The Gadfly

History and Narcissism

After the conflict at Actium, and when it became essential to peace, that all power should be centered in one man, these great intellects passed away. Then too the truthfulness of history was impaired in many ways; at first, through men's ignorance of public affairs, which were now wholly strange to them, then, through their passion for flattery, or, on the other hand, their hatred of their masters. (Tacitus, Histories, Chapter I)

Human history is difficult. As most people realize, there are various perspectives and opinions regarding what has exactly happened in the past. Who do you believe? How do we know that the historian is biased?  The same problem faces us up close in regards to the daily news. There is already a strong awareness that the news of today is written without reference to the truth, but only in reference to the particular viewpoint of the writer and/or the company/government who employs that writer. Facts are left out. Other facts are exaggerated. Stories are created and skewed in order to further the newsmaker's agenda, whether that agenda may be to sell magazines or papers, or whether the agenda is to get a certain candidate elected to office. As a result, we have lost a sense of trust, trust in our nations, trust in each other. At bottom, we believe that most writers write for the sake of their identity. In other words, we have bought into the culture of narcissism.

None of this is new however.

The quote at the beginning of this post from the great Roman historian, Tacitus, is meant to illustrate the challenges facing any historian or student of history - much of what is left in writing is a lie or exaggeration and some of it is a misunderstanding due to ignorance.  Tacitus knew and we all know that freedom is the only way an honest pursuit of history (and the news) becomes possible. A government that tries to control freedom of expression in any way shape or form is trying to "reinvent" history by hiding the truth.  As such, this government behaves like the old Pharaohs who would transform their nation's constitution and history by wiping away all remnants of the previous Pharaoh. The so-called "Fairness Doctrine" or what is known as localism is something that we are going to face during the Obama administration.  In such a state, the definition of what it means to be an American will be determined based on the ideology of this administration, and not on the basis of principles of freedom. In other words, when censorship does occur, it will suffocate all expression to such an extent that the very foundation of American identity, as conceived by the Founding Fathers will be burned with the rest of the history books. 

Unfortunately today, all news organizations, with the exception of independent bloggers, are owned and operated, by  what   termed as the government-media complex. That is to say that nothing has changed since the days of Rome, when Augustus, the first Emperor of Rome, employed writers (poets) in order to provide the propaganda necessary to cement Rome's legacy and power beyond even his lifetime. This does not mean that every employee in every news organization has sat down with the government in order to discuss how they will brainwash an entire generation. Doesn't quite work that way. The marketing of ideas is a slow process that in America's case could probably be traced back to the days during the Hoover presidency, when a few progressively minded intellectuals (later known as FDR's "brain trust") in the media and government decided to take a trip to see the evil tyrant Stalin, and spent the rest of their political lifetimes advocating the Soviet public policies as instituted in Stalin's Five Year Plan. FDR is the man who finally let them free to try out their "experiments" in what was known as the "New Deal" and his agility with propaganda made it all possible. Lies take a long time to become the "New Truth". (Hopefully, many people interested in discovering the truth around FDR and the nature of the New Dealers, will pick up Amity Schlaes' remarkable history about the Depression and the New Deal wittily entitled The Forgotten Man.)

Now the liberal response to this kind of transformation of history is to take the French revolutionary approach. Voltaire said that "History consists of a series of accumulated imaginative inventions.".  Those who think this way simply point out that history is impossible because it's truth is impossible. To them, history is a simply an artful expression of some historian who has no real authority on the subject: he makes up his "history". This is how they support their anti-American positions: the history of America is a lie. This is how they support their anti-religious positions: God is a lie. The only truth, the only god, to them, is themselves and their freedom. Narcissism, in every form, is the essence of tyranny and it is also the essence of the extreme progressive liberal of today. To them, history is a tool of the ego, not a pursuit of truth and truth-telling. This is because the liberal cannot see beyond the base human instincts that plague his own rattled mind. Narcissism in fact is the source for the deconstruction of history. It is the source of the deconstruction of everything, simply because it brings everything down to the lowest common denominator. The faith in mankind's higher spirit is replaced with a faith in his sexual and predatory instincts. Belief in God is replaced with a worship of youth and the plastic surgeon. Knowledge of history is replaced with FaceBook. The mind is thought to be the stomach, and intellectual choice is confused with emotional will. To the liberal, we are no better than the animal. This is what we have come to. The liberal animal, the narcissistic beast is what voted for the narcissistic president-elect Obama, for narcissism only votes for its own reflection in the mirror, a reflection that is very much the child of whimsy and fabrication.

As individuals and as a nation, we now suffer from social narcissism. The beloved Echo of our ancestors, the virgin America, has been abandoned. We have fallen in love with our own image, with images of our making, which turn out to be images of ourselves...America has been a land of dreams. A land where the aspirations of people from countries cluttered with rich, cumbersome, aristocratic, ideological pasts can reach for what once seemed unattainable. Here they have tried to make dreams come true. Yet now... we are threatened by a new and particularly American menace. It is not the menace of class war, of ideology, of poverty, of disease, of illiteracy, or demagoguery, or of tyranny, though these now plague most of the world. It is the menace of unreality.” - Daniel J. Boorstin, American historian, professor, attorney, and writer.

Technorati Tags: New deal,fdr,history,tacitus,boorstin,narcissim,obama

del.icio.us Tags: New deal,fdr,history,tacitus,boorstin,narcissim,obama terrorism ayers

Revive the Obamazombies!

Nations grown corrupt
Love bondage more than liberty;
Bondage with ease than strenuous liberty.
~John Milton

I can't keep up with all the lies and dissimulations of the Obama cabal, so I will just have to do my best. As I pointed out in my previous post regarding Robert Malley and his International Crisis Organization, the Obama administration is, behind closed doors and with deliberate secrecy, spending quality time with Hamas:

Hamas is claiming close and ongoing ties with America's upcoming Obama Administration, according to a report published Tuesday in the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat. The relationship was kept under wraps until after the U.S. elections so as not to harm Obama’s election prospects. The U.S. has classified Hamas a terrorist organization. -  IsraelNN.com

Now, as usual, most Obama supporters will just shrug their shoulders at this, because the American public has been conditioned to believe that all "conflicts" are equal and that, in order to resolve conflict, both sides need to be brought together, talk and and eventually come to some resolution. Now if one side were a group of wild dogs and the other side were my pet Thai Ridgeback dog, I certainly would protest against such a meeting. In kind, I protest any kind of negotiation with murderers. But as I said in my previous post, Obama and the people behind him such as Malley and Soros and the UN itself have no intentions of preserving Israel, or the U.S. for that matter, as we know it. Their agenda of compromise and conversation is a smokescreen for the eventual collapse of the Western concepts of individualism and freedom. That collapse, to the American Zombie mind will simply look like progress, because that is how the U.N. will spin it: Change you can believe in.

Yes, we have become a culture that accepts lies, dissimulation, manipulation and moral equivalence.  That is why the Obama campaign can say, on one hand that "Rob Malley has, like hundreds of other experts, provided informal advice to the campaign in the past.  He has no formal role in the campaign. He will not play any role in the future." (IsraelNN.com) and on the other hand, goes ahead and dispatches Malley to Egypt . People who are paying attention see how much Obama is a lying thief. People who don't pay attention just get confused and give up trying to understand what is going on. Confusion is a tool for power. When a leader confuses the public and does it with an air or position of authority, the public will generally let him off, free to do as he sees fit. "Ah, we don't understand", we zombies say. "Just fix it, Obama!".

