Little Known American History

(Revised 11-11-2009)

There are certain pieces of American history that we all should be aware of right now, particularly with regard to how the founding fathers of the U.S.A. felt about government, and especially about religion. That is crucial, because some Americans have been and still are being misled about how the founding fathers felt about religion.

You see, the founding fathers wanted not only to establish freedom of religion. They also wanted to establish freedom from religious bigotry and theocratic imposition. They wanted to ensure that no religious sect or denomination could dominate or rule, and they also wanted to ensure that no specific religion could dominate or rule. After all, you can’t have freedom of religion without mutual respect and equality of religions.

As you will see, their values were spiritually universal, common to all religions, and based on the universal divine imperative that just happens to also be the golden rule (as I discussed on the main page and the page titled Real Spiritual Values). Thus they were respectful of all faiths, and they were very much against the religious bigotry of certain "Christian" leaders in their day.

For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man."

Jefferson also wrote: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

I will show you more of what he said or wrote. I will also show you evidence proving that Jefferson’s views on that matter were shared by most of the founding fathers. And I show it to you because certain leaders of the so-called "Christian Right" in America have been and still are making false claims about the intent of the founding fathers, and they have misled many people in their spiritually blind flocks. In fact, they have succeeded in impacting the whole country to the extent that during the 2008 presidential election campaigns being a Christian became a litmus test for being a candidate for the presidency of the United States of America.

In 2008, every presidential candidate pandered to the imposing, right-wing theocratic preachers who claim to be Christian. John McCain claimed that "America is a Christian nation," parroting the leaders of the Christian Right. Even Barack Obama did what was politically expedient. He not only assured them he is not a Muslim, he even resorted to talking about the role his Christian faith played in his community work to "fulfill God’s will" and do "the Lord’s work."

That was in direct violation of the intent of the founding fathers, and I will quote the founding fathers to confirm to their true intent.

However, I will also discuss important political and economic issues in discussing little-known history, because Americans should not only be aware of the mind-set and intent of the founding fathers, they should also be aware of certain crucial pieces of their nation’s history that are very relevant right now.

Let me begin by saying that the founding fathers did their best to create and ensure freedom, equality and democracy. But the U.S. Government has its roots in European Empires, particularly the British Empire, and to a certain extent even the earlier Roman Empire, which is particularly evident in the U.S. legal system. And the U.S. economic system based on capitalism was carried over from Europe as well.

When it came to democratic political ideals, though, Jefferson's views appealed to most people, because even wealthy and powerful Americans wanted to be free of monarchy as they had known it under the King of England. But, not all of them felt the same way. In fact, Jefferson had sharp disagreements about economics and politics with Alexander Hamilton, a Federalist and the first Secretary of the Treasury, who had economic and fiscal goals to which Jefferson and Madison strongly objected. That is why Jefferson said that "banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies," and he warned of the danger of private banks and corporations getting too big and having too much power. He even warned that they could "deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless." Unfortunately, in the economic arena, Hamilton’s views prevailed over Jefferson's, and banks and corporations still thrived and grew.

Still, Jefferson prevailed over Hamilton in their presidential campaign against each other, mainly because many people saw Hamilton as a staunch conservative who tended to be self-righteously contentious. He even made an enemy of his more moderate fellow Federalist, John Adams, and Hamilton was killed in a duel with Jefferson’s Vice President, Aaron Burr.

Jefferson was highly critical of Hamilton and other hardline right-wing Federalists, because he felt they threatened democracy. Jefferson believed in truly representative government, and he equated Federalism with monarchial, aristocratic "Royalism." In fact, Jefferson stated that "Hamiltonians were panting after and itching for crowns, coronets and mitres." (A coronet is worn by royalty and aristocracy, and a mitre was worn by rich bishops and abbots of the theocratic church. And, by the way, Jefferson’s view was taken later in the 1930s and ‘40s by the great democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who saw the same kind of people as "Economic Royalists.")

Jefferson promoted true American democracy and fought for equal rights and freedoms for the common man. That’s why Jefferson and James Madison founded and led the Democratic-Republican Party and built a nationwide network of democratic allies to combat "Hamiltonian" Federalists across the country. (And, by the way, the Democratic-Republican Party later became the Democratic Party in the 1830s under Andrew Jackson, who unfortunately disowned some important Jeffersonian ideals, and the Federalist Party became the Republican Party in 1854.)

Still, the seed of Jeffersonian democracy was planted in America, and that’s why many people around the world consider Jefferson the greatest founding father and president. So, even though the European economic model was carried over and continued, and even though the seed of Jeffersonian Democracy did not sprout and grow but became dormant, America at least became somewhat more democratic in its leadership. And, while Jefferson played a key role in that, he was able to do so because most of the other founding fathers of the United States of America were also pluralistic and democratic in their political ideals, and promoted fairly representational government.

What many Americans are not aware of, however, is that most of the founding fathers were even more pluralistic and democratic in their views on religion. As I said, they did their best to ensure that there was a separation of church and state so that no religion or religious sect was favored or had dominant influence.

The writings of Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Paine and Franklin were particularly adamant about that. Their writings also show they were very wary and disapproving of religious superstition, bigotry, intolerance, hypocrisy, aggression, imposition, and persecution. They were very critical of certain right-wing Christian leaders in that regard.

In fact, Jefferson wrote: "The returning good sense of our country threatens the clergy and they believe that any portion of power confided to me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me, and enough too in their opinion, and this is the cause of their printing lying pamphlets against me. . ."

