Conservative Group Calls for Bush Dictatorship

Monday, August 20, 2007 at 10:13 AM

A writer for a national security group set up by a conservative think tank has called on President Bush to declare himself "President for Life" and remove all Arabs from the Middle East so he can "repopulate the country with Americans."

Philip Atkinson, author of the book A Study of Our Decline, argues that Bush should have followed the model of Julius Caesar in Iraq, slaughtering all Iraqis who did not comply with his demands. "He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court."

Atkinson's commentary was published Aug. 3 by Family Security Matters, a "security moms" group established by the Center for Security Policy, a right-wing think tank. The security group's board includes talk show hosts Laura Ingraham and Monica Crowley, Center for Security Policy president Frank Gaffney Jr., and former CIA director R. James Woolsey.

Here's Atkinson's commentary, which was recently removed from the site:

Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy

President George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. He was sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2005 after being chosen by the majority of citizens in America to be president.

Yet in 2007 he is generally despised, with many citizens of Western civilization expressing contempt for his person and his policies, sentiments which now abound on the Internet. This rage at President Bush is an inevitable result of the system of government demanded by the people, which is Democracy.

The inadequacy of Democracy, rule by the majority, is undeniable -- for it demands adopting ideas because they are popular, rather than because they are wise. This means that any man chosen to act as an agent of the people is placed in an invidious position: if he commits folly because it is popular, then he will be held responsible for the inevitable result. If he refuses to commit folly, then he will be detested by most citizens because he is frustrating their demands.

When faced with the possible threat that the Iraqis might be amassing terrible weapons that could be used to slay millions of citizens of Western Civilization, President Bush took the only action prudence demanded and the electorate allowed: he conquered Iraq with an army.

This dangerous and expensive act did destroy the Iraqi regime, but left an American army without any clear purpose in a hostile country and subject to attack. If the Army merely returns to its home, then the threat it ended would simply return.

The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands, or until they were all dead. Then there would be little risk or expense and no American army would be left exposed. But if he did this, his cowardly electorate would have instantly ended his term of office, if not his freedom or his life.

The simple truth that modern weapons now mean a nation must practice genocide or commit suicide. Israel provides the perfect example. If the Israelis do not raze Iran, the Iranians will fulfill their boast and wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yet Israel is not popular, and so is denied permission to defend itself. In the same vein, President Bush cannot do what is necessary for the survival of Americans. He cannot use the nation's powerful weapons. All he can do is try and discover a result that will be popular with Americans.

As there appears to be no sensible result of the invasion of Iraq that will be popular with his countrymen other than retreat, President Bush is reviled; he has become another victim of Democracy.

By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.

However, President Bush has a valuable historical example that he could choose to follow.

When the ancient Roman general Julius Caesar was struggling to conquer ancient Gaul, he not only had to defeat the Gauls, but he also had to defeat his political enemies in Rome who would destroy him the moment his tenure as consul (president) ended.

Caesar pacified Gaul by mass slaughter; he then used his successful army to crush all political opposition at home and establish himself as permanent ruler of ancient Rome. This brilliant action not only ended the personal threat to Caesar, but ended the civil chaos that was threatening anarchy in ancient Rome – thus marking the start of the ancient Roman Empire that gave peace and prosperity to the known world.

If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.

He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.

President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming “ex-president” Bush or he can become "President-for-Life" Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons. Contributing Editor Philip Atkinson is the British born founder of and author of A Study of Our Decline. He is a philosopher specializing in issues concerning the preservation of Western civilization. Mr. Atkinson receives mail at

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of The Family Security Foundation, Inc.

The Family Security Matters web site has removed all articles by Atkinson and references to the writer, who is credited in the commentary as a contributing editor, though many remain cached by Google.

One expunged article explained how to determine whether someone is insane. "[T]he way to determine if a man is insane -- the sanity test -- is to ask him how he tells right from wrong independently of his feelings," Atkinson wrote. "If he cannot immediately nominate a clear moral code, independent of his feelings, then he is insane."


