March 25, 1998 - In Missouri the state is changing the law in the middle of a tobacco lawsuit in order to impair the defense of the tobacco industry. All of a sudden, the tobacco industry's line of defense, carefully prepared in compliance with laws and long established rules, find itself defenceless. Florida all over again. Just worse.

 These events have once again confirmed what I have tried to convey all along: justice and its companion democracy are quickly dying in North America.

The foundation of democracy is due process, and the fairness and equality it guarantees for all. Through this process, freedom and the many personal liberties Americans and Canadians once enjoyed were created and preserved.

As I have said in many editorials, I am an observer of historical patterns. Long ago, and to the amusement of many who now share my conviction, I stated that antitobacco is the frequency that fascism uses today to transmit its message of intolerance to the population. At the time, the tobacco issue appeared much smaller and self-encapsulated. In other words, an isolated situation. Nothing to worry about.

Still today, many opponents of tobacco take great offence when I call them fascists. This is mainly because of their historical inexperience with this powerful social phenomenon. At best, North Americans can recognize fascism only when it manifests itself South American-style: with the high-ranking army officer gaining power through a coup, eliminating all liberties, while the population is oppressed by a highly visible military which is present in every street. (Incidentally, it would help to recognize that in most cases the dictator is heavily financed by the US government in return for uncontrolled American interests in that country.)

But to the point. We have to observe the fundamental difference between South American, European, and Communist-style dictatorships in order to explain the inability of the layman to recognize the marks of fascism in our society today.

In a South American-style dictatorship, a few men gain power and rule a population that is usually already destitute, and alienated from political life for all intents and purposes. No matter who is in power, life is grim, and basic problems such as feeding oneself for the day take priority over political involvement. In other words, the mass of the population does not participate in the rise of the dictatorship.

In Communist-style regimes, the brainwashing of the population occurs after the dictator has taken power. We are all familiar with the primitive propaganda warfare of China and the Soviet Union, for example: big signs in the streets with the face of the ruler(s), loudspeakers everywhere, and so on. Easy-to-spot stuff.

The most insidious form of totalitarianism comes from the European experience, for the sophisticated intellectual patrimony from which totalitarianism arose allowed for the creation of a style based on a great deal of subtle rationalization. In European fascism, for all intents and purposes, the people supported the dictator. This was the case in Germany, where Hitler was elected. It was the case in Italy, where Mussolini got to power with either the active support, or at least the non-intervention, of the citizens. And Franco captured Spain after a bloody civil war that was fought not just with the help of Hitler and Mussolini, but also with the active involvement of a large part of the population.

European-style totalitarianism is intellectual. It grows from the desire to achieve certain goals of a military or social nature expeditiously and without having to go through the complicated motions of the democratic debate, coupled with a deep knowledge of how to manipulate the human mind and emotions.

The desire for expediency becomes widespread among the population in times of low moral values and/or socio-economic hardship. At that point, due process is often perceived as an obstacle to the attainment of goals which are desired with great intensity and emotion because of the hardship people are experiencing. The temptation to eliminate due process takes over, and certain goals -- usually short-sighted and short-ranged -- are actually achieved. This is perceived as confirmation that due process must at least be "flexible" or "adjustable" (politically correct words for "manipulated"), if not eliminated altogether, or reduced to a farce.

We are the powerless spectators of this perversion in the tobacco wars. Socially dangerous individuals create and promote health scares, then offer the promise of solutions by pointing to both a scapegoat, and lavish financial and social rewards for those who enable the solution. Immediately, the population becomes receptive to the dangers projected and the solutions offered.

The most dangerous part of a European-style dictatorship is therefore that the population either justifies the elimination of due process, or does not even realize that due process is being gradually eliminated -- for the propaganda machine is hard at work to convince the public of the necessity of simply "changing" the process to make it "easier" to rid society of a danger that is otherwise portrayed as "invincible". A typical example of this deception are the words of Missouri's Attorney General Jay Nixon, leading the lawsuit against cigarette makers in that state: "This industry is like no other, and no other industry need be worried" (Post-Dispatch, March 24, 1998). This kind of assurance was commonplace during the consolidation of the European dictatorships in the early part of the century.

