Timely book about tyranny
I haven’t read it, but this book, an exploration of how free societies descend into tyranny, sounds like an idea whose time has come (hat tip: Instapundit).
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
I haven’t read it, but this book, an exploration of how free societies descend into tyranny, sounds like an idea whose time has come (hat tip: Instapundit).
Neo,
I haven’t purchased it yet, but the Power Line guys have given this book high praise:
http://www.amazon.com/Soft-Despotism-Democracys-Drift-Montesquieu/dp/030014492X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267664229&sr=8-1
And this book, which I have read, provides a very good, highly accessible explanation of what we are seeing from the Obama administration and the Pelosi-Reid congress:
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267664342&sr=1-1
you realize that i have offered up similar books which are free… and where they get their ideas from?
cloward and piven didnt invent what they did, and suggested… they just plageirized and repeated what was to most forgotten past.
i can recomend a ton of good similar books that are free. and have… but who read them (did you read the one i sent you neo?)
you can read the work of hunter who studied the different regimes and how mass psychology works.
Karl Marx is going to win this war.– Father
Coughlin
anyone besided me remember his drive for “social justice”? anyone here want to tell others as to its roots? and what two totalitarianisms push it?
we we even remember coughlin?
do we remember them at madison sq garden?
how they were big in the hamptons?
how like china today, they were the big in thing that america should emulate?
i listed the flynn book that lays out stuart chases stuff. who was chase? he was the man that created the plan for the new deal.. and of course why read that plan, its only EXACTLY what they are doing now, and goals they are meeting now!
1. To extend the power of executive government, to rule by decrees and rules and regulations
of its own making; between 1933 and 1943 FDR issued 3,556 Executive orders
2. To strengthen its hold on the economic life of the nation;
3. To extend power over the individual – the domestication of individuality;
4. To degrade the parliamentary principle;
5. To impair the independent Constitutional judicial power;
6. To weaken all other powers – private enterprise and finance, state and local government.
7. It is almost amusing that FDR built a cult of personality just as Hitler and Stalin did – it is
necessary in a tyranny because in rule by men, loyalty is not to law or country but to a
person. Power then depends on such a cult.
how about Charles Beard? Norman Thomas? Earl Browder? (SEIU andy knows him well)…
“If the New Deal could be established, it should
be possible to proceed from this, step by step, without violent overturning, to socialism.” Earl Browder
[he was found to be a spy and FDR pardoned him]
“The exciting thing about him, as about Stalin, is that he, too, has more of the
appearance of having modern objectives, however incompletely apprehended, than anyone else in
the world.” hg wells on FDR
FDR liked to call himself the Kerensky of the American revolution.
anyone here know who kerensky is?
“You have been faithless. You have usurped the
function of Congress, hampered freedom of the press…You have urged Congress to pass laws that
you knew were unconstitutional…You have broken your sacred oath taken on the Bible.” family member teddy jr in 1935 to FDR…
“Submission, not freedom is to be the future badge of the United States…the overturn of
institutions, including the Constitution, is the avowed goal of his (FDR’s) immediate advisors. —
Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby, in Portland, OR, Sept. 1934
“Now to bring about government by oligarchy masquerading as democracy, it is fundamentally
essential that practically all authority and control be centralized in our national government. The
individual sovereignty of our states must first be destroyed, except in mere minor matters of
legislation.” — FDR March 2, 1930
when FDR was informed that White and Chambers were spies, he told Berle to go jump in a lake.
after all he stocked the white house full of radicals and communists and fascists TOO.
i would suggest reading “As He Saw It” a biography of FDR by his son eliot (1946)
“I may
say that I got along fine with Marshall Stalin. He is a man who combines a tremendous relentless
determination with a stalwart good humor. I believe he is truly representative of the heart and soul of
Russia; and I believe that we are going to get along very well with him and the Russian people – very
well indeed.” –FDR after Teheran Conference.
FDR defined Freedom of Speech as Stalin did, i.e. he used the Marxist formulation ‘Freedom of
Information’ in his speeches.
so do others in our admin.. they use all kinds of specal phrases that MOST are ignorant about.
FDR told Churchill that “an unwritten Constitution is better than a written one.” When reminded
there was the Constitution, FDR said after his 1936 inauguration “Yes, but it’s the Constitution as
I understand it – flexible enough (to do what he wanted).” He admiringly told Churchill that Stalin
didn’t have to worry about Congresses and Parliaments, “he’s the whole works.” In a letter to a
member of the House Ways and Means Committee, FDR wrote- ” I hope your committee will not
permit doubt as to Constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the suggested legislation.” FDR
did not believe in Constitutional checks and balances – he tried to destroy and was prepared to
defy the Supreme Court and Congress. He did not believe in advise and consent or the rule of law
– he waged war and made treaties without Congressional approval. He did not believe in
representative democracy and often said that since Congress did not reflect the will of the people
they should be ignored.
and who did obama claim to emulate?
is what i said above what you know from history class?
you can almost hear obama saying this
Probably the best exposition of FDR’s procedures regarding the rule of law vs the rule of men was
said by his top deputy, KGB agent Harry Hopkins, to his aides – “I want to assure you that we are
not afraid of exploring anything within the law, and we have here a lawyer who will declare
anything you want to do legal.”
no?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coughlin . from the first paragraph
He was one of the first political leaders to use radio to reach a mass audience, as more than forty million tuned to his weekly broadcasts during the 1930s. Early in his career Coughlin was a vocal supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his early New Deal proposals, before later becoming a harsh critic of Roosevelt.[2] It was at this point Coughlin began to use his radio program to issue antisemitic commentary, and later to rationalize some of the policies of Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.[3] The broadcasts have been called “a variation of the Fascist agenda applied to American culture”.[4] His chief topics were political and economic rather than religious, with his slogan being Social Justice, first with, and later against, the New Deal.
social justice? who else said things about social justice? who said that these guys werent thinking the same? did they know that they use the same terms, the same ideology, the same prophet, the same history, the same ideals, the same goals, the same tactics, just different people?
