So originally the image was just the 2 swords without the star but it’s the Ankara/adinkra sign turned with a star, the brand will be a mix of both African culture and streetwear. I’m still trying to figure out a slogan or phrase for the brand. So it’s named odd ones and I was thinking it goes with the logo cause it’s not your traditional adikra logo but still has culture to it so I was thinking something along the lines of “culturally uncultured” or something like that but first honest opinion on the logo and second Do you think this concept of clothing fit the name and logo? And last If you saw this on a shirt hoodie or sweats would you fw it?

Published today in The Times:

"By the standards of my world, I was a heretic. I’d come to believe that the socio-political movement insisting “trans women are women” was neither kind nor tolerant, but in fact profoundly misogynistic, regressive, dangerous in some of its objectives and nakedly authoritarian in its tactics. However, I kept my thoughts to myself in public, because people around me, including some I love, were begging me not to speak. So I watched from the sidelines as women with everything to lose rallied, in Scotland and across the UK, to defend their rights. My guilt that I wasn’t standing with them was with me daily, like a chronic pain.
What ultimately drove me to break cover were two separate legal events, both of which were happening in the UK.
In 2019, a researcher in England called Maya Forstater, who worked at a think tank, took her bosses to an employment tribunal. Forstater alleged that she’d been discriminated against for her belief that human beings cannot literally change sex. On the one hand, it seemed inconceivable that the tribunal would rule against Maya for holding and expressing a rational and factual belief, yet I had a dark, persistent feeling that she was going to lose, in which case the implications of such a loss for freedom of speech and belief in the UK, especially for women, would be far-reaching.
On the day in December 2019 that Maya lost her discrimination case (she’d go on to win on appeal, and gain substantial damages) I tweeted: “Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya.”
https://preview.redd.it/lwf3hok41e3d1.png?width=776&format=png&auto=webp&s=6c0d26d2de5a1b5b35f0aff52d367b79765af975
I then posted an essay on my website, elaborating on my concerns about gender identity ideology. I’ve been struck, since, by how many of the people who claim to know what I believe on this issue freely admit to never reading that essay. They don’t need to, they say, because their favourite trans influencers have already explained what I really meant. This peculiar stance seems to me to sum up the lack of critical thinking surrounding this issue, and the aversion of gender activists to exposing themselves to ideas that might shake their faith in their beloved slogans.
The following summer, in Scotland, where I’ve lived for three decades, the SNP government, led by the first minister Nicola Sturgeon, was gearing up to pass the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which would remove all medical safeguarding from the transition process. A person would be able to change their legal gender as long as they’d lived in their “acquired gender” for three months, and made a statutory declaration that they intended to keep doing so. There was no definition of what “living in an acquired gender” meant and no requirement for psychological assessment, surgery or hormones. If the bill passed, it would mean that more male-bodied individuals could assert more strongly their right to enter spaces previously reserved for women, including abuse shelters, rape crisis centres, public changing rooms and prison cells.
Polling showed that the public strongly disagreed with what Sturgeon’s government was planning to do. I was so angry that the Scottish parliament looked set to push through the Gender Recognition Reform Bill over public opposition that on October 6, 2022, the day of a women’s protest outside Holyrood, I posted a picture of myself online wearing a T-shirt bearing the slogan: Nicola Sturgeon, Destroyer of Women’s Rights.
https://preview.redd.it/hv0cwsxw1e3d1.jpg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=512ace754aec982a1c0799b034b4d42d19690174
The bill passed in December 2022. Incredibly, an amendment to prevent those previously convicted of sexual crimes such as rape from obtaining a gender recognition certificate was voted down, a stain on the Scottish parliament that will take a very long time to fade. (The bill was subsequently blocked by the UK government because it was in conflict with the Equality Act.)
Sturgeon, who has described herself as “feminist to my fingertips”, spoke out in 2023 about the “real” motivations of those who had objections to the ideology: “There are some people that I think have decided to use women’s rights as a sort of cloak of acceptability to cover up what is transphobia … just as they’re transphobic you’ll also find they are deeply misogynist, often homophobic, possibly some of them racist as well.”
Many were outraged by Sturgeon’s words — a friend of mine ripped up her SNP membership card because of them — but I wasn’t surprised. In the run up to the Gender Recognition Reform Bill vote the first minister had argued exclusively along standard trans activist lines, and one of the gender ideologues’ favourite talking points is that unless you buy into their philosophy, you’re a homophobic white supremacist.
The backlash towards me for speaking out about Maya, about gender ideology in general and about the situation in Scotland has been vicious. Nobody who’s been through an online monstering or a tsunami of death and rape threats will claim it’s fun, and I’m not going to pretend it’s anything other than disturbing and frightening, but I had a good idea of what was coming because I’d seen the same thing happen to other women, many of whom were risking careers and, sometimes, their physical safety. Very few high-profile women — with honourable exceptions, especially in sport, Martina Navratilova and Sharron Davies foremost among them — seemed prepared to stand up and give these women cover and support. I felt it was well past time that I stepped up too.
In what might be loosely described as my professional community, there was bewilderment that I’d abandoned the safe, generally approved position to support Maya and campaign against the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill. What was I playing at?
People who’d worked with me rushed to distance themselves from me or to add their public condemnation of my blasphemous views (though I should add that many former and current colleagues have been staunchly supportive). In truth, the condemnation of certain individuals was far less surprising to me than the fact that some of them then emailed me, or sent messages through third parties, to check that we were still friends.
The thing is, those appalled by my position often fail to grasp how truly despicable I find theirs. I’ve watched “no debate” become the slogan of those who once posed as defenders of free speech. I’ve witnessed supposedly progressive men arguing that women don’t exist as an observable biological class and don’t deserve biology-based rights. I’ve listened as certain female celebrities insist that there isn’t the slightest risk to women and girls in allowing any man who self-identifies as a woman to enter single-sex spaces reserved for women, including changing rooms, bathrooms or rape shelters.
https://preview.redd.it/cux87hjv3e3d1.png?width=1228&format=png&auto=webp&s=e8d605ae2476f960bf3e49328375e929a52be29f
I’ve asked people who consider themselves socialists and egalitarians what might be the practical consequences of erasing easily understood words like “woman” and “mother”, and replacing them with “cervix-haver”, “menstruator” and “birthing parent”, especially for those for whom English is a second language, or women whose understanding of their own bodies is limited. They seem confused and irritated by this question. Better that a hundred women who aren’t up to speed with the latest gender jargon miss public health information than that one trans-identified individual feels invalidated, seems to be the view.
When I’ve asked what the lack of female-only spaces would mean for women of certain faith groups, or survivors of sexual violence, the response is an almighty shrug. Over and again I’ve heard “no trans person has ever harmed a woman or a girl in a female space”, the speakers’ consciences apparently untroubled by the fact that they are parroting an easily disprovable lie, because there’s ample evidence that men claiming a female identity have committed sexual offences, acts of violence and voyeurism, both inside women’s spaces and without. Indeed, the Ministry of Justice’s own figures show that there are proportionately more trans-identified males in jail in the UK for sexual offences than among male prisoners as a whole. When this inconvenient fact is raised, I’m sometimes told trans-identified sex offenders “aren’t really trans, they’re just gaming the system”. Well, yes. That’s the point. If a system relies on an unfalsifiable sense of self rather than sex, it’s impossible to keep bad faith actors out.
One of the things that has most shocked me throughout this debacle has been the determined deafness of so many opinion-makers to whistleblowers at the UK’s now-discredited Tavistock gender identity clinic. Medics who were resigning from the service in unusually high numbers asserted that autistic and same sex-attracted young people, and those who’d experienced abuse — groups that were over-represented among those seeking to transition — were being fast-tracked towards irreversible medical interventions of questionable benefit by activist groups and ideologue medics. Those whistleblowers have since been completely vindicated: after an independent investigation, it’s to be closed.
Looking back now, and notwithstanding how unpleasant it’s been at times, I see that outing myself as gender-critical brought far more positives than negatives. The most important benefit of speaking out was that I was free to act.
One of my favourite writers, Colette, wrote in her book My Apprenticeships, “among all the forms of absurd courage, the courage of girls is outstanding.” For too long, I’d watched in silence as girls and women with everything to lose had stood up in the face of a modern-day witch hunt, braving threats and intimidation, not only from activists in black balaclavas holding placards promising to beat and murder them, but from institutions and employers telling them they must accept and espouse an ideology in which they don’t believe, and surrender their rights. In a sense, of course, all courage is absurd. Humans are hardwired to survive, to seek safety and comfort. Isn’t it more sensible to keep your head down, to hope somebody else sorts it out, to serve our self-interest, to court approval? Possibly.
But I believe that what is being done to troubled young people in the name of gender identity ideology is, indeed, a terrible medical scandal. I believe we’re witnessing the greatest assault of my lifetime on the rights our foremothers thought they’d guaranteed for all women. Ultimately, I spoke up because I’d have felt ashamed for the rest of my days if I hadn’t. If I feel any regret at all, it’s that I didn’t speak far sooner.
From JK Rowling's X account: This article features an extract from an essay I contributed to a book written by those on the frontline of the fight for women's rights in Scotland. For my full essay and over 30 others, buy 'The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht', which is published tomorrow.

