High Gas Prices and the Marxist tactic of Crisis revolution

From the article at American Thinker.
By AWR Hawkins
June 21, 2008

Karl Marx, (1818-1883), believed capitalism was the next to last stage in the evolution to an earthly utopia, which would be ushered in through revolution; a revolution resulting from the tensions that existed between workers and the owners of production. According to Marx, the final stage of this evolution toward utopia would result when workers rose up in revolution to overthrow the business owners who were exploiting them through a capitalistic economy. We know Marx's "utopia" and other aspects of his philosophy by their more prominent name: communism.

Marx's predictions grew out of his atheistic worldview; a worldview that made him hostile toward private property and the accumulation of wealth through capitalistic means. Although his perceptions of the exploitation of workers and his solidarity with those workers has been rigorously tested and found wanting by historian Paul Johnson, his support for communism and his hatred of privatization and its corresponding freedoms have been a mainstay of the Left since at least 1917, when Vladimir Lenin took them to heart and threw Russia into revolution.

Like Marx, Lenin pointed to the struggles and dichotomies in Russian society in order to postulate solutions; solutions to problems that were not always there. From roughly 1915 through 1917, Lenin repeatedly decried the exploitation of the Russian workers by the land and business owners. This "crisis" not only justified, according to Lenin's rhetoric, but demanded a revolution that would take power away from the land owners and give "power to the people."

Lenin's revolution against the "greedy" landowners was carried out at the end of a gun. The gun was necessary because the crisis Lenin saw was not a crisis that every Russian believed to be real. But as Crane Briton has pointed out in his work on revolutionaries, Lenin was willing to use force to move his countrymen toward what he thought was best for them, whether they agreed with him or not. Lenin's implementation of Marxism was so stringent, so accurately in tune with Marx's own predilections for government intervention in every facet of life that Marxism came to be referred to as Marxism/Leninism.

Sadly, this practice of creating a crisis in order to implement a solution has become a staple in today's Democratic Party. Although each individual Democrat may not hold Marxism/Leninism as his or her political and ideological paradigm, many Democrats in Congress hold to the resulting methodology and have adopted passing legislation as their method for revolution and their solution for every type of crisis known to man, be it healthcare, the environment, gun violence or energy problems. For the Democrats, every crisis is but a segue toward the passage of more and more legislation, furthering the revolution while enslaving the very people they claim to be liberating.

When Bill Clinton constantly perceived various crises which demanded solutions that involved the passage of a new laws, he was unapologetically using the Marxist/Leninist "crisis revolution" tactic to spur passage of Leftist-legislation. For example, with each violent crime, like Columbine or other public shootings that took place during his presidency, Clinton pushed for more gun control to alleviate the crisis but he never enforced laws which were already established. The National Rifle Association's Wayne La Pierre rightly saw through Clinton's façade and said publicly that Clinton was tolerating an increase in death and suffering among the American citizenry in order to force the people to adopt and further the gun control programs of the Democrat party. As a result, by creating a crisis sufficient to secure passage of his legislation rather than enforcing the laws that would keep the lives of many single mothers and low income families of every race safer in their neighborhoods and housing units, Clinton actually contributed to the lawlessness that made the streets of our larger cities more dangerous.

Clinton's presidency ended in 2001, yet the disturbing fact is that Marxist/Leninist ideology and method of "crisis revolution" has rarely been stronger and more dangerous among Democrats than it is right now. The current revolutionary cry is to tax the "greedy," American-owned oil companies for their "wind-fall" profits. In much the same way that Clinton spoke of gun companies in the 1990s, today's Democrats demean oil companies with their "shame on you for what you're doing to the American people" approach, while simultaneously refusing to allow domestic drilling, to increase offshore drilling, or to drill in ANWR.

Like Clinton, the Congressional Democrats, who have created the current crisis, will allow a certain degree of suffering on the part of the people in order to insure their agenda is furthered. They will continue to blame and punish "big oil" for the rise in gas prices just as Clinton blamed and punished Smith & Wesson for the violent crimes that took place while he was in office. Moreover, like Lenin, these Democrats will try to to push their agenda through even if many of their countrymen fail to place the blame on "big oil." With the backing of the federal government, today's Marxist/Leninist leaning Democrat party will implement their agenda through "crisis revolution" at the expense of the people by using scare tactics, and raw force when necessary, to silence their detractors.

We must pay attention to the history of Marxist/Leninist ideology and methodology. Lenin's revolution gave the people death instead of power, Clinton's pursuit of gun control endangered American lives instead of curbing violence, and the current path of today's Democrats will only result in even higher energy prices and therefore less discretionary spending by the citizens, which will result in a subsequent drag on our economy that could bring us down a notch from our superpower status; the latter of which has been the real goal of the Left all along.

