The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement -- Part 2

The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement

Thomas Allen

The leading Negro organizations were founded, organized, and controlled by Communists and communist sympathizers. These organizations included the Civil Rights Congress (CRC), Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), Highlander Folk School (HFS), National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), National Negro Congress (NNC), National Urban League (NUL), Revolution Action Movement (RAM), Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), Southern Conference Educational Fund (SCEF), and Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee (SNCC)

In 1946, the NNC, International Labor Defense (the legal arm of the Communist party), and the National Federation for Constitutional Liberties (all three were communist fronts) merged to form the CRC. Representing NNC was its president Max Yergan, a Communist. Vito Marcantonto, president of ILD and a member of many communist fronts, represented ILD. Milton Kemnitz, executive secretary of NFCL, represented NFCL. “In 1957, the Subversive Activities Control Board said that the merger ‘was created and established by the Communist Party as an organization which would utilize defense of civil rights for Party purposes and raise and maintain mass defense and bail funds for Party use. . . . [The Civil Rights Congress’] major activity became the defense of Party leaders, and the Party continued to assign functionaries and members as officers of or to work in the Civil Rights Congress to insure that the CRC would operate in accordance with the Party program. . . .’” In short, the CRC is a communist front.

In 1942 James Farmer and George Houser formed CORE. Rustin was the field secretary of CORE during the 1940s. King was a member of CORE’s national advisory committee. King’s SCLC and CORE collaborated on the southern campaigns. CORE promoted violence while SCLC offered a nonviolent solution. The message was “give King what he demanded or Farmer’s CORE will attack you.” That is, “save yourself from CORE’s violence by acceding to King’s demands.” With this tactic, the civil rights movement advanced.

As national director of CORE, McKissick stated, “CORE has many friends. Some might be Black Muslims or the Communists.” In 1965 CORE allied with the Black Muslims.

CORE’s basic tactic was to take over a person’s property and then force that person to either divide the property with CORE members or forcibly remove CORE members from the property. If the property owner chose the latter, he was castigated for doing a great moral wrong. Farmer, CORE’s national director, declared “CORE is the hard-cutting edge of the civil right movement. We’re much more militant than Malcolm X — we’re activists.” Known Communists were highly active in CORE and its demonstrations.

About CORE, Gannon writes, “Despite CORE’s leaders’ constant prattling about nonviolence, CORE demonstrations were fraught with violence. This was not an unusual development because the same situation held true for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and Martin L. King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the two organizations which were the main collaborators in CORE's demonstrations.”

HFS was a communist front that Myles Horton established with the assistance of Don West. West was the district director of the Communist Party of North Carolina. The purpose of HFS was to train religious leaders and others to subvert churches and labor unions to get them to support communist causes like the civil rights movement.

The NAACP was founded in 1909 to facilitate race wars in the United States and to bring down the white people. Behind organizing the NAACP was Jacob Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., head of the Russian Section of the Jewish International World Government, and a financier of the Bolshevik Revolution through Trotsky. W.E.B. DuBois and seven whites constituted its initial governing body. Most of the early members were white radicals, socialists, and Communists. Throughout its history, the NAACP has maintained close ties with Communists. In 1958 more than 61 percent of the top leaders of the NAACP were involved with communistenterprises. Since the founding of the NAACP, radicals have used it to advance their social and other statist agendas.

In 1923 Communists began financing the NAACP through the Garland Fund, which Communists ran, and continued to do so until at least 1934. A few years later Communists began taking control of the NAACP. By the late 1930s, the NAACP had become associated with communist organizations and fronts, such as the National Negro Congress, World Youth Congress, and American Youth for a Free World. In 1941 it cooperated with the Communist party in establishing Progress Citizens of America. The Communist Party endorsed the NAACP in 1953 and encouraged its members to support the NAACP’s campaigns. Another endorsement was given in 1957. The permanent attorneys associated with the NAACP were affiliated with communist fronts and projects.

Before 1960 the NAACP had focused on legal and educational programs. Then it followed SCLC and CORE and adopted an activist program. It became involved in “peace” marches, boycotts, picket lines at stores, and sit-ins.

Robert Thompson, a Communist, wrote the following about the NAACP in Political Affairs: “The emergence of a powerful left, anti-imperialist, anti-fascist current among the Negro people is unmistakable and is clearly discernible in the NAACP.”

About the NAACP, Manning Johnson declared, “National Association for the Advancement of Colored People set up the situation that erupted into racial violence at Little Rock . . . the main danger and handicap to the Negro is not the southern school, but the persecution and hate complex the NAACP and the Reds are trying to create.”

Gannon writes about the NAACP:

From its inception to the present, no matter the protestations of Langston Hughes or any other NAACP apologist, the organization’s officials and its known members, collectively and individually, have represented the influential left, the leadership of Communist fronts and leftwing political and pacifist groups, and the most effective of the anti-anti-Communist establishment. The NAACP has two seemingly contradictory objectives. One is to foment racial tensions, which intensifies barriers between Negroes and other races, especially whites. The other is to bring down barriers that separate Negroes from other races, especially whites. These two objectives are not really contradictory. Both use the Negro as a weapon to destroy the white people and the United States, which are the ultimate goals of the NAACP and kindred organization.

In 1947 The NNC merged with the CRC. James W. Ford, a Communist and a vice president of the League of Strength for Negro Rights (a communist organization), and the Negro Commission of the Communist Party established the NNC in 1935. Another organizer was Ralph Bunche. Communists who were active in the NCC were James W. Ford, Benjamin Davis Jr. (secretary of the NCC), Louise Thompson (member of the Communist Party’s central committee), and Louise E. Strong.

“In 1942, Attorney General Francis Biddle reported: ‘The National Negro Congress, throughout its existence, has closely followed the Communist Party line, espousing causes and adopting issues sponsored by the Party, and with regard thereto, has sought to affiliate itself and form “united fronts” with other organizations. It has characterized all legislation deemed a threat to the civil liberties of Communists or any alien or minority group as “repressive and fascist.” . . .’” Under Whitney Young’s leadership, NUL threatened the United States government into funding a social revolution to prevent an armed revolt. Actually, the ruling elite wanted to increase spending on social programs. Social programs make people dependent on the government, which the ruling elite control. Thus, social programs facilitated their control of the masses.

RAM’s “avowed goal was the violent overthrow of the United States Government.” Its leaders openly aligned themselves with the Vietcong. It sought to infiltrate and subvert other Negro organizations. About RAM, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover stated, “[RAM is] a highly militant, secretive organization following the Chinese oriented Marxist-Leninist line and believes in replacing the capitalistic system with socialism.”

King, Shuttlesworth, and Rustin founded SCLC in 1957. Among the guests at the SCLC organizational meeting were Ella J. Baker (spiritual mother of SNCC) and Charles Hayes (a Communist and district director of United Packinghouse Works of America).

Levison provided financial, organizational, and public relations services for King and SCLC and was responsible for much of SCLC’s finances. In 1956, Rustin introduced King to Levison, a Communist. Afterwards, Levison and King became close friends. Besides his other services to King, Levison wrote speeches for King.

SCLC collaborated with HFS to train Negro leaders in the civil rights movement.

The Louisiana Joint Legislative Committee on Un-American Activities found that SCLC was “substantially under the control of the Communist Party through the influence of the Southern Conference Education Fund and the Communists who manage it.” King and SCLC were closely associated with Dombrowski and other Communists.

SCEF was a communist front used to promote Communism and communist goals to Southern Negroes. SCEF appeared soon after the Southern Conference for Human Welfare (SCHW) disbanded in 1947. The Communist Party established SCHW in 1938. Carl Braden, a member of the Communist party was the field director of the SCHW and later executive director and information director. His wife, Anne Braden, who was also a member of the Communist party, was the editor of the Southern Patriot, which SCHW published and which the SCEF continued to publish. Law partners Benjamin E. Smith and Bruce Waltzer were part of the overall management of SCEF. Both were indicted under the Louisiana Subversive Activities and Communist Control Act. Benjamin Smith was its treasurer. William H. Melish, a Communist, was the Eastern Representative of SCEF.

Aubrey Williams, a member of the Communist party, was the president of SCEF until 1963, and then he became president emeritus. Under President Roosevelt, Williams was director of the National Youth Administration, which made him Lyndon Johnson’s boss. Dombrowski, former executive director of SCHW and a member of the Communist Party, was the executive director of SCEF.

SCEF was the financial backbone of the civil rights movement and the Negro Revolution and many communist fronts. Without the financial aid of SCEF, SNCC would have collapsed.

In 1960 King founded SNCC (pronounced “snick”) to manage sit-ins. After the founding of SNCC, sit-ins and related demonstrations became commonplace throughout the South. SNCC soon gained the support of the U.S. National Student Association (which the CIA funded), the U.S. Department of Justice, NAACP, CORE, and SCLC.

