5. Fascism, Democracy and First Amendment Rights

5(A) One of the consequences of the largely self-inflicted ignorance of the white working class is that this class has been available, against its own interests, to fully participate in many heinous political projects in human history that have been masterminded by the DMC. One such project, specific to this century, is fascism. Despite the unimaginable horrors inflicted by fascism on millions of people (including the white working class itself) through the agency of the Second World War, only a few decades ago, some members of the white working class continue to remain enchanted with it. Witness the proliferation of neo-Nazi groups in North America and Europe (as well as in countries such as Australia, New Zealand and South Africa) as we close out this century.

5(B) By fascism I am referring to an ideology that potently and dangerously combines jingoism, racism, militarism, capitalism and totalitarianism in the service of a mythical national redemption. The Nazism of Hitlerite Germany is an archetype example of fascism. In this country, at present, a good example of fascist ideology is that espoused by the Neo-Nazi Skinheads. Fascism is especially appealing to the white working classes because through its racist component the white working class is misled into mentally conjuring false solutions to the severe economic problems that the DMC inflicts on it, by scapegoating racial minorities.

In this country, Neo-Nazis are blaming two groups of people for their economically determined woes: Jews and Blacks (includes other racial minorities: Native Americans, Hispanics, Asians, etc.). They blame Jews for supposedly taking over the U.S. government (which they label ZOG--Zionist Occupational Government), and they blame Blacks for supposedly misusing tax-payer money by receiving welfare payments or for taking away jobs through affirmative action policies. The fact that these bizarre beliefs have no basis in reality whatsoever is besides the point; what is important is that they have these beliefs and they are willing to act on them: which means venting their frustrations through terrorist violence against the Federal government as well as Blacks and Jews.

Needless to say, fascism is inherently anti-democratic because it believes in totalitarianism where a fascist oligarchic cult rules society with an iron fist, brooking no opposition whatsoever of any kind. In other words, to fascists democracy is totally and virulently anathema.

5 (C) I have offered two solutions to the continuing presence of fascism in democratic societies: the short term solution is to ban fascist organizations. There should be no freedom of speech for fascists. Only the confused or the suicidally inclined would guarantee democratic freedoms to those who are inherently opposed to democracy--e.g. the NeoNazi Skinheads. Democratic rights should only be enjoyed by those who believe in democracy! It should be denied those who want to use democracy to obliterate democracy. How difficult can it be to understand this simple truth? The failure to learn this lesson can carry a terrible cost, as history has already proven. Look at what happened to the world when democratic rights were extended to Hitler and his henchmen in Germany--tens of millions of people died as a result of the Second World War that the Nazis set in motion--together with the millions that they murdered in their concentration camps. Only a moron would say something like this: "I will defend your right to believe and say that I do not deserve to live because I do not look like you."

I am also advocating the withdrawal of First Amendment rights from these hate-merchants because their activities--even if only at the level of speech--bring harm to their victims in the form of stress, anguish, emotional pain, etc. Those who say that hate speech brings no harm to the victims of such speech are in reality racists or closet racists (assuming that the hate-speech in question is racist hate-speech). Hate speech is always harmful to victims when it is delivered in the context of unequal power relations where the victims have little or no power to counter such speech (as is the case of racial minorities in this society today). The right to be free of emotional harm from others supersedes the right to cause others such harm. How difficult can it be to understand this simple truth?

The U.S. Supreme Court has periodically reversed itself as times have changed even while the Constitution itself has remained the same. Some day it will recognize that First Amendment rights do not belong to those who do not believe in First Amendment right; nor does it belong to those who wish to use speech to bring harm to others who, on the surface, either look different or who practice a different religion or culture. The Supreme Court appears to have forgotten that First Amendment rights were enshrined in the Constitution in order to protect democracy from tyrants and tyranny, and not in order to create democracy for tyrants and tyranny. How difficult can it be to understand this simple truth?

5(D) The second solution, one that I have been advocating for the past ten or so years, is a long-term one and it requires the working classes to join hands across racial and sex divisions to demand from the corporate capitalist class a new economic charter. This charter would rest on the twin pillars of a shortened work week and shortened work day (but for the same pay). In other words, the massive profits that the corporate capitalist class has been raking in through higher productivity per worker, made possible by computerization and robot technology, must be shared with the working class by means of additional jobs that can be created by shortening the work-day and work-week. You say that this will never happen. The truth is that it will happen because scapegoating minorities is not a solution and the white working class will wake up to that fact one day. Besides, it has happened before: at the turn of this century the working classes were able to have their work-day shortened from 12 to 15 hours per day to 8 hours per day and from six days a week to five days a week. Not coincidentally, this change was necessary because of massive unemployment brought about, in part, by technology: the substitution of raw human energy with electrical energy as electricity became the basis of industrial manufacture.

