Chapter Fourteen
So Where Does All of This Leave Traditional Americans?
As I see it, the great contribution which Dr. Carroll Quigley unintentionally made by
writing
Tragedy And Hope
was to help the ordinary American realize the utter contempt which
the network leaders have for ordinary people. Human beings are treated
en mas
se
as helpless
puppets on an international chess board where giants of economic and political power subject
them to wars, revolution, civil strife, confiscation, subversion, indoctrination, manipulation and
outright deception as it suits their fancy and th
[page 113]
eir concocted schemes lot world domination.
But, as we have previously mentioned, this
mass
of world humanity is precisely the
source of latent power which terrifies the Establishment. There is the constant fear that the
masses might awaken and frustrate their gigantic schemes, particularly where t
an education and accumulated a little property (which gives them a highly significant degree of
independence).
That is what has happened to the mass of humanity in America. They now constitute the
great and overwhelming majority of the people, called the middle class. And Dr. Quigley, as we
have already seen, leaves no doubt as to the menace which middle-class Ame
ricans are believed
to represent insofar as the Establishment is concerned.
It was once the great American dream to make as many people as possible a part of the
great middle class because it was recognized to be the backbone of our society and the most
important segment of the population in maintaining a progressive, self-govern
ing, secure, and
freedom-loving people. But, obviously, if you are trying to set up a virtual dictatorship, this
group is an enemy. This group will resist a dictatorship. At least, it will do so if it knows what is
happening.
So this is the fact of life which the super-rich collectivists of the Establishment face
today. Everything they do must be accomplished in an atmosphere of propaganda and deception.
Otherwise they keep running into a groundswell of resentment and resistan
ce as they try to
compel middle class Americans to give up their independence, their property, and their
constitutional prerogatives.
Then what is the current strategy of the Establishment? It is two-pronged.
Pressure From the Top and Pressure From the Bottom
The current tactic is to create revolution, violence and extremely serious social
dislocation at the bottom while creating an ever-increasing pressure at the top for monolithic
power by demanding that the executive branch of the Federal government be give
n massive
power to "solve" all these problems. These demands are made in the form of proposed "social
legislation" involving the expenditure of billions upon billions each year.
Experience is teaching us, of course, that the dissipation of all this wealth has
solving our problems. It has merely permitted the Establishment to use these tremendous
resources to build up its machine of well-paid Establishment lackeys
[page 1
14]
and reward their
abject obedience with fabulous salaries for loyally carrying out the policies and dictates of the
Global Establishment on practically every dimension of the Federal government.
Naturally, many fine, well-meaning people support the broad ramifications of social
legislation because they think they are supporting "a good cause." On first view and at close
range, they seem to be right, but as time has gone by year after year it has
gradually become
alarmingly apparent what all this social legislation is doing to us.
Americans are losing control of their destiny.
not been
Furthermore, many of the people whom we have been calling our national
problem-solvers have been secretly engaged in actual problem making.
As this reviewer has watched the deterioration of the American political structure during
the past several decades, it has been absolutely amazing to see how many of our so-called
"problems" have been literally manufactured or seriously aggravated by Wash
ington meddling
and manipulating.
For example, we had the problem of racial minorities and the need to expose these
minorities to greater opportunities to share in the good things of life. That problem needed to be
solved. But what happened? Washington meddling practically promoted it int
o the explosive
tinder for another civil war.
We had the problem of rising crime rates. These needed to be stopped. Establishment
mentalities flooded the country with elaborate social schemes and grossly permissive judicial
decisions which multiplied the crime rate and set the stage for the greatest
wave of violence and
lawlessness this country has ever known.
We had the problem of providing an adequate educational opportunity for all our
children. Washington came up with a conglomerate of money and policies which have seriously
discredited the public schools in many parts of the country and caused private scho
We had the problem of moral decay and something needed to be done about it. The
ols to spring
up like mushrooms.
Establishment brain-busters came up with a combination of sex education and so-called
sensitivity training which is exploding the problem into a contagion of totally permissiv
e
decadence and moral degeneracy.
We had the problem of pornography and obscenity. Washington smashed what little legal
protection existed, and the country was immediately inundated with running tides of obscene
filth and shot-gun
[page 115]
press and mass communications media.
blasts of four-letter gutter words peppering every dimension of our
We had a problem of subversion by a foreign-based conspiracy which had brazenly
announced that our American society must be overthrown and our children be required to live
under its flag. Grassroots political pressure compelled the Congress to pass a numb
er of security
laws. Establishment-dominated forces in the executive and judicial branches of the government
have now totally nullified them.
Surely our descendants who will reap a terrible whirlwind from all of this will wonder
why the adults of this generation were incapable of realizing what was happening.
Actually, what we are witnessing is a very carefully and methodically executed program
designed to destroy constitutional government as we have known it and make a shambles of the
society which has wanted to keep the Constitution alive. Only then can a hi
ghly centralized,
socialist state be established.
To achieve this, the middle class in America must be ruthlessly squeezed out of existence.
That is the message which looms large from many passages in Dr. Quigley's book and which will
be found as a favorite theme in the books, magazines and newspapers of
liberal press. Just as Marx and Engels waged war against the middle class to set up a socialist
the Establishment's
state, so does Dr. Quigley and the global network.
The middle class is to be identified as the "petty bourgeoisie," the "neo-isolationists," the
broad masses of Americans who are described by Dr. Quigley as "often very insecure, envious,
filled with hatreds, and are generally the chief recruits for any Ra
dical Right, fascists, or hate
campaigns against any group that is different or which refuse to conform to middle-class values."
What are Middle class values?
Middle-class values, of course, are represented by the Constitutional concepts of limited
government, states rights, rights of property, a competitive economy, the solving of problems on
the local level if possible and, in any event, with a minimal of gov
middle-class mentalities. They are described by Dr. Quigley as the same kind of people as those
ernment meddling. But all this,
Dr. Quigley would seem to suggest, is anathema. It has to go. People who think this way are
who supported "the Nazis in Germany
thirty years ago."
2(124)
Dr. Quigley offers no proof
whatever for this fantastic contention but then one should not expect too much.
footnote of authoritative reference in all 1,300 pages of Dr. Quigley's book!
