Third Party & Independents Archives

February 11, 2010

Looking Down The Road

Felt the urge to put fingers to the keyboard today and just couldn’t seem to get a start. I prioritized my thoughts in the form of a tree but the limbs all seemed to run together. Then I watched the Glen Beck hour and it all came together.

I’ve been pounding the keyboard for a couple of years. I knew some bad stuff was going down but couldn't properly nail down the source. I’ve railed against the Corpocracy but was never sure they were 100% of our problems. Then along comes this Beck guy railing against Progressives. I thought they had died out back in the late 40’s. Taking a brief look at the Progressive movement of then and now it’s a mixed bag. Some of their goals in the 40’s are rejected by the modern Progressive and some goals of the modern Progressive were rejected by the earlier folks.

It seems Beck and I agree on much. That the Progressive movement is an off shoot, distant cousin, to the –ism’s. For instance, Hillary talks about being a Progressive and her favorite political organizer is an ex-commie. Obama talks of being a progressive and stands to ‘transform the world’. A lady on his staff talks of Mao and Mother Theresa as her favorite philosopher. Then there’s Van Jones and Cass Sustein and Saul Solinsky and so on. We agree that the Progressive agenda is to create some kind of theoretical utopia for workers of the world. That the US, for the last 100 years, has followed Europe down the path of Socialism. Before Beck, I blogged plenty about there being too much democracy in this Republic. We agree with the, perhaps conservative, but constitutional principle of small government and lots of liberty and freedoms. Individual rights and entrepreneurship, less government interference in our lives. We don’t just believe it, we demand it, in accordance with our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We also agree that the solution to our problems won’t come from government but from the people. In brief, I pretty much agree with Beck that a major cause of our problems is the Progressive, be they rep or dem, policies. Additionally, I hold some wrath in reserve for the Corpocracy. I could understand how the Corpocracy could create economic hardships on the masses but could not find them responsible for these socialistic policies we have endured. Thanks to Glen I now have a clearly defined target. Not saying that it’s likely there is another fringe group or two out there.
When Glen implies that the US is following Europe into the abyss I agree with him. Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain are busted big time. Greece is looking for someone to bail them out of their $28B debt. Similar to the various states, a la California, looking for a Fed bailout. Calif. is currently heaping a great fraud upon their citizenry by releasing supposedly non-felon prisoners, including illegal aliens, to plus their budget. Taxpayers are also paying for schooling illegal immigrants. Calif has a public debt of $20B. Will the Fed bail them out and what about the other states? One in 100 Nevada homes is in foreclosure. One in 400 nationally, 15% higher than in Jan 09. Default on commercial real-estate is expected to be about $1T. Clearly, the worst is yet to come.

Looks like Germany will take on the debt of Greece. Will China/US take on the debt of Calif, and others? Glen and I agree, governments have been lying to their people. Think NAU, think sovereign acquisitions of our security infrastructure, think of millions of illegal immigrants being given many of the rights of citizens, think when you hear ‘the worst is behind us’. Grecians are in the streets objecting to spending cuts. Ten percent of the population is working for the Greek government. Tax and spend, coming to an end there. Could be nasty, perhaps anarchy in the longest living (used-to-be) democracy. The EU say’s there is no sovereignty for EU countries, no turning back.

Our wakeup call is yet to come. Soon we will lose our AAA financial rating. That will likely end the run of US dollar as the world’s currency, thus ruining the dollar. For sure, going to get a lot more expensive to go to McDonald’s. Could be nasty, perhaps anarchy here too. But, we have an ace in the hole. Our Constitution. In a time of crisis we would stand up for our Constitution. People will stick to the Constitution and find a solution to our economic woes. But, as Glen says, and I agree, there will be a force for evil and a force for good. We had better make sure we make the right choice.

The right choice, IMO, is hardcore reform brought about by a populist 3rd party initiative like that represented by the Republic Sentry Party. A Party for 21st century politics designed to prevent being co-opted by corrupting influences, stressing more Republic and less Democracy as the Founder’s intended. For instance, watch carefully as the straying TEA baggers are led safely back to the folds of the GOP. And surely, every person understands that nothing can be done to correct our situation until campaign finance reform is put into effect. There is no sense in pretending at a government where elections can be bought by the Corpocracy. Campaign finance is reform #1 for the Republic Sentry Party.

Otherwise, we have the Socialist-Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by Roy Ellis at February 11, 2010 08:40 PM
Comment #295481

Why I won’t say that taking history lessons fron Glen Beck is wrong, I do believe you need to look at history for the last 200 years and ask yourselve why Americas’ Democratic and Republicans Political Parties are held to the Debate of Labor and Management.

For why we could debate if America or Europe started the Industrial Revolution, I do believe you would have to agree that without Commerce and Industry most Humans on Earth would not have many of the items they need to make their life easier.

However, looking into the future I do believe as America and Europe seek to find a Workable Economy that the folks like Glen Beck need to ask themselve how they will ass positively to the New World? For why “We the Corporation” can help “I the Corporation” and “We the Consumer” build a Green Sustainable Government and Society over the next 100 years. I wonder if America has the Management that can lead Labor or do “We the People” have to throw a revolution to make the Democratic Party Management and Republicans Labor?

