Showing posts sorted by relevance for query JOHN BIRCH. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query JOHN BIRCH. Sort by date Show all posts

Friday, April 17, 2020

I Was A Member Of The John Birch Society


heretofore (AUTHOR)
Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)
Tuesday May 31, 2016 

(and why you should listen to my confession)

I have never confessed this, and as I am not adding my name, it remains, I hope, a secret; and also why this is an early post, a matter that only my sister keeps needling me about since that ONE PERIOD in the 1970s, when I also burned my Black Sabbath albums, which she caught me at, but she also caught me at growing Mary Jane on the roof top. (Mercy, sister, must you always bring this shit up?)

I was a Liberal, a hippie type, in the early ‘70s, as a kid. In 1972, some of us boys in the 5th grade actually staged a sit-in to protest the Vietnam War. It was after Kent State. When parents in a small town see politics reach all the way to their not-even-teen-aged children, well, it made an impact. I guess. That’s all I ever did for the Nam, that’s all we tykes could do. Also, fellow kid Richard M. rigged the sprinkler system to blow … because at that time me and Ross H. couldn’t do better; we were still working on explosives, having gained no experience beyond soda-and-vinegar kaboom.

Kids. (In our defense, we later graduated to mercury fulminate, inspired the 1950s book and 1960s film “Mister Roberts” which led me to a dangerous garage distillation involving nitric acid, mercury, and home-brewed methanol — because they sold all that except booze to kids in the day).


This diary is about the importance of young boys and girls, before they become young voters, and how the far Right has taken over at the local level. You all didn’t see this shit coming since it spread its wings. Let me tell you about the John Birch Society, something that you probably never heard. (You commie rats. – that was snark). This is NOT a CP diary. It is an observation based on my experience. I hope it educates someone.

-------—


So back in the mid-1970s, when the Oil Crisis was going on, I happened upon a JBS book by Gary Allan, “None Dare Call It Conspiracy.” As a teen, I was intrigued by the idea that a “cabal” of rich white men (or others), could somehow conspire to fuck up the world. What I did not know then, and know now, is that the best LIE is couched in truth. (The “truth,” as my Liberal high school teacher said, is that oil companies can and do conspire, but a world-wide conspiracy it does not make). It wasn’t until I got to college and university that my young mind realized the utter nonsense I had been feeding my mind with, and quickly returned to my Liberal roots.

That aside, let me tell you how, back then, the JBS worked, from my experience as an accolade up to, well, a trusted fellow. Yeah, I met Robert Welch (founder of the JBS, named after a missionary killed in 1945) and Gary Allen (the former in a signing of the “Blue Book,” and the later when fat Gary was taking a shit at the Ambassador in Los Angeles when I was afforded into whatever the bastards had planned for me … to be fair, they did say that I might turn into a Liberal if I went and up got educated).

Here is how the JBS worked then, and maybe works now. As an aside, you might wonder why I would be a member of the JBS if I were so anti-war Liberal. Well, back then, the JBS hated Nixon. Hell, they hated Eisenhower. They hated GW Bush, too. But they evolved, though not without their tactics. I see it. So let’s get back to how the JBS won the ground, over the decades, without mentioning the Koch brothers’ influence.

The John Birch Society patterned its local structure according to what it learned from Communism. This is not a conspiracy theory. Read the JBS “Blue Book” by Welch if you are not sure on the point. The reason the JBS established “cells” is because that is how “the commies” succeeded. And by way of emulation, so could the far Right do better. Ah, yes, the JBS introduced me to Sun Tsu’s “Art of War.” How very clever of them. Saruman, indeed.

Anyway, I got into the JBS smack hard, about 1975, and abandoned my long-haired ways. I was taken in, and soon became a small-time speaker at one of their camps for young people. They didn’t press me, they just asked what I wanted to talk about. By this time, all I wanted to talk about was logic. So that’s what they let me do, as long as I hewed to the party line.

As a trusted young-un in the JBS, I was afforded some latitude. Except when I got kissing with a young girl from North Hollywood, whose family were really rich compared to my middle class, and she went missing for a couple of hours, and they (a couple of ex Green Berets name Mahoney and that other short fuck) put the screws to me, ah, but it turns out she was scared by a raccoon or whatever and bolted into the woods, and like that’s my fault. Again, I digress. Oh wait. The year after in Big Bear, there was this upper JBS adult man, who was perving on the young teens. Dude had major film equipment. I still have a couple of photos (don’t ask). Long story short: so I’m 17 trying for a kiss, and this 34-year-old dude is buying really skimpy bathing suits for two teens, then goes all cinema on me … so then the dude’s wife later comes up to me in my room, being as she can see I’m not happy about him horning in, but I don’t know wtf with these people or if this 30-year-old cutie is making a play on me because she is so over her husband, but turns out she’s pissed at him and not going cougar, so I just say “it’s not fair.” As in, it’s not fair to this 17-year-old that a 34-year-old man jumps into my attempt at romance ... when in fact she was simply pissed off because her husband was a fucking pervert. I wanted to punch the fucker, out of principle alone. And then later this 40-year-old JBS hardcase woman gets wind of the shit, and tries to break me on the situation … and I’m thinking, Jesus, I’m fucking 17 and all I want is to get laid in this bullshit juke joint, and even Nurse Ratched is fucking my shit up. Her name was McGowen, as I recall, and the whole clan of them came out the JBS SoCal headquarters in San Marino, CA, a pretty rich enclave to this day. At the center was Joe Merten, a pretty slick dude, perhaps even my handler. Whatever.

I should also mention the “exorcism” of a young boy that happened. I wasn’t there at the scene, but it was later explained to me. See, there was this pig-pen kid, all dirty and smelly, and his fellow campers were complaining about his body odor. Well, the fucking Berets decided to take the boy, strip him naked, and shove him into a hot shower. The boy wasn’t having any of it, and Arnie M., a firefighter, shouted sternly at the boy. As the short Beret told me, Arnie’s “jaw shot out five inches” and then the boy blanched and took his shower. I was told later that the boy was right as rain when turned over to his parents, a happy camper. In hindsight, I suspect something else. It was a tight ship, alright. Later in the ‘80s, after I bolted from the farm, I came across Arnie M. during a refinery fire in Paramount, where I was attempting journalism. “Hey, Arnie.” Straight off, he says to me: “You know, the Russians got us.” He was referring to the KAL 007 flight indeed shot down by the USSR, which happened to have aboard the successor to JBS founder Robert Welch. Fucking commies. (Please know that I grew under the umbrella of the Southern Calif. defense industry, which might explain why I was encouraged to access dangerous chemicals in order to build better rockets against the commies. But by then I wasn’t having any of his shit, and simply plied my trade to get better access to the Paramount Refinery fuckup … good luck googling it, because it was before the internet, but I have some beautiful photos in stock.)

Other than the other JBS camp photos I have from those days, you might wonder why I so vividly recall such memories. Well, one year on the way down from the Big Bear camp (it was a Presbyterian site leased by the JBS, as I recall), I nearly cooked the engine on my 1965 Mercury Comet, because the valve circulating the water cooling shut fast, and all I could do was to keep feeding oil as it boiled away, until I arrived home exhausted. When I woke up, I was told that my engine smoked for six hours. And the enormous heat didn’t crack the engine block. They don’t build ‘em like that anymore.

So what the JBS did, and does so now, is establish a human “cell” system based on the old Soviet model, which they found to be effective. They established a long-term goal, starting not only by garnering the support of Big Business (see, Koch Brothers), but also in recruiting future voters all the way down to 9-year-old children. I was there. They had me on lifeguard duty, because I was Red Cross certified, and at the mountain camp I made sure the kids didn’t drown. That was R&R, according to the Green Beret dudes. The camp was tight.

I made out with JBS girls, sure, almost got hitched to another when I was a cook in Tahoe, before I woke the fuck up (and proceeded with more adventures befitting my early 20s, as in I’ve seen a lot more shit since even that one time, which was off the rails). (Yeah, she tracked me down on the internet ten years’ back, an boy was that just five ways away from Sunday.)

