Here are some initial notes on reading what appears to be Hillary Rodham Clinton’s college thesis from May 2, 1969. I found an online pdf version at :
Hopefully it is still available when you read this.
I’ve been reading “Liberal Fascism” by Jonah Goldberg lately. It mentions Hillary’s nefarious past and her sympathizing with the radical Saul David Alinsky. Her thesis lends credence to Goldberg’s views on her past.
First of all her thesis begins with rhetoric and quotes that cast her in the same light as Hitler’s Nazis or Mussolini’s Fascists, namely a love of power and a man-made morality that seeks to place all others, even God Himself beneath itself. This is evidenced already in page 13 of her thesis with the following statement:
In order to achieve a world without bounds it appears essential for many groups to solidify their identities both in relation to their own membership and to their external environment. This has been the rationale of nationalist groups historically and among American blacks presently.
Is she sympathizing with the Black Panthers here? Is she promoting National Socialism?
Her apparent love of power is further revealed in the following quote she lauds on page 12 of her thesis:
The key word for an Alinsky-type organizing effort is “power.” As he says: “No individual or organization can negotiate without power to compel negotations.”13 The question is how one acquires power, and Alinsky’s answer is through organization: “To attempt to operate on good will rather than on a power basis would be to attempt something which the world has never yet experienced – remember to make even good will effective it must be mobilized into a power unit.”14
Power to do good seems credible. Power however must be tempered by common law, i.e. by God’s law. Alinsky’s and Hillary’s concepts of power however acknowledge no such higher law and is steeped in an arrogance and pride as ancient as Babylon. This is evidenced in her glorifying the following quote from Alinsky’s “Reveille for Radicals”:
What does the Radical want? He wants a world in which the worth of the individual is recognized…a world based on the morality of mankind…The Radical believes that all peoples should have a high standard of food, housing, and health… The Radical places human rights above property rights. He is for universal, free public education and recognizes this as fundamental to the democratic way of life…Democracy to him is working from the bottom up…The Radical believes completely in real equality of opportunity for all peoples regardless of race, color, or creed.
Ah this rings like communist theory – sounds nice on the surface…I mean who isn’t for promoting the worth of the individual, higher standards of living, human rights, and opportunities for all to succeed. The devil is in the details or the means to these ends. If the Radical’s world is based on the morality of mankind rather than God’s law then it is ultimately amoral, unless one accepts moral relativism and its misguided views of there being no absolute moral right or wrong. If the Radical places human rights above property rights then the Radical denies man that fundamental right to property and stewardship under God that is the foundation upon which all his other rights rest. The history of Communism’s abuse of human rights is testament to this principle all too well. If the Radical believes in Equal Opportunity through “affirmative action” style quotas rather than blind justice and the impartial Rule of Law then the Radical embraces fascism and its form of economic justice. In contrast, a truly more equal opportunity often exists under a free market system, where even though life is generally still unfair, everyone can still potentially rise from rags to riches.