FASCISM #1 – The COLLECTIVE (one, “organic” whole)

PROLOGUE: FASCISM seeks COLLECTIVE “salvation”, eventually producing a TOTALITARIAN society of ONE, single, “organic” “WHOLE” benefiting ALL, COMPLETE CONFORMITY allowing no “separateness”. Fascism promises UTOPIA through THIS-worldly political “REBIRTH”, redemption and realization of “meaning”, “solutions” to never ending “CRISIS”, overcome with revolutionary “CRUSADES” of “ACTION” of “social justice” based on their own “WILL to POWER”, instincts and feelings, which typically produce reactionary tantrums by “heretics” who seek limitations on their power and/or critically question fascist utopian lack of “reason”, “reality” and/or DYSTOPIAN RESULTS. (“tragic” UNintended consequences) Totalitarian, all powerful GOD-STATES use political-religion to promise “heaven on earth”. Mussolini said “fascism IS a religion”. Fascists purposely mix and confuse politics and religion, Government and God, co-opting “God” in their pursuit of political POWER, a POLITICAL RELIGION OF government idol worship. The sheep-like masses, contemptible “clingers” and “deplorables”, require leadership by an elite “enlightened” political governing ruling class and/or messianic “CULT of PERSONALITY” (“gods” IN government). Contemptuous of freedom and democratic self-government, the “god OF government” seeks to SOCIALLY ENGINEER utopian “political paradise” through “science” and an evolutionary “Cult of “Progress”. A utopian FUTURE requires INDOCTRINATION of YOUTH and CENSORSHIP of anything contradicting politically correct conformity, preventing eventual totalitarian control on ALL aspects of society, propagated and proselytized by elite media “priests” and educational “seminaries”. Utopian idealism requires total elimination of anything old & corrupt, erasing past history, destroying politically INcorrect dogmas, and/or persecuting non-utopian “heretics” (“tragic” realist “phobes”) which question and PREVENT the “CULT of PROGRESS” and necessary transformational change “we can ALL believe in”. FASCISM #1-The Collective #2-Rebirth #3-Crisis & Crusade #4-Action #5-Politics as Religion #6-Contempt for Democracy #7-The Cult of Personality #8-Social Engineering #9-Youth #10-Censorship #11- Fascist Economics (2017)

FASCISM YESTERDAY and TODAY
BASIC CRITERIA COMMON TO ALL or MOST TYPES of FASCISM:

#1)COMMUNITY and the “COLLECTIVE”

ADAPTED from the BOOK LIBERAL FASCISM:
The SECRET HISTORY of the AMERICAN LEFT FROM MUSSOLINI
and the POLITICS of MEANING by JONAH GOLDBERG

#1) COMMUNITY and the “COLLECTIVE” – Table of Contents:

FASCISM: A QUEST for “COMMUNITY” – The COLLECTIVE: IT TAKES a VILLAGE
COLLECTIVE CRUSADE: UTOPIAN UNIFORMITY
TOTALITARIANISM & DESPOTIC DELUSION
The INDIVIDUAL: ENEMY of the STATE (COLLECTIVE) HOSTILITY to the “HERETIC” The FAMILY: ENEMY of the STATE (COLLECTIVE) Resisting Totalitarian “Progress”
COLLECTIVE POLITICAL RELIGION: The GOD of GOVERNMENT and STATE –
Sacrificing Freedom, Securing “Utopia”
COLLECTIVE MOBS: TOTALITARIAN TERROR &TYRANNY as “SOCIAL JUSTICE” [MASKING the WILL to POWER]
MOBS – TERROR &TYRANNY AS “SOCIAL JUSTICE”
RACE DEMAGOGEURYPOLITICAL CORRECTNESS:
MOB Manipulation, control & conformity, censorship, propaganda and indoctrination

SYNOPSIS:
– fascism sought social unity with the “organic whole” where every class, every individual is part of the whole
an “organic” society is where every class, every individual, is part of the whole.
it is the search for a “CAUSE LARGER THAN OURSELVES”
“the QUEST for COMMUNITY is written in the HUMAN HEART”
the elevation of UNITY as the highest social value is a core tenet of fascism and all leftist
ideologies
meaning and authenticity are found in collective enterprises – of class, nation or race” …
the state is there to ENFORCE THAT MEANING ON EVERYONE without debate
Italian Fascist MUSSOLINI coined the term“TOTALITARIAN” to describe a
“BENEVOLENT” (bene = good) SOCIETY …“where EVERYBODY BELONGED and was
TAKEN CARE OF, where EVERYTHING was inside and NOTHING outside the STATE

NO REALM of HUMAN LIFE (from food, sex, entertainment) IS beyond political meaning
The STATE was charged with “redeeming”, turning everyone into COMPLIANT social
organs. “REDEMPTION” and “SALVATION” could only be achieved COLLECTIVELY

– “the village” attempts to restore an imagined past or satisfy an ancient yearning”
villages are wonderful, supportive, nurturing places where everyone is looking out for everyone … hillary clinton’s village … tries to restore the TRIBAL COMFORTS of SMALL TOWN on a NATIONAL and even UNIVERSAL level” – jonah goldberg:
Fascism #1: A QUEST FOR COMMUNITY
The “Collective” [It Takes a Village]

“WE’RE GOING to TAKE THINGS AWAY FROM YOU ON BEHALF of the COMMON GOOD“
“VILLAGES are WONDERFUL, SUPPORTIVE, NURTURING PLACES WHERE EVERYONE is LOOKING OUT FOR EVERYONE” – Hillary Clinton

FASCISM sought SOCIAL UNITY with the “ORGANIC WHOLE”
An “ORGANIC” SOCIETY is WHERE EVERY CLASS, EVERY INDIVIDUAL, is PART of
the WHOLE. IT is the search for a “cause larger than ourselves. The quest for community is
written in the human heart. The elevation of unity as the highest social value is a core tenet of
fascism and all leftist ideologies.
Jonah Goldberg: “Fascism is the cult of unity, within all spheres and between all spheres.
Fascists are desparate to erode the ‘artificial’, legal or cultural boundaries between family
and state, public and private, business and the ‘public good’”. Interests or institutions that
stood in the way of progress could be nationalized. But if they worked with the regime, if they
‘did their part’, they could keep their little factories, banks, clubs and department stores”

Mussolini adopted the socialist symbol of the fasces to convey that his movement valued unity
over the liberal democratic fetish of debate and discussion. The people united will never be
defeated!” – is a perfectly fascist refrain. Meaning and authenticity are found in
COLLECTIVE ENTERPRISES – of CLASS, NATION or RACE … and the STATE is
there to ENFORCE THAT MEANING ON EVERYONE WITHOUT the HINDRANCE of
DEBATE”

Italian Fascist MUSSOLINI coined the term “TOTALITARIAN” to describe
“BENEVOLENT” (bene = good) SOCIETY … “where EVERYBODY BELONGED and was
TAKEN CARE OF, where EVERYTHING was inside and NOTHING OUTSIDE” the
STATE. TOTALITARIANS BELIEVE that the ENTIRE SOCIETY was ONE ORGANIC
WHOLE YOUR HOME, YOUR PRIVATE THOUGHTS, EVERYTHING was PART of the
“ORGANIC” BODY POLITIC …

“Dr. Zhivago,
‘You might not be interested in “the revolution”, but the revolution is interested in YOU”
“IT’S TIME to PUT the COMMON GOOD, the NATIONAL INTEREST, AHEAD of INDIVIDUALS“ – Hillary Clinton

NO REALM of HUMAN LIFE (from food, sex, entertainment) IS BEYOND POLITICAL
MEANING … The STATE was CHARGED with “REDEEMING”, TURNING EVERYONE
into COMPLIANT SOCIAL ORGANS

“REDEMPTION” and “SALVATION” COULD ONLY BE ACHIEVED COLLECTIVELY

“To do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good” – Solzhenitsyn
“I would like to call upon AMERICA to be more careful with its TRUST … and prevent those … because of short-sightedness and still others out of self-interest, from FALSELY USING the STRUGGLE FOR PEACE and FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE to lead you down a FALSE ROAD. Because they are trying to WEAKEN you; they are trying to DISARM your strong and magnificent country in the face of this fearful threat. … I call upon you: ordinary working men of America … DO NOT LET YOURSELVES BECOME WEAK” – Solzhenitzyn

Jonah Goldberg: “The NAZIS had a word for this process: “gleichschultung”, a political word
borrowed – like so many others – from the realm of ENGINEERING, meaning
‘COORDINATION’. The idea was simple: all intitutions needed to work together as if they
were part of the same machine. Islands of SEPARATENESS’ – be they businesses, churches
or people – were WORN DOWN OVER TIME. There could be no rocks in the river of
PROGRESS. The entire society agreed to the fascist bargain, in which they bought economic,
moral and political SECURITY in exchange for absolute LOYALTY to the ideals of the reich.
This was a FALSE SECURITY; a FAUSTIAN BARGAIN. That is what people thought they
were getting. The Nazis used another term “volksgemeinschaft” – “people’s or national
COMMUNITY.

Hitler: “YOUR CHILD BELONGS TO US ALREADY”; “YOU WILL PASS ON.
YOUR DESCENDANTS … NOW STAND in the NEW CAMP.”
“In a SHORT TIME THEY WILL KNOW NOTHING BUT THIS NEW COMMUNITY”
– Hitler

Fascism #1: A QUEST FOR COMMUNITY
The “Collective” [It Takes a Village]
“We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good“ – hillary clinton
“It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed“ – Lenin
“Ask not what your country can do for you … ask what you can do for your country.”
– JFK inaugural speech, 1961

Jonah Goldberg: The state took the place of the anti-organic, contra-evolutionary influences of
the family. Hillary clinton believes “we are better as a society when we’re “working together”.
“Community” and the collective is symbolized by hilary clinton’s book “IT TAKES a
VILLAGE”, It draws from a mythic past. clinton invokes this premodern image as a source
of authority to ‘REORGANIZE’ MODERN SOCIETY”. it attempts to restore an imagined
past or satisfy an ancient yearning. Villages are wonderful, supportive, nurturing places
where EVERYONE IS LOOKING OUT FOR EVERYONE.
Hillary Clinton’s village … tries to restore the tribal comforts of small town on a national and
even universal level. The LANGUAGE is not hostile, nationalistic, racist or aggressive, but
this only detracts from it’s FASCIST nature. There is no public square where FREE [people]
and their voluntary associations … “deal with each other on their own terms free from the
mommying of the state. People across the ideological spectrum have a tendency to
ROMANTICIZE TRIBALISM …”
Fascism #1: A QUEST FOR COMMUNITY – The “Collective” [It Takes a Village]
Glorifying the benefits of collective conformity at the expense of “liberal” individuality and
pluralism an idealistic view of a “village” and collectivism – providing opportunity, ignoring
it’s capacity for oppression uncritically glorifying the “tribal” collective and conformity
Collective conformity ENFORCED (NOT “NURTURED”) by the “village”- state. the
[collective] path to hell is paved with good intentions. collective conformity, whether it be one
of nazi racism and superiority or one of modern “compassion”, is “totalitarian” collective
coercion, whether it be evil nazism or the modern “nanny state” violates voluntary, individual conscience.

barack obama: “if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that …what i said was
TOGETHER we build roads and we build bridgesthat’s the point i’ve made millions of times “
“Our DISORGANIZED COMPETITIVE LIFE must pass into an organic cooperative life” american progressive walter rauschenbusch
in a 4th grade houghton-mifflin text: “to be a community, people must share the same customs and have some common purpose … you also belong to the world community” “…ask students to find out more about the idea of a ‘global village’” commands the teacher manual (this is my country,1994)

This is NOT to SAY that the COLLECTIVE, CONFORMITY or COMPASSION is
inherently wrong. “Comformity” is not the issue – the source of it is – is it collectively
coerced or voluntary ? political correctnes vs. personal choice
is “compassion”, enforced by the “nanny state” nurturing or nuisance ?
Fascists place a “faith” in the “sacred” collective against the selfish and “corrupt” individual
fascists “deify” the collective or is it the “devil”, history’s bigggest source of evil?
Fascism #1: A QUEST FOR COMMUNITY
The “Collective” [It Takes a Village]
“IT is when people form together as groups, under the “mask” of “righteousness”, that people lose a sense of individual responsibility and act like “beast

UNDER the UNIVERSAL DECLARATION of HUMAN RIGHTS, MAN – AS represented by
a united nations global government – becomes god. The state was charged with
“redeeming”, turning everyone into compliant social organs. “redemption” and “salvation”
could only be achieved collectively. Once government becomes god, citizenship takes on a
new meaning.
According to the cce, “citizenship” is defined as “the status of being a member of a state, one
who owes allegiance to the government, not allegiance to the principles of liberty – but
allegiance to government – the new source of our rights. “CIVIC VIRTUE” now means:
“The DEDICATION of CITIZENS to the COMMON GOOD, even at the cost of their
individual interests and LIBERTY

COLLECTIVE CRUSADE: UTOPIAN UNIFORMITY
TOTALITARIANISM & DESPOTIC DELUSION

AMERITOPIA, by Mark Levin
HOW to ESCAPE the AGE of MASS DELUSION by Stella Morabito

SYNOPSIS:
Mark Levin: “political utopianism is tyranny disguised as a desirable, workable, and even
Paradisiacal governing ideology. There are unlimited utopian constructs, for the mind is capable of INFINITE FANTASIES. UTOPIANISM also attempts to shape and dominate the individual by doing two things at once” It strips the individual of his uniqueness, making him indistinguishable from the multitudes that form what is commonly referred to as “the masses,” but it simultaneously assigns him a group identity based on race, ethnicity, age, gender, income, etc., to highlight differences within the masses”
“[utopianism] exacerbates old rivalries and disputes or it incites new ones”

Mark Levin: “Indeed, the individual’s contribution to society must be downplayed,
dismissed, or denounced, unless the contribution is directed by the state and involves
self-sacrifice for the utopian cause”
Stella Morabito: “Most cannot grasp that such MOBS are mentally detached from REALITY
Participants in the mob action CANNOT COMPREHEND that they are actually CUTTING OFF THEIR OWN FREEDOM of EXPRESSION, as WELL as EVERYBODY ELSE’s
why would anyone want to build such a culture of COERCION? In a word, POWER.

Like all such deceptions, its sole purpose is as a vehicle to transfer power from individuals to
an increasingly centralized state. Equality” is not the reason for what is happening with such
mobs. it is the pretext for what they are doing. In fact, if the first amendment collapses, it
would simply indicate a return to humanity’s tribal default position, in which a sort of
Nietzschean “will to power” rules the day. The fuel, as usual, is the emotional blackmail of
people of goodwill, … mass mobilization to exploit that goodwill, then, finally, to render all
such goodwill meaningless”

“The [COLLECTIVE] PATH to HELL is PAVED with GOOD INTENTIONS”

Mark Levin: TYRANNY, broadly defined, is the use of power to dehumanize the individual
and delegitimize his nature “political utopianism is tyranny disguised as a desirable,
workable, and even paradisiacal governing ideology … there are … unlimited utopian
constructs, for the mind is capable of infinite fantasies. but there are common themes”
The fantasies take the form of grand social plans or experiments, the impracticability and
impossibility of which, in small ways and large, lead to the individual’s subjugation. Indeed,
the individual’s contribution to society must be downplayed, dismissed, or denounced, unless
the contribution is directed by the state and involves self-sacrifice for the utopian cause”
karl popper, a philosopher who eloquently deconstructed the false assumptions and scientific
claims of utopianism, argu[ed] it is totalitarian.

Mark Levin: “[utopianism] exacerbates old rivalries and disputes or it incites new ones”
Stella Morabito: “TYRANNIES always pretend to promote the very thing they seek to destroy”

HOW to ESCAPE the AGE of MASS DELUSION
Mass delusion is an important tool of oppressors because they can’t survive free expression. That’s why the First Amendment’s a target.
by Stella Morabito June 8, 2015

Stella Morabito: “Edward Bernays penned a little volume called “propaganda,” in which he
stated that an elite would always be responsible for making the public aware of “new ideas”,
which the public would then act upon as the elite nudged them into it. Political propaganda
aims to mobilize the masses to move an agenda forward. That’s most effectively done when
the masses are unaware of the process.

There is indeed a WAR on the PRIVATE MIND.The power elites who now control the media,
academia, and Hollywood, seem to understand social psychology well enough to exploit it on a
massive scale. They have engaged in psychological warfare against the private mind by
inducing “collective belief formation”. Conditioning and nudging the masses into
GROUPTHINK is a very old trick of all wannabe dictators. The bloody 20th century is filled
to the gills with examples.

Most cannot grasp that such MOBS are mentally detached from REALITY. Participants in the
mob action cannot comprehend that they are actually cutting off their own freedom of
expression, as well as everybody else’s. Why would anyone want to build such a culture of
coercion? in a word, POWER. “Equality” is not the reason for what is happening with such
mobs. it is the pretext for what they are doing. Like all such deceptions, its sole purpose is as
a vehicle to transfer power from individuals to an increasingly centralized state” collective

Joost a.m. Meerloo published “The Rape of the Mind: the Psychology of Thought Control,
Menticide and Brainwashing”in 1956 after years immersed in the study of social psychology
and countless interviews with victims of mental coercion, including nazi officers and
american prisoners of war in korea. It is an absolute must-read for anyone who hopes to uphold
the dignity of the individual. The book offers the psychic defenses so lacking among those who
submit to logicide. The transformation of the free human mind to an automatically
responding machine’ is essentially the story of the transformation of the United States.

Delusion is an important element, because tyrannies do not stand up to logic. It seems very
sudden, but it’s not. we’re only at this tipping point because we let our defenses down”
In fact, if the first amendment collapses, it would simply indicate a return to humanity’s
tribal default position, in which a sort of nietzschean “will to power” rules the day”

The fuel, as usual, is the emotional blackmail of people of goodwill, the uses of mass
mobilization to exploit that goodwill, then, finally, to render all such goodwill meaningless.
Most who protest … are more likely pawns than true believers. Like the “occupy wall street”
crowd, they tend to be atomized individuals who are drawn to the psychic thrill of being part
of a mobilized mass that feeds on emotions and can feel a sense of righteousness in the
stated pretext.

“CROWDS and POWER,” by elias canetti, is a classic work that explores in detail the draw of
the crowd for human beings. With the continued chipping away of the organic family of
mother-child-father, human relationships inevitably become diluted and more subservient to
a mass state. This detachment cultivates human alienation, which draws more people to
answer to the call of the mass state’s mob. Such protesters and their scores of clueless
apologists in the media are also utterly detached from the reality.

It feels like we’ve awakened to an ambush. but the groundwork for mass hysteria like this was
stealthily laid for decades, and the minefields sown. It’s what ‘community organizers’ work
towards, whether they know it or not. Once the masses are mobilized to push for a cause,
the propagandists’ goals can be put into law. American[s] ar eby and large clueless about
propaganda methods and tactics, and it shows.

In this context, it [political correctness] seems very much like a tool to bring all personal
relationships under state control and it shouldn’t surprise us that this is being done today in
the name of equality for certain kinds of personal relationships. Government doesn’t get to
coerce us in private thought or to dictate what we are allowed to feel, believe, think and
express.

The first amendment is not negotiable if we are to have any semblance of freedom in this
Country. But the emotional stew in which we are now boiling doesn’t allow logic or reason to
Prevail. We can never fight back as long as we are in the dark about how our minds can be
Manipulated. Mass delusion is an important tool of oppressors because they can’t survive
where free exercise of expression and association is practiced.

Unfortunately, delusion can be induced anywhere. It is simply a question of organizing and
manipulating collective feelings in the proper way If one can isolate the mass, allow no free
thinking, no free exchange, no outside correction and can hypnotize the group daily with
noises, with press and radio and television, with fear and pseudo-enthusiasms,
any delusion can be instilled.

Tyrannies always pretend to promote the very thing they seek to destroy. We need to take
philosopher george santayana’s warning to heart, that those who don’t learn from the past are
condemned to repeat it. We need to remind leaders who are tempted to cave in to mob
hysteria that resistance to tyranny is not as futile as submission to tyranny.
America is exceptional precisely because it rejects the tyrants’ rule.

Yet as our speech becomes more restricted, we end up more separated from one another and
more susceptible to mass delusions. As Meerloo wrote: ’where thinking is isolated without
free exchange with other minds, delusion may follow. He added, chillingly, ‘is this not what
happened in hitler germany where free verification and self-correction were forbidden?’”
MEERLOO also shows immense compassion for our human frailties. e understood just how
difficult it is to push back against the social pressures to conform.

When it comes to brainwashing, every one of us has our breaking point. but we absolutely
must push back once we understand those tactics. The TOTALITARIAN potentate, in order
to BREAK DOWN the MINDS of MEN, first needs widespread mental CHAOS and verbal
CONFUSION, because both PARALYZE HIS OPPOSITION and cause the morale of the
enemy to deteriorate – unless his adversaries are aware of the DICTATOR’s REAL AIM.

It’s really hard for control freaks to do their work on us if we are speaking freely with one
another in friendship, and especially if we all understand what they are up to and can call
them on it in one voice. So their first order of business is to separate us. A sense of
enforced isolation is a cruel and effective tool for instilling loneliness and then delusion in
people”
The INDIVIDUAL: ENEMY of the STATE (COLLECTIVE)
HOSTILITY to the “HERETIC”

– LIBERAL FASCISM: by Jonah Goldberg
– AMERITOPIA: by Mark Levin
– ENEMIES LIST UPDATED: At FAULT is NOT OBAMA PERSONALLY BUT HIS PROGRESSIVE PHILOSOPHY of GOVERNMENT by Michael G. Franc

SYNOPSIS
Fascists are “hostile” towards individualism. It left no room for those “heretics” who did not want to “progress” or “evolve” according to group norms
mark levin: “a HEAVENLY SOCIETY is said to be within reach if only the individual
surrenders more of his liberty and being for the general good, … as prescribed by the state”
– ”if [the individual] refuses, he will be tormented and ultimately coerced into compliance,
for conformity is essential
“[the individual] must abandon his own ambitions for the ambitions of the state.
he must become reliant on and fearful of the state” Levin: “[the individual] must abandon his
own ambitions for the ambitions of the state. he must become reliant on and fearful of the
state. His first duty must be to the state – not family, community and faith, all of which challenge the authority of the state”

“It is when people form together as GROUPS, under the MASK of “RIGHTEOUSNESS”,
that people lose a sense of individual responsibility and act like “BEASTS” – Aristotle
– envy under a “mask” hiding “un-fairness“
(lack of individual responsibility by “the mob”)
– mark levin: “nothing good can come of self-interest, which is condemned as morally indefensible and empty”
”the day of individual happiness has passed” – hitler
FASCISTS are “HOSTILE” TOWARDS INDIVIDUALISM (“HERETICS”)
“an individual has no meaning apart from the society in which his individuality has been formed.” – american progressive herbert croly
it left no room for those who did not want to “progress” or “evolve” according to group norms
“We must DEMAND that the INDIVIDUAL shall be willing to LOSE the sense of PERSONAL ACHIEVEMENT and shall be CONTENT to realize his activity ONLY IN connection to the activity of the MANY.” – Jane Addams

The INDIVIDUAL
ENEMY of the STATE (COLLECTIVE)
HERETICS vs The UTOPIAN CRUSADE
“THIS is good. war [ww i] … striking down individualism and building up collectivism” – American George Perkins
John Dewey: “children who know how to think for themelves spoil the harmony of the collective society”
“it’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few, and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.“ – Hillary Clinton
“individualism is the characteristic of simple barbarism, not of republican civilization” – lyman abbot
“it’s time to put the common good, the national interest, ahead of individuals“ – hillary clinton
“all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived in their relation to the state“ – mussolini
“it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential.“ – barack obama

Mark Levin: “political utopianism is tyranny disguised as a desirable, workable, and even
paradisiacal governing ideology …this dogma, his religion, which we’re all compelled to
follow, even though it results in our own demise. it can’t be achieved.The only thing that can be
achieved is the destruction of the individual. A HEAVENLY SOCIETY is SAID to be
WITHIN REACH IF ONLY the INDIVIDUAL SURRENDERS MORE of HIS LIBERTY
and BEING for the GENERAL GOOD, … as PRESCRIBED by the STATE”

Mark Levin: If [the individual] refuses, he will be tormented and ultimately coerced into
compliance, for conformity is essential. Nothing good can come of self-interest, which is
condemned as morally indefensible and empty. Through persuasion, deceit and coercion, the
individual must be stripped of his identity and subordinated to the state.
[The individual] must abandon his own ambitions for the ambitions of the state.
He must become reliant on and fearful of the state. His first duty must be to the state – not
family, community and faith, all of which challenge the authority of the state.