Besides sit-ins, SNCC conducted “freedom rides” and “freedom schools.” Although it claimed to be nonviolent, SNCC used violence and the threat of violence to achieve its goals.

Like nearly all civil rights organizations, SNCC was closely associated with Communists. “Liberal columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak commented: ‘ . . . There is no doubt that SNCC is substantially infiltrated by beatnicks, left wing revolutionaries and worst of all — by Communists.’” It used mailing labels of the communist National Guardian.

SNCC received funds from SCEF and Dombrowski. Jack Rogers, counsel of the Louisiana Joint Legislative Committee on Un-American Activities, noted:

Without the help and backing of the Communist-led Southern Conference Educational Fund, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee would collapse overnight. However it originally started, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee is certainly now under the complete control of the Southern Conference Educational Fund through both money and leadership. . . .

The Committee finds that the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee are substantially under the control of the Communist Party through the influence of Southern Conference Educational Fund and the Communists who manage it.

In 1966 Carmichael became the chairman of SNCC, and SNCC abandoned the pretense of working for integration through nonviolence. Under Carmichael, SNCC pushed Black Power. SNCC formerly merged with the Black Panthers in 1968 for a few months after which SNCC expelled Carmichael and ended its merger with the Black Panthers. However, Carmichael left SNCC its rallying cry: “To hell with America . . . [which is] racist from top to bottom, from left to right.” What is left unsaid is that the racists are black and not the cowered whites.

Many more communist organizations have been involved in the civil rights movement. The ones discussed above are a few of the most important ones.

The Communists approached the civil rights movement with a two-pronged attack. They gave white America a choice to be destroyed by black violence or to be destroyed by black integration. Consequently, Malcolm X preached violence while King was presented as the symbol of nonviolence. If America did not give King what he demanded, it would have to answer to Malcolm X. Only King could save America from the violence of Malcolm X. Yet King seemed to leave a wake of Negro riots wherever he went. (King wrote that the purpose of his demonstrations was to provoke violence.)

Carmichael exposed the myth of “nonviolence” in the civil rights movement. During an interview in 1966, he declared:

This nonviolence bit is just a philanthropic handout. I don’t see why people keep thinking about that. The violence is inevitable. I don’t try to stop the fight. I try to prepare the people I am organizing so that when the right time comes they will be able to win it. Our country does not run on reason; it is run on violence. That’s the reality of how things are done here. It is to my benefit to get the Negro out on the streets to stop the machine which is keeping me from my rights. Whether they do it by marching, singing, dancing or fighting is irrelevant. Communists have been at the center of Negro riots. Former Communist Philip Abbot Luce stated, “All of us, as good Communists, were responsible for some work in the riots and each of us longed for the possibility that Harlem would herald the beginning of a nationwide guerilla war.”

Although many leaders of the civil rights movement are Communists, most members are not. The purpose of civil rights organizations is to get noncommunists to support the communist agenda of bringing the United States and the white race down via the Negro Revolution. (The Negro Revolution is one of several approaches being used to destroy the United States and the white race. Others include feminism and the homosexual movement. The same arguments are used in all three movements.) These noncommunist members, many of whom are naive or idealists, conceal the true masters controlling the civil rights movement: Communists and their lords, the ruling elite.

The communist influence is seen when the leaders talk about poor and working-class whites uniting with oppressed blacks to overthrow capitalism, which according to them is the cause of racism. Also, during their riots, Negroes often destroy many black businesses. Like Communists, civil rights organizations promote the welfare state and socialism. Consequently, they want to reduce blacks, whites, and everyone else besides the ruling elite to wards and slaves of the state. So much for freeing the Negro.

In essence, black leaders claim that, unlike people of other races, Negroes are too inferior to stand on their own. They need special privileges and handouts. If they do not believe that Negroes are inferior, then they reveal that they are more interested in promoting socialism than the welfare of Negroes.

One reason that Communists oppose segregation is that it causes the development of a Negro bourgeoisie. Pepper (Pogany) rightly blamed segregation for “. . . a rapid development of a Negro petit-bourgeoisie, a Negro intelligentsia and even a Negro bourgeoisie. The very fact of segregation of the Negro masses creates the basis for the development of a stratum of small merchants, lawyers, physicians, preachers, brokers, who try to attract the Negro workers and farmers as consumers. . . .” The Communists wanted to replace this independence and prosperity of the Negro people with hatred toward whites and dependence on the government — and they have succeeded remarkably well.

Furthermore, because the ruling elite feeds on crisis and turmoil, segregation was turned into a great social crisis. This crisis has been one of the most artificial crises ever created in the United States. Elitists, primarily through Communists, instigated it to add racial hatred to class hatred. Integration also serves the purpose of hastening the death of the white people as it destroys them with artificial guilt and helps breed them out of existence.

The Carnegie Foundation and the Ford Foundation have been important financial sources for the Negro Revolution and its civil rights movement. Carnegie foundations financed Whitney Young, a racial extortionist, and the National Urban League. Young and NUL also received funding from the Ford Foundation.

Besides NUL, CORE, SCLC, and NAACP received funds from the Ford Foundation. The Ford Foundation also funded Milton A. Galamision, LeRoi Jones, and Floyd B. McKissick.

Carnegie’s money also paid for Gunnar Myrdal’s study that purported proved that segregation caused all the problems of the Negro. If it were not for segregation, the Negro would be the white’s intellectual, economic, and social equal. Myrdal held that liberty must be sacrificed for the sake of social equality. He was a Communist who considered the U.S. Constitution to be a plot against the common people. Aiding him in his study were 16 people associated with communist fronts. At least four of them (Ralph J. Bunche, Doxy A. Wilkerson, Bernard J. Stern, and James E. Jackson) were Communists. The United States Supreme Court relied on Myrdal’s study to reject the U.S. Constitution and to impose integration. Stang described this study and its use by the Supreme Court as “the Communist weapon forged by these totalitarians for the purpose — as one of the main justifications for ordering the forced amalgamation of the races in the schools. And that decision leads straight to the forced bussing of today. In other words, forced bussing is nothing but a tactic in a long-range Communist strategy.” The purpose of this strategy is to subvert covertly the government of the United States into a dictatorship. To achieve this goal, the family must be destroyed. This destruction is the purpose of forced integration. Not only did the ruling elite use the financial might of their foundations to foment the Negro Revolution, they also used the money and power of the U. S. government. President Johnson’s civil rights law and War on Poverty were merely weapons that the ruling elite used through the Negro Revolution to destroy the constitutional government of the United States and the white people.

One ostensible object of the War on Poverty was to eliminate slums that agitators exploited to get Negroes to riot. Yet Communists and other agitators were hired to administer the War on Poverty. Actually, the real purpose of the War on Poverty was to create turmoil. (Before the riots of 1967 broke out, Sargent Shriver, director of the United States Office of Economic Opportunity, knew that the United Community Corp., an agency of the Office of Economic Opportunity, was organizing the riots.) President Johnson used the 1967 riots as an excuse for the expansion of his War on Poverty. Negro riots served the purpose of expanding the size, power, and intrusiveness of the U.S. government.

Black revolutionists gave the ruling elite an excuse to carry out compulsory racial integration in the United States. The organization of racial integration was assigned to Ronald Lippert of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the American Jewish Congress. His program called for the destruction of the individual’s personal identity and his racial heritage — especially the destruction of white racial identity. The National Education Association was employed to execute this program. Controlling the National Education Association was the Stanford Research Institute. Controlling the Stanford Research Institute was the Tavistock Institute. The Tavistock Institute specialized in developing, teaching, and employing mind control and brainwashing techniques.

Some Negro leaders, such as former Communists Helen Wood Birnie and Manning Johnson, had the intelligence and courage to oppose the evils of the civil rights movement. They realized that the ruling elite was using Negroes to advance their communistic, illuministic New World Order. Manning summed up school integration:

. . . the whole issue boils down to taking Negro children out of one school and transferring them to another so that they can be seated with white children on the assumption that only in this way will the Negro child get an education. What really is being implied is that the 113,000 Negro teachers in Southern schools are inferior, incompetent and unable to properly teach the children of their own race . . . it is a question of the liquidation of the Negro school and the Negro teacher under the guise of integration.

These Negro leaders were ignored or smeared with vile epitaphs. (Probably many Negro leaders, such as King and DuBois, who had sold their souls to the ruling elite, were aware of these evils and that their people were merely tools used to advance the illuministic New World Order.)

To show Americans, especially Southerners, that the resistance to the U.S. government and its despotic edicts was futile, President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and used it to invade Little Rock in 1957. Later, President Kennedy federalized the Mississippi National Guard in 1962 and used it to invade Mississippi. Thus, the ruling elite used these national guards against their own States.

