Table of Contents
Introduction: The Socialists’ One-Hundred-Years War On America, 1917–2017
The Epilogue -- But Not the Final Chapter
2. War Creates the
Opportunity to Expand the Revolution
3. Boys with $5 Billon Seed Money
4. The Commissariat for Investing in Capitalism
5. From Strategy of Envy to Fear of Weather
6. An Energy Conservation Strategy Inspired in a Hot Tub
7. Is Smoke from the
Bohemian Club Still Legal?
8. October 18, 2007,
Conference at Newport Beach
9. Political
Correctness Poisons Civilizations
10. Senator
McClintock Describes California’s Suicide
11. Socialism Fails
in America
12. Watermelons
Learn About the “Virtue of Poverty”
13. Eco-Imperialists’
Church of Climate Change
Part Two: The Future
14. On Quantum Politics:
Right and Wrong Are Dead
15. Introduction of the
American Left
16. The Great Deception:
Reds Become Greens
17. The Passengers in the
Old Gulfstream Five
18. The Source of California’s
Wealth Mystifies the Left
19. A 747 Eastbound over
the Pacific Ocean
20. New Age Marxism Takes a
Foothold in America
21. Multiculturalism
Divides the American Nation
22. Culture Is Not a
Civilization
INTRODUCTION:
THE SOCIALISTS’ ONE-HUNDRED-YEARS WAR ON AMERICA, 1917–2017
It was very dangerous to be alive during the twentieth
century. Nazis and assorted Fascists killed many millions simply on the basis
of race. But the Reds outdid them all by a factor of ten. They killed about one
hundred million people simply for saying something, for speaking out. Indeed,
life in any of the People’s Republics was quite unsafe for anybody who
practiced free speech. Criticizing the ruling Communist Party was simply not
allowed, and if you did not know who was listening, your politics could become
a very dangerous activity indeed. One soon learned that survival depended on
knowing the secret code that identified who in the group was the Party member
and how dangerous he was. The code classified Party members into tomatoes,
radishes, and watermelons. Tomatoes, red inside and outside, were a danger, but
known. Radishes, who were only red on the outside, were harmless. Watermelons,
however, were deadly; green outside, red inside.
After
having some success with spreading Communism from Moscow beyond Eastern Europe
into small, distant countries such as Cuba, Nicaragua, Angola, Korea and
Vietnam, the Party realized that it wais the United States of America that
stood in the way of its total domination of the world. More than that, there
were some signs indicating that America might even endanger the Communist
domination where it already existed.
When
the poor of the world started to vote with their feet—many millions abandoning
Communism and joining Capitalism even by risking their lives—the Party needed a
new strategy. It turned from Red to Green, and today, watermelons-flavored
politicians already rule America’s east and west coasts.
This is a story that spans one century, from 1917 to 2017. From 1917, the year of the Soviet Revolution, nine decades of historical facts and extrapolations[1] provide data for the fiction and projections of the final decade that ends with the year 2017. It describes how we got there and what can happen to the whole world if the watermelons end up ruling America.
Borut Prah
Berkeley and Oakland
2008
THE EPILOGUE -- BUT NOT THE FINAL CHAPTER
One hundred years after the
Soviet Revolution
Mexico
City International Airport. It was a crisp and clear
Christmas day of the year 2017 in Mexico City. What a difference from the smoggy
days of the previous century when citizens of Mexico City could not decide
whether to walk with their eyes open or shut. Now the air was as pure as in the
days of Montezuma. Today, it was so clear that one could see, a few moments
ago, a small black dot descending against the background of the white snowy
slopes of Popocatepetl volcano.
Three
minutes later, the dot became a Grumman Gulfstream Five jet. It dropped from
the sky, leaving behind a thin trail of haze from its two engines, and hit the
runway like a rock. Captain Roger Leach reversed the thrust. The two engines
screamed bloody murder for a moment—“don’t do this to us, Roger; we are old and
fragile and about ready to fall apart.” But they did not. In a moment, the
engine noise was replaced by the quiet thumping of tires on the extra-long
runway, seven thousand feet high, on the twentieth parallel.
The ancient G-Five had just performed another perfect landing. In less than a minute, it was rolling toward the newest architectural wonder, the place the whole world was talking about: the imaginative, new International Airport and Resort of Mexico City.
Mexico
was no longer the poor neighbor of the wealthy Estados Unidos up north.
It was now the second richest country in the Northern Hemisphere, right after
Russia. Some said, even ahead of Russia. Mexico had oil; it had sunshine; it
had nuclear power; and above all, it had an abundance of educated people. And
the biggest surprise to all who remembered the dusty old Mexico: It had water.
Mexico
showed the world that water could not be destroyed, no matter what you did to
it. It was the best renewable resource. Water, water was everywhere, and the
new airport was there to show it. Beautifully channeled through shallow canals
lined with mosaic tiles, water flowed through the gardens of orchids and
cascaded down along the escalators. Mexico City not only had the most beautiful
air terminal in the world, but it was also a first-class resort. American tourists would fly there for Kwanza
vacations, after ACLU[2]
managed to get Christmas outlawed because it contained God.
Mexicans
still called their northern neighbors gringos,
but few knew why. Some thought it was because in the old days they paid for
their vacations with green money. Those days were now gone. Some gringos had
managed to convert their dollars into pesos and open secret bank accounts in
Mexico just before the United States went Socialistic. Only they could still
afford vacations in Mexico—if the government would let them travel out of the country.
Generally, Americans were not allowed to travel much anymore. The State
Department kept tight control over emigration. Too many Americans simply went
abroad and remained there, having had enough of Socialism.
Five years earlier, the “World’s Smartest Woman” won
the presidential election on the Green Democrat—sometimes called the
“Watermelon”—platform. She easily defeated the one-term Eco-Republican
president about whom most people said he did more damage to America than
Carter.
“Tax
the rich until there’s no more rich” was her brilliant slogan, a path to power
invented by the progressive politicians who saw the National Science Foundation
2003 report that 50 percent of Americans could not tell how long it takes for
the earth to circle once around the sun. This was the signal that public
schools had accomplished their mission. It worked for Lenin too, with the dumb
Russian peasants. Indeed, the Green and Peace slogans had great appeal among
the dumbed-down population.
“We do not want to be the only superpower,” declared
the first woman president of the United States during her first executive order
as the commander in chief. To get even with the marines, who rejected her
application during her early twenties, she demilitarized America and created the
Virtual Armed Forces to the delight of the Chinese computer video games
industry.
Next, the greenback, “this symbol of Imperialism,”
was taken out of circulation, much to the dismay of some billion people all
over the world who had their dollars stashed away as their “golden reserve.”
The reference to In God We Trust was just too much for the new
government officials. The States became a cash-less society, run by the massive
computer networks that kept record of everybody’s consumption. In 2013, America
added this statement to its “living” Constitution: “from everybody according to
ability to everybody according to need.” The word need made consumption-recording legal. It was no longer
unconstitutional for the state computers to know who was where and when.
The greenback was now out. Food stamps replaced
money, and government-issued credit cards were used for everything else. At the
end of each month, each citizen received a Statement of Consumption over the
Internet. A green screen popped up if consumption was acceptable; yellow was a
warning, be careful; and if red showed, expect a visit from the consumption
police. The blue screen continued to be reserved for “critical system failure.”
Being Green was now even more
fashionable—especially if you were also anti-nuclear. By the time most voters
noticed that the Greens, or actually the Reds, were running the government, it
was too late. America was a nuclear-free zone from the Canadian border to
Mexico. First, all the remaining nuclear power plants were closed. The
president nationalized electricity producers and fixed the retail price. “We
will make power affordable … to the people,” she said. The United States was
soon buying electricity for a higher price from Mexico and Canada than it sold
it to its customers. A financial disaster had to follow.
This was just a sign of the things to come. When
something is cheap or free, people use more of it. The new parameters in the
Constitution of the Socialist America, so carefully resurrected from the ashes
of the Soviet Empire by the best progressive professors from Harvard to UCLA,
did not create conservation. On the contrary, they created waste, and with
waste came shortages—shortages of everything, including government revenues.
The more the government raised taxes, the less people wanted to work. Each
increase of taxes on the “rich” was followed by a corresponding decrease of
private investments. Jobs dried up, and the government had to step in with work
projects. For that, they had to increase taxes, or borrow money. And the
vicious spiral thus began.
But from where to borrow? It was a custom during the
twentieth century that any country that went broke, from Argentina to Zimbabwe,
simply asked the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the World Bank to come to
the rescue. Or better, one could ask the United States for foreign aid, and one
would usually get it. Or best, declare a war on the USA, lose it, and America
would rebuild your country.
All these solutions now collapsed. America, the main
contributor to the pot of money in the IMF and the World Bank, was broke. Where
could the American president go now to ask for a loan? This was the problem
that laid heavily on the World’s Smartest Woman, the first woman president of
the United States of America.
This was the reason why today the Virtual Air Force One presidential jet
descended into Mexico City carrying on board the World’s Smartest Woman and two
not-as-smart government officials.
Theirs was the last attempt to salvage the doctrine
of Socialism that had begun one hundred years ago in St. Petersburg by two
fellows named Lenin and Stalin. Their October Revolution of 1917 was so
successful that each one named a city after himself. Oh, how the power hungry
around the world envied their power! Alas, by 1995, Leningrad and Stalingrad
were renamed back to St. Petersburg and Volgograd, respectively. The Russians
had had enough Socialism. Not only in Russia; Socialism was dead in all the
countries that had tried it.
But one. There was one more try.
Lenin insisted that the nineteenth-century revolutions were not successful because they were joint movements of the bourgeoisie and proletariat. Lenin was wrong; with some help from rich America, all proletarian revolutions of the twentieth century failed too because the poor do not create jobs. Thus, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, many American Marxists diagnosed that Socialism could succeed only if given enough money. Enough power-hungry American rich agreed, and the international Socialist movement, the haven for former communists, found its way into the United States of America.
The United States Congress was no exception. At least 55 members of the House of
Representatives were members of the Progressive Socialists Caucus. Among them was Nancy Pelosi[3]
who became the Speaker of the House in 2007.
She applied the totalitarian principle to the governing, once only seen
in the “one-party democracies”, by shutting down the Congress to prevent the
vote on oil drilling. No stranglehold
of American economy could have been more effective. Why?
PART
ONE: THE PAST
Chapter 1.
The
Proletariat Share the Shortages
1919, Post-revolutionary Soviet Union
The
Communist victory of October 1917 had been consolidated. The revolutionary
leaders now enjoyed all the luxuries of the czar of Russia. Not so the
proletariat. Though this was the revolution of the proletariat, there were
simply not enough palaces to divide among the peasants. To do something for the
peasants, the revolutionary leaders executed the czar and his family.
Russia
was now ruled by the revolutionaries who made it happen. Lenin and the whole
Central Committee of the Communist Party occupied the golden halls of the
Kremlin. From there, they planned to spread their revolution all over the
world. They had absolute power in their hands, and some actually believed that
the workers’ revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat would produce
something close to paradise on earth.
They
failed miserably. Less than a century later, their names were lying on the dust
heap of history. But they would not be forgotten yet. They may have been dead,
but their ideology and thirst for power lived on.
Very
few children born into the twenty-first-century Capitalist life of luxury and
ever-increasing abundance could imagine the misery that these names caused to
several hundred million people who lived during the twentieth century.
History
was about to repeat itself. The Comintern plan, laid out one century ago, could
still succeed. The plan intended to install one world Soviet Communist
government based on “from everyone according to his ability to everyone
according to his need.” This Marxist principle of operations would restore to
the unsuspecting world of the twenty-first century all the miserable shortages
known to peoples in Communist countries during the twentieth century. Never
mind that to date not one university professor of Marxism had yet been able to
explain who decides how to measure your “ability” and how important your “need”
is. But you could be sure it was not up to you to decide, for that would be
Capitalism.
The
Comintern plan, the logical fulfillment of the Communist Manifesto of
1848 took a whole century to hatch and received over time such a transformation
that even its parents, the delegates to the Communist International,
would not recognize it. Lenin was
determined to foment socialist revolution throughout Europe and the rest of the
world.
The
Comintern was an international Communist organization founded in Moscow in
March of 1919. Communist International proclaimed to fight “by all available
means, including armed force, for the overthrow of the international
bourgeoisie and for the creation of an international soviet republic.”
To
the principal leader, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the objective, to spread the
Socialism all around the world under the guise of proletarian revolution, was
clear from the start, but how to reach it was not. “Use all available means”
was the best Lenin could come up with. Refinements will come later.[4]
“Lie, cheat
and steal, kill if necessary.”[5]
And
then Lenin showed his long vision into the future: “If you run out of
proletariat, make it; create welfare recipients.”
Initially,
the planning process was not too secret. The Comintern held seven World
Congresses, the first in March 1919, and by 1928, it was estimated that the
worldwide membership counted five hundred thousand members excluding its Soviet
membership.
The
Comintern proclaimed that the Capitalist system was entering the period of final
collapse and that as such, the correct stance for all Communist parties was
that of a highly aggressive, militant, ultra-left line. In particular, the
Comintern described all moderate left-wing parties as “Social Fascists” and
urged the Communists to devote their energies to the destruction of the
moderate Left.
“Go
from country to country. Lie. Promise you will tax the rich until there are no
more rich.“ Lenin winked to the comrades in the front row where several French
and Polish delegates sat “… The poor will think they will get the riches, but
no, do it like we did it in Russia.”
And
not to be misunderstood, he turned to the large group of German Communist
leaders: “But don’t tell them that we only attained equality here by making
everybody equally poor rather than equally rich … You want especially the
greedy, lazy suckers to think they will all be rich without working. They will
vote for you in masses. Promise general welfare; promise health plans; promise
free food, vacations, and family leave. But always remember, ‘to everyone
according to his need.’ Then infiltrate one left-wing party after another. Lie
more, blame the rich, and they will elect you. Remember, the poor countries
will be easy. Then take over the governments. By force if necessary.”
Lenin
was a good strategist and knew his enemies. “Then comes your big task—America.
Everybody in America is rich. There are two kinds of Americans. Some are rich
because they worked for it, and others are rich by being lucky. Don’t bother
with Republicans. They worked for their money. Go after Democrats; many
inherited their money or earned it without much work as attorneys or actors or
by marriage. They feel guilty and are perfect candidates for our useful idiots
program. Get them to our side, and we’ll control the world!”
Lenin
wanted to add “and then we’ll shoot them,” but he thought it was redundant
anyway.
Soon
after that, Lenin died. Stalin took over. He realized that Capitalists were not
fools. They simply would not let Comintern take over their countries just
because they had some slick propaganda and could organize a sequence of
proletarian revolutions.
The plan required more finesse, but finesse was not Stalin’s forte. He liked the opposite: the heavy hand. And thus, in 1932, special sections were established in many national Communist parties with the purpose of keeping complete records of all party activists. Detailed questionnaires had to be completed by all the leaders and sent to Moscow. The French Communist Party alone sent in more than five thousand dossiers before the 1941 war.
Now
the Comintern had become thoroughly bureaucratized and fully under Stalin’s
control. The members’ discipline became incredibly strict. Anyone suspected of
a minor error was “invited” to visit the Soviet Union, most often for health
reasons. Alas, most did not appreciate Moscow’s “weather.” Their health
deteriorated, and they never returned to their home country. Many of them died
there from other complications. Yet, to this day, American Liberals claim that
the USSR had the best medical care in the world. We have proof, they say, just
like in Cuba today.
Stalin’s
purges of the 1930s decimated Comintern activists who were “living” in the
USSR. Clerks were no exception, 133 out of the Comintern staff of 492 being
victims. Several hundred German Communists and anti-Fascists who had fled from
Nazi Germany were killed, and more than one thousand were handed over to
Germany.
One, Leopold Trepper,
recalled those days: “In house, where the party activists of all the countries
were living, no-one slept until 3 o’clock in the morning. Daily, exactly at
three o’clock the car lights began to be seen, we stayed near the window and
waited where the car stopped.[6]”
Hundreds
died in labor camps. The leaders of the Indian, Korean, Mexican, Iranian, and
Turkish Communist parties were executed. Only two German Communist leaders
survived; one was Walter Ulbricht, who ran East Germany until the fall of the
Berlin Wall. Out of eleven Mongolian Communist Party leaders, only one
survived.
The
iron-clad party discipline was thus established.
Chapter
2.
War
Creates the Opportunity to
Expand the Revolution
1945,
Eastern and Central Europe
At
the start of World War II, the Comintern supported a policy of
non-intervention, arguing that this was an imperialist war among various
national ruling classes, much as World War I had been. Not to be outdone and as
a friendly gesture to each other, Stalin and Hitler divided Poland fifty-fifty.
However, when the Soviet Union itself was invaded in June of 1941, the
Comintern switched its position to one of active support for the Allies. The
Comintern was subsequently officially dissolved in 1943, for working with
Capitalists did not fit its platform. But not for long. It was secretly revived
four years later, with the same objectives: to create one world government to
rule one global Soviet state. But without the help of American wealth, many
things went wrong.
After
the demise of the USSR in 1991, no records of the Comintern plan were ever
found. Although many members of the Central Committee who had heard something
about how America would be taken over with help from within were still alive,
only some glimpses could be found in the files that the KGB meticulously kept
on President Ronald Reagan. These files miraculously ended up in the Hoover
Library at Stanford University. From these and the events of the twenty-first
century, the story that follows could be extrapolated.
One
thing is certain; at the end of World War II, the Soviet leaders saw the
enormous surplus of everything that America was able to produce during the
short four years. And then, in a gesture that stretched communists’ credulity,
America gave it away to any country that asked for it. Of course, all the
Communist countries were ordered by Moscow to decline it, for it would show to
the newly enslaved nations the real difference between American and Soviet aid.
Stalin
now realized that their global plan, the Comintern plan, could only succeed if
it was planted to grow in the fertile grounds of Capitalist countries. How?
Certainly not by engaging proletariats and peasants. America had too few left,
the Comintern concluded. From the events that followed, we can now imagine what were Lenin’s words
that inspired the plan to conquer the world:
”First, don’t forget to create a welfare class to
replace proletariat. You will need them to vote for you. Next increase the
government in all directions. These are your employees, apparatchiks, they work
for you. Then demand protection money from businessmen like gangsters do.
That’s why you have apparatchiks. Their money you will need for propaganda.
“Get
your people to small public offices, such as school boards. Then tell schools
what to teach and order media what to write,” wrote Lenin. “For that, you will
need to buy a lot of people and need a lot of money. Where do you get it?
America is full of the useful idiots who feel guilty for being rich. They will
not openly give you their money, but will do their damn best to make sure it
will come to you.
“Here’s
how.”
Chapter 3.
Boys with $5 Billion Seed
Money
1947, Kremlin Palace
It was the summer of
1947, and the crops failed again in the Soviet Union. No excuse was
possible, blaming neither Hitler nor Roosevelt, not even Churchill. Stalin
called to his ornate office, from where czars ruled for centuries, two of
his closest financial advisors: Lavrenty Beria, who ran NKVD (later renamed
KGB), and Lazar Kaganovich, minister of industry.
“You are both Jews
and understand Capitalist finance better than the rest of the muzhiks
with dense minds full of mashed potatoes that sit on my cabinet.”
