Foundations of the Egalitarian Regime, Part 1

​The United States of America are ruled by a hostile parasitic elite, a ruthlessly extractive ruling class which demonstrably hates its subjects, the benighted and deplorable “bitter clingers”, the American kulaks. As Tucker Carlson has said, “We are ruled by mercenaries who feel no long-term obligation to the people they rule. They’re day traders. Substitute teachers. They’re just passing through. They have no skin in this game, and it shows. They can’t solve our problems. They don’t even bother to understand our problems.” Perhaps the greatest symbol of our present condition is the cover of Charles Murray’s Coming Apart, a dazzling champagne flute atop a crushed beer can. This hostile elite is a self-perpetuating oligarchy, enforcing its vicious rule through a hubristic kritarchy and an engorged corporatocracy, all of the members of which attended the same universities and promulgate the same fashionable opinions. Indeed, Ron Unz has noted that this class has “been produced largely as a consequence of the particular selection methods adopted by our top national universities in the late 1960s.” The academic system provides these rulers with a meritocratic façade, just as the robed tyrants of the judiciary issue diktats from behind the veneer of constitutionalism. This managerial class largely operates through a system of anarcho-tyranny and panoptic schadenfreude, cowing the populace by eroding communities and reducing the human experience to crude devil-terms like “racism.” The hagiographic and perhaps apocryphal tale of Pavel Morozov serves as their guiding light.

The “American” ruling class swept into power during the technocratic regimes of Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt, and fully enshrined itself in 1954 and 1964, the coup de grâce arriving in 1965. These three key death knells, by which the original Constitution was consumed by a new one spun out of whole cloth and a new population ordained, were Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Hart-Celler Immigration Act. The Immigration Act is beyond our purview, aside from noting that New York Representative Emanuel Celler drafted and introduced the Civil Rights Act and authored the Immigration Act. Brown, and almost seventy years of egalitarian jurisprudence since, is based upon a malevolent misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, which itself is not actually a part of our Constitution, while the Civil Rights Act is a gross abuse of the Commerce Clause. After elaborating upon what, precisely, the ruling elite and its Egalitarian Regime are, we will demonstrate that the Civil Rights Act is manifestly unconstitutional and that it represents a naked usurpation by Congress. We will then examine why the Fourteenth Amendment cannot truly be said to be a part of the Constitution, having been neither properly proposed nor ratified, and that even if we were to let that go, the Amendment has still been twisted into knots by almost seventy years of deliberate misconstruction. We will also briefly investigate the origin of the “hate crime” designation, as an example of further Regime malfeasance. Thus, we will expose the cracked foundations of the Egalitarian Regime — which it is high time that we destroy. As the late Samuel Francis wrote, what we must recognize is that “the forces that have destroyed [our] civilization are the same forces that rule its ruins and whose rule brought it to ruin. Not until those forces are themselves displaced from power will [we] be able to recover the legacy [our] ancestors created and left for [us].”

The Egalitarian Regime

The late Samuel Francis[i] employed the classical theory of elites, in conjunction with James Burnham’s concept of “the managerial revolution”, to explain the formation of what I term the Egalitarian Regime. The ruling class is wholly dependent upon totalized bureaucratization, an insatiable Leviathan and metastasizing Blob which seeks ever-greater consolidation. This class is united in “its need to extend and perpetuate the demand for the skills and functions on which its power and social rewards depend.” The older, American elite “must also be displaced as the ruling class of the larger society and their ideology and cultural values discredited and rejected.” Francis saw much of the mid-to-latter twentieth century as that “protracted social and political process by which the emerging new managerial class displaces the old ruling class of traditional capitalist or bourgeois society. On the institutional level this process consists of the replacement of the constitutionalist parliamentary or congressional form of government favored by the old elite with the new centralized state controlled by the bureaucracy of the new class. The new kind of state that emerges takes on new functions that increasingly require the kind of skills only the managerial bureaucrats and technocrats can provide — economic regulation, social engineering, public welfare, and scientific, administrative, and cultural functions unknown to the older states of the capitalist era.”

