This video clip from the documentary video Overview of America explains differences between the major economic systems of free market Capitalism, Fascism, Naziism, Socialism, and Communism. It is explained that all types of economic systems include elements of capital and property, with differences between the systems being varying combinations of types of ownership and control of those two elements.
The alternative to Americanism is what has condemned most of the human race to live as slaves throughout the past millennium— with the ideas that rights are privileges dispensed by an Oligarchy, the nation’s capital and all economic activity being directed from a central power, morality being inconsequential, and security needing to be preferred over freedom and opportunity.
It is explained that the United States continues to be steered off-course through the principals that led to it’s greatness being cast aside, and what is needed is a sufficient number of Americans getting involved to return the nation to having less government and more personal responsibility of citizens.
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
James Earl Jones, the voice of Darth Vader and avid MSNBC fan, called the Tea Party racist. Zo thinks that Jones might very be an expert racist himself. Hear why.
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
Thanks for writing to me. I also want to take a moment to thank you for sending an email to one of my Marxist bosses urging my censure for a recent column that I wrote. Among other things, you, a self-described liberal, allege that my column was racist. I think there are a few things you should have learned about racism, liberalism, and Marxism before you wrote your email. So today I’m taking time from my regular schedule to educate you. I do so because I’m a teacher. It’s what I get paid to do. Today’s lesson on racism, Marxism and morality comes in three parts. I’ll keep it as direct and relevant as possible. I hope you enjoy it.
Most liberals are racists in the classical sense.
You told one of my bosses that I am a racist because I wrote a parable featuring a black character who was a rapist. Alleging that blacks occasionally commit crimes like rape is not racism. Racism is actually a belief in the intellectual inferiority of other races. In this country, it is often a belief held by a white individual and directed at blacks as a group. What you fail to understand is that most of my liberal supervisors and liberal colleagues are racists in the classical sense. I’m not using the term “most” as in 51%. I would estimate the number to be around 90 or 95%. Let me explain.
The overwhelming majority of my colleagues support using race-based affirmative action here at this university. The form of affirmative action they support ads points directly to the SAT scores and GPAs of black students. The reason they support such an ad-on-point system for blacks (but not Asians) is pretty simple: they consider blacks (but not Asians) to be intellectually inferior and thus incapable of competing on an even playing field. They may say that SATs are “culturally biased.” But they make no similar claim that GPAs are “culturally biased.” It is just a liberal code phrase that means “too hard for black people.”
I disagree with my colleagues and supervisors. I believe that black/white performance differences would go away within a few years of eliminating affirmative action. I guess, I’m one of the few non-racists working here at the university.
Most liberals support institutional racism.
Liberals believe there are other forms of racism besides individual racism. Like individuals, they think institutions can be racist, too. For example, they think the criminal justice system advances “institutional racism.” Their reasoning is that the justice system incarcerates blacks disproportionately. According to them, that is racist even in the absence of individual intent. Unfortunately, they lose the moral high-ground by supporting abortion, which kills 51% of blacks while they are still in the womb.
It really doesn’t make much sense to me when you tell my liberal colleagues I’m a racist. I oppose the one procedure that is responsible for killing over half the black population. They vigorously support it. I think that’s why they are so eager to entertain accusations of racism.
To put things in perspective, there have been more blacks killed in abortion clinics than Jews killed in concentration camps. Maybe that’s why liberals use the term Nazi so often. It helps assuage the guilt as the body count climbs above and beyond human comprehension.
Regardless of the topic, Marxists have no real moral authority.
While most of the people I work with are liberal, the specific person to whom you complained is an avowed Marxist. While I might respect Marxists as individuals, I certainly do not respect their views on any given subject. The administrator to whom you complained advocates a Marxist revolution here in America. That’s all I really need to know in order to conclude that her moral advice is essentially meaningless.
Imagine if the aforementioned Marxist were to say “You really shouldn’t be doing that” (in reference to writing my often abrasive column). The obvious rejoinder would be “You really shouldn’t be doing that” (in reference to her advocacy of a Marxist revolution in America). For perspective, stop and look at the following list of 20th Century regimes that committed at least a million murders in the name of utopian Marxism:
China 65 million
USSR 20 million
North Korea 2 million
Cambodia 2 million
Afghanistan 1.5 million
Vietnam 1 million
(Author’s Note: the Marxist feminists are technically in second place with 53 million murders since Roe v. Wade).
If you advance a political philosophy that has killed that many people then you simply have no moral authority whatsoever. I would not even trust a Marxist to give me directions to the grocery store. Why on earth would I hand over my First Amendment rights to someone with such a murderous worldview?
In closing, the First Amendment protects the right to advocate the extermination of millions of black people in name of feminism. It also protects the right to advocate the slaughter of tens of millions in the name of Marxism. Surely it protects my right to pen an abrasive satire some liberals were not Swift enough to understand.
Mind Control. The New York Times has an article on the recently re-opened "National Museum of China," located in Tiananmen Square, the location of the bloody Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4, 1989. Ironically, but not surprisingly, the museum contains not one mention of the incident. I have included a few excerpts from the article below. The discussion of the rampant revisionist history in this museum is painfully amusing - those same people who would wish socialism and communism upon the United States would hardly be delighted at the prospect of complete State control of mind and freedom...
At the elaborately renovated National Museum of China in Tiananmen Square, visitors interested in the recent history of the world’s fastest rising power can gaze at the cowboy hat that Deng Xiaoping once wore when he visited the United States, or admire the bullhorn that President Hu Jintao used to exhort people to overcome hardship after the Sichuan earthquake in 2008. But if their interests run to the Cultural Revolution that tore the country apart from 1966 to 1976 and resulted in millions of deaths, they will have to search a back corner of the two-million-square-foot museum, which will complete its opening this month, for a single photograph and three lines of text that are the only reference to that era...
In the 1990s, museum curators proposed a much franker look at the problems that led to the current era of reform. Initially, they designed a section called “10 years of tortuous development” on the 1950s and ’60s, including the Great Leap Forward’s devastating famine, according to Kirk Denton, a professor at Ohio State University who is writing a book on China’s museums. Curators proposed a similar section in the current exhibit, arguing that this era was decades in the past and the party was now strong enough to withstand criticism. That idea was rejected, however, after a lengthy debate, according to Ministry of Culture officials. In the end, the famine, widely regarded as the worst in recorded history, is only euphemistically mentioned by the phrase that “the project of constructing socialism suffered severe complications.” The Cultural Revolution was reduced to the photograph and brief caption.
“We wanted to celebrate China,” Mr. Tian said. “I think that’s understandable.”
Would encourage you to read the entire article for a reminder of why I am constantly dealing with the subject of Communism, internationally - but particularly as it affects the United States.
Trevor Loudon
Trevor Loudon of New Zealand, was the Blogger Who Exposed Van Jones as a Communist and caused the Van Jones resignation.
Visit Trevor Loudon's Blog NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
_______________________________________________________________________
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.
"The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own choosing, and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled." George Washington
_______________________________________________________________________
NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.