Therefore, whether one considers Lenin, Clinton, or today's Obama-led Democrat party, the bottom line is in the end, the people will suffer at the hands of an office holder who uses "crisis revolution" tactics to further their Leftist, legislative agenda. This means we will continue paying excruciatingly high prices in order to give Democrats the opportunity to pull a bait and switch, whereby they can continue to lessen our oil supply by standing in the way of domestic drilling while simultaneously mounting a campaign against the "shameful profits" of American oil companies. Like good Marxists, they do this in order to distract us from the fact that all the class envy and bitterness that undergirds their policies is robbing us of a burgeoning, profitable capitalist society rather than bringing us into a promised utopia.


"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, U.S. Socialist Party presidential candidate 1940, 1944 and 1948

Sphere: Related Content

Iraq Fairy Tales

Front Page Magazine

By Ralph Peters
New York Post Tuesday, June 24, 2008

WORKING out last Monday, I heard a campaign flunky on TV insist that progress in Iraq is an illusion. "The war isn't over until all of the troops come home!" she grumped.
Guess we're still at war with Germany. And Japan. Even Italy. Oh, and let's not forget all of our military bases occupying the Confederacy.

The poor woman knew nothing about warfare, history - or Iraq. She just wanted to see her candidate win in November and wasn't going to let reality get in the way.
And one look told you she didn't even know any "troops."

But after my initial shrug (back to the bench for more crunches), it struck me how wrong I'd been on a point I'd argued for two decades: I claimed that Western societies have an advantage because of their insistence on factual data.

Yet, since 9/11, I've seen and heard no end of my fellow citizens' arguing from blind passion and utterly refusing to ingest facts that didn't match their prejudices (left or right). Since the turnabout in Iraq began a year and a half ago, the rejection of reality has become an outright pathology for the quit-Iraq-and-free-the-terrorists set.

I've watched millions of my countrymen and countrywomen insist that fantasies are real. In a classic through-the-looking-glass reversal last year, Sen. Hillary Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus, the man who turned Iraq around, that his reports of progress were fairy tales. It was the world turned upside down.

Since that woman on TV "explained" victory last Monday, I've thought about the different kinds of people who refuse either to accept that the situation in Iraq has improved remarkably or that quitting now would have serious consequences.

When I break down the "fairy tales can come true" crowd, the first division is into vendors and consumers. Determined to elect the president of its choice, the "mainstream" media has collapsed into outright lies and whopping distortions. And, of course, political hacks will do anything to get their candidate elected.

It's the consumers of fairy tales - those desperate to believe - who are more interesting. They come in several basic flavors, two of which we can quickly set aside:

Protesting university students. Don't worry about them. Once they graduate and get a dose of reality, most of the kids will do fine. The need for liberal-arts undergrads to prance to the left is virtually hormonal.

Hollywood stars and other celebrities. No worries there, either. Just check out the box-office receipts for the dozen or so self-righteous anti-war (anti-military) films. These folks are so far removed from reality that they believe the roles they play give them genuine expertise. Don't get irate - just laugh. (Coming soon: Susan Sarandon on quantum physics!)

But there's another sad bunch:

My generation. Those of us from our mid-50s into early 60s. The florid youth of yesteryear who declared they were going to change the world, made a mess others had to clean up - and the high point of whose lives came in a protest march down University Boulevard, chanting, "Ho-ho-ho Chi Minh! NLF is gonna win!"

The key to understanding the aging activists' bitterness toward the military (disguised as concern for the common soldier) and their obsession with the rights of terrorists is that this cobbled-together cause gives them one last chance to rise above their disappointing lives and to recapture, for one Viagra-assisted moment, their glory days of raised little fists and bell-bottoms.
Reality proved bitter for this bunch. In an infuriating turnabout, it was the nerds in the comp-science classes, the geeks with punch cards in their shirt pockets, who changed the world (and became billionaires). It just doesn't seem fair that the folks with multiple degrees in Comparative Literature ended up, at best, with tenure at an obscure college, serial divorces and a failed book or two.

My generation's sense of entitlement is, of course, legendary. But most of us got jobs and got on with our lives. Only a soured minority never got over that brief moment in the sun before the communes fell apart because someone had to do the dishes (and pay for the penicillin).

Just as no evidence was ever going to convince them that Communists might not all be virtuous, nothing is going to convince them that Iraq is emerging as a better place, for its own people and for us, than it was under Saddam Hussein. They need to believe that our country, having failed to recognize their innate greatness, is wrong.

I'd pity them, if the stakes weren't so high.