So I know the how and why of the far Right wing. Them fuckers were organized a long ass time ago, and they get ‘em young, they get ‘em stupid (see Tea Party) …

And SOME in the Democratic Party have the vapors whenever we Liberals even mention taking out the hammer and tongs. The far Right had those long knives out before you were born. Thus the top image from dear old Driftglass, a blogger who deserves a lot more credit than he’s gotten.

I have sinned. I was once a bit too deep in the iniquity of the far Right. As a teenager, as a provocateur in high school in the school’s newspaper, influencing my friends, who turned out to be Republicans as I now know from Facebook … to my shame. I was an idiot with a vial full of mercury fulminate.

I done fucked up. I am sorry.

* As a side note to any young people reading this, do not worry about making mistakes. From such you learn a lot. To be perfect is an illusion. To learn from our failures is the beginning of wisdom. (Old man advise done. Peace out.)

This content was created by a Daily Kos Community member.


UN WHO
Urged on by Conservatives and His Own Advisers, Trump Targeted the WHO

Trump cuts WHO funding in concerted efforts with conservatives and allies


Michael D. Shear, The New York Times•April 16, 2020
UN Needs to Go Out of Business !!! | 2012 Patriot

WASHINGTON — Fox News pundits and Republican lawmakers have raged for weeks at the World Health Organization for praising China’s handling of the coronavirus crisis. On his podcast, President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist, Stephen Bannon, urged his former boss to stop funding the WHO, citing its ties to the “Chinese Communist Party.”

And inside the West Wing, the president found little resistance among the China skeptics in his administration for lashing out at the WHO and essentially trying to shift the blame for his own failure to aggressively confront the spread of the virus by accusing the world’s premier global health group of covering up for the country where it started.

Trump’s decision Tuesday to freeze nearly $500 million in public money for the WHO in the middle of a pandemic was the culmination of a concerted conservative campaign against the group. But the president’s announcement on the WHO drew fierce condemnations from many quarters.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said cutting its funding was “not in U.S. interests.” Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the decision “dangerous” and “illegal.” Former President Jimmy Carter said he was “distressed,” calling the WHO “the only international organization capable of leading the effort to control this virus.”
Get US Out! of the UN – The John Birch Society

Founded in 1948, the WHO works to promote primary health care around the world, improve access to essential medicine and help train health care workers. During emergencies, the organization, a United Nations agency, seeks to identify threats and mitigate the risks of dangerous outbreaks, especially in the developing world.

In recent years, the United States has been the largest contributor to the WHO, giving about $500 million a year, though only about $115 million of that is considered mandatory as part of the dues that Congress agreed to pay as a member. The rest was a voluntary contribution to combat specific health challenges like malaria or AIDS.

How Trump’s order to freeze the group’s funding while officials conduct a review of the WHO would be carried out was not clear. Congressional Democrats who oversee foreign aid said they did not believe Trump had the power to unilaterally stop paying the nation’s dues to the WHO. Congressional aides cited a Government Accountability Office report in January that concluded that the administration could not simply ignore congressionally directed funding for Ukraine simply because Trump wanted to.

A senior aide to House Democrats said they were reviewing their options in the hopes of keeping the money flowing. But Democrats conceded that Trump most likely has wide latitude to withdraw the voluntary contributions to specific health programs run by the WHO.

White House officials say Trump was moved to act in part by his well-known anger about sending too much of the public’s money to international organizations like NATO and the United Nations. And they said he agreed with the criticism that the WHO was too quick to accept China’s explanations after the virus began spreading.

           JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY
UN Wants a 10% Global Tax to Pay for New "Shared Responsibility ...

They cited a Twitter post by the WHO on Jan. 14 saying that the Chinese government had “found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus” as evidence that the WHO was covering up for China. And they noted that in mid-February, a top official at the WHO praised the Chinese for restrictive measures they insisted had delayed the spread of the virus to other countries, saying, “Right now, the strategic and tactical approach in China is the correct one.”

“It is very China-centric,” Trump said in announcing his decision Tuesday in the Rose Garden.

“I told that to President Xi,” he said, referring to Xi Jinping of China. “I said, ‘The World Health Organization is very China-centric.’ Meaning, whatever it is, China was always right. You can’t do that.”

Public health experts say the WHO has had a mixed record since the coronavirus emerged in late December.

The health organization raised early alarms about the virus, and Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the group’s director-general, held almost daily news briefings beginning in mid-January, repeating the mantra, “We have a window of opportunity to stop this virus. But that window is rapidly closing.”

But global health officials and political leaders — not just Trump — have said the organization was too willing to accept information supplied by China, which still has not provided accurate numbers on how many people were infected and died during the initial outbreak in the country.

On Wednesday, Scott Morrison, the prime minister of Australia, called it “unfathomable” that the WHO had issued a statement supporting China’s decision to allow the reopening of so-called wet markets, the wildlife markets where the virus is believed to have first spread to humans. And in Japan, Taro Aso, the deputy prime minister and finance minister, recently noted that some people have started referring to the WHO as the “Chinese Health Organization.”

But defending the WHO on Wednesday, Dr. Michael Ryan, executive director of its emergencies programs, cited the early warning it sounded. “We alerted the world on January the 5th,” Ryan told reporters.

Ghebreyesus expressed disappointment with Trump’s decision to freeze funding.

“WHO is not only fighting COVID-19,” he said. “We’re also working to address polio, measles, malaria, Ebola, HIV, tuberculosis, malnutrition, cancer, diabetes, mental health and many other diseases and conditions.”


THE ORIGIN OF ANTI-VAXING IS ANTI-COMMUNIST AMERICAN FASCISM



           JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY


Trump’s decision to attack the WHO comes as he is under intense fire at home for a failure to respond aggressively to the virus, which as of Wednesday had claimed more than 28,000 lives and infected at least 600,000 people in the United States.

The president publicly shrugged off the virus throughout January and much of February, repeatedly saying that it was under control. He said in mid-February that he hoped the virus would “miraculously” disappear when the weather turned warm.

Trump barred some travel from China in late January, a move that health experts say helped delay widespread infection. But he also presided over a government that failed to make testing and medical supplies widely available and resisted calling for social distancing that allowed the virus to spread for several critical weeks.

The president’s decision to freeze the WHO funding was backed by many of his closest aides, including Peter Navarro, his trade adviser, and key members of the National Security Council, who have long been suspicious of China. Trump himself has often offered contradictory messages about the country — repeatedly saying nice things about Xi even as he wages a fierce on-again, off-again trade war with China.

“China has been working very hard to contain the Coronavirus,” Trump tweeted Jan. 24. “The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency.”

At a meeting of his coronavirus task force Friday, Trump polled all the doctors in the room about the WHO, according to an official who attended the meeting. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, said that the WHO had a “China problem,” and then others around the room — including Dr. Deborah Birx, who is coordinating the U.S. response, and Dr. Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — agreed with the statement, the official said.

But the president’s critics assailed the timing of the announcement, saying that any assessment of the WHO should wait until the threat was over.

           JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY



Among those questioning the president’s decision to act now was Redfield, who heaped praise on the WHO during an appearance Wednesday on “CBS This Morning,” saying that questions about what the group did during the pandemic should be left until “after we get through this.” He said that the WHO remained “a long-standing partner for CDC,” citing efforts to fight the Ebola virus in Africa and the cooperation to limit the spread of the coronavirus. And he added that the United States and the WHO have “worked together to fight health crises around the world — we continue to do that.”

Pelosi said Trump was acting “at great risk to the lives and livelihoods of Americans and people around the world.” And in its statement, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said that it supported reform of the WHO but that “cutting the WHO’s funding during the COVID-19 pandemic is not in U.S. interests given the organization’s critical role assisting other countries — particularly in the developing world — in their response.”

In a tweet, Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft and later a global health foundation, said the decision to end funding “during a world health crisis is as dangerous as it sounds.”

He added, “Their work is slowing the spread of COVID-19 and if that work is stopped no other organization can replace them. The world needs @WHO now more than ever.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
© 2020 The New York Times Company

Sunday, January 24, 2021

One of Trump’s last moves as president was to embolden anti-vaxxer hysteria






Peter Bolton
24th January 2021

The one-year anniversary of the outbreak of coronavirus (Covid-19) passed last December. But following the approval of multiple vaccinations from several different pharmaceutical companies, the end seemed within sight. Just as a return to normality begins to look possible, though, this notion seems increasingly threatened by the rise of a familiar foe of science, progress, and public health. The long-simmering anti-vaccination movement is going into overdrive in its attempts to portray mass vaccination as some kind of evil conspiracy.

