For July - December 2003 Excerpts from writings of interest to all.
 The Hans Zeiger Pagee-Mailbox ---
e-Mailbox 2 ---
This 'n' That The way back home. Send this page from You Don't Say to a friend.For those using Microsoft Internet Explorer: Select the "Mail" icon at the top of this window, then "Send Page." For those using Netscape: Select "File" at the top of this window, then "Send Page." |
"[W]e see Fourth Generation warfare in America in the cultural treason of almost all the nation's elite: politicians, educators, church-men, media figures and entertainers. All, almost without exception, have adopted the hideous, anti-western ideology most commonly called 'Political Correctness' or 'multiculturalism,' which in fact is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms, largely by the work of the Frankfurt School. The oft-stated goal of cultural Marxism is, quite simply, the destruction of Western civilization."Led by Herbert Marcuse, the intellectuals of the Frankfurt School determined more than a half century ago that the key to destroying America was to Balkanize it: to divide it up along every possible cleavage of race, sex, age, and belief, and lead each faction to blame all its problems on others, especially on white males. The strategy has worked brilliantly. Though Al Gore is no Latinist, he was correct in his assertion if not his translation: America's motto today is, 'From one, many.' "Here, at last, we see the whole picture. At the same time that the West is under renewed assault from abroad, especially by resurgent Islam, it is possessed at home by an ideology that prevents it from defending itself. From a culturally Marxist perspective, there can be no greater sin than defending Western culture. Thus we see an American President -- a Republican -- respond to September 11 by inviting mullahs to the White House. Whatever has gone wrong, the West, somehow, must be at fault for it. What chance of survival does our culture have, when its own elite regard it as 'a cancer on history.'" -- Excerpts from "Why Islam Is a Threat to America and the West," Essays on Our Times, by Paul M. Weyrich and William S. Lind, page 10. Address: Free Congress Foundation, 717 Second Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002. Phone: 202-546-3000 or 800-683-0660. Fax: 202-543-5605. Website.
"[George Bush haters] hate him because he is too American. As internationalists first, they disdain anything too distinctly American. An America that is unsure and forever critical of itself is the America they prefer. A persona such as Bush's --- a south-westerner, rancher, Bible-believing Christian -- represents an America they cannot control, one at which they sneer and seek to subdue. . . ."Though Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton, for example, are also unlike this crowd, these top Democrats are made acceptable and less American by espousing United Nations and World Court hegemony over the United States, and by favoring a diffusive, multi-cultural America, an America more apologetic, constantly self-critical, less Christian, more European. Having long ago shed themselves of the traditional values of their mother religions, the 'sophisticates' feel antipathy for those faithful to traditional American values as personified by George Bush and greater kinship to liberals like Kennedy and Clinton irreverent of traditional American norms. "While most of the country is pleased to be labeled American, the Hamptons, Hollywood and Greenwich Village crowd aspires to and feels gratification when labeled European. No doubt, most of this crowd would vote for Jacques Chirac, if possible, over Bush, Cheney, Reagan, etc. as President of the United States. . . . "In today's fashionable liberalism, anti-Americanism has become the moral imperative and, therefore, a war against Iraq by America is construed as immoral, notwithstanding the outstanding humanitarian deed it was. Voguishness has replaced principle. "Lawyers such as Stanley Cohen, as well as the ACLU, vigorously defend Islamic terrorists not because they care more about civil rights than the average American, but because in their demented worldview an enemy of America must be good inasmuch as that enemy is arrayed against America the racist, America the imperialist. To them, as evidenced by the lawsuits they bring, the real enemies are the Boy Scouts, the Pledge of Allegiance, the flag: all American traditions. . . . "Though priding themselves as internationalists, [anti-American Americans] live in a parochialism apart from the rest of the country. They have become drugged by a new opiate: anti-Americanism, the opiate of the Left." -- Excerpts from "Bust Drives Adversaries Crazy," by Rabbi Aryeh Spero, Human Events, November 10, 2003, pages 10, 13. Address: 1 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001. Phone: 202-216-0600. Website.