There is not a
[page 116]
However, in passing, one might ask Dr. Quigley this question: "If the middle class in
America is to disappear, where will all these masses go?"
The Establishment has provided the answer in its millions of pages of socialist-oriented
literature. The doomed members of the middle class are promised that they will become the
carefully nurtured, carefully housed, carefully educated, totally dependent
class of Government
wards in a man-made paradise of a one-world socialist state.
But what if it didn't work out, or what if they didn't like it? What if it turned out to be like
Russia, or China, or Cuba? What if they didn't want to be totally dependent citizens in a
one-world, socialist state?
Well, of course, all such thoughts are treasonous. They partake of the traditional
American middle-class mentality. Such doubts are a form of paranoia and mental illness. All
such people should be put away safely so as not to contaminate the rest of the g
reat society. (No
doubt you have read Orwell's
1984
or Dr. Brock Chisholm's recommendations for World Mental
Health!)
But then there is always the haunting possibility that the great middle class in America
1(123)
single
might gradually awaken and decide to take remedial action before it is too late.
Or is it too late already? Dr. Quigley seems to think so.
As he disdainfully indicates in his book on page 979, the grassroots resistance movement,
even as far back as the Korean crisis, was never a match for the big boys who are really running
things. He said it was like "the Midwest of Tom Sawyer against the c
osmopolitan East of J.P.
Morgan and Company, of old Siwash against Harvard, of the
Chicago Tribune
against the
Washington Post or
The New York Times
...." Dr. Quigley never leaves any doubt as to where the
real power centers of the Global Establishment actu
ally lie.
And, as seen through the eyes of Dr. Quigley, the sheer size and power of the world-wide,
super-rich network is now too big and too well entrenched to be overturned, or even resisted
effectively. Its members will go right ahead financing revolution, moral
dislocation at the bottom and then sanctimoniously and energetically promise to solve all these
depravity and social
problems if we will just delegate to them total power at the top. This is the formula which the
[page 117]
master-planners believe is unbeatable.
But this reviewer believes they could be wrong. Without discounting for a moment the
terrifying proportions of the enemy's posture of power, they still could be beaten.
What Can Be Done About It?
Although millions of unsuspecting Americans have become benumbed and bewitched by
Global Establishment brain-washing, this reviewer feels there is still sufficient vitality among the
people to mobilize a formidable wave of hard-core resistance to the whol
e superstructure of
world-wide conspiracy.
One thing which we urgently needed was a book by some insider like Dr. Quigley which
could assure the people that the international conspiracy for global control is as terribly real and
as tragically close to achieving its purposes as it actually is. If t
his reviewer had written such a
book it would have no doubt been brushed aside as merely the work of another middle-class
American striking out feebly against the imponderable powers that be. But not so with Dr.
Carroll Quigley. As a sympathetic insider, h
Now the task is to do something about it.
e has told it as it is. And for that we warmly thank
Possibly the next ten years will be the crucial period during which free men in general,
and Americans in particular, will decide whether we have the stamina and intelligence to turn the
tide. After that, it
could
be too late.
The future task is political in nature. Essentially, it is a matter of methodically and
deliberately uniting the vast resources of political power at the grass roots level and "throwing
him!
the rascals out." Every Democrat, Republican or Independent from the
government right down to the lowest official on the local level, who has been consistently
replaced as fast as the electoral process will permit.
top of the Federal
supporting the collectivist policies and tactics of the global network, should be summarily
Public officials can no longer be equated in terms of "being nice," having a "wonderful
TV personality," or merely making promises. Each one must be coldly examined in terms of his
record. If he turns out to be a lackey of the Establishment, a fellow-trav
eler of the Establishment,
or even a dupe, he has to go.
Establishment henchmen should all be replaced by men and women who are totally
committed to restoring the American society to its
[page 118]
traditional position provided
within the framework of the American Constitution as visualized by the founding fath
ers. If you
study it carefully, you will find that practically every major problem facing the United States
today is related in some fundamental way to a violation (or series of violations) of Constitutional
principles. We had a great system going which so
mebody has betrayed.
Not only must the political puppets of the international network be replaced, but once the
political climate has been improved we have a tremendous amount of restructuring to do.
For example, the conspiratorial enemy's power base must be eliminated. If anything can
be drawn from a study of Dr. Quigley's
monolithic, interlocking power structure of international finance is in
Tragedy And Hope
, it is the alarming fact that the whole
flagrant violation of the
general welfare of the people of the United States (not to mention the rest of the world!).
This mammoth concentration of economic power is in direct opposition to the traditional
American precept that, unless it has been specifically stated otherwise, all power of every sort
must remain
dispersed
among the people. Therefore, laws must be passed so that the nightmarish
monstrosity of credit and money power which has been rapidly gravitating into a few conspiring
hands, can be decisively dismantled. This would also require that the Federal Reserve System
(which is neither "Federal" nor a "Reserve"
) be eliminated and replaced with a fiscal structure
which does not violate the fixed responsibilities of Government as set forth in Article I, Section
8, of the United States Constitution.
Eliminating the enemy's financial power base would immediately facilitate the recovery
of lost ground in many other areas. It would allow us to liberate our captive press, radio and TV
facilities so the people could be told what is really going on. It wou
ld facilitate the liberation of
the captive public school system which, for many years, has been harnessed so effectively to the
collectivist propaganda machinery. It would also facilitate the liberation of certain religious
bodies, universities, and other
powerful, opinion-molding channels which have been bought-over
and corrupted by the fabulous wealth of the network's billion-dollar, tax-exempt foundations.
A fresh political climate would also permit us to rectify a serious political blunder which
our nation committed back in 1945. At the close of World War II, the people of the United States
felt there should be some type of alliance among peace-loving nati
ons to help prevent future
predatory wars. What the Establishment set up for us was a
international intrigue designed to become the political, financial and military power base for the
Establishment's passionate dream of a monoli
charter member. The promise of the United Nations to protect small nati
[page 119]
conglomerate of
thic global government.
As a federation of peace-loving nations, the United Nations proved to be a hypocritical
farce with the world's foremost proponent of war, subversion and world conquest written in as a
ons produced equally
bitter fruit, and the United States found itself having to provide multi-billion-dollar-protection for
the free world against Communist aggression so as to make up for the veto-ridden frustrations of
the quarreling U.N. Security Counci
l.
