Welcome To The Fascist State Of America

 

Liberals are fascistic tyrants and conservatives are whiny little bitches who run around looking for excuses to get offended. -- Caitlin Johnstone, Study US Foreign Policy By Looking At Oil Reserves

Happy Seventh Anniversary, TRC! It's been seven years since this blog began with a handful of enthusiastic Bernie Sanders supporters. Who knew it would last this long? Not us! Of course, there's been some changes over the past seven years, starting first with a name change in mid-2016 after Bernie dropped out of the race and backed *cough* Hillary. 

We never looked back after that. In fact, we continued to grow, discover, explore, and learn more about neoliberalism, capitalism, and then socialism. It's called just socialism or eco-socialism by us, as the term "democratic socialism" makes it sound as if we're acolytes of the poorly-named party of the duopoly who wouldn't know what democracy was even if it hit them over the head repeatedly. After Bernie's screw over by the DNC, we've never considered returning to either of the corrupt establishment's factions. 

We're loud, we're proud, and we're proudly independent and pro-third party. And this week, we're taking a look at how (once again) our government tramples human rights and expects us to shut up and take it lying down. As if!

Welcome to the Fascist State of America
by C.A. Matthews

You live within 100 miles of Canada, Mexico, a coastline, or an international airport. There is no knock on the door. CBP or Border Patrol agents come bursting into your home without warning, without a warrant, and without fear that they'll ever be held accountable for damages or violating your rights in a court of law. They ransack your domicile and take what they will and you can't stop them--they're within their rights. 

Welcome to America 2022.

Why does Homeland Security believe the US "border" is 100 miles wide? Why does it believe that an international airport in the middle of the country is also "on the border" and so 100 miles around it is also the Border Patrol's domain? Why indeed.

Dr. Reece Jones, author of White Borders (2021) and Nobody Is Protected (2022) tells us more about how this concept of the US border zone came about:

"Preserve Racial Types As It Exists Here Today."   (Yes, our immigration laws are inherently racist. This bill was passed less than 100 years ago and remains on the books. Do you feel better or worse about the US as a "democracy" now?)

The Border Patrol was established two days after the eugenics-derived national origins quotas in the 1924 Johnson-Reed Immigration Act was signed, in order to enforce the new restrictions. The original authorization for the Border Patrol was meant to keep the agents at the border line itself. Senator David Reed explained: "They have no right to go into the interior city and pick up aliens on the street and arrest them."

Nevertheless, the agents did go into the interior. In 1930 Treasury Undersecretary Ogden Mills proposed a new law to stop it. "You will not have a Border Patrol operating 20 miles inside the United States. You will have a border patrol where it belongs, and that is on the border."

Mills' and other efforts to rein in the Border Patrol failed in the 1930s. In 1946, Congress revised the Border Patrol's authorization and clarified (kind of) how far inside the US they could go: “within a reasonable distance from any external boundary of the United States.” At the time, the Border Patrol was part of the Department of Justice. In July 1947, the DOJ released a routine update to its policies in the Federal Register. In tiny print on page 5071, they defined the term reasonable distance.

Without public comment or consultation, the Department of Justice defined the reasonable distance for the Border Patrol as “a distance not exceeding 100 air miles from any external boundary of the United States.” Since 1947, the reasonable distance has remained unchanged at 100 miles from borders and coastlines. If DHS Secretary Mayorkas wanted to change it, he could do so immediately himself.

This 100 mile "border" includes about two-thirds of the population. That's about 200 million Americans. Our largest cities, largest ports, and airports are included in this zone CBP can "police" within its confines. They don't have show a warrant to search or arrest you like your local cops. Why can't Americans protect themselves from a government agency with seemingly infinite powers?

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU):

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects Americans from random and arbitrary stops and searches. According to the government, however, these basic constitutional principles do not apply fully at our borders. For example, at border crossings (also called "ports of entry"), federal authorities do not need a warrant or even suspicion of wrongdoing to justify conducting what courts have called a "routine search," such as searching luggage or a vehicle. 

