Written by Karl Marx in 1848.
My question is, who is promoting this agenda in america today, and who stands against it ?
Here are the ten planks, along with my comments regarding the creeping signs in our country.
1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.
Try not paying your property taxes, and you will find out who owns your property. It isn't you. The tax system makes you a renter, renting from the government. Your property taxes can also be raised at any time, without your vote, merely by a 'reappraisal'. The recent Supreme Court expansion of the powers of eminent domain in Kelo v New London, brought to you by the liberal wing of the court, also weakened property rights substantially. The government can now take your property away and give it to another private entity for the sole reason of increased tax revenue. You have virtually NO private property rights. You're a squatter, for as long as the government decides to let you squat.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
Any questions as to which party advocates this the most ? You can add the Social Security Act to this also, since it is nothing but a hidden sham income tax with a welfare program at the back end. The 16th amendment, which made the income tax legal (maybe), violated the original Constitution, which said taxes were to either be direct and apportioned (all are taxed equally), or indirect. The income tax is direct and unapportioned.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance
The Estate tax, Probate laws. Republicans want to abolish or lower the estate tax. Democrats want to keep it and even increase it.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels
Confiscation of citizens property without due process (RICO laws), IRS confiscation of property without due process. Both parties are guilty here. Republicans passed the RICO laws, though many Republicans do want to abolish the IRS.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
We call it the Federal Reserve System, a private entity that, incredibly, charges the government (we the people) interest on the money it prints. The Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by Democrat Woodrow Wilson, though it would be inaccurate to put the blame all on Democrats for this. Republicans are probably even more to blame.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State
Hey, we've resisted this one pretty much, but we do have the FCC, DOT, FAA, AMTRAK, CONRAIL, and the post office.
7. Extention of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
The Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.
8. Equal liablity of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
Could illegal immigrants be our new industrial armies ? Could the high levels of taxation that caused mom and dad to both become part of the labor force be for that 'equal liability of all to labor' ? More workers means more government revenue means more government.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
Okay, if you say so.
10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
People are taxed to support government schools. Democrats support keeping the government school monopoly. Republicans support vouchers and school choice.
{ 23 comments… read them below or add one }
Yes indeedy, Dims = socialists.
But there's more. The Commies also wanted to elimate God and religion from public life — just like the Dims of today do.
The Dims also believe in a big and all-intrusive government run by an 'educated' elite (bureaucrats) — just like their soul-mates in the USSR did.
And now that I think of it, it was the Dim administrations of Truman and FDR which harbored commie traitors in high government position. And it was the liberals who either a) turned a blind eye or 2) made excuses for all the murders that their "Uncle" Joe Stalin committed in trying to build his Utopia.
Yes, you're on to something alright, King. But watch out. The Dims won't take kindly to your exposure of them and their true agenda for America. Posting like yours will surely get the dogs barking.
Vince, you forgot that we dims killed Elvis and Jim Morrison, flew the planes into the towers, threw rocks at kids at the special olympics, and were also largely responsible for Jim Chones' breaking his foot during the Miracle of Richfield. I bet those kids at Columbine were dims, too. C'mon, Vince, give us our due.
The Communist empire ended when the Soviets' moribund economy sputtered and expired in the 1980s.
Considering that half of America is people who are 35 years old or younger, cannot you find topics that are more relevant to comment on? Your "last word on Communism" is as obscure as recounting political angles of the Civil War.
No, the Dims didn't kill Elvis or Jim Morrison, nor did I say or imply that they did. But I can't resest your thrist for knowledge when you bleet out, "C'mon, Vince, give us our due."
Okay, here's your due. More than anyone else, today's Dims are complicit in the killing of tens of million unborn babies due to their unwavering support for abortion rights. In fact, every Dim presidential candidate carries about him/her the stench of the abortion mills.
+++
"The Communist empire ended when the Soviets' moribund economy sputtered and expired in the 1980s."
Well, almost expired, Tom. Unfortuantely, remnants of the commie empire still exist in many of our colleges & universities and in the fringes of the Dim Party. And besides, Chief, if we don't learn from history, we'll be forced to repeat it.
But I fully understand why you Dims want to flush the ugliness and excesses of your soul-mates in the USSA, Red China, etc. down the memory hole. Sorry, it can't be done.
da truth,
"…were also largely responsible for Jim Chones' breaking his foot during the Miracle of Richfield".
I THOUGHT SO !!!
Darn Dems. Did they make Ernest Byner fumble against the Broncos in '87 too ?
Tom,
The half of america who are 35 of younger are precisely the people who need to know this stuff. You know what they say. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
There is another pesky fact as well. A couple billion people still live under communist/socialist regimes, so I think it's still pretty relevant, though I can see why liberal Democrats would like to pretend it's not.
King,
No, Byner fumbled on his own, however, he is likely a dim. Although dims did put the Browns in a prevent defense during THE DRIVE………..and it was dim policy that forced Hargrove to go to Mesa in Game 7……..
Vince,
You're right, damn dim murderers. The fact that it's legal in the USA has nothing to do with it………and I just read a study that says no Republican has ever had an abortion! Who knew?
I bet if you checked, you would see that most people who get abortions are christians, like the majority of Americans. How does that comport with your beliefs all dims are godless? You're the ones using the very right you say we gave you!
"A couple billion people still live under communist/socialist regimes, so I think it's still pretty relevant, though I can see why liberal Democrats would like to pretend it's not."
When I read that I couldn't figure out, at first, who you were referring to….but now I understand…..it's all those Wal-Mart working capitalists in China. Yeah….that's sure some Commie country.
And Ghost….as usual….thanks for the laughs.
Truth, my bud,…..all those Christian women who get abortions
must do so because they are all being peer pressured, somehow, by devilish Democrats, to do so. See? It's not about choice…..it's about the Democratic terrorist war against Chrisitanity.
If it wasn't for the Democratic Party, all those Christian women wouldn't have had the choice in the first place. That choice would be in the hands of mostly white men, where the Christian god wants it. I mean, god is male, right?…..and everyone knows the Democratic Party is godless and anti-Christian. So by advocating for a woman's choice…..what the Dems are really doing is advocating for an anti-Christian platform. That's been the Dems plan all along….destroy Chrisitianity.
Something to do with the Baby Jesus ….or something.
Makes sense, huh?
No, I don't think for a minute that all Dims are godless. But one would have to be willfully blind not to see that godlessness is the guiding philosophy of the Dim Party and its establishment.
Now to a logic that's stupid even for you: You imply that since abortion is "legal" in America that it relieves its proponents of their guilt for it. Well you your edification, Chief, slavery was legal in the Democratic South before the Republican Abe Lincoln eliminated it. Did that make slavery legit? To your logic, I guess so.
Also, the extermination camps were legal in Nazi Germany as far as German law was concerned. So, did that make them okay?
And of course the tens of millions that communist/socialist Joe Stalin eliminated were "legal" murdered under what passed for law in the good, old USSR.
But because you are in the godless Dim party, you can't seem distinguish the difference between what is legal from what is right and/or moral. You are what is called a Positivist. God help you.
In any event, abortion is one of the defining characteristics of today's Dim Party, and it is a burden all Dims must share.
So let's hear your defense of abortion. B.Hussein Obama, Comrade Hillary and the rest of the Dims aren't shy of their voicing their unquestioning support for killing unborn babies; why should you be?.
I have no problem voicing my support for a woman's right to choose. At the same time, like most dims, I would hope no woman would ever choose to get an abortion. Perhaps if you would open your pea-sized brain and ever actually listen to what we think and watch what we do, you would understand our position on things. Not accept, but understand. But, alas Vince, understanding is something methinks you would not understand.