Once dispirited, the individual can be molded by the state with endless social experiments
and lifestyle calibrations. Especially threatening … are the industrious, independent and
successful, for they demonstrate what is actually possible under current societal conditions –
achievement, happiness, and fulfillment – contradicting and endangering the utopian
campaign against what was or is. Indeed, the individual’s contribution to society must be
downplayed, dismissed, or denounced, unless the contribution is directed by the state and
involves self-sacrifice for the utopian cause.

“This way it can speak to the well-being of “the people” as a whole while dividing them
against themselves, thereby stampeding them in one direction or another as necessary to
collapse the existing society or rule over the new one.

Especially threatening … are the industrious, independent and successful, for they
demonstrate what is actually possible under current societal conditions. “ACHIEVEMENT,
HAPPINESS, and FULFILLMENT – CONTRADICTING and ENDANGERING the
UTOPIAN CAMPAIGN AGAINST WHAT WAS OR IS. The INDIVIDUAL’s
CONTRIBUTION to SOCIETY MUST BE DOWNPLAYED, DISMISSED, OR
DENOUNCED, UNLESS the CONTRIBUTION is DIRECTED by the STATE and
INVOLVES SELF-SACRIFICE for the UTOPIAN CAUSE.

“all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived in their relation to the state“
– mussolini
“it’s time to put the COMMON GOOD, the national interest, ahead of INDIVIDUALS“
– hillary clinton
“our nation can achieve permanent health only from within on the basis of the principle: the common interest before self-interest.“ – hitler
“we’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good“ – hillary clinton
“it is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed“ – lenin
“few people desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master.”
– gaius selsustius crispis, roman historian
“i hope we will come together as a nation and do whatever it takes to keep guns away from people who have no business with them“ – hillary clinton
“we have to build a political consensus, and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground“ – hillary clinton
“the aim of the school must be to give the student, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the notion of the state“ – hitler
“it is when people form together as groups, under the “mask” of “righteousness”, that people lose a sense of individual responsibility and act like “beasts”
envy under a “mask” hiding “un-fairness“ (lack of individual responsibility by “the mob”)
envy hidden by a “mask” of “fairness“ through income equality

“FEW PEOPLE DESIRE LIBERTY; MOST MEN WISH ONLY for a JUST MASTER.”
– GAIUS SELSUSTIUS CRISPIS, ROMAN HISTORIAN

“When the TASTE for PHYSICAL GRATIFICATIONS AMONG THEM HAS GROWN more rapidly than their education . . . the time will come when men are carried away and lose all self-restraint . . . . it is not necessary to do violence to such a people in order to strip them of the rights they enjoy; they themselves willingly loosen their hold . . . . they neglect their chief business which is to remain their own masters .”
― Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America Volume 2

“WHAT LOCKE MEANT by EQUALITY, WHAT the FOUNDERS MEANT by
EQUALITY in the DECLARATION, was NOT CONFORMITY, was NOT
UNIFORMITY, was NOT OUTCOMES. WHAT THEY MEANT by EQUALITY is there are
CERTAIN GOD-GIVEN rights that every human being upon birth has he right to
live, The right to live freely and the right to pursue your interests. The right to be unmolested
by other people, your government.
this is the essential part of our founding, and if you listen to obama today, they never talk abou
this. it’s always about our collective interests and … desires. The purpose of the constitution
is to protect and preserve the society that they fought a revolution to protect against outside
enemies. The purpose of the constitution is to protect that society. it’s to protect individual
sovereignty. it’s to protect all these things they fought for.”

This way it can speak to the well-being of “the people” as a whole while dividing them against
themselves, thereby stampeding them in one direction or another as necessary to collapse the
existing society or rule over the new one.

ENEMIES LIST UPDATED
AT FAULT IS NOT OBAMA PERSONALLY,
BUT HIS PROGRESSIVE PHILOSOPHY of GOVERNMENT
by Michael G. Franc may 20, 2013

Michael G. Franc: ”Since President Obama entered the Oval Office, federal agencies have
harassed entire classes of American citizens. Ben Domenech suggests the harassment stems
from the facts that “the progressive approach to modern governance and policy is inherently
flawed and that vast governments are ripe for abuse.

The enemies list à la obama, which targets entire classes of people or organizations, is more
dangerous to a free and open society because it paves the way for more systemic and
widespread abuses by government. It is spawned by an insidious philosophy that discounts
the intrinsic value and uniqueness of individuals. Group traits such as ideology, religious
beliefs, occupation, military status, and even gun ownership trump individual qualities and
come to define the citizen in the eyes of the increasingly intrusive government

New revelations indicate that IRS officials targeted tea-party and other conservative outfits
solely because they fit the profile of being “political action type organizations involved in
limiting/expanding government” or “educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights”
The identity politics practiced by these agencies challenges the very essence of our founding
The understanding of liberty that prevailed at the constitutional convention began with an
acceptance of the “inalienable rights” we possess as individuals. These rights inherent in us
as human beings and predate the creation of any government. Our liberty is not apportioned
to us according to the whims of government officials. government, rather, exists to defend the
liberties we already possess.
The nature of that liberty, moreover, presumes that we are free to plot our life’s trajectory,
define our dreams as we choose, and act accordingly. We are not bound by predestination as
defined by our race, gender, family lineage, occupation, wealth or poverty, world view, or any
other criterion deemed important by the government. The obama administration’s pervasive
adherence to group over individual identity creates a slippery slope that hastens other abuses
of government. Favored groups – e.g., unions and “connected” corporations – receive
waivers from burdensome laws and regulations, as we have seen since the passage of
obamacare. Favored organizations – environmental groups, for example – need not pay the
costs associated with the freedom of information act, while other groups – say, conservative
outfits that question the CURRENT WISDOM CONCERNING the ENVIRONMENT – MUST
COVER ALL SUCH COSTS.

The challenge is to make sure ordinary Americans, already skeptical of the federal government and convinced of its incompetence, understand the real significance of the irs scandal.
These illegal acts extend well beyond the president and his white house cronies. They are the
natural and predictable consequence of the world view brought to us by the left-of-center
political and intellectual establishment.

It is an indictment of an entire philosophy of governance and of a flawed understanding of
human nature. Marxist revolutionaries destroy existing civilizations and build their
totalitarian utopias. On the ash heaps of their carcasses and over the bodies of their own
people whom are ideological enemies that they exterminate.
scapegoating + demonization + polarization = divide and conquer

Mark Levin: “In TRUTH, UTOPIANISM is REGRESSIVE, IRRATIONAL and
PRE-enlightenment. Transforming society becomes a struggle between the utopia and
self-determination and self-preservation, since the individual must acquiesce to centralized
decision-making. “Centralizing and consolidating authority is required to REPLACE
dispersed decision-making with a command and control structure. The purpose of which is
to coerce behavior in pursuit of a fantasy, a dogmatic cause, a false religion, etc. ’

The FAMILY ENEMY of the NANNY STATE

– The WAR BETWEEN the STATE and the FAMILY: HOW GOVERNMENT DIVIDES and IMPOVERISHES
by Patricia Morgan & Raymond J. Keating, The Freeman
– NANNY STATE’s WAR on the TRADITIONAL FAMILY
by Scotty Campbell
– The LONG WAR ON FAMILY by Dr. Ryan N.S. Topping
– From COMMUNISTS to PROGRESSIVES,
the LEFT‘S TAKEDOWN of FAMILY and MARRIAGE by Paul Kengor

The FAMILY: ENEMY of the NANNY STATE – SYNOPSIS:

“children who know how to think for themelves spoil the harmony of the collective society”
– one of the core tenets of kindergarten was the dogma that “the government is the true parent of the child. The state is sovereign over the family”
– The “traditional” family is the enemy of “totalitarian” collectivism, the institution most resistant to political indoctrination
– the family contains loyalties outside state control
– the “nanny state” places the government in the role of parent and provider to children; allows for increased government intrusions into family life”
– the “nanny state” welfare system, intentionally or not, undermines personal
responsibility, destroys the traditional family and hurts children”
Stella Morabito: “TYRANNIES always pretend to promote the very thing they seek to destroy”

Jonah Goldberg: ONE of the CORE tenets of KINDERGARTEN was the DOGMA that the
government is the true parent of the child. The state is sovereign over the family. Good
children will be less attached to their parents and more attached to the “community”
The “TRADITIONAL” FAMILY is the ENEMY of “TOTALITARIAN” COLLECTIVISM
The nuclear family was the institution most resistant to political indoctrinatio because the
family contains loyalties outside state control.

The WAR BETWEEN the STATE and the FAMILY:
HOW GOVERNMENT DIVIDES and IMPOVERISHES
by Patricia Morgan & Raymond J. Keating The Freeman January 22, 2009

Sympathy and compassion help make humans caring, moral beings. Adam Smith, the father
of modern economics, understood that, as illustrated by his emphasis on sympathy in the theory
of moral sentiments. Often, however, sympathy and compassion are transformed from tools of
moral judgment and action into weapons of blind ideology, irrational emotionalism and
cynical politics. They [sympathy and compassion] serve as the bat with which opponents of
the welfare state get pummeled. After all, the argument goes, if you oppose an extensive
network of government income, housing, healthcare, employment and child-care assistance
programs, you must be severely lacking in sympathy and compassion. To truly care, you
must support big government.

That assumption, unfortunately, has long clouded the debate over welfare policies, especially
when it comes to government programs affecting family life. The big-government crowd has
pushed blindly for government to play an ever-larger role as financial provider for households,
thereby contributing critically to the undermining of traditional families.

Meanwhile, it should be noted that some who argue against such programs have tried to make
their case without fully acknowledging the important economic and societal roles played by the
family. Part of the problem is the failure to apply economic analysis to the family’s role in the
economy and to the impact of government policies on the family. The freeman: “the war
between the state and the family: how government divides and impoverishes by patricia morgan
deals with the programs and realities of great britain, but the discussion and analysis obviously
apply elsewhere, including the united states.
“Morgan pulls together overwhelming evidence and data showing the benefits to adults,
children, and society in general of marriage and intact families, and the problems of
non-marriage, single parenthood and divorce. [Morgan] illustrates how the welfare state
subsidizes and encourages family breakdown. She notes the varying ways in which
government policies affect such critical decisions. By rewarding some behaviors and
penalizing others, tax and welfare systems affect the preference and behavior of individuals
not just through hard cash calculations but by (unavoidably) embodying and promoting certain
values and assumptions.

The generous subsidization of the lone-parent household cannot but reinforce the belief that
it is quite acceptable for men to expect the state to provide for their offspring.
The Freeman: “Morgan sums up the implications of all this on the size and intrusiveness of government: “growing family and household fragmentation” drives government spending and taxes ever higher; displaces existing institutional and private
arrangements”; places the government in the role of parent and provider to children; allows for
increased government intrusions into family life and generates an increasing mass of
legislation and regulation of provisions for custody, access and financial support”

After digesting the formidable data, evidence, and arguments harnessed in morgan’s book, it is hard to see how anyone claiming to possess sympathy and compassion for others could still rationally embrace a welfare system that, intentionally or not, undermines personal responsibility, destroys the traditional family (thereby undermining its accompanying benefits), and hurts children.

Given all the problems that come with government, including waste and loss of freedom,
government action should always be a last, desperate resort unfortunately, for decades
government action has been the first resort in dealing with social problems
When it comes to family life, the negative fallout from this government-first philosophy
should be obvious to all who understand economics and feel compassion for others.

NANNY STATE’s WAR on the TRADITIONAL FAMILY
by Scotty Campbell Bulwarker.com

Scotty Campbell: “The big government system of ensconcing the needy is dealing
irreparable damage to our society. The system provides for broken families, and poverty
stricken individuals. It is a helpful program for the most destitute, but it is also costing our
nation morally and financially. It takes the emphasis off the traditional family unit, replacing it
with faceless bureaucracy as the primary provider,

The single parent benefits, by gaining access to needed resources, but overall they lose out by
not having an involved partner. Someone who would mitigate the responsibility, share the actual
costs and burdens of family, to play an integral role in raising the child beyond a paycheck,
The absence of two involved parents negatively affects the child, hindering their opportunity.
statistics over the last decade prove it and as long as big governmentis there to fill the void,
family structure will continue to rapidly decay.

America is awash in poverty, crime, drugs and other problems, but more than perhaps anything
else, it all comes down to this, said vincent dicaro, vice president of the national fatherhood
initiative: deal with absent fathers, and the rest follows”
“people “look at a child in need, in poverty or failing in school, and ask, ‘what can we do to
help?’ but what we do is ask, ‘why does that child need help in the first place?’ and the answer is
often it’s because [the child lacks] a responsible and involved father,” he said”
“the spiral continues each year. married couples with children have an average income of
$80,000, compared with $24,000 for single mothers.

The obvious solution is not more government aid, as increased spending did nothing to deter
the root causes of a broken home. Instead we must restore the traditional two parent family,
where BOTH MOTHER and father are involved in their child’s life, We should promote this
family structure that made america great, and independent of a nanny state to provide for
every need. right now, more than 100 million americans are enrolled in at least one welfare
program run by the federal government. And that does not even count social security or
medicare”.

The LONG WAR ON FAMILY
Dr. Ryan N.S. Topping CatholicExchange.com February 6, 2013

PERPETUATED PREJUDICES AGAINST the family that, unchallenged, lead to its ruin.
among several I cite three: (1) the assertion that marriage makes men and women less free; (2)
the assumption that children are a burden; and (3) the insistence that sexual differentiation is a
fiction.
I would like uncover the three stages of the LONG WAR against the FAMILY.
THESE three ideas represent … three waves of the ANTI-FAMILY MOVEMENT of the
past 150 years. the first is the marxist contribution; the second is the eugenicist; the third is the
fruit of recent gender theorists.
Common to both marx and engels is the belief that social relations not characterized by strict
material equality are unjust. In his influential study, the origin of the family, private property,
and the state (1884), karl marx’s collaborator Friedrich Engels attacked the family as the
original cell of inequality and slavery.
As an extension of man’s first desire for property – marxism’s equivalent of the fall – man
also wished to secure the transmission of property to his posterity, In engels’ account this drive
is what gives rise to monogamy, men with land want heirs with a legitimate title. Hence, in
marriage women belong to men simply “as an instrument for the production of children.
With no right to property and no possibility of handing on an inheritance, men will no longer
care to identify their offspring.

An upshot is that once the economic conditions that gave rise to marriage cease, so also will
marriage. at the end of history, sex will again be unfettered. Engels predicted that the
coming revolution would strike a blow to both family and the bourgeois sexual morality that
sustained it.
in the socialist future, “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society,”
which will result in the gradual growth of unconstrained sexual intercourse. Whatever the
defects of his theory, Engels was prescient at least about its ramifications: AS SOCIALISM
ADVANCES, FAMILY RECEDES. As the tasks of raising children, caring for the old, and
making money are absorbed by the state, fewer and fewer reasons will remain for a man and a
woman to form a lasting bond. When children from the age of three years spend two or
more meals with strangers, it is not surprising that parents find it difficult to command the
level of loyalty that was once taken for granted, More than ‘quality time’ young children need
quantities of time, and when the home is vacant, children transfer their allegiances elsewhere,
usually to their peers. Boys and girls exposed early to state institutions become easy prey to
what has been called “youth culture” – that sum of the popular music, expensive clothing, and
crass entertainments devised by corporations to provide an easy market.
Education, work, prayer, nurture, and play are all essential functions belonging to the
household properly ordered. Restoring the strength of the single-unit family turns on its
ability, then, to recover ground from outside agencies to which its activities have been
transferred.
Writing a generation after marx and engels, pope leo xiii UNDERSTOOD WELL WHAT was at
stake in the fight against socialism. “Rerum novarum (1891) had in view not only the rights of
the worker but also the survival of his family. both have rights that are grounded in nature and
disclosed by revelation. Behold, therefore, the family, or rather the society of the household, a
very small society indeed, but a true one, and older than any polity! In this first wave of attack
on the family, any sign of mutual interdependence was viewed as a threat to freedom. Those
working against the family have insisted that submission to an exclusive contract is a sacrifice
of autonomy. As simone de beauvoir claimed, in marriage, “MAN AND WIFE TOGETHER
UNDERGO the OPPRESSION of an INSTITUTION THEY DID NOT CREATE. The
oppression under which men and women suffer most is not the result of marriage but of
broken promises.
Even by such pedestrian indexes as wealth, health, and reported happiness, a mountain of
social-scientific research has long overturned the popular wisdom of such 1960s thrillers as
the second sex and betty friedman’s the feminine mystique”. Like men, women simply thrive
better in marriage. they suffer less depression, are more financially secure, and experience
more fulfilling intimacy. (for evidence see linda waite and maggie gallagher’s the case for
marriage, broadway books)”

Even today, after decades of ASSAULT ON the IDEAL of the NUCLEAR FAMILY, a mere
8 % of women say they hope to remain unwed. The eugenicist and anti-natal movement
popularized by Margaret Sanger and perpetuated through planned parenthood has been so
successful that great effort will be required to awaken the imaginations of the young to a world
where children are not viewed as a social and economic burden. What atonement will be
required for the holocaust of our little ones is difficult to imagine. Beyond searing our own
consciences, we have only now begun to suffer the social costs of killing.

EUROPE has entered its DEMOGRAPHIC WINTER; what CHINA will experience once the
full effect of WIPING OUT a GENERATION of GIRLS is felt, one can hardly guess.
Having TURNED FIRST AGAINST MEN, and then against CHILDREN, today the
third wave of the assault on the family directly TARGETS WOMEN.
It is from the third wave that the more bizarre claims about the sexes are being trumpeted, and
the MOST BIZARRE CLAIM of all is that SEX is ILLUSORY. For a generation, college
freshman have learned to blink obediently when told that
‘GENDER’ is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION.
If the ideology of [no] gender is accepted, not only locker rooms will be undone; so will the
Family. Christians, jews, muslims and old fashioned conservatives, have extended far too much
tolerance toward the gender-engineers. As pope benedict xvi recently observed in his christmas
homily, the very notion of family, and the safety of children is at issue. But if there is no pre-
ordained duality of man and woman in creation then neither is the family any longer a reality
established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the
dignity pertaining to him”
WHAT DOES the CONTEMPORARY ATTACK on the FAMILY PRE-SUPPOSE?
At the root of these attacks on family lies a corruption of what John Paul II has called “the idea and the experience of freedom. In the late pope’s analysis, underlying these ideas and the social and economic institutions supporting them is a notion of freedom conceived not as a capacity for realizing truth, “but as an autonomous power of self-affirmation. (familiaris consortio 6)
In place of such a notion, and enacted through the disciplines and habits suitable for family,
man and woman united in matrimony are called to embody the self-giving love of christ. There
can hardly be a more attractive witness of self-giving love than a family at prayer. Next,
christians will have to re-evaluate the concept of equality, beginning with its unit of
measurement. Obviously, neither a reduction in men’s height nor an increase in women’s weight
is in view. equality is measured usually by a vote, by a wage, by a raise – in other words,
according to some political or economic criterion.

Even accepting for the moment a strictly materialist conception of equality, it is a long time
since we have passed from equality of opportunity over to the practical necessity of
conformity. Moving beyond marx, for catholics, happiness is not measured chiefly by
dollars and cents. Virtue is a far more stable currency. Moving beyond marx, for catholics,
happiness is not measured chiefly by dollarsandcents. Virtue is a far more stable currency. Is it
really the case that most women are happier at the office rather than in the home? Given the
toxic results of social engineering now evident, there is some prima facie evidence that the
pursuit of abstract equality so defined works against the happiness of both sexes, and our
children”
It is notable that women consistently say that they do not derive their greatest satisfaction
from work outside the home. this preference is all the more marked for women with children.
In one recent pew study, when mothers with children under 18 were asked about their most
important source of fulfillment, 51 % cited their relationship with their children, 29 % cited their
relationship with their husband or common law husband, while a mere 1 % cited their job or
career
Laws could stop penalizing women who stay at home. as a start: greater federal and local
tax relief could be redirected toward families with dependent children; zoning laws could
allow for the greater use of the home as a place of WORK; HOMESCHOOLING families
might be relieved from some portion of property taxes; and so forth. Children are a blessing;
welcoming them does require that we adjust our spending habits. If we really do think that
raising children is a nobler task than accumulating wealth. Since the birth of marxism in the
mid-nineteenth century until about 1980, it was almost universally assumed that social-scientific
research was the friend of left-leaning social engineers.

Early on the social sciences adopted marx’s assumption that social relations not characterized
by strict material equality are unjust. Statistical and empirical research were welcomed as means
of uprooting the prejudice and ir-rationality upon which traditional institutions were
founded. Above all – the argument went – the family, and with it the roles of men and women,
would be exposed as having no hold in nature. All this has changed. many sociologists
remain wedded to radical politics. but their grip on the discipline has loosened. For many years
now, social-scientific studies relating to the family have helped to illuminate, as one recent study
has it, “the strengths, indeed the irreplaceability of the family. As reason and revelation attest, a
communion of persons is founded not upon abstract equality but upon a willingness to serve
Christ in one another.
One of the pressing issues of chesterton’s time was “birth control.” he not only objected to
the idea, he objected to the very term because it MEANT the OPPOSITE of WHAT IT SAID.
it meant NO BIRTH and NO CONTROL. It is safe to say that chesterton stood up against
every trend and fad that plagues us today because every one of those trends and fads
undermines the family.
Big government tries to replace the family’s authority, and big business tries to replace
the family’s autonomy. There is a constant commercial and cultural pressure on father, mother,
and child. they are minimized and marginalized and, yes, mocked. But as chesterton says,
“This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy
those civilizations which disregard it. Sexual morality has decayed progressively. but let us
remember that it began with birth control, which is an attempt to create sex for sex’s sake,
changing the act of love into an act of selfishness. the promotion and acceptance of lifeless,
barren, selfish sex.

“MEN MAY KEEP a SORT of LEVEL of GOOD, BUT NO MAN HAS EVER BEEN ABLE TO KEEP ON ONE LEVEL of EVIL. THAT ROAD GOES DOWN and DOWN”

From COMMUNISTS to PROGRESSIVES,
The LEFT’s TAKEDOWN of FAMILY and MARRIAGE
by Paul Kengor May 28, 2015

“EFFORTS to fundamentally transform family and marriage have been long at work, but
never (until now) accepted and pushed by the mainstream. For two centuries, leftist extremists
made their arguments, from the 1800s to the 1960s, beginning with the communist manifesto,
where marx and engels wrote of the “abolition of the family! Efforts to revolutionize family
and marriage continued from socialist utopians like robert owen, charles fourier, and albert
brisbane, to cultural marxists in the frankfurt school such as herbert Marcuse and freudian –
marxist wilhelm reich, to 20th-century leftists and progressives ranging from the bolsheviks –
lenin, trotsky, alexandra kollontai – to margaret sanger, betty friedan, kate millett and ‘60s
radicals like bill ayers, bernardine dohrn, and mark rudd”

When Tom Hayden and robert scheer ran a “red family” colony near berkeley in the 1960s,
they were merely following the footsteps of socialist-utopian colonies in the 1800s in places
like oneida, new york and new harmony, Indiana. The mere fleeting contemplation, the mere
momentary notion, the slightest passing fancy of a man legally marrying another man in the
1850s or 1950s would have been scoffed at as incomprehensible.
These fundamental transformers did, however, seek to break down natural-traditional-
Biblical boundaries for family and marriage. For the far left, gay marriage is the trojan
horse to secure the takedown of marriage. It has long wanted, and countless everyday
americans are oblivious to the older, deeper forces at work. Gay marriage is serving as a
stunningly effective tool in attacking what the far left has always hated most: religion.
GAY-MARRIAGE advocacy fits and fuels the far left’s ANTI-FAMILY AGENDA, and
specifically its LONGTIME TAKE-DOWN STRATEGY AIMED at the nuclear family.
In signing on the dotted line for gay marriage, they have also, whether they realize it or not,
enlisted in the radical left’s unyielding centuries-old attempt to undermine the family.
Unlike the communists who ripped marriage as “bourgeois claptrap,” as a form of “slavery”
and “vile patriarchy,” as a system of “captive housewives” and who forcibly collectivized
children into full-time nurseries in order to deliberately undermine the traditional family,

The vast majority of today’s proponents of same-sex marriage have friendly motives. Ttheir goal is not to tear down but to “expand” marriage to a new form of spousal partner. They do this with the intent of providing a new “freedom” and “right” to a new group of people. I get that. unfortunately, there’s so much that they are not getting.
Today’s advocates of same-sex marriage need to be aware of the quite insidious deeper
historical-ideological forces they are unwittingly serving” … “that knowledge still will
likely not change their minds, but it’s something that a well-informed, thoughtful person should
at least be willing to learn before urging the unprecedented action that our culture and courts
may be about to take.

