you can find about books on c-span now. our mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. weekends on c-span2 are in intellectual feast. every saturday american history tv documents america story and on sunday book tv brings you the latest nonfiction books and authors. funding for c-span2 comes from these television companies and more. >> the world has changed. fast reliable internet connection is something no one can live without. so wow is there for customers with speed, reliability value and choice. now more than ever it all starts with great internet. wow. along with these television companies support c-span2 is a public service.

>> good evening. i am tony clark. i am really glad you are all here. i think this will be a fascinating evening because it kind ofpo tells why we are in politics the way we are right now. when i was growing up, folk music was a really big deal. there was a group called the chad mitchell trio that had a song called the don't john birch society with lyrics like if mommy is a connie, you've got to turn her in. just really a funny, funny song. they would sing things like fighting for the right to fight the right fight for the right. should google the trio and the john birch society. the billboards at the time along the highways would say things

like impeach supreme court justice earl warren or get the u.s. out of the un. they were very well known back in the 60s. by the end of the vietnam war you did not really hear much about them. their influence carried much further. their influence did not disappear.fe a professor at the graduate school of political management at george washington university. he is ati political historian.li he looks at social crisis, political transformation, liberalism and its critics and tonight's topic the evolution of modern conservative movement. he has authored or co-authored four books. he is a frequent commentator on the news media. about politics and history and

public affairs. he is also a former speech driver for former house minority leader richard gephardt. and so we wanted somebody to talk with matthew about his book and we could not have had anybody better than joe. he is the jimmy carter professor of history at emory university. he is an expert in political and cultural history of the 20th century and joe has written probably three books including one that he was here to speak about atticus finch the biography. the making of american icon. please, join me in welcoming joe and matthew. [applause] >> thank you. >> thank you. it is always so much fun to be at the carter library. thank you for coming out to ask

questions about this really exciting and timely and deeply researched and wonderful book. matt, welcome to georgia. it iss great to have you this week and it's so appropriate to have you here this week. i was reading your book this week in preparation of tonight. i was also reading an op-ed in the new york times this week. i don't know some of you saw it but it talked about the hotness of the georgia republican party. it talked about, it was amazing to read this article because it was all about how the trump supporters are in such conflict with the governor and there is this real tension between the conservatives and the ultraconservatives. lo andth behold, your book begis with a story and the california republican party around 1961 or 62 and there is a longtime republican party activist who is

decrying the rise of these crazy that were ruining the republican party and turning it into a hot mess. so tell us who the john birch society was and it seems to be so similar what was going on in the 1960s. what are this a limited area these -- similarities? >> i want to thank you for doing this with me. it's wonderful to be here with you. thank you for having me. it is really an honor to be here yes, joe was referring to patricia who was a loyalist to richard nixon who was not exactlys liberal. running for a local seat. this gives you a flavor. a local seat on the republican party county committee in southern california and the birchers did not, members of the

so society did not see her basically as being conservative enough. she was not a true believer. they basically ran against her and they defeated her. she described in this amazing oral history what it was like to go up against them. they started calling up everybody in our district. just describing her as a socialist, connie andin a pinko. she said that, she called them destructive force. she said "they were haters beyond anything i had ever seen in my life. she really had kind of a visceral loathing for this group that kind of made me more intrigued. what was she reacting to? the society, just to back up, named after evangelists turned army intelligence officer that

was murderedll or killed after mmworld war ii by now communist forces. the book is from macon georgia. and his parents were very supportive at least initially of lending his name to this organization. the founder wrote a book, a short biography of john in the 1950s. alleging that theov u.s. government, the crime was not necessarily that communist forces had killed him, it was at the u.s. government had conspired to conceal the murder as part of this communist plot. sond, he was kind of seen as a martyr in the first victim of world war iii. you know, the brief background as they started december 58. a group of 12 mostly wealthy industrialist meeting at a very

hush-hush meeting in indianapolis. they decided to form a group. the purpose was to operate outside of the two-party system and to try to educate the country about the internal communist threat. because, in a way, they looked at the republican party that wat probably their natural home and hothey thought that it was partf the communist movement, essentially. it was a bit hopeless. the conspiracy was to teach people about the nature of the threat so the grassroots mobilization and education kind of shocked people into a realization. anyways, they started to form chapters. they had a home chapter based in belmont massachusetts. they operated in 20 person chapters. once you hit that cap you had to form a new chapter. they were pretty secretive.

