"The "Impossible" But Inevitable Solution: Decentralization

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

What lies beyond the current failing, unsustainable versions of Capitalism and Socialism? Decentralization.

Correspondent John D. recently sent in a link to an interview with energy expert and author Jeremy Leggett. The title, "Make no mistake, this is an energy civil war" is a bit sensationalist, but the gist of his point is that centralized control of energy (and the capital that controls the energy and distribution networks) are colliding with new models of decentralized, locally autonomous control and ownership of energy generation and distribution.

Given the immense power of the banking/energy/political Elites that directly benefit from centralization of energy, capital and political power, I term this decentralization solution "impossible." Yet because it is driven by the diminishing returns of the centralized model and the emergence of the Web as an unstoppable force distributing decentralization and new models, the transition from ossified, failing centralized models to adaptive, faster-better-cheaper decentralized models is also inevitable.

This is the context of Leggett's view that there is an 'energy civil war' between the powers defending centralization and those promoting community ownership and control of energy:


You’ve just published a book called The Energy of Nations. Could you just tell people in a nutshell what they might expect to find in there?

I worry that the energy industry is in the process of repeating systemically the mistakes of the financial sector, and on multiple fronts.

It’s not all bleak because I think the neuroscientists also tell us that we have this great yearning as human beings for community and all the rest of it, and individualistic or selfish, perhaps what people on the right of the political spectrum constantly try and persuade us that we are. That all points towards the possibility of a road to renaissance and that’s why I titled the book The Energy of Nations: Risk Blindness and the Road to Renaissance. I talk about the importance of things like the Transition movement as the building blocks for this road to renaissance.

What can we learn from Germany, do you think in terms of practicality and in terms of ambition?

I think that it’s altogether very encouraging indeed. We can learn that it’s possible to renewably power a modern economy like Germany 100% with renewables, and do it much quicker than people anticipate. We can also see that the ownership structures can change radically, so that people power comes into the mainstream. As you know, more than half the renewable assets in Germany are owned by people, by people and communities.

That’s not just the small energy co-ops that are being set up by the multiple hundreds, but whole cities are talking about taking their own power into their own hands, even Berlin, with a membership movement to take control of the way that energy is created in cities. Germany is vital in the whole narrative going forward.

You talk about a localisation mega-trend and peer-to-peer lending and community-led initiatives like Transition and others, need to sit alongside the bigger things as well in terms of investment etc. How do you see those two things sitting alongside each other?

I think inevitably what’s going to happen whether people like it or not, is that communities, towns, individual houses are going to get themselves off that grid and the march of technology is going to help them. People and communities are going to become increasingly self-sufficient. When you do that, where’s the role for the national electricity grid, at a certain point? Where’s the role for a giant company like National Grid?

I think it’s an exciting vision, because you get all sorts of spin-off benefits from a transition of that kind. I don’t have a blueprint template of how we get from A to B, the globalised national, international infrastructure world to the localised world. I think that’s a work in progress that we’re all going to have to be active players."

You say at one point in The Energy of Nations, “I’m now convinced that capitalism as we know it is torpedoing our prosperity, killing our economies, threatening our children with an unliveable world. It needs to be re-engineered root and branch.” Does capitalism still have a place? What would re-engineered capitalism look like, and what does that mean for economic growth?

It depends on your definition of capitalism. Economic growth as it’s currently measured? I think its days are over. That used to be that the mantras of the people classified as the lunatic fringe, but not any more. You can read this kind of thinking in the commentary in the Financial Times. In a world with a global economy on route to six degrees, how can such a system be viewed as sane any more, much less survivable?

The more of us who start using this language, this new type of capitalism – others won’t call it capitalism at all of course – a new type of capitalism. Certainly my point in the book is that modern capitalism, the form of capitalism that’s evolved in the last few decades is basically suicidally dysfunctional and we have to turn our backs on it and introduce an alternative set of systems. That’s what I think we have the opportunity to do in building the road to renaissance."


The interview also raised the same question I have discussed in the Musings and blog: What lies beyond the current failing, unsustainable versions of Capitalism and Socialism? I think the basic answer is coming into focus: since the current iterations of Capitalism and Socialism are both systems of increasing centralization (and thus of systemic fragility), the future belongs to the Web-enabled, localized but globally networked models of decentralized capital, currencies, ownership, production and distribution.

As I have noted before: Central planning perfects the power of threats to bypass the system's defenses.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mitzibitzi's picture

Don't get me started. I've been saying this for years. And my father before me.

