Tangential note: Prior to 2019, the Democratic [Socialist] Party of
New York State "just" controlled one of the two chambers in the
Legislature (the House), and the Governorship, and the Courts. Now, in
2019, on top of that, they also
control the other
chamber in the Legislature (the Senate). Now, day-by-day, in just the
past few weeks, New York State has been moving even more aggressively,
putting more laws in place to further implement their socialist,
"Californication" utopia agenda. Go to
Empire Report New York (empirereportnewyork [dot] com) for the fast-moving, daily coverage. (See also "presscalifornia [dot] com").
On to New York City. We have this from ZeroHedge (1/12/2019):
"New
York City Mayor Bill de Blasio took to the stage on Thursday to deliver
his State of the City address - the sixth such one he has delivered
since being in office. The theme was clear: money
in the city is in the wrong hands and needs to be redistributed to
others."
On that note, let's take a little trip down memory lane, taking a look
again at De Blasio's rhetoric and how socialism leaves the creative
individual producers (the people) in the lurch...
~~~
The mayor of New York embraces Karl Marx
September 2017
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!" (Karl Marx, 1875)
At infowars [dot] com, Kelen McBreen has unearthed a stunning statement NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio made to
New York Magazine:
De Blasio: "What's been hardest is the way our legal system is
structured to favor private property. I think people all over this city,
of every background, would like to have the city government be able to
determine which building goes where, how high it will
be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be. I think there's a
socialistic impulse, which I hear every day, in every kind of community,
that they would like things to be planned in accordance to their needs.
And I would, too. Unfortunately, what stands
in the way of that is hundreds of years of history that have elevated
property rights and wealth to the point that that's the reality that
calls the tune on a lot of development... Look, if I had my druthers,
the city government would determine every single
plot of land, how development would proceed. And there would be very
stringent requirements around income levels and rents. That's a world
I'd love to see, and I think what we have, in this city at least, are
people who would love to have the New Deal back,
on one level. They'd love to have a very, very powerful government,
including a federal government, involved in directly addressing their
day-to-day reality."
Boom.
The elimination of private property rights is one of the primary tenets of extreme socialism/Communism.
And of course, the disposition of private property---the takeover---would be achieved by government.
So for those people who think the rising tide of socialism is just a
myth, you now have the mayor of the world's most powerful city
advocating it publicly and openly.
And the response of the mainstream press? A yawn, and silence.
Or to put it another way, bland acceptance.
Private property was one of the basic issues Ayn Rand, the most reviled
and adored novelist of the 20th century, explored in depth. Here are
several statements she uncompromisingly offered:
"Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to
sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the
product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who
produces while others dispose of his product, is
a slave."
"The doctrine that 'human rights' are superior to 'property rights'
simply means that some human beings have the right to make property out
of others; since the competent have nothing to gain from the
incompetent, it means the right of the incompetent to own
their betters and to use them as productive cattle. Whoever regards
this as human and right, has no right to the title of 'human'."
"You cannot force intelligence to work: those who're able to think, will
not work under compulsion; those who will, won't produce much more than
the price of the whip needed to keep them enslaved. You cannot obtain
the products of a mind except on the owner's
terms, by trade and by volitional consent. Any other policy of men
toward man's property is the policy of criminals, no matter what their
numbers."
In a half-sane society, private property rights would be debated in
depth at every college, without interference. But that is no longer
possible, owing to censorship of speech.
Beyond this restriction, students aren't equipped with tools of analysis
to approach the subject. Instead, they're indoctrinated with vapid
generalities.
As I've detailed in several recent articles, the rank promotion of
socialism has nothing to do with "power to the people." Socialism is an
elite strategy, boosted by Globalists as a way of gaining control of
governments and populations.
Their pretense of "share and care" is a mask behind which they are
instituting a worldwide management system. They, not the people, will
own the means of production, and they will determine the distribution of
goods and services.
Instead of solving the problem of predatory mega-corporations,
"socialism" will elevate those corporations to even greater heights of
power.
As just one example---what president of the US stood for, and promoted,
the greatest degree of socialism? That would be Franklin Roosevelt, who
presided over the New Deal and World War 2. How did he rein in
corporations and prosecute their crimes? Are you
kidding?
Consider Charles Higham's classic,
Trading with the Enemy:
"What would have happened if millions of American and British people,
struggling with coupons and lines at the gas stations, had learned that
in 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey [part of the Rockefeller empire]
managers shipped the enemy's [Germany's] fuel through
neutral Switzerland and that the enemy was shipping Allied fuel?
Suppose the public had discovered that the Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied
Paris after Pearl Harbor was doing millions of dollars' worth of
business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the
head office in Manhattan [the Rockefeller family among others?] Or that
Ford trucks were being built for the German occupation troops in France
with authorization from Dearborn, Michigan? Or that Colonel Sosthenes
Behn, the head of the international American
telephone conglomerate ITT, flew from New York to Madrid to Berne
during the war to help improve Hitler's communications systems and
improve the robot bombs that devastated London? Or that ITT built the
FockeWulfs that dropped bombs on British and American
troops? Or that crucial ball bearings were shipped to Nazi-associated
customers in Latin America with the collusion of the vice-chairman of
the U.S. War Production Board in partnership with Goering's cousin in
Philadelphia when American forces were desperately
short of them? Or that such arrangements were known about in Washington
and either sanctioned or deliberately ignored?"
If you want a modern example of "socialism" at work, consider another
soft promoter of this philosophy, President Barack Obama, and his
response to one of the most predatory of corporations, Monsanto, and
other food giants.
From Scott Creighton,
"Obama Pitches India Model of GM Genocide to Africa":
"At the G8 Summit held two weeks ago at Camp David, President Obama met
with private industry and African heads of state to launch the New
Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a euphemism for monocultured,
genetically modified crops and toxic agrochemicals
aimed at making poor farmers debt slaves to corporations, while
destroying the ecosphere for profit."
"But African civil society wants no part of this latest Monsanto aligned
'public private partnership.' Whatever will the progressives do now
that their flawless hero has teamed up with their most hated nemesis
[Monsanto] to exploit an entire continent like
they did to India not that long ago?..."
"With a commitment of $3 billion, Obama plans to 'partner up' with
mega-multinationals like Monsanto, Diageo, Dupont, Cargill, Vodafone,
Walmart, Pepsico, Prudential, Syngenta International, and Swiss Re
because, as one USAID representative says 'There are
things that only companies can do, like building silos for storage and
developing seeds and fertilizers.'
"Of course, that's an outrageous lie. Private citizens have been
building their own silos for centuries. But it's true that only the
biowreck engineers will foist patented seeds and toxic chemicals on
Africa."
Obama? A socialist warrior against corporations on behalf of the people?
It's long past the time for ripping that false mask away.
Socialism? Power to the people? Share and care? Special concern for the downtrodden?
Socialism is a means for government to gain ironclad control of the means of production by colluding with mega-corporations.
That collusion, that tight partnership has been called fascism. And that's what socialism turns out to be.
To the degree that governments are socialist, in England, the US,
Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, China, Canada, Australia and other
countries, that's the pattern.
It would evolve into the same pattern in New York, where Mayor Bill De
Blasio is blowing smoke up everybody's backside, with his remarks about
people-power and strong government taking over private property.
If the mayor wants to prove otherwise, let's see him go after the most
mighty anti-people corporation in his city: Goldman Sachs. Let's see
him lead a no-holds-barred prosecution of that outfit's crimes.
Let's see him attack the company that is running a significant chunk of Donald Trump's presidency.
No comments:
Post a Comment