Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Protocols of the Elders of Christendom?
American Thinker ^ | March 28, 2010 | Alan Roebuck

Posted on 03/27/2010 11:00:49 PM PDT by neverdem

Theocracy-watcher Katherine Yurica calls it "the most immoral political program ever adopted by a political movement in this country." At Illuminati Conspiracy Archive, Paul and Phillip Collins say that it "echoes the revolutionary fervor of Robespierre's radical Jacobinism."

The object of this fear and loathing? An obscure essay (now available only on web archives) titled "The Integration of Theory and Practice: A Program for the New Traditionalist Movement," written in 2001 by Eric Heubeck, a former associate of the late Paul Weyrich at the Free Congress Foundation. Not only has his essay been removed from Free Congress's website, but Heubeck has apparently withdrawn from public life, as this author has not been able to contact him.

Let's examine Integration to see what might inspire such heated rhetoric. Beginning his case, Heubeck asserts:

The conservative movement is defensive, defeatist, depressed, and apologetic. It lacks self-confidence, virility, energy, intensity, vigor, aggressiveness, vitality, and a firm belief in the rightness of its cause. This is because conservatives have failed to devote the proper amount of energy to developing an alternative cultural world-view opposed to the dominant leftist one.


The result...is a[n American] society that increasingly does not recognize culturally conservative views, and is gradually coming to despise them.

Conservatives must honestly assess the predicament that we are in. We must understand that the American people are no longer on our side, at least not reliably so, and they will be less so as time goes on. But more worrisome still is the fact that conservatives themselves often no longer understand or support a truly culturally conservative vision of America.

Conservatism, in brief, is losing, and Integration attempts to lay a theoretical foundation for properly resisting the left. Heubeck's proposal, in a nutshell, is to develop an elite conservative corps which will spearhead the formation of a new, traditionalist conservative culture that will gradually, by proving itself to be more true, virtuous, and appealing than its liberal counterpart, peacefully displace the existing liberal/leftist order. To quote Integration:

A central mission of this movement is to advance a true traditionalist counter-culture based on virtue, excellence, and self-discipline. The New Traditionalists will not be exclusively Christians, but many of them inevitably will be. What binds the New Traditionalists is a belief that each individual has a duty to obey a higher law than his own will and appetite. New Traditionalists reject the materialism, hedonism, consumerism, egoism, and the cult of self-actualization which permeate modern life.

It is not the goal of this essay to give a detailed review of Integration, much less to examine what the movement leftists call "Dominionism," of which Integration is allegedly part. Instead, this essay attempts simply to point out how absurd and even wicked is the charge that Heubeck and people like him -- i.e., conservative Christians -- are trying to force a "theocratic" government on an unwilling populace.

The Indictment

Not surprisingly, Integration generated a hostile response from the left, and the most prolific Heubeck-hater appears to be freelance journalist Katherine Yurica. At her website, she describes herself as a "just plain ordinary born again Christian," but her primary bête noir is the "Christian right." In an essay with the charming title "Conquering by Stealth and Deception: How the Dominionists Are Succeeding in Their Quest for National Control and World Power," Yurica claims that Integration  is "Paul Weyrich's Secret Manual on How to Win Politically," and "The [evidence] that Weyrich's plan has actually been instituted is all around us."

In the estimation of Yurica and her fellow leftists, Integration concretely articulates a plan developed by "Christian Theocrats" to seize political power and use it forcefully to dismantle the domain of liberalism (secularism, welfare, multiculturalism, affirmative action, etc.) and enforce a fundamentalist Christian order in America. In brief, Yurica sees Integration as an American, Christian version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

This is the full meaning of the smear term "Dominionism" coined by the left. As Yurica sees it, this evil plan is well on its way to victory; one can visualize her shuddering as she imagines jackbooted, goose-stepping "Theocrats" chanting "Sieg Heil!

The Evidence

But is Yurica correct? You should read Integration yourself, but consider the following quotes:

We [conservatives] will never succeed in taking over political structures until we can convince the American people that we can be trusted to take them over, and to do that we must win the people over culturally--by defining how man ought to act, how he ought to perceive the world around him, and what it means to live the good life. Political arrangements can only be formed after these fundamental questions have been answered.

