How to Destroy America…….

Now do not think that I am advocating destroying America, because I am not, but I found this speech, given by Dick Lamm former Governor of Colorado given at an Immigration-Overpopulation Conference in Washington D.C., and I had to study on this a bit. I went to and checked out it’s validity and found that this is true. And people, being true, it is very scary, because Common sense should tell you that what he said is true….read on:

We know Dick Lamm as the former Governor of Colorado. In that context his thoughts are particularly poignant. There was an immigration overpopulation conference in Washington, DC, filled to capacity by many of America’s finest minds and leaders. A brilliant college professor by the name of Victor Hansen Davis talked about his latest book, “Mexifornia,” explaining how immigration – both legal and illegal was destroying the entire state of California. He said it would march across the country until it destroyed all vestiges of The American Dream.
Moments later, former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm stood up and gave a stunning speech on how to destroy America. The audience sat spellbound as he described eight methods for the destruction of the United States He said, “If you believe that America is too smug, too self-satisfied, too rich, then let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and fall and that ‘An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.’
“Here is how it happens,” Lamm said: “First, to destroy America, turn America into a bilingual or multi-lingual and bicultural country.” History shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. The historical scholar, Seymour 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, and 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 difficult times with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.”
Lamm went on: Second, to destroy America, “Invent ‘multiculturalism’ and encourage immigrants to maintain their culture. Make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal. That there are no cultural differences. Make it an article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rates are due solely to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out of bounds.
Third, “We could make the United States an ‘Hispanic Quebec’ without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz 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 ethnocentricity and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.” Lamm said, “I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture.. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with the salad bowl metaphor. It is important to ensure that we have various cultural subgroups living in America enforcing their differences rather than as Americans, emphasizing their similarities.”
“Fourth, 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% dropout rate from high school.”
“My fifth point for destroying America would be to get big foundations and 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 that their lack of success was the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.”
“My sixth plan for America’s downfall would include dual citizenship, and pro mote divided loyalties. I would celebrate diversity over unity. I would stress differences rather than similarities. 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. Look at the ancient Greeks. The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common Language and literature; and they worshipped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty.. Yet all these bonds were not strong enough to overcome two factors: local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions. Greece fell. “E. Pluribus Unum” — from many, one. In that historical reality, if we put the emphasis on the ‘Pluribus’ instead of the ‘Unum,’ we will balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.”
“Next to last, I would place all 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’ halt discussion and debate. Having made America a bilingual/bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, 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 symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact of millions of them.”
In the last minute of his speech, Governor Lamm wiped his brow. Profound silence followed. Finally he said, “Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis’s book “Mexifornia.” His book is dangerous. It exposes the plan to destroy America. If you feel America deserves to be destroyed, don’t read that book.”

Now if this doesn’t scare you people into action, then I guess America is bound for it’s own suicide.

In this speech are at least seven ways listed to destroy America, and people, we are letting all of them happen!

It is like he said, multiculturalism is not bad to have, but it is bad for a society. Why do you think that the countries that seem to be going good now are not doing that? Have you ever wondered why we are having so many problems now? I have been ranting about the war, and immigration…those are not the only reasons we are having troubles. Immigration is a biggie, but it is not the only reason. We are turning ourselves into a bilingual nation, forsaking the fact that English has been our language for centuries, and letting in the Mexican language and culture in is part of the suicide. It is like the former governor said…..multiculturalism in a society causes tension and distrust. We need to stop this, and assert ourselves as Americans and stop trying to be politically correct in everything. Let everyone know that when they come here, they have to do it legally, they have to learn the English language and embrace our laws and culture.

So, the question is clear here people. Do we want to commit suicide as a nation, or do we want to stay a nation that is revered and coveted around the world? The answer is simple, if we want to stay a nation. And that is to stop catering to the whims of illegals, and other nations. Start worrying about our own society and culture. …. . … . cause it is quickly becoming something of the past if we don’t stop what we are doing. And what we are doing is Committing Suicide as a nation.