"What once was called 'paganism' has been renamed and assigned a new respectability as the gaia hypothesis. The once-hated idea of world government has been renamed and assigned a new respectability as global governance. The concept of national sovereignty is eroding and transmuting into the concept of sovereign equality."Most Americans have no idea this is happening. Many don't want to know. For the most part, those who do know are the leaders of the various non-governmental organizations that are actively promoting these policies. "The people of the United States are the only power on earth strong enough to prevent global governance from taking control of the entire planet. Swift, bold action on the part of either the administration or Congress -- preferably both -- is required. . . . "The criteria for deciding the appropriateness of U.S. participation in any U.N. agency or organization should begin with the U.S. Constitution, and the principles of freedom there enshrined. Any U.S. agency or organization whose program infringes on those principles of freedom should not receive funds paid by U.S. taxpayers, nor should the United States participate in their programs. "This doesn't seem to be a difficult concept: If the U.N. wants to govern the world, the U.S. wants no part of it. Sadly, this view appears to be in the minority. Efforts to limit the U.N., or to withdraw from the U.N., have rarely gained even 100 votes in Congress. The advocates of global governance have done their work well, convincing a generation that the environment is being degraded and that only the U.N. can save it through its global policies." -- Excerpts from "The Rise of Global Green Religion," by Henry Lamb, Whistleblower, August 2003, page 38. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"Homeschooling parents . . . don't have to teach multiculturalism, the peculiar notion that other cultures should be preferred to our own, or teach a course in Islam, such as is now taught in California schools. Homeschooling parents are free to teach that their own religion and country are the best."Homeschooling parents do not have to teach political correctness, such as the dogma that all academic subjects must be taught through the prism of gender and race oppression. They are free to teach that America is not a land of victims but a country of freedom and opportunity for all. "Homeschooling parents do not have to teach the androgyny demanded by radical feminism. They are free to teach boys and girls separately and differently, and let their boys enjoy plenty of recess to work off their excess energy and thereby void being given Ritalin to make them behave like girls. "Homeschoolers do not have to take a course every year in Diversity, the code word for gay rights, as is now mandated K-12 by the California State Legislature. Parent educators are free to teach that it is OK to be judgmental about illegal and immoral acts. "Homeschooling parents don't have to teach revisionist history that deletes mention of Washington, Jefferson and Franklin, as the New Jersey State Department of Education tried to do (but had to back down after a parental uproar). Homeschoolers have academic freedom to study the Founding Fathers and read the writings of the DWEMs (Dead White European Males) who contributed so much to Western Civilization. "Homeschoolers do not have to study global education that is designed to promote global interdependence and citizens of the world instead of the U.S.A. Homeschooling parents do not have to teach Environmental Education fantasies such as that humans exist to serve the earth instead of vice versa. "Homeschoolers don't have to study fuzzy math, whole math, new math, new new math, or rainforest math. They won't waste math time discussing, coloring, playing games, or telling their parents how good they feel about incorrect answers. "Homeschooled children will learn to read using authentic phonics as their first order of business, so they won't have to take remedial reading after three years of failure. They won't be inflicted with Whole Language, which fraudulently teaches children to guess at words from the pictures, skip over difficult words, and substitute any words that seem to fit the context. "Homeschoolers will save lots of time because they don't have to read typical middle school assignments of depressing modern fiction by 'nobody' authors writing about drugs, violence, sex, runaway teens, witchcraft, and other depressing subjects. Homeschoolers can read books about heroes and stories that build character, courage, patriotism, and virtue. "Homeschoolers won't have to spend time filling out nosy questionnaires about sex, drugs and suicide. The public schools are obsessed with asking students impudent personal questions such as how many times have you felt depressed and tried to commit suicide. "There are many more worthless courses taught in public schools on which homeschoolers will not spend their precious time, such as courses in murder (forensics is the latest fad), suicide, death and dying, evolution, and self-esteem. Homeschooled students won't have a problem with self-esteem because their self-esteem will be earned by achievement in mastering the important truths of history, literature, math and science." -- Excerpts from "Why Homeschooling Takes Less Time," by Phyllis Schlafly, The Phyllis Schlafly Report, August 2003, page 4. Address: PO Box 618, Alton, Illinois 62002. E-mail. Website.
"The American legal system has been 'corrupted almost beyond recognition,' Fifth District U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Edith Jones told the Federalist Society at its Feb. 28, 2003 meeting at the Harvard Law School."Judge Jones explained that zealous prosecutors are increasingly willing to sacrifice what is morally right for political expediency. She also said that the change has come because our nation's legal philosophy has descended to 'nihlism.' "Nihilism is defined as, '1. a negative doctrine, the total rejection of current beliefs in religion or morals. 2. a form of skepticism that denies all existence.' "Judge Jones would have been hard pressed to find a word that could have painted the current state of our nation's legal affairs in a worse light. 'The integrity of law, its religious roots, its transcendent quality are disappearing,' she said. . . . "'The Framers created a government of limited power with this understanding of the rule of law -- that it was dependent on transcendent religious obligation,' said Jones. . . . "Judge Jones concluded by stating, '1) the state exists to preserve freedom, 2) the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution and 3) it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to state what the law is, not what it should be.'" -- Excerpts from "The American Legal System Is Corrupt Beyond Recognition, Says Federal Judge," The Idaho Observer, March 13, 2003, page 15. Address: PO Box 457, Spirit Lake, Idaho 83869. Phone: 208-255-2307. Fax: 208-255-2607. E-mail. Website.