The Trump administration established a prolific record of opposing science and promoting all manner of conspiracy theories. But it has perhaps exceeded even its own standards, with one last dismal act of support of anti-vaxxer hysteria.

Over $850,000 in bailout money


On 18 January, the Washington Post reported that the US federal government granted several anti-vaccine groups bailout money from public coffers. This was in the waning days of the disgraced Trump administration. Five of the most prominent organizations belonging to the anti-vaxxer movement received more than $850k in loans from the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). The PPP was formed to help small businesses and non-profit organizations struggling under the crippling financial fallout of the coronavirus pandemic.

The process has been controversial due to applicants’ ability to self-certify the loans’ approval. The Post also reported that corporate restaurant giants such as Shake Shack, and a defense contractor with billions in sales, “benefitted handsomely” from the loans. Meanwhile “debt collectors and high-interest lenders pocketed more than $500 million”.

A who’s who of the ‘anti-vaxxer’ movement


The five anti-vaccine groups that received PPP money are:
The National Vaccine Information Center.
Mercola Health Resources.
The Informed Consent Action Network.
The Children’s Health Defense.
The Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center.

The Children’s Health Defense is perhaps the most high profile and notorious of these groups. And it was founded by a member of the US’s prominent Kennedy political dynasty, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. On 17 January, Kennedy wrote an article in which he claims that health officials are “depriving people of the information they need to make informed decisions [about coronavirus vaccinations]”.

JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY 1953













The proof is in the outbreaks


Reluctance to vaccinate children, amongst a small but growing section of the US public, has led to localized outbreaks. These outbreaks are of diseases that were thought to have been consigned to the history books decades earlier. In January 2019, USA Today reported that a county in Washington state, known as an anti-vaxxer hotspot, had experienced over 70 cases of measles so far that year.

The articles states:


The county has one of the lowest vaccination rates in the state: Nearly one in four Clark County kindergarten students during the 2017-18 school year did not get all their immunizations, according to data from the Washington Department of Health. At three schools in the county, more than 40 percent of kindergartners did not receive all recommended shots before starting school.

Meanwhile, in December 2019, the World Health Organization reported that “vaccination rates globally have stagnated for almost a decade”. And as a result of these suboptimal vaccine rates, “more than 140,000 people died [worldwide] from measles in 2018″. This was while “measles cases surged globally, amidst devastating outbreaks in all regions”.

A familiar face of conspiracism


Trump himself has been a long-time exponent of anti-vaccination myths. He’s also voiced conspiracy theories about the pandemic, especially during the crucial early months of the outbreak. Trump’s handling of the crisis is widely viewed as one of the major reasons behind his 2020 election loss to Democratic Party challenger Joe Biden. The US, despite being the wealthiest and most powerful country in the world, holds the dubious distinction of having the most coronavirus cases and the most coronavirus related deaths in the world.

Though Trump is gone, the damage caused by these dangerous peddlers of pseudo-science will continue beyond his presidency. And the Biden administration will likely take a less oppositional stance toward science and reason-based public health measures than Trump. But the threat that these groups pose to containing the coronavirus outbreak – and that of other deadly diseases – will remain.

JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY 1953


Who Was John Birch? - VAXOPEDIA


Monday, March 13, 2023

Why Republicans are pushing one of their most toxic and corrosive memes

Thom Hartmann
March 13, 2023

Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) holds his weekly news conference at the U.S. Capitol June 13, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)



It’s one of the most toxic and corrosive memes the GOP is pushing today, that’s now being used to minimize the importance of universal, free, and fair elections.

Writing at the Heritage Foundation’s website in a warning about “egalitarianism,” for example, Bernard Dobski also uses the famous John Birch Society mantra as the title for his article: “America Is a Republic, Not a Democracy.”

It’s a memorable slogan, and the GOP has been pushing it ever since the 1950s when Senator Joe McCarthy echoed it while recommending that Republicans only refer to the Democratic Party as:
“The ‘Democrat Party,’ with emphasis on the ‘rat.’”

After all, calling America a “republic” sounds so, well, Republican. Fox “News” follows McCarthy’s “…rat party” dictum to this day, as does almost every Republican in Congress.

But recently the stakes have changed for public acceptance of this canard, which has now gone beyond mere political party branding.

Hungary, for example, is now fully “a republic but not a democracy”: your vote doesn’t much matter in that country any more, even though they still have elections. The same is true of the republics of Kazakhstan, Russia, and Belarus, among others.

Once citizens buy into the idea that a nation is a republic but not a democracy, it’s so much easier for “strongman” leadership to justify limiting democratic processes like majority-rule voting so they can rig things so “only the right people” get to vote or have their vote counted.

Expanding on the idea, Senator Rand Paul told The Washington Post:

“The idea of democracy and majority rule really is what goes against our history and what the country stands for.”

While arguably true — from 1789 to 1965 Black people weren’t allowed to vote in the United States, and women didn’t vote until 1920 — Alexander Hamilton would nonetheless beg to differ at least with regard to “what our country stands for.”

For centuries before our Constitutional Convention, the words “democracy” and “republic” were essentially interchangable. The Founders wanted to differentiate us from the Greek “pure democracy,” though, because it failed so quickly. They wanted a “representative democracy” instead of a “pure democracy” like the failed Greek experiment.

In a 1777 letter to the man who would become one of the Constitution’s principal authors (he wrote the Preamble to our Constitution in its entirety), New York’s Gouverneur Morris, Hamilton wrote:
“[A] representative democracy, where the right of election is well secured and regulated & the exercise of the legislative, executive and judiciary authorities, is vested in select persons, chosen really and not nominally by the people, will in my opinion be most likely to be happy, regular and durable.” (Emphasis Hamilton’s)



But then comes Senator Mike Lee, tweeting to support laws that make it harder for college students, racial minorities, and Social Security-age citizens to vote:

“Democracy isn’t the objective; liberty, peace, and prospefity [sic] are. We want the human condition to flourish. Rank democracy can thwart that.”

Spoken like Viktor Orbán himself!

Republicans who believe that a democracy and a republic are incompatible with each other completely miss the fact that our 1789 American republic was the first serious, large-scale nation-state experiment with democracy within a western-world republic since the Greeks tried it almost 3000 years earlier.

Crucially, the Greeks practiced pure democracy: you served in the legislature by lottery, like we do jury duty today.

That history produced a general agreement among the Founders and the Framers of the Constitution that they didn’t want what the Greeks had. It was too unstable and, indeed, collapsed as a “pure democracy” after only 47 years (507 to 460 BCE).

As Hamilton wrote in that same letter to Morris:

“Unstable democracy is an epithet frequently in the mouths of politicians…”

Madison noted the same in Federalist 14, arguing for representative government:
“In a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents.”

But Republicans today don’t want you to know that the Founders and Framers understood that they were creating a republic that was ruled by democratic principles. It wasn’t to be Greece or Rome: it was The United States of America, a democratic republic.

They’d rather you believed that the whites-only policies of about half of those Framers, and the male-only policy of all of them, is what was intended for eternity and should be revived today via the Republican Party’s new Jim Crow 2.0 voter suppression laws.

Nelson Rockefeller, who would become Gerald Ford’s Vice President, saw this coming with the John Birch Society-pushed Goldwater sweep of the Republican Party at their 1964 convention.

“It is essential that this convention repudiate here and now,” he said over boos and chants, “any doctrinaire, militant minority, whether Communist, Ku Klux Klan, or Bircher (pause for “republic not democracy!” chants set off by his attacking the John Birch Society)…”

Rockefeller continued, taking on the crowd:

“…which would subvert this party to purposes alien to the very basic tenets which gave this party birth. Precisely one year ago today, on July 14, 1963, I warned that the Republican Party is in real danger of subversion by a radical, well-financed and highly disciplined minority. The methods of these extremist elements I have experienced at first hand.”


At that time, McCarthy’s slur against democracy and the Democratic Party was not in widespread use. Reagan’s use of that “Democrat Party” slur first peaked in 1984 when he was up for re-election; ditto for G.W. Bush, who used it most frequently in his re-election campaign in 2004.

