America---The Modern Romans
Part
I.
Introduction
The
Roman Empire was in the habit of making allies of their enemies toward the end
of their Empire, until eventually their “allies” turned on them and conquered
them. During World War II The United States went through a war-time re-armament and
re-industrialization process unseen in modern history, and essentially became
an empire, reaching superpower status by 1950. But the United States, starting from the end of World War II and onward
throughout the Cold War, emulated the Roman Empire, in turning their two
primary enemies during World War II, Japan and Germany, into allies. Also while
doing this, United States foolishly turned one of their most significant allies
into an enemy, the one military ally they had that was the principle driving
force for the defeat of Nazi Germany, and this was the Soviet Union. Under their new American President, Harry S.
Truman, the United States achieved superpower status as a thermo-nuclear
military force in the world. But Harry
S. Truman foolishly used this growing nuclear arsenal to belligerently threaten
the battered, shattered and just recovering Soviet Union, and thus initiating a
45 year long Cold War and nuclear arms race with the Russians. The Cold War would flair up into two hot
wars, Korea and Vietnam, costing almost 100,000 American lives and millions of
Korean and Vietnamese lives. Also as a
nuclear superpower, this modern ‘Roman’ empire of America, through the C.I.A.
and covert military operations, supported, fostered and forced Nazi-type
right-wing governments on most of the Central and South American countries from
the end of World War II onward through the 1990s, and this, just so these poor
helpless nations would remain friendly to American big business, using ‘the threat of communism’ as a flimsy
excuse for this crime against humanity. In the late 400s AD Rome’s enemies-turned-allies turned on them and
conquered the Roman Empire. Is the
United States traveling down the same road? Will the enemies we’ve created and even our enemies-turned-allies defeat
us in some future economic and military confrontation? Let’s look at some history and see, history
that has been ignored for far, far too long. “The problem after a war is with the victor, he thinks he has proven
that war and violence pay. Who will now
teach him a lesson?” (A.J. Muste, 1941)
CHAPTER 1
“On The Eastern Front”
(or “Our Empire, Built On
Whose Shoulders?”)
While
the United States was ramping up their industrial machine to full-tilt
arms-manufacturing at the beginning of World War II, who was taking up the
slack in Europe against Hitler’s Nazi Germany? England had just held out gloriously in the defense of their island
homeland during the Battle of Britain, but beyond that, wasn’t doing much
initially. Then right after the Battle
of Britain, in June of 1941 Hitler invaded the Soviet Union. So the full brunt of Hitler’s military might
came upon the Soviet Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians, 300 crack German
divisions stretching out along a 2,000 mile long front blasting their way into
the Soviet Union, conquering up to 200 miles a day. The Soviet Union then, over the next one and
a half years, blunted those 300 crack German divisions to a standstill,
ultimately turning back the tide of the Nazi invasion at Stalingrad in an
incredible 162-day-long battle. It was
the Soviet Union, through the shed blood, sweat and tears of 5 million soldiers
and 10 million civilian (partisans) slain in battle, which bought the Western
Allies of Britain and America the time they needed to gear up for this war and
get on their feet militarily. Let’s take
a hard look at the facts “on the eastern front,” for we’d all be speaking
German if it hadn’t been for this immense Soviet-Russian sacrifice. Essentially “our future American empire” was
built on the shoulders of the military sacrifices and success of the Soviet
Union, while in all honesty we played a supernumery part, under the foundation
of the Red Army’s hard-won successes. That may be a tough truth-pill for Americans to swallow, but it’s the
unvarnished historical truth that serious historians have come to realize.
