Ten years ago, Newsweek magazine shocked mainstream America with a cover story headlined “Thought Police,” a lengthy report on a new social /political movement developed on college campuses since the 1960s. Ironically, one year after the Berlin wall came down and one year before the fall of the Soviet Empire, Americans were being seriously warned that liberal academia had adopted a hybrid “Marxist” philosophy often called “PC.” This new “Politically Correct” creed was being espoused, according to Newsweek, at hundreds of colleges and universities as a result of the growing influence of “a generation of campus radicals.”
If they no longer talk of taking to the streets, it is because they now are gaining access to the conventional weapons of campus politics: social pressure, academic perks (including tenure) and — when they have the administration on their side — outright coercion … where the PC reigns, one defies it at one’s peril.
(Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990)
After that, PC attitudes were heavily criticized, and even mocked, by mainstream thinkers all around the country, liberal and conservative. And yet, in 1992 America elected into power an administration that in many ways adhered to the PC worldview, thus beginning a process of “change” unforeseen not only by most Americans, but by most Democrats as well. I have known for a long time that there were serious problems in my party, but I didn’t fully grasp the political nature of those problems. Sometimes it takes a simple, symbolic moment to cause an epiphany — to bring clarity. That happened to me this past May.
When I read about people spitting on the Honor Guard at the New York State Democratic Convention May 16, I started to understand what has happened to my party over the last few years. I still can’t get over the fact that Democrats attending a formal convention would so insult the American flag, but it happened. As an Honor Guard of Albany police officers entered the convention hall – with band playing and lights shining – they were spit on and called “Nazis” by a number of people on the delegate floor. On top of that, no Democrat nearby stopped the “spitters,” or even reported them. And the Democratic leadership expressed no public outrage.
I was so outraged at my party’s lack of outrage that I started a reward fund to find the “spitters.” But I soon realized that I needed to address the larger issue of what I had come to understand. I direct this commentary to the mainstream elected officials of my party – the “adults” as the media often calls them. Whether you are still in office or retired, you can have a profound effect in waking up the party and the public. I see clearly now that the path the party is taking will eventually lead to its destruction and to the destruction of liberty in America. It is practically mathematical. And it won’t take very long in years if nothing is done to stop it.
I have been a Democrat all my life. I grew up in New York City in a staunchly Democratic middle class family. Although private-school educated (I had financial assistance thanks to Trinity School), my father was a union man, a musician with the Metropolitan Opera. My parents and stepparents were all “Roosevelt Democrats.” As a young English teacher in Montclair, New Jersey, during the Richard Nixon Watergate scandal, I drove around with a bumper sticker saying, “Don’t Blame Me I Voted for McGovern.” I was proud to be on the side of “right” as I saw it. I was proud to stand against corruption and the abuse of power.
Now, 25 years later, I am ashamed to be a Democrat. More than that, I have come to fear my own party. Hatred and corruption – the roots of fascism – are on the march in America as they have never been before, and leading this march is the Democratic Party. Increasingly, mainstream Democrats are uncomfortable with what we see in our party. We may not have a real name for it, but we know it is dangerous.
The totalitarian choice in Alabama
On Sunday, June 18, the headline of the Washington Post read, “Political Dirty Tricks Alleged in Alabama Trial,” but the story revealed something far more serious than “dirty tricks.” A Democrat lawyer and a private investigator are now being tried for attempting to defeat a Republican candidate in 1998 by bribing a prostitute to accuse the Republican of raping her. The prostitute recanted and turned witness against the two “Democrats.”
The Republican, Lt. Gov. Steve Windom, was elected when the prostitute confessed, but let’s consider what his “political opponents” were willing to do to him. This wasn’t political rumor mongering — which is bad enough. These two men allegedly took direct action to destroy Windom’s reputation in the community, shame him before his family, and basically ruin his life.
