Ex-President Clinton and George Bush Jr. both define their policy objectives as communitarian (Galston 1991; D'Antonio 1994; Milbank 2001; Allen 2002), yet only recently have Americans begun to study the communitarian platform as the predetermined synthesis to the Marxist's left-versus-right conflict of ideals (American Patriots 2001; Ball 2000; Iserbyt 2001; Worts 1999; Austin-Fitts 2001).

What is communitarianism?

The obscure term communitarian was introduced into the "upper reaches of Anglo-American academia" in the 1970s (Bell 2001), but it is our "thesis" that communitarianism was actually created at the same time Marx and Engels drafted their anti-thesis to capitalism. We are convinced that philosophical communitarianism is the synthesis in the capitalism-versus-communism dialectical conflict. We are even more convinced that constant, ongoing political conflicts are not at all "natural," and that the communitarian solution is based entirely in a false ideology perpetrated by globalists with less than noble objectives.

Communitarians teach that all free American neighborhoods should be governed like Chinese-Soviet community collectives (Etzioni 1992). They supported "reinventing" the U.S. government in the early 1990s (Gore 1993) and excluded almost all Americans from the process. There was no open debate nor was there ever a public, national vote to modify the constitution of the United States. But now, in 2003, communitarian based global laws and sustainable development programs have been implemented in every State in the Union (Traub 2002).

The misunderstood communitarian philosophy is designed to define the "common good," even though the U.S. Bill of Rights was specifically designed to "protect and maintain individual rights." They insist a "rights" based society can only exist if it is balanced with communitarian perspectives. They believe mandatory volunteerism in the community is the moral responsibility of all modern democratic citizens. Their leader helped establish federal citizen-volunteer programs (Americorps), even though recently he's backed down on the harsher elements of their platform, and now he says spying, reporting, and citizen-police interventions on suspicious neighbors (TIPS) are not necessary to maintain Americans' freedom (Etzioni 2003).

Communitarians study hundreds of reports of "polled" Americans who are asked whether they will "give up" liberty to "fight terrorism" and then present their conclusions as if the whole process wasn't contrived to achieve the desired responses. Mainstream media presents the communitarians' confusing either-or scenarios to unaware Americans who answer as if the questions are valid. While they never poll Americans and ask them if they want to give up their free national system for totalitarian Marxism, they continuously challenge American's foundations for property and privacy rights in academic arenas few average Americans are ever exposed to (Etzioni 1998).

Communitarians call the U.S. national system of political and economic freedom, and especially individual liberty, "outdated" (Etzioni 1968). They claim a global perspective is necessary to ensure Americans' peace and safety, and they always present their philosophy as if it is a "fresh perspective." They emphasize they seek innovative ways to "balance" the ongoing "tension" between Americans' individual liberty and social responsibility. They preach as if their platform is more "moral" than the original American political system of liberty, freedom and equal justice for all under an agreed upon system of protective laws. They sing a soft lullaby for the American ideal of national prosperity and lure American politicans into relinquishing national sovereignty to a modified, "softer" international Marxist system, often called the Third Way (Etzioni 2000, Blair 1993).

This paper attempts to debunk the historical premise for the 21st century communitarian platform. We think their platform will eliminate the freedom and liberty required under fixed and permanent U.S. law. Communitarians would replace State Constitutions and The Bill of Rights with a confusing set of moral standards only they understand. They never planned on telling Americans what they're really doing because their Fabian roots are based on propaganda and lies. They'll never outright explain their platform because the communitarian agenda rests upon the same principles and objectives that established communism. It's also based in the dialectical theory of "natural, holistic social evolution."

The open goal of the global Marxists was always to create world chaos to bring about their desired changes. We show evidence here for the purpose, the planning, and a brief chronological history of world chaos induced by the people who designed the original conflicts. In our conclusion we verify some of the ways the world was led into the many constant conflicts that brought on the final dialectical communitarian synthesis.

Manifesting a communitarian game plan

The enlightened American idea of liberty and justice for all was met with fierce global and internal opposition from its very inception (Chaitkin 1985). The American colonials rebelled against total British control over local production and trade. The colonials wanted to manufacture their own goods and services, and many sought to advance their homegrown industries. In the 18th century the British Empire was a global government monopoly over all goods and trade, and colonials were required to purchase necessary commodities from the Mother country, often to the detriment of their home regions.

Many Americans just wanted to support themselves and control their own lives. They sought "permission" to produce their own goods and to grow and prosper according to the level of their ambitions and needs, within a system of municipal laws. Their "Mother" repeatedly denied the American's requests to be treated fairly, as equals. Raised far away from the Imperial Court, many Americans believed men should be free to grow and prosper according to their efforts and not their social status. Hardworking colonials didn't want to be held back by unfair, unfavorable Imperial policies that stunted their ability to increase their standard of living. This basic and logical Common Sense was the inspiration for the armed colonial rebellion against involuntary servitude to globalist masters (Paine 1776).

The colonial American Revolution was the first successful nationalist rebellion against the formidable power of the dominant British Empire, and the American's victory sent a dire message to every imperial government in the world.

The American colonial revolution was founded in the logical principles set forth by the 17th century English philosopher John Locke. He is called the "intellectual father" of our country. Locke defined property rights as a fundamental liberty under a legitimate government. Locke established the principles used by the Americans because "The human right in property was meant by Locke and understood by the Framers of the Constitution to be the fundamental liberty" (Stephens 2003). The Constitutional Rights Foundation explains what Locke meant by property: "By 'property,' Locke meant more than land and goods that could be sold, given away, or even confiscated by the government under certain circumstances. Property also referred to ownership of one's self, which included a right to personal well being. Jefferson, however, substituted the phrase, "pursuit of happiness," which Locke and others had used to describe freedom of opportunity as well as the duty to help those in want" (crf-usa.org). In 1776, Thomas Jefferson rewrote the American's Declaration of Independence, partially by default, because everyone else in Congress was too busy dealing with the escalating war.

Is it not altogether surprising to see how quickly the global imperialist writers began their pattern of attacks on the logical principles for which the Americans so bravely fought (Smith 1776; Kant 1781; Burke 1790; Hegel 1812; Engels 1841; Darwin 1861; Morgan 1877). British rewrites call the American Revolution a minor British "civil war." British academic mockery and British defamation of America's founders continues into the present day (Bicheno 2003). Today, the books written on the many varied causes for the American Revolution fill libraries (for example see: Historical Resources Branch, US Army Center for Military History 1996).

