A Slice at a Time or Education is the Master Key
by Arthur R. Thompson, CEO, The John Birch Society

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice," is a famous quote from Barry Goldwater's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in 1964.

It inspired his "troops" and at the same time produced panic in the ranks of those who had been programmed to believe Goldwater and his followers were extremists. So it rallied the anti-Goldwater forces to greater efforts to secure the presidency for Lyndon Johnson. It is my opinion that the remark was deliberately intended by Goldwater's speech writer to accomplish both results.

We members of The John Birch Society have long been the target of a subtle and sometimes not so subtle campaign to make us appear to be too extreme, too hard line. We were supposed to loosen up and, if we did, we would succeed more often.

There are ways to behave, act like ladies and gentlemen, and not be in "someone's face." But we also have to understand the consequence of this seeming compromise unless we use it as a strategy. The cost of compromise will be great if we allow it to lead to defeat. If it is just a strategy instead, then we are getting what we can while we organize to come back at the Insiders again with increased strength. We haven't given up; we say to ourselves that we should get what we can while we get busy organizing to get more, and more, in the future.

The "get what you can" strategy has long been played by the Insiders. We should take a lesson from it, not that we shouldn't always strive to get everything we want to achieve. But there are times we can't succeed totally. Let's never get discouraged, but spend our energy and time to educate and organize people while setting the stage for ultimate victory, however large or small that victory may be.

The communist arm of the Insiders frequently employs this strategy. For many years, conservatives have pointed to the ten steps to communize a country published by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in their Manifesto of the Communist Party. The goal of conservatives has been to warn Americans that we are marching toward communism here in the United States.

This is all well and good, but too often the few paragraphs preceding the famous ten measures are never considered. They are actually far more important because they lay a base of understanding that we all need to comprehend if we intend not only to preserve our American system but also defeat the insidious process begun over 200 years ago in America, even before the Manifesto was written.

Marx and Engels simply codified a process used for centuries by those who lust for power. This process had been outlined in the writings of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli for example — and even by Voltaire. In Marx's case, he was working for the street thugs who would become the water carriers for pressure exerted from the bottom of society for the Insiders.  These were the communists. At the time, there was not yet a communist party. There was a need to organize one and set the stage for the socialist revolutions planned in the year it was published: 1848.

It isn't necessary to focus here on other street-level organizations run by the Insiders, such as those under Mazzini, and why another outfit, the communist party, was necessary. Other organizations existed and more would be created to exert the pressure from above amongst the elite.

Those squeezed in the middle would be the bourgeoisie: the middle class, the entrepreneurs. This class of society would feel the brunt of the Insiders' force since they formed the linchpin of a free society. I explain this in Part 9 of my "Real Solutions for the Economy" series posted online as follows: Part 9: "Grow the Middle Class"

Note that Marx referred only to the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, not the rich. In a communist society, there are to be only two classes: the poor and the elite inner party members. Thus, they have the ingredients for control as they eliminate the independent business and professional class.

Here are a few paragraphs from the Manifesto.  Comments about these passages follow.  I am using the official Russian Communist version printed in Moscow in 1952 through 1966 for use in English-speaking countries.

We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy. [Emphasis added.]

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.

Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.

The phrase "to win the battle of democracy" is rich with meaning. As the Manifesto stated, this is the first step in the revolution. What it means is that the communists will always work for democracy as opposed to a true republic. Democracy is majority rule. A republic is rule of law, with all equal under it, difficult to change, and carefully listed limitations on what government can do.

Organization will always triumph over the mass of people because they are unorganized. Organization is key. A democracy is a very dangerous form of government for this reason. It is more dangerous when the people are losing their moral compass and, therefore, losing their direction. This does not mean only individual morality but the entire citizenry's moral compass including civic morality and responsibility. We could spend a great deal of space on this subject alone, but Robert Welch did a much better job than I could ever do. See his "Republics and Democracies." (Make sure "R&D" is posted online.)

Communists want to destroy all possibility of free entrepreneurs remaining independent because they would serve as the rallying point to overthrow tyranny or prevent one in the first place. Again, consult my article mentioned above.

