Does The "Homeland" Bother You Like It Bothers Me?

Posted on Friday, July 20 at 14:29 by Spanky
I came pretty close to heaving a heavy object through the TV screen at that point, but restrained myself and just launched some well chosen swear words at the TV (instead of my shoe). I then went immediately to my computer and fired off an email to the network in question, taking the reporter to task for using US government fascist, brainwashing and propaganda terminology in his presentation on Canadian security and defense issues and emphasizing I did not want to hear the creepy, disgusting, Orwellian term "Homeland" ever, ever used in a Canadian context again. To date I never have, although I'm now living without access to mainstream US and Canadian TV channels (other than clips posted on the internet) so I might have missed it if Canadian media has recently used "Homeland" in relation to Canada. Should anyone think I was overreacting, then I suggest learning more about the origins of the term "Homeland" and which government it was that first determined it would be advantageous to refer to the "Homeland" (and for what reason) in places where it would be more normal to use the official geographic name of the country. See the article "When Democracy Failed:The Warnings of History" posted below for the details. Note that the author grants permission to republish his article on the web as long as the copyright notice at the end of the article is attached. ---------- When Democracy Failed: The Warnings of History by Tom Hartman The 70th anniversary wasn't noticed in the United States, and was barely reported in the corporate media. But the Germans remembered well that fateful day seventy years ago - February 27, 1933. They commemorated the anniversary by joining in demonstrations for peace that mobilized citizens all across the world. It started when the government, in the midst of a worldwide economic crisis, received reports of an imminent terrorist attack. A foreign ideologue had launched feeble attacks on a few famous buildings, but the media largely ignored his relatively small efforts. The intelligence services knew, however, that the odds were he would eventually succeed. (Historians are still arguing whether or not rogue elements in the intelligence service helped the terrorist; the most recent research implies they did not.) But the warnings of investigators were ignored at the highest levels, in part because the government was distracted; the man who claimed to be the nation's leader had not been elected by a majority vote and the majority of citizens claimed he had no right to the powers he coveted. He was a simpleton, some said, a cartoon character of a man who saw things in black-and-white terms and didn't have the intellect to understand the subtleties of running a nation in a complex and internationalist world. His coarse use of language - reflecting his political roots in a southernmost state - and his simplistic and often-inflammatory nationalistic rhetoric offended the aristocrats, foreign leaders, and the well-educated elite in the government and media. And, as a young man, he'd joined a secret society with an occult-sounding name and bizarre initiation rituals that involved skulls and human bones. Nonetheless, he knew the terrorist was going to strike (although he didn't know where or when), and he had already considered his response. When an aide brought him word that the nation's most prestigious building was ablaze, he verified it was the terrorist who had struck and then rushed to the scene and called a press conference. "You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in history," he proclaimed, standing in front of the burned-out building, surrounded by national media. "This fire," he said, his voice trembling with emotion, "is the beginning." He used the occasion - "a sign from God," he called it - to declare an all-out war on terrorism and its ideological sponsors, a people, he said, who traced their origins to the Middle East and found motivation for their evil deeds in their religion. Two weeks later, the first detention center for terrorists was built in Oranianberg to hold the first suspected allies of the infamous terrorist. In a national outburst of patriotism, the leader's flag was everywhere, even printed large in newspapers suitable for window display. Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nation's now-popular leader had pushed through legislation - in the name of combating terrorism and fighting the philosophy he said spawned it - that suspended constitutional guarantees of free speech, privacy, and habeas corpus. Police could now intercept mail and wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be imprisoned without specific charges and without access to their lawyers; police could sneak into people's homes without warrants if the cases involved terrorism. To get his patriotic "Decree on the Protection of People and State" passed over the objections of concerned legislators and civil libertarians, he agreed to put a 4-year sunset provision on it: if the national emergency provoked by the terrorist attack was over by then, the freedoms and rights would be returned to the people, and the police agencies would be re-restrained. Legislators would later say they hadn't had time to read the bill before voting on it. Immediately after passage of the anti-terrorism act, his federal police agencies stepped up their program of arresting suspicious persons and holding them without access to lawyers or courts. In the first year only a few hundred were interred, and those who objected were largely ignored by the mainstream press, which was afraid to offend and thus lose access to a leader with such high popularity ratings. Citizens who protested the leader in public - and there were many - quickly found themselves confronting the newly empowered police's batons, gas, and jail cells, or fenced off in protest zones safely out of earshot of the leader's