By the way, a shortened work week and work day would not only create more jobs, but it would also revolutionize positively family life by allowing family members to spend quality time with each other and by reducing tension between spouses through reduction of work-related stress. In other words, there would be more love in families, which would be good for society as a whole. Remember: children need love as much as they need food to grow up emotionally and intellectually healthy. And when children are deprived of love they have the potential to develop into sociopaths, which, of course, is not good for society.
 

6(A). Although the word "race" is now commonly used to refer to different groups of human beings who can be distinguished to some degree from each other on the basis of physical appearance (though not always), modern science tells us that there is only a single race: the human race. That is, there is no such thing as the white race, or the black race, or the brown race, etc. The category of race, in other words, is a social construct, not a biological construct. That is, the category of "race" was invented by those with power to serve their own ends, it does not exist in nature. Consider the following example: prior to the invasion of the Americas by Europeans, the racial categories of "white" and "black" did not exist. Those who call themselves whites, today, used to be Spanish, Italians, English, Germans, French, Russians, Poles, etc., and those who call themselves blacks used to be Zulu, Ndebele, Xhosa, Hausa, Fulani, Malinke, Senufo, Dogon, Ibo, Asante, Mende, and so on. They became white or black only after coming to the Americas.

6(B). Since race is a social construct, it follows that the categorization of a particular individual within a racial category is purely arbitrary and not based on science. Science did not produce the "one drop rule," (which states that an individual with even a drop of black blood in him/her is black, regardless of appearance). It was produced by those who stood to gain from this rule: the capitalist slave owners of the U.S. South.

6(C). If there are no separate races, but only a single human race, then it follows that there is no such thing as a superior race or an inferior race. All human beings are born with the same intelligence potential (as science now has verified through its study of the development of the human brain's capacity to learn). However, the actualization of this potential is dependent, with rare exception, upon the social environment (whether your parents are loving or abusive, whether they are wealthy or poor, whether they are college educated or only high school educated, etc., etc.), as well as the pre-natal environment (whether you received adequate nutrition, etc., while in the womb).

6(D). Consequently, those who argue that this race is intellectually superior and that race is intellectually inferior are charlatans (if not out and out racists). Remember, that it was not a very long time ago (at the turn of the century, in fact) when these charlatans were spreading the myth that Southern, Central and Eastern Europeans were an inferior people compared to people from Western Europe.

6(E). Whether you like it or not, just as science will never (and I repeat NEVER) be able to invent a computer that can make perfect language translations (e.g. From Spanish to Zulu), no scientist will ever be able to produce an intelligence test that is truly fool proof; that is, one that can measure only the genetically derived component of intelligence. Why? Because the human brain has evolved to become the tool for human adaptation and this makes it infinitely malleable--the key word here is "infinite." It is simply NEVER going to be possible to be able to completely separate genetic influences from environmental influences when determining a person's intelligence.
 

7(A). Today, there are two types of racism in this society: institutional racism and interpersonal racism; (just as there are two types of sexism: institutional sexism and interpersonal sexism). Institutional racism refers to racism that is built into the institutional structures of society (e.g. residential apartheid in U.S. cities, which permanently closes off racial minorities from access to jobs, decent housing, services, etc.) as a result of past, legally sanctioned, racist practices (which may be called juridical racism).

Interpersonal racism is the discrimination that exists on a daily basis as whites and blacks interact in work places and on the streets and highways. Institutional racism can exist, to some degree, without interpersonal racism; however, the reverse is not true.

7(B). Whether it is institutional racism or interpersonal racism, both forms can be divided into two other forms: aversive racism and dominative racism. Aversive racism manifests itself when racists refuse to have any dealings with those of another race as far as is practicable; and if they do have to come into contact with them (for example, in the work place or at school), then they will be frigidly polite, superficially correct and stonily cold.

