Category Archives: Communist

When Friends Become Tall Timbers (Tales)

Race to find the bait...

HAVE YOU EVER WANTED more? I mean lots more, MORE of this, MORE of that. Have you ever heard the phrase "All property is theft!" and wanted to extend your fist into the private property of that public mouth from which you heard those ridiculously poetic words just shouted? Where is more? Evermore. Who is less? Nonetheless. Is the universe chaotic? Psychotic? Programmable nonsense. Or is this wild wobbly marble of unintended consequences the ultimate parade of unscrutinized order? Existential Baby, shake, rattle and roll, always a suspect, never a friend...

Posted by: aware54397
Apr 19, 05:35 AM

Until the mid 1800's society was surging. Since then it is the State that has surged. The last hundred years has been the time of domination of every possible thing by the State. Now we will enter the time of regretting the politicization of everything when the bill finally comes due.

The concept of the State was always a lie, which is why so many fail to understand why good ideas always seem to go wrong with government. It starts with "helping" a guy down on his luck and turns him into a perpetual demander of other people's money enforceable through the State. A thimble of "help" followed by a trainload of corruption engineered by a true criminal class of professional politicians.

All forms of government is bent to revert to its true nature sooner or later. It just took ours a little longer than most, but thanks to legal plunder and distracted citizens we have arrived. Now we will rue the day we ever trusted government to be "good". Over the next decade or so many will pay with their lives for this.

When the Western state finally crumbles, what happens next? You be the judge. Or, uh, is that somebody else's job?

Let us be frank when we ask ourselves just what on God's Green Acre we think of when we think of the state? How are the so-called Peoples' Councils that Marxists clang and clamor for any different than City Hall and the Orange Cap Patrol that either bring a snarl or a smile to our random faces now?

I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the Gods they made
I shouted out,
Who killed the Kennedys?
When after all
It was you and me.

When does a peaceful conservative or a merry prankster stop trying to prop up an essential but failing institution or state? Especially one being pummeled not only by its immediate enemies but by the very writing on the wall? What does a conscientious conservative or pansy pied piper do next when the thunder and the lightening and the rain has turned to blood, fire and thuggery on both the plains and the mountains, in the cities and the rivers?

When the once cringing sound of "all private property is theft" no longer seems absurd, perhaps we can finally re-emerge as rugged individualists who realize the world is exceedingly too complex for any one nation to simplify, but it is fair and simple enough for the many to restore (for all the smart reasons) given the grace and timeliness of knowledge, so as to simply enjoy it within the complexities of our own simple lives...

It was in the calm and peace of his house in Hastings that Desai was able to analyse what he felt about Marx. Tall and narrow, the house commands a panoramic view of the English Channel which Desai has quickly learnt to love. He delights in waking up to a view of the sea and, for the first six months, kept photographing its changing moods.

"It changes one's view of life," he enthuses. "It is fascinating, uplifting, a joyous thing." He bought the house in Hastings because he "wanted somewhere to put my 10,000 books". Every Thursday evening, Desai makes the one hour 40 minute pilgrimage from London Bridge to Hastings, and returns on Monday. "It is here in Hastings I do all my cooking, all my writing, all my thinking," he says. "This is a marvellous place. It is now my main home."

The shift to Hastings also represents his own spiritual, emotional and political journey. His reassessment of Marxism began 20 years ago. In his youth, he, like many others, had assumed that capitalism would be vanquished, sooner rather than later, by socialism.

Yes, Martha Manwaring. Life is short, but every once in a while one may discover that the hard-boiled social philosophers accustomed to the occupational depths of conflict crave the simple joys, too. This Marxist clown, with all due respect, has grown to realize what we petty capitalists here at the Scenewash Project were brash enough to quip while whingeing among a few card-carrying Marxists brought together by the Internet of the day some fifteen years ago.

It was I, wrote Gabriel, who said, "Frankly lads, in my estimation, Capitalism is the purest form of Communism ever practiced!"

Expectingly, I and thee watched their eyes roll then! But fear not!

