The Mises Institute's book,
The Costs of War, argues that the three
wars prior to the New Deal constitute the turning point away from the ideas
of our Founding Fathers. All three were won by the U.S. government: the war
against the South, the war against Spain, and World War I, and they
destroyed the constitutional structure of the old republic created by the
framers. The New Deal would not have been possible without those wars
clearing the way.
Without these wars, Franklin Roosevelt, in his unprecedented four terms,
would not have been able to build the U.S. Imperium through a combination of
domestic socialism and dragging America into World War II. He could not have
built the Imperium unless the constitutional restraints and policies had
been destroyed by the previous three wars. World War I in particular set up
the structure and experience and momentum for Roosevelt to create the New
Deal. He merely revitalized old government agencies that were created during
World War I. But the New Deal would have gradually diminished without World
War II, which put it into cement and established, once and for all, the
all-powerful government we have today.
Another recent and excellent book is Bruce Porter's War and the Rise of the
State. This is a study of 500 years of Western civilization and what effect
wars have had on the rise and fall of states, as well as their enhancement
of power. In his chapter on American government, he says that the New Deal
"was the only time in U.S. history when the power of the central state grew
substantially in the absence of war" (p. 278). He concludes that America's
successful wars have been the primary means by which government power has
been centralized: "Throughout the history of the United States, war has been
the primary impetus behind the growth and development of the central state.
It has been the lever by which presidents and other national officials have
bolstered the power of the state in the face of tenacious popular
resistance. It has been the wellspring of American nationalism and a spur to
political and social change" (p. 291).
FDR is constantly ranked as one of the three great presidents, with
Washington and Lincoln. He is pictured in American mythology as a man who
hated war and loved peace and promised American mothers and fathers that he
would never send their sons into a+ foreign war. He used this slogan for
peace to be reelected to an unprecedented third term in 1940, copying
Wilson's "He kept us out of war" slogan which got Wilson re-elected to a
second term. Wilson then immediately took America into World War I.
I want to investigate this mythology of FDR and I will primarily use the
congressional investigation of Pearl Harbor, which took place in 1945 and
1946, to show how the U.S. Imperium was created, and why the myth of FDR is
false.
History is like a seamless piece of cloth, and not divided into sections.
In order to study one event in time, you have to look at some preceding
events and ideas, which make it significant and see how the event came to
take place.
First, let's recall President Washington's farewell address and his strong
warning about not letting foreign governments control or influence our
domestic or foreign policy: "Against the insidious wiles of foreign
influence, I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens, the jealously of a
free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove
that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican
Government."
Secondly, we need to look back to World War I and Winston Churchill's vital
role in bringing America into that war to help save the British Empire.
Churchill was also a decisive factor in working with Roosevelt to bring
America into World War II. England has always played a balance of power
politics regarding the continent and opposed any nation that appeared to be
gaining power. Germany, at the turn of the century, had become the strong
man of Europe and so England wanted to curb its power. The same strength of
Germany influenced England's policies for World War II.
When England was at war with Germany in World War I, Winston Churchill was
First Lord of the Admiralty. The Cunard Steamship Company had received
government subsidies to build the Lusitania, the world's fastest oceanliner.
In return for this subsidy, the government participated in the design, which
allowed weapons and munitions to be secretly stored, and allowed government
to take full control of the ship during wartime.
The author, Colin Simpson, in his 1972 best-seller The Lusitania shows how
Churchill used the sinking of the Lusitania to bring America into World War
I, because when the Lusitania sank, over 100 Americans lost their lives.
Churchill's Admiralty changed captains on this fateful voyage and
substituted William Turner for the usual captain. As the Lusitania drew near
its final destination, the Admiralty ordered the usual military escort ship,
the Juno, to abandon its mission, but the Lusitania was not told that it was
now alone or that a German submarine was directly in its path. Next, the
Admiralty ordered Captain Turner to reduce his speed, thereby making the
Lusitania an easy target for torpedoes.
At the hearing held in England following this disaster, Captain Turner was
made the scapegoat and found guilty just as the American commanders at Pearl
Harbor would later be made scapegoats for that disaster.