Coughlin’s support for Roosevelt and his New Deal faded later in 1934, when he founded the National Union for Social Justice (NUSJ), a nationalistic worker’s rights organization which grew impatient with what it viewed as the President’s unconstitutional and pseudo-capitalistic monetary policies. His radio programs preached more and more about the negative influence of “money changers” and “permitting a group of private citizens to create money” on the general welfare of the public.[8] He also spoke about the need for monetary reform. Coughlin claimed that the Depression was a “cash famine”. Some modern economic historians, in part, agree with this assessment.[9] Coughlin proposed monetary reforms, including the nationalization of the Federal Reserve System, as the solution.
Among the articles of the NUSJ, were work and income guarantees, nationalizing “necessary” industry, wealth redistribution through taxation of the wealthy, federal protection of worker’s unions, and decreasing property rights in favor of the government controlling the country’s assets for “public good.”
Illustrative of his disdain for capitalism is his statement that, “We maintain the principle that there can be no lasting prosperity if free competition exists in industry. Therefore, it is the business of government not only to legislate for a minimum annual wage and maximum working schedule to be observed by industry, but also to curtail individualism that, if necessary, factories shall be licensed and their output shall be limited.”
anyone want to compare those goals to obamas and andy seiu? Sinclair Lewis in it cant happen here used a character like Coughlin.
ANDY STERN: SEIU has begun reaching out to black church leaders for their support in galvanizing what Stern calls “a broader social justice movement.”
and sweeny
As it has over the decades, the union movement stands for the fundamental moral values that make America strong: quality education for our children, affordable health care for every person–not just some–an end to poverty, secure pensions and wages that enable families to sustain the middle-class life that has fueled this nation’s prosperity and strength. Union members and other working family activists don’t just vote our moral values–we live them. We fight for them, day in, day out. Our commitment to economic and social justice propels us and everything we do.
— John Sweeney, November 2004
[and there is that economic thing from above too]
jeff golstein:
In Obama’s America , we’ll finally be able to break free of the “constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution” – and in so doing, achieve “social justice” through “redistributive change.”
“did you read the one i sent you neo”
Which one are you referring to?
the book by flynn..
The Road Ahead; America’s Creeping Revolution
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_Ahead;_America%27s_Creeping_Revolution
The Road Ahead; America’s Creeping Revolution is John T. Flynn’s treatise on the infiltration of Socialism into the politics of the United States. First published in 1949, it had at least three printings totaling over 500,000 copies. Many of these were distributed by the Fighters For Freedom, a division of The Committee for Constitutional Government, Inc., based in New York City.
This book has no formal introduction, save one paragraph appearing at the bottom of the book jacket bearing Flynn’s signature.
It states, “I wrote this book to answer a question that practically everybody is asking: Where are we heading? I thought it was about time for someone to answer it, candidly and with blunt facts.”
Indeed, bluntness is not in short supply as Flynn, as the very first sentence of Chapter One clearly states that “…this country is traveling to its destruction.”
Flynn continues in that same ominous vein to describe events and political attitudes prevalent in post-World War II America that pointed, according to Flynn, to a shift toward Socialism.
This shift was being steered by the very political leaders of the day who were decrying Communism in Europe on the one hand, and expanding the tax burden on the American people to fight the emerging Cold War with Russia.
Providing some interesting history of the rise of European Socialism, beginning with the Marxist influence of the Fabian Society in England, Flynn points out both obvious and quite subtle steps being taken or proposed in American politics.
Flynn proposed that these steps were intended to take the country in the same Socialist direction as Europe.
He provided a veritable “checklist” of indicators of the progression of Socialism in America that will amaze the modern reader because his predictions have actually come about in the fifty plus years since.
people wanted to know whats happening.
i said look to the books from the 30s, as we are doing all the same kinds of things… and i mean SAME… but you have to know things in grainy details to know its the same old same old. the history books are generally fast summaries.
and the faster summaries leave out completely the tiny details that you would recognize. you can read a book on the decade of wwii in a few days…
but if you really had a detailed history, it would take you many many more years than the actual war took and you wouldnt even dent it.
say you read about each city in detail… how many cities separate history and people would you be wading through?
so people think that the fast story of the most interesting parts embodies the knowlege they need. but it doesnt.
if it did you would have remembered and known about father coughlin and social justice and such before obama was elected. you would say no way to elect a president who spoke the same kind of core idea that coughlin spoke of!!
of course since i couldnt get the better writers who were ignorant to actually read, i couldnt get them to know the facts that they didnt know and didnt feel were missing.
anything i said to prove it was missing was to them a story. this is why this condition of historical swiss cheese is so pernicious.
anyway… its a pretty good book..
very surprising… one of the few places were you can get a bunch in a chunk, rather than hit or miss all over.
Artfldgr: very very few of the readers and commenters here voted for Obama.
Very few of them actually did anything to oppose him either, being reasonable in the face of a very unreasonable person deciding to wait and see what happens first – and convincing others to take that same position with them.
forgetting the maxim:
Not all changes are reversible / you cant turn a pickle back into a cucumber
so such wait and see is actually VERY destructive not a wise council.