accept their leadership without being forced. Joan Veon quotes Bertram Gross from Friendly Fascism:
Although the classic fascists openly subverted constitutional democracy … they took great pains to conceal the Big Capital-Big Government partnership. one device for doing this was the myth of "corporatism" or the "corporate state." In place of geographically elected parliaments, the Italians and the Germans set up elaborate systems whereby every interest in the country—including labor—was to be "functionally represented." In fact, the main function was to provide facades behind which the decisions were made by intricate networks of business cartels working closely with military officers and their own people in civilian government.
Today’s public-private partnerships have these same ingredients even if the main power players have changed. Veon argues persuasively that the process of "reinventing government" that took the country by storm during the Clinton years is the best means of understanding the political environment in which public-private partnerships are most at home.
Over the years I have tried to agree with Cory's criticism of crony capitalism and then show him how the ever increasing roles of government is causing the problem, and that we should instead decrease the size and role of governemnt so that the people can fairly compete in a free enterprise system (or laissez-faire). He refuses to discuss that point and instead looks for every opportunity to attack free market ideas.
It is also sad that the philosopher kings has us divided up into two parties so that too many spend all of their energies fighting with each other instead of joining together and directing the fight toward the true enemies. Even more sad is that those of us who see this and speak out have to deal with this:
This system is fascist since it involves corporations and governments working together to make policy; it is soft fascist because (due to the lack of genuine education) it is not overtly totalitarian. Tyrannical controls are barely needed, because among the mind-controlled workers and future workers there is little resistance. Most go along, fearing unemployment. After all, as George Orwell once observed, "Circus dogs jump when the trainer cracks his whip, but the really well-trained dog is the one that turns his somersault when there is no whip." Soft fascism thus employs behavior modification rather than obvious acts of tyranny. It is guided by an incentive system rather than overt acts of coercion: operant conditioning, a product of several decades of behavioral psychology to which the classical fascists were not privy. Thus for much of the population, there is no whip. Those who do not turn their somersaults—perhaps out of a realization that their choices have been artificially reduced—are marginalized and eventually able to find only menial jobs. Lack of resources renders them effectively helpless—their punishment for nonconformity, in the behavioral psychologist’s sense. The "system" is effectively insulated against their criticisms, which as Orwell also observed, will not be read in places where they threaten the governing class. This class will have the Platonist philosopher-kings at the helm, overseeing public-private partnerships involving big government, big business, big foundations, with the full backing of the mainstream media, approximately 90 percent of which is owned by a half-dozen huge corporations. This explains why you will not encounter criticisms of public-private partnerships or of the idea of sustainable development in any mainstream media outlet today.
This is why many of us find ourselves outside the SDGOP tent looking in as Democratic activists like Cory make fun of us and then block us out of his blog when we bring the truths that he refuses to listen to. Sad that the Democrats fall for the deceptive RINOs' trick of using the conservative label when promoting their collectivist ecomonic development agenda. If you are genuinely educated, then you will understand their fascism (or Fabian Socialism) is near the same side of the spectrum that you find the Democrat's Marxist-based socialism. It is communism by evolution versus revolution. Free enterprise capitalism (or laissez-faire) is way on the other side of the spectrum.