Empire of Reason
e-Article No. 10

From:  Connecticut Committee of Correspondence

(Committees of Correspondence were early revolutionary cells, specially organized for revolutionary reeducation, for the manipulation of opinion, so as to lay the groundwork of resistance to the globe’s greatest imperialist power, the British Empire.  “Sam Adams was the promoter of the first local committees on November 12, 1772, and within three months Governor Hutchinson reported that there were more than eighty such committees in Massachusetts.”  Committees of Correspondence formed the basis for the soon to follow Committees of Public Safety, as the road to Revolution unfolded.  See page 217, “Committees of Correspondence,” Concise Dictionary of American History, Editor, Wayne Andrews.)

* * * * *

Legislating History

By Mark Albertson

* * * * *

          February 2, 2023, the House of Representatives approved House Concurrent Resolution 9, and by an overwhelming vote in favor, 328 to 86.[1]  Note please this recreant attempt at legislation was put forth as a Concurrent Resolution and not as a Joint Resolution or Bill; which the latter options of governance would have required fortitude and conviction in pressing the case in an arena of ardent and lasting debate, that would not, in reality, have been able to stand up to verdicts of history that are unimpeachable and beyond reproach; as opposed to merely sending a message of displeasure with a system of political-economy finding rising favor with certain elements of the population, Blacks, Women, and those between the ages of 18-34.  Prime candidates to have incurred the negative aspects of inequality of wealth and income during the period of Covid, as well as years prior. 

          Though large numbers of Americans who, when asked about Socialism, still hold a negative view, at the same time many do not know what it truly is; and, do not know that Socialism and Marxism are not quite the same.  Indeed, many do not seem to understand that this nation was formed as a Republic, not as a Democracy.  To begin with, a Democracy is for the mass, not the individual.  The Republic forged by the Founders of this Nation was set to not only govern the mass, but protect the rights of the individual; hence the attendant Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution, our blueprint for elective representative government.  Many voters do not seem to grasp such concepts and hence, do not understand why representative government no longer functions, resulting in a failed state.  To which much of this, of course, is the result of a “managerial aristocracy that quietly determines what we buy and how we vote and what we deem as good or bad.”[2]  

          The state of origin for the concurrent resolution in question, H. CON. RES. 9, was Florida, which in 1861 was one of the eleven mosquito republics to rend union so as to create the short-lived supremacist state known as the Confederacy.  Sponsor of said resolution was Maria Elvira Salazar, a Republican member of Florida House District 27, Miami area.  She is of Cuban descent, whose parents fled Castro’s victory over the American-sponsored satrap of Fulgencio Batista.  Yet, no matter what Fidel Castro was, he accomplished something for Cubans they never would have gotten from the Spanish or Americans, sovereignty.  To be an independent nation.  That said, Cubans should decide the form of government they want in Havana today, not Washington.

* * * * *

          H. CON. RES. 9 or, “Denouncing the Horrors of Socialism,” is not merely an exercise in misinformation, but an egregious distortion of history.  With the ultimate aim of painting Socialism as a doctrine of dictators, autocrats and mass murderers.  A tasteless falsification of events by which the voter must give serious consideration to a subterfuge of the most cunning variety at work here:  That is the deliberate attempt to mislead and confuse an American public who, in many areas of this great land, are beginning to question 21st century America from the perspectives of government, economy, society, . . . and, even its secular religion, Capitalism.  For the excoriation of Socialism as outlined below must be viewed as an unprincipled attempt to manipulate public opinion and therefore, manufacture consent.    

          This effort will approach each of the thirteen points for analysis and rebuttal, . . . 

Point 1:  “Whereas socialist ideology necessitates a concentration of power that has time and time again collapsed into Communist regimes, totalitarian rule and brutal dictatorships.”

          Rebuttal:  The concentration of power is the pursuit of Man.  Ideology, whether secular or religious, is a tool to control the masses.  Indeed, throughout history royalty and religion have proven to be two of the greatest banes of human rights, civil rights and political rights.  The introduction of Catholicism into the Philippines resulted in the massacre of Muslims, desecration of their structures, the taking of their lands. . . .  The Thirty Years War, 1618-1648, saw to the slaughter of five to eight million souls, who sought to rend the center of Europe, owing, in part, to Christian divisiveness between Catholicism and an upstart competitor known as Protestantism.

          Man’s modern secular religion, Capitalism, together with the Industrial Revolution and evolution of invention and technology, conspired to irrevocably change society, culture, government, economy and yes, . . . war.  Levee en Masse, the conscription of entire populations and economies for war, Industrialized War or Total War, which will dominate the period from 1793-1945.

