A Manchurian Candidate?

In the early 1960’s Hollywood released an intriguing movie about the then current fears of a socialistic (Communistic) take over of our government called “The Manchurian Candidate.”  The movie had a first-rate cast that included Frank Sinatra, Angela Lansbury, Laurence Harvey and Janet Leigh.  The plot portrayed a platoon of former Korean War POW’s that had been “brainwashed” by a committee of Communist acolytes, from both communist countries and the US, who were part of a plot to take over the US presidency.  A Manchurian general had conditioned, in a Pavlovian way, Laurence Harvey to respond to a conditioned stimulus in any manner that his American operative wished … namely to kill the president.  In the movie the Communists had arranged to make Harvey’s character very respectable … namely, he was a Congressional Medal of Honor winner.  The movie was gripping and believable … much better than its 2004 politically correct sequel … but what it showed was how a foreign enemy, a foreign ideology could take over our political system.

Is it possible for a foreign interest, or more insidiously, a foreign ideology to take over our government?  The Framers of the Constitution thought so … that is why they inserted the “natural born citizen” clause in the Constitution.  As Paul, our esteemed co-blogger, has pointed out, that clause was inserted so that no president could be under the control of a foreign national or ideology during his (or her) formative years.  Of course, the fear in 1787 was that the thousands of property owning Tories who vacated the colonies during the Revolutionary War by going to Great Britain would return, bringing their English (foreign) spouses along with their highly prejudiced … “brain washed”… young children.  Since these children’s parents had actively opposed the revolution, in many cases having fought it, and had, at the very least, “consorted with the enemy,” did we want the children raised under those influences eligible to be president?  The Framers forbid it in the Constitution.

OK, but that was in the 18th Century … what does that have to do with today?

Let’s look at a theoretical situation.  Suppose that an impressionable young woman who was raised by a family of committed socialists from mid-western America, say Kansas, goes off to college and meets a soul-mate, a committed handsome young Islamic Communist from Africa, say from Kenya, falls in love, becomes pregnant and marries him.  The child, a little boy, is named with a traditional Islamic name, that of his father as is customary in his father’s religion.  He is not “natural born,” because although he is born on American soil, in Hawaii, to an American mother, and because of that is certainly an American citizen, he is not “natural born” because his father is a foreign national.  His father most certainly has anti-American prejudices and, as a Communist, is deeply committed to an ideology that is the antithesis of American freedom and to the advancement of the struggle of international socialism.  His father is committed to the overthrow of the American way of life.  In this scenario do we detect some of the antecedents to the fears of the Framers?

So let’s carry this on a little further.  Say the father tires of his immature young bride and his responsibilities to her.  He leaves her destitute in Hawaii,  and returns to his tribe in Kenya.  The terrified girl, with her baby, still consorting with the only people that she knows, the socialists and communists at her school, finds a young Islamic communist from Indonesia who falls in love with her, marries her and takes her to his homeland.  Our little boy is now enrolled in a “madrasa” where he is taught to hate, among other things, the “great Satan,” America.  So our little boy, during his all important formative years is being taught to hate not only America, but the American way of life.  He is becoming an expert at hating a country that he has never seen … a country of which he is a citizen.  But going on … chances are that the impressionable young girl has grown up quite a little because she is “not in Kansas anymore.”  It is difficult comprehend how a modern American woman (or any modern woman) could subordinate herself to a misogynistic religion that reduces women to something less than a chattel.  It is probable that our imaginary girl would have left our Indonesian Muslim after 8 or 10 years to return to the island paradise of Hawaii.  Our boy would have been thrust into a foreign “Christian” society  and would probably had a lot of trouble adjusting.  Let’s say that our girl’s father, the one that had taught her about the glories of Communism, had retired to the island and our boy and his mother, having no other place to go, moved in with him and his wife.  Our boy can’t get along in public school, where the bible is read and the “Pledge of Allegiance” is given daily.  Grandpa embarks upon home schooling our bright boy, but is soon in over his head, but he has an ace in the hole.  Because of his activism in the movement, he has wide acquaintance with the Communist intelligentsia.  One of his favorites is the editor of the “Daily Worker,” the communist newspaper.  Grandpa eventually persuades the editor to tutor our bright boy.  After much success and many years our tutor, using the monetary resources of the communist party, hatches a plan to drive our boy into the apex of political society.  He sends the boy all over the world to help his education; he gets our boy into the best schools;  he sees to it that the boy gets the best grades;  he sees to it that our boy is a BMOC (big man on campus);  when our boy leaves school, he places him in a political environment that will provide a voting block to elevate him into politics;  he introduces him to successful political and religious radicals;  he teaches him how to speak, how to be a gentleman;  he surrounds him with radical thinkers, money men, campaign managers and … eureka … the first thing we know our boy is in the state and then the US Senate, one step away from the presidency.  First thing you know, our little boy, a Muslim and Communist is President.

What do you think our boy would do if he became President?

I am guessing that you can easily figure it out … and it would not be good for the traditional American system … but it would be “fundamental change.”

Were the Framers correct?  Should we make it impossible for a foreigner to become president?

Could we have a “Manchurian Candidate” become President?  … my answer is YES … and I think that we may have already done it!

This entry was posted in Lee's Musings. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.