Jefferson incurred the wrath of self-important and self-righteous Christian preachers who were much like the leaders of the "Christian Right" today, because he did not hide his disdain for them. He dared to echo the feelings of many of his fellow educated men of faith, as when he wrote: "Whenever preachers, instead of a lesson in religion, put [their congregations] off with a discourse on the construction of government, or the characters or conduct of those administering it, it is a breach of contract."

Clearly, Jefferson felt that preachers should not use their pulpit as a partisan political soap box, especially when their personal beliefs and opinions were presented as divine truth. Jefferson stood up to their political grandstanding cloaked in religion, and he exposed their "tyrannical" aggression and imposition. And they hated him for it.

But, you should know that, like me, Jefferson was only against the "corruptions" of Christianity, and against the religious bigotry and hypocrisy of arrogant, self-important and self-righteous people who claimed to be Christian authorities. Like me, Jefferson loved the actual teachings of Jesus. In fact, Jefferson wrote that: "Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus."

Jefferson even compiled a reformed version of the gospels to rescue the philosophy of Jesus and the "pure principles which he taught," from the "corruptions and artificial vestments" which were established as "instruments of riches and power" for church patriarchs. Like me, Jefferson concluded that Jesus never claimed to be God, and he regarded much of the New Testament as corrupted with "palpable interpolations and falsifications." He separated ethical and true teachings from the religious doctrine and dogma and other fictional supernatural elements that were intermixed in the gospels between the mid-first century and the fourth century when the Christian Bible was compiled and edited. Jefferson called his book "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted Textually from the Gospels." He didn’t publish it, because he regarded religious beliefs as a private matter. But now people know it as The Jefferson Bible.

James Madison felt the same way Jefferson did about organized religious bigots. In 1875 Madison wrote: "What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not."

Madison also wrote: "Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by [Christian] Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."

Benjamin Franklin, a founding father and a genius, felt the same way. He became a Deist after educating himself and turning away from his puritanical Protestant Christian upbringing. He learned to appreciate Deism, which was popular among many educated men of faith at the time, because it is the belief in the existence of God on the evidence of reason and nature, with rejection of superstition. That is why presidents George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe were Deists, and their religious perspective was more close to that of today’s Unitarian Universalists than any other.

To give you an example of how Franklin felt, in an essay on "Toleration" he stated: "If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. [The Puritans] found it wrong in the Bishops [of the Church of England], but fell into the same practice themselves in New England [in America]."

Most of the founding fathers understood that the "New Testament" Christian Bible had been compromised and was not fully true to the actual teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

In 1820 Thomas Jefferson wrote: "Among the sayings and discourses imputed to Jesus by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being."

John Adams felt much the same way. In 1816 he wrote: "As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"

That shows how understanding, honest and realistic the founding fathers were, and they said such things because they had the best interests of the people at heart. They, and especially Jefferson, also understood why they had to stand up to the religious bigots and against their "tyranny," as I do now.

That's why Abraham Lincoln later said: "The principles of Jefferson are the axioms of a free society." And, by the way, later Lincoln also wrote: "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years..."

Unfortunately, with respect to religion, the founding fathers were not influential for very long. Their political influence was great, but their feelings about religion were forgotten or ignored after a short time, because certain Christian leaders and their sects were driven by the desire to rule, just as some are today.

I point out these historical facts to expose and refute the claims made by the bigoted and hypocritical leaders of today's "Christian Right" in America, who are also driven by the desire to rule. They falsely claim that the founding fathers did not want separation of church and state or religious pluralism. In fact, they falsely claim that the founding fathers instead wanted America to be "The Land of Jesus." But they are blatantly wrong. They mislead their blind flocks (and in that respect they are similar to misguided Jewish and Muslim extremist leaders.)

The truth is that most of the founding fathers were very rational, independent, free thinkers. In their writings, they referred to God in distinctly non-Christian terms, such as Nature's God or the God of Nature, the Creator, Merciful Providence, Universal Parent, and Divine Goodness. They did not use the typical or traditional Christian references to God as Almighty God, Lord, or Lord God. And, when they referred to the Christ Jesus, it was as a teacher and servant of God that he said he was.

Most of the founding fathers knew that God is not an idol, not a person, and they did not worship an idol because they understood divine intent reflected in all true religions. Furthermore, many of the founding fathers were interested in and influenced not only by the principles of Deism and Spiritualistic thought, but also and especially by Freemasonry, which is non-sectarian, pluralistic, respectful of all religions, and based on brotherly love, good will, and mutual assistance for the common good.

In fact, eight signers of the Declaration of Independence were Freemasons, including Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, and sixteen following presidents were also Freemasons. That is why the reverse side of the Great Seal of the United States (seen on the dollar bill) is Masonic in character and declares (in Latin) "A New Order of the Age begins."

This is important to understand, because while the roots of Freemasonry are ancient, Freemasons were among the first significant organizations to foster what are called "esoteric" spiritual teachings in the 1700s in Europe and then in America. They helped make Deism, Freemasonry and esoteric spiritual teachings accepted and popular. Mainstream Western philosophers of the 1700s followed that trend, and they also became fascinated with Eastern culture, religion, literature and philosophy (especially Hindu and Buddhist), and that fascination began to reach its peak toward the end of the 1700s. In fact, it is what impelled the founding fathers to seek freedom from King George and his theocratic Church of England.