We all know from history that when totalitarian forces, driven by their dysfunctional fury, seek to uproot the political establishment, they will use any means necessary. Bribery and character assassination are easy choices for them, even murder, because civilized limits are meaningless to the Stalins, Hitlers and Maos of the world. Their goal is to grab power, and “The Party” — whether Communist or Nazi — is the highest good. Loyalty to the party is everything because the party is the country.
These two “Democrats” were apparently willing to destroy everything precious to a Republican man because he stood between their party and political power. It is the totalitarian choice. The question is, how deep does it go into the party and what motivates it?
No longer a political party
What we are dealing with here has nothing to do with American politics. In fact, I worry that as the Democrats increasingly adopt fascist tactics they will cease being a genuine political party, focused on honest debate and decision by fair ballot. They could become one day something more related to the fascists of 1930s Germany. The SA “brown shirts” were not interested in debate and civil rule; they wanted power in order to force the democratic nation to accept their Nazi agenda. If I am right about the fanatical direction my party is taking, then America has never faced a danger like this, and real Democrats who stand by and watch will be as guilty before history as the actual leaders of this corruption movement.
When did the party start making its shift to this strange other form? Some Democrats would say the sexual revolution, abortion and other moral issues were the beginning. However, I am not talking here about party alignment over the social issues, although they have been a major contributing factor. There were many other issues in dispute among Democrats during the waning years of the Cold War, but, whether we agreed or not, all issues were seen as debatable opinions of the party’s majority leadership. Reagan Democrats just voted Republican and hoped the liberal Democrats would come to their senses. There was still freedom of thought within the party, and in public debate. But something happened which changed all that.
Suddenly, the traditional restraint of civilized limits was gone. Gone was comity. Gone was loyal opposition. It was somewhere in the mid-nineties – perhaps around the time the Republicans seized control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. The panic among Democrats and the panic within the Clinton administration may have been the turning point. Whenever it was that the dam cracked, it had exploded by the end of 1998.
The year of living dangerously
As mainstream Democrats watched the impeachment trials, we experienced a feeling of vast separation. It was like watching actors on a stage playing the famously recognizable roles from Watergate but saying the wrong lines. We heard that lying under oath and bold-faced lying to the American people didn’t “rise to the level of an impeachable offense.” Famous phrases from the past appeared twisted beyond recognition as we learned that the president of the United States is not “below the law. …”
Where were the lines we knew so well from our youth? “Have you no shame, sir?” or later, “What did the President know and when did he know it?” Or how about the greater words that inspired a generation of Democrats? Words that put the very wind in our youthful sails: “Ask not what your country can do for you…” or “Judged not by the color of skin but by the content of character. …” Where were the words of American tradition, duty, honor and country? These were never just Republican words.
During the Clinton impeachment trial, we listened to honored senators like Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut and Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York. They spoke high-sounding words of outrage, but, in the end, actions betrayed words. In the end, even these honorable men defended party over principle. They rationalized, and let the party fall. Everyone knows it. History will show it. They let one man’s behavior compromise the integrity of the Democratic Party. In the process, they turned their backs on the traditions of our past symbolized by men like President Harry Truman.
We looked for truth during the impeachment and trial process and watched hopefully as the “wise men” of the party in the House and the Senate expressed “concern,” then made excuses, and finally voted lock-step to defend party power. Sure they had their reasons. They also, I believe, did not grasp the significance of the vote – a symbolic alignment with the corrupt elements in the party, an act of submission that sent a message across America, from Hollywood to Wall Street and beyond. Anything goes.
The F-word fund-raiser and losing our souls
About a week after the spitting incident at the New York Democratic Party Convention, there was another incident that shocked me profoundly. I still cannot believe this one actually happened, but it is on videotape. At the MCI Center fund-raiser in Washington, Robin Williams performed before a crowd of corporate and Democrat dignitaries, people who would that very night raise the party over 26 million dollars.
The fund-raiser, including Williams’ performance, was broadcast live on C-SPAN. However, that didn’t stop Robin Williams from doing some kind of seedy nightclub act. He used the F-word and other obscenities several times (C-SPAN later cut this out when the event was rebroadcast). Imagine. A grand room full of powerful Democrats, representatives of America’s oldest political party, and the F-word is being said, over and over again with cameras recording!