Loony Toons

In the author bio, it links to his own site ( ) which is pretty bat-shit crazy with a minor review... (I don't have time to dig deeper but in the 10 minutes I found out that:

Multiculturalism cannot exist because it "is denial of the simple truth that cultures clash."

Or that HIV does not cause AIDS and 'AIDS is syphilis in disguise..'

OR that "It [Political Correctness] was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. (see Newspeak)"

Or... "An undeniable symptom of the malaise is the deliberate use of more words than necessary, such as invoking "at this moment in time" instead of "now", or "the state of the art" instead of "latest". And the addition of surplus words such as converting a "riot" into a "riot situation" and "opportunity" into "a window of opportunity".

This fascist writer doesn't even know his history. Caesar was ruthless when he had to be, of course, and millions died in his military campaigns, but Caesar also was famous for his clemency, for pardoning his enemies, for allowing conquered peoples to have their own indigenous leaders, and for making the top leaders of conquered tribes Roman senators or citizens, to integrate them into Roman society and to make them feel as if they had a stake in Roman success. Caesar didn't just wipe everybody out; co-opting and mainstreaming conquered races was part of his genius. This set him apart from other, more bloodthirsty generals and conquerors, Roman or otherwise. Same goes for Augustus. Caesar also was famous for his education, literacy, oratorical skills, and personal charm. He would have used Dubya as a foot stool to mount his horse, or as a factotum to tie his sandals. And a final note: Romans were very tolerant of other religions. They didn't care who you worshipped, as long as you didn't make political trouble. Not so with this evangelical crowd.

This writer not only is a homicidal lunatic, but he is an ignorant fool. The best historical analogy is Bush as...Caligula.

Sweet baby Jeebus in a picnic basket! Don't ever do that to a tater first thing in the morning, Rogers. Spud thought fer half a second that GWB actually had declared himself a dictator as per his recent ill defined "In case of Emergency-Break Democracy" act. Turns out it's just some wing-nut from a "Family" (codeword fer Xian) Think Tank. When Spud first read the thing as a article on Boa's log Spud assumed it was a Modest Proposal typa thing. Apparently, the moron was being serious it turns out.

Okay, here's the thing. In a sense he's right. Not about nuking the ME or haffing a POTUS fer Life of course. He's right about the essence of War. Fer Millenia because man has been at the top of the food chain War has been an evolved societal mechanism that deters and deals with over-population. Two cultures exist side by side. One of them is more successful in the evolutionary sense in that it's population rises faster than the neighbouring state. Two traditional solutions at this point. Either the aggression and tension caused by the over-population turns inward toward a civil war or it is channelled outward toward a war of aggression against a neighbouring state.

From a genetic perspective, the second path is the clear winner historically. Now consider the war between Rome and Carthage. When Rome won they murdered all the males, took the woman as slaves and ruined their farm land by planting salt. Rome went on to found the Holy Roman Empire and Africa is still a backwards shithole all these years later. Problem in Iraq is that Bush is trying to wage war and not call it that. Technical superiority and better training do not in the end win out against a long term commited insurgency. The idea that true order can only be restored by using Nazi like draconian tactics or all out warfare speaks to folk frustrated by wot they consider the military having their hands tied in Iraq by busybodies who disapprove of torture, indiscriminate civilian casualties, and genocidal bombing campaigns and the like. The notion that Amrica should depopulate the area of Arabs and repopulate with Americans speaks to another aspect of context to this guys blatherings.

The planet, as Spud sees it at present, is in the middle of an unacknowledged breeding war, largely being encouraged by the three "People of the Book". Spud sees the Muslims as "winning" that war at present. On a given level this guy who wrote this piece is aware of all that and it is in a sense only "natural" to want to return war to it's old raison d'etres right quick.

Natural, in a sense, but still pretty much insane.

You can't go to war against billions of people and not understand the potential negative consequences of such an act. America cannot initiate a nuclear war b/c America is not the only nuclear power on the earth and such hubris would not go long unpunished.