An article on the huffington post called “the day she let her son wait in the car”, written by lenore
skenazy founder of free range kids, defended a mother who had been criminally convicted for
leaving her four year old son in the car for five minutes while she ran in a store. The boy was
fine, but a bystander had recorded the whole incident on their phone and called the police. The
mother went through 2 years of legal battles before being handed a sentence of 100 hours of
community service and parenting classes. The mom considered herself lucky, because she could
have received a much stronger sentence. It was during those five minutes though, that a
“concerned” citizen recorded the boy in the car and called the police”

Brooks’ four year old was never even uncomfortable, much less harmed by the waiting, but
that didn’t stop the police from pressing charges against the mother. After reading the articles
written by brooks and skenazy, i must admit that i was a little shaken. is this really what we have
come to as a society? a society where strangers record parent’s normal behavior, in hopes of
getting the parent in trouble?”
What bothers me most about the whole situation isn’t the fact that the mother left her child in the
car, or even that a “concerned citizen” recorded it; it is the fact that the mother was prosecuted
under such an ambiguous law. If leaving a child in the car for five minutes is considered
“contributing to the delinquency of a minor”, what else could fall under the same category?”
What about not watching your child closely enough at the park? they might get hurt. giving a
child a hot dog? hot dogs are a choking hazard! not putting on enough sunscreen? sunburns can
be deadly. letting a child ride a bike? they could fall!” Where does it end? In a world that lacks
common sense, maybe it doesn’t”

“If the GOVERNMENT is GOING to CREATE an EVER-STRONGER NANNY STATE, THEY MUST EVOKE FEAR and PANIC in the POPULATION”
How do they do that? By punishing the smallest infraction, creating new and invasive legislations, and reminding us all the time that we live in a scary world where we need the government to help keep us and our children safe. Parenting is hard, but parenting in a nanny state society is almost impossible.

CAPTAIN MOMMY FIGHTING the NANNY STATE FOR the RIGHT to PARENT

What the heck are we doing arresting parents for things that were perfectly normal 30 years
ago? A woman in south carolina allowed her nine-year-old daughter to play in a local
playground while she worked. she was booked for “unlawful conduct toward a child” and has
lost custody of her kid. A connecticut woman was cited for a misdemeanor because she chose
to run an errand while her 11-year-old sat waiting in the car. None of this is accidental or
coincidence, it is systemic and has been going on for at least three decades. It is all part of an
effort to replace parental authority and discretion with the regulations and standards of the
state.
The african proverb ‘it takes a whole village to raise a child’ seems to serve now as a rallying
call for the establishment of a communal authority to set new standards and methods of child-
rearing,” writes dana mack in her 1997 book the assault on parenthood: how our culture
undermines the family. According to mack’s thesis, family law courts and social service
agencies have been unduly influenced by an attitude that the “best interests” of a child is
separate and often in competition with parental authority and the family unit.

Parents have been convicted of ‘child abuse’ for spanking, for grounding, for home
schooling, and even for no reason other than a suspicion on the part of a mandated reporter or
social worker that while conditions in the home are at present stable, they may be conducive to
neglect or abuse in the future,” explains mack.
As the examples from this summer indicate, family law and mandated reporter rules have now
trickled down to local police who are invoking “potential harm” to children due to the
decisions of their parents. This reality is surely bad enough and yet if we look more broadly at
how public policy questions of children’s health and welfare are legislated, we see that parental
discretion and judgment is often superseded by that of the state. Melissa harris-perry says
we should welcome all this government intervention between parents and their children. We
haven’t had a very collective notion of ‘these are our children,’” she explains, “so part of it is we
have to break through our … private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their
families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.
Once it’s everyone’s responsibility and not just the household’s, then we start making better
Investments. The notion that the state hasn’t gone far enough in its effort to transform our
understanding of who children belong to and who shall have authority for their safety and
well-being, is surely a frightening prospect to all those parents already caught in the web of
unjust parental punishment.

COLLECTIVE POLITICAL RELIGION – The GOD of GOVERNMENT and STATE
SACRIFICING FREEDOM, SECURING “UTOPIA”

– “LIBERAL FASCISM” by Jonah Goldberg
– “IT TAKES a VILLAGE” by Hillary Clinton

SYNOPSIS:
– U.S. president woodrow wilson believed the state was a natural, organic and spiritual expression of “the people”.
– “government is not a machine, but a living thing
– ”the expanding power of the state was entirely natural as part of an evolutionary process. collective political religion: the god of government and state, sacrificing freedom,
securing “utopia”
synopsis:- “constitutional democracy, as the founding fathers understood it, was a “phase” in this “progression”
now it was time for the state to ascend to the “next plateau”
“government does now whatever experience permits or the times
demand” woodrow wilson, the state
barack obama – “my individual salvation depends on our [national] collective salvation”
“recognizing that my fate remains tied up with their fates, that my individual salvation is not
going to come about without a collective salvation for the country”
“because i never thought this day would ever happen. i won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. i won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. you know. if i help [obama], he’s gonna help me.”
Hillary Clinton’s book “IT TAKES a VILLAGE” – COLLECTIVISM is the NEW “FREEDOM’
”I think my underlying values have remained pretty constant; individual responsibility and community i do not see those as being mutually inconsistent.” – hillary Clinton
“When I am talking about “It Takes a Village”, I’m obviously not talking just about or even
primarily about geographical villages any longer, but about the network of relationships and
VALUES that do CONNECT US and BINDS US TOGETHER”- Hillary Clinton
Rodham lets Mr. Alinsky define the term what it means to be an American radical:
“…that unique person who actually believes what he says… to whom the COMMON GOOD is the GREATEST PERSONAL VALUE … who GENUINELY AND COMPLETELY BELIEVES in MANKIND”
‘Alinsky outlines American history focusing on men he would call “radical,” confronting his readers again with the “unique” way Americans have synthesized the alien roots of radicalism, Marxism, Utopian socialism, syndicalism, the French Revolution, with their own conditions and experiences:”
IN WHAT MANNER? (voluntary or mandatory?)

U.S. President woodrow wilson believed the state was a natural, organic and spiritual expression of “the people”. Government and “the people” should have an “organic bond” that reflected the “true spirit” of the people. woodrow wilson:“GOVERNMENT is not a machine, but a living thing”. The expanding power of the statewas entirely natural as part of an evolutionary process. Constitutionaldemocracy, as the founding fathers understood
it, was a “phase” in this “progression”now it was time for the state to
ascend to the “next plateau”. Government does now whatever experience permits or the times
demand” woodrow wilson, the state

Wilson was the first president to speak disparagedly about The Constitution, attacking the very
idea of natural and INDIVIDUAL RIGHTSL “no doubt a lot of nonsense has been talked about
the inalienable rights of the individual,” … and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and
pleasing speculation has been put together as fundamental principle” – woodrow wilson

With this decisively international approach, education is no longer about preserving inalienable
rights based on united states constitutional principles. Education is becoming a case of
brainwashing america’s youth into a world view based on international principles of
global management.

COLLECTIVE MOBS: TOTALITARIAN TERROR &TYRANNY
as “SOCIAL JUSTICE” [MASKING the WILL to POWER]

– REINHOLD NIEBUHR, MORAL MAN and IMMORAL SOCIETY
– ROUSSEAU’s “GENERAL WILL” and
MODERN TOTALITARIANISM
– “DEMONIC” by Ann Coulter
– OBAMA, ALINSKY and SCAPEGOATS by James Lewis
– DEMOCRACY VERSUS MOB RULE by Thomas Sowell
– OBAMA as LENIN-OID by James Lewis

REINHOLD NIEBUHR, MORAL MAN and IMMORAL SOCIETY (1932)
by Matthew Berke FIRST THINGS.com

“Evil is not to be traced back to the individual but to the collective behavior of humanity
while individuals are capable of goodness and morality, groups are inherently selfish and uncaring ; “sin” was problematic in individuals – this was only magnified in any collective
– while individuals in their personal dealings often transcend self-interest (hence “moral
man”), nations dealing with other nations, or social classes with other social classes, have
little or no capacity for self-transcendence (“immoral society”).
thinkers as diverse as gustav le bon, freud and niebuhr explained genocide as a result of the
evil of the collective … believing that while individuals are capable of goodness and morality,
groups are inherently selfish and uncaring “evil is not to be traced back to the individual but
to the collective behavior of humanity” – reinhold niebuhr
“sin” was problematic in individuals – this was only magnified in any collective the hope of
solving larger social problems of mankind, merely by extending the social sympathies of
individuals is vain.
In MORAL MAN and IMMORAL SOCIETY, Niebuhr broke decisively with this “social
gospel” outlook, insisting that POWER is the principal ingredient in arbitrating the competing
claims of nations, races and social classes. “According to niebuhr, conflict and tension are
permanent features of history
“WHILE social improvement is POSSIBLE, the justice of this world is born in strife and is
ALWAYS PROVISIONAL, FRAGMENTARY and INSECURE.
WHILE individuals in their personal dealings often transcend self-interest (hence
“moral man”), nations dealing with other nations, or social classes with other social classes,
have LITTLE OR NO CAPACITY FOR SELF-TRANSCENDENCE (“IMMORAL
SOCIETY”)
INDIVIDUALS CAN BE UNSELFISH and are MORALLY CAPABLE of considering the
interests of others and acting prudently when they sense conflicts of interest between themselves
and others. Men have little enough goodness in themselves and socialization makes them worse
because the reason for being, for all social groups, is to pursue the shared self-interest of the
collective. So in fact, GROUPS MADE INDIVIDUALS WORSE RATHER THAN
BETTER because the work of collectives was invariably governed by a logic of self-interest.
Reason can sharpen ethics and “justice”, but, ironically, it can also sharpen the capacity to
RATIONALIZE SELFISHNESS and the will to POWER – and, doubly ironic, sometimes
both at the same time. The tendency to rationalize, niebuhr argued, is especially pronounced
in man’s collective life.

Fascist “idealism” hypocritically glorifies it’s own “will to POWER”, exercised ruthlessly
through the collective, while demon-izing the “corruption” of the “other” outside the “organic”
whole. Fascists hate individual selfishness and corruption, ignoring collective corruption.

COLLECTIVE MOBS and the WILL to POWER
MOBS produce COLLECTIVE “SELFISHNESS”, NOT “SALVATION”. Power corrupts.
The object of revolution is POWER. It is obtained through polarization,“crisis” and conflict.
Revolutionary France was the first modern, fascist, totalitarian state. The French Revolution
was nationalist – “protection” of the nation and it’s citizenry against the “outsider”. It was
POPULIST – there were only two classes of citizens – the people and it’s enemies.
Jonah Goldberg: “Perhaps it is true that “the people united will never be defeated”, but that
does not mean the people are right. As Calvin Coolidge liked to say, “one with the law on his
side is a majority. We tend to forget that unity is, at best, morally neutral and often a source of
irrationality and groupthing. Rampaging mobs are unified. The mafia is unified..
Marauding barbarians bent on rape and pillage are unified.
Meanwhile, civilized people have disagreements, and small-d democrats have arguments”;
Classical liberalism is based on this fundamental insight, which is why fascism was always
anti-liberal. Martin heidegger, a noted philosopher, told his students and colleagues that
Germany’s soul needed fresh air to breathe and national socialism would provide it.
Heidegger argued that FREEDOM of inquiry and free expression were negative and selfish
Ideas. Instead, he encouraged his students to live up to their obligations to the national
community in both “thought and deed”.

A hundred years before hitler, the german-jewish poet, heinrich heine, had declared:
“Wherever books are burned, human beings are destined to be burned too”.
Frenchman Rousseau’s “GENERAL WILL” forms the basis for totalitarianism.
Rousseau’s “general will” glorified “the people” (the group), while ignoring “the person” (the
individual) The general will refers to the desire or interest of a people as a whole.
Rousseau explained in The Social Contract (1763), freedom could only be achieved in the
‘ENFORCED’ EQUALITY, that each student, rich or poor, would give himself over and
pledge fealty. Citizens must be FORCED by the STATE to be FREE” – this was the condition
which by giving each citizen to his country, secures him against all personal dependence.
No man is an island. In rouseau’s casuistry, to be free of dependence in civil society
mandated forfeiting one’s independence – forfeiting its liberty”
The objective of rousseau’s general will was to SECURE SOCIAL JUSTICE by stripping the
petty, covetous interests of INDIVIDUAL human beings from the guidance of life.
The general will allowed no one liberty and reflected no one’s SELF-determination.
It was what was BEST FOR EVERYONE after all selfish considerations were sublimated to
the “PUBLIC GOOD”.
Rousseau’s GENERAL WILL had FOUR characteristics …
The GENERAL WILL is #1)INALIENABLE
#2)INFALLIBLE
#3)INDIVISIBLE and
#4)ABSOLUTE
The general will was always on the side most favorable to the “public interest”. Classical
liberals criticized this ambiguous “general will”. James Madison wrote in federalist #10 that
men were more likely to OPPRESS another than to “CO-OPERATE” for their common good.
Classic liberals sought to LIMIT power and government to PROTECT US FROM EACH
OTHER. Liberal FREEDOM was “NEGATIVE” , to stop or limit the power of others from
violating the rights of another. at what point would the ”infallible will” become “tyranny” of
the majority ? The ”infallible will” justifying DEMOCRATIC DESPOTISM.

Rousseau offered no mechanism for deciding on or determining the “general will”. who was
in a position to rule on what the “general will” is ??? the “general will” could be manipulated
by totalitarian leaders, who could force “the people” to act against their “wills”
Jonah Goldberg states Rousseau’s “general will” became an intellectual foundation for future
totalitarian states. Fascists share a sweeping vision of social justice and community and the
need for the STATE to REALIZE that vision.

COLLECTIVE MOBS
TOTALITARIAN TERROR &TYRANNY as “SOCIAL JUS
[MASKING the WILL to POWER]

Jonah Goldberg: “INDIVIDUAL existence lacked “meaning, purpose and authenticity”,
except in relation to the collective ‘general will.” “the general will was always righteous
because it was perfectly altruistice: the people acting for their own well-being.
Rousseau “sanctified” (made “holy”) the “sovereign WILL of the MASSES. individuals
could not be “free” except as part of the group. Robespierre stated, “the people is always worth
more than individuals” … “the people are sublime, but individuals are weak”
“a meeting between two beings who complete one another, who are made for each other,
borders already, in my opinion,on a miracle” – hitler

The French Revolution slogan was “liberty, fraternity and equality” – “Fraternity”and
“equality” in the revolutionary “collective”. The GUIILOTINE was a “humane” way to
execute those who got in the way of collective “progress”. Collective “MO RULE” was
“humane” violence and TERROR towards collective “progress”. Mob tactics implement
their idea of rousseau’s “general will'”.

Demagogues EXPLOIT popular PREJUCICES, FEARS and FALSE CLAIMS and
PROMISES in order to GAIN POWER. Leninism is malignant because it DIVIDES all of
humanity into good versus evil, like some bad spaghetti western. It gets actively harmful
because it is a political program aimed at ABSOLUTE POWER – not just an academic
philosophy.

“DEMONIC” by ANN COULTER

Ann Coulter: The demon is a mob, and the mob is demonic. Everything else changes, but
mobs are always the same. A mob is an IRRATIONAL, CHILDLIKE, OFTEN VIOLENT
organism that derives its energy from the group “collective”. Intoxicated by MESSIANIC
GOALS, the promise of INSTANT GRATIFICATION, and adrenaline-pumping
exhortations. Mobs create MAYHEM, CHAOS and DESTRUCTION, leaving a smoldering
heap of wreckage for their leaders to climb to power.
“CROWDS are TOO IMPULSIVE to be MORAL” – Gustav Le Bon
The very idea of a “community organizer” is to STIR UP a mob for some political purpose.
The twisting of truth, stirring of PASSIONS, DEMONIZING of OPPONENTS, and relying
on propagandistic images in lieu of ideas. MANIPULATING the MOB to gain POWER, to
appeal to the least informed, most weak-minded and perpetually alarmed members of the
public.
Historian Eric Durschmied: “As so frequently happens when a crowd goes wild, there is always one who shouts louder and thereby appoints himself as their leader”

“The OVERALL guiding principle to understand is the ‘organizer’ of the group … the person who will be responsible for creating the vision of the group is GOD-LIKE in Alinsky’s vision.

In her book “Demonic“, Ann Coulter traces the history of VIOLENT MOB RULE/
“The MOB is DEMONIC. It is the NIHILISTIC MOB of the French Revolution; …
it is the revolutionaries who seized control of RUSSIA at the beginning of the twentieth century
It is the MAOIST gangs looting villages and impaling babies in china. It is the KU KLUX
KLAN terrorizing republicans and blacks in the south. It is the 1992 LOS ANGELES RIOT
that left fifty dead and did $1 billion of damage after the first Rodney King verdict. It is the
bloody riots at the 1968 democratic national convention. It is the masked hoodlums smashing
up SEATTLE when bankers came to town (1999). It is the 500,000 ILLEGAL ALIENS
marching under a foreign flag in LOS ANGELES. It is throngs of Islamic Fanatics attending
the Ayatollah Ruhollah KHOMEINI’s FUNERAL, tearing his body out of its coffin.
It is left-wing protesters destroying property and attacking delegates at the 2004 and 2008
Republican National Conventions.

GUSTAVE Le BON CAPTURED the MOB PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE in HIS
1896 book, “The CROWD: A STUDY of the POPULAR MIND”
All the characteristics of MOB BEHAVIOR were set forth by Le Bon.
The first to identify the phenomenon of mass psychology, “The Crowd” paints a disturbing picture of the behavior of mobs. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini used Le Bon’s book to learn HOW to INCITE a MOB: simplistic, extreme black-and-white thinking, fear of novelty,
inability to follow logical arguments, acceptance of contradictory ideas. Manipulating them by
images, a religious worship of their leaders and a BLIND HATRED of their OPPONENTS.

Mobs love slogans because the “laws of logic have no action on crowds”. Mobs, le bon says,
“are NOT to be influenced by REASONING, and can only comprehend rough-and-ready
associations of ideas. Crowds CAN‘T GRASP LOGIC, only IMAGES.
“These IMAGE- LIKE IDEAS,” Le Bon says, “are NOT CONNECTED by any LOGICAL
bond of analogy or succession,” …
AFFIRMATION is the creation of a slogan, FREE of ALL REASONING and all PROOF.
CROWDS are TOO IMPULSIVE to be MORAL, according to Le Bon.
The NAZIS were “amoral” (had no morals), except when it came to their own “will to power”.
There were NO LIMITATIONS to FASCIST AMBITIONS. And their “WILL to POWER”.

“ONLY FORCE RULES. FORCE is the FIRST LAW” – Adolf Hitler
“The very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence” – Hitler
“i am freeing man from the restraints of intelligence and a degrading … false vision called conscience and morality” – Hitler
“JUSTICE is what the ARYAN MAN DEEMS JUST. UNJUST IS WHAT HE SO DEEMS.”
Alfred Rosenberg: this “will to power” appealed to a people humiliated and “victimized”
by the west.

“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach”
“by the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise” – hitler
“make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”
“The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force”
“great liars are also great magicians.” – adolf hitler
“the receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous” – adolf hitler
“in consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.” – adolf hitler
“i use emotion for the many and reserve reason for the few” – adolf hitler
“power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak.” – john adams

DEMAGOGUES, MOBS and SCAPEGOATS
Demagogues were a NEW kind of leader who emerged from the lower classes. The ancient
Greeks first invented the word ‘demagogue’ to describe a new class of mob leaders who quickly
evolved to fill a power vacuum left by the demise of a reigning class of elite statesmen.

The verb (to demagogue) described popular leaders who alternately flattered and incited
the MASSES . Demagogues relentlessly advocated action, usually violent – immediately and
without deliberation. Demogugues tell lies to stir up hysteria, exploiting crises to intensify
popular support for their calls to immediate action and increased authority. Their trick was to
obtain and expand their OWN PERSONAL POWER by CLEVER RHETORIC

demagogue: a leader who uses their charisma and public speaking to EXPLOIT POPULAR
PREJUDICES, FEARS and FALSE CLAIMS and PROMISES in order TO GAIN POWER.
Their trick was to obtain and EXPAND THEIR OWN PERSONAL POWER by clever
Rhetoric, DIRECTED AGAINST the BETTER OFF, coupled with promises of more
entitlements for the ‘poor’ paid for by a demonized ‘THEM’. The “LEADER” of “US”
against “THEM”

Fascism’s success almost always depends on the cooperation of the “losers” during a time of
economic and technical change. populist RESENTMENT against “fat cats” using “the
system” at cats too big to fail CLASS RESENTMENT by state leaders on behalf of the
“common” people”.
CLASS WARFARE – the “HAVES” exploiting the forgotten “HAVE NOTS”

Mark Levin: “Utopianism finds a receptive audience among the society’s disenchanted,
disaffected, dissatisfied and maladjusted who are unwilling or unable to assume responsibility
for their own real or perceived conditions, but instead blame their surroundings, ‘the system,’
and others. They are lured by the false hopes and promises of utopian transformation and
the criticisms of the existing society, to which their connection is tentative or nonexistent “

Improving the malcontent’s lot becomes linked to the utopian cause. Moreover, disparaging
and diminishing the successful and accomplished becomes an essential tactic. No one should
be better than anyone else, regardless of the merits or values of his contributions. By
exploiting human frailties, frustrations, jealousies, and inequities, a sense of meaning and self-
worth is created in the malcontent’s otherwise unhappy and directionless life“. “simply put,
equality in misery – that is, equality of result or conformity – is advanced as a just, fair, and
virtuous undertaking. liberty … is inherently immoral, except where it avails equality.
For these reasons and more, some become fanatics for the cause. They take to the streets and,
ironically, demand their own demise as they protest against their own self-determination
and for ever more autocracy and authoritarianism.
“WHEN THEY VOTE, THEY VOTE to ENCHAIN NOT ONLY THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS BUT, UNWITTINGLY, THEMSELVES “ – George Orwell

FASCIST COLLECTIVE “REBIRTH” – The MASSES and MESSIAHS

individual existence lacked meaning, purpose and “authenticity”, except in relation to the
collective “general will”. Fascist worship of the collective “masses”: “an individual has no
meaning apart from the society in which his individuality has been formed.” – Herbert Croly
The DEMAGOGUE
H. L. MENCKEN characterized a demagogue, “preach[ing] doctrines he knows to be untrue
to men he knows to be idiots. The Greek historian Polybius thought that democracies are
inevitably undone by demagogues. Every democracy eventually decays into “a government of
violence and the strong hand,” leading to “tumultuous assemblies, massacres, banishments.
Ancient Greece ultimately destroyed itself incivil war.

The very idea of a “community organizer” is to stir up a mob for some political purpose.
Susan sarandon: “he [Obama] is a community organizer like jesus was … and now, we’re a
community and he can organize us. Historian eric durschmied: “as so frequently happens when
a crowd goes wild, there is always one who shouts louder and thereby appoints himself as
their leader”. The twisting of truth, stirring of passions, demonizing of opponents, and
relying on propagandistic images in lieu of ideas. Manipulating the mob to gain power, to
appeal to the least informed, most weak-minded and perpetually alarmed members of the
public.

Saul alinsky was born in 1909 of russian jewish parents in New York City. Why was the
Alinsky family living in america in 1909 rather than minsk or pinsk or omsk or chomsk? they
fled the russian pogroms of 1890-1910, like thousands of other jews russian pogrom victims
The Alinsky family fled to the united states because life was intolerable in the old country. they
found safety in America and then little saul grew up and wrote rules for radicals, and dedicated
his life to … the very same art of whipping up mobs that his parents fled from.
Tthe kulaks were russian peasants who owned a couple of cows instead of just a scrawny goat
like most others, and therefore provided juicy hate objects for the mob. Rules for Radicals might
have been written by a medieval mob agitator; only a few words need to be changed.
‘pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it‘. Substitute ‘heretic’ or ‘witch’ for
‘target’ and you have all the religious persecutions in human history.

OBAMAGOGUE: DIVIDE “SCAPEGOAT” US against THEM

“OBAMA grew up in his early years in indonesia, where hundreds of thousands of ethnic
Chinese had recently been MASSACRED by – you guessed it – raging ethnic mobs looking
for SCAPEGOATS. Oddly enough those Indonesian massacres are not mentioned in
Obama’s two Autobiographies. Substitute ‘whites’, and you have all of jeremiahwright’s sermons at trinity
united, chicago. it’s all the same thing. human nature doesn’t change.

In the Alinsky model, “ORGANIZING” is a EUPHEMISM for “REVOLUTION”, where the
ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE is the systematic acquisition of POWER by an “oppressed” segment
of the population. According to saul alinsky, “ego must be so all-pervading that the
personality of the organizer is CONTAGIOUS that it converts the people from DESPAIR TO
DEFIANCE, creating a “MASS EGO”.
The goal is to foment enough public discontent, moral confusion, and outright chaos to spark
the social upheaval that Marx and Engels predicted. This is what community organizers do –
rub people’s emotions raw to hype their resentments [the community organizer] must … fan
the latent hostility to the point of overt expression …[his function is] to agitate to the point of
conflict [and] singl[e] out [precisely who is to blame for the] particular evil [that is the source of
the people’s angst]….