Even in places far removed from the border, deep into the interior of the country, immigration officials enjoy broad—though not limitless—powers. Specifically, federal regulations give U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authority to operate within 100 miles of any U.S. "external boundary." The regulations establishing the 100-mile border zone were adopted by the U.S. Department of Justice—without any public comments or debate. At the time, there were fewer than 1,100 Border Patrol agents nationwide; today, there are over 21,000. 

That's 21,000 federal cops free to use their "broad powers" to search, harass, and arrest citizens and non-citizens alike. Who keeps these modern-day "American Brown Shirts" in check? Anyone?

"The Constitution-Free Zone of the United States"

ACLU ominously states:

The Border Patrol often ignores this (100 mile zone) regulation and, aside from limiting interior checkpoint locations to within the 100-mile zone, rejects any geographic limitation on agents' authority. At least two federal circuit courts condone Border Patrol operations outside the 100-mile zone, federal regulations and Supreme Court precedent notwithstanding.

Federal border agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing, and often in ways that our Constitution does not permit.  For example, Border Patrol, according to news reports, operates approximately 170 interior checkpoints throughout the country (the actual number in operation at any given time is not publicly known). The ACLU believes that these checkpoints amount to dragnet, suspicionless stops that cannot be reconciled with Fourth Amendment protections. 

The spread of border-related powers inland is inseparable from the broader expansion of government intrusion in the lives of ordinary Americans. For example, CBP claims the authority to conduct suspicionless searches of travelers' electronic devices—such as laptops and cell phones—at ports of entry, including international arrivals at airports. These searches are particularly invasive as a result of the wealth of personal information stored on such devices.

Americans do not have the right to privacy. Border Patrol agents are free to search your personal information. They can confiscate your computer, cell phone, or other electronic devices to look even deeper for juicy tidbits on you or others. You'd better delete those embarrassing personal photos and text messages now--and I mean now.

Seeing the maps and digesting these facts are sobering. Americans might have thought we lived in a democracy--a flawed one, but at least it had its heart in the right place. But think again: the Border Patrol can enter your home, your vehicle, your business and take whatever items it deems "necessary" for their investigation and arrest you without a warrant. The federal courts will back them up as did the Supreme Court in its recent ruling.  

Is the US a democracy? (Was it ever? Ask a person of color.)

Do you feel safe? (I know I sure as hell don't.) 

What can we do about it? Learning more about the powers Customs and Border Protection wields and what legal recourse(s) we may or may not have to prevent them from continuing their fascistic behavior is a good start. Also, not cooperating with the Border Patrol is an action we all can take. We need to emphasize the point to our oligarch leadership that we are not prisoners in a "border zone" without human rights. We need to stand up and demand the protections listed in the Bill of Rights, rights that apply to citizens and non-citizens alike.

Welcome to the fascist state of America in the year 2022. It's not exactly what the founders envisioned in 1776. Perhaps it's time for us to do like they did and start a Revolution.

Related Articles:

Supreme Court Refuses to Allow Bivens Claims Under First Amendment and Against Border Patrol Agents  https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/supreme-court-refuses-to-allow-bivens-claims-under-first-amendment-and-against-border-patrol-agents

A Border Patrol Agent Assaulted a Citizen in His Own Home. The Supreme Court's Ruling Lets the Agent Off  https://immigrationimpact.com/2022/06/10/border-patrol-assaulted-citizen-supreme-court-ruling/

ACLU: The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone 

ICE Now Holds 25,000 People In Detention, Monitors 266,000 Using Electronic Monitoring Technology   https://austinkocher.substack.com/p/ice-now-holds-25000-people-in-detention?s=r 

We Don't Need More Evidence That Police Can't Be Trusted. We Need Real Safety  https://truthout.org/articles/we-dont-need-more-evidence-that-police-cant-be-trusted-we-need-real-safety/