Both fellows smiled
nervously. “Da, Comrade Stalin.”
Stalin continued speaking
through his teeth, which held his pipe. “I am tired of having to tell the party
to divide the shortages among the peasants. I’ll just have them
shot if they cannot grow more food.”
It was really pretty
embarrassing. People were starving in all of the People’s Republics, including
the victorious Russia. In Ukraine, the former breadbasket of Europe,
people were simply dying of hunger. They were used to it … just like the
thirties, they said. But anyone younger than twenty learned in school that this
was Amerikanski propaganda. Workers there starve too. All of the Eastern
European nations from Poland to Albania stopped producing food, and the
always food-rich Hungary barely fed its own people. The children in
potato-growing regions of Yugoslavia were sent to the fields to collect the
Colorado potato beetles that were eating up even the few potato fields that
were planted. They were told that American planes were air-seeding the Colorado
potato beetles at night to ruin the Socialist economy.
The war was over, and
Stalin’s power was paramount. He was God. Having flunked the divinity
studies (like Al Gore decades later), he actually believed his was the supreme
force (like Al Gore later), sort of Mother Nature with a mustache. There was no
way to blame the gods of rain or any such thing. Stalin was the end of the
road, and there was no god above him. It would have been an easy way out
to blame God, but by now, people had been told over and over again there
was no God. The dialectic materialism of Marx, Engels, and Lenin was the
religion. It was a credible ploy; how can there be a God when you cannot
see it?
Stalin filled the godless
void; he called himself generalissimo. Indeed, as a general of all generals, he
was supreme. He outsmarted Roosevelt so to give to the Soviet Union
control of half of Europe. Even Churchill could not prevent this
foolishness. But he had not, like Roosevelt and his trusted aide Alger Hiss,
been reading the New York Times
and its Pulitzer Prize reporters, whom the NKVD led by the nose. They were
reporting such wonderful things from Moscow! Now that the danger from the West
had turned into admiration, the time had come to consolidate his power at home.
Stalin knew the first rule of party discipline well: Heads must roll. The
more, the better, and people will believe.
Hundreds of revolutionaries’
heads rolled. But Kaganovich knew that rolling more heads would
accomplish nothing on the world scale. He had a sharp and courageous mind. “We
need to do it like Capitalists do it.”
With that pronouncement,
Beria stood up, reached into the pocket where he kept his pistol, and was
prepared to arrest his colleague on the spot, but Stalin waved him off and
turned to Beria, “Explain yourself, tovarishch Lazar Moiseyevich .”
“Comrade Vissarionovich ,”
started Kaganovich, also addressing Stalin with his family name. Stalin
was the name Josip Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili gave to himself during the
revolutionary period, just like Vladimir Ilyich became Lenin and Josip Broz
became Tito.
“Comrade Stalin, we have
structured the organization to rule the world, the Comintern. We are halfway
there, but we will not succeed unless we conquer the Capitalist countries,
especially America.”
“They are the ones that can
produce food,” continued Kaganovich, “not just food. Remember the fifteen
million pairs of boots they sent when Hitler attacked us? They produced more
DC3 airplanes than we produced tanks. They produce Packard cars that we copied
to hand-make our twenty official limousines. But what do we really have?
We parade our ballet and opera, but these were all created before our
glorious revolution. Even Pavlov got his Nobel Prize in 1909. No, tovarischi,
we must do something to copy the Capitalists. The only way that we can conquer
them is to beat them at their own game, making money.”
Beria saw in Stalin’s eye a
spark of agreement. He put the pistol back into his jacket pocket.
“Let me propose a plan that
will be so secret and so effective that Capitalists themselves will help it
succeed. ”
Stalin got up, stuffed his
pipe, and commanded, “Proceed, tovarishch. Every plan that you have
ever proposed could have been created by the devil himself.”
Yes, the reference to the
devil was still politically correct, for he presented no competition. So,
Kaganovich began: “Here is what we do. We select five hundred young fellows,
seventeen or eighteen years old, Jewish if possible, with the highest
scholastic credentials. They can be Russian, Polish, Hungarian, or Romanian.
Then we send them to the West to their best schools of business. Let’s pick
some for now: London School of Economics, Columbia University, Yale, Stanford.
Why the best? For, when each boy graduates and finds employment in financial
markets, we will send to each ten million dollars to invest on behalf of the
Party. My friend Beria’s agents can handle that part well. The financial
secrecy assures us that nobody will know whose money it is. We have some eighty
billion dollars in gold to use. Why not put it at risk? Some will fail,
certainly. But some will succeed, wildly. They will become respected financial
personalities with access to the most influential politicians. And with the
money, we can finance media, elections, demonstrations, even
academics.”
Stalin closed his eyes. That
was his way to think—not to look at other people’s eyes, not to check for
affirmative or counter views of others. Stalin was a one-man show. When he was
making a tough decision, it was his and his alone. After five minutes of total
silence, he opened his eyes.
“Ochen harasho,[7]
comrades, let Comintern develop the plan, but in total secrecy. Nobody but
the Central Committee must know about the investment money. All must think it
is a great plan of providing the best youth in our Socialist countries to learn
about the evil methods of Capitalist business. Some people out west will
doubt our good intentions. They will say, ‘But how can a seventeen-year-old get
to London, tovarishch Vissarionovich?’ Borders are closed so tight that not
even a mouse can escape, and people who try, we shoot. And then, ‘Who pays for
living expenses and tuition?’ they will ask. ‘Something is fishy
here.’ So, Lavrenty, it’s up to your organization to keep this ultrasecret
by explaining it away in such an innocent way that your friends, the
useful idiots who are professors at foreign universities and journalists in Western
media, will buy it completely.“
Stalin certainly knew whom
to depend on then. Lenin told him some thirty years earlier whom to recruit:
First get the media; then get the teachers; then get the useful idiots. Results
came sooner than expected. In 1930, he learned that the Central Committee knew
that the propaganda was beginning to work when an aged Californian writer and
editor, Lincoln Steffens, returned from a trip to the Soviet Union, declaring,
“I have been over into the future, and it works.” Soon after, a New York Times reporter, Walter Duranty, received a Pulitzer Prize for his 1931
series of enthusiastic articles about the Soviet Union. The reports were later
totally discredited as Soviet propaganda, but when the Pulitzer Prize stood,
this was good news for the KGB: “We are doing better than we thought.” Others
followed, mostly useful idiots, but no American politician was yet
converted to Leninism. For this, Stalin knew, more money was needed, and he had
to get his own team together first.
Chapter
4.
The Commissariat
for Investing in Capitalism
1950, Kremlin office complex
The heavy office door in
one of the least attractive buildings of the Kremlin displayed a sign in very small gold letters only
for a few hours and then it was removed.
It read: контора
для
финансовохозяйственный
инвестировать
[8]
Stalin had scheduled the
meeting here twice and cancelled it both times. He could not decide who would
be the three best brains to run the ultrasecret Commissariat. He was investing
half of the party’s gold. Some three thousand tons of it would be converted
into Capitalist securities and other financial instruments and controlled by
the Commissariat of Financial Investments, KOFINT for short.
KOFINT would operate from
two well-hidden offices in the NKVD block 7, on the top floor with a view of
block 5, the so-called Investigative Prisons Department, and a glimpse of the
river Moskva; just to remind them that there was a real life out there.
Stalin
seldom tested his thoughts on others, but this time, he asked two KGB agents
from the coding section that was located nearby if they could break the meaning
of KOFINT. Their reaction was swift: “Da, da, Comrade Secretary
General … no
decoding was needed; we saw the new sign on the door, the контора
для
финансовохозяйственный
инвестировать.”
It was a fatal reply. A
different code name was needed, and the two KGB agents were assigned
immediately to Mexico where the KGB already had experience with liquidating
Trocky.
ULTRA! The thought flashed
behind Stalin’s low forehead; he remembered how the KGB was baffled for many
years about what ULTRA was, so Stalin decided on the code name ULTRA. Not
really original, he said to himself. Let Churchill’s boys think we have cracked
some code or whatever.
ULTRA was the name Winston
Churchill gave to the super-secret cryptographic machine and decoding algorithm
with which the British were able to decode top secret radio messages of the
German High Command during World War II. Thus, until Hitler’s final days, ULTRA
was responsible for many Allied military victories. But ULTRA’s effectiveness
would have turned into dust the moment the Nazis got the slightest suspicion
that their high-command messages were decoded and read in London. To protect
the secrecy was not enough. Winston Churchill added a security level that no
other secret had. He surrounded the secret with “the bodyguard of lies.” Now
Stalin would do no less.
Then he asked that a form
letter of appointment be typed.
“Comrade … ” read the five
identically terse memos typed on an Underwood typewriter using red ribbon, “you
have been chosen by the Secretary General of the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union to be one of the three members of the project ULTRA.”
The letter continued: “YOU
MUST TREAT ALL MATTERS CONCERNING PROJECT ULTRA AS THE ULTIMATE AND PARAMOUNT
PARTY SECRET.
“You are ordered to report
on … at 19:00 hours at the work offices of ULTRA in block 7A, NKVD
headquarters. There you will meet with me and the other members of the ULTRA
directorate.”
It was signed, “Secretary General,
Communist Party of the Soviet Union …”
Stalin penned in the names
on the red forms. Only three, not five. He decided to add Molotov and kept the
original two, Kaganovich and Beria.
“The foreign minister must
know what we are doing. We cannot hide this from him.“
Stalin was already having
some doubts about Molotov. Vyacheslav had been spending too much time in world
capitals and had become accustomed to the good
life of the Capitalist bourgeoisie. “If he becomes a problem, we can always
send him to govern Kamchatka”[9]
was Stalin’s final thought as he handed the three orders to his aide, Nikita.
Chapter 5.
From Strategy of Envy
to Fear of Weather
Around 1952, New Plan to
Rule the World
The four highest-ranking
leaders of the Soviet Union—Stalin, Beria, Kaganovich, and Molotov—sat down
around the heavy, golden rococo table with a magnificent multicolored inlaid
marble top. Many years ago, when this table was given to Catherine the Great by
her finance minister Potemkin, the Great Catherine immediately rubbed the
marble to see if the paint would come off. It did not. She hadn’t trusted
Potemkin since he fooled her with movable village scenery.[10]
This was the point now that Stalin wanted to make: We are talking here real
money, not some inflated rubles, worthless promises, or just hot air
propaganda. Everything in this project will be real.
“Tovarishchi, ULTRA requires
imagination, skill, and gold. A lot of gold. This is the first time that our
revolution has all three.“ With that, Stalin opened the meeting. “The
proletariat was always told that the rich get richer, so let’s see if the rule
really works. Some of the boys that we select for project ULTRA will become
fabulously rich. Their skill, imagination, and our gold will produce more gold,
and when our time is right, we will spring them into action. How, you ask.
“The plan has two parts:
part one, we create the financiers, and part two, the financiers engage the
activists. Twice removed from us, nobody will know who is running the show. It
will all look like spontaneous decisions by individuals. We will strangle the
democracies at their strongest point, individualism. First, the ULTRA project
will create the financiers. They will be totally devoted to us; our NKVD mind
control and brainwashing techniques will take care of that. It will take ten,
twenty, or more years to fill up the money tanks. Many will lose it all in
speculations, but the wealth of the winners will grow faster than the
Capitalists’ economy.“
Lenin said: We must control
the film industry, for film is the most important propaganda tool with which to
reach the masses. Press comes second.
Stalin knew how to convert
any of Lenin’s advice into action, and here was a major case in point. He
continued:
“Then we will let the
financiers engage the activists. First, the media. Some media is already ours.
The useful idiots come next. These are the bleeding-heart Capitalists. Then the
politicians; we will let them find the financiers. Comrades, let me tell you,
many politicians in the democracies are attracted to money like flies to
excrement. This task is the easy one. We want corruptible people with huge
egos, arrogance, hubris, greed, and selfishness—the type whom we can easily
convince that Capitalism is the enemy of life on earth. We will finance their
political campaigns with almost unlimited resources. They will bite on that.
“With that wealth, we will
destroy the very economy that produced it.”
Molotov nodded knowingly. He
knew what Lenin meant by “useful idiots.” He removed his wire-rimmed glasses
and looked with his biddy eyes first at Beria and then at Kaganovich. Did they
get it? Both just sat there, afraid to look skeptical.
Stalin kept on talking. ”We
must grow a completely new class of useful idiots. What is a useful idiot, you
ask. Remember what Lenin said: ‘the Capitalist dupes who will sell us the rope
with which to hang them.’ Where do we find them? We grow them like watermelons.
Red inside, green outside. We’ll start with American schools. The graduates
will come polished from big universities with glorious reputations, with law
degrees, no less. We need useful idiots raised by Harvard, Yale, Berkeley,
Stanford, and other schools that are known for producing exceptionally talented
and creative graduates. They will give us instant credibility. But these
graduates will be different. They will believe that America did untold
injustices to the poor in the world. They will talk about level playing fields,
but what they will mean is leveling the score. Wealth transfers from the rich to
the poor. Their science will be political science, and their economics will be
ecolonomics. This will be the ultimate victory of the proletariat. Rich people
will be gone. Tax the rich till there are no more rich. The whole world will be
equally poor. We can do that; we’ve done it before!”
Kaganovich, the financial
type, could not wait any longer. ”And how will we hang the Capitalists?”
The answer was so secret that even Stalin had to whisper it to the three stooges: “Communism was the biggest lie perpetrated on humanity, until this one, comrades. Communism was based on envy. Not all believed in it, and proof of its failure was visible sooner or later. We have a foolproof lie now; it is based on fear. Fear of bad weather. Weather, da, with weather, we will scare them into submission … We’ll do it with weather, my faithful golubchiks.”
1992 Winter in Berkeley, California
Hillegasse Avenue is a quiet suburban street south of the University of California, Berkeley campus. Houses there were built about a century ago. They were far enough from any student riots of the sixties and therefore qualified as belonging to a quiet neighborhood. Once the Vietnam War was over and the Liberals that ran the City of Berkeley had to find some other causes, the traffic diverters were installed. These channeled traffic to only a few streets—preferably where Capitalists lived. This preferential treatment of some homeowners created intolerable traffic bottlenecks and pollution for some—and quiet streets for those who knew somebody on the city council.
Of
course, the city councilwomen agonized over this unfairness. But the always
progressive-thinking city council had a solution: “We can reduce traffic by
imposing a commute tax on everybody who comes to Berkeley to work.” The idea
did not get far. Any business that saw the writing on the wall closed down or
ran away. But, who cares about small businesses? They were there just to make a
profit.
Indeed,
who cares when thirty million or so California taxpayers provide a steady flow
of cash to the university and in turn to the university community? The City
Council could not care less where the money came from. It simply came. And only
this was relevant.
People
who in one way or another were associated with the university owned most houses
on Hillegasse Avenue. Tonight, in one of them, an important meeting was about
to begin.
Professor
Andy Wolinski was not really a full professor in the Department of Anthropology
at the University of California. He just behaved like one. Wolinski was just an
assistant professor, but he wanted to save the world, and a strong title
without “assistant” helped, he thought. He pulled his Volvo into the driveway
of a large, redwood-shingle-walled house. Three other cars were already in the
driveway.
Probably
belonging to our group, thought Wolinski. He noted they all had “Free Tibet”
bumper stickers.
“Now,
that’s strange. This is a Green Party meeting.”
He
wandered to the back of the house where seven people were already crowded in a
hot tub, steaming in the cold December air. The house belonged to one of them,
Dolores, a Berkeley activist. Dolores let Wolinski squeeze in between her and a
bearded fellow who said, “I’m Charles,” and started the meeting.
“It’s
symbolic that we are holding this meeting in the hot tub. It’s about water. We
have an amazing opportunity to save some of this precious natural resource. As
you know, last month some three thousand houses burned up in Oakland Hills.
These houses will be rebuilt. And you know what? They will be rebuilt with
toilets that waste five gallons of water each time you flush unless we stop
them. Now, we know that there is a three-gallon and a one-point-six-gallon
toilet on the market. Just calculate the water saved if we make these
mandatory.”
Another
girl, Fataisha Firmat, arrived. She always arrived late. She came to Berkeley
to major in women’s studies and was ready to enter politics once she knew what
to do. She was well connected with some political figures in Sacramento, and a
job in the White House would be waiting for her as soon as the Democratic Party
won the presidency.
“Sorry
I’m late.” Fataisha always used this instead of “Hello.”
“But
go on with your numbers. I cannot help you much with calculations. Not my
forte,” chimed Ms. Firmat proudly. She was once asked by a mathematician if she
was related to the mathematician Fermat who posed a problem that nobody had
solved yet. “Not that I know,” she replied, embarrassed that a mathematician
could possibly be in her family. This was the New Age; anything rational was
for Conservatives in the fly-over country, and public figures were proud to
proclaim their ignorance of sciences. What counted was saving the planet.
Andy
Wolinski returned to the prosaic topic of toilet flushing: “And the energy you
can save.”
Charles scratched his head, squeezed the water out
of his beard, and prepared a question but was beaten to it by a topless girl
with long blond hair that was totally wet.
“What
energy?” Her voice continued through the steamy air to the other side of the
tub, “I’m Inge. I don’t know what you are talking about. What energy? Aren’t we
talking about water?” She had difficulty seeing what electricity had to do with
water.
Professor
Wolinski, who was old enough to attend
school when physics was still taught, was able to explain.
“Well, you have to pump water up. That takes
electricity. The higher you pump, the more electric power you need. When water
comes down, it flushes.”
This
seemed to satisfy Inge, who, being a student of political science, had some
knowledge of politics but zero knowledge of science. Charles seemed to agree but needed a few more facts.
“How do we know that the one-point-six-gallon toilet
will flush clean? Suppose you have to flush several more times?”
Inge,
displaying some of her political know-how as well as her topless front, leaned
forward. “Do you think that a law that you are allowed only one flush is
enforceable?“
It
was laughable that a group that wanted to free Tibet would deal with such a
low-level issue as a compromise solution on flushing toilets. But their
intentions were sincere; if you want to save the world, you might as well start
at home. So, the three-gallon toilet was nixed in no time. The group calculated
and concluded that a 1.6-gallon device was simply a revolutionary idea. Such a
law would save fifty thousand gallons of water each day on the Berkeley campus.
Of course, the campus police would ticket the violators. The same ticket rate
as parking in a yellow zone would suffice.
Ms.
Firmat was always ready for federal action. “You make this a federal law and
you end up saving several billion gallons each day.”
They
agreed to start with Sacramento and push the law through the assembly. Saving
about one megawatt or two of energy just by flushing less would certainly put
the Green Party on the map. It would also prevent the rolling blackouts.
“It
takes so long to heat up the hot tub once it cools off.” Dolores was all
smiles, for she just knew they solved a big social problem.
It
was time to depart. Wolinski first hugged wet Inge and then turned to Dolores.
“One more thing. I noticed that we all want to free Tibet. We did not do
anything to free Tibet this time. And Berkeley is already a nuclear-free zone.
But we made a good start, and we should feel good about advancing ecology.”
“Yes,
we should feel good about it,” said Dolores. “Feel good, that’s all about it. I
feel good just thinking about freeing Tibet.“
“Perhaps China will do it,” said Inge.
