Tulsi Gabbard and Steve Miller: Neofascist darlings

David Duke's cover photo is... Tulsi Gabbard. pic.twitter.com/F2Vj9GtV3X

— Caroline Orr (@RVAwonk) November 11, 2019

Tulsi Gabbard -- Democratic presidential candidate -- now has the David Duke seal of approval. Well, you knew that was going to happen. If you didn't, you haven't been paying attention.

First, let's get one thing straight: She's not in it to win it.

Tulsi knows that she will never be president. Very soon, she won't even be in Congress. I believe that she wants to accrue fame and money in order to take over the leadership of her cult, the Science of Identity Foundation, an offshoot of the Hare Krishnas. (Similar cosmology; no celibacy.)

I described SIF at length in an earlier post. The group was founded by a disturbing fellow named Chris Butler, a dictatorial asshole considered a messiah by his devotees. For many years, Gabbard's family has more-or-less held the number two spot within the sect.

I predict that, when Butler finally goes off to dance with Krishna and the Gopi Girls, Gabbard will assume control of SIF. Though she would no doubt angrily deny that she has any such ambition, don't be surprised to see Tulsi function as Brigham Young to Butler's Joe Smith -- or, if you prefer, David Miscavige to Butler's Ron Hubbard.

She is now doing everything she can to destroy Hillary Clinton, who -- quite correctly -- warned that Russia is supporting Tulsi Gabbard. It has been argued that Hillary's comment raised Tulsi's profile unnecessarily. Perhaps, but I would argue that a barrage of well-earned bad publicity forced Gabbard to end her congressional career.

Is Tulsi a true Democrat? I would argue that she deserves to be classified as part of the international neofascist movement. The term "neofascist" describes both Putin's Russia and Modi's India -- and it is no surprise that both love Gabbard.

An opinion piece published in Haaretz offers this headline: "Tulsi Gabbard Unites Putin Apologists, Bloodstained Modi, Genocidal Assad and the U.S. Far Right." The piece opens by describing Gabbard's seemingly-laudable opposition to Saudi Arabia's vile war in Yemen:

On the one hand, she condemns the Saudi-U.S. led coalition as complicit in a genocidal war, but she welcomes India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has been called the "man with a massacre on his hands" with open arms.

There's a difference between left-wingers who oppose war and right-wingers who pretend to oppose war in order to appeal to the disaffected young. The lefties -- the honest ones, at least -- try to conjure up a consistent philosophy. They don't carve out exceptions for their favorite foreign thugs.

Unfortunately, too many young people don't read history. They do not understand that -- from the very beginning -- fascists have adopted stances designed to appeal to those who might otherwise drift toward left-wing populism.

To cite one of my favorite examples: The American Nazi movement of the 1930s -- yes, such a movement existed, and it was far more popular than current history books suggest -- often decried this country's brutality toward Native Americans. Yes, believe it or not, the Nazis were "pro-Indian" at a time when only the far left routinely sounded the same note. The fascists took this stance not because they had a fundamental respect for human decency, but because they wanted to undermine the very concept of democracy; they sought to justify an end to the American experiment.  

In the post-war years, this same "right woos left" strategy gave rise to the Fascist Third Position. (See here and here.) I could write a long, strange book about neofascist infiltration of the New Age movement and various non-mainstream religious groups.

Let's get back to Tulsi Gabbard and her adoration for the brutal bastard currently running India:

Why would Tulsi Gabbard damn what she sees as America’s complicity in Yemen but embrace an authoritarian foreign leader with blood on his hands? Why does she openly support and endorse Modi’s poor track record on human rights? What distinction does Gabbard draw between the thousands of Muslims massacred in Gujarat and the thousands of Muslims who died in Yemen? Why isn’t she making a similarly passionate plea to Prime Minister Modi to stop the ongoing mob lynchings and rapes in India?

One obvious reason she won’t do that is the financial and electoral benefits she accrues from openly supporting Modi.

The problem goes beyond India. Tulsi Gabbard is the one "Democrat" admired by the neofascist right.

Steve Bannon "loves Tulsi Gabbard." He thinks she "gets the foreign policy stuff, the Islamic terrorism stuff." Tucker Carlson loves her Assad-as-genocidaire skepticism, David Duke loves how she’s realigning U.S. politics, and Richard Spencer lauds her "bravery" in the diplomatic field.

