Exposing the Communists and Fascists running the US government
Wallace L. Garneau

In all of the talk about whether or not Joe Biden should step down, along with the question of whether or not Donald Trump’s temperament makes him a threat to democracy, the thing that gets lost in all the noise is the question of what kind of image these two men have for the future of our country.

Trump’s position has been clear going back to his time with Oprah Winfrey when he was in his 40s. Trump is a businessman who understands both free market dynamics and how corruption works. Throughout his career, he was not afraid of using corrupt means to grow his business interests whenever corrupt means were available to him. From 1989 until 2015, when Trump ran for President, he gave $1,845,290 in campaign contributions to members of both parties. Trump knows exactly how the corrupt game is played.

That system is set up not only to allow but to encourage corruption, and we see this even outside of Trump’s circle – our government makes no secret that it targets regulatory actions against any large corporation that does not contribute enough to political campaigns. Our government quite literally extorts businesses to make them corrupt.

Trump has been very clear also in what he wants to do to end, or at least radically reduce, this corruption: he wants to eliminate all regulatory oversight that is performed for non-public interests. In other words, he wants to take the power that businesses buy away from those who sell that power, returning the United States to something more akin to a free market.

Donald Trump believes in free markets.

The most misunderstood word in the English language is the word ‘Fascist,’ and it is misunderstood only because Franklin Delano Roosevelt was one, sending envoys to Mussolini’s Italy to see how he could bring Mussolini’s Italy to the United States. Those envoys put together the National Recovery Act, which was designed to make America a copy of fascist Italy, but the Supreme Court shot it down. FDR then tried and failed to pack the Supreme Court.

The word ‘Fascism’ fell out of favor once Hitler invaded Poland, but the political and economic system of fascism did not. Elizabeth Warren’s Accountable Capitalism Act is a retread of FDR’s Accountable Capitalism Act, and today’s Democrats represent a blend of fascism and communism, both of which entail government control.

Joe Biden is a fascist. Kamala Harris swings more communist. Gretchen Whitmer is a fascist. AOC is more communist, as is the rest of The Squad.

The difference between a fascist and a communist state, incidentally, relates to profit. A communist believes that profit is evil.

Fascism keeps paper ownership of the means of production in private hands but has the government controlling private businesses, leaving profit (and pay) as a state-controlled incentive system. Fascism was initially created not to oppose communism but to make it workable after Italian philosophers like Giovani Gentile noted that the lack of an incentive system in the Soviet Union forced the Soviets to create gulags. Fascism was created as kind of a new and improved version of communism, complete with a government-controlled incentive system to make gulags unnecessary.

Another difference is that Marx envisioned communism as being global. In practice communism has never been global, so Gentile envisioned fascism as occurring within nations.

Fascists see communists as idealists who are opposed to reality. Communists see fascists as sellouts. The two groups are very similar in belief, yet they can be bitterly opposed to one another. China has found a way to blend aspects of both, creating a communist system in which state-owned businesses operate somewhat autonomously as profit-seeking enterprises, and since the communists and fascists get along pretty well in our country, I imagine our future under leftist control would look something like that.

When people think of ‘fascism,’ they generally think of the Nazis, but the German view of ‘the nation’ in the early 1900s was shaped by the fact that there had been no German state until 1871 when Prussia conquered enough of the Holy Roman Empire to declare the creation of a German state.

In the 1920s and 1930s, the German people still thought of the concept of a ‘nation’ along ethnic rather than geographic lines, making their sense of the ‘German nation’ ethnic rather than geographic. This is where Nazism primarily differed from other forms of fascism, such as in Italy, Spain, Bulgaria, Romania, and other places in Europe and South/Central America.