"[T]he greatest enemies to black progress today are within the black community itself, not in American society at large. As black people, we must recognize that our real battle is with ourselves, not with society. It is not racism, but the civil rights establishment, with its victim-centered mentality and irrational fury at white America, that mentally cripples blacks, teaching them to find the means of success outside of themselves in government programs, and urging them to find the origin of their greatest problems in white society."But the politically incorrect truth is that racism today is a state of mind, more than a social reality. . . . "[T]he fact is, today, fatherlessness is our most urgent social dysfunction. From out-of-wedlock births, to violence among boys, to rape and abuse of women, to drug use and poor school performance, most social pathologies can be traced to today's epidemic of fatherlessness. Every night, fully 40 percent of American children go to bed in homes in which their fathers do not live. The psychological effects on children, male and female, of this alienation from their fathers is impossible to measure, but common sense dictates that it must be profound." -- Excerpts from "From Rage to Responsibility," by Jesse Lee Peterson, WorldNet, (now Whistleblower, February 2001, page 27. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"'[C]ompetitive altruism' [is] the desire to raise one's status by appearing more generous than others. There has always been competitive altruism in the United States, but in the 1960s, philanthropists began to shift their emphasis from church-related charities to minorities, Vietnamese peasants, and homosexuals. This shift was part of a much larger cultural shift that accompanied the rise of former student radicals to positions of power and influence. Called the 'New Class' by conservative critics, this group forged what is today known as liberalism."The overwhelming success of New Class activism led to steep increases in welfare spending, public sector employment, taxation of the wealthy, environment and worker protection, and to the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Groups expressing New Class opinions, like the NAACP, the ACLU, the National Organization of Women, and Greenpeace, raised millions of dollars by appealing to the fashionable new forms of altruism. Moreover, liberal groups have garnered more and more positive publicity than business or conservative groups. Virtually all media references to liberal citizens' groups have a positive or neutral spin, whereas references to corporations or conservatives generally have a negative spin. "This is because media operators are, almost without exception, members of the New Class, and promote its views of morality and altruism. They soft-peddle news about black or Hispanic crime, Mexican and other non-white chauvinism, and the depredations of immigrants, while trumpeting any detectable misbehavior by whites, heterosexuals, or corporate executives." -- Excerpts from "Competitive Altruism (Part II)," by Ian Jobling, American Renaissance, November 2003, page 1. Address: PO Box 527, Oakton, Virginia 22124. E-mail. Website. (First page of article.)
"Americans have been conditioned to believe that the majority is right, that polls reflect the majority's opinion, and that government should do what the majority wants. But these Americans could not be more wrong!"Any serious student of American's founding era knows that the men who created this nation abhorred democracy, the essence of which is unbridled majority rule. Rather than subject themselves and their posterity to such a danger, they crafted a republic, the rule of law, which has as its fundamental purpose limiting those who would govern. They showed their contempt for unrestricted popular opinion with their decision to have senators appointed by state legislators and presidents chosen by electors. They understood that popular sentiment should never replace independent thought, good judgement, and courageous adherence to principles. ". . . Karl Marx advocated 'democracy' in his Communist Manifesto, calling it 'the first step in the revolution.' A century later, Mao Tse-tung pointed to 'the democratic revolution' as 'the necessary preparation . . . to bring about a socialist and communist society.' Vladimir Lenin not only manipulated the masses to accomplish his evil ends, but used polling to win their support. He then became their spokesman, built a coalition of supporters, and with outside help seized control of the nation." -- Excerpts from "How Polls Can Destroy American," by John F. McManus, The New American, October 6, 2003, page 44. Published by American Opinion Publishing Incorporated, 770 Westhill Boulevard, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914. Phone: 920-749-3784. Fax: 920-749-3785. E-mail. Website.
"[In the 1800s, Frenchman] Alexis Charles Henri Maurice Clerel de Tocqueville . . . wrote: 'I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there. I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her fertile fields and boundless forests, and it was not there. I sought for the genius and greatness of America in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there. I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her public school system and her institutions of learning, and it was not there. I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her democratic congress and her matchless constitution, and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.'"America is no longer great because it is no longer good. . . We slaughter innocent babies in their mother's wombs yet mourn the passing of a snail darter in a Tennessee river. We take public money to fund an artist whose only talent is to use a toilet on stage in front of a live audience of hooting and whistling morons. We honor as surgeon general [in Clinton's administration] a woman who proclaims a palpable lie, that male homosexuality is wonderful and healthful. We declare war on poverty by creating a generation of bastard children who are condemned to live a life more impoverished than that of their unknown fathers. We elect as President [Clinton -- twice!] a man who cheats on his wife and whose wife is surrounded by lesbian friends, a man who loathes the American military and paraded in London while in college to cheer our Communist enemies, a man who is a pathological liar, a pathological sexual debaser of women and a pathological aggrandizer of pure power." -- Excerpts from What's the Difference? Gray Liberal Mush or Vivid Conservative Facts, by Mike Thompson, 2002, page 13. Published by on-demand in cooperation with Trafford Publishing, Suite 6E, 2333 Government Street, Victoria, B.C. V8T 4P4, Canada. Phone: 250-383-6864 (or toll-free: 888-232-4444). Fax: 250-383-6804. E-mail. Website.