“Inge,
China already has it,” mumbled Wolinski while walking towards his Volvo. He
also said something inaudible about dumb blondes being just right for political
science majors. He was quite certain that soon all toilets would flush with 1.6
gallons of water, but he was not sure at all that one flush would do it. A much
better method had to be found to become the code. He unlocked the Volvo
wondering what penalty there should be for American citizens buying and
smuggling foreign toilets into the country.
San
Francisco, Winter 2000
Cigars
were still allowed at the all-men’s Bohemian Club in San Francisco, and the
city supervisors had not yet outlawed wood-burning fireplaces. But although
this was the end of the twentieth century, some traditions from the old gold
rush days persisted, even under relentless attacks from eco and diversity
Fascists.
A
sparkling fire of cedar logs in the vast fireplace of the Bohemian lounge blended
its aroma with the smoke of Fuente cigars and in infinitesimal layers deposited
yellow patina on the fine oil paintings that many Bohemians had painted. It all
added to the club’s widely known artistic atmosphere. Three gentlemen of an age
that showed that World War II was not totally unknown to them were enjoying
their after-lunch cigars while being engaged in a rather hot debate about the
government’s surplus.
“They
have a surplus of over ten billion dollars up there in Sacramento,” explained
Charlie Van Ness. Charlie was no artist, just a businessman, a real estate man
with some hidden artistic talents, a combination that was always welcomed by
the Bohemian Club. This criterion ensured the quality of membership at such
high a level that several former U.S. presidents, members of the cabinet, and
other high political figures were members. These did not have to flaunt their
artistic talent since it was assumed they probably had none. If the place still
maintained a lot of class, it was because, so far, no former peace protesters
or free speech demonstrators were invited to join, regardless of the political
power they had attained. This was no Marxist nest.
“The
only thing to do with the money is to return it to the people. It’s theirs,”
said John Thompson, using his immaculate Texas logic and accent. John was a
navy admiral, just retired, still flying the friends’ Gulfstream as a part-time
pilot. He was also a part-time grape grower in Napa Valley.
“I cannot think of a worse way to spend the surplus
than to leave it to the bureaucrats.”
“Indeed,
all the bureaucrats will do is hire more bureaucrats. Just look around. What
has California’s government done with our money over the last forty years?
Bridges, freeways, schools, museums, theaters—they were all here when we came
out of school. Even BART, the rapid transit rail, was started about then. Can
you point to anything else aside from more office buildings for state
bureaucrats?
“One concert hall with bad acoustics … but no, hold it … the Davies Hall was built with private funds!
“And
to add insult to injury, after they spent our money on some worthless office
buildings that produce nothing of value but paperwork, they name the buildings
after themselves.“
“But
it’s a sure way for the governor to be re-elected,” added Charlie. “Make people
dependent on you and they’ll vote for you, like it or not.”
By
2012, things were worse than ever. How could you manage the state when
one-third of tax revenues came from 3 percent of people who work in agriculture,
and when the second third, electronics, was trying to leave the state, and when
the rest of the people worked for the government or were on welfare? To vote
for you, all that Californian voter needed was to be scared by “the fear of
climate change.”
For
the first time in history, the door opened wide for the Socialists to win in
the true free elections. Only a few brave politicians valiantly fought the
trend, knowing that if California, the trendsetter, went, the rest of America
would soon follow. This would be a disaster for the whole world.
Chapter
8.
October
18, 2007
Conference at Newport
Beach
“Ah, the
dispassionate language of science and reason.” Senator McClintock began his
speech at the Western Conservative Political Action Conference.
“In a speech in
New York several months ago, our own governor called those who question the
religion of global warming ‘fanatics’ and vowed our political extinction.
“I certainly don’t
want to die a traitor’s death or be run out of town on a rail. So I want the
record to be very clear: I believe that the earth’s climate is changing and
that our planet is warming.
“I actually
figured that out in grade school in the nineteen sixties when our third grade
class took a field trip to the Museum of Natural History and saw the panorama
of dinosaurs tromping around the steamy swamps that are now part of Wyoming.
They were right next to the exhibit of the woolly mammoths foraging on the
glaciers that were also once the same part of Wyoming.
“And I never got a
Nobel Prize for that discovery. In fact, I later found out that my third grade
teacher never even nominated me!
“Then I got to
high school in the nineteen seventies and learned from the Al Gores of the time
that we foolish mortals were plunging ourselves into another ice age. All the
scientists agreed.
“By the way, you
may have seen the Washington Times
story a few weeks ago about the researcher who recently stumbled upon a lurid
story in the Washington Post dated
July ninth, nineteen seventy-one. It included the scary headline: ‘U.S.
Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming.’
“The scientist
based this on a scientific climate model developed by a young research
associate named James Hansen. They warned that continued carbon emissions over
the next ten years could trigger an unstoppable ice age.
“This is the same
James Hansen who is one of the gurus of the current global warming movement.
And it is the same James Hansen who, just three months ago, published a paper
claiming that continued carbon emissions over the next ten years could trigger
a runaway greenhouse effect.
“Let me begin by
asking three inconvenient questions.
“First, if global
warming is caused by your SUV, why is it that we’re seeing global warming on
every other body in the solar system? For the last six years, the Martian south
polar ice cap has conspicuously receded. Pluto is warming, about two degrees
Celsius over the past fourteen years. Jupiter is showing dramatic climate
change by as much as ten degrees Fahrenheit. Even Neptune’s moon, Triton, has
warmed five percent on the absolute temperature scale—the equivalent of a
twenty-two degrees Fahrenheit increase on Earth—from nineteen eighty-nine to
nineteen ninety-eight.
“If you have any
doubt, just Google ‘Pluto warming’ or ‘Mars warming’ or whatever your favorite
planet might be.
“Meanwhile, solar
radiation has increased a measurable zero point five percent since the nineteen
seventies. Is it possible that as the sun gets slightly warmer, the planets do
too?
“This would be a
little scary in its own right, except for the second inconvenient question: If
global warming is being caused by your SUV, why is it that we have ample
historical records of periods in our recent history when the planet’s
temperature was warmer than it is today?
“During the
Medieval Warm Period, from about nine hundred to thirteen hundred AD, we know
that wine grapes were thriving in northern Britain and Newfoundland and that
the temperature in Greenland was hot enough to support a prosperous
agricultural economy for nearly five hundred years.
“The Little Ice
Age that lasted from thirteen hundred until eighteen fifty brought that period
to an end. We know that during colonial times, Boston and New York harbors
routinely froze over in winter, and during Elizabethan times, an annual Winter
Festival was held ON TOP OF the Thames River, which froze solid every year.
“And finally the
third inconvenient question: If global warming is caused by YOUR SUV, why is it
that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide always follow increases in global
temperatures by several hundred years, indicating that CO2 is a
byproduct of increasing temperatures—not a cause?
“Is it possible
that this is the reason Al Gore won’t debate the subject? You’ve seen his movie
An Inconvenient Truth. In it, he portrays himself as an indefatigable,
lonely sentinel (who should have been president of course) wandering the planet
trying desperately to awaken the world to the danger it faces. ‘I’ve given this
speech a thousand times,’ he says about a thousand times.
“But according to
the Chicago Sun Times, this pious
paragon of truth—who assures us he’s willing to go anywhere and talk to anybody
to save us from our mortal folly—is strangely unwilling to take up the
Heartland Institute’s publicized offer to organize an international debate on
the subject. The institute has challenged our new Nobel Peace Prize laureate of
the Left to debate any one of three internationally recognized authorities who
dispute his claims, and it’s willing to front all costs—at Oxford University,
no less—and in a format of Gore’s own choosing.
“After all, Gore’s
new book extols the importance of science and reason in the public policy
debate, so what better way to deliver the coup de grace to the ‘skeptics’ than
to expose their fallacies in front of an international audience?
“And yet, Al Gore,
who has given his speech ‘a thousand times,’ won’t give it just once more in a
forum where it might be questioned by a knowledgeable authority.
“We’re told that
the debate is over and that all scientists agree. Call this the Emperor’s New
Clothes argument. But it’s simply not the case.
“The ISI Web of Science is one of the most
comprehensive collections of peer-reviewed scientific papers in the world. A
recent survey of all papers on the subject of climate change that were
published between two thousand four and February of two thousand seven found
that only SEVEN percent explicitly endorsed the position that man-made carbon
dioxide is causing catastrophic global warming. SIX PERCENT explicitly rejected
it, and a majority of the remaining papers were neutral.
“In fact, another
directory of peer-reviewed scientific papers explicitly refuting the theory of
human-induced catastrophic global warming lists over five hundred leading
climate scientists. The survey itself was conducted by a team that included
Fred Singer, author of Unstoppable Global
Warming – EVERY 1,500 YEARS, whose qualifications include being the
founding director of the National Weather Satellite Service.
“I believe it was Ogden Nash who wrote:
’The
ass was born in March
The rains came in November
Such a flood as this, he said,
I scarcely can
remember.’ “
Chapter 9.
Political Correctness
Poisons Civilization
1956,
Kranj, Slovenia, former Yugoslavia.
Here is where this book’s author steps into the middle of the story:
In
the summer of 1956, a long line of American-made limousines glided towards
Tito’s palace at Lake Bled. There were Buicks, Chevrolets, and even a few
Cadillacs out in front. They carried two important Communist potentates, Soviet
co-premiers Khruschev and Bulganin, and of course their host, Tito.
Seeing
important Communists in Capitalist-made cars was not an unusual sight for me.
Tito had several residences near Kranj, my hometown. We knew when he was
coming. Our house was along the highway, and police always alerted us hours
before by posting guards at dense intervals along the road. What the guards
could not do was prevent anybody from admiring these magnificent American
automobiles with all that chrome.
And,
to dream. Easy for a twenty-year-old. For, one day, Socialism would be
completed and no longer would class distinction be defined by the rich, who
owned a pair of bicycles, and the poor, who owned a pair of shoes. Or even a
better dream (if you dared): Socialism would collapse one day, and we would all
have cars like those in America.
The
first decade of Socialism was getting us nowhere. While citizens in Western
Europe, even those who were bombed into oblivion, were already searching for
parking places, a private car in Slovenia was almost unknown. What war and
confiscations did not take out of circulation, the wear and tear did. By 1956,
there was not a single traffic light in the whole country, to say nothing about
a parking meter. And a traffic jam was called when a crowd stood around a 1956
Plymouth with foreign license plates and big tail fins.
Let
me return to the Soviet chiefs; what were they doing in Slovenia? Did their
visit mean a reconciliation? Did they want to patch up the Tito-Stalin break of
1948? Stalin was now dead and discredited, and Tito was dealing with the West.
Yugoslavia had little else to offer to the West but its somewhat strategic
position, and for this “non-alignment” Tito was receiving annually several
billion dollars of aid from America. The aid came in several forms: military
aid, luxury products (as the limousines attest), cash, technology, and even
some food for the people of this country that before Socialism exported food.
What were the Soviet Communists after?
In
a few months I found out what the Soviets wanted. But it took me another seven
years to find out why: Political correctness finally caught up with the
Marxists. Here is how it happened.
Ancient
Greek skeptics believed that all knowledge is uncertain. That led them to keep
asking questions rather than becoming silenced by the certainty. That’s how we
discovered that the world is round and that the sun does not revolve around the
earth. The Vatican’s unacceptability of such “politically incorrect” knowledge
prevented the appearance of another Galileo on the Italian peninsula for the
several centuries that followed. Creativity simply moves where it is welcomed.
And so it did—to France, Holland, and England, where such minds as Newton’s
added quantum jumps to our knowledge.
But
let me return to 1956. A few months after Khruschev and Bulganin’s visit with
Tito, I had my first “professional” summer job. Entering the fourth year of
electrical engineering, my assignment was at a company called Iskra, a
state-owned manufacturer of electrical goods, a Yugoslavian General Electric. I
was hoping to expand my interest in electronics, but there was not much of it
in these pre-transistor days, and the first week was spent watching
electromechanical telephone switching gear being built.
Then
came an interesting change. My boss, who knew that I was following American
electronic technology closely (without knowing my secret agenda), asked me to
work on a new assignment. The job was more theoretical than practical, which
suited me just fine. It was called something like Soviet Technological
Assistance (STA) to Underdeveloped Nations. My job was to fill up many forms
provided by the STA program, describing in detail our manufacturing processes
for several American devices that Iskra was manufacturing under license. I also
had to copy all the mechanical parts used in manufacturing and provide
electrical diagrams.
So
this was the result of the visit by Khruschev and Bulganin. I could just hear
the proposal to Tito: “The Soviet Union will provide you with this great
technological assistance. And how will we do this, you ask. You will take the
Amerikanski device that you are building under license and copy the parts. Here
is the machine that will do that; you put the part here, below the glass, focus
the lens, put tracing paper on the flat glass, and trace the outline of the
part. Add all the dimensions. Complete the forms, put together a package, and
send it to the minister of industry in Moscow. Our experts and commissars will
review your process and advise you as to where you can make improvements.”
A
transfer of technology from the USA to the USSR through Yugoslavia! I could not
believe it. I didn’t stay around long enough to know if anything came back from
Moscow. I decided that one month of this was enough and made a firm decision
that I would never work under Socialism again. It was time to get ready to skip
across the border.
Seven
years later, I was working for IBM in San Francisco and living in
Berkeley. In the mid-sixties, Berkeley was not yet polluted by left-wing
radicals, perversion activists, and minority rights mafia. Often called the
Athens of the West, the place had more Nobel Prize winners than potholes. It
was one gusher of creativity that eventually made America the sole superpower—and
thus ensured Pax Americana, the longest known period of peace since Pax Romana.
In
Berkeley you could meet Nobel Prize winners like you would meet film stars in
Hollywood. I was lucky to meet Emilio Segré.
Professor
Segré at that time headed the famous Department of Physics at the University of
California in Berkeley. Famous, indeed, for nuclear physics was still the elite
science. One of Segré’s major contributions was in constructing a couple of
bombs that actually worked and quickly ended World War II. This was just a few
years before Hollywood proved Lenin right by engaging Jane Fonda with a little
help from the hysterics after the Three Mile Island power plant shut down.
Fonda, who could not tell the difference between a proton and a potato, successfully
denounced atomic energy as the enemy of civilization.
But
in freedom, creativity strives, and physics found a following in the booming
computer industry. Much to the eventual surprise of the Soviets, who based
their quest for world power on nuclear bombs, computers turned out to be the
weapons of victory. The refined inequality of unpredictable results that only
liberty can create prevailed over the predetermined equality of results that
brute force of the totalitarian society insists on.
Professor
Segré saw it all early. Once during a game of Scrabble at his home in
Lafayette, our conversation turned to the embargo of IBM computers to the
Soviet bloc and then to how Soviets were stealing our secrets. I told him about
my experience with Soviet Technological Assistance.
Professor
Segré got up. “Let me show you why they need to do it. Political correctness
prevents invention.” He walked to his bookshelves and pulled out a book.
“This was
given to me by Pyotr Kapitsa.[11]
It's in German, a translation of a Russian college physics textbook,” he said
and pointed to a page that he obviously had kept well marked. Here it was, a
sentence in bold letters, stating that according to Lenin, the foundation of
Marxism is dialectic materialism, which conflicts with a belief in God.
“Therefore, the Heisenberg’s Principle of Uncertainty is unacceptable to
Marxists.”
I
believed right away that this book was no fake. Soviets indeed provided
translated schoolbooks to the nations of Eastern Europe under their control. I
remember well my history books in Slovenian high schools. They were all
translated Soviet history books. Here it was again—a reverse form of the Soviet
Aid.
Let
me repeat it, said professor Segré: “Therefore, the Heisenberg’s Principle of
Uncertainty is unacceptable to Marxists.”
This Marxist dogma delivered such an insidious blow
to the Soviet state that the revelation of Soviet technological misery was
uncovered only during the détente of the early 1960s, when some scientific
exchange was allowed and Pyotr Kapitsa brought this innocent-looking book
through the Iron Curtain. But the revelation was not known to public, for few
people read books written by physicists. Although the widening technological
gap between the two superpowers was apparent to most, the reason for it
remained a mystery for some time, perhaps even to the CIA and the highest
officials of U.S. government.
“I
think I know why the Soviets would pay any price for your computers,” said
Segré.
“Schrödinger also wrote
about the Soviets’ transistor industry blunder.” I remembered, and Segré agreed, commenting that the cause of this gap between
the USA and the Soviet Union may not become apparent to the public for several
decades.
Indeed.
Almost thirty years later, the damning evidence of what damage political
correctness can do became apparent. Nevertheless, the credit for the collapse
of the USSR was given to the Soviet Secretary of the Communist Party Mikhail
Gorbachev for allowing Glasnost and Perestroika[12] as well as to pressure from the Strategic Defense Initiative,
U.S. military, and Reagan’s diplomacy. All these surely played a part, but a
secondary part. The primary cause of the Soviets’ demise was in a single
word: atheism.
The
Soviet Union officially ignored the discoveries of several Nobel Prize-winning
physicists because they were politically incorrect, in violation of Marxism,
“against dialectical materialism”—in short, too close to affirming God.
Was
there a divine force that let the United States end the World War II with the
atomic bomb? Was there again a divine
force that let American transistors collapse the Evil Empire?
Who
were these men whose God sank the godless
Soviet empire? The discoveries
made by six Nobel Prize winners played a role in the description of the Soviet
blunder. All six were physicists: Werner Heisenberg (Nobel Prize 1932), Erwin Schrödinger
(Nobel Prize 1933), William Shockley (Nobel Prize 1956), Emilio Segré (Nobel
Prize 1959), Lev Landau (Nobel Prize 1962), [13][L1] and Pyotr Kapitsa (Nobel Prize 1978). All six discovered indisputable
laws of nature that opened the way for the development of the cornucopia of
electronic products we know today.
But not all scientific
endeavors are politically correct. In the Soviet Union, discoveries had to
conform strictly to the party’s dogmas, such as the dogma pronounced by
Friedrich Engels, the co-founder of Marxism who declared in the nineteenth
century that the law of conservation of energy was to be forever fundamental to
science. (So far he’s been right, but that does not excuse his pretense
to play God.)
The free world was not
constrained by any such dogmas. Suffice it to say that discoveries made by
Heisenberg (uncertainty principle[14])
and Schrödinger (quantum theory) allowed Shockley to invent the transistor, the
device that from the late ’50s on has been improving and extending our life in
millions of ways and forms.
While the transistor
technology wildfire spread throughout the free world, it could not jump the
Iron Curtain. The political correctness of atheism simply did not allow
Heisenberg’s discovery of 1927 to be taught in schools. It was too much for the Marxists
to allow that the behavior of an electron could be predicted only on the basis
of probability. This was close to admitting that God is the ultimate authority
rather than man, a destructive idea in a society that was built on In Party
We Trust instead of In God We Trust.
The first evidence of this
devastating twist of political correctness appeared in the early sixties in a
book by Erwin Schrödinger.[15]
In it he describes the reasons for the ever-widening technology gap between the
USA and the USSR. While the USA was producing computers, TVs, radios, medical
instruments, airplane navigational tools, etc. that used transistors, the USSR
continued to build the same circuits with vacuum tube devices that we remember
glowing inside the radio sets of our grandmothers.
