"The National Plan for Social Peace"

"Either this nation shall kill racism, or racism shall kill this nation." (S. Jonas, August, 2018)

Vlepa antify%2C Warszawa %282020%29. It's coming, folks (unless the anti-fascist forces finally start organizing NOW).
(Image by Wikipedia (commons.wikimedia.org), Author: Samotny Wędrowiec) Details Source DMCA

As I wrote in a previous column:

"It does look as if we are going to lose [the battle over Roe] in the Supreme Court. Should the Republo-fascists take the House and the Senate in 2022, or 2024, the first thing that McConnell, or a successor, would do is end the Filibuster. Then with 'Roe' (before which each state could set its own abortion policy) gone, the Republo-fascist Congress could pass a national law banning abortion everywhere. How about them apples?"

And of course, if that were to happen, that would very likely be only the beginning of the political process that would turn the United States into a country dominated by social-Fascism (that is, fascism in terms of social/personal policy). (Of course, it would likely would be followed fairly soon by political fascism, but that's another story, with which, as regular readers of mine know, I have been dealing with for a number of years now on these pages.) One thing would indeed lead to another, especially since the Republo-fascists would also have taken full function control of the electoral system (not in every state, but in enough of them to make their rule unchallengeable for the foreseeable future). And so, our nation could very well proceed to something like a state of being that in Chap. 15 of my 1996 "future history," The 15% Solution (3rd version, 2013), I described as "The National Plan for Social Peace."

As the fictional Alex Poughton (see below) would observe: "Just this sort of thing had occurred in another great country, in the previous century." Indeed, William Shirer, author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960), observed that:

            "The cardinal error of the Germans who opposed Nazism was their failure to unite against it. . . . But the 63% of the German people who [at one time or another] expressed their opposition to Hitler were much too divided and shortsighted to combine against a common danger which they must have known would overwhelm them unless they united,   however, temporarily, to stamp it out."

Below are excerpts of an (of course fictional, occurring on a then-fictional date of June 15, 2015) interview by an English correspondent (who survived, both physically and professionally, by being on the surface sympathetic to the regime) with one lithesome blonde named "Connie Conroy" [and no, when I wrote the book in 1994-95 I had certainly never heard of Kelly Ann Conway] who was the chief spokesperson for the fascist regime which governed the apartheid state of "The New American Republics" (the White, the Black, the Red, and the Hispanic). And so, here is a look into the possible future of our nation, if the current far-right majority of the current Supreme Court has its way against even the strongest pressure from Chief Justice Roberts, who would prefer that the Trump-Republo court would cool it just a bit.

                     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Poughton-Conroy Interview, Monday, June 1, 2015 ["Alex Poughton" is the name that I made up for this fictional English correspondent. It is, of course, a play on the name "Alexis de Tocqueville".]

Q. Ms. Conroy, I want to thank you very much for granting me this interview. The NAR has many admirers in Great Brit­ain, eager for the latest news on the progress you are making here. Since this latest ini­tiative is called the National Plan for Social Peace, let's begin with a review of some of the social policies of the NAR.

A. Alex, it's always a delight to talk with you. So few mem­bers of the international media give us a fair shake. It's only through those few objective reporters like you that the world can get to see what we are really like.

Q. My pleasure. Let's turn first to the matter of religion. The NAR is led by the American Christian Nation Party [see a previous column of mine, that is SJ, on that topic: click here]. Yet the NAR has yet to become, officially, a "Christian Nation." Can you tell us why not?

A. Our party and our nation are fully committed to the Chris­tian prin­ciples on which our party is founded: Family, God, and Coun­try. And we, and our predecessor party, the Republican-Christian Alliance, have enacted, and indeed have put into our Constitution the full Christian political and social agenda. I am sure I do not have to review it here for you, Alex.

But let me say briefly that in general, within certain limits, we follow the principle laid down by the great David Barton (Schollenberger): "Whatever is Christian is legal. Whatever isn't Christian is illegal." We do expect people to subscribe to Christian Thinking, as defined by our Party, and accept the Innerancy of the Bible, as laid down by the Party.

At the same time, religious freedom is one of the most im­portant traditions of our country. And we have many friends and support­ers who are not Christian [see "Jews for Hitler"]. We are sensitive to their sensitivities. Thus, while our government follows Christian prin­ciples, and Chris­tianity has taken its rightful place in all aspects of public life, we have not made, and have no present intentions to make, the NAR officially a Christian nation.

Q. A major concern of the ACNP and especially its predeces­sors, the old Republican Party and the Republican-Christian Alliance, was with legalized pre-born baby-killing. [Presumably just being diplomatic, Poughton used Right-Wing Reaction's term for the medical procedure that before the Fascist Period was called abortion.] That led, for example, to the passage back in 2005 of the Morality Amendment which made the practice ille­gal under any circum­stance. That then led to the Life Preservation Police, the War for the Preservation of Life, the significant expansion of the penal system to enforce the law and so forth. [Until the special prison system that was established to handle women who had had abortions just couldn't handle the numbers anymore, yes indeed, as had been advocated by some anti-abortion-rights forces, women who had abortions were imprisoned.]

However, since the establishment of the NAR, you have fol­lowed a bi-partite policy on this matter. The killing of the pre-born is illegal in the White Republic, and you still devote significant resources to enforc­ing those laws. Yet you have legalized the practice in the Negro and Indian Republics. Could you explain why?