Moreover, black organizations allied with communist fronts and liberal organizations have been highly successful in destroying Southern culture. Singing “Dixie” and displaying the Confederate battle flag have been banned. Statues honoring Confederate soldiers and heroes have been torn down. Streets and public buildings bearing the name of Confederate soldiers and nineteenth century. Southern political leaders have been renamed. In the name of tolerance, the South is drowning in a sea of intolerance.

Communists supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964. They correctly saw the law as greatly increasing the power of the U.S. government and the President over the people. Communist Benjamin Davis declared, “Communists believe the achievement of this program [legislation, etc.] will lay an indispensable basis not only for the further social progress of the country, but for its socialist and communist future.”

Lloyd Wright and John C. Satterfield, both past presidents of the American Bar Association, stated about the Civil Rights Act:

It is 10% civil rights and 90% extension of Federal executive power. If this legislation becomes law and is upheld by the Courts—

–It will, in fact, extend Federal control over business, industry and over individuals (with a corresponding destruction of State power) in a degree that exceeds the total of such extensions of power by all judicial decisions and all Congressional actions since the Constitution of the United States was adopted.

–It will, in fact, destroy the Constitutional checks and balances between the Federal Government and the States; and

–It will, in fact, destroy the Constitutional checks and balances between the Executive branch of the Government and the Legislative and Judicial branches.

—The “civil rights” aspect of this Legislation is but a cloak; uncontrolled Federal Executive power is the body.

Wright and Satterfield continue:

This legislation assumes a totally powerful National Government with unending authority to intervene in all private affairs among men, and to control and adjust property relationships, in accordance with the judgment of Government personnel.

It is impossible to prevent Federal intervention from becoming an institutionalization of special privilege for political pressure groups.

They conclude, “This must lead eventually, not to greater human freedom, but to an ever-diminishing freedom.”

Although the Civil Rights Act of 1964 expressly prohibited forced busing, federal judges soon replaced the clear language of the law with the communist agenda of forced busing for racial purposes. Thus, they replaced the “rule of law” with the “rule of man.” Congress did nothing and has done nothing to stop these illegal acts of federal judges. Forced busing has nothing to do with quality education for Negroes. It has everything to do with forcing integration.

To show the result of the civil rights law, Alan Stang comments on a barber prosecuted under the civil rights law of Illinois for refusing to cut the hair of two Negroes:

So in the United States of America — the land of the free — man can be sent to jail for six months, for refusing to cut somebody’s hair.

According to the Rev. Dr. King, what we have to worry about is slavery. It was slavery that made the problem. And is the “vestiges” of slavery that keep the problem alive. It’s slavery that we have to get away from.

What is slavery?

A slave is officially defined as: “One whose person and services are under the control of another as owner or master.” The point on the Old Plantation, according to Dr. King, was that some men’s services were under the control of other men as masters.

And according to Dr. King this was wrong. It was slavery.

But according to Dr. King it’s perfectly all right for the services of a man in Illinois to be under the control of another man as master. It’s perfectly fine that a man can be sent to jail for six months for refusing to cut another man’s hair. That’s wonderful, that’s okay.

That isn’t slavery.

It’s civil rights.

Yet the whole point to slavery, isn’t it, is that a slave can’t quit. Negro slaves couldn’t quit the Old Plantation — and Mr. Rehm apparently can’t quit in Illinois.

The civil rights movement along with forced integration has made race relations worse. It has heightened racial identity and consciousness among nonwhites and has done nothing to reduce racial stereotypes. It has increased intolerance. In the name of tolerance, the leaders of the civil rights movement have been highly intolerant. Conflicts have been elevated between Negroes and Latinos, Negroes and Somalis, Latinos and East Asians, and other racial and ethnic groups. (When left free to choose, most people prefer segregation to integration. They prefer being among others who are like them.) Integration has even created conflict between groups that historically never had conflict with each other until they came to the multiracial, multicultural United States. Communists and other statists feed on conflict as it fertilizes their power. That is why the ruling elite brought the civil rights movement to the United States and has pushed the multiracial, multicultural, open borders, “diversity is strength,” agenda. It destroys liberty and the white race while making the ruling elite all-powerful.

The whole civil rights movement is a hoax. Its purpose is not to grant Negroes “equal rights” per se. Its purpose is to enslave whites. The common excuse for Negro crime and Negro riots is that Negroes are rebelling against white oppression. Whites have denied Negroes their “rights.” Well, Negroes have not only been granted “equal rights,” they have been given superior rights. They have become the new aristocracy, a privileged class. Yet Negro crime grows, and the riots still occurred. However, whites have surrendered enormous freedoms in the name of “equal rights.” The more “equal rights” Negroes have acquired, the more socialistic (fascistic) the United States have become. The more “equal rights” Negroes acquire, the more political power is concentrated in the U.S. government and in the President — and fewer real rights anyone, black or white, has. As Pat Buchanan remarks, “Civil rights has become a racket.”

If whites are as vile and evil as proponents of the civil rights movement contend, why would blacks want to integrate with such hideous people? This is one of the great mysteries of the civil rights movement. That blacks want to integrate with such despicable cowards speaks volumes about blacks — and it is not complimentary. The answer to this mystery must be that blacks do not want to associate with whites. They want the wealth, property, and power that they perceive whites as having. At least they have achieved their goal of power over whites.

In the end, the civil rights movement and Negro Revolution do not benefit the Negro. They were never intended to benefit the Negro. They were intended to enslave everyone under the ruling elite. To see the future of the Negro in what is becoming a Latino-controlled America, one needs only to look at California, especially Los Angeles.

The Civil Rights Act reduced the States, especially the Southern States, to little more than administrative districts of the U.S. government. It has given the President almost absolute control over every business in the country, public education, housing, and the media. In the name of eradicating the vestiges of slavery, the Civil Rights Act has reduced all to slavery. According to King, slavery placed men’s services under the control of other men as masters, which is exactly what the Civil Rights Act that he supported has done. Furthermore, whites have been cowered into allowing their race and culture to be destroyed.

J. Edgar Hoover outlined the communist-led civil rights movement:

Communists seek to advance the cause of communism by injecting themselves into racial situations and in exploiting them (1) to intensify the frictions between Negroes and whites to "prove" that discrimination against minorities is an inherent defect of the capitalist system, (2) to foster domestic disunity by dividing Negroes and whites into antagonistic, warring factions, (3) to undermine and destroy established authority, (4) to incite Negro hostility toward law and order, (5) to encourage and foment racial strife and riotous activity, and (6) to portray the Communist movement as the “champion” of social protest and the only force capable of ameliorating the conditions of the Negro and the oppressed.

In his book Color, Communism and Common Sense, Manning Johnson describes the tactics that Communists used to control the civil rights movement. A chief tactic is to condemn racial strife while creating it. Smearing opponents is another.

The civil rights movement has followed the basic communist tactic of thesis (action), antithesis (reaction), and synthesis (solution). Blacks agitate, threaten violence, take over property, and riot — thesis (problem). Whites react to protect themselves — antithesis. (To ensure a violent reaction, often the reaction is led by agents of the ruling elite.) Agents of the ruling elite come forth with the solution, which is concentrating ever more power in the U.S. government and the President, whom the ruling elite controls if not own — synthesis (solution). It is all very simple.

The objective of the civil rights movement is to divide and destroy America and to bring down the white race. It has been remarkably successful because of the complete and unconditional surrender by whites.

As has been shown, the civil rights movement has been a communist movement from the beginning and continues to be one today. Its leaders have been Communists and communist sympathizers.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.
 
Part 1 Part 3

More articles on social issues.

The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement -- Part 1

The Civil Rights Movement Is a Communist Movement

 Thomas Allen

[Editor's note: Footnotes in the original are omitted.]

