Ch. 7: 2001- ? : The New American Century and global fascism


Richard Moore

Note: I've decided to split one of the earlier chapters into two chapters. That 
is why this next chapter is numbered 7 instead of 6.



(C) 2004 Richard K. Moore



Chapter 7


* The first two American centuries--a review

In its first century, the U.S. grew to be a major imperial
power following a quite different path than the one followed
by it's European counterparts. The dynamics of European
expansionism were dominated by cycles of inter-sibling
territorial warfare, and the shifting balance of power and
alliances. The dynamics of American expansionism were not
constrained by competition, and expansion could be
systematically synchronized to the natural cycles of
capitalist economics. Whenever the economy needed a new
growth cycle, every thirty odd years, a relatively inexpensive
expansionist conquest would be carried out. That would be
followed by a boom phase and then a consolidation phase,
ending with wealth concentrated in elite hands, and leading
then into the next growth cycle. In addition, the imperial
management style developed by America was more efficient than
the European style. Selective interventionism and rule by
dependent local proxies was much cheaper than systems based on
colonial administration and permanent troop garrisons. The
U.S. Marines and the CIA were the agents of imperial management
more than were the Army or Navy. The Army and Navy moved to
center stage during the brief intervals when new expansions
were being pursued.

In its second century, with no more easy pickings available,
American elites turned their attention to the problem of
arranging for economic growth within the context of
geopolitical rivalries. These elites were accustomed to
getting what they want when they want it, and without
incurring major expense or casualties in the process. As a
consequence, rather than entering frontally into the
competitive geopolitical arena, American elites sought ways to
leverage their position through manipulation and by playing
rivals off against one another. Incremental economic growth
could be achieved by doing business with warring parties and
those preparing for war, and expansion of investment realms
could be achieved by a strategy of early "neutrality" followed
by high-leverage intervention in a war when it reaches its
final decisive stage. After serving in turn as the Arsenal of
Fascism and the Arsenal of Democracy, preceding World War II,
the U.S. participated in the war by engaging rear-guard
elements of Japanese and German forces, while the main enemy
forces were exhausting themselves in monumental invasions of
whole continents and engagements with massive hostile forces.
With the rest of the world in ruins, America emerged from
World War II in a decisively dominant position economically,
industrially, and militarily.

If the Nazis had managed to conquer the world, then everyone
would have been well aware of the fact. The structure would
have been a visible hierarchical dictatorship ruled from
Berlin. In fact, it was America that conquered the world, but
more in the manner of a Go game than a chess game. In chess
the bulk of the enemy pieces are usually destroyed and then
the king is killed. Chess is about the playing out of battle
and capture. In Go it is only necessary to place your stones
in such a way that any move of the opponent will undermine
their own position. Your control is potential and positional
rather than combative and destructive. You don't bother taking
off rival stones until your opponent leaves you no other
productive move. In a land of chess players, the Go player is
King, or at least that's the moral of this particular story.

Central to Uncle Sam's diplomatic strategy was the illusion of
multilateralism. America drafted the agendas, but it had the
diplomatic skill to convince its peers that the agenda was
their own. By 1945 that pattern was already established, when
the CFR's plans for the UN, IMF, and World Bank were adopted
and were presented to the world as the product of a
multilateral conferences of peers.  Any required arm twisting
was kept behind the scenes. Later NATO became "Europe's plan"
for collaborative defense, but it in its fundamentals NATO
functioned as a vehicle to enable the forward placement of
U.S. forces in Europe, and as a means for America to dominate
European military affairs and to maintain European dependence
on American hegemony.

Ahead of its time in applied management science, America had
learned to control middle management (other capitalist elites)
by getting them to "own" the game plan of the Board of
Directors (the U.S. elite). U.S. elites, supported by the
multiple capacities of the US Government (economic,
diplomatic, military, CIA), was ruling the world from behind
the scenes. They had created a self-managing, multi-tiered,
imperial system. Their power was exercised not by the issuance
of imperial proclamations, but rather by subtle manipulations
and interventions in the system, as required to keep the
engine of capitalist growth running at maximum speed.

* Capitalism's final consolidation phase

If we take a long-range view, it would be accurate to say that
1970 marks the beginning of the end of capitalism. From that
point forward there can only be a final, relentless, ever more
extreme, consolidation phase. As wealth becomes increasingly
concentrated in a few hands, and in the absence of new realms
to conquer, the dynamics of capitalism will not be able to
operate. A different dynamic will be needed, most likely some
kind of neo-feudalism.