I would point out to you that you are also a liar. You said:
"No, I don't think for a minute that all Dims are godless."
First of all, in prior posts on this blog, you have more than once called all dims godless. Now, in your same post, you said:
"But because you are in the godless Dim party….."
Sounds to me like someone isn't even reading his own posts!
As for your point on the other activities you cited as "legal", yes, those things were legal at one time. I can't speak to what Germany and Russia did, but as for slavery, it was the rule of law. When Lincoln and the North decided it should not be, they took action. What's your excuse? If the majority of Americans wanted abortion stopped, it would be stopped. If Republicans had wanted it stopped, they have had opportunities to put the issue before a conservative Supreme Court and have not done so, because they knew they would get hammered in elections if abortion was again illegal. So what's more important to you, Vince, the rule of law? The will of the people? The Unites States Constitution? Or your own pea-brained view on an issue that has likely never directly affected you?
If you're going to accept the U.S. Constitution, Vince, you have to accept it all. I don't interfere when republicans walk around shooting each other in the face on their hunting trips. You have your 2nd Amendment rights. But along with those rights come other rights.
By the way, I love the continuous veiled slur you throw at Mr. Obama. Genius! Did you learn that at bible school?
Rev,
Brilliant. You said it better than I ever could have. Thank you.
I would point out to you that you are also a liar. You said:
'No, I don't think for a minute that all Dims are godless.
First of all, in prior posts on this blog, you have more than once called all dims godless. Now, in your same post, you said:
'But because you are in the godless Dim party…..'
++++
No, I am not a liar. Nor am I contradictory. It's your reading comprehension that's faulty.
It is my position that many — perhaps even most — of the run-of-the-mill Dims are NOT godless. But their party and their party's leading philosophy is. To put it another way, the run-of-the-mill Dim is not godless but he/she is a dupe of those that are.
When you read, you have to distinguish the context in which the writing is done. For example, when I say "Dims," do I mean the party leadership or the guy on the street who pulls the voting lever for the Dim on the ballot? The meaning is clear in the context; this is Reading Comprehension 101.
+++
What "veiled slur" are you referring to me using? Is it using "Mr. Obama" very own name that you find offensive? Why? As to B. Hussein Obama, perhaps you will recall it was former senator John Kerry (D-Neb) who, when endorsing Comrade Hillary, highlighted Obama's Muslim roots and actually said it was an asset for him. If that sounds contradictory or like a backhanded compliment, realize that is just one of the ways your Clintons deal the race/religious card off the bottom of the deck. They don't do it directly; they do it through their stooges
So the admiration you have for what you have wrongly construed as my "veiled slur," know where I got it from. No, not Bible class. Quite the opposite — the Clintons.
Or maybe your complaint is that I observed that the liberal LA Times call "Mr. Obama" the "magic Negro." Did I commit a faux pas here? Is "Negro" the dreaded n-word that I keep hearing about on the TV? Or is it just wrong for a conservative to repeat what liberals (and Dims) themselves say when analyzing a political phenomena such as the ascendancy of a two year U.S. senator to the position of competition for the presidential nomination of the Dims?
Rev,
What, you think a country can't be communist (China) just because they figured out how to sell things to other countries ? I think you better go back and check the definition of communism. Communism is when property and production is owned by the state, and where everybody shares in the poverty, er, I mean, the wealth. You know, like we'd be under Hillary or Edwards. Just because China sells Wal-Mart a pair of shoes doesn't mean they're not communist. Duh.
da truth,
I don't know, Marty ball (the prevent) seemed rather conservative to me.
Plus, if liberals played football, they'd quit, go home, and declare it a loss as soon as the other team fought back.
I played football….a lot of football…..I'm a liberal. I always had the advantage over non-liberal football players, despite their size advantages.
Why?
Because liberals are smarter. Outsmarting the other team is so invigorating. Take for instance, this election cycle.
