Constant agitation against local Police in America's major urban centers has become so much an expected norm, that few even stop to inquire just why the Police are so frequently targeted for protests in American cities. Few, who claim to represent the public, even seem concerned whether there a pattern that is neither spontaneous nor accidental in the agitation? Those who do challenge the motives of such protesters, seldom link the problem to a broader attack on the continuity of our institutions, or to groups working to undermine the infrastructure of American societies. They fail to see the pattern, the parallels to other phenomena that undermine heritage.
We have become so used to racial controversy over Police action in minority neighborhoods, that few even note the obvious fact that it is in the interests of the law abiding people in every neighborhood, to have the Police there; to have them deal effectively with any lawless element, which preys upon that neighborhood. Common sense is no longer part of the equation. It is--for an obvious example--almost taken for granted that organized groups, claiming to represent the "rights" and interests of American Negroes, will protest an aggressive Police presence in any "Black" neighborhoods; that if one is slain, while committing a criminal offense or in a confrontation with a Police officer, there will be an organized demand for an outside investigation. It is now assumed that demonstrators will take to the streets to call for suspension and even prosecution of any Police officer involved, if there is not a full scale riot.
And yet, again, the interest of the law abiding residents of such a neighborhood are no different than those of the law abiding residents of any other neighborhood. The desire for safety, to be able to go about one's personal and family business without fear, is no different in a White, Black, Asian, mixed or any other community. Safety of the person, of the family--safety in enjoyment of the fruits of one's labor--safety in one's residence--is essential to every normal person.
The differences in neighborhood reactions to Police action, arise not in any innate characteristic of any people, but in the calculated responses of certain organizations, which long predate contemporary incidents. The fires are further fueled by the posturing of other groups that have arisen out of the mindset deliberately promoted by those original organizations. The pattern, described, is part of a much broader confrontation often addressed at this web site. When one looks behind the immediate personalities that may take up the "cause" in the particular neighborhood, erupting with anti-Police bias, one sees only another facet of a century old attack on the underpinnings of traditional American society and values.
To understand the contemporary phenomena, one may begin by noting the differences between the British Fabian approach to Socialism and that of various Continental varieties engaged in the same pursuit. Arising among a group of elitist intellectuals about 1890, the Fabian Socialist movement in Great Britain replaced the rhetoric of hate and militant class warfare, which had marked socialist movements from the French Revolution onward, with the politics of deception--with rhetoric claiming a better path to peaceful reform, progress and the familiar utilitarian pretensions. Among themselves, they even adopted the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing as their private symbol. Shortly after this genesis in Great Britain, the Fabian approach was seeded in American academia, starting with Harvard, at the beginning of the 20th Century.
An excellent overview of the process, thus began, may be obtained from two studies, funded and published by an organization known as Veritas Foundation, which appeared in book form in 1960 and 1964, respectively, as Keynes At Harvard and The Great Deceit. We strongly urge Police intelligence units to obtain copies, in order to more fully understand the "reasons" behind what appear to be utterly mindless attacks on local law enforcement. The source materials are all carefully documented. But a brief background comment may also be helpful. The Trustees of Veritas Foundation, were primarily older Harvard graduates, headed by President Theodore Roosevelt's youngest son, Archibald (Harvard, 1917). While "Teddy" Roosevelt may have characterized himself as a "Progressive," no one ever doubted his courage or his patriotism; and his children were true American patriots.
We quote from Archibald Roosevelt's Introduction to The Great Deceit, Social Pseudo-Sciences, (Veritas Foundation, West Sayville, New York: 1964) to help clarify both the flavor and relevance of that work by the research staff of Veritas:
Fabian socialists have managed to maintain an aura of respectability with the wealthy and the "book educated." These revolutionary wolves masquerade in sheep's clothing as gentle reformers. . . .
The regimes of the German National Socialists under the Nazis, the Italian Corporate Socialists under the Fascists, the Argentine dictatorship under Peron, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics under the Russian Bolsheviks, have all been socialist governments.