Elected politicians are displaced by and placed in gleeful subservience to “the managerial bureaucrats of the new state and the political managers who run the new, far more complicated political parties and organizations.” Think-tanks, nongovernmental organizations, and interest groups take the place of the legislature, such that we may now be said to live in a postconstitutional administrative state. In the corporate sector, the traditional business model is subsumed in new functions, such as the “‘scientific management’ of production, highly technical economic projections and development, specialized management of personnel and consumers, as well as social, political, and cultural functions not directly related to their business activities and interests.” This vast scheme of consolidation is particularly visible with respect to entertainment and “news” media. Monstrous legions of faceless automatons, given comic reference by the “Non-Player Character” meme, operate the levers of power.

The ascendant elite is animated by hatred for traditional America, and Western civilization more generally. The natural conservatism of the displaced class “emphasized States’ Rights, the power of Congress over that of the presidency, loyalty to and identity with the nation and national interest rather than international or global identities, and the interests of smaller, privately owned and operated companies against larger, managerially controlled corporations. It also championed traditional religious and moral beliefs and institutions, the importance of the patriarchal family and local community, and the value of national, regional, racial, and ethnic identity, as well as the virtues of the capitalist ethic — hard work, frugality, personal honesty and integrity, individual initiative, postponement of gratification.” Francis observed that, “like any new elite, the managerial class needed a political formula that expressed and justified its group interests against those of its older rivals in the capitalist elite” and thus developed a Statist system of welfare and warfare “that claimed to be more ‘progressive’, more ‘liberated’, more ‘humanistic’, and more ‘scientific’ and ‘rational’ than the culture defined by the older social and moral codes of traditional capitalism. The managerial ideology also demonized the old elite and its institutions and values as ‘obsolete’, ‘backward’, ‘repressive’, ‘exploitative’, and ‘narrow-minded.’”

The old elite was deeply, indeed inextricably, entwined with traditional America; it “passed on its property and wealth, the basis of its power, through inheritance, and therefore it had a strong vested interest in maintaining both property rights and what are today called ‘family values.’ The family indeed, as well as the local community, religious and ethnic identities, and the cultural and moral codes that respected and legitimized property, wealth, inheritance, social continuity, the personal virtues that helped people acquire wealth and property, and small governments that lacked the power to threaten these things, all served as power bases for the traditional elite and as major cultural and ideological supports for its interests.” The new elite, in order to wrest power from the old, had to eviscerate all of those traditional institutions which stood as stumbling-blocks in its path to the throne. Egalitarian universalism, expressed today by the Regime as Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity, was the weapon with which they accomplished this. Faith, family, and community, the “moral and social bonds” of the old fabric of society, meant “virtually nothing to managers, who… tend to depend on families far less than the older elite and therefore to value the family and the moral codes that reflect and reinforce it far less also. The culture the managers seek to build places more value on individual achievement and ‘merit’ (defined largely as the ability to acquire and exercise managerial and technical skills) than on family inheritance, on sexual fulfillment than postponement of gratification and the breeding and rearing of children, on social mobility and advancement rather than identification with family, community, race, and nation.” These are nothing but obstacles to be annihilated, “barriers against which the managerial state, corporations, and other mass organizations are always bumping, and the sooner such barriers are leveled, the more reach and power the organizations, and the managerial elites that run them, will acquire.”

Employing Samuel Huntington’s discussion of the “denationalization of elites” into “Dead Souls [who] abandon commitment to their nation and their fellow citizens and argue the moral superiority of identifying with humanity at large”, Francis noted that “someone whose loyalties, identities, involvements are purely national is less likely to rise to the top in business, academia, the media, the professions, than someone who transcends these limits. Outside politics, those who stay home stay behind.” Just as nonintervention is demonized as isolation, as independence is recast and pathologized, the Egalitarian Regime eschews “ideologies such as nationalism that justify and reflect national sovereignty, independence, and identity, as well as any ideology or belief that justifies any particular group identity and loyalty — national, regional, racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious. The managerial class therefore tends to disengage from the nation state as well as from these other identities. Its interests extend across many different nations, races, religions, and cultures and are transnational and supra-national, detached and disengaged from — and actually hostile to — any particular place or group or set of beliefs that supports particular identities.” The egalitarianism of the Regime is not truly egalitarian per se, but rather a sort of hydrochloric acid used as a weapon to destroy the barriers embodied by traditionalism; hence, it is not a contradiction that all ethnic identities are accentuated and valorized by the Regime except white identity. These foreign identities are merely used as cudgels with which traditional white America can be subjugated and wiped away.