Ready to elevate your style with a touch of decentralization? Explore our collections now and join the decentralized revolution today!
https://defioutfitters.com/
Key Features:

• Decentralized Crypto Apparel: From trendy t-shirts to cozy hoodies, our apparel range celebrates the world of decentralized finance and cryptocurrencies. Show off your favorite crypto logos and slogans with pride.
• Quality & Sustainability: We prioritize quality and sustainability in everything we offer. Our products are made from premium materials, ensuring durability and comfort, while also aligning with our commitment to environmental responsibility.

Why Choose Us:

• Unique Designs: Stand out from the crowd with our exclusive designs that you won't find anywhere else. Each product is meticulously crafted to reflect the spirit of decentralization and innovation.
• Secure Transactions: Shop with confidence knowing that your transactions are secure and encrypted. We prioritize the privacy and security of our customers, providing a seamless shopping experience from start to finish.
• Worldwide Shipping: No matter where you are, we'll deliver your favorite crypto apparel right to your doorstep. Enjoy fast and reliable shipping options to make your shopping experience hassle-free.

https://preview.redd.it/gmhvz0adjh3d1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e82a8262f53bd9793ec459711f39c46acbcb72bf
https://preview.redd.it/1jclkbcejh3d1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=37864638ac4e1b3269693b4f057878d2849ce3dd