During that time, Tibetan Buddhist texts, the Koran (or Qur'an), Sanskrit, Vedic (Hindu) and Chinese literature, and other Mid-Eastern and Eastern religious and spiritual philosophy became generally accessible and popular. That had a profound impact on the Western (European and American) cultural leaders by the middle of the 1800s, and it influenced such philosophers and writers as Schopenhauer, Emerson, Nietzsche, Baudelaire, James and Shelley, among others. A great respect for the esoteric teachings and Eastern religions grew, and their inclusive, universal spiritual approach was regarded as a refreshing and interesting alternative to the rigid, exclusive theocratic dogmatism of the "Fundamentalist Christian Right" of that time.

Pluralistic interests continued to become more widespread, so much so that in 1893 a Parliament of Religions was held in Chicago. It was a groundbreaking event and the first of its kind, and leaders from each of the great religions presented their views on life. This created even greater appreciation for Eastern religions, which were represented by notables such as Swami Vivekenanda, who spoke about Hinduism, and Soyen Shaku, a Zen-Buddhist abbot. Shortly after that, the first Buddhist society in the West was founded.

Of course, financial wealth still ruled in America, because the spiritual movement was based on humility and was non-materialistic, non-aggressive and pacifistic. They "rendered unto Caesar what is Caesar's," as Jesus advised. They didn't try to push their beliefs or impose on anyone, and they did not fight the "powers-that-be" because their beliefs were based on the spiritual knowledge that the meek shall ultimately inherit the earth and share and share alike, which is a universal belief held by all truly faithful, spiritual people, regardless of their religion.

You see, true servants of God understand why the original Christians wrote: "No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need." (Acts 4:32-35) And "all the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." (Acts 2:44-45) They understood why Jesus said, "If you would follow me, sell what you have and give to the poor." They were the true Christians, as distinguished from many pretenders and misguided zealots who claimed they were Christians.

Of course, today no one would take that literally (about selling all you have), including me, but the point is well taken. It's about caring about each other, caring for one another, and sharing so that no one is in need and no one goes without food and shelter. That's what a true Christian, like a true Jew or Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu, etc., is supposed to do. It's what we are ALL supposed to do.

Unfortunately, that part of Christianity had long since vanished from the political ideology of most wealthy and powerful European and American Christians. In fact, the opposite has been the case ever since the 4th Century when Christianity was "adopted" by the patriarchal materialistic Roman Military Empire. That is why aggressive and greedy wealthy people, who claimed to be Christians, were able to rule completely in Europe, and then in America. After all, post-fourth century Christianity and even post- Protestant Reformation Christianity established the "divine right" of kings and rich aristocrats in Europe, and that tradition carried over in America in spite of the efforts of the founding fathers to establish more equal rights and religious pluralism.

Unfortunately, the tradition of religious bigotry and domination was exemplified in the 1800s in America, particularly by political and religious leaders in the South, who embraced not only the tradition of "Christian" rule by force, but the tradition of racism and oppressive slavery. The American Civil War was in large part about the South’s demand to maintain that tradition, but they claimed they were merely fighting for "state’s rights." And after the so-called "Reconstruction" efforts following the war failed, Southern racists were allowed to adopt a new form of slavery, imposing and enforcing racial segregation and apartheid, denying African Americans voting rights and many other rights. Thus Southern "aristocracy" ruled, and their servants and virtual slaves still did all their work for them.

Of course, not all slave owners were bad people. Even before the Civil War there were a few slave holders who were essentially humanitarians and relatively good to their slaves, but held them because it was socially acceptable at the time as the cheapest way to establish and maintain large farms and plantations. Perhaps the most notable example of that was Thomas Jefferson, who treated his slaves well. In fact, Jefferson was a good example of a wealthy man who cared about all people.

As a U.S. President, Thomas Jefferson established policies respectful of slaves, and of native indigenous (American Indian) peoples. That was evident in 1804 when Jefferson commissioned Lewis and Clark on their Corps of Discovery to find a route to the West Coast, because he gave them specific instructions to respect the native peoples on the way. And they did.

In 1805 President Jefferson also established the first public schools, because prior to that, only the children of the very wealthy received education and learned to read and write. Jefferson had tried even before that, in Virginia, to establish public schools, because he knew democracy could flourish only with an educated citizenry. But, he wasn’t able to get people to act to begin building a public education system until he became president. That’s why I regard Jefferson as the greatest founding father, because of his pluralistic views on religion, democracy, and public education. And, even though he was like most wealthy men at the time in certain respects, especially in how he held and regarded private, personal property and status, he was a great man with a good heart and mind, and very liberal, progressive ideals and intentions.

Unfortunately, many wealthy Americans were not like Jefferson. Many of the wealthiest few were uncaring and selfish, and the power of their wealth was greatly expanded by the invention and use of trains in the late 1800s. It enhanced the capability of the wealthy few in America to increase their wealth, power and domain, utilizing the power of the gun and all that money could buy. Some of the owners or managers of the early railroad companies had little or no regard for farmers and "ordinary" people, and they were able to grab and even steal land "legally" under the doctrine of "Eminent Domain."