The Uvalde Massacre Has Exposed the Lies That Once Justified Police Militarization https://www.rsn.org/001/the-uvalde-massacre-has-exposed-the-lies-that-once-justified-police-militarization.html 

Mother of Buffalo Shooting Victims Says This Is Exactly Who We Are https://scheerpost.com/2022/06/09/mother-of-buffalo-shooting-victim-says-this-is-exactly-who-we-are/

Study US Foreign Policy By Looking At Oil Reserves https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/study-us-foreign-policy-by-looking?s=r

Democratic Leaders Call For a Stronger Republican Party. Why? https://www.directleft.com/p/democratic-leaders-call-for-a-stronger?s=r 

Nobody Is Protected: How the Border Patrol Became the Most Dangerous Police Force in the United States (Book)  https://www.counterpointpress.com/dd-product/nobody-is-protected/

Seen on Twitter: 

You may have seen this map of the 100-mile border zone making the rounds recently. Did you ever wonder why they chose 100 miles? There must be a good reason for it, right? Well, actually no. Here's a short thread 🧵on it ... pic.twitter.com/FMjVMCOdJI

— Dr. Reece Jones (@ReeceJonesUH) June 10, 2022

Both parties have completely sold out the public and formed a corrupt merger between corporations and the state, yet liberals are under the illusion that voting for the blue corporate party will save us from the red corporate party when they both serve the same moneyed interests.

— Ryan Knight ☭ (@ProudSocialist) June 13, 2022

The price of food is up 11.9%, the price of gas is up 48.7%, and the median rent just passed $2000 for the first time ever. Two thirds of Americans already live paycheck to paycheck and inflation will cost the average family $5200 this year. How are people supposed to survive?

— alex gutentag (@galexybrane) June 14, 2022

Democrats’ biggest con is convincing voters that they’re fighting against fascism when they’re actively using the power of the state to fund wars, cage children, protect Big Business & the ruling class, oppress the working class, and crush dissent, which is fascism. #BlueFascists

— Ryan Knight ☭ (@ProudSocialist) June 14, 2022

***

In a near-future dystopian world, hope blossoms where mutual aid and democracy begins...

Zonta’s world is turned upside down when Jake arrives at the commune to investigate the disappearance of agents of the Authority. Can she persuade him to switch sides before the Protectors (antifascist fighters) take action?

Available now from Extasy Books: https://www.extasybooks.com/Where-the-Bodies-Lie 

Please buy direct from the small publisher and not via Amazon. Why? Amazon takes a huge percentage of the book's price and leaves very little for the publisher and author to share. Thanks.

 

#TrumpExit

#TrumpExit

by Cindy A. Matthews

The Pavlic family received assistance from the HOME Investment Partnerships Program to fix their deteriorating home in 2015. Mr. Pavlic can no longer work due to his advancing multiple sclerosis, and Mrs. Pavlic can't make enough money to keep the roof from leaking over their family members' heads. These Trump voters discovered this popular federal program--which helps folks like them, the working poor, the low income elderly and disabled--is to be cut so the defense budget can be expanded. They essentially voted away any help they could expect to receive in the future to keep their home safe and livable.

The Pavlics, by voting for the tangerine tyrant, may have planted the seeds of their own homelessness. Trump did the Pavlics and the millions of struggling American families like them no favors. They don't owe him blind loyalty at the cost of their families' health and safety. It's high time for them to #TrumpExit.

If domestic policy doesn't scare off these Trump supporters, consider the dangerous position the orange commander-in-chief has placed the U.S. by dropping a Massive Ordinance Air Blast or MOAB (better known as a "mother of all bombs") on Afghanistan.  Yeah, it could wipe out a scattering of ISIS fighters, but more than likely it was dropped to cover the CIA's tracks in that war torn part of the world. After all, we helped the mujahideen fighters in the 1980s build the very same tunnels where ISIS and other terrorists have been living for the last few years. ISIS fighters have been using our arms against us, too, as we're the number one supplier of armaments in the world. It's not a list where any so-called peace-loving people want to be number one, either. We're already number one in defense spending over all--we spend more than the rest of the top ten nations combined. Can you imagine all the good we could do with the taxpayers' dollars if we even halved or quartered our defense budget?