Following this logic of the Great Replacement, not only of a vanquished class but the vanquished people which that class represented and defended, “the managerial elite has a proclivity toward as well as a material interest in adopting and promoting ideologies of universalism, egalitarianism, cultural relativism, behaviorism, and ‘blank slate’ environmental determinism.” Francis thus elucidated the seeming mystery of “why the American ruling class betrays its race and civilization.” It is no mystery, but rather a necessary condition of its reign of mediocre supremacy, as “the need of the new elite to formulate a new ideology or political formula and reconstruct society around it provides an explanation of why the dominant authorities in these countries today continue to support the dispossession of whites and the cultural and political destruction of the older American and Western civilization centered on whites and of why they not only fail to resist the anti-white demands of non-whites but actively support and subsidize them. These policies on the part of the new elite are not the result of ‘decadence’ or ‘guilt’ but of the group interests of the elite itself, imbedded in and arising from the structure of their power and position and rationalized in their consciousness by the political formula of managerial liberalism. It is in the interests of the new elite, in other words, to destroy and eradicate the older society and the racial and cultural identities and consciousness associated with it (not race alone, but also virtually any distinctive traditional group identity or bond, cultural, biological, or political). To those (‘conservatives’) who continue to adhere to the norms of the older society, of course, managerial behavior appears as decadence, degeneracy, cowardice, appeasement, pandering, or guilt, but what is an evil, misguided, or suicidal pathology to the ‘conservative’ forces who are still shaped by the older codes and institutions in fact reflects the interest and the health of the forces centered around the creation and control of the new society. The interests of the managerial elite, in other words, are antagonistic to the survival of the traditional racial and institutional identity of the society it dominates.”

Francis discussed another wrinkle wrought in the cultural devastation of the Egalitarian Regime; because the self-elect “rejects and destroys the mechanisms of the old elite that excluded other ethnic, racial, and religious groups, such groups are often able to permeate the managerial power structure and acquire levels of power unavailable to them in pre-managerial society and to advance their own interests and agendas by means of the managerial instruments of power. These ethnic forces, articulating their own strong racial, ethnic, cultural, or religious consciousness, invoke managerial liberal slogans of ‘equality’, ‘tolerance’, ‘diversity’, etc., to challenge traditional white dominance but increasingly aspire to cultural and political supremacy themselves, excluding whites and rejecting and dismantling the institutional fabric of their society.” As aforementioned, “while explicitly white racial identity is virtually forbidden and strictly punished by the managerial elite, institutions that reflect explicit nonwhite or anti-white identities are tolerated and encouraged. Groups such as the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, the National Council of La Raza (‘The Race’), and any number of professional, student, and political organizations, the names, membership, and agendas of which are explicitly racial, are not only tolerated but are often the recipients of millions of dollars in grants and philanthropy from the managerial state and managerial corporations and foundations.” A prime example of such a group is the National Black Law Students Association, whose chapter logo at my law school features the fist of Black Power clutching the scales of justice.

In summation, egalitarianism, Francis argued, “has become an unofficial and increasingly an official ideology of the system in which we live, the government, the dominant culture, and even the economy of the United States and the Western world.  Egalitarianism has become an ideology that protects, serves, and rationalizes the interests of the elites that hold power in Western society, just as doctrines like the Divine Right of Kings served the interests of monarchies and aristocracies before the French Revolution.” The hostile elite that we subsist under the yoke of today is unique in that it has a vested interest not in preserving society, but in revolutionizing it into abyss, in “managing and manipulating social change” to destroy the society which it rules. As such, “traditional institutions can be depicted not only as ‘unequal’ and ‘oppressive’ but also as ‘pathological’, requiring the social and economic therapy that only the ‘knowledge elite’ is skilled enough to design and apply.  The interests of the knowledge elite in managing social change happen to be entirely consistent not only with the agendas of the hard left but also with the grievances and demands of various racial and ethnic groups that view ‘racism’ and ‘prejudice’ as obstacles to their own advancement, so that what we see is an alliance between the new elites and organized racial and ethnic minorities to undermine and displace the traditional institutions and beliefs of white Euro-American society, which just happen to be the power centers of older elites based on wealth, land, and status.  This process of displacement or dispossession is always described as ‘progressive’, ‘liberating’, or ‘diversifying’, when in fact it merely helps consolidate the dominance of a new class and weaken the power and interests of its rivals.”