When Marx called for wanting "to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state," he meant that any citizen would have to look to government for a job and the ability to survive. Every citizen would have a work permit in order to be employed, just as in communist China today. It is a perfect means of control over the people. Anyone who does not have a work card, which must be carried on your person at all times, cannot get a job. Not many people want to revolt if it means that they cannot work and feed themselves.

Individuals in a communist society live in such a condition that they need work every day, at least every week because there is no "hoarding," no larder in the pantry. Americans cannot understand this concept very well because we live in a free system, not simply a capitalist system. A free system produces abundance. The controlled capitalist system, called socialism, produces only enough to keep people controlled.

All economic systems are capitalist. The difference is what type of capitalism. Is it a system controlled by a few (socialism), or is it a free system where the individual decides for himself? Consult Overview of America for a more complete explanation.

In the name of the people, and using rhetoric designed to fool those who can be convinced that they are being suppressed by the middle class, the Insiders have worked to take control of the world's economy. They have not yet been successful, although they have achieved a great deal of progress toward their goal, simply because the world's economy is, by and large, the U. S. economy. One does not have to study the situation very long to realize that even in the poor shape we now find our country, it is still the world's largest economic base. And, it is certainly the country whose citizens own more goods and property per capita than any other country.

It was so out of proportion 70 years ago, that our nation supplied most of the armaments for the Allies to use against the Axis Powers. Without our industrial base, Europe and Asia would have been occupied by Japan and Germany.  If we had entered the war and been unable to supply our allies, we still would have lost. At least in Europe since the countries allied with us were incapable of arming themselves to a level needed to defeat Germany.

Since World War II, the Insiders have been doing all they could to stifle the economy of the United States in addition to bringing it more under their control. Indeed, only by suffocating the economy can they bring it under their control. The recent events seen in Wall Street and Detroit are only the tip of the iceberg. And that iceberg is much more ominous because of the important concepts Marx conveyed in the last of the three paragraphs noted above.

It has taken the communists and the Insiders above them nearly 100 years to get to this point of control because our country has always had such a diverse, huge, and free economy.

Marx boldly advocated reliance on the use "of despotic inroads" regarding both the "rights of property" and "the conditions of bourgeois production."  No one can deny that this is what has taken place in great measure over the last several decades.

How has it happened?  Marx spelled out the route by advocating "measures which appear economically insufficient and untenable." Because they truly were "economically insufficient and untenable," more central power was needed to treat the problem.  Though these made matters worse, they would even be championed by the targeted bourgeoisie, the victim of Marxian attack.  The already failing policies brought on the excuse for "further inroads upon the old social order."  In other words, more taxes, regulations, zoning, noise abatement, land controls, eminent domain, and bureaucratic interference. Marx even said that these additional inroads were "unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionizing the mode of production." 

Why taxes? If I rent and do not pay my rent, the landlord kicks me out. If I do not pay the taxes on land I own, the government kicks me out. Who then really "owns" my land? Our system has become a disguised socialist system when it comes to property rights. We can argue the need for some form of taxation at a different time.

In other words, once put on the Marxian path, it is very difficult to turn back to freedom.  Marx does not say so, but this formula for totalitarianism proceeds with unimpeded progress unless there is a contravening organization working to uphold the Republic. It is a one-sided struggle that is really no struggle at all. This has been the problem for most of our history.

People who understand the process and the ultimate ramifications resist the changes. In the process, they can appear to be extreme - after all we are told, these are only little changes which will not affect much in the long run, so why all the fuss? The same holds true for members of our Society as we try to stop measures we know will have serious ramifications down the road.

And this is the reason that I am writing this column. It is the inability of too many of the American people to be able to extend the lines of the Insiders' actions today that will lead to regrettable consequences tomorrow. This has become an increasingly great problem because American schools have almost universally abandoned classical liberal arts education.

Certainly this last election was a perfect example. The primary campaign on the Republican side confirmed the vast ignorance of the average Republican who was unable to extend the lines put forward by all but one candidate. In their ignorance they rejected the best choice as being "extreme," or "off the wall."

