Greatest Hits: Education: Our Greatest Battle?

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Education: Our Greatest Battle?  And I fear we have already lost. 

This is an article that I had commented on for another site some time ago. I thought that given the current climate of “change,” it might be a good idea to re-visit it. The article is eight years old, however, it seems to echo what is going on today.

From the August 2001 Idaho Observer:

Why Our Schools Teach Socialism

By Joe Larson

Congratulations America: Today there are over 10,000 openly marxist professors and thousands of humanist professors controlling the universities and colleges that produce America’s teachers and other professionals. Varying forms of marxist-humanism are the predominant philosophies of the educational establishment; yet we repeatedly send our most precious gift (our children) off to them for “education” (indoctrination).

Today’s schools are filled with sex education, political correctness, environmental extremism, global unity, diversity training (pro-homosexuality) and higher order thinking skills [HOTS]; which boldly claim that to become a higher order thinker one must first believe the fact that there are no absolutes, absolutely! “The Greatest Story Ever Told” based on the greatest book ever written, “The Holy Bible,” about the greatest teacher who ever lived, Jesus, is not allowed, let alone used, in the schools of America. The Bible was America’s first textbook; yet today it is referred to as a book of fables.

Our schools are filled with violence, murder, extortion, rape, unwanted pregnancy, drug use, disrespect, foul language, declining test scores and children who cannot read. While the pontificators wonder why, God doesn’t; He knows – Hosea 4:6 says, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. I will also reject thee seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God; I will also forget thy children.” Verse 7 says, “As they were increased, so they sinned against Me: Therefore, will I change their glory into shame.”

The problem with America’s educational system began with the birth of socialism and given impetus by federal government involvement. Lenin, one of the world’s leading experts on socialism, tells us – “Communism is socialism in a hurry.” Socialism, therefore, is communism by gradualism rather than by revolution. The socialist “Fabian Society,” the forerunner of most socialist groups in America, had as their motto “Make Haste Slowly.” “Democratic Socialism” became the battle cry to socialize the United States of America. The socialists’ goal was to “permeate and penetrate,” then control this nation from deep within. Their first target in America was our children through public instruction.

In the U.S. their followers would use language as their first line of attack and deceit. They would wear no badge nor socialist label, but were to call themselves “liberal,” “progressive” and even “moderate.” Words were the weapon of choice for this new war. By changing and shifting word meanings the socialists could cover their true purpose. Everything would be done under the banners of “reform” and “social justice,” suggesting all was for the public good, for humanitarian reasons, for true democracy — and finally — for the children. The buzzwords of socialism were then, and are today, “social” and “democracy” (i.e. social science, social studies and socialization of the child). Robert Conquest observed, “a communist never does anything under his own name that he can do under someone else’s.”

This is important:  Totalitarians never announce themselves.  They do not come in and say, “Hi, we’re socialists and we’re going to take away your freedoms bit by bit.  We’re going to criminalize your beliefs and your God. We’re going to control every aspect of your live from cradle to grave, and there isn’t a thing you can do about it!” They couch their intentions with pleasant sounding words; they distort and confuse the meanings of their words to make you think “it’s OK.”  How many times do we hear the term “change, reform, progressive?” Or, what of “tolerance, diversity, or fairness?”  “Change” is certainly true (not change we would want), but what of the others?  I think we all know what they really mean.

Regarding the statement, “make haste slowly,” the left does not announce their plans and intentions in full form.  They know that the public would reject them.  Instead, they move incrementally.  They take whatever step they can at a time.  Either by exploiting a crisis, or creating one, they implement their plans step by step.  It will start with some regulations or restrictions, usually in response to some real or invented event or problem.  As time wears on, they add to the regulations or restrictions.  At each phase, the politicians and media assures the public that it’s just some small sacrifices that they’re making, and the government doesn’t  really want to take some right or freedom away.  The educational system plays a role here as well.  Since so many children are indoctrinated, they will no know the reasons for the freedoms that we have.  As we have heard, there have been more than a few occasions where children have been threatened with failing grades, ridiculed, or otherwise discriminated against because they had a differing viewpoint.  Too many of these people grow to be adults with absolutely no concept of our system of government.  They don’t recognize that government control always leads to tyranny.  They have no idea that the founders wrote our Constitution to protect our rights from the very things that are happening now.

In the early 1900’s, because of unrest in Europe, thousands of socialists flocked to America for safety. Large numbers held degrees in the fields of psychology, sociology and psychiatry (behavioral sciences, dealing with behavior and [social] change). Many went on to become college and university professors.

Norman Thomas, socialist and member of the Civil Liberties Union, boldly told the world, “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”

Note now that they don’t use the word “liberal.” They now refer to themselves as “progressive.”  How ironic! They use a nice sounding term to describe tyranny.

The story of how the socialists took over the American educational establishment would fill a book; so let us just listen to their own words.

John Dewey, called “the father of modern education,” was an avowed socialist, the co-author of the ‘Humanist Manifesto’ and cited as belonging to fifteen Marxist-front organizations by the Committee on Un-American Activities. Do the words (the father of modern education) now take on new meaning? Remember, Dewey taught the professors who would train America’s teachers. He was obsessed with “the group.” In his own words, “You can’t make socialists out of individualists. Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone is interdependent.”

How many of us were taught by our parents, or even our schools, to think for ourselves, be self-reliant, strive to achieve our dreams, be our own person?  Under the system of the future, are these traits illnesses that are to be “treated?” Are we to be replaced by successive generations of subservient drones that have no ability to critically analyze facts, and therefore will never question their masters?

Rosalie Gordon, writing on Dewey’s progressive (socialist) education in her book “What’s Happened To Our Schools,” said, “The progressive system has reached all the way down to the lowest grades to prepare the children of America for their role as the collectivists of the future. The group — not the individual child — is the quintessence of progressivism. The child must always be made to feel part of the group. He must indulge in group thinking and group activity.”

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Collectivist = Communists.  Notice how individuality is to be eliminated.  How meaningful are the individual freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution when individuality is to be eliminated? As an update, is it any surprise that the government has been pushing mandatory pre-school? This has nothing to do with education. This is about indoctrination.  They state it plainly themselves.

After visiting the Soviet Union, Dewey wrote six articles on the “wonders” of Soviet education. The School-To-Work system in our public schools (all 50 states) is modeled after the Soviet poly-technical system.

In 1936, the National Education Association stated its position, from which they have never wavered; “We stand for socializing the individual.”

The NEA in its “Policy For American Education” stated, “The major problem of education in our times arises out of the fact that we live in a period of fundamental social change. In the new democracy [we were a Republic] education must share in the responsibility of giving purpose and direction to social change. The major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual. Education must operate according to a well-formulated social policy.”

Paul Haubner, specialist for the NEA, tells us, “The schools cannot allow parents to influence the kind of values-education their children receive in school. That is what is wrong with those who say there is a universal system of values. [Christians?] Our (humanistic) goals are incompatible with theirs. We must change their values.”

Professor Chester M. Pierce, M.D., Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard, has this to say, “Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well — by creating the international child of the future.”

Some politicians agree. Listen to former Senator Paul Hoagland of Nebraska: “The fundamentalist parents have no right to indoctrinate their children in their beliefs. We are preparing their children for the year 2000 and life in a global one-world society and those children will not fit in.”

What then happens to those children that do not “fit in” to this new socialist world?  Many of the readers of this blog have been subject to the indoctrination of the public schools and universities.  We were somehow able to resist and form opinions of our own.  What will become of such people in the “new order?”

In the Humanist Review magazine it was observed that, “Education is thus a most powerful ally of humanism. What can a theistic Sunday school’s meeting for an hour once a week and teaching only a fraction of the children do to stem the tide of the five-day program of humanistic teaching?”

P. Blanchard, in ‘The Humanist” 1983, continues: “I think that the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny how to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average American child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all other myths of alleged history.”

In a socialist state, there can be no power higher than the state. The concept of God, and for some reason, the Christian God in particular, that has to be eliminated. They won’t say that publicly, but that’s the agenda.  Even for those who aren’t religious, what other ideas might be out of synch with the new worldview?  Once they come for the Christians, who might be next?