But the damage has been done. Most Republicans now believe that democracy is a bad thing, not a benefit or even the foundation of our “democratic republican” system of government.

They think our Constitution was written to protect us against representative democracy, not to institute it in the context of a democratic republican form of government. (And, given how restricted the vote was, there’s more than a grain of truth to that — back then.)

They view Democrats, like President Biden last year asking Manchin and Sinema to “fight for democracy” (instead, they both helped Republicans kill voting rights legislation) as quaint and naïve.

But the Framers of the Constitution didn’t think that at all, at least in the broadest of terms.

Speaking to his colleagues at the Constitutional Convention on June 6th, 1787, James Madison indirectly referred to Massachusetts’ struggle to throw off the preachers who’d once taken over that state and others who’d tried to set up state-based petty aristocracies with British approval, saying:
“Was it to be supposed, that republican liberty could long exist under the abuses of it practiced in some of the States?”

Instead of limiting the protections of government to the rich or the religious, Madison argued, democracy should be as expansive as they could negotiate with the “conservative” slaveholders of that time:

“And were we not thence admonished,” he said, “to enlarge the sphere as far as the nature of the government would admit? This was the only defense against the inconveniences of democracy, consistent with the democratic form of government.”

History admonishes us today: the worldwide damage created by discarding democracy in The United States would be inestimable. Hungarian-style rigged elections would become the new worldwide norm and the new standard for what was once known as the “free world.”



Democrats, after all these years, are finally starting to push back. As Congressman Jamie Raskin recently told Republicans in the House of Representatives who insisted on referring to the “Democrat Party”:
“[W]e’re not the ‘Democrat Party’ unless they’re the ‘Banana Republican Party.’”

Words matter, as Joe McCarthy knew well. Republicans, by trashing the name of the Democratic Party, are simultaneously trashing the concept of democracy itself.

If we fail to honor democratic principles to make and keep voting safe, easy, and convenient for all Americans — the way it works in every other advanced democracy in the world — we risk the entire American experiment.

Which appears to be exactly what the Trump-aligned Republicans and neofascist media figures want.



Friday, April 17, 2020

Trump move to end WHO funding would be 'catastrophic' for polio programs, experts warn

Willem Marx,NBC News•April 15, 2020

JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY 1962

If President Donald Trump carries out his threat to pull American funding for the World Health Organization, the impact on polio eradication efforts around the world could be “catastrophic,” experts told NBC News on Wednesday.

“It’s heartbreaking,” said Dr. Jack Chow, 59, the former assistant director-general at the WHO, where he was responsible for combating HIV/Aids, tuberculosis and malaria.

Chow, who previously served as the State Department’s special representative on global HIV/AIDS under Secretary of State Colin Powell, added the move was a "torpedo" that could “potentially sink” the United Nations’ agency responsible for international public health, which was founded in 1948.

Trump announced Tuesday he was halting U.S. funding for the WHO, pending a review of its response to the initial coronavirus outbreak, after officials at the organization criticized his restrictions on travel from China that took effect i early February.

Trump accused the organization of "severely mismanaging and covering up" the coronavirus crisis, specifically the initial outbreak in Wuhan, China, saying: "With the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have deep concerns about whether America's generosity has been put to the best use possible. The reality is that the WHO failed to adequately obtain and share information in a timely and transparent fashion.”


The move was met with severe criticism at home and abroad, with U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres saying "now is not the time" for such a drastic move with the globe gripped by the the pandemic.

U.S. contributions to the WHO are divided into the kind of regular subscription payments made by all U.N. members, according to their size and ability to pay, and voluntary payments made to specific programs that combat diseases, like polio — a centuries-old scourge that debilitates the limbs and damages the brains of children.

In 1952, many American parents, terrified of polio’s devastating impact, kept their children indoors for months as more than 3,000 people died that year alone and thousands more were left with mild to disabling paralysis.

Three years later, a vaccine that neutralized polio’s harmful effects was developed by Jonas Salk, a physician and scientist at the University of Pittsburgh, and countries around the world began widescale vaccination efforts. American funding has also financed programs in multiple countries. An oral vaccine was later developed by his fellow researcher, Dr. Albert Sabin.

“The American government and U.S. citizens have been the most ardent supporters of polio eradication, because they still remember the devastation of polio in their own country,” said Dr. Hamid Jafari, the WHO's director for polio eradication in the eastern Mediterranean region.

At pains to point out the bipartisan support for this funding, he added that "people have had relatives, uncles, grandparents who were affected by polio.”

In the 1980s, the CDC teamed up with the WHO to launch an effort to eradicate polio globally, sending epidemiologists into the field in dozens of different countries at a time when the virus still infecting and paralyzing hundreds of children worldwide every day.

But after several decades and hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. funding, that mission is now very nearly accomplished, with just a handful of wild polio outbreaks still surfacing in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and roughly 10 sub-Saharan countries facing sporadic outbreaks of a vaccine-derived version of the disease.

JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY


Jafari, who worked for the CDC for 27 years before joining WHO, is a senior official at the Global Polio Eradication Effort — a collaborative program involving six partner organizations, including the WHO, which costs almost $1 billion a year and relies primarily on voluntary contributions from governments.

Roughly a third of its current funding come from the U.S. and he said he was concerned about the implications of so significant a shortfall.

“The program will lose some ground when we stop vaccinating children, particularly in infected areas,” he said.

Chow added that if he had interpreted Trump’s comments correctly, an extra $215 million for polio eradication efforts could also now be withheld.

He said the implications were dire, not just for young children in Pakistan, but for fragile health care systems across the world ranging from HIV patients in Africa to women’s health in Southeast Asia.

“If you’re the sole provider of a vital service, and then you take it away, that’s catastrophic,” he said.

CORRECTION (April 15, 2020, 6 p.m. ET): A previous version of this article misstated the professional affiliation of Hamid Jafari. He is the WHO's director for polio eradication in the eastern Mediterranean region; he is no longer with the CDC.

Friday, November 03, 2023

LIKE JOHN BIRCH BEFORE THEM
Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. John Curtis support legislation to cut funding from United Nations

Gitanjali Poonia
Tue, October 31, 2023 

Finnish U.N. peacekeepers patrol the Lebanese side of the Lebanese-Israeli border in the southern village of Kfar Kila, Lebanon, on Thursday, Oct. 12, 2023. | Bilal Hussein, Associated Press



Utah Rep. John Curtis is cosponsoring a bipartisan bill — the Stand With Israel Act — to cut funding from the United Nations Human Rights Council after a resolution condemning the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7 failed to pass in the U.N. General Assembly.

“U.S. taxpayers should not be financially supporting a council that often acts as a stage for nations like China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, and others to divert attention from their own human rights abuses and target Israel,” Curtis, a Republican who represents Utah’s 3rd Congressional District, said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.

On Friday, the U.N. failed to pass a resolution condemning the Hamas attack on Israeli civilians. A separate resolution, drafted by Jordan, called for the release of more than 200 hostages alongside a call for a “sustained humanitarian truce,” as Hamas continues to bombard Israel and as Israel launches its ground offensive, according to CNN.

The U.S. was one of the 14 countries to vote against Jordan’s resolution, as The Guardian reported.

Curtis’ communications director Adam Cloch told the Deseret News that the Utah representative is concerned about Iran, its proxies, and issues within the U.N.

“We are seeing those concerns come to fruition right now with the Hamas attack on Israel,” Cloch added.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee is on the same page as Curtis and has already begun drafting legislation. He said in a post on X that it’s time to officially withdraw funding from the intergovernmental organization.

“The U.N. does a lot of bad things. And if it can’t even do a good thing as simple as condemning war crimes, it’s over between us,” he added.

“I want to be clear about this,” Lee, a Republican, said. “NOT. ONE. MORE. DOLLAR. NOT. ONE. MORE. CENT.”

The Stand With Israel Act was introduced by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., on Monday. It seeks to cut funding from the U.N. until the international organization condemns Hamas’ attack on Israel, which resulted in the death of 1,400 Israelis.

“It should not be a heavy lift for the U.N., which claims to promote global human rights, to pass a resolution condemning what will go down in history as one of the deadliest attacks against the Jewish people,” Luna said in a press release, per Fox News.

