Category: Marxist Philosophy

The philosophical bases for the ideology of the left side of the political continuum.

PROGRESSIVES PREFER BLOOD OVER OIL

A group of soldiers running through the dirt.Progressives prefer blood over oil. More specifically, the left, communists, socialists, progressives, liberals, and Democrats prefer blood over oil. This is based on the actions, not the rhetoric, of the left including progressives. Since oil is financing much of Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine, the west, especially the United States, needs to cut off all sales of Russian and their allies’ oil on world markets. This must include removal of Russian and their allies’ oil transactions from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system. This step would eliminate most of Russia’s oil exports as a source of financing Putin’s Russian war against Ukraine. It would also further strangle the Russian economy. This would require the Biden Administration to reverse its restrictive oil policies and return the United States to an oil exporter, not an oil importer. This action could eliminate oil imports from Russia and its allies to the United States and our allies, especially Europe. Failure to take this step will prove that progressives prefer blood over oil; and the Biden Administration, by its inaction, prefers Ukrainian blood over oil.

Progressives claim that the United States must transition from carbon energy, oil and coal, to renewable energy to save the planet at all costs, including the blood of Ukrainians. Progressives want the United States to reduce our carbon use unilaterally when they will not require the largest carbon users in the world, Russia, China, and India, to reduce their use as a precondition to reductions by the United States. Without global cooperation, the claimed reduction in greenhouse gases contributed by the United States will have an insignificant affect in reducing greenhouse gases without reductions by the world’s worst polluters. Progressives fail to understand that the United States and the world will use the same amount of carbon energy including oil during their transition regardless of the source of the oil. Progressives also believe that energy inflation is an acceptable tool to reduce carbon energy use in the United States. This is another variant of the idea that progressives prefer blood over oil because they prefer the suffering of the poor and middle class over oil. For the poor and middle class, energy inflation causses them to choose between energy and food, medicine, or other necessities. Energy inflation is like a regressive tax that adversely affects those who can least afford the added costs.

With this in mind, why should the United States pay other countries, many our enemies, for our energy when we can produce it ourselves? Imported oil also includes the added cost of tanker and other high cost means of transport of oil further raising the price of gasoline at the pump. Therefore, the United States must become energy independent, and help eliminate the need for the United States and our allies to import Russian and its allies’ oil. If the Biden Administration does not change its policies to eliminate Russian oil imports and return the United States to an energy exporter and help Europe to become far less dependent on Russian energy, then we will know that progressives prefer blood over oil by their actions.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your œPatriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

MERRICK GARLAND IS A DISGRACE

A man in suit and tie standing at a podium.Merrick Garland is a disgrace to the proud traditions and heritage of the Office of the United States Attorney General (AG) and the Department of Justice (DOJ), in my opinion. As I listened to his speech to the DOJ staff on January 5, 2022, I was as viscerally angry. I was also thankful to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnel for ensuring that Merrick Garland did not become an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States while he was the Senate Majority Leader. Merrick Garland’s speech demonstrated that he is a progressive partisan of epic proportions. With Garland as AG, Lady Liberty looks at justice with her left eye covered, blind folded to affronts perpetrated by those on the left, to quote me.

How did I come to such a drastic conclusion? The answer is simple. Merrick Garland has not pursued the 2020 Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) rioters and murders as vigorously as he is pursuing January 6, 2021, Capital rioters. This fact contradicts statements Garland made during his speech when he said,

Our answer is, and will continue to be, the same answer we would give with respect to any ongoing investigation: as long as it takes and whatever it takes for justice to be done ” consistent with the facts and the law.

The department would do everything in our power to defend the American people and American democracy. We will defend our democratic institutions from attack. We will protect those who serve the public from violence and threats of violence.

The Department will follow the facts, and not an agenda or an assumption. The central norm is that, in our criminal investigations, there cannot be different rules depending on one’s political party or affiliation. There cannot be different rules for friends and foes. And there cannot be different rules for the powerful and the powerless.

Those involved must be held accountable, and there is no higher priority for us at the Department of Justice.

More than 700 defendants have been arrested in the probe and the FBI is still calling for the public’s help in identifying more than 350 other individuals it believes engaged in violent acts on the Capitol grounds that day. Dozens of the January 6 defendants have been charged with obstructing an official proceeding, though the department has not yet brought any sedition charges. Obviously, Merrick Garland is pursuing the January 6, 2021, Capital rioters with the right eye of Lady Liberty aggressively seeking out the guilty, to quote me again.

In contrast, under the Merrick Garland DOJ, the blind folded left eye of Lady Liberty is oblivious to the mayhem caused by Antifa and BLM during the 2020, George Floyd riots when the following details are considered. The Capitol architect told lawmakers the price tag for the January riots stood around $30 million. The George Floyd riots cost an estimated $2 billion. The vast majority of the $30 million cost of the Capitol riot was for additional costs like the unnecessary fencing, mental health care, other medical costs, and additional law enforcement and National Guard protection measures needed to protect the Capitol for months after the riot. The physical damage to the Capitol was estimated at $1.5 million, 1/20 of the touted $30 million cost of the Capitol riot. Using progressive Democrat Capitol math, the cost of the George Floyd riots was $40 billion. Did our cities, destroyed during the 2020 Antifa BLM riots that followed the death of George Floyd, get to add similar costs to the $2 Billion in costs they incurred? I don’t think so.

