Tag Archives: Hitler
America Heading Way Of Nazi Germany
Indiana treasurer Richard Mourdock warned that the failing economy is pushing the country the way of Nazi Germany
History teaches great lessons and the one of the greatest lessons to learn is that human nature never changes.
Scripture declares it:
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun" – Ecclesiastes 1:9
America's Founders understood this, which is why they created a Republic with divided Government containing a system of checks and balances intended to LIMIT government and prevent it from becoming a TYRANNY – which human nature teaches is an assured fate. The Founders considered human nature and history and understood that Ecclesiastes was gospel truth and warned the American people repeatedly that they needed to be vigilant in safeguarding their liberties.
But today – this people will be destroyed for a lack of knowledge. It no longer considers the lessons of history. A lifetime of peace and plenty, incredible technology and wealth, the American people, thinking themselves wise, have become fools by accepting the beguiling of the Secular Left and have rested in the false comfort that history and human nature no longer applies.
Most Americans, indeed even most in the Republican Party whom I read, are lecturing themselves that electing more Republicans will restore the Constitution and we will be saved from disaster and the tyranny now being installed that is staring us in the face. They are not even paying attention to what is being SAID and DONE that negates their false hopes. They are not even CONSIDERING the possibility that we already have a defacto dictatorship under Obama.
Obama Says He Is "In A Strong Position" To Amend The Constitution Himself"
I contend most Americans have a fatal case of Normalcy Bias.
But scripture and what the Foundners warned us because of their understanding of history and human nature stands in truth and cannot be shaken.
When anyone in a position of influence or political power states a similar warning, watch how they are immediately impugned, castigated and laughed at:
RICHARD MOURDOCK WARNS AMERICA HEADING WAY OF NAZI GERMANY IN DRAMATIC FAREWELL SPEECH
"The people of Germany in a free election selected the Nazi party because they made great promises that appealed to them because they were desperate and destitute. And why is that? Because Germany was bankrupt," Mourdock said to a crowd gathered at the Indiana Republican Convention on Saturday.
In the 1930's during the Great Depression and under the pressure of the Treaty of Versailles, the National Socialist Party showered the poor with bread and put millions of unemployed to work with government programs before leading the entire world into war.
"Over the next several years, every time a program began to fall apart, Mr. Hitler's party was very, very good at dividing Germany by pointing to this group or that group," Mourdock continued. "First they went after their political opponents. Then they went after the aristocrats. Then they went after the trade unionists. And ultimately, of course, they went after the Jews. They deprived them of their property, their rights, their citizenship, and for millions their humanity. Because they were bankrupt!"
And immediately here come the fools screaming in outrage that such a warning should even be made:
"We are extremely disappointed to learn that Treasurer Mourdock chose to invoke the rise of Hitler and the heinous acts of the Nazis in comparison to America's national debt," said Shelby Anderson, president of the Indianapolis Jewish Community Relations Council. "Such comparisons are highly offensive and trivialize both the suffering and memory of the six million Jews and millions of others who perished under the Nazi regime."
"[It's] deplorable to suggest that a nation in debt is somehow one step away from perpetrating crimes reminiscent of Nazi Germany," vice president of the council Stephen Klapper added.
What is even more deplorable, is that this very same religious block nearly unanimously supports the MarxoFascists under Obama and the Democrats. That they choose to ignore the lessons that their own relatives and people suffered just 70 years ago, when the signs of warning are all around them, is an abject lesson in sheep being led off a cliff.
Filed under Culture War, History, Obama Marxist Tyranny
Tagged as Constitution, Debt, Founders, Great Depression, Hitler, national Debt, National Socialists, Nazi Germany, Nazis, Obama, Richard Mourdock
American Fascism Is Here
GM, Student Loans, EPA dictates, ObamaCare and now "Income Inequality" – Obama has fundamentally transformed America into a Marxist/Fascist State.
"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good
of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.
The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may
at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good
will torment us without end for they do so with the approval
of their own conscience." – C.S. Lewis
The evidence is right in front of you. The marriage of large corporations and government cronyism in exchange for government protection from government regulation is standard practice in the age of Obama. ObamaCare will probably be the first real pain you feel under this totalitarian system forced upon us by evil men acting under the color of law with a compliant media and legislature in cooperation with big business to control every aspect of your life. And like all things run by government – it fails miserably in contrast to real market principles. Unless the designs themselves are to create misery so as to further government power later.
ObamaCare was designed to do only one thing: collapse the existing health insurance market and force everyone to clamor for government-run healthcare. The fact the website still doesn't work is irrelevant. It was never intended to work. The fact Obama has not met with HHS Frau Direktor Sebelius once in over 3 years is irrelevant. The "law" forcing the collapse of private health insurance is what is the most important aspect of the "law".
With that, it has succeeded beyond even what the Communist Party USA thought possible, and so the push to demand government take over the entire healthcare industry are being made.
From one manufactured crisis to yet another 'cause' the media will parrot – while it 'appears' Obama has a black eye from the ObamaCare web woes, His Heinous jumped right into raw Marxism, furthering Class Warfare with a speech declaring "income inequality" as being the 'defining challenge of our time'.
What we have now, is a Marxist imposing Fascism, which if we will be honest about what it is that Obama has transformed us into – is a MarxoFascist state.
America's Fascist Movement
In an age prone to political overstatement, words have a tendency to lose their currency. How many times in the 21st century have we heard words like "tyranny" or "totalitarian" thrown around in reference to the essentially stable world of American politics?
When the rhetoric clearly outpaces the reality, such pronouncements become meaningless – and we begin to assume that anyone who talks in such foreboding terms is at least slightly unhinged.
The danger, however, is that dismissing the Chicken Littles will lead us to reflexively ignore even legitimate concerns if they're sufficiently dire – and that's a problem because some of our national challenges really are that dramatic.
Case in point: the rising tide of fascism in American life.
To properly understand the threat, we must first strip the word of its non-essential connotations. One of the reasons that "fascism" has become such a toxic term is because of its deep-rooted association with Nazi Germany.
While Adolf Hitler's reign certainly rested on a fascist substrate, that doesn't mean that there's anything going on in modern America that even remotely resembles the undiluted evil of the Third Reich. Nor is it necessarily of a piece with Benito Mussolini's Italy. Those were aggressive, expansionist, malevolent forms of fascism. If anything, ours is a bland, therapeutic iteration.
So what then do we mean by fascism?
In essence, the fascist system is one that rejects any limiting principle upon government. In Mussolini's famous formulation it stands for "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." That notion, of course, is irreconcilable with the conception of America advanced by the Founding Fathers. Theirs was a government of limited powers, with decision-making decentralized through federalism and the protection of individual liberties.
The fascist notion essentially assumes the infallibility of the state. The American alternative – recognizing that "the state" is nothing more than the flawed human beings who administer it – not only assumes fallibility, but also designs the entire system of government to quarantine its effects.
The more time goes by, however, the more those ramparts are breached. Beginning with the Progressive movement of the early 20th century, there was a concerted effort to erode limits on government power. It continued through the New Deal and the Great Society, and manifests itself in the present day in the government expansion overseen by President Obama and his liberal acolytes around the country.