"The issue isn't a granite stone with the Ten Commandments inscribed on it. Never has been. The issue is much more diverse and important than a piece of stone."The issue was best stated by none other than Federal Judge Myron Thompson, who said that a display of the stone containing the Ten Commandments and a host of other historical quotations is illegal. The disputed display was in the Alabama State Judicial Building. Thompson said the central, most important issue was this: 'Can the state acknowledge God?' "After asking the question, he went on to answer it: 'No.' "That is the issue. Lest we fail to understand what has occurred here, let me explain. A single lower court federal judge has bluntly told every American that America is now officially an atheist nation. "In one swift stroke of the pen, Judge Thompson tossed out more than 225 years of American history and law. In one swift stroke of the pen, he has instituted a new form of law based on what he wants it to be. Rex has become lex - the king has become law. He wears a black robe and he says he is the law. "Go back and read the First Amendment, the one Judge Thompson destroyed in the name of preserving it. 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,' the First Amendment says. Congress has passed no law establishing religion. But what Congress refused to do, indeed, because Congress refused to do it, Judge Thompson did. He instituted as the law of the land the religion of atheism, which says there is no God. "Not only did Judge Thompson usurp the power of Congress, he also took away the rights of every individual and state. The second half of the establishment clause of the First Amendment reads: '. . . or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'" -- Excerpts from "America, Now an Atheist Nation," by Don Wildmon, American Family Association Journal, October 2003, page 3. Address: PO Drawer 2440, Tupelo, Mississippi 38803. Phone: 662-844-5036. Website.
"In June 1965, President Lyndon Johnson set the tone for a new vision of civil rights. 'Freedom is not enough,' he proclaimed. 'We seek . . . not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result. . . . To this end equal opportunity is essential, but not enough.'"The sweep of this pronouncement was breathtaking. If equal opportunity is not enough, then some form of unequal opportunity is necessary to achieve equality of result. If freedom is not enough, restrictions on the freedom of some are necessary for the advancement of others -- those who came to be known in affirmative action parlance as 'specially protected classes' or 'preferred classes.' Courts and administrative agencies set about implementing this new vision of equal rights, which was now said to require racial classifications in order to succeed. The watchword of this new vision of civil rights was class rights rather than individual rights. . . . "There is no way to say that rights belong to classes without discarding the notion that the first object of civil society is the equal protection of equal rights. If rights belong to classes and not to individuals, then equal protection of the laws is impossible. . . Class claims are claims of inequality, not equality. Likewise, class remedies, such as affirmative action and racial set-asides, assume that all members of the 'monolithic white majority' are guilty of racial class injuries and all members of 'discrete and insular' minorities are victims of such injuries. But this is pure fiction. . . Class remedies will afford benefits to some who have not been injured and trammel the rights of some who have not perpetrated injuries. This lack of correspondence between rights and remedies violates the rule of law by making the assignment of rights and remedies simply arbitrary." -- Excerpts from "The Michigan Affirmative Action Cases: An Historical Perspective," by Edward J. Erler, professor of political science, California State University, San Bernardino, Imprimis, September 2003, page 4. Address: Hillsdale College, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242. Phone: 800-437-2268.
"In 2000, the kings, princes, presidents and prime ministers of this world went to the United Nations in New York City where they agreed to a major overhaul of its duties, powers and responsibilities. The U.N. gave itself the right to have a rapid deployment force (standing army or global defense department), as well as the ability to add a second chamber for representation from the people of the world in hopes that someday the populace will elect their own representatives to this 'international house of representatives.' . . . ."The rise of the global government structure is like the construction of a house. At this point, the entire structure is in place and now the finish work is beginning -- namely, further integration of countries, values, ideas and philosophies, as well as a harmonization of national laws to conform with one another, thus creating a new corpus of international law. . . . "How did the globalists begin to change how people think? They held a set of mega-conferences in the 1970s and then a repeat of those conferences in the 1990s, which focused on the environment, population reduction, human rights, women's rights, controlling populations through controlling where and how they live, and managing and controlling food resources. Thus, the 1970s set the foundation for the social, environmental, educational and legal changes that were built upon and continued in the 1990s. "The globalists were successful. As a result of the mega-conferences, America's school children are taught sex education as early as kindergarten. Condom distribution and abortion are commonplace with young teens, the homosexual lifestyle is considered normal, and the environment is given greater emphasis than math, English and U.S. history. The Program of Action from the Rio Earth Summit, known as 'Agenda 21,' is taught as its own course in schools, universities and colleges across America with children being taught they are 'global citizens' of the world instead of citizens of the United States of America." -- Excerpts from "Structure of Global Government," by Joan Veon, Whistleblower, May 2003, page 19. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"[S]omeone, somewhere, somehow has to start raising the real issues that must be addressed if America is to survive, let alone prosper, in the 21st century. So here are my suggestions:"Abolish the income tax and the Internal Revenue Service."That would be a start. Does it sound too 'radical'? All I'm suggesting is that our nation once again operate under its legal charter, the Constitution." -- Excerpts from "Contract with the Constitution," by Joseph Farah, Whistleblower, July 2003, pages 3, 44. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"Jefferson grew up with two institutions with which modern Americans have had no experience -- an aristocracy by birth and an official church. The Anglican Church was in his time and is today the official Church of England. In the Virginia colony, people were taxed, and part of those taxes were used to subsidize the Anglican Church. Jefferson believed this wrong, as religion was a matter of conscience, and he did not think government had the right to force a person to support something his conscience did not. Hence, his idea of religious freedom was the absence of an official church or an officially designated religion."When he wrote in a letter that there was a wall of separation between church and state, he meant just that and only that. He meant that Baptists could not be taxed to support Methodists or vice versa. He did not mean that government must be hostile to religion and ban any display of it from all public places. The same Congress that wrote the Bill of Rights also made provision for chaplains. It was a basic premise of American republicans (little R, having nothing to do with the Republican Party, which was not invented until the 1850s) that only a virtuous people, schooled in virtue by religion, could maintain a free republic. "It is worth noting that the people today who so vehemently wish to sweep religion from all public spaces and institutions are also the same people who consistently oppose freedom. They want only one God -- the state, which of course they intend to run." -- Excerpts from "The State Is Their Only God," by Charley Reese, Midnight Messenger, July - August 2003, page 3. Address: 9205 SE Clackamas Road, #1776, Clackamas, Oregon 97015. Phone/fax: 503-824-2050. E-mail. Website.