          What is billed as the Civil War in America was actually the Revolt of the Planters, to which it will become the Nation’s first industrialized conflict.  A prelude to what was in store for mankind in 1914, as entire populations and economies will be organized for Total War.  This is the result of Capitalism, not Socialism or Marxism.  Or as Senator Albert Beveridge will observe in 1898, “Today, we are making more than we can use.  Today, our industrial society is congested; there are more workers than there is work; there is more capital than there is investment.  We do not need more money—we need more circulation, more employment.  Therefore we must find new markets for our produce.  And so, while we did not need the territory taken during the past century at the time it was acquired, we do need what we have taken in 1898, and we need it now.

          “For the conflicts of the future are to be conflicts of trade—struggles for markets—commercial wars for existence.  And the Golden Rule of Peace is impregnability of position and invincibility of preparedness.”[3] 

* * * * *

Point 2:  “Whereas socialism has repeatedly led to famine and mass murders, and the killing of over 100,000,000 people worldwide.”

          Rebuttal:  Where has socialism led to such a multitude of deaths?  What is referred to as World War I was a Capitalist conflict.  It was not waged for Democracy, as Woodrow Wilson was fond of stating with regards to his Fourteen Points.  It was waged for money, colonies, politics and power.  Quite frankly, Britain and France did not want the German interloper in the club of imperialist powers and enlisted the help of the United States to remove same.  The Capitalist powers did not want the Bolsheviks remaining in power after the revolution and supported the White Russians against the Reds.  After all, not many died in the 1917 Revolution.  Not so during the Civil War.  Upwards of 5,000,000, mostly peasants died from 1918-1921.  In addition to the fact that newly-minted Poland precipitated the 1919-1921 Russo-Polish War and invaded Ukraine, supported by such Capitalist powers as Britain and France.

          Britain and France, beginning with the infamous Sykes-Picot Agreement planned to carve up the Middle East in expectation of the impending collapse of the Ottoman Empire.  Modern nations such as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan (Transjordan), Palestine (now disappearing as part of Greater Israel) were formed by imperialist powers seeking new Capitalist markets.  Anatolia, too, was occupied by the Greeks, Italians, British and French in a 20th century Crusade so as to Christianize same for strategic and economic advantage.  Kemal Ataturk organized an army and evicted the White Christian colonial intruders in the 1919-1922 Turkish War for Independence.

          Starting in 1927, Stalin began his program of industrializing the Soviet state.  Knowing as he did that Proletarian Revolution would not translate into being a Great Power.  And knowing that the Versailles Treaty was the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on modern man, he engaged in State Capitalism to transform the Soviet state, focusing on heavy industries such as machine tools and tractors.  This was unbridled Capitalism of a centralized variety in action.  Millions of peasants and farmers will be starved as their livestock and grain will be pinched to raise hard currency to expand the factory system.  Yet, beginning in 1942, Soviet industrial production will be one of the biggest secrets for Allied victory in the second chapter of the Great War.  For it will be the Soviet Union which will win the land war, not the United States and the Western Allies.  And the Soviets will do this largely on their own.  Lend-Lease was only 10 to 12 percent of the Soviet effort.  Again, Capitalist funding of Total War, not Socialism.[4]

* * * * *

Point 3:  “Whereas many of the greatest crimes in history were committed by socialist ideologues, including Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, Kim Jong Un, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro.”

          Rebuttal:  The “Murders Row” of suspects rostered in this fallacious recrimination of a rival political-economic system so as to steer potential voters from an intelligent comparison-contrast, also fails to grasp the cataclysmic alteration of the structure of global power that was evolving in 1918-1919.  The victorious Capitalist states, popularly referred as the Allies, chose to rewrite borders[5] and erect new political structures that would conform to the creation of a new balance of power as outlined in the Versailles Treaty; all in the wake of the demise of royal houses that reveled in arrogant power and prestige for centuries but which could not survive in developing era of Industrial/Finance Capitalism.  And with the weakening of the White Christian European control of colonial satraps came the upsurge of Revolutionary Nationalism.[6]

          The co-called Communist Ho Chi Minh was a Revolutionary Nationalist first and foremost.  So was Mao Tse-tung, since the practitioners of Communism formed the only political movement willing to support those seeking to evict the encroaching imperialists.  Joseph Stalin, the Georgian chieftain, will in the end resort to State Capitalism to assure the primacy of his Stalinist state.  