Dominative racism is present when racists express their bigotry openly, and where necessary, violently, in order to keep members of another race subservient for the purpose of explicitly exploiting them. Now, unlike the aversive racists, the dominative racists do not desire that the victims of their racism disappear; they want them to be around, but only in a subservient state. Under certain conditions aversive racism can develop into dominative racism; usually, however, the reverse is more common. Historically, the Southern U.S. has been the province of dominative racism, while aversive racism has been the principle form of racism in the Northern U.S. From the victim's point of view, the most dangerous of the two forms of racism is aversive racism: it can lead to genocide (as exemplified, in this century, by the Jewish Holocaust in Nazi Germany, or as exemplified by the Native American Holocaust in the preceding centuries in the Americas).

7(C). When it comes to jobs and services, institutional racism serves as a form of affirmative action for whites. This form of affirmative action has always been practiced in this country from the very beginning, and continues to be practiced to this day. When whites compete against each other, at a given class level, they do not have advantages over each other; however, when whites compete against blacks (and other minorities) they have an advantage because of institutional racism (and sometimes, interpersonal racism). This situation creates a false illusion among whites that they have arrived where they are entirely because of their own efforts and not as a result of affirmative action (by discriminating against racial minorities). Take the following example: racism gives rise to exclusively white suburbs. Through accident (not intelligence or hard work) a person is born in this suburb and so he/she is able to go to well funded, resource-rich, public schools located there. With this opportunity this person is able to come out with training that gives him/her greater advantage to do well on standardized tests... And so on. (You can extend my line of reasoning to its logical conclusion.)

7(D). Although racism provides some advantages to all whites, relative to blacks, the fact that we live in a capitalist society implies that for the majority of whites, the working class, this advantage is outweighed by the cost of foregoing the struggle to increase the public and personal wage (as mentioned above). There is, however, another kind of cost too: it destroys one's humanity. At the personal level, it also implies unnecessary emotional stress; and an artificially constricted social life--e.g. reducing the pool of potential friends. (Referring to the latter: imagine how rich and fulfilling one's life becomes when one practices "equal opportunity" in friendships.)

7(E). Not all whites are racists, just as not all blacks are criminals or lazy. In fact, the struggles of blacks for freedom from oppression throughout history has always involved support from some whites--unfortunately, only a minority. In fact, history is full of examples of whites who gave their lives in opposition to racism. Therefore, it is not in the interest of blacks to oppose all whites; not to mention the fact that it is racist to do so. However, it is also true that in a racist society, such as this one, it must be assumed that all whites are racists, unless proven otherwise. In being aware of this fact, it allows racial minorities not to become disillusioned and thereby give up the struggle for democracy. (No. You thought wrong. I am not saying that all whites are racists. Read the sentence carefully.)

7(F) The ideology of racism has permeated U.S. culture to such a point, over the centuries, that it has corrupted the entire fabric of human life, including the human personality itself. However, just as individuals can escape normal socialization to become habitual criminals and murderers; so can individuals escape racist socialization to become normal, non-racist human beings. (Racism is not a genetically determined behavior, it is a learned behavior; therefore, a racist is not a normal human-being.)

7(G). The language of racism today, preferred by aversive racists, is a language that may not even mention the word "race" (or even make an explicit reference to skin color). Instead, the aversive racist speaks in a coded language where things like capital punishment, crime, drugs, welfare, food stamps, affirmative action, etc. are discussed in a manner that is understood to imply that the discussion is really about race--without having to explicitly refer to it. Take the following two statements about welfare: one is a racist statement, while the other is not: "We must eliminate welfare because it encourages people to be dependent on government handouts instead of seeking honest work." "We must find ways to create new well paying jobs so that people do not have to go on welfare." The first is a racist statement because the stereotypical assumption today is that the majority of people on welfare are blacks (not true), and that they are on welfare because they are too lazy to go out and look for a job (also not true).
        However, racist language can even be more subtle than this and it is captured in the term "white talk." By "white talk" I mean discussions that have race as their focus, but yet never bring up the issue of "whiteness" as a privilege in this society. For example: what does it mean to grow up in an environment where your friends, your neighbors, your teachers, your employers, etc. are all white in a racially diverse society, but in which all power (economic, social and political) is almost all in the hands of whites? Any discussion by whites on the issue of race that does not also focus on the issue of "whiteness as a privilege" can only be a racist discussion; period!

