This site is for those who want to know what is happening to their world, and why,
and what they can do about it. This information is already on site, just start reading.
A Brief Textbook of American Democracy
[Editorial comment: I do not know the origin of this article;
should any reader be aware of it please let me know so that credit
can be given. It deserves credit because it well expresses what
has been developed over the last century. Most people need to catch
up with this before they begin to see the reality of the danger
we face today. But the big change (as regular readers will know)
is that control of government has long since passed from a national
governing elite to an international union of governing elite presided
over by international finance. Power, consolidated to international,
is called Globalism. The following is shortened and underlined
for emphasis of important points. End introductory comment.]
Monday, January 19, 2004
While the United States is freer and more democratic than
many countries, it is not, I think, either as free or as democratic
as we are expected to believe, and becomes rapidly less so.
we seem to be specialists in maintaining the appearance without
having the substance. Regarding the techniques of which, a
(1) Free speech does not exist in America. We all know what
we can’t say and about whom we can’t say it.
(2) A democracy run by two barely distinguishable parties is not
in fact a democracy.
A parliamentary democracy allows expression of a range of points
of view: A ecological candidate may be elected, along with a communist,
a racial-separatist, and a libertarian. These will make sure their
ideas are at least heard. By contrast, the two-party system prevents
expression of any ideas the two parties agree to suppress. … issues
most important to most people, yet are quashed.
The elections do however allow the public a sense of participation
while having the political importance of the Superbowl.
(3) Large jurisdictions discourage autonomy. If, say, educational
policy were set in small jurisdictions, such as towns or counties,
you could buttonhole the mayor and have a reasonable prospect of
influencing your children’s schools. If policy is set at
the level of the state, then to change it you have to quit your
job, marshal a vast campaign costing a fortune, and organize committees
in dozens of towns. It isn’t practical. In America, local
jurisdictions set taxes on real estate and determine parking policy.
Everything of importance is decided remotely.
(4) Huge unresponsive bureaucracies somewhere else serve as
political flywheels, insulating elected officials from the whims
of the populace.
Try calling the Department of Education from Wyoming. Its employees
are anonymous, salaried, unaccountable, can’t be fired, and
don’t care about you. Many more of them than you might believe
are affirmative-action hires and probably can’t spell Wyoming.
You cannot influence them in the slightest. Yet they influence
(5) For our increasingly centralized and arbitrary government,
the elimination of potentially competitive centers of power has
been, and is, crucial. This is one reason for the aforementioned
defanging of the churches: The faithful recognize a power above
that of the state, which they might choose to obey instead of Washington.
The Catholic Church in particular, with its inherent organization,
was once powerful. It has been brought to heel.
Similarly the elimination of states’ rights, now practically
complete, put paid to another potential source of opposition. Industry,
in the days of J. P. Morgan politically potent, has been tamed
by regulation and federal contracts. [A little confusion here;
big business was always behind ‘Party Government’.
Ed.] The military in the United States has never been politically
active. The government becomes the only game available.
(6) Paradoxically, increasing the power of groups who cannot
threaten the government strengthens the government: They serve
to those who might challenge the central authority. The encouragement
of dissension … the importing of inassimilable minorities,
weakens what was once the cultural mainstream.
(7) The apparent government isn’t the real government. The
real power in America resides in what George Will once called the “permanent
political class,” of which the formal government is a subset.
*a). It consists of the professoriate, journalists, politicians,
revolving appointees, high-level bureaucrats and so on who slosh
in and out of formal power. Most are unelected, believe the same
things, and share a lack of respect for views other than their
It is they, to continue the example of education, who write
the textbooks your children use, determine how history will be
and set academic standards—all without the least regard for
you. You can do nothing about it.
(8) The US government consists of five branches which are, in
rough order of importance, the Supreme Court, the media, the presidency,
the bureaucracy, and Congress. *b).
The function of the Supreme Court, which is both unanswerable
and unaccountable, is to impose things that the congress fears
to touch. That is, it establishes programs desired by the ruling
political class which could not possibly be democratically enacted.
While formally a judicial organ, the Court is in reality our Ministry
of Culture and Morals. It determines policy regarding racial integration,
abortion, pornography, immigration, the practice of religion, which
groups receive special privilege, and what forms of speech shall
(9) The media have two governmental purposes. The first is
to prevent discussion and, to the extent possible, knowledge
subjects. The second is to inculcate by endless indirection the
values and beliefs of the permanent political class. … *c)
(10) Control of television conveys control of the society. It
is magic. This is such a truism that we do not always see how true
it is. The box is ubiquitous and inescapable. It babbles at us
in bars and restaurants, in living rooms and on long flights. It
is the national babysitter. For hours a day most Americans watch
Perhaps the key to cultural control is that people can’t
not watch a screen. It is probably true that stupid people would
not watch intelligent television, but it is certainly true that
intelligent people will watch stupid television. Any television,
it seems, is preferable to no television. As people read less,
the lobotomy box acquires semi-exclusive rights to their minds.
Television doesn’t tell people what to do. It shows
them. People can resist admonition. But if they see something
over and over, month after month, if they see the same values approvingly
portrayed, they will adopt both behavior and values. It takes years,
but it works. To be sure it works, we put our children in front
of the screen from infancy.
(11) Finally, people do not want freedom. They want comfort, two
hundred channels on the cable, sex, drugs, rock-and-roll, an easy
job and an SUV. No country with really elaborate home-theater has
ever risen in revolt. An awful lot of people secretly like being
told what to do. We would probably be happier with a king. **
Underlining and deletions for efficient presentation.
*a *b *c. The only serious oversight in the above article was
of the ‘international monetary system monopoly’ i.e.; ‘the
commercial governing class’ is our oldest and most powerful
political force and is now international. Today, however, thinking
people should not need reminding of that. The “values and
beliefs” to which we are indoctrinated are not those of the “permanent
political class”, they are the values set for slave class
indoctrination; separation of beliefs between upper and lower classes
is not new to the world. Literature on site includes “Globalism
Brainwash”, “Human Manipulation” and “Think!”
** (11) is true of people indoctrinated to accept ambitions that
have been deformed to worship of comfort, entertainment and animal
excitements as the goal of a mindless, sedated, state of existence.
This was introduced by brainwashing the poor through government
agencies and internationally controlled mass media. On that majority,
the more aware were entangled, entrapped and frustrated. ‘Feel-good
Philosophy’ now leads the great majority to want ‘better’ – meaning
more comfortable, more ‘entertaining’ education for
their children with less intellectual restraint/discipline – meaning
education that covertly enforces, or (in association with mass
media) presents as normal, the deformed values to which parents,
themselves, were introduced. See literature on site. Ed.]