West Point Paper: Constitutionalists Compared to Radical Organizations


West Point emblemThe United States Military Academy, known for its prestigious military education and has a long history in the United States, has issued a report by the Combat Terrorism Center, entitled Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right. [November 2012]

I should note that the paper (by Arie Perliger) offers this disclosure:

The views expressed in this report are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of the Combating Terrorism Center, U.S. Military Academy, Department of Defense or U.S. government.

The paper discusses “far-right” groups and organizations and totally ignores Islamic and progressive organizations in the same light. If this paper was not bias, it would include those and discuss all such groups. In addition, it fails to address that there are numerous Islamic combat training organization camps in the United State, last reported to be as many as 35 … [See: Homeland Security, Truth or Fiction, Atlas Shrugs, Prison Planet, Law Enforcement Today, et cetera]

The government has done nothing about it.

It is important to note that this study concentrates on those individuals and groups who have actually perpetuated violence and is not a comprehensive analysis of the political causes with which some far-right extremists identify. … There are three major ideological movements within the American violent far right: a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement. … The racist movement is comprised of white supremacy groups such as the KKK, neo-Nazi groups such as the National Alliance and Skinheads groups such as the Hammerskin Nation. … The antifederalist rationale is multifaceted, and includes the beliefs that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order” (NWO) in which the United States will be absorbed into the United Nations or another version of global governmentThey also espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights.

If you know that the Constitution has specific limited powers and that there is a check-and-balance system established by the Framers of the Constitution of the United States – you are put in a basket with racist and white-supremacy groups. No mentioned of the Black Panthers here either.

Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self-government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.

This is proof that those We the People elected and people like Perlinger believe that insisting upon individual freedom (in Constitution’s amendments) is subversive! There are radicals on both sides of the political fence. There are religious radicals that the government is ignoring dangerously that is infiltrating the United States like it did in other nations, including the United Kingdom – a valued ally of once free nations.

The constitutional republic is a self-governing government, which means the framers of the Constitution are also subversive according to Perlinger’s ideology. Meanwhile, subversion elements from Mexico and infiltrated Islamic jihadist organizations continue their business as usual in the United States with supporters now being elected into public offices.

Similar to the attempts of terrorism scholars to confront the absence of an agreed definition of terrorism,  two complementing conceptual approaches have evolved to describe the far right. … If there is one ideological doctrine about which there is almost full consensus regarding its importance for understanding the far-right worldview, it is that of nationalism.

These are the type of people who wail about freedom of speech, yet those who cry out, like the Tea Party movement, against the federal government’s unconstitutional power, is defined as nationalism not patriotism. The Nazi are considered nationalists (fascists also). Therefore, constitutionalists are listed in that category because they are against federal government policies and transgressions against the US Constitution and its amendments. Loyalty to our nation, its constitution, and its people is patriotism – not loyalty to government.

Considering foreign influence in the form of Islamic jihadists is also a denominator that could put individuals and organizations on their subversive, terrorist list.

The idea of nativism represents a wider implementation of the internal homogenization concept.  Internal homogenization rejects the incorporation and recognition of those embodying different ethnic and national traits as part of the nation. In addition, nativism adds opposition to external influence, whether on a cultural, religious, or normative basis. Foreign influence is perceived as a threat to the entirety and homogeneity of the nation and, as a result, to its resiliency, its ability to counter external threats and to preserve its essential traits. … Xenophobia involves behaviors and sentiments derived from fear, hate and hostility towards groups which are perceived as alien or strange, including people with alternative sexual preferences, styles of living and behavior; racism refers to the same sentiments, but based on racial grounds, such as belief in the national and moral significance of natural and hereditary differences between races, and  the conviction  that  certain races are superior to others. …

The American far-right was for many years associated with the militant activism of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).

If that statement is representative of the author’s knowledge, then Perliger does not know American history.

Slave owners and members of the KKK formed after the Civil War were members of the Democratic Party – not the party of Abraham Lincoln, Republican political party. This continued into the 1960s, one hundred years after the commencement of the Civil War. Neither political party has maintained its original policies that formed it in respect to Conservatism vs. Liberalism. Indeed, the author mentions the formation of the KKK – but leaves out the fact that it was the Democrat Party whose members formed it, particularly Southern Democrats.

The birth of the racist movement is usually associated with the emergence of the original KKK in Tennessee in 1865. At its peak this association included half a million members. Although in the aftermath of the Civil War it quickly declined and was officially disbanded in 1869, it still provided the ideological foundation for the white supremacy paradigm as exemplified in the declared goal of the first KKK convention (1867) in Nashville: “To maintain the supremacy of the White race in the republic,” and similarly in the words of the KKK historian William Pierce Randel in describing the motivation of the first KKK founders: “America was founded by the White race and for the white race…any effort to transfer control to the black race was an obvious violation of the constitution….” … The early decades of the twentieth century witnessed the rise to prominence of far-right ideologies in Central and Eastern Europe.

Socialism and Communism was established before nationalism in the form of Nazism, and that is the political ideology of the American Democrat Party who uses the same political tactics, media tools, indoctrination of children through government-controlled education, and erosion of the articles of Constitution and its amendments. Presently they are attacking the Second Amendment as they have done for decades, and anyone who disagrees is “anti-government” or ruthless, radical gun nuts. No mention is made of the violent groups that oppose meat packing plants, anti-war movements, or the homosexual movement that is forcing their unnatural lifestyles into family units who choose to be against it, whether it be religious or personal choice. The neo-Nazi movement naturally took up against ethnic groups because they are racists; but should never be compared to Americans who are for keeping the constitutional republic form of government that the Founders and Framers constructed.