While they refrained from drawing any hard conclusions, RealClearInvestigations did an in-depth analysis of the data from not just the Capitol riots and last year’s, 2020, Antifa/BLM-led riots, but also the January 2017 riots that took place during then-President Trump’s inauguration.

Here were some of their findings:

The summer 2020 riots resulted in some 15 times more injured police officers, 30 times as many arrests, and estimated damages in dollar terms up to 1,300 times more costly than those of the Capitol riot. George Floyd rioters were found to have used more sophisticated and dangerous tactics than did the Capitol rioters, and in some cases weapons of greater lethality.

Authorities have pursued the largely Trump-supporting Capitol rioters with substantially more vigor than suspected wrongdoers in the earlier two cases. Many accused Capitol rioters, unlike accused participants in the other riots, have been held in pretrial detention for months “ with one defendant serving more time than the maximum sentence for the charge to which he pleaded guilty. Some allegedly endured solitary confinement and other mistreatment.

With authorities applying lenient prosecutorial standards in many major cities torn by the summer riots, the vast majority of charges last year were dismissed, as were charges in the Inauguration 2017 unrest. Charges have to date been dropped in only a single Capitol riot case.

Another key point to note about last summer’s riots, 2020, were the targets in some of the riots. It’s not uncommon to see liberals try to argue that the Capitol riots were symbolically worse because the Capitol building was targeted during what was supposed to be part of the peaceful transfer of power process.

What they conveniently forget, however, is that in some cities, left-wing rioters deliberately targeted government buildings including a federal courthouse, as Wilfred Reilly Tweeted reminding people as the left was busy minimizing the 2020 riots in the immediate aftermath of what took place at the Capitol building in January:

A screenshot of two tweets with the same tweet.

Sadly, the majority of these rioters have had all charges dropped, many with prejudice meaning they cannot be recharged; or their charges were reduced. Have there been any news stories about arrests or convictions in any of the murders committed during these peaceful 2020 Antifa BLM protests, riots? No, and to the best of my knowledge, not a single arrest has been made regarding the 34 murders.

Merrick Garland is, in my opinion, a disgrace to the United States Department of Justice and the Office of Attorney General. His actions do not hold up the high standards he set for himself. He said,

[The department would do everything] in our power to defend the American people and American democracy. We will defend our democratic institutions from attack. We will protect those who serve the public from violence and threats of violence, [and do] whatever it takes for justice to be done, [following] the facts, not an agenda or an assumption. There cannot be different rules depending on one’s political party or affiliation. There cannot be different rules for friends and foes. And there cannot be different rules for the powerful and the powerless. Those involved must be held accountable, and there is no higher priority for us at the Department of Justice.”

Merrick Garland is not vigorously pursuing Antifa and BLM rioters and their sources of funding. These rioters came equipped with weapons, protective gear and uniforms, incendiaries, lasers that could blind police officers, and trucks to haul their weapons and equipment. They are nationally organized communist or Marxist revolutionaries. With the blind folded left eye of the DOJ under Merrick Garland, Lady Liberty is in hot pursuit of everything conservative, Republican or Trump, but he/she is not interested in investigating anything that could lead to progressive financiers like George Soros. The damage caused by Antifa and BLM throughout the United States during simultaneous, coordinated Antifa BLM riots dwarfs the physical damage to the Capitol. Merrick Garland, progressives, and Democrats call the capitol rioters and parents protesting Marxist and progressive curricula in our schools, terrorists. In contrast, the term terrorist is not used when Antifa or BLM are the culprits. Additionally, as of June 9,2022, after the attempted assignation of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Garland is not enforcing federal laws prohibiting demonstration at the residences of all federal judges intended to influence judicial decisions. As far as I am concerned, the contrast renders Merrick Garland a disgrace as AG of the United Starts.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANTIFA: COMMUNIST REVOLUTIONARIES

A fire that is burning in the middle of a street.Antifa, communist revolutionaries following Vladimir Lenin’s model for communist revolutions is an apt description of the reality of Antifa, in my opinion. Vladimir Lenin believed that evolutionary progress toward communism at the national and international levels was too slow. He devised revolutionary dictatorial plans to hasten the process culminating in communist parties and revolutions in Russia, China, and countless other nations around the world. In his book, THE ORIGIN OF RUSSIAN COMMUNISM, Nicolas Berdyaev’s discussion of Lenin’s personality and revolutionary concepts explains the success communist revolutions around the world. Lenin’s attitude toward the Czar’s Russia was tempered by the execution of his brother as a terrorist which also resulted in a cynically placid attitude regarding mankind. He was not an anarchist but required order and discipline among his followers. In his speeches and writings, he appealed, to labor, discipline, responsibility, knowledge and learning, and positive constructiveness, not simply destruction. Lenin checked the collapse of Russia by despotism and tyranny using cruel policies he considered unavoidable in a revolution. He was only interested in seizure of power. Lenin dedicated himself to developing the technique of revolutionary conflict. He held a totalitarian view of life necessary for the struggle focusing revolutionary energy. Lenin permitted any method in the fight to achieve revolution. To him ‘good’ was everything which served the revolution including fraud, deceit, violence, and cruelty;Revolutionarie’evil’ everything which hindered it. To Lenin, Marxism is above all the doctrine of the dictatorship of the proletariat. He was not a democrat; but he asserted the principle of a selected minority. His plan of revolution did not include development of consciousness among vast masses of workmen. Lenin’s purpose was formation of a strong party representing a well-organized and iron disciplined minority relying upon the strength of its integrated revolutionary dictatorship over life as a complete whole. The very organization of the party, which was centralized in the extreme, was a dictatorship over every member of the party. Lenin’s Bolshevik Party provided the pattern of the future organizational dictatorship of the communist party but also to the dictatorship of the communist dictator over the party membership. The plan for the Bolshevik Revolutionaries of Russia formulated by Lenin became the plan for Communist revolutions throughout the world.