"Socialism is a wonderful idea. It is only as a reality that it has been disastrous. Among people of every race, color, and creed, around the world, socialism has led to hunger in countries that used to have surplus food to export."Its economic disasters have afflicted virtually every industry. In its Communist version, it killed far more innocent civilians in peacetime than Hitler killed in his death camps during World War II. . . . "[T]he story of socialism has been a story of high hopes and bitter disappointments. Attempts to redistribute wealth repeatedly led to the redistribution of poverty. . . . "There is no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over other people is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else." -- Excerpts from "Disastrous Utopia," by Thomas Sowell, NewsMax.com (the magazine), February 2003, page 58. Address: Sequoia Digital Corporation, 224 Datura Street, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401. Website.
"I now fear the legal profession more than I do Islamic terror."I am far from alone. I believe that more Americans rightly fear being ruined by the American legal system than being killed by a terrorist. "Tens of millions of innocent Americans and untold numbers of innocent institutions -- from schools to businesses -- stand a good chance of having their money legally stolen through litigation or even the mere threat of it. "Innumerable American children are terribly harmed by family lawyers who egg on their clients to destroy the other parent. "Parents fear allowing visiting children to play on their property -- in their pools or on their trampolines, for example -- lest they be sued in case of injury. "Airlines won't give passengers aspirin for fear of lawsuits. "Physicians prescribe unnecessary procedures, raising the national medical bill astronomically, for fear of being sued. "American hotel guests can no longer breathe fresh air because hotels are no longer built with windows that open lest they be sued if a hotel guest falls out of one. "Men and Women fear speaking normally at work, lest they be sued. "The deprivation of freedoms in America because of laws and litigation has made this country less free than at any time in its history. "Law in America and internationally is no longer on the side of the decent. It is a weapon in the hands of the indecent. "Everything related to law has been corrupted. . . . "If America is destroyed, it will be done legally." -- Excerpts from "The Legal System Is Now Our Enemy," by Dennis Prager, Whistleblower, August 2003, pages 4 and 5. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.
"A man's house used to be his castle, but oh how times have changed. Today, regulators from scores of government agencies assert they have the authority to determine everything from the width of the doorways and height of electric outlets and light switches (under the Americans with Disabilities Act) to the number of bedrooms, exterior doors, and occupants. . . ."In return for permission to build or renovate an existing structure, regulators demand public access and 'impact fees' bearing little or no relation to the cost of infrastructure the landowner might someday use. "These rules assume someone other than the individual landowner actually 'owns' the property and therefore has the right to decide how to use it. There is a name for this doctrine of 'social' property rights: feudalism. It prevailed in Europe for many centuries, discouraging trade and commerce and elevating privilege over individual freedom. It was finally overthrown in the seventeenth century by the doctrine of natural rights, which held that private property is so important to individual liberty it must remain outside the control of the state. "Private property is essential to the Rule of Law. In all of human history, and in all the countries of the world today, there is no Rule of Law without protection of private property. And yet this keystone of civil liberty is being washed away at an alarming rate with hardly a voice raised in alarm, much less opposition. "A few years ago, Michigan police arrested a man for soliciting a prostitute and confiscated the car he was driving at the time. The man's wife, co-owner of the car, protested she knew nothing of her husband's bad conduct and demanded compensation for her property loss. The case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 'an owner's interest in property may be forfeited by reason of the use to which the property is put even though the owner did not know that it was put to such use. . . . "Do you know anyone who smokes marijuana? Have they ever been a passenger in your car or guest in your home? A single marijuana 'butt' in an ashtray could cost you your car or your home. So could a single illegal pill or capsule. "Between 1985 and 1993, approximately $4 billion in assets were seized by federal, state, and local authorities. The federal government alone carried out 170,000 seizures during that time. . . ." -- Excerpts from "Four Attacks on the Rule of Law," by Joseph L. Bast, The DeWeese Report, August 2003, page 3, published by the American Policy Center, 13873 Park Center Road, #316, Herndon, Virginia 20171. Phone: 703-925-0881. Fax: 703-925-0991. E-mail. Website.
