The United Socialist States Of America

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

– Norman Thomas


Karl Marx’s 10 Point Program of Communism

Liberalism = Communism = Statism

Below are the 10 points laid out by Marx.

Consider them and consider where the nation is today in reference to each. Then, consider for each of the points which of our political parties advocate for policies and programs to achieve the stated goals.

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

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

10. Free education for all children in public schools.

How far along now is the U.S.A.?


Elusive Wapiti Classic #1,Part 1, – Destuction of the Family – Feminism and Communism

The next two posts are in conjunction with the April 25, 2011 post:
<a href=”http://conancimmerian.blogspot.com/2011/04/communism-through-institutions.html”>Communism Through The Institutions
Great video of former KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov</a>

Part 2 is below this post for a more traditional/readable continuation.

Original here: <a href=”http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com/2008/03/evils-of-feminism-part-v.html”>LINK</a&gt;

<div class=’post-body’>
<p>
Feminism Destroys Family and Society–Intentionally

<center><i><b>
“Most Americans do not realize that they, through their institutions, are being led by social revolutionaries who think in terms of the continuing destruction of the existing social order in order to create a new one”
</i></b> [4]</center>

In <a href = http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com/2007/12/evils-of-feminism.html>previous installments</a>, I’ve discussed how feminism devalues women, causes them to be sexually precocious, and leads to cultural <i>hara kiri</i>.  Today, I’ll discuss how feminism, purposefully and with full awareness, aims to destroy the religious- and family-based principles upon which our country and civilization is based, and replace it with its totalitarian matriarchal utopia.  As this post is very long, I’ll post it in two sections.

Some time ago, reader <b>pjanus</b> gently <a href = https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2136312527901126367&postID=2084901249095159579&isPopup=true>rebuffed me</a> for my naivete in thinking that feminists are simply misguided but well-meaning liberals who know not what they do. Well, I’ve done some more thinking and research on the subject, and I concur with him in that, while some feminists, in their zeal for so-called “women’s rights”, fail to appreciate the long-term effects of what they do, the remainder doggedly and intentionally pursue an agenda that is aimed at nothing less than the subsumption of Western and Christian culture.

I will attempt to explain what I found in as brief a manner as possible.  Because it is instructive to know where something came from to know where its going, this post will contain a short history lesson that explains the ideological roots of feminism.  In this task, I ask for your grace…this is ground well-tilled by those far more talented than I, I am not a “women’s studies” major, and I lack the space to delve into these subjects with any considerable depth.  But I will proceed nonetheless, and see where it leads.  Let’s go, shall we?

<b>The Age of Reason</b>

I start my very brief history with the Enlightenment, when man began to reject <a href = http://www.saintswithouthalos.com/n/pcraft.phtml>priestcraft</a&gt; and the theocratic State and used science and his powers of reason to define the world. One primary feature of this event is the decoupling of culture and morality from external sources such as religion.  Man began the process of turning inward and located his compass there, rather than on an Almighty Being, a process probably best exemplified by the rise of the Transcedentalists and the Unitarians in the 1700s and 1800s and the incorporation of their theories into the philosophies of Hegel, Kant, and Marx[4]. As Dreher recently observed, this turn was <a href = http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/02/western-culture-wrecked-this-f.html>doomed to fail</a> as we only now are beginning to fully understand.

This use of humanist reasoning, uninformed by theology, came to a crescendo in Germany in the late 1800s and early 1900s.  We all know what nightmares came of that, both there and elsewhere (such as the USA and USSR).

<b>The Godfather: Karl Marx</b>

Karl Marx thought it all up. His unified, single-factor economic theory of history divides peoples into two classes, sorted by ownership of the means of production. Put short, he dreamt up modern class warfare, in which certain classes of people–in his case, the workers–are <i>a priori</i> good, and others such as the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. His theory of economic organization dictates expropriation from the haves to the have-nots, according to their politically determined need. Marx critiqued society through an economic lens, and he had an intense hatred for Western civilization itself, querying in 1919, “who will save us from Western Civilization?”.[1] He also viewed the family as an instrument of oppression, particularly for the wife who is under the thumb of an oppressive patriarchal male, and advocated for its abolishment in favor of the family of the State.[2]  As one can see, HRC wasn’t the first person to think that raising children “took a village”.