public speeches. (In the meantime, he was taking almost daily lessons in public speaking, learning to control his tonality, gestures, and facial expressions. He became a very competent orator.) Within the first months after that terrorist attack, at the suggestion of a political advisor, he brought a formerly obscure word into common usage. He wanted to stir a "racial pride" among his countrymen, so, instead of referring to the nation by its name, he began to refer to it as "The Homeland," a phrase publicly promoted in the introduction to a 1934 speech recorded in Leni Riefenstahl's famous propaganda movie "Triumph Of The Will." As hoped, people's hearts swelled with pride, and the beginning of an us-versus-them mentality was sewn. Our land was "the" homeland, citizens thought: all others were simply foreign lands. We are the "true people," he suggested, the only ones worthy of our nation's concern; if bombs fall on others, or human rights are violated in other nations and it makes our lives better, it's of little concern to us. Playing on this new nationalism, and exploiting a disagreement with the French over his increasing militarism, he argued that any international body that didn't act first and foremost in the best interest of his own nation was neither relevant nor useful. He thus withdrew his country from the League Of Nations in October, 1933, and then negotiated a separate naval armaments agreement with Anthony Eden of The United Kingdom to create a worldwide military ruling elite. His propaganda minister orchestrated a campaign to ensure the people that he was a deeply religious man and that his motivations were rooted in Christianity. He even proclaimed the need for a revival of the Christian faith across his nation, what he called a "New Christianity." Every man in his rapidly growing army wore a belt buckle that declared "Gott Mit Uns" - God Is With Us - and most of them fervently believed it was true. Within a year of the terrorist attack, the nation's leader determined that the various local police and federal agencies around the nation were lacking the clear communication and overall coordinated administration necessary to deal with the terrorist threat facing the nation, particularly those citizens who were of Middle Eastern ancestry and thus probably terrorist and communist sympathizers, and various troublesome "intellectuals" and "liberals." He proposed a single new national agency to protect the security of the homeland, consolidating the actions of dozens of previously independent police, border, and investigative agencies under a single leader. He appointed one of his most trusted associates to be leader of this new agency, the Central Security Office for the homeland, and gave it a role in the government equal to the other major departments. His assistant who dealt with the press noted that, since the terrorist attack, "Radio and press are at out disposal." Those voices questioning the legitimacy of their nation's leader, or raising questions about his checkered past, had by now faded from the public's recollection as his central security office began advertising a program encouraging people to phone in tips about suspicious neighbors. This program was so successful that the names of some of the people "denounced" were soon being broadcast on radio stations. Those denounced often included opposition politicians and celebrities who dared speak out - a favorite target of his regime and the media he now controlled through intimidation and ownership by corporate allies. To consolidate his power, he concluded that government alone wasn't enough. He reached out to industry and forged an alliance, bringing former executives of the nation's largest corporations into high government positions. A flood of government money poured into corporate coffers to fight the war against the Middle Eastern ancestry terrorists lurking within the homeland, and to prepare for wars overseas. He encouraged large corporations friendly to him to acquire media outlets and other industrial concerns across the nation, particularly those previously owned by suspicious people of Middle Eastern ancestry. He built powerful alliances with industry; one corporate ally got the lucrative contract worth millions to build the first large-scale detention center for enemies of the state. Soon more would follow. Industry flourished. But after an interval of peace following the terrorist attack, voices of dissent again arose within and without the government. Students had started an active program opposing him (later known as the White Rose Society), and leaders of nearby nations were speaking out against his bellicose rhetoric. He needed a diversion, something to direct people away from the corporate cronyism being exposed in his own government, questions of his possibly illegitimate rise to power, and the oft-voiced concerns of civil libertarians about the people being held in detention without due process or access to attorneys or family. With his number two man - a master at manipulating the media - he began a campaign to convince the people of the nation that a small, limited war was necessary. Another nation was harboring many of the suspicious Middle Eastern people, and even though its connection with the terrorist who had set afire the nation's most important building was tenuous at best, it held resources their nation badly needed if they were to have room to live and maintain their prosperity. He called a press conference and publicly delivered an ultimatum to the leader of the other nation, provoking an international uproar. He claimed the right to strike preemptively in self-defense, and nations across Europe - at first - denounced him for it, pointing out that it was a doctrine only claimed in the past by nations seeking worldwide empire, like Caesar's Rome or Alexander's Greece. It took a few months, and intense international debate and lobbying with European nations, but, after he personally met with the