First
let’s look at a misconception we’ve been fed in anti-Soviet propagandized
history books. We’ve been taught that
Stalin and thus the Soviet Union was initially
friendly to Hitler and Nazi Germany. For
one, Stalin had contributed troops and arms to Spain to fight against the
fascist Franco regime during the 1930s. Stalin was no fool, he knew what was coming. He had already run the proposal by England
and France to form a military alliance, but they had both refused him. So, to protect the Soviet Union (which had a
history of being attacked by Germany, going back to the Teutonic Knights (see Alexander Nevsky), he was forced to
“make a non-aggression pact with the Devil.” This was the infamous Rapolo Treaty signed with von Ribbentrop. We get this from Nikita Sergeyvich
Khrushchev’s memoirs “KHRUSHCHEV
REMEMBERS”, p. 128, par. 2-3, p. 129, par. 2-3, p. 130, par. 1, “The English and French representatives who
came to Moscow to talk with Voroshilov [about forming a military alliance]
didn’t really want to join forces with us against Germany at all. Our discussions with them were
fruitless. We knew that they weren’t
serious about an alliance with us and that their real goal was to incite Hitler
against us. We were just as glad to see
them leave. That’s how the
Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, as it was called in the West, came into being. We knew perfectly well that Hitler was trying
to trick us with the treaty. I heard
with my own ears how Stalin said “Of course it’s all a game to see who can fool
whom. I know what Hitler’s up to. He thinks he’s outsmarted me, but actually
it’s I who have tricked him! Stalin told Voroshilov, Beria, myself, and some other members of the Politburo that because
of this treaty the war would pass us by for a while longer. We would be able to stay neutral and save our
strength…I believe that the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact of 1939 was historically
inevitable, given the circumstances of the time, and that in the final analysis
it was profitable for the Soviet Union. It was like a gambit in chess: if
we hadn’t made that move, the war should have started earlier, much to our
disadvantage. As it was, we were given a
respite. I think the vast majority of
the Party considered the signing of the treaty tactically wise on our part,
even though nobody could say so publicly…It
was very hard for us---as Communists, as antifascists, as people unalterably
opposed to the philosophical and political position of the fascists---to accept
the idea of joining forces with Germany. It was difficult enough for us to accept this paradox ourselves…For
their part, the Germans too were trying as a maneuver to win time. Their idea was to divide and conquer the
nations which had united against Germany in World War I and which might unite
against Germany again. Hitler wanted to deal with his adversaries one at a time. He was convinced that
Germany had been defeated in World War I because she had tried to fight on two
fronts at once. The treaty he signed
with us was his way of trying to limit the coming war to one front. All
the while the English and French and the whole bourgeois press were trying to
sic Hitler on the Soviet Union, trumpeting “Russia is nothing but a colossus
with feet of clay!” England and
France would have loved to have stood by and watched Germany and the Soviet
Union go at each other and finish each other off. The English and French rubbed their hands
in delight at the idea of lying low while Hitler’s rampage took its toll on our
blood, our territory, and our wealth.” [emphasis mine] We’ll see this exact same attitude being trumpeted in a speech
by Senator Harry S. Truman on the U.S. Senate floor in 1941. The
time Stalin bought the Soviet Union was from August 1939 to June 21st,
1941, almost two years to prepare for the Nazi-German onslaught. Two weeks later Hitler initiated World War II
by invading Poland, taking half of Poland, leaving the other half to the
Russians. This was September of
1939. Early in the Spring of 1940 Hitler initiated the Battle of Britain, attempting to gain air
superiority over English soil, preparatory to an invasion of England. The British R.A.F. held their own in a stunning
and heroic air battle, successfully fighting off the Luftwaffe and driving them
out of British air space. From that
spring, summer and fall of 1940 the German Luftwaffe was never able to gain
mastery over English soil and air space. Nine months later, in June of 1941, 300 crack German divisions (3
million soldiers), stretching out along a 2,000 mile front from the Arctic to
the Black Sea, were conquering up to 200 miles a day across Soviet-Russian
soil. The Germans burned and razed to
the ground approximately 200 cities and 9,000 villages, with their ‘Death-squads’ following behind the
regular German Waffen SS army, killing men, women and children as they
went. Against all odds, and with
initially very little help coming from their new allies (who had finally
decided to make an alliance with Stalin and the Soviet Union), the Soviet Red
Army prevailed. Falling back repeatedly,
until the German army approached Moscow, Stalin learned from a very heroic
Soviet spy in Tokyo, Richard Sorge, that Japan was
going to conquer southeast into the oil rich Dutch East Indies instead of
conquering up past Manchuria into Siberia. Stalin could now free up General Georgi Zhukov’s 40 Siberian Divisions
to come rescue Moscow. Zhukov, coming on
with a vengeance, turned the tide of battle. German losses that winter of 1941 alone amounted to about 400,000. According to war reporter Leland Stowe in his
book “They Shall Not Sleep” (published 1944) ‘In the first two years
of war against the Germans 5 million Soviet soldiers and 10 million Russian
civilians would die, stopping 200 crack German divisions cold in their tracks,
culminating in the heroic Battle of Stalingrad, and then would start to push
the Germans back toward Germany.’ [read “They Shall Not
Sleep” by Leland Stowe, 1944, available as a used book at amazon.com. Watch also “Enemy At The Gates” about Vasily Zeitzev
and Tonya Ternova, two crack Russian snipers in the midst of the Battle of
Stalingrad, gives you a good audio-visual of the action.]