<b>Critical Theory and the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research (ISR)</b>

After the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, it became clear that economic Marxism was not yielding the worker’s utopia that Marx envisioned. Thus a group of Marxists got together and created the ISR–the first modern-day ‘think tank’–in 1923, in Frankfurt, Germany.

The ISR’s purpose was and is to translate Marxism from economic into social terms, and enable Marxism to be fully realized. The key tool with which to do this was called “critical theory”, at term which sounds vaguely academic at first blush. In fact, the theory behind “critical theory” is just to criticize. Relentlessly criticize, relentlessly “deconstruct”, and relentlessly discredit social institutions and mores at every opportunity.  With one’s criticism, the aim is to undermine the prevailing order with the most descructive criticism possible without offering an alternative, and the ISR was hard at work doing just that when the NASDP came to power in 1933. In this staunchly anti-Marxist and anti-Semitic environment, the Frankfurt School fled to Columbia University, various positions in the US government, and in Hollywood, where they promptly begain to apply critical theory to American culture. The Frankfurt school would not return to Germany until after the War.

End of Section 1.

Tomorrow: <a href = http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com/2008/03/evils-of-feminism-part-v_03.html>Gramsci takes the stick from Marx and runs with it…</a></p>

<div style=’clear: both;’>
</div>
</div>
PART 2 BELOW


Communism Through The Institutions

Great video of former KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov:

<object style=”height: 390px; width: 390px”><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/_Iz3VjoHXLA?version=3″&gt;
<param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”>
<param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”>
</object>


Vox Day Classic Repost: Flunking Fascism 101

One of the reasons for this humble blog is to repost classics from the interwebs.
Here is one such of Vox Day of Vox Popoli:

Flunking Fascism 101
Posted: June 28, 2004
1:00 am Eastern
By Vox Day
© 2011 WND

There are few words the American Left loves to fling around with such abandon as the word “fascist.” According to them, social conservatives, libertarians and the Religious Right are all various brands of fascism, that political ideology which came into such disrepute following the demise of il Duce, Benito Mussolini.

And yet, is the accusation legitimate? Who better to judge than Mussolini himself, not only the founder of the Fascist movement, but also the author of its manifesto. The Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle is not so well-known as the Communist Manifesto – and deservedly so, being markedly lacking in memorable phrases such as “a spectre haunting Europe” – and is not even as well-known as the Munich Manifesto of Germany’s National Socialists.

In fact, one can seldom find a direct translation of the Fascist manifesto, as it is usually summarized quickly before being swept aside in favor of contorted explanations of how its socialist theoreticians, including Panunzio, Gentile and Mussolini himself, are actually right-wing extremists influenced by the Catholic Church. It is fortuitous, then, that I happen to speak Italian, and so I present herein an original translation of The Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle, published in The People of Italy on June 6, 1919.

Italians! Here is the program of a genuinely Italian movement. It is revolutionary because it is anti-dogmatic, strongly innovative and against prejudice.

For the political problem: We demand:

a) Universal suffrage polled on a regional basis, with proportional representation and voting and electoral office eligibility for women.

b) A minimum age for the voting electorate of 18 years; that for the office holders at 25 years.

c) The abolition of the Senate.

d) The convocation of a National Assembly for a three-years duration, for which its primary responsibility will be to form a constitution of the State.

e) The formation of a National Council of experts for labor, for industy, for transportation, for the public health, for communications, etc. Selections to be made from the collective professionals or of tradesmen with legislative powers, and elected directly to a General Commission with ministerial powers.

For the social problems: We demand:

a) The quick enactment of a law of the State that sanctions an eight-hour workday for all workers.

b) A minimum wage.

c) The participation of workers’ representatives in the functions of industry commissions.

d) To show the same confidence in the labor unions (that prove to be technically and morally worthy) as is given to industry executives or public servants.

e) The rapid and complete systemization of the railways and of all the transport industries.

f) A necessary modification of the insurance laws to invalidate the minimum retirement age; we propose to lower it from 65 to 55 years of age.

For the military problem: We demand:

a) The institution of a national militia with a short period of service for training and exclusively defensive responsibilities.

b) The nationalization of all the arms and explosives factories.

c) A national policy intended to peacefully further the Italian national culture in the world.

For the financial problem: We demand:

a) A strong progressive tax on capital that will truly expropriate a portion of all wealth.

b) The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor.

c) The revision of all military contracts and the seizure of 85 percent of the profits therein.

As with National Socialism and Communism, it is easy to see that far from being a right-wing ideology, fascism is simply another variant of leftist worship of the State. I found the first plank in the above platform to be particularly amusing, as last week on my blog, Vox Popoli, a five-day debate sparked by a post on the historical consequences of women’s suffrage caused some hysterical leftists to label me a fascist. And yet, the only serious question is if it is more ironic to tar a libertarian or a member of the Religious Right with the fascist brush, as one seldom hears James Dobson calling for the government seizure of all church-owned property.

In 1925, Mussolini encapsulated the heart of fascist philosophy in a memorable phrase:

Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato. This means “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.” Now, I ask you, in the Year of Our Lord 2004, does that sound more like a Libertarian, a Republican or a Democrat?


The Myth of American Freedom

A great summary of where we are/how did we get here.

The Myth of American Freedom
by Andrew P. Napolitano

Here is Judge Napolitano’s closing argument yesterday on his FreedomWatch.

Does the government work for us or do we work for the government? Is freedom in America a myth or a reality? Tonight, what if we didn’t live in a free country?

What if the Constitution were written not to limit government, but to expand it? What if the Constitution didn’t fulfill the promise of the Declaration of Independence, but betrayed it? What if the Constitution actually permitted the government to limit and constrict freedom? What if the Bill of Rights was just a paper promise, that the government could avoid whenever it claimed the need to do so? What if the same generation – in some cases the same people – that drafted the U.S. Constitution enacted laws that violated it? What if the merchants and bankers who financed the American Revolution bought their way into the new government and got it to enact laws that stifled their competition? What if the civil war that was fought in the name of freedom actually advanced the cause of tyranny?

What if the federal government were the product of 150 years of stealing power and liberty and property from the people and the states? What if our political elites spent the 20th century importing the socialist ideas of big government Statism from Europe? What if our political class was adopting the European political culture from which our founding fathers fought so hard to break free?

What if our political leaders no longer acknowledged that our rights come from our humanity, but insisted instead that they come from the government? What if you had to produce your papers to get out of or into our once-free country? What if you couldn’t board a plane, a train, or a long-distance bus without providing documentation telling the government who you are and where you’re going, without paying the government, and without risking sexual assault? What if your local police department could shoot down a plane? What if government agents could write their own search warrants, declare their own enemies, and seize whatever property they want? What if the feds could detain you indefinitely, with no visitors, no lawyer, no judge, and no jury? What if they could make you just disappear? What if the government broke its own laws in order to enforce them? What if the government broke down your front door in the middle of the night and shot your dog, and claimed it was a mistake?

What if you were required to purchase a product that you didn’t need, didn’t want, and couldn’t afford, from a company you never heard of, just as a condition of living in the United States? What if the government told you what not to put in your body as well as what to put into it; and how much? What if the government claimed that since it will be paying your medical bills, it can tell you what to eat, when to sleep, and how to live? What if the government tried to cajole and coax and compel you into behaviors and attitudes it considered socially acceptable? What if the government spent your tax money to advertise to you how great the services are that it provides? What if the government kept promising to make you safe while it kept stripping you of your liberties and committing crimes in your name that made you a target of more violence?