“We must all hang together or we shall all hang separately.”
Thus quipped Benjamin Franklin as the American colonies joined against the tyranny of George III, the phrase hangs heavy in the imaginations of today’s political opposition. Laden with fears of violence, Chairman Osro Cobb of the Progressive-Federalist National Committee announced the cancellation of the party’s presidential primaries and the formal acquiescence of the party to the Committee for the Preservation of the Republic’s call for a joint presidential nominating convention with the American Liberty League. Yet, with the organization’s President Thomas Schall, once seen as the nearly prohibitive favorite for the nomination, dying in an unforeseen car accident and populist contender Eduardo Chibas taking his own life on live radio, the attempt to unite the opposition must find a candidate able to carry both banners in the face of Philip La Follette’s campaign for a third term.
​
Clare Boothe Luce waves to her supporters.
Major Candidates:
The following candidates are seen as frontrunners for the nomination.
Clare Boothe Luce: 49 year old Clare Boothe Luce of Connecticut rose to prominence as Henry Luce’s scandal-ridden yet massively popular First Lady, whose charisma would lead to a popular joke that every Luce voter wished they had voted for Clare despite widely known allegations of mutual marital infidelity. Marrying Henry after divorcing her first husband and entering high society as the author of an all-female play, Luce would become First Lady at the young age of 38 and soon emerge as a face of the American home front amidst the Third Pacific War. Describing the nation as having become a “dictatorial bumbledom,” Luce has echoed the anti-New State ethos of the party and is seen as the candidate of establishment conservatives. Criticizing the very slogan of President La Follette, she has argued that the United States cannot “win the peace” as it has not truly won the war until the defeat of international communism. Clare has supported the Zionist project in Alaska, a unified military command to replace the Department of Peace, and the creation of a defense pact among American allies in the Pacific as the centerpiece of an aggressively interventionist foreign policy declaring “if we are no longer willing to fight for it, our Christian democracy is finished." Yet, Luce has also opposed the creation of a stronger international United Nations to replace the powerless Parliament of Nations.
Driven to Catholicism in 1946 following the death of her daughter, even as her ex-president husband gallivanted about with a girlfriend a thousand miles from his wife’s baptism, Luce has emerged as a changed woman, reportedly abandoning her affairs and entering a career in electoral politics with her 1946 election to the Senate. Though Aaron Burr Houston maintained a private devotion to the Church of Rome, Clare has taken her faith with a zeal heretofore unseen in American politics, using the Senate as a pulpit to preach against “materialism” and a spiritual decline as the root of both communism and fascism, slyly suggesting that the rise of the Pentecostal, Immannuelite, and Mormon faiths has come hand-in-hand with the nation’s fascist surge as she has publicly wished that “the whole world would be Catholic.” Despite defenses from Presbyterian former President Luce, Clare’s faith has weakened her amongst convention delegates fearing the alienation of firmly Protestant voters. Yet her charm, wealth, and ability to attract millions in funding from backers such as Henry Ford II while winning key endorsements such as that of Richard Nixon has catapulted her to the front of the field.
W. Lee O’Daniel: 62 year old Senator W. Lee O’Daniel, better known as Pappy, rose to prominence in his late 20s as an architect of domestic policy during Aaron Burr Houston’s third term, being largely credited with the introduction of an old age pension system funded by a consumption tax. After making his way to the fore of Texas politics on his own through the integration of musical numbers and a widely popular radio show with his political antics, O’Daniel would turn from an upset gubernatorial defeat in the 1938 midterms to organizing Aaron Burr Houston’s campaign for a fourth term in the White House as the nation’s last hope against Charles Lindbergh. Accused by critics of puppeteering a dementia ridden 86 year old out of his own lust for power, O’Daniel would serve as Secretary of the Treasury for a year before being unceremoniously removed from the cabinet by Henry Luce for his critique of the American attack on Pearl Harbor and opposition to the draft, leaving him in political isolation as the Texan distinguished himself by demanding the execution of striking laborers as crucial to the war effort over his radio show.
A steadfast isolationist, O’Daniel’s foreign policy views have made him a favorite among Liberty League libertarians. Depicting himself as nearly as conservative as Luce on domestic issues with an isolationist foreign policy able to appeal to the Midwest, O’Daniel has emphasized ties to the legendary ABH and anti-alcohol views he claims can over the rural South. O’Daniel has also sought to use Luce’s Catholicism into an issue, seeking the support of Ben Gitlow through their shared membership in the Evangelical Christian Right. Yet, O’Daniel has been seen as the least committed among the candidates to the Committee’s pro-democracy ideals, while others question his fitness for office based on his eccentric manners as a cabinet Secretary and Senator, with Eleanor B. Roosevelt’s 1936 running mate Dan Moody remarking that “Pappy is as lost at the Treasury as I would be in a circus trapeze.”
Lucius D. Clay: A distant relative of former President Henry Clay, 54 year old General of the Army turned banker Lucius D. Clay of Georgia has been the subject of a draft movement seeking to secure a candidate with the allure of a war hero after an attack on right wing generals such as Harold George, “some of whom are my own classmates,” accusing them of leading the party astray with the nomination of the ultra-conservative Benjamin Gitlow. Clay has portrayed himself as the candidate of order, supporting, as the others do, the prosecution of Blackshirts and the freeing of prosecuted opposition politicians. However, Clay, a former administrator of Lindbergh-era public works programs, is the only candidate to stop short of supporting the abolition of the New State, with backers instead focusing on the renowned administrative talent that led Douglas MacArthur to quip that Clay “could run General Motors or General Bradley’s army.” Despite his reticence to campaign at the convention, Clay’s moderation, vague platform, connections, and war hero status have won over a significant segment of delegates.
John Sampson Cooper: Named for martyred Admiral William T. Sampson not long after the First Pacific War dramatically ended with the Second Battle of Hawai’i, 50 year old Kentucky Senator John Sampson Cooper has led an underdog campaign of moderate liberals led by young activists Mark Hatfield and Chuck Mathias and Tannenbaum territorial delegate Jacob Javits. Returning home from Yale to find his father on his deathbed and his beloved Pulaski County burned to the ground amidst the Revolution, Cooper would be elected to county leadership at age 24, famously responding to a legal requirement that he evict the impoverished by personally paying their debts, earning the moniker “the poor man’s judge” as he emerged as a major figure in post-Revolutionary reconciliation in Kentucky. Returning home once more from service as a military attache in the Third Pacific War, Cooper would oust incumbent Farmer-Laborite Jerry Spencer in a 1944 upset, delaying taking his seat to serve as a legal advisor to hundreds of thousands of displaced Indonesians before emerging as a Senate leader in bringing the United States closer to India and other nations newly liberated from colonialism.