          Fidel Castro will utilize Communism/Socialism to rid Cuba of an American lackey and create a basis of power that will enable his control of the nation, while at the same time insure national sovereignty.  For like the Ba’athist doctrine of Michael Aflaq, Liberty does not necessarily mean the liberty of the individual, as opposed to Liberty from centuries of foreign oppression.[7]

          Vladimir Lenin, a middle class lawyer will help to rid Mother Russia of centuries of the Romanov scourge.  In so doing he will create the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.  Capitalist powers will immediately see the threat to the unacceptability to reactionary convention and attempt to throttle this infant political challenger in the womb.  More than 142 years before, America revolutionaries wielding a political ideal known as Republicanism, were correctly viewed as an emerging threat to the acceptable reactionary convention of government known as Royalty, with its Devine Right of Kings in affiliation with the Roman Catholic Church, another reactionary institution servicing its predatory interests before serving the spiritual well-being of the flock.

          Owing to James Madison’s warnings as to the Nature of Man, that no matter the political persuasion, one must lend credence to the reality, that yesterday’s revolutionaries are tomorrow’s reactionaries.  

* * * * *

            Point 4:  “Whereas tens of millions died in the Bolshevik Revolution, at least 10,000,000 people were sent to the gulags in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), and millions more were starved in the Terror Famine of (Holodomor) in Ukraine.”

          Rebuttal:  The White, Christian, European colonial powers and their Capitalist approach to empire, resorted to human trafficking to impress black Africans into the hellish bondage of slavery in the New World.  For several centuries these unfortunates were consigned first to the wretched Capitalist gulags of Central and South America.  Then in 1619, the practice spread to the North American colonies.  Some 11 to 15 million were forcibly taken in chains across the Atlantic to grow such cash crops as rice, sugar, cotton, tobacco, . . . for the profits of the few.  Millions will die in these agrarian concentration camps, in the diseased-ridden jungles of the Caribbean, Central and South America.

          In the North American colonies followed by the formation of the Republic, America’s slaveocracy enjoyed a sordid longevity of fifteen years beyond the halfway point of the 19th century.  And for those who have forgotten, the American Gulag was open for business many, many, many more years under the Stars and Stripes than under the Stars and Bars.

* * * * *

Point 5:  “Whereas between 15,000,000 and 55,000,000 people starved to death in the wake of famine and devastation caused by the Great Leap Forward in China.”

          Rebuttal:  In addition to the hopeless plight of the Blacks, as outlined in Point 4, there is the Red Man, who faced the encroaching Anglo-Saxon.  Invaders seeking a new life, fame and fortune, new worlds to conquer and resources to turn to profit.  Considered one of the lesser breeds, just like Blacks, the tribes of Native Americans were not only evicted from lands once settled centuries ago, but also faced oppression, hatred, racism and, of course, military defeat at the hands of a technologically advanced foe who was not above resorting to outright extermination to advance his cause of imperium.  Such was, in the end, to advance the cause of Capitalism, not Socialism or Communism.[8]     

Point 6:  “Whereas the socialist experiment in Cambodia led to the killing fields in which over a million people were gruesomely murdered.”

          Rebuttal:  Pol Pot was hardly a Utopian Socialist of the Saint-Simon-Robert Owen-Louis Blanc variety.  He was a brutal dictator with a thirst for unbridled power who was also a client of Peking.  He was Capitalist in his approach towards killing people for merely having savings accounts, knowing full-well that money is power.  Precisely why opportunistic Wall Streeters made sure Middle Class owners of homes saw their primary assets reduced in value 2007-2008; while the balance sheets of America’s Royalty went up, as was evident, too, during Covid.

* * * * *

Point 7:  “Whereas up to 3,500,000 people have starved in North Korea, dividing a land of freedom from a land of destitution.” 

           Rebuttal:  The notion of 3,500,000 people being starved to death due to the socialistic machinations of a Marxist is incorrect.  While Kim Il Sung was a professed Communist, he was also one of that crop of post-1945 Revolutionary Nationalists, which was a wave following the evolving collapse of the empires of the White, Christian Colonial Powers of Europe.  Here in Korea, it is the result of the termination of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere or Japanese Empire.  Note, too, Gamal Abdul Nasser in Egypt, pushing the Pan-Arabist movement.