A crowd of people in front of a building.To understand my characterization of Antifa as communist revolutionaries, it is necessary to understand the nature of the communist revolutions in Russia and China. Lenin envisioned Russia as the seat of world government based on the portion of Marxist philosophy suggesting the dictatorship of the proletariat. Lenin selected, trained, and developed a cadre of communist revolutionaries who would be responsible to indoctrinate and train party activists in the tactics of dictatorial revolution. Party leaders were told that authoritarian rule and government control of the entire economy would be needed to secure the benefits of communism, the dictatorship of the proletariat. Only then would the proletariat share equally in the benefits of production.

In 1895, Lenin helped organize Marxist groups in the capital into the &lig;Union for the Struggle for the Liberation of the Working Class, which attempted to enlist workers to the Marxist cause. In 1902, he published a pamphlet titled What Is to Be Done? which argued that only a disciplined party of professional revolutionaries could bring socialism to Russia. Early on, Russian socialists were divided. Lenin’s Bolsheviks advocated militarism while the other group advocated a democratic movement toward socialism. Lenin made the split official at a 1912 conference of the Bolshevik Party. Lenin garnered popular support for his revolution with calls for &lig;peace, land, and bread. The 1905 Bloody Sunday massacre and subsequent Russian revolution were the first of a series of events that eventually led to the Soviet Union. On Bloody Sunday, hundreds of unarmed Russians protesting years of food shortages and costly wars were killed or wounded by the czar’s troops. Russia entered WW I in 1914 and suffered disastrous military losses, economic duress, and extensive food shortages. After WW I, the next Russian revolution stated in early 1917 and Czar Nicholas abdicated the throne. Later that year, Lenin led the Bolshevik revolution, a nearly bloodless coup d’état against a series of representative assemblies, or Dumas established by Czar Nicholas II. At the end of 1917, civil war started between the Red Army, the Bolsheviks, and the White Army, a coalition of monarchists, capitalists, and democratic socialists. In mid-1918, the Bolsheviks executed the Czar and his entire family. The civil war lasted until 1923 when Lenin’s communist revolutionaries defeated the White Army and established the Soviet Union.

After Germany and its allies were defeated in WWII, Joseph Stalin who succeeded Lenin in Russia, expanded communist rule to countries invaded by Germany in Eastern Europe. The result was establishment of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the USSR, and the beginning of the &lig;Cold War. During the Cold War, Russia also attempted to expand its influence into the Middle East, North Africa, Viet Nam, and Latin America through militant communist revolutions. On June 12, 1987, United States President Ronald Reagan said, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,” during a speech delivered in West Berlin. Of course, President Reagan was referring to the wall dividing Germany and Berlin into Eastern Communist and Western Free Democratic sides. The wall was built by the Communists to prevent those on the east from escaping to freedom in the west. On December 25, 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed because it was economically unable to sustain its Cold War military expenditures and support for communist revolutions around the world. From the time of the communist revolution in Russia to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the laboring proletariat of Russia and Eastern Europe never shared equally in the benefits of production or experienced promised freedom from exploitation. They just exchanged bourgeoisie capitalist for totalitarian communist overlords. Sadly, for the people of Russia, they have fallen under a new dictatorship led by a former communist, Vladimir Putin.

After a decade of agitation and riots culminating with a military revolt in 1911, the last Chinese dynasty, the Qing, ended with a revolution resulting in formation of the Republic of China on January 1, 1912. A republican government was established. In 1919 while involved in their civil war, Russian Communists sent a delegation to China to recruit leaders to communism. Chen Duxiu, a leading Chinese intellectual was recruited and became the founder of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), formally established in 1921. Chen was a Leninist supporting eventual world revolution. In their search for Far-East allies, Russian communists also determined that Sun Yat-sen, the first provisional President of the Republic of China, would accept communist support for his party, the Kuomintang or KMT, while it solidified its control of China. The KMT would later become the Chinese Nationalist Party. Chen and his Russian allies thought that their communists could control Sun and his nationalist. After Sun’s death in 1925, Chiang Kai-shek became the leader of the KMT and started a purge of the Communists. By 1927, the two-part Chinese civil war was raging.

The Nationalist expelled the Communists from the KMT; and in many cities communists were massacred. In this purge, the CCP lost approximately 15,000 of its 25.000 members. The remainder of the CCP fled into the countryside. To prepare for future battles, the CCP formed the Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army of China, better known as the “Red Army.”  Mao Zedong, or Mao Tse-tung, was appointed provisional commander of the Red Army in August. Mao’s Red Army unsuccessfully attempted to defeat the nationalist in the cities of Hunan and Changsha. He retreated with his decimated forces into the nearby mountains. In the rural areas and mountains, Mao centralized power, trained a cadre of disciplined professional communist revolutionaries, organized the peasants, and built bases of operation and headquarters that he expanded during and after the Japanese invasion. By 1935 Mao had become the party’s Politburo Standing Committee leader and Red Army commander.