While eschewing the isolationism of O’Daniel, Cooper has demonstrated a far more relaxed stand on foreign policy than Luce, opposing aggressive anti-communism abroad while depicting the United States as a great mediator of peace in situations such as the violence in Palestine or partition of India. The reported favorite of Fulgencio Batista despite Cooper’s criticism of Batista as insufficiently committed to democracy, the Kentuckian has managed to maintain a widespread popularity with labor that has led many to speculate that Cooper would be the only candidate able to win the endorsement of organized labor and an imprisoned John L. Lewis. Lacking the celebrity draw of Senator Luce, Cooper has countered with a far more detailed platform, calling for the opening of American borders to the world’s refugees, massively increased federal aid to education, and, in stances that have left him anathema to many party conservatives, support for universal health insurance, coal subsidies, and public housing. A self admitted “truly terrible public speaker," Cooper’s political independence has won him the support of Will Rogers Jr. and made him a favorite of the modern liberal wing of the Liberty League.
​
Roy Acuff strikes up the band.
Minor Candidates:
The following have significant support, but lag behind the frontrunner candidates.
Luis A. Ferre: Among the most grim results of the 1948 elections emerged from the Caribbean, where states once considered the most loyally anti-Farmer-Labor in America crossed the aisle for the first time in history. With strategists seeing the path to the presidency running through the island states, many among the electorally minded have flocked to 48 year old Puerto Rico Senator Luis A. Ferre, publisher of the nation’s largest Spanish language newspaper, El Nuevo Dia. A classically trained pianist who has focused his senatorial career on securing funding for the arts, Ferre has referred to the United States as the “moral summit of the world,” while aligning himself in the middle on economic policy, calling for “addressing the inequalities of society” by selling off public land at a low price and supporting federal public housing with an emphasis on rural revitalization, in addition to a call for a 4% Christmas bonus on the grounds of the Jesus Amendment.
James A. Rhodes: "Every time I take a position on an issue, I lose two percent of the people. If I do that 50 times, I have everybody mad at me," the quip encapsulates the philosophy of 43 year old Ohio Governor James A. “Jim” Rhodes and his backers. Emerging as the favorite of many convention delegates who have argued that the best path forward for a united campaign is a steadfast focus on bread and butter issues, Rhodes has remarked that “there are only three issues in this campaign: jobs, jobs, and jobs,” and has argued that any anti-La Follette campaign must focus on people’s lives and the economy, not vague notions of democracy and American ideals. Born in the hills of Appalachia, Rhodes would be forced out of college after failing every class, only to work his way into the Mayoralty of Columbus, before unexpectedly catapulting himself to the Ohio Governorship before the age of 40, where he has governed with a moderate conservatism focused on local issues such as water rights and a program to "put a college education within 25 miles of every boy and girl” that has been praised as a national model.
Roy Acuff: 49 year old Roy Acuff of Tennessee was christened “The King of Country Music” for smash hits such as Wabash Cannonball, leading fellow musician Hank Williams to quip “book him and you don’t worry about crowds…for drawing power in the South, it’s Roy Acuff, then God.” Yet, after a rumor that Governor Buford Elington had labeled his music “disgraceful,” Acuff would embrace the label “king of the Hillbillies” in the 1948 election cycle to trade his acoustic throne for the Governor’s chair. Declaring that “any business must be put on a business plan, and so must a state government,” Acuff has cut the budget while requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in government buildings, increasing state pensions, instituting a free school textbook program, cooperating with the La Follette Administration on the hydroelectric Tennessee Valley Authority, and has controversially called for additional restrictions on firearm ownership. Widely considered a possible frontrunner for his celebrity status if a primary were to have been held, Acuff has supported O’Daniel at the convention, yet has evasively refused to disavow a draft movement arising from his pro-union sympathies that many suspect could bring Fulgencio Batista into the fold alongside John L. Lewis, Jimmy Hoffa, and the opposition Farmer-Laborites.
Henry S. Breckinridge: The only member of the Liberty League at the fore of presidential consideration, 66 year old New York Congressman Henry Skillman Breckinridge ran alongside Al Capone in 1936 in the campaign that doomed the Commonwealth alliance, but has reinvented his career since by working to ally Federalist and Liberty League causes against La Follette and serving as the organization’s House leader. Advocating a heavily internationalist vision in line somewhere between that of Cooper and Luce, Breckinridge’s commitment to small government classical liberalism and a strict construction of the constitution has made him the favorite of Liberty League loyalists and some party conservatives. However, it is considered unlikely for a Liberty League member to win outright due to Progressive-Federalists comprising a majority of convention delegates.
Eleanor Butler Roosevelt: 63 year old former President Eleanor Butler Roosevelt was promoted for the nomination for months by her former counsel turned the “voice of impeachment,” Richard Nixon, who has noted that her re-election would have stopped the rise of fascism in its tracks. However, content with retirement, the writing of her memoirs, and the promotion of Nixon’s career, Roosevelt has categorically refused to seek the presidency. Nonetheless, she is expected to receive votes on the convention’s opening ballot from admirers.
​
Richard Nixon with the California delegation.
The Convention:
District of Columbia police scattered the Immanuelites, holding fliers declaring that their savior had prophesied nuclear armageddon on October 3rd of 1952, but they did not touch the Blackshirts. Ominously, they milled about in the blocks surrounding the convention, brandishing small arms and chants for Phil, as, within, the national convention of the Committee for the Preservation of the Republic proceeded without the pomp and circumstance conventions thrive in, a veil of despair lying over the nearly two thousand delegates in the plaza as they longed from their windows for days past. Further, a rule requiring two thirds of the convention for nomination, instituted by Liberty Leaguers fearful of a tyranny of the majority, would practically guarantee balloting periods stretching long into the night.
The first ballot would open with a surprise, as Roy Acuff rose to rebuff the acolytes of Fulgencio Batista. Pointing to the imprisoned Cuba Governor’s permissive policies towards gambling and prostitution, Acuff would draw a firm line between his pro-labor Christian conservatism and the “moral and political corruption” of Governor Batista. With the vociferousness of the singer’s vituperations and an unexpected willingness to attack Batista personally where other candidates stood largely silent, Acuff would find himself winning extensive support. With the rise of Roy Acuff splintering Pappy O’Daniel’s support, the former Secretary of the Treasury would find himself performing unexpectedly weakly, the beginning of a hemorrhage that would see his support move to Acuff in the first several rounds of balloting. Meanwhile, Clare Boothe Luce would take a lead out of the gate, but soon find that the collapse of Pappy O'Daniel's campaign following a wholesale defection to Acuff would lead other O'Daniel backers to rally behind Clay as an electable alternative. With Luce's lead dwindling, Cooper would swiftly capture her momentum, driving her to second place as a draft movement for Eleanor Butler Roosevelt peeled off dozens more Luce votes.
​