In the early 1900s the invention of motorized vehicles expanded the capabilities of the wealthy few even more. It enabled the wealthy few to rule even more totally, and, in certain cases, ruthlessly. After all, there were no labor unions to protect workers, and there was therefore practically no Middle Class. In fact, as the Industrial Revolution got underway, factory workers who tried to organize were brutally suppressed and even beaten by hired thugs. Garment workers in "sweat shops" were cruelly oppressed and treated as slave labor. The wealthy few dominated completely, particularly in more populated areas and cities where the industrial revolution was in full swing, and in effect everyone else worked to serve the wealthiest few people who ruled by using the power of their money. (And please note how that history has repeated itself during the last 28 years, which is why we are in the mess we’re in.)

Of course, not all wealthy people were bad then, just as not all wealthy people are bad now. In fact, some wealthy people are very deserving of their wealth and are very good people. But I must tell you the truth, and there is a very good reason why it is written that the love of money is the root of all evil. All too often it is true, and it has been especially true in recent decades and years.

Meanwhile, to get back to the story, good things were happening behind the scenes. For example, in 1925, Paramahansa Yogananda, the great spiritual teacher from India who wrote Autobiography of a Yogi, came to America and founded the Self-Realization Fellowship, a non-sectarian all-faith teaching organization. It gained considerable popularity in America (and it later flourished in the 1960s and is still growing and going strong today, teaching Hatha and Raja Yoga.) Additionally, the western esoteric spiritual tradition also found a following with new spiritual teaching schools, orders and movements in America, unobtrusively. And that was, as it still is, because true spiritual teachers do not try to recruit students, and they certainly do not try to push their beliefs on anyone. They merely accept students who seek and desire to learn the real truth.

But, that was behind the scenes, and meanwhile the wealthy ruled completely, and some ruled ruthlessly. They lived "high on the hog" in opulent, extravagant luxury. Their increasing excesses, along with the general corruption of the times, led to "The Roaring Twenties." Ironically, most of the average people who went with the flow did not suffer too much, because they were paid just enough to keep most of them somewhat content. However, it was a time when the wealthiest few lived like royalty, and some of them became very corrupt, just like many politicians and many organized crime leaders. In fact, it was when the term "filthy rich" was coined, because whether they were outlaws or operated within the laws, their wealth was essentially plundered, ill-gotten booty.

Much of that corruption was because the very wealthy were enabled by Republican Presidents Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, who were in office from 1921 to 1932. They mistakenly believed that banks, stock brokerage houses, big businesses, corporations and the stock market should NOT be regulated by government, but should be left to their own devices. And that is very important to understand, because they were much like the modern Republican Reaganites and Bushites, who have deceptively claimed that we must "get government off our backs" and pushed for "deregulation" and "free market economy." Again, history has repeated itself.

Then and now, right-wing Republicans have said such misleading things because their goals are to enable big business and corporations to operate with little or no restrictions or regulations. They really want the freedom and license to operate without regulation with regard to employee rights or protections, and without any regulation with regard to environmental protections, and they think they should just be trusted to do the right thing.

Republicans were very successful in achieving those goals in the 1920s (just as Republicans have had much success achieving them since 1980 under Reaganism, and even more since 2000 under Bushism). Consequently, in the 1920s the wealthy few had great license and free rein, so greed was unchecked, and that led to some terrible corruption, unfairness, and abuses of all the power that money could buy.

Unfortunately, American Industrialists were enabled to adopt a European colonialist mentality that justified taking natural resources from Africa, Asia and Central and South America in order to obtain agricultural produce and manufacture products and sell them at huge profits. Since they were unregulated and in control, they were able to ignore and avoid social justice and safety concerns in the U.S. and elsewhere. They provided just enough in paychecks to their employees to keep them somewhat content and thankful to have a job, and to keep the economy going. But, without proper regulation, the workers were demeaned and exploited, and some of the products they made and some of the processes they used involving dangerous chemicals were dangerous and harmful to people and the environment. And, ironically, today there is the same kind of exploitation here and in other countries, due to the policies and activities of multinational American industrial corporations enabled by Reaganites and Bushites.

Another example of the corruption, unfairness, and abuse of power that was enabled in the 1920s due to a lack of proper regulation was that a very wealthy few were able to totally control and manipulate the stock market. They didn’t learn from the stock market crisis of 1907, when some people were abusing the system and using it for gambling (as many have been doing again lately). In the 1920s they managed to get a whole lot of other people to invest their hard earned money too. It was sold as an easy way to make money for nothing. Consequently, many people bought shares of stocks, hoping to make a profit. However, while many people did reap some rewards along with some losses, the very wealthy few made huge profits. They would buy stocks that were low and then spark interest in the stocks, start a buying spree, and then sell as soon as the stock price rose sufficiently. Thus they made huge windfall profits while leaving all the other investors with losses, and they got richer and richer and lived more and more palatially, in fantastic luxury. Many of them even had many live-in servants, gardeners, grounds-keepers and chauffeurs. They were the American aristocracy, and "class" distinctions were very sharp and pretty much like they were in Europe.

At the same time, by the way, Prohibition of alcohol in America was enforced, which created a myriad of problems. It had officially begun just prior to 1920, and organized criminals quickly rose up to establish a reliable supply of alcohol to anyone who wanted it. There was much blood shed during the next twelve years because of the battles between law enforcement and organized crime, and criminal mob bosses became very rich, just like the wealthiest few who became rich "legally."