PICK the TARGET, FREEZE IT, PERSONALIZE IT and POLARIZE IT”.
To the QUESTIONER, NOTHING is SACRED. HE DETESTS DOGMA, DEFIES ANY
FINITE DEFINITION of MORALITY, REBELS AGAINST any repression of a free, open
search of ideas no matter where they may lead. he is challenging, insulting, agitating,
discrediting. He stirs unrest.” – Saul Alinsky
“LIFE is a CORRUPTING PROCESS from the TIME a CHILD LEARNS to PLAY HIS MOTHER OFF AGAINST HIS FATHERin the POLITICS of WHEN to GO to BED; HE WHO FEARS CORRUPTION FEARS LIFE” – Saul D. Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
“TO SAY that CORRUPT MEANS CORRUPT the ENDS is to BELIEVE in the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION of ENDS and PRINCIPLES. The REAL ARENA is CORRUPT and BLOODY.” – Saul D. Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

There were no distinctions between good and evil when it came to transferring power from
the haves to the have nots. In Alinsky’s view, action was more often the catalyst for
revolutionary fervor than vice versa. The idea tha the masses must be roused from their
doldrums is central to fascism. The organizer needed to get people to act first and rationalize
their actions later. People raised from passive acceptance of the “machine” of bourgeois
democracy.
Alinsky readily admitted that he did not trust the people themselves “it is the schizophrenia
of a FREE society that we outwardly espouse faith in the people, but inwardly have strong
doubts whether the people can be trusted. Alinsky warned against an “attempt to answer all
objections on the basis of logic and merit – “with few exceptions this is a futile procedure.”
i.e. appeal to “logic” is useless and counter-productive. The organizer needed to get people to
act first and rationalize their actions later get them to move in the right direction first,”
They’ll explain to themselves later why they moved in that DIRECTION.”
Alinsky was the founder of a Midas muffler-sponsored, “institute,” to teach radical
community Organization.

Thomas Sowell offers this concise explanation of what community organizers do:
“For ‘community organizers’ … racial resentments are a stock in trade. … What does a
community organizer do? What he does not do is organize a community. What he organizes
are the resentments and paranoia within a community, directing those feelings against other
communities, from whom either benefits or revenge are to be gotten, using whatever rhetoric
or tactics will accomplish that purpose.

Part of his mandate was to fight those who have earned any measure of “have”. Alinsky
taught he have nots” should take from “the haves”. The very idea of a “community
organizer” is to stir up a mob for some political purpose. Alinsky stressed the need for
organizers to convince their followers that the chasm between the enemy was vast and
unbridgeable. “Before men can act, …an issue must be polarized. Men will act when they are
convinced their cause is 100% on the side of the angels, and that the opposition are 100% on
the side of the devil.

An Alinsky rule was preparation of an alternative attack. Alinsky was not looking to gain
agreement, he was demanding that the “enemy” be defeated. Because members of the in-group
are essentially good, the “enemy” is therefore evil. Demonization is a form of scare tactics
and de-humanization. It is not enough for the demagogue to be in solidarity with the people
he must also cultivate unity against a clearly identifiable enemy using incendiary, but
otherwise unimportant, example to whip up anger against the so-called establishment classes.

OBAMA, ALINSKY and SCAPEGOATS
by James Lewis americanthinker.com April 24, 2009

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it” – Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals.

James Lewis: That’s what Barack Obama taught his acorn followers in all his community
agitator classes in Chicago. It is an exact prescription for whipping up mobs – by race, class,
gender, ethnicity, religion. In psychiatry, scapegoating is called “displacement of rage,” and it
is often said to be a low-level defense, one that comes easily to people who are already
emotionally troubled or impaired.
With mature adults scapegoating doesn’t work very well – not unless you can make them into
insecure wrecks by destroying their incomes, for example. that’s what happened to the german
middle class in the weimar republic.

Scapegoating is very simple and very malevolent. it is the defining feature of human
Destructiveness – “my administration is the only thing between you [ceo’s] and the pitchforks
– barack obama
All the truly irrational actions in human history involve DISPLACED RAGE.
Pathological societies in the world are always torn by a search for new scapegoats.
Scapegoating is a really effective manipulation for mobs that have long ago decided that their
REAL ENEMY is ANYBODY. Because that overwhelming feeling of rising rage matters
much more than whoever is the victim of the moment. That overwhelming tension is
intolerable and SEEKS an OUTLET.

Alinsky did not write his little book of Rules against the tsar of Russia, nor against mob
demagogues in general. Alinsky wrote it in a RAGE AGAINST FREE MARKET WEALTH,
against CAPITALIST INDIVIDUALISM, against the PROSPEROUS MIDDLE CLASS and
its most successful home, the United States of America.

Alinsky became the hero for other agitators – people who used to call themselves ‘communist
agitators’. those were not shameful words when little saul was growing up, they were proud
words. Hillary rodham complained about her authoritarian father when she was a child, and
instantly on getting to Wellesley she fell for Saul Alinsky and became an admiring disciple of
the master of scapegoating.

Starting with the huge expansion of the U.S. college campuses in the 1960s, saul alinsky’s little
book went viral. Middle-class kids with no personal experience of poverty or suffering –
in the sense that blacks knew it in the south and the jews and many others in europe and asia –
they all went around with alinsky’s rules for radicals in their backpacks. Radicalism
became romantic. Alienated and ignorant kids yearned to become che guevara and kill the
capitalists. That’s how rich kids like bill ayers and bernardine dohrn learned their theology.
it’s how they became heroes in their own eyes. such saintly people, giving their all for the poor
and helpless.

Hillary Rodham complained about her authoritarian father when she was a child, and instantly
on getting to wellesley she fell for saul alinsky and his rules, and became an admiring disciple
of the master of scapegoating. Hillary’s first major political act was to join the staff of the
Senate Watergate committee, where she wrote a legal brief for the committee on why
President Richard Nixon should not, repeat not, be allowed legal counsel in his impending
impeachment and trial.” – “a’pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.’
see how it works? So the persecuted become the persecutor. Hillary the victimized child –
at least in her own mind – BECAME the REALLY VISCERAL HATER of the clinton white
house. Those children of wealth worshipped men of violence, and sanitized them – che, mao,
fidel, carlos the jackal, ayers, mumiah, the list goes on.
There were no distinctions between good and evil when it came to

Mussolini – “reason is a tool, but it can never be the motive force of a crowd”
The indictment of reason, the populist appeals to defeating “the system”, the table thumping
for a new volk-centric community that would replace capitalism with a more organic and
totalitarian approach
The fascist “will to power” towards “new-ness” and “change” was an appeal to “old” (primitive)violence
“the very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence” – Hitler
[violence] … all in the name of “the movement” – the Nazis beat up storekeepers,
extorted businessmen and vandalized property

The NAZIS were “AMORAL” (had no morals), EXCEPT WHEN IT CAME to THEIR OWN
will to power” there were no limitations to fascist ambitions
the dream of a unified, classless germany was deeply heartfelt by many nazi joiners anything endangering the utopian progress of the collective must be “acted” against in “appropiate” fashion
“the personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the jew” – hitler
“the very first essential for success is a perpetually constant and regular employment of violence”
heretics against the fascist, collective crusade
jonah goldberg:
“just as the line between good totalitarianism and bad is easily crossed, … dreams can quickly become nightmares”
“i am freeing man from the restraints of intelligence and a degrading … false vision called conscience and morality” – hitler
jonah goldberg: “whatever admirable idealism they might have had quickly and unavoidably turned into fascist thuggery”
the nazis first appeared as “liberators” in the countries they “conquered” until their “nature” revealed itself
“this is the job for today’s radical — to fan … hopelessness into a flame to fight” towards “change”
fascist “revolutionary” movements often blurred the difference between crime and political rebellion
“the future of our struggle is the future of crime in the streets” – tom hayden
the only way to “revolutionize youth” was to have “a series … of life and death conflicts”the hope and future of america lies with its radicals
“i always held my flower in a clenched fist” – abbie hoffman
jonah goldberg: “bourgeois self-loathing lay at the very heart of the new left’s hatred of liberalism, its love affair with violence and its willingness to take a sledgehammer to western civilization”
“convinced that all whites were born tainted with the original sin of ‘skin privilege’, the fighting brigade of the new left internalized racialist thinking as hatred of their own whiteness”
“we will burn and loot and destroy. we are the incubation of your mother’s worst nightmare’”
jonah goldberg:
“the weathermen became the storm troopers of the new left, horrifying even those who agreed with their cause”
in 1970, bill ayers explained what the weather underground was all about: “kill all the rich people.” …
“break up their cars and apartments. bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at”
“tom ayers was ‘a big, monster-sized executive, and a very, very genuinely nice man with a social conscience,’ says chicago newspaper columnist mike royko.”
“for years, [son] bill had been a source of great anguish. john ayers says of his father, “he was a socially conscious business guy, very involved in integration, very pro-integration and change in the cities. it was rough on them. it was a difficult time.”
mussolini talked about the power and importance of violence
mussolini liked the aesthetics of violence, the sound of brutality,
the poetry of revolutionary bloodshed”
mussolini –
“revolutions are insane, violent, idiotic, bestial they set fire to the louvre and throw naked bodies of princesses on the street”
mussolini:“they kill, plunder and destroy. they are a man-made biblical flood precisely therein consists their great beauty” mussolini
“romantic” revolution “idealized” violence and terror for “the cause”
according to alinsky, “ego must be so all-pervading that the personality
of the organizer is contagious, that it converts the people from despair to defiance, creating a[collective“ mass ego”
1960s liberal catch phrases: “community action, community outreach” communities of mutual respect”
fascists idealized action as “redemptive” (saving) and “transformative” “action” towards reforming a “corrupt” society (spiritual “rebirth” of the “collective”)
action = revolution action = violence
use of action (violence and “terror”) towards “justice”
this “idealism” and “action” often led to violence and “terror” against those who resisted progress
when “moderates” who questioned the use of violence at columbia in 1968 tried to dissuade a radical, hoffman responded …
“you … liberals don’t understand what the scene’s about. the more blood the better”
“if crime is a product of poverty and discrimination … why was there so much less of it when poverty and discrimination were much worse than today?“ – thomas sowell
“when people ask emotionally, “how can we stop these things?” [shooting sprees] the most straightforward answer is to ask: how was it in fact stopped? it was stopped, like most shooting sprees, by the arrival on the scene of other people with guns” – Thomas sowell
“the vision of the anointed is one in which such ills as poverty, irresponsible sex and crime derive primarily from ‘society’, rather than from individual choices and behavior” –
“to believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the whole special role of the anointed, whose vision casts them in the role of rescuers of people treated unfairly by ‘society’” – Thomas Sowell
“in this era of non-judgmental mush, too many americans have become incapable of facing the brutal reality of unprovoked hatred, based on envy, resentment and ultimately on a vicious urge to lash out against others for the pain of one’s own insignificance. that has been a common thread in things as disparate as ghetto riots, two world wars, and now islamic terrorism

– If your are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism – thomas sowell

VERSUS MOB RULE by Thomas Sowell May 11, 2011

Thomas Sowell: “In various cities across the country, mobs of mostly young, mostly
incoherent, often noisy and sometimes violent demonstrators are making themselves a major
nuisance. Meanwhile, many in the media are practically gushing over these “protesters,” and
giving them the free publicity they crave for themselves and their cause – whatever that is,
beyond venting their emotions on television” “members of the mobs apparently believe that
other people, who are working while they are out trashing the streets, should be forced to
subsidize their college education – and apparently the president of the united states thinks so
too.

But if these loud mouths’ inability to put together a coherent line of thought is any
indication of their education, the taxpayers should demand their money back for having that
money wasted on them for years in the public schools. Sloppy words and sloppy thinking often
go together, both in the mobs and in the media that are covering them” “it is common, for
example, to hear in the media how some “protesters” were arrested. but anyone who reads this
column regularly knows that I protest against all sorts of things – and don’t get arrested”
The difference is that I don’t block traffic, join mobs sleeping overnight in parks or urinate in
the street. If the media cannot distinguish between protesting and disturbing the peace, then their
education may also have wasted a lot of taxpayers’ money. People who cannot distinguish
between democracy and mob rule may fall for the idea that the hooligans in the street
represent the 99% who are protesting about the ‘greed’ of the one percent.

But these hooligans are less than one percent and they are grossly violating the rights of
vastly larger numbers of people who have to put up with their trashing of the streets by day and
their noise that keeps working people awake at night. As for the ‘top one percent’ in income that
attract so much attention, angst and denunciation, THERE is ALWAYS GOING to be a
TOP 1 %, UNLESS EVERYBODY has the SAME INCOME. That top one percent has
no more monopoly on sainthood or villainy than people in any other bracket. Moreover, that
top one percent does not consist of the “millionaires and billionaires” that barack obama talks
about. you don’t even have to make half a million dollars to be in the top one percent”
Moreover, this is not an enduring class of people, nor are people in other income brackets.
Most of the people in the top one percent at any given time are there for only one year. Anyone
who sells an average home in san francisco can get into the top one percent in income – for
that year. other one-time spikes in income account for most of the people in that top one
percen “but such plain facts carry little weight amid the heady rhetoric and mindless emotions
of the mob and the media.

OBAMA as LENIN-OID
by James Lewis August 20, 2009 TheAmericanThinker.com

LENINISM is malignant because it DIVIDES all of humanity into good versus evil, like
some bad spaghetti western. It gets actively harmful because it is a political program aimed at
ABSOLUTE POWER – not just an academic philosophy.
The parallels between barack hussein obama and vladimir ilyich leninare intriguing.
To be sure, there are differences: barack obama is not the absolute ruler of a tyrannical state.
Lenin was. America in 2009 is not Russia in 1917. So we won’t equate them and yet, without
losing sight of those facts, the similarities are too strong for mere coincidence. So I’m going to
make up the word “lenin-oid,” as a reminder that Obama isn’t Lenin – but he must have
hired the same hollywood scriptwriters. The Obama-as-Jesus theme has been sounded by
Obama himself, followed by his millions of acolytes SCAPEGOATING the RICH and ALL
“ENEMIES” of the regime. The demagogic version, the one that literally proclaims,
“KILL the RICH!” came from LENIN.

“My administration is the only thing between you [ceo’s] and the pitchforks” – barack obama
The trick in all revolutionary movements is to trigger revolution from above, and to attribute
it to “the oppressed masses”. Understand where the vision for change comes from,
first and foremost”, Obama told reporter “it comes from me. that’s my job, is to provide a
vision
in terms of where we are going, and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing

Our President was brought up by a MOTHER who was a YOUNG COLLEGE RADICAL
from Mercer Island, WA, and KANSAS. His ABSENTEE FATHER in Kenya was a PROUD
POST-COLONIAL SOCIALIST – until, it seems, he ran into trouble with Jomo Kenyatta
and had two car accidents in a row; the second one of which killed him”
But Barack Obama didn’t draw the rather OBVIOUS LESSON that his father may have been
assassinated by a TYPICAL post-colonial TYRANT. Instead, he ADOPTED the SIDE of the
PERSECUTOR in the SAME WAY SAUL ALINSKY DID.
Obama grew up in his early years in Indonesia, where hundreds of thousands of ethnic
Chinese had recently been massacred by – you guessed it – RAGING ETHNIC MOBS
LOOKING FOR SCAPEGOATS. Oddly enough those Indonesian massacres are not
mentioned in Obama’s two Autobiographies.
Obama on Occupy Wall Street protests: “The most important thing we can do right now is
those of us in leadership letting people know that we understand their struggles and we are on
their side … we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you’re
supposed to do, is rewarded”.
‘Because I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas
in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know. If I help [Obama], he’s gonna help me” – the “exploited” victims of modern, liberal society
The vision in which obama has been steeped CALLS OUT, NOT FOR JUSTICE,
BUT FOR PAYBACK. The ‘NANNY-STATE’ PLAYS FAVORITES with its
SELF-SERVING CONSTITUENTS.
EACH SIDE ‘games the system’ for their own political and economic benefits.
“Most people have OPINIONS that are conveniently consistent with their own personal
Economic interests [GREED] which therefore determine their voting decisions).
POLITICIZING the POOR, the OPPRESSED and the CRIMINAL UNDERCLASS
“The overall guiding principle to understand is the “ORGANIZER” of the group … the person
going into the group…the person who will be responsible for CREATING the VISION of the
GROUP is “GOD-LIKE” in Alinsky’s vision.
obama called his community organizer years “the best education I ever had.”

President Obama likes to talk about civility in politics, but then he has a talent for attributing
to his political opponents only “selfish”, corrupt and political motives. He accuses his
opponents of NOT SIMPLY being WRONG but of being HIS ‘ENEMIES’”. The Reverend
Jeremiah Wright preaches mob incitement. Take the RAGE that PEOPLE FEEL and direct
it to the most convenient human VICTIM.
The vision in which Obama has been steeped is one in which white western nations have
OPPRESSED and EXPLOITED non-white, non-western nations, becoming rich and arrogant
at other people’s expense. Jeremiah wright started life as a black muslim, as he tells it, and then
studied black liberation theology. pope benedict calls it a cover name for marxism. in this
case, racial Marxism. Admittedly, it is easy to be intimidated by the rhetoric of ‘fairness’.
Nobody wants to sound anti-poor. In the past it has been all the black people who have done all
the dying … now the time has come when the pigs are going to die”, shouted a leader of the
black radicals.
Obama D.O.J. ignores civil rights cases with white victims: on election day, november 4,
2008, new black panther party members at a philadelphia polling station intimidated white
VOTERS WITH RACIAL SLURS and THREATS of VIOLENCE

RANDOM INNOCENTS VICTIMS of INTERRACIAL VIOLENCE
in DEADLY ‘KNOCKOUT’ GAME RACE DEMOGOGUERY

On January 7, 2009, the Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Bush filed criminal
charges against those responsible. But in May, 2009, the Obama Justice Department filed a
notice of voluntary dismissal. In June, 2010, J. Christian Adams, who had served in the
voting section of the U.S. Department of Justice for 5 years, resigned over the “corrupt nature
of the dismissal of the case”.

Wrote Adams in 2010: “Citizens would be shocked to learn about the open and pervasive
hostility within the justice department to bringing civil rights cases against non-white
defendants on behalf of white victims. EQUAL ENFORCEMENT of justice is NOT a
PRIORITY of this Administration. Open contempt is voiced for these types of cases.

Calling Sharpton “a voice for the voiceless and … dispossessed,” Obama stated: “what national
action network has done is so important to change America, and it must be changed from the
bottom up. One very disturbing recent example of … blind and senseless rage against innocent
people is the phenomenon of flash mobs of black youths attacking unsuspecting white
bystanders – known as the “KNOCKOUT GAME”. I don’t think I need to point out what sort
of reaction we would be witnessing from the White house and the liberal media if the mobs
were young white males attacking innocent black victims. The national guard would probably
have been deployed to every major city by now. This sort of “MOBOCRACY” was something
our ounders warned us about – the TYRANNY of the MOB sans the rule of law.

MOBS – RACIAL DEMAGOGEURY
– the black power movement
– al sharpton’s long bill of goods, from tawana brawley to primetime by stuart stevens
– colin flaherty, american witness by j.r. dunn
– black-on-white violence: the forgotten victims by jack kerwick
– no uncle toms on the left by kevin jackson
– elderly couple in fear over spike lee tweet
– obama’s demagoguery the president has a bad habit of wading uninformed into local controversies by victor davis hanson
– race, politics and lies by thomas sowell
– the left’s rejection of good faith by jonathan keiler
– even steven – fundamental problems with equality by deana chadwell
– the will to reason: can we expect rational man from tribal society? by bruce thornton
– it’s not race that divides us, but culture by jeffrey t. brown

The BLACK POWER MOVEMENT from “Liberal Fascism” by jonah goldberg

Jonah Goldberg: Black athletes raised their FISTS in protest at the 1968 Olympics. The image
was entirely derivative of FASCIST aesthetics”. The FIST is the synthesis of our theory” – an
italian fascist in 1920. By the end of the decade, the civil rights movement had for all intents
and purposes become a black power movement. BLACK POWER, with its clenched fists,
afro-pagan mythology, celebration of VIOLENCE, emphasis on racial PRIDE and disdain for
liberalism was arguably america’s most authentic indigenous fascism. In it’s strictly political
dimension, there is no denying that the movement’s activist core was little more than a
FASCIST YOUTH CULT.
Indeed the movement of the 1960s may be considered the third great fascist movement of the
20th century. Stokely Carmichael – at one time the ‘prime minister’ of the black panther party
Himself DEFINED BLACK POWER (a term he originated) as a movement that will
SMASH EVERYTHING WESTERN CIVILIZATION HAS CREATED.
CARMICHAEL SHARED HITLER’s DREAM of building a folkish racial state upon the
ashes of the old order. When one reads the racial indoctrination taught to the children of
Nazi Germany, it’s difficult to see the difference between Carmichael’s BLACK pride and
Hitler’s GERMAN pride.

What is the first commandment of every national socialist – love germany above all else and your ethnic pride as your self” stated a nazi catechism. The connections between black nationalism and nazism, fascism and other supposedly right-wing racist groups are not merely rhetorical – or recent.

VIOLENCE has been a part of nearly ALL revolutionary movements. Fascists inherently
REJECT the PAST in their quest to build a UTOPIAN FUTURE, PERSECUTE
“HERETICS” against “progress”. In the past it has been all the black people who have
done all the dying … now the time has come when the pigs are going to die”, shouted a leader
of the black radicals.

The STUDENTS wanted to RUN the universities,which to traditional academics was akin to
INMATES RUNNING the ASYLUMS. Professors who deviated from the new orthodoxy
faced all the familiar tactics of the campus left of the 1960s. Their classrooms were barricaded
or occupied, threats were put in their mail, denunciations were posted on campus bulletin
boards and published in student newspapers, lecturers were heckled.
When administrators tried to block or punish these antics, the students mounted massive
protests, and students naturally won, often forcing the resignation of the administrator
readers of a certain age probably know next to nothing about the Cornell Uprising, and an
even larger number probably have a hard time reconciling this spectacle with the image of the
1960s conjured by the popular culture.
Liberal baby boomers have smeared the lens of memory with vaseline, depicting the
would-be revolutionaries as champions of peace and love – free love at that!
Self-styled revolutionaries had grown increasingly brazen in their campaign to force
concessions from the university. Students and professors who were labeled RACE TRAITORS
received DEATH THREATS. ENEMIES of the racial nation were SAVAGELY BEATEN by
ROAMING THUGS. Guns were brought onto the campus, and students dressed up in military
uniforms. professors were HELD HOSTAGE, BADGERED, INTIMIDATED and
THREATENED whenever their teaching CONTRADICTED RACIAL ORTHODOXY.

The President was MANHANDLED by a FASCIST GOON in front of an audience made up of
the campus community. Events came to a climax when students took over the student union
and local radio station. Armed with rifles and shotguns, they demanded an ethnically pure
educational institution staffed and run by members of their own race.
When it was suggested that those who opposed their agenda might be killed, most of the
‘moderates’ quickly reversed course and supported the militants. eventually the fascist thugs
got everything they wanted. the authorities gave in to their demands”
The few who remained opposed QUIETLY LEFT the university.

Where did this happen? the university of Berlin in 1932? Milan in 1922? good guesses.
This happened at CORNELL in the spring of 1969. Paramilitary black nationalists
under the banner of the afro-american society seized control of the university after waging and
increasingly aggressive campaign of INTIMIDATION and VIOLENCE.
The PUBLIC EXCUSE of the armed seizure of the cornell student union was a cross burning
outside a black dorm. this was later revealed to be a HOAX orchestrated by
The black radicals themselves in order to provide a PRETEXT FOR THEIR VIOLENCE.
This Reichstage fire tactic worked perfectly, as the gun-toting fascist squadristi stormed
straight hall in the predawn hours, rousting bleary-eyed parents who were staying there for
parents weekend.
These bewildered souls who had the misfortune to bankroll the educations of the very gun-toting
scholarship students now calling them ‘pigs’ were forced to jump from a three foot high cargo
deck into the freezing Ithaca rain.
THIS is NAZISM in ITS WORST FORM”, declared a mother with breathless, if
understandable, exaggeration in it’s strictly political dimension, there is no denying that the
movement’s activist core was little more than a FASCIST YOUTH CULT. indeed the
movement of the 1960s may be considered the THIRD GREAT FASCIST MOVEMENT of
the 20th century. they were an avant-garde movement that sought to REDEFINE not only
POLITICS but HUMAN NATURE ITSELF.
black liberation, ‘revolutionary’ violence was always justified so long as you insisted that the
bloodied corpse had somehow been an accomplice to OPPRESSION.
WHITES BECAME the NEW JEWS.