For in the Political Thunderdome of Opinion, care to tell me which political party is standing in the Creek of Stupidity?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 12, 2010 01:44 AM
Comment #295483

Socialism is public ownweship of institutions. The public owns the transportation system. postal system,military,law enforcement,fire dept etc. Most likely you are connected to a socialist sewer system,water system and there is a possibility you use a minicipal power system. These things are all socialist. Some instituions just work better for more people that way. No big deal,dispite 80 years of paranoid propaganda perpetrated by a terror stricken ruling class.There is a socialist tradition in America that goes a long way back. To name just a few American socialist there are Jack London and Helen Keller(yes,that one). How about we start looking for things that work instead labelling. Our health care distribution system is the worst and most expensive in the industrial world. A shift to a more socialist system is clearly warranted. This won’t change a whole of a lot. Much of the system is socialist already,VA,government employee benefits,medicare,etc.But wow,what a reaction,Oh my God! socialism!What twaddle and a good deal of it from people already enjoying benefits from the part of the medical system that is socialist.
Many western counties are considerably more socialist than the US. Dispite the discredited propaganda from the right,they are generally doing just fine. Not utopias,as you put it,but pretty good, better retirements,more vacation time,easier access to health care etc. They are also vibrant democracies with religious tolerance,freedom of the press,universal suffrage etc.They also have vibrant private sectors with per capita GDP very close to what the US has. If your looking for boogiemen in your political endeavers pick the right ones.

Posted by: bills at February 12, 2010 06:59 AM
Comment #295484


We all misuse the term socialism. It refers to government ownership of the means of production. Police and fire departments don’t count because they are strictly services that do not produce products. Infrastructure is a little more problematic in this definition because they are adjuncts in production.

In many ways, socialism is the oldest form of economic organization. From earliest recorded history, the state owned or controlled most things. Really private enterprise only emerged about 300 years ago.

Major European countries and most of the world has been becoming less socialistic over the last decades. The UK famously did this under Margret Thatcher, and Labor never set the clock back, but Germany, France and others have reformed their economies in recent times.

Socialism always had its two faces. The benign one you could find in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where socialist majors brought honest administration, good parks and a forward looking sewer system. In fact they used to call is “sewer socialism”. Socialist principles can work when they are embedded in a non-socialist system, especially when socialist authorities do not control an army or the court system.

Then we have the bad socialism, which is really bad. Communist, Nazis and fascists all practice forms of state control.

People talk about ideal forms of government, but you have to look at what they do and what really becomes of them in the real world. A free market democracy can “corrupt” into a system like we have in the U.S. where powerful interests steer government in ways that are not optimal. But socialism corrupts into deadly tyranny. We have to be vigilant in all cases, but when you start down that road to giving the state the power to manage people’s lives by managing everything else, you often end up in a concentration camp.

Posted by: Christine at February 12, 2010 08:59 AM
Comment #295487

Christine, I am impressed with your assessment of the misused “socialiism” definition. Hopefully you are not disowned by the red column regulars for such blasphemy.

BTW are you saying mercantilism as practiced in Europe longer than 300 years ago was not a form of private enterprise?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 12, 2010 09:55 AM
Comment #295490

Henry, your train of thought is hard for me to follow. Like, ‘why are America’s two parties held to debating labor and management’? I can’t relate that to anything in my article. Maybe you are giving me too much credit for being inciteful and keen. As to who started us down the path of technological revolution, I suggest it began with the cave man and ‘incrementally’ developed from there.
I’m trying to communicate that I believe that the devastating effect of incremental corpocracy and the -ism’s is being felt and things will get far worse in the near future. So bad that we will have to choose between a statist regime similar to China or dust off the old Constitution and give it another spin. The corpocracy and the –ism’s will likely side with China. Are you concerned about who will win in that power struggle?
Bill’s writes that socialism is just everybody being nice to everybody and sharing in all the good things. Could be. But, from the broader meaning of the word, it could be something more.
Socialism defined by wiki-
System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice. Because “social control” may be interpreted in widely diverging ways, socialism ranges from statist to libertarian, from Marxist to liberal. The term was first used to describe the doctrines of Charles Fourier, Henri de Saint-Simon, and Robert Owen, who emphasized noncoercive communities of people working noncompetitively for the spiritual and physical well-being of all (see utopian socialism). Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, seeing socialism as a transition state between capitalism and communism, appropriated what they found useful in socialist movements to develop their “scientific socialism.” In the 20th century, the Soviet Union was the principal model of strictly centralized socialism, while Sweden and Denmark were well-known for their noncommunist socialism. See also collectivism, communitarianism, social democracy.
Socialism did not come with the Constitution, not mentioned anywhere in there. In fact, to prevent such socialistic ventures as debasing our sovereignty by creating a NAU and to prevent the leasing and selling of so-called public infrastructure the Constitution called for a small federal government with specific and limited powers. All the rest went to the state’s. Through incremental socialism, too much democracy, the Constitution has been abused, primarily by Progressive’s, to the point where things are upside down. The Fed runs virtually every aspect of our lives and is moving fast, taking advantage of every crisis to grab more control.
Apparently the FED sees success in failure as they are a failed government with seemingly little remorse or acting to change their modus operandi. Greece and several others are underwater from tax and spend, same as the US. We could possibly suffer the same fate as other failed governments. So, what might happen downstream as we lose triple ‘A’ financial certification? Think we are too big to fail? What will happen if we lose world currency status?
As I can tell the Socialistic-Corpocracy is plunging headfirst into the abyss. Toward that end some debate is worthy, IMO.
Otherwise, - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 12, 2010 10:19 AM
Post a comment