Trump and others invested in the Military Industrial Complex are growing wealthier by the second, all the while allowing (maybe even encouraging?) the "War on Terror" to grow and flourish and reap a P.R. bonanza for terrorist groups at our expense. We've become the most despised and feared nation on the planet, the big bully on the playground. Why shouldn't these groups fight back with any and all methods at their disposal? Even if they don't, the Pentagon propaganda machine will make its own videos to paint the picture they want low-info voters to have.

Starting a war isn't likely to bring back our country's reputation or our dead and wounded soldiers or our jobs, but who cares, right?  If you're heavily invested into arms manufacture, you know it's where the real profits are to be made. It's fun to watch people suffer, particularly if they're of a different race, creed or ethnicity, huh? (Read this piece on how Afghan villagers and farmers are dealing with the trauma of the bombing.)

 So, supporters of the spray-tanned man in the Oval Office, if the thought of profiting off the suffering of others makes you feel just a little bit queasy, it's time to for you to #TrumpExit. Get out now before you're labeled a racist war hawk by the decent folk you're trying to convince you're not before you convince yourself you are. 

It's easy to #TrumpExit. Read the article below about how Trump's "pro-business policies" will further hurt you and your loved ones. Then take down that faded Trump/Pence sign in your window and call up your friend or neighbor who posted the Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein sign in their front yard last year. You know the one. Ask them how you can join the political revolution and when is the next town hall or rally event you can attend.

Attend the event and find out more about grassroots democracy, or as we like to call it, "government of the people, by the people and for the people. After you've experienced democracy the way the founders envisioned it, you won't want to go back to the tyranny of the tiny-handed.  You'll realize all we need to do in order to make America truly great is to #TrumpExit and become informed and involved citizens. 

If you can't do it for yourself, then do it for the next generation. The world we leave behind is how our children will judge us. Let's leave it better than we found it. #TrumpExit today.

 ***

Will Trump’s Pro-Business Policies Hurt Consumers?

by Bridget Stack

Donald Trump has been a businessman for far longer than he has been a politician, so it’s no surprise that he sees government regulations as the enemy of business. One of his first acts of business since in office has been to “streamline” multiple United States Government Agencies.

“I will ask each and every federal agency to prepare a list of all of the regulations they impose on Americans which are not necessary, do not improve public safety, and which needlessly kill jobs. Those regulations will be eliminated.” — President Donald Trump. The areas that will be most affected are food safety, drug safety, legal rights, and environmental safety.

Food Safety

Every year, roughly 1 in 6 Americans get sick, over 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases. There is no question that food safety regulations like testing and supply chain tracking encumber efficiency and profit margins for farmers and businesses, but it’s important to remember that they are in place to protect consumers. For example, in 2010, we saw a salmonella outbreak linked to peanuts that resulted in 9 deaths and caused over 700 people to get sick. Without the government’s regulatory shields, incidents like this could become commonplace. 

Drug Safety

Since Congress toughened the drug approval process in the wake of the worldwide crisis over thalidomide, the F.D.A. has come to be viewed as the world’s leading standard on food and drug safety. With President Trump vowing to overhaul the Food and Drug Administration, companies may not have to prove that their drugs work in clinical trials before selling them to consumers. This could have long-lasting impacts on patients’ health. The FDA recently published a study on 22 drugs that were promising in the early studies but failed the final, large-scale trials. Deep cuts in funding and staff at the F.D.A. could impair the department’s ability to evaluate these studies properly, and may result in ineffective or dangerous drugs making their way into consumers’ hands.

“When you have a drug, you can actually get it approved if it works, instead of waiting for many, many years,” Trump told pharmaceutical executives. “We’re going to be cutting regulations at a level that nobody’s ever seen before.”