The war with Japan lasted from 1937 to 1945. The Communists and Nationalists paused their civil war and joined forces to fight the Japanese, but skirmishes between the two occurred throughout the war.  By 1940, cooperation had almost ceased, and the war was fought separately by Communists and Nationalists. The Chinese Nationalist Army took the brunt of the fighting with the Japanese and suffered greatly. The CCP used the end of the war to expand its territory. The Japanese invasion stirred a sense of nationalism among peasants which they previously lacked and set the stage for a communist revolution. The CCP had a doctrine, long-term objectives, a clear political strategy, disciplined leadership, and an army. After the defeat of Japan in WWII and Japan’s withdrawal from China in 1945, Mao became Chairman of the CCP. For about a year the Communists and Nationalists negotiated unsuccessfully for peace.

When the Chinese civil war resumed, the Nationalists had a 3-1 military advantage. The Nationalists prevailed militarily for the next two years of civil war conquering cities while failing to gain control rural territory, CCP strongholds. Nationalists also failed to gain popularity due to corruption. The CCP withdrew tactically from the cities while launching intellectual and student &lig;direct action protests against the Nationalists in the cities. The protests were met with heavy-handed suppression. Corruption and heavy-handedness caused division in Nationalist leadership resulting in desertion of nearly two-thirds of the Nationalist military by early 1948. In the fall of 1948, Chiang Kai-shek determined that he could regain the advantage with one significant battle in Manchuria. Although the Nationalist army was numerically superior, they were soundly defeated. Consequently, the remaining 600,000 Nationalist troops and about 2 million sympathizers retreated to the island of Taiwan. On October 1, 1949, Chairman Moa Zedong officially proclaimed the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) at Tiananmen Square.

The foreign policy of the PRC was not as hostile to the non-Asian world as USSR foreign policy was to most of the world including China. The PRC pursued economic and technological development, global economic intervention, and international diplomacy rather than the global revolutionary intervention and weapons exports preferred by Russia. In 1972, Richard Nixon became the first President to visit the PRC. In December 1978, China announced the Open-Door Policy. For the first time since the CCP won their civil war, the PRC was opened to foreign investment. The normalization of ties culminated in 1979, when the U.S. established full diplomatic relations with the PRC. In 1983, the US State Department changed its classification of China to “a friendly, developing nation” thereby increasing the amount of technology and armaments that could be sold to China as a deterrent to potential USSR hostilities. In 1986, China gained observer status with The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT,  an international treaty lasting from 1948 to 1994 to promote trade and economic development by reducing tariffs and other restrictions. GATT was superseded by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995.

In 1989, as many one million students began nearly two months of protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square.  Protests spread to as many as 400 Chinese cities. Grievances included inflation, corruption, greater accountability, constitutional due process, democracy, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech. In mid-June, CCP leaders ordered the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) to clear the square and end other demonstrations throughout the country. While the PLA was clearing the square, the famous &lig;Tank Man photo of one man standing in front of a line of tanks appeared worldwide. The photo came to represent the repressive nature of China under the CCP. The toll of the subsequent massacres was disputed and ranged from hundreds to thousands of protester deaths and injuries. Subsequently, the CCP made widespread arrests of protesters and supporters, expelled foreign journalists, strictly controlled coverage of the events in the domestic press, strengthened the police and internal security forces, and demoted or purged officials it deemed sympathetic to the protests. These restrictions have continued to this day. The west responded with temporary arms and trade embargos and strained diplomatic relationships. China became a pariah state for a relatively short period of time.

Since Tiananmen, China has worked domestically and internationally to reshape its image from a repressive regime to a benign global economic and military partner. In my opinion, the Chinese image and reality are not synonymous. CCP efforts to soften its world reputation and make significant internal economic changes were successful and culminated in admission of China to the World Trade Organization WTO in December of 2001. China has been able to maintain &lig;friendly developing nation&lig; status granted by the US in 1983 in the WTO. This status has given China enormous economic advantages while competing with &lig;developed nations like the United States.

While Russia and China pursued different strategies regarding the spread of communism internationally following their respective revolutions, their internal revolutionary plans were virtually identical. Both communist revolutions followed popular revolutions against monarchies and subsequent establishment of weak representative republican governments. These governments failed to resolve the economic problems caused by their respective monarchies which allowed communist revolutionaries to gain popularity with promises of &lig;peace, land, and bread. In both Russia and China, the people felt that they were being exploited by the wealthy and ruling classes. Both communist revolutions followed the model developed by Lenin. Lenin and Moa spent considerable time selecting and training a small cadre of disciplined professional communist revolutionaries completely dedicated to a totalitarian dictatorship of the proletariat.  This cadre of revolutionaries agreed with Lenin that ‘good’ was everything which served the revolution including fraud, deceit, violence, and cruelty; ‘evil’ everything which hindered it. Both revolutions sustained heavy initial losses which hardened the resolve of their leaders and members. These hardened survivors became even stronger leaders who were sent throughout their countries to establish revolutionary cells in both urban and rural parts of their countries as these movements grew. These communist revolutionaries were ready and willing to fight and die for the cause.