Ballot	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Lucius D. Clay	512	513	549	601	632	637	656
Clare Boothe Luce	646	641	619	599	529	515	514
John Sampson Cooper	277	282	308	310	366	368	369
Roy Acuff	46	101	112	165	187	188	170
Pappy O'Daniel	351	299	247	143	89	88	87
James A. Rhodes	58	58	58	58	58	58	58
Luis A. Ferre	42	42	43	42	43	44	46
Eleanor B. Roosevelt	1	1	1	19	31	38	38
Henry Skillman Breckinri-dge	21	21	21	21	19	17	15

With 1,310 delegates necessary to win the nomination, another half dozen rounds of balloting would bring no candidate anywhere near the necessary supermajority. Luce delegates would fiercely resist the rise of Lucius D. Clay, with Luce's manager Walter Judd and friend Anna Chennault illicitly spreading pamphlets accusing the General of being a plant of the regime to take control of the opposition. Yet, with his eyes on leading a reformed State Department, Pappy O'Daniel would stand back as his collapsing campaign gave its strength to Lucius D. Clay. Flatlining after several ballots with delegates consternated at the unwillingness of their chieftain to actively rally them, Roy Acuff's support would soon begin to bolt to Cooper and Clay, leaving Cooper to peak on the 11th ballot. However, a core of loyalist Acuff delegates would hold back the Kentuckian's momentum, as Lucius D. Clay covered ever closer to a majority. Yet, Clay would find himself having exhausted every avenue, with Acuff delegates reluctant to switch, and the block of Cooper and Luceites unwilling to come to the table. Further, a movement would begin to circumvent the squabbles of the major candidates and nominate General Curtis LeMay, the young face of the Pacific War. Yet, LeMay's role in the atomic bombings of millions of Japanese civilians would leave Senator Will Rogers Jr. to implore the convention not to proceed with the General as a compromise.
​

Ballot	8	9	10	11	12	13	14
Lucius D. Clay	659	661	692	712	739	744	744
Clare Boothe Luce	514	513	512	512	513	516	516
John Sampson Cooper	368	392	397	439	438	435	433
Roy Acuff	168	144	141	99	71	61	61
Pappy O'Daniel	83	81	28	8	2	2	3
James A. Rhodes	58	58	58	58	58	58	58
Luis A. Ferre	46	47	61	61	61	61	65
Eleanor B. Roosevelt	45	45	45	45	48	48	47
Henry Skillman Breckinri-dge	10	9	7	6	5	4	2
Curtis LeMay	1	2	12	13	13	13	13

The Convention would lock itself in deadlock as three ballots passed. The night as black as the shirts of the threatening bystanders, it would become clear that, with neither's supporters willing to concede to the other, neither Clay nor Luce would prevail. From Haitian Senator Elie Lescot to Convention Chair S.I. Hayakawa and General Claire Chennault, delegates would attempt to draft a compromise. On friendly terms with Luce and Clay alike, Chennault would nearly prevail, yet his dogged loyalty to the Liberalism of his youth would hold back his chances. The Liberals could veto a candidate, but they could never nominate one. Yet, Chennault would telegraph his wife Anna with a suggestion, a protege of his whose famed dogfights over the Pacific and haughty demeanor had bought him fame. A protege drummed out of his beloved Air Force for opposing the "Bomber Mafia" consensus of Curtis LeMay only to purchase a baseball team. A protege who survived eight airplaine crashes. A protege who had once been an aid to Hugh S. Johnson and who counts Charles Lindbergh among his friends, but who donated to the re-election campaign of "the voice of impeachment," Representative Nixon. A protege married to the heir to the Pulitzer fortune and media empire. A protege by the name of Elwood R. Quesada, but better known to friend and foe alike as "Pete." Bankers Fred Akers and George Garrett, friends of the dashing commander, would throw themselves in pre-organizing on his behalf, hiring demonstrators to spark what seemed an almost spontaneous movement.
Kate Quesada, once the young Kate Pulitzer who had defied high society to marry a hot tempered Major League Baseball player turned fighter pilot, would awake her husband before dawn to inform him that Professor Chennault from his Academy days had entered his name to be nominated for President of the United States, with delegate Milton Eisenhower casting the first vote. In the Convention's recess between the 16th and 17th ballots, Anna would go about printing hundreds of "Can't Beat Pete!" buttons, while working behind the scenes among those such as the Ohio delegation, long loyal to Jim Rhodes, winning second choice. Most importantly, she would win over Richard Nixon among the Luce delegates and Jimmie Davis among the supporters of Clay, portraying Quesada as capturing the party platform while holding the war hero's mystique. Taking things a step further, Chennault would pitch the ex-General as a moderate, a liberal, and a conservative at variance, refusing to let policy distract her from her central argument: the 48-year-old Quesada could win, Clay and Luce had proven they couldn't. The 18th ballot would see the deadlock broken as hundreds of supporters abandoned Luce and Clay alike for Quesada, by the 19th, Clay and Luce themselves would step back from their campaigns. With Luce admiring tales of Quesada's pre-flight rosaries and Clay on friendly terms, both would accept the compromise as supporters of the minor candidates such as Ferre and Rhodes rallied behind him. On the 20th ballot, with other candidates excepting Cooper falling behind Quesada, he would win the nomination, narrowly surpassing the 2/3 requirement before a motion to declare his nomination unanimous on the 21st ballot.

Ballot	15	16	17	18	19	20	21
Pete Quesada	0	0	1	368	734	1,379	1,954
Lucius D. Clay	744	744	743	503	402	98	0
Clare Boothe Luce	519	517	513	489	365	101	0
John Sampson Cooper	430	427	407	387	354	355	0
Roy Acuff	57	57	56	49	49	11	0
Pappy O'Daniel	3	3	3	3	3	3	0
James A. Rhodes	58	58	58	58	0	0	0
Luis A. Ferre	65	69	86	46	46	0	0
Eleanor B. Roosevelt	47	46	49	48	3	0	0
Henry Skillman Breckinri-dge	2	2	3	3	3	1	0
Curtis LeMay	13	12	12	1	0	0	0
Claire Chenault	2	3	3	1	0	0	0
S.I. Hayakawa	1	1	3	3	1	1	0
Elie Lescot	1	1	1	1	0	0	0

Louisiana Governor and former country musician Jimmie Davis, famous for "You Are My Sunshine," would come in third to S.I. Hayakawa, with California Senator Will Rogers a narrow second. Yet, many would worry that Hayakawa's Japanese ancestry would risk racist attacks so soon after the Third Pacific War, even as Americans reconciled with the now fallen sun across the ocean. Hayakawa's chances would be further weakened with the remark that “I would encourage insurrection in those poor crushed countries that have been under tyranny all these years.” Further, the death of Rogers' father by a fascist bomb and his military service would be contrasted with Davis's lack of either to paint Rogers as more compatible with the theme of a heroic ticket to rescue the nation from fascism. With the eccentric linguist's support set back, Hayakawa would endorse Rogers in the name of party unity, securing the Senator a third ballot victory despite significant support for Jimmie Davis across the South. Thus, at four o'clock in the morning on August 14th of 1952, the Committee for the Preservation of the Republic would adjourn its first national convention.
Senator Will Rogers Jr. of California, Cincinnatus nominee for the Vice Presidency.

Ballot	1	2	3
Will Rogers Jr.	838	947	1,329
S.I. Hayakawa	906	801	4
Jimmie Davis	209	208	523
Happy Chandler	1	1	1

​
A DC native, Pete Quesada would be in the convention hall at ten as it convened anew, meeting kingmakers and strutting through mobs of delegates as the party considered a series of resolutions on names. With a breakaway group led by legal Chairman Frank Chodorov suing the merger faction of the Liberty League, affiliated delegates would vote near unanimously to drop the title in favor of christening themselves anew with the old moniker of Liberal. Further, in an attempt to stress the status of the Preservationist nominee as a military hero, the convention would vote to adopt for its presidential ticket, and presidential ticket only, the partisan line of "Cincinnatus," after the New Order of Cincinnatus operating among oppositionists in Washington state and Alabama, and, of course, the Roman statesman who transformed his swords into plowshares after a brief tenure as leader of his republic in a time of crisis. With every delegate declared a member, the New Order of Cincinnatus would go national as the campaign vehicle of the Quesada and Rogers ticket.
A narrower vote would approve the use of the name "Law Preservation Party" for those candidates running without Progressive or Liberal affiliation.
Further, the party would approve a short platform, rejecting a suggestion from Quesada to enshrine an age limit for holding office while vowing:

• First and foremost, to recognize no political principle other than the Constitution of the country, the Union of the states, and the enforcement of the law.
  • To bring about a renaissance in politics and to promote a Spartan-like devotion to honesty, cleanliness, efficiency, and economy in government.
  • To clean out graft, corruption, and hypocrisy in our public offices.
  • To modernize state, county, and local government and to eliminate all duplicating phases thereof.
  • To eliminate waste in governmental machinery and to work for a substantial reduction in the tax burden the average taxpayer is forced to bear.