In 1847 the London Communist League's primary goal was to "abolish private property," and in 1848 the Communist Manifesto established the modern rules for the "constant conflict" between European property holders versus landless workers, peasants, and serfs (Marx 1848). The primary flaw in Marx's logical equation is the premise itself; the economic theory of aristocratic corporate capitalism (Webster 1877) Marx referred to in Dialectical Materialism [1] was never the political economy of American free men (Lloyd 1885).

The revised Marxist history of pre-revolutionary American colonial capitalism changed the American's formula for economic freedom around so that it appears to be identical to the history of Imperial colonial economics, slavery, and servitude (Weinberg 2002). In his Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, Oxford-educated Marxist Charles Beard (1913) led the movement of American intellectuals who rewrote American history to correspond to Marxist economic theory.

Exploitation of the masses was not every American founder's ideology (West 1997). American revolutionaries fought against the Imperialist global financial scheme (Paine 1792) and, upon winning the War for American Independence, they laid the foundations for a limited government that would enable future free born American men to control their own destinies as independents, rather than as subjects to the Imperial British crown.

The United States Articles of Confederation formed a small government designed to protect the property and prosperity of the individual states. The individual state citizens protected under the new arrangement included American commoners and the educated wealthy, equally. Not only a war of independence over land rights and local access to a responsive, representative government, it was also a war against global imperialism and the aristocratic "free trade" policies and nepotism governing the British Colonies (Globe and Mail.com 2003).

Post-Revolutionary Policies & Determining the Principles of Self-Governance

In 1787, less than six years after the Imperialist Cornwallis surrendered to Patriot General George Washington, the loose federation of young states was unable to raise taxes to pay for its war debts, and Shay's Rebellion exemplified the education the war had provided to average American citizens who continued to defend themselves from unrepresentative government taxation. Armed rebellions against state legislatures dominated by wealthy land owners had already begun. For the many wealthy founders with quasi-imperialist tendencies, coupled with the legitimate concerns of the unprotected producers, it became necessary to establish a stronger, central, federal government. Imperialist designs to the constitution are most often examined by International Socialists (Zirin 2001; Zinn 1980).

The proposed U.S. Constitution produced heated debates over protecting and expanding the personal and economic rights of the individuals living in the free states. For many of the Constitutional framers, the Bill of Rights was an unnecessary inclusion in a people's government (National Government Archives 2003). The first Ten Amendments agreed upon in 1789 were not included in the 1787 draft U.S. Constitution.

It is possible that the entire constitutional crisis was a power-game between high powered men who sought controlling interest in the newborn country. There is such an abundance of written history regarding the formation of a strong central government in the United States that it requires years of reading to form even a rudimentary understanding of the many conflicts involved. For this paper I will only briefly examine the main conflict. But it is interesting for our purposes to note that the Hamilton branch wanted strong trade relations with the British and the Jefferson branch supported "many of the ideals of the French Revolution (infoplease.com)."

Internal debates over the formulation of the new government were a major force in determining U.S. federal policies (Hamilton; Madison; Jefferson 1791 ). Controlling money, creating and issuing currency, and establishing a federal bank were all central themes to the debates surrounding the Constitutional Convention of 1787. First U.S. President Washington not only turned down offers from his officers to make him a king (Parry) he also appointed opposition leaders from both sides (Jefferson and Hamilton) to key positions in his cabinet because of his belief in including reasonable discourse in decisions made over future public policy (National Center for Constitutional Studies).

The American System of Economics

Alexander Hamilton argued for creating a strong federal government with a national banking system controlled by the U.S. (Federalist Papers). A national bank was to provide loans to American industrialists, farmers, and inventors, as well as provide capital investments to build the infrastructure necessary to move goods to markets (canals, roads, railways, etc). His arguments prevailed, and Hamilton's economic theory was the original political economy of the new American republic (Trask 2003).

The creation of a National Bank was considered by the Federalists to be the only sure way to protect the weak U.S. from the European imperialist's powerful financial network. Thomas Jefferson saw Hamilton's plans as an avenue to draw the U.S. into monarchial systems. The first Bank of the United States was founded in 1791, and it was authorized by the newly established Constitution to implement institutions and coin money (Findlaw: U.S. Constitution Article One, Cases and Codes). The National Bank continues to be a topic of national discussion but much of it is discounted by conspiracy experts (Rough 1997).

In response to public opinion about President Adams' lack of action in regards to (Jacobin?)-French activities in the U.S., The Alien and Sedition Act was approved July 14, 1798 (Yale Law Avalon Project-U.S. Statutes), making sedition a crime. It also became illegal to openly criticize the U.S. government. Vice-president Thomas Jefferson secretly drafted state legislation to overturn the Acts (Jefferson Timeline).

Thomas Jefferson is credited with creating the first democratic party, (contrary to Washington's warning that parties would ultimately destroy the country), commonly referred to as Jeffersonian Democracy. The Jefferson Democrats were "based in large part on faith in the virtue and ability of the common man and the limitation of the powers of the federal government (infoplease.com)." Early supporters were most influential Southern politicians, Aaron Burr, James Madison, and Albert Gallatin. "Albert Gallatin came of an old and noble family... Thomas Jefferson believed the Sedition Bill was framed to drive Gallatin from office. However, as soon as Jefferson was elected President, early in 1801, he tendered Gallatin the post of Secretary of the Treasury" (U.S. Treasury Department Archives).

U.S. Treasury's website explains to us how Gallatin's "love of independence" was the reason he fled his homeland to seek freedom in America, and forgets to add anything about his family ties to established Swiss banking and imperialist financial institutions (Chaitkin 1985). U.S. Treasury's official "history" doesn't explain how Gallatin became educated in government's "fiscal operations" either, but other sources tell us he "was reared by his patrician relatives and had an excellent education," adding, "Greatly interested in the Native Americans, Gallatin wrote papers on them and was responsible for founding the American Ethnological Society in 1842" (1UpInfo-Enclycopedia).

Ethnology is: "a science that deals with the division of human beings into races and their origin, distribution, relations, and characteristics" (Merriam Webster.com 1928). The science of ethnology is directly connected to the science of eugenics (Winston 2002).