7(H). The corrupting influence of racism is such that, ironically, it will also corrupt relations among racial and ethnic groups within the victim population as a whole, as each group tries to jostle for a socio-economic position that is as close to the top as possible (but of course still remaining below that of the racists). Consider these examples from New York City, one of the most racially segregated cities in the U.S.: Korean-Americans versus African-Americans; U.S. born Chinese-Americans versus foreign-born Chinese-Americans; East Indians born in India versus East Indians born in the U.S. or elsewhere; light skinned African-Americans versus dark-skinned African-Americans; Jewish-Americans versus African-Americans; African born African-Americans versus U.S. born African-Americans; Puerto-Rican Americans versus Dominican-Americans; and so on and so on.

7(I). The availability of the white working class for racist ideological manipulation by the DMC (via the work of psuedo-intellectuals), through the mechanism of scapegoating, rests primarily on economic discontent. As we enter the twilight of the twentieth century we are entering a phase of massive job redundancy brought about by a new form of industrial revolution: the computer revolution. Unemployment and underemployment is going to increase on a large scale and that is going to create even a greater need for scapegoats than is the case in the present. Imagine what will happen to jobs when the technological dream of inventing a camera that can "see," much in the same way that the human eye sees, comes to pass. Now, the DMC, as it has always done in the past in this country, will use minorities as scapegoats (in fact, it has already started doing this). This will be a repetition of what happened in this country at the turn of the century: increases in worker productivity through mechanization--as well as a flood of immigration from Europe--led to massive unemployment among the white working class, which in turn created the conditions for the intensification of racist oppression of minorities. The only alternative to this scenario (as I mentioned earlier) is if the white working class wakes up and joins hands with the minority working class to demand a shorter work week and shorter work day (but with the same total pay)--as they eventually did early in this century--so as to create more jobs to replace those lost to computerization (not to mention global competition).
 

8(A). Christianity first began in the Middle East. From this perspective, it is a Middle Eastern religion (like the two other religions: Judaism and Islam), and not a European religion. However, with the eventual acceptance of Christianity by the Romans as their official religion, centuries after the birth of Christ, and their assistance in spreading it throughout Europe, it became a Europeanized religion. This Europeanization of Christianity led to two forms of corruption of Christ's teachings: first, Christianity became involved in providing ideological support for slavery and racism; and second, it abandoned its concern with the poor and the downtrodden and instead allied itself with the rich and the powerful. To this day, there are racists who claim to be good practicing Christians!

8(B). Those of you who believe in this religion must examine carefully your beliefs so that they are in line with what Christ really taught and not what the charlatans have taught over the centuries. (Always remember, Christ was not a capitalist, nor was he a racist, nor was he a right-wing conservative, and he certainly was not a European.)
 

9(A). Among the tragedies that human beings must confront for not being fully civilized is that victimization by oppression does not imply that the oppressed automatically gain moral superiority, and therefore will not oppress others should the opportunity arise. History is full of examples that show that victims of oppression will oppress others readily when given the opportunity. Consider the white working class in this country: it leaves Europe as a consequence of severe oppression and degradation (brought about by the collapse of the feudal system, famine, and war); but after arriving in this country it joins the DMC to oppress Native Americans (and later other racial minorities). To take another example: in this country, many of the descendants of European Jews, who suffered greatly from the racism of other Europeans, exhibit the same kind of aversive racism toward blacks as that practiced by Euro-Americans.

9(B). To be civilized means we should oppose all forms of oppression, including both dominative and aversive forms of racism. It is aversive racism that permits the dominative racists to do what they do. Without aversive racism, the Nazis would not have been able to carry out their monstrous atrocities against the European Jews. It is only by remaining vigilant against all oppression, regardless of who the oppressors are, that one achieves moral superiority. In other words, one must be opposed to not only one's own oppression, but also the oppression of others (whatever form it takes: class oppression, racist oppression, sexist oppression, etc.)

9(C). Racism and sexism are forms of oppression that are cut from the same cloth in that they are based on biologically immutable factors; that is factors over which the victim has no control. Consequently, to be opposed against one of these two forms of oppression, but not against the other, is to be hypocritical; moreover, it undermines one's moral position, not to mention the fact it also undermines one ability to struggle against the oppression one is opposed to.