    Early in the twentieth century, the racial plan to destroy the United States and the white race was laid out:

We must realize that our party’s most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the whites, we can move them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against whites, we will instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise to prominence in every walk of life, in the professions, and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause.[1]

Congressman Thomas Abernathy entered this quotation into the Congressional Record. It was from “A Racial Program for the 20th Century” (1912) by Israel Cohen, a British Fabian.
    Cohen reveals the real objective of the Negro Revolution and the civil rights movement. This plan has been highly successful and has been mostly achieved.
    Soon after the Communists consolidated their position in Russia, they exported their revolution to the United States. Stalin sent Joseph Pogany, also known as John Pepper, to the United States to promote the Negro Revolution and Black Nationalism. The goal of Black Nationalism was to carve a Negro nation out of the United States. Pogany sought to convert American Negroes into communist revolutionists and to use them to destroy the United States. Black Nationalism grew into the Black Muslim and Nation of Islam movements. The “Million Man March” of 1995 and the demands-for-reparations movement (the demand that today’s American Negroes be paid large sums of money and be given additional legal privileges because Negroes were slaves 160 years ago) are also outgrowths of Black Nationalism. Unlike most communist revolutions, the Negro Revolution has been more covert than overt. It has been a revolution concealed in the crime statistics and frequent riots.
    In 1925, the Communist Party laid out its plan to use the Negro to ignite the Negro Revolution:

The aim of our Party in our work among the Negro masses is to create a powerful proletarian movement which will fight and lead the struggle of the Negro race against the exploitation and oppression in every form and which will be a militant part of the revolutionary movement of the whole American working class . . . and connect them with the struggles of national minorities and colonial peoples of all the world and thereby the cause of world revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.[2]

Part of this plan would make any act of discrimination against a Negro a crime. Blacks would receive greater benefits than whites.
    Part of the communist plan for Negro liberation was to agitate for “full racial, social, and political equality for the Negro people.”[3] Initially, the Communists tried to get equality and independence for blacks in the South. In 1930, Stalin ordered that the Negroes in the North be included in the agitation for “equal rights.”[4]
    The most effective part of the Negro Revolution has been the communist plan to establish organizations to promote “civil rights” for Negroes. These “rights” include forced school integration, bussing students to a particular school because of their race, micro-managing the hiring practices of businesses (covert quota systems), stripping landlords and home sellers of their right to rent or sell or not to rent or sell to whomever they desire, stripping restaurant owners of their right to serve whom they please, and admissions to college based on skin color. “Civil rights” have led to reverse discrimination (discrimination against whites), lower standards (especially for Negroes), double standards (higher standards for whites and lower standards for blacks), hiring and job promotions based on race instead of ability, denying people the right to choose, deteriorating education, stripping people (especially whites) of the freedom of speech and assembly, emphasizing a person’s race over his character, and degrading Negroes (are they admitted, hired, or promoted because of ability or because of race). Whites have been trained to cower before black militancy. If they do not, the weight of the U.S. government and the news media is brought to bear against them. The goal of the civil rights (equal rights, integration, black privileges) movement is to bring down the United States and the white race. It has led to revising the immigration laws to favor nonwhite immigrants, which has transformed into open borders, especially for nonwhites.
    For the most part, the leaders and organizers of the civil rights movement and other Negro movements, Negro riots, and Negro organizations have been Communists or communist sympathizers. Backing these leaders and organizers are globalists, one-worlders, heads of major foundations, international financiers, chief executives of multinational corporations, Zionist leaders, leaders of the occult, and other elitists — that is, the ruling elite.
    Most promoters of the Negro Revolution and the civil rights movement have been Communists or communist sympathizers. Most supported North Vietnam during the Vietnam War. Many supported Castro’s Cuba. They include:
        Herbert Aptheker: white, a Communist, editor of the communist journal Political Affairs, considered the chief theoretician of the Communist Party in the United States, a supporter of Congress of Racial Equality and Black Panthers, “encourage Negroes to be extremely militant in their pursuit of massive social revolution,”[5] author of numerous books and articles on the Negro in America and American history.
        Ralph Abernathy: a Negro, treasure and vice president of the Southern Christian Leadership League, a member of the advisory committee of the Congress of Racial Equality, and a leading organizer of the Montgomery Improvement Association (the force behind the 1955-1956 Montgomery boycott and the use of Rosa Parks to initiate the boycott), threatened to burn the country down with his Poor People’s March on Washington if the U.S. government did not give Negroes enough largess.
        Ella J. Baker: a Negro, member of In Friendship (an organization that provided financial aid to blacks who were in legal trouble because of their political activity), established the Southern Christian Leadership Conference headquarters in Atlanta, a special consultant of the Southern Conference Educational Fund, and an active member of the Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee. (John Lewis called her “the spiritual mother of S.N.C.C.”[6])
        James Bevel: a Negro, civil rights agitator, one of King’s most militant lieutenants (1963-1968), member of the Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee staff, and head of the Spring Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam (a communist front). (Bevel remarked, “We must move to destroy Western Civilization.”[7])
        H. Rap Brown: a Negro, chairman of the Student Nonviolence Coordinating Committee, Black Panther, member of the Republic of New Africa, (the geopolitical arm of the communist Revolutionary Action Movement), instigator of the East St. Louis Negro riot of 1967, and the Cambridge, Maryland, Negro riot of 1967. (Brown urged blacks to murder whites: “How can you be nonviolent in America, the most violent country in the world. . . . You better shoot that [white] man to death, that’s what he’s been doing to you.”[8])
        Ralph Bunche: a Negro, a Communist,[9] founder of the National Negro Congress, contributing editor of the communist magazine Science and Society, high official of the Institute of Pacific Relations (a communist front), U.S. delegate to the United Nations, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relation.
        Stokely Carmichael: a Negro, chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, help organize the Black Panther party in Mississippi, promoter of Black Power. (Carmichael told a Negro audience, “I don’t ever want to hear you apologizing for a black man. Don’t you apologize for anyone who’s driven to throw Molotov cocktails. And don’t you call them riots, call them rebellions, for that’s what they are.”[10] Just before the 1967 riot in Cincinnati, “Carmichael urged Negroes to ‘fight the police and burn the city.’”[11])
        Revels Cayton: a Negro, a Communist,[12] and executive secretary of the National Negro Conference.
        Leroy Eldridge Cleaver: a Negro, a Black Muslim, a Black Panther leader, Peace and Freedom party (a communist front) candidate for President, considered himself “a member of the world communist movement which has made many sacrifices for the Soviet Union.”[13] (Speaking to a crowd of students in Paris via a tape-recorded message, Cleaver said, “Now is the time for us to move into the streets, to cause destruction, to drag this decadent system [of capitalism] over the cliff.”[14])
        George Crockett: a Negro, a Communist,[15] civil rights attorney, judge, vice president of the National Lawyers Guild (a communist front), a sponsor of the Civil Rights Congress. (Crockett remarked, “The Communist Party, greatest champion of Negro rights, doesn’t have to take their hats off to anyone when it comes to fighting on that issue. . . .”[16])
        Benjamin J. Davis, a Negro, a Communist,[17] Communist party secretary of Negro Affairs.
        John W. Dobbs: a Negro, a national vice-president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, on the board of the Southern Conference Educational Fund.
        James A. Dombrowski: white, a Communist,[18] executive director of the Southern Conference for Human Welfare and Southern Conference Educational Fund.
        W.E.B. DuBois: a Negro, a Communist,[19] affiliated with at least 96 communist fronts,[20] a founder of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and editor of its magazine The Crisis, recipient of the Lenin Peace Prize in 1959. (He wrote, “The most ordinary Negro is a distinct gentleman, but it takes extraordinary training and opportunity to make the average white man anything but a hog.”[21])
        William Epton: a Negro, a Communist,[22] chairman of the Harlem Defense Council.
        James Farmer: a Negro, 1941-1945 race relation secretary of the Fellowship of Reconciliation (a radical-pacifist organization), field secretary for and later vice president of the socialist League of Industrial Democracy, a program director of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (1959-1961), a founder and national director of Congress of Racial Equality (1961-1968).
        Herman B. Ferguson: a Negro, member of the Revolutionary Action Movement.
        Milton Galamison: a Negro, organizer and leader of the New York school boycott in 1964, 1965, and 1968, director of the School Community Organized for Partnership in Education (which demanded racial integration of New York City schools and which received funding from the Ford Foundation), affiliated with the Southern Conference Education Fund, after the 1964 riot in New York threatened more and larger riots if New York City did not agree to his demands.
        Jesse Gray: a Negro, a Communist,[23] vice chairman of the Communist Party’s United May Day Committee, chairman of the Organization for Black Power (1965), campaign manager for Benjamin Davis in 1952 and 1958, and organizer of the 1964 Harlem riot.
        John H. Holmes: white, a founder and national vice-president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People for 55 years, affiliated with at least 30 communist organizations.[24]
        Myles Horton: white, founder and director of Highlands Folk School, affiliated with the Southern Conference Educational Fund and the Southern Conference for Human Welfare.
        George Houser: a Negro, a founder and director of the Congress of Racial Equality, executive director of the American Committee on Africa.
        Roy Innis: a Negro, associate director and later national director of the Congress of Racial Equality, executive director of the Harlem Commonwealth Council. (Innis displayed more wisdom and intelligence than most whites. He wrote, “Under segregation, black people live together but their institutions are controlled by whites. Under integration, black people are dispersed and the institutions, goods and services are still controlled by whites. In effect, the two are the same. But under separatism, black people will control their own turf.”[25] And, “We no longer want or seek integration. Integration ends up being almost as obnoxious to both blacks and whites as segregation.”[26] And, “Integration is a total failure. We must continue as a separate entity.”[27] And, “In America today there are two kinds of black people — the field-hand blacks and the ‘house niggers.’ We of CORE — the nationalists — are the field-hand blacks. The integrationists of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People are ‘house niggers.’”[28] According to Innis, the “house niggers” are mostly mulattoes of various degrees, who preferred living in the white world over living in the black world. [The “house niggers” have won in the political arena. However, as the United States disintegrate into multiracial multiculturalism, the field hand blacks are prevailing by segregating themselves from the social suicide of whites. When the Latinos, i.e., Indians and mestizoes mostly from Central America, reach a critical point, the “house niggers’” political victories will be overthrown. Then blacks will be fortunate to sit in the bus’ backseat as the Latinos may not even let them on the bus.])
        James Jackson: a Negro, a Communist,[29] Communist party secretary in charge of Negro and Southern Affairs,[30] a member of the World Peace Council (a Soviet-controlled front organization).
        LeRoi Jones: a Negro, poet, playwright, essayist, member of the Republic of New Africa cabinet, leader of the 1967 riot in Newark (Jones wrote, “We [blacks] must eliminate the white man before we will ever be able to draw a free breath on this planet.”[31] And, “We [blacks] must make our own world, man, and we cannot do this unless the white man is dead. Let’s get together and kill him.”[32] And, “I don’t see anything wrong with hating white people.”[33])
        Martin Luther King, Jr.: a Negro, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, a member of the Congress of Racial Equality advisory committee, and founder of the Students Nonviolence Coordinating Committee. (See the Part 3 for more information on King.)
        Stanley Levison: white, a Communist,[34] liaison between the Communist party and the Soviet Union, involved in In Friendship, one of King’s top advisors in the 1960s. (Coretta Scott King, King’s wife, described Levison’s importance to her husband and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference: “Always working in the background, his contribution has been indispensable.”[35] Also, she wrote that Levison was one of her husband’s “most devoted and trusted friends.”[36])
        John Lewis: a Negro, a founder and leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, an organizing member of the Organization of Afro-American Unity, and advocated the communist position on the Negro Question. (Lewis urged “those of us involved in the freedom fight to bring about confrontations between the federal government and the state governments of the South.”[37])
        Lincoln Lynch: a Negro, associated director of the Congress of Racial Equality. (Lynch remarked, “If America doesn’t come around, we’re gonna burn it down.”[38])
        Floyd B. McKissick: a Negro, general council and later national director (1966-1967) of Congress of Racial Equality, a leader of the 1963 March on Washington, an advocate of black power achieved through revolutionary means. (McKissick remarked, “Forget about civil rights. I’m talking about black power.”[39] [Thus, he reveals what Negroes really want: It is not integration per se; it is power.] And, “Negroes are not geared to nonviolence.”[40] He advised whites, “If you want to help, keep your mouth shut and get out of my way.”[41])
        Malcolm X: a Negro, Black Muslim leader, founder and chairman of the Organization of Afro-American Unity.
        Thurgood Marshall: a Negro, counsel for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, director and counsel of the Legal Defense and Educational Fund, U.S. circuit court judge, U.S. Solicitor General, U.S. supreme court justice. (Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Marshal said, “I want you to understand that when the colored people take over, every time the white man draws a breath, he’ll have to pay a fine.”[42] [For the Senate to approve the nomination for the Supreme Court of someone who expressed such hatred for people because of their race makes one wonder what the ruling elite had on these Senators. If a white nominee ever said anything resembling this remark, he would be persona non grata for life.] About Marshall’s appointment to the Supreme Court, Representative Joe Waggoner commented, “I suppose we should be thankful it was not Stokely Carmichael who go the job.”[43])
        Elijah Muhammad: a Negro, Black Muslim leader.
        Huey P. Newton: a Negro, cofounder of the Black Panther party, neighborhood organizer in Oakland for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Peace and Freedom party candidate for Congress.
        Hunter Pitts O’Dell: a Negro, a high-level Communist,[44] King’s secretary, executive director of Southern Christian Leadership Conference, organizer of the Communist party in New Orleans, associate editor of the Communist party’s propaganda magazine Freedomways, member of the World Peace Council (a Soviet-controlled front organization).
        William L. Patterson: a Negro, a Communist,[45] executive secretary of the Civil Rights Congress.
        Philip Randolph: a Negro, first chairman of the National Negro Congress, national vice-president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, a member of the Congress of Racial Equality advisory committee, affiliated with at least 20 communist organizations.[46]
        Bayard Rustin: a Negro, a Communist,[47] an organizer of Young Communist League (an arm of the Communist party), organizer of the 1947 Freedom Ride Through the South, King’s secretary (1955-1960) and advisor, an organizer the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, organizer of King’s 1958 March on Washington (which was a project of the Communist party[48]), leader of the 1963 March on Washington, a field secretary for Congress of Racial Equality. (Rustin suggested “that more bloody Negro suffering should be encouraged so that squeamish Northern Negroes would be horrified into line. . . .”[49])
        Bobby G. Seale: a Negro, cofounder and chairman of the Black Panther party, helped incite the riot during the 1968 Democratic Convention, organizer for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and member of the Afro-American Association.
        Fred Shuttlesworth: a Negro, correspondence secretary and then vice-president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, president of the Southern Conference Educational Fund, leader of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights, and a member of the Congress of Racial Equality advisory committee.
        Susan Sontag: white, a birth mother of the revolution of the 1960s. (Sontag remarked, “The white race is the cancer of human history.”[50])
        Sterling Tucker: a Negro, head of the Washington Urban League of the National Urban League. (Tucker stated, “I view rioting as a tool of communication that more and more people will accept. Man needs to be heard, needs people to respond to him.”[51])
        Wyatt Tee Walker: a Negro, King’s chief of staff. (Walker declared, “If the Negro is to be given equality, our whole economy will have to be changed — probably to some sort of socialism.”[52])
        Andrew D. Weinberger: white, a national vice-president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, treasurer of the Emergency Civil Liberties Committee (a highly active communist organization[53]).
        Roy Wilkins: a Negro, executive secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, affiliated with at least seven communist organizations,[54] sponsor of a joint meeting of the communist League against War and Fascism and the communist-controlled American Friends of the Chinese People in 1937. (Gannon described Wilkins as follows:

            Wilkins is undoubtedly one of the suavest spokesmen for Negroes in the civil rights area. He does preach nonviolence as a tactic, but at the same time, lards his speeches with references to police brutality and lynching and three-hundred-years-of-deprivation — just enough to keep militants from rejecting him. As for riots, Wilkins is extremely careful never to blame Negroes for instigating them and he characterizes riots as a “grass roots revolt” against conditions imposed upon Negroes. He never hints that anarchists, Communists, and black revolutionaries are conspiring to cause riots. And whatever solutions he offers to Negroes’ problems inevitably entails large expenditures of money by the federal government.[55])

        Aubrey Williams: white, a Communist,[56] president of the Southern Conference Educational Fund, and director of the National Youth Administration under President Franklin Roosevelt. (King noted that Aubrey Williams was “one of the noble personalities of our time.”[57])
        Robert F. Williams: a Negro, a Communist,[58] a leader of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, cofounder and chairman-in-exile of the Revolution Action Movement, a founder of the communist Fair Play for Cuba Committee, a founder of the Black Liberation Front, a propagandist for Fidel Castro and Mao Tse-tung (Mao Zedong). (Williams declared “‘RAM and Black Panthers share a common objective’: guerilla warfare.”[59] Williams described Mao as “our great leader and teacher, the architect of people’s warfare.”[60])
        Max Yergan: a Negro, a Communist,[61] president of the National Negro Congress, and writer for the communist Sunday Worker.
        Andrew Young: a Negro, trained at Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee.
        Whitney M. Young: a Negro, head of the National Urban League, presented himself as nonviolent to gain the support of (guilt-ridden) white liberals and (cowardly) white conservatives and then promoted black power.
    All these men were Communists or communist sympathizers.
    Manning Johnson, a former Communist and a Negro, describes black civil rights leaders as:

    The utter bankruptcy of the Negro intelligentsia is startlingly evident by reason of the absence of any strong and dramatic movement for genuine Negro organization, leadership and thinking. Deep in the swamp of inferiority, lack of ability, muddled thought, the Negro intelligentisiam [sic] looks to the phoney white liberals, politicians and progressive hypocrites for leadership, guidance and money. These “whites” are carriers of “isms” other than Americanism which spreads like an epidemic in the ranks of the hapless Negro intellectuals. Due to the lack of race pride, there is no immunity.[62]

    Johnson cites some things that the Communist led civil rights movement has accomplished for the Negro:

    [It has made the Negro:]
    (a) feel sorry for himself;
    (b) blame others for his failures;
    (c) ignore the countless opportunities around him;
    (d) jealous of the progress of other racial and national groups;
    (e) expect the white man to do everything for him;
    (f) look for easy and quick solutions as a substitute for the harsh realities of   competitive struggle to get ahead.
        The result is a persecution complex — a warped belief that the white man’s prejudices, the white man’s system, the white man’s government is responsible for everything. . . .[63]

At least the civil rights movement has given blacks an excuse for all their failures: racism.