In 1804 Jefferson's Vice-President Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. He was charged with murder but never prosecuted. Aaron Burr was indicted and acquitted in 1807 for his role in a foiled British coup against the government of the United States (Buckner 2001) The details about his close family ties to other identified traitors in the plot are played down in most American histories (Chaitkin 1985).

Throughout the first decade of the 19th century, the British Navy seized 1000 U.S. ships and kidnapped 10,000 American sailors.

In 1812, Americans fought the British a second time because British Navy kidnappings and British-Indian terrorism continued unabated. Contemporary historians tell us the War was instigated and pressed upon President Madison by War Hawks in Congress (Calhoun, Clay, Porter, Langdon, and Cheves) who insisted on defending America's "honor." The Hartford Convention of 1814 was drafted by a small minority of New England Federalists, and its authors were accused of being secessionists. This was the beginning of the period introducing Sectionalism. In 1816 Henry Clay was the formost proponent of the American System and instrumental in the Tariff Act of 1816 (AP US 2003).

By 1825, Imperial colonies across the globe were copying the Americans and declaring themselves independent from Imperialist rulers (Blackwell 1998). Imperial monarchs appealed to the United States for support in suppressing nationalist revolutions. U.S. President James Monroe reiterated President George Washington's foreign policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of foreign nations (Washington's Farewell Address 1797). Monroe was firm in upholding U.S. opposition to the creation of new Imperial colonies and he said the U.S. would recognize national revolutions proven to come directly from the rebellious nation's people (Monroe's' Speech to U.S. Congress 1824). (The eventual understanding of what became known as The Monroe Doctrine was not what Monroe originally said nor intended).

Many of the founding fathers were members of American Free and Accepted Freemasonry but after a freemason dissapeared in 1826 who had threatened public exposure of masonry secrets, masonry was targeted as a bad thing. (Thomas Paine also wrote a pamphlet about the origins of freemasonry, published after his death.) The 1830's witnessed the formation of an American Anti-Masonic party, which incidentally helped defeat Henry Clay and elect President Andrew Jackson, who was a Freemason (Groiler Encyclopedia 2000). There were originally two branches of freemasonry in the U.S.; the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry survives to this day while the American version complied with the anti-masonic public sentiment and mostly disbanded (Chaitkin 1985). Today freemasonry and communism are both absolutely taboo political topics; speaking about the communists or the freemasons, as if they really exist, will get the writer condemmed as a conspiracy theorist (Hofstadter 1964).

The Anti-thesis is introduced into world affairs

In the 1830s there began a mass immigration from Germany and Ireland into the United States. Both areas, like most of the world at that time, suffered under British Free Trade mandates and a globalized aristocratic system of governance (Shi 2003). Aristocrats held property in the highest esteem and they often named their successors after their LAND, it's what "titled" means. The current ruling European families all date back to the 12th century, and their holdings and their inter-related bloodlines remain mostly intact. Many immigrants settled in New York City. Their poor living conditions in the wealthy landowners' ghettos (Chaitkin 1985) and the lack of sanitary services set up the dialectic used most often on the world's poor, by providing a "good" reason to allow Darwinian eugenicists to teach population control and basic public hygiene to landless people forced into living with the most unsanitary conditions (Trachtenberg 2000).

Early U.S. policy protected the small producers of raw materials and goods, and according to the U.S. Treasury Department, "The 1830s was a period of general prosperity and by 1834 had paid off the national debt."

From 1816 to 1846 there existed a "thirty year tariff war" between agriculture and commerce versus manufacturing. The pro-tariff Americans wanted to ensure protection of American cottage industries against cheap foreign imports, the anti-tariff Americans wanted access to the cheapest goods available regardless of where they came from. In Volume III of The Great Republic by the Master Historians editor Hubert H. Bancroft tells us about the financial panic of 1837:

"When Jackson became President, in 1829, he very quickly manifested an enmity to the National Bank, which he declared to be corrupt, dangerous, and unconstitutional. His first hostile measure was to remove from it the government deposits, which he distributed among the State banks. This measure produced a storm of opposition, greatly disturbed the conditions of business, and caused general distress in the industrial community. But Jackson was unyieldingly obstinate in his opinions, and his hostility to the bank was next displayed in a veto of the bill to renew its charter, which would expire on March 3, 1836. The State banks took advantage of this condition of affairs to expand greatly their discounts, new banks came rapidly into existence, and the banking facilities were enormously increased, the discounts augmenting from $200,000,000 in 1830 to $525,000,000 eight years afterwards."

Bancroft continues:

"A series of wild speculations attended this expansion: foreign goods were heavily imported, and enormous operations took place in government lands, in payment for which paper money poured profusely into the treasury. Such was the state of affairs at midsummer of 1836. To check these operations a "specie circular" was issued by the Secretary of the Treasury, which required payment for government lands to be made in gold and silver after August 15, 1836. The effect of this series of executive actions, and of the fever of speculation which existed, was disastrous. The species which was expected to flow into the treasury in payment for public lands failed to appear. The banks refused discount and called in their loans. Property was everywhere sacrificed, and prices generally declined. Then, like an avalanche suddenly talling upon the land, came the business crash and panic of 1837, which caused the financial ruin of thousands. During the first three weeks of April two hundred and fifty business houses failed in New York. Within two months the failures in that city alone aggregated nearly one hundred millions of dollars. Throughout the whole country the mercantile interests went down with a general crash, involving the mechanic, the farmer even the humblest laborer, in the ruinous consequences of the disaster. Bankruptcy everywhere prevailed, forced sacrifice for valuable merchandise was the order of the day, on less than eight of the States partially or wholly failed, even the general government could not pay its debts, trade stood still, business confidence vanished, and ruin stalked unchecked over the land. " [emphasis added]

To complicate matters even further, open immigration throughout the 1830s gained fresh voters in New York's intense local political struggles and "movements." The policy of importing the world's poor was apparently used more than once in American history in order to "balance" the national vote (as is witnessed in the mass immigration of Eastern European Jews and socialists beginning in the 1890s).

Unable to defeat the U.S. with treason, terrorism or warfare, and faced with nationalist rebellions in colonies from Australia to South America, globalists finalized their scheme to lead Americans into re-submitting to permanent colonial status. The immediate goal was to stop the spread of the American's economic theory of liberty and self-governance into the rest of the world. Friedrich Engels, co-author of the Communist Manifesto (a rich, British-German merchant, lover of world proletarian workers with a concern for social justice) was also a shameless racist. He called the Americanized German merchant a "Yankee ape," and U.S. Ambassador and economist-author Friedrich List a "philistine" (Engels 1841).