As in the case of the harassment of the Honor Guard at the Albany Democratic Convention, the specific violation was bad enough, but the most egregious violation was the passive, cowardly acceptance of the audience. The hardest thing to believe – for those of us who remember America before 1992 – was that the president, vice president and Mrs. Clinton were at this fund-raiser. Did none of them think to stand up and leave? Didn’t anyone in the audience consider booing the smutty language spoken before the assembled dignitaries? No, there was only laughter.
Even when Robin Williams noticed a child present and joked about the “new words” he was learning that night – even then – no one objected. Not one Democrat dared step forward and condemn the moment. Peer pressure is a powerful and coercive thing, for adults as well as children – one breaks rank at one’s peril. And I’m sure it wouldn’t have been good for “business” for the party leadership to create embarrassment at such a high-level Hollywood/corporate function. So everyone laughed.
This is not about politics. This is about corruption. Stop and think about it. Somehow Robin Williams knew that no one would object if he used the F-word and the S-word continually – even on national TV! How did he know no one would walk out on him? Apparently, Williams knows something about the Democratic Party that most “little guy” Democrats like me don’t know (not to mention the “little guy” Republicans who are still embarrassed by MTV, thank God). He knows the party has become corrupt.
Democrat leaders have lost their way. They find themselves at the head of a parade full of people Harry Truman or even Jack Kennedy wouldn’t recognize – radicals of various kinds who think that Western civilization began in 1969. Strangely, without meaning to, mainstream Democrats find themselves representing this “corruption movement.” However, for the “new fascists” in the party, there is nothing so strange about it. Fascists have always sought to leverage corruption for the sake of power.
In William Shirer’s seminal book, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” listen to his famous description of Hitler: “He who was so monumentally intolerant by his very nature, was strangely tolerant of one human condition – a man’s morals. No other party in Germany came near to attracting so many shady characters.” Shady characters, I should add, who are useful because they will do “whatever it takes” to win.
Carried to its extreme, this corruption movement will destroy us all. It is compulsive in its lust for power. It is an anti-establishment lobby that is vast and very powerful. Right now the specific labels don’t matter, and there are too many to name here, from corporate greed to union greed to organized crime to “special interest” causes. It is a long list. However, the core desire of this group, conscious or unconscious, is to tear down everything traditional and decent in this country. Full of personal anger and a desire for radical change at whatever cost, these people wish to “re-imagine” an America they have never understood.
The Party uber alles
Fueled by anger, the New Fascists have completely adopted the radical ’60s notion of the “honest con.” In other words, they think that because they are “correct in their beliefs” and because in their minds what they fight is so “evil,” just about any act can be committed for the sake of victory – and certainly, lying is no problem. Loyalty to “the cause” is at the heart of this mindset. And for the moment, at least, the heart of their loyalty is President Clinton.
Allegiance to the Clintons personally has become a key factor of the current corruptive atmosphere. During the Starr investigation, this allegiance took a particularly extreme form. According to award-winning investigative reporters,
Susan Schmidt and Michael Weisskopf, who worked together at the Washington Post, throughout the Starr investigation the Clintons “operated like a crime family, expecting friends and aides to protect them even against their own best interests.”
And yet, despite this demand of personal loyalty to the leader, blind loyalty to cause and party is the larger problem. “This administration sets their own standards of loyalty. If they don’t think you’re ‘one of them,’ they don’t want you around,” said one Secret Service agent I talked to recently who has served under a number of administrations at the national level, including serving the current one. “It’s something you expect from a Nazi Germany – the party over all, the Party ‘uber alles.'”
“Sometimes party loyalty asks too much,” said President Kennedy in a different era, and yet, these days loyalty to a “higher right” than the party is apparently no longer an option among inner circle Democrats. Even the FBI was used by the Clinton administration to double check people’s loyalty to the cause, according to 25-year FBI veteran Gary Aldrich. Your conscience is not yours to obey – the cause is everything. Thus, traditionally neutral governmental agencies, from Energy to Defense to State to Justice to the IRS, increasingly, seem to be loyal to something other than the American people.
