America's Socialist Origins (Read 14437 times)

punaperson

America's Socialist Origins
« on: March 23, 2016, 08:11:49 AM »
America's Socialist Origins

Was America once socialist? Surprisingly, yes. The early settlers who arrived at Plymouth and Jamestown in the early 1600s experimented with socialist communes. Did it work? History professor Larry Schweikart of the University of Dayton shares the fascinating story.

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2016, 12:28:33 PM »
Well, you guys want to know America's socialist/liberal origins?

I got the goods for you. Read this. Not easy to find, this PDF.

(Do you know who Bill Ayers is? Mentor to Obama?)

Note that the "reasons" for the "movement" are not necessarily valid. They are actually rather confused, and possibly may be an excuse for some OTHER agenda.

Read this booklet and you will see for yourself.

http://www.sds-1960s.org/PrairieFire-reprint.pdf

"The Weathermen’s government will be one of total control over each individual in the society," he wrote.  "In Weathermen terminology, this new society will be 'one people working in total unity.'"

Grathwohl continued: "This means an elimination of all the individual freedoms we are accustomed to having; it was my absolute belief in the freedoms offered by our form of government that drove me to fight the Weathermen in the first place."

Grathwohl's daring descent into the bowels of the anti-American left showed that the subversives of the Weather Underground, which grew out of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) splinter group Weatherman, worked with Communist Cuba and the governments of other hostile foreign nations.

Grathwohl attended a kind of Wannsee Conference at which Weather Underground operatives plotted the murder of 25 million Americans.  At the Wannsee meeting in 1942, Hitler's cabinet members and senior bureaucrats set in motion the “Final solution to the Jewish question,” which led to the systematic murder of six million Jews.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/10/before_there_was_isis_there_was_the_weather_underground.html
« Last Edit: March 23, 2016, 12:35:04 PM by passivekinetic »
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2016, 12:35:31 PM »
And some people think it is all just conspiracy theory...
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

eyeeatingfish

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2016, 06:24:50 AM »
Did see the video today, an interesting history. Socialism has come up quite a bit as of recent with a lot of interesting takes on the various forms. I am not sure what you are getting at in your 2nd post though.

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2016, 12:18:57 PM »
Did see the video today, an interesting history. Socialism has come up quite a bit as of recent with a lot of interesting takes on the various forms. I am not sure what you are getting at in your 2nd post though.

Huh?!

Have you read that PDF and the web page?!
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

Kuleana

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2016, 12:48:13 PM »
Huh?!

Have you read that PDF and the web page?!

If you are implying that there is somehow a socialist take-over of the US, it is not the socialists who have taken over, but the Fascists.  Anytime a government can take money away from its citizens, as they did in the bailout of Wall Street in 2008, that is not socialism.  Socialism is taxing the money from the people and giving it to the poor, fascism is when the government takes money away from the people and give it to the rich (i.e., Wall Street).


Kuleana

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2016, 01:22:00 PM »
I'm not implying anything. The facts are there for anyone to draw their own conclusions. I just find it hard not to connect the dots because they are so obvious.

Also, their agenda is very confusing to me.

They seem to want to make the world a better place, but their plan makes no sense at all.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

eyeeatingfish

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2016, 08:02:05 PM »
Huh?!

Have you read that PDF and the web page?!

No I did not.

My question is for you, not the articles. I am asking why you are bringing this up. What sort of discussion are you trying to start. Just posting an article like this doesn't say much. Unless it is a news piece I am hoping to hear what you think about the issue raised in the article. Where you agree or disagree, etc.

punaperson

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2016, 06:47:18 AM »
If you are implying that there is somehow a socialist take-over of the US, it is not the socialists who have taken over, but the Fascists.  Anytime a government can take money away from its citizens, as they did in the bailout of Wall Street in 2008, that is not socialism.  Socialism is taxing the money from the people and giving it to the poor, fascism is when the government takes money away from the people and give it to the rich (i.e., Wall Street).
Kuleana
Here's a very brief column from 2012 by economist Thomas Sowell parsing the "socialist/fascist" definitions. He uses the traditional private vs. government ownership of the means of production, and explains how politicians, including Obama, use private ownership, along with severely binding and restrictive government "regulations", to his advantage.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/06/12/socialist_or_fascist/page/full

excerpt:

Socialist or Fascist

It bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a "socialist." He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.

What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector.



passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2016, 09:10:31 AM »
After thinking about how to reply here, I decided to say this:

Don't worry too much about what to call it, just see what is happening.

Words don't really mean that much, at the end of the day, and if you really think about what is going on.

For example, what do they call North Korea? The DPRK. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

What about communist China? The People's Republic of China.

These places are neither democratic, nor for the people. They are for the ruling class. The oligarchs or, in the case of the DPRK, the emperor.