Years passed, and by the
1970s the Soviet economy fell so far behind that they would do anything to get
transistor technology. Wisely,
most of it was embargoed, so many Soviet vice-consuls assigned to the United
States were ordered to obtain designs, plans, and techniques from the American
semiconductor industry in any way possible. The party would rather steal than
directly acknowledge the existence of God.
By 1980, this simple mistake
of politically correct science and technology could no longer be corrected.
Soviets could never catch up.[16] Professor Segré compared the damage of political correctness
exercised by the Soviets in the twentieth century to that of the Vatican in the
sixteenth century when they made Galileo recant. For the three centuries that
followed, science simply left Italy and moved to friendly countries, England,
France, and Holland.
In both cases, it was not
God but organized religion that chased away Galileo’s and Heisenberg’s
discoveries and stalled the civilization. Similarly, the brilliant discoveries
of Arabs ended after the eighth century when an organized religion called Islam
established what is politically correct and what is not. Discoveries simply moved to where they were
more welcome.
In the early twenty-first
century, the religion of global warming, which is essentially anti-energy, is
chasing away the industries that need energy. Businesses from bread bakeries to
slicers of silicon wafers were destroyed by the religion of global warming, simply
because the growth of the industry that produces energy, mainly nuclear power,
oil, and natural gas, was prevented. The result was the same as under Islamic,
the Vatican’s, or Communist doctrines: a darkening of the age.
In the godless Soviet Union,
the secretary general was the highest authority. The best the Soviets could do
was to blame organized religion or America for their failures. But we must not confuse God
with organized religion. To equate the two is like equating the sky with
airline schedules. Politicians and the judiciary should understand this
difference and leave God alone.
No bureaucrat can plan
invention. Only God knows where and when the next magnificent law of creation will be found. And
by whom. So far, it has happened to the
good guys.
Chapter 10.
Senator McClintock Describes
California’s Suicide
Perhaps here is
the only place where California’s Liberals will read about the suicidal folly
of their carbon dioxide policy, so we need to continue Senator McClintock’s
speech of October 2007:
“But now I would
like to address myself to a grim subject: the actual threat that global warming
poses to our planet—and most specifically to California. And that threat is
very real, and it is devastating.
“I speak
specifically of the radical policies that the global warm-mongers are now
enacting.
”Last year, in the
name of saving the planet from global warming, California adopted the most
radically restrictive legislation anywhere in the nation, including AB
Thirty-two, which requires a twenty-five percent reduction in man-made carbon
dioxide emissions within thirteen years.
“To put this in
perspective, we could junk every car in the state of California RIGHT NOW and
not meet this mandate.
“Californians just
approved forty billion dollars of bonds that California’s political leaders
promised would be used for highways, dams, aqueducts, and other capital
improvements. They are desperately needed.
“But at the same
time, those same political leaders have imposed a twenty-five percent reduction
in carbon dioxide emissions.
“Now here’s the
problem. Building highways, dams, and aqueducts requires tremendous amounts of
concrete, the principal ingredient of which is cement.
“How is cement
produced? It is produced by taking limestone and superheating it into a molten
state; it comes out the other side as a compound called clinker. Clinker is
about two-thirds the weight of the original limestone. The missing one-third of
that weight is carbon dioxide. And when you include the emissions required to
superheat the limestone, it turns out that for every ton of cement, a TON of
carbon dioxide is released. It’s the third biggest source of carbon dioxide in
all human enterprise.
“But now we have a
law that specifically forbids us from doing so. That was the essence of the
Jerry Brown lawsuits against new highway projects that were part of the summer
budget impasse.
“Citing AB
Thirty-two, Brown argued that unless the counties could show how they would
build highways without using earthmoving equipment or concrete—and that once
built, that people would not drive automobiles on them—the only legal use of
the funds would be to promote mass transit, transit villages—and I’m not making
this up—pedestrian trails and bicycle paths.
“So much for
construction.
“Agriculture is in
big trouble, too.
“You can start
with nitrogen fertilizer, which is a critical component of all agricultural
activity. Unfortunately, it produces large amounts of nitrous oxide, another
so-called greenhouse gas that must be radically curtailed in California.
“The wine industry
is also in for a shock. Fermentation of wine occurs when a molecule of glucose
in the grapes is converted into EQUAL PARTS of alcohol and carbon dioxide.
“But the biggest
agricultural impact is the administration’s mandate for heavily subsidized use
of ethanol fuel. Ethanol is produced in exactly the same way as the alcohol in
wine: The glucose in corn is converted into equal parts of ethyl alcohol and
CARBON DIOXIDE.
“Following AB
Thirty-two, the governor’s appointees on the California Air Resources Board
imposed a requirement that ALL gasoline sold in California within THREE YEARS
must be comprised of at least TEN PERCENT ethanol, doubling the current
mandate.
“Now think about
this: An acre of corn produces about three hundred fifty gallons of ethanol.
There are fifteen billion gallons of gasoline used in California each year. In
order to meet the ten percent requirement in three years, it means converting
four point three million acres of farmland to ethanol production. Now that’s a
lot of farmland, considering that we have a total of 11 eleven million acres
producing any kind of crops in California.
“Current ethanol
mandates are already producing serious shortages in other parts of the world,
as farmland that had been producing food shifts to ethanol to chase hundreds of
millions of dollars of government subsidies coming out of your pocket. There
were riots in Mexico earlier this year in response to spiraling tortilla
prices.
“And we’re seeing
this across the board—including commodities like milk and beef that are
responding to increased prices for corn feed. And as you see your grocery
prices rise as a result of this policy, just be glad you’re not in the third
world. Food is a relatively small portion of the family incomes in affluent
nations, but they consume more than half of family earnings in third-world
countries.
“So when the
global warming alarmists predict worldwide starvation, they’re right. They’re
creating it.
“While we’re on
the general subject, you may have noted that Interstate Bakeries announced last
month that they are completely withdrawing from the Southern California market.
They are shutting down four bakeries, seventeen distribution centers, and
nineteen outlet stores—and throwing thirteen hundred employees out of work.
They’re the makers of Wonder Bread, Roman Meal Bread, Home Pride, and Baker’s
Inn.
“If you’re a fan
of those breads, you’d better stock up now; they’ll be gone by the end of
October.
“They cited the
high cost of doing business in California, but I believe had they stayed they
would have faced an even thornier problem: Bread is only bread because of the
carbon dioxide produced by yeast. It’s the same chemical process we’ve been
talking about, although in this case, the central ingredient IS the carbon
dioxide. That pleasant smell of baking bread is the ethyl alcohol oxidizing as
those gases are vented during baking.
“Electricity
prices are also taking a heavy hit. California already suffers one of the
highest electricity prices in the United States, but that situation is about to
worsen.
“A companion
measure to AB Thirty-two was SB Thirteen sixty-eight that prohibits the
importation of electricity produced by coal—even state-of-the-art plants
thousands of miles from California that meet all EPA requirements.
“Truckee became
the first victim of this law. Truckee was about to sign a fifty-year contract
for electricity produced by a new coal-fired plant in Utah. They were forced to
back off because of AB Thirteen sixty-eight. They just announced the new
contracts to replace that lost power. Instead of paying thirty-five dollars per
megawatt hour, Truckee electricity consumers will now be paying sixty-five
dollars per megawatt hour.
“It gets worse.
Last month, the chairwoman of the Air Resources Board—which was given virtually
unlimited power by AB Thirty-two—announced that they will TRIPLE the number of
AB Thirty-two regulations this year.
“The radical laws
now in place in California are having a dramatic impact on energy production,
agriculture, manufacturing, wine-making, and construction, just to name a few
sectors of our economy.
“We are already
seeing the economic impact in California.
“Nationally, the unemployment rate is stable at four point six percent. Until last year, California’s unemployment rate tracked with the national figures, but since January—while the national rate has remained stable at about four point six percent—California’s unemployment rate has skyrocketed from four point eight percent to five point five percent.
“I was struck by
the governor’s speech to the United Nations last week. He said:
Last year in California, we enacted groundbreaking greenhouse
gas emission standards.
We enacted the world’s first low carbon fuel standard.
Do I believe California’s standards will solve global warming? No.
What we’re doing is changing the dynamic, preparing the way, and encouraging
the future …
“So even the
individual most responsible for this economically catastrophic public policy
ADMITS that it’s not going to solve global warming. He just wants to set an
example.
“I believe he is
going to set an example, all right.
“Responding to the
enormous new burdens imposed on our economy, our state’s revenues have taken a
dramatic turn for the worse. On June thirtieth, we closed the books on the
biggest deficit in California’s history—more than six and a half billion
dollars.
“We just got the
first-quarter revenue numbers for this new fiscal year. State revenues needed
to grow TWICE as fast this year as they did last year to avert an even bigger
deficit.
“In the first
quarter, though, our revenues are actually shrinking. Last year at this time,
we had one and a half billion dollars in the bank; we now have a bank overdraft
of seven and a half billion dollars that’s being covered entirely by internal
borrowing.
“That’s a NINE
BILLION DOLLAR DIFFERENCE. And that’s the measure of our actual year-over-year
deficit spending.
“Combined with the
growing budget deficit projection for next year, we could be facing a two-year
gap of twenty billion dollars by May—and we don’t have the money to cover it.
“There is one
other thing that strikes me on this issue, and that is how puny is the amount
of carbon dioxide produced by human enterprise compared to simple, natural
processes.
“The AB Thirty-two
mandate is to reduce man-made carbon dioxide emissions by one hundred seventy
million metric tons per year. That’s what all this tremendous economic
dislocation is about.
“Now let me
mention one other man-made source of carbon dioxide that they don’t count.
“Every one of us
in this room will produce about two point two pounds of carbon dioxide today—by
breathing. That’s over eight hundred pounds of carbon dioxide per year. If
anyone brought a pocket calculator, pull it out and stay with me here.
“There are six
point six billion of us on this planet. That comes to five point three trillion
pounds or two point four BILLION metric tons of carbon dioxide—simply through
the process of human respiration. And that’s before you count up all the cats
and rats and elephants.
“So all of this
economic dislocation is over a tiny fraction of natural carbon dioxide
emissions.
“The only good
news I can offer is that perhaps we’re all wrong. Perhaps the unprecedented
burden now imposed upon our commerce will produce a wave of new investment and
innovation and environmental purity as the governor has so loudly promised.
Perhaps the unprecedented levels of deficit spending will send our economy into
paroxysms of prosperity. Perhaps.
“But there’s
another possibility. There’s a possibility that we’re right, and that the
inevitable economic realities of these outrageous regulations are already
beginning to destroy California’s once-vibrant economy in a dark and miserable
example of human folly.
“And we must be
prepared for that possibility. In normal times, citizens don’t pay a lot of
attention to public policy, and that’s why democracies occasionally drift off
course. But when a crisis approaches, that’s when you see democracy engage. One
by one, citizens sense the approach of a common danger and they rise to the
occasion. They focus—they look beyond the symbols and rhetoric—and they begin
to make very good decisions. Political majorities can shift very quickly in
such times. Polls can reverse themselves almost overnight in such times. And I
believe that day is now rapidly approaching.
“People ask me all
the time: ‘What can I do?’ And the only answer I can offer is the answer the
great abolition leader Frederick Douglass offered to a young protégé. He said,
‘Agitate. Agitate. Agitate.’
“We have greater
tools with which to communicate with our fellow citizens than ever before. The
Internet and talk radio have given us powerful new ways to organize and reach
people. And we have something else that’s even more important: truth and common
sense.
“We have based our
entire form of government on the assumption that when democracies engage, they
make very good decisions. The radical policies now imposed on California are
already beginning to impact the economy, and will have an increasingly negative
effect as they proliferate in coming days. As the impact of these policies is
felt, people will begin paying close attention to policymaking and the
policymakers responsible, and then they’ll begin exercising something that the
majority of California’s public officials have so completely lacked: simple
common sense.
“And at that moment, we will see a
new political awakening and a new political realignment in California, and
before you know it, we’ll be living once again in Reagan Country.”
Chapter
11.
Socialism
Fails in America
1620, New England
Almost
four hundred golden years of American civilization separate us from the first
try at Socialism. On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower
set sail from Plymouth, England, seeking freedom and equality in the New World.
Among one hundred passengers were forty Pilgrims, led by William Bradford.
During the trip, which was no pleasure cruise at all, Bradford made all agree
to a contract stating that just and equal laws would apply to all members of
the new community when they reached the New World. In modern terms, he wanted
to build a Communist America.
The
Pilgrims landed in New England on a chilly November day. Bradford wrote in his
journal that they found “a cold, barren, desolate wilderness … no friends to
greet them … no houses to shelter them … no inns where they could refresh
themselves.” [17]
The
cost of their freedom was very high; during the first winter, half the Pilgrims
died of exposure, starvation, or sickness. Spring and Indian help arrived none
too soon. The settlers learned from the natives how to plant corn, fish for
cod, and hunt for fur. Although the Pilgrims were now at least surviving, their
community did not prosper. Why? The original contract into which the Pilgrims
had entered required that everything produced went into a common store and that
all the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community.
Today,
the whole world knows that Communism produces nothing but shortages of
everything. Everyone who is still trying to make Communism work can justifiably
be called stupid or evil. But four hundred years ago, long before Lenin or Marx
were even born, the Pilgrims tried Socialism with the best intentions—and
failed.
Most
people, save some professors of political science, now know why: The Pilgrim
community discovered that even the most creative and industrious people were
not inclined to work any harder than anyone else, unless there was some
personal incentive to drive and motivate each individual.
During
the twentieth and early twenty-first century, much of the world stubbornly
experimented with refinements to Socialism. It was a fail-safe gamble;
certainly America was always there to ship food to end starvation. The
Pilgrims, however, had no America to ask for food. They were America, although
in embryo form. So the embryo decided to abort Socialism to survive.
Bradford,
now the governor of the colony, recognized that collectivism was so costly and
destructive that the Pilgrims could not survive another winter. Fortunately,
there was no economist or politician around to stop Bradford from discovering
the power of the marketplace. He took bold action. He privatized the land by
assigning a plot to each family to work and manage.
Later,
he wrote this detail into his journal: “The experience that was had in this
common course and condition, tried sundry years … that by taking away property,
and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and
flourishing—as if they were wiser than God.”
And he continued, “For this community was found to
breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have
been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit
for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength
to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense … that was
thought injustice.”
Unlike
many Socialists who always blame other factors but themselves—bad weather, lack
of capital, not tried long enough, war damages, etc.—and stay on the Marxist
course while sinking ever deeper, the Pilgrims were not impeded by any
doctrine. They discovered, although just in time, that people could not be
expected to do their best work without incentive. They did not wait. Bradford
released the power of free enterprise by instituting the Capitalistic principle
of private property and free markets. He allocated to every family a plot of
land to work and allowed it to sell its own crops and farm products.
“This had very good success, for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been,” wrote Bradford.
Almost overnight, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat. They started to trade their surplus with the Indians for their goods. Profits soon followed, allowing the debt to the merchants in London who financed the Mayflower cruise to be repaid.
The
word of prosperity at the Plymouth settlement quickly spread among the
oppressed and poor on the other side of the Atlantic. For the next four hundred
years, it attracted millions of immigrants to America, to seek freedom—and the
prosperity that resulted from it. Not only did the Pilgrims’ settlement survive
splendidly, but their offspring learned the lesson so well that a century and a
half later they created the United States of America. For the next two hundred
and fifty years, their country became more than just the food basket to the
rest of the world. From these precarious beginnings—that would have ended in a
disaster but for one good decision made by Governor Bradford—it became the
beehive of unprecedented creativity and creations as well as the only
superpower on earth.
For
the next four hundred years, many countries were saved from hunger and
oppression by receiving American food, clothing, education, enlightenment, and
even military help. Unlike any other superpower in history, the only thing
America ever asked for in return was small plots of land where its soldiers
could be buried. America was copied in every way imaginable, from its
Constitution to its music, and everything in between, yet the copies seldom
surpassed the originals.
It
is an axiom that one can never get a job from a poor person. It is also an
axiom that only the rich can help the poor. But the rich can also destroy, and
that was the brilliant strategy of the Comintern plan, using the Watermelon
Conspiracy. Several high-level meetings have already been held by the Greens in
the exotic places where great food, wine, and lodging are certain and success
is only probable: Rio de Janeiro, Montreal, and Kyoto. Now, in early December
2007, swarms of expensive private and luxurious government jets were descending
on Bali.
Chapter 12.
Watermelons Learn About
the “Virtue of Poverty”
Bali, Winter 2007
While good intentions usually produce prosperity and wealth, good intentions can also create poverty. Sometimes, mismanaged wealth and prosperity can self-destruct within good intentions, and the surprising result is: poverty. The case of ethanol is an excellent example of doing-good going haywire. Food that was intended to feed people became fuel for the machines, creating a worldwide shortage of food. It obviously did not occur to the politicians who created this world-class food shortage that, unlike humans, machines’ appetites are unlimited.
At the turn of the second millennium when the average life span was twice of that two centuries ago, the Green lobby, in its effort to send the world back into the dark ages, attained another major victory. For thirty years, America did not construct a single nuclear power plant and drilling for oil and gas was suspended. The fashionable substitutes were solar and wind energy, but together they could not provide more than 2 percent of the energy needed by the three hundred million citizens of the United States.
With China and India joining the energy consumer market, the price of available oil quadrupled. Then, a few blessed politicians in America ordered that alcohol, made from grain, be mixed into gasoline.
In a couple of years, the world ran out of cheap food. The price of grain doubled. The impact on the citizens of poor countries, where half of a family’s income is often needed for food, was devastating. To solve the problem ecologically, the assorted Greens called together a conference on the virtue of poverty. Bali seemed like a suitable place for the meeting that would create more poverty, for it followed similar luxurious gatherings in Rio, Montreal, and Kyoto.
For centuries, the noble objective had been to enrich as many poor people as possible. Then came Communism, which managed to make everybody poor. But Communism was not successful worldwide, and Capitalist countries created ever more rich people. But not enough. Some of the rich who thought themselves elite decided there was virtue in poverty, especially when by being poor you could save the world.
In the winter of 2007, so many private jets descended on
Bali to attend the global climate conference they had to be parked on a nearby
island. The who’s who of the future world government was in attendance. The
topic, “the virtue of poverty,” could not have come at a better time: Let’s
prepare the poor for the doubling of food prices.
Another profound social discovery and what to do about it was discussed: electricity. Breathlessly described by one U.S. environmentalist, the introduction of electricity is “destroying” the cultures of the world’s poor.
This was too much for another pioneer of the environmental movement. He left it because he viewed it as too radical and called the anti-electricity views an example of the “Eco-imperialism” of the white upper-middle class who think it’s “neat to have Africans with no electricity.”
The editor of the San Francisco Earth Island Institute’s online magazine, The Edge, Gar Smith, spoke about what he considered to be the virtues of poverty. San Francisco was replete with environmental groups, for it was indeed a fine environment to live in for any trust-fund kid who believed in Eco-imperialism. Earth Island Institute was once popular with millions of schoolchildren for its efforts to save Keiko, the killer whale that starred in the movie Free Willy. Now they found a greater cause and sent representatives to this week’s Earth Summit in Bali with a message that they must have borrowed straight from Marie Antoinette’s manual of “What to Say to Peasants.”