Recently, former prosecutor Charles LaBella was interviewed on Fox News’ “Hannity and Colmes” about the fundraising scandal of 1996 and about LaBella’s memo to Reno, recommending an independent counsel. The news had just broken that Robert Conrad, Jr., LaBella’s successor as special prosecutor for the Justice Department, had also recommended to Attorney General Reno that there be an independent counsel. “I know what he’s going through,” said LaBella, talking about Conrad’s politically incorrect decision and the price he would pay for disloyalty. “You’re made to feel radioactive, isolated like I was – like you’re the enemy and ‘we’re going to show you what team sports are all about – you play with us or you don’t play.‘” So much for Conrad’s career and so much for making decisions based on “the facts and the law.” LaBella paid a price too, famously losing a plum federal job in San Diego.
Those who are “disloyal” pay a price, but those who are “loyal” are rewarded. Consider the White House Travel Office scandal that occurred when Clinton took office. In what the Washington Post called a “shabby episode,” Mrs. Clinton had made it clear to White House senior officials that she wanted to replace the White House Travel Office employees (who had served the American people faithfully) with loyalists who would serve the Clintons faithfully. Suddenly, Billy Dale, the head of the travel office, was fired and accused of “improper financial practices.” The court cleared him in “record time,” according to Dale, but he was nearly ruined. Sound familiar? Shades of Alabama. And in the end, the goal was accomplished: Dale and his staff were out and “loyalists” were in.
Democrats can redeem the party from this kind of “party first” fascism. But for that to happen, mainstream Democrats must wake up, including the 80 percent of the media who are Democrats. Instinctively, we all know the dangers of what I am describing. It is simply not an American way of doing things. We must dare to understand and communicate what is really going on in our party, and in our country.
Understanding the fascist motive
People are essentially innocent and fair-minded. They look for reasons in debate. Power-grasping totalitarians know this, and, no matter what the country, they always supply some plausible response: They seek to “empower the people”; they seek to “reestablish national pride,” or to correct “social injustice.” Consider the irony that “racial injustice” has long been a popular cause with fascists. For the Nazis it was white power, but for other fascists it could be “black power.” It doesn’t matter what the reasons are. America’s Corruption Movement may be politically empowered by “reasons,” but it is not truly motivated by them. It is motivated by something far more basic.
radio show, I always like to demonstrate a key principle with a current news story. The principles of life are everywhere in the news. One need only look for them. Famous supermodel Naomi Campbell was recently accused of attacking two former employees in separate incidents. The story was covered June 23rd on ABC’s “20/20.” Ms. Campbell confessed that her violent temper is rooted in her childhood.
In one of the attacks, Campbell’s irrational, out-of-control temper led her to assault her former assistant Georgina Galanis with a blunt instrument. She pleaded guilty, but more than that, she was brave enough to reveal to the public exactly where her rage came from.
“There are a lot of issues that I have from childhood,” Campbell told Barbara Walters. “For instance, not knowing your father, not seeing your mother. It manifests a lot of feelings. One of those feelings is anger.” She went on to talk about her insecurity, lack of self-esteem and loneliness. Naomi Campbell is not the only person whose father abandoned her before she was born, and whose mother was a distant presence in her life. Our neighborhoods around the country, both minority and white, are increasingly full of such children. The June issue of the journal “Pediatrics” declares that nearly three times as many U.S. children have “emotional and behavioral” problems as did 20 years ago.
Rage is everywhere in our adult society too. Just listen to the words of “Gangsta” rap music, or the words spoken at some of the radical rallies in Washington, D.C. Rage is the raw material of the New Fascists. They know how to focus it – and give it a cause – and how to direct it at their enemies. This process has now become so obvious that it’s time we face up to it, and identify it in our national political dialogue. In fact, facing up to it is the only way we can save ourselves, and save this “grand experiment” in political and religious freedom we call America.