At Cornell most of the black students were admitted on what we’d today call affirmative action,
with lower than average sat scores. Many of the gun-toting revolutionaries were recruited to
the school precisely because they fit [the] STEREOTYPE of the NOBLE ‘GHETTO YOUTH
the AUTHENTIC negro … given preference over other blacks with higher scores and better
qualifications – because more qualified blacks were too ‘white’
By the end of the decade, the civil rights movement had for all intents and purposes become a
black power movement. black power, with its clenched fists, afro-pagan mythology,
celebration of violence, emphasis on racial pride and disdain for liberalism was arguably
america’s most authentic indigenous fascism.

MARCUS GARVEY, the founder of the black nationalism movement, admitted in 1922 that
his ideology was perfectly simpatico with mussolini’s – ‘we were the first fascists he declared’”
the founder of the black nationalist movement, marcus garvey, mandated as far back as the
1920’s that black groups should BORROW their ideas and methods from white supremacists
groups, such as the KKK and NAZIS.
GARVEY PROPHESIED that ONE DAY the BLACK RACE WOULD PRODUCE THEIR
OWN “BLACK HITLER”.

“No greater injury can be done to any youth than to let him feel that BECAUSE HE BELONGS to this or that RACE he will be advanced in life regardless of HIS OWN merits or efforts.”
– Booker T. Washington

The “NEW’ RACIST SUPREMACY and SEPARATISM
Black Nationalists have a long tradition of belief that the black race is god and certain
individuals have special roles that are exalted above others in their divinity. black liberation
theology teaches that the BLACK RACE is DIVINE, the CHOSEN PEOPLE of GOD.
Black liberation theology as inspired by the black cult doctrine of the nation of islam and has
the same basic beliefs a sect that believed that the black race is god and will produce a black
messiah. a black messiah will be a real man of flesh and blood, will arise to liberate the world
from white domination via a real, revolution
A millennial UTOPIA, the Biblical kingdom on earth, is to be created by the DESTRUCTION
of WHITE SOCIETY. The basic belief is that WHITE MAN is the CAUSE of SUFFERING
in the world. The white race is equated to the ANTI-CHRIST and the black race is called the
manifestation of GOD ON EARTH. The WHITE man can only be REDEEMED by
SUBMISSION to the black race.
Black liberation theology is formulated as a WOULD-BE STATE RELIGION, destined
to RULE OVER the EARTH after the FINAL CONFLICT with “WHITE SOCIETY”.
After DESTRUCTION of white society, a MILLENNIAL KINGDOM will be established on
earth which will be a real, physical government, A BLACK THEOCRACY.
The “kingdom” is envisioned to be a real political and physical
ruling government and not just a spiritual event black liberation theology informed
jeremiah wright’s pseudo-christian sect in Chicago.

BLACK LIBERATION theology believes the BLACK MESSIAH will arise from the black
race with a DIVINE MISSION to DESTROY AMERICA, as we know it and create a
BLACK-RULED UTOPIA, a MILLENNIAL KINGDOM,which, in concept is similar to the
1000-year reich.

Obama caused controversy at a memorial for the victims of 9/11 in 2011 when he read
PSALMS 46:“be still and know that i am god.” and “i will be exalted among the nations”
obama often treats such public events as an opportunity for the ritualized expression of his
black-liberation religious beliefs. the black race is god and will produce a black messiah – it
can be assumed that obama is talking about his own divinity when he read psalm 46 (“be still
and know that i am god” … “i will be exalted among the nations”) at the memorial service

it is a signal to others, who believe as he does and also serves as a provocation to those who may find this type of belief system to be heretical and repugnant. there have been many allusions by obama’s followers that he is the messiah or god, as obama seems to be hinting with his bizarre reading of psalm 46 at the site of the sacrificial murder of 3,000 americans by islamic terrorists. self-exaltation and self-worship of man and exaltation of man’s works is a central characteristic of the gnostic occult
if you recall the Biblical story, lucifer wanted to be worshiped the same as God.

jonah goldberg: In the 1960s elijah muhammed, head of the nation of islam, formed a cordial
relationship with george lincoln rockwell, the head of the american nazi party
rockwell was even invited to speak at the nation of islam national convention in 1962, at which
he praised elijah muhammed as the black adolf hitler. on january 28, 1961, muhammed sent
malcolm x to atlanta to negotiate an agreement with the ku klux klan whereby the klan would
support a separate black state
The black power movement became addicted to violence, setting the tone for the white left.
h. rap brown had exhorted his followers to ‘DO WHAT JOHN BROWN DID, pick up a gun
and go out and shoot our enemy. calling sharpton a voice for the voiceless and …
dispossessed,” obama stated: “what national action network has done is so important to
change america, and it must be changed from the bottom up.

We are living in a time of REVERSE RACISM, having flipped dixiecrat racism to the
other side. The tragedy is that we have not transcended race, not and as long as RACIAL
DEMAGOGUES can SQUEEZE THIS NEW HATRED FOR MONEY and POWER.

The BLACK NATIONALIST doctrine of obama’s trinity church in chicago teaches that the
BLACK MAN is the manifestation of GOD ON EARTH and one can self-exalt himself to god status. Pergamos was a regional center of the roman state and a center of occult/pagan worship and persecution of the early Christians. The roman state “imperial cult” was a religion, in which the roman emperor was worshiped at pergamos as a god.

fascism #7: The “GREAT” REVOLUTIONARY LEADER

Alinsky was dead by the time obama moved to chicago, but he was trained as a community
organizer by alinsky’s top students. Self-worship and exaltation of man as god is therefore
fundamental to the concept of luciferianism. It is a religion for megalomaniacs and their
followers. Politicians are often narcissistic and are particularly susceptible to the idea of
self-worship. Many will ridicule this idea, especially fans of the occult, but the psychology of
humans has not changed and we still have a powerful instinct to self-exalt ourselves
it is not uncommon for dictators – or would be dictators – to insinuate that they are a
prophet of god or god. The famous psychologist, c.g. jung, a student of freud’s, wrote that even
if people had no formal religion, human psychology would follow the same patterns
people can subconsciously conform to this cult psychology, but with obama and his cohorts, it appears to be a conscious strategy for manipulation of the masses.

PROMISE of a UTOPIAN WORLD TRANSFORMATION, EXALTATION of the GROUP
of FOLLOWERS and demonization of their “enemy” can be used to mesmerize a PUBLIC
FOLLOWING and produce FANATIC LOYALTY that does not respond to normal logical
arguments. A certain percentage of the population are true believers in the promise of world
transformation by the great leader and nothing will change their minds.

Pagan tribal chiefs were often worshiped as gods and exercised the power of life and death
over their TRIBAL MEMBERS. The Nazis were the first political group to intentionally use
such techniques on a large scale in an election (1932). The Aryan RACE was considered a
race of gods and hitler was self-exalted as the aryan messiah.

MOBS: TOTALITARIAN TERROR AS “SOCIAL JUSTICE”
RACE DYSTOPIA & DEMOGOGUERY

“I shall ALLOW NO MAN to BELITTLE MY SOUL by MAKING ME HATE HIM.”
– Booker T. Washington
“The INDIVIDUAL who can do something that the world wants done will, in the end,
make his way REGARDLESS of HIS RACE.” – Booker T. Washington
“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the
wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are
ABLE to MAKE a LIVING OUT of THEIR TROUBLES, they have grown into the settled
habit of advertising their wrongs – partly because they want sympathy and partly
BECAUSE IT PAYS. Some of these people DO NOT WANT the NEGRO to LOSE HIS
GRIEVANCES, because they do not want to LOSE THEIR JOBS.”
– Booker T. Washington

AL SHARPTON’s LONG BILL of GOODS, from Tawana Brawley to Primetime
as a ‘times’ documentary revives one of the many ugly incidents from the reverend’s past, it’s time nbc accounted for its decision to rehabilitate and promote him
by Stuart Stevens June 3, 2013 The Daily Beast

stuart stevens: “The 1988 Tawana Brawley case that captivated new york in the late 1980s is
a shocking reminder of the toxic mix racial exploitation and personal ambition can produce.
brawley was 15 years old in 1987, when she was found in with “bitch,” “kkk,” and “nigger”
written on her stomach, her jeans burnt in the crotch, feces in her hair, and her tennis shoes
sliced open. Brawley said that she had been abducted and raped by a group of white men.

Brawley told them said that a cop had been one of her attackers, and sharpton named that
officer as harry crist jr., who had committed suicide shortly after brawley was found. sharpton
also named a local prosecutor, Steven Pagones, as one of the attackers he offered no proof”
after a six-month investigation a grand jury found that the entire episode had been a hoax, with brawley having defaced herself to avoid the wrath of her stepfather after staying out late to visit a boyfriend.

The Brawley case inflamed racial tensions in America and left victims like the falsely accused
Pagones in its wake. but it HELPED LAUNCH SHARPTON’s CAREER.
SHARPTON was a KEY PLAYER INFLAMING the 1991 CROWN HEIGHTS RIOTS
following the death of a young african-american who was hit by an ambulance driven by a
Hasidic driver.
On Monday 8, 1991 a station wagon driven by Yosef Lifsh, hit another car and bounced onto the sidewalk at 8:21 p.m. the station wagon was part of a 3-car motorcade carrying the lubavitcher rebbe menachem schneerson. the station wagon struck two black children, 7-year-old cousins gavin and angela cato who were on the sidewalk. lifsh immediately got out of his car and tried to help the children. a gathering crowd started to attack him. within minutes, an ambulance from the hasidic (jews)-run ambulance service, and two from the city’s emergency medical service arrived. the gathering crowd became unruly. the police who showed up radioed for backup reporting the station wagon’s driver and passengers were being assaulted. the injured children went by separate city ambulances to kings county hospital. gavin cato was pronounced dead; his cousin survived.
A rumor began to spread that the hasidic ambulance crew had ignored the dying black child in favor of treating the jewish men. ignoring the commandment about bearing false witness, SHARPTON USED THIS FALSEHOOD to INCITE the CROWD. Charles Price, an area resident who had come to the scene of the accident, INCITED the MASSES with claims that, “The JEWS GET EVERYTHING THEY WANT. THEY’RE KILLING OUR CHILDREN”

Price later pled guilty for inciting the crowd to murder Yankel Rosenbaum. Ignited by the falsehoods, resentment exploded into violence. groups of young black men threw rocks, bottles and debris at police, residents and homes. according to the new york times, more than 250 neighborhood residents went on a rampage that first night, mostly black teenagers, many of whom were shouting “jews! jews! jews!” SHARPTON CALLED JEWS ‘DIAMOND MERCHANTS’ with ‘the BLOOD of INNOCENT BABIES’ ON THEIR HANDS”
more than 250 neighborhood residents, mostly black teenagers, many of whom were shouting “jews! jews! jews!”, jeered the driver of the car and then turned their anger on the police.
later that evening, as the crowds and rumors grew, people threw bottles and rocks. at about 11:00 pm, someone reportedly shouted, “let’s go to kingston avenue and GET a JEW!”
A group of about 20 young black men surrounded 29-year-old australian jew, Yankel
Rosenbaum, a university of melbourne student in the U.S. conducting research for his doctorate
they stabbed him several times in the back and beat him severely, fracturing his skull
according to the sworn testimony of efraim lipkind, a former hasidic resident of crown heights, sharpton started agitating the crowd:
“Then we had a famous man, al sharpton, who came down, and HE SAID … KILL the JEWS, TWO TIMES. I heard him, and he started to lead a charge across the street to utica”
with each passing hour the violence worsened, Jewish leaders began to desperately complain
about the lack of protection to the authorities. They said, the rioters were being allowed to
rampage unchecked, too little force was being brought to bear, and too few arrests were being
made. area jews felt the police were under orders by the city’s first black mayor to hold back,
that the police were not allowed to fight against the black rioters, who continued to grow bolder
in their anti-semitic attack as they sensed the appeasement.
For three days following the accident, numerous african americans and caribbean americans of
the neighborhood, joined by growing numbers of non-residents, RIOTED in Crown Heights.

During the riots, jews were injured, stores were looted, and cars and homes were damaged.
the rioters identified jewish homes by the mezuzot affixed to the front doors. after episodes of
rock- and bottle-throwing involving hundreds of blacks and jews, and after groups of blacks
marched through crown heights chanting “no justice, no peace!”, “death to the jews!”, and
“whose streets? our streets!”, an additional 1,200 police officers were sent to confront rioters

Edward Shapiro, a historian at brandeis university, later called the RIOT “THE MOST
SERIOUS ANTI-SEMITIC INCIDENT in AMERICAN HISTORY”. two weeks after the
riot, anthony graziosi, an italian sales representative with a white beard dressed in dark
business attire, was stopped at a traffic light at 11 pm, six blocks away from where rosenbaum
had been murdered, a group of four black men surrounded his car and one of them shot and
killed him.
During the funeral of gavin cato, sharpton gave an anti-semitic eulogy, which fueled the fires of hatred:“the world will tell us he was killed by accident. yes, it was a social accident. … it’s an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of crown heights.”

All we want to say is what jesus said: if you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for
it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin’ and grinnin’. pay for your deeds.”
Sharpton was asked about the violence, he justified it,“we must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system,” he said.

The first sabbath after the funeral sharpton TRIED UNSUCCESSFULLY to KICK UP
TENSIONS AGAIN by marching 400 protesters in front of the lubavitch of crown heights
shouting“NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE”. regarding the mayor’s (black mayor david dinkins) call
for peace Sharpton pontificated:”they don’t want peace, they want quiet”
You have a clear picture of a man who has made his living for decades with RACE-BAITING
and INFLAMING RACIAL ANIMOSITY. In 1995, an african-american pentecostal church
asked a Jewish tenant of a church-owned property, freddie fashion’s mart, to evict one of his
subtenants, an african-american-run record store.
Sharpton led protests crying, we will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business’” one of the protesters attacked freddie fashion mart, shot several customers, and started a fire that killed seven employees. there are a lot of angry, twisted individuals in america and sharpton is hardly alone in having spent decades VOMITING HATE, LEAVING INNOCENT VICTIMS IN HIS WAKE. What distinguishes sharpton is the willingness of powerful people and organizations to look past the hate when they believe it may benefit them.

COLIN FLAHERTY, AMERICAN WITNESS
by J.R. Dunn americanthinker.com June 19, 2015

There has been a MASSIVE and UNPARALLELED SURGE in RACIAL VIOLENCE
over the last decade or so. The entire country has been wracked with violent assaults
included beatings, mobbings, and murder aimed at non-black races and ethnic groups – with a
particular emphasis on whites – by certain elements among the black population.
Characterized by such terms as “the knockout game” or “polar-bear hunting,” this plague of
violence has been IGNORED by media, government, academics, and the civil-rights
establishment. While the rest of the world has behaved with the perspicacity of the three
monkeys, a single reporter, operating in the classic mode, has refused to let the story be buried

COLIN FLAHERTY HAS COVERED the UPSURGE in BLACK VIOLENCE in a
RELENTLESS SERIES of REPORTS, BREAKING IT NATIONWIDE in a BESTSELLING
BOOK, WHITE GIRL BLEED a LOT.
Flaherty’s second book on the subject: DON’T MAKE THE BLACK KIDS ANGRY – The HOAX of BLACK VICTIMIZATION and HOW WE ENABLE it takes the narrative farther than the first effort, adding depth and detail to the story

Violent outbreaks in ferguson and baltimore are well known. But we can also add portland,
seattle, minneapolis, kansas city, dayton, d.c., and continue all the way down to carbondale ill.,
antioch, cal., and myrtle beach., S.C.

BLACK VIOLENCE in the 21st century is a NATIONAL PHENOMENON, a
SOCIAL PATHOLOGY as repellent in its own way as slavery and segregation before it, and
PRODUCED by the SAME POISONED SEED – BLATANT RACISM.

It typically occurs when a group (or many such groups) of urban blacks, usually in their teens or twenties, begin stalking and assaulting whites along with the occasional asian or latin. the reasons can be trivial or nonexistent. there can be a trigger event or none. Generally the victims are strongly outnumbered and overwhelmed. The violence is usually
savage – far worse than in casual crimes, with victims often ending up hospitalized and
occasionally maimed for life. When large groups of blacks congregate – for beach weeks,
black expos, or rap concerts – such assaults have become almost inevitable

On many occasions they have reached the level of riots. all the same, very few arrests are ever made, and the punishment usually amounts to wrist-slap. It is not unknown for law enforcement in many cities to stand down and ignore the incidents. the victims are often overlooked or even mocked. In the aftermath, reportage in local and national media is minimal. Yhe news is either squelched completely or buried under a soothing blanket of political correctness (of the “rowdy youths” or “unruly teens” variety)

If the incidents do succeed, due to bloodiness or size, in attracting general attention, the usual
suspects leap up to defend of the perpetrators. Such officials and media figures as wayne bennett,
glenn singleton, jean walsh, toure, marietta english, cynthia tucker, and somebody named “eric
holder” stand accused by their own words of DEFENDING BLACK THUGGERY.

The standard excuses of “slavery and “racism” are trotted out, the victims are often blamed for
their suffering, and beneath it all is the unspoken threat: leave it alone if you don’t want things
to get worse.

Colin Flaherty has not left it alone, and for this he deserves our thanks. Flaherty writes with clarity, dispassion, and a journalistic objectivity that might seem archaic in this IDEOLOGICALLY CORRUPT AGE.

A case that occurred in Middletown, Ohio in 2013-14, in which JENNIFER CHITWOOD was TARGETED BY MOBS after calling the police on black burglars ransacking her house. Afterward, Chitwood was subjected to months of torment, virtually ignored by the police, city government, and media until at last her house was burned to the ground. The resident had called police a few hours earlier and said she had been threatened repeatedly by friends of a juvenile who had been arrested for breaking into her home last fall:
“They bust my windows out, they destroy my house and the last time i called police, they pulled my daughter’s window out and climbed in while she was in there and i called police and their brother or someone went to jail and that’s what they’re retaliating about,” jennifer chitwood said. the most recent incident happened monday night, chitwood said, when they threatened to burn the house down:
“Last night, they all came and swarmed my house and was shooting my house with pellet guns and they were throwing flares, like, lit flares at my house, telling me they were going to burn my house, kill my kids, that we were all dying, we were cop callers,” she said
“She fears for her life and stated that these juveniles continue to come back and threaten her and she feels that they are eventually going to make entry into the residence and harm her,” the report states. a black teenager is facing charges as an adult for what authorities are describing as the REVENGE ARSON of the home of a white woman and her two children. His arrest, and that of a juvenile, may be just the tip of the iceberg, authorities say.
Thaddeus Shields, 18, is facing a court hearing this week on the count, and a 17-year-old whose name was not released is facing juvenile court. authorities, meanwhile, say their investigation continues and more perpetrators may be arrested and charged in the attack in middletown, ohio. the alleged black-on-white crime earlier this week culminated a CAMPAIGN of TERROR AGAINST the MOTHER, according to a report by wcpo-tv.

The station reported that the victim, jennifer chitwood, came into conflict with members of a
LOCAL GANG about thanksgiving last year when her home was burglarized. “I caught them
coming out … with my tv – my flat screen – and they threw it,” she told the station

“They don’t like you calling the police on them,” chitwood said. They said, ‘if you guys call the
police we’re coming back for you.’ Every time i walk down the street i get called names by girls
and guys. (they say), ‘you’re the one that called police on my brother. you’re the one that put my
cousin in jail.’”at that point, media finally woke up – to BLAME CHITWOOD, a single
mother, FOR HER OWN PREDICAMENT.

the RATE of BLACK ON WHITE RAPE is like 50 to 1 … the numbers from federal crime
stats that are published each year, BURIED and TOTALLY IGNORED

BLACK-ON-WHITE VIOLENCE: The FORGOTTEN VICTIMS
by Jack Kerwick august 29, 2013

Jack Kerwick: “As the nation remembers martin luther king’s “i have a dream” speech, it
should also note that while the self-appointed guardians of king’s legacy, the ‘anti-racists’,
obsess over paula deen and liken trayvon martin to emmet till, they say nothing about
interracial violence when it involves black perpetrators and white victims.

Delbert “Shorty” Benton: the 89 year-old veteran of world war ii was beaten to death by two teenagers armed with flashlights. benton was making his way through the parking lot of one of the places that he regularly frequented when he was attacked.
Chris Lane: The 23 year-old australian was in oklahoma visiting his girlfriend. while on a run, some “bored” teenagers shot and killed him in the back. they had a history of expressing hostility toward whites, one of them was said by police to have laughed and danced upon being arrested.
Jack Kerwick: There is no shortage of people who will defend the deafening silence of the “anti-racists” with respect to these interracial horrors on the grounds that, supposedly, they had nothing to do with color. black criminals seek out whites, it is often said, simply because whites are perceived as having more in the way of material goods. yet if this is true, then color or race most certainly does have something to do with these attacks: black criminals profile whites. but if there is nothing illegitimate about black predators (or others) profiling whites as “privileged,” “advantaged,” “racist,” etc., then neither can it be said – as it is always said by “anti-racists” – that there is anything illegitimate about whites profiling blacks

Only hypocrisy, illogic, or some combination of the two could make one suggest otherwise
so, if this is the case, then “racism” should never come under attack at all, for it isn’t, say,
the color of the klansmen and the black victims that they lynched that is blameworthy,
but the lynching itself.

Jack Kerwick: There isn’t a single “anti-racist” who would dream to reason thus.
One reason that black-on-white violence should be discussed is that it is both ubiquitous and
evil. The blacks responsible for it constitute but a tiny percentage of the national population, and
yet they are several times more likely than their white counterparts to engage in interracial
violence. Another reason that black-on-white cruelty must be brought out into the open is that it
is a reality that can only weaken the false narrative of unrelenting white oppression and
perpetual black suffering that has been used by demagogues and opportunists to prop up the
destructive policies that they’ve promoted in the name of combating “racism”

These incidents have occurred in the hundreds in recent years. The number of victims is in
the thousands. The number of deaths amounts to dozens, perhaps more, and is rising steadily.

Do the INSTITUTIONS – law enforcement, criminal justice, government, and media –
EXPECT IT TO SIMPLY GO AWAY? If so, it would be one more example of the
SPINELESS MINDSET of the age of obama.

Justice Department STATISTICS ABOUT BLACK ON WHITE RACE VIOLENCE
‘The RACE WAR of BLACK AGAINST WHITE’
by Paul Sheehan the sydney morning herald, australia 20/5/1995

Paul Sheehan: The longest war America has ever fought is the dirty war, and it is not over. it has lasted 30 years so far and claimed more than 25 million victims. It has cost almost as many lives as the Vietnam War. It determined the result of last year’s congressional election.
no matter how crime figures are massaged by those who want to acknowledge or dispute the
existence of a dirty war, there is nothing ambiguous about what the official statistics portray
for the past 30 years a large segment of black America has waged a WAR of VIOLENT
RETRIBUTION against white America.
And the problem is GETTING WORSE, NOT BETTER. In the past 20 years,
violent crime has increased more than FOUR TIMES FASTER than the population.
“Young blacks (under 18) are more violent than previous generations and are 12 TIMES more
likely to be arrested for murder than young whites. nearly all the following figures, which speak
for themselves, have NOT BEEN REPORTED in AMERICA:” …

According to the latest U.S. Department of Justice survey of CRIME VICTIMS,
more than 6.6 MILLION violent crimes (murder, rape, assault and robbery) are committed in
the U.S. each year, of which about 20 %, or 1.3 MILLION, are INTER-RACIAL CRIMES.
Most victims of race crime – about 90% – are white, according to the survey “highlights from
20 years of surveying crime victims”, published in 1993. almost 1 million white americans
were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black americans in 1992, compared with
about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites,
according to the same survey.

Blacks thus committed 7.5 TIMES MORE VIOLENT INTER-RACIAL CRIMES THAN WHITES even though the black population is only one-seventh the size of the white population. when these figures are adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an extraordinary disparity: blacks are committing more than 50 TIMES the number of violent racial crimes of whites.

According to the latest annual report on murder by the federal bureau of investigation,
most inter-racial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering
whites at 18 TIMES the rate that whites murder blacks. Yhese breathtaking disparities
began to emerge in the mid-1960’s, when there was a sharp increase in black crime against
whites, an upsurge which, not coincidentally, corresponds exactly with the beginning of the
modern civil rights movement.

Over time, the cumulative effect has been staggering. justice department and fbi statistics
indicate that between 1964 and 1994 more than 25 MILLION VIOLENT INTER-RACIAL
CRIMES were committed, OVERWHELMINGLY INVOLVING BLACK OFFENDERS
and WHITE VICTIMS, and more than 45,000 KILLED in INTER-RACIAL MURDERS.