Friedrich List was a German immigrant who studied Hamilton's economic system. He was a historical economist who laid out the history of national economies. List included most of the principal players in Europe by following economic history from before the Crusades. In the National System of Political Economy, Chapter Ten: The Teachings of History (1841), List reminds us that, "Everywhere and at all times has the wellbeing of the nation been in equal proportion to the intelligence, morality, and industry of its citizens; according to these, wealth has accrued or been diminished; but industry and thrift, invention and enterprise, on the part of individuals, have never as yet accomplished aught of importance where they were not sustained by municipal liberty, by suitable public institutions and laws, by the State administration and foreign policy, but above all, by the unity and power, of the nation." He promoted National Systems by writing books. He contributed as a hands-on consultant to German national unions formed against British free trade policies. Karl Marx drafted an unconvincing rebuttal to List's National System of Political Economy in 1845 (Marx/Engels Archive).

Throughout the mid 1800s, "The general growth of manufacturing interests throughout the North had given the protectionists the balance of strength, and the free-traders, finding themselves powerless to gain their ends in Congress, began to indulge in treasonable language, claiming that individual States had the right to refuse to submit to laws which worked adversely to their interests (Bancroft 1900)." The stage was being set for the Civil War between the States.

Friedrich List died in 1846, either of suicide-poisoning in London (Chaitkin 1985) or of a self-inflicted gunshot in Austria (Stuttgart Marketing). While most historians assure us he was despondent, unemployed and aimlessly wandering, others tell us he was in London investigating the English Corn Laws and the Comden Club (and subsequent workers riots associated with Engel's free trade practices). Friedrich Lists' 1841 book on National economics was translated into numerous languages including Russian, Chinese, and Japanese. While Lists' works are mostly unfamiliar to American students, they were the basis for many national recovery movements and still are, as is evidenced by the Pan-Russian Social Political Movement EURASIA (Dugin 2002).

George Friedrich List's position on Adam Smith's 1776 theory of laissez-faire capitalism?

``It is this theory, sir, which furnishes to the opponents of the American System the intellectual means of their opposition.... Boasting of their imaginary superiority in science and knowledge, these disciples of Smith and Say are treating every defender of common sense like an empiric whose mental power and literary acquirements are not strong enough to conceive the sublime doctrine of their masters'' (Freeman 1992).

Rebuilding Civil Societies

In Treason in America: from Aaron Burr to Averell Harriman , American historian Anton Chaitkin (1985) traces the untold version of the U.S. Civil War. He tells us in the 1860s the London-American Scottish Rite Freemasons agitated again for a war of secession, and when it came the war almost entirely destroyed the Union of Free and Independent States.

Albert Pike was a prolific Freemason and figures prominently in Chaitkin's research about the Southern secession, but Pike's biographers at West Virginia University say Pike was opposed to secession. Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike (Charleston, 1871) "prepared for the Supreme council of the thirty-third degree, for the Southern jurisdiction of the United States, and published by its authority" is a credible source for understanding freemasonry and its "civil society" goals.

The term civil society comes from the Jacobin freemasons who began using it in 17th century France. Famous for its line: "liberty, equality, fraternity," it is also credited with introducing the guillotine into the French Revolution. Modern day Russians call it a "hopeless phrase" (PrimaNews 2002).

Whoever was behind it, fresh immigration boosted elistment in the Union Army, and the end of the American Civil War in 1865 opened the door to massive reconstruction and the industrialization of America. It also created a "pool" of seasoned soldiers necessary to invading the western Indian lands, Mexico, and Cuba. What happened next is best described by University of Iowa lecture notes on American Foreign Policy:

"After the civil war, efforts to steer the United States toward a more internationalist foreign policy began to increase. Many internationalists of the day were imperialists who sought to expand America's reach beyond the confines of the North American continent. For more than three decades these efforts came to naught. Isolationists continued to hold the upper hand and defeated bids to extend American rule over territories as diverse as Cuba, Greenland, and Hawaii."

Nearly thirty years after the Communist Manifesto, Lewis Henry Morgan, the father of anthropology, published his theory of the history of civilization, and he placed Native American societies in "Middle Barbarism" (Morgan 1877). Without missing a historical beat, Darwin's (1859) theory of evolution had expanded to include "evolving" political systems (Singer 2000). Morgan's unscientific revelations were another boost to Engels' 1840's unscientific theory of natural social progress, and was "seized upon by Frederick Engels as the basis for communism" (SMSU.edu). Putting aside his interests in Indians, philanthropist Henry Morgan became rich in expanding railways and mining. Over the next decade, the Western Indian wars eliminated "middle barbarism" from the continent.

Engels' altruistic revolutionary communist ideology of empowering the working man, and ideas like geopolitics and free trade , spread quickly throughout the upper-reaches of Anglo-European academia (GlobeandMail.com). Hundreds of books were already prepared and written to enhance their theories and promote different routes to "rebuilding the world" (Darwin 1861). 1873 saw the first Populist Movement for Agrarian Reform (Krebs 2002). The metaphysical movement of Theosophy was established in 1875 to apply Darwin's theory of evolution to the "spiritual level" (Schumacher 1996).

The British Fabian Society formed in 1884, merged with the British Labor Party in 1904, and established the London School of Economics to teach Marxist finances. Key Fabians were socialist writers Bertrand Russell and George Bernard Shaw, both men having many honors bestowed upon them for various socialist causes, including world peace. H.G. Wells is probably the most familiar of the Fabian authors, he wrote the famous A New World Order (1939), and the less famous The Way to League of Nations (1919). Another famous Fabian is Annie Besant of the Theosophical Society, follower of Madame Blavatsky who penned, among other esoteric works, a magazine called Lucifer in 1887.

Americans embrace the Fabian agenda and free trade policies

Fabians founded Socialist Clubs at Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and the University of Chicago; Fabian-Keynesian change agents eventually taught their progressive economic theories at every elite university in the States (Terrins 1984). In 1883, the new version of global American capitalism was solidified in the first free trade agreement between rich American financiers and the Mexican aristocracy (Hart 2002).