The left likes to call Donald Trump a racist, so they compare him to Hitler, and they compare his followers to Nazis. The left does this while ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter (BLM) act as their personal Brown Shirts, stifling opposition political rallies by beating people over the head with bicycle locks, akin to how Hitler’s Brown Shirts acted. ANTIFA, ironically, stands for ‘Anti-Fascism,’ but unlike the Stalin-led ANTIFA movement of 1920s Germany which went against ACTUAL fascists, our ANTIFA movement is anti-free-market, and though ANTIFA and BLM are openly communist organizations, they seem OK with actual fascism, provided the fascists don’t go by that name.

When the left says ‘fascism’ today, they mean ‘anything that is not totalitarian in nature,’ as if Hitler was a libertarian or something.

If you think that last statement was purely a joke, understand that Rand Paul has been called ‘Fascist adjacent’ and that libertarianism has been called ‘a gateway drug to the alt-right’ by left-leaning members of the press.

Shakespeare once wrote, “What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Similarly, fascism smells like someone stepped in dog poop, and it continues to smell even after people like Elizabeth Warren rebranded it as ‘Accountable Capitalism.’

I’d love to quote Joe Biden on this, but his brain is where words go to die, which is all anyone really wants to talk about these days.

We have a guy running for President who thanked the people of Philadelphia the other day for electing him to the Senate in Delaware. Joe Biden recently said in a radio interview for which he’d been given the questions in advance, “I’m proud to be the first black woman.” That was a prepared answer, woefully slaughtered, and the political left – the people who think Hitler was a libertarian – have been telling us for four years that there is nothing wrong with this guy…

As far as economic policy is concerned, Elizabeth Warren is Joe Biden with boobs and a brain. Both of them are fascist through and through.

The modern view of fascism being on the right is at odds with history, with logic, and with common sense. The extreme right is anarcho-capitalist, which is a free market system in a stateless anarchy. Such a system, of course, cannot exist as it goes against the fallen nature of man – as does Marx’s vision of a stateless communist world. Both of these visions are based on stateless utopias that will never exist, and quests to create such utopias in the real world have caused more pain, suffering, and death than can be quantified. Communism alone has killed more people than smallpox, and anarchy leads to warlords.

When we aim for utopia, we get dystopian nightmares every time. Karl Marx and Murray Rothbard were both wrong; we need a government.

Once you accept the need for a state, the question becomes one of purpose: what is it, exactly, that the state exists to do?

Either the state is there to protect the freedom and liberty of the people within it, or the state is there to be the provider of things.

If someone wants the state to protect the freedom and liberty of the people, then that someone will want a limited government, and the more a person sees this role as the ONLY valid purpose of government the more one aligns with libertarianism.

Libertarians see the role of government as enforcing the Non-Aggression Principle and nothing else.

If one views the government’s role as being primarily the provider of things, one has to face the fact that the government cannot provide what it does not have, and as such a government that acts as the provider of things must also be the taker of things. This requires totalitarianism of some form, be it communism, fascism, monarchy, or some other such thing.

Most people want the government to be both a protector of rights AND a provider of things, even though those roles are at odds with one another. While it is possible to craft a government that does some of both it is always possible to seek for the government to provide a little more. In contrast, it is very difficult to make the government provide a little less, making a government that is both prone to moving ever further toward the role of providing (and taking) things at the expense of our individual liberties.

The history of the United States over the past 248 years has been a master class on how governments tend to grow over time until they become totalitarian, even when they were originally created under a libertarian framework. People ask me sometimes if I think we’ll even make it to 250.

My answer is that the monstrosity we have today bears no resemblance to the Republic our founders created. Once we extended liberty to everyone (which sadly was not politically possible in 1789), the left immediately began to repeal it.

The Democratic Party was founded to preserve slavery, and in 1964, they did not change their minds on slavery so much as they decided to extend it to everyone. Serfdom isslavery. This is where we are today. The left now has the basic mechanisms of control it wants, and the debate has shifted from one over what the purpose of government is to one over which form of totalitarianism is best.

