Bill O’Reilly may have gained access to one of us secularists’ most important documents. Our secret plan:
O’REILLY: Well, that’s right. I mean, if there’s anything The Factor does it’s bring the big picture to people so they understand what’s going on, and — because it isn’t in a vacuum. I mean, the ACLU and George Soros and these websites don’t operate day to day without a plan. There is a plan.
O’REILLY: There’s a very secret plan. And it’s a plan that nobody’s going to tell you, “Well, we want to diminish Christian philosophy in the U.S.A. because we want X, Y, and Z.” They’ll never ever say that. But I’m kind of surprised they went after Christmas because it’s such an emotional issue.
At the very least, he knows of its existence. A troubling development. I have my copy right here and it’s quite a read. I only wish I had a copy of the homosexual agenda, as it’s referenced a couple times. Sadly, it’s not that secret a plan. Your local ACLU chapter has plenty of copies. You just have to know the secret handshake and be able to acquire a goat on short notice.
The current plan lays out some very pressing issues for us. For instance, how exactly can we coordinate our actions better? I mean, Soros doesn’t own any of Media Matters, our primary media outlet. We really need a secular board to decide on courses of action. A group that can pull the strings from behind the scenes without being exposed, except by a few people on the Internet or living in bunkers. Luckily Soros, being Jewish, has a lot of insight to offer here.
There’s also a lot of discussion about whether or not our Christmas strategy has backfired. An interesting perspective was put forth by Michelle Goldberg: by pursuing a fairly benign strategy of advocating government neutrality, we’ve enraged the Christian Right so much that they’ve inadvertently convinced many school boards that restrictions are much greater than they actually are. We’re having problems with businesses, though. Seeing as we’re bent on ridding this country of corporate fascists, we don’t have the boycotting abilities that the Christian Right has (we have strict policies banning anyone seen at a Wal-Mart). This means we really don’t have the influence over them we need. Luckily, they seem to see inclusiveness as good for business. We are currently searching for strategies to co-opt them for our purposes, rather than letting them be useful idiots.
The final major issue discussed is how to divert people’s attention from a common point, as put by O’Reilly recently:
In every secular progressive country, they’ve wiped out religion.
Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, all of them. That’s the first step. Get the religion out of there, so that we can impose our big-government, progressive agenda.
Obviously, we wish being associated with people like Castro and Mao wasn’t such a negative in this country at the moment. Model leaders who do the best with difficult situations are to be praised. However, we can’t afford to be associated with mass murderers like Stalin (no matter how great a leader he was) and Hitler. A couple of propaganda techniques have been devised to try and counter this devastating argument:
1. Use fake quotes. Hitler is obviously the main person we have to distance ourselves from. We’ve created some clever quotes and have been working on embedding them in otherwise trustworthy historical documents. For example, most copies of Mein Kampf you see now include the following, completely fabricated, quotes:
I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.
The greatness of Christianity did not lie in attempted negotiations for compromise with any similar philosophical opinions in the ancient world, but in its inexorable fanaticism in preaching and fighting for its own doctrine.
What we have to fight for…is the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the Creator.
I’m particularly fond of the first one. Short and to the point. It’s going to take a lot of work to make Stalin and the others Christian, but we think we can make it happen.
2. Rhetorical misdirection. This is a more intellectual approach, which I fear may turn off the moronic population of this country. Nevertheless, it’s very clever. The basic idea is to point out other similar associations from which we can make absurd conclusions. For example, racists are against affirmative action. Very cleverly, we’ve associated racism with being against affirmative action, which many people would object to. Another example would be that white supremacists are Christian. Again, the same reasoning applies. It’s a very risky strategy; it has to hit the sweet spot of convincing people that the Stalin-secularism comparision is weak, but not having people realize the actual truth: everyone against affirmative action is racist, all Christians are white supremacists, and we’re Stalinists. Are Americans smart enough to make the first conclusion, but dumb enough to miss the second one? We’ll see.
So, there you have it. The current state of our plan. I think we’re making good progess and have several promising strategies to pursue. If only Bill hadn’t exposed it so soon.