“World’s poverty is relative; you can’t really have poverty unless you have wealthy people on the scene. The idea that people are poor doesn’t mean that they are not living good lives,” Smith said.
This certainly made sense until Smith made this pronouncement about the introduction of electricity to the poor residents of the developing world: “I don’t think a lot of electricity is a good thing. It is the fuel that powers a lot of multi-national imagery. Electricity can wreak havoc on cultures. I have seen villages in Africa that had vibrant culture and great communities that were disrupted and destroyed by the introduction of electricity,” he said. “With the introduction of electricity, the African villagers spent too much time watching television and listening to the radio, allowing their more primitive traditional ways to fade away.”
Smith lamented: “People who used to spend their days and evenings in the streets playing music on their own instruments and sewing clothing for their neighbors on foot-pedal-powered sewing machines lost their culture with the advent of electricity.”
He forgot that the average life span has doubled wherever electricity became available. “If there is going to be electricity, I would like it to be decentralized, small, solar-powered,” Smith said, forgetting his own use of microwave ovens, computers, heaters, power tools, dentist tools, street lighting, flush toilets, and thousands of other conveniences. On the few watts generated by solar power not one of those conveniences would be useful, and many could not even run. He challenged Americans to give up their own modern conveniences and then threw this verbal hand grenade into the crowd: “The real question is, what personal conveniences and self-indulgences are you willing to give up in order to stop destroying the planet?”
This accusation was taken seriously, especially by the scientifically illiterate public, much like the peasants of the Middle Ages who bought indulgences to be relieved of their sins and attain heaven sooner. By now, the naïves who had become used to having any ailment taken care of by the big government programs, fearing they weare destroying the planet, soon created a new health crisis—eco-anxiety. Some seriously believed that the U.S. was not a model for the rest of the world to follow because our level of consuming was unsustainable. Smith projected that if the rest of the world consumed at rates similar to the U.S., the environmental degradation would require “three extra planets to exploit.”
The assembled group, already pre-qualified as a hate-America crowd, was delighted to hear that America was exporting the “myth of the American way” of life. Smith revealed to the group that many of his friends had already voluntarily given up automobiles in favor of bicycles and mass transit. He neglected to explain how the masses would go shopping at COSTCO or HOME DEPOT by bicycle or by mass transit, but nobody noticed the problem.
The gathered eco-society simply assumed that one ate in restaurants like they did and lived like they do. In quaint college towns where most attendees spent their youth debating politics in coffee houses or attending lectures, these were easily reached by bicycle. Now, in big cities, they had limos or taxis. Plumbers and such were just a phone call away; they make house calls. You do not need to drive to the hardware store if you are rich.
If you are rich, the automobile is a passé technology.
To prove the point, Smith used the collapse of Communism in the former Soviet Union as an example of how to solve ecological problems.
“There is a solution to climate change and pollution. We saw it happen to Russia when their economy collapsed. When their industrial plants closed down, the skies got clear.[18] Their air is a lot cleaner now,” Smith said.
However, in the USSR all businesses were government-owned, for this is the main distinction between socialism and capitalism. Therefore, it was the government that could not care less whether Russians would breathe clean air or drink clean water. It was not the automobile-based economy that was producing pollution in Russia anyway. The Russian economy was already bicycle- and shoes-based, the nirvana that Smith wanted America to regress into, some day in the not-too-distant future.
Chapter
13.
Eco-Imperialists’ Church of Climate Change
By 1980, the founding member of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, had had enough of green peace terrorism. He abandoned Greenpeace after becoming disillusioned with what he considered to be the group’s radical approach to environmental concerns. Instead, Moore put his energy behind the environmental advocacy group Greenspirit and distanced it as far as he could from Greenpeace, which was running “Eco-imperialism at its worst.”
“It’s that kind of arrogance that is coming from a movement that is basically white upper-middle class and is saying that it’s neat to have Africans with no electricity,” explained Moore. “Many Greens now represent a naive vision of returning to some kind of Garden of Eden, which was actually not that great because the average life span was thirty-five.”
“Poverty is romantic … what a terrible thing to say. It’s just so obviously stupid—this romantization of poverty, where people can’t afford to fix their teeth, can’t afford decent nutrition, can’t afford proper health care, can’t afford education. What do they think—that some illiterate with her teeth falling out and living in the mountains is a good life?” asked Moore.
The dire poverty that existed in the developing countries, especially in Africa and Latin America, was a kind of poverty that no one would wish on anyone. Yet, many of the poverty-stricken residents of the developing world did seem optimistic despite their conditions. That did not mean they were happy. Hope springs eternal. The tourists from Capitalist countries who visited Eastern Europe during its Communist decades learned why people could still laugh while they were dying of malnutrition: They were telling jokes about their leaders. Satire is the last resort of the oppressed.
By the turn of the millennium, they were telling jokes about the environmental movement too, featuring some of the world’s biggest losers who became Eco-imperialists: Al Gore and Mikhail Gorbachev. The original mission of ecological protection had been failing, except in the richest countries. India, China, and Brazil became the worst polluters, and even Europe failed to attain the Kyoto objectives, for which they so arrogantly signed on. Eco-imperialists now borrowed Lenin’s techniques by encouraging class envy and anti-Capitalist rhetoric.
The environmentalists added a modern component to Leninism: Inject guilt into people for consuming, as if consuming by itself causes destruction to the environment. There is no truth to that at all; the wealthiest countries on earth have the best looked-after environments. Poverty, not wealth, is one of the biggest threats to the earth’s ecological health. The evidence is that environmental destruction is caused by poverty, because there is no money to reforest, no money left to prevent soil erosion, no money to clean the dirty water.
Then, in 2005, the Green wave and global climate change religion were joined by the farm lobby, and the U.S. Congress made ethanol a mandatory additive to gasoline. Since ethanol is made from grain, in two years the price of corn doubled and the poorest people were hit the hardest, having lost their cheap source of food. When more than half of your budget goes for food and the price of food doubles, the result is hunger. Thanks to the political activists and media, both having very little actual scientific background, trying to save the world on behalf of the newfound religion of global warming caused the poorest countries to become even poorer.
In 2008, speaking before an audience in Boise, Idaho, Dr. Moore
confirmed that there is no proof that humans are causing global warming, and he
wisely advocated a dramatic shift toward reliance upon nuclear power.
In light of the fact that Greenpeace was originally established for the
very purpose of opposing underground nuclear testing, the Greenpeace founder’s
change of direction was most refreshing. The highest guru from the
eco-political culture contradicted the agenda promoted by science illiterates
from Hollywood who blessed Al Gore for advancing his silly and self-serving
global warming crusade with fabricated evidence.
Dr. Moore, who today represents the Clean Air and Safe Energy Coalition,
believes that the only viable way to reduce America’s reliance upon fossil
fuels and foreign energy sources is to add hundreds of safe nuclear power
plants during the upcoming decades. Although he acknowledged that solar, wind,
hydroelectric, geothermal, and other renewable energy sources could assist in
this transition, they simply don’t possess the enormous potential that nuclear
energy does.
Naturally, radical environmentalists reflexively accused Dr. Moore of
selling out, because their other arguments against nuclear power have evaporated
during recent years. So how did Dr. Moore respond to these accusations? He
merely pointed out that his professional and educational backgrounds are in
actual science, whereas people whose backgrounds lie in political activism
dominate Greenpeace.
And Dr. Moore was correct. The simple fact is that nuclear power
provides America’s cleanest, safest, most reliable, cheapest, and most
independent source of future energy.
Nuclear energy emits none of the so-called “greenhouse gases” that
environmentalists claim warm the globe, so one would assume that they would
enthusiastically embrace it. But alas, environmentalists continue to
irrationally oppose nuclear energy at every turn, oblivious to their
contradictory positions.
With 103 reactors in operation across the United States, nuclear power
today provides 20 percent of America’s electricity, our second-largest source.
By the year 2030, this is expected to expand to 25 percent, even as American
energy consumption increases. Even France, a nation that those on the Left
typically wish to imitate, generates over 76 percent of its electricity through
nuclear energy. Despite this, the environmentalist lobby is not persuaded.
Additionally, the uranium from which nuclear energy plants obtain their
power exists in abundance within the United States, as well as Canada and
Australia. Accordingly, nuclear energy allows Americans to reduce reliance upon
the Middle East, Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, and other undependable nations such
as Nigeria.
Moreover, unlike other renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and
hydropower, nuclear reactors do not depend upon unreliable weather or
fluctuating natural conditions, rendering it far more reliable. It is also less
subject to skyrocketing commodity prices and foreign suppliers than other
energy sources, such as oil or natural gas.
And in terms of safety, a person would have to live next to a nuclear
plant for over two thousand years to receive the amount of radiation created by
a single medical x-ray. Nuclear generators are also better protected against
terrorism and other calamities than other plants, as the Center for Strategic
and International Studies found that nuclear plants “are probably our
best-defended targets.” And despite such over-hyped media creations as Three
Mile Island, not a single life in America has ever been lost due to a nuclear
malfunction or accident.
Nuclear energy also has the lowest
production cost of the major sources of electricity. Clearly, nuclear power
could help alleviate many of America’s increasing energy difficulties.
Ultimately it would reverse the shortage of food created by hysterical
environmentalists’ propaganda, emanating like bad exhaust fumes from their
countless lavish buffets at Earth Summit conferences.
But will America listen to science? No religion dies easily.
PART
TWO: THE FUTURE
Chapter 14.
On Quantum Politics:
Right and Wrong Are Dead
2001, The beginning of the Big Government
For some twenty generations after the Pilgrims
applied the free enterprise system to farming, Americans enjoyed four centuries
of prosperity and also helped millions of people all over the world survive.
Then it all came apart.
America abandoned the fundamental decision that
Bradford made. Individualism was out, and big government was in.
For four centuries, the right was right and the
wrong was wrong. The truth came in discrete pieces, quanta. But in the late
twentieth century, the system of truth quanta, right and wrong, changed. Now it
was a mush, where right started and wrong ended was a matter of personal
opinion. Black and white were replaced by shades of gray. Relativism ruled:
Everybody could be a little right and at the same time a little wrong or vice
versa.
This was the principle of now-extinct quantum
politics: Things can be right, and things can be wrong. Bradford was right;
Lenin was wrong. But many a professor of soft subjects at American universities
still thought there was the third way: a shade of gray.
Marxism would succeed—if only given enough time,
money, smart people, and so on.
And so began the new era of relativism. Right was
right, maybe. Wrong was also good, sometimes. And so, each law passed by
Congress and each White House decision, even each decision by the Supreme
Court, had more than two sides. Each proposal, regardless of how valid, met
with several oppositions, regardless of how idiotic. You are OK and I am OK was
the book to read.
One side won, the other side lost, and there was no
way of telling who won until the votes were counted, and not even then.
Civilization advanced like a snail climbing up the wall, up during the day,
sliding down during the night. Progress happened if the winner was right, and
decay occurred if the winner was wrong. Our past was made out of such right and
wrong quanta.
The decisions made by the best American presidents
also were the best for America, and decisions made by the worst American
presidents set America back. Or, was it vice versa? How could we have won World
War II or dismantled the Soviet Union with relativistic Carter or Clinton?
Fortunately, American presidents’ rule is limited to two terms, and although
the voters can be fooled more than once, they cannot be fooled twice in a row.
Imagine an America in which certain right quanta did
not occur.
To begin: The isolationists in America succeeded in
1940 and abandoned Great Britain to its fate; peaceful coexistence with the
Soviets remained; we left oil in Kuwait to Saddam; Clinton vetoed welfare
reform for the third time, and so on.
Assume that for all the key decisions the coin had
actually fallen on the wrong side. You would now be living in the Fourth Reich
or the USSA—the United Socialist States of America. And things would not be
well. This is the setting of our future that is facing the attack of a religious
force, Islam.
Our relativistic government no longer can tell the difference between a
friendly force and an enemy. Multiculturalism blends good and bad quanta into
an amorphous mess. Like mixing good and rotten apples in the same box, soon all
will be rotten. President Reagan was the last president who clearly articulated
right from wrong, and Americans understood it. We elected him twice with
immense majority and thus entered a period of peace and prosperity.
But not for long.
With peace dividends and the absence of danger came the luxury of a
“kinder, gentler” society. Suddenly unambiguous, straight-talking America
slipped into the future without clear definitions of good and bad, right and
wrong. We no longer were even allowed to discriminate between the two. The word
itself was eliminated from use. The result was Clinton and then Bush.
Now our political leaders can only be elected by promises they cannot
keep—in short, lying, for the lie allows diversity and relativism. Telling the
truth is telling it like it is. And being accused of telling it like it is, is
no longer socially acceptable.
So how can a socially
unacceptable person ever be elected, especially in a society where only half of
the eligible voters care to vote? Those who do not vote do so because “all
politicians lie,” and many of those who vote believe the lies.
Chapter
15.
Introduction
of the American Left
It
is said that the American Revolution succeeded with one-third of the population
being for secession, one-third for staying with the British, and one-third who
were afraid to take sides. That is how in the early twenty-first century the
American Left succeeded in taking over America.
Who
is the American Left? From the top down, the wealthiest politicians are Left
Democrats, most worth hundreds of millions of mostly inherited dollars.
Following them are Hollywood actors, who are paid millions for reading other
people’s lines but believe nevertheless they are smart enough to make public
policy pronouncements. Next come the people who became journalists because they
could not do math or fainted at the sight of blood; 90 percent of these vote
for the Left. They work for the major newspapers that keep losing readership
and the TV networks, watched mainly by the lower-IQ society. The third group is
the professors with tenure in rich universities, well endowed by now-dead white
males whom they so despise. Most of the endowments would never exist had the
donors followed their teachings.
The
American Left—and not you—always knows what is good for you. Never mind the
spectacular failures of such famous Socialists as Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Pol
Pot, Ho, Mao, Allende, Ortega, Mugabe. At the micro level, there are Leftist
leaders such as Jim Jones, friend of the San Francisco Liberal elite and former
chairman of its Housing Commission, who convinced nine hundred people to drink
poisoned Kool-Aid and die. Will the supply of such names ever end? They all
came to power as minorities pretending they knew what was good for the
majority. They were blindly followed, and all failed miserably.
The
American Left believes it can do far better. But, when we revise history
according to the wishes of the American Left, a catastrophic picture emerges
too scary to contemplate.
Nevertheless,
fear aside, let’s look at the conditions in America as if the votes of the Left
had prevailed during the last two decades of the past century.
First,
the Soviet Union is still here, but now it has the largest military on earth.
We continue the precarious “peaceful coexistence” based on matching nuclear
weapons thousand by thousand in the strategy that carries an appropriate name
MAD -- Mutually Assured Destruction[19]—that
is, tens of thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at each other. But the Soviet
Navy rules the oceans now after President Clinton reduced our navy by half. The
economic boom did not happen, for President Reagan could not decrease taxes and
Clinton successfully increased them. The Kyoto Accord was signed, and it
prolonged the longest recession of the American economy in history. With the
USSR stronger than ever, the Warsaw Pact nations remain under Soviet control;
there are no peace dividends and no free Poland, Hungary, Estonia, etc.
Yugoslavia still has the third largest army in Europe, and Khadafi keeps terrorizing
tourist trade in the Mediterranean. Grenada or Nicaragua or both are now
members of the Central American Communist bloc and members of the Havana Pact.
The Berlin Wall has been reinforced with the best technology Silicon Valley can
produce. Iraq owns Kuwait as well as Saudi Arabia and emirates. We are paying
ten dollars for one gallon of gas, which made Al Gore happy. Domestically,
Hillary Clinton’s Health Care Reform Act passed, and one-seventh of the
nation’s economy is now run by government officials. The best medical care in
the world is now on par with the quality of the post office or DMV, but not as
swift. Thus, the black market persists, and many physicians are in jail or have
moved to Mexico. The Welfare Reform Act did not survive three Clinton vetoes,
and welfare rolls are swelling with unwed mothers. As soon as the jurisdiction
of the World Court was acknowledged, it ordered the White House to negotiate
peace with Osama bin Laden. Most people now work for the government. Elections
are still free, but you do not bite the hand that feeds you.
These
events are the political quanta that defined the entry into
twenty-first-century America just as Bradford’s decision of 1621 defined
eighteenth-, nineteenth-, and twentieth-century America. What is a political
quantum?
Our
future is not made out of never-ending political debates. It is made out of a
few but quantifiable political decisions that often depend on the narrow margin
of votes in Congress, where a switch from Yes to No can turn good into bad,
wealth into poverty, life into death. Such quanta, and not what we do day to
day, define our happiness—or misery.
Quantum
mechanics, laid out during the first quarter of the twentieth century,
profoundly advanced our understanding of nature and provided the basis for so
many technologies that by the year 2000 almost one-third of the United States’
gross national product was based on inventions made possible by quantum
mechanics.
Yet,
after one hundred years, some fundamental enigmas of quantum theory remain
unresolved in physics—and the same is true in politics. We simply know that
quantified events affect our lives, positively or negatively. The same is true
with quantum politics. We can never predict the result with certainty, but we
can look back and apply some probability to what is about to occur in the
future.
There
is already one known link between quantum politics and quantum mechanics. We
now know with certainty that a major factor of the Soviets’ demise was that
Marxism simply could not accept the probability aspect in quantum mechanics. It
was too close to acknowledging God, a concept that is in serious contradiction
with the dialectic materialism of Marxism. Anyone who seeks ultimate power will
not defer his power to God.
It
is now easy to look back and see how badly the Marxists blew it. But this was
not the case even in the ’80s when many American TV personalities and
university professors considered the Soviets’ choices to be just a different
path to the “pursuit of happiness.”
Here’s
what some leading lights of the American Left pronounced in all seriousness in
the face of millions of refugees who risked their lives to escape from
Socialist countries. Seweryn Bialer of Columbia University wrote in 1982: “The
Soviet Union is not now nor will it be during the next decade in the throes of
a true system crisis, for it boasts enormous unused reserves of political and
social stability that suffice to endure the deepest difficulties.”[20]
Massachusetts
Institute of Technology economist Lester Thurow went a step further, claiming
that the Soviet Union was “a country whose economic achievements bear
comparison with those of the United States.” As for President Reagan’s talk
about trying to liberate Eastern Europe, Thurow announced that “it is a vulgar
mistake to think that most people in Eastern Europe are miserable.”
John
Kenneth Galbraith of Harvard concluded as late as 1984 that “the Russian system
succeeds because, in contrast to the Western industrial economies, it makes
full use of its manpower.“
Historian
Arthur Schlesinger took a trip to Moscow in 1982 and later declared that the
vision of pushing the Kremlin over the brink was nonsense. “I found more goods
in the shops, more food in the markets, more cars on the street—more of almost
everything, except, for some reason, caviar.” He was dismissive of “those in
the U.S. who think the Soviet Union is on the verge of economic and social
collapse, ready with one small push to go over the brink … Each superpower has
economic troubles; neither is on the ropes.”
Thanks
to such “useful idiots,” as Lenin called them, it took almost one hundred years
to empirically prove that the Marxist formula “from everyone according to his
ability to everyone according to his need” creates nothing but shortages, waste,
and general misery. Today, it no longer fools most people in the countries
where it was tried, and everybody who could escape it, did.