In September of
1941 Stalin
had pleaded in vain with the British to send 25 to 30 divisions to the
Motherland. He also once again pressed
Roosevelt to open up a 2nd Front against the Nazi forces in Western
Europe. (I dare say, he had better luck with Roosevelt than Churchill.) Roosevelt announced publicly in May of 1942
that he would open up this 2nd Front, and told General Marshal to
order General Eisenhower to draw up plans for the invasion of Europe, to be
implemented no later than the spring of 1943. Stalin, understandably, was elated, but
Winston Churchill balked at such an invasion, supposedly fearing a
bloodbath. Churchill somehow talked
Roosevelt into having Eisenhower and Patton invade North Africa (both Generals
Marshal and Eisenhower thought this was a waste of time), instead of going for
the German jugular. Churchill, an
“empire man,” was more concerned with keeping British sea-lanes open to their
eastern and far eastern empire than relieving Soviet suffering and bringing a
speedier end to Nazi Germany. The
Italian Campaign up through Italy was a slow, costly and bloody series of
battles against well-entrenched German forces. Marshall and Eisenhower both thought it was a waste of time and
lives. So the 2nd Front
against French shores was ultimately delayed by one and a half years. Leland Stowe, a U.S. war reporter assigned to
the Eastern Front on the Russian side of the lines, was constantly being asked
by the desperate Russians, from peasant-partisan men and women, young children
to old women, and by generals alike “When will the United States start a 2nd Front in France against Germany?” This was not just a plea coming from Stalin, but from the entire Soviet
Russian populace as well, as attested to by Leland Stowe in his book. He didn’t know how to answer them, and it
made him feel real uneasy, as he could see and witness daily their
single-handed struggle and slow but steady victory over the Nazi war machine,
accomplished with almost no Allied assistance except a trickle of planes,
jeeps, trucks and some canned food. His
constant implication throughout his account of the Russian Front was that had
it not been for this heroic sacrifice on the part of the Soviet Russians, we in
the United States would be speaking German. In Leningrad the Russians lost 1 million citizen-soldiers during the
siege, and Leningrad was never taken.
But
Stalin was not waiting around for or relying on Allied promises, and proceeded
to move the entire Soviet war industry---all of it---across the Urals,
creating over 2,000 new factories, where an entire workforce made up mostly of
women and children worked 12 to 18 hour days. Within two years, by 1943, the Soviet Union was out-producing all other
nations on the European side of the Atlantic, including Germany. Leland Stowe said within the first one and a
half years of war, from June 1941 to the beginning of 1943, 10 million Russian
civilians, partisans included, and 5 million regular soldiers had died fighting
the Germans to a standstill. Other
estimates after the war were 4 to 8 million Ukrainian Soviets, 2 to 2.5
Belorussian Soviets, with 200 cities and 9,000 villages burned to the ground,
not to mention the Soviet Russian losses, the final tally for the war coming to
27 million dead for the whole Soviet Union in defeating Nazi Germany.
“Stalingrad”
In
spite of huge losses, the Red Army and Soviet civilian partisans could not be
defeated. One option lay open to the
German army, to capture the Soviet oil fields at Baku, southeast of Stalingrad. Stalingrad lay right
smack in the way. Get the oil fields at
Baku and Stalin’s Red Army would grind to a halt without the needed gasoline,
diesel fuel, oil, and bunker fuel an army, air force and navy run on. So the German 6th Army under General
Friedrich von Paulus drove south toward the oil rich area of Baku. The Red Army under Marshal Zhukov had to stop
the Germans at all costs. The loss of
Baku would force the Soviet surrender. Stalingrad was the one city which geographically stood right in the way
of Baku. In the winter of 1942, as the
United States was in the beginning stages of ramping up war-production, the
German army met its match. In what could
be the single greatest battle in World War II, the Soviets lost more men (and women)
than the British or Americans did during the entire war, losing an estimated
500,000 (half million) killed. Considering General Paulus’ reinforced 6th Army came at
Stalingrad with 30 divisions (300,000 men), the Luftwaffe and thousands of
tanks, the 6th German Army lost 200,000 of their best troops. At the time of General
Paulus’ surrender in January 1943, only 91,000 were left alive to surrender, of
whom only 9,000 returned to Germany ten years after the end of the war. In the Battle of Kursk, the greatest tank
battle in history, the Germans lost 70,000 dead, the Red Army twice that
much. Now the Germans were in the midst
of a full-scale retreat.