Regardless of how much we despise the accused, once we justify the alteration of due process to convict the indicted, we inevitably accept the elimination of the need for fairness and dispassionate procedure. Move a little further down this path, and we unavoidably find a replacement of justice with blind and brutal repression -- always in the name of a nobilitating cause.

We may not like how the tobacco industry behaves, and we may not like the fact that it often manages to stall due process. The industry may indeed be guilty of everything it is accused of. But if we give in to the libido to destroy and loot what we have chosen to represent as evil, then we'll never find out the truth because we "believe" that we already know it, and in the process we will become no better -- indeed worse -- than the evil we seek to destroy.

We may hate the tobacco industry, but their defense is based on solid scientific evidence -- or the lack of it. Their arguments, or at least most of them, have logic and common sense, or they don't. The state's arguments may be based mainly on questionable statistics, scientific fraud, and faulty premises, dictated by political agendas and fuelled by propaganda. Maybe not.

The key is this: the validity of all arguments is to be established in the proper place: a court of law where both parties are permitted to present their cases, and receive equal consideration and respect. There must be NO EXCEPTION. The atrocious crime in progress in Missouri is changing the law -- midstream -- to use the court to achieve political results. The dismissal or bypassing of inconvenient evidence to achieve an end, or forcing evidence to become proof, especially when perpetrated in a trial, is the clear mark of fascism, which is turning all legality into a mockery of justice.

The USA and its satellite, Canada, are following the same inevitable path as the early European dictatorships, while their people are dangerously unaware of where that path inescapably leads. While the United States is already a danger to themselves, they'll soon become a danger to the world, for they are equipped with thousands of megatons of nuclear power, the most sophisticated military on earth, and the self-righteousness to use it.

The measures to eradicate fascism are available to us today, but first we are to be aware of, and accept, the existence of the problem, and understand the costs involved to uproot it.

Already, carving out antitobacco (and what it represents) today would have to be achieved at a tremendous cost that would inevitably leave deep social scars. When antitobacco "methodology" is institutionalized, the only way to uproot it then would be a civil war, or at least political unrest as serious as that with which Americans objected to Vietnam in the 1960s. Predictably, many will feel that the tobacco issue is not worth this. Thus the institutional "remedies" that antitobacco has introduced will stay, ready to be used again and again for anything the state chooses to loot and control. And each time, whatever the "it" may be, it will not be worth spilling blood.

Let us always remember that fascism does not accept discourse, and it will bend any evidence to justify its agenda. We see that every day in the Senate as well as at City Hall where tobacco is concerned: tobacco IS a problem, tobacco companies ARE guilty, smokers ARE killing other people, and any evidence to the contrary MUST be false or corrupted. It is no coincidence that those who accuse the freedom of choice side of being corrupted are often themselves corrupted.

The antitobacco supporters who are justifying -- as well as perpetrating -- the alteration of due process, and who use scientific and statistical frauds to achieve their ends are -- and should be treated as -- state criminals. If this sounds extreme, let us stop and think of the consequences and the number of lives their decisions affect: usually millions. The responsibilities that politicians take on are usually underestimated by the politicians themselves. And it is this alienation from the office they occupy that weakens the effectiveness of democracy, and validates the temptations of expediency. It follows that irresponsible acts by legislators and politicians result in tremendous damage, the scope of which sometimes exceeds the ability to comprehend or foresee. Thus the punishment must fit the crime.

There is a fundamental reason why complex and lengthy mechanisms are in place in a democratic system: to slow down the overly-expedient, to allow time for the hysterias of the moment to settle down to a realistic level -- and to permit a variety of views to come forth.

The removal of this safety system automatically leads to totalitarianism and intolerance.

Ironically, tobacco, antitobacco and fascism have in common one important element: they are so pleasurable that, once tried, it's very hard to shake them.

And the addiction is purely psychological.

Gian Turci