Renewable Life's picture


Finally an article about the reality of real solutions!! The only solution actually, but it will be the absolute LAST thing tried, and only when the system is smoldering in the rubble, no less!! But it will be the solution to fixing the current madness we live in!

Spanky's picture

If I may: Whose dead bodies?

Spanky's picture

If it's mine, a it matters a helluva lot. If it's yours, not so much.

Stackers's picture

We don't need to reengineer capitalism. We just need to actually follow capitalism and not the crony corporatist fascism they keep calling capitalism these days

Landotfree's picture

The solution to the "problem" is simple, collapse and liquidation of the walking unfunded liabilities.   The equation does not care if you split the nation up or you have seats of government here or there.   The only thing the equation needs is exponential growth... fortunately or unfortunately humans have no way to supply exponential growth.

Use the equation + time = Eventually unable to grow exponentially, collapse and liquidation of the walking unfunded liabilities.

Same as it ever was, just like 1 + 1 = 2.... come back in 200 years and the equation will have the same solution.


crunchyfrog's picture

Garbage. Adam Smith identified the downside of capitalism 240 years ago. Pretending it's some modern state based thing is at best delusion and more likely a deliberate lie.


BobPaulson's picture

How would you summarize what Smith identified?

Eeyores Enigma's picture

Capitalism requires a highly net positive, organic REAL economy which can only be powered by cheap almost free natural resources primarily energy in order to extract its exponential requirement for growth and the extraction of profit therein.

As soon as the world started butting up against resource constraints which hits the net positive first, capitalism died but the "Masters of the Universe" refused to accept this reality believing that they could create an artificial economy from which to extract profit from. [loud buzzer sound] WRONG!!!!!

Seer's picture

The resource issue is clearly THE issue.  I have no idea whether "Capitalism" can address it or not, but, I suspect it couldn't because we're too ingrained with the notion of growth: there's also the very notion that "Capitalism" is about garnering MORE capital, which in essense IS about growth.

Seer's picture

This is how the trap always gets reset.  Exclaim that something is so much better than that which is obviously failing, and that the mere exclaimation (no real discussion) can be taken as gospel.  Sorry.

NONE of this addresses the underlying FACTS that are provided with simple observation.

It's a finite planet.  "Capitalism," even IF the theoretical totality of it could exist in the real world, does NOT address the fundamental problems that we are now encountering (well, it's a path we've been on since day one- it's just that there's no longer any way to distract from them).

Capitalism cannot overcome the forces of entropy.

Capitalism cannot create matter.

I am NOT attacking "Capitalism" as a virtual, human construct for providing a mechanism for distributing goods and services (there is no better system).  I'm attacking the notion that it can somehow overcome issues of our finite world.

Until someone can demonstrate how "Capitalism" (or any other trade system) can manage in a world without growth (and note that "excess" [usually in the form of energy] is required in order to offset the forces of entopy) I will NOT accept this blind notion of "Capitalism" as a magic bullet.

Yeah, only a blind person could miss that what we currently have going is leading to one huge failure.  It's always an issue of the "solution."  And when one doesn't even know what the true problems are then it's often easy to proclaim something as being a "solution" (line it up agaoinst some false test environment in which the table is set for "success" [of course, we haven't been doing that now, have we?]).

fockewulf190's picture

All it takes is one Carrington Event (which is an inevitable, yet unpredictable event) and the whole web based, centralized mumbojumbo disintergrates utterly.  Each day that passes by, we become more and more relient and intertwined, allowing our life support systems to be controlled by electrically dependant computer systems.

The vast majority of our power grids, and our electronic equipment on a worldwide scale, are totally vunerable to the effects that a Carrington Event will cause....turning trillions of dollars worth of equipment into so much worthless junk.  We know the danger (Congress even had hearings and knows how gigantic a disaster it will be), and with each passing day that nothing happens, we dodge another bullet. 

But no one wants to spend the money to harden our systems before it´s too late; not in the US, or anywhere else in the world.  It is not being discussed at the UN.  Imagine what will happen to all those old soviet era nuclear power plants scattered around eastern europe and the ex-Soviet satellite states when their computer systems and/or power grids fail and they eventually run out of diesel fuel for their generators to power their cooling systems. Now imagine the same problem happening throughout western Europe, Asia and in North America....simultaneously.  How many Fukushimas can mankind withstand? 