          But one of the most egregious of actions perpetrated by the two big winners of Man’s greatest industrialized conflict in 1945, was the division of the Korean peninsula.  It is easy to understand the occupation of Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and militarist Japan.  But Korea was not an Axis power; but, had to incur the indignity of occupation by the United States and the Soviet Union.[9]  A distinct violation of the precepts of the Atlantic Charter of August 14, 1941.[10]  

* * * * *

Point 8:  “Whereas the Castro regime in Cuba expropriated the land of Cuban farmers and the businesses of Cuban entrepreneurs, stealing their possessions and their livelihoods, and exiling millions with nothing but the clothes on their backs.”

          Rebuttal:  Precisely the mode of conduct practiced by the United States in Central America in places such as Guatemala and El Salvador, such as through United Fruit and backing the landed gentry and tin-horn dictators so as to maintain American corporate control and consign the indigenous to the hell of bondage in their native lands.

          Whatever else Castro is reputed to be, he bequeathed to the Cuban people something Spain and the United States never intended for them to have, sovereignty and independence from foreign control.  Whether Castro was to remain in power or not should have been the province of the Cuban people, not opportunistic outsiders who have no regard for the plight of the Cuban citizenry.  

           For instance, within the Platt Amendment of 1903, America’s self-interest is quite evident.  Take clause III:  “That the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene for the preservation of Cuban independence, the maintenance of a government adequate for the protection of life, property, and individual liberty, and for discharging the obligations with respect to Cuba imposed by the Treaty of Paris on the United States, now to be assumed and undertaken by the government of Cuba.”

          Clause VI:  “That the Isle of Pines shall be omitted from the proposed constitutional boundaries of Cuba, the title thereto being left to future adjustment by treaty.”

          In addition, with the Treaty of Peace of December 10, 1898 in Paris, Articles II, and III, Spain will turn over sovereignty of Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam to the United States.  Little more than a business deal implemented on the battlefield by a relic of 16th century imperialism turning over its ill-gotten gains to a more virile competitor on the ascendency.  A rising industrial-financial power practicing Capitalism, not Socialism. 

* * * * *

Point 9:  “Whereas the implementation of socialism in Venezuela has turned a once-prosperous nation into a failed state with the world’s highest rate of inflation.”

          Rebuttal:  Venezuela is the product of centuries of manipulation by Spain, the Holy Roman Empire, Britain, the United States. . .   Though having been considered a “Democracy” during its history, Venezuela has been afflicted with a track record of representative government purposely retarded by contending powers—primarily the United States in the modern era, owing to its abundance of oil—for the political, economic and financial agendas of primacy at the grievous expense of the indigenous.  And as long as the United States’ primary foreign policy objectives are maintaining the Dollar as the globe’s reserve currency and the control of resources, Venezuela will continue to be a target for subversion by the United States. 

          175 years ago, Marx and Engels observed, “The bourgeoisie, by rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of production, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization.  The cheap prices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate.  It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production; it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves.  In one word, it creates a world after its own image.”  See pages 39 and 40, “1. Bourgeoisie and Proletarians,” The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. 

* * * * *

Point 10:  “Whereas the author of the Declaration of Independence, President Thomas Jefferson, wrote, ‘To take from one, because it is the thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.’”

          Rebuttal:  That America was founded on liberty, freedom and democracy is a bedtime story for children put forth by those who have little understanding of the Founding the Republic, not a Democracy.  America was founded on Economic Liberty, Private Property.  Recall, at the outset, if you did not own land, you could not vote.  Recall John Jay, “Those who own the country, ought to run it.”  That is property owners.  But being the Founders, in part, were disciples of such types as John Locke, Baron de Montesquieu, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and St. John Bolingbroke, ownership of land, knowing full well that too much land in too few hands leads to autocratic power.  Note John Adams:  “Power always follows property.  Men in general, in every society, who are wholly destitute of property, are too little acquainted with public affairs for a right judgement, and too dependent upon other men to have a will of their own [such is religion, which for many who seem to need same, cannot seem to think for themselves; bracketed narrative belongs to editor].They talk and they vote as they are directed by some men of property, who attached their minds to his interest.”[11]

         Economic Liberty, then, is the antithesis of Marxism.  For as outlined by Marx and Engels, “The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolishment of Bourgeois property.  But modern Bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.

