An open letter to Americans of the Republican persuasion

I am appealing to you for financial support for our publishing company.

Rather than trying to convince you that the books we want to publish will be very good from an intellectual point of view, and that there is a crying need for certain points of view to be aired, I will start by saying what is in it for you, that is, for the Republican Party.

We are totally in favour of free market libertarianism and opposed in principle to the reduction of individual liberty and its transfer to state controlled authorities. The dissemination of the sort of books which we want to publish can only tilt the balance of voting, however slightly, in favour of a party which is less identified with rapid progress along the path of high taxation to the welfare state ideals which prevail in this country.

In this country, in spite of the deterioration which has manifestly resulted from the increasing dominance of this ideology, it is practically impossible to express any serious criticism of the situation. That everyone should be highly taxed to provide funding for education and medicine provided by a Welfare State appears unquestionably desirable, and a party proclaiming its wish to provide such things has tremendous appeal to voters. Any alternative policy is presented defensively, without anyone daring to suggest that the effects of increased state control of every activity are in principle bad in themselves, have already produced deplorable consequences, and will continue to do so.

Frequent revelations of dreadful conditions in hospitals, such as that 5,000 people a year (which one may be sure is a very conservative estimate) die from infections acquired while in hospital, as a result of neglect of basic hygienic precautions by doctors and nurses, are greeted only with demands that yet more money should be poured into the National Health Service, and into even more prolonged and expensive training of even more numerous doctors and nurses. It occurs to no-one to suggest that the deplorable state of the NHS is the inevitable outcome of the intrinsically oppressive ideology of the Welfare State.

We need money to fund the publishing company which we have set up to publish books expressing criticisms of various aspects of Welfare State ideology and practice. Viewed commercially, this cannot be expected to be anything but a loss-making enterprise in this country. We have already found it is exceedingly difficult to get publishers to accept books which do anything but reinforce the constant assertions of what is called political correctness which are continuously poured out in books and newspapers, and on the television screen. If one pays for books to be published, they are as far as possible suppressed, receiving only few and inconspicuous reviews.

Nevertheless we are asking for the funding which we need to publish these books on as large a scale as possible. If, in addition to funding, you could provide us with an association with a publisher who would produce American editions of our books, there would be a possibility that the American editions, at least, might sell enough to be profitable, and the influence on the balance of voting could only be in favour of the Republican party, as being less identified with progress in the direction of a Welfare State.

I had intended to enclose a copy of The Power of Life or Death, by Dr Fabian Tassano. This was published with support and commendation from Professor Anthony Flew, who was for some decades the leading (virtually the only) libertarian writer in this country. The British editions of his books had little success, and most of the British publishers can no longer be traced. He told us that his books were more successful in America, particularly in the Bible belt.

The Power of Life or Death was critical of the powers of the medical profession and relevant to the euthanasia debate, but Fabian Tassano's voice was not permitted to be heard in this one-sided 'controversy'. The reason I am not sending you a copy of The Power of Life or Death is that the greater part of our stock, which the printers were warehousing, has vanished and probably been pulped down. We have very few copies left, so please do not ask for one unless you have a serious interest in supporting us. One can only wonder whether the political incorrectness of the book contributed to this accident, which means that we shall have to pay for a reprint to keep the book in print.

As well as publishing new books written by ourselves and any writers who can be found willing or able to express similar views, we would like to be able to reissue books by Professor Flew, Professor Eysenck, and other formerly classic writers whose books are now unobtainable in this country, with new introductions by ourselves placing the books in relation to modern trends in psychology, philosophy and so on, as well as to modern social developments in this country.

The Oxford Forum publishing company needs a minimum annual income of £500,000 to enable us to produce a reasonably continuous stream of books.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Celia Green