We need to be focused on taking care of the real problems mankind if facing, and in my opinion, the above threat is truly the most dangerous because it can literally happen tomorrow.  Worrying about how capitalism or socialism 2.0 needs to be evolved is a luxury and is just wasting time .  If we don´t take care of the Carrington Event problem, there will eventually be no capitalist or socalist system left to fix.

prains's picture

how did you get three down votes?

fockewulf190's picture

This video tells all about the threat, and consequences to soceity thereof, from an EMP attack, either from a coronal mass ejection from the sun, or from enemy forces.  Our vunerability is shockingly enormus, and considering the damages that would occur (let alone the tens of millions of deaths or more) AND the ridiculous low amount of money actually needed for the fix, it is beyond derelict to allow such a danger to stand. No matter if your far left or off the charts right, if an EMP event were to occur, you and your family can very well perish NEEDLESSLY.

This video is from last July, and still very little has been done, with the exception of the lone state of Maine which has seen the light, and passed laws to protect their citizens by upgrading their power grid.



Urban Redneck's picture

1) The risks associated with EMP and CME are different. Man-made EMP is a short duration high intensity event with basically no forewarning whereas CME is a long duration low intensity event with some forewarning.

2) The amount of money needed to even "theoretically" defend against both possibilities is NOT "ridiculously low"

3) While the risk is very real, the sales job often comes across as prepper catnip, in the same way that "global warming" gets the tree huggers all excited.

Ghordius's picture

re 3) this results into a hijacked narrative set by the biggest interested group. as so often, friends of a truth can be the worst enemies of this truth

yet individualistic preppers are more geared versus single-household schemes. note that those German energy co-ops (and whole cities) are "small group" efforts set in a specific order

their basis, btw, is some strong effort by German ordo-liberals in the past legislation to have a functioning & open energy market. by those laws and the related enforcement, regulation and all that stuff, in Germany you have a right to sell to the grid as much energy you want at market prices

lots of people are taking this very seriously and are founding those energy co-ops, being so both consumers and producers

this site in English is of an advocational org for 700 energy cooperatives with 150'000 members

capitalistic systems don't have to put the public stock company front and center for everything. it's the financial centers that have an interest to pretend it has to be so

Urban Redneck's picture

The German model exposes the economic unsustainability of the current scale of the existing centralized model. But it also doesn't necessarily properly price the function of providing base load and distribution services. It will be interesting to see how it works out, because TPTB, whether in the Bundestag or the BMW C-suite, will demand their always available base load and move heaven and earth to make sure they don't bear the full cost of that service. But base load and distribution will not be allowed to die, it simply a question of who pays and how they pay.

The hijacking of the narrative is also troublesome because the preppers should know better. Protection of the grid in the event of an EMP is not for the benefit of the end user, it is entirely for the benefit of TPTB and the maintenance of their critical control infrastructure. In the case of a man-made EMP (regardless of thermonuclear/vicorator/flux compression generated) the end users', debt serfs', and common men's iCrap is hosed. The only protection from man made EMP for a home or business owner is installing proper (e.g. spark gaps) equipment on all copper/aluminum service lines (power/telephone/cable tv). Home and small business owners simply don't go to this effort and expense (except for a financially well-endowed extremist subset of the tinfoil hatter brigade).

But of course TPTB's politicians want mo' money for the "common benefit" and "general welfare" or more accurately their common benefit and general welfare.

Ghordius's picture

UR, wonderful, something we can disagree on!

so you are pitting the interests of the TPTB in keeping the grid functional against the interests of the individuals in...?

aren't you - to keep in theme - hijacking the narrative, here? think about how many people could be hurt. you make it sound to my ears as if cities and civilizations have no right to protect themselves from chaos. I find this a very narrow political view, did you put a special black & yellow anarchic hat when you wrote that? ;-)


in the case of energy in Germany, I don't understand your base load argument

my (weak) understanding is that it's easy to provide relatively cheap base load, and difficult to provide for peaks in consumption. of course, if you are making a big industrial competition argument, then of course there is always a continent with cheaper industrial energy costs, and it will never be Europe, barring the invention of fusion reactors or any other future technology

Urban Redneck's picture

I might be wearing my anarchist hat, but only the extent I look at the preppers and I feel like pulling a Hitlery Clinton, "What difference does it make now?" An analogy would be the then-contemporary public discourse regarding extraordinary solutions to the 2008 financial crisis undertaken by the Treasury and Federal Reserve- they were "a" solution to the predicament, but the consequences and context of their imposition were not properly disclosed. Furthermore, allowing institutions to fail is actually distinct from flooding the market with with USD liquidity, so I didn't view the ideal solution as all-or-nothing, and I actually don't view the economic collapse of the "nothing" route as any sort of solution. Perhaps Jefferson put it more eloquently on a several occasions: "Though (the people]) may acquiesce, they cannot approve what they do not understand." or "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization it expects what never was and never will be."