Equipped with this proper translation of “egalitarianism”, we may perceive things as they really are, from greater heights than “conservative” pundits. It is important that we remember the words of the theologian R.L. Dabney, that “American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition.” So, Francis said, “when we see university deans and presidents ‘caving in’ to the demands of the hard Left, they are not really displaying traits of weakness and appeasement. Universities are the breeding grounds of egalitarianism and its applications to society by the elites, and hence they occupy a special and strategic place in the functioning of the system.  If the ideology of egalitarianism were abandoned, many of the functions that universities now perform in the way of research and much of what their faculties do in designing egalitarian social programs and therapy would become obsolete.  When the universities ‘cave in’ to the Left, therefore, they are simply pursuing their own interests, which are to preserve the political ideology of egalitarianism intact and suppress or silence those who dissent from it, and they are in fact behaving like any elite, like the French aristocracy of the 18th century, for example, when it punished Enlightenment writers who challenged aristocratic ideologies. Their behavior appears to be weak or degenerate or renegade to us because we look at their conduct from the point of view of those who believe the consequences of egalitarianism are harmful and have to live with those consequences and also because most of us continue to harbor the illusion that the elites that now prevail in this country and much of the Western world are still in some sense ‘our’ elites, that they represent us, when in fact they mainly represent themselves and their class interests and the ideology and agendas that serve those interests.”

Angelo Codevilla has also examined the strategies of the Egalitarian Regime, especially its transformation of the judiciary into mendacious kritarchy, recognizing that, indeed, “the Republic established by America’s Founders is…gone.” When the ruling class is rarely “asked what gives them the right to do such things they have acted as if the only answer were Nancy Pelosi’s reply to whether the Constitution allows the government to force us into Obamacare: ‘Are you kidding? Are you kidding?’” Today, the ruling class merely does whatever it wishes; its primary tactic, as we shall see, is to appeal to the Constitution through the Supreme Court. When that is inconvenient, however, they simply dispense with that nominalism altogether. Codevilla notes that “executive orders, phone calls, and the right judge mean a lot more than laws. They even trump State referenda. Over the past half-century, presidents have ruled not by enforcing laws but increasingly through agencies that write their own rules, interpret them, and punish unaccountably—the administrative state. As for the Supreme Court, the American people have seen it invent rights where there were none—e.g., abortion—while trammeling ones that had been the republic’s spine…The Court taught Americans that the word ‘public’ can mean ‘private’ (Kelo v. City of New London), that ‘penalty’ can mean ‘tax’ (King v. Burwell), and that holding an opinion contrary to its own can only be due to an ‘irrational animus’ (Obergefell v. Hodges).”

“Constitutional law” is now taught in place of the Constitution, and has essentially overwritten it; indeed, as will be further examined, “when the 1964 Civil Rights Act substituted a wholly open-ended mandate to oppose ‘discrimination’ for any and all fundamental rights, it became the little law that ate the Constitution…the Act pretended that the Commerce Clause trumps the freedom of persons to associate or not with whomever they wish, and is being taken to mean that it trumps the free exercise of religion as well…This arbitrary power, whose rabid guard-dog growls and barks: ‘Racist! Sexist! Homophobic!’ has transformed our lives by removing restraints on government. The American Bar Association’s new professional guidelines expose lawyers to penalties for insufficient political correctness. Performing abortions or at least training to perform them may be imposed as a requirement for licensing doctors, nurses, and hospitals that offer services to the general public.” One of the most egregious innovations of the Regime is the bipartisan practice “of rolling all of the government’s expenditures into a single bill. This eliminates elected officials’ responsibility for any of the government’s actions, and reduces them either to approving all that the government does without reservation, or the allegedly revolutionary, disloyal act of ‘shutting down the government.’” I am often bemused to see that, during these oh-so-odious “shutdowns”, all “nonessential” federal workers are furloughed; if they are not essential, why should they be employed at all?