In the United States, with the help of our great American news media, both on the air and in the press, Fabians cleverly disclaim their close kinship with these tyrannies, so that Mussolini and Hitler are never called socialists here, though their regimes bore that name. Hitler and Mussolini became competitors with the Fabian socialists and Russian communists in the struggle for control of the Western world. But their quarrels were chiefly tactical. . . .
Socialists have infiltrated our colleges, our schools, our law courts, our government, our media of communication and our churches. They have done so by the old Fabian method of infiltration--wolves in sheep's clothing.
This book is completely documented. Should you doubt any of the statements in this opening summary and introduction, we suggest you look at our careful index and check the references, both in the text and in the footnotes. . . .
Our documentation necessarily includes specific names and actions.
The socialists have always realized the importance of capturing the impressionable mind of youth, and they set about gaining control of the teaching profession in the United States over a century ago. . . .
Nowhere did the socialists' perversion of the colleges serve them better than in the field of anthropology. American socialists picked this subject as a number one objective in the United States some years after the Civil War and they have been successfully exploiting it ever since. . . . They knew . . . that man, for all his progress in other fields, has never found a permanent racial solution. So the socialists set about using it (as they do all our problems) to stir up trouble.
They adopted for popular consumption the emotionally attractive slogan of racial non-difference, and introduced it to the professors, who in turn taught it to their students. They had no compunction about discarding all the painstaking researches and fact-findings of centuries. . . .
Race, say the socialists in public, is nothing but an outside "paint job." Then they exacerbate racial difficulties by urging students to make inflammatory speeches and to incite riots. They frighten officials into condoning civil disorder and chaos. This is the pattern of violence which in Germany, Italy and Russia paved the way for the socialist seizure of power.
While popularly proclaiming the identicalness of races, socialists in their trade journals and textbooks and in their personal diaries and private correspondence tell a wholly different story. . . .
They use the riots which they have stirred up in the name of racial equality as a lever to persuade legislatures to pass more and more stringent measures, while the socialistic Warren Supreme Court pours out a constant stream of revolutionary decisions, none of them justified by the Constitution, and all aimed at establishing a centralized dictatorship by judicial fiat.
Socialists preach that there are no permanent standards of conduct or morality. . . .
Socialists assert that all human actions and reactions depend upon environment. The theory is that human beings are mere robots, responding to "external stimuli," and that heredity and the accumulated experience of countless centuries, should be disregarded.
We have quoted enough to suggest the relevance to rationalizations in the rhetoric that ordinarily accompanies the, seemingly racially motivated, attacks on local Police. Let us, then, turn to page 172, where the formation of the NAACP is discussed in detail, and the picture will grow much clearer:
In 1909 a group of socialists and socialist sympathizers founded a socialist Negro front organization which they labelled the National Association for the advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The two prime movers of the organization, Mary White Ovington and William English Walling were prominent white socialists. These two were also key members of the Fabian socialist organization in the United States which went under the name of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society (later called the League for Industrial Democracy).
The NAACP was strictly a Socialist Party front of white radicals designed to push through measures based on demands for Negro rights which would aid in conditioning the United States for a socialistic society.
A few years previously, a parallel organization was organized of Negroes headed by W. E. B. Du Bois, a Harvard educated Negro socialist. The movement was termed the Niagara Movement, named after the locale of its organization at Niagara Falls, Canada. The function of Du Bois and his group was to destroy the effectiveness of the great Negro leader Booker T. Washington. Washington had espoused the philosophy of Negro self-help and self-development in the trades and professions as a means of lifting the Negro into a higher economic and cultural level. . . . By 1910, the socialists decided to merge the remnants of the Niagara movement into the NAACP.
Booker T. Washington's path had been the course of personal responsibility. He believed that individual progress should be earned, not demanded; that one should be accountable for one's actions, not blame others for each frustration. He urged the races of the South to explore a common interest, not trash a common heritage.