The Globe and Mail gives us another version of British free trade:

"It was more akin to forced trade, as many of these products were taken under, to be overly generous, coercive conditions. In that sense, the British Empire engaged more in racketeering than free trade.... Now, let us take a closer look at the British Empire, often heralded as a model for the benefits of free trade. Free trade was indeed first introduced to Great Britain, but not until 1846. By that time, the British Empire was already near its apex of economic dominance, a result not of free trade but of exploitation of its colonies, both for natural resources and markets. Before 1846, the British state was more interventionist than any contemporary government and probably rivaled that of the centrally planned economies of the erstwhile Soviet Union. Success was firmly built on monopoly. The only large-scale businesses of the day, the equivalents of contemporary corporations, were run by governments. These organizations were anything but competitive, as they were granted exclusive trading rights in the colonies. The Hudson's Bay Company and the English East India Company are well-known examples of this. Under the Navigation Acts, even transportation of goods to and from the colonies was monopolized. Protected markets and nepotism meant markets were anything but free."

Benjamin Harrison was elected president in 1888 and began dismantling the tariff system established by Washington, Hamilton, Clay and List. Harrison's White House biographers explain: "The most perplexing domestic problem Harrison faced was the tariff issue. The high tariff rates in effect had created a surplus of money in the Treasury. Low-tariff advocates argued that the surplus was hurting business…To cope with the Treasury surplus, the tariff was removed from imported raw sugar; sugar growers within the United States were given two cents a pound bounty on their production. Long before the end of the Harrison Administration, the Treasury surplus had evaporated, and prosperity seemed about to disappear as well (Whitehouse.gov)." (This is even more interesting when compared to a review in 1997 in The Atlanta Business Chronicle of the book "Hamilton's Blessing." Hamilton's Blessing: The Extraordinary Life and Times of Our National Debt by John Steele Gordon who claims to prove the national debt was Hamilton's "brainchild." One reviewer of the book says "the emergence of Keynesian economics further sanctified the role of deficit spending as an economic strategy" (O'keefe 1997).)

In the early 1890s a panic somehow occurred on Wall Street, and by 1895 the failing U.S. Treasury had allowed banker-financier J.P. Morgan to create a syndicate to buy up U.S. bonds, and the U.S. Supreme Court declared the income tax law unconstitutional.

The first World Zionist Conference was held in 1897 with the goal of enlisting support for the creation of a Jewish homeland. The international coalition of Zionists had support from very influential global players, many of them with access to heads of states. One of their founding members was a Rothschild banker and the Zionists appealed directly for recognition from several world rulers, including the Pope (Herzl 1896). (The Rothschild name pops up again in the 1992 Democratic Leadership Council DLC as a source for start-up finance capital (Chaitkin 2002). The DLC agenda is to "define the Third Way".)

According to a biography published in the Atlantic Monthly in March 1901, President William McKinley turned down the Republican nomination twice. When he accepted, "... he thought, and as almost everybody else in his party thought, to substitute on the statute books in cooperation with the Republican Congress elected at the same time, a modification of the McKinley tariff bill for the Wilson Gorman tariff law, and thus to restore the prosperity which had for some reason disappeared; and also, as others thought, to bring about the enactment of a law for the maintenance of the existing gold standard, and to remedy the defects in the Treasury system which, under the conditions of the former administration, had compelled it to issue two hundred and thirty million dollars in new bonds… Congress, on his recommendation and under his inspiration, passed the law to maintain the gold standard, to provide for refunding at two per cent, the lowest rate of interest ever paid by the United States government, and to extend the national banking system to small towns" (Macfarland 1901) [emphasis added]

America is redirected by foreign interests

By 1898, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Theodore Roosevelt, acting for the Secretary who took the afternoon off, gave the order of readiness which helped convince McKinley to go to war against Spain and liberate Cuba (Chaitkin 1994). It was only McKinley's solid reputation and the esteem of the U.S. Congress which allowed him to hold out against Congress and public opinion as long as he did, and after war began, he worked diligently and diplomatically to end it honorably, and to restore Cuba and the Philippines to the people living in those countries (Macfarland 1901).

In 1889, the London Fabian-trained Nobel Peace Prize winner Jane Addams brought socialism and international "peace" to Chicago neighborhoods (University of Chicago). Addams was just in time for the poverty and wars that would define the coming 20th century and lead us into the 21st century Middle Eastern Clash of Civilizations (Huntington 1993).

In 1901, U.S. President William McKinley was assassinated "for the working man" by an immigrant laborer who associated with anarchists and Fabian Socialist Emma Goldman in Chicago (American Jewish Historical Society). Goldman's Fabian terrorism was also the inspiration for the foundation of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). "McKinley's assassination came after a wave of anarchist terrorism in Europe. Between 1894 and 1900, anarchist assassins had killed M.F. Sadi Carnot, President of France; Elizabeth, Empress of Austria; and Humbert I, King Of Italy" (US Gov. Archives).

Apparently some Americans still wanted to create a monarchial government after 125 years: "The tendency toward government by a monarch in this country appears most clearly in the sayings and doings of the people who want "a strong man in the White House" (Macfarland 1901).

Following McKinley's death, elitist "nabob" vice-President Teddy Roosevelt took the oath of office. Under his progressive presidency, Roosevelt introduced Marxist environmentalism and, using blueprints of successful British land conservation policies in colonial India, firmly established the U.S. model for a national forest service (Chaitkin 1985). Between 1890 and 1920, over two million Eastern European Jews (many with communist sympathies) would immigrate to the United States, assisted mainly by New York banker Jackob Shiff.

University of Iowa's lectures on American Foreign Policy fill us in:

"By the close of the nineteenth century isolationists were beginning to lose the battle with internationalists. In 1898, the United States went to war with Spain and won an empire. Under President Theodore Roosevelt and his corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, the United States embraced the role of policeman of the Western Hemisphere. But despite the ascendancy of internationalism, the core isolationist prohibition against becoming entangled in European affairs persisted. President Wilson challenged that taboo with America's entry into World War I and his bid to commit the United States to membership in the League of Nations. After protracted and bitter debate, however, the Senate rejected the Treaty of Versailles and with it Wilson's vision of a liberal, multilateral internationalist order."

Teddy Roosevelt appointed Darwinian-Eugenics Congress attendee Gifford Pinchot as national protector of prime U.S. "public" lands (Mehler 1988; Chaitkin 1985). "The area of the United States placed under public protection by Theodore Roosevelt totals approximately 230,000,000 acres" (Wikepedia 2003). In 1902, he appointed Oliver Wendell Holmes to the U.S. Supreme Court. Holmes was a liberal justice who " became known for his innovative, well reasoned decisions, balancing property rights with human rights, with the latter taking precedence over the former" (Wikepedia 2002).

