History has shown us time and again that calamities fall upon societies such as ours, often without warning. Individuals suffer personal disaster because of certain choices they make. A nation of people may suffer corporately for the same reasons. With the emergence of a global economy, a global culture, and a global government, all nations and people will now experience the collective results of their collective choice to participate in the trends of this time -- even if their choices are apathy or ignorance.
Why did the tens of millions die during the world wars? Why have paroxysms of pain, suffering, and death burst so suddenly upon unsuspecting populations around the world? These events seem so removed from our time, mere stories told by history books and old photographs. Time has softened the memory of these tragedies. Some say we are in a new day of progressive ideas.
A wise man once said, "There is nothing new under the sun." History repeats itself because people will not learn from it. To forget is an essential trait of human nature, as is ignorance and apathy. So is cruelty. These work together to reincarnate the horrors of the past. By comparing the trends of our present day with history, we cast a prescient gaze into our future.
Political scientist R. J. Rummel calculates that in this century alone governments have killed more than 119,400,000 people during times of peace. This is four times the casualties of combat in this century's wars and more than all the people killed in religious persecution in all history. This is the wretched fruit of a political madness and fanaticism to which mankind seems so prone. It is the fruit of Statism, or the worship of the State. It is a religion in and of itself.
Statism is a religion that goes back to man's early existence when he first built a tower on the Chaldean plain. It has asserted itself in every civilization where true Christian principles were absent or in decline. Statism was dealt a blow on the American continent where, for a time, a nation recognized that the rights of man were endowed by his Creator, not by other men. But the Creator was forgotten, in practice if not in theory, and Statism reared its head once again.
From the beginning, statists have proffered solutions for human suffering. These solutions have failed because they spring from a false premise -- that of force -- which is the quintessence of Statism. The Creator is the God of the individual and of freedom of choice. Statism destroys individuality and freedom to choose. Its only method is force. One degree of force invariably leads to another until rivers of blood result. The Creator required the blood of one Man to atone for the misdeeds of many, thereby bringing peace to all. Statists require the blood of millions, and yet they are never satisfied. This is another hallmark of the statist religion--an insatiable blood-lust.
Statists of this century differ only in dress, language, and symbolism. They share the fundamental belief that the State is supreme--the end in itself. The individual must submerge his interests in the interests of the state or community. Individualism is the enemy. Statism is flourishing in the world today with a new twist; there is now a universal State, the dream of all statists of the past. Thus we begin to see the universal calamity that lies ahead as Statism produces its wretched fruit on a global scale.
President and Hillary Clinton are consummate statists. In 1993 Hillary said, "We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." In 1993 Bill Clinton said, "We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans...." "When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans.... And so a lot of people say there's too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it." This is what he is doing--gradually.
In 1956 Clinton comrade Nikita Khrushchev boldly declared, "Comrades! We must abolish the cult of the individual decisively, once and for all." In 1933 comrade Hitler said:
It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual.... This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man.
Hitler also said, "There is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it." He may have said the same of The New Deal. He would love corporate fascist America today. It must be seen that there are no significant differences between the statists of today and those of the past. Their premise is the same.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was the leading French philosopher and statist during "The Enlightenment" period of the 18th century who helped shape the modern statist philosophy. He wrote:
Once there is a society it is necessary to have a coercive force to organize and coordinate the movements of its members so that the common interests and reciprocal ties are given the solidity they would not be able to have by themselves. 
This "coercive force" is directed by what Rousseau called the "general will" of society, the community over the individual. In this cult there is constant agitation for "equality" in order to maintain an atmosphere where individual differences will not be tolerated. Few are aware that the full slogan of the French Revolution was "Liberty, Equality, Brotherhood -- or Death."
Historian Arnold Toynbee wrote of statist cult in Revolutionary France:
In the Revolution a sinister ancient religion which had been dormant suddenly re-erupted with elemental violence. This revenant was the fanatical worship of collective human power. The Terror was only the first of the mass-crimes that have been committed ... in this evil religion's name."
This statist religion is propagated today by so-called "human rights" groups who attack non-conforming segments of the population while sanctioning the human rights violations of the State. Race is not the issue. They operate from the collectivist premise that the State is supreme and infallible and any opposition to state crimes is "hate" and "intolerance." While professing a love for "diversity," these groups urge on the campaign of state terror against heretical elements, proving that their "tolerance" is reserved for those who conform to their statist world view.