To understand the enormity of what the NAACP and its socialist allies have accomplished at the expense of the legitimate interests of American Negroes; to really put the unending confrontation into context; to understand the deliberate alienation of Negro youth; consider the break down in Negro society, since the NAACP won its battle against the leadership represented by Booker T. Washington, that wise, kindly man, who had recognized the worth and believed in values that had benefited every other group that ever prospered in America!
When Washington emerged as the American Negro leader in the 1890s, about 20% of Negro births in America were to single women, out of wedlock. While certainly far from ideal, the fact was that 80% were legitimate, born to married couples, in family units. By 1930, 21 years after the launch of the NAACP, but at a time when Washington's benign influence still dominated Negro society, the illegitimacy rate had fallen to 14.11%, with almost 86% being born to married couples. It was from 1930 onward, that the Fabian Socialist design--by that time aided by a major Communist effort--began to exert an increasing influence; and the "Civil Rights" movement, which we have experienced ever since, gradually became more successful in spreading its demoralizing message.
By 1964, when Veritas produced The Great Deceit, documenting the deliberate efforts of the Fabians to undermine the infrastructure and values of American society, that illegitimacy rate had risen to over 25%, clearly reversing the benefit of the wise counsel of Booker T. Washington and other Negro Conservatives. But that was the year in which the "Civil Rights" movement, experienced its landmark success in the "Civil Rights Act" of that year. It is, thus, a convenient point from which to look both forward and backward, to assess the validity of the Veritas hypothesis (that it was a deliberate effort to undermine society), against what was to follow. What has happened in the 40+ years since? The illegitimacy rate which, as noted, had been falling under the influence of Washington's movement, has soared to around 70%, representing virtually a total breakdown in the family structure in the Black inner-cities of America. (Remember that it is through the family that social progress is passed on and retained.)
Interesting additional evidence may be obtained by comparing Black to White crime ratios across America, over many decades. (As every Policeman who has ever worked a beat in an inner-city neighborhood is well aware, a very high percentage of the alienated young Negroes, hanging around street corners waiting to get into trouble, come from those single parent homes--homes without the discipline or example of a real father figure, devoted to his family's interests as a family.) The culture of blaming others for every problem, reinforced by the rhetoric of organizations that blame the system for any frustration that an individual experiences, has replaced that wise counsel, which advised youth to learn a trade and go to work; which taught the traditional values, responsibility and accountability, essential to individual success. Washington offered self-respect and family values; the Socialists, something for nothing. The results should have been obvious.
A 1964 study by this author, analyzed the social readjustment to civilian life, following the great mustering out of the United States Armed Forces at the conclusion to World War II, as reflected in a comparison of the 1946 crime statistics to the prewar data. In reviewing felony crime figures by year, we had stumbled on an interesting phenomenon, which seems to further verify what we will term the "Veritas hypothesis." (Or is any other interpretation really rational?)
The per capita ratio of Black to other felony prisoners (primarily White), received from the Courts in 1940 in the 26 States and the District of Columbia included in the comparison, had stood at 5.22. This surged slightly to 6.10 in 1946. But the more revealing statistics were derived by regional comparisons. The section where the "Civil Rights" movement had already achieved the greatest measure of political support was in the Northeast. Clearly "liberal," before the War, the Black to White felony ratio, measured in 1940 in a composite of the States of New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Connecticut, had stood at 8.37. In 1946, this spurted to 11.25 (in New York, itself, to over 12). Assessing a non-Southern, non-Eastern composite of the Midwestern States of Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Kansas, with the Western State of California, showed a 1940 ratio of 6.18, rising to 8.45 in 1946.
Less dramatic ratios were tabulated for six "border States," Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Oklahoma, and the District of Columbia. There a composite ratio in 1940 of 5.53 rose in 1946 to 7.00. Yet what about the Old South--the region that was the least sympathetic to the "Civil Rights" movement? A 1940 Negro to White ratio of 3.31 actually fell to 3.25 in 1946! In other words, the soldiers adjusted best to the culture in the area that was most resistant to socialist reform," to socialist innovations in race relations.