By comparisons 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam, and 34,000 were killed in the Korean war. When non-violent crimes (burglary, larceny, car theft and personal theft) are included, the cumulative totals become prodigious. the bureau of justice statistics says 27 MILLION NON-VIOLENT CRIMES were committed in the U.S. in 1992, and the survey found that
31 % of the robberies involved black offenders and white victims (while only 2% in the reverse)
“When all the crime figures are calculated, it appears that black americans have committed at least 170 MILLION CRIMES AGAINST WHITE AMERICANS in the PAST 30 YEARS.
It is the great defining DISASTER of american life and american ideals since World War II
All these are facts, yet by simply writing this story, by assembling the facts in this way, i would
be deemed a racist by the american news media. it prefers to maintain a paternalistic
double-standard in its coverage of black america, a lower standard.

Al Sharpton: “Without government handouts,black men can’t take care of their
families”… yes, he really said that. Iin every case, barack obama cannot conclude that his
commentary created greater unity rather than FURTHER POLARIZATION”

“An amazing proportion of the media has given us a painful demonstration of the
thinking – and lack of thinking – that prevailed back in the days of the old jim crow south,
where COMPLEXION COUNTED MORE THAN FACTS in DETERMINING HOW
PEOPLE WERE TREATED” NOTHING that is done to george zimmerman – justly or
unjustlyWILL UN-LYNCH a SINGLE BLACK MAN who was tortured and killed in the
Jim Crow south for a crime he didn’t commit. LETTING HOODLUMS GET AWAY with
hoodlumism TODAY DOES NOT UNDO a SINGLE INJUSTICE of the PAST”
– Thomas Sowell

The Real Reason Race Relations Have Deteriorated
by David Byrne January 12, 2017

The end of Obama presidency, along with Martin Luther King Day day, provide an opportunity to analyze race relations after eight years of the first (half) black president. From one perspective, it hasn’t been successful. That racial tension has increased since 2008 is undeniable. One poll finds that 55% of Americans believe race relations have deteriorated under Obama, while only 8% feel they have improved. The New York Times writes that 60% of Americans (including the majority of blacks and whites) feel that race relations are generally bad, much higher than 2008. Riots have recently rocked communities like Ferguson, Milwaukee, and Charlotte. For conservatives, this shows the failure of the Obama Administration.
What conservatives must understand is that for Marxists on the far left, increased racial tensions, riots, and violence are necessary preconditions for an egalitarian society. SOOTHING RACE RELATIONS HAS NEVER BEEN the GOAL BECAUSE FOR MARXISTS, PROGRESS OCCURS THROUGH VIOLENCE. The existing exploitative racist society can NEVER BE PEACEFUL OVERTHROWN, they believe. This is Marx’s influence on the contemporary left-wing activists.
Marx EXPLAINS the WORLD by EXPLOITATION and OPPRESSION. Marx specifically argued that a “veiled civil war” exists within society between oppressors and oppressed. This struggle underlies all history and explains contemporary social conditions.
How do we change this? How do we act ethically and make the world a better place? By RAISING CONSCIOUSNESS about this raging social conflict. For Marxists, the oppressed and exploited MUST BE TAUGHT THAT THEY are VICTIMS. Thousands of left-wing activists across the country have dedicated their lives to this cause. And they have been successful: according to a CNN poll, in 2011, 28% of Americans said race is a “big problem” in America. By 2015, 49% of Americans agreed. FOR CONSERVATIVES, THIS SUGGESTS OBAMA HAS FAILED, BUT FOR ANYONE WORKING WITHIN the MARXIST PARADIGM, this is PROGRESS BECAUSE CONSCIOUSNESS of REALITY, AWARENESS OF THE STRUGGLE, HAS INCREASED. IT IS A STEP TOWARD VIOLENT REVOLUTION, a STEP TOWARD a MORE EGALITARIAN SOCIETY.
Like the Bible, Marxism also prophesizes; the VIOLENT UPRISINGS THAT FOLLOW RAISED CONSCIOUSNESS are INEVITABLE. Marx prophesizes: “Here and there, the contest breaks out into riots… At first the contest is carried on by individual laborers, then by the workpeople of a factory, then by the operative of one trade, in one locality, against the individual bourgeois who directly exploits them. They DIRECT THEIR ATTACKS NOT AGAINST the BOURGEOIS CONDITIONS of PRODUCTION, BUT AGAINST the INSTRUMENTS of PRODUCTION THEMSELVES; THEY DESTROY imported wares that compete with their labour, they smash to pieces machinery, they set factories ablaze…” These are the CONDITIONS current activists and protesters SEEK to CREATE in HASTENING the INEVITABLE REVOLUTION. And it’s not peaceful.
Whereas conservatives and Marxists both see this violence as threatening to the existing social structure, conservatives need to recognize that Marxists encourage this violence. Marx further prophesies, “Finally, in times when the class struggle nears the decisive hour, the progress of dissolution going on within the ruling class… assumes such a violent, glaring character, that a small section of the ruling class cuts itself adrift, and joins the revolutionary class, the class that holds the future in its hands.” EXISTING SOCIAL STRUCTURES are INHERENTLY FLAWED and MUST BE DESTROYED THROUGH VIOLENT REVOLUTION. IT’s PROGRESS.
But none of the African Americans rioters have never read Marx? No matter. We learn not just by directly reading sources, but from friends, teachers and the media. In the twentieth century, prominent African-American writers like C.L.R. James, Langston Hughes, and George Padmore used Marx’s ideas to EXPLAIN RACIAL ISSUES IN AMERICA, EMPHASIZING STRUGGLE and EXPLOITATION. The philosophy then spreads to other prominent African-Americans, like W.E.B. Dubois, Angela Davis, and Harry Edwards. This can be said of a host of academics, too, many of whom may not be formal Marxists, but ADOPT PART OF HIS PARADIGM, SUCH as the EXISTENCE of RAMPANT OPPRESSION. They teach these ideas to their students, some of whom go on to foment protests and riots.
Harry Edwards provides a paradigmatic example. As a sociologist, Harry Edwards is steeped in Marxism. MARX is to SOCIOLOGISTS WHAT FREUD is to PSYCHOLOGISTS. Their writings, although not always literally followed, form a general framework for the whole field. No one can succeed in contemporary sociology without adhering to some Marxist principles. STRUGGLE is so central to Edwards’ cosmology, he published a book in 1980 titled The Struggle that Must Be.
One more important fact about Edwards: he is a close friend of Colin Kaepernick, the young quarterback who refused to stand for the national anthem, starting a national debate about the status of African-Americans in society. Kaepernick acknowledges “Dr. Edwards is a good friend. He is someone I talk to and run a lot of things by and have lots of conversations with.”
Edwards returns the compliment: “He [Kaepernick] is evolving through an awakening [read: awareness has been raised].” Edwards teaches his disciples like Kaepernick the Marxist paradigm and Kaepernick acts accordingly, hoping to raise consciousness among others. And the quarterback’s actions have caused two phenomena: increased awareness among athletes and MORE RACIAL TENSION. OBJECTIVE ACHIEVED. The REVOLUTION LOOMS.
All Marxists promote revolution. That violence and riots have grow worse under Obama is in no way a repudiation of anything he has done, for the far left. In fact, for Marxists, it is QUITE the OPPOSITE. IT is PROGRESS.

“Racism does not have a good track record. It’s been tried out for a long time and you’d think by now we’d want to put an END to it INSTEAD of putting it under NEW MANAGEMENT” – Thomas Sowell
NO UNCLE TOMS ON the LEFT
by Kevin Jackson September 2, 2014

Kevin Jackson: “In my recent appearances on TV to discuss the Michael Brown shooting,
I sympathized with the brown family’s loss of a loved one. no family should feel that loss
but the fact is black families feel this loss disproportionately, mostly at the hands of people
who look like us. I balanced my comments on brown’s death with an understanding the plight
of the police officer involved. Officer Darren Wilson is a person too. He has a family, a wife
and a child. And unless the man is a psychopath, I’m sure he anguishes over this incident.
In my analysis, I didn’t rush to judgment; just thoughtful opinion about both sides of the story.

For saying this, I was called an Uncle Tom by many, and even received more than my normal
share of death threats. I came from poverty, growing up in a black neighborhood.
I understand how cops were used as tools of government to oppress black people.

However, as a student of history I’m smart enough to know that democrats were and still are
to blame. For my knowledge of the depravity of democrats, I was deemed a “coon-ass
n*igga” by black liberals, specifically a guy who supposedly was part of the new black panther
party, the authority on blackness. The narrative had been established that michael brown didn’t
deserve to die … for any reason; at least not at the hands of a cop. Ironically, if Brown had
been killed by a gang-banger or from “beefin'” with some hoodrat, all would be normal in the
hood. In the ‘death by cop’ scenario, however, Michael Brown was not to put in a negative
light under any circumstances. Because in that scenario, the bigger issue is police brutality
and the militarization of police. Those were the marching orders of the left politburo,
Black liberals READILY ACCEPT the FALSE IDOLS; the NAACP, the congressional black
caucus, al sharpton, and the new black panther party (nbpp), all of whom have
led black people into a state of PURPOSEFUL ANGER with NOTHING to show for it.

Kevin Jackson: “I ask the NBPP knuckledragger WHO WANTS ME DEAD,
“How many black children have you helped?”
Has the NBPP got any black children adopted?
Has the NBPP helped any black children get into get into college?”

Of course they haven’t because actually accomplishing good in the black community is
not part of their mission. This reptilian-brain behavior in black liberals is taught by
bourgeois white liberals who are out for what they can get, and they have taught this strategy
to blacks up and down the food chain. “The real sellouts – you would think that black liberals
would be ashamed of their behavior. Black liberals go to work for their white bosses, interact
with white people who treat them with honor and respect, and go back home to teach hate of
white people to their children and anybody else who’s willing to listen.
They take NO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for THEIR lives, instead
BLAMING SO-CALLED “UNCLE TOM’s”, TOO STUPID to KNOW that CALLING a
BLACK MAN UNCLE TOM is a COMPLIMENT!”

They refer to black conservatives as sellouts, and say, ‘think like us or die!’” The reason many blacks do not speak their mind around other blacks is FEAR. They are NOT STRONG ENOUGH to SAY WHAT NEEDS TO BE SAID to the THUGGISH BLACK LIBERALS who have been BRAINWASHED into this ‘HATE WHITEY’ MINDSET”.
“IT TAKES GUTS to STAND UP FOR WHAT YOU KNOW is RIGHT”
the TRUE SELLOUTS are those BLACKS who WITNESS THIS INSANITY LIKE
FERGUSON, and SAY NOTHING; go with the flow.
Meanwhile the white liberals, who supposedly care about tolerance and justice, amble about
as if they don‘t see what’s occurring. That’s why the left has no Uncle Toms.
uncle tom was SELFLESS and CARING, suggesting that he be sold into slavery so that
his wife and children REMAIN INTACT as a FAMILY. as a slave, Uncle Tom was abused,
cheated, and ULTIMATELY DESTROYED by BRUTAL MEN, YET HE
NEVER LOST HIS FAITH in GOD or his COMPASSION FOR HIS FELLOW MAN”

Uncle Tom took NO JOY in his circumstance; NEVERTHELESS, he was satisfied in
knowing he had PREVENTED HIS FATE FOR OTHERS.

Because HE LOVED HIS FAMILY MORE THAN HE LOVED HIMSELF,
he was not mired in bitterness or anger at being a slave, but found happiness that
HIS ACTIONS SAVED OTHERS”
I repeat. there are no Uncle Toms on the left. but there are PLENTY of SELLOUTS”.

Don’t Blame Uncle Tom
The hero of a novel published 150 years ago has become a byword for black betrayal and subservience. But has he been misrepresented? Gary Younge defends Harriet Beecher Stowe’s iconic fictional slave
This is suicide. For a politically engaged black writer I might as well pen my own obituary. Or at least sentence myself to a life in purdah – for the words will almost certainly be taken down in evidence and used against me at a later date. But we cannot always espouse fashionable causes. So hang it. It is time that someone spoke up for Uncle Tom.
This month sees the 150th anniversary of the publication of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and it is time that Uncle Tom was rehabilitated. Not the Uncle Tom of popular insult; not the “neutralised negro”, “non-practising Black” or “Reverend Pork Chop” charged with undermining black freedom struggles by ingratiating himself with his white overseers. Not the Tom of racial slur, but the Tom of literary history: the original Tom, husband of Chloe, father of Mose, Peter and Polly and creation of Harriet Beecher Stowe. It is time to save the signifier from the sign. Uncle Tom’s Cabin is one of those books which is more likely to be cited in anger than to have been read at leisure. So while most people think they “know” Uncle Tom as the Stepin Fetchit of plantation politics, few have actually met the man who lived on the page and whose good name has been so thoroughly traduced.
So let me introduce you. We first see Tom in his cabin in Kentucky where his slave master, Mr Shelby, is forced to sell two of his slaves to clear his debts. Shelby chooses Tom and Harry, the young son of fellow slave Eliza. Preferring the risk of being caught to the certainty of being split up, Eliza makes a run for it with her child. But Tom, to whom Shelby had promised freedom, refuses to flee.
Later, separated from his wife and family, Tom heads deeper down south in the hands of a slave trader, while Eliza makes it to Canada with her son and husband, who has also fled from another owner, and eventually settles in Liberia.
Tom, meanwhile, is floating on a passenger boat down the Mississippi under the watchful eye of the slave trader when he sees a white girl, Eva, fall overboard and dives in to save her. Eva persuades her father to buy him and Tom becomes the property of Augustine St Clare, a wealthy planter from Louisiana. St Clare also offers Tom his freedom but dies suddenly before it is granted. His wife refuses to honor the promise and sells Tom to the vicious Simon Legree. Legree admires Tom’s diligence but is frustrated by his refusal to do his bidding. When he orders Tom to whip a fellow slave, Tom refuses and is beaten himself.
When two other slaves go missing, Legree threatens Tom with death unless he tells his master where they are. Tom says he knows but won’t say and is fatally thrashed. As he lies, dying, the son of Mr Shelby arrives with the money to honor his father’s promise of freedom in time to see the family’s once favorite slave perish at the hands of a brute.
The story was originally run in an anti-slavery newspaper. But when it was released in book form in March, 1852, it was an immediate sensation. In the U.S. alone it sold 300,000 copies in a year, and more than 2 million copies by the end of the decade.
What is now commonly regarded as a sentimentalist, racist text was at the time received as a vicious polemic against slavery in general and against the fugitive slave law in particular. In an America divided at the time between the slave-owning south and the “free states” of the north, the law demanded that northerners returned slaves who had escaped back into the bondage of the south.
In a nation bitterly split and destined for civil war on this very issue, the book’s publication, not to mention its success, provoked a vicious reaction. “Uncle Tom’s Cabin was the epicentre of a massive cultural phenomenon,” writes Richard Yarborough, a California-based academic, in his essay: Strategies of black characterization in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, “the tremors of which still affect the relationship between blacks and whites in the United States.”
In the 19th century, the editor of the Southern Literary Messenger instructed his reviewer: “I would have the review as hot as hellfire, blasting and searing the reputation of the vile wretch in petticoats who could write such a volume.”
Within two years, pro-slavery writers had answered Uncle Tom’s Cabin with at least 15 novels, similarly polemical in style but arguing that slaves in the south were better off than free workers in the north. One of these novels was called Uncle Robin In His Cabin In Virginia And Tom Without One In Boston.
When Abraham Lincoln met Stowe in 1862, one year into the American civil war, he greeted her with the words: “So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war.” But the novel’s impact was global rather than national. Among those who hailed it as a masterpiece were Ivan Turgenev, Victor Hugo, Leo Tolstoy and George Eliot. The British prime minister, Lord Palmerston, read it three times and admired it not so much for the story as “for the statesmanship of it”.
It was Lenin’s favorite book as a child. “When we try to trace the origins of Vladimir’s political outlook, we often look to what he read in his late adolescence and early manhood,” wrote Robert Service in his biography of Lenin. “But we need to remember that, before these Russian and German male authors imprinted themselves upon his consciousness, an American woman – Harriet Beecher Stowe – had already influenced his young mind.”
Within the confines of its age then, Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a progressive text, exerting an influence which few works of literature have done before or since, into the political debate of the time. The PROBLEM is that the CONFINES of ITS AGE are VERY NARROW INDEED. Written by a white woman principally for other white people when black people were still regarded as chattels, its failure to transcend its age is what made it VULNERABLE to CARICATURE and CRITICISM at a LATER DATE. “Although Stowe unquestionably sympathised with the slaves,” writes Yarborough, “her commitment to challenging the claim of black inferiority was frequently undermined by her own endorsement of racial stereotypes.”
For, in terms of any broader sense of universal humanism or anti-racism, let alone radicalism, it is deeply problematic. Stowe likes her “mulattoes” tragic and handsome and her Africans wild and brawny. The black characters in the book are stock types with only three means to confront their enforced degradation – SUBMISSION, BRUTALIZATION OR BANISHMENT.
“Uncle Tom must be killed; George Harris exiled! Heaven for dead Negroes! Liberia for living mulattoes,” an unnamed black writer argued “Neither can live on the American continent. Death or banishment is our doom.”
The ONE THING STOWE COULD NOT IMAGINE, even though real-life heroes like slave rebel Nat Turner and underground railroad organizer Sojourner Truth existed to fuel her imagination, WAS THAT SOME MIGHT WANT TO STAY AND FIGHT. “In order to appreciate the sufferings of the negroes sold south, it must be remembered that all the instinctive affections of that race are peculiarly strong,” she writes in the book. “They are not naturally daring and enterprising, but home-loving and affectionate.” In another work, she describes black people as “confessedly more simple, docile, childlike and affectionate than other races”.
Like most liberals she believed that support for the downtrodden DEMANDED SYMPATHY RATHER THAN SOLIDARITY. Like most liberals, she thought that liberation could only be granted by the GOOD GRACE of the POWERFUL rather than achieved by the will and tenacity of the powerless. In one polemical passage Stowe asserts: “There is one thing that every individual can do [about slavery] they can see to it that they feel right.” TO THAT EXTENT TOM MUST ALSO BE RESCUED FROM STOWE AS WELL.
So, if you are looking for a revolutionary role model; someone who remains master of his own destiny in the most humiliating of circumstances then Uncle Tom is not your man. But then few people are. His sense of duty, even in bondage, depresses. When his wife encourages him to escape with Eliza he tells her: “Mas’r always found me on the spot – he always will. I never have broke trust… and I never will.” HIS INABILITY, OR UNWILLINGNESS, to ADAPT HIS PRINCIPLES to a GREATER GOOD, FRUSTRATES. Encouraged, by another slave, to murder the vicious Legree while the latter lies in a drunken stupor, Tom says: “No! good never comes of wickedness. I’d sooner chop my right hand off… The Lord hasn’t called us to wrath. We must suffer, and wait his time.”
If ever there was a character to illustrate Marx’s most famous quote that “[Religion] is the opium of the people,” it is Uncle Tom, who would rather wait for freedom in the afterlife than fight for it on earth. But the less famous part of that same quote better sums up Tom’s morality and provides the cornerstone for his defence: “Religion,” wrote Marx, “is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless condition.” For when Tom is apparently at HIS MOST SUPINE he is, nonetheless, motivated by a DESIRE to REMAIN TRUE to HIS CHRISTIAN FAITH RATHER THAN to INGRATIATE HIMSELF WITH HIS MASTER.
It is from these deep pools of SELF-BELIEF and MORAL ABSOLUTES that he manages to PRESERVE HIS HUMANISM, DESPITE CONDITIONS WHICH DEGRADE HIM DAILY. It is in this CONSISTENCY that we find Tom’s INTEGRITY. It is through it that he is ABLE TO ASSIST and DEFEND HIS FELLOW SLAVES and, at times, STAND HIS OWN GROUND and STILL KEEP HIMSELF FROM LOATHING WHITES.
When St Clare asks him if he would not be better off a slave than a free man, Tom responds with a straight: “No.” “Why Tom, you couldn’t possibly have earned, by your work, such clothes and such living as I have given you,” says St Clare. “Know’s all that Mas’r,” says Tom. “BUT I’d RATHER HAVE POOR CLOTHES, POOR HOUSE, POOR EVERYTHING and HAVE ‘EM MINE, THAN HAVE THE BEST, AND HAVE ‘EM ANY MAN ELSE’S.”
Picking cotton alongside a woman whose health is failing, he dumps handfuls that he has picked in her bag. “O, you mustn’t! You donno what they’ll do to ye,” she says. “I can bar it!” said Tom, “better ‘n you.” Shortly afterwards, Legree offers him an easier life if he will whip the woman. “I mean to promote ye, and make a driver of ye; and tonight ye may jes as el begin to get yer hand in. Now, ye jest take this yer gal and flog her.”
Tom is punched when he refuses but finally tells Legree. “I’m willin’ to work, night and day, and work while there’s life and breath in me; but this yer thing I can’t feel it right to do… t’would be DOWNRIGHT CRUEL… IF YOU MEAN TO KILL ME, KILL ME; BUT AS TO MY RAISING MY HAND AGIN ANYONE HERE, I NEVER SHALL, – I’LL DIE FIRST.” He isn’t killed although he is beaten senseless and has scarcely recovered when Legree finds out two other slaves have fled. He asks Tom to tell him if he knows anything about it and threatens him with death if he refuses.
“I han’t got nothing to tell Mas’r,” he says. “Do you dare to tell me, ye old black Christian, ye don’t know” asks Legree. “I know, Mas’r, BUT I CAN’T TELL ANYTHING. I CAN DIE.” AND DIE HE DOES.
To discover just HOW this literary figure of PASSIVE RESISTANCE becomes a byword for BETRAYAL and SUBSERVIENCE, we must look to theatre, film and politics. Stage adaptations removed any remotely radical anti-slave messages and turned it into a minstrel show. “Tom troupes” toured the country and characters sang songs like I Am But A Little Nigger Gal and Happy Are We Darkies So Gay. Tom provided the role for the first black film lead in 1914. Elsewhere, white actors occasionally blacked up. Those performing in film adaptations of the novel included Shirley Temple, Judy Garland, Bill “Bojangles” Robinson, Abbott and Costello – Felix the Cat even played Tom in an animated version.
By the second world war, Uncle Tom had become a byword for lickspittle subservience in the face of racial oppression. Richard Wright called his collection of short stories about black life in the American south Uncle Tom’s Children. The protagonist in his most renowned work, Native Son, is called Bigger Thomas – an eponymous northern descendant of Uncle Tom. James Baldwin lambasted the novel: “It was [Stowe’s] object to show that the evils of slavery were the inherent evils of a bad system, and not always the fault of those who had become involved in it and were its actual administrators.” The oldest and most moderate civil rights organisation in America, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, tried to proscribe the book and ban its dramatizations.
The fictitious Tom’s actual attributes and flaws soon became incidental. Black America had another use for him in real life. He was to represent the lackey, the moderate, the conciliator and the sell-out. IF STOWE HAD NOT INVENTED HIM, AFRICAN-AMERICANS WOULD HAVE HAD TO. True he might not have been called Tom. It could have been Uncle Ben of long-grain rice fame (Tom’s female counterpart is Aunt Jemima, the grand matron of pancake mix). Black radical Malcolm X once said: “Just as the slavemaster in that day used Uncle Tom to keep the field negroes in check, he was the same old slavemaster who today has negroes who are nothing but modern Uncle Toms – 20th-century Uncle Toms – to keep you and me in check.” But the truth is it was the term Uncle Tom itself that was REALLY DESIGNED TO KEEP BLACK PEOPLE IN CHECK. As a defensive response to racism, those who use it seek to ENFORCE ALLEGIANCE and CAST OUT DISSENT PURELY ON GROUNDS of RACE.
Black people are not alone in this DESIRE to POLICE THEIR BORDERS IN THIS WAY. Many cultures that feel on some level embattled will attempt to proscribe behaviour deemed equal to betrayal. That is how Zionist Jews get to brand anti-Zionist Jews “self- haters” – “They’re people of Jewish extraction who’ve had most of the Jewishness extracted,” one academic explained to me recently. Similarly, those not deemed to be sufficiently Irish become “West Brits”.
Malcolm X was not talking about Uncle Tom the character but Uncle Tom the construct. The Tom of the novel had preferred to die than oversee his fellow slaves. But to Malcolm X, and many others before and since, UNCLE TOM was the MAN PREACHING REFORM WHEN OTHERS were PREACHING REVOLUTION; the ONE WHO ADVOCATED PEACE INSTEAD of WAR; the PERSON WHO URGED OTHERS to STAY AT HOME INSTEAD of TAKING to the STREETS; the LEADER WHO PREACHED RACIAL EQUALITY INSTEAD of BLACK POWER.
In SHORT, UNCLE TOM is WHOEVER YOU WANT HIM TO BE. ARBITRARY in APPLICATION – who decides who is an Uncle Tom and on what basis? – and prohibitive in nature, it EXEMPLIFIES the VERY LIMITS of RACE-THINKING. Even though it is an INSULT that FALLS MOST READILY FROM the LIPS of SELF-AVOWED RADICALS, IT is in FACT a REACTIONARY FORM of PSYCHOLOGICAL and BEHAVIORAL RACIAL POLICING WITHIN BLACK COMMUNITIES.
Nowhere is this more obvious than in the American Directory of Certified Uncle Toms, released earlier this year. The book comes with the subtitle: “Being a review of the history, antics and attitudes of handkerchief heads, Aunt Jemimas, head negroes in charge and house negroes against the freedom of the black race.” It was published by the self-appointed “Council on Black Internal Affairs” which was set up after the Million Man March and cast itself as the supreme arbiter of black authenticity. The council set the lofty target of “[monitoring] the progress of the black race toward its inevitable freedom”. The book, wittily written as it is, remains a landmark document in the history of internal race regulation.
It ranks over 50 black leaders, past and present, according to a five-star Uncle Tom rating, with five being the worst. Michael Jackson, who has had plastic surgery which left many of his black features destroyed, gets one star; Bayard Rustin, the gay activist who organised the march on Washington at which King made his “I have a dream speech,” gets five; WEB Dubois, a pioneer of Pan-Africanism who died in Ghana publishing an Encyclopedia Africana, is also, according to the authors, a five-star Uncle Tom.
Colin Powell (five stars) becomes; “an official, government issue Uncle Tom”, Maya Angelou (two stars) is “the much glorified but innocuous negro emissary of ebony culture,” and Oprah Winfrey (four stars) is “the best unambiguously black ambassador of plantation placidity since Hattie McDaniel gushed over Scarlett in Gone With the Wind.” You do not have to like these people to find these assessments obnoxious. Like the insults “coconut”, “Bounty bar” and their American equivalent “Oreo” – all of which mean black on the outside and white on the inside – the racial determinism on which these insults are hinged is in the very worst tradition of identity politics.
The book promises not only constant vigilance – “More will be nominated. More will be exposed. More will be certified,” – but also redemption: “Only by refashioning his mind and recasting his role in black affairs can the Uncle Tom declare himself to be a friend of his own black race.”
In so doing it presents race not as a starting point from which to understand the world from your own experience, but the sole prism through which the world should be viewed and understood. It emphasizes not what you do but who you are. As such it is, effectively, a de-blacking – an attempt to deny racial legitimacy as well as the possibility of genuine debate and disagreement among black people.
If US supreme court justice Clarence Thomas keeps voting against the interests of African-Americans then say that. If you think that in the UK the Voice editor, Mike Best, has contributed to a culture that could lead to more widespread harassment of black youth with his comments over stop and search, then say that too. Blame them for being overly ambitious, rightwing, misled, misguided, bankrupt or washed up. Blame those who back them for being patronising, cynical, opportunistic, manipulative or disingenuous. Call them what you want.
BLAME THEM FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, NOT WHO THEY ARE. BUT WHATEVER YOU DO, DON’T BLAME UNCLE TOM. HE HAS SUFFERED ENOUGH.
Uncle Tom STANDS UP to Simon Legree
“And now,” said Legree, “come here, you Tom. You see, I telled ye I didn’t buy ye jest for the common work; I mean to promote ye, and make a driver of ye; and to-night ye may jest as well begin to get yer hand in. Now, ye jest take this yer gal and flog her; ye’ve seen enough on’t to know how.”
“I beg Mas’r’s pardon,” said Tom; “hopes Mas’r won’t set me at that. It’s what I an’t used to, – never did, – and can’t do, no way possible.”
“‘Ye’ll larn a pretty smart chance of things ye never did know, before I’ve done with ye!” said Legree, taking up a cowhide, and striking Tom a heavy blow cross the cheek, and following up the infliction by a shower of blows.
“There!” he said, as he stopped to rest; “now, will ye tell me ye can’t do it?”
“Yes, Mas’r,” said Tom, putting up his hand, to wipe the blood, that trickled down his face. “I’m willin’ to work, night and day, and work while there’s life and breath in me; but this yer thing I can’t feel it right to do; – and, Mas’r, I never shall do it, – never!”
Tom had a remarkably smooth, soft voice, and a habitually respectful manner, that had given Legree an idea that he would be cowardly, and easily subdued. When he spoke these last words, a thrill of amazement went through every one; the poor woman clasped her hands, and said, “O Lord!” and every one involuntarily looked at each other and drew in their breath, as if to prepare for the storm that was about to burst.
Legree looked stupefied and confounded; but at last burst forth, “What! ye blasted black beast! tell me ye don’t think it right to do what I tell ye! What have any of you cussed cattle to do with thinking what’s right? I’ll put a stop to it! Why, what do ye think ye are? May be ye think yer a gentleman master, Tom, to be a telling your master what’s right, and what ain’t! So you pretend it’s wrong to flog the gal!”
“I think so, Mas’r,” said Tom; “‘the poor crittur’s sick and feeble; ‘t would be downright cruel, and it’s what I never will do, nor begin to. Mas’r, if you mean to kill me, kill me; but, as to my raising my hand agin any one here, I never shall, – I’ll die first!”
Tom spoke in a mild voice, but with a decision that could not be mistaken. Legree shook with anger…
“Well, here’s a pious dog, at last, let down among us sinners! – a saint, a gentleman, and no less, to talk to us sinners about our sins! Powerful holy critter, he must be! Here, you rascal, you make believe to be so pious, – didn’t you never hear, out of yer Bible, ‘Servants, obey yer masters’? An’t I yer master? Didn’t I pay down twelve hundred dollars, cash, for all there is inside yer old cussed black shell? An’t yer mine, now, body and soul?” he said, giving Tom a violent kick with his heavy boot; “tell me!”
In the VERY DEPTH of PHYSICAL SUFFERING, BOWED by BRUTAL OPPRESSION, THIS QUESTION SHOT a GLEAM of JOY and TRIUMPH THROUGH TOM’s SOUL. He suddenly stretched himself up, and, looking earnestly to heaven, while the tears and blood that flowed down his face mingled, he exclaimed: “NO! NO! NO! MY SOUL AN’T YOURS, MAS’R! YOU HAVEN’T BOUGHT IT, YE CAN’T BUY IT! IT’S BEEN BOUGHT and PAID FOR, BY ONE THAT IS ABLE TO KEEP IT; NO MATTER, NO MATTER, YOU CAN’T HARM ME!”
“I can’t!” said Legree, with a sneer; “we’ll see, we’ll see!”