Obama also says that his administration will be transparent, through the use of technology:

If Obama gets his way, all Americans will have broadband Internet access, whether they live in big cities or remote villages. Online life will be safer, with better defenses against cybercriminals. And there will be greater access to government, with online services to let anyone question members of the president's Cabinet or track every dime of the federal budget. - Boston.com

The appearance of transparency is just that: an appearance. That will further sink the American people into a coma even deeper than the one they already suffer. Trust me, if you drink soy milk long enough, you forget what real milk tastes like and, eventually, you don't miss it. This is why those who are not zombified must take on the responsibility of keeping America awake. Bondage, as Milton says, is easy. Freedom, as we all know, is not. Communicate, write, create: do SOMETHING, and be the freedom that you stand for and remind others to do the same.  Obama cannot continue to lie to people who are fully awake and can see the so-called wizard behind the Oz.

UPDATE: Just in, more lies from Obamanation: Obama likely to escape campaign audit

 

del.icio.us Tags: obama,hamas,malley,propaganda

Technorati Tags: obama,hamas,malley,propaganda

The Communist Cancer in America

The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world. ^[B] - Marx to Lincoln (Address of the International Working Men's Association to Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America)

When Marx watched the American Civil War, he saw a "class struggle" manifesting itself in the United States. What he saw was the possibility of the Communist movement take hold. He saw Communism in our present and in our future. Communism to him and to Marxists like him is in fact the unfolding of justice for the world.

This righteousness of Communism is alive and well today in thought and in deed. Communism is not something that just happened or is happening in specific countries, like China or Russia or Cuba. The entire movement of Communism is based upon principles and ideas that transcend national and territorial boundaries.  Communists are decidedly global in their thinking. That they are in this or that country is only so because Communism starts its movement by using the current state of any one nation as a foundation upon which to launch itself and feed. Communism is like a cancer in this sense, and it doesn't matter that this or that implementation of Communism failed by killing its host (the host would be to blame); what matters is that it itself continues to survive and to survive globally. Marx, a reader and admirer of Hegel, saw the movement he created as a manifestation of the true Spirit of the World, the manifest of something that ultimately transplants the God and the divine, because to Marx and to Communists, Mankind is Divine:

"The criticism of religion leads to the doctrine according to which man is, for man, the supreme being; therefore it reaches the categorical imperative of overthrowing all relationships in which man is a degraded, enslaved, abandoned, contemptible being."(K. Marx, Per la critica della filosofia del diritto di Hegel, Introduzione, Rome 1966).

Decidedly for Marx and American Communists, all religion is slavery. One might wonder however, how Obama's Black Liberation Theology could be possible, since it is Marxist in its roots.  You have to remember, Communism is a parasite that cannot survive without feeding on a host. It will use the culture or religion of its host in order to infect it, zombify it and, as usually happens, destroy it:

James Cone, the chief architect of Black Liberation Theology in his book A Black Theology of Liberation (1970), develops black theology as a system. In this new formulation, Christian theology is a theology of liberation -- "a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the gospel, which is Jesus Christ," writes Cone. Black consciousness and the black experience of oppression orient black liberation theology -- i.e., one of victimization from white oppression. - Acton Institute

Communists are only, you see, standing up for the common man, the working class, the poor, the downtrodden. In fact, the current globalism of the U.N. is  based upon the conceptual unification of the "poor" and "underprivileged" and "persecuted". World globalism, the globalization of the world powers is unified by virtue of a philosophy of victimhood. This is no different from the victimhood as preached by Obama's former Church in Chicago. This is no different from the victimhood as preached by the media regarding the Katrina disaster. Again, this is no different from the American people who are currently victims of the evil fat cats of Wall Street. The list goes on and one. So what do the Communists offer as a solution? Community organizing, youth groups, civilian groups of various sorts. All of these aim at teaching young people that they or their peers are victims who need saving by government programs and institutions.  Just take a visit to the UNESCO's website and review the hundreds of organizations, both small and large, that they are supporting. All of it sounds so good, because who doesn't like Unicorns and smiley faces. But please, read between the lines. After you peruse the UNESCO website, then go check out president elect Obama's http://change.gov:

"The change we need isn't just about new programs and policies. It's about a new politics - a politics that calls on our better angels instead of encouraging our worst instincts; one that reminds us of the obligations we have to ourselves and one another."

Sounds nice doesn't it? You'd have to be a hate-mongering Republican to not jump on the bandwagon. And that is in fact what you are going to be labeled (or worse) in the future America.

Ayn Rand spent much of her philosophical life talking about the dangers of the so-called virtues of altruism, as opposed to the "virtue of selfishness":

Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men. - Ayn Rand

Now she did not mean that it is bad to help people.  Private individuals can choose to help and give to whomever they choose. That is a privilege of being free. What she did intend is for us to become aware of how Communism and Globalism uses the natural goodness and cooperativeness in man's nature in order to enslave it to some public ideal of the State. Communism is a huge contradiction: it wants to enslave the world by freeing the slaves. And you wonder why today so many people today are turning to psychiatry and Oprah? Americans are a confused bunch these days, mainly because they have by and large become tools of the Communist left. In a free society, in a civilized society human beings can give and cooperate with each other freely. In a society of slaves, the leader or the state imposes requirements on individuals who, if they do not comply, are ostracized at best or at worst sent to GULAGS or some euphemistic equivalent,

Michelle Obama, the woman behind the mask,  in fact said that Obama will not allow us to go back to our former ways. Below is a transcription of some of what she said in a speech, but listen to the audio itself. She sounds like Oprah. She sounds like Landmark Education or EST.

Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed... - Hugh Hewitt (audio)

The people cheer! America has arrived towards its destiny!

So despite the contradiction in itself, that it enslaves in order to free, that it kills in order to let live, the Communists plod on: altruism is a virtue and selfishness is capitalism. Currently in the United States, what we call "political correctness" is in fact altruism, extreme altruism, that has first and foremost infected our corporations, churches, synagogues and virtually every other public organization/community. Muslim leaders, black leaders, leaders of the gay movement all use altruism to unite themselves into a single force, which is that motley brew known as the American Left, the crowning achievement of the Communist agenda. Workers of the world unite! Brainwashing the American people has always been first and foremost the top priority of the global Communist agenda because America is the most powerful nation in the world. America was a priority even in the mind of Marx long ago when he, though only in mind, united American slaves to the European working class as evidenced in the quote at the top of this post.

So, as it stands, we have voted Obama in BECAUSE we have bought into the victimhood persona, way before Obama. And now, in Obama, we see what Marx saw in Lincoln. Obama will continue to appear centrist or moderate, and he will only push the rhetoric and propaganda into areas that work to the Communist advantage. You will never see him become a Stalin, because that would be absurd in place like America. You will see however, the indoctrination of our young people from earliest ages, the enforcement of political correctness in our workplaces, the abandonment and forgetfulness of the history of America, the peer pressure, the formation of community organizations, the absorption of government into our daily lives.

Communism always, as a movement, uses the language and mores of any one nation to its own advantage. That is why Communism is always insidious and invisible to most people. It is a slow and but sure poisoning of the language and culture of the nation in which it chooses to live. Look no further than this quote on Obama's Change website:

"When you choose to serve -- whether it's your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood -- you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That's why it's called the American dream." - Change.gov

If I remember correctly, the people are not to "serve" our nation or any other community for that matter. Our Constitution does not say that we will serve the State, but rather that we elect officials of state who will serve US. Also notice how Obama says that we should look towards the global collective in our pursuit of the American Dream. Again, Communism is a parasite and a cancer. It feeds off the words, the dreams, the life of its host.  America is getting ready to have the rest of its life blood consumed by the beast, and when that happens, the remains of the carcass will shrivel up and disappear, forever ending this grand experiment that we once knew as freedom.