In regards to EMPs- I simply don't view that what is being discussed actually protects cities and civilizations, much less the individuals who comprise the citizenry, from chaos. With either a natural or man-made EMP- protecting the individual and protecting the collective are distinct, but interconnected issues. From a technology perspective all the wires act as antennas of electromagnetic radiation, and the infamous "last mile" of copper/aluminum that plugs into everyone's home and business also acts as an antenna to overload and fry the connected circuity at every home and business and this is completely unaddressed either in TPTB's designed solution or their marketing plan for their solution. So in the aftermath of an EMP event you would have millions of people with no power, and when the power is eventually turned back on they still have no lights, refrigeration, computers, electric heating/cooling, or charging capacity for electric cars. So there are certain benefits to the collective is certain critical functions are restored in a timely fashion, however, the collective is also seriously harmed by the damage done to individuals. Lastly the practical distinctions and risk remediation methodologies between a warhead event and a Carrington event is troubling. Hardening the grid against a warhead is costly, and will also protect the grid (and only the grid) against Carrington-like events, but in the event of an induced EMP- the residential, commercial, and most industrial endpoints will be destroyed. Whereas if one is taking the economical approach and just trying to protect against another Carrington event, of critical importance is how quickly the grid can be completely shut down until the event has passed (potentially days or weeks), but there is time to shut down & disconnect which does provide an opportunity residential, commercial, and most industrial endpoints to weather the storm intact if they have their own proper plans that are implemented in a timely fashion.

In regards to base load- Europe is better positioned than the US- much less forced air central heating/cooling, higher population density and smaller transmission distances, and more efficient electrical devices, but Europe's climate is particularly unsuited to using wind or solar 365 days a year or 24 hours a day, which leaves hydro and geothermal among renewables (of which there isn't enough of those to go around), and coal, gas, nuclear among the non-renewables. Since Europe has a relatively high amount of installed wind and solar capacity there are huge swings in supply depending on the daily weather, time of day, and time of year, and the magnitude of those swings in supply is much greater than the magnitude in swings in demand, which makes the economic arguments particularly subject to manipulation. Developing a fair pricing model is incredibly complex because the value of the supply changes so much in real time. What's the value electricity on a long cold winter night with no wind in Germany or Finland versus a long hot sunny afternoon on the windswept Spanish coast? Regardless of the availability of supply- trains, traffic & street lights, hospitals, oil refineries and factories all require electricity everyday and the storage capacity doesn't yet exist in scale to produce it when available and use it when needed.

Next to Arch Stanton's picture

UR - please tell me this subject matter is related to your profession.  I'm getting demoralized seeing how much people know on this website.  I think of myself as well-read (especially compared with most people who don't read ZH, et al) but feel like I need to quit my day job and study full-time.  

Threat of EMPs, energy production (oil, shale, nat gas), fiat currencies, fractional reserve banking and the need for continual credit growth, shadow banking, and on and on.  Too many important subjects, too many people on ZH making me feel clueless on a daily basis.  Must be why I read this thing morning, noon and night.  Thanks.  Sort of.

Urban Redneck's picture

In the course of doing program management for industrial and military facility construction and overseeing business continuity and IT (among a lot of other things) in the financial sector I amassed a huge (and largely speed-read) library on the issue, but I really had only a high-level understanding until I started doing the engineering for a build out of my farm (where I didn't have a team of engineers and accountants to all the math for me, and the risk mitigation dollars we coming out of my own pocket- which put things in a different perspective).

There's actually a handful of electrical engineers on ZH who have spent time in the US energy industry focusing on this issue, but I'm guessing they have other issues they'd rather spend their weekend focusing on.

EDIT: and they might be of the opinion that the "gizmos" are a worthwhile expenditure, which I don't necessarily disagree with. What I have a problem with is the notion that what these people are offering is any sort of solution. When the FSA cannot swipe their EBTs or stuff themselves full of GMO McFood- only TPTB in their fortified .gov facilities will think a zombie apocalypse was an acceptable return on their "investment" of OPM.