Yeah King, I think Rev has a point. The SEC is blowing out the Big 10 for the most part these days because they actually think of ways to try to move the game forward.
In any event, does anyone know if LeBron is conservative or liberal? I mean, I know his race would lead us to believe one thing, but his tax bracket says the other. In any event, he still needs to work on his free throws………
Vince, is that the best you can do? You're starting to sound like John Kerry now yourself.
Ok, so the party is godless, the people in it are not. I guess that would make sense…..if you were running for office. Excuse me for not realizing your linguistic skills. I didn't take reading comprehension 101 but I do know that if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's a duck. In other posts, and if you like I'll go get them, you have called all dims godless. You never distinguished between party leaders and the man on the street before, so why start now? They're your words, so stand by them. At least Mr. Bush does that, why can't you?
What I should have suspected is that this would all come back to the Clintons. We could have saved a few posts if you would have just said all of these things were their fault in the beginning. I would say, you should be careful, don't want to end up in the Clinton circle of murder, do you?
Unlike you, I could care less what some LA movie critic decides to call Mr. Obama. And it is interesting you use Mr. Kerry to defend your point, but I never mentioned him either. My question is, when you mention your beloved Republican candidates, you don't post their middle names? You know the answer. Your pea brain can't see beyond Mr. Obama's race.
Good point about Mr. Obama's ascendancy, though. Kinda reminds one of how a failed oilman riding on his family name became the head of the strongest political party in the nation and the leader of the free world.
Hussein=Dubya
"I didn't take reading comprehension 101 "
Obviously. It shows.
+++
"… you should be careful, don't want to end up in the Clinton circle of murder, do you?"
No, I sure don't. But in that regard, wouldn't B. Hussein Obama have more to worry about than I? I think so.
+++
"Your pea brain can't see beyond Mr. Obama's race. "
"Pea brain?" How creative of you; how immature. But go ahead, throw you little pout if it makes you feel better.
++++
As to the use of Mr. Obama's middle name, it in no way implies his race.
But, his religion, that Obama was once a Muslim and he has a Muslim father, well yes, the use of Hussein does indicate that. But we can't expect some with as low a reading comprehension ability as you to understand that. So keep reading the posts, Chief, you'll get yourself an education, maybe even some polish, too.
Vince, that's interesting, you calling me immature. When you're the one who calls everybody names and says they can't read. The only person I have ever called a name on here is you. You do it in virtually every post you make towards anyone who disagrees with you.
Since we're bringing up things in people's pasts, how about talking about how George "cokehead" Bush ruined businesses because of his drug and alcohol abuse? Something like that would be more important than someone's middle name in terms of being qualified for President, wouldn't it? No, not to you, because as long as that big "R" comes after their name, you could care less what they stand for.
Vince, it's people like you that are what's wrong with America. Your closed-mindedness shows not only a lack of tolerance for other views, it shows an ignorance of the type of discourse inherent in this country's history. I will read the posts, you do the same. Maybe you'll notice how I am able to disagree with da king on things without either of us calling each other names or worrying about things that have no bearing on the discussion. You are exactly what is wrong with American political reality today.
da truth,
The Rev isn't smarter, he's just more dishonest. He only butted into our football conversation because I blew his nonsense about communism out of the water.
As for the SEC beating the Big 10, the SEC is in the south, and the south is MORE CONSERVATIVE than the north, remember ? da King shoots and scores, lol.
Hey, wait a minute, I'm a Buckeye fan. What am I saying ?Rats. Hoisted on my own petard.
And I won't venture a guess on Lebron. If he is a liberal, I'd just as soon not know…but he DOES calls himself The King, just like yours truly (though I had the name first)
da truth,
If the guy you call George "cokehead" Bush's activities should have disqualified him from being president, aren't you also saying Obama should be disqualified from being president ?
Btw, has it ever been proven that Bush did cocaine ? To my knowledge it hasn't.