We should note here a key distinction: Not all expansions of government are necessarily indicative of fascism. The hallmark of fascism is destroying the space that exists between the individual and the state; it's a desire to crush civil society, the mechanism that allows free people to voluntarily organize on their own terms for their own purposes.
Particularly in America, such efforts usually don't stem from people explicitly lusting for power. Rather, it's often the work of do-gooders whose desire to create a better society inevitably leads them to strip away the freedoms of those who don't share their vision.
Take, for instance, the increasing attacks on the right to free association. The New Mexico Supreme Court recently found that an Albuquerque couple that refused to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony on the basis of their Christian beliefs had violated the state's human rights law. An analogy can be made with ObamaCare's insistence that religious employers provide access to contraception for their employees.
In both cases, one could disagree with the underlying views without accepting the notion that individuals should be compelled, by force of the law, to violate their deepest religious beliefs to satisfy government's notion of "The Good."
The freedom of religion is an essentially meaningless concept if that freedom is only operative in situations where it aligns with the values of the governing class.
One sees this impulse for the state to order private relations at every turn. What is ObamaCare if not an attempt to get doctors and patients – which is to say everyone in the country – to conduct one of life's most private activities, medical treatment, along the lines of government dictates? What is Common Core, the proposal to create national educational standards, if not an attempt to snuff out competing views on what children need to learn to become fully intellectually formed?
The reach of government even goes so far as dictating the offerings and calorie content of school lunches under First Lady Michelle Obama's Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (which is currently touching off a rebellion in schools throughout the nation).
That may seem a trifling example if you're thinking of fascism in terms of brownshirts. For our purposes, however, its marginal importance is precisely the point.
Civil society can't meaningfully exist with a state so expansive that it sees plucking the cheeseburger out of your child's hands as a legitimate application of government power.
The Founding Fathers gave us a limited government of enumerated powers, constructed around the notion of protecting individual liberty. What we are currently cultivating, however, is a government that presumes to overrule the church on matters of faith, to overrule your doctor on matters of health, and to overrule parents on matters of childrearing. "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."
Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny
Tagged as Fascist, Hitler, income inequality, Marxist, Mussolini, Obama, Obamacare, Sebelius, Socialism
Fascism – A Progressive Construct: From The French Revolution To Obama's Age of Tyranny
History reveals Satan's fingerprints on the ideology that spawned the worst miseries and genocides in modern history. Obama and the Democrats in America are imposing upon us, a similar fate.
One of the two greatest lies that most Americans have bought lock-stock and barrel from decades of liberal Left indoctrination is that 1.) Our Rights come from government which is the greatest good; and 2.) That European Fascism and Hitler's Nazi's were a product of Right Wing Christian Conservative Nationalism.
Nothing could be further from the truth, and the Left has always known this which is why they worked so hard to achieve success in the minds of easily deceived Americans that Fascism is a Conservative/Right/Christian ideology. The meme that "fascism will come carrying a cross and wrapped in the flag" is the fear and loathing the Leftists have for Christian Conservatives, and it was convenient for them to convince as many as possible that liberty has nothing to fear from the Progressive Left, but rather from the Conservative Christian.
The abject truth of the matter is that Fascism along with Nazism and Marxism are bastard sons of Socialism, which is not a Conservative/Right wing ideology. Rather, they emanate from the top-down controlling aspect that Statists of Socialism and Communism demand.
What Obama and his MarxoFascist Democrats are fundamentally transforming America into, is a Fascist totalitarian state that ensconces the Ruling Class into a position of power that micromanages every single aspect of our lives. How we live, what we think, what we eat, what we learn and teach, to what kind of health care we will be allowed to have is all part of the agenda to subjugate liberty to Statism. Do not marvel at the charge, for this is what the Progressives have sought to do to this country for a century.
The fingerprints of such tyranny stretch back to antiquity – but the modern strain of Satan's imprint on man's government are found squarely in those who in name of 'fairness', 'compassion', 'equity' and 'common salvation' impose their tyranny and rule their subjects with an iron fist – exterminating any and all who stand in their way.
And we're next.
French Revolution and the triumph of Liberal Fascism
"There are only two parties… the people and its enemies. We must exterminate those miserable villains who are eternally conspiring against the rights of man… [W]e must exterminate all our enemies."
~ Robespierre
For the progressive left, all roads lead to the French Revolution (1789-99) which was the first totalitarian revolution, the genesis of modern totalitarianism, and the spiritual foundation for the Russian Communist, Italian Fascist and German Nazi revolutions. A nationalist-populist rebellion, it was established and controlled by a small intellectual braintrust hellbent on killing God, Christianity, capitalism and objective truth thus devolving Western civilization into a savage society based on a political religion that deified "the people," anointed the revolutionary elites as their priests, and destroyed the rights of individuals. As Robespierre put it, "The people is [sic] always worth more than individuals… The people is sublime, but individuals are weak" – or collectively, dispensable.
In this case, I believe that American presidential history over the last 100 years has (or soon will) establish the Wilson, the FDR, the LBJ and the Obama administrations as the direct descendants of the world's first fascist movement: the French Revolution.
Since history is the final judge of our deeds (JFK), it's incredulous how any rational person today would doubt the fascist nature of the French Revolution. Few doubt that it was tyrannical, terrorist, nationalist, conspiratorial, and populist. It created the first modern dictators, Robespierre and Napoleon, and functioned on the foundation that the nation had to be ruled by a progressive avant-garde, a pagan oligarchy who would personify as the authentic, organic expression of the "general will" according to the political philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78). The fanatical Jacobin character made the revolutionaries more vicious and evil than the king they supplanted. Some fifty thousand people eventually were murdered in the Great Terror, a majority in political show trials that British historian Simon Schama defines as the "founding charter of totalitarian justice." Robespierre summed up the totalitarian nihilism of the Revolution: "There are only two parties in France: the people and its enemies. We must exterminate those miserable villains who are eternally conspiring against the rights of man… [W]e must exterminate all our enemies."
Jonah Goldberg, in his essential treatise, "Liberal Fascism," connected modern liberalism directly to the French Revolution writing:
But what truly makes the French Revolution the first fascist revolution was its effort to turn politics into a religion. (In this the revolutionaries were inspired by Rousseau, whose concept of the general will divinized the people while rendering the person an afterthought). Accordingly, they declared war on Christianity, attempting to purge it from society and replace it with a "secular" faith whose tenets were synonymous with the Jacobin agenda. Hundreds of pagan-themed festivals were launched across the country celebrating Nation, Reason, Brotherhood, Liberty, and other abstractions in order to bathe the state and the general will in an aura of sanctity. As we shall see, the Nazis emulated the Jacobins in minute detail.
The American right and classical liberals embraced the American Revolution (1775-83), which was fundamentally conservative, while rejecting categorically the evil deeds and fanaticism of Jacobinism. However, if the French Revolution was fascist, then subsequent generations should have deduced that this diabolical movement rightly as the fruit of this poisoned tree and fascism and be relegated to its proper place in history as the genesis of political liberalism. This would lead to a major paradigm shift in the leftist worldview; therefore, liberals turned to the irrational and willingly embraced to cognitive dissonance and revisionist history rooted in pseudo-scientific ideas like Social Darwinism, scientism, scientific racism, evolution atheism and postmodernism.
Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744-1803), the infamous theologian, philosopher, poet and literary critic is perhaps unjustly credited with establishing the intellectual foundation for Nazism, borrowed heavily from Rousseau's neo-pagan political arguments returning mankind back to his original savage state of nature and reformulated them into an existential cultural struggle (e.g., Kulturkampf of Otto von Bismarck [1871-78]). According to Herder, Rousseau's "general will" was exclusive in each nation since its history, culture and traditions were unique to a particular Volk (people). This Romantic, nationalist worldview led different intellectuals and artists to champion the individuality or supremacy of races, nations, and cultures leading inexorably to scientific racism and race-based genocide against minority and religious groups.
Rousseau's utopian society is not expressed by ethnicity or geography or tradition, nevertheless, Rousseau's deification of the nation under the rule of the dominate State, his glorification of neo-pagan ideas led directly to the Golden Age of twentieth century tyrants (e.g., the Ottoman Turks, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Mao, Pol Pot, Iranian Ayatollahs, etc.) all who systematically implemented Rousseau's savage utopia worldview as public policy leading to democide – the government sponsored deaths of people in the hundreds of millions – and that's just in the twentieth century alone.
Rousseau's ideals established by the general will and the dogmas of what he called a "civil religion" was controlled by the omnipotent God-state (e.g., Nietzsche's "Will to Power" and "god is dead" philosophy). It's effect meant that Jews, Christians, critical thinkers, intellectuals and people who rebelled against Rousseau's collective community (spirit) of the society are forced outside the State and have no claim on its protections (e.g., Mussolini:Everything inside the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State). In reality, the pagan State is not only required to identify and guard against unsociable individuals or subcommunities (i.e., the church), it is mandated to eradicate them (e.g., Darwin's natural selection, survival of the fittest, Galton's eugenics, Hitler's holocaust, abortion, etc.).
Jonah Goldberg continues his historical critique establishing the French Revolution as the first fascist movement:
Fascism is indebted to the French Revolution in other ways as well. Robespierre appreciated, as did Sorel and his heirs, that violence was a linchpin that kept the masses committed to the ideas of the Revolution: "If the spring of popular government in time of peace is virtue, the springs of popular government in revolution are at once virtue and terror: virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is not so much a special principle as it is a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country's most urgent needs."
"For the first time in history," proclaimed historian Marisa Linton, "terror became an official government policy, with the stated aim to use violence in order to achieve a higher political goal." The paradox seemed lost on the Bolsheviks – self-proclaimed heirs of the French Revolution – who championed fascism, rather than their own method, as an "openly terroristic dictatorship."
The usefulness of terror as a proven strategy to seize and maintain absolute power to the Jacobins as to modern day liberals, socialists and progressives was totalizing, but amid its dominant objectives was its penchant to preserve a permanent sense of crisis – Leon Trotsky (1879-1940) called it the "Perpetual Revolution." Saul Alinsky (1909-72) and his acolytes Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the Democratic Socialist Party use existential crisis which is historically identified as a central role of fascism because it ends debate and democratic discussions (e.g., "never allow a crisis to go to waste"). Therefore, all fascistic movements put forth considerable effort to extending a perpetual state of emergency – a perpetual revolution that never ends. Historically speaking, the French Revolution was the direct descendant of both World War I and II and in our present era has established the rise of radical Islam, thus spawning a new, globalist Age of Terror (9/11-present).
Filed under History, Obama Marxist Tyranny, Uncategorized
Tagged as Benito Mussolini, Communism, Democrats, Fascism, FDR, French Revolution, Hitler, LBJ, Obama, Progressive, Renew America, Saul Alinsky, Totalitarianism
The Revolution Is At Our Door
As the American experiment with liberty collapses into tyranny, a very real bloodbath stands in wait
The American War of Independence and the French Revolution. Two revolutions against state authority and tyranny. Two completely different outcomes.
In attempting to answer the question of where his native nation of France went wrong, Alexis DeToqueville summed up in Democracy in America, that America's greatness could be found in our churches, and that the day America ceased to be good (and moral), she would cease to be great. He was stating what John Adams himself had declared when he wrote: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the governance of any other (people)".
It is not lost on any right-thinking American that our nation has ceased to be a moral or religious nation and has ceased to be good. MarxoFascists and Leftists have been busy redefining morality and what is good for the better part of five decades, and their cultural revolution has paved the way for their hoped-for Marxist revolution against Capitalism and individual liberty. Running on the induced self-loathing of America that has been soaked into the minds of public school and college students since the 1960's, the culture war has been lost to Leftists. Coupled with a complete brainwashing of Communist/Socialist propaganda by Leftist Teachers and their Communist Unions being taught as the only true morality and fairness, Obama's army of disgruntled welfare class dependents and media stooges, are openly calling for the deaths of Americans they hate.
At the other end of the spectrum, lovers of our liberty and Constitution see this as a direct threat to freedom. The actions of the Obama regime and Democrat MarxoFascists in Congress; the impending nullification of the Second Amendment is spurning the exponentially accelerated talk of revolution against the counter-revolutionaries of the Obama-Left.
War it appears, is on our doorstep.
Revolution may sound romantic – but it is anything but. It often descends into a bloodbath of horrors and terror that end up being waged by those not grounded in religious principles. It would do us all well to read the following essay by Daniel Greenfield and contemplate what is being stoked among us, and is standing upon our doorsteps.
And This Is Revolution
Daniel Greenfield @ the Sultan Knish blog
There are a few things worth knowing about revolutions. Most people don't participate in them, even if the history books often make it seem otherwise. Revolutions are thought up by small groups of people who then make it everyone's business. Or alternately they don't. And those are the revolutions that never happen.
Most people, at any given time and place, are dissatisfied with the government and believe, rightly, that whoever is in charge is guilty of stealing from them, oppressing them and making it impossible for them to live their lives in peace. And they also believe that things are not likely to get any better. Hope is a vanishing emotion that dissipates easily in the drudgery of ordinary everyday work. It may be taken out for a spin on historical occasions, but then it goes back into the barn where it sits for a while gathering dust until it is needed again.
There are however some known crossroads of revolution. A successful revolution usually doesn't happen among the thoroughly repressed. Those people tend to lack the motivation and skills to face down a modern army. When the peasants revolt, they can often be tricked into going home with some false promises and free beer. It worked more often with the serfs in European history than you would think. It's the middle class that you really have to watch out for.
People are not at their most dangerous when they're eating bread crusts and hoping that they won't die tomorrow. By then they're often broken, perhaps not individually, but as a society. It wasn't the people on the collective farms who challenged Soviet tanks in Moscow. Nor was it the Chinese farmers, now being bulldozed off their land, sometimes literally, who stood up to the tanks in Tienanmen Square.
The most dangerous people are the ones who have tasted enough freedom and prosperity to want to keep it. They don't think their leaders are godlike and they have enough education and competence to think the heretical thought that just about anybody could do the same job as the king, the emperor, the czar or the president. They have experience enough upward mobility to understand that a man's place in the world isn't fixed. It can and should be changed. And that is what distinguishes them from the serf. That is what makes them so dangerous.
Authority works best when it isn't challenged. Ceremony, whether it is that of an emperor or any lesser rank, invests authority with mystical force. Peer pressure and social conformity employ horizontal pressures to keep everyone in their place. Secret police and ranks of informers allow the regime to project an illusion of omnipotent force that seems to be everywhere at once. Reigns of terror create examples to intimidate anyone who might think of challenging the regime.
Revolutions strip away these illusions. The secret police run for cover or comically march out with clubs and guns against mobs, and get beaten to a pulp. The neighbor who rats on everyone sits home and stews in front of the television. And then the regime has no choice but to call on the army and hope that it still retains enough control over the officers and that the officers still have enough control over their men to do the bloody work of winning a civil war.
The army test is the acid test of a regime because it exposes the actual level of power of the regime, which relies entirely on its officer corps and its grunts to be willing to shoot people in the street. In Russia, the army proved unwilling to kill a bunch of civilians to protect a coup by their own superiors leading to the end of the Soviet Union and the fall of Communism.
After generations of worldwide terror, the great red beast was reduced to relying on the willingness of a handful of Russian kids in tanks to run over protesters. The kids, who had grown up on Western rock and roll, listening to old men preach about a coming revolution that was already older than the oldest man they had ever seen, while the echoes of capitalist dreams leaked through the Iron Curtain, chose to sit this one out. And Communism died in the streets of Moscow.
But where the Soviet Union fell, the Chinese Communist Party succeeded because they had men who were willing to run over other men with tanks. After all the great debates and posturing, the fate of hundreds of millions of people came down to the same things that all revolutions come down to, not cogent arguments or complex theories, but the willingness of some men to kill other men for a cause.
Communism also died in China. It had to. But the leadership class remained in power and their princes made it into a hereditary dynasty. In Iran, protests were pitted against the guns of the Revolutionary Guard. The regime won, but at the cost of shifting power to the Revolutionary Guard. In Syria, each side escalated, found foreign backers and is fighting a war in which the most ruthless bastards are winning. That is how the Communists ended up winning in Russia, but not after a long bout of murderous warfare in which all sides did horrible things and painted the land red. Any Russian naval officers with a sense of history watching the whole thing happen from a portside cafe are probably remembering how the same thing went down in the land of red snow.
It's the aspiring middle class that begins revolutions, but when they turn bloody enough, then they usually aren't the ones who inherit them. An ascending middle class begins revolutions to protect its privileges, only to see those revolutions hijacked by the fanatics, who to be fair, often began them, the lawyers who want to be executioners, the demagogues who fail at everything but street corner tirades and the psychopaths who drift in and then take over.
The American Revolution avoided being overtaken by these types of lunatics, though at times it was a closer thing than anyone realizes. If history had gone a little differently, Aaron Burr could very well have been our Robespierre. And General Lafayette could have been France's George Washington. Instead the American Revolution stayed in the hands of the people who wanted peace and prosperity, rather than radical social change, and France descended into blood and chaos at the hands of those who thought that revolution was worthless unless it allowed them to completely transform society.
The other kind of revolution, the Bastille kind, has managed to catch up with us. A vast territory and technological revolutions held it at bay for the longest time, but it was the aspiring middle class that eventually allowed itself to be seduced into mortgaging its political power, national integrity and economic freedom to gain an illusory peace and security in the form of a powerful government. And if there to be another revolution against it, it will once again come from the ranks of the middle class.
The American middle class can feel itself sinking. Its prosperity has been stagnating and the jobs are drying up. The educational revolution isn't doing what it was supposed to, for most, instead it saddled much of the country with even more debt. Debt is the watchword of the present, as it was of France before the Revolution. Everything is in debt and mortgaged to the hilt for everything else. International financial systems have made it possible to spread the pain and bury it in complicated financial transactions and speculation, but that just means the debt is bigger and badder than ever.
The pre-revolutionary middle class can choose between two sets of villains, big government and big business. Both are big, and thus meet the criteria for being worth revolting against, but the choice of villains often comes down to a choice of professions.
The college student who owes insane amounts of money to a complex network of financial institutions for a degree of dubious worth and a credit card whose interest rates are more complicated than the subject she was studying, is likely to sympathize with Occupy Wall Street's bank baiting. The small businessman who feels like he spends all day filling out forms in order to get other forms to fill out, while seeking his profits being sucked up by the government and its institutions, feels a tug toward the Tea Party.
It's the anarchist who is closest to the mark when he notes that there really isn't that much of a distinction between the two. The government bails out the banks with bad money and the banks bail out the government with fake money. Governments and corporations, are run by the same people with the same phony mantra of social justice, that really means showy philanthropy and profitable regs. But then the cynics usually tend to be closer to the mark because faults are easy to find.
The American middle class is caught between two rebellions. One by an urban middle class elite that would like a more closed and regulated society and another by a rural middle class that would like a more open and less regulated society, with the suburbs split in the middle.
Having the cities is not absolutely mandatory for a revolution. The modern American city is a drain that produces very little except bureaucracy and culture. And while the power of those two should not be underestimated, if every major American city were to vanish tomorrow, some of the sciences would be hard hit and the bureaucracy would become decentralized, but most other things would continue on as before.
During the American Revolution holding on to the cities proved next to impossible, because of British naval power and the large concentrations of Loyalists. Even during the Civil War, most Northern cities leaned rather close to the anti-war side. Urban Democrats may lionize Lincoln now, but many of them thought of him, the way that their descendants thought of George W. Bush, as a war criminal with the brain of a monkey who was obsessed with oppressing the common man. Even some liberal Republicans thought of him that way.
But underestimating culture is dangerous. The sort of culture that we have is mostly worthless, but that doesn't make it any less effective. There is a great distance between Beethoven's Eroica and Katy Perry singing for Obama, but unlike Beethoven, few modern liberal writers and artists would have the integrity to rip up the title page on learning that their messiah had feet of muck. The Soviet Union fell in part because it lost that sense of cultural momentum, clinging to the Western Canon, while being overwhelmed by the pop trash that now rules Russia. And though it may be trash, cultural innovation creates a sense that we are moving forward. Those on the side of the newest trend seem like they have the answers to the future. Those who aren't, end up looking like Brezhnev.
Revolutions can be won without that cultural momentum, but it's harder than ever because culture carries with it that tang of prosperity, that sense that the good times are out there for those who want them. And revolutions tend to fall on the side of prosperity, on the side of an aspiring middle class looking to the future. Culture can be beaten, but it is best beaten with culture. Successful revolutions make their ideas compelling and appealing, not just in words, but in attitudes, in music, in literature and in art. France had Marat and America had the Death of Jane McCrea,
A revolution is part anger and outrage. It is that sense that you are being unfairly treated and that the life you had or could have had is slipping away from you. It is that breath of freedom that you once took and the belief that life on the other side of the wall must be better. It is a narrative, a story that rejects the authority of those in power on moral grounds and on practical ones.
Revolution works best when the authorities are weakened by a transition period, when they were once oppressive, but have been liberalizing, or where they are asserting a new level of authority that the people are not used to. It is in these transition points that revolutions are most effective because the authorities are not ready to cope with them and the people are made bold and desperate by the uncertainty.
Revolutions are not easy, until they begin rolling, and then it seems in retrospect as if they were always inevitable, the way that big things are. It is that explosion of kinetic energy born out of the potential energy of large numbers of people discovering their strength that fills the air with energy. That ionization is what most people associate with freedom, with the inevitable collapse of an old order and the rise of a new order.
At first a few people begin to push against the wall, and then more and more, their numbers growing as wall-pushing suddenly becomes the thing to do, and suddenly the sober men and women who never held with it, who put their faith in protests and petitions, join in. The wall shakes and then it falls.
This is revolution.
Filed under Culture War, Obama Marxist Tyranny
Tagged as Alexis DeToqueville, Bolsheviks, Daniel Greenfield, Fascist, French Revolution, Hitler, Hope & Change, Mao, Marxist, middle class, Obama, Occupy Wall Street, Progressives, revolution, Robspierre, Stalin, Sultan Knish
November 3, 2011 · 10:18 pm
As Populist Socialism Rises A Class War Bloodbath Looms
The "99 Percent OWS" are really the "35 Percent" but the hordes of Useful Idiots are growing
"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet' and 'Thou shalt not steal' were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free." –John Adams, 1787
I remember my Brother-In-Law's father telling us the tale of what it was like to grow up during the waning days of the Weimar Republic, and the onset of Hitler coming to power.
One of the things he noted, was that among the majority thinking of Germans during the early 1930's, was that Hitler and his Nazis were a fringe minority of malcontents that they needed not worry about. They had faith their fellow German citizens would see through his insanity and relegate him and his National Socialist Workers Party to the ash heap of relevance.
He called them brigands, rioters, trouble-makers and accusers. He said they were people from largely wealthy station or middle class means that sought a perverted revenge for the economic woes they suffered as the global depression deepened, and they chose Hitler's vision for a return to 'fairness' in Germany rather than the subtle efforts of the Communists.
As our Founders noted, revolutions happen when a tireless minority continue to set brushfires in people's minds. And while a majority of Germans rejected Hitler, the tireless minority set fires both figural, and literal.
It can be a good thing when those brushfires are rooted in a biblical and civil morality that puts the Law of God and natural law on a pinnacle to be obtained, but horrifying when those brushfires are rooted in jealousy, greed, vengeance and the desire to rule. The tireless minority setting such brushfires can easily overthrow a civil society, and in fact that was the case in Russia, China and yes – in 1930's Germany.
Hitler was written off by the majority as relevant when he lost 2 bids for the German Presidency in 1932 to Paul Von Hindenburg. An overwhelming majority of Germans, near 70% – rejected Hitler and his Nazi ideology in the first election. Sadly, Hindenburg did not receive a majority percentage so a runoff between the top 3 was held a month later – and Hitler lost almost as badly in the run-off election.
Hitler seemed finished politically. But the German people underestimated what Hitler's intentions for the German Republic actually were. Hindenburg's appointed Chancellor Franz Von Pappen was, if anything – a stooge for the Nazi's. He dissolved the Reichstag and called for new congressional elections. It was during those legislative elections that Hitler's plan to take over Germany under totalitarian rule were put into full motion.
The Nazis went to work organizing protests and rallies in the streets. Chaos was stoked and violence spread from one city to the next, until martial law had to be declared in Berlin itself. The chaos and violence had it's desired effect: The Nazi party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, and while they never gained a majority – the chaos that ensued in the Reichstag ensured that Hindenburg could not get a majority coalition to pass any legislation. With the Nazis holding positions in the cabinet, consolidating power by using the threat of violence was an easy task. Hindenburg caved to the minority Nazi populists – and appointed Hitler as Chancellor in order to appease the growing riots in the streets.
Why the history lesson?
Because while Conservatives and most Americans today disregard the hippie OWS crowds and think Obama is finished politically with his low poll numbers, history shows that similar demagogues with a desire to 'fundamentally transform' a society, often can and do succeed in overthrowing the civil society and establish a horrifying tyranny.
Socialists who are in a clear minority of a society, achieve their ends by always using street chaos and protests to invite and incite violence. That is what the Occupy Wall Street movement is all about, and history screams a clear warning when such crowds and protests are stoked by their handlers for the purpose of achieving a political transformation. We ignore these facts at our own individual peril.
I have stated on this blog since 2008, that the Marxists and Leftists who make up the Obama regime and the Ruling Class would invite, instigate and incite violence in order to establish the cause for iron-fisted rule that a majority would accept in order to 'return things to normal'.
Mark Alexander from the Patriot Post, excellently makes the point we must regard with all seriousness:
Populist Socialism on the Rise
The populist message of the Occupy Movement, the agelessly adolescent class warriors who make up Barack Hussein Obama's Red October Uprising, now has the support of some 35 percent of Americans, mostly urbanites.
The Occupiers have now infested cities from coast to coast, including Oakland, Seattle,Denver, Austin, Chicago, Atlanta, Baltimore,New York and Boston.
Their mantra is simple (by necessity): "We are the 99 Percent, and we're all victims of the 1 Percent." By any objective standard, the 99 Percenters are not the brightest bunch, and they really represent the roughly 20 percent of Americans who are irrevocably dependent upon government subsidies and pay no income tax. Thus, this 20 percent has no vested interest in the cost of government and is predisposed to vote for the redistribution of others' incomes rather than work for their own. The underlying assumption is that it's easier to confiscate wealth than create it.
This "entitled" 20 percent combines with the 10 percent of American labor who are collectivists and another 5 percent who are perpetual malcontents to thus form Barack Hussein Obama's entrenched socialist constituency of Useful Idiots.
The intellectually challenged Occupy morons have built their movement around the errant assertion that if the assets of the 1 Percent were entirely redistributed, everyone would live happily ever after. Unfortunately, what the 35 Percenters really want, "redistributive justice" as Obama calls it, would require the redistribution of income from the other 65 percent of Americans families who live on earned income, so that everyone could be equally impoverished.
Of course, there's a problem with liquidating the assets of the 1 percent (comprised of more celebs and pro athletes than Wall Street bankers), or even the top 25 percent of the so-called rich: Most of their assets are on paper, and the rest of that "wealth" is in the form of small businesses and real property that support the jobs of tens of millions of Americans who actually work for a living — and take pride in their occupations.
Thus, liquidation would result in the collapse of the entire economy, leaving everyone under the same statist tyranny as Obama's 35 Percenters — equally miserable, equally dependent upon the government, and that much closer to Obama's mandate to implement Democratic Socialism.
Fact is, socialist economies always fail. In the inimitable words of former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, "Socialist governments … always run out of other people's money. They then start to nationalize everything."
Of course, socialists never let reality intrude upon their classist fantasies of universal equality and happiness. Nineteenth-century historian Alexis de Tocqueville once observed, "Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude."
If you have any doubt about the socialist motives of the Occupy Movement, consider this proclamation from my daily American Communist Party communiqué (yes, I subscribe to certain leftist publications, so, yes, I know my enemy): "We Are the 99%! The AFL-CIO has taken another step to embrace the Occupy Movement by creating their own We Are the 99% website. Also, CPUSA Chair Sam Webb has an article on the movement at the People's World: 'Occupy: embrace the new, build the movement.'"
Next, I suggest you review the official list of Occupy supporters, including Marxists, Nationalists, Fascists and even Islamists. What a sorry lot for a supporting cast.
Given all this, it's not surprising that the Occupiers' highest-profile support emanates from Obama himself, who says, "People are frustrated and the [Occupy] protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works. … I think it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel. … The American people understand that not everybody's been following the rules. These days, a lot of folks doing the right thing are not rewarded. A lot of folks who are not doing the right thing are rewarded."