Also,

In terms of our long term prospects, because we will be seen as a purely defensive movement, not interested in imposing our views on anyone, only interested in being left alone, we will surely gain the sympathy of the public. The dominant culture will see its life-force being sapped, and it will grow terrified. It will do whatever it takes to destroy its assailant. This will lead to the perception that the dominant leftist culture is empty, hollow, desperate, and has lost its mandate to rule, because its only basis for authority is coercion, much like the communist East Bloc. Sympathy from the American people will increase as our opponents try to persecute us, which means our strength will increase at an accelerating rate due to more defections--and the enemy will collapse as a result.

Further,

There are operational libertarians and there are ontological libertarians. There is nothing in this movement that an operational libertarian would find objectionable. It does not seek to replace an intrusive leftist state with an intrusive traditionalist state. [Emphasis added]

The Conclusion

Yurica is wrong on three basic points: With the possible exception of tiny fringe groups, Christian conservatives are not advocating, or attempting, what she says they are. Second, those attempting it are bound to fail because it cannot be done. Finally, Christian conservatives are not "succeeding in their quest for national control and world power"; they are resisting only the so-far-successful leftist campaign to impose its will on America.

Yurica (and others) claim that Integration calls on Christian conservatives to seize power over an unsympathetic populace by a combination of force, stealth, and dissimulation. But the above quotes clearly show this accusation to be a lie. As you can see by reading Integration, Heubeck's plainly-stated plan is to convince people peacefully and openly to reject leftist ways. Every plan for cultural renewal necessitates a certain amount of aggression, but aggression in presenting good ideas and attacking bad ideas is entirely different from employing physical violence (as the left often does) to intimidate your enemy and bend him to your will. Heubeck is advocating intellectual, not physical, aggression.

Neither is he advocating dissimulation. Yurica describes as "Machiavellian" Integration's assertion that "the truth of an idea is not the primary reason for its acceptance." But the context makes Heubeck's meaning clear: It's not enough for activists to possess truth. They must present it effectively. This isn't Machiavellianism -- just common sense.

Why do Yurica and her ilk miss the obvious? A possible explanation is that leftists assume that conservatives want to rule by force and dissimulation because that's the way the left generally operates. The basic leftist model of sociopolitical "improvement" involves academics secretly (i.e., without input from ordinary people) deciding how man ought to live, legislators implementing (deceptively, if necessary) laws that reflect this understanding, and then lawyers and bureaucrats (and occasionally thugs) forcing ordinary people to obey. It is therefore natural for leftists to assume that their opponents wish to operate in the same way.

But perhaps the explanation is simply that Yurica is a propagandist who will use any smear that her intended readers might find plausible.

Integration's enemies (deliberately, we may presume) miss its central point: To gain real sociopolitical power, a movement needs to persuade the man in the street. And since leftist propaganda surrounds us, constantly emanating from school, church, and media, the man in the street currently accepts (at least passively) the basic premises of liberalism. Until that situation changes, conservatism will continue to retreat.

Many resist the conclusion that most Americans are content with the liberal status quo. True, John Q. Public often opposes the latest leftist initiatives. But it is change he opposes. He agrees with the basic premises of the left that have become conventional wisdom: America is secular and multicultural; all people are equal, therefore all discrimination is wrong; science defines reality, and religion is opinion rather than truth; government must fix all our problems; the individual and his desires are not constrained by God, country, or family; and so on. Liberalism won these battles long ago in the sense that these beliefs have long been widely accepted by America's authorities, and those who disagree are opposing a semi-official orthodoxy. This is why leftists portray their conservative opponents as "radical" or "out of step with America." True conservatives are indeed "out of step" with conventional -- i.e., liberal -- thinking.

The left is in the driver's seat, and there is therefore one irrefutable argument against the view that a secret cabal of Christian fundamentalists is taking over the country: Conservatism continues to lose. There may very well be secret or semi-secret conservative organizations dedicated to wresting control of the country from the left, but if so, these organizations are failing spectacularly. On average, with exceptions noted, the left is expanding its control over America's intellectual, moral, social, spiritual, and legal order. That the left is winning does not necessarily mean that conservatism can never come back, but we must acknowledge the current situation.