Through
the years of 1944 to 1945 the Red Army continued to advance through Poland,
Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia, loosing another 1
million soldiers in the process. As the
Red Army was now fighting its way toward Berlin through these German-occupied
eastern European countries, the Allies finally opened up their long-delayed 2nd Front on Normandy’s beaches, with just twelve months remaining in the war. The Soviet Red Army had done the lion’s share
of the fighting and absorbed the lion’s share of death and destruction in
beating back the Germans, first to a standstill, and then into full retreat,
all while the Allies essentially fought on the sidelines in North Africa and up
through Italy. But it must be remembered
that the United States was truly fighting a two-front war, one against Nazi
Germany in the west, and the Empire of Japan in the east. Within the first two years of the United
States being in the war, while the Soviet Union was ‘buying the U.S. some precious time’ by taking on the majority of
the German war machine, the U.S. was able to build itself into a
top-of-the-line, first-rate naval and military power. From 1943 onward we were producing 100,000
military aircraft a year (as compared to Japan’s total of 70,000 aircraft
produced for the whole war), and by 1944 the U.S. had 100 Essex class heavy
aircraft carriers, to the mere 25 Japan produced during the whole war. Our 352 Fleet Submarines sank about
two-thirds of Japan’s merchant ships and over 20 percent of Japan’s warships,
Japan was being strangled.
An Interesting Statistic
Here’s
an interesting statistic, the Red Army at any one time was fighting more than
200 German divisions. In sharp contrast
to that, the Americans and British fighting in the Mediterranean never faced
more than 10 German divisions at any time. As Oliver Stone said in his history series, “Though the myth lives on that
the United States won World War II, serious historians agree it was the Soviet
Union and its entire society, including its brutal dictator Josef Stalin,
through shear desperation and inordinately stoic heroism, forged the narrative
of World War II, the defeat of the monster German war machine.” [“Oliver
Stone’s: THE UNTOLD HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES”] As the end
of 1942 approached, the United States was ramping up their war production, as
the industrial might of the United States came on line. About two million tons of supplies finally
started flowing through to the Soviets from lend-lease, including 400,000
trucks, 52,000 jeeps, 7,000 tanks, 15,000 aircraft (our Aircobras, which we
felt were underpowered, so we gave them to the Russians), guns, and 8,000 railway
cars. According to Nikita Khrushchev in
his memoirs KHRUYSHCHEV REMEMBERS, where
he honestly gives credit where credit is due, “Unfortunately, our [the Soviet Union’s] historical works about World
War II have perpetrated an illusion. They have been written out of a false sense of pride and our of a fear to tell the truth about out Allies’
contribution---all because of Stalin himself held an incorrect, unrealistic
position. He knew the truth, but he
admitted it only to himself in the toilet. He considered it too shameful and
humiliating for our country to admit publicly. But telling the truth needn’t have been a humiliation. Recognizing the merits of our partners in the
war need not have diminished our own merits…But I think we should have openly admitted
what happened and not tried to cover up. We would have been helping our country and our cause by not trying to
hide our mistakes, by revealing them for the people to see, no matter how
painful it might have been…We shouldn’t boast that we vanquished the Germans
all by ourselves and that the Allies moved in only for the kill. That’s why I give my own view of the Allies’
contribution, and I hope that my view will be confirmed by the research of
historians who investigate objectively the circumstances which developed
between 1941 and 1945. The English
helped up tenaciously and at great peril to themselves. They shipped cargo to Murmansk and suffered
huge losses. German submarines lurked
all along the way. Germany had invaded
Norway and moved right next door to Murmansk.