9(D). Oppression is not always naked, as in the case of, in days gone by, the brutalization and dispossession of Native Americans or the enslavement of Africans in the Americas, or the enforced exclusion of women from public life. Oppression, instead, can be hidden, as is often the case today. In a "democratic" society, such as this one, oppression takes place in such a subtle way, that even the victims of the oppression will be unaware of it. Consider, for example, the thousands of women out there who would be the first to challenge the statement that even in the 1990s, women continue to be oppressed in this society. In fact, the subtlety of the ideological mechanisms of oppression can be such that even the oppressed will become willing participants in their own oppression! Take, for example, the idea among young blacks in inner cities that succeeding in school is like pretending to be "white," and therefore it is not a "cool" thing to do. Or the idea among black teenagers that speaking correct English (as spoken by the majority in this country) is not something blacks should do. Or take the idea among some blacks, especially those who follow Louis Farrakhan, that self-segregation is the answer to white racism; surely, that is exactly what the white aversive racists want!

9(E). Oppression also takes the form of killing dreams. It is in the interest of oppressors to make you believe that the dream of a better society, a better world, a better future, etc. is impossible to achieve. Without dreams there can not be a new future. All human progress began with dreams. And remember: freedom first begins in the mind: unchain your mind and learn to think the impossible. Do not be a dream killer!

10(A). Just as we live in a racist society, we also, at the same time, live in a sexist society. Consequently, all men, unless proven otherwise, are sexists. In being aware of this fact, it allows women not to become so disillusioned that they give up the struggle for human and civil rights for women. (No. You thought wrong. I am not saying that all men are sexists. Read the sentence carefully.)

10(B). As in the case of racism, there are two types of sexism that operate in this society: institutional sexism, which operates at the level of society as a whole (macro level), and interpersonal sexism, which operates at the level of individuals (micro level). Institutional sexism refers to sexism that is built into the institutional structures of society, as a result of past, legally sanctioned, sexism; and interpersonal sexism is the discrimination that exists on a daily basis as women and men interact in work places and in the home.

10(C). While most intelligent people today can easily comprehend the sexist biases of society at the institutional level; the problem arises when one turns to interpersonal relations at the level of the individual and the family. Both, men and women, are often unable to see that the "traditional" gender roles that we are burdened with today are highly sexist: they exploit women, physically and emotionally.

10(D). One of the ideological mechanisms by which women are kept subservient in interpersonal relations is the ideology of "love" (an ideology that is transmitted in a thousand ways through the male dominated "popular culture"). Consider this, for example: because a woman is supposed to "love" her family (as if men are not supposed to love their families too), she is supposed to put up with all kinds of inequities--including the husband's philandering! Or take this example: How often one comes across the statement by a woman that she does not want to pursue a particular career because she wants to have children and raise a family. Why doesn't a man perceive a similar impediment to his pursuit of a career?

10(E). The only work that is considered important in this society is work that has been traditionally performed by men: paid work. Yet, the work that is performed in the home, from an objective point of view, is just as important as paid work; because without it, the other work would not be possible. (For example, unless a worker is fed, he will not be able to work at his job the next day; or unless children are brought up properly, they will not grow up to be functioning workers.) Consequently, it is time society began to value the home-related work (which to this day is still performed mostly by women), by working out a system in which this work would also receive compensation of some form from those who derive direct and indirect economic benefits from it: the DMC.

10(F). Even at the basic level of marriage and courtship, women are placed in an unequal power relationship: it is the man who asks a woman out; it is the man who proposes marriage to the woman, etc. It should be remembered that the person who waits to be "chosen" is automatically at a disadvantage, compared to the person who "chooses."

10(G). Sexual terrorism against women is a direct outcome of the ideology of machismo that a sexist society like this one venerates. However, sexual terrorism against women (which takes several forms: rape, sexual harassment, spousal abuse, etc.) is a curse that no one must tolerate--especially, in this day and age. All of us, men and women, must work toward eliminating it. Not only is it immoral and a violation of the human rights of women, but it also negatively affects the well being of all in a society by placing impediments on the full and total contribution to society by women.

11. Class and classism

11 (A).  We live in a class-ridden society, not a class-less society. Yet, most people in this society find this so difficult to grasp. And since this class-ridden society is a capitalist society too, it stands to reason that the class arrangements are by definition heirarchical: that is, one class will be above another in terms of access to power and resources. Yet, the lower classes in this society (who are made up of the working class and the unemployed) appear to be almost completely clueless in how this heirarchical arrangement negatively affects their lives in both political terms and economic terms. Why are they clueless? They are clueless because of self-engineered ignorance of the world around them. And this in turn is an outcome of three principal factors: alienation (the feeling of powerlessness and hopelessness), lack of time (especially if you are holding down two or more jobs or doing regular overtime), and lack of a cultural tradition that emphasises self-educational activities (ranging from going to libraries and bookstores, to visiting exhibits and museums, to watching educational television--such as PBS, The Learning Channel, The History Channel, etc.)