Most Americans have probably forgotten that it was the Soviet Union which insisted that
the headquarters for the United Nations be set up in the United States, but of course, as Dr.
Quigley points out, that was exactly the way Rhodes and Stead originally
also no small coincidence that the entire site for the United Nations headquarters was donated by
No doubt the American people would have been happy to see some kind of international
internal affairs) to the jurisdiction of the World Court. Establishment spokesmen su
planned it.
3(125)
It was
the Rockefellers.
arena provided where various disputes could be publicly ventilated. In fact, that is what they
thought they were getting. However, the United Nations charter was written
by a State
Department-Soviet Union coalition of strategists who specifically designed the U.N. so that it
could eventually override the sovereign independence of its member nations and subject them to
the Marxist dominated World Court and the Marxist-direc
Nations.
ted military forces of the United
Amazingly, Establishment-sponsored U.S. presidents from both the Democratic and
Republican parties have endorsed this scheme to subjugate the United States (including its
ch as Senator
J. William Fulbright (Rhodes Scholar) has advocated scrapping the Constitution, while
presidential advisor, Walt W. Rostow (Rhodes Scholar), has proclaimed that the United States
must prepare to give up its national sovereignty.
The hour is late. At this stage of America's historical development, no honest student of
current events should have any difficulty recognizing that we have been involved in a deadly
flirtation with national disaster.
Of course, if we are to build a genuine bulwark of political strength against the
international network, it is essential that one of
renovated and restructured. as a base of operations for all Democrats and Rep
[page 120]
the national political parties be
ublicans who
sincerely want to preserve the Constitutional structure of the American nation. This can be done
only by launching a nationwide educational program designed to eliminate much of the confusion
which presently exists concerning each of the major
parties.
For example, the Democratic Party has become popularly identified as the "people's"
party, the "prosperity" party, the party of the poor, the down-trodden, the working man, and the
distressed. In reality, it has been the party through which the Wall Stree
announced that there wasn't any need for a
t globalists and the
Left-wing international conspiracy have accomplished most of their subversion of both the
Constitution and the traditional pattern of life on which the American culture was founded.
Actually, the Democratic Party was originally the conservative party. It promised to guard
the constitutional prerogatives of the people against the usurpation of power by big government.
It stood for public frugality, a balanced budget, states rights, re
sistance to Wall Street monopolies
and all the rest. In fact, this was the theme of the 1932 platform on which FDR was elected and
this reviewer endorsed that platform and became a registered Democrat. But by 1936, a complete
metamorphosis was taking place
.
Alfred E. Smith, standard-bearer of the Democrats in the 1928 presidential elections,
announced in 1936 that the party had been deliberately betrayed into the hands of those who
represented the Socialist-Left-wing camp. It has remained there ever since pr
omising, promising,
taxing, taxing, spending, spending, electing, electing. Harry Hopkins said this was the magic
formula by which the Democrats could continue in power indefinitely. In fact, Norman Thomas,
the perennial Socialist Candidate for President,
Socialist Party any more because the Democrats were doing practically everything the Socialists
had been advocating.
4(126)
The Republicans, on the other hand, have been identified as the genuinely "conservative"
party which it has NOT been for a full generation. Whenever it has been in power it has tried to
out-do the Democrats in both spending and big government. Its leaders
have been largely
Establishment figures serving as a backstop for the Democrats in case the Democrats felt out of
favor with the public. Establishment Republicans have always insisted that the ideological base
of the party be stretched out far enough to i
nclude a powerful Left-wing segment because they
claimed that was the only way to
[page 121]
obtain or retain power.
Actually, the Republicans and conservative Democrats might take a hard look at the
possibility of remaking the Republican Party into a genuine, American Constitutionalist Party
and openly challenging the whole fabric of Left-wing betrayal regardless of wh
coming from Democrats or Republicans. At least, by restructuring the Republican Party it could
ether it has been
be a place where men and women of honest convictions could rally without being betrayed by the
Establishment's pseudo-Republicans.
Some have felt the necessity of pushing for a third, independent party and eventually this
may be the only recourse. At the moment, however, and due to the shortness of time, it would
appear to be more practical to restructure the traditional "conservativ
e" party as a genuine
hard-hitting defender of American institutions and American values and come out in the open for
international cooperation while vigorously opposing international consolidation. It could be the
party for responsible fiscal policies, th
e protection of property rights, the elimination of
confiscatory taxation, the disengagement from international intrigue. It could be the means of
restoring the people's confidence in the processes of representative government by providing
more men and wom
en of genuine integrity in the courts and other stations of public service.
To bring about these needed changes it is necessary to push to the surface a whole new
breed of articulate, well-informed, tough-minded political leaders who have done their
homework and are capable of taking on this gigantic international network of glob
already been elected to political office. This must become the wave of the future.
al power.
Already a few such men and women are beginning to appear on the political scene. Some have
The job devolving on the rest of us is to encourage these courageous Americans who are
willing to give up the peace and quiet of their personal lives in order to take on the stormy career
of public service. We should encourage them with money, moral suppo
rt, by doing our own
homework, and by speaking up decisively to sustain the fight when critical issues are being
decided.
The job ahead is gigantic, but this reviewer believes that America's misused, much
abused, silent majority can still turn back the prevailing tide of impending disaster.
It is time we got on with the task.
----------------------------------------
[page 122]
Appendix A
Betrayal of the Democratic Party
By Alfred E. (Al) Smith
Alfred E. Smith, Democratic Governor of New York during four terms, became the
Democratic candidate for President in 1928 but lost to Herbert Hoover. In 1932 he supported
Franklin D. Roosevelt for President, but by 1936 he was so shocked and alarmed by wh
at he saw
happening that he decided to warn his Party. Because of the popularity of President Roosevelt
this step was considered by some to be virtual treason. Nevertheless, on January 25, 1936, Alfred
E. Smith gave the following speech in Washington, D.C.
, to warn the American people that the
Democratic Party was being betrayed.
Alfred Smith and Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932.
At the outset of my remarks let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am not a candidate
for any nomination by any party at any time, and what is more I do not intend to even lift my
right hand to secure any nomination from any party at any time.