John J. Dunphy wrote in the Jan/Feb 1983 edition of The Humanist, “The battle for mankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom. The classroom must and will become the arena of conflict between the old and the new. The rotting corpse of Christianity and the new faith of humanism.”

Our bureaucrats, politicians and educators are constantly on television blaming either parents or lack of funds for our schools’ dilemmas. The answer is always more money and more government control. For well over 50 years the American voter has believed this line of crap. Victor Gollancz, a famous socialist publisher tells us why he believed that socialism would take over America; “Christians are not exactly bright, so it will be easy for socialism to lead them down the garden path through their ideals of brotherly love and ‘social justice.’”

It’s (past) time that Christian men stand up for their families and their faith and put God back in charge of this nation and it’s schools.

Joe Larson is the director of Restoring America, a nationwide association of individuals and organizations, including The Idaho Observer, that are dedicated to networking their information, activities and resources to further the effort of a peaceful restoration of our Constitutional Republic. Larson can be contacted at restoringamerica.org or by calling: (573) 793-3156.

http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20010816.htm

I know, why this now?  I know the ObamaCare plan is oozing its way through Congress.  I know Cap and Trade lurks on the horizon.  Education is already in the hands of the left, and it has been for some time.  We vehemently defend our health care choices and our income, as well we should, but we then forget about our children?  With every successive generation of children going through the public schools, the levels of violence, the lack of ethics, and the lack of knowledge of the average American citizen continues to grow.  Yes, many of us were taught well at home.  We learned lessons of hard work, discipline, integrity, and so forth from our parents and other family members.  But as these new generations are indoctrinated with leftist ideas, there will be fewer and fewer parents able or willing to teach such lessons.  My fear is that, at some time in the future, we will reach a tipping point where people that are honest, have integrity, or are able to think independently will become a small minority.  At that point, the indoctrinated ones will freely give up all the rights that made this nation great, simply because they don’t know the utility of them.  In fact, they will have been taught to despise them.

People that believe in freedom are already the new pariahs for the left.  One only needs to look at the media coverage of the Tea Parties to confirm this.  The drumbeat will only grow.  As it does, the left will continue to indoctrinate more and more children.  We might yet defeat the socialized medicine, and we might prevent passage of Cap and Trade.  Obama may lose hig congressional majorities in 2010.  He might even be defeated in 2012.  But if we continue to give our kids to the government every day, those victories will be temporary, delaying the socialists for a few years to be sure, but in the end, futile.

Share

Greatest Hits: Why Leftists Deny Reality?

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Why Leftists Deny Reality? Facts are the kryptronite to the left. 

Ever try to argue facts and information with a Liberal?  Ever come away from the encounter frustrated?   Well, there’s a reason for that. Here are some excerpts from an interview with Yuri Bezmenov, a defector from the Soviet Union.

I know that intelligence gathering looks more romantic…. That’s probably why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond types of films. But in reality the main emphasis of the KGB is NOT in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion, and the opinions of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, active measures, or psychological warfare. What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.

It’s a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided into four basic stages. The first stage being “demoralization“. It takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years required to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy exposed to the ideology of [their] enemy. In other words, Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least 3 generation of American students without being challenged or counterbalanced by the basic values of Americanism; American patriotism.

The result? The result you can see — most of the people who graduated in the 60?s, dropouts or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems. You are stuck with them. You can’t get through to them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern can not change their mind even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. [alluding to Pavlov].

So, It would seem, by the admission of a former KGB official, that their efforts were successful.  If fact, the progress has even exceeded their expectations…

The demoralization process in the United States is basically completed already for the last 25 years. Actually, it’s over fulfilled because demoralization now reaches such areas where not even Comrade Andropov and all his experts would even dream of such tremendous success. Most of it is done by Americans to Americans thanks to lack of moral standards. As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures. …he will refuse to believe it…. That’s the tragedy of the situation of demoralization.

Mind you, these words were spoken in the 80?s.  I think we all recognize that the situation has deteriorated significantly since then. Think about politicians like Allen Grayson, everyone on MSNBC (and most of the MSM), and the public schools and universities.  It’s all there.  Rights that do not exist are created, and rights that do exist are denied.  Capitalism is decried, and socialism is praised.  Lies, deceit, thuggery, intimidation, propaganda, and media control are all practiced by the left, and are viewed as acceptable practices.  They cling dogmatically to socialism, as it continues to destroy the country.  They deny, emphatically, all evidence to the contrary, irregardless  of it’s bulk and validity.  Then, they turn and attack anyone that presents the truth.

It seems hopeless, but it isn’t.  Since the last term of Bush, and especially since Obama’s election, more and more Conservatives have been speaking out.   While the left has entrenched and are attacking with all of their resources (which are considerable), they are losing the debate, as well as the battle for public opinion.  Our advantage is that they are still, in spite of their best efforts, a small minority.  Our disadvantage is that while the left is statistically small, they are extremely well placed.  Since their “long march through the institutions,”  their impact reaches far beyond their numbers.

As usual, here are some ideas on how to deal with this situation:

1.  Don’t engage a leftist unless you can bury them in facts.  It won’t matter to the leftist, but anyone else that can see, hear, or read might be convinced by reality.

2.  Stay on message.  Leftists, when hit with reality, will change the subject to something that they think they use against you.  The classic, “Where were you when Bush was POTUS?” is easily answered by saying, “where are you now?”  You might be tempted to state that most of us didn’t agree with Bush’s policies, but then you are talking about history, and not what’s happening now.  Also, you are defending yourself rather than dealing with Obama’s policies.  Thread hijacking, ad-hominem attacks, lies, and logical fallacies are all part of the leftist playbook.  Point out that they are not responding to content, and move on with your point.  If they get shrill, let them, because you win!

3.  Don’t allow yourself to be distracted.  The infiltrators, the “anarchists,” and the MSM are all lying and/or threatening the movement.  While these need to be addressed, they don’t have to be a primary focus.  From what I saw, the Tea Parties did a fantastic job of identifying the infiltrators.  That, and the message still got out, and that is the key.  As for the MSM, let them say what they will.  This blog, and many others, expose their lies on a regular basis.  When they lie, and anyone can look it up on-line and see the truth, the more audience they will lose.  Let them fall on their own swords.  Basically, if your adversary is self destructing, get out of the way and let them.

4.  Facts, facts, and non-violence are our weapons of choice.  Stick with those, and we win.  Forget the left, they cannot be convinced of anything.  They will likely not overcome their programming.  We are trying to convince the people that aren’t sure, and might still be able to think a bit.  That too is working.  More people are coming to our cause all the time.

5.  Educate yourselves.  Read, watch, and learn.  A knowledgeable opponent will give the average leftist fits.  Again, when they get shrill, we win.

6. Stay calm.  If you lose your cool, you lose.  The goal of the leftist, beyond taking you off message, is to upset you and make you lash out, rendering you ineffective.

To sum it up, this is the key to our victory.

“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.”
—  Mahatma Gandhi

Share

Greatest Hits: How Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda

Share

How Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda:  My thoughts from 2010 on how regressives have to kill hope in order to subjugate the masses. 

The POTUS used “Hope” as a slogan during his campaign.  While we would argue that “hope” has nothing to do with Obama’s policies, there is a different context for it.

The progressive agenda has nothing to do with hope; it is a proposal for a control mechanism, nothing more.

  • Health care for all?  Not necessarily.  CONTROL of healthcare?  Absolutely!
  • Financial reform?   Not so much. CONTROL of the financial sector?  Yup!
  • Dealing with “Climate Change” saving the planet?  Not even close.   Massive redistribution program?  YES!

I could go on and on, but I think the point is made.  If there is any hope there at all, it is only the “progressive’s” hope for total control of all human activity.

But what of real hope?  Here is the definition.

hope

/ho?p/ Show Spelled [hohp] Show IPA noun, verb,hoped, hop·ing.

–noun

1. The feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best: to give up hope.

2. A particular instance of this feeling: the hope of winning.

How can we say that the “hope” that Obama advertised is actual hope?  His policies and actions have made things worse, just as we predicted.  Unemployment has gone up.  Debt has risen to unsustainable levels.  People are losing their health coverage and doctors.  Our standing in the world has decreased, as foreign powers ridicule him.  Businesses refuse to hire over the uncertainty of tax increases and excessive regulation.  Corruption has increased.  If anything, actual hope has decreased.  Frankly, I believe that this is the intent.

