Rise of the Fourth Reich


Richard Moore

Original source URL:

  Rise of the Fourth Reich
Published: The Frontier Post, Nov 09, 1999

On June 15th, 1998, long before the Clinton Administration's strong 
backing of Mr. Nawaz Sharif and the subsequent criticism of the 
military take over in Pakistan, Public Television in the US aired its 
documentary, "The People's Century, Master Race." The documentary 
outlined the rise of the Nazis and some of the principles that 
governed their thinking. Shown were the dancing Germans who welcomed 
their new leader with joy and worship. Shown were the Jewish and 
Gypsy persecutions and murders along with others who would not 
conform to the national dream. Since they were not of "The Order", 
and could not be made to conform, they were deemed expendable.

As the documentary progressed, it became clear, though unintended, 
that the much vaunted New Order now sweeping the world does not use 
the name "Nazi" but is fully involved with its principles in the name 
of promoting democracy. It does not require a Nazi to eradicate 
dissent at home and abroad. This eradication happens in America, 
Israel and in most other countries. The Nazis used various forms of 
propaganda as is done these days to form public opinion and bring 
everyone into support of the so-called international community and 
its leader the Fourth Reich in Washington.

Eradication of dissent to the New World Order and subjugating a 
people need only a good sell out democrat, like Benazir or Nawaz 
Sharif. The Western leaders, who preach democracy, do not, in fact, 
practice it. Not even the Fourth Reich gains the presidency by 
popular majority vote. The chief of the United Nations does not even 
pretend to be elected in this way. The EU foreign ministers at their 
meeting in Luxembourg on November 15 are expected to decide the fate 
of "undemocratic" Pakistan. They must keep in mind that when men 
rule, and that rule has not been given to them by popular consent, 
there must be force and coercion to sustain it. Unlike our 
much-criticised military government, this was true in Germany and it 
is true in America as well.

Like the American government that dislikes popularly supported 
governments in places like Tehran, Islamabad, Khartoum etc, the 
National Socialist German Workers' Party of the Nazis would not 
tolerate divergent ideologies. All were to be brought into the grand 
and Third Reich. There were to be no nationalities holding back. This 
is also true for the US and UN. Those who are not co-operative and 
supportive of the New Order are viewed as pariah states, and the 
national propaganda machine and international sanctions are used to 
starve the offending state into submission.

Preaching democracy is one thing and practising it is another. 
Holding elections does not mean that a functional democracy is in 
place. To say the least, the two political parties in the US have 
become so mixed in with the government that they have convinced 
voters that they are government. In fact, it is a two party 
dictatorship in which it is hard to distinguish where one begins and 
the other leaves off. The following faults and foibles make the US 
permanent democracy worse than our temporary military rule.

     * Political parties often illegally take over powers reserved for 

     *  Strong party discipline weakens the power of elected 
officials, often forcing them to go against the wishes of their 

     *  State and local rules, drawn up by the two parties, purposely 
discriminate against millions of independents, who are virtually 
unrepresented in American political life.

     *  The ability to run for office as an independent on the same 
basis as the two parties or to start a solid third party movement is 
cut down by the entrenched system.

     *  The "initiative" which grants direct democracy to the voters 
is denied to most Americans.

     *  The ability of citizens to reject or approve legislation 
through the referendum does not exist in most states or on the 
federal level as it does in many democratic nations.

     * Majority rule does not exist in most American elections.

     *  The primary system for the nomination of presidential 
candidates is often foolish, and the result undemocratic.

     *  The laws that elect the President, from the Electoral College 
to a possible choice in the House, are irrational.

The military government in Pakistan is not acceptable to the EU even 
if more than 90% of the Pakistanis approve it. On the other hand, the 
government in Washington is acceptable even if more than 50% of the 
Americans stayed out of the elections. It is ironic that as the major 
parties gather more power, their support is shrinking dramatically. 
In 1952, only 23% of American called themselves Independents. This 
number has increased by more than 60%, and is rising yearly as voters 
become increasingly disillusioned with democracy as it is in the US.

The American democracy is permitting politicians who lose elections 
to be declared the winner. In the trade, this is called a plurality, 
but it actually means that most people voted against he so-called 
winner. More than 90% of the world and the US citizens do not even 
know what is going wrong with their democratic system. The same thing 
happened in 1992, when Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% 
of the vote in a three-way split. It also happened in 1990 in 
Connecticut, when former Senator Lowell Weicker won the governorship 
with 40% of the vote.

Bill Clinton is not the first minority president. In fact, there have 
been eleven, the most grievous case being John Quincy Adams, who got 
only 31% of the popular vote and became President by virtue of a 
victory in the House of representatives. American presidential 
election system is the most convoluted and the least democratic in 
the Western world, but the sad reality is that none of the UE members 
look at the series of compromises between the US state and federal 
apparatus that creates an anti-democratic monster, under which the 
Americans have painfully lived for over two hundred years.

It is the Electoral College, which could not care less about how many 
people voted for whom in the election. It only cares about votes per 
state. So ridiculously askew is that ballot counting that when 
Clinton skinned by with only 43 per cent of the popular vote, he was 
Mr. State Champion incarnate, taking 68% of the Electoral vote! Very 
few American know it is not fair and they are not aware of its 
potential distortions. States are awarded an Electoral College number 
equal to their population, which seems reasonable. But it is a 
winner-take-all system. A victory of one vote gives the candidate all 
the electoral votes of that state. For example, the candidate who 
gets 6 million votes against his opponent's 5,999,999 in California 
wins all fifty-four Electoral votes, almost 20% of what is needed for 
national victory.