The author also puts Libertarians into the basket with neo-Nazi and Skinheads …

Anti-federalist and anti-government sentiments were present in American society before the 1990s in diverse movements and ideological associations promoting anti-taxation, gun rights, survivalist  practices, and libertarian ideas.

Were anti-federalists of the 1780s subversive also? Enemies of the state?

The anti-federalist movement’s ideology is based on the idea that there is an urgent need to undermine the influence, legitimacy and practical sovereignty of the federal government and its proxy organizations. … The groups comprising  the movement

suggest several rationales that seek to legitimize anti-federal sentiments. Some groups

are driven by a strong conviction that the American political system and its proxies

were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order,” (NWO)

in which the United States will be embedded in the UN or  another version of global

government.

The father of GW Bush, GH Bush when he was president and both favored the idea, which included a North American Union that was held from the public, first publicly coined the New World Order. If the political left is denying that globalization (New World Order) and a global government is not being instituted – then they must be in favor of it, as long it is their elite who gains the power.

The last stage, according to most NWO  narratives, involves the  transformation of  the United States government into an international/world government and the execution and oppression of those opposing this process. Linda Thompson, the head of the Unorganized Militia of the United States details the consequence of this global coup: ”This is the coming of the New World Order. A one-world government, where, in order to put the new government in place, we  must all be disarmed first. To do that, the government is deliberately creating schisms in our society, funding both the anti-abortion/pro-choice sides, the antigun/pro-gun issues…trying to provoke a riot that will allow martial law to be implemented and all weapons seized, while ‘dissidents’ are put safely away”. The fear of the materialization of the NWO makes most militias not merely hostile towards the federal government but also hostile towards international organizations, whether non-profitable NGOs, international corporations, or political institutions of the international community, such as the UN. The militias’ anti-federalist sentiments are also rationalized by their perception of the corrupted and tyrannical nature of the federal government and its apparent tendency to violate individuals’ civilian  liberties and constitutional rights. …

In the context of violation of constitutional rights, militia members in particular tend to point out the steady increase in gun control and environmental legislation and the overregulation of the economic and social realms, especially in regard to immigration and education issues. The opposition to gun control legislation has been driven mainly by the perception of many that this represents a breach of the Second Amendment and a direct violation of a constitutional right, having direct impact on the ability of many to preserve their common practices and way of life.

Finally, many of the militias also legitimize their ideological tendencies by referring to the strong role of civilian activism, civilian paramilitary groups, individual freedoms, and self-governing and frontier culture in America’s history and ethos, especially during the Revolutionary War and the expansion to the West. Hence, members of  these groups see themselves as the successors of the nation’s founding fathers, and as part of a struggle to restore or preserve what they regard as America’s true identity, values and way of life.

Then the author mentions Christian fundamentalists, ignoring the real threat: Islamic fundamentalists and includes those opposed to abortion or pro-life advocacy – against government’s systematic infanticide, something definitely neo-Nazi.

The Christian fundamentalist violent far right emerged from two ideological platforms. The more influential and popular one is that of the Christian Identity school of thought. The second is the anti-abortion/pro-life paradigm.

To put the icing upon the cake, Christians are accused of being anti-Semitic!

Historically, other anti-Semitic characteristics have emerged in the movement, including Holocaust denial and the linking of Jews to practices and beliefs, which their members perceive to be socially injurious, such as abortion and socialism.

This author is accusing the conservatives and constitutionalists (and Founders) as having the same agenda the progressives promote.

To conclude, pro-life violence is driven by several ideological building blocks that are enhanced by religious-based convictions, i.e., fetuses are human beings created in God’s image, and as such should be accorded the rights of humans from the moment of conception; any violent acts to end their lives are immoral and should be prevented.

Fetuses are human beings no matter if someone believes in God or not.

National Socialism has maintained a presence in the American political and social arena since the early 1930s.

Yes, we know, President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered Japanese descent Americans and naturalized citizens to be taken to camps with only a suitcase – leaving behind their homes, furnishings, and businesses they worked for. The only difference between the FDR internment camps and Nazi Germany camps is that the Japanese Americans were not used as slave labor, tortured, killed, and put in ovens. Indeed, despite substantial and verified reports, FDR continued to deny how far Nazi Germany had gone with their nationalist supremacy ideology. FDR condemned a shipload of Jewish refugees 90 miles from Florida to concentration camps by not allowing them to find safe haven in America. FDR is the Democrat Party’s demagogue. FDR did not deny their request to enter US as refugees, but simply ignored them. Both Republicans and Democrats of the time were to blame when it came to Congress.

Can we label all of this as misrepresentation, bias, and hypocrisy?

If not, we should.

As Oath Keepers stated:

A Republican congressional staffer who served in the military told The Washington Times: “If [the Defense Department] is looking for places to cut spending, this junk study is ground zero. Shouldn’t the Combating Terrorism Center be combating radical Islam around the globe instead of perpetuating the left’s myth that right-wingers are terrorists?” the staffer said. “The $64,000 dollar question is when will the Combating Terrorism Center publish their study on real left-wing terrorists like the Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, and the Weather Underground?”  

stars

 FIREARMS IN THE NEWS

Just in: Marine Corp to get new sidearm — Colt M45. Now available to public for $2,000 [limited edition, thus far – unless Obama, Bloomberg, and Feinstein have their way.] It is .45-caliber like the original M1911 instead of the Beretta 9mm now used by most military units.

 bar_goldenfeather

Advertisements

2 comments on “West Point Paper: Constitutionalists Compared to Radical Organizations

  1. Thanks for linking. In this administration, none of this is surprising to me, EXCEPT that this report comes from our military – no matter that the author claims the views are his, it’s published under the auspices of the US Military Academy. Astonishing.

  2. Indeed, Maggie. Really like your Maggie’s Wine site! Professional, but tailored for all to enjoy.

Comments are closed.