Another important matter to consider prior to Pearl Harbor is Winston
Churchill's close friend, William Stephenson, who later became famous by his
code name, "Intrepid." Stephenson was a Canadian who made millions during
World War I through the miliary industrial complex of Great Britain. He
became a close friend and confidante of Churchill during the war, and
remained very close to him thereafter. When Churchill became Prime Minister
in May 1940, a year and a half before Pearl Harbor, he immediately arranged
for financing from the Royal Family, without the knowledge of Parliament,
for a secret organization headed by Stephenson to be located in Rockefeller
Center in New York City.
The primary purpose of this organization was to help Roosevelt and
Churchill bring America into the war through propaganda and whatever other
means were necessary. This organization also had Roosevelt's blessing to
eliminate any enemies of Great Britain in America, including American
citizens.
This story is told in great detail by Intrepid himself in a 1976 book, A
Man Called Intrepid by William Stevenson, who spells his last name
differently than Intrepid. This is history from the original source, because
the book is based on personal interviews with Intrepid himself, and on
complete access to all of his original documents.
Intrepid has also been made famous through the fiction of one of his
agents, Ian Fleming. Fleming created the fictional British agent James Bond,
and these novels have been made into some of the most famous movies of our
time. Intrepid is represented by the character "M," the mysterious boss of
James Bond.
FDR had direct communication with Intrepid through his close associate,
Bill Donovan and through his son, James Roosevelt. Donovan was the founder
of the American spy agency known as the OSS, which was modeled on a plan
provided by Intrepid, and which later became the CIA. J. Edgar Hoover was a
reluctant participant in this whole scheme, but an important player. The
whole plan required Hoover and his FBI to be subservient to Intrepid.
One dramatic incident proudly recalled by Intrepid is the mysterious death
of an American citizen by the name of William Rhodes Davis, a wealthy oil
man from Oklahoma, whose main business office was also in Rockefeller
Center. During the 1930s, Davis had developed strong business ties to the
German government and was an important source of oil for it. In the summerof 1941, Davis, age 52 and in excellent health, suddenly died. The FBI
stepped in and stopped all local police investigation, labeling the cause of
death as "sudden heart seizure."
Propaganda was also a prime activity. Intrepid created false documents and
a false map actually used by FDR in a speech to the nation on October 27,
1941. These documents were allegedly obtained from a German spy and
purported to show Hitler's plans for a secret invasion of South America.
Intrepid also created a false document which was put into Hitler's hands as
allegedly stolen from the American government. It was received by Hitler on
December 3, 1941, and purported to show FDR's secret plans to make a
surprise attack on Germany. This document played a major role in Hitler's
decision to declare war on America on December 11, 1941, which surprised
almost everyone except FDR and Intrepid.
Intrepid also provided ammunition to attack FDR's political enemies such as
Charles Lindbergh and false information was created to make Lindbergh appear
to be a Nazi sympathizer.
Now, let's look at what led to the alleged surprise attack at Pearl Harbor,
which killed 3,000 American servicemen and caused massive damage to the
Pacific Fleet.
In 1932, as part of the annual maneuvers, Naval planners documented that
if there was ever a war with Japan, the Japanese would strike the Pacific
Fleet, and Pearl Harbor was extremely vulnerable to a surprise attack by
aircraft carriers. The reports showed that in order to prevent such an
attack, a large contingent of aircraft would be needed for 360-degree
surveillance, to provide sufficient warning to prevent disaster.
Secondly, FDR ordered the Pacific Fleet transferred from its base at San
Diego to Pearl Harbor, with virtually no air cover or support. Admiral James
O. Richardson, Commander of the Pacific Fleet, was so opposed to this order
that he made a visit to the White House and personally protested to FDR. So
Roosevelt removed Richardson from command and placed Admiral Kimmell in
control.
Next, FDR began to deplete the Pacific Fleet of some of its ships by
sending them to the Atlantic to assist England and try to provoke the
Germans into firing the first shot against America.
Some of the provocative acts by FDR to get America into the war are shown
by the following events:
In the Atlantic, he used American military personnel and equipment to helplocate the German battleship Bismark for the British to sink, and he told
Harry Hopkins at the time that if this was ever discovered, he would be
impeached.