“As Mikoyan confirmed after this trip
to America, we received military equipment, ships, and many supplies from the
Americans, all of which greatly aided us in waging the war. After Stalin’s death, it seemed that all our
artillery was mounted on American equipment…By this I wanted to only stress how
many of our cars and trucks we had received from the Americans. Just imagine how we would have advanced from
Stalingrad to Berlin without them! Our
losses would have been colossal because we would have had no maneuverability…We
also received food products in great quantities. I can’t give you the figures because they’ve
never been published. They’re all locked
away in Mikoyan’s memory. There were
many jokes going around in the army, some of them off-colored, about American
Spam; it tasted good nonetheless. Without Spam we wouldn’t have been able to feed our army. We had lost our most fertile lands---the Ukraine
and the northern Caucasus.” [KHRUSHCHEV
REMEMBERS, pp.224-226, selected parts] The United States was getting
on its feet industrially and rapidly ramping up the size and training of its
military. But the question still begs to
be asked, on whose shoulders was our re-armament and re-militarization made
possible? All our successes, it can be
fairly stated, were accomplished on the shoulders of the Red Army and Soviet
citizens, men, women and children, 27 million of whom ultimately died to enable our victory on the Western Front.
Who Was Henry Wallace?
Henry
A. Wallace, during the first two terms of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s
presidency, during the Great Depression, was Roosevelt’s Secretary of
Agriculture. Along with Roosevelt, he
had shown the financially destitute working and middle class citizens, as well as
all those who had fallen on hard times during the Depression the kinder side of
government. Theirs was a government not
just of the people, but for the people. As Secretary of Agriculture Wallace had first introduced Food Stamps for
all those in need, and free school lunches for all school children in public
schools, both programs of which continue to this day. Henry Wallace was selected to be Roosevelt’s
Vice President and became so when Roosevelt was re-elected for his 3rd term. In May of 1942 Wallace gave his
famous “Common Man” speech, where he said, “Some have spoken of the American
Century. I say the century on which we
are entering which will come out of this war, can be and must be the Century of
the Common Man. There must be neither
military nor economic imperialism. The
march of freedom of the past 150 years has been a great revolution, there were
the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Latin American revolutions,
the Russian Revolution; each spoke for the common man. Some went to excess, but people groped their
way to the light.” Wallace detested the British Empire, for
what Leland Stowe as a war reporter had observed, the
poverty-stricken conditions which he had witnessed which British colonialism
had fostered in almost all the British colonial nations he had traveled
through, particularly Burma, India and Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Roosevelt had observed the same things in the
British colony of Gambia in western Africa, and was disgusted by what he
saw. Leland Stowe observed in his book
that “The
colonial nations of the British Empire were like rotten fruit, ready to fall
off the vine.” Wallace said in
another speech, “The future must bring equal wages for equal work, regardless of sex or
race.” In early 1943 President
Roosevelt sent his Vice President, Henry Wallace, known for his love for the
common man and anti-colonial attitudes, to the Latin American nations on a ‘Good Will Tour.’ Their love for him was overwhelming, and
in the process he was able to recruit twelve nations to declare war on
Germany. This would give the United
States a valuable number of air-bases and radio-intercept towers which enabled
the successful defeat of Germany’s U-boat forces (radio-triangulation towers
and submarine patrol aircraft). And all this because of who Henry Wallace was, and what he
represented to the ordinary citizens of those nations. Henry Wallace was one of the few, along with
Roosevelt, but he spoke out more publicly on it, who said that the two
government-economic systems, that of democratic
capitalism and socialist communism, ought to be allowed co-exist and function
side-by-side, in friendly competition, each learning from the other and helping
each other. They both felt, given enough
time, coupled to this friendly co-existence, Soviet-communism would moderate
out and democratize, taking on and working into its system elements of
capitalism. They were so right, and visionary in this belief. Nikita Khrushchev and John Fitzgerald Kennedy
also felt this way. But Roosevelt
wouldn’t live to bring his visions to the world, and Wallace wouldn’t be
allowed to. We’ll get to John Kennedy
and Nikita Khrushchev a little bit later.