J.P. Morgan and his associates averted another financial panic in 1907. The U.S. Supreme Court declared J.P. Morgan's consolidation of the Northern Pacific Railway illegal, but the Railway's financial ties were never disbanded (Britannica). In Politics of Change, Pacific-Northwestern biologist Dr. Robert Crittendom (1994) details Railway-related land grabs from the Mississippi to the gates of the Columbia River, and Weyerhaeuser's massive takings all along the route.

In 1913 the private, corporate Federal Reserve was created. In accordance with plank two of the Communist Manifesto, the Sixteenth Amendment created the national income tax law. This is also where we see the rise in prominence and self-aggrandizement of British and American joint "Councils" on foreign relations, national historical societies, wealthy merchants' philanthropist foundations, grant funded public policy research, privately funded social research institutes, and politically left and right wing think-tanks.

Woodrow Wilson was elected on a no-war platform, and in 1917 he petitioned the U.S. Congress to enter World War One. Here's where the dialectic gets really tricky. Information from around this time is contradictory, and reference to actual historical documents is labeled conspiracy theory, or worse. We have verified the Balfour declaration to Rothschild (Balfour 1917) and a first draft for a League of Nations (Balfour 1922), which has evolved into the modern day United Nations (Rothschild 2003). President Woodrow Wilson's decision to enter World War I (Wilson 1918) is connected to Colonel Mandel House, Zionism (Balfour-Palestine Mandate 1922), and Supreme Court Justices Louis Brandeis and Wendell Holmes (Lariens 19--).

The early 20th century is shrouded in controversy, but it is well known that in 1917 the Marxists toppled the Russian Revolution and replaced the ruling Kerenskys with a genocidal, totalitarian regime that killed millions of people (Courtois 1999). The USSR established credibility for the anti-thesis, and provided justification for the United States' Cold War expansionist policies.

Russian Marxist Leon Trotsky wrote Disarmament and the United States of Europe, (the first draft for a European Union?) reprinted by the International Commitern in 1945. Trotsky saw the strength of an American system: "The prewar power of the United States grew on the basis of its internal market, i.e. the dynamic equilibrium between industry and agriculture. In this development the war has produced a sharp break." Trotsky explained the Marxist's ongoing destruction of Wall Street businesses in the U.S., with: "American finance capital is digging with its own hands powder and dynamite cellars beneath its own foundation. Where will the fuse be lit? (Trotsky 1929)"

Marxist chaos multiplies

In 1929 the stock market made a major crash after a series of ups and downs. In Europe, the defeated German Weimar Republic suffocated under runaway inflation and the crushing Balfour-House Treaty of Versailles. The Rothschild's Bank of England quit the gold standard in September 1931, and by December of that year, German unemployment was in excess of five million (Timebase 1931). In Germany, Marxist ideology set up the dialectic that brought Hitler and the National Socialists (Nazis) to power. In the July 1932 Reichstag elections, "the National Socialists won 230 seats; the Socialists won 133 seats, the Communists, 89, and the Catholics, 87" (Timebase 1932).

Around this time the Nazis were growing stronger by working with U.S. companies, which were represented by New York attorneys John Foster Dulles, Prescott Bush, and Averill Harriman, also affiliated with J.P. Morgan and U.S. Steel (Chaitkin 1994). In 1933, U.S. presidential candidate Franklin D. Roosevelt introduced the New Deal. Congress then established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) under the Banking Emergency Act, and the U.S. followed Rothschild's lead and dropped from the gold standard. U.S. Congressman McFadden charged the Federal Reserve with causing the stock market crash, and the U.S. was the first nation to officially recognize (sanction?) communist rule in the Soviet Union (Timebase 1933; Congressional Record 1933).

Darwinian geopolitics justified Hitler's expansionist "living space" policies and the new science of Eugenics inspired country after county to pass anti-Semitic restrictions. Between 1933 and 1934, Hitler's government passed law after law against the Jewish people and the World Jewish and Zionist organizations staged protest after protest. Initially the Catholics were opposed to Hitler, though the Pope was later said to have supported Hitler because he was opposed to communism (Timebase 1933-34).

On January 4, 1935, President Roosevelt told Congress, "throughout the world, change is the order of the day" (Coughlin 1935). The people of the United States, ravaged by the Great Depression and the Federal Reserve credit-banking system, embraced Marxist rhetoric and established the conflict: "We are determined to place once and for all the sacredness of human rights above the materialism of property rights" (Holmes? 1935). That same year, even as the Supreme Court declared FDR's National Recovery Act unconstitutional, Congress passed the Social Security Act. Determined to stay out of what many Americans called "the next banker's war," Congress also passed the Neutrality Act (Congressional Record 1935). In spite of a steady barrage of anti-German sentiment, it was only the Japanese devastation of the U.S. fleet at Pearl Harbor in 1941 that allowed Roosevelt to take the U.S. into the war.

Anti-Jewish violence had exploded across Europe throughout the 1930s (Timebase 1933-45), forcing a mass exodus of reluctant Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine, which was mostly populated by Arabs. In 1936, Palestinian leaders appealed to the League of Nations to stop the flood of Jewish immigrants (Timebase 1936). From 1920 to 1945, the European Jewish population in Palestine increased by 367,845 (palestineremebered.com), since 1945 it has increased to a million (Maas 2002). By the end of World War Two, International Zionists had the population and the financial and military support necessary to take control of Palestine and "de-invite" the British.

In 1947, the Zionists seized Palestine from British control. In 1948, they defeated the surrounding Arab nations aided by communists and the Russian Jabotinsky's pre-WWI military units (Frank 1992). Amitai Etzioni, father of American communitarianism, was a terrorist (Etzioni 2002), a revolutionary, and a Palmach soldier in Ben Gurion's army (Etzioni 1978). Etzioni and other Israeli soldiers grew up in communist-collective kibbutzes in confiscated Arab territories-always presented to Americans as a very progressive lifestyle (kibbutzprogramcenter.org). In May 1948, the Jewish Peoples' Council declared the establishment of the State of Israel (Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1999). Israel, like England, does not have a written constitution.