There are many other such places (and organizations) in the world. They use words like socialist, people's, democratic, etc. etc. etc.

All B.S.

You can call Ted Bundy a humanitarian. He likes certain aspects of humans.

You can call an organization socialist or democratic or whatever. You can say our agenda is democratic or socialist or whatever.

Don't lose the forest for the trees.

And read the PDF and article.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

eyeeatingfish

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2016, 07:40:18 AM »
Very true, people can and do use labels very loosely. A lot of the times, subtle but significant differences are missed or glazed over. Occasionally the label is used completely wrong.

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2016, 08:09:43 AM »
Very true, people can and do use labels very loosely. A lot of the times, subtle but significant differences are missed or glazed over. Occasionally the label is used completely wrong.

Usually for deliberate reasons. So, the labeling is not necessarily "loosely" but "cleverly."

This is why nowadays we can't trust the wording. If they say you must do this for the children, or do this to make your community safe, or this is important for national security, etc. we need to get down to brass tacks and see exactly what is going on and what is being proposed.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

punaperson

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2016, 12:25:46 PM »
Usually for deliberate reasons. So, the labeling is not necessarily "loosely" but "cleverly."

This is why nowadays we can't trust the wording. If they say you must do this for the children, or do this to make your community safe, or this is important for national security, etc. we need to get down to brass tacks and see exactly what is going on and what is being proposed.
For example, the Orwellian use of names like the "Patriot Act" or "National Security Agency", which really mean "Those Constitutionally-guaranteed safeguards against government intrusion into your private life without due process, warrants, etc. are hereby, unbeknownst to you, revoked".

punaperson

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2016, 03:24:50 PM »
Speaking of socialism, and fascism, etc., here is Bill Whittle's latest "Firewall" opinion piece "American Fascists", discussing some of the tactics currently employed by "progressive" political activists.

robtmc

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2016, 08:34:31 PM »
After thinking about how to reply here, I decided to say this:

Don't worry too much about what to call it, just see what is happening.

Words don't really mean that much, at the end of the day, and if you really think about what is going on.
Food for thought.

Have been disgusted for decades at the leftist hijacking of the term for happy to mean homosexual.  How big a joke could this be?  A demographic rife with suicide, masochism, bestiality, and they want to hijack to word for "happy"?

Same for "Progressive", where what they mean is a return to Stalinist/Leninist repression of all but state approved thought and speech.  The current poroms being carried out in just about any mainland college capmpus bears this out.  You do not conform to politically acceptable thought, you are guilty of crimes against the state/people/whatever. 

There is no allowance for progress with the "progressives".  It must all be in accordance with the dogma of the regime.

Liberal at one time meant something to me.. Voted for McGovern at a time when I was pissed off at Nixon and the DC cabal sending too many of my bro's to be killed for nothing. 

What a joke the democrats have become now they are "progressives".  Farging word games............

Drunken posting, I am............

eyeeatingfish

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2016, 09:57:19 PM »
Food for thought.

Have been disgusted for decades at the leftist hijacking of the term for happy to mean homosexual.  How big a joke could this be?  A demographic rife with suicide, masochism, bestiality, and they want to hijack to word for "happy"?

Same for "Progressive", where what they mean is a return to Stalinist/Leninist repression of all but state approved thought and speech.  The current poroms being carried out in just about any mainland college capmpus bears this out.  You do not conform to politically acceptable thought, you are guilty of crimes against the state/people/whatever. 

There is no allowance for progress with the "progressives".  It must all be in accordance with the dogma of the regime.

Liberal at one time meant something to me.. Voted for McGovern at a time when I was pissed off at Nixon and the DC cabal sending too many of my bro's to be killed for nothing. 

What a joke the democrats have become now they are "progressives".  Farging word games............

Drunken posting, I am............

I don't think Liberals hijacked the term gay but I agree with the rest of what you said.
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/how-gay-came-to-mean-homosexual/
« Last Edit: March 29, 2016, 12:44:37 PM by eyeeatingfish »

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2016, 10:49:27 PM »
Food for thought.

Have been disgusted for decades at the leftist hijacking of the term for happy to mean homosexual.  How big a joke could this be?  A demographic rife with suicide, masochism, bestiality, and they want to hijack to word for "happy"?

Same for "Progressive", where what they mean is a return to Stalinist/Leninist repression of all but state approved thought and speech.  The current poroms being carried out in just about any mainland college capmpus bears this out.  You do not conform to politically acceptable thought, you are guilty of crimes against the state/people/whatever. 

There is no allowance for progress with the "progressives".  It must all be in accordance with the dogma of the regime.