leader of the United Kingdom, finally a deal was struck. After the military action began, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain told the nervous British people that giving in to this leader's new first-strike doctrine would bring "peace for our time." Thus Hitler annexed Austria in a lightning move, riding a wave of popular support as leaders so often do in times of war. The Austrian government was unseated and replaced by a new leadership friendly to Germany, and German corporations began to take over Austrian resources. In a speech responding to critics of the invasion, Hitler said, "Certain foreign newspapers have said that we fell on Austria with brutal methods. I can only say; even in death they cannot stop lying. I have in the course of my political struggle won much love from my people, but when I crossed the former frontier [into Austria] there met me such a stream of love as I have never experienced. Not as tyrants have we come, but as liberators." To deal with those who dissented from his policies, at the advice of his politically savvy advisors, he and his handmaidens in the press began a campaign to equate him and his policies with patriotism and the nation itself. National unity was essential, they said, to ensure that the terrorists or their sponsors didn't think they'd succeeded in splitting the nation or weakening its will. In times of war, they said, there could be only "one people, one nation, and one commander-in-chief" ("Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer"), and so his advocates in the media began a nationwide campaign charging that critics of his policies were attacking the nation itself. Those questioning him were labeled "anti-German" or "not good Germans," and it was suggested they were aiding the enemies of the state by failing in the patriotic necessity of supporting the nation's valiant men in uniform. It was one of his most effective ways to stifle dissent and pit wage-earning people (from whom most of the army came) against the "intellectuals and liberals" who were critical of his policies. Nonetheless, once the "small war" annexation of Austria was successfully and quickly completed, and peace returned, voices of opposition were again raised in the Homeland. The almost-daily release of news bulletins about the dangers of terrorist communist cells wasn't enough to rouse the populace and totally suppress dissent. A full-out war was necessary to divert public attention from the growing rumbles within the country about disappearing dissidents; violence against liberals, Jews, and union leaders; and the epidemic of crony capitalism that was producing empires of wealth in the corporate sector but threatening the middle class's way of life. A year later, to the week, Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia; the nation was now fully at war, and all internal dissent was suppressed in the name of national security. It was the end of Germany's first experiment with democracy. As we conclude this review of history, there are a few milestones worth remembering. February 27, 2003, was the 70th anniversary of Dutch terrorist Marinus van der Lubbe's successful firebombing of the German Parliament (Reichstag) building, the terrorist act that catapulted Hitler to legitimacy and reshaped the German constitution. By the time of his successful and brief action to seize Austria, in which almost no German blood was shed, Hitler was the most beloved and popular leader in the history of his nation. Hailed around the world, he was later Time magazine's "Man Of The Year." Most Americans remember his office for the security of the homeland, known as the Reichssicherheitshauptamt and its SchutzStaffel, simply by its most famous agency's initials: the SS. We also remember that the Germans developed a new form of highly violent warfare they named "lightning war" or blitzkrieg, which, while generating devastating civilian losses, also produced a highly desirable "shock and awe" among the nation's leadership according to the authors of the 1996 book "Shock And Awe" published by the National Defense University Press. Reflecting on that time, The American Heritage Dictionary (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983) left us this definition of the form of government the German democracy had become through Hitler's close alliance with the largest German corporations and his policy of using war as a tool to keep power: "fas-cism (fbsh'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." Today, as we face financial and political crises, it's useful to remember that the ravages of the Great Depression hit Germany and the United States alike. Through the 1930s, however, Hitler and Roosevelt chose very different courses to bring their nations back to power and prosperity. Germany's response was to use government to empower corporations and reward the society's richest individuals, privatize much of the commons, stifle dissent, strip people of constitutional rights, and create an illusion of prosperity through continual and ever-expanding war. America passed minimum wage laws to raise the middle class, enforced anti-trust laws to diminish the power of corporations, increased taxes on corporations and the wealthiest individuals, created Social Security, and became the employer of last resort through programs to build national infrastructure, promote the arts, and replant forests. To the extent that our Constitution is still intact, the choice is again ours. Thom Hartmann lived and worked in Germany during the 1980s, and is the author of over a dozen books, including "Unequal Protection" and "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight." This article is copyright by Thom Hartmann, but permission is granted for reprint in print, email, blog, or web media so long as this credit is attached. Link to original: http://www.thomhartmann.com/democracyfailed.shtml [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on July 23, 2007]