Then, inevitably and consequently, all the greed, corruption, materialistic excesses, and the growing widespread desire to make a "quick buck" and a financial "killing," led to some inevitable bad consequences. For one thing, it led to the stock market crash of 1929, when in three days the New York Stock Exchange erased over 5 billion dollars worth of share values, and before long 16 billion dollars of stock capitalization were erased. And in those days, those numbers represented far greater monetary value than they do today. And to make matters worse, banks that had invested their deposits in the stock market lost them. Bank customers tried to withdraw their money, but $140 billion of depositor money disappeared and 10,000 banks failed.

The stock market crash was beneficial for some who saw it coming and cashed in, but it was disastrous for most Americans and for the whole economy. It caused the Great Depression, which lasted from October 1929 to the mid 1930s. It plunged many people into poverty. Many workers lost their jobs and were forced to live in shacks in shanty towns (makeshift slums). They had to depend on charitable soup lines and bread lines to get anything to eat. In fact, thirty percent of Americans were reduced to conditions of poverty, hunger and homelessness. And again, that history has repeated itself.

In 1932 Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt offered a New Deal that gradually helped average people and the great majority. He was a great leader who, in spite of being a victim of Polio and mostly confined to a wheelchair, unified the American people, led them out of the horrible depression, and to victory over the German Nazi and Japanese tyrants who threatened to conquer and rule the world by force of arms. He also led the average man to far greater prosperity than ever before.

During Roosevelt's first term many reforms of the economic system were established, and some much needed regulations were put in place. Moreover, many New Deal programs such as Social Security and the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) helped tremendously. For while President Roosevelt is now best known as the president who won the Second World War, it was the domestic programs he established before the war that helped most and saved millions of Americans from poverty. The CCC, for instance, put more than a million people to work and produced many wonderful and immensely useful public works projects that are still used and enjoyed by the public even today. It was a marvelous and worthy investment in people, in the infrastructure, in the country, and in the land.

Roosevelt's and other New Deal Democrats' efforts were boosted because, at the same time, a grass roots political protest-liberation movement had begun, led by great and courageous people like Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Joe Hill, Paul Robeson, Josh White, Dorothea Lange, Eleanor Roosevelt, and many others who were instrumental in the progressive political liberation movement. They tried to expose the corruption of the greediest, wealthiest, powerful few, and they especially tried to point out the plight of the poor and the working poor. And, together with the moral support of those in the spiritual movement, they produced a lot of progress.

Unfortunately, in the mid-1930s, in reaction to the success of the good liberal progressives, there was a revival of right-wing political activism, driven by right-wing conservative, materialistic, dogmatic Christian sects. They sought to establish more firm "Christian" control in the United States, and they founded a so-called "Legion of Decency" designed to do that. It consisted of right-wing conservative Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists, conservative Catholics, and others --- pretty much the same denominations, sects and factions that even today make up the "Christian Right" and what they call a "Moral Majority" or "Christian Coalition." They think they are the true Christians, but they ironically act in opposition to true Christians, because true Christians actually care for and/or advocate for the majority, and especially the poor and the least of our brethren.

The right-wing conservative "Christian Revival" started by the Christian Right in the 1930s continued sporadically throughout the 1940s and 1950s, but it had a significant impact. That's why the television programs of the 1950s were so superficial and unrealistically "perfect." Rigid censorship was imposed on the broadcast and entertainment industry by a very powerful minority conservative clergy.

The trouble is, rigid censorship always proves to be counterproductive, because it produces repression. And that produces unnecessary guilt, rebellion, and other negative consequences. We are, after all, human, and, if we are conscientious, we learn from our mistakes. But, in spite of that, and because of what was politically and socially "correct" at the time, strict conformity was the general rule.

However, there were many who rejected it and rebelled. In fact, that's when the Bohemians and "Beatniks" (the forerunners of the "Hippies") became influential with their liberation poetry and songs, and it is when many young people simply ignored authority when no one was looking. After all, when authorities are overly and unnecessarily prohibitive and restrictive, young people are especially rebellious. That’s because distrustful and rigidly strict church and state authorities, just like distrustful and rigidly strict parents, tend to do things that are counterproductive, because most people, and especially young people, resent and resist being rigidly controlled.

Ironically, though, in the 1950s America was, for the most part, united. That was mainly because the Second World War (1941-1945) helped to bring the American people together very noticeably. And, because of that unifying event, along with the efforts of New Deal Democrats and all those in the political liberation movement and the pluralistic spiritual movement, many things improved. The most notable example was that by the late 1950s Labor Unions had grown significantly. Because of some good regulations and worker’s rights, the American Middle Class had become very large and great, and the minimum wage was actually close to a living wage, not poverty wage, as it had been and is again today because of the deceptive but highly successful Reaganite/Bushite war on labor unions and disregard of the working poor.

However, most of the improvements were made in spite of the efforts in the 1950s by some very unscrupulous and maliciously ruthless right-wing partisan conservative Republican politicians who rose up, led by Republican Senators Joseph McCarthy and Richard Nixon. They labeled and condemned all the progressive people on the left and in the political liberation movement as "Communists," just because they advocated for the majority and especially for the working poor. It was called "red-baiting," and McCarthy, Nixon and their right-wing cohorts did it with terrible malice. They demonized those in the liberation movement in a terribly unfair, slanderous, deceptive, misleading way, and they were successful. They ruined the lives of many good people in the liberation movement, many of whom were in the entertainment industry and other influential professions, who were "black listed," ostracized and punished in many different ways.

By the time we entered the 1960s, those dishonest and deceptive right-wing conservative tactics had produced their desired affect. Laws and policies reduced regulations and enabled the very wealthy few to enjoy even more privilege and license. Consequently, many of them had fallen into temptation and let the power of their wealth corrupt them.