Endnotes

1. Henry Makow, “Is Plan for Racial Strife Another Hoax?”, http://henrymakow.com/the_book_the_bankers_made_disa.html accessed June 13, 2008. Willie Martin, “Do You Care?” http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/Inter-88.htm, accessed Feb. 24, 2015.

2. “Chapter 4. Communism and Racial Tension,” The Modern History Project, http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php ?Article=FinalWarn04, accessed Nov. 5, 2005.

3. Alan Stang, It’s Very Simple; The True Story of Civil Rights (Belmont, Massachusetts: Western Islands, 1965), p. 31.

4. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 31.

5. Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left, III (1972), p. 218.

6. Samuel Francis and Jesse Helms, The King Holiday and Its Meaning (1983,1998.), p. 29.

7. William P. Hoar, “Inside FBI Files on the Reverend Martin Luther King,” Conservative Digest, reprint.

8. Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left, I (1969), p. 188.

9. Gannon, I, p. 261. Alan Stang, “Forced Bussing: Crisis in Boston,” American Opinion, June 1975, p. 2.

10. Gannon, I, pp. 269-270.

11. John A. Stormer, The Death of a Nation (Florissant, Missouri: Liberty Bell Press, 1968), p. 27.

12. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 87.

13. Gary Allen, “Detroit,” American Opinion, April 1970, p. 3.

14. Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left, II, pp. 276-277.

15. Allen, “Detroit,” p. 7. Gannon, III, p. 296.

16. Allen, “Detroit,” p. 7.

17. Manning Johnson, Color, Communism and Common Sense (1958, Rpt. Belmont, Massachusetts: Robert Welsh, Inc., 1963) p. 9.

18. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 102.

19. Gannon, I, p. 140. Gannon, III, p. 338. Stang, It’s Very Simple, pp. 45, 129.

20. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 129.

21. Gannon, I, p. 141. Francis X. Gannon, Biographical Dictionary of the Left IV (1973), p. 337.

22. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 77.

23. Gannon, III, p. 420. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 75.

24. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 129.

25. Gannon, III, p. 462.

26. Gannon, III, p. 462.

27. Gannon, III, p. 463.

28. Gannon, III, p. 464.

29. Johnson, p. 9.

30. Francis and Helms, p. 7. Johnson, p. 9.

31. Gannon, II, p. 434.

32. Gannon, II, p. 434.

33. Stormer, p. 32.

34. Francis and Helms, pp. 19ff. Paul Scott. “Marting Luther King Jr. and the Tapes,” Dec.1978, p. 13.

35. Francis and Helms, p. 21.

36. Francis and Helms, p. 21.

37. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 185.

38. Gannon, I, p. 45.

39. Gannon, I, p. 45.

40. Gannon, I, p. 45.

41. Gannon, I, p. 450.

42. Gannon, I, p. 439.

43. Gannon, I, p. 438.

44. Francis and Helms, pp. 7, 25-26. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 105.

45. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 94.

46. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 128.

47. Gannon, I, p. 51.

48. Gannon, I, p. 518.

49. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 107.

50. Patrick J. Buchanan, The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigratant Invasion Imperial Our Country and Civilization (New York, New York: Thomas Dunne Books, St. Martin’s Griffin, 2002), pp. 55, 71, 217.

51. Gannon, I, p. 613.

52. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 145.

53. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 128.

54. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 128.

55. Gannon, I, p. 594.

56. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 101.

57. Hoar, “FBI Files.”

58. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 68.

59. David Emerson Gumaer, “The Panthers,” American Opinion, April 1970, p. 5.

60. Gannon, II, p. 587.

61. Stang, It’s Very Simple, p. 86.

62. Johnson, p. 61.

63. Johnson, p. 44.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Part 2

More articles on social issues.

What is the Gold Standard ?

What is the Gold Standard ?

Thomas Allen

    Much confusion exists about the gold standard. Under the true gold standard, which is also called the gold-coin standard and the unadulterated gold standard, gold does not back the money. Gold is the money.

    Most promoters of a gold standard promote a monetary system that does not constitute a true gold standard.

    First, gold is used to back a currency that is irredeemable. For example, between 1933 and 1968, Congress required federal reserve notes to have some gold backing. Yet citizens of the United States could not redeem their federal reserve notes for gold. With a few exceptions, they could not even own gold.

    Second, the government issues paper money that is redeemable in gold. The government buys gold and uses it, either as coins or bullion, to back its paper money. Often it issues more notes than it has gold backing it. An example of this type of money is the U.S. note between 1879 and 1933.

    Third, the government buys gold on its own account and coins it. This type of monetary system looks like a gold-coin standard, but it is not. The government arbitrarily decides the quantity of coins to issue. An example of this system in the United States involved silver dollars between 1873 and 1900. After 1873, the U.S. government no longer allowed the free coinage of silver. Instead it bought silver bullion on its own account and coined it into silver dollars, which it declared legal tender and standard money and which was not directly redeemable into gold until 1900.

    Fourth, some supply-side economists recommend requiring the central bank to expand or contract the money supply and credit to keep the price of gold within a specific range. This is obviously not a gold standard. It is a fiat monetary system where the price of gold becomes the index by which to adjust the money supply.

    Fifth, Irving Fisher’s plan to make dollars redeemable in gold based on purchasing power as determined by an index instead of weight is not a true gold standard.

    Although these systems use gold, they are not a true gold standard. They are forms of fiat money because the government or its central bank arbitrarily controls the money supply. The quantity of money does not expand or contract to meet the needs of commerce; the law and the  government’s collections and disbursements fix the quantity.

    Two other forms of standards that use gold are sometimes promoted. They are the gold-bullion standard and gold-exchange standard. However, gold coins do not circulate under either of these standards.

    Under the gold-bullion standard, paper money is redeemable only in large bars of gold bullion. The country’s money is not redeemable in gold coins. Consequently, it is considered a rich man’s standard. Because redemption is in large high-value bars, few besides specialists in foreign trade redeem notes for gold. Gold bullion presented to the government or its central bank is not coined. Instead the government or its central bank pays the presenter in government notes or bank notes.

    Under the gold-exchange standard, gold can only be used to transfer payments in gold to approved foreign institutions. Governments created the gold-exchange standard. It is a politically created system and not a product of the markets. The gold-exchange standard allows governments and their central banks to manipulate international gold flows for political reasons. The government holds the reserves of its foreign claims in gold. Most of the world’s gold ends up in the vaults of a few central banks. The gold-exchange standard offers little resistance to the desires of governments to inflate their currencies. Gold is subordinated to governmental policies and goals. Because of domestic inflation, against which it offers little resistance, the gold-exchange standard becomes unstable and dysfunctional. Most of the world operated under a modified gold-exchange standard between 1944 and 1971. (This standard was more of a dollar standard as foreign currencies were pegged to the dollar, which was pegged to gold at $35 per ounce.)

    A common misunderstanding about the true gold standard is that the government fixes the price of gold. For example, if an ounce of gold exchanges for $20, the government has fixed the price of gold at $20 per ounce.

    Under the true gold standard, the government does not fix the price of gold. It defines the monetary unit, such as the dollar, as a specific weight of gold. That is, the dollar is a specific weight of gold. For example, the dollar is defined as 1/20 of an ounce of gold or 24 grains of gold. The dollar is 24 grains of gold. It is a unit of weight like the pound or gram. It is just limited to money. By declaring the dollar to be 24 grains of gold, the government has no more fixed price of gold than it has fixed the price of a pound by declaring it to be 7000 grains.

    Thus, a fundamental principle of the true gold standard is that the price of gold is not fixed. The monetary unit is a specific weight of gold. Furthermore, gold does not back the money. The money is gold.

    Moreover, under the true gold standard, the government does not monetize gold. Gold does not have to be in the form of a coin minted by the government to function as money. Privately minted coins can function as money as well as those minted by the government. Furthermore, gold often functions as money in the form of bars. Thus, coining by the government does not monetize gold. To the extent that gold is monetized, the markets, and not the government, monetize it.

    Under the true gold standard, regulation of the money supply is automatic and decentralized. Supply varies to suit the needs of the people and commerce. Governmental intervention is unnecessary and would cause more harm than good. The true gold standard automatically optimizes the quantity of money to suit the needs of the people and the economy.

    In summary the true gold standard has the following attributes:

    1. Gold does not back the money; gold is the money.

    2. The price of gold is not fixed. The monetary unit is a specific weight of gold.

    3. Gold coins circulate as money.

    4. The value of a coin is the value of its metal content.

    5. There is the free coinage of gold: Anyone can bring any amount of gold to the mint, which does not have to be owned by the government, and get it coined.

    6. Anyone can melt coins without restriction and use the metal for nonmonetary purposes.

    7. No restrictions are placed on exporting or importing gold.

    8. All paper money is redeemable in gold on demand.

    9. The supply of money is self-regulating and automatically adjusts to meet the demand for metallic money. The government does not manage or otherwise manipulate the money supply. No monetary policy is necessary, and none is desirable.