I think that this boils down to an old quote that I had heard years ago.  I believe it shows us what is happening.  Excuse my paraphrase.

“A man is useless to the socialist state until he has given up all hope.”

Kindly consider that in any totalitarian system, individuals cannot succeed in as much that the government permits them.  All phases in the life of the individual is under the control of the state.  Housing, education, work, wages, retirement, medical care, transportation,  and even diet, are all dictated by the state.  How can hope exist in that environment?  The state assumes the control of an individual at birth, and doesn’t let go until they die.  I would suggest that hope is derived from the ability to actively engage in efforts to improve one’s situation.  If one had no control or influence over even the most basic aspects of their lives, how can they hope for anything?  If personal effort, ideas, or labor will not change an individual’s situation, why would they try?

I would submit that this is the general intent of the totalitarian system.   If a person has given up all hope, they will completely submit to the state’s control.  This submission would not be due to the superiority of the state’s position or it’s services, it would come after the realization that there are no alternatives.  The end result would be a discouraged citizen that would not only comply, but eventually wouldn’t even think about having hope for anything else. This is the soul crushing lack of personal will that gripped the population of the former Soviet Bloc.

We can also see this in how the former Soviet Bloc nations presented information to their citizens.  In the late 60’s, the Soviets had some difficulty in keeping their client states subjugated.  The Czechs, in particular, wanted freedom, and at least in that nation, Soviet troops were needed to crush freedom movements.  Therefore, throughout the Vietnam War period, the state controlled media behind the iron curtain piped as much information about American “atrocities,” (The Russians now admit to staging ones that never happened) and student protests as they possibly could.  This was, of course, to smear the American cause in Vietnam, but it was also to crush any hope for freedom among their own citizens.  The anti-war protests in the west were portrayed as a successful communist revolution (they were, in many ways, just that).

The overall goal was to discourage the people that sought freedom.  The United States represented the best hope for human freedom on Earth.  The people that were trapped behind the iron curtain looked to the US for hope (of freedom).  When the Soviets and their puppets broadcast the protests, and spun the coverage, it looked as if Americans were losing their freedom.  It was made to appear that there was no longer an alternative.  The Soviets couldn’t destroy America, but they could use their control of information to destroy the IDEA of America, at least among their own populations.    Again, causing the people to give up hope, and submit to the all-powerful state, as there appeared to be no alternatives.

Many people have asked why our “progressives” don’t go to Cuba, or some other Communist nation to live?  The true answer to that is relatively simple.  If America exists as a free nation, and our Constitution remains intact, it will continue to be a beacon of hope to the oppressed nations of the world.  As long as we remain a free state that protects human freedom, economically outperforms the rest of the world, and provides more wealth to more people, socialism will continue to pale by comparison.  As long as there is true hope for human freedom, and the individual opportunity that comes with it, people will continue to desire it.  Therefore, America, and the ideas that are associated with it, must be destroyed.  So, our left stays, and works hard at destroying America.  If they can accomplish that goal, they will not only end human freedom on this continent, but all over the planet.  Socialism will grow in control unimpeded, as there will be no alternative.  Eventually, the idea and reality of the United States would be scrubbed from history, and sent down the memory hole.  In a few generations, most people would never know that there ever was an alternative.

That’s what the “progressives” want.

Such is the extent of control, and the elimination of hope that is required by the left, that they don’t want their subjects thinking that even an after-life can be better.

In 1979, the Three-Self Church reemerged under the control of the Chinese government, which monitors its activities. Certain topics were off limits, including the Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the establishment of the kingdom of God. Teaching from books of prophecy that predict the end times — such as Daniel and Revelation — was prohibited. The church’s influence over teenagers and younger children was severely limited. The government oversees clergy education and retains the right to review sermons to assure compliance with government restrictions. (Emphasis mine)

You see, the nanny state wants to take the place of God.  And, apparently, the god of the nanny state is a rather jealous one.  People cannot look forward to a day when God will save them.  They cannot look forward, with hope, to a day that they will be in paradise.  Even more so, they cannot look forward to the day when their savior might return.  The nanny god will have no other God before him.  Any other faith, and especially the Christian God and Savior, puts the state in a subservient position to God.  For the “progressive,” obedience to the state is first and foremost, so either Christianity must change, or it must go.

I realize that I am not painting a pretty picture.  Things do look rather grim.  Of course, that too, is a goal for the left.  Eventually, our “progressives” want us to give up on freedom, and seek the cold, unloving embrace of big brother.  However, it doesn’t have to be that way.  Let’s take a look at recent history, and see what happened when people found hope.

After a national pattern of high taxation, failure, and appeasement, Ronald Reagan was elected President.  In a single day, our pattern of engagement with the Soviet Union changed.  After a decade of high taxes and stagflation, the American economy boomed.  After the “malaise” of the inept Carter administration, the American people gained more pride in our nation, as well as in it’s future.  After a nearly a decade of neglect, President Reagan modernized and strengthened our military.  And, more importantly, Reagan challenged the Soviet Union directly.  Our diplomacy turned from one of capitulation, to one of confrontation.  This confrontation is perhaps best exemplified by the statement President Reagan made in Berlin…

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

The meaning of this change in diplomacy was not lost on the people of Eastern Europe.  They heard of Reagan, through radio and more clandestine means.  And as Reagan’s military buildup pushed the socialist economies of the Soviet Bloc to the breaking point, the differences between free and socialist states became all the more clear.  The people started seeing through the lies that they were being told, and gained hope for the freedom and prosperity that are available in the US.

The rest, as they say, was history.  As the Socialist nations crumbled, their people simply stopped believing in the false claims of their leaders and socialism.  They had heard of the US, and of Reagan, and of the ideas that formed this nation.  With that hope, they found the bravery to risk the wrath of the state.  Then, the states fell.  It is well known that in many homes in Eastern Europe, hangs a picture of Ronald Reagan.  The left may deny his influence, but the people who lived under tyranny kept score on their own.

So where does that leave us now?  While we are close to losing our Republic, we are also able to achieve victory.  The real choice is with us.  Will we lose hope, and give up to the state, just as our would-be masters would want, or will we realize that we can hold on to our hope?  We have to realize that it’s up to us and it’s right now.  We need to take some pages out of Reagan’s book.  We need to confront the left strongly, and give alternatives.  We need to be bold and confident. We are right.  We have evidence, and we need to spread the hope that springs from individual freedom,  a Constitutional Republic, and a real free market.  We need to spread the hope that comes with the ability to change one’s lot in life.  If we do these, and it will be a long and difficult ride, we can free the minds of millions more our fellow citizens.  Then, our socialist system will collapse under it’s own failure.

Share

How Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda

Share

The POTUS used “Hope” as a slogan during his campaign.  While we would argue that “hope” has nothing to do with Obama’s policies, there is a different context for it.

The progressive agenda has nothing to do with hope; it is a proposal for a control mechanism, nothing more.

  • Health care for all?  Not necessarily.  CONTROL of healthcare?  Absolutely!
  • Financial reform?   Not so much. CONTROL of the financial sector?  Yup!
  • Dealing with “Climate Change” saving the planet?  Not even close.   Massive redistribution program?  YES!

I could go on and on, but I think the point is made.  If there is any hope there at all, it is only the “progressive’s” hope for total control of all human activity.

But what of real hope?  Here is the definition.

hope

/ho?p/ Show Spelled [hohp] Show IPA noun, verb,hoped, hop·ing.

–noun

1. The feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best: to give up hope.

2. A particular instance of this feeling: the hope of winning.

How can we say that the “hope” that Obama advertised is actual hope?  His policies and actions have made things worse, just as we predicted.  Unemployment has gone up.  Debt has risen to unsustainable levels.  People are losing their health coverage and doctors.  Our standing in the world has decreased, as foreign powers ridicule him.  Businesses refuse to hire over the uncertainty of tax increases and excessive regulation.  Corruption has increased.  If anything, actual hope has decreased.  Frankly, I believe that this is the intent.