By 1949, Marxism had completely destroyed the Chinese Imperial government and replaced the Emperor with a genocidal regime that murdered over 50 million people (Courtois 1999). Conflicts created by Middle Eastern communism successfully closed the door to intellectual discourse between Arabs and Jews in the 1950s (Somekh 1999). In 1951, the highly decorated and respected (but now denigrated) General Douglas MacArthur was unceremoniously relieved of his Korean War command under very controversial circumstances, and the country was scandalized by communists uncovered in high U.S. government positions (Linder 2001).

Beginning in the late 1940's the communist-communitarian agenda was almost revealed to Americans, as several well-researched, thought provoking books were published during these years (Dilling 1940; Beaty 1947; Stormer 1962). But in spite of all the evidence, by the mid-1950s Senator McCarthy had thoroughly disgusted America with his fanatical approach to routing out "communist subversives." The well-publicized interviews by the House Committee on Un-American Activities made a national mockery of any anti-communist sentiment, and Congressional investigations of communist players and programs ceased (Reese 1952; Wormser 1953).

The Marxist conflict throws the back doors wide open

With all the barriers down, the final planks of the Communist Manifesto were steadily implemented across the U.S., and future American "public" education was placed in the hands of Marxist-Fabian-Keynesian change agents (Kjos 1998; Iserbyt 1999).

The 1960s witnessed the assassination of John F. Kennedy, (who, according to some conspiracy theorist-historians, signed an executive order to take away the power to coin U.S. money from the Federal Reserve (Cedric X)). His successor, Lyndon Johnson, expanded the undeclared Vietnam War to stop the communists and take over the opium trade in Indo-China. Poised for war, Marxist change agents completely infiltrated the pacifist anti-war movement in the United States (Lewy 1988). They found a willing, agitated audience in American youth who were serving as fodder on the Asian front lines. Anti-war protestors in America (including Amitai Etzioni) tooted their anti-capitalist horns for "democratic" progressive communism, but in the 70s everyone mostly ignored the Democratic Kampuchea in Cambodia who taught children how to kill their own families (Chandler 1992).

In 1967 Israel invaded Egypt and launched an attack on a U.S. ship killing 34 Americans and wounding 175. Termed an "accident" by both governments, the contradictory testimony about the air strike against the U.S.S. Liberty is discounted as another part of the conspiracy theory (Ennes Jr. 1997).

In 1973 Henry Kissinger and the CIA were accused of complicity in the bloody coup that overthrew Salvador Allende's freely elected national socialist government in Chile with the murder of Allende and 3000 voters; the Asian War was abandoned by the U.S. in 1975. By the 1980's the Cold War had evolved into a global Drug War with the Israelis and the British training mercenaries and supplying weapons to both the cocaine drug cartels (Block ) and to the local police (Farah 1997). While the war centered in Urban U.S., Central, and South America. (Fitts 2000; Ruppert 1999) it maintained its 18th century Asian connections and expanded on 19th century British and Dutch opium operations in the Middle East (Chaitkin 1985).

The Marxism of the 80s blossomed into violent, global revolutions against Imperialist interests. In retaliation, the U.S. government spent the latter half of the 20th century building a giant medieval-military-corporate structure, financing Russian and British-Fabian-Israeli communists. Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State, was shaped studying Lenin's idea of diplomacy (Bassford 1994). The U.S. staged domino wars to stop the spread of world communism and used the CIA to protect global corporate colonial interests. By 1984 the U.S. government was financing a covert drugs-for-guns operation between the genocidal Nicaraguan Contra-National Guard, cocaine dealers, and Middle Eastern-Israeli arms brokers, against the Sandinista Junta government (Draper 1992; Webb 1999). In 2002 Admiral John Poindexter, who lied to Congress about the Iran-Contra Affair, returned to U.S. government appointed to the new Homeland Security division of the Pentagon, DARPA. DARPA's original website used a freemason symbol for its logo but alluding to this is discounted as part of the conspiracy theory.

Alienating Americans from their own heritage

Marxist-Darwinism grew in the upper classes of Europe because the ideology of "saving" the masses appealed to their eugenicist sensibilities. The appeal it apparently holds for activists and poor people is their understanding that capitalism, as it is practiced by the international bankers, is anti-human. To stand against war, unless the security of your nation is at stake, is the founding American way. Americans were the original "peace movement;" staying out of the imperialist's wars was the basis for America's "isolationist policy," NOT selfishness. But mixed up with legitimate concerns, many people world-wide are convinced that all men should have all basic life necessities provided free of charge by the government. Not to be confused with equal opportunity to provide for themselves, these people insist on fixed prices and guaranteed housing and utilities (Russian Communist Platform 2002).

International U.N. laws say all natural resources should be publicly owned or controlled, and that governments should provide training and jobs. It's called social equity and human rights.

The fundamental problem with the communist's idea of "utopian plenty" is governments don't produce anything. The only way a government can "provide" anything is if they take it away from the producers. And the primary goal of the 1847 Communist League in London was to "abolish private property." The biggest threat to imperialist monopolies has always been property rights for little individuals, and property rights are the primary target under all new U.S.-U.N. Sustainable Development Laws. The Marxist-Soviets didn't eliminate the financial power of the aristocrats to control Russian domestic markets; they confiscated the power and used it tenfold. They didn't encourage prosperity and growth for the little guy, they practiced "community policing" on dissidents and Ukrainian farmers because they refused to shut up and "donate" their hard labor. The Soviet government didn't produce anything but terror, and they brazenly begged what they needed from the U.S. taxpaying producers and their friends with influence on American government, who had initially helped put them in power.

The United States provided critical economic aid to the USSR from its inception (American Patriots 2002), and the U.S. continues to almost entirely support Israel, particularly the Israeli military (Sustaincampaign.org). If communist kibbuttz/collectives fail without help from capitalist nations, or if they are unable to force enough slave producers to sustain them after "wealthy" Americans are completely absorbed into the global collective, who will support the basic human rights guaranteed by the U.N.'s new socially equitable system? And, if a government tests and trains everyone for their best fitting jobs, where is free will?

The American "idea" was for men to be free to pursue their own destinies with every man getting a fair chance under an agreed upon system of laws, because truly legitimate governments are created only to protect the people they represent. Was the original U.S. Constitution also a prefatory tool of the dialectic? Is it possible that the American system was designed only to become the "capitalist" thesis in the dialectical opposition of ideas? If the U.S. Bill of Rights was not included in the Constitution until the American people insisted on additional protections from the newly formed central government, and most of the Founders argued brilliantly against adding a Bill of Rights… is it possible that the Bill of Rights exists outside the dialectic?