          “In this sense, the theory of Communism may be summed up in the single sentence, Abolition of Private Property.”[12]    

         Yet as an apologist for the Republic [which no longer exists], admittedly the American quest to establish a Republic, or known later as Manifest Destiny, was actually a contiguous empire, forged as it was by the outright removal of the indigenous, on whose labors forged many nations in an effort to exist upon this wondrous land.  And unlike the Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, British, French. . . , Americans did not claim each new parcel by dropping a flag and claiming same for their monarch; no, these were people charting a new course for themselves by taking land, while at the same time, building a new nation.  In this the White Man won, the Red Man lost.  For in almost every human endeavor of consequence, someone wins and someone loses.  It is an essence of Man.  Weak die, strong survive.  Also the primary objective of, . . .  Capitalism.

* * * * *

Point 11:  “Whereas the “Father of the Constitution,” President James Madison, wrote that it ‘is not government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest.” 

          Rebuttal:  Just like the secret of Henry Kissenger is the Congress of Vienna 1815 and the resulting post-Napoleonic Balance of Power of Europe, the essence of Madison is his understanding of the Nature of Man.  “But the great security against the gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist encroachments of the others.  The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made to counteract ambition.  The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.  It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.  But . . . 

          “. . . what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?  If men were angels, no government would be necessary.  If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.  In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:  You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.  A dependence on the people is no doubt the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”[13]  Giving way, of course, to Point 12.

* * * * *

Point 12:  “Whereas the United States of America was founded on the belief in the sanctity of the individual, to which the collectivistic of socialism in all its forms is fundamentally and necessarily opposed . . . “

          Rebuttal:  The United States Constitution was not merely put in place to govern the masses, but govern the government, owing to Madison’s concerns of the Nature of Man.  For instance, the prophylactic of an undisciplined chief executive taking this Nation to war against the wishes of the people is found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, providing Congress with the power to declare war, since members of the Chamber of the People’s Deputies are elected by those people.  Yet today, owing to a corporate-controlled America, such is no longer the case.  Barak Obama, reputed to be a constitutional lawyer, violated not only the United States Constitution, but the War Powers Act with the involvement of the United States, together with the Europeans, in the removal of Muamar Qaddafi from Libya.  Just one of many singular examples of America as a rogue state.

          The attendant Bill of Rights is that roster of protections provided for the individual to shield same from the uninvited encroachments of government.  But same has been prostituted in the reduction of constitutionally ordained government which exists in form only and not in substance.

          To which, on to Point 13. . . 

* * * * *

Point 13:  “Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), that Congress denounces socialism in all its forms, and opposed the implementation of socialist policies in the United States of America.”

          Rebuttal:  . . . The opposition to Socialism “in all its forms” and “the implementation of socialist policies in the United States” would most certainly have to include the reality that is ever tightening its grip on the American political economy; that of, Corporate Socialism.  Same has accelerated with such developments as the demise of the Class-Steagall Act by which Clinton helped to turn the American financial structure into a mega-ATM for his benefactors, America’s Tinseled-Aristocrats.  The “mortgage” crisis of 2007-2008.  Citizens United by which America’s Royalty could pour ever increasing amounts of money into elections.  And, of course, the exorbitant tax breaks for the privileged set which amounts to undeserved income by which they can control the markets and hide their ill-gotten gains overseas so as to avoid taxation.  Leaving a shriveling Middle Class, Working Class and Poor to shoulder a greater load of funding government, while those same Tinsled Aristocrats buy control of a government they intend to privatize at the grievous expense of the masses.

          The origins of this kind of Socialism is certainly not Marxist or from the Utopians.  John D. Rockefeller thought that he and his class of so-called “Robber Barons” would never be able to make the profits they sought with Free Market Capitalism; rather, pressure state legislators to appoint senators who would pass legislation enabling the then America’s Royalty to fashion the economy in their favor, creating a Corporate Socialist State.[14]

          October 1922, Benito Mussolini assembled a Corporate Socialist State with his Corporate Fascist State.  Consult Il Duce’s Charter of Labor, April 21, 1927.  “VI: . . . Corporations constitute the unitary organization of all the forces of production and integrally represent their interests.

          “As representing the unitary interests of production, corporations may enforce binding regulations for the discipline of labor relations as well as for the co-ordination of production, whenever they are empowered to do so by the affiliated association.[15]

          “VII:  The Corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and useful instrument of the nation.”

          The above was bolstered by the “Fascist Doctrine as Presented by Mussolini, June 1932.”   According to Il Duce, Fascism is, “ . . . Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State . . . And if liberty is to be the attribute of living men and not of abstract dummies invented by individualistic liberalism, then Fascism stands for liberty, and the only liberty worth having, the liberty of the State . . . The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing, outside of it no human or spiritual values exist, much less have value.  Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State—a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values—interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people.