My characterization of Antifa as communist revolutionaries is, in my opinion, accurate. Antifa has at least 200 affiliated groups or cells in the United States. The Wikipedia Antifa article is a contradiction in terms. The first paragraph of the article states, &lig;It is highly decentralized and comprises an array of autonomous groups that aim to achieve their objectives through ¦both nonviolent and violent direct action rather than through policy reform. This description parrots the mainstream news, media, academic, progressive, and Democrat view of Antifa. My question is which came first, &lig;the chicken or the egg? Did these groups write the article, or do they parrot what the article says as the reality of Antifa for public consumption, mere propaganda? Antifa agrees with Lenin and Mao when they claim that &lig;policy reform is too slow and change must be forced through &lig;non-violent and violent direct action. Although the article claims that Antifa is composed of &lig;highly decentralized¦ autonomous groups, these &lig;groups are organized to achieve &lig;their objectives which implies common objectives; and &lig;their direct actions are conducted to achieve &lig;their objectives. When Antifa cells, or &lig;groups, arrive in cities throughout the United States, sometimes internationally, unload rental trucks full of riot gear, march under the same flag with trained precision to &lig;direct action events, &lig;protests, and conduct disciplined &lig;violent direct action that includes political violence, assault, arson, and property destruction, We the People are told that Antifa is an ideology not an organization.

In the section of the Antifa article titled &lig;Public reactions, &lig;Academics and scholars appear to justify a vigilante view of Antifa’s &lig;violent direct action as follows:

&lig;Historian Mark stated that ‘[Given] the historical and current threat that white supremacist and fascist groups pose, it’s clear to me that organized, collective self-defense is not only a legitimate response, but lamentably an all-too-necessary response to this threat on too many occasions.’

Alexander Reid Ross has argued that Antifa groups represented ‘one of the best models for channeling the popular reflexes and spontaneous movements towards confronting fascism in organized and focused ways.'”

Historian and Dissent magazine editor Michael Kazin wrote that ‘non-leftists often see the left as a disruptive, lawless force. Violence tends to confirm that view.’ Historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat was ‘worried that antifa’s methods could feed into what she said were false equivalencies that seek to lump violence on the left with attacks by the right.'”

Excuse me, but violence is violence. Supporters of law and order understand this simple concept about right and wrong. Violence is violence! Violence by those on the left is equivalent to violence by those on the right. Clear thinking adults understand that these are not &lig;false equivalencies. Furthermore, the statement by Ruth Ben-Ghiat supports my contention that academics and scholars and most of the news media on the left support and encourage &lig;violent direct action, riotous actions perpetrated by Antifa. My contention that Antifa are communist revolutionaries acting as vigilantes is further supported by the following statement by Peter Beinart:

“Antifa believes [that]¦ in the name of protecting the vulnerable, antifascists have granted themselves the authority to decide which Americans may publicly assemble and which may not.

Antifa is organized as a vigilante group of communist revolutionaries.

At this point in this discussion, I must state unequivocally that I abhor all forms of white supremacy and racism. The first section of the article, what most people read, also states, &lig;Some scholars argue that Antifa is a legitimate response to the rise of the far right and that Antifa’s violence such as milkshaking is not equivalent to right-wing violence. Scholars tend to reject the equivalence between Antifa and white supremacism. Antifa &lig;direct action is described as milkshaking not the reality of Antifa members beating men and women to a pulp, setting fires, destroying businesses, attacking law enforcement officers, headquarters and other government buildings including courthouses. Leftist &lig;expects and news media expect us to believe what they tell us about Antifa not what we see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears. Again, these are the tactics of communist revolutionaries. One last question, &lig;In the last fifty years, what &lig;white supremacist group or groups have caused one billion dollars in damages throughout the United States over a single summer?

According to the article, individuals involved in Antifa hold left-wing anti-authoritarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-state views. Most Antifa members are anarchists, communists, and other socialists who describe themselves as revolutionaries, communist revolutionaries in my opinion. The idea of direct action is central to the Antifa movement. The term &lig;direct action is used by political activists to describe economic and political acts requiring physical power to achieve their goals which are opposed by authorities. Antifa often engages in &lig;violent direct action, political violence, assault, arson, and property destruction, riots to the &lig;politically incorrect. Scott Crow says that Antifa adherents believe that property destruction ds not “equate to violence.” According to Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at the California State University, San Bernardino, Antifa activists feel the need to participate in violent direct actions because “they believe that elites are controlling the government and the media. So, they need to make a statement head-on against the people who they regard as racist. Therefore, according to Antifa, our government and the media are racist and must be confronted by &lig;violent direct actions. The idea that our government and media are racist is consistent with the ideas of Marxist Critical Race Theorists and Black Lives Matter activists. Violent direct action also describes the tactics of the communist revolutionaries during the Russian and Chinese communist revolutions.