America is still voluntarily the most generous nation in the world when it comes to donations, both next door and abroad. Americans are so generous they give one third of their foreign aid to maintain Israel, even when it deprives the U.S. of basic and necessary commodities (Davis 2003). Free people have something to contribute. Modern Marxism promises varied Utopian cultures where everybody shares everything they have and the central government's job is to dole out housing, utilities, medical, work, and benefits according to ability, need, and party status. But what happens when America goes Marxist… who will provide the necessary foreign aid that supports Marxist economies?

The U.S. Bill of Rights was clearly not exploitative, but over the years, thanks to Fabian economics, manufactured "credit," massive unemployment in the 1920s, two world wars, and a constant barrage of Darwinian anti-Semitism and anti-Islamic racist rhetoric mixed with outright lies about everything American, the conflict came to be represented by international corporate capitalism on the right, versus the rights of the "common good" on the left. Protecting the legal rights of the individual, common MAN was relegated into selfishness.

The conflict between capitalism and communism was never authentic, and, based on a false conflict, the communitarian solution was planned as the final move in the Marxist theoretical, revolutionary, economic game equation. Designed to "change the world," the stated goal of the Marxists was to promote global conflicts, create chaos and disorder, and offer up a predetermined evolved society, benevolently ruled exclusively by them.

The well thought out solution to global madness

Communitarianism is human society's most developed Darwinian geopolitical ideology in the theoretical, "natural," Marxist evolution of social systems. Communitarians differ in their beliefs as to the type of force that should be used against their immoral neighbors (some advance shame while others advance "boot camps"), but they all share the same belief that Earth's scientists have an obligation to guide humanity into achieving a less violent, livable quality of life. (Still confused by the language? We're sorry, but the communitarians made up sciences and a language to define them. Don't worry all you hardworking American taxpayers who support the conflicts, you can trust the Fabians. Their lies are only one way they help needy, uneducated, oppressed people, and even if their methods are shady, their goals are holistic. Morally evolved people promise to save others from living a dangerous and free life.)

A Communitarian is an academic elitist privy to the solution, and their position in the New World Order is one of the best-kept secrets in the world. For over 150 years the globalist merchants and their "agents of change" worked diligently towards their goal of "rebuilding the world" into an advanced communitarian civil society. Today, thanks to millions of "useful idiots" (whose beliefs helped murder a 100 million innocents), the left and right have nearly achieved the ultimate chaos necessary for humanity's pleading to the U.N. for a more powerful global humanitarian peacekeeping force.

The founder of the Communitarian Network, Amitai Etzioni, has been an adviser in the White House since 1979. Etzioni says: "Nationalism must be ended. It is a creed that has come to burden the expansion of globalism." He explains the communitarian approach as one that, "... favors shifting much of the defining involvements of citizens in those countries afflicted with nationalism from the nation-state to the body society, specifically to communities (not to be confused with local governments)" (Etzioni 1992).

Communitarian "thinkers" were essential to introducing the solution as an accredited social science "project" (Milbank 2001; Allen 2002). Communitarians also perform valuable backdoor assaults on American standards for individual liberty defined by the U.S. Bill of Rights and U.S. State Constitutions (Etzioni 1999). Communitarian scholars exploit bogus explanations for America's moral decline and loss of communal bonds. They use their elitist think-tank influence to piggyback their theoretical solutions into all new and established national programs. Rebuilding community, part of the domestic and exported globalist's War on Terror (Bush 2002), is entirely a communitarian-based solution. The appointed Iraqi Interim Council is the communitarian model for the globalist's plans for rebuilding the Middle East.

In 2003, the transformational Marxist solution to the thousands of global conflicts between the left and the right (solidly represented in every country of the world) is the communitarian balance between the conflicts of opposites, a "radical middle", called a Third Way (Milbank 2001; Blair 2000; Clinton 1992; Allen 2002; )Mark Satin, the editor of Radical Middle Newsletter, says his newsletter "expresses an emerging political perspective." Stressing "one world citizenship," Satin advertises all the "new" ideas for global communism, with a friendlier face.

For over a century the communitarian solution has been successfully implemented. It now openly exists via outright international communitarian laws, or, as in the U.S., via community justice, community development, community government, community councils, community volunteerism, and community policing. Every new program in the U.S. that uses the words "sustainable, livable, safe, and healthy community" (and accepts government/NGO grants) is a communitarian solution.

In the 21st century, every member of every known political party on the planet potentially plays a role in furthering Marx's dialectic games (Satin 2002). The Marxist game is so brilliantly designed that the more fervent your dedication to your personal beliefs, the more powerful a tool you become in the hands of the global communitarians (Fraizer 2002). Communitarian solutionists either design or infiltrate both sides of every conflict.

Global Marxist change agents clamor loudest for the United Nations to end world chaos, and are prominent in every global movement designed to "usher in world peace" (antiwar.com). Initially, a Marxist change agent was a secret entity, today it is a masters program in elite universities, and Marxist change agent COPS are advisers in most U.S. Agenda 21 community meetings. The most brilliant of the communitarian scholars have already positioned themselves into a libertarian-communitarian divide and pre-defined the "final American debate" (Dionne 2003). The master game theorists already know that the U.S. Libertarian party platform is logically indefensible against the unreasonable but morally superior argument of the global community.

Benevolent international communitarians are "shoring up the moral, political and social environment" (Communitarian Platform 1993), whether national, American, Christian, or Islamic. Their programs balance all national self-interests against the more humane, modern version of communitarian-ra (Beinin 1996). As for the future, not only are American law schools teaching communitarian law (Harvard 2000) and Talmudic Law (Zacariah 2002) to American lawyers and judges, Chinese communitarian courts and the United Nations export local regulations as blueprints for overruling national laws (Miethe 2003; Veon 1998-2003). Global to local… Zionist-communitarian law prevails (Wald 1998), and unnatural evolution guides us into holistic subservience to a superior, master empire. In the words of David Ben Gurion, Amitai Etzioni's patron, who was quoted in Look Magazine in 1962: "In Jerusalem, the United Nations (a truly United Nations) will build a Shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents; this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind (Duke 2002)."

GO BACK TO PART ONE:
What is the Hegelian Dialectic?