Bannon was so impressed with Gabbard as a potential ally that as he brokered a meeting between her and the newly-installed President Donald Trump. Tulsi jumped at the opportunity: in her own words, "I walked out thinking that there may be some opportunity to work with this administration to shift our foreign policy in a more positive, less destructive direction."

The marvelous Caroline Orr is one of our finest Tulsi-watchers:

A reminder that The Daily Stormer took credit for getting Tulsi onto the debate stage. Her campaign did not respond to repeated requests for comment about whether they knew of The Daily Stormer’s efforts, or if they’d return donations from neo-Nazis.

“Anti-war" Tulsi has taken huge sums of money from the defense industry, expressed support for increasing the use of drone strikes, hinted that she would consider using torture, and has a strange affinity for brutal dictators around the world.

Like Trump, Tulsi Gabbard believes in putting “America first,” regardless of the global consequences, human suffering, or death toll. She isn’t “anti-war” — she’s a nationalist, hiding behind a mask of anti-interventionism.

I don't know where the Gabbard story is going. But she will be around well after Trump is gone -- and I have an unnerving suspicion that she has just begun to make her mark on history.

Miller time. On a similar note, the Southern Poverty Law Center has uncovered Stephen Miller's "inner Adolf." 

Emails. We have his emails. It always comes down to the emails these days.

In this instance, far-right watchers have gained access to messages sent by Miller -- Trump's senior policy adviser -- to Breitbart in 2015 and 2016. The messages were stockpiled and revealed by one Katie McHugh, who transitioned away from what she now considers an "evil" movement.

In the run-up to the 2016 election, White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof’s murderous rampage, according to leaked emails reviewed by Hatewatch.

It's worse than that. Miller constantly hectored McHugh to read and republish ultra-racist stories promoted by white nationalists. Apparently, Miller is a big fan of a racist website called VDare. I just now took my first glance at that site, which offers a strikingly racist review of the latest attempt to keep the Terminator franchise going.

Unfortunately, the latest installment of the franchise delivers a less optimistic message: You, white man, are doomed. Indeed, Terminator: Dark Fate might well be called Terminator: The Great Replacement.

That should give you a flavor of what VDare offers. (Interestingly, they also offer a laudatory piece on Andrew Yang, who has gained a following in Sieg Heil circles.)

Miller also recommends an extremely racist 1973 French novel called Camp of the Saints, which has attained cult status on the far right. Steve Bannon also loves it.

Did you ever think you would see the day when creeps like Miller and Bannon could tell you what it feels like to walk across White House carpeting? Did you ever think that a neofascist hag like Tulsi would appeal to a small but loyal percentage of the Democratic electorate? Yet Trump won't fire Miller. And Democratic leaders won't call out Gabbard the way they ought.

A final word about the Clintons. On Twitter and elsewhere, there has been a disturbing uptick -- actually, far more than a tick -- in messaging devoted to promoting the idea that the Clintons killed Epstein (as if they could engineer such a thing!) and that Bill Clinton went to Epstein's island (which he didn't).

The bots are at work, folks. These things are never organic. It's all part of a long-term plan.

For a long time, I've predicted that Trump will win when his underlings release fake evidence linking the Clintons to Epstein's crimes. Even lefties won't denounce the fakes as fakes, because we've all been brainwashed into viewing the Clintons as something other than they are.

This tweet deserves republication here.

.@ewarren are you fo’real? @HillaryClinton has been eviscerated by the press for over 3 decades while advocating for universal healthcare, handled a 10 hour Benghazi hearing, paid respects at the 9/11 Memorial flu ridden, & is still campaigning for local elections. #ToughAsNails https://t.co/UvboDY0PUK pic.twitter.com/hh1EB59GVp

— Maya Contreras (@mayatcontreras) November 11, 2019

A few words about the Clinton health care plan. I recall that mid-1990s fight; some of you are too young to know what really happened. The plan failed, in large part, because idiot progressives refused to support it. They held out for the "Medicare for all" ideal.

Result: No health care reform. A lot of people died. A lot of people lost everything they had because they got sick.

Fucking arrogant progs.

In fact, fuck everyone who reflexively falls into paroxysms of hategasm whenever the name "Clinton" is mentioned. Your reaction to that name is how I judge you.