Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The plan to destroy America


Render

Recommended Posts

Origins: Richard D. Lamm was a Democrat who served as governor of Colorado for twelve years from 1975 to 1987. Of the above-quoted third person account regarding his speech on the perils of multiculturalism, he told us in mid-June 2005:

Yes, it is a speech I gave a year and a half ago in Washington D.C. It was a 5 minute speech, and I am amazed and gratified it has received so much coverage.

He also passed along to us the following "revised version" of his speech:

I HAVE A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA

RICHARD D. LAMM

I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.' Here is my plan:

I. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:

The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.

II. I would then invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.

III. We can make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarx said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:

... The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved! Not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.

I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences, rather than as Americans emphasizing their similarities.

IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated - I would add a second underclass: unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.

V. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of 'Victimology'. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.

VI. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would 'celebrate diversity'. 'Diversity' is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other - that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse, peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's World History tells us:

The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to over come two factors: . . . (local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions . . .)

'E. Pluribus Unum' — From many, one. In that historical reality, if we can put the emphasis on the 'pluribus' instead of the 'Unum,' we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.

VII. Then I would place all these subjects off limits - make it taboo to talk about anything against the cult of 'diversity'. I would find a word similar to 'heretic' in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like 'racist' or 'xenophobe' that halts argument and conversation.

Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multi-culturism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of 'Victimology,' I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra - that because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good. I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.

VIII. Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis's book Mexifornia. — This book is dangerous — It exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please — If you feel that America deserves to be destroyed — Please, please — Don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." — Noam Chomsky, American linguist and US media and foreign policy critic.

http://www.seedship.com/pi/lamm.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 28
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cadetak

    7

  • preacherman76

    7

  • shaka5

    2

  • Render

    2

Um wasn't America founded and built by a bunch of people from different places and different cultures? English, Irish, Polish, etc, etc...and eventually they just blended into 'white' over time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um wasn't America founded and built by a bunch of people from different places and different cultures? English, Irish, Polish, etc, etc...and eventually they just blended into 'white' over time?

lmao...soon as i stated reading this post that same thing ran through my head...but thats just like the whole people think America is a Christian nation despite what the founding fathers said about religion.

Its funny how people always claim what America was made of or who and what should be here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is a mirror, onto which people project their own desires and ignorances. Everyone sees America as being exactly what they think it is, rather then being more then their own perceived reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is a mirror, onto which people project their own desires and ignorances. Everyone sees America as being exactly what they think it is, rather then being more then their own perceived reality.

Meh. I'd describe America more as a dream or an idea. A vision of a utopia. The problem with dreams, they're hard to interpret, and easy to forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmao...soon as i stated reading this post that same thing ran through my head...but thats just like the whole people think America is a Christian nation despite what the founding fathers said about religion.

Its funny how people always claim what America was made of or who and what should be here

What did the founding fathers say about religion? Wanna go quote for quote?? Trust me, you dont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did the founding fathers say about religion? ...

In brief -- Founding Fathers ensured that religion would not rule the Law in the New Land.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder in what dream world this jokers lives? There are several countries with multi-ethnic multi-language cultures.In fact the most stable country in the world,Switzerland, is one of them. 4 official languages!

Edited by questionmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh*

My state embarasses me sometimes.

*didn't vote for him*

Nibs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In brief -- Founding Fathers ensured that religion would not rule the Law in the New Land.

They also said our constitution could govern no one but Christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They also said our constitution could govern no one but Christians.

They said a lot of stuff and there was also 55 of them who all said different kinds of stuff 234 years ago, also consider they only governed about 2.5 million people.

I understand that tradition tells us to hold our founding fathers up to the standard of mythic heroes who were infallible but in reality we know that the times change and old ideals no longer apply in the same fashion if at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said a lot of stuff and there was also 55 of them who all said different kinds of stuff 234 years ago, also consider they only governed about 2.5 million people.

I understand that tradition tells us to hold our founding fathers up to the standard of mythic heroes who were infallible but in reality we know that the times change and old ideals no longer apply in the same fashion if at all.

Yea, instead we go to even older ideas, that are proven beyond a reason of doubt failures. If we followed our constitution to the tee, we wouldnt have half the prblems we are having.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, instead we go to even older ideas, that are proven beyond a reason of doubt failures. If we followed our constitution to the tee, we wouldnt have half the prblems we are having.

Our Constitution isn't perfect, a big deal of problems come from it's interpretation a fault in my opinion with the original writing not being vary descriptive or adaptive in certain instances. It also does not address every issue a nation would encounter. It's a good basis but surely our country could not rely on only on it and nothing else. The Ammendments being evidence of this.

Following the exact ideologies and beliefs of our founding fathers in this day would be akin to following everything in the Old Testament. A good foundation, I'm a Jefferson man myself, but adaptation is of course necessary for survival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did the founding fathers say about religion? Wanna go quote for quote?? Trust me, you dont.

when i go home tonight i'll post them...and you think i don't wanna go back and forth with you?...your funny, i know your a big believer but i will crush your lil belief system, i'm an atheist that has never lost a debate about religion yet, i know i won't lose against you but it'll be fun...but later, going to get more toys to give away to a homeless shelter...look, doing good without a god, maybe i'd get into heaven :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys are going to have a quote battle, which will end up being a source battle, so you can pretend to know the personal beliefs of 55 individuals who lived centuries ago so you can somehow prove an irrelevant point that has little to do with the topic at hand? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when i go home tonight i'll post them...and you think i don't wanna go back and forth with you?...your funny, i know your a big believer but i will crush your lil belief system, i'm an atheist that has never lost a debate about religion yet, i know i won't lose against you but it'll be fun...but later, going to get more toys to give away to a homeless shelter...look, doing good without a god, maybe i'd get into heaven :lol:

I didnt ask you to debate religion. Im asking you to debate what the founding fathers thought of religion, and lets just say I look forward to it.