This sort of “MOBOCRACY” was something our founders warned us about –
the TYRANNY of the MOB sans the rule of law

ELDERLY COUPLE in FEAR OVER SPIKE LEE TWEET
FLORIDIANS ERRONEOUSLY LINKED TO TRAYVON MARTIN KILLER
March 27, 2012

March 27, 2012 – With twitter and facebook continuing to explode with posts purporting to contain the address of George Zimmerman. Property records and interviews reveal that the home is actually the longtime residence of a married florida couple, both in their 70s, who have no connection to the man who killed trayvon martin“and are now living in fear due to erroneous reports about their connection to the shooter.

The mass dissemination of the address on edgewater circle in sanford – the florida city where
martin was shot to death last month – took flight last friday when director spike lee retweeted a
tweet containing zimmerman’s purported address to his 240,000 followers

The original tweet was sent to lee (and numerous other celebrities like will smith, 50 cent, and
lebron james) last friday afternoon by marcus davonne higgins, a 33-year-old Los Angeles
man who uses the online handle “maccapone. Hhiggins included the direction,
“everybody repost this.
Higgins first began disseminating the sanford address to his twitter followers last wednesday,
including the claim that zimmerman “like the fat punk he is, he still lives at home with mommie
& daddy. higgins’s dissemination of zimmerman’s purported edgewater circle address was not,
however, limited to cyberspace. at a protest rally in an l.a. park near his crenshaw home,
higgins held a sign containing zimmerman’s name, address and phone number

Except, of course, none were accurate. the residence on edgewater circle is actually the
home of david mcclain, 72, and his wife elaine, 70. the mcclains, both of whom work for the
seminole county school system, have lived in the 1310-square-foot lakefront home for about a
decade.

When told that twitter posts containing her address continued to pour in this evening, an
exasperated elaine mcclain remarked, “maybe we should get a lawyer and send a cease and
desist letter to spike lee.

OBAMA’s DEMAGOGUERY: The PRESIDENT HAS a BAD HABIT of
WADING UNINFORMED INTO LOCAL CONTROVERSIES
by Victor Davis Hanson March 27, 2012

The atrocity at first SEEMED undeniable: a white vigilante, with a Germanic name no less,
hunted down and then executed a tiny black youth, who, from his published grammar-school
photos, seemed about twelve – while he was walking innocently and eating candy in an
exclusive gated community in northern florida. Understandable outrage followed in the black
community, but the killing also brought out the usual demagogues. al sharpton, jesse jackson,
louis farrakhan and the new black panther party all alleged that the shooting death of trayvon
martin was an indictment of a systematically racist white society . They demanded justice, and
the black panthers announced a $10,000 bounty on the supposed killer. Even philadelphia
mayor Michael Nutter got into the act, dubbing the shooting an “assassination”

Just a few days earlier in Chicago ten youths were murdered and at least 40 others shot.
Most of those victims and shooters were african americans, but the carnage did not earn
commensurate national attention from black leaders. the president waded into an ongoing
investigation, in which the facts of the case remain murky and in dispute. instead of playing
down the racial component of the tragedy in polarized times, he seemed instead deliberately to
have EMPHASIZED it”

July 19, 2013 – “trayvon martin could have been me 35 years ago”

Given that the black minority currently commits violent crimes against the white majority
more frequently than do the nation’s 70 % whites against its 12 % blacks, the president’s
evocation of race in the martin case seemed inappropriate to many. In sum, what had seemed
from media accounts to be a racist first-degree murder, horrifically covered up, On closer
examination might have been either second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, some
sort of criminal negligence, or even simple self-defense.
The point being that we will not know the degree of Zimmerman’s guilt, if any, until all the evidence in the case is released to the public. What do all these presidential interventions teach us – other than that there are two sides to every story?”

MY administration is the only thing between you [ceo’s] and the pitchforks” – barack obama

First, that race and gender are flashpoints in our culture, as liberals see justice routinely denied to Americans on the basis of their sex and skin color, and conservatives believe these issues are continually trumped up to further divide the country and serve the political interests of a partisan elite. But a larger lesson should be the president’s, because a disturbing pattern has developed in his editorializing, Yet in every case, further evidence, more information, and subsequent events suggested that the president had offered either incomplete or misleading commentary to the nation predicated, not on a desire for healing or truth, but on a wish to gain partisan advantage. Which brings us right back to Lenin whipping up the Bolshevik MOBS to KILL the KULAKS. It doesn’t matter where you direct the rage. Alinsky espoused the strategy of finding how the desired target contributes to some problem and then attack that target as if they are the only cause of the problem.
Alinsky warned the organizer who “forgets the significance of personal identification.

RACE DYSTOPIA: INTRO
The HEGELIAN ROOTS of BLACKLIVESMATTER
by David Byrne August 27, 2016

David Byrne: Can one man – a man who died in 1831 – be blamed for nazism, communism and
even the uprisings in places like milwaukee and ferguson. karl popper, leo strauss and ayn rand
all suggested G.W.F HEGEL, the greatest philosopher of the 19th century, contributed to the
most malignant totalitarian systems in history
By describing the world as a conflict between two competing concepts, hegel created a paradigm
used by marx, hitler and even african-american protesters. hegel interpreted reality as a
struggle between two competing ideas, the thesis and anti-antithesis
after intense conflict, the struggle between these antagonistic ideas resolves with the emergence
of a synthesis which adopts elements from the thesis and anti-thesis, thus creating a new level of
reality. another thesis and anti-thesis emerge from the synthesis and the process begins anew
this is the dialectic, more specifically the idealist dialect since it’s based on conflict between
ideas. the dialectic guides history. all historical events can be reduced to a struggle between
ideas.
Without the dialectic, life and history have no meaning. hegel maintained, “without the active
opposition of an antithesis working through the dialectic … periods of happiness are empty
pages in history, for they are the periods of harmony, times when the antithesis is missing”
and the dialectical movement of history is a never a smooth and simple
the conflict takes places on battlefields, revolutions, torture chambers and even the streets
such as milwaukee, Wisconsin the DIALECTIC also TRANSCENDS INDIVIDUALS.
participants are UNCONSCIOUS of THEIR ROLE in the GREATER DIALECTICAL
HISTORICAL PICTURE, like someone holding a small image that makes up a larger mosaic

Hegel was a holist, so he believed that individuals don’t exist in isolation, but are formed by the
larger group (accordingly, both Nazis and Communists were anti-individual)
In other words, the police officers in places like Milwaukee and Ferguson do not act as an
individuals, but rather as part of a larger GROUP, in this case, the white race.
All of their actions are not determined by free will, but the conditions that reared them, in this
case WHITE SOCIETY.
For a second, let’s assume the worst and that the young black men were killed due to their race.
But why can’t this be interpreted as one INDIVIDUAL with free-will killing another?
Can’t the police officers just be bad apples? Do they have to represent a bigger, deeper issue in
America? For a holist, they do. as louis farrakhan declared, “I warn you that something
terrible is about to go down, and it is a sign: a microcosm of the macrocosm. Hegel would
have agreed the events in Milwaukee and Ferguson aren’t just one man killing another,
They represents deeper struggles that African-Americans face, a STRUGGLE THAT IS
FUNDAMENTAL to AMERICAN SOCIETY.
whether the police officers are individually racist is a moot point. The protestors know, or
think they know, because they understand the reality of American society. Is it possible that
race had nothing to do with the shooting the young man? Of course it is, but for the protestors,
this interpretation doesn’t conform to their reality, … a REALITY that asserts the existence
an AFRICAN-AMERICAN CLASS STRUGGLING AGAINST the OPPRESSIVE WHITE
RACE.

But none of the African Americans protesters have ever heard of, much less studied, the great idealist philosopher? No matter but none of the african americans protesters have ever heard of, much less studied, the great idealist philosopher? No matter.
MARX TOOK HEGEL’s IDEAS OUT of the HANDS of the academic philosophers and
brought it to the streets through works like the communist manifesto.
In this work, MARX MATERIALIZED HEGEL’s IDEAS and APPLIED THEM to
SOCIETY. Society is characterized as a titanic struggle between material CLASSES,
sometimes even violently. Marx contends the overthrow of the existing order requires
violence on the streets. Marx also added exploitation and oppression to the Hegelian dialectic,
so the fabric of social reality is more than just two antagonistic concepts.

Now, one oppresses and exploits the other in the 20th century, prominent African-American
writers like c.l.r james and george padmore USED MARX’s IDEAS to EXPLAIN RACIAL
ISSUES in AMERICA, EMPHASIZING STRUGGLE and EXPLOITATION.
the philosophy then spread to other prominent african-americans, many of whom may not be
formal marxists, but still adopt parts of his paradigm. Everything has a history, including
metaphysical interpretations of reality the killing of the young men can be explained in many
ways, but the one driving the protesters in Milwaukee is Hegelian because it is
based on INHERENT CONFLICT between two concepts.

RACE DYSTOPIA:
BLACK NATIONALISM & LIBERATION THEOLOGY –
the “NEW’ RACIST SUPREMACY and SEPARATISM

RACE, POLITICS and LIES
by Thomas Sowell may 5, 2015

Thomas Sowell: “Among the many painful ironies in the current racial turmoil is that
communities scattered across the country were disrupted by riots and looting because of the
demonstrable lie that michael brown was shot in the back by a white policeman in
Missouri. But there was not nearly as much turmoil created by the demonstrable fact that a
fleeing black man was shot dead by a white policeman in South Carolina.
TOTALLY IGNORED was the fact that a black policeman in alabama fatally shot an
unarmed white teenager, and was cleared of any charges, at about the same time that a
white policeman was cleared of charges in the fatal shooting of michael brown.
IN a WORLD WHERE the TRUTH MEANS SO LITTLE, and headstrong preconceptions
seem to be all that matter, what hope is there for rational words or rational behavior, much less
mutual understanding across racial lines?”
When the recorded fatal shooting of a fleeing man in South Carolina brought instant
condemnation by whites and blacks alike and by the most conservative as well as the most
liberal commentators. That moment of mutual understanding was very fleeting, as if mutual
understanding were something to be avoided, as a threat to a vision of “us against them”
that was more popular. That vision is nowhere more clearly expressed than in attempts to
automatically depict whatever social problems exist in ghetto communities as being caused by
the sins or negligence of whites, whether racism in general or a ‘legacy of slavery’ in particular”

Like most EMOTIONALLY POWERFUL VISIONS, it is SELDOM, if ever, SUBJECTED
to the TEST of EVIDENCE.

The ‘legacy of slavery’ argument is not just an EXCUSE FOR INEXCUSABLE BEHAVIOR
in the ghettos. In a larger sense, it is an EVASION of RESPONSIBILITY for the
DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES of the prevailing social VISION of our times, and
the political policies based on that vision, over the past half century.

Anyone who is serious about EVIDENCE need only compare black communities as they
evolved in the first 100 years after slavery with black communities as they evolved in the
first 50 years after the explosive growth of the WELFARE STATE, beginning in the 1960s.
You would be hard-pressed to find as many ghetto riots prior to the 1960s. As we have seen
just in the past year, much less in the 50 years since a wave of such riots swept across the
country in 1965. We are told that such riots are a result of black poverty and white racism.
But in fact – for those who still have some respect for facts – black poverty was far worse, and
white racism was far worse, prior to 1960. But violent crime within black ghettos was far less.

Murder rates among black males were going down – repeat, down – during the much lamented
1950s, while it went up after the much celebrated 1960s, reaching levels more than double what
they had been before. Most black children were raised in two-parent families prior to the
1960s. But today the great majority of black children are raised in one-parent families.
Such trends are not unique to blacks, nor even to the united states. the welfare state has led to
remarkably similar trends among the white underclass in england over the same period.

Just read ‘Life at the Bottom ’ by Theodore Dalrymple, a british physician who worked in a
hospital in a white slum neighborhood. You cannot take any people, of any color, and
EXEMPT them from the requirements of civilization – including work, behavioral standards,
personal responsibility and all the other basic things that the clever intelligentsia disdain –
without ruinous consequences to them and to society at large.
Non-judgmental subsidies of counterproductive lifestyles are treating people as if they were
LIVESTOCK, to be FED and TENDED by others in a WELFARE STATE, and yet expecting
them to develop as human beings have developed when facing the challenges of life themselves.
One key fact that keeps getting ignored is that the poverty rate among black married couples
has been in single digits every year since 1994.
BEHAVIOR MATTERS and FACTS MATTER, MORE than the prevailing social visions or
political empires built on those visions.

MOB CONFORMITY
FAIR vs FREE EQUALITY (TOTALITARIAN SOCIAL JUSTICE)
vs RIGHTS (INDIVIDUAL DUE PROCESS)

EVEN STEVEN – FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS WITH EQUALITY
by Deana Chadwell December 6, 2014

The idea of fairness is one of the earliest moral ideas that children grasp.
If Little Steven sees his sister with a cookie, he’s going to throw a fit if he doesn’t get one,
too. You expect that in a little kid.
Grown-ups understand the more sophisticated concept of justice. Maybe steven’s sister ate
her broccoli and is being rewarded, maybe she helped wash the dishes and that is her wage.
Steven’s too little to GET THAT. Basically there are two faces to the concept of FAIRNESS:
fairness as in equality, and fairness as in justice.
WE CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO CONFUSE THE TWO.

FAIRNESS, as in EQUALITY, deals with OUTCOMES … that have to be FORCED.
Let’s say steven’s favorite aunt, nancy, takes pity on him and forces his sister suzy to share her
cookie. That’s NOT JUST – SHE EARNED IT and HE DID NOT.
But it is equal fairness, as in justice, deals with process with merit, with intrinsic value.
Suzy completed a task; she screwed up her face, squinted her eyes, held her nose then chewed
and swallowed the nasty vegetable. Her plate was clean and she had obeyed her parents.

Steven had just flat-out refused to be bribed into eating anything green.
Justice demands that he suffer the loss of the treat. that’s sad for him, but it is just because
equality is a lesser idea than integrity – it is NOT EQUAL to JUSTICE.
Equality suggests a NUMERICAL accounting. Justice suggests a MORAL or legal accounting.
Justice emphasizes action and accurate, truthful evaluation of that action.
Crowds comprehend the little boy level, the Steven level,
the YOU-GOT-YOURS-I-WANT-MINE LEVEL
EQUALITY IN OUTCOME CAN NEVER BE REALIZED.
When we INSTITUTIONALIZE equality, some human beings have to IMPOSE that equality,
and therefore those people are, by necessity, above all others. We could decide to read into it
our own desires to return to childhood dependency and throw fits whenever life didn’t give
us cookies. BEFORE LONG, NO ONE HAS ANY COOKIES –
Aunt Nancy has eaten them ALL, and Suzy’s mom has gotten TIRED of BAKING cookies;
everything is even-steven, yes, but NO ONE WANTS an EQUAL AMOUNT of NOTHING.

MOBS: TRIBAL SOCIETY and SOCIAL [IN]JUSTICE]
The WILL to REASON: CAN WE EXPECT RATIONAL MAN from TRIBAL SOCIETY?
by Bruce Thornton

Bruce Thornton: Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War, “If you know neither the ENEMY nor
YOURSELF, you will SUCCUMB in every battle. Lee Harris is an writer whose first book,
Civilization and its Enemies, unabashedly called on America to accept its role as a SUPERIOR
civilization threatened by BARBARIC FANATICISM from WITHOUT and
SELF-LOATHING cultural relativism from WITHIN.

Harris’ book The Suicide of Reason: Radical ISLAM’s THREAT to the west explores the
weakness of the liberal west: its “EXAGGERATED CONFIDENCE in the power of
REASON . . . [and] profound UNDERESTIMATION of the forces of FANATICISM.”
The persistence of fanaticism, these days in the form of ISLAMIC JIHAD, CHALLENGES
the WEST’s CHERISHED MYTH of INEVITABLE PROGRESS fueled by the increase of
knowledge and the improvement of human life. The utilitarian and materialist goods by which
the west judges PROGRESS – the “carpe diem” principle of maximizing the happiness and
pleasures of each individual at the expense of one’s community, the world, or the future —
are NOT TYPICAL of most peoples in history.

The existence of “rational actors,” people who in the pursuit of “enlightened self-interest”
adjudicate conflict through “rational procedures,” is an anomaly. Rather, “tribal actors” are
more typical of humanity, those peoples who put the survival and flourishing of tribe ahead of
the individual’s happiness.
Who unthinkingly accept and NEVER QUESTION the SUPERIORITY of THEIR TRIBE
and its values and who work for the tribe’s success at any cost, particularly at the expense of
OTHER PEOPLES DEEMED INFERIOR simply because they are NOT members of the
SAME TRIBE. Such people are “fanatics,” willing to DIE and KILL for the group and its
values, and unwilling to trade away those values for the material goods we in the west prize.
because we assume all peoples prize the same goods we do as “rational actors” –
Individual autonomy, tolerance for other individuals and their differences, and a preference
for negotiation and compromise over force.
Both left and right attribute jihadist violence to material or political factors – “poverty or a lack
of democracy” – important to the west, rather than seeing such violence as the expression of
fanatical loyalty and resentment.
Condorcet failed “to grasp the powerful hold that the tribal mind will always command over
those who have been raised by the TRIBAL SHAMING CODE. Harris defines this “code”
as a PRE-COGNITIVE, NON-NEGOTIABLE “visceral attitude that is IMPERVIOUS TO
REASON,” one manifested as “horror, shame, revulsion, embarrassment, anxiety and so forth”
in the presence of actions condemned by the tribe.
The purpose of this code is to make sure its members live and behave in ways approved by the
tribe, and thus reinforce the tribe’s values and ensure its survival. Rather than a force of
instability and chaos, as we in the west assume, a fanaticism shared by a whole society and
reinforced by the shaming code operates as a way of assuring a COMPLETE CONSENSUS
of values and HOMOGENEITY of thought.

