The etymology of the word fascist is an interesting one. It is derived from the Latin word fasces which, to the Roman lictors or policemen, meant “bundle”. The Italian word fascio was coined in the late 19th century, referring to revolutionary labour groups and it was morphed into fascisti by Benito Mussolini in 1919.
Today the word is closely associated with a political philosophy or movement that is nationalistic, may be race specific, and is associated with autocracy and dictatorial power. In the context of 20th century history, it is often associated with brutal totalitarian, socialist regimes like the Nazi Party of Germany (National Socialism is the name of that German party, remember, and not National Far Right Extremist Party) and Italy’s National Fascist Party.
In a strict economic rather than political sense, fascism is the combination of big business with big government in public-private partnerships to achieve specific government goals, using private means of production. One might consider the military-industrial complex to be a fascist combination. In Canada, the healthcare system is a fascist system.
I am inclined to believe that the original economic meaning of fascism drove the political meaning of fascism. Government leaders with the levers of economic power in their hands tend to become authoritarian and autocratic. That is how the healthcare system, in the hands of our former prime minister, resulted in people losing access to their bank accounts and the continued harassment. of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber. It is a fascist kind of thing.
Fascism, like many words today, has become so overused that it loses meaning. I was called a fascist for suggesting that, in return for kindergarten funding, parents should participate in teaching their five-year-olds to read. Clearly authoritarian fascism on a par with the Third Reich.
Here is another suggestion being made today by our new “sans votes” prime minister. You decide whether his proposal suggests a certain, Je ne sais quois… fascism.
Mr. Carney is offering Canadian voters the stellar opportunity to have our government provide a "lean, mission-driven organization" which gives managerial direction and billions in funding to construct millions of "deeply affordable," prefabricated homes. The builders will be pre-approved and competent for the job to which they are contracted.
“Wonderful! Finally, my kids can move out of the basement!” you say.
But what will they move into? Mr. Carney proposes revisiting an apartment housing scheme called Multiple Unit Rental Building finance (MURB.) The new housing stock, based on the Liberal information, will be rental only. Who will own these new rental properties? The government? The Liberals don’t tell us. What will happen to the current overstock of empty rental apartments and townhouses? Can you spell bankruptcy?
The MURB programs of the 1970s were notorious for the many investors who lost a lot of money due to the 1984 failures of the Northland and Canadian Western Banks who had invested in MURB schemes. Mr. Carney’s idea has some hair on it.
Which brings me back to the question, “Who will own the new housing stock?” I am just spitballing here, but doesn’t Mr. Carney's old company, Brookfield, own a lot of rental stock? Aren’t they the biggest landlord in San Francisco? Isn’t Mr. Carney one of Herr Schwab’s “guys” and isn’t he philosophically aligned with the concept that we will all own nothing and be happy?
And if we put the two thoughts together, can we ask if maybe Mr. Carney is thinking of hooking up his old company with the Canadian government in some authoritarian, fascist scheme to make bazillions?
Will Brookfield become the Krupp of Canada in the making of such a fortune? Is it fair to ask what connections Mr. Carney continues to have with Brookfield? What undeclared, retained interests might he have forgotten to mention? (I am asking for a friend.)
The problem with most politicians and particularly those who parachute into power, short circuiting the political apprenticeship system, is not that they bury the truth. It is that they think I am too stupid to see the fresh dirt.
Mr. Carney, I find that very aggravating.