Further than that, I have no axe to grind. There is nothing personal in this whole
performance so far as I am concerned. I have no feeling against any man, woman or child in the
United States....
I was born in the Democratic party and I expect to die in it. And I was attracted to it in my
youth because I was led to believe that no man owned it. Further than that, that no group of men
owned it, but on the other hand, that it belonged to all the pla
in people in the United States.
Patriotism Above Partisanship
It is not easy for me to stand up here tonight and talk to the American people against tire
Democratic Administration. This is not easy. It hurts me. But I can call upon innumerable
witnesses to testify to the fact that during my whole public life I put p
partisanship. And when I see danger, I say danger, that is the "Stop, look, and listen" to the
atriotism above
fundamental principles upon which this Government of ours was organized, it is difficult for me
to refrain from speaking up.
What are these dangers that I see? The first is the arraignment of class against class. It has
been freely predicted that if we were ever to have civil strife again in this country, it would come
from the appeal to passion and prejudices that comes from t
he demagogues that would incite one
class of our people against the other.
In my time I have met some good and bad industrialists. I have met some good and bad
financiers, but I have also met some good and bad laborers, and this I know, that permanent
prosperity is dependent upon both capital and labor alike.
And I also know that there can be no permanent prosperity in this country until industry is
able to employ labor, and there certainly can be no permanent recovery upon any governmental
theory of "soak the rich" or "soak the poor."...
[page 123]
A Government By Bureaucrats
The next thing that I view as being dangerous to our national well-being is government by
bureaucracy instead of what we have been taught to look for, government by law.
Just let me quote something from the President's message to Congress:
"In 34 months we have built up new instruments of public power in the hands of the
people's government. This power is wholesome and proper, but in the hands of political puppets
of an economic autocracy, such power would provide shackles for the liberties
Now I interpret that to mean, if you are going to have an autocrat, take me; but be very
of our people."
careful about the other fellow.
There is a complete answer to that, and it rises in the minds of the great rank and file, and
that answer is just this: We will never in this country tolerate any laws that provide shackles for
our people.
We don't want any autocrats, either in or out of office. We wouldn't even take a good one.
The next danger that is apparent to me is the vast building up of new bureaus of
government, draining resources of our people in a common pool of redistributing them, not by
any process of law, but by the whim of a bureaucratic autocracy.
The 1932 Platform
Well now, what am I here for? I am here not to find fault. Anybody can do that. I am here
to make suggestions. What would I have my party do? I would have them reestablish and
re-declare the principles that they put forth in that 1932 platform....
The Republican platform was ten times as long. It was stuffy, it was unreadable, and in
many points, not understandable. No Administration in the history of the country came into
power with a more simple, a more clear, or a more inescapable mandate than d
id the party that
was inaugurated on the Fourth of March in 1933.
And listen, no candidate in the history of the country ever pledged himself more
unequivocally to his party platform than did the President who was inaugurated on that day.
Well, here we are!
Millions and millions of Democrats just like myself, all over the country, still believe in
that platform. And what we want to know is wiry it wasn't carried out....
Now, let us wander for awhile and let's take a look at that platform, and let's see what
happened to it. Here is how it started out:
"We believe that a party platform is a covenant with the people, to be faithfully kept by
the party when entrusted with power, and that the people are entitled to know in plain words the
terms of contract to which they are asked to subscribe.
"The Democratic Party solemnly promises by appropriate action to put into effect the
principles, policies and reforms herein advocated and to eradicate the political methods and
practices herein condemned."
My friends, these are what we call fighting words. At the time that that platform went
through the air and over the wire, the people of the United States were in the lowest possible
depths of despair, and the Democratic platform looked to them like the st
ar of hope; it looked
like the rising sun in the East to the mariner on the bridge of a ship after a terrible night.
But what happened to it?
[page 124]
Economy in Government
First plank: "We advocate immediate and drastic reduction of governmental expenditures
by abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating departments and bureaus, and
eliminating extravagance to accomplish a saving of not less than 25 percent in
the cost of the
Federal Government."
Well, now, what is the fact? No offices were consolidated, no bureaus were eliminated,
but on the other hand, the alphabet was exhausted. The creation of new departments and this is
sad news for the taxpayer -- the cost, the ordinary cost, what we refer t
o as housekeeping cost,
over and above all emergencies that ordinary housekeeping cost of government is greater today
than it has ever been in any time in the history of the republic.
The Unbalanced Budget
Another plank: "We favor maintenance of the national credit by a Federal budget annually
balanced on the basis of accurate Federal estimate within revenue."
How can you balance a budget if you insist upon spending more money than you take in?
Even the increased revenue won't go to balance the budget, because it is hocked before you
receive it. What is worse than that?...
The Middle Class Will Pay the Debt
Now here is something that I want to say to the rank and file. There are three classes of
people in this country; there are the poor and the rich, and in between the two is what has often
been referred to as the great backbone of America, that is the plai
down five or six thousand dollars a year.
It is going to come to them in the form of indirect and hidden taxa
n fellow.
That is the fellow that makes from one hundred dollars a month up to the man that draws
Now, there is a great big army. Forget the rich; they can't pay this debt. If you took
everything they have away from them, they couldn't pay it; they ain't got enough. There is no use
talking about the poor; they will never pay it, because they have noth
This debt is going to be paid by that great big middle class that we refer to as the
backbone and the rank and file, and the sin of it is they ain't going to know that they are paying it.
ing.
tion. It will come to them in
the cost of living, in the cost of clothing, in the cost of every activity that they enter into, and
because it is not a direct tax, they won't think they're paying, but, take it from me, they are going
to pay it!
What About States' Rights?
Another plank: "We advocate the extension of Federal credit to the States to provide
unemployment relief where the diminishing resources of the State make it impossible for them to
provide for their needs."
That was pretty plain. That was a recognition in the national convention of the rights of
the States. But how is it interpreted? The Federal Government took over most of the relief
problems, some of them useful and most of them useless. They started out t
o prime the pump for
industry in order to absorb the ranks of the unemployed, and at the end of three years their
employment affirmative policy is absolutely nothing better than the negative policy of the
Administration that preceded it.