I think that this boils down to an old quote that I had heard years ago.  I believe it shows us what is happening.  Excuse my paraphrase.

“A man is useless to the socialist state until he has given up all hope.”

Kindly consider that in any totalitarian system, individuals cannot succeed in as much that the government permits them.  All phases in the life of the individual is under the control of the state.  Housing, education, work, wages, retirement, medical care, transportation,  and even diet, are all dictated by the state.  How can hope exist in that environment?  The state assumes the control of an individual at birth, and doesn’t let go until they die.  I would suggest that hope is derived from the ability to actively engage in efforts to improve one’s situation.  If one had no control or influence over even the most basic aspects of their lives, how can they hope for anything?  If personal effort, ideas, or labor will not change an individual’s situation, why would they try?

I would submit that this is the general intent of the totalitarian system.   If a person has given up all hope, they will completely submit to the state’s control.  This submission would not be due to the superiority of the state’s position or it’s services, it would come after the realization that there are no alternatives.  The end result would be a discouraged citizen that would not only comply, but eventually wouldn’t even think about having hope for anything else. This is the soul crushing lack of personal will that gripped the population of the former Soviet Bloc.

We can also see this in how the former Soviet Bloc nations presented information to their citizens.  In the late 60’s, the Soviets had some difficulty in keeping their client states subjugated.  The Czechs, in particular, wanted freedom, and at least in that nation, Soviet troops were needed to crush freedom movements.  Therefore, throughout the Vietnam War period, the state controlled media behind the iron curtain piped as much information about American “atrocities,” (The Russians now admit to staging ones that never happened) and student protests as they possibly could.  This was, of course, to smear the American cause in Vietnam, but it was also to crush any hope for freedom among their own citizens.  The anti-war protests in the west were portrayed as a successful communist revolution (they were, in many ways, just that).

The overall goal was to discourage the people that sought freedom.  The United States represented the best hope for human freedom on Earth.  The people that were trapped behind the iron curtain looked to the US for hope (of freedom).  When the Soviets and their puppets broadcast the protests, and spun the coverage, it looked as if Americans were losing their freedom.  It was made to appear that there was no longer an alternative.  The Soviets couldn’t destroy America, but they could use their control of information to destroy the IDEA of America, at least among their own populations.    Again, causing the people to give up hope, and submit to the all-powerful state, as there appeared to be no alternatives.

Many people have asked why our “progressives” don’t go to Cuba, or some other Communist nation to live?  The true answer to that is relatively simple.  If America exists as a free nation, and our Constitution remains intact, it will continue to be a beacon of hope to the oppressed nations of the world.  As long as we remain a free state that protects human freedom, economically outperforms the rest of the world, and provides more wealth to more people, socialism will continue to pale by comparison.  As long as there is true hope for human freedom, and the individual opportunity that comes with it, people will continue to desire it.  Therefore, America, and the ideas that are associated with it, must be destroyed.  So, our left stays, and works hard at destroying America.  If they can accomplish that goal, they will not only end human freedom on this continent, but all over the planet.  Socialism will grow in control unimpeded, as there will be no alternative.  Eventually, the idea and reality of the United States would be scrubbed from history, and sent down the memory hole.  In a few generations, most people would never know that there ever was an alternative.

That’s what the “progressives” want.

Such is the extent of control, and the elimination of hope that is required by the left, that they don’t want their subjects thinking that even an after-life can be better.

In 1979, the Three-Self Church reemerged under the control of the Chinese government, which monitors its activities. Certain topics were off limits, including the Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the establishment of the kingdom of God. Teaching from books of prophecy that predict the end times — such as Daniel and Revelation — was prohibited. The church’s influence over teenagers and younger children was severely limited. The government oversees clergy education and retains the right to review sermons to assure compliance with government restrictions. (Emphasis mine)

You see, the nanny state wants to take the place of God.  And, apparently, the god of the nanny state is a rather jealous one.  People cannot look forward to a day when God will save them.  They cannot look forward, with hope, to a day that they will be in paradise.  Even more so, they cannot look forward to the day when their savior might return.  The nanny god will have no other God before him.  Any other faith, and especially the Christian God and Savior, puts the state in a subservient position to God.  For the “progressive,” obedience to the state is first and foremost, so either Christianity must change, or it must go.

I realize that I am not painting a pretty picture.  Things do look rather grim.  Of course, that too, is a goal for the left.  Eventually, our “progressives” want us to give up on freedom, and seek the cold, unloving embrace of big brother.  However, it doesn’t have to be that way.  Let’s take a look at recent history, and see what happened when people found hope.

After a national pattern of high taxation, failure, and appeasement, Ronald Reagan was elected President.  In a single day, our pattern of engagement with the Soviet Union changed.  After a decade of high taxes and stagflation, the American economy boomed.  After the “malaise” of the inept Carter administration, the American people gained more pride in our nation, as well as in it’s future.  After a nearly a decade of neglect, President Reagan modernized and strengthened our military.  And, more importantly, Reagan challenged the Soviet Union directly.  Our diplomacy turned from one of capitulation, to one of confrontation.  This confrontation is perhaps best exemplified by the statement President Reagan made in Berlin…

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

The meaning of this change in diplomacy was not lost on the people of Eastern Europe.  They heard of Reagan, through radio and more clandestine means.  And as Reagan’s military buildup pushed the socialist economies of the Soviet Bloc to the breaking point, the differences between free and socialist states became all the more clear.  The people started seeing through the lies that they were being told, and gained hope for the freedom and prosperity that are available in the US.

The rest, as they say, was history.  As the Socialist nations crumbled, their people simply stopped believing in the false claims of their leaders and socialism.  They had heard of the US, and of Reagan, and of the ideas that formed this nation.  With that hope, they found the bravery to risk the wrath of the state.  Then, the states fell.  It is well known that in many homes in Eastern Europe, hangs a picture of Ronald Reagan.  The left may deny his influence, but the people who lived under tyranny kept score on their own.

So where does that leave us now?  While we are close to losing our Republic, we are also able to achieve victory.  The real choice is with us.  Will we lose hope, and give up to the state, just as our would-be masters would want, or will we realize that we can hold on to our hope?  We have to realize that it’s up to us and it’s right now.  We need to take some pages out of Reagan’s book.  We need to confront the left strongly, and give alternatives.  We need to be bold and confident. We are right.  We have evidence, and we need to spread the hope that springs from individual freedom,  a Constitutional Republic, and a real free market.  We need to spread the hope that comes with the ability to change one’s lot in life.  If we do these, and it will be a long and difficult ride, we can free the minds of millions more our fellow citizens.  Then, our socialist system will collapse under it’s own failure.

Share

Venezuela: Communist Dictator Blames Others for Failure of Communism

Share

As I have noted many time, leftists, whether they  call themselves communists or not, share the blame game with their fellow travelers.  When the Soviet Union’s beautiful collective farms failed to produce; causing the Soviet Union to go from being a food exporter to starving millions, someone had to be blamed.  Rather than admit that their bastions of equality and social justice were a steaming pile of rancid failure, they created scapegoats.  “Conspirators” with the “imperialist capitalists,” usually some poor slobs that the political commissars didn’t like, were rounded up, or “disappeared.”  It didn’t really solve the problem, but at least the people’s misery was redirected onto an imaginary “enemy.”  Yuri Bezmenov commented on this in his early 80’s interview…

Fast-forward to the present, and think about how long did the Administration and MSM blame President Obama’s failures of President Bush.  When the insurance companies followed the law, and cancelled plans that were illegal under ObamaCare, they blamed the insurance companies.  When the government ordered the banks to make bad loans, and the housing bubble burst, the banks were blamed for doing what the government told them to do!

When the plans of statists fail, it is NEVER because the plans are flawed, horrible, or ill-advised, it’s ALWAYS the fault of the statist’s political foes.  For the latest example of this, here is some news from Venezuela…

Heads are rolling and ministers are being shuffled as Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro takes on the dangerous saboteurs that comrade Stalin warned us about. The country with the world’s biggest oil reserves can’t seem to keep baby formula in its stores, as sinister right-wing “mafias” have speculated Venezuela’s way into chronic sugar and milk shortages. Maduro identified the culprits in his first state of the union address as President, reports the BBC:

Speaking at the National Assembly in Caracas, Mr Maduro vowed to introducer [sic] tougher penalties against “sabotage and speculation”.

“How can you describe someone who hides [from the shelves] formula milk for babies? We cannot create a new euphemism for that. That person must be described as a criminal,” said President Maduro.

But Mr Maduro says his government is under attack from powerful right-wing sectors in the country.

“While the government makes a big effort to guarantee the quality of some services and the availability of products, the mafias speculate with other products and even medicines,” said Mr Maduro.

In the years prior to Hugo Chavez assuming room temperature, he nationalized many parts of the economy, and most have turned into fail.  They sell oil by the tanker, but have power problems.  They earn billions, but cannot get baby formula on the shelves.  The wealthy job creators are leaving, or going Galt, and Venezuela is suffering what all leftist states eventually suffer:  the entire place is turning into Detroit.

But don’t worry.  It’ll always be someone else’s fault.  They might fire some people, or maybe even jail some political opponents.  Life won’t get any better, but at least some otherwise innocent people will be blamed, right?

 

Share

Welcome to Amerika, 2014!

Share

Note: As I’ve been paying attention the rhetoric of the left, particularly the content in Common Core, I am again reminded of the old ABC miniseries, Amerika. Here is a modified version of a post I wrote about it in March of 2010…

Every now and again, I refer to Obama’s version of our nation as “Amerika.” Given that the ObamaCare abomination has survived it’s first few hurdles, it might be a good time to revisit why I say that.

In 1987, ABC ran a 12 hour miniseries called, “AMERIKA,” chronicling life in an America that was taken over by the Soviet Union. Here is the trailer.

I started looking for clips from it. There aren’t all that many, but this one rings true for modern liberal thought.

All that’s missing is the “mmm, mmm, mmm.”  That, and it sounds to be straight out of Common Core.

I wonder what folks in the lefty media thought…

Well, that sounds like anyone on MSNBC referring to Conservatives.

Is it just me, or is truth imitating fiction here?

Note: This is the fourth time I’ve run this post since 2010.  Each time I’ve run it, I’ve had to find another version of the last video, which featured some heated exchanged among the media talking heads of the time.  Seems that many of the were thinking that the miniseries was too tough on the Soviets.  Perhaps that’s why news coverage of a TV miniseries from 1987 has to be censored, or put down the “memory hole,” so to speak!  Can’t have the fictitious Amerika interfering with the real Amerika, can we?

Share

Welcome to Amerika!

Share

Note:  This a post that was originally published in 2010.  It still fits, if you ask me. 

Every now and again, I refer to Obama’s version of our nation as “Amerika.” Given that the ObamaCare abomination has survived it’s first few hurdles, it might be a good time to revisit why I say that.

In 1987, ABC ran a 12 hour miniseries called, “AMERIKA,” chronicling life in an America that was taken over by the Soviet Union. Here is the trailer.

I started looking for clips from it. There aren’t all that many, but this one rings true for modern liberal thought.

All that’s missing is the “mmm, mmm, mmm.”

I wonder what folks in the lefty media thought…

(note the final video is different than the original version)

Well, that sounds like anyone on MSNBC referring to Conservatives.

Is it just me, or is truth imitating fiction here?

Share

Resource Post: How the Soviet Union Collapsed

Share

Law-books

Some of my Conservative friends might be put off by this, but take a look at this video on how the Soviet Union collapsed.  The Classic Liberal posted it, and it is an hour long.  However, it is worth the time to view, or at least listen. 

Now, one of the premises here is that Reagan confrontation of the Soviet Union, both rhetorical and military, was not a significant contributory factor in the fall of the Soviet State.  Now, think about this.  On the surface, leftists might celebrate this, saying that Reagan really wasn’t the hero that so many make him out to be.  However, then those leftists would also be admitting that the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of their own failure.  Reagan didn’t “kill communism,” communism died because it was an enviable abomination that is so totally inconsistent with human nature, that it could not have survived, and only lasted as long as it did on the massive piles of corpses that it generated.

Share

Get Told to Bum Rush a Gunman, Be Punished For Bum Rushing a Gunman

Share

Last month, law enforcement officials released some asinine advise.  They apparently suggested, with a straight face, that school teachers, and even children, bum rush an active shooter.  Gateway Pundit had the coverage last month…

KSDK reported:

Law enforcement authorities are increasingly advising school officials – and even young students – to physically confront suspects in future campus attacks as a final line of defense.

The advisories, now included in training videos and documents prepared by police, represent a major shift in tactics for law enforcement officials who have traditionally counseled potential victims to flee and hide while waiting for authorities to answer calls for help.

“These incidents are becoming a fact of life,” University of Wisconsin-Madison Police Chief Susan Riseling told a meeting of law enforcement colleagues gathered here. “If there is no other option, take the shooter out.”

Riseling, who has produced an instructional video on dealing with so-called “active shooters,” said that while police have long urged potential victims to avoid such confrontations at all costs, recent mass shootings are forcing a controversial change in the ranks.

“We’re simply bringing citizens into reality,” Charleston, S.C., Sheriff Al Cannon said. “We aren’t being fair when we tell teachers to lock the door and cower in the corner with their children.”

Of course, they COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE ARMED in order to “take the shooter out.”  They have to do a human wave attack and have a number of them picked off in order to save the day.  In other words, sacrifice yourself, because we will not permit you a fighting chance.  It puts me to mind of human wave attacks conducted by the Soviets, and other systems to place no value on the life of an individual human.

OK, it is asinine advise.  No one would argue that.  However, what happens when someone actally follows that advise?  They are punished!  Maggie’s Notebook has the details…

ABC-7.com WZVN News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral

If the video doesn’t load, it can be seen at the station’s website.

So, these guys did a good, but dangerous thing, and they were punished? In the end, you can see the stupidity of government. They tell you to attack an armed gunman, while denying you the right to defend yourself. Then, we some kids follow that advice, they are punished for it. In other words, the school says, “don’t interfere with the gun man!” This is stupidity. And, before someone says something stupid, I am NOT suggesting that we arm school children on buses. The post is about the mixed messages and stupidity of the varying levels of government.

Share

The 7 Pieces of Advice by Trotsky for Obama, found in the 1934 Chicago Tribune Cartoon ‘Planned Economy or Planned Destruction’

Share

This image is taken from the 1934 Chicago Tribune cartoon ‘Planned Economy or Planned Destruction?’. It focuses on the character of Leon Trotsky, who is laying out a series of policy goals for the United States. The Chicago Tribute suggested in its latest reprint of this cartoon that we take a look at this cartoon and see if it rings true in today’s political and economic climate.

Whereas others have focused on simply analyzing the larger cartoon to identify all the characters in it (for the best analysis see this post), today I am going to attempt to see if this cartoon sheds some understanding on the economic and political challenges facing today and whether it gives us as voters of a free nation any sort of guidance on how to vote in upcoming elections or which way to pressure our public officials:

  1. Motivations.

    Leon Trotsky was the founder of an ideology called Trotskyism, which is an extreme left-wing political ideology that believed that although the ‘working class’ had seized power in Russia, true socialism could not be established unless there was a global and permanent revolution led by vanguard parties of the smartest and best workers who would take control of society and achieve real change that would transform society. His vision of progress forward was defeated because even the communists saw that his economic and political theories were flawed and ignored the realities of of the world and did not lead to positive results as determined objectively. It is stunning how closely his ideas and thoughts mirror those of Obama.

    Although in specific there are differences that will arise from current US President Barack Obama’s general lack of referencing specifics and although Obama is by no means is a committed follower of Trotsky (I’ve suggested previously that Obama may in fact be a fascist), in the general Obama appears to echo the same ideas and beliefs of Trotsky. During his campaign he talked often about fundamentally transforming society by giving more power to bureaucratic elites, and one of the reasons why he was initially so popular overseas is that he translated his message of change and hope for workers and the working class to make it a call for an international and permanent struggle.

    Both Obama and Trotsky appear to be motivated by a sincere belief that their economic and political policies will indeed make the world a better place- but sadly, Obama is facing the same realities and objective results that Trotsky faced. One can only hope that he doesn’t end up some day with an ice pick in his back put there by a more committed Stalinist who works in his Politiburico.

  2. Spend Spend Spend.

    Soviet economic policy, as pushed by the most progressive and idealistic of the communists, advocated for higher and higher government spending. From a low of 8784 million rubles in 1928, Soviet government spending skyrocketed 106238 million rubles by 1937 (spending)- and the Soviet economy crashed, millions of people starved to death, the ruble fell heavily in value, and the standard of living fell. Even though the government spent more and more money, things got worse, which might be shocking to those who think that more government spending is good, but is perfectly understandable to those who see unelected and accountable bureaucrats taking money and property from those who earn it and blowing it on politically connected businesses in an inefficient manner.

    President Obama also has attempted to increase the wealth of society and make people more free by increasing government spending, and the United States has seen similar results to those experienced by FDR and the Soviet Union in the 1930’s- economic depression. And the worse is yet to come- unlike past spending programs which were structured in the immediate time frame, President Obama’s spending programs are paid for through debt, promises, and IOU’s, a ticking time bomb which is going to destroy the prosperity of future generations. It simply does not work to take property from others, either via taxes or fees or through borrowing money paid for with interest or future payments, and then have it spent by politically connected bureaucrats. It destroys wealth and property because this property and wealth is spent inefficiently and in a manner that violates the unseen supply-and-demand hand of God.

    Both the rulers of the Soviet Union and President Obama may sincerely believe that their economic policies of spending more money will indeed stimulate the economy and lead to a more prosperous people. President Obama has completely unhinged from reality on this, and his reply to mounting staggering debts and deficits is to borrow more money from foreign nations and spend that as well. Sadly, these policies have led to a long and lingering recession, matched only by the Great Depression that occurred the last time these ‘spend spend spend’ economic policies were employed.

  3. Under the Guise of Recovery.

    The main reason that the people of Russia went along with the economic plans put forth by Lenin and later Stalin were that they were desperate to recover from the effects of various calamities. World War One destroyed the Russian economy and so the people desperately empowered Lenin to implement his communist policies. The results of these early communist policies proved to be devastating economically, and so everyone looked forward to Lenin’s New Economic Policies. These more-capitalistic policies proved to be successful, but took power away from the elites and politically-connected, and so as soon as Lenin was dead, the tyrant Stalin proclaimed them failures and implemented his own economic policies, which turned into even worse failures. It was by disguising these various policies as responses to some sort of crisis that made the people willing to go along with them, willing to sacrifice seeing objective positive results, willing to sacrifice their property, liberty, and eventually their lives.

    In the United States, our nation has also gone along with the ‘under the guise of recovery’ swindle, giving up freedoms and property in a desperate attempt to recover from the Bush years, which we are all told were awful but are increasingly looking good in comparison to the lingering Obama recession. In response to various crisis’, many of them provoked by Obama’s very policies or policies which he supported during his short time in elected office, our nation is embarking on a historic redirection towards more government control over industries, more government control over our lives, and more divisive class warfare and bitter partisanship. It’s a crisis, we are told, and the only response is more cowbell, and so our nation continues to empower the very man who is pushing the very policies that are making the crisis worse.

    Same excuses used in both communist Soviet Union in the 1920’s and 1930’s and those used by President Obama and the Democratic Party today. And sadly, both groups appear to be supported or intimidated or fooled by the public that they are making poorer and less free.

  4. Bust the Government.

    A little history lesson for you- with the death of Lenin in 1924, the Russian political system was in flux. Before 1924, the Politburo and other communist institutions had run the nation, which Lenin having a great amount of power but Stalin and Trotsky also having big roles to play. Lenin’s death led to a power struggle won by Stalin, who eventually excited Trotsky. Later problems in the Soviet Union were blamed on Stalin’s political enemies, who were killed off in the Great Purges of the late 1930’s. The key to understanding what was happening this time is that the government and political structures were continually being broken by the very men who were promising to fix them- Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin.

    And today, President Obama is stunning in his disregard for the historical political system that is established by the Constitution. In many instances he has violated passages of the Constitution, if not legally according to the letter of the law than in dozens of instances realistically according to the spirit of the law, from recess appointments to ignoring the War Powers Act to governing without budgets to drone attacks to appointed czars. At perhaps no point in the last century has our political system been as broken and busted as it is today, with the nation increasingly sharply divided and bitter and partisan attacks commonplace. The Democrats in the US Senate, Obama’s allies, are even going so far as to seriously contemplate removing the filibuster so that they can jam legislation past the minority because they allege that the old historic political ways of doing things in our nation need to be broken.

    Breaking government and busting society, whether you call it permanent revolution by the proletariat or the forward march of progressives, destroys property, makes people less secure in their rights, and eventually causes death. It happened in the past- and it is happening today.

  5. Blame the Capitalists for Failure.

    Trotsky blamed capitalists for both the political and economic problems facing humanity, arguing that the economic boom and bust cycle that led to the destruction of so much wealth was caused by capitalists and that the lack of political power held by workers was also their fault. He believed that private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods or services for profit was at the root of the problems facing society, and that the solution to this was a genuine workers’ state where the working class controlled all the political power and the state owned and controlled the means of production. His desire was for the workers to really rule and the government to run industries for their good. But in reality what Soviet Russia ended up with was a nation ruled by a bureaucratic caste, where decisions were made by special interest groups and labor unions that controlled these various bureaucracies and made economic and political decisions to reward their supporters and not benefit the nation as a whole (or even ‘the workers’).

    The modern day Democratic Party, led by Barack Obama, has apparently subscribed to these very same ideas, and is reaping the very same results of the implementation of these ideas. Running in 2008 President Obama promised to be able to smooth out the boom and bust cycle of capitalism- especially the banking industry and investment of capital- by empowering government agencies to have stronger oversight over them. In another example, he argued that government ownership of healthcare, a major industry in the United States, would prevent healthcare costs from rising. And it was his belief that by having the government take over major automobile companies and then turn over that ownership to ‘the workers’ that both the automobile industries and the workers would benefit. And everywhere that his Trotsky-like ideas have been implemented, the results have been economic and political failure. Industries have failed to prosper- even General Motors is only profitable right now because it was bailed out by billions of dollars and given billions more in government support- and politically power has shifted farther away from the workers and increasingly towards the bureaucrats. The gulf between the rich and poor has widened, not narrowed, as as result of Obama’s Marxist policies, and this has been bad for America.

    And through all the failures of Trotsky and Obama, even as their own policies resulted in more failures, they have blamed ‘the capitalists’, ‘the rich’, ‘the bourgeoisie’, or ‘the 1%’. Deficits skyrocketed, currencies collapsed in values, the world became more unstable, civil unrest became more common, individual liberties were less protected, unemployment went up, and GDP stagnated- and yet still Trotsky and Obama blame capitalists.

  6. Junk the Constitution.

    A constitution is a body of fundamental laws that set up the principles, structures, and processes of government- and although I’ve been reading about the Soviet system of government over the last couple days, honestly I can’t really figure out how it works, especially during the 1920’s and 1930’s that are addressed in the cartoon. The principles of government appear to be ‘junked’ by the 1930’s- no longer holding to idealistic communism but instead succumbing to the reality of human nature. The structures of governing appear to be junked as well- the various political structures that Lenin may have used like the Politburo appear to have become merely tools for the people in power instead of actual structures of governing. And the process of creating laws to govern the actions of men appear to have been junked so much that in the Soviet system it really became all about decrees and directives from the ruler, whether it was Lenin or Stalin.

    And in America over the last couple of years under President Obama and his allies in Congress, we are seeing the same junking of our governmental principles, structures, and processes. The process on how the Affordable Care Act became law still confuses me- my students always ask me “just how did it get through the filibuster in the Senate” and my explanation, even though I explain it correctly, still rings hollow and untrue. In discussing how our nation is going to put in place laws to avoid the fiscal cliff or sequestration, I’m forced to spend a lot of time talking about ‘secret negotiations’ and backroom discussion between government elites, wondering the whole time where the time-honored processes involved in creating legislation through Congress and committees went. During President Obama’s run for the President, one can’t help but notice that his campaign was devoid of governing principles and that Democrats who ran for Congress also seemed to lack governing principles as well- they didn’t talk about their economic philosophies, or the politicians that they would emulate in office, or the latest political philosophies that they were students of, preferring instead discussions about power and demonetization of their opponents. And the czars and other bureaucrats who appear to be gaining more in power outside of the traditional structures of government are clearly similar to the bureaucrats and czars who ruled Soviet Russia.