In the Atlantic, he used ships by the names of Greer, Kearney, and Ruben
James as destroyer escorts to British ships. These destroyers helped locate
submarines and assisted British airplanes in trying to destroy the subs.
Submarines finally retaliated with torpedoes which missed and Roosevelt
tried to argue that these were acts of war by Germany justifying America
entering the war. Congress would not buy it. Roosevelt also used three ships
from the Philippines to try to get the Japanese to fire first, but they
would not take the bait there either.
In regard to the diplomatic maneuvers of Roosevelt, he tried to provoke the
Japanese by freezing all of their assets in America, and, most importantly,
by cutting off all their oil supply and trade.
FDR met with Churchill in August 1941. Later, after America had entered the
war, Churchill revealed to the British government that FDR had promised him
at this meeting that he would get America in the war against Germany, even
if he had to go through the backdoor by provoking a war with Japan.
Churchill also bragged to the House of Commons in 1942 that it has been the
policy of his cabinet to get the U.S. into the war. As part of his
statement, he said, "This is what I dreamed of, aimed at and now it has come
to pass" (Morganstern, p. 116).
A member of Churchill's war cabinet, Captain Oliver Lylleton, British
production minister, who knew all of Churchill's and FDR's moves before
America entered the war, stated in a speech on June 20, 1944, to the
American Chamber of Commerce in London: "America provoked Japan to such an
extent that the Japanese were forced to attack Pearl Harbor. It is a
travesty on history, even to say that America was forced into the war"
(Morganstern, p. 116).
In FDR's cabinet, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary on
November 25, 1941, 13 days before Pearl Harbor, and described a cabinet
meeting covering the problems with Japan. His diary notes that the meeting
occurred at the White House and he states: "There the president...brought up
entirely the relations with the Japanese. He brought up the event that we
were likely to be attacked, perhaps [as soon as] next Monday, for the
Japanese are notorious for making an attack without warning and the question
was what should we do. The question was how we should maneuver them into the
position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to
ourselves" (Morganstern, p. 292).
In an unprecedented diplomatic move by Japan, its Prime Minister, a member
of the Royal Family, offered to meet with FDR in American after learning of
his visit with Churchill. The Royal Family had never left Japan before for a
diplomatic meeting. The Japanese Prime Minister could see the danger of the
meeting with Churchill. FDR flatly refused any such meeting.
Now, let's see how the American Imperium treated its own armed forces and
the commanders in Hawaii.
These are the matters known by FDR and George Marshall, his main military
contact in Washington, D.C., but not relayed to the commanders in Hawaii,
who were later blamed for the tragedy.
On January 27, 1941, American Ambassador to Japan, Joseph Grew, telegraphed
FDR that he had learned from a colleague from Peru that reliable sources had
intercepted Japanese military plans to the effect that if Japan was forced
into a war with the U.S., they would launch a massive surprise attack on
Pearl Harbor (Coverup, p. 53).
America broke the Japanese diplomatic code and actually listened to
everything they were saying to each other up to the moment of Pearl Harbor.
Here are some of the things they learned:
Japanese spies in Hawaii were regularly reporting the positions of all
ships in Pearl Harbor, and this information drastically increased the week
before the attack, even including information that ships were not moved. A
grid system was set up so they could relay the positions of the ships.
Roosevelt and Marshall learned that the Japanese diplomats stated that if
the matter was not settled by November 26, 1941, things would automatically
go into operation.
On December 3, 1941, Captain Laurence Safford intercepted the "winds
execute" message which translated to mean: "War with America, War with
England and peace with Russia" (Coverup, p. 98-100).
Written evidence of this message was mysteriously removed from the naval
records before the Pearl Harbor Congressional inquiry in 1945 and never
found.
On December 6, 1941, a message was delivered by Naval Commander Lester
Schulz directly to FDR and Harry Hopkins was present. It said that the
diplomatic code machines were to be destroyed and a major event would occur
the next day. FDR turned to Hopkins and stated, "This means war." There is
an apocryphal story of Nero fiddling while Rome burned. FDR stated that onSaturday, he spent the evening working on his stamp collection.
