Politico Absurdly Hypes Supposed Resurgence of John Birch Society

What exactly is wrong with Constitutional Rights for all American Citizens?!

So you think the entire Affirmative Discrimination bureaucracy that covers the country now is "Constitutional"?

EO 11246 which Johnson issued would have no authority except for the '64 Act.

Goldwater was right. But his defeat came from Johnson painting him as a warmonger, not as a closet Confederate. In 1965, even if he had been - and he was far from it - it wasn't that big of a deal. The country was still 90% white.

Thanks for putting flesh on it.

It’s hard now to remember the country as it was, when we didn’t have to worry about offending a 250 lb male with lipstick and a skirt headed into the Women’s room by telling him to get out. Or being flat on your back in an ER facing a minority doc who probably got into med school with a 2.4 GPA in Gender Studies.

All of these evils came from the “noble” ‘64 Act.

EO 11246 could be rescinded in a 2nd Trump term. He’s got the stones to do it. The Bush family was all for it, so they were part of the problem. Reagan couldn’t, it was too early to see the eventual damage, and he tried to fix the SCOTUS instead (yessirree, Sandy Baby O’Connor was a real win...).

And we would not have Jihadists in our government since there would be no pressure to hire them. They could be completely rejected as the enemies they are.

Imgaine a world without Communist coercion.

Forty years ago, I was a member of the John Birch Society. I thought they hung the moon. I thought they were the greatest bunch of people on the face of the earth.

I was wrong.

It took a while for me to notice it, but the Society had a very pronounced anti-Israel prejudice. They distributed anti-Semitic material by Nesta Webster and even published bowdlerized versions of books by pro-Nazi Romanian Prince Michel Sturdza, and while they were big fans of Rhodesia, South Africa, Protugal, Spain, and Nationalist China, they were very stand-offish about Israel, even though they never labeled Israel or Ben Gurion as Communist.

The Birch Society is actually largely a front for anti-Semitic sedevacantist and Feeneyite Catholics and anti-Israel "Reconstructionist" Protestants (although it was founded by an evolutionist Unitarian and included among its founding members the notorious atheist anti-Semite Revilo P. Oliver).

The Birch Society was and is totally alien to traditional American (pro-Israel) Fundamentalist Protestantism and is tied in with the anti-Semitic "right" in foreign countries. On the side they pushed an anti-Israel book called The Rapture Cult, which actually speculates that pretribulation dispensationalism was a creation of the "conspiracy." I was even given a copy of this book by my own coordinator!

I know precious few people will take my word for any of this, but I can only say that I have been there and done that, and I know what I know.

The Birch Society is not a righteous organization. To take conservative positions domestically while opposing the Return to Zion shows that their "gxd" is not the True G-d. And there simply is no national American "gxd." The Jewish G-d is the only G-d there is--whether anyone likes it or not.

The Birchers got themselves in a pickle when they opposed the Civil Rights Movement in the 60’s, not because of rights per se, but because they claimed the movement was full of communists in leadership positions.

There's a little more to it than that. I'm no fan of the "civil rights movement," but the Birch Society was always a coalition of radical libertarians and traditional white Southern segregationists, and the latter very much considered "race mixing" to be the essence of Communism. Each side of this coalition was given free reign and for the most part ignored each other's "eccentricities." At any rate, white racialism was definitely a factor, along with the Communists in the civil rights movement.

Another factor was that, like Goldwater, the non-racialists in the Society considered all federal involvement in civil rights issues to be illegitimate and contrary to true Constitutional federalism. I pretty much agree with this position, but unfortunately the racialists in the organization (and in the conservative movement) simply refused to let their "blood is thicker than water" concept go. It's a darn shame that these issues could not have been addressed at local and state levels. It was a case of an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object.

What’s so bad about the John Birch Society? They have proven to be more accurate than the average college professor.

Race realism.

It's complicated. For the traditional white Southern segregationists in the Birch Society, that certainly was a factor (although this was never stressed in Birch outreach). But other Birchers were from the radical libertarian, non-racialist "Intercollegiate Society of Individualists" school of thought, and they certainly were not what people today call "racial realists."

Of course Society founder Robert Welch was an evolutionist, so if you're promoting the idea that human beings make up a plethora of different species with millions of years of evolution separating them from one another, then yes, maybe you have some kinship there. Then there was founding member Revilo P. Oliver, an atheist who thought religious people were stupid rubes and who considered being "Aryan" the big thing holding anti-Communists together. He was also pro-Nazi, anti-Jewish, and ranted and raved about the "Congoloids" in America. Is that what you mean by "race realism?"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.