The 1946 surge in Negro crime, in the more "liberal" venues, subsided somewhat in the years immediately following. However, as the "Civil Rights" movement continued to gather momentum, the ratios returned to the elevated 1946 levels by the early 1960s.
It is interesting to note that South Carolina, perhaps the most Conservative State in America on racial questions, had by far the lowest Negro to White Felony crime ratio of any State during the entire period from 1920 to 1960. Approximately on a par, with some years one, others the other slightly higher, the Negro felony crime rates were slightly lower than the White in both 1940 and 1946. A comparison with even the other States in the deep South, would have shown Negro to White felony ratios approximately 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 times South Carolina's. Yet, the South Carolina statistics should surprise no one. Crime is no more a natural tendency in the Negro than in any other race. There is very little crime in many tribal areas of Black Africa--a stark contrast to the situation in some of the large cities of that continent, where White "Liberal," i.e. Fabian Socialist influences, have prevailed, and tribal mores have been replaced with something quite different.
Was the "Civil Rights" movement really about "advancement," as its proponents claimed, or social disintegration, as Veritas documented in the above referenced book? Did it make sense to abandon a movement developed for American Negroes by self-educated American Negroes, a course which offered constructive pride in one's heritage and which had clearly proved beneficial, to embrace a course of endless confrontation, developed by leftwing Whites? How many generations must be sacrificed to socialist deception, before we realize that we have taken some terribly wrong turns? Consider Booker T. Washington's sage counsel, below. Consider the NAACP approach. Forget all that you know of history, for a moment. Just on pure common sense, which approach would you expect to benefit, which destroy?
The origin and history of the NAACP, which had a Board of Directors controlled by leftwing Whites at least until the late 1950s, is far from being an isolated example of the Fabian assault on American values and infrastructure. Consider, for example, another organization also well known for confrontations with the Police, the ACLU--the American Civil Liberties Union--founded in 1920. The same Veritas Foundation study deals at great length with the antics of the ACLU. We quote from page 294 (ibid., where the prominent Fabian Socialist, Felix Frankfurter--later one of the key activist Justices on the United States Supreme Court's--role is being discussed:
After leaving the War Department, Frankfurter resumed his law professorship at Harvard, where he promptly joined hands with a group of socialists along with a few communists and formed the American Civil Liberties Union. Every single founding member of this body had a record of associations with either the socialist or the communist movement. It is an amazing fact that from its inception the American Civil Liberties Union, clearly a socialist front, has successfully masqueraded as an impartial body interested only in justice for all. Frankfurter and his cohorts busily spread ACLU's principles of socialized law throughout the American legal structure.
During the same period, Frankfurter represented the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which was another socialist front, organized and masterminded by white socialists. Later, Frankfurter sat on the Supreme Court and participated in decisions in favor of both the NAACP and ACLU, just as if he had never had any previous personal interest or bias in the matter. Such insensitiveness to professional standards of ethics had no precedent in American jurisprudence. [The text goes on to quote a letter which former President Theodore Roosevelt had sent to Frankfurter during World War I (three years before the ACLU) describing Frankfurter's "attitude . . .to be fundamentally that of Trotsky and the other Bolsheviki leaders in Russia; an attitude which may be fraught with mischief to this country."]
The tactics of the ACLU have closely paralleled those of the NAACP, the essential differences being functional. Once the related significance of those distinct functions is recognized, the Fabian methodology will become much clearer--as will the danger that it poses, and the lateness of the hour.
