Friday, September 4, 2009

Calling a spade, a spade. Or in this case, a Communist

You can't turn on the TV or talk radio show these days without hearing the words "communism" and "socialism" flying around like a swarm of locust. Most Democrats ridicule such talk and simply write it off as the rantings of those right-wing extremists. For Democrats, words like communism and its brethren are just pejorative barbs design to sidetrack debate on the good works they are trying to do. You know -- clean up the atmosphere, healthcare for all, save the economy, etc, etc. Democrats aren't for Socialism or Communism -- they're good Americans just like you and me with different approaches to policy, right? Wrong.

Now, I'm not talking about the average Democrat voter. They are merely followers. I'm talking about the insidious, treacherous intent of the left-wing activists which have overrun the Democrat party. They have been at it, chipping away at the foundation of liberty and capitalism for decades. Now, with control of all branches of government, they are stepping on the gas.

Before you poo-poo the idea that elected leaders could possibly intend to do such a thing, I ask you to continue reading... (my remarks in blue). Note that these prescriptions for communist panacea aren't in linear order.

10 Conditions For Transition To Communism
(Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich, The Communist Manifesto, 1848)

• Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
This can easily be furthered by the imposition of crippling property taxes, among other measures, as means to divest individuals of their private property. America is not near the abolition of private property today as incrementalism is the name of the game. This would likely be one of the last planks to fall on the bridge to communism.

• A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
The United States already has this in place and under Obama and the Democrat leadership, it would intensify. This is the most effective and perverse method to gain control of the nation's wealth and is the engine for wealth redistribution. It is also the most difficult to defeat because of the populist, political power inherent with sticking it to the "rich" -- a definition by the way, which will continually be redefined downward.

• Abolition of all right of inheritance.
This is well on it's way given the existence of the estate or "death tax". It's as high as 45% for estates as little as $1.5M -- that's a small house in many large cities. Many Democrats want to make this tax much higher.

• Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
Existing asset forfeiture laws are the mechanism for this element should it ever come to pass.

• Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
This one is a done deal. The Federal Reserve effectively controls the money supply and though that, the credit supply.

• Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
The "Fairness Doctrine" and a bill now in the Senate to grant authority to Obama to seize computer networks in an "emergency" puts this goal well in reach. The major broadcast networks have effectively turned themselves over to the Left long ago.

• 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.
We have been witness to this evolution in just the past year. It's name is GM: Government Motors. This is just the first step as now, government has established a precedent. But beyond the traditional "factory" under Marx, our government has and seeks to absorb other elements of the productive economy. Consider what the government already controls: the Post Office (means of communication), Fannie and Freddie (primary means of home/property ownership), several U.S. banks and investment firms (private equity), Medicare and Medicaid (insurance industry for the poor and retired) and the list could go on. Now, they want control of 1/6 of the U.S. economy by seizing the health care industry. Oh yes, they will privatize it all -- hospitals, doctors and drug companies. The insurance industry as it stands today will be gone within a decade if the government passes Obama care. This is all more than a coincidental trend.... these growing elements of state control lead only to one thing. And it's not more freedom.

• Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded," said Barack Obama. This, along with his proposal to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps is bone-chilling.

• Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equal distribution of the population over the country.
This has been an established trend of the past several decades. I'm not sure the intent here with Marx, but dense populations are inherently dangerous to oppressive governments.

• Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
This one is complete and is probably the most responsible for the state we are in as a nation. The liberals have had total control of the public education system for decades -- a time during which our education standards and results have plummeted by the way. Decades of children have been taught revisionist history and their receptive minds massaged to embrace the notion of "American Guilt". There is a good account of this here.

You can debate the intent of leftist politicians all you want. What isn't deniable is the fact that policies pushed and implemented by the Left have inexorably led to a less free society. Millions of Americans understand this. That's why "liberal" is a dirty word these days and they now call themselves "progressives". The labels can change but what remains is their fervent desire to metamorphose the "Land of the Free" into a well-intentioned, but nonetheless despotic, Nanny State.

The one inconvenience standing in their way is that thing known as the ballot box. America, are we fully awake yet? I am.


  1. How, exactly, have liberal policies interfered with anyone's freedom?

    Can you name a specific policy, passed and implemented by liberals, that made me or you less free?

  2. Off the top of my head, I can name the recent decision to bailout companies and regulate their executives' pay. That's certainly making them less free.

    Also: Energy taxes, taxes in general (which take your money, limiting your FREEDOM to spend it), inheritance taxes, all forms of political correctness, all nanny-state laws such as banning trans fats, etc etc.

  3. How about the health care mandate that's working its way through Congress, R. Stanton Scott? I personally like my health care as it is with all of the amenities and will continue to purchase it of my own free will. But if I don't want to then that is my choice, and I should be willing to live and die by the consequences of my actions. That is freedom, until the health care bill which is being entirely written by the Democrats gets passed and I could face fines and jail time if I don't want to buy it. It's nothing like car insurance, either. Right now I have the freedom to buy it and not be "nudged" into a single-payer plan, like Obama wants (plenty of video of him saying it on youtube, so don't ask), and I don't want it to change in most ways, including the financial incentive for research. My father has a type of cancer that has no cure, and free-market research is the only efficient way to find cures. Obamacare will put the nail in his coffin by stifling research. Other countries can only have universal healthcare because they eek off of our research. We pay for it and they benefit, but when we're all socialized, we'll all be swimming in the cesspool. If we go universal everyone loses, and that's where the Liberals want to go. I agree that there are things about our system that need to change, like the free-market limiting legislation that keep costs high and the frivolous litigation that is currently allowed beyond common sense which also increases costs. But Liberalism is just Communism-lite. It's fiscally irresponsible to push our responsibility to be charitable onto the government, and morally reprehensible because it's LAZY. Charity should be a neighbor to neighbor, person to person thing, not a government mandates and higher taxes thing. Time and time again it has been shown to not work. Taxes do not create charity. Liberal policies are not charitable. It's a nanny state that trains people to be suckling babies instead of responsible individuals, and the agenda of liberalism comes right out of Marxism, which is where Hitler and Stalin got the dogma they preached. So don't tell me for a second that Liberalism protects freedom or doesn't infringe upon it. That is nonsense.

  4. What about private sale and ownership of firearms? The Democrats would completely ban this, and many are trying to do so...along with our Great Leader.