At best, conservatism is only slowing the left's progress, although there is hope that the blatant power-grab that is ObamaCare will show the truly radical nature of the left and stimulate the right to fight back effectively for a change. Indeed, if Yurica were a more astute observer, she would understand that the growing resistance to the left about which she worries is actually a sign that the left is winning: The culture war may be likened to a foreign (leftist) army invading America and attempting to force their alien ways on us, and as the invading army penetrates deeper into the country, resistance naturally stiffens as more people become aware that their backs are against the wall. 

And there is an even more fundamental problem with the assertion that fundamentalist Christians are secretly taking power: It can't be done. Even in a dictatorship, the people must be made at least outwardly to go along with the ruling ideology, which is why dictators always employ propaganda. The only way to seize power in America, where we have a tradition of popular sovereignty and resistance to tyranny, is to convince the average person that your beliefs are true. Are there people secretly plotting to gain power in the name of Christianity? Probably. Do they have a chance of taking over? Not a snowball's chance in Hell, unless they peacefully and rationally convince John Q. Public that their views are true and good. That's why Integration makes a lot of sense.

Alan Roebuck is professor of mathematics at Chaffey College, a community college in Southern California which certainly doesn't share his views. Contact him at asrprof@yahoo.com.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dominionists; integration; katherineyurica; newtraditionalists; paulweyrich; weyrich; yurica

1 posted on 03/27/2010 11:00:49 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Ping.


2 posted on 03/27/2010 11:06:07 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The “Dominionist” fantasy is simply the Left projecting their very real plans to subjugate the USA onto the right.


3 posted on 03/27/2010 11:12:00 PM PDT by denydenydeny ("I'm sure this goes against everything you've been taught, but right and wrong do exist"-Dr House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
In an essay with the charming title "Conquering by Stealth and Deception: How the Dominionists Are Succeeding in Their Quest for National Control and World Power," Yurica claims that Integration is "Paul Weyrich's Secret Manual on How to Win Politically," and "The [evidence] that Weyrich's plan has actually been instituted is all around us."

This broad probably wouldn't know a Dominionist from a Reconstructionist from a member of Opus Dei. Theocracy, as if she'd recognise it, LOL.

i'll be taking a look at Heubeck's work.

Very interesting, thank you for posting this.

4 posted on 03/27/2010 11:12:23 PM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Katherine Yurica the term 'born again' is not Biblical, Christ said 'born from above'. Yes, I read her hand wringing piece from September 14, 2004, where she can't wait for those she has judged to be the ones Christ says 'I never knew you'... that did not feed and cloth the poor... Well, how the religious I mean political winds have changed since September 2004. The left has their 'god' that spends his time non-stop promising to strip the wealth from those he has judged to not deserve it. And daily he promises cars, kitchens, gas, and 'death care' for the downtrodden of this nation.

And the 'right' has a secret plan for dominion????

5 posted on 03/27/2010 11:48:49 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I appreciate the link to the original piece.
The left believes contiuous revolution is the natural order of things. Therefor an attempt at counter-revolution must be suppressed with all force.
6 posted on 03/27/2010 11:54:55 PM PDT by rmlew (There is no such thing as a Blue Dog Democrat; just liberals who lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny
[Article]
Yurica (and others) claim that Integration calls on Christian conservatives to seize power over an unsympathetic populace by a combination of force, stealth, and dissimulation. But the above quotes clearly show this accusation to be a lie.

The “Dominionist” fantasy is simply the Left projecting their very real plans to subjugate the USA onto the right.

You got there before me. But that's essentially correct.

Leftists so often give themselves away in the charges they hurl against others, which charges are merely shadows of their own self-privileging, amoral, ultimately mass-murderous thought. If you can really call it thought.

7 posted on 03/28/2010 12:01:23 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
Theocracy, as if she'd recognise it, LOL.

A couple of relatives live in a university town and interact with academe all the time. About five years ago I began to be puzzled by references in their speech -- always derogatory of Bush 43, sometimes incandescent -- to "theocracy" on the right, as if they were directly comparing Mr. Bush's little morning prayer sessions to the Iranian mullahs.