Likewise, in the general election, we saw that the majority of voters had no clue as to the consequences of listening to the "something for everybody" rhetoric. They listened hard for the "what's in it for me" part. In the end, in order to give to the people, the people will have to be taxed more, or the currency inflated more, which is the hidden tax. And along with it, more government control.

The solution is not easy but it has been the solution since Robert Welch founded the Society: education. Education to build understanding about what is right as well as what is wrong. For if we stop what is currently happening, the current education level of the American people will allow the process to be started all over again.

The problem with the educational level of the American people is that it is public education to begin with. In the end, government education teaches only what government wants taught and will certainly block the teaching of anything that will lessen government power.  I am not advocating abolishing what we have until we have something better with which to replace it.  Can we not all agree that if we can find something better, no matter what, that it should be within the framework of liberty?

Many people have opted out of the government schools for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is they recognize shoddy teaching in key areas such as the basis for morality, classic liberal arts, emphasis on "pop culture" rather than eternal truths, etc. And, don't get me started on history.

Even when I attended school they taught me mythology, not just Greek and Roman, but something they liked to call American History. I was a few years out of school when I started to read history on my own. Then I discovered that what I thought was true and accurate was not always the case.

Even those who opt out for a better education in home schooling, academies, parochial, and private schools, are also missing many ingredients necessary for a future of freedom for their children and grandchildren.

Rectifying this deficiency in our children's education is vital for the future. We have to find new ways to do this and teach the parents at the same time. So we are starting down a new path using our online TV channel to present family education rather than simply camps for our kids.

The deficiency that I see in almost all education today is the obvious lack of classic liberal arts, although a few schools are fairly decent at this, but even most of them lack the following:

• What is right. Solutions based on the liberal arts that led to the Constitution. If we solve one problem and replace it with another, what have we accomplished? A classic example in this area is the fact that while good Americans see the problems, they do not know enough to shun the neo-conservatives with their false socialistic and internationalist solutions. Most of the education that good "conservative" Americans rely on comes from people who always seem to end up supporting neo-cons. This is a good indicator that something is wrong, that there is something missing, even in home schooling.
• The teaching of civic morality. The idea that each of us inherited a system of freedom and that we have an obligation to work to preserve it; to get involved in the process; to realize that we have a responsibility to pass on freedom to our children. Much is taught about individual morality but very little, if any at all, about civic morality that includes responsibility — not simply to vote, but to get involved with a higher degree of understanding than what is being taught now. It is the Christian admonition: occupy.
• The fact that the problems with America do not stem from the natural course of things or the lack of knowledge per se, but they stem from people and organizations dumbing down our citizens, and that this has been going on for almost 200 years. The reason the Insiders get away with what they are doing is ignorance on the part of the people, not ignorance on the part of those perpetuating the problems. They know what they are doing.
• Coupled with the above, the fact that superior organization is the only thing that can defeat the other organization. Organization based on what we have enjoyed in The John Birch Society over the last 50 years, not what some call organization that is simply names on a list, not organized all across the nation to be locally active with a carefully crafted national agenda.

Education should do more than simply accomplish learning a profession or trade. It must include awareness of what it takes to ensure liberty. What use is the profession or trade if one is a slave? Or, if their children become slaves?

As part of the move to reach out with an educational program over our online TV channel, we are also starting the process of developing curricula for private education at the preparatory level. It will take some time to develop, so do not contact us just yet asking for the program.

As with so many things we do, if we do not do it, who will? And, when will it be available unless we start now? Our members were instrumental in starting the modern home school movement; we now have to reinsert ourselves into its development.

We have to take the resources and experience gained from an "okay" program, such as our summer camps, and use them for a superior program that will educate literally tens of thousands, at the same time influencing other private educational programs to be better because of the competition we will create.  And we must do this very soon. 

We could win the battle against the Conspiracy today and lose everything tomorrow by leaving our country to children who do not understand what is right — who do not understand what can happen when despotic inroads are begun that seem minor at the time but soon become deadly and plunge us right back into the mess we find ourselves in today.

Education is the master key — propped up by a polite backbone.  If this is extremism, it is only because so few appreciate what freedom really is.