Fred Essays Nutballery
A Conspiracy Of His Own
Sometimes it's hard to tell a conspiracy from a bunch of bad ideas that just happened together. I've always wanted a conspiracy of my own, though. This is it. Hang on to your hats.
Sez me, the federal government does not rule the country. Instead we are managed by an ill-defined meta-government the journalists, academics, policy shops, and racial lobbyists who control what can be said aloud, who shuttle in an out of formal government.
Any government's urge is to strengthen and consolidate its power. Now, suppose that you were of this regnant miasma and wanted to turn the country into a docile hive not into a jackbooted totalitarian state, for which you would have no need, but into an obedient and manageable polity. Suppose further that you didn't want to be obvious about it, which might arouse resistance. How would you proceed?
The first step, it seems to me, would be to emasculate competing powers churches, unions, aristocracies, the military, anything that might seriously oppose you. You increase your own power simply by diminishing the power of anything else. This is happening, methinks.
Consider the de-Christianizing of America. A religion that is not in fact the government is a potential adversary of government. Faith seriously held, in whatever creed, implies a categorical allegiance to something other than Washington's bureaucracies or the tenets of CBS. A populous and cohesive faith, as Catholicism once was, can stand up to central power. And might.
Is it an accident that the churches, for many years under attack, are now in decline? Yes, I know that nine out of every seven Americans say they believe in God or pray three times a day or that religion is "very important or somewhat important" in their lives. But what I see, or think I see, is a generation who have seldom been to church, and know next to nothing about Christianity. They have been taught, never quite explicitly, that religion is silly, oppressive, and promotes social injustice. Ever its power diminishes. Notice that Christmas this, I promise, was calculated -- has become the Holiday Shopping Season. The churches have been neutered.
I'll get angry mail disputing this, but it will come chiefly from people over fifty.
Next, the press once provided something of a counterbalance to centralized rule. I do not suggest that, except for momentary lapses, newspapers have ever been honorable, truthful, or discernibly intelligent, but they have at times been boisterously independent. Of a Hearst not much good could be said, but he was nobody's lackey. Newspapers were once a force that the government had to reckon with.
Today the papers are the government. The press is not subservient to Washington; rather, Washington is a subset of the odd class of people who, without official portfolio, run the country. All media without exception say exactly the same things. No idea disapproved by them will be heard from the gabbling box. People sometimes say with alarm that the news outlets increasingly are controlled by a small number of holding companies. True; more important, however, is that they are manned by a self-aware class who all believe the same things.
Next, commerce once was an independent force. The Morgans and Carnegies, though seldom beneficent, wielded formidable power. Today the robber barons have given way to obsequious bureaucracies. The big corporations are run by salaried managers and owned by stockholders who have no influence. The Lockheed-Martins will lobby hard for contracts; otherwise they have been brought to heel.
Next, and crucially, the underlying culture of America has been housebroken. The principal fount of political power in this country, so much a part of the atmosphere as to be noticed no more than sunlight, has been the white, European, male-dominated civilization that built the United States. A civilization, if not weakened, tends to impose its values, which would make it a counterweight to the miasma.
This European culture is under savage attack and, as best I can tell, will shortly be a thing of the past.
Next, feminism has struggled mightily, with large success, to destroy the family structure that has underpinned European white civilization. This is a curious development: Women seem still to want families, yet they let NOW call the shots for them as much as Jesse Jackson sets the agenda for blacks. The semi-abolition of the family probably isn't reversible. By making people dependent on government instead of themselves, it strengthens the hand of government.
Next, note the unrelenting campaign of Negrification. One sees this both in the very high numbers of blacks in television and in the relentless inculcation of ghetto culture. If you have any doubt that this is deliberate, reflect that Latinos, our largest minority, seldom appear. The point, one might suspect, and certainly the effect, is to weaken further the European matrix. The influx of Latinos over the southern border also serves to counter the influence of European whites and the influx that could easily have been prevented.
Finally, ponder coercive homogenization -- seldom mentioned, but a powerful limitation of the political power of a dominant group. Normally those who share a community of interest will band together to work for common goals. Lobbies come to mind, anad trade associations. People who favor preserving the environment publish magazines supporting desired legislation. This is possible because everyone on the staff agrees regarding the goals of the organization.
Now the miasma, by making exclusive association illegal or at least painful, has made it virtually impossible for certain groups whites, males, heterosexuals to promote their own interests.
Now, when one mentions, for example, whites promoting their interests, a vision arises of Klansmen, burning crosses, and plans to ship blacks back to Africa. I mean no such thing. Yet blacks are a political group and, as is always the case with political groups, favor policies which others do not. For example, affirmative action appeals to blacks who benefit by getting jobs they otherwise would not; whites tend to oppose affirmative action because it lowers standards.
The full weight of governmental power works to prevent the exclusive association of whites, or of males, in almost any recognized organization. Newspapers, corporations, and so on are carefully vetted for proper proportions of races and sexes. Companies that transgress do not get contracts; often they are sued. Only in private may one associate with one's own.
Human nature being what it is, a newsroom forcibly populated with two politically discordant groups cannot take a position that offends either. Imagine the Democratic Party if it were required to be fifty percent Republican. The dominant group is muzzled, but of course in the name of justice, equity, and nondiscrimination. Swell.
That's my conspiracy.