But we can take little comfort from the knowledge that
capitalism is ultimately doomed. Not only are its death throes
likely to be drawn out in time--I'd image a few decades--but
regardless of how quickly they pass they will bring with them
incredible suffering and destruction. Like a hungry beast in
barren terrain, capitalism will devour everything in its path
before it gives up the ghost. Whole third-world populations
will die of thirst and starvation so that their water and land
can be diverted to support Western agribusiness exports.
Western societies will continue to spiral downwards, as every
ounce of wealth is squeezed out to keep capitalism operating
for as long as possible. Police forces will function as a
hostile occupation force, as they do already in most American
minority communities.

The final consolidation phase began with neoliberalism at the
national level in the USA and UK. By means of the deceptive
Maastricht Treaty, European elites were able to join forces
with Anglo elites in the promulgation of neoliberalism
globally--under the banner of globalization and supported by
the mythology of beneficent free trade and market forces.

This neoliberal project, for nearly two decades beginning in
1980, existed within the context of the "level playing field"
set up in 1945, and operated under the illusion of
multilateralism that had been carefully maintained as the
centerpiece of American diplomacy. Capitalist elites
everywhere were collaborating in the exploitation of the third
world and their own populations--and in the looting of their
own national treasuries and resources. In this way corporate
profits soared to record levels while quality of life
generally declined. The neoliberal project is about the
corporatization of society. It represents the transfer of
sovereignty from the parliament to the board room. It is a
process that continues relentlessly to this day. As I write,
public utilities and transport systems everywhere are being
restructured so as to offer maximum returns to anticipated
privatization suitors. And month after month the IMF tightens
the screws on hopelessly impoverished third world countries,
while deregulation in the capitalist powers continues to
reverse all the gains that two centuries of liberal reformers
have managed to achieve.

But by the late 1990's, the neoliberal project was no longer
delivering sufficient growth to global capitalism. It was
contributing, but it wasn't enough by itself. Globalization
had been another case of "all boats equal" and "all boats
rising", where in this case the boats represent the elites of
the the various capitalist powers. By the late 1990's the
neoliberal tide had stopped rising, and it was now necessary
for some boats to be forced to the shoals. The solution to the
problem of over-production would be the elimination of some

The shakeout began with a serious of coordinated financial
attacks on targets including Thailand, Brazil, South Africa,
Argentina, and the Asian Tigers. First the currencies were
raided, and then the IMF supervised the selling off of local
assets at bargain prices to the remaining industrial players.
Those remaining players were thereby provided more room for
economic growth. It's like a game of "Weakest Link".
Yugoslavia, a significant economic player with tendencies
toward socialism and autonomy, became another shakeout target.
A covert destabilization program was undertaken--a
collaborative operation of German and American
Intelligence--and the program was stoked along until public
opinion could be steered toward acceptance of a final NATO
assault on the the designated Serbian "enemy".

This is not a game that can stop. Each time a player is
eliminated, the growth provided eventually runs out. In the
game of Weakest Link, only one player remains at the end. As
the growing global economy continually collides with the
limits of a finite Earth, and finite markets, the U.S.
Establishment must increasingly monopolize global markets and
resources under its own control. And it has the means to do so. The
same elites that dominate U.S. commerce also control the White
House and the Pentagon.

In the typical style of U.S. elites, the easy pickings were
being harvested first. But still, growth was stagnating. A
more drastic program was needed, the pace of consolidation
would need to accelerate. At the same time it would be
necessary to deal with the inevitable civil unrest that would
result from such acceleration. Already in 1999, in Seattle, a
massive anti-globalization and anti-capitalist movement
emerged and caught the attention of the global media. By the
Summer of 2001, anti-globalization protests dominated the
international news.

* 2001-? : The New American Century

The New American Century began on September 11, 2001. For
anyone familiar with the history of American war-enabling
"outrage incidents", the attacks on the World Trade Center and
Pentagon were highly suspicious from the very beginning. Four
planes were known to be hijacked for more than an hour, and
yet no fighters were scrambled to intercept them--not even
after the first Tower had been hit. This is completely
contrary to standard procedure. Typically, when any flight
goes off course in the U.S., even if it's not a hijacking,
interceptors are scrambled within minutes. The manner in which
the Towers collapsed was also highly suspicious--particularly
the third tower, which was not even struck by a plane. All
three collapsed in precisely the manner one would expect from
a professional demolition, with explosives placed inside the
buildings. Although the Administration expressed complete
surprise at the attacks, it claimed to know the exact
identities of all the hijackers within hours of the event.
While the whole world was transfixed to TV screens, awed at
the magnitude of the attacks, President Bush read stories to
children and other top administration officials carried on
with their normal schedules. The announcement of the War On
Terrorism and the Patriot Act followed entirely too rapidly to
have been the result of a surprise attack.