What if you didn’t have a right to every dollar you earned? What if the government decided how much of your earnings it will keep and how much it will permit you to have? What if the government took money from you and gave it away to its rich banking and corporate friends whose businesses were failing? What if the government thought it knew better than you did how to lead your life and had no problem telling you so? What if the government took the credit for every success your own human actions helped you achieve? What if the government told you that only it could build roads, run schools, keep you safe, and collect trash even though it’s never been able to do so efficiently before? What if the government spent nearly twice as much as it took in? What if it couldn’t pass a budget on a timely basis and funded itself just weeks at a time? And what if the government kept borrowing money against the wealth of future generations to pay for wasteful programs today?

What if you worked for the government and the government didn’t work for you? What if freedom were a myth? What if we don’t live in a free country? What do we do about it?

From New York, defending freedom; so-long America.

September 30, 2011


The NRA Just Gave Me A Call

Well, the NRA just gave me a call about the UN Gun Grab (!). They thought they were going to solicit me, but instead that got a rant  instead. My final words to them were simply they cannot be trusted to do what is right and that my money is better served going to the GOA and the JPFO. I give you this from Alvie D. Zane of The Cliffs Of Insanity titled UN Gun GRAB!!!! which pretty much sums up most of my other comments to them:

Friday, September 2, 2011
UN Gun Grab!!!!!!
From now on, I’ll refer to the UN Gun Grab!!! as the NRA Money Grab!!!

Tough guy Wayne LaPierre had his telemarketers pay me a phone call today.  Right as I got in the house, I was greeted by the NRA.

I received the customary welcome message, then Wayne’s 2 minutes of hate for the UN Gun Grab (with extra exclamation points!!!!), then a “poll question” of whether I supported the UN going after gun rights on American soil.

I gave no answer, but I did get another human on the line.

He gave me the pitch for a 5 year membership-all of the benefits, the perks, the free decal, and the commemorative NRA knife.

Forgive me but why not something that’s at least related to firearms.  A bayonet?  Yes.  A cute rosewood handled commemorative knife?  Eh….not so much.  Don’t want to get in trouble with the tree popo.

Finally, my chance to talk.

Excellent…open bomb bay doors

Well sir, I actually dropped my NRA membership.  And I’ll tell you why I’m proud of that.

A couple of years ago, about 50 of us got together.  We manned up and rifled up and carried openly on the banks of the Potomac-in sight of the Washington Monument and the Capitol Dome.  Larry Pratt from Gun Owners of America came.  But no NRA.  Press from all over the world came, but the NRA wouldn’t touch us.

As far as the UN Gun Grab goes, I’ve been hearing this talk from the NRA for years.  Honestly, I don’t care what the UN does, what Obama does, what Washington does.

My rights are God-given, they are unalienable and no piece of paper can take them away.  My freedom doesn’t depend on what a judge says, on what Washington says, or even what the majority says.  If they want to come grab our guns, then let them try.  And then we’ll see what “fighting for our gun rights” looks like.

Understand that this sentiment isn’t directed at you, but your bosses.  Feel free to pass this uphill to them.  Good day.

My only regret is that I didn’t talk longer and thereby consume valuable working time in a non-productive effort. Starve the monkey.

After I hung up, I thought of so much more that I could have said.

How the NRA won’t stand up for the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.  How they didn’t want to push Heller.  How they gave Harry Reid a “B”, yet couldn’t see their way fit to endorse his opponent when he was clearly vulnerable.  How they are so late to the party where Gunwalker is concerned.  How they aren’t a “cold dead hands” organization anymore, but instead insist we need to be tough like Chuck and trigger the vote.

I suppose I also could have tried to get the caller to look through the Hoffman lenses.

Well, I’ll have something to talk about next time they call.