Now I think I've discovered the poisoned well they've been drinking from, thanks to the poster.

8 posted on 03/28/2010 12:07:11 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

There IS a “Christian” cabal who maintains its power and influence as a junior partner of the dominant left. These Christians give their support for leftist tyranny in return for the War on Drugs and restrictions on obscenity. The left is nominally pro-drugs and pro-obscenity. But the left’s grip on power is that of a plurality. For now, the left needs to concede these peripheral issues where some “Christians” can access and therefore support the machinery of coercion that mainly serves the left.

The left and some “Christians” also collude on issues of supporting illegal immigration and welfare under a mistaken view of coerced charity. Freely given charity demands accountability, while coerced “charity” breeds dependence and fuels a growing bureaucracy of tyranny.

Unfortunately, whoever is “in charge” wants to push their views beyond the limits. The worst thing that happened to the Roman Empire is when “Christians” went from persecuted to persecutor with the unholy power of the roman state. It never occurred to them to proclaim liberty throughout the land.

I don’t like the left, but the Christian Right in charge would be no bed of roses either unless the power of the State is broken as well, lest we are left with a 4th-5th Century Rome.


9 posted on 03/28/2010 12:46:06 AM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (IN A SMALL TENT WE JUST STAND CLOSER! * IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I’ve been accused on FR of being a “Dominionist.” ;-)


10 posted on 03/28/2010 1:50:58 AM PDT by familyop (cbt. engr. (cbt), NG, '89-' 96, Duncan Hunter or no-vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Rule #1: Leftists write manifestos.

If a manifesto is found, see Rule # 1.


11 posted on 03/28/2010 2:06:02 AM PDT by Talisker (When you find a turtle on top of a fence post, you can be damn sure it didn't get there on it's own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide; All

Have you ever considered if Jesus Christ just took over everything right now what the world would be like?

I suspect even the most “righteous” among us would chafe at first at the restrictions we would find ourselves under, which is why the Bible speaks of needing a “tranformation by the renewal of our minds”.

We criticized for example the Taliban for blowing up those big idols of Buddha, erected in Asia. Under Christ, those idols are coming down anyway as well as all idols and temples devoted to false gods. Witchcraft and all occult practises will be done away with. Satan and his demons will be imprisoned and the beast and false prophet cast alive into the lake of fire.

When Christ rules, all evil forms of entertainment will be done away with, dress will become considerably more modest. The arts, painting sculpture, photography if it still existed will be considerably more restricted, no nudes or lurid sexual or violent themes. Habakkuk says “for the knowledge of the Glory of the Lord shall cover the earth as waters cover the seas”.

There will be no more wars. The Earth will heal and may become almost a paradise. The curse of sin is lifted off of
of creation and the full potential of genetic expression of plants, animals, and people explodes beyond anything we could ever imagine. The Bible speaks of plants bearing differing fruits every month of the year and of other trees with leaves used for healing. So while there may be illnesses at first, the cures will be phenomenal. Animals will become tame, the big cats will eat straw. Snakes won’t bite ect.

Personal behaviors will be restricted, to the point that personal thoughts may be limited somewhat. God will have very strong direct influence. If any man “dies before 100 years of age, it will be said that God has cursed him”. There may be yet expressed rebellions by certain people groups, the Bible speaks of what happens to nations who don’t present themselves yearly in Jerusalem to pay respects and do homage(”there will be no rain”).

Sadly, evil will lurk in the hearts of many, for there is still the need for Christ’s regeneration in every heart. When Satan is loosed “for a season” at the end of 1000 years of Christ’s reign, multitudes will attempt to rebel against Christ and his saints.

American Christians I think need to reprioritze and realize that American freedoms have existed in a 200 to 300 year bubble and that the natural hearts of men are evil and anti-christian. Hence, there would arise such men that would attempt to persecute Christians and destroy our liberties.
Christians are citizens of a higher order than America. Yes we should do what we can, pray, fast, ect so that God turns his judgment away from us, yet eventually God’s Higher order will be imposed on this Earth. As it says in Revelation” and the child was caught up to heaven and from there to rule the nations with a rod of iron.”