Confronting the gathering political storm
Increasingly, personal anger has a political face in America. Millions of dysfunctional people can create a very difficult situation in a free society. They have a right to be wrong, but their “wrong” can undermine our rights. They are also our brothers and sisters.
Solving the problem, of course, begins with seeing the problem. We know from incidents of “road rage” or “workplace shootings” that angry, hate-filled people are dangerous. They are also hard to reason with; try reasoning with someone who’s attempting to run you off the road because you forgot to signal. We are talking here about “political road rage”; it’s a slower burn, but the intent is the same — running you off the road.
As we observe the political scene, the politics of rage will become more and more obvious. Make your own list of radicals and you’ll see that rage has many faces and many “reasons” to demand justice. Watch those angry faces on talk television. See how difficult it is for others to reason with them and how rarely they accept anyone else’s point of view. Here’s the secret: For these political road ragers – in whatever category of public or private life – it is no longer about debate or logic. In that sense, we have reached the end of debate, which is a civilized method of dialogue involving two groups seeking the truth. Fascists, as we know from history, don’t debate free thinkers. They choke them out of existence.
Make no mistake: We are headed for what President George Bush called “the silly season” back in 1992. Of course, “silly” doesn’t describe it anymore than “tricks” are what the two “Democrats” were up to in Alabama. The election period will get more and more emotionalized as we get close to the vote – by whatever means necessary, from the race card, to Christian bashing, to class warfare, to corporation bashing, to fear-mongering of all kinds. What Ronald Reagan called the “Iron Triangle” will be in full gear: The angry special interest groups will be out in force demonstrating and calling press conferences; the liberal media will cooperate with cameras rolling; and hysterical Democrat politicians will make outrageous statements like, “They’re coming for our children.” All this, focused on emotionalizing the atmosphere of the presidential debates where Al Gore will do his best to “rip the lungs out” of George W. Bush. It is serious business, provoking anger and fomenting hate – all with a purpose of getting millions of Americans to fear Republicans, or any other opposing party. Then, in this kind of heated atmosphere, people will vote.
The technique of “legislation by hysteria” – emotionalizing debate in Congress and rushing a decision – now becomes “election by hysteria.” Fascists do not operate in a calm, considered environment. Inflammatory language is an essential tool in their kit. Already we are seeing race-baiting Democrats calling on Americans to “Stop the Lynching” because of the tragic hanging death of a local black teenager in Mississippi, which authorities so far have indicated is a likely suicide and which, in any event, is an isolated incident. Remember the black church burning scare in the ’96 election cycle? That turned out to be a sham, but it made headlines, created anger, caused fear and it galvanized voters. That tactic is applied aggressively to every issue in every political arena, local, state or national. If you haven’t recognized it before, it will now be transparent.
Holding on to truth
The key to successfully confronting the New Fascist movement is, first, to see it for what it is. Fascism inspires an emotionalized, cultic allegiance, and many of these people can’t see what they are trapped in. If we rage back at them, it pushes them deeper into this alien loyalty. So the second key is to be forceful but remain calm – to understand that they need our help. I don’t mean a weak, simpering, “can’t we all get along” kind of help, but a focused, forceful desire to draw the line for their own sake as well as ours. They need us to resist them with strength, but they don’t need our rage. They got that as children.
The principle here is something Mahatma Gandhi, the great liberator of India, called “force of righteousness,” “love force,” or “soul force.” Gandhi was a great admirer of Judeo-Christian thinking and Americans will recognize the wisdom. He coined a new Indian word for it, Satyagraha. The root meaning is “holding on to truth,” and “not hating back” is one of the keys to this truth.
Of course, fascists reject the idea of a truth higher than the party, and hate is their driving impulse. This puts them at odds with America’s “under God” religious heritage, and as a result, America has suffered a great deal of pain and confusion in recent decades. The fascist corruption movement (which puts power, material wealth, personal pleasure and everything else above what’s right) has all but destroyed the social fabric of our society, much to the horror of most Americans. In this respect, mainstream Americans also deal with an anger problem. Nevertheless, the hope for America’s future lies in love. It may sound corny, but in the end, it is the only way to avoid civil conflict. Permissive weakness will drive these “children” crazy, but so will judgmental anger.
