ONE OF MY CORE BELIEFS AS A NEW DEAL DEMOCRAT is that an important role of government is to act as a counterbalance to the power of big business. History provides ample evidence that, absent some mechanism to prevent it, corporate enterprises will create a civilization divided between Capital, which will get ever-richer, and Labor, which will toil for starvation wages and be treated as replaceable cogs in the machinery of wealth-creation.
It is a sign of how far right the economic ideology of the United States has drifted that the above paragraph — which until recently was treated as the sensible, middle-of-the-road liberal view that it is — is now routinely described by Republicans and their supporters as “socialism,” which it isn’t.
Speaking of socialism, I notice that word gets thrown around a lot, especially by the present-day American political right, and there is usually not much attempt to define the word itself. So my question is, what are the defining features of socialism? Is it one ideology, or are there many disparate ideologies calling themselves “socialists” even though they might be anywhere from uncomfortable with, to sworn mortal enemies of, each other?
Since I have never been able to get an ideological opponent to actually define “socialism” with any sort of clarity, let me take a guess as to its meaning for the American right. Their definition usually alludes to something resembling the Brezhnev-era Soviet system: The government controls all the means of production, all decisions in the economy come out of a gigantic, centralized government bureaucracy, private property is outlawed, and so on.
In other words, a system that bears virtually no meaningful resemblance to the present-day U.S.
The rejoinder is usually that the kind of proposals I make are a “step toward” socialism, and I guess one can come up with a lawyerly, Jesuitical sense in which this is “true,” but it is still a strange claim.
Let me put it this way: Some governmental restraint of the power of corporations, modest wealth redistribution and a moderately progressive income tax are “steps toward” socialism in the sense that having a police department is a “step toward” the creation of a Gestapo.
In traditional rules of logic going back to Aristotle and Socrates, this is described as the Fallacy of the Excluded Middle, or the False Dilemma. The extremes are: 1. The government doing absolutely nothing (see the desolate philosophy and wooden writing of Ayn Rand); and 2. The government doing absolutely everything (see the previously mentioned 1970s-era Soviet Union). The great, big, wide, diverse land between these two extremes has lots and lots and lots of stuff in it that is not “socialism.”
My political hero, FDR, was accused in his day of being a socialist, and called a “traitor to his class” (the elites were more honest about their elitism in those days). But he came not to destroy capitalism, but to save it.
Capitalism has certain built-in, self-destructive structural problems. The biggest problem is the concentration of wealth at the top, which eventually makes economic growth impossible — stagnant wages mean capitalists’ customers don’t have the money to keep the economy growing — and leads to crisis. FDR understood this. His speech to the 1936 Democratic convention can be seen as the animating idea of the New Dealers:
“An old English judge once said: ‘Necessitous men are not free men.’ Liberty requires opportunity to make a living — a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.
“For too many of us, the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor — other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.
“Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government. The collapse of 1929 showed up the despotism for what it was. The election of 1932 was the people’s mandate to end it. Under that mandate it is being ended.
“The royalists of the economic order have conceded that political freedom was the business of the government, but they have maintained that economic slavery was nobody’s business. They granted that the government could protect the citizen in his right to vote, but they denied that the government could do anything to protect the citizen in his right to work and his right to live.
“Today we stand committed to the proposition that freedom is no half-and-half affair. If the average citizen is guaranteed equal opportunity in the polling place, he must have equal opportunity in the market place.
“These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power. In vain they seek to hide behind the flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjection; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the overprivileged alike.”
I had some hope that the current president would follow in the footsteps of FDR, since the situation he inherited from his predecessor was a less-severe copy of the Great Depression, with the same causes — wealth concentrated at the top combined with economic growth that was unsustainable because it was financed by increasing consumer debt rather than rising wages — but with more remedies already in place, thanks to FDR: unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other public assistance, so that the current episode is nowhere near as bad as the Great Depression.
Obama, though, has turned out to be almost as much a servant of the oligarchs as any economic royalist in the other party. In his economic policies, he’s a more-fiscally-responsible Ronald Reagan.