For now we have the global debt crisis and Gentleman George Soros cascading along the scars and scabs of Kierkegaard Boulevard to prove it!

Accidently Like A Martyr

Bit by bit, decorate it, arrange the details, find the ingredients, imagine it, choose it, get advice on it, shape it into a work without spectators, one which exists only for oneself, just for the shortest little moment of life.

—Michel Foucault, describing the pleasure of preparing oneself for suicide.

The Italian cheerleader for Hamas, Vittorio Arrigoni, has died at the hands of the Islamic terrorism that he venerated throughout his life. The fellow traveler journeyed to the Gaza Strip to prostrate himself before his secular deity, Hamas, and to assist its venture of perpetrating genocide against Israelis. Islamic terrorists, who call themselves “Salafists,” showed their gratitude to Arrigoni by kidnapping, mercilessly beating, and executing him.

This episode was, of course, all part of an expected script: even though the media and our higher literary culture never discuss the reasons, the historical record reveals one undeniable fact: like thousands of political pilgrims before him, Vittorio Arrigoni went to Gaza to die. Indeed, consciously or unconsciously, in their unquenchable quest for sacrificing human life on the altar of their utopian ideals, fellow travelers always lust for death, and if not the death of others, then of their own.

It is no coincidence that a short while before “Salafists” killed Arrigoni, Juliano Mer-Khasin, a cheerleader of terrorism in Israel who, like Arrigoni, dedicated his life to praising the Palestinian death cult and working for the annihilation of Israel, was murdered by Islamic terrorists in Jenin. It is no coincidence that Rachel Corrie, the infamous enabler of the International Solidarity Movement, a group that disrupts anti-terrorism activities of the Israel Defense Forces, committed suicide in protecting Hamas terrorists by throwing herself in front of an Israeli bulldozer. And it is no coincidence that female leftist “peace” activists are routinely raped, brutalized, and enslaved by the Arabs of Judea and Samaria that they come to aid and glorify in their Jew-hating odyssey against Israel. And don’t hold your breath, by the way, waiting for leftist feminists to protest this phenomenon; they are faithfully following in the footsteps of American fellow traveler Anna Louise Strong and the Stalinist German writer Bertolt Brecht, two typical leftist believers who were completely undisturbed by the arrests and deaths of their friends in the Stalinist purges—having never even inquired about them after their disappearance.

Read it all.

Make No Mistake About It

THE UNITED STATES MUST CHECK ITS SENTIMENTALITY at the door, shake loose of the leftist solipsisms and get down to the mature and necessary business of clarifying our geo-political relationships across the globe. Again we must consider the Red China redux.

Militarily: Restore the military's inventories of weapons to sufficient levels, replace obsolete weapons (with F-35s, Virginia class subs, etc.), and equip the U.S. military to protect the U.S. and its allies against Communist China. This must include a national missile defense system capable of intercepting all Chinese missiles, cyber defenses, and modernized minesweepers. Congress should also refuse to reduce total defense spending. America's global military deployments should be reconsidered and realigned with the 21st-century threat environment.

Economically: Protect the American industry with strict product quality standards and export-import certificates to end America's large annual trade deficits. Also reform the tax code to prevent corporations from fleeing abroad (e.g., to China); abolish all bans on drilling for oil and natural gas to ensure plentiful, cheap energy for the U.S. economy; and reopen America's mines of rare-earth minerals.

Diplomatically: Strive for good relations with China's neighbors, recognize their territorial claims rather than China's, and establish an Asian NATO to bring America's Asian allies and partners together against China and North Korea. Sell weapons to China's foes.

Morally: Speak out for Chinese dissidents and label the criminal Chinese regime as such. Link Sino-American relations to China's human rights record. Ronald Reagan did so throughout the 1980s: he recognized the USSR as an evil empire, publicly called it such, and used the moral lever to win the struggle against the Soviet Union. Today's American officials should do the same vis-à-vis China, the new Evil Empire.

By Their Fruits...