When the leaders of the corruption movement understand that “the game is up” – that we see them for what they are without hate – they may hate and fear us all the more. At that point, they must get the kind of love that good parents deliver: Tough love. Consider a mother who warns her son that he is getting too close to the street, but the child gets closer. Does the mother stop the child with a gentle voice? Of course not. An aggressive shout is what’s needed to frighten the boy away from danger. Now let’s take it a step further. Despite the mother’s shout, the boy rebelliously runs toward the street where there are cars coming. At that moment, for the sake of the child, the mother rushes to use force and yanks the child out of danger.
We must be as determined in our love for these “unloved children” as they are absolutely determined to get revenge on the “establishment” they associate with the parents who abandoned them in one way or another. I confess I am talking about myself since in my angry youth I was once on their side.
Most of us are reachable. Former radical leftist David Horowitz is a classic example. Or consider Jane Fonda’s recent desire to turn her life around,
which has been reported in these pages, and which Fonda now talks about with Oprah Winfrey in the current issue of “O” magazine. Fonda’s mother committed suicide when she was 12. That kind of shock is inconceivable to most of us. What a lonely, painful journey it must have been for that little girl, especially since her father Henry Fonda was aloof and incapable of giving her the love she needed. Many of us remember her angry youth in the 1970s. Now, we are coming to understand it. Courageously facing the mistakes of her past, Jane Fonda looks to the future with a renewed determination to change. I believe there are people like this in every political and social sphere within my party. People who are looking to do what is right – people who can change their angry ways.
Coming home to America
When it comes to a dysfunctional, angry childhood, Jane Fonda has lots of company. Think of how many of other famous liberal Democrats have already admitted serious parental problems from sexual abuse to alcoholism to abandonment, either physical or emotional. It is a remarkably talented group of people, from Barbara Streisand to Rosie O’Donnell to Bill Clinton to Gloria Steinem. If we truly knew the length and breadth of this list of cultural and political leaders, and the details of their personal suffering, we would all be shocked – and touched. Don’t be distracted by their political labels. When they were children, these people deserved love, and they didn’t get it. Can we blame them for being angry?
I know how they feel. My parents were divorced when I was five. I spent some lonely years in boarding school until I was 9 years old. You bet I was afraid – and angry. The world is supposed to be a safe place for 5-year-olds, not a hostile environment. My suffering was small compared to the list above, but I can tell you that by the time I reached college age my anger manifested, and not only politically. I was rebellious in my moral behavior too. The “sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll” socialist creed of the 1960s and ’70s didn’t just affect the Clintons and a few other famous people. There were millions of us.
Some of us functionally recovered from our anger, but some didn’t – and there are many angry children coming up in the generations behind the “baby boomers,” younger people who don’t remember the America we remember. They need to believe in something and we need to give them something genuinely good – because the New Fascists have a dream to sell, too. And it isn’t the American dream.
How Democrats can reclaim the party
The following is especially important for the mainstream Democratic leadership to read. The corruption movement with its fascist tendencies is not yet a determined majority in America. However, its strength is threefold: Its adherents have access to great combined wealth; they have huge influence on our culture; and most importantly, they have not yet been clearly identified in the minds of average Americans. Most Americans still think the Democratic Party is “liberal,” even “liberal to moderate.” They may distrust the president and the rest of the PC crowd, but they don’t see the larger problem.
Let me be clear. This is not about President Clinton. The current corruption goes way beyond him. It started before him and it will undoubtedly survive him. Consider that Newsweek’s “Thought Police” issue was published in December 1990, two years before Clinton’s presidency. Even then, Newsweek raised the specter of what it called “New McCarthyism,” describing the “politically correct” movement among liberal-leftists as essentially “Marxist” and “totalitarian,” an extremist belief system determined to root out and destroy all those in the mainstream who oppose it.