The west has transcended the old tribal “shaming code” by instilling another that reinforces
the goods that “rational actors” should pursue. The power of fanaticism can return and prey
upon the weaknesses of the west – particularly the habit of seeing its own values as universal
and inevitable. This UNWILLINGNESS to ACKNOWLEDGE the POWER of
FANATICISM has been dangerous in the confrontation with jihad. islamic popular fanaticism
has been historically expressed through jihad, the [group] desire to spread islam through
conquest.
The modern REVIVAL of JIHAD in the LONG TRADITION of islamic HOLY WAR whose
goal was not rule over a multicultural domain, but to create a SINGLE UNIFIED CULTURE
under islam,” which is the only legitimate spiritual and political order for ALL HUMANS.
The NAÏVE IDEALIZATION of democracy, the spread of which … will not create cultures
of “rational actors but will end by empowering those who are most opposed to the very

The west has abandoned the idea of “cultural protectionism,” instead seeing pride in one’s
OWN culture and its superiority as a species of benighted intolerance rather than as a necessary
defense mechanism this SELF-LOATHING has been INSTITUTIONALIZED in
MULTICULTURALISM, which encourages westerners to feel ASHAMED of their own
cultural traditions AS RACIST, EXPLOITATIVE and INTOLERANT.
inhibiting the individual’s desire to pursue his own happiness according to his own desires.
Western cultural decadence weakens our defenses and gives traction to the jihadist hatred of
the west. We believe nothing is worth killing and dying for, leaving us weak in the face of a
fanatic enemy, for “an intolerant ethical code will always end by trumping a carpe diem
ethical code.
Reverse what he thinks is the coming “crash of western civilization. The first is “enlightened
tribalism,” which “retains … that our artificial tribe is made up of people who are determined to
preserve our own historically unique popular culture of reason.
Living by “universally respected and impersonal rules of reasonable behavior in resolving their
disputes and differences,” enlightened tribalists will also be aware of how different – and
“ethically superior” – they are from cultures of popular fanaticism … and they will never
assume that such fanatics are “JUST LIKE US” and WANT the SAME GOODS”,
“abandons UTOPIAN SCHEMES for making the rest of the world into copies of the west.
it will realize how EXCEPTIONAL is the existence of “rational actors,” and accept the need to
PROTECT THAT HARD-WON GOOD from THOSE WHO WOULD DESTROY IT,
PROTECT OUR OWN “UNIQUE CULTURE of REASON from being SUBVERTED or undermined through an abstract ideal of tolerance that FORCES TOLERANT MEN AND WOMEN TO TOLERATE THOSE WHO HAVE NO INTEREST IN TOLERATING OTHERS.”
Our traditions of reason and individualism are indeed superior, which is what makes them
worth defending and fighting for. But he recognizes too that they are EXCEPTIONAL and
hence FRAGILE. His approach is almost Darwinian – the main issue is sheer SURVIVAL:
for no matter how superior a culture is, IF IT CAN NOT DEFEND ITSELF, then its superiority
is MEANINGLESS.
For the West to SURVIVE, we need to know our OWN SHORTCOMINGS and the NATURE
and AIMS of the ENEMY. BUT IF WE PERSIST IN OUR IGNORANCE, WE WILL END
with the “SUICIDE of REASON. The “dismal prospect of a RETURN to the BRUTAL LAW
of the JUNGLE” that has GOVERNED HUMANITY FOR MOST of ITS HISTORY, and
from which certain LUCKY cultures have MIRACULOUSLY MANAGED TO ESCAPE –
and, even then, only by the skin of their teeth.

IT’s NOT RACE THAT DIVIDES US, BUT CULTURE
by Jeffrey T. Brown americanthinker.com may 23, 2015

Jeffrey T. Brown: “The racialists in power have again called us to an “honest discussion” about
Race. The emphasis on race assumes too much, but does so because it advances the agenda of
DIVIDING US on grand scales, which is more conducive to the ILLUSION of
VICTIMHOOD and the CULTURE of ENTITLEMENT.
To DIVIDE BY RACE in the way practiced by the president and the left enables them to
HIDE one set of social realities from scrutiny while predetermining the fault of another
social set, based entirely on the colors of their skin, as long as it is understood that the guilty
are NOT BLACK.

So, if it’s NOT RACE THAT DIVIDES US, WHAT is it? In a word, CULTURE.
How is it possible that two or more groups, coincidentally divided by skin color,
live in the SAME COUNTRY but do NOT live in the SAME REALITY?”
The president, for example, has NO INTEREST IN REPRESENTING the black citizens who
live in STABLE FAMILY UNITS, who WORK HARD, PROVIDE for their CHILDREN,
encourage success, obey the LAWS, go to CHURCH, and TRY TO DO WHAT’s RIGHT.

He never speaks to their REALITY. His people, and Eric Holder’s people, are the ones who
both celebrate and are imprisoned by a DYSFUNCTIONAL FORM of BLACK CULTURE.
WITHIN that CULTURE there is SELF-SEGREGATION, HOSTILITY to other races,
PARANOIA, ANGER, RESENTMENT, BITTERNESS, VICTIMHOOD,
ENTITLEMENT, CRIME, POVERTY, DISINFORMATION, DECEPTION,
EXPLOITATION, BROKEN FAMILIES, DESTRUCTION of RELIGIOUS FAITH and
FAILURE.

Mr. Holder, mr. sharpton, and countless others whose POWER comes from using black culture
to advance themselves while benefitting its practitioners nothing. RACE is a TOOL to
INFLAME PASSIONS, using the LIE that DIFFERENCES are the PRODUCT of
white and non-black hatred of blacks.
Therefore, in black culture OUTSIDERS are NOT WELCOME. In non-black culture,
however, SKIN COLOR is IRRELEVANT. Membership is defined, without reference to skin
color, BY ONE’s INDIVIDUAL DIGNITY, willingness to strive, adherence to rules of ethics
and conduct, responsibility and accomplishments.
The BIGGEST LIE told in black culture is that to “ACT WHITE” is to SELL OUT
OTHER BLACKS, a fraud whereby some blacks define themselves and each other by
LOYALTY to the CULTURE, rather than to the potential and POSSIBILITIES of the
INDIVIDUAL.
In this way, membership in the culture that SELF-OPPRESSES is ensured through
COERCION and SHAME. To join the other culture is betrayal and disloyalty.

We see the despair, the anger and hatred, the violence of the MOB that is literally a single eventaway from boiling over, and we shake our heads because the wounds are
largely SELF-INFLICTED. THEIR CHOICES, be they in culture, leadership, propaganda, beliefs, morals or otherwise, were not made for them by us. They are not forced to remain in their perceived distress, but have chosen by their leaders and ideology to remain there, stuck until a future Moses leads them out of a SELF-IMPOSED DARKNESS that is UNNECESSARY.
To hear our black, democratically elected president tell it, OUR DYSTOPIAN NATION is a
HELLHOLE of VIRULENT RACISM. IF ours was a RACIST NATION, the countless
foreign nationals who come legally to the united states from Africa, the Middle East, and Asia
WOULD ALL FAIL MISERABLY, FALLING VICTIMS to the ENTRENCHED RACISM
THAT SIMPLY DOESN’T EXIST.
A major reason those people SUCCEED, SEIZING upon the OPPORTUNITIES that are there
for the taking, is that they are not indoctrinated by a culture that lies to them about what
their future is, or could be, in our amazing country.
THEY SUCCEED BECAUSE NO ONE is PREVENTING THEM FROM DOING SO.
If we were ever to have that honest conversation about race, it would need to start with
CULTURE, and how that FORM of black culture which IMPRISONS its subscribers
CONDEMNS THEM to FAILURE. The last thing the president wants is that conversation.
if all those PEOPLE FREED THEMSELVES from the YOKE of THAT CULTURE,
they might turn on the democrats forever.

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: MOB MANIPULATION, CONTROL & CONFORMITY,
CENSORSHIP, PROPAGANDA and INDOCTRINATION

MOB MANIPULATION – Edward Bernays
MOB RULE ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES by cinnamon stillwell
Politically Correct Death Threats at Georgia Tech by peter collier
“Victory of the Demagogue” by hyatt seligman

MOB MANIPULATION – Edward Bernays
“We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested,
largely BY MEN WE HAVE NEVER HEARD OF”
“it is they who pull the wires which CONTROL the PUBLIC MIND”
“possibly no one has been as influential in changing public opinion by understanding and
manipulating the human psyche than the ‘father’ of public relations and propaganda”
– Edward Bernays

Fascists, in their quest to build a UTOPIAN FUTURE, PERSECUTE “HERETICS” against
“progress”. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business,
in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number
of persons …who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.

Bernays understood that PEOPLE COULD BE MADE TO ACT IRRATIONALLY IF YOU
STIMULATE THEIR SUBCONSCIOUS DESIRES and IMPULSES – he successfully did
this for a huge list of wealthy backers. Bernays was responsible for (among many other things):
making it acceptable for women to smoke – backed by the tobacco industry.
Making bacon and eggs a staple breakfast food in america – backed by a meat packing
Company causing a consciousness harming chemical to be added to water supplies – backed by a
company producing alumini.
Bernays was later quoted as an inspiration by Joseph Goebels, the infamous propaganda
minister of nazi germany, a master of FEAR-BASED MANIPULATION. Fear is a weapon of
SOCIAL CONTROL used to manipulate thoughts and actions without people even knowing it.

The FIGHT-OR-FLIGHT RESPONSE is one of the most basic INSTINCTUAL
MECHANISMS we are BORN WITH. FEAR has an impressive history of helping us to
AVOID HARMFUL SITUATIONS, and as we listened to it and SURVIVED by
RUNNING FROM PREDATORS. These instincts were probably reinforced through
generations as those who survived through fear brought their children up to survive in the same
way. But FEAR can also be used as a MECHANISM to CONTROL us and scientists have
long been fascinated by fear reactions, conducting many studies trying to understand
HOW FEAR BECOMES CONDITIONED.

The greatest developments in this field have been in the realm of ‘behaviorism’; the theory that
animal and human behavior can be explained through conditioning. In the early 20th century,
John B. Watson began experimenting with fear-based conditioning. He wanted to know if
PHOBIAS could be CONDITIONED in humans. Watson conducted the
“LITTLE ALBERT” EXPERIMENT, showing an emotionally stable baby:
a fire, a monkey, a dog
a rabbit
a white lab rat
All of which Little Albert responded to without fear. Watson then began making a loud noise
every time little albert reached out to touch the rat with increasingly loud noises, Little Albert
became more and more distressed when the rat came near.
Watson then showed little albert STIMULI which had similar characteristics to the rat, including
other animals, a fur coat and a santa claus mask. Each time Little Albert (although previously
calm) responded with fear, leading watson to determine that FEAR is most likely
a CONDITIONED RESPONSE in humans.
Watson completed many more experiments with young babies, famously stating
“GIVE ME a baby and I CAN MAKE ANY KIND of MAN”. Can you guess what he turned
his understanding to later in life? ADVERTISING

B.F. Skinner felt that there is NO such thing as FREE WILL and that all actions undertaken
are PRE-DETERMINED by our ENVIRONMENT. As part of his studies in ‘RADICAL
BEHAVIORISM’, he infamously created the operant conditioning box (nicknamed the skinner
box) which used NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT in the form of ELECTRIC SHOCKS
to create ESCAPE and AVOIDANCE LEARNING in animals.
Escape learning’ is the behavior exhibited when an animal (or human) learns that they can
escape pain through completing a certain action. Escape learning’ can be turned into
‘avoidance learning’ by adding an associated stimuli. For example a light bulb turning on
before an electric shock is administered. The scary thing about ‘avoidance learning’ is that it’s
self-reinforcing – once the avoidance behavior is conditioned, it will continue even when the
shock is turned off.
The reinforcement then becomes relief from not getting an electric shock, and the test subject
will continue the behavior due to the perception of a threat rather than an actual threat
whenever the pre-shock stimuli is presented.
What if I told you that the same techniques used to make little albert afraid of rats?
REINFORCE AVOIDANCE LEARNING in animals are the
SAME TECHNIQUES USED TODAY BY GOVERNMENTS.
If you have probably been affected by this manipulation (most likely without being aware of
it), and you’re probably affecting others too. The fear of victimization projected onto
significant others (partners, children, friends) is known as altruistic fear – it’s been used in
propaganda campaigns at least as far back as world war one and some scholars believe that it is
a main motivating factor.
When altruistic fear can be created in people against a segment of society, it can then be
used to encourage them to willingly give up their human rights and freedoms
Want to introduce a national picture database of all american citizens? make them afraid
that their jobs are unlawfully being taken away by illegal immigrants and tell them that
a national id card will fix the problem. Want to censor web forums and esoteric material in
the U.K.? Make people afraid that without default-on censorship their children will be
exposed to harmful adult material and shape negative public opinion by putting it into the
same category as drug use, terrorism and other deviant behavior
Fearing for themselves and their loved ones, with the propaganda being repeated by key
influencers in society, people will rarely think twice about what it is they’re giving up for a
FALSE sense of SECURITY. The media furthers their own agenda, providing information,
“expert” commentary and personal testimony for news stories, conveniently highlighting the
more extreme behaviors of a small number and ignoring positive features.

The media amplifies stereotypes, DESPITE the OPPOSITE being TRUE. It is clear that there
is a campaign ongoing to SENSITIZE PUBLIC OPINION AGAINST “SCAPEGOATS” by
LABELING THEM INDISCRIMINATELY as ‘DANGEROUS’, thus MARGINALIZING
and attempting to CRIMINALIZE them. This MANIPULATION of PUBLIC OPINION is
done almost daily at the moment with press, radio and television, centering on the supposed
dubious activities of scapegoats while interviewing their main opponents. Since the inception of
propaganda, its practitioners have known that with enough repetition, it’s POSSIBLE to
CONVINCE the PUBLIC that ALMOST ANYTHING is TRUE – just ask goebells or hitler.

“Great LIARS are also great MAGICIANS.” – Adolf Hitler

A single piece of media often does not have a lasting effect on the human psyche, but the more
we are bombarded by scapegoating, the more likely we are to believe that what we’re being
told is true. Just like SKINNER’S RATS would LEARN HOW TO AVOID ELECTRIC
SHOCKS, WE are PROGRAMMED to AVOID ALTERNATIVES by seeing things
repeatedly ASSOCIATED with DANGER and PAIN (physical, financial and emotional).

This avoidance behavior can become self-reinforcing, as we may never take the opportunity to
explore alternatives, being so afraid of the personal danger we are repeatedly told we would
be putting ourselves in. WE BECOME “FEARING SUBJECTS” – people expected to
govern their own risks through media-induced fear. The more we fear scapegoats and the
more they are talked about in a negative light, the more they become a risk in the eyes of the
public, and the GREATER the BENEFIT for GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS to be seen
to be managing thembecause SCAPEGOATS are depicted as THREATENING and
BIZARRE, by sympathizing with their position and RESTRICTING THEIR LIBERTIES …

GOVERNMENTS APPEAR to be WORKING in the BEST INTERESTS of the SAFETY
and personal freedoms of citizens, WHILE ACTUALLY TAKING AWAY PERSONAL
FREEDOMS. It is IRONIC that GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS PROMISE TO
‘PROTECT” AGAINST SCAPEGOATS using the fear as justification when
GOVERNMENTS THEMSELVES HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE for the WORST DEATH
and DESTRUCTION in HISTORY.
Yet government actions are often justified as PEOPLE GENERALLY BELIEVE and
PRESUME (whether it’s true or not) that government institutions are working in their best
Interests.

MOB RULE ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES
by Cinnamon Stillwell www.sfgate.com november 29, 2006

America’s college campuses, once thought to be bastions of free speech, have become
increasingly intolerant toward the practice. Visiting speakers whose views do not conform
to the prevailing left-leaning political mind-set on most campuses are at particular risk of having
their free speech rights infringed upon. While academia has its own crimes to atone for, it’s the
students who have become the bullies. As of late, a disturbing number seem to feel that theirs
is an inviolate world to which no one of differing opinion need apply. As a result, everything
from pie throwing to disrupting speeches to attacks on speakers has become commonplace.
Conservative speakers have long been the targets of such il-liberal treatment.

At San Francisco State University, former liberal activist-author turned conservative activist-
author David Horowitz, had his entire speech shouted down by a group of protesters.
Composed primarily of students and other members of the spartacus youth club, a trotskyist
organization, the group stood in the back of the room shouting slogans and comments at every
turn. Even this was not enough to warrant their removal, so Horowitz and his audience, which in
cluded me, simply had to suffer through the experience.
Horowitz, whose speech centered on his academic bill of rights, took on his critics and
attempted to engage them in dialogue, with varying degrees of success. But those who actually
came to hear him speak, whether out of sympathy for his views or out of a desire to tackle them
intellectually, were unable to do so fully because of the actions of a few bullies.

It is not only conservative speakers who are at risk of having their free speech rights trampled
upon on american college campuses. Those who dare criticize radical islam in any way, shape
or form tend to suffer the same fate. In 2004, u.c. berkeley became the locus for bullying
behavior during a speech by islam scholardaniel pipes. I was witness to the spectacle, one i’ll
never forget. Members of the muslim student association and other protesters formed a
disruptive group in the audience, shouting, jeering and chanting continually. They booed
loudly throughout and called pipes everything from “racist” and “zionist” (which in their minds
is an insult) to “racist jew” – all because pipes had the audacity to propose that moderate
muslims distance themselves from extremist elements in their midst,that in tackling terrorism
authorities take into account the preponderance of muslim perpetrators and that israel has a
right to exist peacefully among its neighbors.

This was hardly the first time that u.c. berkeley students had espoused hostility toward
speakers with “unpopular” views or those hailing from “unpopular” countries such as Israel.
Nonetheless, it was a wake-up call for many in the audience who had not yet experienced
first-hand the INTIMIDATION of the MOB.

Recently, reformers from within the Arab world itself have been on the receiving end of such
Treatment. Whether it be the work of student groups or faculty, insurmountable security
restrictions and last-minute cancellations have a strange way of arising whenever such figures
are invited to speak on college campuses. Recently, reformers from within the arab world
itself have been on the receiving end of such treatment
arab american activist and author nonie darwish was to speak at brown university. The event
was canceled because her views were deemed “too controversial” by members of the muslim
students’ association. Given that darwish is the author of the recently released book, “now they
call me infidel: why I renounced jihad for america, israel and the war on terror, Such
claims are hardly unpredictable. Like most arab reformers, darwish must overcome the
resistance within her own community, aided and abetted by misguided liberal
sympathizers,
In order to get her message across, darwish’s pro-israel views led to an invitation from the
campus jewish group hillel to speak at brown university. Unfortunately, the very same
organization later backed out, fearing that their relationship with the muslim students’ association
would be harmed by the experience. But if such a relationship is based on MUTUALLY
ASSURED CENSORSHIP, then it’s hardly worth preserving. In the end, all of brown’s
students missed out on what would undoubtedly have been a thought-provoking experience
it’s a sad state of affairs indeed when the figures of moderation and reform that many who call
themselves liberal or progressive should in theory support are instead shunned in the name of
political correctness. For how can one expect to promote progress while helping to stifle the
voices at its heart?

People such as shoebat and darwish, who literally risk their lives to call attention to a grave
threat to all our rights, are the true freedom fighters of our day. But far too many accord that
label to those who choose to effect political change by blowing themselves up in a crowd of
civilians or by randomly lobbing rockets into homes and schools or by promoting hatred of other
religions. By excusing such behavior and simultaneously helping to suppress reformers, liberal
student groups are in fact aiding the very totalitarian forces they claim to oppose. They have in
effect become part of the problem, not part of the solution.

It would be nice if we could look to our colleges and universities as the bearers of progress, but
at this rate it seems an unlikely prospect. If we are to truly promote an atmosphere of intellectual
openness, respectful political debate and the free flow of ideas on campus, then we must stem the
tide of thuggery, bullying and intolerance that threatens to subsume future generations.
Otherwise, we cede the day to MOB RULE.
stewart alsop: “the fascistic overtones are obvious to anyone who has seen those forest of
arms raised in unison by the revolutionary young, or heard their mindless shouted chants”]
“surely, anyone with a sense of the political realities can smell the danger that these silly,
kind, irrational people, in their cushioned isolation from reality, are bringing upon us all
… the danger starts with the university, but it does not end there. that is what makes the
mush so scary.”

POLITICALLY CORRECT DEATH THREATS AT GEORGIA TECH
by peter collier frontpagemagazine.com march 21, 2007

peter collier co-authored seven books with david horowitz, including the widely read destructive generation: second thoughts about the ‘60s. he is also the author of many other books including, biographies on the fords, rockefellers, and kennedys

This past February, while other Georgia Tech students were exchanging flirtatious valentine’s
day notes, Ruth Malhotra received an anonymous letter whose message was anything but
amorous:
This valentine’s day, you cannot attack gay marriage. it is about love and you are about hate.
This valentine’s day, you cannot condemn a woman’s choice. it is about love and you are about hate.
This valentine’ day, you cannot protest the vagina monologues. it is about love and you are about hate.
No, this valentine’s day, you will be raped. sex is about love and through it you will experience hate. i cannot wait.

To find a rape threat in her mailbox was almost a relief to malhotra after months of receiving
death threats (one of the most charitable, from a fellow student, said, “i really want to choke
you, bitch”) As with all the other letters, she turned the vicious valentine over to the campus
police, which added it to the “ongoing investigation”. That so far has yielded nothing.
Malhotra can’t help believing that a university that claims to be more committed to “civility”
than any other school in the country and routinely initiates proceedings against students who
commit such offenses as smoking in the dorms. Would certainly have immediately sprung
heroically into action if she had been a black, hispanic, lesbian, or almost any other woman
receiving such messages.
But she is a conservative activist and almost by definition a thorn in georgia tech’s side
so the school’s administration, beginning with president wayne clough and working downward
to various assistant deans, has sat on its hands while malhotra endures what her attorney david
french calls “a persecution.”
Presently a graduate student in international affairs, malhotra has had a college career that
resembles a sort of pilgrim’s progress through what the campus sensitivity experts like to call
“hostile environment”. A committed christian, she was personally conservative but not
particularly political when she arrived at tech in 2002. In the perfervid post 9/11 atmosphere
on campus, she found herself gradually pulled into the orbit of the college republicans and soon
galvanized not only by questions of war and peace but also by issues such as race preferences
and abortion. And on all of these issues, she found, conservative students faced a tilted
playing field. She recalls: “the more i got involved, the more i saw the obstacles conservative
students face in expressing themselves. The administration put so many more challenges in
our way. We didn’t have the same resources and opportunities that leftist students had.
I expected an open forum for ideas, but the administration was clearly biased. Already a
controversial figure on campus, malhotra, now chief plaintiff in the suit filed with
fellow student leader orit sklar, became public enemy number one for the georgia tech left

An ad hoc group called clam (conservatives and liberals against malhotra) formed on
campus with the sole raison d’etre of harassing her. An anti malhotra website appeared calling
her “CHRISTO-FASCIST” and showing an unflattering shot of her face stippled with digitized
swastikas. Flyers were posted throughout the campus denouncing her as a “twinkie“- an asian
who was “yellow on the outside and white on the inside”.
The charge of ethnic treason was almost laughable: malhotra’s indian descent had given her
a dark complexion and she wasn’t asian according to the racial taxonomy propounded by
campus victim groups” … “although she knew that if she had been on the left she would have
been accorded “protected status” as a presumptive “minority”
Far more disturbing that the mundane slanders she faced as she completed her course work for
her degree were the messages that now began to appear on her campus email. On her campus
email, one writer threatened to throw acid in her face at the upcoming graduations ceremonies.
Threats against malhotra reached a crescendo. “So your not dead yet ruth malhotra,” one of
them began with uncertain grammar but unmistakable enmity. But you will be soon.”
Another one warned, “Don’t even try to protest national coming out day. If you do, you will
regret it, and don’t say you were not warned. you are hated on this campus and you should fear
for your life.” Yet another said, “for every time a student is called nigger on campus – you will
receive a BULLET TO THE HEAD.”
Malhotra is unable to forget the kafka-esque situation: “it is ironic that the georgia tech
administration would enforce unlawful speech policies that silence disagreement with its
preferred political agenda, but remains absolutely silent in the face of threats on a student’s
safety. David French, her lawyer in this case and a longtime litigator in matters of free speech
and student rights, is also stunned by what has happened to Malhotra: “I’ve never seen anything
quite like this. The tolerant left at georgia tech seems to have decided that
RUTH MUST BE DESTROYED to PROTECT `TOLERANCE’
“power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak.” – John Adams

The DEMAGOGUE & DEMOCRACY
The easiest way to restrict the ability of people to QUESTION a demagogue is to make it
DANGEROUS to do so. INTIMIDATION can take many forms. people can be thrown in jail,
fined, or sued for saying certain things. A demagogue’s followers (the “mob”) might try to
punish or harm anyone who disagrees. The ability to criticize is overwhelmed by
“conformity” under the mask of “correctness”.

“VICTORY of the DEMAGOGUE” by hyatt seligman the american thinker.com november, 2012

Chicago style politics. Kill your opponent by CHARACTER ASSASSINATION and
PROMISE FREEBIES to YOUR BASE. Toss in a little SCAPEGOATING and
BLAME-GAMING through ENVY and CLASS-WARFARE.

His simple plan of DIVIDING and CONQUERING through FEAR, ENVY and CLASS
WARFARE trumped all else, barely. appeals to RACE, GENDER and EMOTION triumphed
over economic reason and self-interest and the good of the country. It didn’t matter to them
that unemployment was at record highs and their communities and lives devastated the last
four years.
The community organizing, empty-suit incumbent won by pandering to the democratic base, a
cobbled, bare majority of ‘victims’. The most important thing about you is ‘tribal’ identity”
Obama is the master of the “BASIC INSTINCTS ” of his SELF-CENTERED,
NARCISSISTIC BASE. It’s not complicated once you understand the CON.

man plans, God laughs