During the early morning hours of December 7, the broken code indicated
that at 1 o'clock Washington time, an important message was to be delivered
by the Japanese diplomats. One o'clock in Washington was dawn at Pearl
Harbor. General George Marshall had this message directly in front of him,
coupled with all of the prior information, and he had more than two hours in
which he could have warned the military commanders at Pearl Harbor. He had a
scrambler phone on his desk which he could pick up and talk instantly with
Admiral Kimmell and give him all of this information. Marshall testified
that he decided not to do that and instead sent a regular telegram which
arrived after the attack had already taken place.
Almost immediately after Pearl Harbor on December 15, 1941, FDR appointed a
committee to hold secret hearings in Pearl Harbor to determine how this
event could have happened. He appointed Supreme Court Judge Owen J. Roberts
as Chairman. Roberts had made a speech at Madison Square Garden on August
19, 1941, advocating America's entry into the war as a means of achieving
world government. This commission investigated through secret hearings at
which Commanders Kimmel and Short were not allowed to submit any evidence or
confront any witnesses and were denied due process completely. The
commission concluded that these two commanding officers, Kimmel and Short,
were solely at fault for the surprise attack and they were forced to resign
in disgrace.
It was not until after the war and the death of FDR that a joint committee
of Congress investigated in 1945 and 1946. All of the information I have
related to you is contained in the sworn testimony of those hearings. At the
end of this article are all of my bibliographical sources. Get the books and
read them for yourselves, and see the testimony that developed over Pearl
Harbor. The findings went basically along Republican and Democratic lines
with the Republicans finding gross misconduct and guilt on the part of FDR
and George Marshall.
The evidence is so overwhelming that FDR was at fault at Pearl Harbor that
many of his defenders have now changed their tactics and no longer deny that
he tricked America into the war. A good example is the following quote from
Professor Thomas Bailey: "Franklin Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the
American people during the period before Pearl Harbor.... If he was going to
induce the people to move at all, he would have to trick them into acting
for their best interests, or what he conceived to be their best interest. He
was like the physician who must tell the patient lies for the patient's own
good.... The country was overwhelmingly non-interventionist to the very day
of Pearl Harbor and any overt attempt to lead the people into war would have
resulted in certain failure and an almost certain ousting in 1940, with aconsequent defeat for his ultimate aims." (Coverup p. 64)
One final word about this "good war" against tyranny. In addition to Great
Britain, our other ally was Soviet Russia. Joseph Stalin was already, by the
end of 1938, the greatest tyrant and murderer in all of human history. I
recommend two books by Robert Conquest: The Harvest of Sorrow and The Great
Terror. They cover the two separate periods of terror launched by Stalin
against his own people. The first was during the period of 1929-1934 where
he intentionally killed 11 million of his own people, and the second was
1936 to 1938, where he murdered three million more. Just prior to World War
II, he killed 40 thousand Soviet officers and 50 out of 57 of his core
commanders as a purge of non-loyal military. You will recall that Hitler did
not purge his military and some of the regular army generals attempted to
kill him before the war was over.
Instead of allowing Hitler and Stalin, the two great tyrannies who were at
war with one another, to simply fight it out, we entered the war and sided
with the greatest tyrant and murderer in all of history. The alleged good
war was supposedly fought because Hitler invaded Poland, but it must be
recalled that Stalin invaded Poland at the same time in alliance with
Hitler.
At the end of the war, instead of freeing Poland, we turned it over to
Stalin along with all of Eastern Europe, and Stalin continued his murders by
the millions. We also turned over China to the communist. The end result of
World War II was the destruction of Nazism, but the dramatic enhancement of
communism throughout the world, leading to a 45-year cold war that got hot
in Korea and Vietnam.
In the correspondence between Lord Acton and Robert E. Lee after the Civil
War, Acton asked Lee to describe the significance of the war and Lee
predicted that "The consolidation of the states into one vast Republic, sure
to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor
of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it."
The problem with building a huge military and stationing 1.5 million men in
over a hundred countries is that you also create a massive government at
home which must become oppressive. Let's fast forward up to our present time
and look at the U.S. Imperium at work at Ruby Ridge and Waco.