If aging activists really want to change the world for the better, facing reality would be a great first step. Magic beanstalks don't really grow into the clouds. That's still a minivan, pal, before and after midnight. Little Red Riding Hood doesn't always make it safely home to the Upper West Side.

And the United States isn't always evil.

Sphere: Related Content

Paul Abrams Is A Class Act Moron

~Snooper~

Not only is Paulie a moron, he is a disingenuous bloviating fool.

In his ill-conceived and retarded rhetoric posted at the Leftinistra hang-out called the Huff and Puff, his grip on reality is not only questionable, it is out-right lost in space. This clown and other doltish cads that subscribe to the same lame train of feigned intelligence, have no clue what this war against terror is all about...not a damn clue.

To George W Bush, the loss of nearly 4000 lives, 30,000 wounded and $500B on the Iraq War is "worth it". But, there is no evidence his family, Republican members of Congress or any member of his Administration agrees---unless, of course, they mean it is "worth it" for others to be doing the fighting, the dying, and the multiple tours-of-duty. [...]

So, let's get this straight...had the above alluded to went to war, all would be OK. Right? Wrong. It doesn't matter to these retarded left-wing sycophants of the One World Socialist Soros. No matter what happens or what doesn't happen, nothing satisfies these chronic malcontents and selfish whiners of the hate-filled socialists in this country.

This dumbass has no idea that the vast majority - the frauds of Winter Soldier II not withstanding - volunteered in a time of war to fight the enemy over there so Paul Abrams and his whining dweebs can stab them in the back at every turn. Simply pathetic.

[...] Pat Tillman left his lucrative and high-profile career in the NFL to volunteer for Afghanistan. Yet, not a single Republican member of Congress of military age has thought the Iraq war "worth it" enough to resign and volunteer for his country. Adam Putnam (R-FLA), for example, votes to send his generation to war, but will not volunteer himself. [...]

So, I suppose that Paulie Baby is under the delusion that in order to think the war is worth it, one has to serve. Such an idiot. Does he not think things through before he makes such a raging ass of himself? Hey, Paulie? We all have a job to do in this war because it is America's war, you blithering fool.

[...] Many members of the Bush Administration are under 40. None have volunteered. [...]

Idiot. How many have ALREADY served you silly boy? While we are at it, how many Democrats that bought off on the war that haven't "signed up for duty"? Idiot. Do the Democrats get a free pass for whatever test you have initiated? Idiot.

[...] Neither of the Bush daughters, nor Jenna's fiance, nor military age Bush nephews or nieces appear to think the war is "worth it" enough to volunteer. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has two military-age sons. Neither has volunteered despite their dad's sending troops on second and third and fourth extended tours-of-duty. Does Secretary Gates think it is "worth it"? His sons apparently do not. [...]

BDS personified. What a childish and immature dweeb this Paulie is. Most are called to service and they answer the call - something this Paultard will never understand.

[...] Everyone knows the Iraq War would never have been launched if the military age Republican members of Congress would have been expected to resign and volunteer, or that members of their families and the Bush family would have been expected to go. Both of Lyndon Johnson's sons-in-law volunteered for Vietnam. [...]

More ignorance from a leftist hack and complete blithering idiot. Substantiation for this "charge"? Idiot.

[...] To all Americans arguing about the cherry-picked intelligence or lies used to get us into this war, you should stop your bickering. Bush would have invaded anyhow. Even without WMD, even without the link to al-Qaeda, he would have invaded. How do we know? He keeps telling us. Knowing what he knows now, he would have done the same (and would he lie?). [...]

Perhaps, Paulie, you should check your facts before you sound so incredibly retarded. I know it will hurt, Paulie, but, do try to keep up. Oh. Wait. Substantiation for the above? We'll wait.

Well, that is enough of that retard's verbiage. Perhaps this blithering dunce should find out how many members of Congress ARE serving and to what degree, both R and D. I know the answer and it wasn't hard to find out a while back, either. I also know which sons and or daughters of Congress Critters are also serving.

Paulie? You are a foolish leftist hack.

Sphere: Related Content

BREAKING: Another Recruiting Station Vandalized

~Snooper~

Fox News is reporting that a recruiting station in Wisconsin has been vandalized. Add this one to the list, Michelle!

Vandals scrawled an anti-war message on a Milwaukee Army Recruiting Station Wednesday, the day marking five years since the Iraq war began, WTMJ radio reported.

All the windows of the station were busted out, and graffiti that read "War is Offensive" was scrawled on the side of the building. A witness told WTMJ that he saw anti-war slogans written on the windows before they were broken.

The recruiting station is no stranger to such vandalism. Exactly one year ago, police arrested 21 people who reportedly attacked the facility with smoke bombs while throwing paint, WTMJ reported.

More here...

Sphere: Related Content