But back to Spud's larger, more serious point. Do. Not. Ever. Again. Do this Banner Headline thingy over the fact that some wing-nut in a right wing think tank is prolly insane. Cos you could prolly do that a lot if ya think about it.

Serious need fer coffee now.

Be Well.

I never knew that Julius Caesar committed genocide of the Gauls. And I always thought that far from being universally hailed and ruling a stable Rome for a long time, Caesar was assasinated soon after he got home by an ad hoc cabal of many who feared too much power being concentrated in one citizen's hands. They dreaded absolute monarchy coming back. Think King George III, or is it King George W?

At one point Mr Atkinson seems to conflate Caesar with his adopted heir, Octavian. The latter did establish a durable imperium, but only after a long and uneasy triumviral interregnum followed by a civil war which almost split the Roman Empire in two. Sort of like California declaring war on New York...

As the final days of their supreme folly unwind, the neocons' retreat into the consolations of paranoid and totalitarian fantasy make them seem like the Nazis in the bunker in spring 1945, consoling themselves with astrological projections.

If America is ever unlucky enough to emulate Haiti with a president-for-life, I doubt any current or future member of the Bush crime family will be deemed big enough to fill those boots.

At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new Constitution
in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University
of Edinburgh, had this to say about The Fall of the Athenian Republic
some 2,000 years prior:

"A Democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist
as a permanent form of government. A Democracy will continue to
exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote
themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."

From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates
who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the
result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal
policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning
of history has been about 200 years.

We should expect to hear more and more of this kind of scary shit as we get closer and closer to next falls election. The wingnuts are running out the clock praying that OBL gets in another attack so his partner in crime Emperor BV$H can claim he and only he can fight the endless war on terror the right way and its high time everyone understood what that means.( Dictatorship) Its not an unlikely scenario after all we've seen of this man's rule these last 6.5 yrs.

Finally, a wingnut crazier than Max Boot (senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations) who has wished for "a new era when America, like the British Empire, will always be fighting some war, somewhere, against someone," and who has several times advocated creating an American version of the Foreign Legion, recruiting foreigners to fight our never-ending wars with the promise of citizenship.

If Atkinson wasn't such a dangerous nut, I could feel sorry for him. His bio pretty much establishes that he is a prototypical "revennge of the nerd" character:

My esteem for my peers became replaced by contempt, and planted the seed of suspicion in my mind that my whole community was of the same calibre --foolish cowards. A notion that experience rarely confounded but often confirmed, so insensibly I became a social exile.

This was just as well, for in a declining community any citizen who retains respect for the truth must become alienated from the majority of his fellow citizens because they hate the truth. Inevitably I could only ever be a social outcast, but being freed from the need to win social approval also meant being freed from social prejudices, and being able to see my community more clearly; a detachment that is essential for any student of society.

As an adult it is easy to understand why the other boys in the street hated me, I was from a different class. My father was an honest, educated man, who didn't smoke or drink, and would never dream of striking his wife, but he was surrounded by drunks, thieves and wife-beaters. Our family enjoyed money, comfort and stability, unlike many of those around us. Not only were we the only family in the street to have a car, but also we were the only family in the whole suburb to have tea on the lawn. Everything about us was different, and we were naturally resented. While the neighbouring adults never confronted my father, their children were delighted to bully his children. My siblings and myself became social half-castes, accepted by no class and despised by all. The result in my case was an initial bitter resentment of my community, along with the traditional notions that I should pursue university and a career; so I dropped out of school to take a job as a bus conductor. And to escape this dead-end job, I emigrated, arriving in Australia in 1969, aged 22, with a pregnant wife, two small children, 30 pounds sterling, no job and no qualifications other than an incomplete public school education.

With determination, skill and a little luck I forged a career in computers before being forced into retirement in 1991; a fate that brought as much relief as anxiety. No more salary, little chance of ever getting a job, but no longer having to pretend that the community and its administration was sane. And I was fortunate that my second wife, an Australian by birth, was happy to work so her husband did not, and for the first time in my life I was blessed with leisure. Not only did I not have to toil, but also I did not have to worry about paying the bills, which is another essential qualification for any student of the community.