A. Certainly. We think the way we deal with killing of the pre-born is indicative of the enlightenment that we have brought to America. We recognized that you couldn't have one policy on legalized pre-born baby-killing for everybody. That's be­cause contrary to what the liberalniggerlovers used to tell us, the colored races are not the equal of the Whites. That as you know, Alex, is the fundamental principle on which the NAR is founded.

So, for us Whites, legalized pre-born baby killing is baby kill­ing, pure and simple. There's simply no two ways about it. It's something that civilized people don't do. It's God and man, not woman, who make babies. After all, without God and man there would be no babies, would there? No woman has the right to undo the work of God and man. Pre-born baby-killing is a sin of the first water. And so, we are very strict on this matter when it comes to White people.

But the inferior races are another matter indeed. They just aren't human. God views them in a different way, more like the highly intel­ligent animals they are, so monkey-like, you know. As the great Alexander Stephens said: "Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race. Such were, and are in violation of the laws of nature [emphasis added]. Our system commits no such violation of nature's law. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the Negro. Subordination is his place."

So, for them, pre-born baby-killing is OK. When they kill one of their unborn off­spring, they're not killing another human being, because they aren't human themselves. So, we actually encourage the practice in the other Republics.

Q. You have recently achieved complete abolition of the sys­tem of Public Education. All children are now educated in pri­vate schools or at home. Parents receive private tuition aid in the form of "education vouchers." Could you explain the advantages of this system?

A. The old public schools were places where young minds were pol­luted, where Christ was excluded, where our values were denigrated. As Michael Farris once said (NYT, 8/18/93), the public schools were "godless monstrosities," "values" indoctrination centers," and a "multi­-million dollar incul­cation machine."

Teachers taught what they wanted to teach instead of what the parents wanted them to teach. As the revered Chuck Baker once said about our children attending public school [Freedom Watch, Vol. 3, No. 4, Jan/Feb, 1994]: "They're not learning facts, they're not learning things. They are being conditioned to cooperate with their neighbor." The worst of the public-school teachers tried to get children to actually think for themselves. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine a child who is capable of thinking for himself? It's that sort of thinking which got this country into such trou­ble in the old days.

The only solution to this problem was to get rid of the public schools. Now our children are taught either by their parents in the home or in private schools where the teachers teach what's right and what they are told to teach. And the children learn what's right and what we want them to think.

Q. As is well-known, all those activities popularly known as "culture" are closely monitored by the government here, much more so than in other countries. What advantages does that bring to the NAR?

A. First, we should make it clear that we are talking about culture in the White Republic. What goes on in the other Re­publics that appears to be the same is obviously not, because those inferior peoples are just not capable of anything ap­proach­ing true culture.

Art is the great potential destroyer of minds and hearts. One of the two most important concepts in our art policy is "poten­tial obscenity." We simply cannot allow anything that might produce sinful thoughts to be placed in the minds of our peo­ple, especially our vulnerable young. Every contemplated art work, regardless of who pays for it, whether painting, sculp­ture, liter­a­ture, film, theatre, mu­sic or dance must be approved in ad­vance by the Bu­reau of Moral Standards of the Depart­ment of Infor­ma­tion. There must be no sexual referenc­es of any kind in any work of art. There is just no way to refer to sex in public that is not obscene or potential­ly ob­scene.

The other primary principle of our art policy is that nothing with any Negro influence is allowed any longer to contaminate White minds. So, for example in popular music, there's no ragtime, no jazz, no blues, no swing, no rock and roll of any kind. Good God's Music and White Country & Western are what our sta­tions play now.

Q. You have a bi-partite weapons policy. Could you explain it for our readers?

A. In the old days, the right to own firearms was one of the basic rights that the old Republican Party and then the R-CA set out to pro­tect, against the attacks of the liberalniggerlovers. In the Second Amendment,[9] the Constitution clearly grants that right. And of course, we have secured it in the New American Republics. For personal pro­tection, Whites may own any kinds of individual firearms they want to, without restriction, up to and including machine guns and grenades.

None of the other races are permitted to own firearms, nor are any of those few liberalniggerlovers remaining in the White Re­pub­lic. Any such person caught with a firearm will be de­ported to one of the colored Republics, sent directly to a Moral Reha­bili­tation Center (MRC), or subject to trial and imprison­ment. The pen­alty imposed depends upon the type and number of weapons we find in the possession of such snakes. Enforc­ing the fire­arms laws is an important function of the Helms­men.

Q. You mentioned the Helmsmen [which would be the New American Republic's version of the Nazi "S.A.," Die Sturmabteilung]. The institution of the Helmsmen is a touchy subject abroad. There are rumored to be "Death Squads." What are the functions of the Helmsmen, how are they controlled, and what is their relationship to the Inde­pendent Militias?

A. The Helmsmen are the Peoples' Guides. They know what's right; they know what's wrong; they know the Word of God. They are every­where. Their job is to preserve peace and safety everywhere they are. Again, our great country is being libeled by ridiculous charges from self-interested parties or people who are frankly criminals. I can cate­gorically deny the existence of any so-called "Death Squads."

Q. Miss Conroy, I want to thank you for being so generous with your time, and so forthright with your answers. I know that our readers will be most grateful to you for both.

A. Alex, it's has been a pleasure. As you know, you are wel­come to talk with us any time.