As KSL News reported, the U.S. has been the biggest backer of the U.N. In 2021, it contributed nearly $12.5 billion to the organization.

Curtis also said in his post that Iran will be a leader in the U.N. Human Rights Council starting next week.

U.N. Watch press release noted that Iran’s “record of oppression, torture and executions make it ill-suited for the post,” which Tehran has held four other times.

John Kirby, spokesperson for the National Security Council in the White House, said at a press conference Monday, the U.S. recognizes that Iran, which has faced U.S. sanctions since 1979, backs Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis and other terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria.



Wednesday, January 04, 2023

Waging War on Medicine: From Nixon to Trump

 

JANUARY 4, 2023

LONG READ
Facebook

Photograph Source: Lord Jim – CC BY 2.0

Cancer Wars

Distrust of corporate profiteering by ordinary people has always been a sensible reaction when it comes to maintaining their own longevity; and this explains why alternative cancer treatment like Laetrile managed to assert a firm hold on the public imagination. And while the so-called health and lifestyle magazines promoted by the powerful Rodale stable had done much to undermine public understanding of effective medical interventions, the role of the mainstream (corporate) media in facilitating such confusion should never be underestimated.[1] For example, shortly after President Nixon launched his “war on cancer” in 1971, he reopened diplomatic talks with China, and low and behold, one of the first things that the mainstream media fixated upon was the so-called magic of alternative medicine. One writer who helped catalyze this strange mystical obsession was James Reston, a popular reporter who had accompanied Henry Kissinger on a preparatory visit to China in July 1971. Reston had apparently been taken ill with appendicitis and had allegedly been operated on with only acupuncture for anesthetic – a tall-tale that he wrote about at length in the New York Times. Irrespective of the truth of the matter this misreporting set-in motion much popular intrigue among ruling-elites, and soon all manner of authoritative medical practitioners were traveling to China to witness such miracles first-hand; and one over-awed journalist even reported having watched an acupuncture-assisted heart operation!

The Chinese operations were all cleverly devised fakes, but nevertheless their uncritical reception in the American corporate media led to a resurgent belief in the efficacy of acupuncture.[2] India likewise managed to achieve a similar miracle with homoeopathy, which it re-exported back to the West in the 1970s. Such alternative medical therapies were promoted in the mainstream media as being “an exotic, natural, holistic and individualized form of medicine, and an antidote to the corporate medicine being peddled by giant pharmaceutical corporations in Europe and America.”[3]

A “War on Cancer” may well have been declared by the American government, but the methods by which it was launched and developed continued to be scrutinized by a suspicious citizenry. In an environment of growing skepticism and hostility towards professional expertise, President Nixon’s official promise of finding a scientific solution to cancer, combined with the very real fear that millions of people had of dying of cancer, led many people to search for their own health solutions.

Related to such public anger at the stark limitations of medicine under capitalism, socialists like the Black Panthers had already pioneered a political approach to running health clinics to cater for the needs of the poor,[4] and feminists likes Barbara Seaman and countless others set about experimenting with more democratic forms of health provision. Other socialist groups that formed part of this resistance to capitalist health priorities included the Medical Committee for Human Rights (formed in 1964) and a loose alliance of concerned researchers who established an organization called Science for the People in early 1969. Over the next two decades, this latter group published a magazine with the same name, and they played an important role in arguing that, politically speaking, biology and medicine cannot remain neutral. Illustrating this point, in the July 1971 issue of Science for the People’s magazine, an article highlighted how the Bionetics Lab, a Maryland subsidiary of Litton Industries, was “receiving a large chunk of money from President Nixon’s highly publicized ‘War on Cancer’.” The writer explained:

“What credentials do these organizations have which qualify them to look after the public health? Litton is a conglomerate which has gotten rich primarily on contracts with various governments. Its Minnesota subsidiary has performed studies of delivery of biological weapons, and its Mississippi subsidiary produces nuclear submarines. Litton holds an $800 million contract with the Greek military junta for economic development of Western Peloponnesus and Crete.

“Under a National Institute of Health contract, the Bionetics Lab recently performed a study of the hazards of several hundred agricultural chemicals. Some chemicals in heavy use were found to be quite dangerous, but the Bionetics Lab managed to keep this information hidden from the public. Low doses of 2,4,5-T were shown to produce deformed fetuses in rats. 2,4,5-T is a defoliant widely used in Viet Nam, and recent reports from Viet Nam have indicated a huge increase in the number of malformed babies born. Bionetics said nothing of its findings, and the report might still be secret if a group of ‘Nader’s Raiders’ had not stumbled across it during the summer of 1969. Subsequent attempts by various scientists to obtain a copy of the report met with evasions, ‘no comments’, and being told it was classified.

“With considerable effort a Harvard biologist obtained a bootlegged copy. In December,1970, after much furor from a few scientists, and two years after the original results were in, President Nixon said he would “phase out” the use of 2,4,5-T in Viet Nam. It is also worth noting that some of the other chemicals in the Bionetics study, pesticides used primarily in the U.S., were found to produce cancer.”[5]

Such detailed criticisms of the medical establishment were a common feature within the magazine and in July 1972 Science for the People lambasted the so-called “ethical drug industry” highlighting how:

“The prescription drug industry, with the complicity of protecting and supporting institutions of its corporate capitalist complex; the government and the FDA, the doctors and the AMA, the advertising media, has made the technology of drugs and health care a destructive one, a technology designed to promote the best interests of a small elite in lieu of, and at the expense of, the majority of people.”[6]

Simultaneously, the far-right attacked the “monopoly” of the AMA, government regulators, and drug companies, and pushed “freedom of choice” in all medical treatments. But as the seventies progressed, precisely because the socialist left had been unable to provide a convincing lead to the diverse mass social movements of the day – which wasn’t helped by massive government repression of their activities – too many disorientated progressives found themselves “duped” by the libertarians “’freedom of choice’ dogma” particularly when it came to the contentious issue of Laetrile.[7] Tragically this led to the situation where the ultraconservative leaders of the health freedom movement even managed to weaponize the 1973 legal precedent set by Roe v. Wade to argue that medical patients had the right to choose any treatment they wished.[8] Laetrile thus became something of a cause celebre in the 1970s.

“Derived from the pits of apricots, it could be taken orally but was usually given by injection. It did not attract widespread attention until the early 1960s, when a combination of circumstances-the closing of Hoxsey’s clinic in Dallas, promotion of laetrile by an aggressive manufacturer in Canada, timely publicity in The American Weekly-part of the conservative Heart press] made it better known. When California prosecuted a physician who was prescribing it, the Committee for Freedom of Choice aggressively took up his cause.

“For all these reasons laetrile emerged by the mid-1970s as the unorthodox cancer remedy extraordinaire. One contemporary opponent of the substance called it “the greatest episode of quackery in our history.” So great was popular interest in the substance during its most heralded years-in 1977 and 1978-that Newsweek carried a cover story on it and “60 Minutes,” the television series, devoted a program to it. Polls suggested that a majority of people favored legalization of laetrile in interstate commerce. It was estimated that 70,000 Americans took the substance in 1978, roughly one-fifth of the number of Americans who died of cancer in that year.”[9]

The key authors who pushed forward the Laetrile agenda were the numerous conspiracy theorists associated with the John Birch Society, the most famous being G. Edward Griffin, who published War Without Cancer in 1975.[10] But the far-right drew other apparently non-affiliated writers into their orbit too, commentators whose work enabled medical libertarians to appeal to a much wider political audience than they might otherwise have been able to reach. Three notable journalists who acted in this vein were Ralph Moss, who would publish The Cancer Syndrome (Grove Press, 1980),[11] Gary Null who in 1979 wrote a series of influential cancer-related articles for Penthouse magazine,[12] and Peter Barry Chowka, who wrote about Laetrile for a variety of New Age publications in the late 1970s.[13] Initially at least it would have been difficult for the public to identify the political approach of these authors, as they all made a concerted habit of side-lining or ignoring the central involvement of far-right health organizations in the ongoing Laetrile wars. Yet it is now clear that the politics of all three widely-read commentators did nothing to stop them promoting all manner of right-wing conspiracies throughout their writing careers. Thus, these authors popularized their own Laetrile journalism by couching their arguments within convincing (non-libertarian) criticisms of Nixon’s official “War on Cancer,” taking advantage of the fact that ordinary people were desperate for any relief from the death toll inflicted upon their communities by this dreaded disease.