As more information emerged in the following weeks and months,
the official version of the 9/11 events became increasingly
untenable. The administration had received dozens of warnings
that Al Qaeda was planning to use hijacked aircraft as attack
planes, contrary to White House claims of being caught
completely by surprise. In fact, the Pentagon had carried out
practice exercises in anticipation of precisely such an
attack. Two weeks prior to the attacks, $100,000 was
transferred to the accounts of the alleged hijackers by
Mohammed Atta, head of Pakistani Intelligence. On 9/11, while
the attacks were being carried out, Atta was having breakfast
in the Senate lunch room with members of the Select Committee
on Intelligence. The FBI identified Atta as the "moneybags of
the hijacking", and yet he was allowed to leave the country
and there has been no follow-up regarding his involvement.
About the only thing supporting the Administration's official
version of events is the inability of most people to imagine
that the events of 9/11 could have been an inside job. For
those familiar with America's history of "outrage incidents",
not much imagination is required.

We now know that Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and crew came into the
White House with a detailed agenda up their sleeve, and it was
an agenda that would have been very difficult to pursue
without the dramatic events of 9/11. Indeed, such an agenda
would have been incomplete if it did not include a plan for
achieving domestic public acceptance and international
acquiescence. And after 9/11, the pre-existing agenda was
immediately launched into implementation. In terms of
evaluating suspected perpetrators for 9/11, one must clearly
attribute to top U.S. elites motive, opportunity, means, modus
operandi, and lack of alibi. In addition there has been no
evidence presented that is contrary to their culpability.

The agenda of the new White House was written up as a report,
"Rebuilding America's Defenses-- Strategy, Forces and Resources
For a New Century", produced in September 2000 by The Project
for the New American Century (PNAC). The report is an updated
version of a classified "Defense Policy Guidance" document
drafted in 1992 under the supervision of Paul Wolfowitz. Some
of the founding members of PNAC include Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Defense Policy Board chairman
Richard Perle.  Here are some excerpts from their written
agenda for the New American Century:

   "The United States has for decades sought to play a more
    permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved
    conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need
    for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends
    the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein". (p. 14)
   "Further, these constabulary missions are far more complex and
    likely to generate violence than traditional 'peacekeeping'
    missions. For one, they demand American political leadership
    rather than that of the United Nations, as the failure of the UN
    mission in the Balkans and the relative success of NATO
    operations there attests" (p. 11).
   "Despite the shifting focus of conflict in Europe, a
    requirement to station U.S. forces in northern and central
    Europe remains. The region is stable, but a continued American
    presence helps to assure the major European powers, especially
    Germany, that the United States retains its long-standing
    security interest in the continent. This is especially
    important in light of the nascent European moves toward an
    independent defense 'identity' and policy; it is important
    that NATO not be replaced by the European Union, leaving the
    United States without a voice in European security affairs"
    (p. 16).
   "Since today's peace is the unique product of American
    preeminence, a failure to preserve that preeminence allows others
    an opportunity to shape the world in ways antithetical to
    American interests and principles. The price of American
    preeminence is that, just as it was actively obtained, it must be
    actively maintained" (p. 73).
  "To preserve American military preeminence in the coming decades,
    the Department of Defense must move more aggressively to
    experiment with new technologies and operational concepts, and
    seek to exploit the emerging revolution in military affairs" (p.
   "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings
    revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some
    catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor" (p. 51).

Soon after the PNAC crew managed to gain control of the White
House, they got their "new Pearl Harbor", they got their
"substantial American force presence in the Gulf" under
"American political leadership", and the revolution in
military affairs is now moving "more aggressively". The "War
on Terrorism", enabled by 9/11's "new Pearl Harbor", is the
smoke screen behind which the agenda of the New American
Century is being aggressively implemented. American
"preeminence", apparently, is to be ensured into the future.
No challenge to U.S. military or economic supremacy is to be

In response to yet another capitalist growth crisis, the
American elite establishment has adopted yet another blueprint
defining yet another paradigm of world order. In the postwar
blueprint, the U.S. invited the other great powers and their
populations to join in the collective imperialization of the
third world. In the neoliberal blueprint, the U.S. elite
invited the elites of the other great powers to join them in
betraying their nations and populations--to enable continued
corporate growth. In the New American Century blueprint, the
last surviving collaborators are being betrayed as well. As
part of the final consolidation phase of capitalism, the
American elite have circled their wagons and little more than
the Pentagon and the Homeland Security apparatus remain inside
their circle. Homeland Security is needed to keep the domestic
population under control, while the Pentagon keeps everyone
else under control.



If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website
( or try out our low-traffic, moderated email 
list by sending a message to:

You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website,
provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and
this disclaimer.

Richard Moore (rkm)
Wexford, Ireland
    "...the Patriot Act followed 9/11 as smoothly as the
      suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the
      Reichstag fire."  
      - Srdja Trifkovic

    There is not a problem with the system.
    The system is the problem.

    Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs.
"Zen of Global Transformation" home page:

QuayLargo discussion forum:

cj list archives:

newslog list archives:
Informative links: