The progressive movement which is really the neocommunist movement in disguise should not be confused with the Soviet or Chinese system. This is what makes this movement so dangerous for all of us that value the traditions of American freedom. The progressive population will always portray that their movement is that of democratic freedom in order to take fear out of the equation. Then, the progressive will portray that their movement represents social security of the highest order in order to attract those who are emotional over financial insecurities. The progressive solution is to have a world order where central governments direct our lives. On paper, it all sounds like the secure way to go. The problem is that the human nature of those in control will never allow the system to work as portrayed. The people that are sucked into the belief that utopia is possible will never conform in the end. Those that gain power through democratic elections will eventually change the rules of the game to suit themselves.
However, the progressive movement can win if they make you believe that change is needed. The so-called change is really evil in disguise. It will happen slowly at first. It will come with the reshaping of the minds of the new generations in the public school system. Traditional values will be discarded in the school texts. Then, on every economic problem that we may encounter, more reasons will arise for a change leading to further government control. It may even come to the point where the havoc will be contrived. In the end, it will all boil down to the idea that people will be willing to give up certain traditional rights in order to receive protection. The protection will be health care and a socialized job career.
Communist Democracy: The Progressive Movement
Written by Anthony Campos (2/13/10)
The so-called "progressive movement" is misunderstood by most Americans. In brief fashion, let us get it clear right now. The words socialism and Marxist are being thrown around loosely in the media which adds to the confusion. People tend to associate these words with Russia or Red China which is a mistake. In other words, the American people or any free people are making a grave error if they believe that the pure form of communism is like that of Red China or Cuba.
First of all, the United States is a republic by definition of the Founding Fathers. In the Constitution of the U.S. in Article IV, section 4, it says, "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government,........." It does not say democratic. I am sure that the progressives would love to get that off the Constitution.
In the original pledge of allegiance, it says, "I pledge allegiance to my flag, and the republic for which it stands." It says republic. It does not say democracy. The progressives have already succeeded in stopping the pledge of allegiance in schools.
Communist democracy is the pure form of Marxism which says that people can vote for leadership and then it is the leadership that does what is best for the masses. Doesn't that remind you of Pelosi and Obama? If it does not, then you must be either naive or dumb or both, or if you are a liberal, then you are in denial.
A communist democracy is operated by centralized authority where the government controls the economy and business with centralized regulation. This is the progressive movement. You have already seen examples of this with Obama and Pelosi. Let there be no doubt about it. The progressive will say that this pure form of communism allows for freedom of speech and the right to vote. The progressive actually believes that this can exist in pure form without infringing on the democratic rights of the people. Of course, the progressive does not consider that human nature becomes part of the formula.
The progressive will contend that the communism of the Soviet Union and China is not what Karl Marx had envisioned. The problem as I see it is that the progressives actually believe that the control authority can operate without the abuses that occurred in Russia and China. At this point, I say that it is naive to believe that a communist democracy can exist in its purest form. I further believe that it is naive to believe that a pure form of communism can lead a nation to be great. The Soviet Union crumbled. China will also crumble unless it is reinforced by a progressive United States.
Let us be clear about the progressive movement. These people do believe that the United States should be equalized with other nations based on a distribution of wealth. This is a most dangerous mental disorder. It means that the United States should give up power so that other nations may elevate in power for there to be equalization. This is what George Soros stands for and that is why he supported Obama.
There is a major problem with the progressive utopia. The problem is that of human nature. On paper the ideal world of the Communist Manifesto is possible. In reality, it is not very probable. Power of control breeds arrogance where the end will always justify the means. There will always be deviance to the cause which will justify executions and the need for concentration camps. In the end, the perfect state becomes death itself.
The progressive or pure communist will believe that the government should take full care of us which would lead to stabilization and less expense in the end. The progressive will believe that distribution of wealth will also lead to stabilization by draining wealth into the government treasury where it will be allotted to the population. Reward for achievement would have to come by way of recognition instead of money. In other words, there would be a social ranking system. The incentive would be title and power. Thus, capitalism would no longer be the incentive for crativeness and innovation.
An example of the progressive movement has been the way that the U.S. health care bill has been initiated. The progressive individuals, Obama and Pelosi, decided that they knew what was best for the people. Then, they used their majority power in the House and Senate to pass the bill without debate. If you believe that the method used was correct, then you are a progressive.
Another example of the progressive movement is to destroy all that is traditional. That is what change is all about. The phrase, "In God We Trust" is a target for destruction by the progressive movement. Anything that is spiritual must be destroyed and replaced by what the progressive interprets as the reality of the state. There can only be allegiance to the state.
I also believe that the study of history in the public school system will be revised under the progressive movement. Teachers will be used as pawns to foster the idea that the Founding Fathers are really no longer relevant. In other words, the inspiration of our initial American Revolution is not to be considered more important than the new Progressive Revolution.
I do believe that many Democrats in Congress realize what is occurring and want their traditional party back away from Howard Dean who is indeed a radical. I also believe that many Democrats in congress do not even realize the truth about the heading they are taking by supporting the far-left members.
It now becomes up to us, the people, to do what is right for our nation. It becomes important for us to vote for Republicans, Democrats or Independents that stand for the values of the majority. We must defend the present Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We must all be observant and aware of the methods that are used by a dangerous minority geared to imprison the minds of the majority. You may not be able to see the forest for the trees in front of you.
You decide what you want to be or support. The important thing here is that the American people should know exactly what the progressive movement entails before they vote. Even more important, the American people should know what is the objective of the progressive movement.
Americans do not seem to realize the danger that they are in, because they do not realize the true definition of the progressive movement.
Look at the Non Profit Foundations, Big Banks (JP Morgan, Federal Reserve etc...), Think Tanks, and Research Institutes.
"There will be, in the next generation or so, Pharmacological methods of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by DRUGS. And this seems to be the final revolution."
---Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961
P.S. Aldous Huxley's brother Julien was head of the United Nations UNESCO giving him access to the policy and planning papers drawn up in the think tanks and research institutes which is where he got his material for his books. He was not the creative genious and visionary many people think of him as.
The other gem in that lecture identifies him as a research professor at the Ford Foundation.
With that as the backdrop, this is what Norman Dodd says of a conversation he had with the President of the tax-exempt Ford Foundation in 1954 as part of his Congressionally mandated investigation of tax-exempt foundations:
“Mr. Dodd, we’ve asked you to come up here today because we thought that possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of the foundations such as ourselves.” Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on and said: “Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here have had experience operating under directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
ED GRIFFIN: Why do the foundations generously support Communist (Progressive) causes in the United States?
NORMAN DODD: Well, because to them, Communism represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly, that is, an organization of, say, a large-scale industry into an administerable unit.
ED GRIFFIN: Do they think that they will be the ones to benefit?
NORMAN DODD: They will be the beneficiaries of it, yes.
The communitarian synthesis is the final silent move in a well-designed, quietly implemented plot to re-make the world into colonies. To us it doesn't matter if there is some form of ancient religion that propels the plotters, nor does it really matter if it turns out they're aliens (as some suggest). The bottom line is the Hegelian dialectic sets up the scene for state intervention, confiscation, and redistribution in the U.S., and this is against our ENTIRE constitutional based society. The Hegelian dialectic is not a conspiracy theory because the Conspiracy Theory is a fraud. We've all been duped by global elitists who plan to take totalitarian control of all nation's people, property, and produce. Communitarian Plans exist in every corner of the world, and nobody at the local level will explain why there's no national legal avenue to withdraw from the U.N.'s "community" development plans.
The Soviet Union was based on the Hegelian dialectic, as is all Marxist writing. The Soviets didn't give up their Hegelian reasoning when they supposedly stopped being a communist country. They merely changed the dialectical language to fit into the modern version of Marxist thinking called communitarianism. American author Steve Montgomery explores Moscow's adept use of the Hegelian dialectic in Glasnost-Perestroika: A Model Potemkin Village.
thesis, antithesis, and synthesis
Hegelian conflicts steer every political arena on the planet, from the United Nations to the major American political parties, all the way down to local school boards and community councils. Dialogues and consensus-building are primary tools of the dialectic, and terror and intimidation are also acceptable formats for obtaining the goal. The ultimate Third Way agenda is world government. Once we get what's really going on, we can cut the strings and move our lives in original directions outside the confines of the dialectical madness. Focusing on Hegel's and Engel's ultimate agenda, and avoiding getting caught up in their impenetrable theories of social evolution, gives us the opportunity to think and act our way toward freedom, justice, and genuine liberty for all.
Today the dialectic is active in every political issue that encourages taking sides. We can see it in environmentalists instigating conflicts against private property owners, in democrats against republicans, in greens against libertarians, in communists against socialists, in neo-cons against traditional conservatives, in community activists against individuals, in pro-choice versus pro-life, in Christians against Muslims, in isolationists versus interventionists, in peace activists against war hawks. No matter what the issue, the invisible dialectic aims to control both the conflict and the resolution of differences, and leads everyone involved into a new cycle of conflicts.
"Towards the end of 1922 ,on Lenin’s initiative, a meeting was organised at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow. The aim of the meeting was to clarify the concept of, and give concrete effect to, a Marxist cultural revolution. Amongst those present were Georg Lukacs (a Hungarian aristocrat, son of a banker, who had become a Communist during World War I ; a good Marxist theoretician he developed the idea of ‘Revolution and Eros’ - sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction) and Willi Munzenberg (whose proposed solution was to ‘organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat’) ‘It was’, said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007) the conservative author and co-founder of the ‘National Review’, a meeting ‘perhaps more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.'
The School believed there were two types of revolution: (a) political and ( cultural. Cultural revolution demolishes from within. ‘Modern forms of subjection are marked by mildness’.
They saw it as a long-term project and kept their sights clearly focused on the family, education, media, sex and popular culture.
Defector and KGB agent who was trained in subversion techniques explains the 4 basic steps to socially engineering entire generations into thinking and behaving the way those in power want them to.
It's shocking because our nation has been transformed in the exact same way, and followed the exact same steps.
Trilateral Commission Endgame: This speech was delivered to the Fall 2008 Radio Liberty Conference in Santa Cruz, California. It lays out how members of the Trilateral Commission have controlled U.S. and global trade policy since 1976 with the election of Jimmy Carter and with every successive administration. http://blip.tv/august-review/why-financi...me-2155117
"It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people
will henceforth pledge their allegiance."
--- President George Bush addressing the General Assembly of the U.N., February 1,1992.
Congressman Larry McDonald on the New World Order
Around May of 1983, approximately 4 months before being shot down in KAL007, Congressman Larry McDonald takes on Pat Buchanan and Tom Braden on Crossfire as they badger him about his new role as Chairman of the John Birch Society. He easily handles them and answers questions concerning the Elite's Conspiracy for a One World Government.
The Club of Rome commissioned Cyrus Vance, Jimmy Carter's Secretary of State to write The Global 2000 report. This is a Draconian plan to reduce the world's population by means of wars, famine, diseases, and plagues.
The Club of Rome appears to base much of its important decisions affecting mankind on the philosophy of Polish aristocrat, Felix Dzerzinski, who regarded mankind as being slightly above the level of cattle.
In 1976, the United States Association of the Club of Rome (USACOR) was formed for the purpose of shutting down the U.S. economy gradually.
The Technetronic Era
The Club of Rome commissioned Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carters National Security Advisor, (who also with David Rockefeller formed The Trilateral Commission in 1973), to write The Technetronic Era. This is a post-industrial zero growth plan designed in part to cripple U.S. industry in order to prepare us for the New World Order.
NATO-Club of Rome officials charged with urgent anti-NASA action were Harland Cleveland, Joseph Slater, Claiborne K. Pell, Walter J. Levy, George McGhee, William Watts, Robert Strausz-Hupe (U.S. ambassador to NATO) and Donald Lesh. In May 1967 a meeting was organized by the Scientific and Technological Committee of the North Atlantic Assembly and the Foreign Policy Research Institute. It was called "Conference on Transatlantic Imbalance and Collabora-tion" and it was held at Queen Elizabeth's palatial property in Deauville, France.
The basic purpose and intent of the conference at Deauville was to end U.S. technological and industrial progress. Out of the conference came two books, one of which is mentioned herein, Brzezinski's "Technotronic Era." The other was written by conference chairman, Aurellio Peccei, entitled "The Chasm Ahead." Peccei largely agreed with Brzezinski, but added that there would be chaos in a future world NOT RULED BY A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.
This website exists for fun and discussion only. The reader is responsible for discerning the validity, factuality
or implications of information posted here, be it fictional or based on real events.
The content of posts on this site, including but not limited to links to other web sites,
are the expressed opinion of the original poster and are in no way
representative of or endorsed by the owners or administration of this
website. The posts on this website are the opinion of the specific
author and are not statements of advice, opinion, or factual
information on behalf of the owner or administration of
LunaticOutPost.Com. The owners or administration of this website can't
be hold responsible for content hosted on sites that posters link to
in; including, but not limited to, posts, signatures, private messages and such.
This site may contain content not suitable for minors and if you feel
you might be offended by such content, you should log off immediately.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use
of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance
awareness and understanding of issues relating to civil rights,
economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science
& technology, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material. The
material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes.
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users
limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant
portions of the article you wish to discuss (no more than 50% of the
source material) provide a link back to the original article and provide
your original comments / criticism in your post with the article. If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and
you believe a post on this website falls outside the boundaries of "Fair
Use" and legitimately infringes on yours or your clients copyright please contact [email protected]
This website is owned by :
2516 XR The Hague
I will not rent, sell, share or otherwise disclose your personal information to any third party.
We might contact you from time to time
regarding your purchases or the services (like forums and announcement
lists) you have subscribed to.
to track peformance and/or to serve relevant ads.
If you wish to read more and/or opt out of such cookies, please visit: http://www.networkadvertising.org/choices/