Steps to totalitarianism

Steps to Totalitarianism

Liberalism

It starts out with things like save the whales, save the dolphins, save the frogs, save the tigers, save the chimps, save the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus. All are worthy (and real. Google search “save the…”) causes as are ecological and humanitarian causes.

Liberalism progresses into socialism by briefly passing through the Progressive lens. Progressivism takes liberalism into action for change based on the emotion of liberalism. The progressives are a little more rigid and preach soft collectivism. Progressive is the stage where all of the desensitizing takes place. Desensitized to what? Socialist ideas. The movement is growing in the shadows. Still connected to liberals who want to live and let live in peace, the progressives have so damaged the other side that it’s a knee-jerk reaction to vote Democrat - never realizing what is happening inside the Democrat party. So the liberals get dragged into voting for Progressives

While the Progressives have their eye further down the field.

Socialism

After Progressives have desensitized people to the idea of collectivism, it begins to show a little more ankle. The language changes slightly, and by using Western style words like Democracy, and equity, and by adding the word justice as a suffix to their popular causes, the meaning and direction of the movement changes course. Suddenly things like social justice, or economic justice becomes accepted by people who are still sleeping. Now we have social justice, economic justice, water justice, food justice, housing justice, environmental justice, ecological justice, carbon justice, really, it’s endless.

So what is there about democracy that isn’t fair? Isn’t it the will of the people? Majority rule? I’ll deal with that very shortly. What is there about “justice” that anyone can argue with? In this case the only way the word justice can fit is from the point of view of someone who has made a series of bad choices in their life and now doesn’t want to take responsibility. Mostly, I’m referring to economic or social justice. All the others have jumped onto the phrase to appeal to other liberals who know-what-they’re-talking-about.

In the long run, giving people free stuff isn’t helping them at all, is it? It is simply creating dependence. This is what is done with pets, making them dependent. When this is done with people, it ensures their loyalty when the vote comes around.

So, when the vote comes around, what do candidates say to procure that vote? They will promise to continue to pay benefits for people who, at this point it can easily be said, vote for a living. Now we have the richest poor people on the planet. How did that happen? It happened because the participation in this socialism is not voluntary by all. Participation is enforced through the progressive income tax. The higher the income, the higher the percentage of tax you pay. Why? Because it’s fair. Patriotic even.

It’s easier to control a population where large numbers of the people are dependent on government. Once the population is under government control, you have full on…..

Communism

Now that the population is controlled, industry gets absorbed into government.

Maxine Waters, D California during hearings of oil companies.

Waters told the president of a major oil company to “guess what this liberal would be all about? This liberal would be all about socializing -- uh, uh, would be about basically taking over and the government running all of your companies.” ^[i]

So that’s the oil companies. What about the rest of them? What do you think all the bailouts were for? Ya got ‘chur Auto bailouts - two of the three major manufacturers, ya got ‘chur insurance companies - AIG, ya got ‘chur Freddie mac and Fanny May - government mortgage holders. Now the population is controlled through confiscatory taxes and regulations and many of the big industries are owned by the government, what’s next? All they really have to do is wait. Pretty soon, the people riding in the cart outnumber the people pulling the cart. Achievement is discouraged, success is disparaged, and the pullers of the cart get dispirited and give up. Soon everyone is in the cart, and all that’s left to do is disseminate resources. Everyone gets equal portions of everything. This can be read in the preamble to their Communist Constitution.

So let’s review:

When you take apart the means used to promote the goals of communism, you first find liberalism which is an emotional ideology. The next degree is progressivism, which takes liberalism into action for change based on the emotion of liberalism. The next step is socialism. Socialism would work just fine on a voluntary basis. The problem is human beings are individuals! Socialism is collectivism, and lazy humans will follow the path of least resistance, which means they will try to get away with less work. It also means less of a full life. Less juice. Fewer fulfillments. And this is accomplished by using logical words like democracy, and democratic this or that. The final step (or final solution) is Communism. State run everything. State distributed everything. Everyone is totally one hundred percent dependent on the state. Totalitarianism.

---

^[i]  http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2008/may/maxine-waters-wants-socialize-oil-companies

Cloward and Piven

Cloward and Piven

At his point, I’d like to inject the Cloward-Piven strategy again, that has undulated like a creepy dark shadow through the entire Obama administration and Democrat party alike. I don’t think that Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid know what this is, I mean if you asked them on the street, other than a vague fuzzy image in their head that it’s something good that has to do with redistribution, if that. Now that’s not to say that if they both had a crystal clear understanding of the strategy, that they wouldn’t fully support it and push more to accomplish it.

Obama knows… I know he knows.

The overview of the strategy is to overwhelm the system until it breaks down. Then a new system (transform America) with the stated goal to help eliminate poverty with a guaranteed annual income for all can be installed. The inevitable result would be a stifling of enterprise and creativity. Holding people back by punishing success and wealth through massive regulation and red tape. Why shouldn’t someone try to do the best that they can? Work to the best of their ability? There’s no such thing as equality of abilities. Again, I ask: why shouldn’t a person work to the best of their ability to provide as best they can for their families? Holding people back by punishing success is not the answer. More money will be harvested through more people working than by stealing more from only the very wealthy. Think about it. Taxes will be raised so millionaires and billionaires would pay more because they can afford it. We have covered that logic. But then the bar is set at 200K or 250K for two income households. These are now millionaires and billionaires. How does that track? The poor don’t pay much if any in taxes and the extremely wealthy will barely notice the difference. But now you make 200K or 250K per year, you have a family, and a mortgage based on your current income, you notice it. Do you think those shop owners, salons, or the teacher-and-the-firefighter couple won’t notice?? Tax hikes on the rich are really intended to destroy the middle class. Money is taken from mostly middle class families and given to the poor and the rich. The rich, in this case being the government, will then distribute tax dollars in the form of pork projects to wealthy donors as a reward for helping them to be elected. Get it?

Chapter 2 socialism

How many people would want to live in a socialist society? Well guess what? You kinda are. And they're not done. Every time Obama refers to the work his party has done, he always makes a point to say that there’s a long way to go. Or he talks about how much work remains. What is he talking about? It’s vague on purpose. You fill in the blank. In other words, whatever you think the government should be responsible for, then that’s exactly what they have left to do. If you were presented with what we now have (as the end game) as an agenda, you wouldn't go for it. They know that. That's why Obama didn't run on the socialist party ticket.
There is one.
He could have.
Obama knows that wouldn't get him elected. He also knows that (and the people around him do too) people will reject things changed by revolution or rapid change. That is why we are the frog that has been put into cold water and cooked. Seriously, who has the time to keep up with all this stuff when there's work and family and life in general? Oh sure, once in a while an issue comes up that gets you hot and you pay attention, maybe even make a call to the congress, but it soon fades. I'm glad there are people who do punditry for a living.

This is also the reason behind writing the book.

Stay Mad and VOTE!

P.S.

Regarding the "frog" analogy, I've noticed a serious acceleration and increasing boldness regarding the agenda as if Obama-as-president is the "checkmate" move....I'm not dead yet!

Republic V Democracy

Code Words

Just remember, code words for socialism: Economic justice, social justice, (the newest one is food or nutritional justice), water justice, environmental justice, democracy, democratic citizenship, open society, global citizenship, global warming, global cooling. Most code phrases have the word justice, global, or equality, and now to disguise it even further, the word democracy. Egalitarian society or classless society sounds so sophisticated but it just means equal outcomes for all, no matter the degree of input. Socialism.

What they don’t get is that right now in America, if someone wants to work a little bit harder than the next person, then they can earn a little more than the next person. Socialism holds that back by removing the financial incentives for entrepreneurship, ingenuity, inventiveness, cleverness, smarts, good ideas, on and on. That’s not even getting into the rest of the liberties forfeited in the process.
A republic is a more disciplined system than a democracy. That’s why democracy or democratic is now used as a codeword for collectivism. (Socialism or Communism)
A Republic:
Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.A Democracy:
Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, the Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.A Republic is a few layers removed from the raw emotion of an electorate. In other words, in the Republic, with democratically elected representatives, it will take time and offers cooling layers to issues that are highly emotional.
There are popular speakers who can whip large numbers of people into a highly emotional state. If they all voted to take a vote immediately on an issue, then all voted emotionally, you have what is known as a lynch mob.