France on the eve of revolution closely resembles America today, as well as pre-Nazi Germany. Historian Otto Scott writes:
French intellectuals, middle and upper classes had grown ashamed of their country, history, and institutions. Such a phenomenon had never before arisen in any nation or race throughout the long history of mankind, and deserved more attention than it received.
A great loosening began; the country slowly came apart.... For the first time since the decadent days of Rome, pornography emerged from its caves and circulated openly in a civilized nation. The Catholic Church in France was intellectually gutted; the priests lost their faith with the congregations. Strange cults appeared; sex rituals, black magic, Satanism. Perversion became not only acceptable but fashionable. Homosexuals held public balls to which heterosexuals were invited and the police guarded their carriages.... The air grew thick with plans to restructure and reconstruct all traditional French society and institutions.
Scott writes that "...the heirs of the Enlightenment of the late eighteenth century ... launched the first revolution in all history against the idea of Christianity, and Christianity's God." Christianity stood in the way of the statist's Utopia on earth. The destruction of Christian values resulted in the destruction of cultural norms of behavior. Christianity held the nation together, and now it would come apart.
So it is in America. Statists are destroying the dominant, White Christian culture and supplanting it with multi-culturalism -- a false theory that simply cannot exist. In France the target was the church, the monarchy and the aristocracy. In America it is Christianity and everything White. The federal government has undertaken the promotion of homosexuality and abortion which are crimes against nature and nature's God. The aim is always to destroy the cultural cohesiveness and bring a revolution. The press plays its major subversive role. Scott writes of France:
The press ... was the spearhead, font, and fuel for these discussions ... the journals were mixtures of politics and smut. They admired agitators extravagantly and never discussed the Church without mention of scandal nor the government without criticism. They relied heavily on tales of sin in high places and high-handed outrages of the Court; no name, however highly placed and illustrious, escaped.
Through its journals and pamphlets ... it could distort, color, plead, argue, lie, report, and misreport the information upon which the balance of the realm depended. In recent years it had used this weapon with unscrupulous force to arouse and direct the mobs as well as the intelligentsia.
The Spokesman-Review newspaper in Spokane, Washington hardly lets a day pass without bashing traditional American culture. The bold headline in its July 13, 1998 edition reads: "What's it like being white?" The article pities the poor Caucasians who are "struggling with their identities ... in an increasingly multicultural society. 'I've realized that I have a color called white ... that scares me'" said one Spokane resident quoted in the article. "Whiteness is subtle yet pervasive" it reads. "Nearly everyone [in the Inland Northwest] is White. 'We are so immersed in white culture that we know so little else,'" one expert lamented.
Such blatant race-baiting is the norm at many newspapers such as The Spokesman-Review. It is acceptable and even commendable because, like 18th century France, Americans have been trained to hate their culture. American culture is not exclusive to skin color or national origin, but the race-baiters in education and the media have turned it into a racial issue, confusing and dividing Americans and making coherent discussion impossible. These statists are simply continuing the war against "Christianity, and Christianity's God" as Scott writes.
Left wing ideologues dominate the information media today, some under the cover of "neo-conservatism." It was in the French revolution that the terms "right wing" and "left wing" were coined. Those on the "left" were the radicals who proudly adopted the designation as a symbol of their "revolutionary defiance of Christian tradition, which had always represented those on the right hand of God as saved, and those on the left as damned."  Some things never change.
Statist ideas never originate with the working class. They emanate from power and privilege. The French Revolution began with the aristocracy. Hitler's National Socialism and the Sixties counter-culture began on university campuses. Sixteenth century reformer Martin Luther warned that the universities could become "great gates of hell." They did.
In his book Slouching Towards Gomorrah, Judge Robert Bork writes, "It is important to understand what the Sixties turmoil was about, for the youth culture that became manifest then is the modern liberal culture of today."