If you are wondering how this belief system has affected liberalism in the last decade, just read the words of long-time, liberal Democrat commentator Mark Shields writing in the Washington Post last month: “Today to be a liberal there is one test,” said a frustrated Shields. “Unqualified support for all legal abortions ideally joined by an almost libertarian commitment to no societal limits on individual behavior or autonomy.”
Although increasingly dominant in our culture, this PC ethic is still only one element of the New Fascism, and Bill Clinton’s personal anger and radical Sixties “no-limits” attitude is only the most current catalyst to the dark impulse that has risen before in human history. Remember, Clinton is a victim too – and has the potential to recover.
Once Democrats like Shields start to recognize in large numbers what has happened to our party, the fascist power base will be greatly weakened – mainstream Democrats will all back away from it. Catholic Democrats will certainly run the other way. So will most teachers. I’m sure church-going African Americans and Latinos won’t stand for it – and neither will patriotic union workers. If that is a dream, it is a good dream. And like the one of Dr. King’s, it is up to us to make the dream a reality.
Conclusion: Our awakening
Many middle-aged and older Americans will remember the famous World War II movie, “Bridge on the River Kwai,” in which Japanese prisoner Col. Nickolson, a British officer played by Alec Guinness, is forced to lead his fellow prisoners in building a bridge for the Japanese. Under great hardship and to rally his men’s morale, Col. Nickolson sets out to prove the superiority of British freedom over Japanese tyranny by building a great bridge. Under his leadership, the prisoners succeed marvelously. They demonstrate to the Japanese what inner-inspired free men can do. It’s a magnificent bridge. But there’s a tragedy coming in the story: Due to the pride he takes in the impressive bridge, built to last long after the war, Col. Nickolson ends up on the wrong side when British commandos come to destroy the bridge. For a moment he resists his own countrymen, warning the Japanese.
After several of the commandos die in the struggle to blow up the bridge, Col. Nickolson realizes to his horror that his passionate dedication to “the cause” has led him to forget his first loyalty – his country. Severely wounded, and with his last bit of energy, he blows up the bridge himself.
It is time to detonate the lie the Democratic Party is becoming. It’s time to call on the people who are the keepers of the flame in the party – President Carter, Sen. Byrd, Sen. Moynihan, Sen. Lieberman, Sen. Nunn and all the rest of you who remember the true Democratic Party: We need you and we need you now.
Stop this totalitarian “party first” madness! Stop the moral decline, and help us return to the values and traditions of our parents and those of our once-great party. If you cannot change the party, if the levers of power are totally controlled by the New Fascists among us, from Hollywood to Washington to Wall Street, then please tell us. Talk to the people. Sound the alarm so that America will know the danger it truly faces. Yes, it will temporarily diminish the Democratic Party, but like a beautiful garden, once weeded and pruned, it will come back stronger than ever as the patriotic party of “the little guy.”
When Newsweek reporters told Americans about the growing totalitarian ethic on our college campuses at the end of the Cold War, they revealed a core ingredient of the New Fascism, something impossible for most Americans to even imagine:
- The failure of Marxist systems throughout the world has not noticeably dimmed the allure of left-wing politics for American academics. Even today, says David Littlejohn of Berkeley’s Graduate School of Literature, “an overwhelming proportion of our courses are taught by people who really hate the system.”
(Newsweek, Dec. 24, 1990)
“Hate the system. …” What if such people got complete control of one of our two major parties? I say they are very close to doing it. But more, let’s say they succeed. What if these New Fascists go on to corrupt our military, our police, our courts, and even our Congress and our governmental agencies with this same anti-American ethic? If that happens, then by any analysis we will no longer have a “culture war” in America, but rather a “cold civil war,” ready to heat up the moment government establishes laws that tyrannize the American conscience.
Right now we have two parties that are becoming like two different countries – which are increasingly acting like enemies. God forbid it, and please make us again one nation, a shining city on a hill for all the world to see, where love can reign and truth prevail, and where freedom can be enjoyed by all.