Then, ironically, it was Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was a four-star Army General during World War II, who recognized what was happening and spoke up. In his farewell address in 1961, he warned America about the dangers of allowing the "Military-Industrial Complex" to have too much power and get out of hand. It was very appropriate and needed advice, but, unfortunately, most Americans did not listen and the problem continued to increase.

However, some aware and conscientious people did understand why Eisenhower issued that warning. In fact, in response to all the political and corporate corruption, and in response to the prudish "religious" repression that had been caused by the right-wing conservative clergy in the 1930s, '40s and '50s, the protest-liberation movement was reborn in the early 1960s.

Indeed, the protest-liberation movement was not only reborn, it was greatly expanded by many different folk singers, rock bands, entertainers, political activists and spiritual leaders, including Joan Baez; Bob Dylan; Pete Seeger; Peter, Paul and Mary; Gloria Steinham; Martin Luther King Jr.; Baba Ram Dass; Stephen Gaskin; the great rock band Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young; Richie Havens, and many others far too numerous to mention here.

In fact, huge numbers of people joined the liberation movement, part of which was known as the political New Left. But the overall movement was better known as the love, peace and freedom movement, and they were and still are good, fair, compassionate, conscientious people. They tried, and most of them still try, to point out true spiritual values having to do with love, peace, freedom and equality, that are really at the core of all religions.

People in the movement warned about the growing income disparity and gap between the rich and the poor, because once again the rich were getting much richer while the working poor and the poor were becoming much poorer. In 1962, Michael Harrington’s book, The Other America, pointed out that at least 20 percent of the American population were living below the poverty line and had missed out on the prosperity of the 1950s. Such research and facts gave the movement knowledgeable authority in speaking out on the behalf of the working poor and the poor, even though they met very strong and well-financed resistance from right-wing conservatives like Nixon and Reagan.

Another book was published in 1962 that was very important and influential. It was Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson. But, as Al Gore has noted, Carson’s book met with considerable resistance from those big businesses and corporations who were profiting from being the sources of pollution. Major chemical companies tried to contradict the facts in the book and made false claims to the contrary. Carson was even accused of being "hysterical and extremist." People like Al Gore understood such misguided criticism, because when he was a young member of the U.S. Senate, he was labeled as "Ozone Man" in disparaging remarks made by George H. W. Bush (George W. Bush’s father). Nevertheless, Silent Spring helped originate the conservation and environmental movement in the 1960s, and many environmental protections began to be established.

The best thing, though, in my view, was that in the 1960s the idea that there is a unity at the core of all religions emerged once again. The basics of the esoteric spiritual teachings, along with an influx of Eastern religious teachings, created the "New Age" movement that blossomed in the United States in the 1960s. That's when "The Dawning of the Age of Aquarius" was widely announced in the great classic musical, Hair, which was great and wonderful, even though it was premature in announcing the beginning of the new age.

The huge peace-freedom-liberation movement in the 1960s was extremely effective politically and socially. However, it must be said that most of the "hippies" and "flower children" of the 1960s were non-political. Most of them were involved in a "back to the earth" and "back to nature" movement. That's when the interest in natural foods, ecology, environmental protection and conservation really began to flourish. In fact, it was when the "Green" movement really began in America (even though it later suffered severe setbacks under presidents Reagan and Bush Jr.).

Unfortunately, what got more of the media's attention in the 1960s was the political part of the protest and liberation movement. As I said, it was called the New Left, and it was very influential because it was very motivated. After all, they were seriously trying to save the world and establish peace, freedom, and social and economic justice and equity.

Granted, there was some foolishness demonstrated by relatively small radical elements of the New Left, because they responded in-kind to the violent right-wing suppression of dissent and protest. But, in spite of that, most of those in the political New Left were more rational and they succeeded significantly. Their influence ultimately produced many welcome reforms in environmental protection and criminal justice, and established more civil rights, more women's rights, and many other rights and protections for the majority of people and the environment.

Now, of course, part of the success of the New Left was due to the presidency of Democrat John F. Kennedy, a great charismatic man whose inclinations were truly democratic. He had become president in 1961, and he helped to inspire the younger generation with great hope and courage. His Peace Corps was and still is great, and it has done and still does a lot of good in the world. He was also instrumental in getting the minimum wage increased, and he issued an executive order to provide surplus food to unemployed Americans.

At the same time, however, there were very strong right-wing conservative Republicans vying for power. In fact, the dissenting protests of the New Left provoked vehement and violent reaction from the Right. The earliest and most notable example of that was in the early 1960s, instigated by Ronald Reagan, who was at that time the newly elected Republican Governor of California. He reacted with intolerance and brutal violence against the student Free Speech Movement in Berkeley at the University of California, where the political New Left movement was born. Reagan was vehemently against it, and he falsely claimed it was led by "outside agitators, communists, and dirty bums who simply wanted to tear down society." He also said that if it took a "bloodbath," he would stop them. And sure enough, Reagan did create a bloodbath, because he used terribly brutal armed forces to try to suppress valid and needed dissent and protest.

In doing that, Republican Governor Ronald Reagan set the tone for the violent right-wing reactionary confrontations that swept across America in the 1960s -- first in reaction to the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley, and then eventually in reaction to the civil rights and anti-war demonstrations and marches all across the country. Militant right-wing leaders used tremendous violent force to suppress protest and dissent in America.

