American SITREP: Left Versus Right Equals Same Goals

We have come to know terms like “left wing” and “right wing” - opposites in the political arena of America. To be extreme “Left” is to be a socialist or a communist, while a radical of the “Right” are considered fascists. But people don't realize that the three political ideologies have a common factor, a purpose one might say, and that is collectivism. 

According to Wikipedia:

Collectivism is any philosophic, political, religious, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human being. Collectivism is a basic cultural element that exists as the reverse of individualism in human nature (in the same way high context culture exists as the reverse of low context culture), and stresses the priority of group goals over individual goals and the importance of cohesion within social groups (such as an "in-group", in what specific context it is defined). Collectivists usually focus on community, society, or nation. It is used and has been used as an element in many different and diverse types of government and political, economic and educational philosophies throughout history, ranging from communalism, democracy, monarchy, and socialism to totalitarian nationalism and exists in some organized religions.

America today is comprised of both collectivism and individualism, the latter being established by the Founders in creating our government and drafting the US Constitution.

Another theme that socialism, communism, and fascism share is that government grants rights and liberties (or takes them away), while the individualist system insists that government doesn't have the authority, but a higher purpose does – humans are born to be individuals, yet are social creatures.

One of the best text against collectivism was written by Friedrick Hayek in his book The Road to Serfdom, published in 1944.

Ludwig von Mises wrote:

On the other hand the application of the basic ideas of collectivism cannot result in anything but social disintegration and the perpetuation of armed conflict. It is true that every variety of collectivism promises eternal peace starting with the day of its own decisive victory and the final overthrow and extermination of all other ideologies and their supporters. ... As soon as a faction has succeeded in winning the support of the majority of citizens and thereby attained control of the government machine, it is free to deny to the minority all those democratic rights by means of which it itself has previously carried on its own struggle for supremacy. ⁱ

Ayn Rand (founder of objectivism) was an opponent of collectivism because it leads to totalitarianism. She wrote:

Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group … throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing the common good. … horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by altruists who justify themselves by the common good. ⁱⁱ

Democratic socialism is how historians have described socialism that has been established within a democracy. It is a political movement that use authoritarian principles in order to achieve socialism and decentralized economic democracy; and because of the varied opinions, democratic socialism is hard to define. Basically it is what the “new” Democratic Party of the 1990s has based their political platform in which they feel that democracy can be successfully coupled with socialist ideology through social programs. But what it really does is empower the government and slowly erode individual rights and liberties for the benefit of the collective.

When John F. Kennedy stated:

Ask not what your country can do for you: Ask what you can do for your country.

John F. Kennedy

Was he referring to patriotism or was preaching the collective?

Often the phrase has been interpreted as his way of saying that welfare programs should be kept to a minimum – for Americans at that time began to slip into dependency upon government for which things before the Great Depression Americans provided for themselves.

It is odd, when thinking in logical terms, how the American people continue to rely upon government and aid in its growth beyond its constitutional limitations, when in fact it was the government who caused the Great Depression that allowed the financiers to gain too much control within the government; as well as the mistake of Woodrow Wilson in establishing the Federal Reserve system run by financial wizards who now operate outside the jurisdiction of the government and yet has power over it. Woodrow Wilson also established, with the help of Congress, the income tax system – which is a major means of controlling the population through its earnings from labor. The increase upon the scope of regulations within the tax system has increased and the IRS, an arm of the United States Treasury Department now has the power that only the legislative and judiciary branch are supposed to have. As Thomas Jefferson stated:

I place economy among the first and most important virtues and public debt as the greatest dangers to be feared.

Based upon Friedrich von Hayek's book, Road to Serfdom, Jacob Hornberger, founder of Future Freedom Foundation, wrote:

There is no difference in principle, between the economic philosophy of Nazism, socialism, communism, and fascism and that of the American welfare state and regulated economy.

When socialism is divided into three sections: Marxist Socialism, Nationalist Socialism, and Democratic Socialism – one can see that there is -

no economic distinction between socialist systems in different political wrappers … The conclusion of socialism by any name, once it has replaced Rule of Law with the rule of men, is tyranny. ⁱⁱⁱ

In America, socialism has evolutionized, infiltrated by elements of foreign espionage and organized infiltration by Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler, the latter establishing neo-Nazi groups that have become known as White Supremacists. Stalin helped forge the Soviet Union's foreign insertion of the ideology of socialism and communism through American organizations that infiltrated aspects of the American infrastructure from trade unions to the seat of government in Washington, DC. ^iv

Alexander Solzhenitsyn (Noble Prize winner and Russian dissident) wrote:

Socialism of any type leads to a total destruction of the human spirit.

