I have been involved in conservative politics since the 1960s, when I voted for Barry Goldwater for president. Even though Lyndon Johnson won the election by a landslide, Goldwater was able to get 26 million Americans to vote for him, despite the most devastating press campaign against him by the major media. The Rockefeller Republicans did all in their power to sabotage a conservative victory. And since then, conservatives and so-called moderates have been largely at each other’s throats in the Republican Party.
The takeover of the Republican Party by the Council on Foreign Relations internationalists took place early in this century when the money powers decided to use both political parties in a dialectical process to promote their world government agenda. Carroll Quigley, in “Tragedy and Hope,” explained how this was done. He wrote,
- To Morgan all political parties were simply organizations to be used, and the firm always was careful to keep a foot in all camps. Morgan himself, Dwight Morrow, and other partners were allied with Republicans; Russell C. Leffingwell was allied with the Democrats; Grayson Murphy was allied with the extreme Right; and Thomas W. Lamont was allied with the Left.
Using both major parties to implement the Rhodes agenda was the most effective strategy that could be used by the Anglo-American network. Working on both sides of the Atlantic, the Royal Institute for International Affairs in London became the front organization for the new world order cabal in England, and in New York it was the Council on Foreign Relations that fronted for American internationalists. According to Quigley, the New York branch was dominated by the Morgan Bank, which was also involved in creating the Federal Reserve System and the institution of the graduated income tax. Quigley writes,
- These tax laws drove the great private fortunes dominated by Wall Street into tax-exempt foundations, which became a major link in the Establishment network between Wall Street, the Ivy League, and the Federal government. Dean Rusk, Secretary of State after 1961, formerly president of the Rockefeller Foundation and Rhodes Scholar at Oxford (1931-33), is as much a member of this nexus as Alger Hiss, the Dulles brothers, Jerome Greene, James T. Shotwell, John W. Davis, Elihu Root, or Philip Jessup.
It is obvious that the creation of third and fourth parties is motivated by the need to break loose from the straitjacket of establishment control. But how can this be done when the financial cards are stacked against third party efforts? In America today, money runs politics. Clinton learned this lesson early in his career, using Chinese restaurant owners and Indonesian bankers to finance his political rise. And they financed him for a reason: to have access to the power and influence of the White House.
Those who have lots of money to give politicians do so for a very practical reason: access to the power and influence of the office holder. And such access is necessary because the federal government is involved in virtually every aspect of our economy. If the federal government were less involved, there would be less need to want to get something from it.
During the Labor Day weekend, the U.S. Taxpayers Party, now known as the Constitution Party, held its presidential nominating convention in St. Louis. There had been much talk about the possibility of New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith accepting the nomination from the party. But he withdrew as a contender because, as he said, he was not yet ready to join another political party.
The result was that the convention voted for Howard Phillips, founder of the party, as its presidential candidate and nationally syndicated columnist Joe Sobran as the vice-presidential candidate. It’s a ticket made in conservative heaven. In his acceptance speech, Phillips called for undoing virtually everything that the internationalists have done to create a monster of a federal government gradually ceding American sovereignty to international and global organizations. The Constitution Party has outlined a political agenda, which is more radical than conservative. There is not much in the present federal government that Phillips wants to conserve. What he does want to conserve is the U.S. Constitution.
Meanwhile, Pat Buchanan is going to try his luck with the Reform Party, which has federal matching funds at its disposal. Will the Reform Party nominate him? Not if Jesse Ventura has anything to say about it. However, Ross Perot may back Buchanan because Buchanan will draw conservative votes away from George W. Bush. It is rumored that Perot has a somewhat negative attitude toward the Bush family, and might be willing to do what he can to undermine a Bush victory.
So what are we going to get in the presidential election of the year 2000? I submit that it is too early to tell. Bradley may replace Gore as the Democratic nominee. But one thing all conservatives ought to be able to agree on is getting more conservatives elected to Congress. No matter how powerful the president is, Congress is still the place where presidential power can be checked. We simply need more gutsy conservative congressmen and women to stand up for what is right — like those brave men who impeached Clinton. Everyone seems to have forgotten that Clinton was impeached. That was the great conservative achievement of that Congress.
Meanwhile, the American people are ever so slowly moving to the right, despite the liberal control of the culture. The homeschool movement is an important indicator of the direction in which people are moving: away from government control of their lives, toward private solutions. And homeschoolers, led by such energetic men as Michael Farris of the Home School Legal Defense Association, are getting more and more involved in politics.
The corruption of the Clinton administration, the Waco backlash, NATO’s aggression against Yugoslavia, high taxes, violence in the public schools are leading many Americans to rethink politics. Steve Forbes is probably the one candidate who best articulates the growing disenchantment with government solutions to our problems. He seems to understand that it will take much time and effort to roll back the federal juggernaut, and that it will have to be done at both the grass-roots and political levels.
So much concentration on Bush and Buchanan, Gore and Bradley, has just about drowned out the best conservative message being given by Steve Forbes. And what about the McCain factor? He’s an ideological enigma. That’s why I believe that it is much too early to tell what’s in the cards for the year 2000. Meanwhile, we might as well enjoy the political season for all it’s worth.
Samuel L. Blumenfeld is the author of eight books on education, including “NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education” and “Homeschooling: A Parents Guide to Teaching Children.” His books are available through Amazon.com.