"By 1976 the Cultural Revolution was over and the revolutionaries had won. The country had been subverted by its own sexual passions, and the citizens of the land were like Samson under Philistine yoke, 'eyeless in Gaza,' to use Milton's term, 'grinding at the mill with slaves.' That world, a world where a child can have its brain sucked out in late-term abortions and have the president of [the] United States veto any attempt to stop it, is the world we live in today. It is a world, which, as President Clinton well knew, uses sexual license as a way of maintaining its hold on power by defending the most abject bondage as the most advanced freedom. It is a world, in which, as Augustine said, men have as many masters as they have vices. And this is so for a simple reason. There will always be control. The only question is whether it is going to be self-control of the sort that John Adams felt was essential for our constitutional form of government or external control for the benefit of the controllers. Edmund Burke saw the alternatives clearly at the very beginning of this diabolic 200-year experiment in libido dominandi. 'Society,' he wrote, 'cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.'"-- Excerpts from "Sex, Revolution & Political Control," by E. Michael Jones, The Barnes Review, November/December 2002, page 17. Address: TBR Co., 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100, Washington, DC 20003. Phone: 202-547-5586. E-mail. Website.
"In Book VIII [of Plato's The Republic] he gives a step-by-step account of the decline of the civilized city-state, which begins as a state which honors honor, what he calls the Timocratic state. That in turn is followed by oligarchy, which is interested in nothing but money. Each constitution is undermined by 'the insatiable desire for that which it defines as good.' That means that oligarchy 'was destroyed by its insatiable desire for riches and disregard of everything else for the sake of moneymaking.' Those who lost their money at the hands of the oligarchs band together in resentment and bring about the overthrow of the oligarchic state and usher in the democratic state. But democracy is 'also dissolved by insatiable desire for that which it defines as good,' namely, 'freedom,' the thing according to Plato 'you would always hear described as the most beautiful in the democratic city.'"But the trajectory of decline does not end with the democratic city because 'freedom' of this sort very quickly gets defined as the ability to do whatever one wants, and, human passion being what it is, that means license. When freedom gets defined as license or the gratification of passion, that means that freedom has become its opposite, namely, slavery. For, if, according to Plato, 'To do anything too much tends to take you to the opposite extreme,' then 'too great liberty seems to change into nothing else than too great slavery, both in man and in city.' The democracy of freedom defined as the ability to gratify appetite quickly become a form of slavery. That means, again according to Plato, that 'democracy is precisely the constitution out of which tyranny comes.' St. Augustine said that man was free as long as he was moral, which is to say acting according to the dictates of practical reason. 'It is clear,' he wrote in the City of God, 'that sin is the primary cause of servitude.' That means, he continued in another passage from the same book, that 'a good man, though a slave, is free; but a wicked man, though a king, is a slave. For he serves, not one man alone, but, what is worse, as many masters as he has vices.'" -- Excerpts from "Sex, Revolution & Political Control," by E. Michael Jones, The Barnes Review, November/December 2002, page 10. Address: TBR Co., 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100, Washington, DC 20003. Phone: 202-547-5586. E-mail. Website.
"In black slave settlements [in America in the 1800s], many slaves had minimal contact with whites. Significantly, this situation meant that much of African culture was preserved on American plantations. Little is known about how white and Indian slaves lived, and their very existence is usually completely ignored, and pictures are impossible to find. However, they were a significant part of true history. Also, the establishment leads students to believe that all owners of slaves in America were white. In reality, Indians also owned slaves, and so did blacks and mulattos. . . ."Contrary to official mythology, chattel slaves, . . . if only by reason of pure economic necessity, were likely to have been better treated in the South than factory workers ('wage slaves') were in the North. In the Southern system, a strong black or white slave was extremely expensive -- so much so that only a small percentage of rich people (who might themselves be white or black) could ever afford them. It is highly questionable that such a major investment would ever be treated so poorly as to diminish his strength. A Southern plantation owner had every incentive to treat his charges well, so as to preserve their ability and incentive to work hard, long and profitably. Black slaves in America were treated immeasurably better than they would have been in Africa, then or now. Slaves in Africa frequently wound up in the cook-pot or were tortured for the amusement of their fellow blacks. Most slaves imported to America were not captured by whites but had already been enslaved by other blacks or Arabs." -- Excerpts from "The Reality of Slavery in the Old South," The Barnes Review, November/December 2002. Address: TBR Co., 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100, Washington, DC 20003. Phone: 202-547-5586. E-mail. Website.