11 (B).  One of the principal reasons why the lower classes in this society believe that, for all intents and purposes, this is a class-less society is their inability to recognize their own class-position. Note: This lack of awareness is especially acute among whites because they have come to believe that only minorities constitute the working class in this country. They (especially whites) all think that they are part of the middle class, yet the truth is that if you are not part of the DMC then you are among the lower classes--regardless of your income. Here are some indicators of your class position that will help you to understand this point: (a) your take-home pay from your factory job is $70,000.00 but you have no say in whether or not the factory should move to another country--you are working class. (b) You own state of the art DVD 5.1 digital surround sound system, but you have no interest in watching foreign films or independent (non-Hollywood) films--you are working class. (c) You own your own home and you live in the suburbs, but your house is only twenty feet apart from that of your neighbors--you are working class. (d) You have enough income to send your kids to college, but you cant afford to send them to Harvard or Yale or Columbia, so instead you send them to SUNY Buffalo--you are working class.
 

11 (C).  Now, because the lower classes are for the most part clueless, they become available for manipulation by the Decision Making Class (DMC) through ideologies of oppression. Here is an example of this manipulation in this country: when the white working class is hit with unemployment because the capitalist class has decided to move jobs out of the country to places that employ para-slave labor or because they have brought in computerised technology, it seeks for solutions through scapegoating minorities that the ideology of racism facilitates.
 

11 (D).  The price that the lower classes have had to pay for ignorance, historically and up to the present, has been a heavy one. For instance: they have always been available, by means of ideological manipulation, for war on behalf of the interests of the DMC. Two examples to make this point: (a) from the past we have the Crusades, which was a project of the DMC of that time (led by the Pope) who used religious ideology to galvanise the European serf/peasant class into undertaking what was essentially politically and economically motivated wars that lasted nearly four hundred years. (b) Today we have the example of Serbia where the Serbian working class has been manipulated by the Serbian DMC to wage war in the most brutal and cowardly fashion on the civilian populations of Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. The ideology that has been used for this purpose has been ethnicism.
        Another example of the heavy price of ignorance: the penchant of the lower classes to vote (if and when they do vote) for political parties that stand for policies and programs that favor primarily the interests of the capitalist class, and not the lower classes.
 

11 (E).  So, what then is classism? Classism refers to discrimination against the lower classes by the DMC. This discrimination takes many forms: at the political level it takes the form of barring effective access to decision-making in government, but while permitting the illusion of access through the charade of elections. At the economic level it takes the dual form of a continuous assault on the public wage and the private wage, while at the same time the pursuit of policies and programs that facilitate a continuously spiralling aggrandisement of the capitalist class. Private wage refers to wages that you recieve from your employer. Public wages refers to all tax-supported public expenditures for the benefit of the entire society (such expenditures would range from those on health, education and public transport to those on improving the quality of life: air, water, libraries, parks, etc.)
 

12(A). Education must not be seen in a narrow sense as referring to only formal education, but it must be viewed to also encompass anything and everything that contributes to self-betterment (e.g. morals and ethics). In other words, the acquisition of formal educational qualifications alone, does not make one an educated person.

12(B). Scientific research to date now no longer leaves one in doubt about the following truth: every mentally healthy child, regardless of race, sex, religion, etc., is born with the same potential to be educated as any other child. However, depending upon the environment in which the child is raised, the actualization of that potential will vary from child to child. Consequently, any society that wishes to raise the educational level of its members must begin its efforts when the child has not even begun formal education. What this requires is the creation of decent day-care programs; child-rearing support systems; and so on.

12(C). When this country spends money on education it is not wasting money, it is investing it. In other words, the benefits of education are not only felt at the level of the individual, but also at the level of society as a whole. Consider this: it is only educated people (it doesn't matter whether you are self-educated or institutional-educated), who are able to actualize their potential for creativity. And it is creativity that is the basis of all progress in society. It is creative people, for example, who create businesses that eventually provide jobs for others. Therefore, even if an education may not lead directly to a job, it doesn't necessarily mean it is a waste of time.

