The language of Republican multi-millionaire candidate Mitt Romney, as we approaching US elections, is characteristic. Speaking about nearly half of the electorate, he supported actually that the 47% wrongly believe that are entitled to health care, food, housing and that government has a responsibility to care for them, that these are people who pay no income tax, ending with the extremely cynical statement that his job is not to worry about those people.
The philosophy of neoliberal doctrine is exposed quite easy when someone thinks that is not recorded by cameras. What is the deeper meaning of Romney's words? Maybe this: All people (not just half), must stop beleiving that they have a right to healthcare, food, housing and that is the job of the state to provide them. Until they do, the lower incomes should be taxed to the level that someone could barely allowed (or not allowed) to survive, as was done in the “Greece” experiment, and continue the tax cuts in the name of competition and job creation for the 1% that owns most of the wealth. Besides, it is the poor who believe in the welfare state, why should the rich pay for it?
Romney was just honest, possibly not knowing that he was recorded, and said things that will be applied in future in any case. They will be applied, perhaps slightly disguised with a camouflage of social sensitivity and lots of crocodile tears, regardless of the outcome of the elections.
The new totalitarianism moves forward vehemently into the second decade of 21st century. The goal is, the 47% to become 37% and later 27%, until vanish, either through an ideological or a biological extermination. The goal is, to prevail the “Randian” philosophy of Objectivism and to remove any trace of concepts such as solidarity and collectivism, concepts, that “oblige” the state to take care of its citizens. The goal is, the return to barbarism: everyone against everyone and each one for himself. Here is a possible scenario-nightmare for the future.
For now, the new totalitarianism is spreading either through a cynical ideological imposition of neoliberalism, or through a supposed other way of the “necessary” for the stability of economy, improving economic indexes, preservation of jobs, investments at any cost as if there is no future without them, all under any ideological umbrella. But how is prevailing despite the continuing destruction that brought? Despite the opposite results from the ones that supposely intended to bring?
In America, the “McCarthic” terror of the Soviet Communism is brought back, together with a systematicaly planned propaganda, in order to stigmatize the welfare state and labor rights as a consequence of this type of Communism, which of course is completely false, since, the conquest of the welfare state and the labor rights, derived through social struggles of decades from the people primarily in western countries. The “communistophobia” is also brought back in Greece from various mouthpieces, in order the welfare state and labor rights to be targeted through a similar way, while extreme nationalism exploits this fact in order to be promoted as the only voice of truth against the systemic propaganda, and gain greater slice of the electoral pie.
But this new totalitarianism, imposed mainly through a Protestant type logic that the painful path to the future is inevitable. The logic, according to which the societies must bleed today for a better tomorrow. The logic, which essentially represents the new rationalism of the 21st century, replacing the rationalism of the industrial society denounced by Herbert Marcuse in “One-dimensional Man”. This neorationalism, which may be more horrible, because it becomes the vehicle of this totalitarianism which leads the societies to a slow death. More perverse, because it is accepted almost automatically by the majority of society, expecting a better future. More powerful, because it leads ultimately not to the totalitarianism of “one-dimensional man”, but to the totalitarianism of “one-dimensional culture”, gradually eliminating any cultural element that can surpass him and beat him.
Despite the hypocrisy of the supposed rival ideologies against this totalitarianism, the representatives of the Greek political scene betrayed by their own words. A characteristic example can be taken from a recent speech by the “Socialist” Evangelos Venizelos: “It has no meaning to speak nowdays about cutting the disability welfare payments. It is not worth for the state to behave with cruelty against the most vulnerable social category.”
The “Socialist” should be more careful than Romney. Besides, he is talking in front of cameras and knows that they record him. Wearing the mask of the Socialist, he is opening issues that in the past he wouldn't dare even to consider: cutting the disability welfare payments: “It has no meaning nowdays...”, which means that maybe someday in the future it will have? “It is not worth for the state to behave with cruelty...”, which means that if it was worth, ie if the economic indexes were going up again, the state should drop its people with disabilities like garbage?