Seer's picture

"you make it sound to my ears as if cities and civilizations have no right to protect themselves from chaos."

Cities are, by definition, UNSUSTAINABLE.  The very FACT that they HAVE to import goods and materials into them (from the outlying areas, which slowly get depleted as the demands of the cities increase) is proof.

Just because people point out the FACTS that does not mean that they are AGAINST something.  And, just because someone "likes" something that doesn't mean that it's "good."

Have you ever been to a place where an AVERAGE person lives?  There's 7+ BILLION people on this planet.  2/3 of them live on $3/day or less.  My wife is from the Philippines- I've seen/smelled/tasted/felt what AVERAGE is like.  Shit, there's like 750 million people in India living on $0.50/day, a population size that is over NINE TIMES THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF GERMANY!

BTW - Energy is just ONE part of the resource equation.

Food, shelter and water.

Seer's picture

You know what you're talking about!

Should things get EMP'd I'd think that it would pretty much be the end of our eletricity-centric society.

NOTE: I've got a truck that would easily survive any EMP (though the facts are that EMP won't be any big killer to vehicles unless they're grid-tied [w/o air gap protection]).  It's a diesel and it's a manual transmission, so, theoretically, that is, I should be able to start it with no electrical input (it has no electronic engine stuff).  Anyone want to help push start a 21.5:1 compression rig?

I have simple infrastrucural systems that I have to maintain (some simple and others relatively complex) and they ALL require energy to maintain: and, well, nothing like having an emergency pop up with one of them while being in the middle of some maintenance activity with something else.  This is no different with larger, community-based systems.

There's the issue of future capital in which to continue to maintain and or upgrade/replace all systems.  Look around at the over-in-debt kids of today and ask yourself whether they'll have enough money to do these things.

Electricity is about being able to do MORE work... and in a world whose future indicates less energy being available?  Logic problem?  Cognitive dissonance?

fockewulf190's picture

Check out the video in my post above starting at minute #44 until #51.  The costs are laid out as well as the solution.  Deals with both the solar threat and enemy EMP attacks.  The costs are ridiculously low to protect the main critical weakness to the grid which is the transformers.  The way to pay for it is brilliant in it´s simplicity.  The federal government and Congress have been criminally negligent in not finally taking action on this.  They are playing with all our lives over chump change.   They have known about this danger for decades!

Urban Redneck's picture

I am not familiar with the particular "gizmo" (his word, not mine) that he is peddling, but he is only talking about transformer isolation which is only a small subset of EMP risk remediation. Furthermore, even if he is just focusing on remediating the risk to HV electrical transformers of a CME (as opposed to ICBM-initiated EMP), he is talking about "truckload sized" pieces of fabricated metal equipment and quoting a price of 200,000 per unit. By my guestimation this would be an FBO price, not an installed price (or even including transportation). Finally, his logic needs some further explanation, he says the cost would be largely covered by savings from not having to buy electricity elsewhere (I would assume he is talking about throttling electricity generation); however, I don't see how this actually saves money to offset the gizmo cost (electrical demand exists and fluctuates irrespective of any CME, and that demand is met met by producing and distributing electrical supply in excess of the combined demand and the transmission loss). Regardless, he wants someone else to spend x billion dollars of Brand Y's product- which in the end doesn't offer the protection that he and they are promising/implying (shades of Michael Chertoff and TSA cancer boxes, but coming from Frank Gaffney what would one expect?).

Also amusing from a purely Socratic standpoint was his admission that the energy industry is already successfully dealing with small scale CME radiation EVERY DAY, just by (relatively) effective throttling of supply/transmission.

Or the bizarre logic of the bit about the North Koreans hiding ICBMs along the Chinese border, as if the US would be less likely to launch a full scale nuclear retaliation/holocaust if they thought the Chinese (instead of Dennis Rodman's BFF) were lobbing nuclear warheads against the US mainland. These are not the drones who should be selling an investment in EMP remediation products.

runningman18's picture

The decentralization philosophy has been around for a very long time, but you're right, it will be the last solution tried because it is the hardest solution to achieve.  The best solutions always are, and usually a bunch of bloodshed is included in the price. 

El Vaquero's picture

There are two main reasons why it is the hardest solution:

1) Those in power want to remain so.