The left sees the right as ‘extreme’ because the right is against all forms of totalitarianism, and to the left, the question of whether or not to have totalitarianism has already been settled. The left has taken 248 years to turn our republic into the totalitarian mess it is today, and they are not open to restoring our liberties beyond the new rights to kill a baby and to use the wrong restroom.

The question of racism follows a similar split, with the right seeing racism as existing only in the hearts and minds of people who, as individuals, either are or are not racist, and the left looking for racism in institutions.The left determines whether or not an institution is racist based on how equally outcomes are delivered by that institution, such that eliminating racism means eliminating all differences in all outcomes, which by extension requires a totalitarian state.

To the left, any system in which the state is not just the provider of things, but the onlyprovider of things, will lead to inequity and is thus racist.

The right, believing in individual rights, must acknowledge not only that some racism exists but that it always will, as the government has no power to control how people think or what they say. The left sees this as tolerance for racism and wants a government that is actively ‘anti-racist,’ which requires the government to control what people think and say, which in turn requires totalitarianism.

There is a pattern here. Every problem the left sees requires a totalitarian solution, be it racism, climate change, or whatever. That’s not because totalitarianism is the only solution but because totalitarianism is the only solution the left will accept. Today’s left is not a party of people but of power.

One of the great ironies of politics is that we often want one thing for ourselves and something else entirely for everyone else. On the right, this is not so much of an issue, as we want everyone to be free, but on the left, the party leadership has to sell personal freedom along with group control, and since each person is a part of the overall group, this is difficult.

When I was in the Marine Corps, I was taught that in a fire fight I should focus on the mechanics of a shot (sight alignment, sight picture, trigger control, etc.) rather than on shooting the target. The purpose of this was to separate the emotional fact that firing a rifle in combat involves shooting people, from the mechanics of each individual shot. In theory this makes it easier to kill people.

The left does something similar, focusing on ‘fairness,’ ‘equity,’ and other moral platitudes rather than on the reality that to provide the things the left offers, they have to take totalitarian control over our lives. Those who vote for candidates from the left can pretend that the totalitarian mechanisms needed to provide things like ‘fairness’ and ‘equity’ will be directed at other people rather than themselves. Voters will often believe this falsehood even while acknowledging that the corporate interests of the rich and powerful are today aligned with the left (which would never happen if the left were really out for rich, corporate interests).

The left also loves to run on scare tactics and does this in ways that are comically bad to anyone who digs in even a little, such as by saying that Donald Trump is a fascist while also claiming that Donald Trump is supporting the Heritage Foundation’s ‘Project 2025’ to radically reduce the size of the administrative state. Fascism being totalitarian, the notion that the person who supposedly wants to radically reduce the size of government could also be a fascist is laughably absurd, and yet many people believe it.

As for Project 2025, Trump claims never to have heard of it, although I hope he takes a look as the administrative state NEEDS to be cut down to size. Project 2025 is how you drain the swamp.

 

Wallace L. Garneau, political commentator and professional author, brings a unique blend of expertise to the airwaves. Raised in a family of historians, Garneau's roots in history and economics run deep, with a particular focus on Europe between the World Wars. With a background in information technology and a keen business mind, Garneau authored "The Way Forward: Lean Leadership and Systems Thinking for Large and Small Businesses." His knack for breaking down complex ideas in clear, accessible language makes him a standout author and a powerful voice in the radio and podcast sphere. Beyond the corporate world, Garneau's culinary passion shines through in his social media presence, where he shares grilling and smoking techniques. A two-service military veteran (Marine Corps and Army), family man, and father of two, Garneau embodies dedication both personally and professionally. Listeners can expect insightful commentary on politics, economics, and culture. His unique perspective, rooted in historical understanding, sets him apart. Join Wallace Garneau on the America Out Loud network—his is a voice that not only informs but resonates, helping make sense of today's complex world through a lens of experience, knowledge, and a touch of culinary flair.

 

 

 

 

www.americaoutloud.news