​
Elwood R. \"Pete\" Quesada in flight gear after a demonstration of his aeronautical prowess to eager delegates.
With the end of procedural matters, Pete Quesada would rise to the stage for the first time, a handful of cheers greeting him. Omar Bradley once wrote that the dashing young Air Force General "could have passed for a prototype of the hot pilot, with his shiny green trousers, broad easy smile, and crumpled yet jaunty hat, but he was a brilliant, hard, and daring air-support commander on the ground," and his youthful smile upheld that characterization today, yet his face would soon turn grave as he began.
“I think a military officer, regardless of what service he’s in, is improved if he handles unusual assignments...I look forward to being assigned by the American people to the White House! I believe every person has been put on this Earth for just one purpose—to serve his fellow man. It doesn’t matter how he does this. He can build a bridge, paint a picture, invent a labor-saving gadget, or run a gas station. The point is, he should try to leave the Earth a better place than he found it. If he does, his life will have been worthwhile. If he doesn’t do what he can within his own limitations, he is destined to be unhappy.” Comparing himself to his longtime friend Lindbergh, Quesada would continue with a chuckle, saying that “I'll have something to bounce off Lindy whenever he boasts too much about that little term he served.”
Promising without elaboration to defend “integrity, Americanism, fiscal responsibility, and courage,” Quesada would speak on foreign policy, declaring that the United States had won a war on tyranny, and that “Korea remembers. Indonesia remembers. The Philippines remember..to abandon them is to tell the Free World that they cannot depend on the United States.” Further, he would note that while "“I abhor war," he stands firm in a belief that "we can maintain peace only through strength.”
Moving to domestic matters, Quesada would claim that “a government is the servant, not the master,” declaring that “Fascism has been wasted effort...middle class, sincere decent people, need to regain the influence they’ve lost over the past decades," while arguing that “there are too many intellectuals in government who have no experience in management in which the majority’s will is to be followed.” Quesada would accuse the government of being led by “men of limited imagination" and “those who postponed making decisions," promising to “weed out the incapable and inefficient." Then, in a tacit move of comparison between the man the convention styled as a latter day Cincinnatus and the incumbent dynamo who had energized so many Blackshirts, Quesada would declare that "the more I see the more I realize there is a difference between men.”
Quesada would turn to the party's past failures and shock many delegates by placing them directly at the feet of the opposition itself, claiming that "an examination of these failures reveals contributory negligence on the part of ourselves, discord and a lack of confidence in our forces.” The convention looked on with bated breath as Pete Quesada, infuriated by the fear among the delegates assembled, raised his voice for the shouted words that have entered immortality as the most famous words of his campaign, screaming from his microphone into millions of American homes and newspaper headlines that:
"Our whole country is stopped by a tinpot dictator that tossed a few dozen of us into jail! Follow the light which leads to truth and we will prevail, history will show we saved the day...
THE ONLY THING WE HAVE TO FEAR IS FEAR ITSELF!"
​
\"THE ONLY THING WE HAVE TO FEAR IS FEAR ITSELF!\"