While the NAACP was intended to undermine the legacy of Booker T. Washington and the good will between the races in the Old South, to which Washington appealed most strongly in the address, linked below; the ACLU was directed at a broader spectrum of targets, important to the continuity of American society. Thus while the ACLU might join the NAACP in challenging local Police procedures, it became even more focused on religious observations, and on supporting radical agitations of a wide variety; in the first situation, seeking to restrict the observations; in the second, seeking to redefine "free speech" and "freedom of assembly" to include purely disruptive acts--such as forced others to listen, against their will, to that "speech," or to endure much insult without protection. While this two pronged onslaught has been sold to much of the public as a protection of religious freedom and a protection of dissent, it is really neither--rather an incursion against both the character of local self-government and the freedom of other citizens, as well as an inroad on the basic right of each community to preserve that which is distinct in its own heritage.
Whether a particular court decision or legislative enactment enhances or limits freedom, often depends upon a very subjective analysis. The Fabian apparatuses have conveniently promoted a useful myopia through a sympathetic media, which has completely distorted public perceptions.
One can certainly dissent and practice one's Faith, or no faith, without being able to veto the traditional religious observations of one's neighbors or the rooted citizens of a community, in which one has happened to settle. One can certainly dissent from the popular viewpoint, without forcing others to alter their normal course, to endure some sort of disturbance considered inappropriate as to time or place, by the established residents of a community. Free speech is a fine thing; indeed, essential to a free society. Telling those who do not want to be your audience that you can disrupt their intended routines to force them to be that audience, however, is actually a negation of freedom--a variety of assault. In that sense, so-called "peaceful protests" aren't. Nor is confining such peaceful protests to friendly or neutral venues, an interference with the right to "peaceably assemble."
To understand the American tradition with respect to the roles of Church and State, one needs to look beyond the rationalizations that the ACLU has managed to promote via Left leaning Judges, justifying interference with traditional public observances and memorials. We discuss some of the relevant points in the essay, linked below, on "Leftist Word Games & The First Amendment Guarantee Of Religious Freedom." Rather than repeat that material, we will only point out the very carefully chosen phraseology of the First Amendment--the one the ACLU has been claiming to defend for 85 years--on the subject: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . .
Note that the selected language does not simply prevent Congress from establishing a Federal religion. The choice of the word "respecting" is no accident. It was intended to specifically prevent Congress from doing anything with respect to a State or local establishment of religion. The Supreme Court decisions, built upon a skein of previous ACLU attacks upon our religious traditions--traditions important to the maintenance of healthy local societies in America--which today prevent school prayer and public displays of religious symbols, etc., are doing precisely what the Founding Fathers sought to make certain that the Federal Government could never do! Yet why, one might ask, has the ACLU made such an enormous effort (and see The Great Deceit above, for a detailed background of how they set about corrupting our law on the subject) to limit the freedom of local communities to decide such issues for themselves?
Socialism in all its forms, seeks a consolidation of power, a collectivization of people under its own control. Having local communities and societies with strong Faith based moral principles, is as threatening to its ends as was the previously discussed morally based philosophy of Booker T. Washington. Again, because our subject here is Police/Community Relations, there is a direct corollary between Police problems and the social infra-structure of the various neighborhoods of a City.
While the NAACP and like organizations undermine that infra-structure in one way, the ACLU does much the same thing, coming from a slightly different direction. It should surprise no one that the two organizations have worked together, closely, throughout their common histories--not surprising that both have sought increased Federal domination over local decision making in providing for the public safety, for the maintenance of law and order. Indeed, can anyone conceive a better way to emasculate the local Police, as an instrument for preserving community values, than litigation seeking outside supervision of Police procedures.
But observe, in all of this, how false is the ACLU claim to be the defenders of civil liberty. In their alliance with the NAACP and the "Civil Rights" movement, they have repeatedly come down on the side of new legislation and court orders that restricts the rights of private property. Is there a more vital civil liberty than the right to determine the uses of your own property? They have continually ignored the 2nd Amendment and the primordial right of people to bear arms for their own protection and the protection of their civil societies. And, while they will defend the right of any revolutionary group to organize and do mischief, they have even opposed the right of the Boy Scouts of America to decide with whom they would associate. Put the two ideas in juxtaposition, and you will see the ACLU for what it is, and for what is has always been intended.