12 posted on 03/28/2010 4:19:49 AM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Katherine Yurica the term 'born again' is not Biblical, Christ said 'born from above'.

The Koine Greek phrase "to be born again" utilizes an adverb [anothen] which is deliberately ambiguous. "By means of this literary device [ambiguity] John (or better Jesus) is able to synthesize two fundamental truths of Christianity: the believer must be "born again" and "from above" (supernaturally)." ("Linguistics for Students of New Testament Greek" by David Alan Black, pg. 130)

This is why Nicodemas asks in the next verse "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb?" (John 3:4). Jesus resolves the ambiguity by clarifying: "Except a man be born of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5) "born of water" refers to natural birth when the amniotic sac ruptures; and "born of the spirit" refers to quickening and rebirth of the believer's spirit.

13 posted on 03/28/2010 7:06:22 AM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
Now I think I've discovered the poisoned well they've been drinking from, thanks to the poster.

Decades ago, i read Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, which dealt with a theocratic group taking over much of the US. At least Atwood did her homework. All through the book (and the movie picked it up too), references were made to Southern Baptist forces attacking government convoys.

i'm not a Southern or any other type of Baptist, but i can understand their concern.

Separation of Church and State is heavily ingrained into Southern Baptist thinking. Even Pat Robertson resigned his ministerial credentials with the Southern Baptist Convention the day before he announced for President in 88.

Funny, i didn't see Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton resign their credentials when they ran.

Maybe that woman is looking for Theocracy in all the wrong places.

14 posted on 03/28/2010 7:46:34 AM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord ((I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting
The Koine Greek phrase "to be born again" utilizes an adverb [anothen] which is deliberately ambiguous. "By means of this literary device [ambiguity] John (or better Jesus) is able to synthesize two fundamental truths of Christianity: the believer must be "born again" and "from above" (supernaturally)." ("Linguistics for Students of New Testament Greek" by David Alan Black, pg. 130) This is why Nicodemas asks in the next verse "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb?" (John 3:4). Jesus resolves the ambiguity by clarifying: "Except a man be born of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5) "born of water" refers to natural birth when the amniotic sac ruptures; and "born of the spirit" refers to quickening and rebirth of the believer's spirit.

Yes the soul/spirit is placed in the flesh at conception, and is described by Luke 1:41 in the conception of Jesus, when John six months in the womb leaped in recognition of Jesus (Holy Spirit) just conceived in Mary. And Paul elaborates further in Hebrews 2:14 of the children being partakers of flesh and blood as was Christ.

And this was not 'new' doctrine as per the question Christ then answers/asks in John 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, "Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Genesis 2:7 and Ecclesiastes 12:6-7 Jeremiah 1:5, etc...

15 posted on 03/28/2010 8:38:18 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The left has succeeded in part because they adopted Gramscii’s strategy of making “the long march through the institutions.”

The time has come for us to make the long march through THEIR institutions. In fact, I’m doing it right now as a teacher at a high school. Every year, in every class, there are students fascinated with the ideas of liberty, freedom, limited government, and American exceptionalism - in part because those ideas stand out among the dreck presented everywhere else as accepted wisdom. In those students are the seeds of the destruction of the left. This website does the same sort of thing concerning the role of communication in culture.

Poor, stupid Gramscii, sitting his little prison cell, unable to understand that his strategy could easily be used against his own ideology. The same is true with Saul Alinsky and his little list of tactics.

We all do our part.


16 posted on 03/28/2010 9:24:52 AM PDT by redpoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
Decades ago, i read Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, which dealt with a theocratic group taking over much of the US. At least Atwood did her homework. All through the book (and the movie picked it up too), references were made to Southern Baptist forces attacking government convoys.

DING! DING! DING! DING! Winner!! .... hold all calls, please! We have a winner!

The wife is a huge Atwood fan.

Thanks for bringing that out. Of course, people who get paranoid about the Baptists becoming some kind of Inquisition have to overcome some inconvenient counterfacts, viz. a) the history and doctrine of the Baptists and b) the fact that Bill Clinton is one of the most prominent products of the Southern Baptists.

17 posted on 03/28/2010 3:26:55 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson