People Can't Handle the Truth: American Communism Is In Place

Sometimes in my my various discussions on Twitter, I often had to explain to many closed mind, brainwashed people that there is a difference between Socialism & Communism. 

Some will say that like everything, things and words evolve, prime example is the word gay, from the middle English, gai, meaning happily excited, to a meaning for homosexual. This has also been done to the Constitution where many people and politicians change what the Founding Fathers wrote for their own particular purpose. Unlike those people I believe in source documents as well as any supporting to understand the meaning of various documents and terms.

Now, having explain that, I present the following for you education and comment.

In my re-evaluation concerning my position on socialism I showed that according to Frederick Engels in 1888, Manifesto of the Communist Party, should have been titled the Manifesto of the Socialist Party.

I further showed in the second part of my re-evaluation, the views of noted socialists through their writings the difference between socialism and communism.

Finally in part three, I showed how America has actually actually established its own unique form of communism, what I chose to call American Communism.

Now, “the knownothings” or those who just refuse to accept the facts, whether they be on radio, television, in print or the general public don't want to see or admit the difference. They would rather use soft terms like, Liberalism, Progressivism, Big Government or God forbid, Socialism. I present what I consider the evidence.

I am not going to rehash or go into a complete a repeat of past posts, but I will define some terms:

Socialism: The ORIGINAL meaning, as defined by Marx is society, not government, controls production and distribution. Much like a local farmer's Co-op or as the Riceman explains it, a hive mentality, everyone working for the “good” of society or the hive, with no real leader a TRUE democracy or as Vladimir Lenin said: 

"Democracy is indispensable to socialism"

SPECIAL NOTE to everyone: America is a REPUBLIC not a democracy as guaranteed by Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution.

Or, once again turning to Lenin:

“Under socialism all will govern in turn and will soon become accustomed to no one governing.”

Communism: As currently defined and accepted by those who have not taken nor will not take the time to study the sources or even read some of my prior posts, is a dictatorship established by violent revolution where government uses Marx's theories to control production, distribution and consumption. This idea was based on the model established by aforementioned Lenin:

"The goal of socialism is communism"

There will be some who will say its a case of semantics, others will say the main differences is “revolution” and “dictatorship”. 

To the former I say, if this helps you to avoid the facts and history nothing I can say will change your closed mind.

To the latter, look up the word revolution. It does not have to be violent. Prime example the Industrial Revolution. As far as a dictatorship, that is a political system, communism is a economical system.

Did America have a revolution to put in place the tenets of Marx's Manifesto, YES.

It was quiet and accomplished by politicians who got the taste of power and realized that the American people had gotten envious, greedy and to some extent lazy and realized that they could use their positions to gain control, a quiet less obvious dictatorship, with the illusion of freedom.

To accomplish this, they turned back Marx and passed laws / regulations in order to put in place as Karl Marx said: 

        “…in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.” 

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 

Antiquities Act of 1906 - This act gave the President of the United States (POTUS) the authority, by presidential proclamation, to restrict the use of public land owned by the federal government.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 

The 16th Amendment to the Constitution

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. 

The Revenue Act of 1916 (39 Stat. 756) created a tax on the transfer of wealth from an estate to its beneficiaries, and thus was levied on the estate, as opposed to an inheritance tax that is levied directly on beneficiaries.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 

This particular plank may be separated into two parts. On one hand the American Communists are embracing emigrants, illegal and legal in order to build a “power base” to maintain power and control. While on the other hand using courts and laws to take people's land through Eminent Domain and if necessary Condemnation.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

The Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The Federal Reserve also was given the power to buy and sell treasuries and influence credit and money conditions. This power helped to stabilize prices and make full employment more likely for larger shares of the population.
Banking Act of 1933 (which establishes FDIC)

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act : July 21, 2010 

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. 

The Interstate Commerce Act of 1887: First federal law to regulate private industry in the United States. It was later amended to regulate other modes of transportation and commerce. 

Communications Act of 1934: Established the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), a government agency established to regulate in the public interest interstate and foreign communications by radio and wire. The FCC is divided into six major operating bureaus: Common Carrier, Wireless Telecommunications, Mass Media, Compliance and Information, International (includes satellite regulation), and Cable Services. In addition, there are 10 staff offices, consisting of Managing Director, General Counsel, Inspector General, Engineering and Technology, Plans and Policy, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, and Public Affairs, Administrative Law Judges, Communications Business Opportunities, and Workplace Diversity. (Editor's note: What does workplace diversity have to do with communications?)

Department of Transportation (USDOT or DOT) established by an act of Congress on October 15, 1966

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Reforestation Relief Act of 1933: established the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC); it provides work in reforestation, road construction and developing national parks.

In 1965 youth conservation corps program was finally developed. One of the major concerns of President Johnson’s war on poverty was how to help the rising number of teenage drop-outs and draft rejectees break the “cycle of poverty.” Sargent Shriver, the President’s General in the War on Poverty, incorporated a youth conservation element into a new training program to be known as the “Job Corps.”

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 

Maybe this should read, unequal liability for all not to work and draw government handouts, thus establish armies of those on welfare to continue to keep American Communist controlled government in power.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. 

Sustainable Communities Initiative: Provides grants to improve regional and local planning efforts that integrate housing and transportation decisions, and increase the capacity to improve land use and zoning to support market investments that support sustainable communities.

By taking advantage of these grants, thus giving federal government more control this is taking place at the state level as more and more American Communists push for the combination or unification of city and county governments. Using a local example, the combination of Jefferson county, Kentucky and the city of Louisville, Kentucky into Metro Louisville.

An outstanding source for more information on this is Spreading The Wealth, by Stanley Kurtz.

10. Free education for all children in public schools.

The responsibility for K–12 education is suppose to be the providence of the states under the Constitution. However, American Communists believe that there is a compelling national interest in the quality of the nation’s public schools. Therefore, the federal government, through the legislative process, provides assistance to the states and schools in an effort to supplement, not supplant, state support. 

The primary source of federal K–12 support began in 1965 with the enactment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
 
Department of Education in 1979

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001

Common Core 

Now there is talk of free college paid for, thus controlled, by the government using taxpayers money.

Now, something I pray people noticed. Although a number of these planks have been put in place by Congress and in doing so congress abdicated their duties under the Constitution to the Executive branch.

Also, remember this, even though Congress passed the laws putting these planks in place,   they are not the responsibility, under the Constitution, of the federal government.

Now, its up for you to decide.

Semper Fi!

For All Who Are Clamoring for Constitutional Convention, Forewarned is Forearmed

As George Washington cautioned in his Farewell Address, "to resist the spirit of innovation upon the principles of the Constitution, however specious the pretexts"[1]...OM

Obama blamed Founding Fathers’ ‘structural’ design of Congress for gridlock

"The States in their House (Senate) would be a check on sudden and ill-considered action by the House of the People (House of Representatives).[1]...OM"

President Obama is taking a swipe at the Founding Fathers, blaming his inability to move his agenda on the “disadvantage” of having each state represented equally in the Senate. (For a so called, Constitutional scholar how little does BH0 know about the history of the Constitution he swore to "...preserve, protect and defend..." The Senate was originally designed to be a House of the States and "...shall be composed of two Senators from each state, CHOSEN by the Legislature there of...Art 1, Sec 3 emasculated by the 17th Amendment[1]...OM)

At a Democratic fundraiser in Chicago Thursday night, Mr. Obama told a small group of wealthy supporters that there are several hurdles to keeping Democrats in control of the Senate and recapturing the House. One of those problems, he said, is the apportionment of two Senate seats to each state regardless of population. (The House of Representatives is the HOUSE of the PEOPLE, elected by the PEOPLE as defined in Art 1, Sec 2 of Constitution and the House of Representatives is the people's check on the POTUS. The Senate was suppose to be the STATES check on the POTUS as explained in Federalist 62, "It is recommended by the double advantage favoring a SELECT appointment, and of giving to the STATE GOVERNMENT such an agency in the formation of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT as a must secure the authority of the former, and may form a convenient link between the two systems"...OM)

“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said. (That is exactly why the Founding Fathers set up Congress consisting of a HOUSE and SENATE because as much as the Socialist stress that America is a DEMOCRACY it isn't, AMERICA IS A REPUBLIC...OM)

The Founding Fathers decided in the “Great Compromise” in 1787 to apportion House seats based on population and give each state two seats in the Senate regardless of population. The solution was a compromise between large states and small states in a dispute that nearly dissolved the Constitutional Convention.

The president also blamed “demographics” for the inability of the Democratic Party to gain more power in Congress, saying Democrats “tend to congregate a little more densely” in cities such as New York and Chicago (Isn't that where most of the welfare handouts go?...OM). He said it gives Republicans disproportional clout in Congress.(Because most who believe in original meaning of the Constitution and hard work usually live outside the Democratic controlled urban areas...OM)

“So there are some structural reasons why, despite the fact that Republican ideas are largely rejected by the public, it’s still hard for us to break through,” Mr. Obama said. (Is that why the House turned over in 2010 and MAYBE there will be a turn of the Senate in 2014?...OM)

He also said Democrats suffer from the “congenital disease” of not voting in midterm elections.

Let's turn once more to the Federalist:

"The necessity of a Senate is not less indicated by the propensity of all single and
numerous assemblies to yield to the impulse of sudden and violent passions, and to
be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate and pernicious resolutions. Examples on this subject might be cited without number; and from proceedings within the  United States, as well as from the history of other nations."

Sources: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/23/obama-blames-structural-design-congress-gridlock/#ixzz32c1xNmwe 

[1] Norton, Thomas James, Undermining The Constitution, A History of a Lawless Government, The Devin-Adair Company, New York, 1950. (Thomas Norton was a member of the Bars of the Supreme Court of the United States, the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals for the 7th, 8th, and 9th Circuits, and the Supreme Courts of Illinois, Kansas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California.)

The War Nobody Saw Coming – The Plan

INTRODUCTION:

As the holiday season is in full swing, Patriots cringe as we watch the American Communists and those who want to destroy the American way of life crawl out from under their rocks and once again begin their ongoing war on religion and escalated it to the all out  “War on Christmas” (again).

Just as predictably many talking heads showed up on talk shows, some have written books or are there to hawk their past published books.

Others are just there to complain and yet give no rhyme or reason of why the war goes on with no apparent end in sight.

Some. not many, will even cite Karl Marx;

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".

While others might cite the idea that the American Communists do not want people to believe that there is anything more important then the "State" (In this context, Centralized Government)

If people stop and really think, both are considered correct by those wishing to destroy the American way of life.

Like a number of wars throughout history, the how or the why they started gets lost in time.

What if someone were to say that the war on religion, thus the War on Christmas, began in Italy ca. 1920's. I'll bet that people would call that person nuts.

"Hello." You can call me nuts.

Since 2008, the names of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Antonio Gramsci and Saul Alinsky have become common names in debates about the ongoing destruction of the America way of life. I can imagine people reading the list, nodding and then all of a sudden, stop and say, “WHO is Antonio Gramsci and what does he have to do with the destruction of America?”

Everyone knows who Karl Marx is, but few people will even mention Marx's "comrade in arms" Friedrick Engels (1820-1895), both were the “great scientists” that laid the foundations of “scientific socialism” [1] in Manifestoof the Communist Party and “were the first to explain that socialism was not the invention of Utopian dreamers, but the inevitable outcome of the workings of modern capitalist society”.[2] Considering that Friedrick Engels DID say in the Preface of the 1888 edition of the Manifesto, “Yet, when it (Manifesto of the Communist Party [sic]) was written, we could not have called it a socialist manifesto. By Socialists, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand the adherents of the various Utopian systems:....”.

However, few know that after the publication of the Manifesto and the defeats suffered by the Socialists during the Revolution(s) of 1848, different ideas developed on how to implement Marx's ideas into society.

 Just as today, where there is a division within the Democrat Party between the few so called “moderates” (what was once known as Blue Dog Democrats) and the Liberal/Socialist/Occupy Wall Street/Black Lives Matter Democrats, a division between the three philosophies of Marxist Socialists also developed.

The “Revisionist” socialists were those who promoted gradual reform by using compromise, the democratic process and non violence to achieve the nationalism of state and local public works and large-scale industries. Does this sound like the Fabian Society of Great Britain and America and the modern day Progressives or in reality the American Communists.

Then there were "Anarchic” socialists who believed that both the state and private property should be abolished and society would be composed of small collectives of producers, distributors and consumers. This is similar to the system in France where industries are owned and managed by the workers. Or more locally, your neighborhood farmers CO-OP.

Finally and very well known and often cited, the “Bolshevist” socialists, those that believed in using revolutionary (violent) tactics to raise the conscious of the working class (proletariat) in order to advance socialism through an absolute dictatorship[4] much like the unions and Occupy Wall Street of today.

It is this group who would eventually be the symbol of Communism, though if one were to read Marx's Manifesto, no where does the word "government" appear.

These differences would come to the world's attention in 1917 when Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov aka Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924) along with Leon Trotsky lead the Bolshevik Revolution that overthrew the Tzar of Russia.

This revolution not only established what we, today call Communism but also separated the Revisionist's idea of peaceful social revolution as envisioned by Marx and Engels [4] and the Bolshevik's theory of armed conflict to overcome the injustices of the capitalistic economic system[5]. This revolution not only caused a split within the American Socialist Party but also a split between the international socialists and one of the leaders in the theory of the “peaceful” change was Antonio Gramsci.

Gramsci believed that capitalism was so firmly entrenched that violent revolution would only serve to further strengthen the Bourgeoisie (modern capitalists, owners of means social production and employers of the Proletariat, wage laborers) resolve to maintain “control”.

Antonio Gramsci was born January 22, 1891 on the island of Sardinia,Italy and would grow to be considered a leading Italian Marxist as well as a major theorist.

Gramsci's belief in Marxism along with his membership plus his actions as a leader of the Italian Communist Party brought him into direct conflict with Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime. This conflict would cumulate in 1926 when he was arrested and sentenced to five years in prison. This five year sentence would eventually become twenty five years when a year later he was transferred to another prison and an additional twenty years imprisonment was added to his sentence. It was during his imprisonment that Gramsci wrote the Prison Notebooks. It is within the pages of these notebooks that, I feel the foundation of the war on religion and the “War on Christmas” and the peaceful destruction of the America way of life was laid.

Cultural Hegemony

Although no translation of Gramsci's Notebooks actually gives a black and white definition of Cultural Hegemony, his often quoted characterization of hegemony as “the 'spontaneous' consent given by the great masses of the population to the general direction imposed on social life by the dominant fundamental group; this consent is 'historically' caused by the prestige which the dominant groups enjoys because of its position and function in the world of production” In other words, the ruling group(s) uses its political, moral and intellectual leadership[6] to impose the direction of social life (culture) whether it be religion, the family or the basic traditions.

Gramsci felt that in order to bring about the defeat of capitalism, it would be necessary for the proletariat to develop a counter-hegemony (counter culture) and bring this counter culture to institutions such as schools and colleges, the churches, charities, media, and most importantly, the Family.

America and the free world has faced and to some extent defeated armed aggressors out to destroy free societies. BUT, cultural hegemony is the saboteur who quietly infiltrates and slowly works to destroy a society from within. Unlike an enemy with a weapon that can be stopped with equal or superior force, those seeking the destruction of traditions can be everyone, because everyone is part of the culture.

As the old Pogo cartoon said, “We have met the enemy and he is us”

Continued in "The War Nobody Saw Coming - The First Attack"

[1] Foster, William, History of the Communist Party of the United States, International Publishers, 1952.

[2] Iliad Foster, William, Chapter 2.
[3] “The social revolution originally envisioned by Marx and Engels would begin witha proletariat dictatorship. Once in possession of the means of production, the dictatorship would devise the means for society to achieve the communal ownership of wealth. Once the transitional period had stabilized the state, the purest form of communism would take shape. Communism in its purest form would be a classless societal system in which property and wealth were distributed equally and without the need for a coercive government.” 
[4] Russell, Bertrand, The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism, George Allen & Unwin Ltd., London, 1920.
[5] Gramsci, Selections from the prison Notebooks, Translated and edited by Quentin Hoare and Geoffrey Norwell Smith, New York, 1971. In T.J. Jackson Lears' The Concept of Cultural Hegemony: Problems and Possibilities, The American Historical Review, Vol. 90, Issue 3, pages 567-593, June, 1985.
[6] Moraes, Raquel de Almeida, University of Brazil, Encyclopedia of Philosophy of Education.

Let me know what you think.