    Principles, structures, and processes- look at how these are increasingly becoming junked in our nation as our nation moves away from the founding principles, the structures established in the written Constitution, and the processes of making laws and executing those laws that governed our nation for the first several hundred years. Just like the Soviets junked their Constitution as Trotsky recommended, Obama and the Democrats are junking ours today.

  7. Declare a Dictatorship.

    The last piece of advice that Trotsky wrote to Obama all those many years ago was to declare a dictatorship. This is the last step on the path to tyranny and injustice and the final attack on property and those people who create property, and is the end goal of all tyrants. Although Trotsky might have been suggesting that the dictatorship should be some sort of ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ where the political and economic power was controlled by the worker class within a democratic system, the reality is that his allies and friends and supporters and fellow Marxists eventually established a classical ‘dictatura’ where a small group of undemocratic elites control the economic and political power in the nation.

    And although President Obama sees himself as some sort of transformative community activist who is going to empower the workers or middle class or whatever he calls them, the reality that we are seeing is where an smaller group of appointed individuals are increasingly gaining in economic and political power. Trotsky saw himself as a fighter for the community too, but much like his experience, the reality that the Tea Party on the right and the Occupy Wall Street on the left can both plainly see is that political and economic power is moving father away from the common man, the middle class, or the worker and increasingly being concentrated in the hands of those who have the right political connections, who are the union bosses, those who have control over the bureaucracy, and those who have families and inherited wealth. The political classes enrich themselves while the workers become poorer, all due to President Obama and the Democratic Marxist policies which are supposed to due the opposite.

    President Obama is not declaring a dictatorship in the sense that he is going to announce that he is some sort of dictator for life- rather he is going to declare that the America and the world should embrace a new arrangement of economic and political power which empowers a smaller elite to make decisions for everyone based on some sort of notion of fairness or social justice. It’s a sneaky sort of declaration of dictatorship, but is one none-the-less, and the results will be that you personally will have less power over your own property, less power over decisions regarding your own healthcare, less choice in your own actions, and less protection of your life. It’ll be a dictatorship different than the sort that Trotsky advised, softly declared by a smooth-sounding teleprompter reading tyrant.

President Obama is not an evil person or a conspiracy theory or a giant plant or someone who is secretly planning on the destruction of the United States. He is just a guy who spews rhetoric that some people believe in, and he does it so well and campaigns so effectively that he has become the President of the strongest and most influential nation in the world. From this position, he is in place to implement his economic and political theories, which are proven failures that have driven nations into depression and war in the past, but which he is ignorant of because of his overall ignorance of economic and political history combined with his stunning conceit and confidence.

The advice and truths that Trotsky is writing in this cartoon are advice and truths on how to establish a tyranny and destroy life, liberty, and property, and it appears from an objective standpoint over the last several years that President Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress (and some Republicans too) are following this advice and believing these truths. They are rejecting other truths on which our nation was built- that all men are equal, that all men are endowed with certain inalienable rights, that the purpose of government is limited to protecting these rights from men who would take them away, that these rights are the right to live and live in freedom and earn and keep property, and that governments that abuse any of these rights are tyrannical and deserve to be abolished so that men may put in place better governments to protect these rights.

America is playing out some sort of Greek play, where our main character in his hubris thinks that he can achieve positive results by implementing the same policies in the past that only achieved negative results. Opposition to him and his agenda should be motivated by knowing that history, morality, and truth are on our side and not with him, and that where he is taking our nation and the world is to a place where life is less secure, liberties and freedoms are broken, and property and wealth are not protected.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share

Pravda Knows Where We Are Going, Why Don’t We?

Share

I find it a cruel , yet hilarious irony that Pravda, the former propaganda media outlet in the also former Soviet Union, finds it tragic that we are going down the road traveled by the Bolsheviks.  Steve, from Motor City Times, has more…

Via Pravda (yes, that Pravda):

Reading Putin’s speech without knowing the author, one would think it was written by Reagan or another conservative in America. The speech promotes smaller government and less taxes. It comes as no surprise to those who know Putin as a conservative. Vladimir Putin went on to say:

“…we are reducing taxes on production, investing money in the economy. We are optimizing state expenses.

The second possible mistake would be excessive interference into the economic life of the country and the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state.

There are no grounds to suggest that by putting the responsibility over to the state, one can achieve better results.

Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game.

During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”

And, here’s a little more…

The Pravda author adds a little food for thought.

Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America?  Their suffering has only begun.

I think he might be on to something.

On to something indeed.  I do agree with Steve (in his post) in that Putin is hardly a good guy, and that he is likely using appealing words to hide statist policies, kinda like the establishment GOP.  However, the irony is just as tragic.  The former Soviet Union is moving towards at least  a RINO nanny state, and we are headed for the cradle to grave oppression of the socialist state.

Elections have consequences.

Share

Leftist Meme for Layoff Bomb, Anything but Obama’s Policies!

Share

As the layoff bomb continues, it might be a good idea to take a look at the probable reaction from the left.  For this one, I think it will rather simple.  It’s all going to be variations on the leftist classic…

It’s ALWAYS something or someone else’s fault.  

Remember that no matter what happened in Obama’s first term, it was Bush’s fault?  Or maybe even a tsunami?  Or perhaps ATM machines?  It doesn’t matter how bad the liberals fail, the fault always lies elsewhere.

This is not  new.  The communists made an art form out of it.  Remember this from Yuri Bezmenov?

The Soviet system didn’t work.  Making people slaves on collective farms didn’t work, so being leftists, they had to blame someone else.  Then, they had to explain away the lack of evidence for their claims.  Sounds rather familiar, doesn’t it?

We could also talk about how the Soviet rhetoric about the US reeks of claims about Conservatives by liberals, but that is a post for another day.

So, for right now, the blame will be placed on the owners of the businesses for trying to stay in business. If the layoff bomb continues at a brisk rate, the blame will become more shrill, and there might even be moves to punish business owners.  Only time  will tell, but I’ll be around to cover it.

Share

Warnings About Communism From People That Lived Under it

Share

Perhaps I should say, “emphasis on the ‘under it.”  As we all know, Communism in actual application is perhaps the most tyrannical killing machine ever devised by man.  Unfortunately, as we saw with OWS, many of those would-be Marxists deny that the deaths, starvation, or shortages occurred at all.  Fortunately for us, there are millions of people that lived under communism that can speak out on what really happened.  Glenn Beck interviewed several recently…

I wish there was a bit more, but I think the point is conveyed. But, as our friend Bezmmenov has told us, the truth means nothing to OWS, or other useful idiots…

Everytime I see a leftist argue by attacking people personally, rather than present information (because they have none), I am reminded of Bezmenov’s point, “They are programmed to respond to certain stimuli…”

Sad, but true. However, the good news is that not everyone is brainwashed like the OWS and, say the pro-labor crowd. So, we still have a fighting chance.

Share

AGW Alarmist Compares Reality to Racism, Wants it Categorized as a Mental Illness: Where Have we Heard That Before?

Share

History always repeats itself.  And when statists are bent on acquiring power, or then keeping it, they can’t allow something like facts get in the way.  So, they have to be creative when attacking truth.   Since reality blows the narrative out of the water, they can do nothing with it, so, they attack those that advocate or present the truth.  The idea is simple, if someone presents facts that run counter to the narrative, smear them, so no one will pay attention to the facts.  Here is the latest example comes from Professor Kari Norgaard, via The GateWay Pundit…

Professor Kari Norgaard, from the University of Oregon, has labeled an entire population of people who think for themselves… racists.  But, it’s even more absurd than that.  If you reject the junk data, corruption, and blatant grab for power that is the Green Movement she wants you diagnosed with a disease.  And treated.

Via Bluegrass PunditThe Register reports,

Scepticism regarding the need for immediate and massive action against carbon emissions is a sickness of societies and individuals which needs to be “treated”, according to an Oregon-based professor of “sociology and environmental studies”. Professor Kari Norgaard compares the struggle against climate scepticism to that against racism and slavery in the US South.