Note: http://www.thomhartmann...

Contributed By


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by Spanky
    Fri Jul 20, 2007 11:34 pm
    Seems like I am not the only one who was creeped out by the sudden rise to prominence of "Homeland" to describe the USA. Take a look at this post at <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com">www.democraticunderground.com</a> and the comments that follow:<br />
    <br />
    I don't live in the "Homeland".<br />
    I don't live in the "Motherland"<br />
    I don't live in the "Fatherland"<br />
    <br />
    I live in a state<br />
    My state is part of the UNITED states<br />
    My country is the sum of its parts<br />
    <br />
    Until recently, when my country was spoken of by its leaders, it was called OUR COUNTRY..or THE UNITED STATES...or just AMERICA.<br />
    <br />
    The re-naming of our country is just another exclusionary tactic to further isolate us .<br />
    <br />
    SNIP<br />
    <br />
    WinkyDink Tue Jul-17-07 01:47 PM<br />
    I think Georgie learned that at Grampa Prescott's knee, don't you? The term is no accident, no fluke, no coincidence.<br />
    <br />
    Golden Raisin <br />
    I think they know exactly what the derivation is and associations are. I'm waiting to see the 'Arbeit macht frei" signs over the gates to the domestic Halliburton internment camps.<br />
    <br />
    SNIP<br />
    <br />
    dicksteele <br />
    A chill went down my spine the first time I heard that word used to describe my country. Even more frightening was how many of my fellow citizens didn't even BLINK at the term.<br />
    <br />
    Blue_In_AK <br />
    I absolutely LOATHE that term "homeland" It's so Third Reich. <br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1356275">http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1356275</a>

  2. Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:05 am
    In BC "Heartland" was introduced

    ---
    "When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

    William Blake

  3. Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:14 am
    Seems like I am not the only one who was creeped out by the sudden rise to prominence of "Homeland" to describe the USA. <br> <a href="http://www.xuefeng8.com">seo</a> <a href="http://www.hkyanda.com">搬屋公司</a> <a href="http://www.hkyanda.com">搬屋</a>

  4. Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:40 am
    <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland">From Wikipedia</a>: <blockquote>Various meanings <br><br> * The Soviet Union, which commonly referred to its homeland as "Mother Russia," created homelands for some minorities in the 1920s, including the Volga German ASSR and the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. Often, as in the case of the Volga German ASSR, these homelands were later brutally abolished and their inhabitants deported to either Siberia or the Kazakh SSR. <br><br> * In the current United States, the Department of Homeland Security was created soon after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, as a means to centralise response to various threats. The term is rarely used by common United States citizens to refer to their country, which made the chosen name sound odd to many. In a June 2002 column, Republican consultant and speechwriter Peggy Noonan expressed the hope that the Bush administration would change the name of the department, writing that "The name Homeland Security grates on a lot of people, understandably. Homeland isn't really an American word, it's not something we used to say or say now." <br><br> * In the apartheid era in South Africa the concept was given a different meaning. The white government transformed the 13% of its territory that had been exempted from white settlement into regions of "home-rule". Then they tried to bestow independence on these regions, so that they could then claim that the other 87% was white territory. Four of them were declared independent nations by South Africa, but were unrecognized as independent countries by any other nation besides each other and South Africa. See Bantustan. <br><br> * In German, homeland is translated as Heimatland, and this was a term used by the Nazis to refer to the German "Fatherland." It was also the name of a strongly pro-Nazi magazine edited by Wilhelm Weiss during the rise of the Nazi Party in Germany. </blockquote> You're damned right, all of this "homeland" bullshit ought to bother every last one of us into action to stamp it out before it gets any worse, and I don't just mean the word. <br><br> See: <a href="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/">FAKE TERROR - THE ROAD TO WAR AND DICTATORSHIP</a> <br><br> Also see <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares">The Power of Nightmares</a>