The article also describes the organizational structure and membership of Antifa as loosely affiliated with no national chain of command. Antifa groups share “resources and information¦ across regional and national borders through loosely knit networks and relationships of trust and solidarity.” According to Mark Bray, members have &lig;high expectations of commitment to Antifa and each other. Activists typically organize protests via social media, websites, peer-to-peer networks, or encrypted-texting services. Antifa activists dress in black and cover their faces to thwart surveillance and create a sense of equality and solidarity among participants. The progressive news media and the left would have We the People believe that Antifa is just an ideology because its 200 plus cells do not have a Lenin, Moa, or Duke to lead a united front in their &lig;direct action campaigns. However, their cell leaders share resources and information, organize by social media, websites, peer-to-peer networks, or encrypted-texting services; and they are joined by high expectations of commitment and solidarity to Antifa and each other. As Lenin required, Antifa cell leaders and members are a &lig;disciplined cadre of professional revolutionaries. Antifa is operated by a committee or council of cell leaders, a board of directors, not a commander, CEO, or chairman. Consequently, Antifa is an international anarchist, communist, organization with a significant operation in the United States. Antifa employs the tactics of the early phases of the communist revolutions in Russia and China. Antifa are vigilante communist revolutionaries.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your &lig;Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

 

 

 

 

CIVILIZATION JIHAD AND THE SQUAD

 

A collage of pictures with the president and his military service.

Civilization Jihad is a Muslim Brotherhood plan to peacefully conquer the west, including the United States, from within using our Constitution and laws as the primary weapons. The Squad, congresswomen Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts are critical to the Civilization Jihad strategy to defeat us, create an Islamic state, and impose un-Constitutional Sharia law on our society. Rashida Tlaib and AOC are the first female members of the Democratic Socialists of America. Of the four Squad members only AOC is not Muslim. It is important to note that Islam and socialism are statist ideologies making AOC an effective Civilization Jihadist.

Several years ago, the radical right wing website Godfather Politics Published a now deleted article titled, Muslim Brotherhood’s Five-Step Plan of Domination, Key elements are cited below:

The Muslim Brotherhood, the originator of modern-day terrorism, has a five-step or phase plan, which could take 100 years or more to fully implement and gain dominance over western civilizations like the United States. They call it civilization Jihad. Many religions have step programs. There are the nine steps to convert to Judaism and 13 steps to convert to Catholicism. Eventually, the plan would require all to submit to Sharia law. The plan was crafted by Mohammed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the United States and board member of the Muslim Brotherhood of North America and approved by its Shura Council in 1987. Their mission statement is as follows:

The process of settlement is a Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim brethren united by common ties] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers [especially Christians and Jews] so that it is eliminated and God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.’

This mission statement for civilization Jihad is remarkably similar to the plan of another Statist. Joseph Stalin purportedly said, America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. Details of the Muslim Brotherhood civilization Jihad plan follow:

Phase One calls for discretion as members and operatives keep a low profile and go about their business as shop owners, students and professionals. They are to be model citizens, gaining respect within their vocations and communities. Years or even decades may pass between stages.

Phase Two requires sufficient population of Muslims who begin to come out of the shadows. They begin gently pushing for recognition of Sharia law within their own communities and sphere of influence while publicly siding with the West against radical Islam. They insist that Islam is a religion of peace while co-opting progressive western leaders. They assure these leaders that Sharia will never be applied outside their own communities.

Phase Three is the penetration and escalation phase. When there are enough Muslims in a city, political and economic influence is expanded beyond the Muslim communities as in Dearborn and Minneapolis. [Muslim influence has now expanded to the US House of Representatives where five Muslims now serve.] Extensive mosque construction, funded by foreign entities, exceeding requirements based on Muslim populations is part of this phase of civilization Jihad. [Today, there are nearly 2800 mosques in the United States. There are also nearly 30 front groups and organizations that make it a appear that Muslims have more influence than they actually do.]

[The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is one of the most influential Islamic front groups. CAIR has a paid staff of about 70, around 300 volunteers, an annual budget of $3 million, affiliates in 20 states, and 33 chapters in the US. Lorenzo G. Vidino, observed that while CAIR is not a “Muslim Brotherhood organization,” CAIR has significant ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Front groups like CAIR pressure politicians and academia for Islamic studies and prayer areas, claiming victimization and demanding accommodations. They file lawsuits and cry Islamophobia at every turn, thus wearing down their Western hosts.]

Phase Four is where Muslims, now a rather significant minority population in the host country, become more belligerent and insistent that Sharia law be woven into the host’s legal, political, economic and systems. Violence from supposedly independent and disparate radical groups may also be part of Phase Four. [These Islamic revolutionaries often employ communist revolutionary tactics like those used in the Russian and Chinese communist revolutions and Iranian revolution.]

Phase Five is the final step. Muslims become the majority, or at least the ruling minority. Without pretense, the ruling Muslims terminate all non-Islamic influence. Sharia law is imposed nationwide.

In the Hudson Institute article, The Muslim Brotherhood’s U.S. Network by Zeyno Baran, the six decade history of the activities of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States is detailed including the civilization Jihad mission statement cited above. This article provides stark details concerning the tactics employed by Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists in the United States including the five phases of civilization Jihad. Key elements of Baran’s article are as follows:

In Akram’s 18-page Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America, he states that the general strategic goal of the Group [the Muslim Brotherhood] in America consists of six stages:

Establishing an effective and stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood,

Adopting Muslims’ causes domestically and globally,

Expanding the observant Muslim base,

Unifying and directing Muslims’ efforts,

Presenting Islam as a civilizational [sic] alternative,

Supporting the establishment of the global Islamic state wherever it is.

Akram then notes that the priority for this strategy is Settlement.’ This entails becoming rooted in the spirits and minds of [the] people and establishing organizations on which the Islamic structure is built.’ Akram states that Muslims should look upon this mission as a Civilization Jihadist responsibility,’ one that lies on the shoulders of Muslims [but especially on those of] the Muslim Brotherhood in this country.’ 

In setting up their various institutions over the past four decades Brotherhood members have remained secretive, working through the organizations mentioned above to exert their influence. When questioned, most of these organizations at first deny any links to the Brotherhood. One undated MAS memo explicitly instructs group leaders to respond negatively if asked whether they are part of the Brotherhood. When this deception failed and connections to the Brotherhood were disclosed, MAS members have downplayed these links as merely an association of the past. At the same time, they adopt the role of the victim, accusing their accusers of McCarthyism’ and Islamophobia.’ This intimidation, up to and including antidefamation lawsuits, has silenced many journalists, researchers, and other Muslims¦.

What do I mean by Islamist?’ The term was coined by the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna, in an effort to politicize Islam. Broadly, the label Islamist applies to individuals or groups who believe that Islam should be a comprehensive guide to life. Islamists do not accept that the interpretation of Islam could evolve over the centuries along with human beings’ understanding, or that the religion could be influenced or modified by the cultures and traditions of various regions. Nor do they recognize that Islam can be limited to the religious realm, or to simply providing its followers with a code of moral and ethical principles¦.

Islamists are strenuously opposed to secular governance. Instead, they believe that Islamic rules and laws based upon the Quran and the sharia code must shape all aspects of human society, from politics and education to history, science, the arts, and more. Islamic jurisprudence developed and codified over the course of the 8th and 9th centuries and has not changed since then. In wholly sharia-based countries such as Iran, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia, there is little distinction between religion and state, leaving no room for liberal democracy. The institution of elections might be maintained, but this will inevitably be an illiberal system without dissent, individuation, or critical thinking¦.

Non-Islamist Muslims understand the inherent incompatibility between Islamism’s desired imposition of sharia law upon society at large and Western society’s pluralism and equality. To the Brotherhood and groups like it”whether in the Middle East or the United States”the Quran and Islam are not merely one possible source of law; they are the only source of law. As the Muslim Brotherhood declares in its motto, Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Quran is our law, jihad is our way, dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

The Muslim Brotherhood in America, Is a ten-part, Center for Security Policy, YouTube expose that also discusses the agenda and tactics of the Brotherhood in the United States including civilization Jihad. These videos range in length from fifteen minutes to two hours. Videos cover Brotherhood tactics and influence operations used against conservatives and Republicans and the organizations Islamists use to promote civilization Jihad and counter opposition primarily from the political right.

Islamists are patient people who appear to be succeeding beyond their wildest dreams in their plan for civilization Jihad in the United States. Muslims control large communities in major cities where they have succeeded in imposing Sharia law with the consent of these city, county, and state governments. In these communities, Muslims have been elected and appointed to city, country, state, and national leadership positions as well as election to the US House of Representatives in the Congress of the United States. Muslims are also becoming more belligerent and insistent that Sharia law be woven into legal, political, economic and systems in the United States. These activities are consistent with Phases Three and Four of civilization Jihad; and members of the Squad integral to the plan.

Islamists, Squad members, and other elected and appointed Muslim government officials use their positions, the Constitution, and our laws to advance the objectives of civilization jihad.  Amendment I, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or the press¦; and Amendment XIV, No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, ¦ nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the free protection of the laws are used quite effectively for their purposes. Islamists claim that Sharia law is an integral part of their religion and must be permitted under the free exercise clause of Amendment I. When Muslims violate our family practice or other laws, they often claim their actions are allowed under Sharia law and demand the protection of the equal protection clause of Amendment XIV.

On the other hand, Islamists reject those parts of our Constitution and laws which preclude imposition of Sharia law in any US jurisdiction. While Islamists invoke the free exercise phrase of the religion clause of Amendment I to the Constitution when demanding establishment Sharia law, they neglect the first phrase of the religion clause which states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Since Sharia law is an integral part of the Islamist Muslim religion, laws enabling establishment of Sharia law are an un-Constitutional establishment of Religion. Additionally, Article VI, Paragraph 2 states,

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States ¦, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws, of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Article VI, Paragraph 3 provides further proof of the un-Constitutional nature of Sheria law when it states,

[All elected and appointed government officials and judges] shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Sharia law, a Constitutional Thing, does not recognize the Constitution and Laws of United States as the supreme Law of the land, since Islamists believe that the the Quran and Islam are not merely one possible source of law; they are the only source of law violating the supremacy paragraph of our Constitution. A judge or other adjudicator of Sheria law must be a Muslim or at least agree that the Quran, Islam, and Sharia law supersede the Constitution and laws of the United States. Consequently, a religious Test is required as a Qualification to administer or adjudicate Sharia law. Therefore, Sharia law is un-Constitutional according to Article VI, Paragraphs 2 and 3, of our Constitution.

Squad members Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, and AOC embrace their civilization Jihad role as part of the

Ikhwan [Muslim brethren united by common ties] [who] understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their [own] hands¦.

They support incorporation of un-Constitutional Sharia law into our local, state, and national legal codes. Their rhetoric is anti-Semitic and supports Islamic terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al-Qaeda which seek to eliminate the nation of Israel. They refused to support funding for the Iron Dome missile defense system which defends Israel from Hamas and Hezbollah rocket attacks. The Squad along with Islamist activists like Linda Sarsour and Abbas Hamideh also supports the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement which views Israel as occupiers of Palestine and seeks to punish Israel for defending itself against Palestinian, Hamas, and Hezbollah terror and rocket attacks. Squad members also embrace language accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians without evidence.