Randy Weaver was not the Unabomber. He had been charged by the BATF with
possession of illegal guns whose barrels were slightly too short. He lived
with his wife and family in the mountains. On August 21, 1992, three federal
agents ambushed Weaver's 14-year old son, Sammy, and a family friend named
Kevin Harris. One government agent shot the boy's dog, and when the boyfired back, a fire-fight ensued in which Agent Degan was killed. Sammy
Weaver left the scene and while running back toward his home, another
government agent shot him in the back and killed him.
The next day, FBI snipers arrived, having received the official rules of
engagement that declared that, "any armed male adult observed in the
vicinity of the Weaver cabin could and should be killed."
Within an hour of the snipers' taking position, every adult in the cabin
was either dead or severely wounded, though they had offered no resistance
whatsoever. FBI sniper Lon Horiughi shot Randy Weaver in the back as he
stood outside his shack and then fired the head shot that killed his wife,
Vickie Weaver, as she stood in the cabin door holding their 10-month old
baby.
The Justice Department and FBI launched a massive coverup and even
destroyed critical documents which were detrimental to the government.
Seven months after Ruby Ridge, the BATF was scheduled for its budget
hearings before Congress on March 10, 1993. A command decision was
apparently made to have a sensational, successful event prior to that budget
hearing in order to increase the budget for the next year. This fact is the
key to the whole Waco event.
Present law prohibits the use of army helicopters and tanks against U.S.
citizens, except in the case of a drug raid. Therefore, the search warrants
falsely charged that the residents of the church community in Waco, Texas,
had drugs, rather than just supposedly illegal weapons. Several members of
the community were gun collectors and sold guns at shows. Local law
enforcement officers, including the sheriff, had frequently investigated the
compound to see if any illegal activity had taken place and they found none.
Lies were obviously told that this was a drug raid, so as to use Fort Hood
facilities for the training of the operation and to use army helicopters and
machine guns for the raid which initially occurred on February 28, 1993.
The BATF employed a pr expert to deal with the press so as to get the best
coverage for the event. It is because of this press agent's contact with the
press prior to the event that apparently word leaked out to the people in
the community that a raid was to take place and the element of surprise was
lost. As the trucks pulled up with armed federal agents and helicopters flew
overhead, firing down into the home, the people inside fired back and
several government agents were wounded and killed. A 51-day siege then took
place and the FBI took control of the matter.
During this 51-day period, some of the women and children were allowed toleave, but the people in the community saw that they were slapped into
chains and arrested. Finally, Janet Reno ordered the attack on April 19,
1993, resulting in the death of at least 76 men, women, and children inside.
A truly fantastic, independently-made movie entitled "Waco: The Rules of
Engagement" has been produced. It presents the actual pictures of the events and then covers the
Congressional hearing and the sworn testimony before the joint committee. It
is presented in a very balanced way, but the conclusion is inescapable that
the FBI agents lied under oath.
The most telling thing about the movie is to see the federal agents testify
under oath that they were not firing into the community and never used
machine guns. The government used high flying aircraft and special film
which shows heat, and the purpose was to show that the tanks did not cause
the fire. However, the film not only picks up the fire, but it shows rapid
machine gun fire coming from positions where only FBI agents could have been
located behind the tanks as they moved in and around the compound. There was
one particular area in the building that was more secure, and this was known
to the FBI agents. It was known that the women and children had gathered in
this area for protection and this is where the tank and machine guns
delivered their most brutal attack.
To me Waco is worse than Tiananmen Square in China. At least those brave
Chinese students voluntarily placed themselves in harm's way to protest
tyranny, and they were freedom fighters willing to die for the cause of
liberty. At Waco, we simply have peaceful individuals, including women and
children in a religious community that has been there for five decades. They
have been living peacefully with their neighbors and harming no one. They
were no threat to the government and they were not placing themselves
voluntarily in harm's way. They were viciously murdered by our government.
The cover story for the April 28, 1997, issue of Time Magazine was "What's
Wrong at the FBI?" The article begins by pointing out that the FBI was the
idea of a man named Charles Joseph Bonapart, a descendant of the French
emperor. As you might imagine, the FBI was created in the big government
push of the progressive era in 1908. Bonapart was attorney general for Teddy
Roosevelt. The article goes on to point out that initially, there were
strong suspicions and objections that this central government police force
would become as secretive and oppressive as the Czarist police force. The
author of the article then concludes, "It did precisely that."