Indeed, the situation is further complicated when we recognize that Congress itself is no longer the Legislative Branch. In fact, we no longer have a Legislature; what the Seventeenth Amendment did not destroy, the administrative state has. Congressional abdication has created a situation in which our elected politicians vote on bills that are thousands of pages long and that they have not read, but are rather summarized by the unelected army of Leftist attorneys and bureaucrats who actually wrote them. In other words, completely unaccountable, nameless, faceless tyrants write legislation that “legislators” sign off on without deigning to look at and then farm the implementation of said legislation back to the same administrative attorneys and technocrats. To reiterate, by conferring massive commerce power to Congress, we are crowning unelected and entirely unaccountable “men without chests”, to use C.S. Lewis’ term, with the power to legislate every breath we take.

Codevilla, echoing Francis, notes that “all ruling classes are what Shakespeare called the ‘makers of manners.’ Plato, in The Republic, and Aristotle, in his Politics, teach that polities reflect the persons who rise to prominence within them, whose habits the people imitate, and who set the tone of life in them. Thus, a polity can change as thoroughly as a chorus changes from comedy to tragedy depending on the lyrics and music.” The Egalitarian Regime is a system by which “a network of executive, judicial, bureaucratic, and social kinship channels bypasses the sovereignty of citizens…If you are on the right side of that network, you can make up the rules as you go along, ignore or violate any number of laws, obfuscate or commit perjury about what you are doing (in the unlikely case they put you under oath), and be certain of your peers’ support. These cronies’ shared social and intellectual identity stems from the uniform education they have received in the universities. Because disdain for ordinary Americans is this ruling class’s chief feature, its members can be equally certain that all will join in celebrating each, and in demonizing their respective opponents.” If, however, we find ourselves on the wrong side of the Regime, we are depersonalized and persecuted, our slightest transgression from the doctrine of Diversity punished to the fullest extent of the “law.”

As a consequence of the coup d’état outlined by Francis, “people and practices that had been at society’s margins have been brought to its center, while people and ideas that had been central have been marginalized. Fifty years ago, prayer in the schools was near universal, but no one was punished for not praying. Nowadays, countless people are arrested or fired for praying on school property. West Point’s commanding general reprimanded the football coach for his team’s Thanksgiving prayer. Fifty years ago, bringing sexually explicit [material] into schools was treated as a crime, as was “procuring abortion.” Nowadays, schools contract with Planned Parenthood to teach sex, and will not tell parents when they take girls to Planned Parenthood facilities for abortions. Back then, many schools worked with the National Rifle Association to teach gun handling and marksmanship. Now students are arrested and expelled merely for pointing their finger and saying ‘bang.’ In those benighted times, boys who ventured into the girls’ bathroom were expelled as perverts. Now, girls are suspended for objecting to boys coming into the girls’ room under pretense of transgenderism. The mainstreaming of pornography, the invention of abortion as the most inalienable of human rights and, most recently, the designation of opposition to homosexual marriage as a culpable psychosis—none of which is dictated by law enacted by elected officials—is enforced as if it had been. No surprise that America has experienced a drastic drop in the formation of families, with the rise of rates of out-of-wedlock births among whites equal to the rates among blacks that was recognized as disastrous a half-century ago…and the social dislocations attendant to all that.”

The revolutionary logic of the Regime holds that “America’s constitutional republic had given the American people too much latitude to be who they are, that is: religiously and socially reactionary, ignorant, even pathological, barriers to Progress. Thankfully, an enlightened minority exists with the expertise and the duty to disperse the religious obscurantism, the hypocritical talk of piety, freedom, and equality, which excuses Americans’ racism, sexism, greed, and rape of the environment. As we progressives take up our proper responsibilities, Americans will no longer live politically according to their prejudices; they will be ruled administratively according to scientific knowledge.” The technocratic Regime is even more dangerous when we consider what Patrick Michaels has termed “scientocracy”; as Codevilla explains, “truth” is coopted by the mutant bastard of “normative pull”, or “what furthers the ruling class’s agenda, whatever that might be at any given time.” In other words, “because rejecting that true and false, right and wrong are objectively ascertainable is part of this class’s DNA, no corpus of fact or canon of reason restrains it or defines its end-point. Its definition of ‘science’ is neither more nor less than what ‘scientists say’ at any given time. In practice, that means ‘Science R-Us’, now and always, exclusively. Thus has come to pass what President Dwight Eisenhower warned against in his 1960 farewell address: ‘A steadily increasing share [of science] is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.… [T]he free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution…a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.’ Hence, said Ike, ‘The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.’ The result has been that academics rise through government grants while the government exercises power by claiming to act on science’s behalf. If you don’t bow to the authority of the power that says what is and is not so, you are an obscurantist or worse.”