    10. The government does not buy gold and coin it on its own account.

    11. Gold coins are the property of the individual holding them; they are not the property of the government. No restrictions or controls are placed on the private ownership of gold.

    12. Legal tender laws are unnecessary and undesirable.

    13. The government’s monetary duties are limited to defining the monetary unit, coining all gold presented to it for coinage and guaranteeing the weight and fineness of such coins, punishing counterfeiters of such coins, punishing issuers of paper money who fail to redeem their paper money on demand, and punishing acts of fraud and enforcing contracts in monetary matters.

Copyright © 2013 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Is the Price of Gold Fixed Under the Gold Standard

Is the Price of Gold Fixed Under the Gold Standard

Thomas Allen

    A common misunderstanding about a commodity standard is that the government fixes the price of the monetary commodity. Many people believe that under the gold standard, the government fixes the price of gold. For example, if an ounce of gold exchanges for $20, the government has fixed the price of gold at $20 per ounce. No one would sell gold bullion for less than $20 per ounce because he can take the bullion to the mint and get it minted into coins at $20 per ounce. Furthermore, no one would pay more than $20 per ounce for bullion because he can melt coins to obtain bullion.
    Under the gold standard, the government does not fix the price of gold. It defines the monetary unit, such as the dollar, as a specific weight of gold. That is, the dollar is a specific weight of gold. For example, the dollar is defined as 1/20 of an ounce of gold or 24 grains of gold. The dollar is 24 grains of gold. It is a unit of weight like the pound. It is just limited to money. By declaring the dollar to be 24 grains of gold, the government has no more fixed price of gold than it has fixed the price of a pound by declaring it to be 7000 grains. The dollar is a unit of weight like the pound or gram. It is just limited to gold. The dollar is fixed in terms of gold; gold is not fixed in the terms of the dollar.
    Another way of stating this point is in terms of the independent variable and the dependent variable. People who claim that the price of gold is fixed under the gold standard are claiming that an abstract unit of value, e.g., the dollar, is the independent variable. A concrete weight of gold is the dependent variable. Thus, an abstraction fixes the value of a concrete weight of gold.
    Conversely, people who claim that under the gold standard the price of gold is not fixed claim that the value of gold is the independent variable. The monetary unit is the dependent variable as it is a fixed weight of gold. A concrete weight of gold fixes the value of the monetary unit.
    “The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1∕299,792, 458  of a second.” Does the speed of light fix the metre, or does the length of the metre fix the speed of light?  If they are consistent, people who claim that the government fixes the price of gold instead of gold defining the value of the monetary unit, must argue that the government fixes the distance that light travels in a fraction of a second instead of defining that distance as the length of the metre. How absurd. The government defines the abstraction, the “metre,” in terms of the tangible distance that light travels in a fraction of a second. It does not define the tangible distance that light travels in a fraction of a second in terms of the abstraction. Likewise, with gold, government defines the abstract monetary unit in terms of a tangible weight of gold. If the speed of light fixes the metre, then the weight of gold fixes the value of the monetary unit.
    This discussion may seem to be an unimportant discourse about semantics. It is not. The distinction is highly important. Is gold to be fixed in dollars, i.e., gold is priced in dollars? That is, the government declares that the dollar is an abstraction, and it has arbitrarily fixed the price of gold. This notion leads quickly down the road to paper fiat money. On the other hand, is the dollar to be fixed in gold, i.e., the dollar is a unit of weight of gold? The government declares the dollar to be a tangible and defines it as a measurable amount of gold. This notion is the essence of the gold standard; the monetary unit is a weight of gold.

Copyright © 2014 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on money. 

Indo-Australian: Part II

Indo-Australian: Origins and Migration
Thomas Allen

[Editor's note: Footnotes and references in original are omitted.]
    When God created a species that depends on sexual reproduction, at a minimum He must have created a male and female of the species. For most species He probably created multiple males and females. Furthermore, for species that can and do interbreed, He had to isolate them from each other until their population had built up. If they were allowed to crossbreed indiscriminately, their unique and distinguishing characteristics could be lost.
    The Indo-Australians were created about 75,000 years ago on the Anatolian Plateau. From here they spread westward into Europe and eastward into Iran. Most of those who left their Anatolian homeland settled in Mesopotamia and Iran with some even reaching East Asia.[5] By the time that they began migrating from western Asia, they had acquired the Mousterian culture from the neighboring Neanderthals. During the Würm I glaciation, they migrated eastward and southward in search of a warmer climate. Many had reached India by the end of the Würm I glaciation (c. 57,000 B.P.) where they spread across the Indo-Gangetic Plain. Here they remained until the Melanochroi population grew large enough to encroach on their lands.
    As the Melanochroi moved into the Granges valley, they drove the Indo-Australians living there into Burma. (These were the progenitors of today's Australians.) As the Melanochroic population grew in the Ganges valley, they began to move westward across the Indo-Gangetic Plain. As they moved, they forced the remaining Indo-Australians into the Deccan and down the west coast of India or to the Chota Plateau. (These Australians became the progenitors of the Pre-Dravidians.)
    Later the Melanochroi drove most of the Pre-Dravidians farther south into the coastal lands and jungles of southern India and other places that the Melanochroi found as undesirable habitats. (The Pre-Dravidians of the Chota Nagpur seemed to have remained there throughout the millennia of Melanochroic invasions.) Some Pre-Dravidians fled to Sri Lanka (Ceylon). The Vedda of Sri Lanka are the descendants of these Pre-Dravidians.
    The Indo-Australians who fled to Burma migrated down the Malay Peninsula into Indonesia. These Australians were the Wadjak man from whom today’s Australians descended.[6] For the next several thousand years, Melanochroic and Turanian tribes were continually pushing them southward and eastward. At the peak of the Würm II glaciation (c. 45,000 B.P.), Indo-Australians spread across the East Indies (Indonesia) into New Guinea with Turanians close behind. About 40,000 years ago Australians had reached Borneo[7] and Australia.[8] A few crossed the Timor Sea and settled in Australia about 30,000 years ago.[9] About 9000 B.C.[10] most of the Australians remaining in Indonesia migrated to Australia. This wave came because of Turanians pushing into Farther India. Eventually, the Melanesians and Papuans, who were the primary people pushing the Australians, drove the Australians remaining in New Guinea to Australia (c. 7000 B.C.).[11] Except for occasional encounters with the Melanesians and some minor encounters with Aryans earlier in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, they would live here free of outside interference until Aryan settlers (soldiers and convicts) arrived in 1788 A.D.[12]
    While Melanesians were pressing the Australians, Melanochroi were pressing the Pre-Dravidians. During the Würm III (Achen) glaciation about 25,000 years ago, the Dravidian Melanochroi invaded the Deccan and drove most of the Pre-Dravidians living there southward, eastward, and westward into the lower coastal lands and jungles.
    The Indo-Australians driven from India by the Dravidians into Burma spread across Farther India. As these Indo-Australians spread across Farther India, they pushed the Turanians northward and the Australians southward. About 24,000 years ago the Dravidians drove many of them from Farther India down the Malay Peninsula across the East Indies into New Guinea. These Indo-Australians became the progenitors of the Papuans. Later Dravidian invasions, beginning about 7600 B.C. and lasting several millennia, drove the remaining Indo-Australians out of Farther India except a few tribes of Negritos. The Negritos of Malaya, Indonesia, and the Philippines and the Melanesians are the descendants of these Indo-Australians.[13] By 847 B.C. the Melanesians had reached New Caledonia, and by 46 B.C. they had reached Fiji.[14]
     Some Indo-Australians journeyed to South America in their attempt to escape the Indo-Australians who had retreated to Australia fleeing from the Melanochroic and Turanian advances.[15] When the climate in Antarctica was much warmer than today, a group of Indo-Australians who had earlier migrated to Australia crossed the south Pacific to Antarctica. Traveling along the coast of Antarctica, they crossed the from the Graham Land (Palmer peninsula ) into South America.[16] They became the progenitor of the extinct Lagoa-Santa type and the extant Fuegian.
    As a result of the Turanians pushing into Farther India, a group of Indo-Australians who became known as the Ainu began migrating toward Japan. They arrived in Japan about 8000 B.C. A few centuries after the Ainus had settled in Japan, Mins crossed over from Korea to Japan. They quickly drove the Ainus out of Kyushu, Shikoku, and Honshu Islands to Hokkaido and Sakhalin Islands.
    Since the arrival of the Aryans in Australia, Australians of that continent have been in retreat. The only thing preventing the extinction of these Australians is that the Aryans had not completely opened their borders to the Turanians hordes to the north.
    Aryans and Turanians have also contributed heavy to the demise of the Fuegian. Miscegenation more than anything else is driving the Fuegians to extinction.
    In Japan the Ainu are close to extinction. However, in India the Pre-Dravidians have generally persevered. Today they account for nearly all of the extant Indo-Australians. Nevertheless, miscegenation may well cause the extinction of the Pre-Dravidians.
    Laws protect races of bloodsucking, disease carrying mosquitoes, ticks, and fleas from extinction. Unfortunately, no laws protect the races or nations of man from extinction. To the contrary, laws encourage their extinction.