To be clear, the threat to public health caused by the “Cancer Establishment” inaugurated by President Nixon’s “War” remains very real now just as it did in the 1970s. And one of the best-known writers to document such threats from a left-leaning perspective has been Samuel Epstein, who recently surmised that:

“Apart from well-documented evidence on control and manipulation of health and environmental information, industry has used various strategies to con the public into complacency and divert attention from industry’s own recklessness and responsibility for the cancer epidemic. Key among these is the “blame the victim” theory of cancer causation, developed by industry scientists and consultants and a group of pro-industry academics, and tacitly supported by the “cancer establishment.” This theory emphasizes faulty lifestyle, smoking and fatty diet, sunbathing, or genetic susceptibility as the major causes of preventable cancer, while trivializing the role of involuntary exposures to occupational and environmental carcinogens. Another misleading diversion is the claim that there is no evidence of recently increasing cancer rates other than lung cancer, for which smoking is given the exclusive credit. While the role of lifestyle is obviously important, the scientific basis of this theory is as unsound as it is self-serving. Certainly, smoking is a major, but not sole, cause of lung cancer. But a wealth of evidence clearly incriminates the additional role of other causes of lung cancer, particularly exposure to occupational carcinogens and carcinogenic community-air pollutants.”[14]

Yet by 1982 the once powerful Laetrile movement, which arguably peaked in the late 1970s, was now in decline. This dwindling of interest in Laetrile was partly a result of scientific research that had been published in January 1982: research that had shown that the alleged treatment did nothing to prevent cancer. This proved to be one of the final nails in the coffin of the movement and it built on the positive results of the Supreme Court’s Rutherford decision (made in June 1979) which had unanimously upheld the Federal Government’s authority to ban distribution of Laetrile.[15]

However, the war on science was by no means over, and medicinal treatments like Laetrile were simply replaced by other new non-scientific remedies. These succeeding New Age treatments had the novel selling-point that they were “anti-medicines, emphasizing purification through dietary regimens, detoxification and internal cleansing, or mind control” and so involved “no agents that require FDA approval”. This was the considered view of the up-and-coming integrative health megastar Dr. Barrie Cassileth who at the time had recently published her first book, The Cancer Patient: Social and Medical Aspects of Care (Lea & Febiger, 1979) – a book that helped lay the groundwork for the institutionalization of alternative treatments within the cancer establishment.[16] Cassileth would go on to serve as a founding member of the advisory council to the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Office of Alternative Medicine, and in 1999 she was recruited by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York to create an “Integrative Medicine” program, which led to her holding the Laurance S. Rockefeller Chair in Integrative Medicine.

Another influential supernatural doctor who charted a similar course to Dr. Cassileth has been the best-selling author Dr. Norm Shealy, one of whose first books was Occult Medicine Can Save Your Life (Bantam Books, 1977).[17] Here it of more than passing interest that the publisher of this text, Bantam Books, was owned by the Italian company IFI, which was run by the immensely powerful and conservative Agnelli family.[18] So, it is not too surprising that in the same year the conservative publisher also printed the work of Dr. John Richardson, a leading John Birch Society member who was the first physician to be prosecuted for treating cancer patients with Laetrile.[19] Dr. Shealy himself however, in contrast to these libertarians, traced his medical inspiration to the New Thought movement,[20] and was most famous for having acted as the first president of the American Holistic Medical Association which had been founded in 1975.

Dr. Shealy, as it turns out, continues to preach occult medicine to this day, but with the advent of blogging his ultraconservative politics are now open for all the world to see. As early as 2013 Dr. Shealy therefore wrote on his blog about his belief in aliens (following the work of Zechariah Sitchin), adding:

“Undeniably our media are owned by the insiders of this Secret force that may best be called The Committee of 300 [citing John Coleman’s anti-Semitic text]. Thus the pap we get from all media and their failure to cover the TITANIC evidence that this is going on leaves most people in the dark or hypnotized and drugged out of reality This is coupled with the Committee’s control of food, energy, drugs, Congress, etc. Unless there is significant Awakening, the future is indeed One World Government By the Elite, For the Elite and Of the Elite!! And remember, those who believe that there is conspiracy are much more likely to be sane!”[21]

The Magic of Supplement Power

But leaving Dr. Shealy’s depraved ravings aside for a moment, with Laetrile’s fall from grace the growth of the medical freedom movement was nowhere near from over. Thus Republican Senator Orin Hatch, a Mormon representing the State of Utah (from 1977 until 2019), who maintained close links to a prominent John Birch Society supporter named Cleon Skousen (who himself was a close friend of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon),[22] had already jumped into action, and along with Senator Samuel Hayakawa (Republican-California) they had sponsored the Voluntary Vitamin Act of 1981 which, if it had passed, “would have eviscerated all FDA attempts to control the unfettered use of vitamins.” This “Vitamin Act,” however, never came to fruition because after President Reagan appointed a new Food and Drug administrator “momentum for the Hatch bill petered out.” This owed to the fact that as far as the supplement industry was concerned the FDA had now been effectively defanged by Reagan’s new appointment.[23]

As a part of the vitamin lobbies ensuing celebrations, in 1981 the National Health Federation gave Linus Pauling another award in recognition of the extraordinary services he had rendered on behalf of health freedom. And the following year Maureen Salaman, an activist who had penned a health column in America’s leading anti-Semitic publication, the Liberty Lobby’s Spotlight newspaper, was then elected president of the National Health Federation. From this position of authority, Salaman quickly built upon her vile political legacy by founding the Populist Party with Holocaust denier Willis Carto, which she followed up by standing as their vice-presidential candidate for the 1984 elections.[24]

1984 also marked the release of a significant government report that summarized a four-year investigation that had been overseen by Congressman Claude Pepper (Democrat-Florida) through his chairmanship of the House Select Committee on Aging. This report represented a scathing attack on the highly profitable industry revolving around the sale of quack remedies. Moreover, the investigation highlighted the massive political shortcoming of both the FDA and Federal Trade Commission (FTC), in the latter instance observing that their “efforts to control misleading advertising” were “almost nonexistent.”[25] Pepper then “introduced three bills [that were] intended to strengthen the government’s authority to control health fraud,” but health freedom advocates were not backing down for a moment.

“The National Health Federation, with the support of more than a hundred local chapters and 25,000 members, lobbied aggressively against each bill, referring to the proposals as ‘lysenkoism.’ NHF President Maureen Salaman reportedly went so far as to buy a plane ticket on a flight with Congressman Pepper, arranging to have [a] seat next to him so that she could ‘bend his ear’ all the way to his destination. After failing to pass the bills during the ninety-eighth Congress, Pepper decided not to reintroduce them.”[26]

Another significant moment for Reagan’s inaugural anti-regulatory presidency arose when the Kellogg cereal company teamed up with the National Cancer Institute to argue that food companies should be allowed to place misleading health advice on their products. Tragically the so-called regulatory bodies once again sided with the powers that be and “the FDA did everything but outright endorse the Kellogg advertisements” implying that their cereals might help prevent cancer, while the “FTC also enthusiastically endorsed the Kellogg advertisements and recommended that other companies follow suit.”[27]

Having given the green light to food manufacturers to embark on a new advertising extravaganza, the supplement industry however remained furious that they were being excluded from this lucrative marketing opportunity. Lawsuits were soon threatened by the supplement industries trade body, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (an organization that had initially been established in 1973 to help oppose the Proxmire Amendment). This corporate lobbying had the desired effect, and the FDA were consequently blocked by the government from taking any form of meaningful action against the bogus health claims of supplement manufacturers.[28] Nevertheless, the neutering of the government’s regulatory organizations never meant that the FDA’s own staff gave up on trying to hold food and supplement manufacturers to account.