God Bless America
God Bless our Troops
God Bless my Readers


About Robert P. Garding

I am a Reagan Conservative, who is very alarmed at the Liberals who have just lost their majority over our government, but continue to act like it never happened. They have to be stopped. NOW or even sooner.
This entry was posted in Conservative Talk Blog host, National Security Concerns, Political. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to How to Destroy America…….

  1. It’s scary to think about it. I write posts on this topic all the time. The irrationalist left hates America. Multiculturalism is the ideology of death, of the individual, and ultimately, the nation.

  2. Deborah says:

    Great site Robert, you’re a very good writer.

    Famed you and your blog on BTF =)

    Keep up the great work!

  3. Steve Higgins says:

    I appreciate former governor Lamm’s insights. His speech suggests that my perspective of America’s future is not unfounded. Like Lamm, I have reservations regarding America’s future.

    The influx of immigrants refusing to assimilate American culture is problematic. More troubling is the liberal devotion to “multiculturalism.” According to their dogma, the notion of one single language, personal responsibility, and assimilation is blasphemy.

    Call me a heretic, but I believe this is ridiculous. So…… how did this happen? How did this liberal religious-like devotion to “multiculturalism” come about? I do not pretend to have all the answers, but I believe the emergence of “political correctness” contributed to today’s political climate.

    The answer is rooted in the 1950’s-60’s. Following the Civil Rights movement, greater government attention was placed into the realm of race-relations, particularly racial equality. Coupled with government action was the emergence of “white guilt”- spearheaded by progressive academia. The obvious goal of this movement was to ensure social, economic, and political equality for persons of all races in America. This goal is mandated by the Constitution-notwithstanding moral obligations.

    Unfortunately, this goal morphed into a blind devotion divorced from common sense and forward thinking. Enter the “P.C.” movement. Today most arguments that run counter to racial/ethnic progressive thought is attacked as “racist” or “closed-minded.” It is under this type of linguistic protection that multiculturalism was allowed to flourish beyond reason.

    Think about it. Opponents of Spanish as a second language can be attacked as “racist” or “closed-minded.” Social commentators who hint that Black America’s plight is partially self-inflicted are dismissed as ignorant bigots.

    To be objective-has racism been completely stomped out in America? I submit that it has not. However, 70% of black children are born out of wedlock. Many black children are raised without a father in the home. While this trend is not unique to the blacks, it is most prominent in the black community.

    Needless to say, having only one breadwinner in the home is not conducive to economic advancement. Also, having only one parent places greater burdens on black mothers to provide oversight and discipline required to protect children. Granted, this is not the sole condition restricting black advancement. I concede that racism has not been completely erased. The point is, even discussing this social condition is not “politically correct.” It is possible that progressive/liberal readers would quickly dismiss my black family unit suggestion as racist.

    Hence the problem. I am not racist. I consider myself objective- with an ability to approach issues with an open mind. However, suggesting anything that is inconsistent with multiculturalism- or an argument that suggests the black community is plagued by anything other than individual and government racism is “racist.”

    Say I debate a liberal who embraces multiculturalism and I articulate the above argument. It is possible I will be dismissed as a racist. Once that happens, I become the social “other.” Any merit to my argument is deflated given my new status as a racist. The same goes with an attack on blind devotion to advancing multiculturalism- I will be dismissed as a closed-minded bigot. Again, at this point, my argument is rendered moot.

    Stated differently, the P.C. movement emerged as a strategy to restrict the dissemination of antagonistic ideas. It allows liberals to attack a conservative’s person without addressing our ideas. The P.C. movement in a way created the paradigm needed for a quasi-monopoly on the multiculturalism debate.

    The question I leave for whoever might read my submission: how can conservatives address this devotion to “multiculturalism”- , within the confines of political correctness?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s