That is pretty poor democracy even if compared to our popularly 
supported military rule, because we can imagine an even worse 
scenario. To win California's giant Electoral prize, a majority is 
not required. All that is needed is one vote more than the next 
candidate. I minor parties were to take 4% of the vote in California, 
for example, that would leave 96% for the major candidates in a 
three-way race. The victor of that, with only 32.1%, or less than one 
third the votes, would take the entire giant prise. Hardly a 

This indirect election of the president of the US is more a violation 
of common sense than the military take over in Pakistan as the causes 
and consequences in our case are clearly known and everyone 
understands inevitability of the military rule at the moment. If the 
Electoral College is undemocratic, what follows when no one gets a 
majority of that body is even worse. The vote is then thrown into the 
House of Representatives -- where it should never be. But what most 
people do not know is the devil in the peculiar details. The House 
can chose the President from any one of the top three vote getters, 
regardless of how well they did in the actual election.

If a candidate received only 10% of the popular vote and none of the 
Electoral College vote, the partisan House could still name him as 
President of the United States!

Another kicker in the face of democracy is that House members cannot 
vote individually. Only states can vote. And each state, regardless 
of population or the size of its delegation, gets only a single vote. 
So, California, with fifty-one Congressmen, is only as powerful that 
day as Vermont with one Congressman. To win the presidency in the 
House, the candidate needs only twenty-six votes from the states, one 
greater than half the fifty cast.

It would have been better if the undemocratic practices were limited 
to this extent. But here starts the process of what we call 
"political victimisation" under the strict state of national 
emergency that is in place since March 9, 1933. When General 
Musharraf declared emergency in Pakistan, it was criticised in many 
Western capitals as tantamount to Martial Law without the knowledge 
that the powers available to the Executive branch since March 1933 
have effectively placed the American people in slavery, by 
nationalising the vital industries and removing the common law from 
their court system.

The police state that is well in Placed in the US violates 
immigrants', minorities' and children's rights. The public has no 
idea about how expose and eliminate the wave of violence and killings 
of Americans everywhere at the hands of government law enforcement 
officers and officials of the judiciary. Such claims of human rights 
violations would seem questionable, at best, were it not for the fact 
that people like a fourteen-year veteran of Congress and former 
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Agriculture under 
Nixon have themselves been the focus of "political retribution."

According to The Idaho Observer, the "Seven-term U.S. Congressman, 
George Hansen (R. Idaho) was punished severely for having the 
audacity to implement a plan which would make Congress instantly 
accountable to the American public. " Hansen, author of "To Harass 
Our People, an indictment of the IRS," was also the architect of the 
Congressional Accountability Project (CAP) which was...to use 
national TV and a 1-900 number to instantly post congressional floor 
votes and public response to them."

This legislation met with a hostile congressional response and began 
a series of events in the life of the congressman that makes the term 
"bizarre" seem woefully inadequate. The real substance of Rep. 
Hansen's nightmare began when James Cole, special counsel to the 
House Ethics Committee went after Hansen on alleged violation of 
Title 18 sec. 1001 of the United States Code. He was accused of lying 
to the government by omitting specific information on his financial 
disclosure statement. Even after the Supreme Court handed down its 
decision, years later, vacating Hansen's conviction and calling the 
litigation a "wrongful prosecution." Hansen got the relief and 
thousands of others are still languishing in the American prison 
system for showing dissent and making efforts to change the status 

It shows that the U.S. does not tolerate resistance by its citizens, 
but feigns such human concern when other nations seek to stop 
rebellious elements and remove the corrupt leaders in their own 
societies. By fostering and supporting dissenters and sell outs, the 
U.S. is able to weaken the fabric of nationalistic states and make 
them more pliable for the new system of things now being set up. 
Nations, which have a strong love for country, must be demoralised 
and diminished. The US, EU and international bankers particularly 
make the same kinds of efforts towards Islamic groups who are 
strongly individualised and not susceptible to control by the New 
World Order. While Nazi Germany wielded its control in obvious and 
open ways, the New International beast, sometimes misnamed in 
American propaganda as the "family of nations", is using deceit and 
chicanery to destroy the ethnic and nationalistic societies and bring 
them into complete submission to the new super government of the 
Fourth Reich now taking charge over all kindred and people.

The conclusion of the matter is laid at the feet of the people. The 
"Master Race" film reasoned concerning the duplicity and knowing 
ignorance of the German people in regards to Hitler and his purposes 
for world control and the annihilation of certain populations. The 
modern propaganda machine of the West mentions nothing of its own 
willing ignorance. While enforcing different kind of sanctions 
against sincere governments aiming at good governance, the Western 
leaders support oppressive and corrupt regimes in the name of 
protecting democracy and lie to their population regarding their true 
political purposes in enforcing a new order on nations around the 
world. No matter how they cut it, they cannot claim a better state of 
morals than the Nazis. If the truth were exposed, they cannot even 
claim the morality of the Nazis.

Escaping the Matrix website:            http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website:                       http://cyberjournal.org
Community Democracy Framework: http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html
Subscribe cyberjournal list:            •••@••.••• 
(send blank message)
Posting archives: 
cyberjournal blog (join in):            http://cyberjournal-rkm.blogspot.com/
Moderator:                                         •••@••.••• 
(comments welcome)