The corrupt few were so corrupt that they resorted not only to violent suppression of dissent and protest. They, like today’s Republicans, resorted to slander, and accused those who dared to criticize and protest of being unpatriotic.

Unfortunately, in the 1960s, power-hungry right-wing zealots even resorted to murder and assassination. The first notable one was President Kennedy, who was tragically assassinated in November 1963. That caused horrified disappointment and frustration in those who were trying to reform our political-economic system, but it soon made them stronger and more determined. Unfortunately, that created an even stronger right-wing reaction against them. Conflict and violence increased, and it caused a tremendous amount of grief, despair and suffering. When it peaked during the brutal police riots against anti-war demonstrators in Chicago during the 1968 Democratic National Convention, it left the country deeply divided and terribly polarized.

That was a very crucial time, because when the nation was deeply split and polarized, the balance of political power began to sway slightly to the right again. That happened for several reasons. Two more heroes of the democratic New Left, Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, were also assassinated. Democrats then became split. Progressive liberals were led by Eugene McCarthy, who went into the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago as the clear frontrunner, having won most of the presidential primary elections. Unfortunately, the democratic party bosses favored and nominated the relatively conservative and traditional Hubert Humphrey, even though he had not campaigned in the primary elections. That was why so many progressive and liberal anti-war democrats demonstrated in the streets of Chicago, and that was why the corrupt Mayor of Chicago at the time ordered his police forces to crack down and crack heads, which caused the bloody police riots at the time.

Consequently, with Democrats divided and with their candidate not really representing the majority of them, right-wing conservative Republican Richard Nixon was able to become president in 1969. And he was able to do so not only because democrats were divided, but also because he sold the misleading notion that the whole New Left was just a radical misguided minority and that he represented the "Silent Majority." It was not true, because by that time the actual majority of Americans identified more with the peace and freedom movement, and even somewhat with the values of the "Woodstock Generation," because most of them were really loving and caring. However, many Americans were so disgusted with partisan politics and conflict by that time that they did not even vote, and Nixon swayed just enough people who did vote to get elected.

With Republican President Nixon in power, the Military-Industrial Complex became even stronger and more out of hand. He expanded U.S. involvement in the Viet Nam War, which was very profitable for certain U.S. corporations and military contractors who supported Nixon. After all, there was a tremendous amount of military hardware needed and used there during all the war years.

Even so, the peace and freedom movement of the 1960s and ‘70s eventually succeeded in being the conscience of America. And it succeeded in many respects because it was essentially the same spiritual-philosophical movement that had become popular in both Europe and America in the 1700s and 1800s. It had not only survived, it flourished again and successfully advocated the ideals of universal love, peace, freedom, equality, compassion, tolerance, and religious pluralism. It recognized that all spiritual teachings and all religions have, at their foundation and core, the same eternal, universal values and principles. And, behind the scenes, the popularity of the movement continued and grew in the 1960s and through the 1970s, and even though it didn't receive the media attention that the political protest movement did, it was very influential socially.

Indeed, it was so influential that in 1979, a very deceptive and cunning right-wing conservative backlash began. Its most well known kingpins were presidential candidate Ronald Reagan and "Christian conservatives" like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. It was very similar to what had occurred in the 1930s and history repeated itself, because all right-wing, patriarchal theocrats hate real religious freedom and pluralism, and they seem to think that religious freedom means they have the right to try to impose their brand of religion and ideology on the whole country and world. They always have, and they have always falsely claimed that God is on their side.

Reagan was just what right-wing conservatives and the U.S. Military-Industrial Establishment needed, because he had become a proficient pitchman for corporate interests on commercial television. Moreover, he actually believed in much of what he said, and he made nationalistic flag waving, bible thumping and sword rattling seem "right" to many Americans. He was also supported in his bid for the presidency by other like-minded right-wing conservative political leaders and ideologues, and especially by very wealthy corporate executives and attorneys. Together they created the Reaganite New Right and the early "Neo-Conservative" Movement, which has, for the most part, operated ever since then under the guise of patriotism and "religious Christian values," even though its values are far from being Christian, and not good for the country or the world.

The New Right Reaganite Republicans steadily and increasingly chipped away at Roosevelt's democratic New Deal programs, and claimed they were doing so in the name of God and Country. The truth, however, is that Roosevelt’s programs are actually based on Christian values because they are compassionate and charitable and care about and for the poor and the least of our brethren. In spite of that fact, the Nixonites, Reaganites and Bushites have tried to do away with and reverse all the rights and protections that had improved the lives of the American people and the environment during the 1930s, ‘40s, '50s, and '60s. That is why the rich have steadily gotten so much richer, at the expense of the majority, the working poor, the poor, the infrastructure, and the environment.

When Ronald Reagan gained the power of the presidency in 1981, he appointed people to the Civil Rights Commission, the Justice Department, the Department of Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency who reversed much of the progress that had been made. They started huge setbacks and terrible trends. They simply ignored the facts put forth by scientists, environmentalists and advocates of the poor. They pushed for "deregulation" to benefit big business and corporations, claiming it was to "get big government off our backs," all of which was very misleading and deceptive.