Recession Line
Toeing The Party Line

Free Speech Lesson #1

WITH REGARD TO THE female videographer from Human Events who was attacked several times by a belligerant black woman attending the One Country hatefest on October 2, who for some reason did not want to be on camera , we cannot even imagine anyone at a Tea Party rally behaving like this toward a reporter who was merely quietly videotaping the event. And of course if they had, they would have been immediately arrested.

But leftists have behaved this way since the 1960s, (and I have the scars to prove it). Leftists are sad, angry, raging fools; blinded by hatred toward the very country and institutions who have given them so much. But as Oscar Wilde wrote, "the best revenge is living well." We have strong, loving families—children and grandchildren—and they (mostly) do not.

That is another reason that they hate us, and the shape of our values. Did you see pictures of all the litter these liberals left on the grounds while the Glenn Beck crowd and the Tea Party crowds leave the grounds as spotless as they found them?

Interesting observation, non?

Free Speech Lesson #2

To note the sheer ineptitude, or is it just plain fear and dhimmitude that the Left exhibits in dealing with what used to be considered proper morality, let us ask again how imperiled is the freedom of speech?

Take this passage from Slate magazine: "In 2004, filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered after making anti-Muslim remarks, as was the anti-immigrant politician Pim Fortuyn in 2002. Why is there so much anti-Muslim rhetoric in the Netherlands?"

Christ spoke of peace - Muhammed spoke of war.
Christ said to love others - Muhammed said kill them.
Christ said turn the other cheek - Muhammed said to behead those that offend you.

And guess which one the "peace and love" liberals rally behind? Because, just like Islam, the liberals, including the state media, is not about "tolerance" and "peace." Not in a thousand years. It's about control and domination with no freedom for anyone who doesn't think like they do, in bowing to the party line convinced of their own righteousness.

What we are up against is not just opposing ideologies. It comes down to the basic battle of GOOD versus EVIL.

Islam To Conquer America

There is No Generic Islam

A REFUGEE FROM THE MUSLIM Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020—a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

On the other side of the mountain, the cat is playing. Here's a snippet we found in the comment section of a Washington Post article suggesting that risk-tolerant China is investing heavily in Iraq as US companies stand pat. This, as the US is drained of its fortune in war while others swoop in to partnership the real business of nation building..

The Chinese are smarter than we Americans. While we are engaged in wars all over the world, some openly some not so openly, the Chinese seek to make friends and useful business connections. While the US supports useless sanctions against Iran, the Chinese are all over Iran making deals. Some Americans think the Chinese are Communists. They are communists in name only. First and foremost they are interested in business.

The US throws money away in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere on military spending or bribes to win influence and our national debt continues to grow. We get nothing from this type spending. The Chinese, using "soft power" are doing business and making money which they are spending to make China a better place for the Chinese. They are building highways, airports, rail lines, schools, factories, hospitals and rapidly improving life for their people. At the same time the US standard of living is dropping so fast that you can see it by driving through almost anywhere in America.

Can the American powers be this stupid? Perhaps not, as another quipster's hypothesis suggests. We've probably got a hush-hush deal with China; that in order to pay off US debt, we'll use our military to open up markets for them and call it even.

It's kind of like sometimes when you get in debt to the Mob, and they cut you a deal that you can work it off by helping them out with "collections" if you're a tough guy.

We shoot 'em, you loot 'em...

Oops, Let's Try That Revolution Again

Remember John Lennon?

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out?

John Lennon

"Life is a corrupting process
from the time a child learns to play
his mother off against his father
in the politics of when to go to bed;
he who fears corruption fears life."

David Saul Alinksy

The function of socialism is to raise
suffering to a higher level.

Norman Mailer

The Laughing President

IT'S A WONDERFUL DAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, but don't ask me about the details. That would take too much time away from the problems still at hand. Here's what we have in mind—a nice slice if argumentative heaven, as one rugged individualist to another. As some might say, "There, but for the grace of God, go I..."

Q: But aren't Anarchists just socialists?

A: In a greater sense, yes. Anarchists like Benjamin Tucker and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon were both Anarchists and socialists. Today, however, when one hears another refer to himself as a “socialist,” what the other person usually means is, “state-socialist.”

Though the difference seems to be lost in translation between Anarchists, socialists, and outsiders, it remains an important one to distinguish. As Ernest Lesigne, a French Anarchist of the 19th century, put it, "There are two Socialisms" and we here at the Project Scenewash have got both their numbers"

  • One is communistic, the other solidaritarian.
  • One is dictatorial, the other libertarian.
  • One is metaphysical, the other positive.
  • One is dogmatic, the other scientific.
  • One is emotional, the other reflective.
  • One is destructive, the other constructive.
  • Both are in pursuit of the greatest possible welfare for all.
  • One aims to establish happiness for all, the other to enable each to be happy in his own way.
  • The first regards the State as a society sui generis, of an especial essence, the product of a sort of divine right outside of and above all society, with special rights and able to exact special obediences; the second considers the State as an association like any other, generally managed worse than others.
  • The first proclaims the sovereignty of the State, the second recognizes no sort of sovereign.
  • One wishes all monopolies to be held by the State; the other wishes the abolition of all monopolies.
  • One wishes the governed class to become the governing class; the other wishes the disappearance of classes.
  • Both declare that the existing state of things cannot last.
  • The first considers revolutions as the indispensable agent of evolutions; the second teaches that repression alone turns evolutions into revolution.
  • The first has faith in a cataclysm. The second knows that social progress will result from the free play of individual efforts.
  • Both understand that we are entering upon a new historic phase.
  • One wishes that there should be none but proletaires. The other wishes that there should be no more proletaires.
  • The first wishes to take everything away from everybody. The second wishes to leave each in possession of its own.
  • The one wishes to expropriate everybody. The other wishes everybody to be a proprietor.
  • The first says: ‘Do as the government wishes.’ The second says: ‘Do as you wish yourself.’
  • The former threatens with despotism. The latter promises liberty.
  • The former makes the citizen the subject of the State. The latter makes the State the employee of the citizen.
  • One proclaims that labor pains will be necessary to the birth of a new world. The other declares that real progress will not cause suffering to any one.
  • The first has confidence in social war. The other believes only in the works of peace.
  • One aspires to command, to regulate, to legislate. The other wishes to attain the minimum of command, of regulation, of legislation.
  • One would be followed by the most atrocious of reactions. The other opens unlimited horizons to progress.
  • The first will fail; the other will succeed.
  • Both desire equality. One by lowering heads that are too high. The other by raising heads that are too low.
  • One sees equality under a common yoke. The other will secure equality in complete liberty.
  • One is intolerant, the other tolerant.
  • One frightens, the other reassures.
  • The first wishes to instruct everybody. The second wishes to enable everybody to instruct himself.
  • The first wishes to support everybody. The second wishes to enable everybody to support himself.
  • One says: The land to the State. The mine to the State. The tool to the State. The product to the State. The other says: The land to the cultivator. The mine to the miner. The tool to the laborer. The product to the producer.
  • There are only these two Socialisms. One is the infancy of Socialism; the other is its manhood.
  • One is already the past; the other is the future.
  • One will give place to the other.

I would add another socialism to this dichotomy, in a sense much more pernicious than either of the first two when strapped against the winds of reality swirling through the early 21st century. The third socialism is that which mouths the idealism of the future, yet remains steadfast in its error.

Sunstein Says Americans Too Racist

Work, get paid, dish out taxes, stay put...

BUT HEY WAIT, there's more, this Cass Sunstein fellow says that Americans are too racist FOR SOCIALISM. And he defends communism and the welfare state but says that this nation's 'white majority' opposes programs aiding blacks and Hispanics. What about all those obese out of work white folks still clinging to guns and religion? Guess they don't even figure into the race-baiters wealth redistribution strategies. Methinks, of course, we need a new deck. That race card is so frayed, we can see it coming, and it's ALWAYS coming, from the bottom of the deck, from the top of the deck, from somebody's cuff-linked sleeve, yes, it's always coming from somewhere, no matter how skewered the results...