During the Sixties, American culture and institutions were assaulted by leftist student radicals who committed vandalism and arson, seized administrative offices, assaulted and terrorized faculty, and disrupted classes. Terrorist groups such as the Black Panthers and the Weathermen flourished on campuses coast to coast. Protests were characterized by a dark, revolutionary nihilism and totalitarian behavior. Pitched street battles between radicals and police eclipsed the 1968 Democratic Convention. Drug abuse, sexual promiscuity, hedonism, and hatred of law and order became rampant in the Sixties. The social fabric was coming apart.
University administrators either caved in to the demands of radicals who seized them and their offices or sympathized with them outright. So divorced were these institutions from the mainstream that they often would not even ask for the police to restore order on campus. Bork writes:
University establishments collapsed under moral, and sometimes physical, assault, and often publicly accepted the Left's indictments of themselves and of America. In this, Yale and Cornell were entirely typical. Scenes such as these, and worse, were played out on scores of campuses. Almost nowhere did the faculty and the administration stand firm.
Nihilism is an extreme skepticism that rejects all distinctions of moral and religious values and sees the destruction of all existing moral and social institutions as necessary for future improvement. The Enlightenment softened up the French intelligentsia until they became guilty about everything in their own culture and gave themselves up to nihilistic sophisms. Modern liberalism, a reincarnation of the Enlightenment, has done the same to America's upper crust.
British journalist Ambrose Evans-Pritchard observes:
The American elite, I am afraid to say, is almost beyond redemption. Moral relativism has set in so deeply that the gilded classes have become incapable of discerning right from wrong. Everything can be explained away, especially by journalists. Life is one great moral mush -- sophistry washed down with Chardonnay. 
Judge Bork summed up the nihilistic philosophy that was the essence of the Sixties counter-culture. All that mattered to the radicals was the destruction of society's institutions. He writes:
Radical groups, even as they grew more violent in their effort to destroy the white, bourgeois world, were without any notion of what was to come after. As one of the apostles of violence put it, "The idea was not to create a perfect state operating by the clock-work principles of Marxist law but to promote a chaos that would cripple America and ultimately cast it into a receivership that would be administered by the morally superior third world.... People shouldn't expect the revolution to achieve a Kingdom of Freedom; more likely, it would produce a Dark Ages."
It would appear that the virulent counter-culture of the Sixties has sputtered out of existence. War is fashionable, students are back in class, and women are wearing bras again. The radicals finally came to their senses and got a life. Unfortunately, this is not the case. As Judge Bork observes, many of the student radicals graduated and even pursued advanced degrees at the institutions they tried to burn down. Instead of entering business or the conventional professions they joined "the chattering class," the army of talkers that fill the ranks of influence. 
They comprise the bureaucratic elite in America. They are teachers and university professors. They occupy positions in the major news organizations, journalism, foundation staffs, and public policy organizations. They run Hollywood. They gravitate to any position where opinions may be influenced. These are now called "coat and tie" radicals who are not attacking the social order on the streets, but are destroying it from within.
For example, Berkeley radical Ron Dellums was elected to Congress in 1970, retiring in February after twenty-seven years in the House of Representatives. Gone are the bell bottom pants, shaggy beard and afro. He looks much more distinguished now with his short, gray hair and well cut suits. Dellums personifies the "coat and tie" radical in appearance and philosophy. "I learned not to think like a sprinter but as a long-distance runner," said Dellums when he announced his retirement in 1997. 
Dellums also said that his proudest moment as representative was when he escorted a Communist and convicted terrorist to the House floor to receive a fawning ovation from the U.S. Congress. In the Sixties police caught this terrorist plotting a violent overthrow of government while in possession of a large cache of weapons and enough explosives to kill thousands of people. This terrorist is Nelson Mandela, who is now the President of South Africa.
While Mandela was in prison, his wife Winnie was busy advocating the "necklacing" of other blacks who were disloyal, the practice of forcing a tire filled with gasoline over an unfortunate person and setting it alight. As the victims burned, their families were challenged by the mob to pull the burning tire off. "With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we will liberate this country," Winnie shouted before television cameras. According to sources in South Africa, hundreds died in this manner. International TV crews captured footage of a necklacing where the mob smashed the victim's head with large stones.