The ACLU decision to target community religious symbols, in itself, tells you that they have no genuine interest in civil liberty. Many American communities were originally settled by people who sought a Faith based community; who came here and cleared a wilderness, to have a community based upon adherence to a particular theology. Is there no civil liberty to form such a community? What civil liberty is involved in destroying the continuity of such societies, or in taking away their right to local self-government? Was Hitler really only defending "liberty," in insisting on one value system for every facet of German society?! Properly understood, civil liberty has no more dedicated foe than the ACLU.
In the previously mentioned essay on Leftist word games and religious freedom, you will find reference to an umbrella collection of Socialist leaning organizations, including the ACLU, NAACP and 27 other like-minded groups, in a "Consultative Conference On Desegregation," which was active in the late 1950s. What was the function of this conference, which met in secret? It was to try to keep any intellectually sound argument for the Southern position against forced integration of the schools, out of the media; or, where it could not be suppressed, outright, countered with human interest distractions carrying the message the Fabian Socialist groups wished to promote. So much for the right of dissent! So much for a public right to think things through, before we leapt.
Among those "like-minded groups" in that "Consultative Conference" was the ADL--the Anti-Defamation League--which also deserves attention here. The ADL's announced purpose, since its founding in 1913, has been to counter the defamation of American Jews. Yet its function--as demonstrated by its actions--has been very different; instead, closely parallel to those of the NAACP and the ACLU, organizations with which it has been closely associated throughout its history. By making exaggerated claims of anti-semitism; by smearing groups and individuals by association; by labeling those who dissent as bigots and hatemongers, while pretending to represent American Judaism, it has actually stirred antagonism against American Jews. But the most compelling evidence that it is, like the NAACP and ACLU, a deceptive Fabian device, intended to deceive and mislead, in order to undermine the social fabric, including the Jewish part of that social fabric--that is, to both alienate Jews from American society and to actually undermine the Jewish religion--is clear from some of the stands the ADL has taken.
What was the ADL even doing in that "Consultative Conference," set up to twist public opinion against the Southern position with respect to the "Civil Rights" movement? It was in the Old South, that American Jews were first accepted into the social mainstream. While there have been many Jewish Senators in recent years, such was not the case in the 19th Century. But the former Confederate States had two Jewish Senators among their 22 at the time of secession. Would an organization actually intent upon preserving the freedom and dignity of American Jews, in their adherence to an ancient Faith, conspire with Fabian Socialists to prevent other traditionally minded Americans from being able to defend their beliefs in the public forum?
Why does the ADL, today, support the ACLU in fighting against public displays of the Ten Commandments? Is there a Jewish interest in suppressing the Ten Commandments? It was Moses, the same prophet who inscribed Jewish theology, who brought the Ten Commandments down from Mount Sinai. Does Moses or the ADL define Judaism? What about the ADL support for a denial of gun rights, which would render Jew and Gentile, alike, unable to defend themselves? What about their support for the ACLU attack on the Boy Scouts of America, for not wanting to accept men who reject the male role, as male role models? What about the ADL's effort to have groups opposed to the social acceptance of Homosexual behavior, treated as "bigots," and hatemongers?
Anyone remotely familiar with the first five books of the Bible--the "Pentateuch," "Torah," "Books of Moses"--should quickly grasp that the ADL is not promoting or defending Judaism. Its role, like that of the ACLU, is to undermine. It does for American Jews, almost precisely what the NAACP does for American Negroes. And it is a hideously ugly picture. The fact that it is the ADL, from among the Fabian ranks, which has taken up the specific task of "educating" local police departments on how to recognize "hate crimes," is further evidence of the shameless duplicity of our Socialist foes. That they have succeeded for so long is disheartening evidence of how very late is the hour.