Consequently, every effort must be made to provide real educational opportunities for all children, not only those who live in privileged neighborhoods (e.g. most of the suburbs). What this requires is that the funding of schooling in the country should not be based on property taxes, but general taxes. Wherever this suggestion has made it into the political arena, suburbanites (mostly whites) have opposed it. Yet, they fail to realize that by not providing equal educational opportunities for minority children in inner cities, they are not only being unfair and undemocratic, they are directly shooting themselves in the foot: they will pay higher taxes to warehouse these children in prisons when they (the children) grow up and turn to drugs and crime to finance their own version of the U.S. American Dream. In fact, there are some states today where more money is being spent on prisons than on schools! This is a recipe for disaster. This is not a step forward toward civilization, this is a step backward toward barbarity.

12(D) This country has the wealth to make education a constitutional right and to provide it for free to everyone, up to, at least, a Masters level or its equivalent. The fact that it does not do so, is short sightedness on the part of, both, the DMC (for not proposing it) and the working class (for not demanding it).

12(E)True education is education that is aimed at cultivating critical thinking. Critical thinking refers to the kind of thinking that is specific to true intellectuals (not psuedo-intellectuals). In other words, it is a special type of thinking that is characterized by, among other things:

• a fiery passion for truth;
• a profound belief in the value of honest research;
• the courage to change one's views on the basis of new knowledge and information;
• patience and open-mindedness to take seriously the views of others;
• a deep sense of commitment to the acquisition of knowledge and information on a variety of issues, both, personal as well as public;
• uncompromising honesty in confronting personal biases, prejudices, stereotypes, etc.;
• cultivation of the ability to conduct 'thought-experiments';
• the recognition that education encompasses much more than training for specific career goals;
• possession of limitless curiosity regarding all kinds of subject matter; and
• a refusal to make judgments that are not based on reasoned reflection.

13 (A). The transition from the dictatorship of the monarchy to capitalist democracy; or the transition from a slave owning society to a non-slave owning society; or the transition from a racially segregated society to a relatively non-segregated society are all examples of progress toward civilization. But this progress has only been possible through struggle (involving the sacrifice of lives) against those who were opposed to these transitions. Two points follow from this fact: first, for every step of progress that a generation enjoys, it does so because of the sacrifice of the preceding generations; and second, we owe it to succeeding generations to do our part in the continuing struggle toward civilization.

13(B). Civilization is not a product of conservatism, it is a product of progressivism. In other words, all human progress toward civilization has come about through the sacrifice of those who believed in progress (revolutionaries and radicals), not the conservatives. Consider the following examples: Those who overthrew feudalism were not conservatives, they were revolutionaries; those who overthrew the dictatorship of monarchies to establish democracy, were not conservatives, they were revolutionaries; those who fought the U.S. War of Independence were not conservatives, they were revolutionaries; those who worked for the abolition of slavery were not conservatives, they were radicals; those who fought for women's rights were not conservatives, they were radicals; those who fought for civil rights for minorities in the 1960s were not conservatives, they were radicals; those who fought for the abolition of Stalinist communism in Eastern Europe were not conservatives, they were radicals; those who fought for the abolition of apartheid in South Africa were not conservatives, they were radicals; those who are fighting for democracy in China, Africa, Latin America, etc., today are not conservatives, they are radicals; and so on, and so on. If you are a conservative, you must ask yourself on which side of history are you: civilization or backwardness?

13(C). As the most privileged group--in terms of education--in society, today, we have an additional responsibility to do our part in the continuing struggle toward civilization. This responsibility requires that, at the minimum, we should acquire political consciousness. What do I mean by political consciousness? Or, who is a politically conscious person? At the immediate level it may be assumed that a person who lacks political consciousness is someone who lacks political knowledge about society. Yet there are many political science professors who can easily be classified as persons who lack political consciousness. (I call persons who lack political consciousness as the ignorantsia.) Political consciousness goes beyond the matter of knowledge and information. (I consider this issue to be so important that I am going to spend some time on it in the rest of the pages that follow.) Knowledge and information, of course, are very important, but in themselves they are not sufficient to make a person politically conscious. Political consciousness should be seen as the conscious acquisition of knowledge and information about society and the world in general, and one's position in that society and the world, with a single overriding purpose: to consciously work, by whatever means (political, educational, social, economic, etc.) toward the betterment of society and the world. The motivation behind this goal is twofold: love--love for the human race and love for the planet earth--and deep altruism.