Future Roosevelt-Wallace Foreign Policy That Would
Never Be
Roosevelt,
just like Henry Wallace, hated the colonial system which the British and French
had imposed on the poorer nations of the world (which we would later emulate
through C.I.A. controlled “client states” in the Latin American nations and
elsewhere). Roosevelt spoke about
setting up a post-war trusteeship system which would help prepare these
colonies for independence. Roosevelt
even told Cordell Hull, his Secretary of State in 1944 that “France
has had the country [of Vietnam], 30 million inhabitants, for nearly 100 years,
and the people are worse off than they were at the beginning.” So remember, this is one of two key, critical
elements of the Roosevelt/Wallace Presidential foreign policy which Roosevelt
wanted to establish for the post-war United States and in the world, an end to
colonialism. Another foreign policy
direction the Roosevelt/Wallace Presidency desired to establish in the post-war
world was the peaceful coexistence of the United States with the Soviet Union. A critical part of this included the post-war
economic assistance---which Roosevelt promised---to help the Soviets rebuild
their shattered nation. A reparations
commission was set up based on an estimated 20 billion dollars, with
half going to the Soviet Union. Serious students of Soviet history know that Josef Stalin was not
interested in pursuing or promoting International Communism (as Leon Trotsky
was). He was very interested, instead,
in guaranteeing the Soviet Union had secure borders, which included making sure
nations on their borders had governments friendly with the Soviet Union (they
didn’t have to be communist). Considering what the Soviet Union had just endured from Nazi Germany,
Poland alone, at first, then many of the other eastern European nations, needed
to have their governments friendly to the Soviet Union. Germany had invaded Russia twice in the 20th century across the flat plains of Poland, like an arrow headed straight for
Moscow, and Napoleon had done the same in the early 1800s, not to mention what
the Teutonic Knights had done earlier. Stalin had even remarked, amazingly, “that
Communism fit Poland like a saddle fit a cow.” Thus, these concerns and promises were made
at the Yalta Conference, between Roosevelt and Stalin. Roosevelt
had also made it clear that he intended to give the Soviet Union (based upon
their security concerns) “considerable latitude in the shaping of the
future of eastern Europe and the Baltic states,” his only request being, “that Stalin only implement changes
judiciously and not offend world opinion.” About Yalta Roosevelt wrote, “We made great progress…I may say that I got
along fine with Marshal Stalin, and I believe that we are going to get along
very well with him and the Russian people, very well indeed.” Roosevelt also got Stalin to commit to
have the Soviet Union with its huge Red Army invade Japan three months after
the close of the European war, in return “for territorial and economic
inducements.” Thus, these concerns and
promises were made at the Yalta Conference, between Roosevelt and Stalin. Roosevelt had said to Churchill in his last
cable to him, “I would minimize the
Soviet problem as much as possible, because these problems in one form or
another seems to arise every day, and most of them straighten out.” Two months later, after 12 years in office,
this great man died of a massive stroke. Why would Henry Wallace not be able to follow through with the visions
of the Roosevelt/Wallace Presidency?
What
Is A Liberal? Also, Wallace the prophet
“He answered, “To
me a liberal is one who believes in using a non-violent, tolerant and
democratic way the forces of education, publicity, politics, economics,
business, law and religion to direct the ever-changing and increasing power of
science into` channels which will bring peace and the maximum of well-being
both spiritual and economic to the greatest number of human beings. A liberal knows that the only certainty in
this life is change but believes that the change can be directed toward a
constructive end.” As he spoke,
liberalism in America was at a low ebb. Republicans controlled the White House [Eisenhower] and both houses of
Congress. Joseph McCarthy rode high in
the Senate.”… “War and the tensions leading to war are the great
destroyers of the liberal spirit,” Wallace declared. Under the circumstances what were liberals to
do? First, he said, “liberals must
be ready with a program for full employment not dependent upon the
military-industrial complex.”… “Liberals must push for a stronger and more
efficient United Nations, free trade, and economic development to Third World
countries.” [which, that last one especially, toward economic
development to Third World countries, John F. Kennedy tried to put into U.S.
foreign policy, and was fought all the way by big money and the Right.] But finally, Wallace added, liberals must
examine themselves. “The great
peril of liberalism is its tendency to become materialistic,” he said. “Because liberalism is tolerant it also tends
to be without faith in anything which is outside the realm of physical
perception….Liberals must look on religion as the hope of the future rather
than the dead hand of the past. Democracy and science are not enough. Full employment and efficiency are not enough. Full respect for other races and religions
are not enough.” [American
Dreamer, by John Culver and John
Hyde (a biography about Henry A. Wallace, VP of Franklin Roosevelt), sel. parts
p. 520, par. 3-5, 7, p. 521, par. 1, emphasis mine throughout]
What
Was Henry A. Wallace Trying To Say In The Previous Paragraph?