As to the Occupy Movement's momentum, Obama says their agenda "will express itself until 2012 and beyond until people feel they are getting back to old-fashioned American values. That's going to express itself politically in 2012 and beyond."
What Obama admits, is what I am warning you is taking place right before your eyes; the 'expression' of these OWS street protests will transcend to violence. And it is that violence and bloodshed that the Left wants so desperately in order to finalize the REAL change Obama seeks to implement.
Obama has a history fomenting and suggesting violence as a means to overturn elections. He himself advised his cousin Raila Odinga to incite street violence in order to overturn the Kenyan election in 2006.
The Nazis were ALWAYS a minority in Germany, until street chaos, bloodshed and political subterfuge opened the door to compromise for the sake of ending the chaos. Soon a climate a fear would allow genocide and a world war to be enacted in their names as they surrendered their society to a minority of Socialists playing a populist card.
History is knocking on OUR door, seeking a repeat in a new fashion that sadly, we no longer recognize the dangers of.
Tagged as 99%, Class War, Communist Party USA, History, Hitler, Mark Alexander, Marxists, Nazi, Obama, Occupy Wall Street, OWS, Patriot Post, Protests, Redistribution of wealth, Reichstag, Socialists, Von Hindenburg
August 6, 2011 · 10:49 pm
Template: 'America's Credit Rating Was Intentionally Sabotaged By TEA Party Republicans"
"It is untrue that I, or anyone else in Germany wanted the war in 1939 … It was desired and instigated solely by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests….Above all, I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, international Jewry." – Adolph Hitler, Last Will and Testimony, April 29, 1945
The lie and the perfection of using the lie to achieve totalitarian ends, is most popularly attributed to Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister who said "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". This is the art of using demonization to paint a political enemy in the light of extremism that makes it easier for the Ruling Class to exterminate it's opposition.
The efforts are now ratcheting up by the Obama regime and it's supporters in the media ahead of the official 2012 Presidential Campaign to declare Conservative TEA party Americans as "Extremists & Terrorists" in the past few weeks. As documented here on this blog, we see that their shame knows no bounds. Today – the template for the Obama Propaganda Media is: Blame TEA Party Republicans for the Standard & Poor's credit rating downgrade that occurred this past Friday evening. As the misery for what this regime has done to the American economy and it's people begins to really hurt – the template is to blame Obama's political opposition for what he, and his party have done to the country.
In the face of warnings over a SECOND credit rating downgrade, from the White House Talking points reporting Bureau – radical Leftists in the media are furiously going to work to pin the credit downgrade on the TEA party and Conservative Republicans.
Tell a lie big enough and often enough – they hope this too – along with declaring Conservatives "terrorists" will be accepted as the truth.
Newsbusters calls this absurdity for what it is.
'America's Credit Rating Was Intentionally Sabotaged By Congressional Republicans'
Snip:
Yahoo Finance economics editor Daniel Gross wrote Friday evening:
"In downgrading the U.S.'s credit rating, S&P points out what has long been obvious: Washington's inability to come to an agreement on how to close the large fiscal gaps that have emerged since the recession began is troubling. Recent events have sapped the agency's confidence that the government can and will do what is necessary to align revenues with spending commitments. And it's difficult to escape the conclusion that America's credit rating was intentionally sabotaged by Congressional Republicans."
…Since the Democrats took over Congress in 2007, spending has increased by $1.1 trillion or 41 percent.
More commentary at link.
UPDATE 8-7 AM: I hate being a "prophet" but as I predicted just 8 hours earlier in this blog – this is now the WHITE HOUSE TEMPLATE: Blame the TEA Party for the credit downgrade.
White House adviser David Axelrod on CBS' Face The Nation – pinned responsibility for the U.S. economic downgrade on the Tea Party movement, arguing that the group's political "brinksmanship" during debt ceiling negotiations "brought us to the brink of a default" — and that, subsequently, "this is essentially a Tea Party downgrade."
This is a White House directed effort now – from the media to advisors for Obama (Don't think for a second Axelrod is not heading Obama's reelection efforts from Chicago) – the template is set: blame the TEA Party for everything, and paint them to be terrorists, extremists, credit defaulters, and a danger to the state.
Here's Axelrod's appearance and exchange with Bob Schieffer this morning:
UPDATE 8-8 AM – NOW DNC CHAIR Wasserman-Schultz blames Tea Party 'tyrants' for US credit rating downgrade
"Wasserman Schultz noted in a tweet Monday that she agreed with Kerry, calling the Tea Party "tyrants" who blocked a more comprehensive bargain on the debt ceiling."
Now the TEA Party are 'tyrants" along with the claim we are 'terrorists'.
Wonder how long it takes before the Ruling Class mandates that the TEA Party Conservatives wear yellow stars?
Filed under Economy, Obama Marxist Tyranny
Tagged as Blame The TEA Party, CBS Face The Nation, Credit downgrade, David Axelrod, Demonization, DNC Chair, Hitler, Marxists, Moody's, Republicans, S&P, Sabotage, Second Downgrade, Tea Party, Wasserman-Schultz, Yahoo
This Morning In The Bunker: Der Fuhrer Learns Scott Brown Wins "Ted Kennedy's" Seat
Tagged as Health Care, Hitler, Obama, Scott Brown
ObamaNation – A 100-Day Retrospective of Imposing Marxism
I will leave it to these fine folks to encapsulate for us – what has transpired in the last 100 days of the Obama Regime.
100 DAYS…in Summary
By Keep Your Powder Dry
What WE are, and What Obama has done:
On the road to Obamanism, he has: Nationalized the Banks and Maintains Control
and Nationalized General Motors.
Pushing through socialized heath care because it works so well in Mexico, Canada, Europe, and Massachusetts, and choosing what procedures you can have done.
He employs a civilian army to promote his legislations, just like Hitler did, and Mao, Chavez, and Castro.
Prohibit 'Volunteers' from practicing religion, charge them to volunteer, and punish the charitable.
Controls the press through secret meetings.
Ignores the Real cause of the financial meltdown, continuing to blame Bush, While he allows the real culprits to continue.
Ignores the facts about 'global warming'; introduces a new tax to 'offset' global warming, and creating a new class of welfare recipients with the money.
Continue to pump money into the unproductive sector of the economy, while strangling the innovators, and the investors.
Thinks he can spend his way out of this just like the Japanese did in the 90's.
Appoint intellectual infants to key posts, such as a DHS Secretary that doesn't know the laws she has sworn to uphold, appoint a Taliban head to the Justice Department, nominates a porn lawyer, a perpetuator or racism asAttorney General, a tax cheat as Treasury Secretary.
Bows to the Saudi King, and befriends Chavez.
Supports a back door approach to 'banning' guns.
And there will be a return of the wonderful practice of eugenics, and with that this will come even faster.
And what is really scary is that someone wants him in the oval office forever.
But there is more analysis:
Obamalinsky's First 100 Days
The President's Radical Playbook
The evidence to date suggests that President Obama is not simply formulating his own goals, but has rooted it in the tactical prescriptions of leftist godfather Saul Alinsky.