"We favor unemployment and old age insurance under State laws."
Now let me make myself perfectly clear so that no demagogue or no crack-pot in the next
week or so will be able to say anything about my attitude on this
am in favor of it. And I take my hat off to no man in the United St
[page 125]
kind of legislation. I
ates on the question of
legislation beneficial to the poor, the weak, the sick, or the afflicted, or women and children.
Because why? I started out a quarter of a century ago when I had very few followers in
my State, and during that period I advocated, fought for, introduced as a legislator and finally as
Governor for eight long years, signed more progressive legislation i
n the interest of the men,
women and children than any man in the State of New York.
Unconstitutional Measure -- Unfulfilled Pledges
And the sin of this whole thing, and the part of it that worries me and gives me concern,
is that this haphazard, hurry-up passage of legislation is never going to accomplish the purposes
for which it was designed and -- bear this in mind, follow the plat
NRA! A vast octopus set up by government, that wound its arms around all the business
form-under State laws....
Another one: "We promise the removal of Government from all fields of private
enterprise except where necessary to develop public works and national resources in the common
interest."
of the country, paralyzed big business, and choked little business to death.
Did you read in the papers a short time ago where somebody said that business was going
to get a breathing spell?
What is the meaning of that? And where did that expression arise?
I'll tell you where it comes from. It comes from the prize ring. When the aggressor is
punching the head off the other fellow he suddenly takes compassion on him and he gives him a
breathing spell before he delivers the knockout wallop.
Wasteful Extravagance
Here is another one: "We condemn the open and covert resistance of administrative
officials to every effort made by congressional committees to curtail the extravagant expenditures
of Government and improvident subsidies granted to private interests."
Now, just between ourselves, do you know any administrative officer that has tried to
stop Congress from appropriating money? Do you think there has been any desire on the part of
Congress to curtail appropriations?
they were for.
Why, not at all. The fact is that Congress threw them right and left -- didn't even tell what
And the truth, further, is that every administrative officer sought to get all that he possibly
could in order to expand the activities of his own office and throw the money of the people right
and left. And as to subsidies, why, never at any time in the
history of this or any other country
were there so many subsidies granted to private groups, and on such a huge scale.
The fact of the matter is that most of the cases now pending before the United States
Supreme Court revolve around the point whether or not it is proper for Congress to tax all the
people to pay subsidies to a particular group.
Here is another one: "We condemn the extravagance of the Farm Board, its disastrous
action which made the Government a speculator of farm products, and the unsound policy of
restricting agricultural products to the demand of domestic markets."...
What about the restriction of our agricultural products and the demands of the market?
Why, the fact about that is that we shut out entirely the farm market,
the radio time will not permit it. But just let me sum up this way. Regulation of the Stock
[page 126]
and by plowing
under corn and wheat and the destruction of foodstuffs, food from forei
gn countries has been
pouring into our American markets -- food that should have been purchased by us from our own
farmers.
In other words, while some of the countries of the Old World were attempting to drive the
wolf of hunger from the doormat, the United States flew in the face of God's bounty and
destroyed its own foodstuffs. There can be no question about that.
Now I could go on indefinitely with some of the other planks. They are unimportant, and
Exchange and the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, plus one or two minor
planks of the
platform that in no way touch the daily life of our people, have been carried out, but the balance
of the platform was thrown in the wastebasket. About that there can be no question.
Let's see how it was carried out. Make a test for yourself. Just get the platform of the
Democratic Party, and get the platform of the Socialist Party, and lay them down on your dining
room table, side by side, and get a heavy lead pencil and scratch out
the word "Democrat," and
scratch out the word "Socialist," and let the two platforms lay there.
Then study the record of the present Administration up to date. After you have done that,
make your mind up to pick up the platform that more nearly squares with the record, and you will
put your hand on the Socialist platform. You don't dare touch the De
mocratic platform.
Democratic Or Socialistic?
And incidentally, let me say, that it is not the first time in recorded history, that a group of
men have stolen the livery of the church to do the work of the devil.
Now, after studying this whole situation, you will find that that is at the bottom of all our
troubles. This country was organized on the principles of representative democracy, and you can't
Socialism
or
Communism
with that. They are like oil and water; they refuse to mix.
And incidentally, let me say to you, that is the reason why the United States Supreme
Court is working overtime throwing the alphabet out of the window three letters at a time.
Now I am going to let you in on something else. How do you suppose all this happened?
Here is the way it happened.
they ran away with their clothes
The young Brain Trusters caught the Socialists in swimming and
.
Now, it is all right with me. It is all right to me if they want to disguise themselves as
mix
Norman Thomas or Karl Marx, or Lenin, or any of the rest of that bunch, but what I won't stand
for is to let them march under the banner of Jefferson, Jackson, or C
Now what is worrying me, where does that leave me as a Democrat? My mind is now
leveland.
"We Can Take a Walk"
fixed upon the Convention in June, in Philadelphia. The committee on resolutions is about to
report, and the preamble to the platform is:
"We, the representatives of the Democratic Party in Convention assembled, heartily
endorse the Democratic Administration."
What happens to the disciples of Jefferson and Jackson and Cleveland when that
resolution is read out? Why, for us it is a washout. There is only one of two things we can do. We
can either take on the mantle of hypocrisy or we can take a walk, and we will
probably do the
[page 127]
Now leave the platform alone for a little while. What about this attack that has been made
upon the fundamental institutions of this country? Who threatens them, and did we have any
warning of this threat? Why, you don't have to study party platforms. You
don't have to read
books. You don't have to listen to professors of economics. You can find the whole thing
incorporated in the greatest declaration of political principles that ever came from the hands of
man, the Declaration of Independence and the Cons
titution of the United States.
Constitutional Limitations
Always have in your minds that the Constitution and the first ten amendments to it were
drafted by refugees and by sons of refugees, by men with bitter memories of European
oppression and hardship, by men who brought to this country and handed down to thei
descendants an abiding fear of the bitterness and all the hatred of the Old World was distilled in
There are just three principles, and in the interest of brevity, I will read them. I can read
r
our Constitution into the purest democracy that the world has ever known.
them quicker than talk them.
