US Intel

I actually think the model here isn't communism, it's fascism/corporatism. They aren't nationalizing directly, they're intimidating private enterprises into compliance and cooperation.

I think that's an incorrect framing. A more proper framing is that some industries are key to ensuring a nation is not dependent on another for key products that ensure a dominant (not supplicant like say Ukraine) position with regard to defence and therefore independence.

This is recognized by the current administration but is also a continuation of the previous administration's pivot toward undergirding and supporting key industries. I hope it's also recognized by any subsequent administration.

I think even neocons now recognize the "new world order" is not sustainable if some players don't play by the rules that they all agreed on.

No country with an ability to avoid it wants to be subject to being held by the neck.

One of the key features of fascism is keeping up the illusion of private property and other individual rights. When such abrogation of rights ultimately results in disasters, our intellectuals will lay the blame at the foot of capitalism without having ever really understood what it was and why the current administration is not pro-capitalist and neither is the GOP.

this sounds like the situation with the Krupp Corporation

The credit belongs to Laurence Britt. And this was for a poster briefly sold at the museum, not produced by it. Full text: https://secularhumanism.org/2003/03/fascism-anyone/

As a German with extensive exposition to the third Reich I can attest to the fact that the parallels start to become uncanny.

Thanks for the details, I was only aware of the museum bit.

I've been to Berlin this summer and I think every single citizen of any western democracy should see the still standing piece of the Berlin Wall and the museum bit that explains the 50 or so years that led to its construction. Even if only a quarter understood the message, we'd be better off as a civilization.

Alas, I'm afraid some people would take it as an instruction manual instead of a warning.

> A more proper framing is that some industries are key to ensuring a nation is not dependent on another for key products that ensure a dominant (not supplicant like say Ukraine) position with regard to defence and therefore independence.

That was why they passed the chips act to direct this money to Intel. It has nothing to do with Trump forcing them to dilute shareholder value in order to get money that they had already been allotted by congress.