Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Un-Killing Whitey: The Achievement of Sam Francis Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/unkilling_whitey_the_achievement_of_sam_francis#1348 Post contents: Speaking of Stalinists, Sam (in <i>Chronicles</i>, in 1993) placed "abortionists" between "civil liberties Stalinists" and "common criminals": "The whole point of the U.S. Constitution as it was originally written and adopted was to enable the people of what was then one of the world's largest and most diverse countries to govern themselves without coming under the centralized dominance of a particular interest, faction, or region. Throughout American history, it has been that very feature of the Constitution that has so profoundly offended and alarmed the legions of those armed with a Better Idea -- High Federalists, abolitionists, Social Darwinists of the Gilded Era, Wilsonian apostles of the New Freedom, Rooseveltian peddlers of the New Deal, New Frontiersmen, Great Society social engineers, lunch counter liberators, civil liberties Stalinists, <b>abortionists</b>, common criminals, and overeducated freethinkers who feel oppressed because someone could read the Ten Commandments on the school bulletin board." His problem with ideological "pro-lifers" was that they reflect and contribute to the "Marxist false consciousness" of the Religious Right, and he recognized the Religious Right as "the current incarnation of the on-going Middle American Revolution . . . " (<i>Chronicles</i>, Dec. 1994). As part of the MAR, the Religious Right is primarily (and justly) motivated by "the perception that the white middle-class core of American society and culture was being evicted from its historic position of cultural and political dominance"—the very dominance that kept abortion illegal and rare. But he also believed that the Religious Right was flawed, because religious commitments alone are not enough to "codify the objective interests and needs of [the Middle American socio-political class]." The federalism of the Founders is necessary, given our diverse society, to sustain the generally Christian culture of America—a culture that rejects, among other things, abortion. Such federalism is not derived from religion, but from political thought that flows out of a concrete tradition. But the Religious Right/pro-lifers' ignorance of the American/English political tradition (evidenced by their insistence on the Human Life Amendment) undercuts the very culture that supports their faith and their commitment to the sanctity of life. That ignorance allows them to appeal to the 14th Amendment on behalf of the unborn when, in fact, the 14th Amendment hurts the unborn by giving power to the Metropole, which has consistently opposed and degraded Christian culture and morality, and has promoted, in its place, a mass-culture of death. In short, Sam's criticisms of the Pro-Life Movement and the Religious Right were a far cry from praise for abortion or "choice." Sam simply wanted Middle American Christians to realize that they could never restore their culture by feeding the Beast that was and is destroying it. But to claim that Sam was "pro-sterilization" and "pro-choice" would be to claim that Sam opposed the very Middle American morality he was courageously fighting for. His short-sightedness in 1995 on contraception can be attributed, in part, to the fact that he viewed that Middle American morality as being largely Protestant, and Protestantism (for the last 75 years, sadly) has not opposed contraception. Yet the federalism Sam defended would allow traditional Catholics and/or Protestants to ban contraceptives (as well as abortion and "gay marriage") in their localities. Aaron D. Wolf Associate Editor <i>Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture</i> Sent at: 2008 07 20