Alinsky: "… taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people," — according to Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals, by Saul Alinsky, 1971, Random House
Is Mr. Obama a radical? Here are some of his stated objectives:
• He wants to dramatically expand government control over our health care system.
• He wants to enact a broad set of environmental controls and environmental taxes on the economy, with little apparent concern for the effect on business profitability and thus sustainability.
• He wants to abolish the right to a secret ballot in union organizing.
• He wants to subordinate American sovereignty to the United Nations by committing us to treaties and agreements on a wide variety of issues.
• He appears to be working to undermine popular support for the Second Amendment by repeating false statistics about gun violence. His few positive comments about ownership of firearms typically related to hunting and target-shooting, neither of which was the basis for the Second Amendment.
• He is appointing radical advocates of abortion to positions within his administration, including advocates of taxpayer-funded abortion and partial-birth abortion, and he moved within days of his inauguration to send taxpayer money to international organizations that perform abortions.
• He is moving to cut the budget of the Defense Department specifically to limit research into future combat systems that could more effectively protect America at a lower cost.
Note that all of these policy items were less urgent than the "stimulus" bill. The stimulus was an ingenious way to seize the opportunity presented by the recession. In fact, the purpose of the stimulus itself would have made Alinsky proud:
• Much of the stimulus money went toward "feeding and watering" of radical constituency groups such as ACORN and Planned Parenthood, as well as unions and government bureaucrats.
• Much of the stimulus money is in the form of "down payments" on questionable energy programs desired by liberal environmentalists or transportation programs designed to make it harder for individuals to own cars and easier for the government to force them into mass transit systems.
• Much of the stimulus money relies on the discredited notion that simply pushing money through the system — taking $10 out of one pocket and putting it into another — creates economic growth. In fact, it is entrepreneurship that creates growth, because it creates value.
• Some of the stimulus spending is designed with time bombs in the form of expansions of government health care initiatives that expire in a few years, "forcing" Congress to continue them. This was done on the front end to hold the official cost of the stimulus under a trillion dollars.
Mr. Obama pursues what is unquestionably the most radical agenda of an American President in decades, but he does it with a smile, and gentle words about the American dream and cutting taxes. As Alinsky said in Rules for Radicals, raving about "white racist[s]" and "fascist pig[s]" (or bombing the Pentagon) may feel good to a leftist organizer, but the responsible organizer blends into the community and avoids foolish risks that could get him shunned by regular members of the community.
Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny, Politics
Tagged as Banking crisis, DHS, Economy, Gun Ban, Hitler, Hugo Chavez, Leftists, Marxism, Obama, Socialism, Taxes
America's Road To Fascism
Mr. John Wallace posted this as a reply to the entry on Obama's Fascist Takeover and I decided it needed it's own entry.
To answer his question – the answer is already YES. We are there, and now it just expands and tightens it's control over us.
But read his entry to understand how we got here and what history teaches us what will happen next.
IS AMERICA ON THE ROAD TO FASCISM?
By John Wallace
Mr. G. Richard Wagoner, the chairman and chief executive officer of General Motors, was recently forced to resign his position because of pressure from the Obama administration. He was told that if he didn't leave, the Obama administration would not give General Motors any more federal bailout money. President Obama also told General Motors and the Chrysler Corporation that if they wanted more federal bailout money, they would have to shrink and refocus their businesses according to his (the federal government's) wishes.
In our country's history, there have been some limited instances of the federal government exercising some sort of control over private industry, but that was during wartime. The current assault on American capitalism by the Obama administration is unprecedented in both its scope and speed and should raise the red flag of alarm for all freedom-loving Americans.
World history has shown us that the implementation of strict government controls over private industries has been one of the first steps in the introduction of various forms of Fascism to formerly free countries. The practice of a government taking control of private industries was refined by Benito Mussolini in Italy in the 1920's and it is called 'corporatism.'
According to Wikipedia, political scientists use the term 'corporatism' to describe "a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly." Mussolini described it more simply when he said, "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
Some corporatist-style regimes of the 20th century included those of Benito Mussolini of Italy (1922-1945), Adolph Hitler of Germany (1933 to 1945); Francisco Franco of Spain (1936 to 1973); Juan Peron of Argentina (1943 to 1955) and even our own President Franklin Roosevelt (1933 to 1945) during the 'New Deal.' The Mussolini, Hitler, Franco and Peron regimes were brutal, totalitarian, Fascist dictatorships, but not all the regimes that had a corporatist foundation were fascist. The Roosevelt administration, despite its many faults, could not be described as fascist, but the 'New Deal' program was definitely corporatist.
Corporatism boils down to this: The government tells industry (and eventually labor unions) what to do and that they must do it for the supposed good of the country, or else their individual leaders will pay a price. Does this sound similar to what is happening to the auto industry today?
Where in the U.S. Constitution does it authorize the President of the United States to fire the head of a major private corporation just because he disagrees with his management policies? Where in the U.S. Constitution does it authorize the President of the United States to decide what kind of cars a private company will build? or what kind of car I will drive? President Barack 'Mussolini' Obama is taking this country down a very dangerous road and a road that America has never taken before.
Confucius said "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." Are the 'corporatist' policies of President Obama and his administration just the first steps of many in a move towards a government takeover of our major industries? Are these policies much different than those that Mussolini and Hitler initiated in the early stages of their rise to power?
With the Politburo in our expanding federal government now having the power to hire and fire the leaders of major private corporations and to tell the auto makers what cars they can produce, will they soon be telling Americans what kind of cars they can drive; how much money they can earn; where they can go to school, what sodas they can drink, what foods they can't eat, where they can travel, what national ID card they must carry at all times and it will impose any number of other restrictions on them. Look at California, where the state legislature is currently considering banning black cars by 2012, for some bogus global warming reason.
Thomas Jefferson said: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." Americans must remember that we cannot fully enjoy our freedoms and liberties in America unless we keep our government limited. As our government grows and becomes more intrusive, as it is today, it is our freedoms and liberties that are becoming limited.
Welcome to the United Socialist States of America!
If we continue on President Obama's road to CHANGE (socialism), the American people will no longer be free. The question is: "Will we learn to accept our captivity at the hands of our new masters or will we be willing to do something about it?"
http://www.freedommovementusa.com/
Tagged as GM, Hitler, Marxism, Mussolini, Obama, Richard Wagoner
How An Economic Depression Makes A Hitler
History repeats itself, because we fail to remember the lessons it teaches. We think we can avoid the same mistakes of the past. But that is not possible when we are ignorant of history, or had it so thoroughly perverted and revised that we have no comprehension that events taking place today – took place a little over 70 years ago, and the consequences cost millions upon millions of lives and plunged the entire world into conflict.
History is again repeating – and we have no clue how late in the game it really is for this nation…and the world.
How the Great Depression Brought Adolph Hitler to Power
Oh goody! Looks like we're having another Depression — maybe just a little one, but who knows how long we can stretch it out, if we give it a good try?
So now we can play FDR and The Glorious New Deal.
If that sounds insane to you, well, it's what both Charles Krauthammer and David Broder — the Burt and Ernie of the Washington Post — have now concluded about the Obama White House.
The Great Depression certainly empowered FDR to make big changes in America over his four terms. In spite of all the hoo-hah the country didn't get out of the long, long slump until 1940 or so, with the huge mobilization of men and industrial resources for World War II. But FDR did get to play to his heart's content, through the NRA, the WPA, the AAA, the CCC, the TVA, the NLRB, the FDIC and the SEC. By comparison all we've got is a measly TARP. So far.
Trouble is, the Great Depression also brought Adolf Hitler to power. (Darn, I knew there had to be a downside somewhere.)
For those who have forgotten history or never bothered to learn it, here's is the sixty-second version.
1. Adolf Hitler started out as just another Bohemian intellectual, a sort of fire-breathing hippie, hanging around the coffee houses of Vienna after the big defeat of World War I. Just like Lenin, Mussolini and all the other psychopaths who rose to power around the same time. (Look it up, kids). His ilk can still be found in all the big city cafes of Europe, along with Berkeley, California, Madison, Wisconsin, and other college towns. They all profess peace. But in the right conditions, they are all happy to set off sociological or real dynamite. (Viz., Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn; the Rev. J. Wright and all the rest.)
Today the cafe intellectuals are more likely to be Islamic fascists, but what's the big diff? They all follow Hitler's big maxim, "Alles muss anders sein!" ("everything must change") or, in Obamalingo, "Change you can believe in." They all hate whatever is; it doesn't matter where they want to go.
They want a perfect world, every single one of them. Therefore they all hate freedom, electoral democracy, and the blood-sucking capitalists. They all demand justice and equality. And millions of suckers always fall for it. Some things never change; even the words don't change, much less the marching music.
2. When Hitler got out of the Kaiserliche Wehrmacht with burned-out lungs from mustard gas, Germany was broke. The Reich had started the war as the wealthiest, most industrialized, most highly-educated, and perhaps even the most arrogant nation in Europe. (Although that's a tough one to judge, there being so much competition in the arrogance sweepstakes in Europe.) Anyway, if you remember the goose-stepping soldiers with the funny helmets with the little spikes on top, and all the cheering people standing on the sidewalks going Hoch! Hoch!, that's the one.
3. As punishment for the war, the Versailles Treaty required the Germans to pay their victims, to handicap their military and heavy industries, and to be nice to their neighbors. They did pay some money for a while, but then they just lied about all those other things. None of the victorious nations dared to actually find out if the Germans were re-arming or not. Besides, the Germans and Austrians felt threatened by the new and militant Soviet Union, accidentally created when the old Reich helped Lenin to overthrow the Czar of Russia. (Lenin was another cafe intellectual who turned into a ruthless mass-murdering tyrant, except that he hung around Zurich rather than Vienna.)
4. After WWI the Weimar Republic brought parliamentary democracy of a kind to Germany. But it also saw a wave of corruption, degradation of middle class values, attacks on religion, promiscuity, and glorification of "alternative lifestyles" — which all agreed on their hatred of thebourgeoisie (who happened to be their parents) — along with lots of artistic expressions of the same Up Yours! attitude that has made government-funded artists so popular in our day.
(A lot of our avant garde is just the derriere garde of Europe's Weimar period. Nothing new there at all.)
5. Having the Soviets practically next door was a big help to the German Communists — who still called themselves Communists rather than Black Liberation Theologians, as ours do today. But just like Rev. J-Wright, they all hated middleclassness, or as they called it, the bourgeoisie. (That was their parents, remember?) So did Mussolini and Hitler, who also rose to power as radical world-changers in the turmoil of the day. They were also big ecofreaks — because Mother Nature was good, you see. They practiced a fair amount of nudity and gayety, celebrated sex and violence, got drunk and carried on riots, and whipped up giant hatreds against scapegoats — the French, other racially inferior peoples, and of course … . Yes.
They also swore to eliminate the handicapped, the retarded, and any organized religion. Both the Communists and the Nazis really really hated Christianity. Not just Judaism and the Jews. They were equal-opportunity haters, without fear or favor.
6. The whole Ship of Fools seemed to go sailing along until the economy went kaput. But why did it? You can point to hyperinflation, long and deep declines in industry and agriculture, unemployment, and shaky currencies. Europe had decades of troubles before the United States caught the bug. Stock markets dwindled, trade barriers went up, and on October 29, 1929, far away in New York City, Wall Street went into a tailspin. It was followed by the other big stock markets. People lost their jobs and their savings. No capital, no productivity, just despair.
7. Europe decided that democracy wasn't its thing after all, and looked for nice trustworthy generals to take over the hopelessly ineffective parliamentary governments — like in Germany. But the President of Germany, General Paul von Hindenburg, was elderly and out of his depth, and after a while was forced to ask that nice Herr Hitler to organize a new government. Hitler's National Socialist Workers Party had never gotten a majority, but the time was ripe, and the Nazis never cared much for rules. So they took power.
In the end United States kind of lucked out, compared to Europe — but don't try to tell that to anybody who managed to live through it. It's not just our habit of democratic governance that brought us out of it without tyranny and the devastation of Europe and Asia. FDR had a certain amount of demagogue blood in him.
Or as he proclaimed in accepting the Democratic Party nomination,
"Throughout the nation men and women … look to us here for guidance andfor more equitable opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth… I pledge you, I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people… This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms." (Italics added.)
A better "opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth? … A call to arms?" Has the Obama crowd seen this speech? FDR naturally attacked greed and wealth, coming from a family of old wealth and long-forgotten greed himself. Greed is in the eye of the accuser.
What's the bottom line? Well, certain politicians thrive in times of trouble; and if they don't see enough trouble, they're always happy to add some more.
They always practice the same kind of demagogy. They always promise radical change. And they often bring the opposite. Historians have long pointed to the breakdown of Europe's middle class as the single biggest earthquake, the one that shook all the other pillars of society until it crumbled.
In the 21st century, you can kill the middle class by teaching kids to despise their parents and their traditions; you can tax them into poverty; you can whip up nationalistic fervor against the Frogs or the Boches; you can inflate the currency so that everybody is equally miserable; you can teach the poor, the black, the women, the young, to attack the middle class values that brought prosperity over generations of toil; you can torpedo the currency and destroy retirement plans; you can turn the Organs of Propaganda — pahdon me, the "news media" — to assault middle class values; you can unify the very wealthy with the very poor to try to squeeze and whack the middle; you can take historic wrongs like black slavery or Christopher Columbus to turn people against each other; you can easily turn bubbleheaded movie makers and starlets against George W. Bush; you can break the banks and turn the desperate against the malefactors of great wealth; or you can unify white liberals with poor blacks and militant feminists against all the Evil White Guys…
But it's all the same, you see. Nothing ever changes except the color of the flags and the uniforms. And it's always the militant idealists, the obsessional clerks and scribblers, who seize the moment to raise yet another Hero of Change and Hope to the peak of power. Because, you see, Adolf Hitler was not the exception. In the century of Mao Zedong and Pol Pot, of Lenin and Stalin, of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, of Robert Mugabe and Saddam Hussein, of Ahmadinejad and Khomeini, of genocidal little tyrants in the Sudan and Rwanda, Hitler was by no means the exception.
He was just brought down faster than the others. Heigh-ho. Interesting times.
See what a little history can teach you?
Filed under History, Obama Marxist Tyranny, Politics
Tagged as Communists, Hitler, Jeremiah Wright, Lenin, National Socialists, Obama, Stalin, Weimar Germany, William Ayers