  5. by Spanky
    Sun Jul 22, 2007 1:26 am
    <b>America 2007 Is Germany 1930</b><br><br> By Norman D. Livergood (a former department head at the US Army War College)<br><br> We who live in the post-World War II period possess an immensely valuable symbol, even if we don't understand it or use it effectively: the example of Nazi Germany.<br><br> <i>"The German experiment, except to those who are its victims, is particularly interesting, and, like the offer of a strong man to let himself be vivisected, should make a great contribution to political science. For the Germans are the most gifted and most highly educated people who ever devoted the full strength of a modern state to stopping the exchange of ideas; they are the most highly organized people who ever devoted all the coercive power of government to the abolition of their own intellectual life; they are the most learned people who ever pretended to believe that the premises and the conclusion of all inquiry may be fixed by political fiat."</i><br><br> Walter Lippmann. (1936), The Good Society<br><br> <b>An Unknown Episode In American History</b><br><br> Nazi Germany was created by the criminal cabal that currently rules the United States and much of the world. One of the early underlings of this cabal was Prescott Bush, Dubya's grandfather. Prescott Bush was a director of the Union Banking Corporation, which the U.S. government took over in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The U.S. Alien Property Custodian seized Union Banking Corporation stock shares, all of which were owned by E. Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush, three Nazi executives, and two other associates of Prescott Bush.<br><br> President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order, published in obscure government record books and kept out of the news, explained nothing about the Nazis involved; only that the Union Banking Corporation was run for the Thyssen family of Germany and/or Hungary, nationals of a designated enemy country.<Br><br> This act by the U.S. government made it clear that Prescott Bush and the other directors of the Union Banking Corporation were in essence front men for the Nazis. By keeping news of this seizure quiet, the American government avoided the more important issue: in what way were Hitler and his Nazi cohorts set up, armed, and supported by the New York and London cartel of which Prescott Bush was an executive manager?<br><br> On Oct. 28, 1942, the U.S. government issued orders seizing two Nazi front organizations run by the Bush-Harriman bank: the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. Nazi interests in the Silesian-American Corporation, long managed by Prescott Bush and his father-in-law, George Herbert Walker, were seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act on November 17, 1942. In this action, the government announced that it was seizing only the Nazi interests, leaving the Nazis' U.S. partners to carry on the business.<Br><br> These were actions taken by the U.S. government during wartime, but Prescott Bush and his collaborators had already played a central role in financing and arming Adolf Hitler for his takeover of Germany. Harriman, Bush and the other cabal puppets had financed the buildup of Nazi war industries for the conquest of Europe and war against the U.S. They had also helped in the development of Nazi genocide theories and racial propaganda, with the slave labor and extermination camps as the result.<br><br> The cabal that controls America has moved as rapidly as possible to bring about the same conditions of dictatorship and fascism in the U.S. as it did in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. The first major thrust toward fascism began during the Bush takeover of the Reagan presidency. During Bush Senior's (second) presidency he pulled off the Iran-Contra drugs-for-weapons crime, the savings-and-loan heist, the illegal use of U.S. military force to protect Bush's criminal collaboration with Manuel Noriega, his man in Panama, and many other crimes of state.<br><br> Beginning in 2000, the cabal forced their chosen puppet into the U.S. presidency and have now put in place a mechanism to steal all future elections in America. As they did in Germany, they have now destroyed the bedrock of democracy, the right of citizens to vote for their leaders.<br><br> <b>American Citizen Complicity in the Current Fascist Dictatorship</B><br><br> The 2004 election revealed that many American citizens are as intellectually and morally incompetent as the Germans in 1930. Such incompetence and ignorance always lead to tyranny. The United States is exactly at the same point in national degradation as the German nation in the 1930s when Hitler assumed absolute power and began his regime of mass murder and war crimes against the people of the world.<br><br> Continued at: <a href="http://www.hermes-press.com/germany1930.htm">America 2007 is Germany 1930</a>

  6. by RPW
    Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:47 am
    A lot "friendlier" though, don't ya think?

    ---
    "When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
    -Max Planck

  7. Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:24 am
    Nope! I don't see it other than what it is: BS
    and it appears the shelflife was less than that of a bananna.
    Yup I do think, contrary to the opinions of some that have abandoned our site

    ---
    "When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

    William Blake



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news