"In a short three decades, gay rights activists have successfully secured societal toleration for a behavior that was once illegal throughout the United States. With the June 26 Supreme Court ruling rendering Texas' sodomy law unconstitutional, homosexuals now enjoy a favored legal status as well. . . ."For more than 30 years, gay activists have relentlessly echoed the message that homosexuality is innate, irreversible and normal. Even though no scientific evidence exists to support the aforementioned claims, many in our society have bought the misinformation like it was a bargain at Wal-Mart. "Whether they realize or not, the six justices who voted to affirm homosexual behavior have themselves fallen for the mesmerizing message of gay activists." -- Excerpts from "Pinnacle of Perversion," from Kelly Boggs' "An Unnecessary Boost to the Gay Rights Movement," June 27 in the Baptist Press News, as quoted by The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, July 14-20, 2003, page 28. Address: 3600 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002. E-mail. Website. "That sodomy is an inalienable right would no doubt come as a big surprise to the Constitution's framers. They are, of course, the last constitutional experts the Supreme Court would ever consult. The Supreme Court, judging from the majority opinion's slavish attention to Europe's regard for sodomy, is much more interested in the thought of modern Danes than dead Americans. . . . "The majority on the Supreme Court declares that anti-sodomy laws compromise the 'dignity' of homosexuals. The framers would reverse the judgement: it is sodomy that compromises their dignity, and it is the rule of law which points to and protects that dignity. The framers belonged to communities that passed such laws so as to safeguard a moral culture in which human dignity is possible." -- Excerpts from "No Dignity in Indecency," from George Neumayr's "Sodomy in the Age of Oprah," June 27 in the American Spectator, as quoted by The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, July 14-20, 2003, page 28. Address: 3600 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20002. E-mail. Website.
"Collective fraud is the systematic and knowing suppression of unwelcome truths by a set of experts who either shade the truth or acquiesce to such shading. . . . [I]t is tacit collusion in distorting or suppressing scientific evidence for the purpose of sustaining a major falsehood. . . . Perhaps the most aggressively perpetrated collective fraud in the social sciences today is that which sustains the egalitarian fiction. This is the frequent but false assertion that intelligence is clustered equally across all human populations, that is, that there are, on average, no racial-ethnic disparities in developed mental competence. . ."Our rulers are schizophrenic about IQ and mental testing. It is fashionable to claim that IQ scores are meaningless; to claim that intelligence cannot be defined; that whatever it is, it can be boosted by early instruction; that essentially anyone can be trained to do anything. And yet, when the US Supreme Court was persuaded to rule that convicts with IQs below 70 could not be considered fully responsible for their actions and should therefore not be executed, there was no outcry about the meaninglessness of IQ. Likewise, the US Army routinely tests recruits and does not accept anyone with an IQ below 85. . . . "If the theory is that blacks fail because they do not have proper 'role models' we hire unqualified blacks and put them in positions of authority. If white society has destroyed black self-esteem we promote grandiose fantasies about African history. If segregated schools were bad for blacks we send them to white schools. If black children still get bad grades, we devalue the curriculum so everyone can get 'A's. If blacks do poorly on standardized tests we do away with the tests. If not enough blacks and Hispanics can get into gifted programs, we lower standards just for them. If 'racist' employers prefer not to hire blacks, we force employers to hire them. If a 'racist' society still manages to impoverish non-whites, we give them welfare and food stamps. And everywhere, always, we batter whites with the constant message that 'racism' is the greatest of evils, and that whites are collectively responsible for black and Hispanic failure. "When one grand project to lift up the black man mysteriously fails, America embarks on yet another, but each successive failure only confirms the terrible truth: Whites must be even more viciously racist than anyone had thought. Therefore, each new experiment is launched with more denunciations of white wickedness and appeals to white guilt. . . ." -- Excerpts from "The Hollow Debate on Race Preferences," by Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, June 2003, pages 5, 7. Address: PO Box 527, Oakton, Virginia 22124. E-mail. Website.