"First, a Federal Government, strictly limited in its power, with all other powers except
those expressly mentioned reserved to the States and to the people, so as to insure State's rights,
guarantee home rule, and preserve freedom of individual initiativ
Constitution is that in the State you can do anything you want to do provided it is not prohibited
e and local control."
That is simple enough. The difference between the State constitutions and the Federal
by the Constitution. But in the Federal Government, according to that
government, you can do
only that which that Constitution tells you that you can do.
latter.
What is the trouble? Congress has overstepped its bounds. It went beyond that
Constitutional limitation, and it has enacted laws that not only violate the home rule and the
State's right principle -- and who says that? Do I say it? Not at all. That was sa
Chorus of Yes-men in Congress
id by the United
States Supreme Court in the last ten or twelve days.
Secondly, the Government, with three independent branches, Congress to make the laws,
the Executive to execute them, the Supreme Court, and so forth. You know that.
In the name of Heaven, where is the independence of Congress? Why, they just laid right
down. They are flatter on the Congressional floor than the rug on the table here. They
surrendered all of their powers to the Executive, and that is the reason why you
newspapers references to Congress as the Rubber Stamp Congress.
read in the
We all know that the most important bills were drafted by the Brain Trusters, and sent
over to Congress and passed by Congress without consideration, without debate and, without
meaning any offense at all to my Democratic brethren in Congress, I think I c
an safely say
without 90 percent of them knowing what was in the bills.
That was the meaning of the list that came over, and besides certain bills were "Must."
What does that mean? Speaking for the rank and file of American people we don't want any
executive to tell Congress what it must do, and we don't want any Congress or
the Executive
jointly or severally to tell the United States Supreme Court what it must do!
And further than that, we don't want the United States Supreme Court to tell either of
them what they must do.
[page 128]
What we want, and what we insist upon, and what we are going to have is the absolute
preservation of this balance of power which is the keystone, the arch upon which the whole
theory of democratic government has got to rest. When you rattle that you rattl
e the whole
structure.
Of course, when our forefathers wrote the Constitution of the United States it couldn't be
possible that they had it in their minds that it was going to be all right for all time to come. So
they said, "Now, we will provide a manner and method of amending
it."
That is set forth in the document itself, and during our national life we amended it many
We amended it once by mistake, and we corrected it. What did we do? We took the
amendment out. Fine, that is the way we want to do it, by recourse to the people.
times.
But we don't want an Administration that takes a shot at it in the dark and that ducks
away from it and dodges away from it and tries to put something over contradiction of it upon
any theory that there is going to be a great public howl in favor of that
Bryanism, and I know exactly what Bryan did to our party. I knew how long it took to build it
something; possibly the
United States Supreme Court may be intimidated into a friendly opinion with respect to it.
What I have held all during my public life is that Almighty God is with this country, and
He didn't give us that kind of Supreme Court.
Now this is pretty tough on me to have to go at my own party this way, but I submit that
there is a limit to blind loyalty.
As a young man in the Democratic Party, I witnessed the rise and fall of Bryan and
after he got finished with it. But let me say this to the everlasting credit o
f Bryan and the men that
followed him, they had the nerve and the courage and honesty to put into the platform just what
their leaders stood for. And they further put the American people into a position of making an
intelligent choice when they went to the
polls.
Why, the fact of this whole thing is I speak now not only of the executive but of the
legislature at the same time that they promised one set of things; they repudiated that promise,
and they launched off on a program of action totally different.
Well, in 25 years of experience I have known both parties to fail to carry out some of the
planks in their platform. But this is the first time that I have known a party, upon such a huge
scale, not only not to carry out the plank, but to do the directly
opposite thing to what they
promised.
Suggested Remedies
Now, suggestions, and I make these as a Democrat anxious for the success of my party,
and I make them in good faith.
No. 1: I suggest to the members of my party on Capitol Hill here in Washington that they
take their minds off the Tuesday that follows the first Monday in November. Just take their
minds off it to the end that you may do the right thing and not the expedi
ent thing.
Next, I suggest to them that they dig up the 1932 platform from the grave that they buried
it in, read it over, and study it, breathe life into it, and follow it in legislative and executive
action, to the end that they make good their promises to the Ame
rican people when they put forth
that platform and the candidate that stood upon it 100 percent. In short, make good!
Next, I suggest to them that they stop compromising with the fundamental principles laid
down by Jackson and Jefferson and Cleveland.
[page 129]
Fourth: Stop attempting to alter the form and structure of our Government without
recourse to the people themselves as provided in their own Constitution. This country belongs to
the people, and it doesn't belong to any Administration.
Next, I suggest that they read their Oath of Office to support the Constitution of the
United States. And I ask them to remember that they took that oath with their hands on the Holy
Bible, thereby calling upon God Almighty Himself to witness their solemn
promise. It is bad
enough to disappoint us.
Washington Or Moscow
Sixth: I suggest that from this moment they resolve to make the Constitution the Civil
Bible of the United States, and pay it the same civil respect and reverence that they would
religiously pay the Holy Scripture, and I ask them to read from the Holy Scr
ipture the Parable of
the Prodigal Son and to follow his example.
house.
Stop! Stop wasting your substance in a foreign land, and come back to your Father's
Now, in conclusion let me give this solemn warning. There can be only one Capitol,
Washington or Moscow!
There can be only one atmosphere of government, the clear, pure, fresh air of free
America, or the foul breath of Communistic Russia.
There can be only one flag, the Stars and Stripes, or the Red Flag of the Godless Union of
the Soviet.
There can be only one National Anthem. The Star Spangled Banner or the Internationale.
There can be only one victor. If the Constitution wins, we win. But if the Constitution --
stop. Stop there. The Constitution can't lose! The fact is, it has already won, but the news has not
reached certain ears.
[page 130]
----------------------------------------
Appendix B
Socialist Norman Thomas Claims Great Victories
for Socialism Under Both Democrats and Republicans
Norman Thomas was the Socialist candidate for President in 1928 and for every single
election during the next twenty years. However, he never received more than 190,000 votes
because he ran on the Socialist ticket and Americans have always despised social
ism whenever it
was labeled as such. Unfortunately, however, they had never been educated to recognize socialist
principles if they bore no label. This made it possible for the last several administrations to
restructure the country on socialist lines with
out the American people realizing it.