The Meaning
And Explanation Of History
What he’s getting at,
but didn’t spell it out, is that the breaking of even just the last four of the
Ten Commandments – which by the way, Jews, Christians and Muslims all share as
a universal code of conduct, which also are accepted by society in general –
has brought about all the wars fought in the history of man. But let’s just focus on one major war, just
to prove this point Wallace was alluding to. Adolf Hitler “coveted” what was not his, and then he “lied” to his
people, the Germans that they needed more “living room, Lebensraum.” That’s two of the four. Then he convinced the German people, again
through lies, that they needed to what amounted to stealing this “lebensraum”
from the Russians, the Soviet Union. He
did this with all of Europe as well, but he specifically wanted Russian land to
become a greater part of Germany itself, Russia’s vast plains for farming, rich
in oil and minerals, and vast amounts of timber. As a direct result of breaking these three
commandments on a national and military level, he was directly responsible for
the murder of nearly 60,000,000 people in greater Europe and the Soviet Union,
most of them being Russians. The kind of
religion Henry A. Wallace is talking about is an adherence to at least these
last four of the Ten Commandments. Wallace, as this biography about him brings out, was a prophet of sorts,
and an accurate one, who predicted the course America was taking, and what the
result of that course would be. The
history of the United States in all the multiple wars it’s fought since 1945 is
vivid proof that his “prophecies” were accurate to the letter. This is the major lesson of history which
mankind fails to understand, simply because this lesson comes out of the Bible,
the lesson that the breaking of the last four commandments, which are general
societal laws, has essentially brought on every war fought by mankind. “When Henry Wallace was near death,
suffering from Lou Gehrig’s Disease, he expressed this, “He was greatly
alarmed, however by Johnson’s Vietnam policies, which were bringing Wallace’s
Cold War nightmares to life. Unable to
speak, he scrawled on a tablet to a visiting friend, “The policies of Truman
and Byrnes will yet make this country bleed from every pore.” [ibid. p. 529,
par. 5]
Who Was Harry Truman?
Missouri
Senator Harry Truman declared on the floor of the Senate in 1941, “If
we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia---and if Russia is
winning, we ought to help Germany, and that way, let them kill as many as
possible.” That just gives us a
foretaste of who Harry Truman was, a hint as to how totally different in
outlook and his humanity or lack thereof, he was from Franklin Roosevelt and
Henry Wallace.
The 1944 Democratic National Convention
In
1944 Franklin Roosevelt was up for re-election for his unprecedented 4th term in office as President. He was
chosen for the Democratic Ticket hands down. He was in San Francisco, and not at the convention. He asked people to vote for Wallace as his
running mate, but maybe due to his failing health, he failed to press home his
support for Wallace. A Gallup Pole on
opening day showed Wallace for Vice President with 65 percent of the vote. Jimmy Byrnes had 3 percent of the vote, and
Truman had come in 8th with 2 percent. Yet within another day, led by the corrupt
Party bosses (Edwin Pauley, Treasurer of the Democratic National Committee,
Robert Hannegan, Ed Flynn, Bronx party boss, Ed Kelly, mayor of Chicago, and
the list goes on), they not only choose Truman, a political light-weight with
no real experience, but then through some of the most underhanded, smoky
backroom political wheeling and dealing, defeated Wallace, and successfully put
Senator Harry Truman on the Democratic Ticket as Roosevelt’s running mate for
his 4th term election. On the
second day of balloting the final tally was: Truman 1031 votes; Wallace 105 votes. This totally overlooked footnote in history
for the average history student, the Democratic National Convention of 1944,
would be the hinge upon which the future history of the world would turn on,
what I term as “a hinge of history.” In
early spring of 1945 Franklin Delano Roosevelt died, and on the 15th of April 1945 Henry Wallace and Harry Truman, the new President of the United
States met at Union Station in Washington D.C. to meet Roosevelt’s funeral
train. The direction history was going
in was about to change radically, as was the foreign policy of the United
States of America.