The article continues with specifics of the horrible incidents at Waco,
Ruby Ridge, Filegate, Richard Jewell, and the fiasco with the crime lab.
However, part of the problem has been that no politician is willing to
attack the FBI directly or to cut its budget, since the public has indicatedits great concern about crime or perhaps because of the files the FBI has
long kept.
No one wants to mention that there is a problem of crime in the government
either. The article points out that under Clinton, some agencies have been
reduced, but the FBI's budget has jumped by 25% to $2.9 billion. Congress
has paid for 3,600 new employees and new computers. Law and order
Republicans, as well as leftist Democrats, have joined in the support of the
FBI, in spite of its despotic actions at Waco and Ruby Ridge. The agency has
gone international now with offices even in Moscow. The FBI may spin
completely out-of-control like the CIA. It has become an integral part of
the American Imperium.
Crime inside a government is far more dangerous to individual freedom than
crime outside the government, because it is done under the appearance of
legitimacy and has the full force of the government to sustain it, as well
as the ability to hide the facts from the people. Government propaganda can
be very persasive on the population.
Let me mention one other government agency, the one most likely to come
into contact with us and most likely to be oppressive to us. It is the
Internal Revenue Service, an agency created by the federal government during
the Civil War.
As Lord Acton is famous for saying "power tends to corrupt and absolute
power corrupts absolutely." This has certainly proven to be true nationwide
and agency-wide with the IRS. I want to recommend an excellent new book
entitled Unbridled Power written by Shelley Davis, who was an insider to the
IRS. She was actually hired away from the Defense Department to be the first
official historian of the IRS. She did her job well, studied documents,
interviewed witnesses, and attended Congressional hearings, which exposed
the whole operation.
I will only mention one of the many examples in the book showing total
corruption. This involves two competitors for a major clothing contract in
New York. One company contacted the head of the criminal division of the
IRS, Ronald Saranow, and offered him a bribe in the form of a lucrative job
and other benefits if he would launch a criminal investigation of the
competitor, which he did. This investigation went on for three and half
years and turned up absolutely nothing; but, in the meantime, the competitor
was almost ruined financially.
You will be relieved to know, however, that once the IRS found out about
this total corruption, they took immediate and direct action. They fired the
historian, Shelley Davis, and banned her from ever coming inside the IRSagain.
This is the U.S. Imperium at its finest hour. This fall, Congressman Ron
Paul reported, with great lament, that the budget of the BATF was increased
by 14% and the IRS by 8%.
The U.S. Imperium, the all-powerful government created primarily by
successful wars of the American Government is, as Robert E. Lee predicted it
would be, both "aggressive abroad and despotic at home." Our task is to
begin dismantling the Imperium, which must occur before we can rebuild and
improve the constitutional republic created by the framers. Two of the big
mistakes made by the advocates of freedom, especially in the 20th century,
have been the reliance simply on the ballot box coupled with the failure to
recognize the need for and the value of intellectual support in the battle
for public opinion.
F.A. Hayek wrote a brilliant essay published in 1949 in the Chicago Law
Review entitled "The Intellectuals and Socialism." He concluded that the
vast majority of intellectuals have favored socialism and collectivism,
especially in the 20th century. He defined intellectuals to include all of
those who shape public opinion, such as professors and journalists. He
points out that socialism was not originally a mass movement but was created
by intellectuals.
Murray Rothbard wrote an even greater essay entitled "The Anatomy of the
State," published in Rampart Journal in 1965, and pointed out that the
alliance between the state and the intellectual is an ancient one going back
to the time of the joinder of church and state. He states that the job of
the intellectual has often been to convince the masses to support the state.
He says in particular that, "Promoting this ideology (support of the state)
among the people is the vital social task of the 'intellectuals.' For the
masses of men do not create their own ideas, or indeed think through these
ideas independently; they follow passively the ideas adopted and
disseminated by the body of intellectuals. The intellectuals are, therefore,
the 'opinion-molders' in society. And, since it is precisely a molding of
opinion that the State almost desperately needs, the basis for the age-old
alliance between the State and intellectuals becomes clear.