          “Fascism is likewise opposed to trade-unionism as a class weapon.  But when brought within the orbit of the State, Fascism recognizes the real needs which give rise to socialism and trade-unionism, giving them due weight in the guild or corporative system in which divergent interests are coordinated and harmonized in the unity of the State.”[16]

          Hitler followed this model when he abolished unions in Germany, May 2, 1933.[17]  America’s Royalty buying up Democrats and Republicans, enlisting the blueprint of the Lewis Powell Memo (Manifesto of American Fascism) of August 1971, took a more proactive role in attacking unionism, off-shoring jobs and with undeserved tax breaks which amount to unearned wealth, not only gained control of the economy, but bought the government.  Over this period of time, for example, the Middle Class has declined from 61% of the population to less than 50%.  While at the same time, corporate profits and the ill-gotten gains of the privileged has created an economic imbalance which has been the result of the American Corporate Fascist State.  For decades, America has conformed to the basic structure of Mussolini’s blueprint for a Corporate Fascist State.  Which for the privileged few in this nation has resulted in, Corporate Socialism, giving rise to the true essence of America:  Making Society Work For the Few.  

* * * * *


[1]  “Matters affecting the operations either in the House of Representatives or in the Senate are usually initiated by means of concurrent resolutions.  A concurrent resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ‘H. Con. Res.’ followed by its individual number.  On approval by both the House of Representatives and Senate, they are signed by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate.  They are not presented to the President for action.”

          The above differs from a Joint Resolution, which “may originate either in the House of Representatives or in the Senate.  There is little practical difference between a bill and a joint resolution.  Both are subject to the same procedure, except for a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution.  On approval of such a resolution by two-thirds of both the House and Senate, it is sent directly to the Administrator of General Services for submission to the individual states for ratification.  It is not presented to the President for approval.  A joint resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ‘H.J. Res,’ followed by its individual number.  Joint resolutions become law in the same manner as bills.”

          See page 1, “Concurrent Resolutions,” Bills and Resolutions:  Forms of Congressional Action, United States House of Representatives, www.house.gov/…/bills-resolutions

[2]  “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in a democratic society.  Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.

          “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.  This is the logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized.  Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.”  See page 37, Chapter 1,”Organizing Chaos,” Propaganda, by Edward Bernays.

          Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud and the man most responsible in this nation for inventing modern American Consumerism, just explained to the reader how the modern democratic society is for the mass and not for the individual.    

[3]  Beveridge, Albert J., “March of the Flag,” 16 September 1898, National Humanities Center, nationalhumanitiescenter.org/…/empire/text5/beveridge.pdf

[4]  To provide the reader an example, in 1942, Hitler’s Nazi Germany produced 5,997 tanks and assault guns (see page 212, Appendix 4, 1939-1945, German Tanks of World War II, by F.M. von Senger und Etterlin, which indeed, is a bible of German armor); while the Soviets, without Allied assistance produced 24,668 tanks and assault guns (see page 180, Soviet AFV Production, Russian Tanks, 1900-1970, by John Milsom, indeed a bible of Soviet armor).  Indeed, Chelyabinsk in the Urals was the globe’s greatest tank-producing combine, not Detroit.

          It must be added here, that of the 24,668 tanks produced by the Soviets in 1942, some 13,500 were the superlative T-34, the best tank produced by any Allied power during the war, bar none.  And the T-34 will be the most produced tank of the conflict, at the 54,550 copies.  Second place, the M4 Sherman, 49,234 machines; which when compared to the T-34, was little better than a Purple Hart box; or, as the British nicknamed it, the Ronson Lighter.”  

[5]  “State borders are made by man and changed by man.”  See page 653, Vol. II, The National Socialist Movement, Chapter XIV, “Eastern Orientation of Eastern Policy,“ Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler.

[6]  “After the 6 January 1946 elections of the DRV’s (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) first Provisional Coalition Government, I was approached by Abbot Low Moffat who headed the Division of Southeast Asian Affairs at State (U.S. State Department).  He asked me for background information on Ho Chi Minh, and I provided him with what we had.  It was extensive, particularly his career, in the Comintern and his association with the Chinese Communist Party.  But, above all, I emphasized Ho’s nationalist character—that of a Vietnamese patriot first and communist second.  I noted that on several occasions he had voiced to me his disappointment with both the Soviet government and the communists of the world for not lending his cause for independence even moral support.  Only the United States, albeit in vague terms, had spoken out for self-determination, and Ho had responded by dissolving the Indochinese Communist Party (11 November 1945).