A much better method had to be found to make the
naive masses in the rich countries willingly accept their loss of their
freedom.
As soon as the Y2K scare
fizzled out, the scare was resurrected as “global warming.” But that too did
not last long when the cooling trend followed. So that nobody could be
offended, “global warming” became “climate change.” Can’t define the coming
“danger” any safer than this.
Chapter 16.
The
Great Deception: Reds Become Greens
The
Green movement turned out to be a perfect answer and the ideal heir to Marxism.
The Green movement did not ask for the redistribution of wealth, the doctrine that
propelled the Red movement and eventually destroyed it because it was unable to
create wealth, such as food, machinery, or energy. Once promised, this wealth
had to be created and provided to keep people happy.
The
Green movement spread like wildfire because it contained a simple and
unassailable dogma of the conservation of the earth’s resources, as God created
them. Poverty is romantic, claimed the Greens.
The
generation born after World War II, who never saw a shortage in their lives,
was therefore quite easy to deceive. By the beginning of the third millennium,
the deception was mostly complete. By then, like some medieval saintly
movement, the Greens attained a monopoly over the protection of air and water
with the implied pretentious notion that whoever opposes them is for dirty
water and foul air.
Here
was the air-tight and water-proof doctrine to attain and maintain political
power. No longer was there the problem of perpetual shortages that haunted governments of Socialist countries, such as
shortages of bread, toothbrushes, shoes, soap, and other basic items that
people need. This time, no promises would have to be broken since nothing had
to be made or provided.
The
road to power was simply in convincing people that doing less is better than
doing more.
This was a brilliant change in the Red’s former
operating plan, but the objective was the same: attainment of absolute power by
a small group of activists.
The
new ruling class no longer needed to fabricate Five-Year Plans to deceive the
people as to how much better they would be five years from now. The new ruling
class no longer needed to explain over and over, as they had to in the
Socialist countries, why the Five-Year Plans were not met. Then, a simple
promise of a new Five-Year Plan would fool most of them again. Now, less would
be more, and whatever goods the small ruling class needed could simply be
imported from exclusive boutiques in Paris.
The
Greens learned about exclusivity from the history of the Reds. The Communist
Party never accepted more than a tiny fraction of the population into its
membership ranks. Why bother with membership in a single-party state where
party membership has no bearing on the election results at all? All that a
higher number of party members would do is degrade the elite-class status of
the party members and their quality of life. There are never enough goodies to
spread among the elite anyway.
Chapter
17.
The Passengers in the Old
Gulfstream Five
2017,
Mexico City International Airport
The
high-pitched whine of G-five’s twin jets at low rolling power could not hide an
ear-splitting blast from the cabin: “Roger!”
The
president was obviously not pleased with the landing. Her deep voice continued,
“What the hell was that?”
“Carrier
landing, ma’am,” answered Roger’s copilot, John Thompson. “It was my doing.
Just a little practice.” He was not about to call the bitch Madam President.
Better
explain that, thought John. “I have to do it when I can, ma’am. We no longer go
out into the middle of the ocean and practice landing. No fuel. All we get is a
simulator here and there. Just enough to get killed if we have to defend the
country.”
John,
of course, had his doubts if it was still worth defending the country. For
whom? For Commie pinkos who have taken over and become the ruling class?
Yes,
the shortest path to riches is Communism. Back in the previous century, would
the Russian people want to defend themselves from America? No, only the Soviet
leaders would. Same for Mexico. But now, the tables had turned. During the last
decade, Mexico’s fortunes had changed. Mexico was now flush with money, mostly
by selling energy, of all kinds and types, to its impoverished neighbor up
north. Up north, especially in once-wealthy California, with Socialism came shortages.
Nothing was learned from the prior century’s history of the Soviets and Eastern
Europe. It can’t happen here, they said, but it did.
Therefore,
John, a former navy pilot, could now only fly simulators. Virtual reality was
everywhere. But John wanted to enjoy this landing. It was the real thing. Like
landing on an icy runway. Drop down on engines only, no brakes all the way to
the ramp. Closest thing to drop in onto the heaving flattop.
“Like
making love,” said John to himself, “there is no substitute for the real thing
…” But he kept quiet. The three women on board made the rules. Two of them had
studied in Berkeley, and their careers were in the world of virtual reality,
artificial intelligence, and dot orgs. Would they even understand that there
were things that could be done better without electric power?
Now
they were on the ground. The World’s Smartest Woman and her two aides, Rose
Thorn and Fataisha Firmat-Acton, flew into Mexico City on important business.
Fataisha, the secretary for public benefits, and Rose, the first woman vice
president of the United States, developed a plan to get financial help from
their southern neighbor. They arrived with their hats in their hands. Half of
the country, especially California, was out of power. Out of juice. The rolling
blackouts were replaced by the rolling power service, and this really hurt the
economy. Not only did the industry begin to move south of the border, but
people were also missing work just to do their laundry, waiting for the power to
come on.
Calling the president and the World’s Smartest Woman “ma’am” was not proper protocol, but John Thompson did not give a damn anymore. He was a guy from Texas, and he knew he had made a mistake in not returning home after the 2010 Texas Independence Referendum. Now he was stuck with these three hens in a rusty jet. He may still split one day, if he could only sell his old Napa vineyard.
Fataisha
looked through the big oval window as their Gulfstream came to a stop. “No
red-carpet treatment today … Mmmm … But, a mariachi band is playing …”
“No,
not for us,“ she determined after some pause. It played for a planeload of
arriving Italian girls. Sixteen-year-olds or so.
“My,
God, they are clones!”
Indeed, they were all identical. Italians had it all
figured out. If you have to clone something, why not the best you have? Drudge
Media System reported that the only problem they had was whom to clone: Gina,
Virna, Sophia, Antonella, Silvana, etc., etc. … The mariachi were a telltale
sign of who would be received by el presidente today …
“No
red carpet … Well, let’s make a dignified exit anyway.”
Rose
remembered the feeling of superiority she had every time she welcomed some
third-world country dignitary at Dulles Airport. Now she was one of them. Nevertheless,
her training in self-esteem was excellent.
“Let’s show them we are from Socialist America, not
from some third-world country.”
Rose,
the tallest of the three women on board G-five, was about six feet tall and
presented a substantial figure, worthy of the first woman vice president of the
United Socialist States. She stepped in front of a mirror.
Trying
to install her fashionable hat, a la Bella Abzug style, with not too much
success, she bumped her head into the low cabin ceiling and all she could see
was her feet.
“I
sure miss the old Air Force One, or Two, or even Three,” she said to the World’s Smartest Woman, remembering the
heady days when she and Fataisha were promoted from interns to aides in the
White House several decades ago.
“Even the tail section, where they put Newt, was
more comfortable.”
“But
that’s the price of building Socialism,” she mumbled to herself, and then aloud
to her companion: “Fidel Castro told me he had to fly in Cessnas. And, poor
fellow, probably still does, with a parachute attached.”
“Now
… let’s get serious. We are here to get electricity and oil from these macho
bandidos.” Such words were outlawed during the days of blooming
multiculturalism, but now the tables had turned.
“You
think our payment plan will work?” asked Fataisha. “These guys know they have
us over a barrel.”
“But
… Joe assured me that his new mega-movie, The
Multiple Bypass at Templo Major, will do it. It’s a master work of
multiculturalism. We apologize. We are sorry. We totally misunderstood the
Aztecs’ heart surgeries. In it, America clearly states: We got it all wrong.“
“Joe
already sent them the promo.” Joe was actually Yussuf, originally Joseph
Schmellnik, the film producer who made his fortune making porno movies for the
Internet. His was the only business that actually made money during and after
the dot-com flameout. To keep his empire out of trouble, he contributed heavy
campaign donations, for which he was allowed twice to sleep in the Lincoln
Bedroom. After 9/11, he changed his name to Yussuf to be in line with the
Muslims—after all, they ran the banks now—then he became Giuseppe upon the
Vatican denouncing his porn business. When the Leftists came to power, he said,
“Just call me Joe, like Stalin.” And he continued to make money by making TV
ads for corrupt politicians.
“They
should like that,” concluded Rose. “I’m so glad we made Hollywood the
privileged industry. Make sure they get an extra ration of electric power.”
She
turned to the flight attendant who was holding her bag. “Steward, let’s go.”
It
gave her a special pleasure to get even with the male chauvinistic pigs who
still called flight attendants stewardesses.
The
Gulfstream steward pushed the steps button and the steps unfolded out of the
door. The three important ladies walked off the plane to shake hands with the
deputy director general of Petrolieros Mexicanos.
“Only
ten years ago, many of these guys would be happy if I’d let them blow leaves in
my garden in Berkeley,” Fataisha whispered to the World’s Smartest Woman,
lamenting the disastrous turn of events. The new Socialist America was falling
apart in front of her eyes. Fifty years had passed since the dismantling of the
Capitalistic freedom of America was started in Berkeley with the free speech
movement. The leaders of the American Left were supposed to build a new, better
America and world.
Early
2000’s, the river of gold dries up
John
Thompson returned to California in the late twentieth century from Texas and
bought himself ten acres of land in Napa Valley—then you could still buy or
sell and own land—and planted it with grapes. He could do anything well. After
teaching the IBM management trainee classes in San Francisco, he flew Boeing
747s for TWA till it went bankrupt, then tended his vines and flew navy jets
from Alameda Air Station. Life in California could not get any better. How long
can this good life last, John often wondered. He remembered what John Steinbeck
wrote in The Log from the Sea of Cortez[21]:
“And suppose some all-powerful mind and will would cure our species so that for
a number of generations we would be healthy and happy?”
It
almost happened. Liberals invented the “all-powerful mind” of government. It
would take care of any problem anybody had: universal health care, food stamps,
aid for dependent children, paid family leave, etc. Steinbeck analyzed the
consequences: “These are factors as powerful as other genetic factors. To cure
and feed would be to change the species, and the result would be another animal
entirely.”
The
human species changed. By 2010, a new human animal began to prevail in America:
Liberals. But the fail-safe law of nature resists change; plenty of species
remained unchanged. The main one was appropriately called Conservatives.
Steinbeck
continued: “Certain communicants of the neurological conditioning religions
practiced by cowardly people who, by narrowing their emotional experience, hope
to broaden their lives, lead us to think we would not like this new species.
These religionists, being afraid not only of pain and sorrow but even of joy,
can so protect themselves that they seem dead to us. The new animal resulting
from purification of the species might be one we wouldn’t like at all. For it
is through struggle and sorrow that people are able to participate in one
another—the heartlessness of the healthy, well-fed, and unsorrowful person has
in it an infinite smugness.”[22]
So, who needs defense; who needs the military? Who
needs to work, even think? Captain Thompson often wondered how long this
partying could last before they hit us from behind, if not from the front.
First the Alameda Air Station was closed; the navy found the area too hostile
to the military. Both California senators and most congresswomen were
antimilitary. Alameda was Congressman Dellums’ district, and the congressman
was no friend of the military. Then came the TWA Flight 800 explosion. John was
quite sure it was an act of terrorism not a 747 malfunction. But political
correctness prevailed. After all, we were creating a multicultural society and,
really, we could not take sides. TWA sold its last 747 by 1998. And finally, on
that fateful September 11, 2001, when TWA made its last transcontinental
flight, another protected minority converted four Boeings into kamikazes and
killed three thousand innocent people. It seemed the good life for John was
over.
Not
quite. In 2001, the Californian economy became the fifth largest in the world.
Why California got so rich was lost on most people. Bigger than France. Only
three decades earlier, France was one of the four superpowers of the world.
What happened? This was such heady stuff that according to the fashion of the
age, only some Hollywood stars could understand it. Once or twice, even
Congress consulted clueless actors’ expertise, knowing full well that their
knowledge was obtained solely through their acting roles. No, they did not have
a clue what made California wealthy, was the answer. California simply was rich
because it was California.
That
type of logic prevails with most actors. They are professional pretenders, and
their acting fame qualifies them as spiritual leaders to many. Most believe
that moral relativism should replace the U.S. Constitution anyway. At least in
California, most people believe them.
Some
Californians thought this was crazy and emigrated to Texas or Nevada, but John
was retired by then and growing grapes. He decided to stay. But little did he
know that in a few years he would be a citizen of the first Socialist state on
the American continent, save Nicaragua in the ’80s. Even his small possession
earned with hard work, the vineyard, was in danger of becoming state property
if he did not pay all the taxes that the government kept inventing to keep
bribing the voters with programs of all kinds.
In
his young days, John Thompson was a navy flyer, and now he was moonlighting as
a pilot of the presidential jet. At least he could get some flying hours in
this way. Due to the demilitarization policy, there was no money for military
flights. Moreover, this way he could pay the wealth tax the state put on his
vineyard. But more than that, he was able to visit foreign countries, a
privilege which was now only available to the state officials, like the three
women on board.
Chapter
19.
Eastbound
over the Pacific Ocean
2010,
Conversation in Air Georgia 747
America
used to grow magnificent watermelons. Nick Pisarenko was one farmer who grew
some of the sweetest and crispest watermelons. These you could buy at any
American supermarket for a couple of dollars, from Memorial Day to Labor Day.
Nick’s watermelon ranch was started in the 1930s by Nick’s parents with a
couple of dollars to their name in San Joaquin Valley—what used to be a desert
in mid-California. When three-quarters of a century later Nick inherited the
ranch, it was already quite a valuable property.
There
were some problems, though. Nick had to install special water pumps that would
not suck in the yellow-bellied lizard that liked to swim in the pond. And
pumping water needed a lot of expensive energy. But more surprises were in
store; the inheritance tax he owed to the government was almost two million
dollars, an amount of cash that Nick never dreamed of having and certainly had
no way to pay. He found some Mexican buyers. They were flush with money. He
sold the watermelon patch to Jose and Miguel, two brothers who were actually
illegal immigrants.
As
much as he loved his native California, Socialism makes people vote with their
feet, and Nick emigrated to Ukraine, almost one century after his father left
it for America. That is how much the world had changed … Nick’s father Nikolay,
came to America around 1925 after an exhausting trip across Siberia, just
barely escaping Soviet troops, crossing China in and on freight trains, and
from there taking a ship to America. He arrived in America like most legal
immigrants: with no money but with plenty of talent and will to work.
Back
in 1917, somewhere in the endless plains of Russia, the junior Nikolay attended
school while helping on his father’s farm. They, and farmers all around them,
grew enormous amounts of food and sold most of it to Western Europe. No
marketing pitch was needed then to call Russia the breadbasket of Europe. Most
Europeans knew it.
Then came 1917, the year of the Soviet Revolution,
and everything in Russia changed for the worse, or worst. Nikolay sensed what
was coming. Lenin was not fond of landowners, so-called kulaks, and eventually
killed most of them—among them Nikolay’s father and his elder brother Pyotr.
Lenin was convinced that the government could grow food far better than the
kulaks could. But he was wrong.
This
was the beginning of the great Russian famine during which several millions of
Russians perished of starvation.[23]
Nikolay was lucky. Just in time, he abandoned his home and everything he had.
But he saved his life—and this was enough when you came to America. There he
ended up growing watermelons. And what watermelons they were! You could not
find anything like this in Europe.
Now
Nick, Nikolay’s son, in his late seventies, was flying back to Ukraine, almost
on the same route his father came in—across the Pacific Ocean. In the seat next
to Nick was an elegantly dressed girl. She introduced herself as Jacqueline—but
call me Jackie—and told Nick her parents were Vietnamese refugees. She was born
and raised in California. She received a scholarship in Tbilisi University in
Georgia to work on a master’s degree in viticulture.
“So
both of us are second-generation refugees from the Reds,” observed Nick.
He
was pleased to have such civilized company on a long flight, remembering that
his luck with seat companions had not been too good recently. Usually the young
ones were quite dumb, as a rule the products of TV, video games, and public
schools. The electronic beat of acid rock must have dissolved any metal they
were made of as well. Nick often thought that the rings they hung from their
noses and ears and other body parts substituted for their lack of inner metal.
This
girl was different. She wanted to know what he did.
“I
used to farm watermelons.” In no time, the conversation between the former
farmer and the future agronomist reached the fine points of growing
watermelons.
“Watermelons
are green inside and out when small,” Nick explained. “As they grow, they become
more and more red inside.”
“Ah,
they are so good,” Jackie said, ”yet … they got such a bad name in Vietnam. My
grandfather in Saigon was exposed by a watermelon and executed.”
“Really?“
It had been decades since Nick heard his father use the word in this same
context. Beware of watermelons, he used to say.
“So
the term was universal,” concluded Nick. The code word spanned
generations. He went on:
“Communists
killed about one hundred million people during the past century.
That
many dead bodies should have been proof enough that life in any of the People’s
Republics that constituted the evil empire was quite unsafe. Socialism can be
dangerous indeed.
Consider
that these people did not die in any physical battle. Almost all were executed
for practicing free speech.“
Jackie
nodded, carefully looking around for anyone who may be listening to their
conversation.
Nick
continued, “Criticizing the Communist Party was simply not allowed, and if you
did not know who was listening, talk became a dangerous activity. One soon
learned that survival often depended on knowing the secret code which
identified who is the party member and who is not. The code classified the
party members into tomatoes, radishes, and watermelons. Tomatoes, red inside
and outside, were a danger, but known. Radishes, who were only red on the
outside, were harmless. Watermelons, however, were deadly.“
Jackie
nodded; her father often described his life in Vietnam in these terms. She
continued to listen.
“When
in 1991 the evil empire collapsed, the radishes could shed their red coats. Now
they no longer needed to be sycophants to earn their living. The tomatoes, now
totally discredited by the abundant evidence of the failures of Marxism, could
not hide. Their visibility swept them into friendly territories of academia and
media; they became professors and journalists.“
Nick
turned toward Jackie so that he could make this point very clear: “But the watermelons were not noticed
because they found their place among the Greens.
“We
now even have the hate police in California. You go to jail for hate speech.”
“It
is almost here; it’s plain as day. Nevertheless, so few people saw it coming.”
Jackie nodded. “But we are safe here. This is a Georgian plane; they have real
glasnost. No free-speech police here.”
Nick
could not agree more. “How things have changed,” he sighed. “In America, rights
were your guarantees against government. Then came Clinton, who wanted us to be
like Europe. In Europe, rights are your entitlements to what the government
‘owes’ you and allows you to do.”
“Indeed
so.” Jackie learned civics and U.S. history well from her teacher at the San
Jose State University business school. ”Equality meant everyone has the same
rights before the law. Then the Liberals copied Europe, and now equality means
the government should make sure everyone earns the same money and has the same
level of success.
“That
is pure Marx. The power of our government was limited by our Constitution, but
we just have too many lawyers. They made the Constitution into a living
document, and it is so alive that there are virtually no limits on what the
government can do.”
“Even control free speech. That’s why I am again
voting with my feet. I’ll miss California but not its government. Fortunately,
I speak the language; it’s almost like going home. But where will the Americans
go to escape Marxism. England?
“Let me tell you a story my father told me about how
free speech worked in the Soviet Union, the workers’ paradise.“
“Ivan Ivanovich was a worker in a steel mill,” continued Nick, “of the polluting type that any Socialist country needed to meet its ever-elusive goals of the Five-Year Plan. Comrade Ivanovich always attended the Five-Year Plan meetings; after all, absence itself was a form of free speech that you would not dare to exercise. At the end of each meeting, the commissar, who conducted the meetings, always asked: ‘Are there any questions?’