Democratic Socialism seeks a centrally planned economy directed by a dominant-party state that controls economic production by way of taxation, regulation and income redistribution. ^v

Patriot Post image

Of course, such discussion of comparison of Democratic Socialism to Marxist and Nationalist Socialism is an met with cries of being “offended” from the American political Left – who views, incorrectly, that National Socialism is the ideology of the extreme Right. It is false, as G. Edward Griffin explains in his video. They fail to realize that Americans who think that democratic socialism is a path to follow because it takes the best from both ideologies is delusional and misinformed. History shows us differently. They are paving a path to tyranny – it just takes the right leadership figure to lead us, just as Hitler did in the 1930s, who in his campaign for power used the economic misery of Germany and the people someone to blame for it as well as a promise for a better future. It was accomplished at first, but the cost was greater than the short-lived economic success and traditional national pride.

While Barack Hussein Obama is not the first to push democratic socialism into our established democratic republic system, he has taken it to a higher level with the help of his radical and socialist cohorts. Like history shows us, a welfare state cannot survive financially, Obama doing his part in furthering the debt he promised to relieve in his “Hope and Change” campaign promises that has further escalated America's debt, as well as loss of liberties and downgrade of individualism.

Republicans who tag themselves as “moderates” fare no better in this slip toward the fall of our republic.

Overspending, or deficit spending, is a scheme that hides the confiscation of wealth. In 1960, distributions by the federal government were 10% of the total wages and benefits in America. Out of the total wages and employee benefits paid in 2010, 35% were paid by the federal government as wages, or in entitlement programs.

In my state of Wisconsin, we have citizens signing a petition to recall Governor Walker.

The reason?

Scott Walker

Because he is fulfilling a campaign promise of budgeting in order to reduce state debt. State government employees no longer get free retirement benefits – they are required to co-pay into the system just like the private sector. This upset the unions, who incited the teachers, who campaigned to oust Governor Walker. The plot thickens:

Twenty-nine circuit judges in Wisconsin, which includes the Door Peninsula judge – D. Todd Ehlers signed petitions to recall Governor Scott Walker. Their actions are not unlawful according to the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct; however, judges are supposed to be partial and non-political. Interestingly, only circuit judges signed and not appeals court judges or state Supreme Court judges.

Governor Walker has been advocating the voter identification law for Wisconsin to ensure lawful voting practices, especially since so many cities in Wisconsin are sanctuaries for illegal aliens. Dane County Judge David Flanagan, who on March 6^th issued a temporary restraining order on the voter identification legislation signed a petition to recall Governor Walker.

Governor Walker succeeded in harnessing the runaway budget of Wisconsin, but the unions, specifically the teachers' union, has pushed for recall. Some have changed their minds about the credibility of the trade unions who instigated all of this, when they found out that their union bosses (CEOs) get annual salaries that are three to four times more than Governor Walker.

The corruption and socialist ideologies reaches all levels of government in America, but it is harder to reform as government gets bigger reaching the top at federal level.

Barack Obama is relying on the naivety of the American people when he states:

Not only were we able to yank this economy out of the recession, not only were we able to get this economy going again, but in the last 15 months we've seen the economy add jobs. We didn't just rescue the economy; we put it on the strongest footing for the future.

He must still think that no one noticed that the only campaign promise that occurred is the ObamaCare fiasco, and Americans are just starting to see that big costly pipe dream is going to be another federal government shell game.

The Tea Party movement began as a non-affiliation with political parties, in fact was founded by those who were disappointed in GW Bush and Barack Obama – seeking reformation that would bring back the Jeffersonian republic, curb the powers of government (specifically federal government) and stop asking more and more in tax hikes while the government continues to spend more and more. They were definitely against Big Government.

As the movement grew, however, political parties took notice and the GOP establishment decided to get their hand into this situation. For that is what the two parties have been doing for decades, taking on a movement, making themselves as the creators, and then tailoring according to their established political philosophies and agenda.

The Democratic Party met the movement head on by using their tried and proven methods of making any opposition to their agenda look ridiculous and paint the Tea Party advocates as radicals. The movement became too big to be successful – despite what the mainstream media wanted the people to believe.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party continued to gain control of the movement, which in turn, they have achieved some success in tailoring it towards their political goals. Sarah Palin became the main spokesperson, along with other “conservative” notables that are dedicated Republican Party members and the main reason for the Tea Party movement became corrupted with partisanship instead of sticking to its theme of limited government by including in their membership those politicians who are RINOs, who describe themselves as “moderates” who are in reality a GOP form of collectivism. So mavericks that have been against “left wingers” have forgotten that there are those who are not following the rule of law that call themselves “conservatives” - but are not.