by Hans Zeiger Since I was six years old, a poster of the Declaration of Independence has hung on my bedroom wall. That’s one reason why I turned out to be a young conservative. But I don’t suppose many Leftists have posters of the Declaration of Independence hanging in their homes and workplaces. They’ve managed to take it out of the schools too. It seems the Left would rather burn it. The Declaration is of equal importance to the Constitution, because it is the founding creed of the United States. It is a classic doctrine of American ideals that is the foundation of the constitution and the American way of life. Most importantly, the Declaration of Independence is a spiritual statement of dependence on God. For that reason and the fact that the rights identified in the Declaration come from God, the Left wants to keep the Declaration of Independence hidden from the view of elementary school children and college students alike. The New Jersey State Assembly passed a bill in 1999 to require school children to recite the Declaration of Independence, and the Left sent out forces to vigorously lobby against it in the state senate. The New Jersey Education Association said the Declaration of Independence is “too jingoistic” and the reference to God crosses the line between separation of church and state. Eventually, the bill was defeated. What was New Jersey’s proposed recitation? It happens to be the vision statement of America: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” If somehow the Declaration of Independence can be presented absent of its core principles, the Left will engage in historical revisionism with great fervor. This is the task of Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz in his latest book America Declares Independence. Dershowitz spends most of his time attacking conservatives for believing in the essential Declaration of Independence. “It should come as no surprise that [the Declaration has] been wrenched out of context by partisan pleaders to promote parochial causes,” he writes. Unfortunately for the revisionist, Mr. Dershowitz, the pure and unaltered Declaration is not a document lacking in honest words and comprehensive discussion of context. The British crown is thoroughly taken to task and the practical reasoning for doing so is expounded in great detail. And if it’s the simple truths of the Declaration that Mr. Dershowitz is so disturbed by, he should remember that they don’t need context. They’re “self-evident.” The Declaration of Independence is not a fresh abridged translation courtesy of the religious right as Dershowitz contends. The original parchment leaves no stone unturned in its quest to summarize the truth about government and natural rights. Besides identifying the source of rights (God), the investiture of rights (individuals), and the definition of a legitimate government (consent of the governed), the Declaration lists the three things that a free people must be willing to sacrifice to preserve their liberty. The founders wrote, “We mutually pledge to each other our lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.” So why is the Left so virulently intolerant of the Declaration of Independence? Because it presents a political and philosophical worldview entirely inconsistent with the liberal view that rights come from the government or Mother Earth, that rights are invested in groups and classes of people, and that preserving freedom is a task that can be met through the effortless consumption of rights. The Left says that we must move beyond the perspectives of slave-owning white males known as the Founding Fathers, that we must cling to the prospects of change and moral relativism. It just so happens that the sacred words of the founding fathers were the summation of freedom for millions of 19th century southern slaves who rejoiced in their emancipation that all human beings “are created equal.” The Left will continue to distort, revise, and shred the Declaration of Independence as long as we allow them to do so. President Calvin Coolidge wouldn’t allow the Left to burn the Declaration when he delivered a 4th of July oration 77 years ago. In it, he summed up the disparity between liberalism and the Declaration of Independence. “If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction cannot lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient than those of the Revolutionary Fathers.” Let’s never forget that we’re the real progressives when we believe in the Declaration of Independence. -- Hans Zeiger, 18, is a Seattle Times columnist, activist, and speaker. As an Eagle Scout, he is president of the Scout Honor Coalition. He can be contacted at hanszeiger@yahoo.com.
"The War of Independence was fought 226 years ago principally over the issues of sovereignty and self-government."These are two concepts that have been obliterated from the debate today. The war was fought so that we in America would have the ability and right to govern ourselves as individuals and that our individual states would have sovereignty with little interference from London, Washington, or anywhere else. "Do we have that today? "Let's just talk about taxes -- since that was such an important issues in the War of Independence. "Just like in 1776, we have taxation without meaningful representation. In 1994, for instance Americans elected Republicans to both houses of Congress for the first time in decades because they promised, among other things, to scrap the tax code. They lied. Let's not mince words. They failed to live up to their 'Contract with America,' and Americans have not had an opportunity to express their rage against the unconstitutional income tax since. "Today the tax code is every bit as complicated and confiscatory as it was before 1994, if not more so. "We've been living with an unconstitutional income tax in this country now for nearly ninety years. Why is it unconstitutional? Because it is in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.' "You just try invoking your Fourth Amendment rights to the IRS when it comes to make a claim on you. "Is there any doubt that Americans don't like the income tax? Do you think most Americans would trade it or scrap it if they could? If we had real representation, would it still be around? Of course not. Americans have no choice. The game is rigged -- just as it was rigged against the colonials. . . . "Too many Americans, in my opinion, are overly concerned with safety and security, and not nearly enough are concerned about freedom and liberty. "That's the trap that government always uses to lure power away from the self-governing individual. Self-government is what George Washington and his barefoot men sacrificed for in the snows at Valley Forge. It wasn't simply a matter of independence from the crown of England. It was a war fought so that free men could govern themselves. . . . "Freedom isn't about prescription drug plans dictated by Washington. Freedom isn't about more laws. Freedom isn't about a false security promised by your federal government. Freedom isn't about being numbered from cradle to grave. Freedom isn't about having your wealth confiscated by government before you even cash your paycheck. Freedom isn't about the government mis-educating your child. Freedom isn't about United Nations peacekeeping missions. Freedom isn't about more cops on the beat. "Freedom, ultimately, is about the liberation of the individual to run his or her own live with minimal interference from government. Period. End of story." -- Excerpts from "What Is Self-Government?" by Joseph Farah, Whistleblower, February 2003, pages 14-15. Address: PO Box 2450, Fair Oaks, California 95628. Phone: 916-852-6300. Fax: 916-852-6302. Website.  Must-Read items for March-May 1999. June-August 1999. September-December 1999. Must-Read items for January-April 2000. May-August 2000. September-December 2000. Must-Read items for January-June 2001. July-December 2001. Must-Read items for January-June 2002. July-December 2002. Must-Read items for January-June 2003.The way back home. |
