Occupy Admits Its Real Goal: Communism … Que: @RedScareBot

August 21, 2012

(IBD) The Left: An Occupy organizer admitted over the weekend that the goal of his protest group was to “overthrow the capitalist system and build communism.” So the cat’s out of the bag again on this bunch. Where is the outrage?
The true agenda of the Occupy movement has been revealed — it’s a totalitarian one. Billing itself as a spontaneous people’s revolution and embraced by the media and Democrat political establishment, Occupy is really a destructive band of thugs whose goal is the violent demise of democracy.
Speaking at a “People’s Assembly” in Washington, former Amalgamated Transit Union local 689 president Mike Golash told Occupy members his goal was to “make revolution in the United States, overthrow the capitalist system and build communism.”

The Occupy organizer added that he was “trying to learn something from the examples of the Soviet Union, Red China and Castro’s Cuba. … What can we learn from them so we can build a more successful movement to transform capitalist society?” he asked.
This attachment to the miserable failure of communism — an ideology that left 100 million people dead in the 20th century and met its demise as an idea after millions rose up in 1989-90 to repudiate it — is insane.
Remarks like Golash’s were common among the Occupy mobs who filthied up Los Angeles and other cities last year — perfectly representative of Occupy thinking.
Such talk never fazed anyone at the “People’s Assembly” either. Maybe that’s because it’s of a piece with the thinking of Occupy master planner, SEIU boss Stephen Lerner, who in 2011 said he wanted to bring down the stock market and destroy banks such as JPMorgan.
Occupy flourishes because it draws support and legitimacy from the media and like-minded Democratic politicians who pitch a fit anytime someone accuses them of supporting the destruction of democracy.
Not long ago, Democrats pounded Rep. Allen West for pointing out that Congress is loaded with soft-core communists who sugarcoat themselves as the “progressive caucus.” They are Occupy’s loudest supporters.
Democratic leaders such as then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hailed Occupy as “spontaneous,” while President Obama himself heaped sympathy on the group, even intervening in a local police matter to keep Occupy Portland members from being arrested.
It’s a disgrace. Occupy is nothing but a far-left group, learning nothing from the past yet drawing support from the left. Is communism the agenda they really stand for? From Golash’s remarks, it looks like it.


Allen West: Obama intentionally killing the economy

December 28, 2011
(EYE) First, a short history lesson.
Karl Marx believed that capitalism must be destroyed and replaced by socialism which will pave the way to communism:

Marx’s theories about society, economics and politics, which are collectively known as Marxism, hold that all societies progress through the dialectic of class struggle. He was heavily critical of the current socio-economic form of society, capitalism, which he called the “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”, believing it to be run by the wealthy middle and upper classes purely for their own benefit, and predicted that, like previous socioeconomic systems, it would inevitably produce internal tensions which would lead to its self-destruction and replacement by a new system, socialism. Under socialism, he argued that society would be governed by the working class in what he called the “dictatorship of the proletariat”, the “workers state” or “workers’ democracy”. [Exactly what the Occupy Wall Street parasites are advocating for. -ed.] He believed that socialism would, in its turn, eventually be replaced by a stateless, classless society called pure communism. Along with believing in the inevitability of socialism and communism, Marx actively fought for the former’s implementation, arguing that both social theorists and underprivileged people should carry out organised revolutionary action to topple capitalism and bring about socio-economic change. [Again, exactly what Occupy Wall Street parasites and Obama are fighting for. -ed.]

Fast forward to 2011. Avowed Marxists radical leftist professors Cloward and Piven, heavily influenced by Saul Alinsky, took it even further, advocating that “government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet”, which would collapse the economic system, resulting in violent takedown of the power by the “downtrodden”:

Their article called for “cadres of aggressive organizers” to use “demonstrations to create a climate of militancy.” Intimidated by threats of black violence, politicians would appeal to the federal government for help. Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of “a federal program of income redistribution,” in the form of a guaranteed living income for all — working and non-working people alike. Local officials would clutch at this idea like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it. With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act. This was an example of what are commonly called Trojan Horse movements — mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. The flood of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown — providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That was the theory.

Sounds familiar? This is what Obama is trying to achieve, with ballooning national debt and an overwhelmed welfare system. “We are on their side“, he said of the Occupy Wall Street “revolutionary foot soldiers” spoken of by Cloward and Piven.
And now, Allen West, calling a spade a spade:

…yeah… but my guess is that Obama has no intention of holding power when the system implodes. The thing about inflation is the long term effects of the abuse from printing money that is not reflective of a countries wealth could take years to collapse from within. When leftists say the economy has reached a point where it is no longer in free fall they fail to mention the long term effect of the problem created. This is going to be Obama’s argument. He is going to point out that he revived the economy… and that is the problem. What he is doing is juicing the economy full of sugar… and eventually our system will self destruct… but Obama will say… hey… it wasn’t me. This is very similar to what FDR did (though he didn’t live long enough to see the long term effects of his New Deal, but many of us remember the urban decay). Think of the inner city riots of the 70’s and the African American migration from rural America… because the government bailed out the white farmer (who no longer needed the black share cropper). The level of irresponsibility is exponential.

Cultural Leftism

November 18, 2011
Theoretical leftism and class warfare was a lot less destructive then cultural leftism and class warfare. The Jews predominantly created Christianity and it was Christian culture that committed genocide on the Jews, likewise the Jews predominantly created leftism and class warfare and the end result is cultural leftism is trying to kill us now. Who were the National Socialists? Why are we not allowed to call them Socialists? …why, because it would offend Stalin. But even though we own the logic, the cultural horde marches on.

Fidel Castro’s Niece in Twitter Row with Cuban Dissident Yoani Sánchez

November 10, 2011

(h/t Libra Bunda) THE GUARDIAN: Mariela Castro – daughter of president Raúl – calls dissidents ‘despicable parasites’ hours after joining Twitter
Within hours of signing up to Twitter, the daughter of the Cuban president, Raúl Castro, has got into the online equivalent of a shouting match with a prominent dissident blogger, Yoani Sánchez.
Mariela Castro called Sánchez and her supporters “despicable parasites” in a brief exchange that may have been the first direct confrontation, verbal or otherwise, between dissidents and a member of the Castro family after years of mutual animosity.
Sánchez, who regularly criticises the lack of freedoms in communist Cuba in her Generation Y blog, touched off the dispute by sending tweets that welcomed Mariela Castro to the “plurality of Twitter” where “no one can shut me up, deny me permission to travel or block entrance”.
“When will we Cubans be able to come out of other closets?” she asked, alluding to Mariela Castro’s championing of gay rights as head of Cuba’s national centre for sex education.
“Tolerance is total or is it not?” Sánchez tweeted.
Castro, 49, replied coolly: “Your focus of tolerance reproduces the old mechanisms of power. To improve your ‘services’ you need to study.”

I know all my right wing readers are looking for me to fry a Communist, but I’m not going to do that. Castro’s response is correct, and I’m shocked that I agree with her. Toleration of Evil is a crime… is the well known quote from the Socialist Thomas Mann that Conservatives love to quote,,, and it is true. Castro’s argument was sound, but Cuba’s proportions are all off. The Castros have tolerated plenty of intolerance… and that is why theory is all bunk. Do I need to detail the amount of intolerance that the Castros have tolerated? It would be endless. Today the Castro family tolerated Shia controlled Iran for starters. and while Fidel has attempted to make ammends with Jews and Homosexual… it is all words. That is what the Castro people are. Monsters out of theory.

Envious Marx

July 21, 2011
In an early meditation on “raw” or “crude” Communism (der rohe Communismus), by which he meant the Communism of Babeuf and Buonnaroti, Marx explained its appeal as a universalization of envy. By implication, he distanced himself from it:

Universal envy establishing itself as a power is only the disguised form in which greed re-establishes and satisfies itself in another way. The thought of every piece of private property as such is at the very least turned against richer private property as envy, and the desire to level, so that envy and the desire to level in fact constitute the essence [of the hatred of the results] of competition. Crude communism is only the fulfillment of this envy and leveling on the basis of a preconceived minimum.

This is a highly sophisticated moral discourse that cuts to the quick of the mechanisms of ressentiment parading as idealism. But for all such insight, Marx ended up stoking the very fires he here critiqued. Helmut Schoeck notes: “It is only in Marxism, the abstract and glorified concept of the proletariat, the disinherited and exploited, that a position of implacable envy is fully legitimized.” – The Augean Stables

the obvious is that Marx was not consistant on his view of Envy, Jealousy and Greed. The Post Marxists were very concerned with libidinal desire and attempted to fuse Marx with Freud. It became necessary to ask if there was a violent human reaction because of envy then existentially why must this be so? Was it inherent? Marx really resolved nothing. (image source)

How Four Influential Socialist Anti-Semites Shaped the Left

July 16, 2011

“How Four Influential Socialist Anti-Semites Shaped the Left” looks at the impact that the bigotry of Karl Marx, H.G. Wells and the man who coined the word “Socialism” had on the modern left today.  Here are some excerpts from Sultan Knish

Even as the Nazi Holocaust had begun, H.G. Wells wrote in The New World Order (1940);
“The hostile reaction to the cult of the Chosen People is spreading about the entire world to-day… there has never been such a world-wide—I will not use the word anti-Semitism because of the Arab—I will say anti-Judaism… it is becoming world-wide and simultaneous… Until they are prepared to assimilate and abandon the Chosen People idea altogether, their troubles are bound to intensify.”

Hyndman founded England’s first Socialist political party, the Social Democratic Federation. He also went on to found the National Socialist Party, which eventually became part of the Labor Party.
Hyndman and the SDF’s newspaper “Justice” carried on a relentless campaign of attacks against Jews. What is unique about Hyndman is that he employed those attacks only as a cover for a larger anti-war movement.

Leroux is credited with coining the term, ‘Socialism’. He also expressed the idea of commerce as an original Jewish sin in the clearest of terms. To Leroux, banking was the original sin of the Jews. And therefore commerce was the Jewish spirit.

Fourier, the co-creator of French Socialism, would take this premise to its more explicit conclusion, writing; “Every government having regard to good morals ought to repress the Jews”.
Unlike Wells or Marx, Fourier and Leroux were not so much aspiring to a new order, as they were to a scientific application of an old order (this was more like Hitler’s view of a return to a classical ideal past). A return to a pre-commercial civilization based on cooperation, rather than competition. This would be impossible if commerce were a natural human form of resource organization and distribution. So it was necessary to theorize that commerce was something alien. A creation of the Jews.

Marx depicted Jews as the anti-thesis of Socialism, a theme that he was to repeatedly revisit, and more poisonously in such essays as “The Russian Loan”, where he implicitly suggested that war would continue for as long as the Jews existed.

Hip and trendy anti-Israel hatred

June 9, 2011
The IDF is shown presumably targeting Palestinian civilians with tank fire. (An  interesting moral inversion in the context of Hamas’s use of an anti-tank missile at an Israeli school bus in April.) 

During the promotion of Live Aid… the cause (helping to feed starving children) would fail to move only those with the hardest hearts, what was notable in retrospect is how the song, and accompanying publicity, focused solely on helping the African victims of hunger in Ethiopia (around one million people died during the country’s 1984–1985 famine) and didn’t delve into the politics – despite the fact that the Marxist Ethiopian government’s policy of  enforced ‘resettlement’ programs, utilized as part of its counter-insurgency campaign, was one of the major causes of the starvation.  
My guess is that there was a conscious decision not to wade into politics in order to protect the purely humanitarian intent of the endeavor.
Today’s efforts to aid Palestinians, whether by NGOs, professional activists, or journalist activists at the Guardian, are not only unconstrained by such considerations, but something approaching the opposite is true: The pro-Palestinian cause is almost entirely monopolized by those possessing an unmistakable desire to demonize the Jewish state.

Here we’re treated to the site of inhumane Israelis who appear to be denying entry to a Palestinian mother and her sick child:

Not only is the Israeli soldier unmoved by the mother’s pleas regarding her sick child, but, as we’ll here, the soldier is then seen striking the woman. (Notice both the expression on the face of the soldier striking the innocent woman, as well as the additional faceless Israelis behind him):

Free Palestine is CODE for KILL THE JEWS!