 

 

del.icio.us Tags: obama,communism,marx,lincoln,rand

Technorati Tags: obama,communism,marx,lincoln,rand

American Liberals: The New Hegelians, the Heralds of Approaching Change

The frivolity and boredom which unsettle the established order, the vague foreboding of something unknown, these are the heralds of approaching change. The gradual crumbling that left unaltered the face of the whole is cut short by a sunburst which, in one flash ,illuminates the features of the new world. - Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit

Liberalism is decidedly Hegelian.  Okay, so maybe a few curious readers of this blog will then go over to Amazon and buy Hegel's masterpiece, The Phenomenology of Spirit, just to check it out for themselves. Unfortunately, the work is as arduous and as contradictory as the liberal mind itself. The reading of it is no easy task. At the same time, you know the American saying: good things come to those who work.  I think that if more conservatives help each other understand who Hegel is and how his ideas have shaped liberal fascism yesterday, today and tomorrow, the more we will be able to fight off the monster that threatens the very existence of freedom in the world today.

I haven't read Hegel in many years. But I think it is high time that I take a look back. His extreme idealism was not as striking when I first read him as a student at Boston University's Dept of Philosophy, because I myself was just as idealistic. I was however (and still am) a Platonist, which pretty much meant I despised Hegel and so put him down eagerly. There you go - that was my idealism. Boy did I miss out on learning all about the true origins and foundations of what Michael Savage now calls a mental disorder.

When I started this blog, I did it with the intention of educating myself and my readers, regarding what really motivates and moves politics, namely, ideas.  I do not of course have the answers, so this is not a blog to come to when you want those. I specifically started the blog because I want to begin the learning process and would like to share it with others who also wish to join in. We can talk about the issues of the day, and I will continue to do so, but at some point we need to get to the bottom of all this, the root of all evil, the cancer that is currently spreading throughout the body politic.

A good place to start looking for this cancer would be Hegel and in particular his Phenomenology of Spirit, a work that, written in 1807, inspired the likes of our friend Karl Marx; for Hegel, in his Phenomenology, describes the ultimate goal of the Collective Spirit is to end the movement, the ebb and flow of History, much in the same way Marx describes the ultimate achievement that is Communism. In fact, to be specific, the end of History, for Hegel and Hegelians is the fusion of the individual with the collective: "Absolute freedom has thus removed the antithesis between the universal and the individual will" (Hegel, Phenomenology). For Hegel, this is what "Finding oneself" means, just like Oprah perhaps.

I suppose that the first thing to know about Hegel is that he appeals to the idealistic. He appeals to the young and the inexperienced; and he appeals to those who are far too removed from "Joe the Plumber" types to understand the first thing about crap and what to do with it. As a result, where you find a "Young Hegelian" type, you will find nearby, but usually hidden, piles of bullshit. Some of us pay lots of money to send our children to places like these. They usually come back stinking. I know I did.

Okay, so why do I say he appeals to these groups of people? The first reason that comes to mind is that Hegelian thought justifies the means to any end and so in a very specific way, it absolves people from any moral responsibility or conscious thought about what they are doing.  In other words, Hegelian liberals are  always willing to crack a few eggs in order to deliver the big golden one to the world. It does not matter what the golden one is as long as they convince themselves that it is a stepping stone towards the achievement of communism, collective and happy Spirit. It could be racial equality, the dissolution of classes, the end of private greed, the prevention of global warming. The means towards achieving the these ends, and the ultimate end (which is the end of History itself) could be eugenics, Nazism, Pol Pot, Lenin, Al Gore, Barack Obama.

So Hegelian justice, if you wish to call it that, takes the place of the classical notion of divine justice. In other words, Hegel's thought is decidedly atheistic and Darwinian, which is one reason Marx and the Young Hegelians of Prussia slobbered all over him, and ushered in the murderous and fascist dictatorships to come.   Hegelian justice appeals to the unbridled ego who hasn't yet learned that it is not a god, and who believes that it has overthrown God Himself. You see, for Hegel, Spirit, the collective Spirit IS God. We just don't know it yet.

But some who profess to know it already have been in the news as of late.

William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. They believe they are working towards the achievement, not of their own, but of History itself. His belief in the evolution and revolution of History and its eventually culmination in the realization of collective Spirit, is how Ayers can get up every morning and NOT turn himself into the authorities. It is how, contrary to seeing himself as being a terrorist, he sees himself as a kind of prophet.  Terrorism was a necessary means that he does not regret, as we all know and don't seem to understand.

As an example of his Hegelianism, I found this little piece on his blog, where he praises the words of James Baldwin. In Ayers own estimation (which he loves and prizes as highly as Christians prize Jesus himself), Baldwin is brilliant:

Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word ‘love’ here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace – not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth. - Bill Ayers

"Not in the personal sense". This is key to understanding liberal Hegelians. They depersonalize and THAT is their method of justifying their criminal and destructive behavior. They believe that the rest of us are infantile apes who still dwell in the soup of our individual concerns and loves. We are the selfish capitalists, the ones that prize our own property, the ones who still cling to our Bibles and our Guns.

Now keep this idea in mind. Ayers views himself as a more evolved individual, one that identifies himself with the moving Spirit and evolution of history. This is why he said, "Education is the motor-force of revolution." , a quote that I included in this post called Ayers and Obama: Different Men, Same Ideas. So keeping that in mind. Read closely Hegel's own words about the infantile state of anything in development and consider that in Ayers' case, and probably Obama's as well, we are still in that infantile state.

Besides, it is not difficult to see that ours is a birth time and a period of transition to a new era. Spirit has broken with the world it has hitherto inhabited and imagined, and is of a mind to submerge it in the past , and in the labour of its own transformation. Spirit is indeed never at rest but always engaged in moving forward. But just as the first breath drawn by a child after its long, quiet nourishment breaks the gradualness of merely quantitative growth - there is a  qualitative leap, and the child is born - so likewise the  Spirit in its formation matures slowly and quietly into its new shape, dissolving bit by bit the structure of its previous world, whose tottering state is only hinted at by isolated symptoms. The frivolity and boredom which unsettle the established order, the vague foreboding of something unknown, these are the heralds of approaching change. The gradual crumbling that left unaltered the face of the whole is cut short by a sunburst which, in one flash ,illuminates the features of the new world.  - Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit

Gives a whole new meaning to "nanny state", yes?

More to come on Hegel. I am just getting started.

Technorati Tags: Hegel,Ayers,Hegelian,Obama,Revolution,Marx

del.icio.us Tags: Hegel,Ayers,Hegelian,Obama,Revolution,Marx

Obama, the United Nations and Our Children

Being a new mother, I have grave concerns as to what the future holds for my little girl ,and I am particularly concerned about the kind of education she will receive. I know that education is not usually  on the forefront of people's minds when electing the President of the United States. Most people are concerned more with the economy, taxes or healthcare. These also are critical issues, but education is probably more important than any of these. The kind of education our children receive will determine the shape of their lives, the shape of our nation and the shape of our communities. Education is the cultivation and preservation of our future as a nation and will determine how are children deal with the problems that they will confront. If we give up our involvement in the education of our children to the government or the United Nations or some other powerful entity, we will lose our children and so too, our nation. Just like parents who lost their children or their lives to the Hitler Youth, so too will American parents lose their children to a world that has traded American freedoms for something else entirely.

Unfortunately, when Obama talks about what "Obama and Biden" will do for our children's education, he says that he will throw more money into the educational system.

"Obama and Biden will create Early Learning Challenge Grants to promote state "zero to five" efforts and help states move toward voluntary, universal pre-school."
"Obama and Biden will quadruple Early Head Start, increase Head Start funding and improve quality for both."
"Obama and Biden will also provide affordable and high-quality child care to ease the burden on working families." - BarackObama.com

Obama is hiding something, namely, his true agenda. Money cannot buy wisdom; it can't even buy intelligence. Now Obama is a lot of things, but he is not an idiot. He is just avoiding the topic.