By 1953 Norman Thomas was jubilant. He wrote a pamphlet called, Democratic
Socialism in which he stated that:
"... here in America more measures once praised or denounced as socialist have been
adopted than once I should have thought possible short of a socialist victory at the polls."
Under President Eisenhower, Norman Thomas still found reasons to be jubilant. In the
Congressional Record for April 17, 1958 (p. A-3080) Norman Thomas is quoted as saying:
"The United States is making greater strides toward Socialism under Eisenhower than
even under Roosevelt, particularly in the fields of Federal spending and welfare legislation."
By 1962 Norman Thomas summed up the whole situation as follows:
"The difference between Democrats and Republicans is: Democrats have accepted some
ideas of Socialism cheerfully, while Republicans have accepted them reluctantly."
But whether the various administrations in Washington have been pushing Socialism
1(127)
"cheerfully" or "reluctantly," the facts clearly support the contention of Dr. Quigley in
Tragedy
And Hope
, that the people of the United States are being rapidly collectivized, their Constitution
emasculated, and the groundwork laid to transform the United States into the major industrial
power base for a global society of totalitarian socialism.
****************************************
Endnotes
1 (Popup - Popup)
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
up - Popup)
, p. 991.
2 (Popup - Popup)
2. Quigley,
Tragedy and Hope
, p. 950, emphasi
s added.
3 (Popup - Popup)
3. See, for example, Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1248.
4 (Popup - Popup)
4. See Quigley,
Tragedy An
d Hope
, p. 949.
5 (Popup - Popup)
5. See Quigley,
6 (Popup - Popup)
7 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 950-956.
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 51.
2. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 51-52.
8 (Popup - Popup)
3. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 52.
9 (Pop
4. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 52-53.
10 (Popup - Popup)
5. Quigley,
11 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 53.
6. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 48-49, emphasis added.
12 (Popup - Popup)
7. Quigley,
13 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 325, emphasis added
.
8. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 499-500, emphasis added.
14 (Popup - Popup)
9. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope,
pp. 71-72.
15 (Popup - Popup)
10. Quigley,
16 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 72.
1. Gabriel Kolko,
The Triumph of Conserv
atism
, Quadrangle Books, Chicago, 1967, pp. 4-6.
17 (Popup - Popup)
2. Serano S. Pratt,
The Work of Wall Street
, Appleton & Comp
any, New York, 1916, p. 340.
18 (Popup - Popup)
3. Stephen Birmingham,
9 (Popup - Popup)
Our Crowd
, Dell Publishing Co., New York, 1967, p. 400.
4. Frank Vanderlip, "Farm Boy to Financier,"
Saturday Evening Post
, February 9, 1935, p. 25.
20 (Popup - Popup
)
5. Gabriel Kolko,
The Triumph of Conservatism, Quadrangle Books, Chicago, 1967, p. 184.
21 (Popup - Popup)
6. Ferdinand Lundbe
rg,
America's 60 Families
, the Vanguard Press, New York, 1938, pp.
110-112.
1
22 (Popup - Popup)
211.
12.
7. Ferdinand Lundberg,
30 (Popup - Popup)
America's
60 Families
, the Vanguard Press, New York, 1938, pp.
109-113.
23 (Popup - Popup)
8. Gabriel Kolko,
24 (Popup - Popup)
The Triumph of Conservatism
,
Quadrangle Books, Chicago, 1967, pp. 205 and
9. Gabriel Kolko,
The Triumph of Conservatism, Quadrangle B
ooks, Chicago, 1967, p. 186.
25 (Popup - Popup)
10. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 213.
26 (Popup - Popup)
11. Quigley,
Tragedy A
nd Hope
, p. 225.
27 (Popup - Popup)
U.S. News & World Report
, May 5, 1969.
28 (Popup - Popup)
13. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope,
p. 326.
29 (Popup - Popup)
14. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 324, emphasis added.
15. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 326.
31 (Popup - Popup)
16. Ferdinand Lundberg,
opup - Popup)
America's 60 Families
, the Vanguard Press, New York, 1938, p. 122.
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 950.
33 (Popup - Popup)
2. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 130.
34 (Popup - Popup)
3. Kenneth Clark,
Ruskin Today
, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1964, pp. 267-268.
35 (Popup - Popup)
4. Quigley,
Tragedy
And Hope
, p. 269.
36 (Popup - Popup)
5. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 130, emphasis added.
37 (Popup - Popup)
6. Quigley,
Traged
y And Hope
, p. 130.
38 (Popup - Popup)
7. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 130-131, emphasis added.
39 (Popup - Popup)
8. Quigley,
40 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 131.
9. Quigley,
41 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 131.
10. Quigley,
42 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And
Hope
, pp. 131-132.
11. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 132.
32 (P
43 (Popup - Popup)
12. Quigley,
48 (Popup -
Tragedy And Hope
Tragedy And Hope
,p
p. 132-133.
44 (Popup - Popup)
13. Quigley,
, p. 133.
45 (Popup - Popup)
14. Quigley,
46 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 133.
15. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 950.
47 (Popup - Popup)
16. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 951.
Popup)
17. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 951.
49 (Popup - Popup)
18. Quigley,
, pp. 951-952.
50 (Popup - Popup)
19. Quigley,
51 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 952.
20. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 938-939.
52 (Popup - Popup)
21. Qui
gley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 939.
53 (Popup - Popup)
22. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 937.
54 (Popup - Popup)
23. Quigley,
Tragedy
And Hope
, p. 952.
55 (Popup - Popup)
24. Quigley,
56 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 953.
25. Quigley,
57 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
,
p. 953.
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 954.
58 (Popup - Popup)
2. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 954.
59 (Po
pup - Popup)
3. Quigley,
60 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 954, emphasis added.
4. The figure of twenty million dollars is
cited by his grandson, Jacob Schiff, in the
New York
Journal-American
for February 3, 1949.
61 (Popup - Popup)
5. For additiona
l details see
Czarism and the Revolution by Arsene de Goulevitch and also
Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development --
1917-1930
by Anthony C. Sutton,
Hoover Institute, Stanford University, 1968.
62 (Popup - Popup)
6. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp
. 954-955.