Socialism? This despite the fact that nearly every former socialist nation, including those in western Europe, are warning the US that socialism isn't all it's cracked up to be, as even they are moving away from the organizing system that suffers from too much rampant idealism and not enough bootstrap periphery.

In "The Second Bill of Rights," WND reported, the self-professed communist Obama aide Cass Sunstein proposed a new "bill of rights" in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. Among his mandates:

  • The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
  • The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
  • The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
  • The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
  • The right of every family to a decent home;
  • The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
  • The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
  • The right to a good education.

The Obama czar's controversial comments were made in his 2004 book "The Second Bill of Rights," which was obtained and reviewed by WND. On one page in his book, Sunstein claims he is "not seriously arguing" his bill of rights be "encompassed by anything in the Constitution," but on the next page he states that "if the nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the Constitution itself."

Later in the book, Sunstein argues that "at a minimum, the second bill should be seen as part and parcel of America's constitutive commitments." WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.

Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement, which openly seeks to create a "progressive" consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime into being.

Just before his appearance at the conference, Sunstein wrote a blog entry in which he explained he "will be urging that it is important to resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party."

That's rich. Notice how Sunstein in his first amendment says that everyone should have the right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation. He didn't mention that everyone has the "right" to a publishing contract, or a paying gig in the arts, a cush talking head job, or a gravy train in politics.

Rather, he intends his own brand of segregation touting a system that demands that everyone participate in this new slavery, the new feudalism, enunciated and controlled by the prestigious oligarchy of beautiful and bright, hand-picked elites who know to toe the party line, and are amply rewarded with entry into the gated communities of government from on high.

Cass Sunstein, Obama czar

Notice also, the usage of the word "decent" when describing certain guarantees this new world order claims to represent. Who gets to decide what is decent or just shy of Shantyville? Who tells me that what I choose to attain or acquire or inherit is too extravagant, and what in all this decision-making is based on criteria other than the equalitarian limits of the open marketplace? We've all seen this movie before. From the September 29 issue of New York Times, itself a bastion of liberal pretentions:

"Even in the midst of one of the greatest challenges to capitalism in 75 years, involving a breakdown of the financial system due to “irrational exuberance,” greed and the weakness of regulatory systems, European Socialist parties and their left-wing cousins have not found a compelling response, let alone taken advantage of the right’s failures.

German voters clobbered the Social Democratic Party on Sunday, giving it only 23 percent of the vote, its worst performance since World War II. Voters also punished left-leaning candidates in the summer’s European Parliament elections and trounced French Socialists in 2007. Where the left holds power, as in Spain and Britain, it is under attack. Where it is out, as in France, Italy and now Germany, it is divided and listless."

No matter what methodologies these aggressive statists intend to use in cutting the materialistic pie, we are told that we will be guaranteed decent jobs, decent health care, decent wages, decent lives. Meanwhile why are these cut-throat millionaires doing all the talking, doing the deciding for us? As constitutional Americans we are already guaranteed an equal opportunity to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, within the realms of moral responsibility. We are not guaranteed a bowl of soup, a box of rocks, a diamond ring, or a job, but we are at liberty to pursue any and all of these things.

But a totalitarian statism is like a skin disease which encompasses all and threatens to spread to every organ in the body, and I respond with a deliberately loud and progressive—NO THANK YOU!

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”
—Norman Thomas, Socialist

As for me, I would rather fail completely while chasing a dream, embrace my aching inner hobo, and take my God-given liberty to my grave than to play with the scorching fires of committed communism. The founding fathers knew what they were talking about as they studied man's history in dealing with other men. We were warned. And now, perhaps, the greatest threat to America as a freedom-seeking nation since the Civil War is upon us.

That peculiar stealth threat is already upon our shores. While Mister Obama signs away our rights of freedom of speech to the OIC-dominated United Nations, we must ponder how quickly and where the enemy may pounce next.