All hell finally broke loose in mid-1992 when a front-page story in the New York Times reported that armed FDA agents had apparently raided an alternative medicine clinic as “part of the agency’s increased efforts to stop manufacturers of nutritional supplements from making unproven claims for their products,” with newspaper editorials referring to the “Gestapo-like tactics” of the FDA. But within just a single week it turned out that this news story was wrong in just about every way. Yet the Times’ subsequent retraction was too little too late. Thus, the lies told within the initially shocking articles now set in chain a series of events that played right into the hands of the supplement industry. Moreover Senator Orrin Hatch once again leaped to the defense of his friends and helped encourage an already supplicant Congress to pass the Dietary Supplement Act of 1992, which effectively acted to block “the FDA from applying its forthcoming labeling rules for conventional foods to dietary supplements for another year—until the end of 1993.”[29]

It remains not at all coincidental that the owner of the ‘raided’ clinic that made the headlines was Dr. Jonathan Wright, who himself was a longstanding health freedom activist, and author of the best-selling Book of Nutritional Therapy: Real-Life Lessons in Medicine Without Drugs (Rodale Press, 1979). In addition to having formerly served as the chair of the National Health Federation’s board of governors,[30] Wright had popularized his libertarian health advice while acting as the nutritional editor for Prevention magazine between 1976 and 1986. This meant that when the raid on Wright’s property eventuated, he was perfectly positioned to become a cause-celebre for the supplement industry, especially when he circulated a video of the law enforcement incident which soon became known as the “Vitamin-B Bust.” Film-star Mel Gibson famously recreated the scene of this bust (with exaggeration and comedic affect) for a one-minute advert that was made by the supplement industry and aired across the country in August 1993.[31] These scare tactics proved highly effective, and tens of thousands of people took to the streets to ward off the FDA’s alleged attempts to stop them obtaining supplements.

From Waco to Natural Solutions

The wealthy far-right activists who were steering this health campaign were of course aided by the horrifying fact that in the month preceding the FDA’s vitamin bust, another federal law enforcement agency had participated in an armed raid at the Waco compound of the Branch Davidians. A raid which caused the death of 78 people, including 20 children. By the time the vitamin bust therefore came to pass, the Waco bloodbath had already become a rallying point for right-wing activists across the nation; although it was only in later years that the conspiratorial interpretation of the sieges event would become immortalized in the militia classic, Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997).

Here, illustrating the close relationship between the two raids, the producer of this film on the Waco siege, William Gazecki (whose occult connections were introduced earlier), had, at the time of the vitamin bust just directed a PBS documentary in support of the supplement industry which was titled “The Natural Solutions: Freedom of Choice and the FDA” (1993).[32] This earlier documentary began with the following blunt statement from Steven Fowkes, a vitamin enthusiastic who was the recent co-editor of Stop the FDA: Save Your Health Freedom (Health Freedom Publications, 1992):[33]

“The reason why I am spending all this time on it is that I think that people are going to die as a result of what the FDA is doing, and to me that is a travesty that an organization that is supposed to protecting the health of Americans is actually endangering our health. That upsets my sense of justice in the world.”[34]

The former Wheel of Fortune letter-turner Susan Stafford who had served as the executive producer and host of Gazecki’s PBS documentary had, it bears mentioning, recently trained as a nutritionist and produced a long-running health talk-show (called Alive) for Pat Robertson’s far-right Christian Broadcasting Network. The connection here to Robertson, the evangelist and hugely popular conspiracy theorist – who was the bestselling author of the 1991 book New World Order — is perhaps fitting as Robertson has been referred to as “the most famous figure to mix religion and supplements”.[35] Stafford’s association with the Christian Right was however not a passing phase in her career and in later years she went on to work as an advisor to a group that in their own words aimed “to educate the public of the need to fulfill our civic responsibilities according to traditional biblical moral absolutes and to bridge cultural barriers.” This group had been headed by Tony Nassif, a Christian businessman who was obsessed with fighting and massively exaggerating the modern evils of child abduction and sexual slavery.[36] Not insignificantly, Nassif had for many years acted as a leading light in Robertson’s theocratic lobbying enterprise, the Christian Coalition.

But returning our focus to the supplement lobby once again: one immediate result of all the frenetic activity in the early 1990s on the part of the ‘alternative’ pill-popping industry was that hundreds of thousands of letters poured into Congress and the FDA giving the illusion of “what appeared to be a large and spontaneous consumer movement”. In reality, the campaign “had been orchestrated by supplement trade organizations, using ‘scare tactics to give cover to lobbyists and lawmakers in Congress trying to free the industry of government controls.’”[37] Yet the effect of the campaign was very real and the lobbying paid huge dividends. With Senator Hatch at the forefront of proceedings, who now had the support of Tom Harkin (Democrat-Iowa), Congress soon passed their Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), which President Clinton signed into law on October 25, 1994. With this Act, the supplement industry had effectively created a law that gave them a license to print money, and in “the five years after its enactment, supplement sales in the United States grew from $4 billion to nearly $15 billion” with the latestestimates suggesting that the market is now worth around $56 billion.[38] As one astounded critic put it:

“Breathtaking in its dimensions, DSHEA would end forever the simple legal dichotomy between “food” and “drug” to create a third, hermaphroditic category that was both yet neither: the dietary supplement. And beyond the usual suspects – vitamins, minerals, herbs, and amino acids – the law would permit manufacturers to define a product as a “dietary supplement” merely by saying so, no matter how artificially derived. For this special, magical category of products, DSHEA would specifically exclude all their ingredients from the stringent laws used to guarantee the safety of food additives.

“… With a stroke of a pen, nearly ninety years’ worth of laws dating back to Dr. Wiley’s Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 had been gutted for a huge category of products, and all because enough people had become absolutely convinced that nothing deemed ‘natural’ could be unsafe.”[39]

Institutionalizing Alternatives

Unfortunately the passing of DSHEA was not the only victory for what as in effect the occult anti-science lobby. This is because elite lobbying efforts to institutionalize nonsense within the state apparatus had received a boost a few years earlier (in 1991) when the Senate Appropriations Committee — which is responsible for funding the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — set in motion a chain of events that led to the formation of the Office of Alternative Medicine. The prime mover behind this momentous turn of events was Appropriations Committee chair, Tom Harkin, who apparently had been encouraged to take this legislative step by two of his constituents, the first being his predecessor, the former six-term Democratic Congressman Berkley Bedell and the second, a former recording artist turned alternative health activist named Frank Wiewel. All three individuals however had personally witnessed the alleged curative power of alternative medicine and were now keen to use their political clout to advance their personal beliefs in the efficacy of non-medicines.[40]

Since then, the Office of Alternative Medicine has gone from strength-to-strength, and in 1999 it was re-established as a full NIH center known as the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). The only real lasting benefit of their having burned through more than $2 billion enquiring into the utility of alternative (non-medical) therapies is that they have now concretely demonstrated that such treatments don’t work. Nevertheless, NCCAM’s work is never seemingly done, and they remain well-funded, such that in 2021 they had a generous annual budget of $138.2 million.[41]

With so much at stake and so much still to prove, alternative medicine activists never rested on their unproven laurels. So, in 1998 Berkley Bedell founded the Foundation for Alternative and Integrative Medicine to examine the miracles undertaken by ‘marginalized’ health practitioners. One integral person associated with Bendell’s Foundation was their board member George Zabrecky, a chiropractor who purports to treat cancer and is also a scientific advisor to Bernie Marcus, the notorious right-wing founder of Home Depot. Billionaire Marcus, who has the dubious honor of having been the second biggest donor to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, evidently has plenty of money to burn when it comes to pursuing medical libertarianism, and in 2017 Marcus pledged $20 million to Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, to allow it to set up what Zabrecky said was the “first department of integrative medicine at a conventional medical school in the world.”[42]

Yet the real precursor for splicing integrative medicine into the heart of a university’s medical programming occurred in 1994 when the University of Arizona authorized Dr. Andrew Weil to establish a Program in Integrative Medicine within their College of Medicine. Weil, who is perhaps one of America’s most famous health gurus and a millionaire to boot,[43] has, over the years, been able to provide substantial personal financial support to his Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine. But conservative philanthropists have joined Weil’s integrative challenge, most notably the notorious ultra-rightwing Adolph Coors Foundation.[44] This interest on Coors’ part has meant that they have additionally funded integrative research at the aforementioned Thomas Jefferson University and at the Susan Samueli Center for Integrative Medicine. The latter center having been founded in 2001 at the University of California, Irvine’s School of Medicine, with most of the financial assistance coming from the head of Broadcom, Henry Samueli (who happens to be another Republican billionaire); while the Center for Integrative Medicine’s operations were overseen by Henry’s wife, Susan, who is software engineer turned homeopath/ nutritionist.[45] Likewise another alternative project based in California that has been helpfully financed by a right-wing billionaire is Dr. Dean Ornish’s Preventive Medicine Research Institute in Sausalito. The donor and former board member of this Institute was the late Theodore Forstmann, who is credited for creating the ultra-predatory business model that is now known as the private equity industry.[46]

