| Contact WND | WND Page One | Search WND |
    Click here for more information!  


WND Exclusive Commentary
The open conspiracy

By Samuel L. Blumenfeld
© 1999

In my last column, I quoted from Stuart Chase's "A New Deal" and was quite amazed at how open and frank were the socialists in the 1930s about their plans to replace our constitutional form of government with a controlled socialist society. Chase was not in the least afraid of violent revolution and was quite prepared to accept its consequences. He wrote,

    I am not seriously alarmed by the sufferings of the creditor class, the troubles which the church is bound to encounter, the restrictions on certain kinds of freedom which must result, nor even by the bloodshed of the transition period. A better economic order is worth a little bloodshed.

You won't hear that kind of talk from our present-day socialists in and out of Congress. Rather than be frank and honest about who they are and what they want, they disguise themselves as Democrats or Liberals. They don't use the word socialism because of its negative connotations. Even though most Americans today couldn't define socialism if they had to, they nevertheless don't trust the idea. Our public education system has made sure that Americans are illiterate when it comes to political and economic ideologies. So socialists can talk about "industrial democracy," or "economic justice," or "equity," or "fair income distribution" -- all fine-sounding terms that can mean anything to the average individual.

In his book, Chase called on a million intelligent Americans to organize locally in order to bring about revolutionary economic and political change. And there is no doubt that at least a million liberals and socialists did organize and infiltrate our political, educational and cultural institutions with the clear intention of steering our nation in the direction of socialism.

Even religious institutions were to be infiltrated, taken over, and changed. That was openly advocated in the Humanist Manifesto of 1933, written by young Unitarian ministers, who reflected the kind of revolutionary fervor that was in the air. They wrote,

    Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.

In other words, the purpose and program of the humanist agenda is to "reconstitute" the institutions of other religions and change their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods and communal activities. No other religion in America advocates "reconstituting" the institutions of other religions in order to make them more compatible with the humanist long-range agenda.

Stuart Chase, did not sign the Humanist Manifesto of 1933, but John Dewey, Robert Morss Lovett, R. Lester Mondale, and 31 other liberals and socialists signed it. They, no doubt, were in complete agreement with Stuart Chase in the need to organize a million intelligent Americans to bring about change in their communities. Indeed, to this day, local Unitarian churches have been hotbeds of opposition to efforts by conservatives to get elected to school boards in their communities.

"The funny thing about it is that the groups are actually beginning to form," wrote Chase. "They are part of what H.G. Wells has called the Open Conspiracy." Wells, in fact, was an indefatigable promoter of world government. In a chapter entitled "The Idea of a Planned World" in his book, "Experiment in Autobiography," published in 1934, Wells wrote, "If Russia has done nothing else for mankind, the experiment of the Communist Party is alone sufficient to justify her revolution and place it upon an altogether higher level than that chaotic emotional release, the first French Revolution."

Both Chase and Wells were horribly wrong about Communism and the Russian Revolution. But they were so carried away by the idea of "universal peace," that any means to reach it was acceptable. Wells wrote, "Life is conflict and the only way to universal peace is through the defeat and obliteration of every minor organization of force. Carrying weapons individually or in crowds, calls for vigorous suppression on the part of the community."

NATO and our anti-gun activists have been carrying out the very acts necessary to bring about the new world order -- or the world-state, as Wells called it. He wrote, "I believe this idea of the planned world-state is one to which all our thought and knowledge is tending. It is an idea that is quietly pervading human mentality because facts and events conspire in its favour."

Wells wrote that before Prof. Carroll Quigley told us that those "facts and events" were anything but accidental. They were planned to lead us in the direction the advocates of the world-state wanted us to go. And when the world-state is thrust upon us, Wells says, "We shall find ourselves almost abruptly engaged in a new system of political issues in which the socialist world-state will be plainly and consciously lined up against the scattered vestigial sovereignties of the past."

That just about explains what NATO did in aggressively bombing Yugoslavia in order to bring "peace" to Kosovo.

In 1934, Wells interviewed FDR in the White House. He wrote, "As the vast problems about them expose and play themselves into their minds, the goal of the Open Conspiracy becomes plainer ahead. Franklin Roosevelt does not embody and represent that goal, but he represents the way thither. He is being the most effective transmitting instrument possible for the coming of the new world order."

And so, what does all of this mean? It means that the new world order has been long in the making, that it has had behind it the wealth of big money, the power of prominent politicians, the cachet of intellectuals like Wells and popular writers like Chase. But what it also means is that, as an idea, the new world order is as doomed to ultimate failure as is communism. But because it has so much political power behind it, we shall be dragged through much suffering before its defeat becomes apparent.

What we need now is not an Open Conspiracy, and not even an Open Opposition. What we need is an Open Affirmation of Freedom. We can start with gun owners and homeschoolers. These two groups alone represent the essence of freedom. They are the pillars of a free society, and they have grown out of the traditions and values handed down to us by our Founding Fathers. As long as we steadfastly uphold these traditions and values, we shall win.

Samuel L. Blumenfeld is the author of eight books on education as well as an effective reading program for children and adults, "Blumenfeld's Alpha-Phonics." For information call 888-922-3000.

Samuel L. Blumenfeld is the author of eight books on education, including "NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education" and "The Whole Language/OBE Fraud." His books are available through or from the Paradigm Company, 208-322-4440.

Click here for more information!


© 1999, Inc.
This page was last built 8/11/99; 1:51:37 AM    Direct corrections and technical inquiries to