Endnotes -- continued
5.  Bean, p. 104. Herbert Wendt, It Began in Babel: The Story of the Birth and Development of Races and Peoples. (Translator James Kirkup. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961), p. 127.

6. Gates, pp. 145 ff. G. Elliot Smith et al. Early Man: His Origin, Development, and Culture (Freeport, New York: Books for Libraries Press, Inc., 1931. Reprinted 1967), pp. 15-16.

7. Vincent Megaw and Rhys Jones, The Dawn of Man In The Putnam Pictorial Source Series (New York, New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1972), p. 73.

8. John Gowlett, Ascent to Civilization (Editors Louisa McDonnell and Emma Fisher. New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1984), pp. 118, 139.

9. James F. Downs and Herman K. Bleibtreu. Human Variation: An Introduction to Physical Anthropology. (Beverly Hills, California: Benziger Bruce & Glencoe, Inc., 1972.), p. 283. Megaw, and Rhys, p. 73.

10. Carleton S. Coon, The Origin of Races (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962), pp. 92, 406-407.

11. Calvin Kephart, Races of Mankind: Their Origin and Migration (New York, 1960), p. 170.

12. Herbert Wendt, It Began in Babel: The Story of the Birth and Development of Races and Peoples (Translator James Kirkup. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961), pp. 339-341.

13. Wendt, pp. 124, 196-197. Kephart, pp. 82-86, 169.

14. Carleton S. Coon and Edward E. Hunt, Jr., The Living Races of Man (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965), p. 171.

15. Kephart, pp. 61, 103-105.

16. Comas, p. 631.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen. 

 More articles on anthropolgy.

Indo-Australian Part I

Indo-Australian: Description
Thomas Allen

[Editor's note: Footnotes and references in the original are omitted.]
    The Indo-Australian consists of four branches: Asian, Oceanic, Australian, and American.
    Pre-Dravidians and Ainus (Paleoasiatics) make up the Asian branch.
    Pre-Dravidians are found predominately in India with lesser numbers in Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Malaya. They include the Veddas of Sri Lanka; Bhils, Gondi,  and Khonds (Kandh) of north and central India; Bihors, Kolarians, and Oraons (Kurukh) of Chota Nagpur; Paniyan, Kadars, Uralis, Irulas, and Kurumbas of southern India; Toala of Celebes; and Che Wong of Pahang province in Malaysia. Pre-Dravidians account for only a small part of the population of the countries in which they are found. However, Pre-Dravidians account for a large part of the Indo-Austrian population.
    Ainu are predominately found on Hokkaido Island, Kuril Islands, and Sakhalin Island. They are a principal type in northern Hokkaido Island and southern Sakhalin Island.
    The Australian branch contains the Australian, Murrayian, and Carpentarian types. They are found in Australia. This branch comprises only a small part of the population of Australia. Murrayians inhabit south east Australia, and Carpentarians inhabit north and central Australia.
    The Oceanic branch consists of Negritos (Oceanic Pygmies), Melanesians, and Papuans.
    Negritos are found in small numbers on the Andaman Islands, Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Philippine Islands, and New Guinea. They include the Aetas of the Philippines; Mantra, Saoch, Semang and Senoi (Sakai) of Malay Peninsula and east Sumatra; Tapiro of New Guinea; Andamanese (Mincopies) of the Andaman Islands; and Shompen of the Nicobar Isles.
    Melanesians are found predominately along the coast of New Guinea and in the Melanesian Islands (Admiralty Islands to New Caledonia and Fiji). Except in Fiji where Melanochroi from India are now in the majority, Melanesians are generally a majority of the populations of the Pelew Islands, New Ireland, Solomon, New Britain and other islands of the Bismark Archipelago, New Hebrides, New Caladenia, and Loyalty Islands.
    Papuans are the predominant population of New Guinea. They are also found in Aru, Flores, Solor, Adonara, Lomblen, Pantar, and Alor Islands of Indonesia.
    Fuegians make up the American branch. They are found in Tierra del Fuego, along the Pacific coast of Chile, in Columbia, along the Atlantic coast of Brazil and in northern California. They consist of Yaghan (Yamana) and Alakaluf of Tierra del Fuego; Botocudos (Aimoré, Aymore) of Brazil; Chono of Columbia; and Piaroa, Goajiro, and Motilon of Colombia.
    Before 1500 A.D. Indo-Australians inhabited parts of India, Sakhalin, and Hokkaido Islands, New Guinea, Melanesian Islands, Fiji, and all of Australia. Since then they have lost most of Australia to the Aryans. In Japan and Siberia, the Japanese, Russians, and Turanians of Siberia are pushing them to extinction. Although they still dominate New Guinea and many of the surrounding islands, they are losing Fiji to Melanochroi immigrants. Also, approaching extinction is the American branch.
    The general physical characteristics of the Indo-Australian follow. Most of the information below and in Tables 1, 2, and 3 come from the works of Bean, Brinton, Comas, Coon, Deniker, Haddon, Hooten, Keane, and Nesturkh with minor input from various other sources.
    Skin Color: dark brown, chocolate brown, nearly black
    Hair Color: usually black
    Head Hair: wavy, curly, or frizzy; some nearly straight
    Facial Hair: variable, often strongly developed, some sparse
    Body Hair: variable, often well developed, some sparse
    Face: narrow and low; jaw project (prognathism); prominent cheeks; concave temples
    Forehead: somewhat sloping with strongly developed supra-orbital (brow) ridge
    Eyes: deep set, round
    Eye Color: dark hazel, brown, dark brown
    Nose: usually platyrrhine; short and broad; big with a low or medium bridge; very wide nostrils; bulbous tip; depressed at base
    Lips: thick, full
    Teeth: megadont; large
    Chin: poorly developed
    Head Shape: usually dolichocephalic, some mesocephalic
    Body Characteristics: ectomorphy; similar to Aryans with longer and thinner limbs; elongated forearms and legs; skin when cut tends to form prominent, elevated sores or keloids
    Stature: short or average
        Table 1 describes the characteristics of the American branch (Fuegian) and Asian branches (Pre-Dravidian and Ainu). The characteristics of the Australian branch (Australian, Murrayian, Carpentarian) are described in Table 2. Table 3 describes the characteristics of the Oceanic branch (Melanesian, Papuan, and Negrito).

    Among the extinct races of Indo-Australians are Grimaldi man, Brno man, and others of the Aurignacian culture (14,000 B.C.) in Europe. Grimaldi man was long-headed with a broad face and projecting jaw. He was medium height.[1]
    Of the American Branch, the Paleo-Indian (the Lagoa-Santa type and Punin type) is extinct. The Lagoa-Santa type ranged from Lower California to Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, and Brazil.[2] This type had a small, hypsicephalic (very high) vault, dolichocephalic head; retreating forehead; well-developed brow ridge; a short wide face; a medium to broad nose; medium orbits; deep-set eyes; shovel shaped teeth; and an alveolar prognathic face or considerable prognathism.[3]
    Of the Oceanic branch, the Tasmanian became extinct in 1877. Tasmanians inhabited the island of Tasmania. They possessed the following characteristics: variable stature but generally short, very thin legs, small keel-shaped head, dolichocephalic, pentagonal face, narrow forehead with a well-developed brow ridge, very broad short nose with depressed root, broad and prognathic face, small and retreating chin, large teeth, quite fuzzy or woolly hair, black hair color, beard peppercorn around the border, almost black skin, small and deep-set eyes, conspicuously large ears with large lobs, full lips but not thick, large mouth, large teeth, and cranial capacity ranging between 1060 and 1430 cc, mostly about 1250 cc.[4]

Endnotes
1. Dr. Robert B. Bean, The Races of Man: Differentiation and Dispersal of Man (New York, New York: The University Press, 1932), pp. 69.123.

2. Juan Comas, Manual of Physical Anthropology (English edition. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1960), p. 629.

3. A. C. Haddon, The Races of Man and Their Distribution (New York, New York: The Macmillian Company, 1925), pp.24, 142, 143. R. Ruggles Gates, Human Ancestry from a Genetical Point of View (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1948), 311.

4. Daniel G. Brinton, Races and Peoples: Lectures on the Science of Ethnography (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: David McKay, Publisher, [1901]), p. 240. Comas, p. 651.  J. Deniker,The Races of Man: An Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography (London, England: Walter Scott, Limited, 1900), p. 432. Gates, p. 155. A. H. Keane, Man Past and Present (Revised by A. Hingston Quiggin and A. C. Haddon. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1920), pp. 159-160. Taylor 88-89.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

 More articles on anthropolgy.