they had kind of nondescript, they had numbers or letters. xqyz. they were not supposed to communicate with one another. they were supposed to be somewhat distinct entities that would communicate with the home office, but not with each other. a former candy maker in founder, he wrote a ton of stuff including monthly bulletins and american opinion mattered -- magazine. now, you know, the chapters did not necessarily go out and file every word of his prescription, but he suggested things like taking over your local pta. take over your school board. see what kind of books are being offered in the library. if they are kind of socialistic tracks, you need to pressure the library, essentially to put in this text. set up a billboard as tony

alluded to earlier. supporting the impeach campaign. i am not even sure if i have his name. he funded, i believe it is in georgia. twenty billboards out of his own pocket. so, you know, really, the insights, one of the beauties was this was a group that allowed empowered members and enabled them to actually do something to take the fight to this alleged communist conspiracy theory in their communities. they can kind of filter this conspiratorial brand of anti- communism through the perceived needs. now as i argue a real insight that they had.

as a quote one person in here saying the so society is the answer to every anti-communist prayer. he meant by that is it allows us to act. we are not just talking about how bad things are in the country. we can do something about it. that was a longish explanation. that gives you an overview of what is. they helped to forge an alternative political tradition. on the far right. aa subsequent generation but alo ideas like isolationism, conspiracy theories. a more violent mode of politics. and that, you know, the ideas picked up by subsequent generations. it is not like a perfect kind of line, but one to the other.

this challenged a lot of the sort of mainstream conservative often republicans, not always, people like patricia who i talk about here or we could argue in a contemporary context at the current governor secretary of state georgia and see them as much as the enemy as our ally. we can see the kind of tensions, the divisions within this broad conservative coalition whereas, you know, these mainstream conservatives are electorally successful, much more pragmatic. back in the day, 1960s or 70s , pre-effective. pretty effective about pushing them and their supporters to the edges. not allowing them to engulf their party and to leave the .arty

some of the reasons the party was stronger, you know, they had more carrots and sticks back in the day. it wasni a different country. the cold war was constraining in some ways. the biggest difference i would say today is a lot of reasons in which we can get into, i think the successors sort of this far right tradition is if not mainstream, pretty close to the mainstream ofth conservatism. the ideas, one of the arguments is they have made, i think a lot of people see it as a steady comeback. you mentionedt designated because of these incredible tensions that actually feel familiar albeit with different setting in different circumstances. >> one of those interesting moments. your first book was about conservative politics,

conservative history. a gubernatorial governorship of ronald reagan. kind of this critical movement. i think one of the things that you recognize if you do this work professionally is always shaping our understanding. for you and i, we been working on this history for 20 years. a lot of the stuff that was written 20 years ago was kind of trying to take conservative ideas seriously to try to understand how it came to power in the 1960s through the 1990 s. it was about kind of the major establishment figures. these figures were seen, you know, but now, it's like the present changes our understanding of things look differently. is it right to say the present

moment american politics since 2016 essentially makes you think differently about the history of conservatism. >> absolutely. we are sort of human and being influenced by what is happening around us. i think a lot of people have been trying to understand what they see as may be a transformation in the conservative movement. the trumpetet right and the ides and where they come from. one thing i wanted to do in this book is take what i describe as is far right ideas and take them seriously. take this mass mobilization and take that seriously. because not just in recent years , but also at the time, what is really interesting is you go back where characterizing respects, either mocked

or they were described basically as neofascists. they were described as people who were going to start a civil war because they said the enemy was within. it is an invitation to engage in civil war. they attacked, they were seen as , you know, little old ladies and tennis shoes as well as one of the famous phrases had appeared you know, they were kind of nuts. right. you know, the other song that was popular in the 1960s was the bob dylan song. john birch paranoid lose. paranoia became this shorthand for the birchers. seen in the film, doctor and the general raving about bodily fluids in o the communist

conspiracy, that is a spoof on the water supply. so -- >> what was the theme before? >> well, look. with all of these conspiracy theories, i have a chart which i showed. you cannot see it here. you can see the conspiracy on this chart. it is a birch document from thea mid 60s. they are verypp hard to pin down the conspiracies, but, the water supply basically, it was a wedge for socialized medicine. and, sometimes they said that this was basically a government step two, you know, control us. to tell us what to put in our body. other times, there were hints that it was a communist plot to poison people which is doctor strange. but, i i mean, basically, of a

piece withde this federal the heavy hand of a federal bureaucracy. basically doing the communist work for it. and, so, it was seen as part of the communist conspiracy. >> i'm going to talk more about in spiritual political movement. you may have some questions about that. one of the things i think is important for people to realize, a secret organization. maybe explain why they were so intent on may be kind of maintaining secrecy. also, how were youlo able to research if they were so jealous about guarding information? >> well, the founder and some of the others argued early on that they wanted to keep a low profile because if they said it,

they did not want the communist to know they existed. because the conception of themselves was at the best strongest and most aggressive anti-communist group in the united states. they are thinking let the communists learn about us. they willit go to town and try o destroy us. it gives an insight into the gamentality the us against them. and,le so, actually, welch, when he had this first meeting, he told his friends, he said, look, i don't want you all staying at the same hotel. if anyone asks you you tell them you are here on business in indianapolis. we do not want people to get wind of what we are up to. they were actually pretty successful for the first i would say two years at keeping it under wraps. there were a series of news articles in them 1950. in and they exploded in early 61

and became a theme frenzy. they were everywhere. they had basically come onto us. there trying to take us out. it was part of that attack. >> the civil society has some papers at brown university that apparently, were used to being in belmont massachusetts and when the society, they picked up and moved to appleton wisconsin and dumped all of their papers in a dumpster. i think near their headquarters. someone found these papers and then donated them to brown. they are now organized. finding aid.

they are not like the papers in the carter library of course. there are big holes in it. these are just taken out of a dumpster. you know, you don't really know what you will get. there are some a lot of like messages from members who are writing into headquarters and those are the best because you are getting antidotal. members from all around the country and what they are thinking and what is kind of moving them. it is like a window. but, what is amazing is that there are so many collections. the anti-defamation league have a chapter and they have waged a quite effective spike campaign against the so society infiltrating the far right.

they have about 20 boxes that the historical society in new york city, those are great. winot just looking at how libers are treating them and how they are trying to undermine them, but how they are trying to do it themselves. you have these detailed memos about these meetings. these are about individual birchers. library of congress has a ton of stuff surprisingly related to the society. you can find letters from the patriarch who was one of the original founders. about how great the society is. you know, you can go around the country. one of the right-hand people. they boths came out of the national association of manufacturers. he has some great papers in wisconsin. he was a wisconsin industrialist

you just kind of keep going. you have more archives then you can actually go through. >> one of the things you talk about inn the book, one of the things you traces the division between mainstream conservatives and ultraconservatives. these ultraconservatives. the story traditionally is that at this. in conservative history you have mainstream like national review by way of william buckley junior that starts in 1955. buckley who represents that kind of more intellectual playing at the party is able to kind of, certain people in the establishment conservative movement able to police the boundaries of the movement. and they are able to kind of say

, no, we will draw a line here. and wahlberg walch and barry goldwater does this as well to a certain degree. i wonder, you know, how do they do that? >> one of the things that i argue, buckley, mostly, no one person had the ability to keep the gatekeeper. the berkshires were 16 -- a lot of them were very wealthy. buckley, just an example, he had a lot of ties to first leaders. some of his readers were either in the society, they were not members, but they were supportive of it. it was very hard to kind of disentangle. so he wrote a couple of editorials in the 60s denouncing welch's conspiracy theories.

welch had argued and buckley said, youou know, too far. and then later in 65 especially as they were more radical on the vietnam war he did a bigger thing. when buckley ran for mayor of new york city in 1965, even though a lot were angry at him, he still had some so society, some that supported his mirror run. it was very hard, what i was interested in, though, the main stream, they bothan kind of wood and they tried to bring them into the fold at times but then they did not want -- they wanted the money, both in energy, but, you know, i think they understood that electorally especially after goldwater boston 64 and the landslide

where he famously declared extremism in defense of liberties no vice which was seen as other radical groups. i think of aligned in the 1964 acceptance. >> san francisco. a famous line. >> moderation in defense of virtue. moderation in pursuit of justice in the devices of virtue. the pursuit of justice. something along those lines. yeah. >> something like that. >> summarizing it. >> so, you know, coldwater who did have a lot of liking, there were efforts that he made in late 64 and afterwards to try to distance himself from the

birchers and he actually madeom some of them mad. some actually accused him of telling the communist line. what i was interested in was the intentions of these ultras and these more mainstream types. i don't think anyone ever pushed out the ultras, per se. they were part of the conservative coalition, but i also argue that they were not really on top. they weren not dominant, for te most part. the so society as an organization, they kind of fade in the late 60s, early 70s. people are not talking that much about them. they fade organizationally. so, appointed in 71 or 72 to the supreme court, there is a story, actually, a rumor that he was a

john bircher in arizona. he actually has to issue a statement saying, i never was and, you know, i am not a member of the john bircher so society. even ted kennedy the senator from massachusetts came and basically said this is a smear against him. so, you know, the birchers built a society and they were fairly well contained for a lot of reasonsd . but, i think the idea is lived on by the groups. kind of picked up the ideas and cap the presidential candidates nalike pat buchanan, ron paul, forefather of rand paul, they adopted a number of ideas that were very familiar to the society and that is probably why someone like ron paul had a lot

of nice things said. even just as a random aside, when one of his constituents died the proper to the birch society kind of splitting it. so, part of the coalition, but also putting up the tensions i thought was an interesting way to sort of think about the conservative coalition. >> give us a little sense of the organization. kind of really pretty much ending in mid 70s, 74. sketch out that time period. what are the high watermarks. why do they go away? >> it still exists. it is in wisconsin. an organization, they have a website. they tried to dispel myths about themselves. early 70s really a shadow of

who their former. they have a lot of i would say hi watermarks. depending on your perspective, low motor -- watermarks. that was a pretty big deal. it was shocking in the context96 of the early 1960s for this group to put up billboards to impeach really, you know, seen by many americans as one of the great justices of the 20th century. >> and a former republican governor of california.en >> it seems incredibly upright the member of the establishment. deeply american. they want to impeach him which had not been done. impeachment was not talked about the way that it is today. but that was, i argue, again and again, they won by losing.

as well said, you know, we realized we would not actually impeach. but, as he said, by the time we are done, the enemy will know we are there. the enemy will know that we are there. so the idea, one of the ideas is to put this on the bloodstream of the politics. to get attention. to draw members. hand energy behind these things. what they had was a series of front groups that can be a high or a low. that was one. support your local police was a big movement and an important movement. a lot supported that movement as well. we are defending the police against basically these communist orchestrated riots in the streets. they had awh decent amount of support for that. one of the areas where there was some real overlap.

goldwater and ronald ragan. this one had predecessor. >> it was a real thing. they would publish photographs of police officers who were beaten. suppose it communist writers. you know, really visceral stuff. they had a series of these, committee against summit entanglements. eisenhower meeting with a cruise chef. they launch a case with some entanglement. many thousands of postcards to members of congress. they ran newspaper ads

one of the interesting moments here in the book, i think, for me, after john f. kennedy's assassination in dallas, dallas was a hotbed, initially, there were some that thought another did it. ii quoted someone in here becaue it was someone on the far right. it turns out it was not. how you could recognize the assassination. and use it to mobilize. basically as evidence, outlook, we were actually onto something. a communist killed kennedy and we were the one saying the communists were, nevermind that they called kennedy a communist to begin with but why another would want to kill another who would let logic get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. so, but, they were able to put

ads in papers, a lot of their leaders spun various conspiracy theories and you know, the theories are wild, but also some people responding to them. there is actually this one guy, this guy, he spends his crazy theory that government officials were rehearsing kennedy's funeral one week before he was assassinated. his speech i think was called marksmanship in dallas. what i found were these letters from members from arizona and california saying the founders and spokesperson for the site saying, this guy oliver, he is —-dash he is so over-the-top i

cannot, we're going to take 10 years to recover. from this injury that is inflicted on us. but, you see a lot of other theories kind of coming out and it mobilizes a lot of the supporters. so, there was a series of ways in which, you cannot point to something and say they achieved a legislative victory. >> i want to ask you what is really an impossible question to answer. i want you to give me a short answer. i want to let you all ask questions. i have a lot more questions. i will only reserve myself to this one. what is it that these conspiratorial political thinking. >> i think about it in our current political moment. associating it with the transformations of social media that is given voice to these

pockets of bizarre ideas and now people can connect in social media. these come unities of conspiratorial thoughts feeding on each other. it is really a kind of product of, you know, a kind of technological moment. but, do you see the same thing happening in the 1960s? what would the social or technological conditions give rise to? >> that is a great question. i don't have a great answer. i do not think that technology is sufficient. i do not think twitter is enough a lot of different conspiracy theories in the 50s and 60s. i do think that there are ways in which particular moments and particular developments like social and historical developments can be feeding into

this. conspiracy theories have always existed. for one reason, welch and a lot of hispu other supporters, they look at the whole republican party and they saw eisenhower as , basically a communist. they saw two of their heroes joe mccarthy and bob taft midwestern senators who had been basically pushed out. oswhile bert welch and 52 and tn he called it the dirtiest deal in american political history. so, they saw a two-party system as they sought in hock to this communist conspiracy. essentially succumbing to the new deal. to progressive ideals.

again, just one example, but that was very powerful, i think, for a lot of the followers. there was no kind of american nist home within the political system where they could go and they could have their ideas heard and taken seriously and be on top. and, so, now, of course, the cold war, historians have a lot of different arguments about this; right. i don't want to get to into this sure, the government did commit conspiracies. it is not like, look, infiltrated in the birch so society, the birch society paranoids even have enemies, there were actual conspiracies that existed and i think arguing

that these government conspiracies have fed into the conspiracy theories. but, i do think that conspiracy theorists have a way of doing this with certain events whether it's 9/11 or the 2020 election or eisenhower's dominance of the republican party that seems so unjust to some and so inexplicable that they really empower conspiracy theorists and then of course today they are supercharged by twitter and other things. i think that that is one thought >> so many things about this book that are echoed and give insight and depth. i hope everybody will go buy a copy. by two copies and give one to your friend. it is a fantastic read. >> thank you. >> i want to open it to questions from those of you that may want to ask some questions.

>> when you were talking about buckley and the birchers being on opposite sides, you brought up vietnam. how did the birchers respond to vietnam? >> well, they were very supportive of pows and getting soldiers back. they made an issue of that. but, as a whole, they looked at the u.s. government, and not just the u.s. government, but american allies who were supporting us, part of nato let's say or other allies in the cold war and they believe that these were essentially communist government. and that the reason america was not winning in vietnam was

because they were being held back by our own government. that was the official at least line. and, so, in a way, they looked at the vietnam war as a rotten war, because if we could win it, sure, it would be okay, but they looked at the government as wanting to lose. losing on purpose. it gives you a sense of how jaundice there view was, the conflict. and they did blame, you know, they blamed a conspiracy on the u.s. o government for causing or defeat. >> next question over here. >> thank you. >> you made a reference before about how the echoes and a lot

of modern day movements today and we can see it through examples where you mentioned one of the founders of the so society and he was also principal and one of the blunders for the tea party for the tea party which, in turn, funding members such as whatever thatou little fastest kid on youtube's name is, do you think that there is evidence for a lot of these to be respected in international politics? i looked into a lot of things like this and i feel that there are echoes between how the society, how the alt-right or any one of these little parties, they have a lot of echoes. a lot of echoes from how the fastest movements were organized

in argentina and indonesia and south korea. i'm curious to think there was any kind of ties. examples before the society in which the business plot against, my mind is blank, i apologize -- a organization founded by right-wing industrialists. i was curious to see if he had any connections between any of those? >> really interesting question. it is actually a bit of a hold in my book. more international connections. more members who were overseas. i only found really a handful. what explains out? i mean, i don't know, the birch leaders did identify with some, i think, authoritarian, you know

, maybe allies in the u.s. taiwan or south korea in the 1950s. kind of strong. and, so, there was some support, for that.thy they were seen as truly anti-communist. but i would say one difference between then and now is that now , therese is much more international consciousness along a lot of these movements in the far right. the groups you are describing, the domestic ones, a real international presence and awareness. i am not saying they all meet up or anything, but going over to europe and france or the five-star movement in italy. yeah. tucker carlson weaponization of

the republican' party. so, i do not think that level of international consciousness existed among the far right in the 60s. i think one reason is, you know, the birchers really viewed themselves as an american nist movement. they looked at u.s. allies as communistl dominated. .... .... had a very kind of nationalistic and also they did not want us i mean, they had the slogan, right, i have this here. someone gave me this it i was a politics and prose in dc and someone gave this bumper sticker, get the us out of the u.n., the un, out of the us. another famous slogan, you know, the birch society was very energy and an adventurous. they did not want the us. they repudiated.

they thought the un was a communist, kind of dominated. they were is kind of a dominated institution, they were very concerned about the loss of american sovereignty, and senescence it was kind of - and i think that they were really involved in that way could be more nationalistic movement, as opposed to today to do thank you so more international. >> in a long tradition of isolation in american political life that was specific to the rights 1930s right. >> yes. >> yes a question here. >> am i wrong to remember the society it is anti-immigrant and racist and connected ended that contributed to the downfall in the second part of the question would be, a way to expose the

conspiracy theories today, and to maybe you know, get some of that out of the american. >> so yes, and that we didn't really touch about so immigration was not will sovereignty was a big issue but immigration safe is not like a major first issue, and the race of course was. and civil rights was. and they argued that specific racism in the first society but there's all debating the 1960s, because that virtuous insisted, then we accept the , members of any creed in any race, religion, and you name it they do have some handful of jewish members and have boulevard parking americans so you know there was a look, this is evidence that we are tolerant and not bigoted. a couple of things so one is, they put up billboards all over.

especially thinking the south and martin luther king, and there was a martin luther king economists training school is released school for labor haven't school labor organizing you know, the branded actually one of the african-americans spokespeople and spokeswoman for the society, former fbi agent it is a speech entitled, was once a civil rights movement, directed by the kremlin right and so you know essentially, to me that of echoed discharge the barack obama was not born in the united states right and virtuous of antiquity what is a conspiracy right but if they didn't have the echo this idea that in the civil rights era, andnd movement for mechanical room movement for racial equality and social

justice and that was a movement imported from the kremlin and it was alien to the u.s. and so i think that is a kind of - and that i would say on top of that, there's just a lot of i would say racist and anti- - and movement, or saw the movement as an ally and you know i have a lot of evidence in the book for that. and it was not going into the book thinking that it would necessarily much but it's funny, and george wallace in one of the top eggs, said wallace, that one point he said to pick up moderate vice president kevin on his nominee, because look, we already have all of the nuts in the country have the kkk in the citizens council we have the john birchers and this will be great because of moderate one-sided strength of moderates on the other side, and so even

he was kind of lumping them with us. [inaudible].te >> will first, he try to figure moderate he said no and so they picked curtis lemay. and so, there was a lot of for the last thing that i will say about this ifsa that society at times, the police their own rights and for example, there's a letter from a member clearly r anti-semitic on this ranch about, the jewish conspiracy an the root of evil was the jewish and the headquarters, and is a skype anti-semitic or white, somebody else rights these while minute drop him and they had a file heris anti-semitism right d so there were some efforts arguably of the true energy from

the date and at first it didn't really police a lot of them. >> are there the question. >> yes so i come home surprised to hear the maybe rage against eisenhower and accepting the new deal or something like the u.s. federal government actually be d could you. >> is a puzzle right paradox and eisenhower course of d-day and and present at columbia university had like ike and ms. all-american, and a hero. and so another thing is that welch, so robert welch wrote to his friends in the 50s to my letter, long letter charges that

eisenhower is dedicated agent of conspiracy and it's interesting there was a lot of the other founders, they become news the early 60s for the actually themselves from it braided they say well, is not official for thee doctrine, in effect, actually two of the first founders, one was noted eisenhower cabinets but they were eisenhower appointees in the administration, and a document in his book, it becomes is huge thing were eisenhower said, my gosh, this is the man this verse sounded like this is when you told me to a points to labor-management committee. and so, the founders especially very mainstream average and in particular with the ymca and the management year, but they say is a particular to about welch, and

obviously, some others at least believed not everyone did the society, and average though gets and what is a sense thatd eisenhower had distorted maybe even fill harvey and bob taft, the truth of america's voices on the rightfa for right it would return america is more isolationist and ideal waste and welch to get a sense of the raged were talking about, wrote to birchers and said the bob welch, i'm sorry, bob taft of the ohio centage or die from a peculiar cancer and he may have been killed by arabian to that was implanted in the back of his chair at his senate seat and so

it's been so widely rumored to predict so basically thank you so a wild the noise 700 eisenhower visibly got sent for, enumerating to been there, because cancer over i don't know how many years but anyway coming to my point right so but i think that captured the sense that there's heroes i think they struck it down and cut down the been destroyed and eisenhower the party was responsible for that. losing cold war release communist and losing it at home. and so i think the rage stemmed from the country being lost as was a sake of the biden being founders, the nation's most dynamic economy, there i mean, this is a system that is made them right in a sense they're incredibly prosperous and successful. more successful vast majority of other americans yes, there is this kind of rage at the

direction of her many decades and eisenhower, for some of them at least is that comes up from the focal point of this. >> another question. >> you said thehe beginning, tht you started this book in part two seriously consider the arguments made with the philosophy of the john birch society my question is, do you think by giving legitimacy, taking these sort of crazy argument seriously that you give them a legitimacy that theyes do not deserve. >> well this brilliant question. in an historian so i'm interested i guess in trying to analyze individuals or movements or ideas, that i think are

impactful and influential, and not trying to you know, not a comeback but is sort of a well as to making like a political argument, butlo ideological argument. and also, someone is a historical movement that it was interesting, and important i also thought it was interesting and important to think about how they were constrained atim this time and out of far right organization is constrained and diaper say that's another question but in the book, i was also interested in trying to provide onen another giving answers to this try to the shifting character of the conservative make you get from st. george w bush to donald trump or from ronald reagan comfort mixing however you want to look at this from eisenhower

that this was one way into that. i guess that the other thing is, because i do negas but hopefully not like a political way but as a historian, that will i can shed light on this movement was you know is i assent, maintained that there were not anti-semitic and not resist they were not even really the question of's conspiracy. tradeshow like they have a ghostlike thousands of documents, and so i hope the evidence kind of speaks for itself and then you know, most people can kind judge that to me nothing would add to that is welcome having the book, such as the ideas see taking are just seriously or but what are taking seriously, is the fact that the right key constituency within

conservative and right-wing politics that they were not just crazy and ignored at the time, i didn't think anything of it and they thought that the mainstream of republican conservative thought a lot about this and spent a lot of time figuring out how to address them publicly, how together money and resources and influence but taking seriously come over the fit within the broader landscape of the american right, that is different from taking seriously, the idea of o dwight eisenhowers an agent and communist. >> i do not endorse any that have that idea absolutely but i think that you would be extremely well, thinking about what kind of agency that like our do they have over political debate that slogan and republican democracy must keep it that way and explicitly,. >> keep you here today and so

once behind that when a scheme and that the d challenges to the democracy from the right. and again, trying to understand will induce a serious movement within this coalition. >> i think we have learned a lot about the kind of why we are the way we are and why our politics is the way and kind of origins of it in the book is called birchers and copies are in the lobby and he'll be signing them out there and so i would encourage you to pick up a copy and pay for it. [laughter] and let's think matthew dallek and john birch society and david horowitz. [applause] >> if you're enjoying book tv, this on for a newsletter using the qr code in the spring, to receive the schedule of upcoming programs, discussions, book

festivals and more, to become every sunday on "c-span2", anytime on my netbook to be .org. television for serious readers. see spence shop .org is c-span's online store and tour latest collection of tt spent products and apparel and books home decor and accessories and something for every c-span fan and repurchase help support our nonprofit operations shop now or anytime as c-span shop . oregon. >> democracy doesn't just look like this, it looks like this americans can see democracy work and citizens are truly republic, and get informed, string from the source, on c-span, unfiltered unbiased, word for word from