Reaganites claimed that none of their industrial technology harms the environment, and they also claimed that "we cannot afford a welfare state" and that government was "too big." But all that was not merely misleading and deceptive. It was blatantly dishonest. They like big government when it suits their purposes. The truth is that they and their wealthy supporters simply do not want to be regulated or pay their fair share of taxes, or pay for correcting what they have done that was and is wrong and harmful. That is why Reagan insisted that tax cuts for the rich are absolutely necessary and good for the country, just as Bush did after he gained power in 2000. And the Reaganites and Bushites have done so even though all their tax cuts mainly benefitted the wealthy and actually and inevitably plunged the country into debt and proved disastrous in many ways.

Anyway, with the rise of Reagan to the U.S. presidency in 1981, the Military-Industrial Complex grew even more, and it took on a new aspect. With the influence of so-called "Christian evangelists" like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, it then gradually became the Religious-Military-Industrial Complex, and it established a culture I call Reaganism. It claims to serve all the people in the name of God and Country, but it actually serves the wealthiest few and what Jesus called "Mammon" (material wealth and power). It is designed very cunningly to create the appearance that it is beneficent and good, even though it has actually enabled the very wealthy to get much more wealthy, while worsening conditions for most people in the country and world.

Unfortunately, because Ronald Reagan was a very good television pitch man, and because he appealed to those who thump their bible, wave their flag and rattle their sword, the Religious-Military-Industrial Complex grew under Reaganism, and it got even more out of control.

Part of the reason for that was because in 1982 a large group of right-wing extremist ideologues who were attorneys and judges established a so-called "Federalist Society." It was designed to impose right-wing partisan political ideology into the U.S. legal system in order to establish even more firm control by the wealthiest few. And, on the "religious" front, a secret right-wing "Super Christian" group called "The Family" began to ensure that the U.S. Religious Military Industrial Complex served the interests of what they call "The Army of God." (And that, by the way, is why a good number of members of the Federalist Society and members of The Family later became part of George W. Bush's administration in 2001.)

Unfortunately, the Reaganite/Bushite Neo-Conservative movement, which flies the banners of religiosity and patriotism, succeeded in America. Their misleading, deceptive and hypocritical words and actions have achieved many of their political goals during the last 28 years. They have been instrumental in electing right-wing conservative ideologues in many political offices, from local school boards to state legislatures to the U.S. Congress to the presidency.

However, in spite of all their political successes, the Christian Right has been far less successful socially, and right-wing politicians have had to be content with the manipulation and control of the political-economic system. That is why the Christian Right has been so politically active, because their goal is to politically and legally force all of us to be subject to their will. They can't be honest about that, of course, which is why they have been so adamant in claiming that their political action is simply an effort to "restore God to America" and "fulfill the intent and desire of the founding fathers." But, in fact, they have done neither. They have merely created conflict and division, fighting to win power and control in the name of patriotism and religion, and they have resorted to dishonest, deceptive and misleading tactics in that attempt.

Unfortunately, they’ve been successful enough that today there are lot of Americans who think that you are a "True American" only if you proudly proclaim yourself to be a Christian, agree with Neo-Conservative Republican ideas, insist that every person in American should speak only English, and look down upon those who cannot speak English well yet. They do not realize they have swallowed right-wing conservative propaganda that is extremely bigoted, intolerant and hypocritical, nor do they realize that their religious bigotry is in violation of the intent of the founding fathers.

They ignore the fact that all white Americans are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants, and the only truly native Americans are Native American "Indians" (and that includes Native Central Americans like the Yaquis, Mayans and Aztecs). Furthermore, representative democratic government can work properly only if and when all the people are fully free, fully educated, and have fully equal rights and opportunities.

The fact is that today's leaders of the "Christian Right" and their right-wing Republican cohorts are NOT doing what America's founding fathers would have wanted. In fact, under the reign of George W. Bush, the Religious-Military-Industrial Complex grew totally out of control. Huge corporations (especially military contractors, oil companies, banks, predatory lenders, credit card companies, health insurance companies, HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, and monopolistic food production companies) have been raking in record profits and indulging in terribly unfair price gouging, "ripping off" the public and rewarding their corporate executives absurdly excessive financial incomes. Even worse, they’ve enabled Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) to rake in even more absurdly excessive financial "compensation" amounting to many tens of millions of dollars per year.

Reaganites and Bushites, as well as certain "sold out" Democrats, have enabled the CEOs of very large American corporations to do what they’ve done during the last 28 years. They have even used slander and all the shady influence that money can buy, not only to silence "whistle blowers" who feel the public should know the truth, but also to use the power of television in paid commercial advertisements to spread misleading and even deceptive propaganda to make their corporations seem good and beneficial to us all, and even good for the environment.

Unfortunately, rather than abide by real and true spiritual values, the Reaganites and Bushites focused instead on the Hamiltonian "royalist" view, along with the erroneous man-made patriarchal doctrine of preeminence and superiority that has been used over the last sixteen centuries to serve the wealthy few and justify miltary-industrial imperialism, colonialism and even genocide, all in the name of serving God and Country.

Remember, it was liberal progressives on the left who won independence in the American Revolution of 1776 against the right-wing military imperial rule of the King of England. And even today, right-wing "royalist" ideologues have no choice but to be dishonest and deceptive, pretending that they serve all the people and appealing to the "conservative" group ego and to emotions, prejudices, nationalism and religious bigotry, which is why they "get tough," wave their flag, thump their bible, and rattle their sword to stir up support.

In the last 28 years they had a lot of political success doing that. That is why the U.S. Government under the Reaganites and Bushites epitomized the divided "Babylon," which is falling and will eventually be replaced by a true democracy, with government that is actually of, by, and for ALL the people.