Congress passed legislation in 1962 requiring companies to provide “substantial evidence” of a drug’s efficacy and safety before it can be sold. This law has forced drug manufacturers to rigorously test their products, run clinical trials, and submit them to the F.D.A. for approval. Ninety percent of drugs that enter the final stages of clinical development fail these trials, which means they are essential to protecting consumers.

Legal Rights

Budgets and regulations aren’t the only thing on Trump’s chopping block. He’s also taken aim at consumer rights. Government laws may seem burdensome to businesses, but they’re designed to protect consumers’ legal rights by allowing them to seek damages from companies and manufacturers that have put profits ahead of their customers’ safety. Fines don’t mean much to billion dollar companies, but a public lawsuit resulting in hundreds of millions in damages and loss of public opinion can be enough to force action.

The most powerful examples include litigation around asbestos, used in construction and even cigarette filters. Once touted as a miracle material for its insulating properties, asbestos is now the subject of lawsuits linking it to a deadly form of lung cancer called Mesothelioma. The current government has stated they will look into lawsuit reforms specifically around asbestos exposure claims—which will impact everyone from veterans to firefighters, and could send the wrong message to companies profiting from products that result in serious injuries.

If you look on the label of a pack of cigarettes, there are warnings of how smoking can lead to lung cancer. Even though the first studies suggesting a link between tobacco and lung cancer emerged in 1950, the tobacco industry refused to admit that smoking caused cancer. It took over 33 years for the first court victory, and another decade before any damages were awarded.

The threat of harmful materials in common products is once again making headlines with the possible connection between talcum powder and ovarian cancer. Though evidence has been around since the early 1970’s, the first guilty verdict was only handed out to Johnson and Johnson in 2013. After evidence surfaced that J&J knew about the risks, but decided not to warn consumers, three more women won talcum powder lawsuits against the company in 2016.

These cases are all tell the same tale. Companies cut corners and denied facts until there was enough proof to hold them accountable. The most powerful weapon consumers have to wield against corporations is litigation. So while it may be good for business to remove barriers to growth and profits, consumers will pay the price with their health and safety.

Environmental Rights

In one of the most stunning victories for protecting the environment, The Paris Agreement on climate change was agreed upon by 197 countries, including the United States under President Obama’s presidency. This agreement is the first international, voluntary deal to curb greenhouse gas emissions from both rich and poor countries. One of Donald Trump’s first acts in office was to back out of the Paris Agreement and appoint Scott Pruitt to the Environmental Protection Agency. Pruitt is a climate change denialist.

Trump campaigned on rolling back most, if not all, President Obama’s environmental protection acts. In late March, Trump signed his 19th executive order: “Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth.” This order consisted of one terrifying sentence: a sentence directing Ryan Zinke, the Secretary of the Interior, to “review the rules which regulate oil and gas drilling in national parks and to repeal, suspend, or rescind them if they are found inconsistent with the president’s energy goals.” In other words, we could soon have oil rigs in Grand Teton National Park.

In his first few weeks in office, President Trump signed an executive order placing a hiring freeze on all national parks, directed the Army to issue the final permit for the Dakota Access Pipeline, and invited the company behind the Keystone XL to reapply for the permit denied under President Obama’s presidency. 

The formation of the EPA, FDA, and CDC were to protect environmental and consumer rights. Government regulations are a safety net to keep corporations in check, and they provide people with a means to force compliance when companies put profits before safety. Deregulation would result in a rise in illness and deaths from products. Even more than the danger of personal health deregulation promises, the greater risk would be removing consumers’ rights to sue when they are harmed

by products. The loss of legal rights against companies and products is a real threat under Trump’s administration.

BIO: Prior to joining ConsumerSafety.org Bridget worked in marketing, social media, and journalism. She previously worked for numerous national brands, and she now focuses her passion for research on protecting consumers.

***

 Trump supporters...

Remember...