2) Prissy motherfuckers want to be coddled and taken care of and want to feel "safe."


Those two reasons feed upon each other. 

TheHound73's picture

The Revolution will not be centralized.

Moe Howard's picture

How I Found Freedom in a Unfree World...

Individualism. Decentralized.

Seer's picture

3) Because people don't know anything else (other than the status quo).

Death and the unknown tend to repel people...

Seer's picture

I'm sure that, such as with most things, decentralization can take up it's own philosophy.

I see it all as being something that WILL happen regardless of what we attempt to do.  We're no match for entropy: Mother Nature bats last.

If anywhere it's predicated on growth then it's based on a bad premise (and will lead to guaranteed failure).

I've noted this before, and I'll do so again, "decentralization" also has its risks.  The notion of controlled "Decoupling" from the larger grid steers higher concentrations of stored energy "closer to home."  Fine if one is thinking in terms of one's "competent" self, BUT... look around at folks close to you, do you see them as likely being competent enough to manage energy in the same way?  I'm out in a rural area and have neighbors far enough away from me such that any potential meldown of them wouldn't, assuming the event releases some highly toxic cloud, likely affect me (other than emotionally).  Urban and suburban residents are a bit more at peril... and, I'm sure, the insurance companies will be sure to account for this (the more paid into such entities the LESS is available for "productive" purposes- yes, we start realizing REAL risk, a good thing, though it comes with a more realized price-tag).

buttmint's picture

Whoa! Thought I'd stumble upon James Kunstler's website. He's been a Decentralized guy his entire life and body of work...just saying.

Boxed Merlot's picture

What lies beyond the current failing, unsustainable versions of Capitalism and Socialism?...



How about this?  Huge fines levied against owners of vacant residential properties.



seek's picture

Many counties in my state tax non-owner occupied property at a far higher rate (about 2X) than owner occupied, and it's just as much BS here as it is in Spain.

The government taking advantage of people that have the ability to pay is nothing new.

Raymond K Hessel's picture

How about a tax everytime some fascist dickhead says, there should a tax or there should be a law?


How about that?

discopimp's picture

Wow, that sword cuts both ways...

A Lunatic's picture

Capitalism as we know it is called Fascism. There is nothing inherently wrong with Capitalism; Fascism on the other hand......

Sudden Debt's picture

I wouldn't call it fascisme, todays culture is more about the handouts and bonusses. Nobody cares about the real power.
Real power means they actually do something with it. These days it's all pure inaction.

A Lunatic's picture

There are plenty who care about real power, namely the Fascist overlords. There is not one remaining guaranteed right left to the citizenry in America. Corporate Lobbyists write our laws. Our Representatives no longer read those laws before voting to pass them. We are forced to buy certain things and not allowed to purchase others..... On and on and on.......Capitalism is hardly at fault, only the ignorant or agenda driven would argue that point.....

satoshi911's picture

Been this way since 1776, that's why we say

"The frog was boiled long ago"

The USA, was always FASCIST, ... Constitutional REpublic FEDERALISM,

DEMOCRACY was never  the USA, tocqueville said such in 1860's

prains's picture

....here we go, chinabot 911 is gonna get his shaved pig on and go "flaming cubicle crazy" with posts ALL FUCKING night.

El Vaquero's picture

Son of a bitch.  That means that I have a lot of posts to skip. 

NidStyles's picture

As correct as you might be in refering to French authors, you would be missing the greater point in that there were American thinkers that said it well before him. Lysander Spooner is one of the ones that came before the French asshole named Tocqueville.

Anusocracy's picture

The fascist overlords are just another variation of the alpha-male - one that occurred when people settled down and produced things, rather than foraging for things.

It's telling that the Freedom Culture really doesn't have alpha-males. There is no use for them when the legalized use of force disappears.

satoshi911's picture

FACISM is just when Corporations control the GUBMINT

So given that goldman-sachs controls the world, yes the world is now fascist

Rich country's can afford to be POLICE-STATES and give their cops unlimited toys, this is why I choose to live in a poor region of the world.

The USA being able to pull INFINITE FIAT out of its ass, can make their cops the worst fuckheads on earth,... another reason NOT to be in the USA.

Make no mistake, that ALL is FASCISM in the USA, that all is controlled by BIG-BUSINESS, that all politicians are OWNED by BIG-BIZ interests.

Raymond K Hessel's picture

When people say "crony capitalism" what they don't have the vocabulary to explain is the word "fascism"