Edited by preacherman76
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you guys are going to have a quote battle, which will end up being a source battle, so you can pretend to know the personal beliefs of 55 individuals who lived centuries ago so you can somehow prove an irrelevant point that has little to do with the topic at hand? :rolleyes:

well yea :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our Constitution isn't perfect, a big deal of problems come from it's interpretation a fault in my opinion with the original writing not being vary descriptive or adaptive in certain instances. It also does not address every issue a nation would encounter. It's a good basis but surely our country could not rely on only on it and nothing else. The Ammendments being evidence of this.

Following the exact ideologies and beliefs of our founding fathers in this day would be akin to following everything in the Old Testament. A good foundation, I'm a Jefferson man myself, but adaptation is of course necessary for survival.

I obviously totaly disagree. The Amendments are testiment to the fact that the document can evolve with us. Our problems have come from walking away from the princibles layed out by the constitution, not from following them. I dont see why interpretation should be a problem. It only sees to be a problem when those who are making the calls, dont like what it has to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well yea :P

We have changed topics like 3 times in 1 page time :P Record?

Anyways um ya...so about them minorites and their imposing cultures or whatever this thread was about...

Screw it, this thread is now about cookies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have changed topics like 3 times in 1 page time :P Record?

Anyways um ya...so about them minorites and their imposing cultures or whatever this thread was about...

Screw it, this thread is now about cookies.

I like oatmeal cookies. :tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have changed topics like 3 times in 1 page time :P Record?

Anyways um ya...so about them minorites and their imposing cultures or whatever this thread was about...

Screw it, this thread is now about cookies.

mmmmmm chocolate chip? ...yeah....cookie dough ice cream..

errrrrrr

topic is about hmmm, this guy saying these points in a "sarcastic" manner, but obviously meaning them. So i guess the question is..does anyone agree? Does he make some valid points in some way? Is this the way a lot of politicians actually see it , and he's the one who actually got the nerve to say it...trying to ease everyone into it by bringing it on the table in such a way?

Or is it just bigot bs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mmmmmm chocolate chip? ...yeah....cookie dough ice cream..

errrrrrr

topic is about hmmm, this guy saying these points in a "sarcastic" manner, but obviously meaning them. So i guess the question is..does anyone agree? Does he make some valid points in some way? Is this the way a lot of politicians actually see it , and he's the one who actually got the nerve to say it...trying to ease everyone into it by bringing it on the table in such a way?

Or is it just bigot bs?

It's bullpoopy.

Although mixing of cultures can be potentially dangerous as history has shown as there are also many instances of where it has proved beneficial.

Back on topic...you know what I hate raisins in cookies you know like what is that? I'm like oo look chocolate chips and i bite down and they are raisins masquerading as chocolate, this is when I throw a fit and ruin christmas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um wasn't America founded and built by a bunch of people from different places and different cultures? English, Irish, Polish, etc, etc...and eventually they just blended into 'white' over time?

switzerland???????? 4 languages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I HAVE A PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA

RICHARD D. LAMM

I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that 'An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.' Here is my plan:

Oh, this ought to be good. It reminds me of the "Seven ways communists plan to corrupt American youth" or what not from the 1950s.

I. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:

Multi-lingual empires have survived for centuries in the past. Canada, in spite of its problems, continues to survive quite well in spite of the French-heritage obsession by the Quebecois. Switzerland has multiple languages and holds together pretty well. China has internal conflict, but multiple languages and dozens of dialects of each.

I agree that it is a unifying factor for a society to have a single language that serves as the lingua franca, but multi-lingual nations aren't necessarily doomed.

The histories of bilingual and bi-cultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.

Tension, perhaps, but I would hardly call Canada a "tragedy". As for most of the other countries, the real problems lies in the "other" reasons why there are issues, like forcible cultural suppression, bad blood between ethno-religious groups (Lebanon), and so forth.

II. I would then invent 'multiculturalism' and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.

Which has yet to be widely accepted. But then, a lot of it is due to "external reasons" - just look at some of the inner cities. Why attend an under-funded, piece of **** school to get a crappy education for a minimal job, when you might have a chance at getting moderately rich off of drug-dealing (or at least surviving)?

III. We can make the United States a 'Hispanic Quebec' without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarx said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:

... The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved! Not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.

Hispanics have actually been assimilating at pretty close to the historic rate in the US. Most third-generation hispanics speak virtually no Spanish (it's something like 4%), and english-speaking is pretty dominant even in the second-generation, born in the US. That's pretty close to some earlier migrations; people forget, for example, that there were long-lasting pockets of german-speaking in the Great Lakes area, and so forth, at the turn of the century.

IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated - I would add a second underclass: unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.

The US needs wide-spread reform of virtually every aspect of the educational system, which is still fundamentally based around the Taylorian model wherein the school system is supposed to turn out largely semi-literate graduates with a smattering of civic education (since they make better factory workers), and the administrators hold virtually all the power.

To be honest, these screeds always say much more about the fears of the person writing it rather than their supposed problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.