Matt Talbot is a writer and poet, as well as an old Benicia hand. He works for a tech start-up in San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
Matt, I think you hit the nail on the head: “an important role of government is to act as a counterbalance to the power of big business.” Currently, “big business” is giving our elected officials about ONE BILLION DOLLARS a year with the promise that the “elected officials” will do whatever they can to ensure HUGE profits for “big business”. Big Business gets bigger and the average American gets smaller. One answer is to outlaw lobbyists in Washington! Don’t allow big business to give ANY MONEY whatsoever to elected officals. When that happens, maybe we’ll have a government worth fighting for! Until then, we don’t have any kind of democracy! We have a PLUTOCRACY — a government of the rich, run by the rich, for the rich!
Correct – the corruption of our political process by money is a huge problem.
I’ll probably address the issues you raise in a future column, but for now I’ll just say that Citizens United may well have been a death blow to those of us who wish to counter the outsized influence money has had in our elections.
What about Unions Matt. Do they count or is it OK because they vote Democratic. Your evaluation is Out of balance Matt.
I’m for public financing of campaigns.
From the above article:
” I had some hope that the current president would follow in the footsteps of FDR…” “Obama, though has turned out to be almost as much a servant of the oligarchs as any other economic royalist in the other party…”
“Beyond the bitter bickering and bull-sh-t.”
More on PLUTOCRACY for the community to consider…
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/04/01/plutocracy-in-america/
I do believe it has always been that way. Very successful at that.
Matt, you hate capitalism, that is clear. What about “Free Enterprise”?
Is that as evil?
It might be evil, if it wasn’t a figment of someone’s overactive imagination. We are so far from Adam Smith it’s ridiculous to even use that term.
I have to disagree. The role of government isn’t to counter-balance “big business.” If that was true, big business would counter government; that’s not the case. Little if anything counters “big goverment.” Instead, big business and big government are mutually beneficial to the other’s interests. Which, in a macro sense isn’t a bad thing…but let’s not point fingers at the right when neither side is correct.
I voted for Obama twice (look at the opposition), but I have to agree that he has not moved against the robber barons, in spite of the 2008 crisis being an open invitation and wide open opportunity. That’s why this “socialism” business is such nonsense. I get in arguments with some lefties who call tea party types “fascists,” it’s the same thing. Even having authoritarian tendencies doesn’t make you a fascist; being in favor of redistribution or progressive taxation (however mildly) does not make you a socialist. Words should be used for what they mean, and not twisted hideously out of shape.
Larry – agreed. As I said to jfernst upthread, I think that corruption of the process by money is the basic problem here. Campaigns that cost a billion dollars per presidential candidate mean that He Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules.
Well, our current Supreme Court is wedded to the idea that campaign spending, no matter how much it subverts the process, is “free speech,” so short of a constitutional amendment, I don’t see a way out.
Well, it’s worth mentioning that another liberal justice would also get that mission accomplished.
So now you want to stack SCOTUS with Liberals. Remember your beloved FDR tried that once also. Did not work. So as you see Ragman Matt Talbot is all about Liberal politics.
What I meant, Bob, was that I hope that Obama or another Democrat nominates a liberal to the bench, just like you (presumably) hope that a conservative president might nominate a conservative to the bench when they are president.
And yes, I’m a liberal.
I hope that Obama or another Democrat nominates a liberal to the bench, just like you (presumably) hope that a conservative president might nominate a conservative to the bench
I cannot speak for Bob, but I for one would rather see a nominee (from either side) who will honestly interpret the law and not advance an agenda. Roberts failed in that regards on the ObamaCare decision and Lord knows that Liberals have long recognized the Courts as being their best strategy to impose their agenda on an unwilling public.
DDL – the kinds of things New Dealers like me propose to do tend to be quite popular with the public – just try to propose ending Social Security, Unemployment Insurance or Medicare if you doubt this.
The why do they lie about their agenda when running for office?
See what a waste of time this is, Matt? Then when you try to pin him down on specifics, like with Lisa Jackson last week, he descends into ad hominem nonsense. His ideological blinders are riveted to his numb skull.
Just who is doing that. No Conservative would ever think of that. S/S is fully funded for the next twenty years. It is not and should not be a budgeted item. It needs adjustments to continue and they will be done by Conservatives. No s/s person will be hurt. Medicare is an entitlement and needs further funding. Not the provider cuts that President Obama is doing. The single biggest budget item going forward will be the combination of Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare. It is not funded properly and will need adjustments. That also will be done by Conservatives. Again no one will be hurt by proper funding. Unemployment and food stamps are way out of line at present. Employment will solve that issue. Food stamp eligibility is not going to go down in fact the President wants to up it to cover more of his voter base. Both of these issues will be solved by Conservatives. Again no one will be hurt. They will now have a job and the need will drop dramatically. All done by the Conservatives. The Liberal answer is lead them to the feed bag and let them go at it. Why work. They are going to get a very rude awakening in 2014 and 2016.
“They are going to get a very rude awakening in 2014 and 2016.” I hope, given your track record, that is your first venture into prognosticating the next two elections. Because that bodes very well for liberals.
Matt ask Obama that question.
I don’t think you can count on the government to balance things out with big business but labor can unionise. Working men and women in private industry need to band together and strike if necessary to get their wages up and improve their standard of living. It will increase the middle class and they will spend more money and improve the economy.
RKJ that will all be done by the Conservatives. More and more manufacturing is now on the move in America. All done by energy and tech. Less workers per plant and much lower energy costs result in many more factory’s and thus more employment. It is happening right now. Liberals do not understand that. They can try to stop it and keep their base unemployed but it is not working. Big surprise for the Liberals in 2014and 2016.
Real A stated:See what a waste of time this is, Matt?…. Lisa Jackson
I posted three links one each to articles from The Washington Times, Forbes Magazine and New American, which I stated I had done so and that they were “awaiting moderation”. For some reason if I try and post more than one link, I always get that message.
You and Matt then accuse me of not responding, yet Matt was too lazy to confirm that Lisa Jackson resigned because she was caught circumventing the law.
Liberal Progs like you and Matt will tolerate anything, as long as it moves the Agenda along, such as:
• Black thugs with Billy clubs at polling stations
• Acorn being given Millions of dollars by democrats to register thousands of phony voters
• Firing an Inspector general for getting to close to an Obama supporter (Mayor of Sacramento)
• An AG held in contempt of Congress
• Gun running to Mexico resulting in the death of a Border Agent and hundreds of Mexicans.
• Obama care being passed w/o being read based on the blatant lie that it was “not a Tax”
• Gitmo to be closed, it wasn’t
• Hillary and others lying about Benghazi. One of your prog cohorts even stated on a thread here that it was only a “few who were killed”. They were killed while Obama lacked the courage to send in help.
• A President, a “Constitutional expert” who does not understand Marbury vs. Madison.
The list could go on, but like you said, what is the point. You and Matt would probably be willing to supply the ammo to Shelby, for use against the heads of the NRA, or any other people who dare to speak out against your goals.
At least Matt has the courage to show his face and not hide like a coward.
I could match every one of those items, and then some, with a comparable fuckup-slash-atrocity by Republicans in Congress or the White House. But you constantly choose to attack one side with your unbalanced Breitbart regurgitation, nine-tenths of which turns out to be inaccurate on later review. This is why you are a joke, and not worth the trouble. Fortunately most readers here seem to understand that.
with a comparable fuckup-slash-atrocity by Republicans in Congress or the White House
No you can’t, because you will not find me defending the actions of the Republican’s as you and Matt defend or ignore the actions of Obama.
Uh, what? Read slower, I think the words are getting jumbled in your brain.
The first sentence in the comment was a reference to ME, the second a reference to you. And both are true beyond dispute.
Do it then madame. You are so smart. Real American you are the most nasty, negative, stubborn, foul mouthed person I have ever encountered. You make statements right out of no where. No proof on any thing. You just mouth off to see yourself in print. Back up your statement on the nine-tenths which as you say are inaccurate. Give us a run down. Just who are most readers. Real American you have no credibility. You run off at the mouth for no reason other than your hate of Conservatives. You are a very hateful person with no accompishments in life it appears. If you have some tell us about them. Get off your name calling foul language garbage. Sorry Real American you are discusting. That is my opinion I will let others have their own opinion. You are a coward that hinds behind a no-name. That is very easy to do and you win all the no-name honors for coward of the year. I can just see you all pruned up and ready to fire back. It will be a blank from a blank.