63 (Popup - Popup)
7. Quigley,
65
69
16.
Tragedy And Hope
(Popup - Popup)
, p. 938.
64 (Popup - Popup)
8. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 945.
9. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 945.
66 (Popup - Popup)
10. Quigley,
, pp. 945-946.
67 (Popup -
Popup)
11. Quigley,
68 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 946.
12. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 946-947, emphasis added.
(Popup - Popup)
13. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 947.
70 (Popup - Popup)
14. Quigley,
71 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 947-948, emphasis
added.
15. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 938.
72 (Popup - Popup)
Reece Committee Report
, Summary of Findi
ngs.
73 (Popup - Popup)
17. Quigley,
74 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 948.
18. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 935, emphasi
s added.
75 (Popup - Popup)
19. See, for example, Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 949.
76 (Popup - Popup)
20. Quigley,
Tragedy And
Hope
, p. 955, emphasis added.
77 (Popup - Popup)
21. Quigley,
78 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 956, emphasis added.
Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 950, emphasis added.
79 (Popup - Popup)
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 951-952, emphasis added.
80 (Popup - Popup)
Review of the News
, September 9, 1970, p. 17.
81 (Popup - Popup)
1. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 954-95
5, emphasis added.
82 (Popup - Popup)
2. Quigley,
83 (Popup - Popup)
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 955, emphasis added.
3. Quigley,
84 (Popup - Popup)
Trage
dy And Hope
, p. 955, emphasis added.
4. Rene A. Wormser,
Foundations: Their Power and Influence
, Devin-Adair,
New York, 1958.
85 (Popup - Popup)
22.
2.
5. Quigley,
1.
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 987, emphasis added.
86 (Popup - Popup)
6. Quigley,
Tragedy
And Hope
, p. 1244, emphasis added.
87 (Popup - Popup)
7. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1245.
88 (Popup - Popup)
8. Quigley,
Tra
gedy And Hope
, p. 938, emphasis added.
89 (Popup - Popup)
New York Star
90 (Popup - Popup)
, August 18, 1948, p. 1.
2. Felix W
91 (Popup - Popup)
ittmer,
Conquest of the American Mind, Meador Publishing Co., Boston, 1956, p. 39.
3. E. Merril Root,
Brain W
ashing in the High Schools, Devin Adair, 1959.
92 (Popup - Popup)
4. E. Merril Root,
Collectivism on the Campus, Devin Adair, 19
, p. 1311, emphasis added.
61.
93 (Popup - Popup)
5. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
94 (Popup - Popup)
1. See, for example, Quigley,
95 (Popup - Popup)
T
ragedy And Hope
, p. 954.
2. George Racey Jordan,
ompany, 1952.
96 (Popup - Popup)
From Major Jordan's Diaries
, New York: Harcourt, Brace and
3. Arthur Bliss Lane,
I Saw Poland Betrayed
, New York: Bobbe-Merrill Co., 1949.
97 (Popup - Pop
up)
4. David Martin,
Ally Betrayed
, New York: Prentice-Hall, 1946.
98 (Popup - Popup)
5. Ivor Thomas,
The Socialist Tragedy
, New
York: The Macmillan Company, 1951.
99 (Popup - Popup)
6. Albert C. Wedemeyer,
Wedemever Reports
, New York: Henry Holt & Co., 19
58.
100 (Popup - Popup)
7. John Leighton Stuart,
101 (Popup - Popup)
itute of Pacific Relations Hearings
Fifty Years in China
, New York: Random House, 1955.
, Part 3, p. 923.
102 (Popup - Popup)
9. Ralph de Toledano,
Seeds of Treason
, Chicago: Henry
Regnery, 1962.
103 (Popup - Popup)
10. Whittaker Chambers,
104 (Popup - Popup)
Witness
, New York: Random House, 1952.
11. For an
inside story on the way the Russians ran the entire Korean War, see "Russians in
Korea: the Hidden Bosses," by Pawel Monat,
Life
magazine, June, 1960, pp. 76-102.
105 (Popup - Popup)
1. For an intimate and sometimes critical biography of Joseph McCarthy,
see
McCarthy
by Roy
Cohn, The New American Library, New York, 1968.
C
8. Inst
106 (Popup - Popup)
4.
1. 2.
1965.
2. William F. Buckley and L. Brent Bozel
Regnery Co., 1954.
107 (Popup - Popup)
l,
McCarthy And His Enemies
, Chicago: Henry
3. Lionel Lokos,
Who Promoted Peress?
, New Yo
rk: The Bookmailer Press, 1961.
108 (Popup - Popup)
America's Retreat From Victory
, New York: Devin-Adair Co., 1951.
109 (Pop
up - Popup)
5. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 928-929.
110 (Popup - Popup)
6. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 932.
111 (Popup - Po
Reuther Memorandum
pup)
, p. 8.
112 (Popup - Popup)
Reuther Memorandum
, pp. 10-11.
113 (Popup - Popup)
3. Quigley,
Tragedy
And Hope
, p. 1245.
114 (Popup - Popup)
1. Stephen Shadegg,
What Happened to Goldwater?, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston,
115 (Popup - Popup)
2. Stephen Shadegg,
116 (Popup - Popup)
What Happened To Goldwater?, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston,
1965, pp. 263-264.
3. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1248, emphasis added.
117 (Popup - Popup)
4. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp.
1234 to 1278.
118 (Popup - Popup)
5. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 1243-1244.
119 (Popup - Popup)
6. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1247.
120 (Popup - Popup)
7. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1246.
121 (Popup - Popup)
8. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, pp. 979-
980.
122 (Popup - Popup)
1. Quoted in
The Review of the News
, September 21, 1966, p. 22.
123 (Popup - Popup)
1. Quigley,
Tragedy
And Hope
, p. 1243.
124 (Popup - Popup)
2. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope
, p. 1244.
125 (Popup - Popup)
3. Quigley,
Tragedy And Hope,
p. 133.
126 (Popup - Popup)
4. See the Appendix, Alfred E. Smith's " ." 1.
Betrayal of the Democratic Party
127 (Popup - Popup)
Cleveland Plain Dealer
, October 19, 1962.
No comments:
Post a Comment