          Indeed, . . . 

          “From mid-November 1945 to March 1946 copies of several telegrams and letters from Ho Chi Minh to the President, the Secretary of State, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and the United Nations reached my desk.  They were earnest appeals for intervention in Viet Nam on the basis of the principles embodied in the Atlantic Charter and on the humanitarian grounds.  In the main they asked for political support in the Vietnamese quest for independence, citing the example of the United States in the Philippines and expressing hope that the French would follow the American example.  I inquired at State if letters and telegrams were being acknowledged or at least being seriously considered by anyone in authority and was told that the DRV ‘government’ was not recognized by the United States and that it would be ‘improper’ for the President or anyone in authority to acknowledge such correspondence.  Further, the United States was ‘committed’ to look to the French rather than to the Vietnamese nationalists for constructive steps towards Vietnamese independence.”  See pages 380 and 381, Chapter 36, “America’s Albatross,” Why Viet Nam?  Prelude to America’s Albatross, by Archimedes L.A. Patti.  The author was head of the OSS—Indochina Mission, 1945.  And his petitions for the U.S to at least consider opening relations with Ho and the nationalists were rebuffed.

[7] Ba’athism was the brainchild of Michael Aflaq, together with Salah al-Din Bitar and Zaki al Arsuzi.  A secular movement of the Pan-Arabist variety, Ba’athism was the result of consulting such Western persuasions as Fascism, Marxism and Socialism.  Motto:  Unity, Liberty and Socialism.  Unity for all Arabs into a single nation.  Socialism for Arabs solely.  Liberty from colonial oppression, as opposed to the liberty of the individual.  Another political agenda along the lines of Georg Hegel, “people are second to the state.”   

[8]  The superiority of the Anglo-Saxon was put forth by Josiah Strong, Pastor of the Central Congregational Church, Cincinnati, Ohio.  His book, which became popular, Our Country, was published in 1885, to which this writer has a first edition copy.  

          Reverend Strong wrote of the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon thus:  “. . . another marked characteristic of the Anglo-Saxon is what may be called an instinct or genius for colonizing.  His unequaled energy, his indomitable perseverance, and his personal independence, made him a pioneer.  He excels in pushing his way into new countries.  It was those in whom this tendency was strongest that came to America, and this inherited tendency has been further developed by the westward sweep of successive generations across the continent.

          “Again, nothing more manifestly distinguishes the Anglo-Saxon than his intense and persistent energy. . . 

          “The time is coming when the pressure of population on the means of subsistence will be felt here as it is now felt in Europe and Asia.  Then the world will enter a new stage of its history—the final competition of races, for which the Anglo-Saxon is being schooled.  Long before the thousand millions are here, the mighty centrifugal tendency, inherent in this stock and strengthened in the United States, will assert itself.  Then this race of unequalled energy, with all the majesty of numbers and might of wealth behind it—the representative, let us hope, of the largest liberty, the purest Christianity, the highest civilization—having developed peculiarly aggressive traits calculated to impress its institutions upon mankind, will spread itself across the earth.  If I read no amiss, this powerful race will move down upon Mexico, down upon Central and South America, out upon the islands of the sea, over upon Africa and beyond.  And can anyone doubt that the result of this competition of races will be the ‘survival’ of the fittest?’ . . . Nothing can save the inferior race, but a ready and pliant assimilation.  Whether the feebler and more abject races are going to be regenerated and raised up, is already very much of a question.  What if it should be God’s plan to people the world with better and finer material?”  See pages 173 and 175, Chapter VIII, “The Anglo-Saxon and the World’s Future,” Our Country, by Josiah Strong. 

[9]  “. . . whoever occupies a territory also imposes on it his own social system.  Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach.  It cannot be otherwise.”  See page 114, II, “Doubts,” Conversations With Stalin, by Milovan Djilas.

          Stalin’s words resonate with the utmost degree of truthfulness.  For war is Man’s greatest locomotive of change.  Or as Georg Hegel inferred, “War is change, Peace is stagnation.”  The United States, together with the Soviet Union, trampled the sovereignty of Koreans to create a situation that has led to the division of a people and has created a situation that could result in the most dire of consequences.   

[10]  The division of Korea by Washington and Moscow, voided the following precepts of the Atlantic Charter:

          1.  Their countries (Meaning the United States and Britain; however, with regards to the Korean situation, the opportunistic powers here are the United States and the Soviet Union.) seek no aggrandizement, territorial of other. . . 