Of course, bombing, necklacing, torture, and murder are acceptable if your politics are in order. At most you may become president and at least you will stay out of jail and live comfortably. This is a major plank in the radical manifesto. The only crimes are political crimes. You may commit perjury, molest children, cheat, rob, steal and murder without guilt so long as you are a good radical. The desecration of the rule of law by the black government in South Africa has produced a surge in violent crime that has brought that nation to the verge of anarchy and ruin. The government reserves its moral outrage for the remaining symbols of the former white establishment, not the murderers on the streets.
South Africa's criminal justice system is on the verge of collapse. Over two percent of the total population is behind bars--more than twice the number imprisoned under white rule. South Africa has a murder rate that is seven times greater than that of the United States, with rapes, carjackings and home invasions epidemic. Black on white crime is epidemic. Thirty-four thousand prisoners escaped from jail over the past four years, and many accused are never convicted due to police ineptitude, corruption, or inadequate resources. President Mandela asserts that reports of an increase of crime under his administration is nothing more than propaganda put out by by political opponents. This is another plank in the radical manifesto--"Don't confuse me with the facts."
Nelson Mandela was a leader in a terrorist conspiracy in the Sixties. His organization, the African National Congress (ANC), carried out a campaign of bombings and assassinations in a campaign to overthrow the government. The ANC killed many innocent civilians, as well as several of their own people suspected of disloyalty. The government offered to release Mandela from prison early if he would renounce terrorist acts, but he refused. In May of 1997, the ANC publicly apologized for killing civilians, claiming they did not intend to do it. Forty top ANC officials have applied for amnesty.
Mandela's terrorist past was no secret to Vice President Al Gore and First Lady Hillary Clinton when they attended his presidential inauguration in 1994. Mandela held up his clenched fist, a symbol of the iron rule of Communism. Al and Hillary applauded enthusiastically. Killing civilians doesn't matter as long as you promote the radical agenda. The only crimes are political crimes.
Back at home this radical philosophy has destroyed the ideal of the American legal tradition, "equal protection under the law." While there has been an exponential increase in crime over the past two decades, the federal government increasingly throws its unlimited resources into those cases that have political overtones.
For instance, Eric Robert Rudolph is the subject of a massive manhunt in North Carolina. His alleged crime? He is suspected of a bombing, killing one person and wounding another. If murders are committed everyday, why has this one elicited such an overwhelming response from the federal government? An abortion clinic got bombed. That's a big federal no-no. So is bombing gay bars. The body count doesn't matter. It's the political statement made by these bombings that makes it such a grave offense in the eyes of radicals. Mandela can bomb people and be president. Rudolph, who may view himself as a "freedom fighter", could be executed because he isn't carrying the correct political baggage. But as Evans-Pritchard wrote, "Everything can be explained away, especially by journalists."
Political seduction of the law spells the end of justice--and the beginning of a great social unraveling.
Pre-revolutionary France resembled America in other ways. Even though the government was almost bankrupt, the nation's economy was booming, the result of borrowed capital. A popular national lottery was created. The finance minister theorized that the appearance of prosperity would create the real thing. France was Europe's leading military power as well as eminent in science and the arts. The future seemed to glitter with promise. Concerning the national mood Scott writes:
Socially the trend [of equality] was promising.... a sort of leveling took place ... [as] the ideas of Rousseau suffused the land.... A season of peace seemed to envelop the land. It was as though the misty and dreamlike ideas of Rousseau had, for the nonce, taken tangible form.... The fact was that the situation was grim beyond anyone's knowledge.
Volumes may be written about the parallels between America today and pre-revolutionary France. There are many parallels, as well as some differences. There will be differences in the final outcome as well, but the immutable results of Statism will be the same. They may be even more horrifying this time.
Soon France's dream-like state was shattered by a loud crash. Their financial house of cards collapsed, resulting in flight of capital and economic depression. A series of events combined to create food shortages and hunger. Agitators fanned out across the countryside to destroy grain stores and terrorize the inhabitants. Hired mobs staged "spontaneous" riots in Paris. The powers of government weakened and then collapsed. Everything fell apart with astonishing coordination.
The appalling thing in the French Revolution is not the tumult, but the design. Through all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of calculating organization. The managers remain studiously concealed and masked; but there is no doubt about their presence from the first.