I don’t know about you DDL but having the Village Idiot swoop in to rescue me is not something I’d brag about. Just sayin
Dennis does not need to be rescued. Real American you need help badly. Go get it and comne back a better person. You have completely lost your direction. You are the only one that can help yourself. Go get it done.
Which is it? I need help or I am the only one that can help myself? I am so confused and that makes me so angry. When I get like this, all I see is red. Sometimes I wake up and I don’t know where I’ve been. There’s only darkness … and of course the blood. So much blood …
Yes you are confused. Just answer the questions I asked. You can not and wll not. Match them Real{Coward} American. You will come back with your standard line. You firstand when I or anyone else answer you disappear. You have no credibility just a coward mentality to run and hide.
I could match every one of those items, and then some
But you won’t.
To be comparable, you would also have to match the following:
All actions named would need to have occurred under the same President.
That president would have to have paid no political price.
It is a challenge you cannot meet, so your response was all bluster and bullshit, as are all of your responses.
I know you have your pat Breitbart responses to all this, but everyone knows how full of shit you are so have at it anyway. Chump.
George W. Bush had all the luck of Jimmy Carter, the attention to detail of Ronald Reagan, the adaptability of Lyndon Johnson, the abiding respect for the Constitution of Richard Nixon, the humility of Teddy Roosevelt, the rhetorical skills of Calvin Coolidge, the fiscal restraint of Franklin Roosevelt, the cronyism of Warren Harding, and the overreaching idealism of Woodrow Wilson.
And his election had all the legitimacy of Rutherford Hayes’.
None of the disasters of the past eight years can be entirely blamed on Bush, of course. No president is all powerful, and Bush was handed some raw deals, especially in that first year with the recession and then the nightmare of 9/11. But other presidents – Lincoln, Roosevelt, and the incoming Obama come to mind — have had to deal with worse. The test of greatness is what you do when faced with the impossible.
Here’s my list of the seven worst things Bush did during his time in the White House.
7. Bush politicized parts of the government that should be nonpartisan. From NASA to the Justice Department, professionals were forced out or silenced if they departed from the true Republican way. What was good for the Republican Party trumped what was good policy for the nation. Every administration is political to some extent, but the Bush administration took it too far. When Paul O’Neill was forced out at Treasury, it was clear that every major decision would be determined by Karl Rove’s calculus.
6. Bush squandered the budget surplus. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Bush had a near-religious faith in the ability of tax cuts to deliver prosperity. Tax cuts were the panacea that would cure all ills. Economy too strong? Cut taxes. Economy too weak? Cut taxes. Stock market falling? Cut dividend taxes. Investment weak? Cut capital gains taxes. But tax cuts didn’t make the economy stronger; they merely blew a big hole in the budget. Now, when we could really use that surplus to pay for the bailouts and the stimulus, it’s gone.
5. Bush comforted the comfortable and afflicted the afflicted. The Bush years were the ultimate test of trickle-down economics, the theory that says the government should favor the rich because the benefits will flow down to the rest of us. The results of that experiment are clear: We’ve had the weakest job growth since the 1930s. We’ve had the biggest increase in debt ever. We’ve had the highest share of national income going to profits since the 1920s. Income inequality has soared while our public and private investment has slowed to a trickle. Instead of building a fundamentally sound economy, Bush nurtured a Ponzi economy based on get-rich-quick schemes.
4. Bush rewarded incompetence. Because politics and personal loyalty were all that counted, Bush appointed incompetent people to vital jobs. He hired interns to run Iraq. He hired a horse expert to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He wanted to hire Harriett Miers to be a Supreme Court justice. Top jobs were reserved for sycophants, toadies and failures.
3. Bush lied us into war. Every argument for war against Iraq was a delusion, and hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost as a result.Saddam Hussein was not responsible for 9/11 in any way. He was not a danger to the United States. The Bush administration ignored or dismissed mountains of evidence that showed that Saddam was not building an arsenal of chemical or nuclear weapons. Bush rushed to war without giving diplomacy or weapons inspectors a chance. Later, administration officials blew the cover of a CIA employee whose husband told the truth, and then lied about their involvement.
2. Bush has exposed himself to war crime charges. By his own admission, Bush authorized interrogation practices that are illegal under U.S. and international law. His administration at best looked the other way and at worst ordered prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib to be tortured. Not only is torture an immoral and heinous crime against humanity, it is ineffective in the fight against terrorism. Nothing has given Osama bin Laden more support than Bush’s immorality. And our nation’s reputation has been tarnished, possibly forever.
1. Bush weakened our democracy. Bush has embraced a theory of dictatorship. Bush, under Vice President Dick Cheney’s guidance, encouraged an imperial presidency answerable to no one. Working with a complacent Congress, Bush gutted the constitutional checks and balances that are supposed to keep any part of the government from growing too powerful or too corrupt. In the name of an endless war against an amorphous enemy, he canceled our most fundamental rights of habeas corpus and the right to be free from unreasonable government spying.
One final note: Bush had the opportunity to be a great president. After 9/11, the nation was as united as it had been since Pearl Harbor, and Bush rode a wave of popularity that he could have used to turn around the nation’s politics, security and economy.
Instead of uniting us as he promised, he divided us instead.
As predicted: Bluster and Bullshit
7. Laughable – See Eric Holder, The Czarist regime of Obama
6. The surplus myth again? Borrowed money and increased the debt
4. and 5. What you see as incompetence is not illegal.
3. The war again? The war the Democrats approved?
2. Zero used that info to get OBL and is proud that he did.
1. See number 7
As predicted, pat and uneducated. Try this on for size big boy:
Took more vacation time than any other President
Invaded Iraq to get rid of WMDs which didn’t exist
Implemented protectionist steel tariffs
Outed a CIA agent for political purposes
Fired prosecutors who refused to abuse their positions for political purposes
Disregarded FISA laws and wiretappd Americans without warrants
Never caught Osama Bin Laden
Failed to plan for Iraq occupation after Saddam’s government fell and the subsequent occupation has killed 150,000 Iraqi civilians.
Created a vague “enemy combatant” status in order to indefinitely hold foreigners and even US citizens without trying or charging them with a crime.
Used torture to interrogate prisoners despite evidence that says information acquired through unreliable
Prematurely said the mission in Iraq had been accomplished.
Approved budgets that outspent our tax revenue by hundreds of billions of dollars.
Poor leadership on response to Hurrican Katrina
Little or no policy changes on our changing climate
Didn’t veto a single bill for six years and when he finally did it was to shoot down the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.
Passed the Military Commissions Act, which removes the right to Habeus Corpus, one of the most fundamental safe guards against tyrannical governments.
Pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missle Treaty
Issues illegal “signing statements” when passing bills, saying which portions of the bill he will or won’t enforce.? This essentially allows him to rewrite legislation.
Pushed for elections in Palestine that lead to a Hamas victory, and then tried to overthrow them.
Allowed Don Rumsfeld to outsource much of the Iraq war to security contractors which are not subject to Iraqi or American military laws or standards.
Tried to appoint his personal attorney, Harriet Myers, to the supreme court.
Dangerous diplomatic philosophy that discourages peaceful negotiations with certain nations.
Appointed John Bolton, a man who said “there is no such thing as the United Nations“, as the UN Ambassador.
Consistent intellectual disinterest in his job.
Failed to act on warning signs of the September, 11th attacks.
Was dishonest with the American people about his National Guard service.
Lied about giving up golf in a time of war.
Dissolving the Iraqi army right after the war, putting thousands of trained soldiers into the insurgency.
Believing Paul Wolfowitz that the war and subsequent reconstruction would pay for itself with Iraqi oil revenue.
His policies contributed to a quadrupling of the price of oil.
Lied to the American people that Saddam Hussein was working with Al-Qaeda
Looks like you did a cut paste or had that pre-prepared .
Narrow the list down to illegal actions, not just ones you don’t like, otherwise your comments are not worth considering.
RA, When I make a mistake, I am not afraid to admit my error, so I will withdraw the above comment.
Thank you for your thoughtfulness in taking the twenty seconds to do a cut and paste from previously prepared statements. I will enter my applicable comment in a separate post.
Strategic, and well-advised, retreat. Live to prevaricate another day.
RA: Your comments are not worth considering.
See below you fatuous fool. Try not to fall off your barstool in response.
Matt Stated: having a police department is a “step toward” the creation of a Gestapo.
I am going to invoke Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies here.
You can to better Matt then that Matt
That law doesn’t apply here because Matt is pointing out the ridiculousness of the analogy, which if you knew how to read you would understand.
So apparently he we was not perceptive enough to think of a better analogy than a Nazi one.
No, he’s highlighting the frequent dimwittedness of your ilk in resorting to them.
You pretty much always pick the wrong answer, don’t you?
You need help Real American. Thre are clinics for your addiction of hate.
And there are homes for daffy old bastards like you
The only answers you have are personal attacks. Cool down Real American. Folks would like to set you on the road to recovery but you first must figure it is you that has the problem. Not me, DDl, Watching or anyone else you wish to attack. This a very serious problem for you. Get help fast. You do need it.
Hahahahahahaha
By the way that is a symptom of your illness. Get it fixed before it is too late.
Shall I list your symptoms? Inability to define socialism, as Matt pointed out above, is one of them.
One of the real problems with liberals of today, when they don’t like or agree with the definition of a word they lobby feverishly to have the definition changed. Look at same sex marriage for example….
Rather than try to redefine old terminology, it may be better to create new terminology to try to sell an agenda. Take “intelligent design”, for instance.
Real American you are in violation of a Liberal Policy. Written abuse, name calling, personal attacks and just plane rudeness. You saw what happened to the Rutgers coach. Now your local Liberal comrades may well boycott you. Boy what a blow that would be to you. Being boycotted for written abuse by your fellow comrades. Not good Real American.
Something tells me you don’t have a very good handle on the views of this town’s — or any town’s — liberals. I know for a fact, however, that this town’s conservatives mostly think of you as a braying jackass who cost Alan Schwartzman the mayorship and who gives all conservatives a bad name.
Real American you have some loose traps and you are flapping around to much. Socialism as been defined many times. If you can not figure it out. Sorry for you
Many times, but never by you. You just prefer to use it as a cudgel to dismiss ideas you disapprove of. Very fascist of you, VI.
Time to post another observation. RA your bouncing all over the place not only here but on other threads really makes you look like a Gnat on Methamphetamine. Time to take a chill pill and calm down.
Your observations are always astute.
I noticed that you have drawn the attention of the town’s former Poet Laureate, congratulations for having done so. This now means you will be monitored, on a regular basis, to see if you are worthy of consideration in his ‘people of your ilk’ club.
Big biz and liberals are actually in bed together on the road to fascism.
Wrong again. Give me some names.
Right and you know it. But I won’t help you go on another witch hunt. Enjoy your ignominy.
Tell me the which hunt I went on. All you do is talk like a yenta.
Real American did you get the Mayors latest three e-mail blast. Very disturbing stuff from the Mayor.
Are you zoftic Real American?
Are you hitting on me Bob? When did you convert?
Just a question. Again you did not answer. I will ask again did you get the latest three e-mail blasts by the mayor? The queen of personal attacks is at it again. Very low profile of yourself I see. That will get a come back by the queen. Sorry I have to leave this run but my driver is coming by to take the wife and myself to SF for a few hours.
Ok, A cut and paste item from a time long ago….I did state the other day somewhere that socialism is just a step to the ultimate goal of communism. Many of the 45 items listed have happened already. Some here will make a big deal about this and do their best to change the subject. I really don’t care, those that have the desire to look at the big picture with an open mind and not push FORWARD with the party line may be enlightened. Those that don’t you are set in your ways which I respect, that is your right.
EDIT ALERT::: I know this is long, but seriously people, PLEASE share this so that people whose eyes are closed might open them and see the truth.
Let’s take a ride down memory lane and see what the future has brought us, shall we? This will be long and has been posted here before, but this needs to be brought to forefront to show that us right winged conservatives AREN’T paranoid, we are just paying attention. If reading this doesn’t send a shiver down your spine, then you are NOT a true patriot!
The Communist Takeover of America: 45 Declared Goals (Congressional Record, 1963)
“The Naked Communist”/Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35 ^ | January 10, 1963 | Cleon Skousen
Posted on January 20, 2006 8:03:31 AM CST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
Communist Goals (1963)
Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals
EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 10, 1963
Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:
[From “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen]
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.