Conservative billionaires evidently see a handsome market in non-scientifically tested remedies, and another billionaire who is more intimately involved in the dispensing of alternative medicine is the investment banker Richard Stephenson. In this instance, Stephenson was quick to recognize the profits to be made from those suffering from cancer,[47] and 1988 he formed a chain of for-profit hospitals called the Cancer Treatment Centers of America – Centers which integrate non-scientific therapies like homeopathy with real medicine. Forbes magazine, not the type of media outlet that usually criticizes capitalist entrepreneurship, made an exception when it came to documenting Stephenson’s callous profiteering. Writing in 2012, a Forbes health correspondent explained that Stephenson’s entire premise for business “sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory,” and it is! But, as we have already seen, corporate elites have a long history of cashing in on the concept of health freedom to “support [their] favorite right-wing causes.”[48] One of these causes in Stephenson’s case is FreedomWorks — a conservative lobbying group that played a central role in building the Tea Party Movement. Stephenson’s interests in such dark electioneering however remains longstanding as he was “an early supporter” of FreedomWorks predecessor organization, Citizens for a Sound Economy – a well-oiled lobbying group that was founded in 1984 by the fossil fuel billionaires Charles and David Koch.[49]

Either way, Richard Stephenson’s lucrative cancer enterprise proved too exciting an opportunity to overlook for one of America’s most famous naturopaths, and in 2001 Joseph Pizzorno Jr. joined the Cancer Treatment Centers of America as one of their most illustrious advisors.[50] I say this because prior to taking up this post Pizzorno had served for more than twenty years as the founding president of Bastyr University: a naturopathic university which was established in 1978 that refers to itself as “America’s largest and most successful accredited institution of natural medicine.” The high esteem in which this institution is held was demonstrated in 1994 when they were awarded a grant by the Office of Alternative Medicine, making history by becoming the first ever natural medicine institution to receive an NIH grant.

Another founding board member of Bastyr University who has  proven quite able to turn a profit from his mystical preoccupation with all things natural is Jeffrey Bland, who in addition to having previously been the head of nutritional supplement research at the Linus Pauling Institute, recently retired from his role as the president and chief scientific officer of the gargantuan nutritional supplement manufacturer, Metagenics.[51]But despite the hard done-by public image of the ever-growing supplement juggernaut, a lie which has been assiduously cultivated by a massive propaganda campaign, it is safe to say “there is essentially no difference between the vitamin industry and the pharmaceutical and biotech industries…”[52]

“Key players include companies like Roche and Aventis; BioCare, the vitamin pill company that media nutritionist Patrick Holford works for, is part-owned by Elder Pharmaceuticals, and so on. The vitamin industry is also- amusingly — legendary in the world of economics as the setting of the most outrageous price-fixing cartel ever documented. During the 1990s the main offenders were forced to pay the largest criminal fines ever levied in legal history — $1.5 billion in total — after entering guilty pleas with the US Department of Justice and regulators in Canada, Australia, and the European Union.”[53]

Scamming the People

Senator Tom Harkin himself, the man who helped the supplement industry get it wings in America, likewise maintains direct and seriously intimate connections to the nutritional establishment through the indomitable support he has given to Herbalife – a company which is “perhaps the nation’s leading marketer of nostrums covered by DSHEA”.[54] In fact, it is a point of record that Herbalife’s employees and PACs were Senator Harkin’s largest contributors between 1989 and 2016; and Amway-style multilevel marketing is the extremely exploitative game played at Herbalife. In this way…

“…the company sells products to large district distributors, who turn around and sell them for piece of the action to smaller district distributors, who so the same to even smaller distributors, and so on down the line until everbody’s Aunt Tilly is selling it to her friends on the block. [Multilevel marketing] has been a boon to supplement companies [“and no supplement company has done better than Herbalife”] because individual distributors can make dramatic personal claims about their products to customers while talking in their living rooms or on the telephone. Best of all from the companies’ point of view, the FDA and FTC are none the wiser if Aunt Tilly steps over the line to essentially practice medicine without a license by pitching the products as cures for illnesses – not that the companies (big money) would ever officially condone such practices (big money) in their official literature or training (big money).”[55]

Fittingly, given the regressive nature of this business model (for pretty much everyone involved except those at the company’s very pinnacle), in 2009 Donald Trump chose to lend his name to a similar multilevel marketing enterprise that was reanointed as The Trump Network. This allowed Trump to rake in millions through the sale of vitamins and other health related products. Furthermore, Amway’s toxic legacy would live on during Trump’s presidency, as his secretary of education, Betsy DeVos, was the wife of former Amway CEO, Dick DeVos Jr. – a man whose fortune was made from the marketing of “the world’s No. 1 selling vitamin and dietary supplement brand” Nutrilite which has been sold across America since the 1930s.

For those who don’t follow the twists and turns of the vitamin supplement industry, Amway itself had been formed as a multilevel marketing company in 1949, and their Christian fundamentalist cofounders, Jay Van Andel and Richard DeVos, soon became leading distributors of Nutrilite. Federal regulatory authorities including the FDA and FTC attempted to clamp down on the dietary scaremongering that accompanied Amway’s sales patter, but ultimately “legal action against isolated vendors did not hamper Nutrilite’s growth.”

In fact, five years after the 1951 injunction, when the FTC had first “looked into Nutrilite’s sales practices, the force had expanded by a third and totaled 20,000 doorbell-ringing women and men,” such that sales in 1956 amounted to $26,000,000.[56] And owing to their interest in selling supplements Amway soon formed a long-lasting working relationship with the leadership of the National Health Federation.[57] Yet the founders of Amway maintained their own separate political agenda to that of the National Health Federation, which led Amway to support a variety of hard-right and Christian reconstructionist causes, not to mention their ongoing attempts to transform their tens of thousands of “distributors” into relentless and individualistic automatons for capitalism.

As one former Amway salesman put it, once you scratch below the outward veneer that presented Amway to the world as a simple purveyor of vitamins and cosmetics, you soon find that what Amway really sells. It “is a marketing and motivational system, a cause, a way of life, in a fervid emotional atmosphere of rallies and political-religious revivalism.”[58] In recruiting new distributors to Amway’s way of life:

“A speech that might have been used in other times to bring workers into a union, or a socialist political organization, is applied here to sell the idea of “free enterprise.” The imagery of one effort has leaked into the other — the insecurity and monotony of depending on bosses for a living, the poverty of retirement, the contrasting lifestyles of rich and poor. But the assumptions have been reversed. The labor movement organizer would blame poverty on the greed and power of employers; the Amway organizer, by implication, using himself as an example, blames the ignorance and inertia of workers for staying in their Rut. From the labor movement perspective, the way out is through mass collective action. According to the [Amway] Plan, the way out is through individual initiative, directed towards personal goals.”[59]

Amway sold their salespeople a dream, the American Dream, and in doing so they built a mass movement that took America by storm – peddling a mythical and empty dream that thrived on the fabled tale of rags to riches and the lie that a compassionate form of capitalism could ever exist.[60] Yet despite all their smooth propaganda, the house of cards that is capitalism, however, has never been more unstable than now. And this truism is demonstrated by the recent working-class victory in Seattle which succeeded in stopping the billionaire-classes anti-democratic “recall campaign” against Marxist council member Kshama Sawant.[61]What is clear is that the working-class is fully capable of organizing to defend their own class interests, after all we have nothing to lose but our chains.

This essay is an excerpt from the second-half of chapter 6 of The Occult Elite: Anti-Communist Paranoia and Other Ruling-Class Delusions (2022). The footnotes referred to in the text of this essay can be found here.

Michael Barker is the author of Under the Mask of Philanthropy (2017).