A dictatorship was impossible in our Republic because power was widely diffused. Today, as we approach Democratic Socialism all power is being centralized at the apex of the executive branch of the federal government. This concentration of power makes a dictatorship inevitable. Those who control the President indirectly gain virtual control of the whole country.

The chief liberal gains in the past generally remain on the statute books when the conservatives recover power; liberalism grows constantly more liberal, and by the same token, conservatism grows constantly less conservative...

Conspiracy to seize the power of government is as old as government itself. We can study the -- conspiracies surrounding Alcibiades in Greece or Julius Caesar in ancient, Rome, but we are not supposed to think that men today scheme to achieve political power.

The way to bring down the wrath of the Liberal press Establishment or the professional Liberals is simply to use the word conspiracy in relation to Communism. We are not supposed to believe that Communism is a political conspiracy. We can believe anything else we wish to about it. We can believe that it is brutal, tyrannical, evil or even that it intends to bury us, and we will win the plaudits of the vast majority of American people. But don't ever, ever use the word conspiracy if you expect applause, for that is when the wrath of Liberaldom will be unleashed against you. We are not disallowed from believing in all types of conspiracy, just modern political conspiracy.

It must be remembered that the first job of any conspiracy, whether it be in politics, crime, or within a business office, is to convince everyone else that no conspiracy exists. The conspirators' success will be determined largely by their ability to do this. That the elite of the academic world and mass communications media always pooh-pooh the existence of the Insiders merely serves to camouflage their operations.

There does exist, and has exited for a generation, an international network, which has no aversion to co-operating with communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years, and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. It have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.

Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act.

Politicians and "intellectuals" are attracted to the concept that events are propelled by some mysterious tide of history or happen by accident. By this reasoning they hope to escape blame when things go wrong.

Most intellectuals, pseudo or otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory of history by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It can't be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn't work, these "objective" scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks, ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and effort defending himself.

In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, it was planned that way.

Yet, despite high hopes and glittering campaign promises, these problems continue to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be Republican or Democrat, continues the same basic policies of the previous administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election campaign