REX 84 / crypto-fascist rumblings

[Thomas Eckhardt]

'[...] long lines of civilians at the gun shops [...]. and the 
pawnshops, and all the military traffic on the freeways, more than 
Hector could ever remember [...] troops in full battle gear, and that 
queer moment the other night around 3:00 or 4:00 A.M., right in the 
middle of watching Sean Connery in The G. Gordon Liddy Story, when he 
saw the screen go blank, bright and prickly, and then heard voices hard, 
flat, echoing.
"But we don't actually have the orders yet," somebody said.
"It's only a detail," the other voice with a familiar weary edge, a 
service voice, "just like getting a search warrant." Onto the screen 
came some Anglo in fatigues, about Hector's age, sitting at a desk 
against a pale green wall under fluorescent light. He kept looking over 
to the side, off camera.
"My name is -- what should I say, just name and rank?"
"No names," the other advised.
The man was handed two pieces of paper clipped together, and he read it 
to the camera. "As commanding officer of state defense forces in this 
sector, pursuant to the President's NSDD #52 of 6 April 1984 as amended, 
I am authorized --what?"'

Vineland. 339.

According to David Thoreen, this chilling vision of a military coup 
whose real sponsors are "off camera" is part of a history of "executive 
aggrandizement" told in VL. I note the pointed reference to Richard -- 
"When the President does it, that means that it's not illegal" -- 
Nixon's "Plumbers", I note Oliver North's Iran-Contra and Continutity of 
Government (which could not be discussed publicly during the 
Iran-Contra-hearings, see Wiki on "REX 84" or Bill Moyers' "The Secret 
Government" on Youtube) activities, and once again recommend Thoreen's 
essay to the list:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101116080155/http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/lpop/etext/okla/thoreen24.htm#10

(Thank you, John Krafft!)


Now for the real world:

"If these people are radicalized and don’t support the United States, 
and they’re disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principal 
that’s fine, that’s their right. It’s our right and our obligation to 
segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict."

– General Wesley Clark in a MSNBC interview

https://youtu.be/eaPwqokBn9M


"'The Army just wouldn’t stand for it. The general staff would not allow 
a prime minister to jeopardise the security of this country and I think 
people would use whatever means possible, fair or foul to prevent that. 
You can’t put a maverick in charge of a country’s security.

'There would be mass resignations at all levels and you would face the 
very real prospect of an event which would effectively be a mutiny.'"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-army-could-stage-mutiny-under-corbyn-says-senior-serving-general-10509742.html

An unnamed British general on the possibility of Jeremy Corbyn becoming 
Prime Minister. I suspect that threatening a military coup is illegal 
but it seems that the general can not be identified and that therefore 
no action will be taken.


And, while I'm at it:

"Cameron will tell the NSC: 'For too long, we have been a passively 
tolerant society, saying to our citizens: as long as you obey the law, 
we will leave you alone. It’s often meant we have stood neutral between 
different values. And that’s helped foster a narrative of extremism and 
grievance.

'This government will conclusively turn the page on this failed 
approach. As the party of one nation, we will govern as one nation and 
bring our country together. That means actively promoting certain values.'"

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/13/counter-terrorism-bill-extremism-disruption-orders-david-cameron


"One nation"?


Related music:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xe3k7_laibach-geburt-einer-nation_music

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJMP0FEz51U


-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l