          2.  They desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned.

          3.  They respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self-government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them.

          4.  They will endeavor, with due respect of their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all States, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity.

          The Soviet Union did not conjure this document with the United States, Great Britain did.  But the United States will willingly join with the Soviet Union in dividing a people and robbing them of their sovereignty and violating their territorial integrity.  A process repeated in the postwar world ad nauseam, including Ukraine today.  

[11]  See page 52, “Three,” Inventing a Nation:  Washington, Adams, Jefferson, by Gore Vidal.

[12]  See page 52, II.  “Proletarians and Communists,” The Communist Manifesto, by Karl Marx and Friedreich Engels.

          With Marx and Engels, land would be commonly owned so as to create the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.  John Adams professed the wide ownership of land as conducive to a functioning system of representative government.  Both seemed to have viewed a collective control of land as a prophylactic to dominance by the Haves over the Have Nots.

[13]  See page 349, “The Federalist No. 51,” The Federalist, by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay.

[14]  With the founding of the American Republic, people could not vote for their senators directly.  Senators were applied by those the people voted for to represent their interests in their state capitals.  Note Article I, Section 3, of the United States Constitution:  “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislators thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.”

          The machinations of the early practitioners of Corporate Socialism will incur a setback with Amendment XVII to the Constitution, ratified 1913, enabling citizens to vote for their senators.

[15]  See pages 131 and 132, “Document No. 14:  ‘Charter of Labor, April 21, 1927,’” Mussolini and Italian Fascism, by S. William Halperin.

[16]  See pages 146 and 147, “Document No. 18:  ‘Fascist Doctrine as Presented Officially by Mussolini, June 1932,’” Mussolini and Italian Fascism, by S. William Halperin.

[17]  See pages 330 and 331, Chapter 16, “Nazism and the Working Class:  ii, The destruction of the Trade Unions,” Nazism, Vol. 1, J. Noakes and G. Pridham, Editors.   


Andrews, Wayne, Editor, Concise Dictionary of American History, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1962.  Originally published, 1940.

“Atlantic Charter,” Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs, State Historical Society of Iowa, iowaculture.gov/…/world-war-ii/atlantic-charter 

Bernays, Edward, Propaganda, IG Publishing, Brooklyn, NY., 2005.  Originally published, 1928.

“Concurrent Resolutions,” Bills and Resolutions:  Forms of Congressional Action, United States House of Representatives, www.house.gov/…/bills-resolutions 

Djilas, Milovan, Conversations With Stalin, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., New York, 1962.

Ford, Roger, The Sherman Tank, MBI Publishing Company, Osceola, Wisconsin, 1999.

Great Books of the Western World:  The Philosophy of Right, and, The Philosophy of History, by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, The University of Chicago, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, London, Toronto, Geneva, Sydney, Tokyo, Manila, 1978.  Originally published, 1952.

Halperin, S. William, Mussolini and Italian Fascism, D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., Princeton, New Jersey, 1964.

Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James and Jay, John, The Federalist, edited by Jacob E. Cooke, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, Connecticut, 1961.

Hitler, Adolf, Mein Kampf, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Mass., 1943.  Originally published by VERLAG FRZ, EHER NACHF, G.M.B.H., 1925.

Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich, introduction by Eric Hobsbawm, Verso, London and New York, 1998.  First published as The Manifesto of the Communist Party, 1848. 

Milsom, John, Russian Tanks 1900-1970, Galahad Books, New York, NY., 1970.

Payne, Robert, The Life and Death of Lenin, Simon and Schuster, Inc., New York 20, NY., 1964.

Noakes, J and Pridham, G., Editors, Vol. 1, Nazism:  A History of Documents and Eyewitness Accounts, 1919-1945, Schocken Books, New York, 1983.

Patti, Archimedes L.A., Why Vietnam?  Prelude to America’s Albatross, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1980.

Robinson, Kirk War and Eaton, Christopher, Founding Character:  The Words & Documents That Forged a Nation, Roan Adler Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 2003.

Strong, Josiah, Our Country:  Its Possible Future and its Present Crisis, The American Missionary Society, Bible House, Astor Place, New York, 1885.

Vidal, Gore, Inventing a Nation:  Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Yale University Press, New Haven & London, 2003.
Von Senger und Etterlin, F.M., German Tanks of World War II, The Complete Illustrated Historyof German Armoured Fighting Vehicles, 1926-1945, Lionel Leventhal Ltd, Munich, Germany, 1969.

Posted in

Mark Albertson

Recent Posts