Crazed fuckwads aren't they?

Bush dissolves the Senate and declares himself Emperor of the United States of America..

Sounds like something straight out of a science fiction movie.. and we know how that trilogy ended...`

By the way, the Visitor who was so enamored of Alexander Tyler and his supposed description of how Democracies fall has been snagged by yet another internet/e-mail hoax. One version or another of this story has been e-mailed and gullibly posted from one end of the ether to the other.

But it ain't true.

Well, at least this half-baked scheme comes somewhat close to a win-win. The way I see it, a President with 30% approval ratings who tells his military that he'll relieve them of that pesky little chore of VOTING every 4 years, will, in fact, serve the rest of his life as president AND have his term ended early. It's got something for the neocons AND the rest of the country. Everybody plays, everybody wins.

Darn. Now I am sooo sorry I loaned them my old copy of "The Handmaid's Tale."

President for life. Has that "Oh, hell, did we just go and remove all doubt about being a fascist state!?" sort of irony to it.

Yes, by all means, lets. Then, we'll see who wakes the heck up, mmmmmmmmmm?

I could see a president for life in our future, but I don't see Bush as the one making that play. I'd be more inclined to go with Tom Kratman and his dystopian novel A State of Disobedience. His natural suspicions point the finger at Hillary as a more likely future dictator.

As for how long Democracies last, what does it matter? The US is hardly a democracy.


um, mr atkinson, caesar's seizure of power didn't end the strife

there were assassinations (rather famously of caesar himself) and massive civil wars for years to come. so maybe his coup wasn't such a great move. least of all for himself. and no one can claim the roman republic was a democracy, it was an aristocratic oligarchy with a bit of voting and lots of sword play.

it was augustus who ended the fighting. well, for a bit anyway. and he did so by concealing the dictatorship behind republican forms.

sound familiar.

but really mr atkinson is a sad exhibit of our civilisation's decline. once creative, innovative and free thinking, unbounded by rusty chains of the past, our tragic fall into an ignorant and mindless religious conservatism has led to an inability to perceive the world as it is, with clarity and honesty. Exhibit One: Iraq. Exhibit Two: Mr Atkinson

Don't miss Atkinson's May 11, 2007 exercise in hysteria here, which is groundwork for his call for a Bush dictatorship:

Ya, this guy is clearly insane or just a ruthless bastard who is hell bent on wiping out an entire race of people to heal his wounded ego because of how bad he was treated as a rich child. Cry me a freaking river. Basically, in his bio, he says that he dropped out of school because he did not fit in with everyone because he was rich and everyone else was cowardly, moved to another country and got married and had kids, retired early so his wife could become the provider so he could have more free time and become a "student of the community", and people actually listen to this loser?

So basically we should forget everything our founding fathers fought and died for, which was a republic and NOT A DEMOCRACY, and become the thing the founders despised the most: a tyrannical form government like they escaped from with King George III. the founders hated democracy. Thomas Jefferson viewed democracy as this," Democracy is two wovles and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb constesting the vote." Lets just forget everything we were taught about the constitution and our rights that were given to us by our creator and throw them in the toilet and hail Bush as dictator for ever, agnosium( Oh, wait! Most people do not know shit about the constitution and the intentions of our founders because history has been revised and ignored by our government run public education system so everyone is told their history by a bunch of PE teachers. So the students end up learning nothing about the constitution or the importance of our inalienable rights and that we must be the watchdogs of liberty or we shall lose it. They are taught to serve and obey the governments every whim, intstead of the government serving we the people and obeying the constitution by protecting our rights). Wake up people! Don't buy into to the neocon BS, think for yourselves and beware of anyone who is asking for us to give away our liberties to protect us. Remember " Those who give up essential liberties for temporary security deserve neither and lose both."- Thomas Jefferson