Now, having had a classical education myself, I understand the value of teaching kids ancient languages, history, literature, math, science and awareness of their own culture, religion and nation. To me, the cultivation of the mind will naturally result in more thoughtful and deliberate action in life. A mind can only be exercised in that manner in a nation that values and defends freedom.

A nation that does not value freedom no longer educates, it brainwashes.

I wrote a post a few days ago about the relationship between Ayers and Obama called Ayers and Obama: Different Men, The Same Ideas. I don't want to reiterate what I say in that post, so it will be sufficient that I simply quote Ayers again where he said:

'"Education is the motor-force of revolution."

Obama has minimized Ayers as much as he has minimized his true intentions regarding education in America. I assert that Ayers is the "motor-force" of Obama.

William Ayers: Educational Terrorist

William Ayers, Obama's friend and unrepentant domestic terrorist, has ingratiated himself into America's educational system. Americans do not know this because they pay little attention to what goes on in academia:

Courses that taught young children to feel good about being Americans are being replaced by a system that teaches them to be ashamed of being Americans. Spreading out from the schools that teach our teachers, the ideology that is promoted by William Ayers is revolutionary and anti-American. Ayers has entered his sixties, his lust for violence seems to have diminished, but his revolutionary ardor has not. Instead of planting bombs, he has been a key force in harming our schools and our children. - American Thinker

Ayers' method of teaching is, at bottom, built upon the agenda of overthrowing the capitalist system.

Ayers has subsequently written a best seller used in ed-school courses which focuses on the moral imperative of teaching social justice to students in K-12 classrooms. He has been active in "teaching teachers" that capitalism is a curse and imperialism is an American obsession. -American Thinker

Ayers wants to turn our children into radicals, not children who want to improve American life, improve their minds and expand their imaginations. He wants to create a generation of community organizers and activists who want nothing less than the complete overthrow of the "capitalist"  system.  This is not to say that communists have not been teaching in American schools before. They have, but times have changed. The U.N. has become more powerful and we are about to elect a Marxist for President of the United States.

Ayers' educational agenda is completely compatible with the agenda of the United Nations. They too want to use the natural energy and idealism of youth in order to further the agenda of the United Nations. They want to create a world of young activist "soldiers" to usher in the new age of globalism. The soldiers in the United States are called SustainUS. To get a sense of how they view themselves, here is a quote from Whit Jones, a SustainUS delegate:

In the halls of the UN Climate Negotiations, there is a new presence felt. A growing, cohesive group of youth is storming the negotiating sessions, holding daily creative demonstrations, and meeting face-to-face with their government delegations. They are here to provide a face to the future, to speak for future generations, and to plan for the future of their movement. We've made formal interventions in the negotiations, hosted "mock swimming lesions" to emphasize the urgency of the situation, and are actively broadcasting a fresh perspective of the conference through photo and video.

The youth are carving out a space of their own here at the UN. In the true spirit of global cooperation and collaboration, daily meetings are held for regions, continents, and global youth. The meetings are held to plan for both activities here and in the coming years. Since we are not afforded office space, many of these gatherings are held underneath a staircase, in an area affectionately known as "The Bunker." It is a source of incredible energy and enthusiasm, and the hub of all things New Media. Youth are email blasting their home networks, blogging, uploading to YouTube, all to tell their own story. It is a story of frustration and enduring vigilance; but it is also a story of hope that if youth continue to emerge as leaders, we can set an example for the global community and lead the way to a scientifically-credible and just global agreement.

Each day of this conference, I have been amazed by new youth organizations, networks, and activities around the world. We are working to make our communities sustainable, organizing at the grassroots, and building stronger, more robust movements. We recognize that climate change is the issue of our generation, and we intend to take our future into our own hands. We'll be forging new partnerships across boundaries, and working strategically together, so that we can create a powerful global youth climate movement that cannot be ignored. UN Dispatch

So what exactly is this youth movement doing? What is their agenda? The issue that the youth movement focuses on most is climate change. Why climate change? Because climate change and environmental issues are going to replace war. The goal of the United Nations is disarmament and peace. This is why their army is not called an army. They are called Peacekeepers.  The enemy of the future will not another nation or terrorism. The enemy will be those who disregard, argue with or fight against the mission of the United Nations.  Even as I write this post, I was just made aware, via AtlasShrugs of an article written by Bruce Bawer called the Peace Racket. In it he says:

Peace studies initiatives may train students to be social workers, to work in churches or community health organizations, or to resolve family quarrels and neighborhood disputes. At the movement’s heart, though, are programs whose purported emphasis is on international relations. Their founding father is a 77-year-old Norwegian professor, Johan Galtung, who established the International Peace Research Institute in 1959 and the Journal of Peace Research five years later. Invariably portrayed in the media as a charismatic and (these days) grandfatherly champion of decency, Galtung is in fact a lifelong enemy of freedom. In 1973, he thundered that “our time’s grotesque reality” was—no, not the Gulag or the Cultural Revolution, but rather the West’s “structural fascism.” He’s called America a “killer country,” accused it of “neo-fascist state terrorism,” and gleefully prophesied that it will soon follow Britain “into the graveyard of empires.”

Sound familiar? There has been over the years a persistent and evil beast growing in America that takes joy in seeing a great nation fall to her knees. That joy will be experienced if Obama becomes the next President of the United States:

One American employee here seemed puzzled that he was being asked whether Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was even a consideration. "Obama was and is unstoppable," the official said. "Please, God, let him win," he added.

"It would be hard to find anybody, I think, at the U.N. who would not believe that Obama would be a considerable improvement over any other alternative," said William H. Luers, executive director of the United Nations Association. "It's been a bad eight years, and there is a lot of bad feeling over it."

Conservatives who are skeptical of the United Nations said they are not surprised by the political tilt. "The fact is that most conservatives, most Republicans don't worship at the altar in New York, and I think that aggravates them more than anything else," said John R. Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "What they want is the bending of the knee, and they'll get it from an Obama administration." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/25/AR2008102502011.html?hpid=topnews

The following is the final section of the SustainUS charter. Please read it and consider as to whether or not you want your children to become members of this global brainwashing asylum called the U.N. The link to the entire piece is at the bottom.

66. No state in history has ever occupied such a dominant position in world affairs as the
United States does today. With the world’s most powerful military and strongest
economy, can make or break the international efforts to achieve a sustainable future. Our
country has long emphasized the importance of concepts like accountability,
transparency, and human rights; the U.S. must continue its commitment to these ideals in
the 21st century, both domestically and internationally, and incorporate sustainable
development into its main priorities and values. We, as empowered American citizens,
will do our part for advocate for a U.S. foreign policy that makes us proud.
67. The U.S. should be a responsible global citizen. Our country should pay all dues to all
international institutions, programs, and ventures in a timely fashion. The U.S. should not
obstruct any effort to advance sustainable development or human rights that enjoys a
broad international coalition.
68. As host of the UN, the U.S. should recognize the necessity of universal participation
at international conferences. With that in consideration, the U.S. should provide visas to
all foreign delegates to the United Nations, be they in government, civil society, or
business.
69. The U.S. should immediately ratify all agreements that advance sustainable
development, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Kyoto Protocol,
and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
70. The U.S. government should fulfill the commitment made by President George H.W.
Bush at UNCED to allocate 0.7% of our GDP to ODA for developing countries. The
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) should cooperate with the
IFI’s, foreign aid organizations, private donors to coordinate strategies. USAID should
also consult stakeholders and consider the different needs and development goals of each
recipient country to produce effective assistance plans.
71. In keeping with its commitments to free trade, the U.S. government should cease to
offer subsidies to industries that compete with their counterparts in trade partner
countries. In particular, the U.S. should discontinue subsidies for the agricultural and
steel industries.
72. Technology transfer to developing countries will be one of the primary means of
implementation for sustainable development. The U.S. offer financial incentives to
corporations that share technology with private enterprise in the developing world.
72. The U.S. should adopt measures to improve voter turnout and citizen participation in
government, including same day voter registration. The U.S. should also take steps to
increase the level of public funding for elections.
73. Creating an environment of gender equality, particularly in the workplace and
schools, should be a priority in the U.S. The U.S. government should reaffirm its
commitment to that ideal by ratifying CEDAW.
74. The U.S. government should collaborate with local authorities and civil society to
maintain and establish community gardens, which can serve to educate people in the U.S.
about local growing conditions and potential for agriculture.
X. Our Mission
75. As responsible and concerned citizens, we will work tirelessly to advocate for our
vision of a sustainable future. We will continue to educate our peers, our communities,
and ourselves. Inevitably, as a result of our continuing education, our vision will evolve.
Our commitment, though, will remain steadfast until the promise of sustainable
development becomes a reality. - SustainUS.Org

Technorati Tags: Education,obama,ayers,marxism,United Nations,One world government

del.icio.us Tags: Education,obama,ayers,marxism,United Nations,One world government

Obama Bombshell Redistribution of Wealth Audio Uncovered

 

Pass this along to as many people as you can! Here it is from the horse's mouth.

 

del.icio.us Tags: obama,marxism,communism

Technorati Tags: obama,marxism,communism

Amazing Ayers Audio Unearthed from Same Week Obama worked with him

Thanks to Atlas for bringing this to my attention.

 

Midway, the video compares statements of Ayers side by side with Obama's statements.

A few examples:

On Patriotism:

Ayers: "That the country is unanimous in this kind of suffocating narrow view of what September 11th represents and what it means and therefore you would kind of concluded in DESPAIR that everyone is a BORN AGAIN PATRIOT"

Obama: "I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead I will tell the American people what I believe will make this country great"

 

On Marxism

Ayers: "I consider myself partly an anarchist then and consider myself partly an anarchist now. I mean I'm as much an anarchist as I am a Marxist"

Obama: "I think that when you spread the wealth around, its good for everybody"
(The Gadfly would like to add his speech given at Knox. Please see this article for more on Obama and Marxism. The video also quotes Marx here, giving the point more power: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs".

Please watch this video and pass it along.

 

 

 

del.icio.us Tags: obama,ayers,marxism,communism

Technorati Tags: obama,ayers,marxism,communism

Obama's Economic Plan: Spread the (Stolen) Wealth, Yes You Can!

 

Only free men can negotiate. Prisoners cannot enter into contracts. - Nelson Mandela

There has been much controversy on the Internet regarding the "Joe the Plumber". One controversy involves the question as two whether or not Joe is an authentic plumber, a regular Joe. I believe whether or not he is really a plumber and really makes the amount of money stated is not very important here. Fiction and literature, while it can contain half-truths, can still express truth, as all good liberal philosophers know. Even more, economics is a difficult subject to communicate in a short amount of time. The economical system in any country requires one to not only notice what is caused and affected by economic policies, but also what is not caused, that is, what is lost, to borrow a notion from economist Henry Hazlitt. So, ironically enough, of two possible candidates, it is easier for the liar to sound better than the one who is attempting with all his might to be clear to the public about what they will actually lose or gain by a particular economic policy. Whether or not Joe the Plumber is a story powerful enough to achieve truth telling, is doubtful. Like all other McCain's attempts to counter Obama's socialistic policies, he comes off very weak and doesn't quite make the impact that he could.

Obamanian Principles from the Horse's Mouth

What is an authentic controversy is the very nature of Obama's tax plan in relation to small business, nay, in relation to the entire population of America.

First, it always helps to look at a man's principles. So lets but Joe aside for a bit and look at Obama. No better place than from the horse's mouth, correct? I appreciate the following quote from Obama, since it is one of the few times where he has been very clear about his principles and it tells a lot about the nature of the man:

Like so much of the American story, once again, we face a choice. Once again, there are those who believe that there isn't much we can do about this as a nation. That the best idea is to give everyone one big refund on their government—divvy it up by individual portions, in the form of tax breaks, hand it out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, their own education, and so on.

In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our past there has been another term for it—Social Darwinism—every man or woman for him or herself. It's a tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity. It allows us to say that those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they can afford—tough luck. It allows us to say to the Maytag workers who have lost their job—life isn't fair. It let's us say to the child who was born into poverty—pull yourself up by your bootstraps. And it is especially tempting because each of us believes we will always be the winner in life's lottery, that we're the one who will be the next Donald Trump, or at least we won't be the chump who Donald Trump says: "You're fired!"

But there is a problem. It won't work. It ignores our history. It ignores the fact that it's been government research and investment that made the railways possible and the internet possible. It's been the creation of a massive middle class, through decent wages and benefits and public schools that allowed us all to prosper. Our economic dependence depended on individual initiative. It depended on a belief in the free market; but it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, the idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity. That's what's produced our unrivaled political stability.

- Knox College Commencement Address (4 June 2005)]

 

Obamanian Corruption: You Can Too!

Obamanian is a strange beast indeed, because for the most part it makes little sense even in the context of a single speech  First of all, he describes American capitalism as being Social Darwinism, survival of the fittest. Worst of all, he describes it in a way that makes it appear to be economically dependent on government handouts: "Divvy it up by individual portions".  It is clear that Obama believes that everyone who is anyone gets a handout from the government, that everyone at bottom is corrupt in America. This notion is ratified even further with the current economic crisis, exposure of Wall Street treachery and complicit government officials. Obama and other socialists can point and say "See, capitalism is a giant scam against the people of this country for the sake of a few individuals."  This apparent fiscal corruption perhaps justified his own, as he merrily sees his own nefarious deeds and associations as means to a "more noble" end. He might have said to himself long ago, "America is unjust and corrupt, where the capitalists get handouts from the government; they get a free ticket. I need to use this system to my advantage no matter what, in order to fix it and change the world."

Obama's own corruption is that he has become the very monster he wishes to destroy. True, there is always corruption and greed and there will always be such corruption as long as human beings exist, but Obama's solution is simply this: "Look, folks, those capitalists have taken your money and have enjoyed themselves with it at your expense. These robbers have a huge amount of cash, while you have very little. So, I am going to bring some of this cash to you, that way we can all share the joys of communal robbery."

Obama is not a man who will provide solutions to our economic problems.  He will perpetuate our problems further, legitimizing the corruption in the form of government sanctioned taxation policies. He is simply legalizing the robbery of the American people.

Joe (back to him) represents a typically successful small businessman. If he is a plant, he is a plant intended to demonstrate the nature of Obama' philosophy which is to "spread the wealth".  Unfortunately, spreading the wealth sounds really great, as long as you are blind to the fact that you would be taking from someone else, i.e. stealing.

 

The Right To Choose

While Obama supports the right to choose in the case of abortion, he is clearly not for the right to choose in the the case of everything else: "encourage[ing] everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, their own education, and so on" , to Obama, is Social Darwinism after all. Instead, Obama will usher in a new health care system that is government controlled and operated. The taxes he will put on Joe for not supplying the appropriate health coverage for employees will be used to fund this health care plan. In other words, the government is seizing money from Joe to pay for unrestricted health care for other Joes (who aren't so successful and may not even have jobs). Now Joe can choose to provide health care for his employees but he will have to do so in accordance with what the government says is required, which probably won't be worth the costs. As a result, more people will have to choose the government's health plan, which will be an enormous burden on the economy:

Where McCain seeks to address the problems of our health insurance system by building a market for private individuals, Obama seeks to do so by building a public-insurance system. His plan would force all but the very smallest businesses to either provide insurance coverage that meets the plan's requirements (which the Obama campaign has not specified, but would surely involve extensive particular coverage mandates like those in the federal employee health plan, which exceed what most popular employee plans provide today), or pay a tax to the government. Many employers would thus face the choice of increasing their insurance costs to comply with the new coverage requirements or dropping their workers' coverage. Obama, meanwhile, would create a new government-run insurance program (funded by the new tax on employers who don't offer coverage) that would compete with private companies to cover people who are not insured by employers.

In effect, the Obama plan creates an incentive to drop employees from existing plans, and then takes private insurers out of the race to cover them by using price controls to make the public option cheaper. The plan's goal is to drive Americans into a public Medicare-like insurance system by default. - Yuval Levin, The Weekly Standard

Obama has promised his worshippers that they will still be able to keep the health care plan they choose. He lies. What he really means is that they can choose, until they can't.

Ownership Society

For Obama, we currently live in what he coins as an Ownership Society, and it is a society he would like eliminate. Again, despite people who say I am nuts, the truth is that Obama is die hard Marxist, with a capital M. He also mildly agrees with Al Gore in that he believes the government has made the Internet possible. Speaking as a software engineer myself, I have to say that that is utter hogwash. What has made the internet possible was the invention, by individuals, of the telephone network, which in turn was invented by a variety of, again, individuals. Here is a little synopsis of how the internet came to be. Maybe a government official presided over it as a cheerleader, but who knows.

The Internet began as a computer network of ARPA (ARPAnet) that linked computer networks at several universities and research laboratories in the United States. The World Wide Web was developed in 1989 by English computer scientist Timothy Berners-Lee for the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN).

"The design of the Internet was done in 1973 and published in 1974. There ensued about 10 years of hard work, resulting in the roll out of Internet in 1983. Prior to that, a number of demonstrations were made of the technology - such as the first three-network interconnection demonstrated in November 1977 linking SATNET, PRNET and ARPANET in a path leading from Menlo Park, CA to University College London and back to USC/ISI in Marina del Rey, CA." . - IdeaFinder

 

Furthermore, if it were not for the likes of private companies such as Microsoft, IBM or Google, the internet would not be something that it currently is today: in every home and on every desktop.

Come to think of it, actually, I can't think of a single thing that the government itself has invented, since the Constitution itself which should be enough. For Obama to continue the lies and say that the government has caused our prosperity and wealth is beyond belief. No thinking, industrious and informed American will accept such a statement. No one who knows the meaning of hard work, the joy of striving for excellence and success and the bounty that it in itself brings to those around us, will accept Obamania.

That is why I so fear for this country. If he can win this election, standing on a platform such as this, than I truly question who we have become. Have we become so complacent that we don't even realize the source of our possessions and our freedom? Are we so unaware of surroundings that we cannot see the power of the individual, his impact as the true socializer, inventor, creator, source of wealth and source of empowerment?

It is time we all start to show the truth, that each one of us is a better organizer of community , by virtue of our own light, than Obama ever could be. For when, in history, has a government ever been a hero? When in history, has a government discovered a medicine to cure disease? When in history, has a government every written a profound poem, or painted a beautiful painting? Our American civilization is great  because of the greatness of our people, not the greatness of our government.

As such, Mr. Obama, your positions, your ideas, the essence of your soul is grounded in the stupid economics of Marxist principles.  That the American people have even thought to vote for you is testament, simply, to our failure to provide the proper education for ourselves and our children. With the election of Obama and the huge taxation that will befall of us, and the resulting lack of innovation and incentive to work and excel, we will lose, even more, our freedom, to such an extent, that we will be unaware of the world around us. This is why, Mendela says that a prisoner cannot enter into contracts. Prisoners have no choice, because they do not know that such choices are possible. They take what they can get. And what they usually get is some kind of Gorbachevian utopia.

So to end this, I will do so in typical liberal style, by quoting Nelson Mandela again, for literary balance, who really seems to know who is the true Community Organizer:

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone. And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.

Technorati Tags: Mandela,election,obama,economy,mccain,marxisim,communism,socialism

del.icio.us Tags: Mandela,election,obama,economy,mccain,marxisim,communism,socialism

Trotsky's If America Should Go Communist

I was going to write a commentary on this "classic" written by Leon Trotsky in 1934, but I think the piece speaks for itself.

If you haven't viewed it yet, please check out this 1984 interview with an ex-KGB officer regarding the sovietization of America.

 

Should America go communist as a result of the difficulties and problems that your capitalist social order is unable to solve, it will discover that communism, far from being an intolerable bureaucratic tyranny and individual regimentation, will be the means of greater individual liberty and shared abundance.

At present most Americans regard communism solely in the light of the experience of the Soviet Union. They fear lest Sovietism in America would produce the same material result as it has brought for the culturally backward peoples of the Soviet Union.

They fear lest communism should try to fit them to a bed of Procrustes, and they point to the bulwark of Anglo-Saxon conservatism as an insuperable obstacle even to possibly desirable reforms. They argue that Great Britain and Japan would undertake military intervention against the American soviets. They shudder lest Americans be regimented in their habits of dress and diet, be compelled to subsist on famine rations, be forced to read stereotyped official propaganda in the newspapers, be coerced to serve as rubber stamps for decisions arrived at without their active participation or be required to keep their thoughts to themselves and loudly praise their soviet leaders in public, through fear of imprisonment and exile.

They fear monetary inflation, bureaucratic tyranny and intolerable red tape in obtaining the necessities of life. They fear soulless standardization in the arts and sciences, as well as in the daily necessities of life. They fear that all political spontaneity and the presumed freedom of the press will be destroyed by the dictatorship of a monstrous bureaucracy. And they shudder at the thought of being forced into an uncomprehended glibness in Marxist dialectic and disciplined social philosophies. They fear, in a word, that Soviet America will become the counterpart of what they have been told Soviet Russia looks like.

Actually American soviets will be as different from the Russian soviets as the United States of President Roosevelt differs from the Russian Empire of Czar Nicholas II. Yet communism can come in America only through revolution, just as independence and democracy came in America. The American temperament is energetic and violent, and it will insist on breaking a good many dishes and upsetting a good many apple carts before communism is firmly established. Americans are enthusiasts and sportsmen before they are specialists and statesmen, and it would be contrary to the American tradition to make a major change without choosing sides and cracking heads.

However, the American communist revolution will be insignificant compared to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, in terms of your national wealth and population, no matter how great its comparative cost. That is because civil war of a revolutionary nature isn't fought by the handful of men at the top -- the 5 or 10 percent who own nine-tenths of American wealth; this handful could recruit its counterrevolutionary armies only from among the lower middle classes. Even so, the revolution could easily attract them to its banner by showing that support of the soviets alone offers them the prospect of salvation.

Everybody below this group is already economically prepared for communism. The depression has ravaged your working class and has dealt a crushing blow to the farmers, who had already been injured by the long agricultural decline of the postwar decade. There is no reason why these groups should counterpose determined resistance to the revolution; they have nothing to lose, providing, of course, that the revolutionary leaders adopt a farsightcd and moderate policy toward them.

Who else will fight against communism? Your corporal's guard of billionaires and multimillionaires? Your Mellons, Morgans, Fords and Rockefellers? They will cease struggling as soon as they fail to find other people to fight for them.

The American soviet government will take firm possession of the commanding heights of your business system: the banks, the key industries and the transportation and communication systems. It will then give the farmers, the small tradespeople and businessmen a good long time to think things over and see how well the nationalized section of industry is working.

Here is where the American soviets can produce real miracles. "Technocracy" can come true only under communism, when the dead hands of private property rights and private profits are lifted from your industrial system. The most daring proposals of the Hoover commission on standardization and rationalization will seem childish compared to the new possibilities let loose by American communism.

National industry will be organized along the line of the conveyor belt in your modern continuous-production automotive factories. Scientific planning can be lifted out of the individual factory and applied to your entire economic system. The results will be stupendous.

Costs of production will be cut to 20 percent, or less, of their present figure. This, in turn, would rapidly increase your farmers' purchasing power.

To be sure, the American soviets would establish their own gigantic farm enterprises, as schools of voluntary collectivization. Your farmers could easily calculate whether it was to their individual advantage to remain as isolated links or to join the public chain.

The same method would be used to draw small businesses and industries into the national organization of industry. By soviet control of raw materials, credits and quotas of orders, these secondary industries could be kept solvent until they were gradually and without compulsion sucked into the socialized business system.

Without compulsion! The American soviets would not need to resort to the drastic measures that circumstances have often imposed upon the Russians. In the United States, through the science of publicity and advertising, you have means for winning the support of your middle class that were beyond the reach of the soviets of backward Russia with its vast majority of pauperized and illiterate peasants. This, in addition to your technical equipment and your wealth, is the greatest asset of your coming communist revolution. Your revolution will be smoother in character than ours; you will not waste your energies and resources in costly social conflicts after the main issues have been decided; and you will move ahead so much more rapidly in consequence.

Even the intensity and devotion of religious sentiment in America will not prove an obstacle to the revolution. If one assumes the perspective of soviets in America, none of the psychological brakes will prove firm enough to retard the pressure of the social crisis. This has been demonstrated more than once in history. Besides, it should not be forgotten that the Gospels themselves contain some pretty explosive aphorisms.

As to the comparatively few opponents of the soviet revolution, one can trust to American inventive genius. It may well be that you will take your unconvinced millionaires and send them to some picturesque island, rent-free for life, where they can do as they please.

You can do this safely, for you will not need to fear foreign interventions. Japan, Great Britain and the other capitalistic countries that intervened in Russia couldn't do anything but take American communism lying down. As a matter of fact, the victory of communism in America -- the stronghold of capitalism -- will cause communism to spread to other countries. Japan will probably have joined the communistic ranks even before the establishment of the American soviets. The same is true of Great Britain.

In any case, it would be a crazy idea to send His Britannic Majesty's fleet against Soviet America, even as a raid against the southern and more conservative half of your continent. It would be hopeless and would never get any farther than a second-rate military escapade.

Within a few weeks or months of the establishment of the American soviets, Pan-Americanism would be a political reality.

The governments of Central and South America would be pulled into your federation like iron filings to a magnet. So would Canada. The popular movements in these countries would be so strong that they would force this great unifying process within a short period and at insignificant costs. I am ready to bet that the first anniversary of the American soviets would find the Western Hemisphere transformed into the Soviet United States of North, Central and South America, with its capital at Panama. Thus for the first time the Monroe Doctrine would have a complete and positive meaning in world affairs, although not the one foreseen by its author.

In spite of the complaints of some of your arch-conservatives, Roosevelt is not preparing for a soviet transformation of the United States.

The NRA aims not to destroy but to strengthen the foundations of American capitalism by overcoming your business difficulties. Not the Blue Eagle but the difficulties that the Blue Eagle is powerless to overcome will bring about communism in America. The "radical" professors of your Brain Trust are not revolutionists: they are only frightened conservatives. Your president abhors "systems" and "generalities." But a soviet government is the greatest of all possible systems, a gigantic generality in action.

The average man doesn't like systems or generalities either. It is the task of your communist statesmen to make the system deliver the concrete goods that the average man desires: his food, cigars, amusements, his freedom to choose his own neckties, his own house and his own automobile. It will be easy to give him these comforts in Soviet America.

Most Americans have been misled by the fact that in the USSR we had to build whole new basic industries from the ground up. Such a thing could not happen in America, where you are already compelled to cut down on your farm area and to reduce your industrial production. As a matter of fact, your tremendous technological equipment has been paralyzed by the crisis and already clamors to be put to use. You will be able to make a rapid step-up of consumption by your people the starting point of your economic revival.

You are prepared to do this as is no other country. Nowhere else has the study of the internal market reached such intensity as in the United States. It has been done by your banks, trusts, individual businessmen, merchants, traveling salesmen and farmers as part of their stock-in-trade. Your soviet government will simply abolish all trade secrets, will combine all the findings of these researches for individual profit and will transform them into a scientific system of economic planning. In this your government will be helped by the existence of a large class of cultured and critical consumers. By combining the nationalized key industries, your private businesses and democratic consumer cooperation, you will quickly develop a highly flexible system for serving the needs of your population.

This system will be made to work not by bureaucracy and not by policemen but by cold, hard cash.

Your almighty dollar will play a principal part in making your new soviet system work. It is a great mistake to try to mix a "planned economy" with a "managed currency." Your money must act as regulator with which to measure the success or failure of your planning.

Your "radical" professors are dead wrong in their devotion to "managed money." It is an academic idea that could easily wreck your entire system of distribution and production. That is the great lesson to be derived from the Soviet Union, where bitter necessity has been converted into official virtue in the monetary realm.

There the lack of a stable gold ruble is one of the main causes of our many economic troubles and catastrophes. It is impossible to regulate wages, prices and quality of goods without a firm monetary system. An unstable ruble in a Soviet system is like having variable molds in a conveyor-belt factory. It won't work.

Only when socialism succeeds in substituting administrative control for money will it be possible to abandon a stable gold currency. Then money will become ordinary paper slips, like trolley or theater tickets. As socialism advances, these slips will also disappear, and control over individual consumption -- whether by money or administration -- will no longer be necessary when there is more than enough of everything for everybody!

Such a time has not yet come, though America will certainly reach it before any other country. Until then, the only way to reach such a state of development is to retain an effective regulator and measure for the working of your system. As a matter of fact, during the first few years a planned economy needs sound money even more than did old-fashioned capitalism. The professor who regulates the monetary unit with the aim of regulating the whole business system is like the man who tried to lift both his feet off the ground at the same time.

Soviet America will possess supplies of gold big enough to stabilize the dollar -- a priceless asset. In Russia we have been expanding our industrial plant by 20 and 30 percent a year; but -- owing to a weak ruble -- we have not been able to distribute this increase effectively. This is partly because we have allowed our bureaucracy to subject our monetary system to administrative one-sidedness. You will be spared this evil. As a result you will greatly surpass us in both increased production and distribution, leading to a rapid advance in the comfort and welfare of your population.

In all this, you will not need to imitate our standardized production for our pitiable mass consumers. We have taken over from czarist Russia a pauper's heritage, a culturally undeveloped peasantry with a low standard of living. We had to build our factories and dams at the expense of our consumers. We have had continual monetary inflation and a monstrous bureaucracy.

Soviet America will not have to imitate our bureaucratic methods. Among us the lack of the bare necessities has caused an intense scramble for an extra loaf of bread, an extra yard of cloth by everyone. In this struggle our bureaucracy steps forward as a conciliator, as an all-powerful court of arbitration. You, on the other hand, are much wealthier and would have little difficulty in supplying all of your people with all of the necessities of life. Moreover, your needs, tastes and habits would never permit your bureaucracy to divide the national income. Instead, when you organize your society to produce for human needs rather than private profits, your entire population will group itself around new trends and groups, which will struggle with one another and prevent an overweening bureaucracy from imposing itself upon them.

You can thus avoid growth of bureaucratism by the practice of soviets, that is to say, democracy -- the most flexible form of government yet developed. Soviet organization cannot achieve miracles but must simply reflect the will of the people. With us the soviets have been bureaucratized as a result of the political monopoly of a single party, which has itself become a bureaucracy. This situation resulted from the exceptional difficulties of socialist pioneering in a poor and backward country.

The American soviets will be full-blooded and vigorous, without need or opportunity for such measures as circumstances imposed upon Russia. Your unregenerate capitalists will, of course, find no place for themselves in the new setup. It is hard to imagine Henry Ford as the head of the Detroit Soviet.

Yet a wide struggle between interests, groups and ideas is not only conceivable -- it is inevitable. One-year, five-year, ten-year plans of business development; schemes for national education; construction of new basic lines of transportation; the transformation of the farms; the program for improving the technological and cultural equipment of Latin America; a program for stratosphere communication; eugenics -- all of these will arouse controversy, vigorous electoral struggle and passionate debate in the newspapers and at public meetings.

For Soviet America will not imitate the monopoly of the press by the heads of Soviet Russia's bureaucracy. While Soviet America would nationalize all printing plants, paper mills and means of distribution, this would be a purely negative measure. It would simply mean that private capital will no longer be allowed to decide what publications should be established, whether they should be progressive or reactionary, "wet" or "dry," puritanical or pornographic. Soviet America will have to find a new solution for the question of how the power of the press is to function in a socialist regime. It might be done on the basis of proportional representation for the votes in each soviet election.

Thus the right of each group of citizens to use the power of the press would depend on their numerical strength -- the same principle being applied to the use of meeting halls, allotment of time on the air and so forth.

Thus the management and policy of publications would be decided not by individual checkbooks but by group ideas. This may take little account of numerically small but important groups, but it simply means that each new idea will be compelled, as throughout history, to prove its right to existence.

Rich Soviet America can set aside vast funds for research and invention, discoveries and experiments in every field. You won't neglect your bold architects and sculptors, your unconventional poets and audacious philosophers.

In fact, the Soviet Yankees of the future will give a lead to Europe in those very fields where Europe has hitherto been your master. Europeans have little conception of the power of technology to influence human destiny and have adopted an attitude of sneering superiority toward "Americanism," particularly since the crisis. Yet Americanism marks the true dividing line between the Middle Ages and the modern world.

Hitherto America's conquest of nature has been so violent and passionate that you have had no time to modernize your philosophies or to develop your own artistic forms. Hence you have been hostile to the doctrines of Hegel, Marx and Darwin. The burning of Darwin's works by the Baptists of Tennessee is only a clumsy reflection of the American dislike for the doctrines of evolution. This attitude is not confined to your pulpits. It is still part of your general mental makeup.

Your atheists as well as your Quakers are determined rationalists. And your rationalism itself is weakened by empiricism and moralism. It has none of the merciless vitality of the great European rationalists. So your philosophic method is even more antiquated than your economic system and your political institutions.

Today, quite unprepared, you are being forced to face those social contradictions that grow up unsuspected in every society. You have conquered nature by means of the tools that your inventive genius has created, only to find that your tools have all but destroyed you. Contrary to all your hopes and desires, your unheard-of wealth has produced unheard-of misfortunes. You have discovered that social development does not follow a simple formula. Hence you have been thrust into the school of the dialectic -- to stay.

There is no turning back from it to the mode of thinking and acting prevalent in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

While the romantic numskulls of Nazi Germany are dreaming of restoring the old race of Europe's Dark Forest to its original purity, or rather its original filth, you Americans, after taking a firm grip on your economic machinery and your culture, will apply genuine scientific methods to the problem of eugenics. Within a century, out of your melting pot of races there will come a new breed of men -- the first worthy of the name of Man.

 

Leon Trotsky
August 17, 1934

Obama's The Living Constitution: Euphemism for the Destruction of America

"Only when a regime is in a state of decay can its transformation into another regime become publicly defensible"

"A permissive society which permits to its members also every sort of non-permissiveness will soon cease to be permissive; it will vanish from the face of the earth"

- Leo Strauss, The City and Man

America has not yet come to the point of being transformed, but it has almost arrived.  Americans, due to doublespeak and confusing propaganda, just cannot distinguish -- as a society -- between freedom and utter anarchy. Let's look at it this way, the Aristotelian way. A dog is a dog; it has an essence, namely, the essence of a dog, which is a defined by its boundaries (what it can and cannot do, what is possible and impossible for it). So too a nation has an essence which is defined by and through its constitution.  The American public still regards the Constitution as something that is sacred, that is, something that we must still look towards when determining what is right and wrong in our society.

But ever wonder that the Constitution is not religiously taught in schools? Ever wonder that American history, the history of who we are is not taught in schools?  The reason is that there has been an ongoing infiltration of the fascistic left inside our school system, and inside our government. The next generation will not know itself well enough to defend itself. Instead it will allow itself to be defined by foreign entities.

Now, the notion of a "Living Constitution" is a notion that serves anyone or any movement that intends to ultimately destroy the United States of America.  If the public is indoctrinated towards this idea, the identity and principles upon which the United States stands will dissolve into history.

Obama adheres to the doctrine of a "Living Constitution." Those who subscribe to Living Constitution ideology believe that the founding principles of this Nation are passé, that the Declaration of Independence's ringing endorsement of individual rights and limited government is outdated, that the Constitution's creation of a representative republic is from a long past moment in history, and that the Bill of Rights is not a restraint on government but rather a source of newly invented "rights." - Assyrian International News Agency, Judicial Arrogance

In America, people have the freedom to say and print what they believe, but this very principle could be at odds with the purpose and function of the Constitution itself.   The "inalienable rights of man" are natural sacred rights bestowed by God Himself.  Once the public has become utterly atheistic, it will have trouble honoring the sacred nature of any document, let alone the Constitution. In a culture where money and power is king, there is nothing that is not at the mercy of transformation either by group or individual. Now, without the Constitution as a our sacred text, America will no longer be America. It will be something else entirely. Jesse Jackson, supporter of Obama and friend of Castro, himself agrees and encourages this development:

"PREPARE for a new America: That's the message that the Rev. Jesse Jackson conveyed to participants in the first World Policy Forum, held at this French lakeside resort last week.

He promised "fundamental changes" in US foreign policy - saying America must "heal wounds" it has caused to other nations, revive its alliances and apologize for the "arrogance of the Bush administration." 

The most important change would occur in the Middle East, where "decades of putting Israel's interests first" would end. 

Jackson believes that, although "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" remain strong, they'll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House." 

-Amir Taheri, The New York Post

The agenda of the Communists is in fact, not to cause violent revolution or encourage such activities. On the contrary a good Communist knows that the  best way to achieve revolution is to infiltrate and transform from within. It is no accident that the tactics of the Communist are identical to the tactics of the Islamic movement in America.  Both are equally fascistic. Unfortunately, Americans, who are addicted to Hollywoodesque explosions and violence, cannot identify the violence commented by subterranean pirates of civilization: these are by far the scariest of monsters:

So this is how the United States will end: in the night, when we are sleeping, when the great giant sleeps:

"This is my analysis of the Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020! Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?

1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with hate crime bills state-wide and nation-wide.

2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities to promote Islam as the original African-American's religion while Christianity is for the whites! Strange enough, no one tells the African-Americans that it was the Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves, neither the fact that in Arabic the word for black and slave is the same, "Abed."

3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.

4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office for favorable legislation to Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.

5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the internet by buying the corporations or a controlling stock.

6. Yield to the fear of imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America - the black gold. America's economy depends on oil, (1000 products are derived from oil), so does its personal and industrial transportation and manufacturing -41% comes from the Middle East.

7. Yell, "foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran" anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.

8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions, get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way. Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America? 

Read more here: Dr. Anis Shorrosh ,Twenty-Year Plam: Islam Targets America

 

del.icio.us Tags: obama,communism,islam,jihad

Technorati Tags: obama,communism,islam,jihad,leo strauss