Liberal at one time meant something to me.. Voted for McGovern at a time when I was pissed off at Nixon and the DC cabal sending too many of my bro's to be killed for nothing. 

What a joke the democrats have become now they are "progressives".  Farging word games............

Drunken posting, I am............

I agree the libtards hijacked the "good" words so they look like the good guys. Democrats. Liberals. Progressive. All make it sound like they are the enlightened people. While the "conservatives" seem like the retards who are narrow minded and afraid of new ideas, etc, holding back "progress."

The biggest stupidity that I see is what these left-wingers want to do. They say they want to make the world a better place where people are less oppressed, in fact what they are doing is trying to bring on a totalitarian society where things are much worse than what they are fighting against. Just doesn't make sense.

You can already see the oppression at work in the numerous new laws that they want enacted, as well as some very stupid (and even cruel) situations caused by political correctness (basically thought police).

At least the anarchists have their story straight, that everyone has equal rights and nobody rules over them.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

crazy cat

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #17 on: March 29, 2016, 07:35:13 AM »
While the SDS were mostly middle class college kids, the Weather Underground were the children of the ruling class.  And mostly, they never got caught.  Think about that for a moment.....

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #18 on: March 29, 2016, 08:18:18 AM »
While the SDS were mostly middle class college kids, the Weather Underground were the children of the ruling class.  And mostly, they never got caught.  Think about that for a moment.....

Most people in America don't even know what you are talking about when you say Weather Underground. So they can't connect that to Bill Ayers, and Bill Ayers to Obama, and Obama to Hillary. (Maybe even Sanders).

Heck, most of them don't even remember Whitewater.

This is the problem with today's younger voters. No sense of history so they don't realize they are being tricked. Only when you actually research this stuff do you start to see what is going on.

But that takes time and a lot of the so-called millennials do not have patience.
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous

passivekinetic

Re: America's Socialist Origins
« Reply #19 on: March 29, 2016, 08:39:08 AM »
http://spectator.org/articles/37001/theyre-all-together

Asked during the 2008 presidential campaign about his relationship with the left-wing radical Bill Ayers, Barack Obama replied that Ayers was just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood." He implied that to even bring that questionable relationship out of the shadows was a mean-spirited, guilt-by-association political tactic. Ayers, Obama went on, had done something deplorable "forty years ago when I was six or seven years old."

Otherwise, Obama insisted, Ayers was a paragon of virtue: a respectable fixture in mainstream Chicago, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, on a foundation board focused on education that included "Republicans, bankers, lawyers." Ayers had even worked for, and was a good friend of, Mayor Richard M. Daley. The Obama campaign at once launched a crusade to distance Obama from Ayers. It went so far as to actually defend the man who had implicated himself in terror bombings in his own 2001 memoir, Fugitive Days.

In fact, Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, were radical Marxist revolutionaries in the Vietnam War era. They were founders of the Weather Underground, a violent terrorist arm of Students for a Democratic Society. Both were eventually indicted in federal court, and Dohrn by the State of Illinois. Rather than face a trial they jumped bail and disappeared into the underground in 1970. After they resurfaced 11 years later, both were admitted into the halls of academia. Ayers became a Distinguished Professor of Education and a Senior University Scholar at the University of Illinois-Chicago. Incredibly, Dohrn became a law professor at Northwestern.

The American Spectator has developed information that demonstrates, without any doubt, that Ayers and Dohrn have spent a lifetime advocating and practicing the strategies and tactics of Marxism. That includes the violent overthrow of the United States government. It also involves treasonous cooperation with revolutionary Communist governments in China, North Vietnam, and Cuba during the 1960s and '70s and, until the fall of the Eastern Bloc, governments in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. But unlike many of their compatriots from those days of violence and turmoil, Ayers and Dohrn are completely unrepentant about their past activities. To this day, they continue to support destruction of the American free enterprise system and its replacement with a Marxist utopia.

What, then, is the relationship between these two hard-core leftist revolutionaries and the president of the United States, and why is it important?

It is important, first, because Obama, along with Ayers and Dohrn, went to great lengths to mislead voters during the fall of 2008. They "just lived in the same neighborhood" and had little contact, they pretended. On the contrary, The American Spectator's investigation has concluded that Obama and his campaign staff, with the help of the mainstream media, lied outright about his relationship with Ayers. It has also concluded that Ayers lied about it as well. The Ayers-Obama association is far deeper, longer, and more significant than was ever acknowledged during the campaign.

The relationship is important, second, because Ayers and Dohrn are not reformed former radicals who have abandoned their old habits. Indeed, they are unrepentant, violent radicals who may have adopted new tactics to upend the United States and what it stands for, but whose goals remain just what they were in 1970.

(Read more at the web page)
"The sheep fear sheepdogs, because they fail to see the wolves."
- Anonymous