The resulting political changes were not brought about by the majority of hungry peasants. As in America today, Frenchmen were a herd of cattle controlled by a minority of leftist radicals. Scott writes:
Paris, like the nation, was divided into the politically active and the passive, between the many confused, disorganized, and abstracted, and the highly concentrated, organized, and intent few.
A common bond between statists of every age is the element of romantic occultism -- a satanic blend of nihilism, hocus pocus, and eastern mysticism. French revolutionaries, Communists, and modern liberal statists in government today share this common faith. Romantic occultism teaches the Big Bang theory of social science. If you blow everything to smithereens, you will have, presto, instant Utopia.
Romantic occultism fired the French Revolution through secret societies such as the Freemasons and the Order of the Illuminati. Rousseau taught it would be necessary "to reap the harvest of perpetual peace by ... [the] bloody trial of sharp war." Perpetual peace, he said, "can only happen by means that humanity might find violent and fearful.... We will not see [world government] except by revolution.... Statists only use gradualism to the point where society is near collapse. Then they blow it up. Eighteenth century historian John Robison writes:
[Illuminati founder Adam] Weishaupt grants that 'there will be a terrible convulsion, and a storm -- but this will be succeeded by a calm -- the unequal will now be equal-- and when the cause of dissension is thus removed, the world will be in peace. 
European federalist Fisher Ames said that Illuminists had a "strange heat in the heart, but no light in the brain" as they set about "to kindle every thing in the state that is combustible, into a blaze." Ames lamented that a "slender hope" for world peace "is all that the Illuminists have proposed as the indemnity for all the crimes and misery of France, and all the horrors of the new revolutions that they wish to engender in Europe from the Bosphorous to the Baltic."
In the 19th century Hegel refined the fanaticism of the Illuminists with his widely accepted theory of dialectics, which essentially teaches that conflict is the engine of historical change.
"The joy of destruction is a creative joy," enthused radical Hegelians Bakunin and Proudhon (p. 233). This was not just youthful indulgence in graphic metaphors. They knew they were calling for violence, that their much-lauded 'flow of history' was to be a river of blood. It is just this doctrine of creative destruction which is at the core of the modern revolutionary faith.
The extreme nihilism of this faith is found in this statement by a influential student activist proceeding the violent Bolshevik Revolution, a statement that resonates ominously as one views the youth of today:
Everything is false, everything is stupid, from religion to the family.... a revolution, a bloody and pitiless revolution must change everything down to the very roots ... we know that rivers of blood will flow and that perhaps even innocent victims will perish...
Some may remember the segment broadcast on National Public Radio during the Los Angeles riots in 1992. A woman commentator, speaking with almost erotic ecstasy, described the beauty of the scene as the poor, oppressed classes shook off their oppressors and burned their city down. This segment aroused considerable protest from some listeners. The L.A. riots (themselves the product of considerable coordination) as well as the broadcast on NPR, are further evidence that creative destruction is very much a tool of statist master planners today.
Little does America appreciate the lessons of the past. What passes as "enlightenment" in this day is nothing more than the reoccurring fanatical Statism of the past. What promises liberation and equality brings repression and slavery. The future, appearing to glitter with promise, brings only death and destruction. Such are always the results of departing from the time-honored truths embodied in true Christianity.
As the old order in France collapsed, Frenchmen freely exercised sexual as well as political freedom. The old morality was considered part of the bondage of the past. Churches were invaded and turned into temples of debauchery. Fornication was committed in the aisles. Homosexuality, bestiality, and every other perversion imaginable flourished. Christianity and all its symbols were outlawed while witchcraft, blackmagic, and demon worship were widespread. Indescribable disorder resulted. The Christian age was dead. The Age of Reason had arrived.
Immoral sexual practices always bring darker passions in their wake. In ancient times the worship of Baal, the god of sensuality, was followed by the worship of Molech, the god of human sacrifice. The mobs of France were seized by a demonic blood-lust, causing them to commit atrocities that are beyond description, all in the name of "Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood."
On July 14, a Parisian mob stormed the Bastille prison. This fateful day marks the beginning of the Revolution, as well as a macabre orgy of human butchery. Several unfortunate soldiers and the Bastille's governor were slaughtered, their heads severed, stuck on pikes, and paraded through town. Other body parts followed--torsos, hands, genitals, and entrails were bobbing along the street on pikes. Later members of the Swiss Guard were torn apart, their internal organs used for batting practice. The crowds who witnessed it cheered. These scenes would be repeated countless times throughout the revolution, scenes of unthinkable barbarity committed by humans stripped of every decent impulse.