"It is evident that the state needs the intellectuals; it is not so evident
why intellectuals need the State. Put simply, we may state that the
intellectual's livelihood in the free market is never too secure; for the
intellectual must depend on the values and choices of the masses of his
fellow men, and it is precisely characteristic of the masses that they are
genuinely uninterested in intellectual matters. The State, on the otherhand, is willing to offer to intellectuals a secure and permanent berth in
the State apparatus; and thus, a secure income and the panoply of prestige.
For the intellectuals will be handsomely rewarded for the important function
they perform for the State Rulers, of which group they now become a part."
John Maynard Kaynes and John Kenneth Galbraith come to mind as examples of
these sycophantic intellectuals.
When the believers in individual freedom saw the vast support of the
intellectuals for big government and collectivism in the 20th century, they
falsely concluded that all intellectuals were against them but that they
could win the battle for public opinion through political leaders at the
ballot box. They didn't believe intellectual support was necessary or
available. The state has a vast array of resources for propaganda,
distortion, and hiding the truth. Intellectuals who support freedom can
serve as the essential method by which one can cut through the myths and
falsity and expose the disastrous ideas that have created the American
Imperium.
Returning to F.A. Hayek's essay, he makes a vital point: "We need
intellectual leaders who are prepared to resist the blandishments of power
and influence and who are willing to work for an ideal, however small may be
the prospects of its early realization. They must be men who are willing to
stick to principles and to fight for their full realization, however remote.
The practical compromises they must leave to politicians.... Unless we can
make the philosophic foundations of a free society once more a living
intellectual issue, and its implementation, a task which challenges the
ingenuity and imagination of our liveliest minds, the prospects of freedom
are indeed dark."
That was 1949. I believe the prospects for the success of freedom are
greater today than at any time in the 20th century. The fall of the Soviet
Empire and the dramatic demonstration of the failure of central planning of
an economy under socialism have impressed the entire world. But American
universities remain the most promient stronghold of intellectuals who still
support collectivism and socialism. And this is a major problem for
developing intellectuals who will support freedom.
Another exciting and encouraging note for the future is the existence and
work of the Mises Institute, which is dedicated to developing those types of
individuals Hayek mentioned, who will support the ideas of a free market
economy and private property. We will need these intellectuals to help
dismantle the U.S. Imperium in order to rebuild the American republic.
_________
Mr. Denson, a practicing attorney in Opelika, Ala., is vice chairman of the
Ludwig von Mises Institute. This article is adapted from a speech he gave to
the Institute.
SOURCES
PEARL HARBOR
Morgenstern, George. 1947 Pearl Harbor: The Story of the Secret War. Old
Greenwich, CN: Devin-Adair (There is a 1991 reprint of this by another
publisher.)
Bartlett, Bruce R. 1978. Cover-up: The Politics of Pearl Harbor 1941-1946.
New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, Publishers
Colby, Benjamin. 1974. 'Twas a Famous Victory. New Rochell, NY: Arlington
House, Publishers
Theobald, Robert A. 1971. The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor. Old Greenwich,
CN: Devin-Adair
Barnes, Harry Elmer. 1972. Pearl Harbor After a Quarter of A Century. New
York: Arno Press
Stevenson, William. 1976. A Man Called Intrepid: The Secret War. New York:
Ballantine Books
Simpson, Colin. 1972. The Lusitania. New York: Ballantine Books
Russett, Bruce M. 1972. No Clear and Present Danger: A Skeptical View of the
U.S. Entry into World War II. New York: Harper Torchbooks, Harper & Row
Publishers
RUBY RIDGE
Bock, Alan. 1997. Ambush at Ruby Ridge: How the Government Agents Set Randy
Weaver Up and Knocked Him Down.
WACO
Reavis, Dick J. 1995. The Ashes of Waco: An Investigation. New York: Simon
and Schuster
Kopel, David D. and Blackman, Paul H. 1997. No More Wacos: What's Wrong WithFederal Law Enforcement and How to Fix it. Amhurst, New York: Prometheus
Books
See also
Anti-War Links