“There
never were. It was normal procedure that nobody ever had a question, and this
formality always concluded the meeting. To everyone’s delight.
“One
day, when the commissar asked, ‘Are there questions?’ Comrade Ivanovich raised
his hand and said, ’Yes, I have one. Why have we no bread?’
“The
surprised commissar did not expect a question outside his tons-of-steel pitch
and especially not this one. He had no ready answer but replied, ’Well, let me
ask about this at our next Cell meeting. I’ll give you the answer next time.’
Reaching for his notebook, he inquired, ‘Comrade, what is your name?’ With
that, the meeting was over.
“The
following week, the commissar again talked and talked about the Five-Year Plan
and its coal and steel production, but not a word on the bread shortage.
Finally the time came again for questions, and again there was the usual
silence. Finally a small voice was heard from the back of the room: ’Yes,
Comrade Commissar, I have one question. Where is Ivan Ivanovich?’
“For
seventy-five years, people were disappearing for such or other negative comments—and
then came ‘glasnost.’ With it, free speech returned to Russia. By 1991, the Red
empire collapsed and the secret code was no longer needed. The world breathed a
sigh of relief. Communism collapsed of its own weight and no nuclear war was
necessary. And so it seemed. Glasnost led to free speech, and free speech led
to free elections, from Albania to Russia. Free speech and free elections—we
were assured—would purge the world of Communist dictators just like the wars
eliminated the Nazis and Fascists.”
Nick
looked out of the window. The blue of the Pacific Ocean was below them and the
American continent was far behind.
“The promised land has changed. For four hundred years, the world was beating on its door to come in. What actually happened?” asked Jackie.
“We were misinformed. Although Communism lost, the
Communists won. Changed color, became Green, leaped the Atlantic, and landed in
America. How could this happen in the countries where free speech and free
elections were assured, and indeed happened? Free speech and free elections are
wonderful concepts if all the people have equal opportunities to have their
speeches heard and to present their platforms to large audiences. Such equal
opportunity, however, was simply not present in the former Communist countries,
because the state owned all—that is, one hundred percent—of the property. How
else can you attain Socialism? All the assets—banks, insurances, factories,
schools, media, forests, farms, or any other significant property that was
plundered by the Communists when they took power—were in the hands of the
plunderers. It was a redistribution of wealth, from many to the few who ran—or
better, owned—the state.
“As
we now know, no force or violence was needed for the change. The Soviet system
collapsed of its own weight and disintegrated. The new governments of the
just-born democracies in Eastern Europe were now looking towards the West for
advice.
“Alas,
just at that time in the West, precisely in the countries that built their
prosperity by respecting private property, the concept of redistribution of
wealth that collapsed the Soviets became popular. Professors from Capitalist
universities, such as Harvard, crisscrossed Eastern Europe and advised many a
naive new government against restitution of property to the legitimate owners.
This was terrible advice, for it ensured the re-election of former Communists
to power. Now they obtained power by legitimate means. They also proved a new
political strategy: It’s easy to win free elections if one party holds all the
wealth.
“This
technique to win elections was not lost on some politicians in America: Could
we pass a law in the United States Congress by which only some can influence
elections, by selective freedom of speech? Yes, indeed, we could.
“The
first step to this goal was attained by the 2002 campaign finance reform act,
proposed by senators McCain and Feingold. Like the term workers’ paradise in the twentieth century, the act used all the
right words to appear benign. Yet, it banned free speech to any citizen sixty
days before the elections—precisely at the time when an average voter starts
paying attention. Of course, it exempted the media.
“Thus,
instead of the American political model infecting Eastern Europe, it was the
political model from Communist Europe that infected America. The candidates
promoted by the media began to get elected. Certainly nobody could claim that
the elections were not totally free, especially since one would expect that
people in the media were of a balanced mix of political opinions. But that was
not even close. Already in the early nineties, Vanderbilt University showed
that about ninety percent of journalists voted for candidates that stood for
more government and less individual freedom. Now, in the twenty-first century,
the American people, so easily influenced by advertising, were in the hands of
the media, driving it down the road toward the growing black hole of Socialism.
“We
hoped President Bush would veto this monstrosity, but he passed the buck to the
United States Supreme Court. They deliberated the constitutionality of the
campaign finance reform—is it a violation of free speech or not?—but
watermelons were in the majority again, and the campaign finance law was ruled
constitutional. The outcome was expected, for the only justices that the Senate
would have approved for the Supreme Court were the product of big law schools,
where the Liberal Left has gained absolute power.
“Thus,
the campaign law became law and the media in America was the sole voice able to
influence elections. They no longer reported the events. Rather, they
interpreted events with bias and sympathy toward the failures, the guilty and
the unlucky. Achievement not only became politically incorrect, people began to
envy achievers, and they in turn simply ended achieving.
“Precisely
what happened to the Communist bloc fifty years ago was now happening in
America. America was beginning to lose its competent workforce. The competent
and the achievers began to leave the country for places where they were
appreciated, and those who remained said, ‘They pretend to pay us, and we
pretend to work …’”
“Isn’t that exactly what we are doing?” asked
Jackie. She was still a student and had a lot more to say about education.
Chapter 21.
Multiculturalism Divides
the American Nation
Jackie had much to add: “The availability of a competent workforce turned out to be even a worse problem in the Socialist-leaning America than it was in the Communist countries. If Communists did one thing right, it was to provide a good education to the masses. It was built on the disciplines of existing civilizations and not on such aimless mush as outcome-based education and moral relativism. The Communists’ good schools turned out to be their tactical error; instead of enhancing their power, they were the major factor contributing to the collapse of the Communist empire.
“It seems that the American Liberals did not want to repeat this mistake. They did all they could do to dumb down public schools and increase the number of dependent people. The collapse of public education created millions of semi-illiterate voters, TV addicts who reacted to images with feelings rather than brains. The media went along; it glorified performers: rock bands, movie actors, or sports stars who produced nothing of value, yet something an average journalist’s IQ could understand and the underclass could easily follow. On the other side, people who were creating the nation’s wealth and its well-being were ignored. Producers and creators, such as engineers, farmers, inventors, chemists, and such, were doing things that were generally over the heads of the media or impossible to cover in TV bites. These people who created the highest living standard that the world has ever experienced were seldom recognized for their contributions. Instead, they were taxed to the point where many stopped working.
“Look,
here we are, you of Ukraine stock and I from Vietnam. You would think American
natives would see the severity of the problem of education better than you and
I can. But it appears they are concerned with the fluff of multiculturalism.
“This
is a political disease that the American Liberals invented to attack their
mother country: the divisiveness of multiculturalism. Multiculturalism defined
all cultures as being equal in value. The idiocy of the concept was immediately
apparent if you asked: How about the Nazi culture? The political theory divide and conquer that created the
power of the Roman emperors, divide et
impera, was now re-invented by the Liberal politicians to rule America.
“Multiculturalism
was exactly the reverse of the process that created America. It was the undoing
of several-centuries-long evolution, where the best of the diverse cultures of
immigrants to America were blended into the glorious and coherent American
civilization. Liberals have destroyed it, but is it dead?” wondered Jackie.
Nick
had the flight steward bring over two cognacs. “Cheers to you, Jackie. It’s
young people like you that will bring it back to life … America was created by
immigrants, and immigrants will save it. But don’t ask me who, when, and how.”
Chapter
22.
Culture Is Not a Civilization
At
the beginning of the third millennium, ethnic diversity was unraveling America
with full force. Thanks to the brainwashing in schools and by the media,
Americans now imported the weak and the bland instead of the “tired and poor”
and confused their culture with civilization. A witch doctor from New Guinea
had to be equally admired as an Austrian concertmaster. Though all cultures,
from Albania to Zimbabwe, have a valid raison
d’etre, their reason for existence is not of equal value. Regardless of
what these nations’ contributions are, or were, a culture does not a
civilization make.
Civilization
is an accumulation of layers and layers of accomplishments, often from
different cultures. Yet, many universities in pursuit of political correctness
threw out the accomplishments of the so-called “dead white males” who certainly
came from different cultures, in favor of some drum beating.
It
does not take long for such an atmosphere of equivalence-at-all-costs to
attract the negatives and repel the positives. Only in the totalitarian
countries can the negatives operate freely in society, for the totalitarian authorities
provide them legitimacy. By the year 2000, America was still a free country, so
the negatives had to find a hiding place among the respectability of the
Greens. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the former American Reds and
their Progressive sympathizers—an assortment of Communists, Socialists, and
other true believers, even thugs, for whom the government is the answer to all
problems—changed their color to Green. They hijacked the ecology movement and
thus managed to attain more credibility than Capitalists, regardless of the
abundant proof that the Communist rather than the Capitalist industry caused
the greatest damage to the environment.
And
then, during the first decade of the twenty-first century, many found a home in
the Democratic Party. Green outside and Red inside, it was inevitable that a
so-infiltrated party of FDR, Truman, and Kennedy was soon nicknamed the
Watermelon Party by those few who survived the evil empire.
The
first indication that Greens were bad for America was their terrorist acts.
Driving spikes into trees scheduled for cutting caused many bad chain saw
accidents. But that was just the beginning. The Unabomber advocated his beliefs
by sending letter bombs. A Green activist in Berkeley accidentally blew herself
up in a car while transporting a bomb. Another Green activist was driving all
over the Midwest placing pipe bombs in letter boxes. Some Green terrorism was
more subtle. Huge projects were closed to protect a few insects; private
property was confiscated for disturbing a rare rat; farms went bankrupt when
their water was taken; pastures were closed to ranchers; and oil drilling was
stopped. Some convicted terrorists from the sixties even managed to find jobs
as university professors from where they could spread the damage while on the
government’s payroll. Two convicted terrorists of the Weatherman group who were
sentenced to sit many decades in prison for blowing up buildings, but were
pardoned by President Clinton, became advisors to a presidential candidate in
2008.
There
were some genuine Greens who tried to put sense back into the movement—the
co-founder of Greenpeace resigned in 2002—but critical mass was reached. The
thin layer of Green was now just a camouflage for the voluminous Red center.
Under Green skin, with major media on their side, the former Reds easily
convinced many a dumbed-down naive American citizen that the opposition party
only wanted to breathe dirty air, drink polluted water, and govern sick people.
Only the Greens were for clean air, clear water, and healthy people. People
believed it, just as one hundred years ago they believed Lenin and eighty years
ago they believed Hitler and Mussolini.
On the one hundredth anniversary of the Soviet Revolution, in 2017, it was clear that the American Greens were driving the country towards the final step of Socialism, 100 percent government and 0 percent individual responsibility. Khrushchev unveiled the plan in 1963 when he told Americans in San Jose, California: “We will bury you.”
Nikita was not too far off; one hundred years after the Red October revolution in Russia, Americans, while thinking Green, elected their first Red government.
The Liberal school system had done its work.
Chapter
23.
Education
Paradox:
Schools Create the New Dark Age
Flashback
to the events of 2009.
Schools
were now ruled by a monopoly of PhDs in education, the worthless doctors of
teaching. For years, one could obtain the PhD degree in education by simply
following the rules of New Age behavior. Revolutionaries of the sixties,
members of terrorist groups such as the Weatherman, Symbionese Liberation Army, Black Panthers, and such
who blew up buildings and executed judges, now qualified to be professors at
many respectable universities and colleges of education. At many American
universities, a violent pedigree was a resume enhancement, preferably if it had
some Marxist flavor. Sometimes even wearing the right tattoos or a ring through
the nose would help to get the job, for it showed the common ground between teachers
and students. With the support of the federal Department of Education, the
teachers were told to leave no child behind. Leading edge? Many thought that no
child left behind meant that the front should stand still or even back up until
the trailing edge of stragglers caught up with the front.
There
were many great efforts to create the New Age generation—brainwashed on
antimilitarism, reinforced with pills into quiet submission and unisex
behavior. Yet, boys will be boys, and girls will be girls. Genes in children do
not sleep. Here and there, especially in the fly-over states where Liberalism,
Marxism, and the general government’s
we-know-better-than-parents–what-is-good-for-children attitude had not yet
taken a foothold, acts of shocking student violence still occurred. It was
somewhat acceptable that such unenlightened states, which the media designated
as “red states,” would still have a problem with undisciplined students who
listened to what their parents said. But for such outrage to happen in the
Liberals’ controlled “blue” states, it was very disturbing. The government had
to get involved although the Constitution says said nothing about it. The
Department of Education, employing thousands of bureaucrats who did no teaching
whatsoever, must have somehow been involved, but not in the three R’s. Moral
relativism provided them with plenty of opportunities. Following are a few
examples.
It
started in Vermont, where Johnny and Marco got into a fistfight after school.
Several students made a video and sent it to YouTube. The police were called,
and the Armed Response Unit arrived and arrested Johnny and Marco. Mobil
devices with videos of fights were confiscated as evidence. They were charged
with assault, and both were suspended even though Johnny started it.
Diversionary conferences and parent counseling meetings were conducted and the
video was shown on six Internet sites.
Massachusetts
soon followed. Jeffrey wouldn’t sit still in class, disrupting other students.
Jeffrey was given huge doses of Ritalin, was counseled to death, became a
zombie, and was tested for ADD. The school got extra funding because Jeffrey
had a disability. Jeffrey dropped out of school.
Things
got worse. In Illinois, Billy’s fly ball broke a window in his neighbor’s car, and
his angry dad slapped him. Billy’s dad was arrested for child abuse. Billy was
removed to foster care and joined a gang. Billy’s sister told the psychologist
that she remembered being abused herself, and their dad went to prison while
Billy’s mum had an affair with the government psychologist.
In
New York, Jose, a college student, brought cigarettes to school. The police
were called, and Jose was expelled from school for drug possession. His car was
searched for drugs and weapons.
In
Michigan, Mohammed failed high school English. Mohammed’s cause was taken up by
a local human rights group. Newspaper articles appeared nationally, explaining
that making English a requirement for graduation was racist. A civil liberties
association filed a class action lawsuit against the state school system and
his English teacher. English was banned from the core curriculum. Mohammed was
given his qualification anyway but ended up mowing lawns for a living because
he could not speak English.
In
California, ten-year-old Johnny fell during break and scraped his knee. His
teacher, Mary, found him crying and gave him a hug to comfort him. Mary was
accused of being a sexual predator and lost her job. She faced three years in
prison. Johnny underwent five years of therapy and became gay.
With
schools like these all over America, in a few years American businesses would
run out of employable high school and college graduates and move the last
remaining factories and laboratories out of the country. The “hidden” tax
revenues that were never appreciated nor understood by the Liberals, resulting
from the royalties for the creative work of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries, either expired or traveled beyond the border with corporate
headquarters, inventors, and creators.
The
attack on corporate America had succeeded beyond the Liberals’ wildest dreams.
The new dark ages—which started with the 1964 free speech movement in Berkeley
and brought us first one-chord guitar music then anonymous sex, followed by the
drug culture, and culminated in the Church of Climate Change with its
relentless attack on any profitable business—infected the whole nation in less
than half a century. Marxist professors also successfully brainwashed most
Americans and especially Congress, where the windfall losses were never
investigated, only the profits. When Congress found that profits were “bad,” it
sent a signal to many taxpayers indicating that losses were good. The same
happened in Communist countries; many decided to enjoy life and stopped working.
Tax revenues plummeted.
The unintended consequence really surprised the United Nation bureaucrats when they realized that more than one-quarter of their total funding came from America. Is America now broke? The concern about their meal ticket became the call for an urgent meeting with the Nobel Prize Committee.
2016, No Feeding
Hand Left to Bite
Pressure
from the United Nations and the International Socialist Organization on the
Nobel Prize Committee was unbearable. These were old friends, after all. The
Nobel Prize Committee was asked to restructure the awards. The Socialist
government of the United Socialist States of America, now changed to USSA, pressed
the hardest.
The
meeting was held in the former Vanderbilt mansion in Poughkeepsie, New York.
The mansion did not quite match Versailles, but it was the closest the USSA
State Department could come up with to accommodate public dignitaries who had
now gotten used to the lifestyle of the power elite. A necklace of helicopter
limousines was parked around the vast immaculate gardens overlooking the Hudson
River. The new elite class no longer used roads. The potholes were for the
people’s transportation. They made travel unbearable even in the air-cushioned
automobiles, but more than that, the political elite had to avoid contact with
people. It was no longer safe for the elite to travel on the surface. Although
the Second Amendment was deleted with the revised Constitution, few guns were
collected, and here and there a bullet would fly off a potentate’s vehicle.
Limos that traveled through the air space were the only way to go. Or by water;
down the slope toward the Hudson River were several yachts, none shorter than
two hundred feet. All public property. To represent the people, they always
said.
The
conference was in the ballroom. The gold leaf ceiling, mirrors, and chandeliers
were bouncing light off of each other and off of a few bald heads who sat
around the table as well. But in the setting that Marie Antoinette would have
approved of, most attendees looked out of place. The gathered had all the
finesse of federal prison guards, evidence that the feminazis had at long last
come to power.
“We
at the Nobel committee certainly understand the complaint by the United Nations
representatives,“ meekly proclaimed one shiny baldhead, belonging to a
Norwegian man who tried to make the last stand.
“Which
is …” The hostile looks from the women who now ruled the impoverished world
caused him to dampen the rest of the sentence. “… that it is not fair that most
of the Nobel Prizes to date have been given to white men.” In the minds of the
assembled, this was not far from an admission of racism. It certainly was the
type of self-accusation and admission of guilt that would reappear every
century. During the Holy Inquisition, it guaranteed you death without torture;
during French Communes[24],
quick separation of mind from the body; during Stalin’s terrorism, it was an
invisible shot in the back of the head. In this multicultural setting, the
Norwegian certainly did not know what to expect. But he had to go on.
“We
have done our best to award peace and literature awards to people who are not
white, although they were hard to find. But we are very proud of our records of
giving Nobel Prizes to some real losers. For example, my colleagues gave a
Nobel Prize for Economics to a Soviet economist when the Soviet economy was in
shambles. That was at the time everybody knew the Soviets could not even feed
their own people. Remember also, we gave peace prizes to Arafat while he was
terrorizing Israel and to Gorbachev for losing the arms race to Reagan. We
awarded Al Gore for exposing global warming—when global cooling was almost a
decade old. This one was not too bad, for we called it ‘climate change’ and we
were right whatever happened. And we have been really, really trying to give
every Nobel Prize in Medicine to people who work on AIDS.”
“Why?”
The Norwegian looked around the table to see if people really believed what he
was saying and then continued, “… we want to encourage sexual practice that
does not produce children. We also want to discourage such medical research
that keeps old people healthy too long. It is no longer in the public interest
to keep the old folks alive. The social programs for the old people simply cost
too much.”
“But
…“ He took a very deep breath. Now he was about to open a sensitive issue and
knew that his was the minority opinion. ”… the Nobel committee does not want to
eliminate Nobel Prizes for Chemistry and for Physics just because these awards
only go to the white folks. We are open to give them to any race.”
This
brought the American ambassador to the UN out of her chair. She was a former madam
who became a poet, then professor of history at Harvard and a recognized expert
on slavery.