The number of prisons in Paris increased from nine to twelve. Two-hundred thousand prisoners languished in France, most accused of vague crimes against the Revolution. The work of execution proceeded too slowly. The government, fearful of an outbreak, hired goons to slaughter inmates in what is known as the September Massacres. Men and women prisoners were shoved into the courtyard where they were butchered. More grisly parades began.
The infamous Reign of Terror began when the "Law of the Suspects" was passed by the Assembly. It condemned to death "all who by their actions, by their connections, speakings, writings, have shown themselves to be ... enemies of freedom." France was turning into one large, grisly graveyard. Of this cult of death David Chilton writes:
The Reign of Terror, that eminently logical application of the Enlightenment claimed 40,000 victims in 1793-1794, but that was only the beginning. For, as the Revolution progressed, its leaders calmly calculated the number of citizens who would have to be exterminated, laying elaborate plans for the methodical liquidation of two thirds of the population -- more than sixteen million people (see Nesta Webster, The French Revolution; A Study in Democracy, 1919, pp. 423-429)
The "coat and tie" radicals in Washington and elsewhere might want to consider the fate of their counterparts in Revolutionary France. Those that led at the beginning of the Revolution were later beheaded in the guillotine they set up for others. They were replaced by other, more radical elements who later met a similar fate. Even the Duke of Orleans, the wealthy patron of the Revolution who supported and financed its subversive activities during the monarchy, literally lost his head. The blade of the guillotine fell without prejudice. This reveals another plank of the radical manifesto--"everyman for himself."
There is a group of Americans that the Washington elite mockingly call "the black helicopter crowd." Some in this group may mistakenly identify certain facilities as FEMA detention centers. Some may be wrong about the mission of certain helicopters flying on the horizon, but they are not mistaken in their fears of history repeating itself. Their fears are justified. This century has produced more terrors in the name of Utopia than the two centuries before it. Face it. It is happening again.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand....
Taken from a poem entitled "The Second Coming" by William Butler Yeats (1919)
- President Bill Clinton, March 11, 1993, USA Today.
- President Bill Clinton, March 22, 1994, MTV's "Enough is Enough."
- Nikita Khrushchev, February 25, 1956 at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party.
- Grace G. Roosevelt, Reading Rousseau in the Nuclear Age (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1990), p.204).
- John Willson, "The Gods of Revolution" (essay) in Reflections on the French Revolution: A Hillsdale Symposium, Stephen J. Tonsor, ed. p.22.
- Otto Scott, Robespierre: The Fool as Revolutionary, p.6, The Reformer Library, New York, 1974.
- ibid, p.8.
- ibid, preface to the second edition.
- ibid, p. 8.
- ibid, p.40.
- James H. Billington, Fire in the Minds of Men: Origin of the Revolutionary Faith, p. 22.
- Robert H. Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah, HarperCollins, 1996.
- ibid, p.49.
- ibid, p.48.
- Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, The Secret Life of Bill Clinton, p.366, Regnery Publishing, 1997.
- Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah, p.50.
- ibid, p.51.
- Rep. Dellums Announces Retirement, The Daily Californian, 11-18-97.
- In S. Africa, two percent of population is behind bars, CNN, 1-17-98.
- ANC apologizes for deaths in anti-apartheid fight, CNN, 5-12-97.
- Scott, Robespierre p.23.
- Lord Acton in his Lectures on the French Revolution.
- Scott, Robespierre, p.153.
- Roosevelt, Reading Rousseau in the Nuclear Age, p.204.
- John Robison, Proofs of a Conspiracy, p.258.
- Fisher Ames, The Works of Fisher Ames as published by Seth Ames, W.B. Allen, ed.
- David Chiston, Essay on James H. Billington's Fire in the Minds of Men (part 2), Institute for Christian Economics 1984.
- ibid, (part 1). 23:25.
Disclaimer: APFN is not responsible for the accuracy of
material on 'The Winds'
and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within their web pages.
This page is in the public domain.