LAST DITCH OF DEMOCRACY - Majority Rights

Well, in a way, and in a way NOT. First eliminate religion, and then
eliminate thought from amidst the goym. Are they cattle? Do cattle
think?
I don’t know where to find a susceptible spot in the American or English
brain, one whereinto one could inject a little historic curiosity? But what
caused the antipathy between Christians and Moslems? And the
Crusades, to rescue the sepulchers of a Jew in Jerusalem? And were the
Masons incited against the Catholics? [The] normal American Mason is
the type of friendly fellow who says to you: “Shucks, I’m a Mason and
my wife is Catholic and the kids going to Catholic school, and I think a
man would have to be pretty small to allow it to have an effect on his
politics.”
That is the soil prepared. Some drop out or stop going to lodge meetings.
Some feel bound by their oaths. And not one in a hundred thousand won
ders about the central control. Penetration? Get into all parties. BUT
why, if the auditor is a Communist, should he want a Communism
administered by a foreign committee of plutocrats, whether of his own
race or some other? It is the question about local control. Communism
has been tried, as one wearies of repeating, in America, under favorable
conditions. But there is a gap, a sudden collapse from the idea of owning
all property in common, and the effect of one’s owning anything
whatsoever but being constrained to work like heelll for the state. Ain’t
that funneee? Well, is Stalin leading a world revolution? And if so, why
so? Or is he playing at power politics?
Why not revolute? Why should world revolution need a foreign secret
committee? Why revolute at the command of Mr. Finkelstein? Is
America unable to go Communist without Finkelstein? Is England, are
the young saps of Cambridge unable to revolute without Maisky to help
them? Or is there a touch of insincerity somewhere in the wangle? As a
producer, I can go Communist, the artist can go Communist without
trouble. But why all the trimmings?