“I propose that these physics and chemistry awards
be eliminated immediately. Just look at the American slave owners. Benjamin
Franklin, a slave owner, invented electricity. Thomas Jefferson, another slave
owner, analyzed weather, tested balloons and submarines, even brought matches
to America. No, no. Physics and chemistry have done too much discriminatory
damage to our society. The physicists even produced two atomic bombs that were
dropped only on minorities. This has to stop, and I ask you to vote for my
proposal, which is: I want the money to go for new classes of awards—rap
poetry, barbecue technology, to mention just two.”
The
assembled Socialists, Leftists, and Liberals just loved these words. The
applause and the buzz gave the former madam extra energy. She became inspired
with a breakthrough idea.
“Now,“ she continued in her whisky-softened voice,
“I am not a hardheaded woman, and I am offering a compromise to all the
physicists out there. Let’s combine their award with education and give a Nobel
Prize for Physical Education. It certainly is close enough to physics. Thank
you.” She laid down all of her three hundred pounds on the delicate Louis XV chair
that gave out a sigh of unwanted pressure.
The
next speaker was a representative from the American National Teachers Union.
“Comrades, por favor, por favor, don’t you know that we stopped teaching
physics and chemistry ten years ago? We are a developed nation. Our children no
longer need to sweat the hard subjects. Our children no longer have to win.
Winning is bad. All baseball games now end in a draw. As Marx said, eliminate
the differences. Bring us the lowest common denominator. We should now recognize
the losers—our artists who cannot draw, rock musicians who know only one chord,
poets who cannot spell, actors who can barely read, journalists who copy from
each other—and if we should really want to try, let’s award excellence for
being a homeless drug addict, a creator of illegitimate children, a sexual
deviant, a transvestite child molester. This is our diversity! Let us celebrate
diversity.
“Several
years ago, we said we would leave no child behind. Even if we do not move a
single child forward, we will succeed. We must have equality, and equality can
be achieved only by bringing everybody to the level of the lowest common
denominator. We can regress and nobody will be left behind. Even there we have
some work to do, for among developed nations our children continue to score the
highest on their self-esteem and basketball. Let the underdeveloped nations
slave at trigonometry, organic chemistry, and quantum mechanics like our
forefathers did before they became wealthy. We are already wealthy; we don’t
need that stuff.”
“Okay,
we have time for one more comment,” said the chairman.
“Thank
you, Madam Chair. As a representative of the artists union, I fully support the
previous speaker’s recommendations. Just look at what caused global warming:
physics and chemistry. They are the root causes. They have to go if we want to
survive.”
Predictably, votes were cast and two-thirds of the votes were for eliminating physics and chemistry from the Nobel Prize list. Immediately, this success was broadcast by every government-owned television channel. The last bastion of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy[25], which Liberals blamed for all the misery in the world, was demolished. There would be no more logical or mathematical proofs. Thinking was now out; feeling was in. It would appear that the superstitious belief in the global climate change won.
“We knew we were on the right track,” commented the mayor of Oakland on national TV that evening. “Several years ago, we invested in cultural centers to teach pottery and yoga in green facilities with such eco features as waterless urinals. Our graduates will now be competitive for Nobel Prizes too.”
Were the preacher Malthus[26] and the quasi preacher Gore right? The media said so, and not for the first time in human history, the last lights of rationality were going out and the world was sinking into irrational darkness.
“We should leave no culture behind” now meant: wait until all cultures catch up with us—even at the cost of regressing. Waterless urinals, invented by the former Roman emperor Vespasian two thousand years ago became the signal: We are all in this together. Instead of creating more sources of energy that would allow the whole world to flush, the pre-Roman “green” technology, some two thousand years old, was re-employed during the energy blackouts.
Then, the most appropriate question for the age of creeping darkness was raised: How long may we keep the lights on?
Chapter
25.
How
to Keep the Lights on During the Dark Age
2009 Even Children
Fear to Exhale
When in 1945 everything was falling apart in Adolf Hitler’s attempt to rule the world, his scientists redoubled the effort. “Find solutions to the energy and to the food crises. Wherever!” was the high command. Soon there were some breakthroughs from unlikely sources. Making gasoline out of coal was a success, but butter made out of cow manure just did not smell right. The two problems were not linked, and at least Hitler had partial success while continuing his losing battle.
But
in the losing battle of the twenty-first century to eliminate climate change,
the crises of energy and food were linked. The production of energy required
that food be converted into energy, primarily ethanol, while the production of
food needed energy that used ethanol. It was a no-win situation; rather, it was
a lose-lose arrangement, spiraling out of control.
The Green lobby managed to outlaw nuclear and hydroelectric power many decades ago. The last attempt to drill in Alaska was vetoed by President Clinton. So few new oil or natural gas wells were drilled since then that the production volume was negligible relative to consumption. The United States had enough coal to last a thousand years, but coal powered plants were outlawed also. Food-powered energy was the last resort. But also most politically correct, for it leveled the playing field with the most backward tribe on earth.
Most Americans were on a diet, so this was an easy sell. But, the authorities had to deal with the problem of where to find more food to be converted into energy.
California
again led the way. The bureaucratic breakthrough happened soon after 2009 when
the newly elected governor formed the Department of Energy and Food, DEAF. The
energy shortage devastated the revenues of the most populous state of the USA.
Of California’s three main industries—agriculture, electronics, and film—the
electronics and film industries were emigrating to other states due to the lack
of energy.[27]
Agriculture, the only tax-subsidized industry, did not leave. This put California
on a path to becoming a third-world country. It already looked like one with
all the illegal immigrants taking advantage of free health care, free schools,
and free food.
But
many immigrants came to California to improve their lives, not to make it worse.
One such person was Jose Manuel. He knew not a word of English when he sneaked
across the border ten years ago. After having spent several years under the
protection of the sanctuary city of San Francisco, he knew enough English to
become a DEAF inspector. His job took him often to those fitness gyms that
sprang up all over the country, full of exercise machines that people pushed
and pedaled in brightly lit rooms with TV sets glaring from every wall all
night. Having been raised in Nicaragua, where muscle power was the main source
of energy to grow food, this seemed to Jose a shocking waste of human energy as
well as of electric power.
2016,
a Trickle of the New Spring
At
that very same time, three thousand miles away in a remote cabin on the shore
of a small lake in Idaho, seven boys and nine girls were watching the stars
appear over the nearby mountain peaks that only minutes ago were glowing red in
the setting sun. And not one of them had the arrogance to ask, “Will the earth
be there after I grow up?” They knew that this scene has already been repeated
several billion times and will repeat again, with or without them.
The
sixteen children were members of the Right Wing Renaissance, an international
organization of young people dedicated to restoring civilization.
All
sixteen children were products of home schooling. Most never attended a public
school or any classes on multiculturalism and moral relativism. They knew that
spring, summer, autumn, and winter were just convenient names for mushy
concepts of global warming and cooling and climate change, and that all these
changes were caused by the sun, even the perceived shortage of polar bears.
All
these children were born a decade after the Reagan years and after the collapse
of the Soviet Union. By not attending public schools, they learned history.
They learned about the Founding Fathers and the Constitution and the wars that
were fought and won for freedom. They learned about the strange concepts of
nuclear disarmament, peaceful coexistence, and mutual assured destruction,
although this simply made no sense to them in the context of the world into
which they were born where only one benevolent superpower ruled. They were
taught how the peace dividend produced the moral slide of our civilization by
allowing the leader of the free world perversities and derelictions of duties
not seen since Caligula ruled imperial Rome. And how the people followed his
example.
For
such mismanagement and the selling of national secrets for fat campaign
donations, America soon had to pay a substantial price. Motivated by their
love-hate paradox of the Hollywood pornographic industry, terrorists from the
Islamic world pounced on America while it was sleeping. While its children were
being brainwashed in multiculturalism, another culture tried to give America
the mortal blow. Nevertheless, the public schools pushed moral relativism
until, at the turn of the millennium, it became not only fashionable, but
actually required.
Out
went the understanding of the laws of nature that extended the human life span
to almost one hundred years. A belief in Mother Nature that regressed to the
lifestyle of animals was in. Abundant genetic crops were out; a shortage of
organic food was in. Abundant nuclear energy was out; dim lights in rooms too
hot or too cold were in. In short, misery was in.
Misery was tried previously during President
Carter’s administration for four short years, but people did not like it. It
was too close to, say, life in the Soviet Union or China. Misery was now back.
It returned in full force, ensured by and due to the existence of the First World
Socialist Government. Its leaders knew that Socialism requires misery like fire
requires oxygen. Eliminate misery and Socialism dies; and the other way around.
The solution to end misery would also be the end of Socialist government,
including all the goodies that political power brings along.
To
stay in power, Socialist governments have at all times depended on abundant and
strict police control of its citizens’ movements and thoughts. In the eighties,
the stronghold of the Soviet Union over Russia and Eastern Europe was cracked
by President Reagan, who understood the power of human creativity when it is
given freedom. But Socialists regrouped globally and invented a new, easy to
sell religion. The Church of Climate Change preached the new insidious
simplistic philosophy that energy consumption causes bad weather. Within a
decade it created general misery and poverty worldwide.
Three decades after Reagan’s market driven economics
liberated half of the world from slavery, the first World Socialist government
was formed by the naïve new generation who, without knowledge of history
allowed it to repeat itself.
But
the spark of freedom never dies. Due to the wisdom of some parents, some boys
and girls escaped the thought control. In the darkest years of the early
twenty-first century, they were able to discover and build techniques to again
advance the human life span and enrich civilization.
They
worked, like their grandparents in obscure locations, far away from the
approval of government bureaucrats, mostly with private funds after the
government, fearing climate change, turned off all funding of energy-consuming
technology.
Like
the first Renaissance, the Second Renaissance expanded civilization beyond
anything imagined before. Following the Second Dark Age, the Second Renaissance
created many magnificent discoveries that improved life on earth into many
centuries beyond the twenty-first—nanotechnologies, physiobiologies, nuclear
medicine, micronutrition, and such.
These discoveries prolonged people’s life span; one hundred years was
now an approachable average for most. No government bureaucrat could ever even
dream of such unpronounceable innovations as graphics
processors, CMOS optics, copper chip metalization layers, content addressable
memories, new backhaul systems, modulator-based projection displays, multicore
and multicell and tile processors, 3D silicon structures, image based I-O,
optical transponders, on-chip test engines, transceivers, cable optics,
fast-hardware trusted platform modules, and memistors. Not even a single bureaucrat, not one.
Yet, these
and many other unplanned but magnificent breakthroughs in science and
technology produced techniques that not only provided longer and healthier
lives but also insight into nature that gave enough food and energy for
everyone.
According
to all the predictions by the people who dealt only with words rather than
instruments, such an outcome was dead wrong. Business executives, presenting
verifiable facts and concrete results, were pitted against politicians, judges,
and journalists who dealt with unverifiable abstract thoughts. We could always
verify what physicists said but very seldom could trust sociologists. It is the
condition of trust. By contrast, the sociologist dealt in broad propositions—such
as, “ethnic diversity improves educational outcomes” or “patriarchy causes
war”—that, by sinking into a mush of definitions, defy disproof.
By
avoiding such mush, the sixteen children in Idaho and many millions all over
America restarted the engine of innovation and productivity.
They
were the carriers of the American gene, which no amount of Liberal
indoctrination could destroy forever.
1500
to 2000, Evolution of Freedom Continues
In
1789 the French revolutionaries came up with this slogan: Liberté, Egalité,
Fraternité. Fraternity was probably added by the French for style—it made the
slogan sound elegant—hoping that women would not notice: “Alors, where is
Sororité?!”
Today,
fraternity is just another sexist
term without the balance of sorority,
and political systems simply dropped both. That left only liberty and equality to
work with.
After
the French Revolution, many revolutions tried to combine the two remaining
ideals, liberty and equality, into a workable economic system, but without
success. The two simply contradict each other. A system based on liberty is
Capitalism, and a system based on equality is Socialism.
A
system that insists on equality cannot allow liberty because liberty produces
and assures unequal results. Equality evens out the results to the lowest
common denominator while liberty allows spectacular successes as well as
spectacular failures.
The
winner or the loser is progress, for progress is not achieved by mediocrity but
by excellence. Therefore, only liberty assures progress. Equality at best
ensures status quo, but more likely, decay.
America
began with a heavy dose of liberty. As the American nation matured with the
proportion of immigrants diminishing, each generation had a slightly diluted
preference for liberty-and-risk in favor of equality-and-safety.
Why,
then, did Americans not succumb to the social safety model during persistent
Socialist attacks, and not even during the brief victory of the Liberals when
they wanted to Europeanize America?
It
is highly probable that the “homo Americanus” has a different gene pool than
most “homo Europensis” have. This natural selection evolved during the five
centuries after 1500, because only the people who had the courage to leave
everything behind for the sake of freedom and independence came to
America. Imagine the travel days before the jet age, when leaving the place of
your birth, your parents, relatives, friends, and any property dear to you
meant leaving all behind you. Forever.
The
“couch potatoes,” albeit not exclusively, preferred the comfort of home. Such
triage eventually produced in America a far higher density of risk-takers and
adventurists than in Europe. These are the components required for innovation
and invention as well as for preservation of freedom.
In each person, there is a mix of two types of genes. One type controls our inclination toward liberty-and-risk and the other our preference for equality-and-safety. The mix of such genes regulates all our behavior.
The immigrants to America brought to the new country the prevalence of liberty genes—otherwise, they would have never emigrated. Through this natural selection, America benefited from a much higher concentration of risk-takers, resulting in its formidable creativity.
Very
few people came to America for equality. As the nation matured, Americans with
a prevalence of liberty genes became Conservatives, while those with a
preference for equality became Liberals. Liberal? What a misnomer! Just like
their European cousins, Liberals in America evolved over the last few centuries
into “we would rather hide from the bear than attack it.”
Thus, it follows that only Conservatives have been able to successfully protect liberty wherever it needed to be protected. The evidence is plentiful, but the Berlin Wall is evidence enough. It stood for decades during the Liberals’ pursuit of peaceful coexistence with evil. It only came down when the last Conservative president, Ronald Reagan, stated our liberty-and-risk strategy: “We win, they lose.”
Thus, the end result was as good as it was inevitable: the world’s only benevolent superpower. This superpower now lays immobilized and dormant, ruled by genes of equality, where evil and good are equal, awaiting the surge of a new generation with the American liberty genes.
╬ THE END ╬
[1] Quotes that are part of the
record have been footnoted. Quotes
without a footnote are fictitious, added to illustrate the probable situation
of an event.
[2]
American Civil Liberties Union, formerly often a front for communists, now
operating openly with a similar agenda.
[3]
Members of the Progressive Caucus, US Congress 1998 :
http://web.archive.org/web/19980206053229/www.dsausa.org/pc/pc.members.html
[4]
What had first been simply the need of the moment was transformed into a
full-fledged political project: world socialist revolution. The
Black Book of Communism (Harvard University Press 1999), 271.
[5] Lenin’s telegram on 10 August 1918: “Comrades! The kulak uprising in your five districts must be crushed without pity. The interests of the whole revolution demand such actions, for the final struggle with the kulaks has now begun. You must make an example of these people. (1) Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see it) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. (2) Publish their names. (3) Seize all their grain. (4) Single out the hostages per my instructions in yesterday's telegram. Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks and that we will continue to do so. Reply saying you have received and carried out these instructions.
Yours, Lenin.
PS. Find tougher people.”
Ref.: The
Black Book of Communism (Harvard University Press 1999), 72.
[6]
Comintern 7th
Congress and the Popular Front http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comintern
[7]
“Very good”
[8]
Office of Financial Investments
[9]
Kamchatka is a large peninsula in Eastern Siberia, next to Mongolia, as far as
you can go from Moscow. Molotov was
indeed dispatched there after Stalin’s death in 1953.
[10] Potemkin tried to impress upon the czarina how well her subjects lived by constructing a few stage sets of beautiful villages and setting them along the Volga river as Catherine the Great sailed by.
[11] Kapitsa--one of the few Soviet scientists to receive a Nobel Prize. Pyotr Kapitsa was born in Petrograd in 1894, attended Petrograd Polytechnic and in 1921 went to Cambridge. He worked with Sir Rutherford and became an assistant director of magnetic research at Cavendish laboratory, fellow of Trinity college and a member of the Royal society. In 1934 Kapitsa went to a professional meeting in Moscow from which never returned. When the American atomic secrets were passed to Soviets in the fifties, Kapitsa was one of the few scientists in the Soviet Union who understood Quantum Mechanics and was therefore placed in charge of developing the Soviet atomic bomb. But the importance of the physics that gave birth to transistor was still not understood by the Party.
[12] Russian for “free speech” and “change,” a novel
concept for Soviet citizens who used to be shipped to Siberia by the thousands
for even thinking such thoughts.
[14] In short, the uncertainty principle states that any attempt to
measure the velocity of a subatomic particle, such as an electron, will confuse
the simultaneous measurement of its position.
[15] Cecily Hastings, trans., Erwin
Schrödinger: My view of the world (Cambridge University
Press, 1964).
[16] “U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union proceeds on the assumption that the maintenance of power by the Soviet regime rests ultimately on force and that Soviet external aggressiveness stems in part from the nature of the Soviet political system,” Harvard professor Richard Pipes began the forty-three-page secret NSC paper. Pipes went on to quote Khruschev’s conclusion that if a real arms race took place, it might “bring about the collapse of socialism and a restoration of capitalism in our country.” Ref.: Richard Schweizer, Reagan’s War (Doubleday), 156.
[17]
Rush H. Limbaugh, See, I told you so (Pocket Books) 70.
[18]
To this day, Russia has barely one car per one hundred Russians, while in the
“mythical” U.S. economy, we have about two cars per one U.S. citizen. And water
and air in the U.S. are still far cleaner than in Russia.
[19] MAD is a product of the 1950s’ US doctrine of massive retaliation, and despite attempts to redefine it in contemporary terms like flexible response and nuclear deterrence, it has remained the central theme of American defense planning.
[20] Foreign Affairs. Winter, 1982/83
[21]
John Steinbeck, The Log from the Sea of
Cortez (Viking Press, 1951), 117.
[22]
John Steinbeck, The Log from the Sea of
Cortez (Viking Press, 1951), 119.
[23] A severe famine of 1921–22 that
occurred in Bolshevik Russia. The famine killed an estimated 5 million in the Volga-Ural region. The Bolshevik government
had requisitioned supplies from the peasantry for little or nothing in
exchange. This led peasants to drastically reduce their crop production.
[24]
Reign of terror by the Commune (“communist”) governments in Paris during (1792)
the French Revolution and the end (1871) of the Franco-Prussian War.
[25]
The title of her enemies. It was
apparently invented by Hillary Clinton during the Monica Lewinski scandal.
[26]
Thomas Malthus set out an idea in 1798 that the world would run out of food due
to the limits of available land. Until 2008, the world has been awash in food,
except in the countries with failed Socialistic economies or where green energy
policies are converting food into fuel.
[27]
Intel decided in 2008 not to build another plant in California. An Intel plant
provides annually up to one hundred billion dollars’ income to its
infrastructure.
[L1]Please provide the author of the article, if available, in footnote 7.