During the course of this time, as it has been at least for 50 years, the American people bounce back and forth between the American left and the American right – all the while slowly losing their government to the establishment that is the true power in Washington. In other words, those that want to keep business as usual in the federal government – occasionally providing something to appease the public into thinking they are actually making a difference in the fight against Big Government.

Pretty much, that is the situation occurring now in the GOP primary election – it is like watching debates between a Democrat and Republican, but between same party members. Those that are not in tune with the mainstream media's idea of who is a viable candidate to win or not in tune with the establishment of the right wing element of the GOP elite who don't want to lose the power they deviously worked hard to achieve.

One major ideology that BOTH political parties agree to is the formation of a world government, which is advocated by international big businesses who see it as a capital scheme. That world government is not thought of in terms of how and why the founders of the United States and the authors of the US Constitution envisioned or set in place, but instead, it would be a central power government. That means that collectivism will be set in place and the people who are not connected to that government would become like the medieval serfs – no real middle class will exist.

As part of this agenda, there is the dominance over the banking system as well as private enterprise, the means to retain and maintain their power. Anyone who voted for the bailouts of private enterprise using taxpayer dollars is part of those that are trending and prepping the American people into a state of collectivism and citizens dependent upon government from cradle to grave. BOTH political parties agree on these things – but do not make it known publicly, of course.

Meanwhile, they make each other look bad, because there must be a winner in the political arena.

When things go wrong they blame each other. They spend more time focusing upon blame than looking for solutions to issues and problems concerning government, American economy, and so on. The big illusion is when the members of Congress brag about bipartisanship – they want the power, but don't want to share it with each other.

These main points and several other minor ones represent what our federal government has become. Politicians only say what people want to hear, rarely actually doing it when elected or reelected.

Americans are dissatisfied, mostly because of the personal impact upon the economic situation where it is getting harder to budget their paychecks with rising costs that the government has caused with excessive legislation and intrusion – as well as creating such a large national debt that it will become impossible to put a halter on it.

Ron Paul has stepped on the toes of both parties, and thanks to the mainstream media, he is made to look the fool. The Democrats are outright against him, while the GOP establishment are using other methods under the table – ignoring him and Newt Gingrich, another person who fights against the establishment, but has also made some mistakes along the way.

Mark Alexander wrote:

If those elected to national office, regardless of political affiliation, fail to abide by their oaths to Support and Defend our Constitution, particularly its limitations on the central government which have been disregarded for much of the last century, then we, the people, will restore the integrity of our Constitution, as is our right and obligation. Rest assured, there will come a time for choosing as outlined by Ronald Reagan, and that time must come. … For those whom such notions offend, I offer these words of parting from Samuel Adams: "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom -- go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!"

Unfortunately, the rest of Americans must face the consequences of poor leadership, along with those that voted them into office.

Concern should not be in what the media and the political elite are saying – but what they are NOT saying.

Remember the North American Union idea?

It is off the radar, but it is still in place to be implemented when the time is ripe.

Waiting for that time is a big mistake, for it may be too late to do anything about it.

The elite (establishment) working in the the background behind these scenarios have established their minions within our educational system, which the federal government controls, and thus working towards a generation that will not know any better but to follow along to the government that pretends to be For the People but not allowing a government By the People.

Enuff said, for now …

ENDNOTES:

i Morris, Brian. Bakunin: The Philosophy of Freedom. Black Rose Books Ltd., 1993. p. 115.

ii Rand, Ayn. The Only Path to Tomorrow, Readers Digest, January 1944, pp. 88–90.

iii Alexander, Mark, Patriot Post, Democratic Socialism, March 10^th, 2011.

iv The person that exposed this, Joe McCarthy, was made to look like a bias zealot; which history proves that his investigations did not find the root of the infiltration nor the scope as it soon infiltrated the educational system, firs through the students and later the faculty of universities and colleges by the 1960s as well as into the bias of mainstream media. The Vietnam War was part of the plan of JFK to stem the tide of growing communism in countries outside of the Soviet Union and the Stalin “useful idiots” were aided by anti-war media as well as the fact that the war had not been ended in a timely manner. The result is that Washington ran the war from Washington instead of letting generals do their job in the field. It didn't free South Vietnam from communism, like what occurred in the cease fire of the Korean War.

vSee Essential Liberty.