Thus, Codevilla’s description of the Regime is very similar to that of Francis; the self-installed ruling class “includes, most of the bureaucracies of federal and state governments, the judiciary, the educational establishment, the media, as well as major corporate officials…it…separated itself socially, morally, and politically from the rest of society, whose commanding heights it monopolized; above all that it has contempt for the rest of America, and that ordinary Americans have no means of persuading this class of anything, because they don’t count…The rulers are militantly irreligious and contemptuous of those who are not…They distrust elections because they think that power should be in expert hands—their own. They believe that the U.S Constitution gave too much freedom to ordinary Americans and not enough power to themselves, and that America’s history is one of wrongs. The books they read pretend to argue scientifically that the rest of Americans are racist, sexist, maybe fascists, but above all stupid. For them, Americans are harmful to themselves and to the world, and have no right to self-rule.” The 2016 election symbolized the reawakening of the Middle-American Radicals, to use Francis’ term; with Candidate Donald Trump as our empty avatar, the Regime has been driven to lower its mask and reveal the nightmarish vacuum within.

The Regime utilizes “reductio ad Hitlerum” to suppress us, and for the past four years, “since the beginning of the Trump administration, some federal district court judge somewhere has either stayed or outright declared every action of his and his subordinates unconstitutional, dictated remedies, and passed that off as the rule of law. Thus do such judges exercise the powers of the president and Congress. At a minimum, fighting such obstruction through the appellate courts (panel and then en banc) and then to the Supreme Court takes months or years. And since the Supreme Court has been the Left agendas’ chief legitimizer, holding on to it by any and all means has been a priority… The revolutionary import of the ruling class’ abandonment of moral and legal restraint in its effort to reverse election results cannot be exaggerated. Sensing themselves entitled to power, imagining themselves identical with legitimacy, ‘those general laws to which all alike can look for salvation in adversity’ — here the US Constitution and ordinary civility — are small stuff to them…Unattainable, and gone forever, is the whole American Republic that had existed for some 200 years after 1776. The people and the habits of heart and mind that had made it possible are no longer a majority. Progressives made America a different nation by rejecting those habits and those traditions. As of today, they would use all their powers to prevent others from living in the manner of the Republic.”

This dissolution, both of national identity and the Republic itself, is nicely encapsulated in the regnant cosmology espoused within the film Network by Arthur Jensen, the chairman of the CCA conglomerate, to a terrified Howard Beale, in subliminal rapture as the scales are lifted from his eyes. Beale had galvanized populist opposition to the purchase of CCA by a Saudi Arabian conglomerate; in response to Beale’s torpedoing the lucrative deal, chairman Jensen sits Beale across from an infinitely receding conference table and proclaims the Egalitarian Gospel: “You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale! And I won't have it! Is that clear?! You think you've merely stopped a business deal? That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations, there are no peoples, there are no Russians, there are no Arabs, there are no Third Worlds, there is no West! There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane, interwoven, interacting, multi-variate, multi-national dominion of dollars. Petro-dollars, electro-dollars, multi-dollars, reichsmarks, rins, rubles, pounds, and shekels. It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today. That is the atomic and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature! AND YOU WILL ATONE! Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale? You get up on your little twenty-one-inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state? Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do. We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale. It has been since man crawled out of the slime. And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world in which there's no war or famine, oppression or brutality. One vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock. All necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused. And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel.” Beale replies, “I have seen the face of God.”

[i] Francis, Samuel T. (Ed.) “Why the American Ruling Class Betrays Its Race and Civilization,” in Race and the American Prospect: Essays on the Racial Realities of Our Nation and Our Time (The Occidental Press, 2006).