According to an Oregon uni statement announcing the paper:

Resistance at individual and societal levels must be recognized and treated …

“This kind of cultural resistance to very significant social threat is something that we would expect in any society facing a massive threat,” [Norgaard] said.

The discussion, she said, is comparable to what happened with challenges to racism or slavery in the U.S. South.’

Of course, this type of thing has happened before, pricipally in the former Soviet Union.  I discussed that back in March of 2010….

Psychology Today Blogger Channels Psikhushka

One of the many abuses of human rights in the Soviet Union was the use of psychiatric treatment for people that did nothing more than disagree with the state and communist party.  Diagnosed with “Sluggishly Progressing Schizophrenia,” dissidents were subjected to forced treatments, that, when exposed to the world, caused universal condemnation.

Here is a description of the “treatment” of dissidents.

In the Soviet Unionpsychiatry was used for punitive purposes. Psychiatric hospitals were often used by the authorities as prisons in order to isolate political prisoners from the rest of society, discredit their ideas, and break them physically and mentally; as such they are considered a form of torture.

The official Soviet psychiatry allegedly abused the diagnosis of sluggishly progressing schizophrenia (??????????? ??????????), a special form of the illness that supposedly affects only the person’s social behavior, with no trace of other traits: “most frequently, ideas about a struggle for truth and justice are formed by personalities with a paranoidstructure,” according to the Moscow Serbsky Institute professors (a quote [4] from Vladimir Bukovsky‘s archives). Some of them had high rank in the MVD, such as the infamous Danil Luntz, who was characterized by Viktor Nekipelov as “no better than the criminal doctors who performed inhuman experiments on the prisoners in Nazi concentration camps” [4] .

The sane individuals who were diagnosed as mentally ill were sent either to regular psychiatric hospitals or, those deemed particularly dangerous, to special ones, run directly by the MVD. The treatment included various forms of restraint, electric shocks, electromagnetic torture, radiation torture, entrapment, servitude, a range of drugs (such as narcoticstranquilizers, and insulin) that cause long lasting side effects, and sometimes involved beatings. Nekipelov describes inhuman uses of medical procedures such as lumbar punctures.

At least 365 sane people were treated for “politically defined madness” in the Soviet Union, and there were surely hundreds more [4] .

Note the emphasized section.  People that were concerned with truth and justice were determined to be mentally ill.  How many Americans, therefore, would be diagnosed with “Sluggishly Progressing Schizophrenia?”

I guess that they’re just modifying it to reflect the need to smear anyone who see’s the modern environmental movement as a power grab.  Of course, they’ve changed the narrative, from global cooling, to global warming, to global climate disruption.  And, at every stage of the process, the science is settled, until, that is, they decide to change the narrative.   But, once again, recognizing that is akin to racism, and needs to be treatment.  Maybe they can create “camps” where these poor people that follow reality can be “treated?”  Come to think of it, maybe they can call them, “Gulags!”

Share

Former East German Citizen Warns of Communism

Share

We all know that OWS, and many union bosses are advocates of a Communist revolution here in the US.  We also know history, and where that leads.  Additionally, we also know, from footage, that Marxists in OWS deny history.  However, will another witness help them see the truth?  The Blaze recently posted a video, featuring a woman who escaped East Germany in the 80’s. 

Of course, the truth will not matter to the useful idiots.  As our late friend Bezmenov points out, they are programmed to deny reality, and I would argue that they are also programmed to attack anyone who does state it.  Remember this?

It didn’t matter that the man had actually LIVED IN the Soviet Union, he was dismissed.  Again, useful idiots cannot and will not grasp reality, until the new order decides that it’s their time to go.  By then, it will be too late.

Share

Occupy Update: Occupy Phoenix Advocates Forced Labor

Share

I’ve been saying all along that the occupy movement is a microcosm of it’s desired socialist/communist state.  And sometimes, they are very honest about their intent.  OWS Exposed has a video…

It has all the hallmarks of the old Soviet state; show trials, forced confessions, and then, forced labor (read-Gulags).  Of course, the verdicts will be decided before any trials begin.  Then, people will be beaten, tortured, or otherwise coerced into signing “confessions.” Then, they will sent off to do their forced labor.  When they never return (having been murdered) they will never be mentioned again. These occupods will deny that, even though they just suggested it, and, they’ll probably deny that the Soviets did it either.

All they need is a Stalin-type figure to rule with an iron fist, and they’re set to go.

Share

Occupy Whistle-blower Gets Banned From Spokes Council: Is OWS a Microcosm of a Marxist Regime?

Share

I’ve been noting for some time now, that OWS is a microcosm of the Marxist regime that they would prefer rule this nation.  Last month, I discussed the experiences if a feminist in at one of the European Occupy sites, and how she was threatened and silenced for pointing out inconvenient truths.  Now, we are seeing this being recreated at the mothership of the Occupy movement, Occupy Wall Street.

It seems that a female occupier, Nan Terrie, has been raising some uncomfortable issues for OWS, such as rape, robbery, and the suspicion that OWS funds are being misused.  The response by the leaderhip at OWS?  Ban her from the Spokes Council, the “governing body” of Occupy Wall Street.  Big Government has more…

The minutes of the January 20, 2012 Spoke Council meeting details some of the back-and-forth about excluding Ms. Terrie, who has been a vocal whistle-blower about theft, violence, and sexual assault, allegations that have been proven to be true as verified by outside reporting and police arrest records. Terrie has also asked for an accounting of money spent by the #Occupy movement. Further, she has alleged an organized coverup of violence and financial malfeasance by de facto leadership of the supposedly leaderless movement.

Ms. Terrie, an 18-year-old activist originally from Florida, was treated at the hospital for a concussion just two nights ago, after being hit in the head with a chair at a meeting.

Once again, historical parallels jump out at me.   I recall stories, from both the Soviet Union under Stalin, and Nazi Germany, of people reporting problems to the state, and abruptly disappearing.   In those nations, the state propaganda apparatus told the people, and the world, that everything was great and spiffy, and there were no problems with the great socialist system.  If there were acknowledged problems, they were the result of nefarious plots by Jews, imperialist Americans, Jews, evil capitalists, Jews, or Jewish bankers.  This set up a rather disastrous situation for those that pointed out problem with the spiffy system.

In the days before modern communication, it was rather easy for the state to control information.  If the state owned, or otherwise controlled the press, radio, television (if it existed), the population could be spoon-fed the approved propaganda of the day.  So, more often than not, the people bought into the message.  But, on occasion, a citizen would think the following; “Gee whiz, Comrade Stalin is so busy, perhaps he didn’t know that we are out of food, or our farm tractors are broken, and we have no spare parts.  Maybe I’ll write him a letter, and surely, he will help us.”  That poor soul would write a letter, and the KGB would get it.  The writer would be arrested, tried, and shot, or sent to a Gulag, or just taken out back and shot.  Why?  Because their sincere effort to elicit help contradicted the state’s position that everything was great and spiffy.  Going against the state’s position that everything was great was a crime, for “discouraging” the people, or creating dissent.  And, we all know how statists deal with dissent.  Dissent, and the dissenters must be marginalized, attacked, and otherwise silenced. That is what happened to Miss Terrie.

Of course, they did not kill her.  That would hit the media, and would be more bad press.  They don’t have sufficient control of information to cover up their activities, let alone a murder.  So, they settled for less, banning her from meetings, where her inconvenient truths can be ignored.  Also, it could be assumed that most of the occupiers are naive enough to think that they can install a Marxist government without killing millions of people.  So for now, they will settle for kicking out people that point out the obvious and predictable flaws in their system.  But what happens if they do manage to accomplish their goals, and people start dying of starvation, or there are massive riots, or when people simply refuse to be robbed of their property?

Share

Occupy Wall Street: This is what they support-even though they don't realize it

Share

Recent posts have shown that many in the Occupy Wall Street Movement not only support Communism, but deny the death and destruction wrought by the Soviet Union, and other Communist nations.  Just in the interest of “keeping the record straight,” here are some videos on the Holodomor, the intentional starvation of millions of Ukrainians…

The occupiers will deny it, but this is the result of Communism.

Share