Deutsche Übersetzung des Skript:
Der slowakische Premierminister hat nur knapp einen Attentatsversuch überlebt, und in Deutschland gewinnt die rechtsextreme, einwanderungsfeindliche AFD-Partei zunehmend an Einfluss. Und ja, ihr Logo sieht tatsächlich so aus, als hätte der Nike-Swoosh einen sehr scharfen Penis bekommen. Diese Woche jedoch erlitt die AFD mehrere Rückschläge: Ein Gericht entschied, dass sie eine potenzielle Bedrohung für die Demokratie darstellt, und ein führendes Mitglied wurde wegen einer ziemlich auffälligen Anklage verurteilt.
Eine prominente Figur der rechtsextremen Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) steht vor Gericht, weil er ein verbotenes Nazi-Motto verwendet hat. Björn Höcke soll den Satz „Alles für Deutschland“ zweimal bei politischen Kundgebungen wiederholt haben. Dieser Satz war einst das Motto der ursprünglichen paramilitärischen Organisation der NSDAP. Höcke bestreitet, die Ursprünge des Mottos gekannt zu haben, und behauptet, es sei ein gängiger Alltagsausdruck.
JOHN: Ja, Höcke behauptet, er habe nicht gewusst, dass „Alles für Deutschland“ ein Nazi-Motto ist. Das ist allerdings schwer zu glauben, wenn man bedenkt, dass er – erstens – diese Nazi-Augen hat und – zweitens – bevor er in die Politik ging, Geschichtslehrer in Deutschland war! Es sei denn, seine Version der deutschen Geschichte verlief vom Mittelalter direkt ins 18. Jahrhundert, dann zu Otto von Bismarck und danach zu „alle hingen nur so rum“ bis zu „99 Luftballons“. Es ist schwer zu glauben. Und ich weiß, es mag seltsam erscheinen, wegen eines solchen Slogans vor Gericht zu stehen. Es ist ein krasser Unterschied zu den USA, wo unsere Verfassung nahezu unbegrenzte Redefreiheit garantiert, außer natürlich, wenn der Oberste Gerichtshof entscheidet, dass es in Ordnung ist, einer öffentlichen Universität Dragshows zu verbieten. Ja, das ist vor zwei Monaten passiert. Es ist irgendwie überraschend, dass niemand eine umgedrehte Regenbogenflagge aus Protest in seinem Garten gehisst hat. Aber Deutschland hat verfassungsmäßige Schutzmechanismen, um autoritäre Herrschaft zu verhindern – aus Gründen, die für jeden offensichtlich sein sollten, außer vielleicht für Deutschlands schlechtesten Geschichtslehrer. Und dennoch wird die AFD immer beliebter. Tatsächlich ist sie mittlerweile die zweitbeliebteste Partei des Landes. Höcke selbst kandidiert im September bei den Landtagswahlen in seinem Bundesland – im Grunde genommen für das Amt des Ministerpräsidenten. Sollte er erfolgreich sein, wäre es das erste Mal seit dem Ende des NS-Regimes, dass eine rechtsextreme Partei eine Landesregierung in Deutschland übernimmt. Das Wachstum der AFD ist alarmierend. Ein CNN-Reporter besuchte tatsächlich eines ihrer Treffen und berichtete auf eine etwas merkwürdige Weise darüber.
Pro- und AFD-neugierige Anhänger haben sich versammelt, um von Parteioffiziellen zu hören. Die Botschaft hat sogar Trump-ähnliche Untertöne. „Unser Land zuerst“, sagen die Plakate. Ein Teil des AFD-Reizes für Wähler besteht darin, Menschen von einigen der größten politischen Parteien Deutschlands durch Transparenz wegzulocken, sagen sie. Aber einiges, was in diesem Raum besprochen wird, ist verzerrt, zum Beispiel die Frage, ob die COVID-Pandemie und der Klimawandel überhaupt real sind.
JOHN: Absolut, es ist alles sehr beunruhigend, aber – ist dir jemals in den Sinn gekommen, von draußen darüber zu berichten? Sie können dich hören! Deine Onscreen-Beschriftung könnte genauso gut lauten: „Leichtgläubige Idioten hier drinnen merken nicht einmal, dass ich über sie rede.“ Ich weiß, diese Leute sind bekanntlich ziemlich intolerant, aber selbst ich muss zugeben, dass sie überraschend entspannt darauf reagieren, dass jemand während ihrer Sitzung schlecht über sie redet. Dennoch haben AFD-Anhänger einige zutiefst beunruhigende Ansichten.
Ich bin froh, dass sich endlich jemand um den ganzen Abschaum kümmert, der sich in diesem Land ausgebreitet hat, in unserem schönen Deutschland.
Wenn rechts zu sein bedeutet, mein Leben so zu leben, wie ich es bisher getan habe – mit 68 Jahren zu studieren, zu arbeiten, Steuern zu zahlen und nie etwas falsch zu machen – dann kann es nichts Falsches daran geben, rechts oder ein Nazi zu sein.
JOHN: Okay, aber das ist sehr weit von dem entfernt, was es bedeutet, rechts zu sein. Viele Menschen sind 68, arbeiten und zahlen Steuern, und ich würde sagen, die meisten von ihnen sind keine Nazi-Enthusiasten, außer anscheinend Ihnen und Mel Gibson. Die AFD drängt auf harte Anti-Immigrations-, Anti-Muslim-Politiken und fördert eine „Rückkehr zur traditionellen deutschen Kultur“. Im Jahr 2017 sagte das Parteiprogramm: „Der Islam gehört nicht zu Deutschland“, und im selben Jahr lief diese Anzeige, die übersetzt bedeutet: „Burkas? Wir mögen Bikinis.“ Das ist das Motto, das man bekommt, wenn man die Geilheit eines „Weiblicher-Körper-Inspektor“-T-Shirts mit der Islamophobie des tatsächlichen FBI kombiniert. Es ist ziemlich klar, dass all diese Reden über die Liebe zu „deutschen Traditionen“ nur ein Deckmantel sind – besonders wenn man entdeckt, wie wenig einige von ihnen über die Kultur wissen, die sie feiern. Schauen Sie einfach zu, wie ein AFD-Parteiführer von einem wörtlichen Kind völlig überrumpelt wurde.
Wir möchten, dass mehr deutsche Volkslieder und mehr deutsche Gedichte unterrichtet werden. Dass wir unsere deutschen Denker und Dichter mehr in den Schulen wertschätzen.
Ich denke, wir müssen bereits ziemlich viele Gedichte auswendig lernen. Was ist eigentlich Ihr Lieblingsgedicht? Ihr deutsches Lieblingsgedicht?
Mein Lieblingsgedicht… Ist, ähm… Ich müsste darüber nachdenken. Mir fällt gerade keines ein.
Keines?
Nein.
JOHN: Wow, gut für das Kind. Einen Politiker zu demontieren, während es gleichzeitig über Hausaufgaben klagt. Das ist peinlich für den Mann, der gerade von jemandem zerstört wurde, dessen Mutter ihn nach diesem Interview abholt. Und die AFD ist mit weitaus unangenehmeren Dingen verbunden als nur „Lernt deutsche Gedichte“. Kürzlich wurde bekannt, dass eine Reihe von AFD-Vertretern an einem geheimen Treffen teilnahmen, bei dem Vorschläge diskutiert wurden, „nicht assimilierte Bürger“ in einen „Modellstaat in Nordafrika“ abzuschieben, was sofort Vergleiche zu den Nazi-Plänen zog, europäische Juden nach Madagaskar zu deportieren. Es ist alles sehr düster. Aber wenn es hier eine gute Nachricht gibt, dann die Schärfe der Gegenreaktion gegen die AFD von vielen Deutschen. Im Januar demonstrierten über eine Million Menschen in Städten in ganz Deutschland mit Bannern und Schildern, auf denen Dinge wie „Keine Nazis“ und „Die AFD zu wählen ist so 1933“ standen. Und sie wussten offensichtlich, was auf dem Spiel stand.
Mehr als 150.000 hier vor dem Reichstag mit einer Botschaft: Deutschland wird nicht in die dunklen Tage zurückkehren.
Wir waren schon einmal dort. Wissen Sie?
Und Sie können sie diesmal aufhalten? Ich hoffe es, wir müssen es.
Wenn Sie jetzt hören, wie Leute davon fantasieren, Millionen von Deutschen und Migranten in Deutschland in andere Länder abzuschieben, wohin auch immer, dann klingt das direkt nach Geschichte.
JOHN: Ja, dieser Mann hat recht! Und ich kann Ihnen nicht sagen, wie sehr ich es schätze, dass er nicht nur diesen wunderbar zusammengesetzten Dackel mitgebracht hat, sondern dass dieser auch die Geistesgegenwart hatte, direkt in die Kamera zu schauen, als würde er auf einen Rekordkratzen warten, um zu sagen: „Ja. Das bin ich. Sie fragen sich wahrscheinlich, wie ich in diese Situation geraten bin.“ Und eine kurze Anmerkung an den CNN-Reporter: So berichtet man. Nicht, indem man über eine laufende Rede flüstert, sondern indem man Menschen mit perfekten Hunden identifiziert und sofort mit ihnen spricht. Und obwohl der Widerstand gegen die AFD inspirierend ist, wird die Partei nicht so schnell verschwinden. Sie kandidieren für Sitze im Europäischen Parlament im nächsten Monat, und es stehen regionale und nationale Wahlen bevor. All das sollte sehr besorgniserregend sein. Denn zwischen dem versuchten Attentat auf einen zentral-europäischen Führer und dem Aufstieg einer rechtsextremen Partei in Deutschland scheint Europa gerade die Hits des 20. Jahrhunderts zu spielen, auch wenn einige ihrer ehemaligen Geschichtslehrer die Ähnlichkeit nicht sehen wollen.
[…]