Of course, the NAACP, ACLU and ADL, are but part of a far larger complex of like-minded organizations. Almost everyone, reflecting on the tactics described, will recognize other organizations--including those merely local--which have employed the same techniques, demanding the same ends. It is suggested that problems in preserving law and order in the urban areas of America will continue to be needlessly aggravated, until such time as we turn the light of truth onto those who are deliberately stirring the cauldron of alienation. The only real hope is in an awakened public perception of the dynamics involved; and that has to include an understanding of the actual purpose and function of Fabian socialist organizations.
Does this mean that the average person, who joins the NAACP, ACLU or ADL, in any community, has consciously embraced these ends--or would even believe the history we relate? No, of course not. The Fabian movement depends upon deception; has always depended upon deception: The use of dupes, "limousine liberals," College students looking for causes, naive idealists who believe that there has to be a solution for every problem; all sorts of foolish folk who, for whatever reason, cannot accept reality, yet seek an outlet to vent their anger at what they do not understand. But examined under the light of reality; considering cause & effect, how people prosper & how civilizations crumble, what works for good & what works for ill in the human experience; the destructive qualities of the organizations and the movement they reflect, are very clear indeed.
Novel Challenges False Assumptions That Drive Obama:
Return Of The Gods
Conservative Intelligence Center
How You Define A Problem May Define You
Answer To Anti-American Lies
Prosperity & Peace Depend On Mutual Respect
Crimea's Return To Russia
Another Variation On Demonic Theme
Variations On Demonic Theme
Short or Long Term: Perspective Governs Values
Corporate Managers & "Immigration Reform"
Compassion Or Compulsion? (Egalitarianism)
Jason Richwine & An Assault On America's Future
Agenda Serving Bullies?
Implied Powers? Clear Limitations!
Missing Link To An Armed Citizenry
Missing Link To Reality
Whither American Conservatism?
Obama Or America--Irreconcilable Differences
Losing America's Multi-Generational Purpose
Social Reform: Confusion & "Unintended Consequences?"
Cloud Dancing Revisited--A Spreading Contagion
Blame & Envy--Demagogues' Path To Power
"Diversity": Reality vs. Leftist Fantasy
World Government? Surrender By Subterfuge!
Conflicting Social Premises
Pseudo Pragmatism--Political Folly
"Occupy Wall Street": Fruits Of Corrupt Education
Paths To Success & A Path To Failure
Socialist Policy Effects
Debt Default In America
Egalitarian Collectivism Sabotages Human Potential
Pursuit Of "Diversity," A Return To Babel?
Gold & Money In America
Freedom Of Choice? Gulliver Discovers America!
Libya, America & The Law Of Nations
Greatest Mischief Ever Wrought
Does The Left Perceive Reality?
Time--Neglected Dimension In Social & Economic Analysis
A Place For The America We Knew?
Cloud Dancing--Social Medium For Scoundrels & Neurotics
America, Built On Experience & Reason
Keynesian Harvest, 2008 & Beyond
Gaming The Question--Staple of Demagogues
"Social Justice"--Not Social & Not Just
Keynes & The Keynesian Appeal
Addiction: An Economy Dependent Upon Easy Credit
Function Of Money--A Medium Of Exchange
Congress & The Regulation Of Commerce
Price Of Egalitarianism
Leftwing Chickens Coming Home (Obama)
Race & Ethnic Politics--America, 2008
Liberty: The Basics
Promoting Hate--SPLC In Action
Death Of Community
Rebuke To President Bush On Immigration--2006
Dancing Judas Goats
George Washington or George Bush (Foreign Policy)
How The Welfare State Works
Declaration Of Independence--With Study Guide
Civil War, Reconstruction & Creating Hate In America Today
To Recognize The Bigot In An Argument
Leftist Word Games & First Amendment Guarantee Of Religious Freedom
Booker T. Washington's Wise Approach To Racial Progress
Conservative Debate Handbook: Defining Issues--Logistics Of Political Debate
Conservative Resource Menu--200+ Items