The Squad supports most ideologies, movements, and rhetoric that pits groups of Americans against each other. They support claims by Black Lives Matter and Critical Race Theorists that the United States was founded as a racist nation because of slavery. The fact that slavery was a worldwide institution not an institution unique to the Thirteen Colonies and the United States prior to the Civil War is irrelevant to those seeking to sow division in the United States. They also neglect the fact that African slaves were sold to slavers by other Africans victorious in tribal warfare. They claim that we are a systemically racist nation where all white people benefit from white privilege and the country is plagued by white Supremacists who are a greater danger to our democracy the Islamic terrorists. Whenever the policies or initiatives supported by the Squad, Democrat Socialists, progressives, and Democrats fail or are opposed by Republicans and conservatives, the left shouts that their opponents are racists or white supremacists. When racist does not fit, the left shouts misogynist, and xenophobic in an effort to divide and silence opposition.   

It seems worthwhile to reiterate the marching orders of the Squad and the Marxists of the left. The purpose of civilization Jihad in America for the Ikhwan Squad members, Omar, Tlaib, Pressley, and AOC is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands. Similarly, the Marxist objective for America states that, America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. The civilization Jihadists and the Marxists seek to destroy the United States from within using a divide and conquer strategy.

The questions for We the People is simple. Will We the People allow these enemies within our nation to divide us and defeat us. Will We the People unite against these internal enemies seeking to destroy our culture and our nation?

SILENCE IS NOT GOLDEN!

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

THE OBAMA BIDEN FAILURES: AFGHANISTAN AND 9/11

 

A group of men in white and black outfits.
A large fire and smoke cloud is coming from the top of the twin towers.

The Obama Biden failures in Afghanistan will gut punch the world, especially We the People of the United States of America on 9/11/2021. This will be the twentieth anniversary of the Islamic terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, on the United States. On September 11, 2021, the terrorist Taliban will inaugurate their Afghan government while we commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the Islamic terrorist attacks on our nation planned by Al Qaida from Afghanistan under the protection of the Taliban. The sickening juxtaposition of these two events infuriates me.

A collage of pictures with the president and his military service.

Obama traded Sargent Bowe Bergdahl for five high ranking Taliban members who were being held at Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba. Bergdahl, a treasonous traitor, pled guilty to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. He was demoted to a private, fined, and Dishonorably Discharged; but not imprisoned. Obama and his Administration naively assured We the People of the United States that none of the five would return to Afghanistan and the Taliban. The entire Obama administration was wrong, including Biden and his current Secretary of State, Blinken who was a key player in the misguided negotiations for the Taliban Five trade. Four of the five Taliban terrorists released in the trade for the traitor Bergdahl are again high-ranking leaders in the new Taliban government of Afghanistan, the first of the Obama Biden failures.

The second of the Obama Biden failures was the disastrous withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. The withdrawal of troops to the Kabul airport occurred before US citizens and legal residents, Afghanis with Special Immigrant Visas who assisted allied forces in the war on terror in Afghanistan, and other vulnerable Afghanis were evacuated stranding hundreds to thousands of these people behind enemy Taliban terrorist lines. Estimates for stranded Americans range from 100 to 550 people. The result is that we must negotiate with Taliban terrorists to free these Americans and the others. Contrary to longstanding American military tradition, Biden left Americans and the others behind enemy lines stranding them creating a high potential for a hostage crisis.

A collage of pictures with the president and his military service.

The Obama Biden failures also include the fact that they did not complete the trial of 9/11 master mind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. In March 2007 testimony, he said, “I was responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z. In a pre-trial hearing prior to the Obama inauguration in 2009, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four co-defendants indicated the that they would plead guilty to all 9/11 charges knowing that they faced the death penalty. Mohammed noted that he had been looking to “be a martyr for long time.” The trial was never held because Obama had campaigned on closing Guantanamo Bay. The trial was delayed because of a long-failed attempt to close Guantanamo, subsequent Supreme Court rulings, and legal maneuvers by court appointed defense attorneys. These delays prevented the trial and execution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-conspirators, another of the Obama Biden failures. Consequently, two decades after the 9/11 attacks, the master mind of the attacks has not faced justice. He will be happy that his friends the Taliban will hold the inauguration of their new Afghan Taliban government on the twentieth anniversary of his greatest success, the 9/11 attacks on the United States of America.

Given these three colossal Obama Biden failures, it will be difficult for me to listen to the song, I’m proud to be an American, on 9/11, 2021. This year it’s tuff to be proud of the Biden America.

Join the fray. All of the America s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

AFGHANISTAN FAILURE: A 20-YEAR PROCESS

 

A group of people in military uniforms holding guns.

The Afghanistan failure has been a 20-year process. The Afghanistan failure was a failure to understand history and Islamic culture, train Afghan forces to fight independently, understand the evolution of the US and Afghan political environment, and poor intelligence or the failure to understand or properly use the intelligence provided. Since no empire or nation has exerted long term control over Afghanistan from Genghis Khan to the Soviet Union, Afghanistan is known as the graveyard of empires. Afghanistan was and is a nation ruled by tribal war lords, who are the village and regional leaders of most of Afghanistan, with many ethnic groups and tribes that have been fighting to control the nation for decades if not centuries. These groups only unite effectively to fend off external enemies. In our arrogance, US politicians and military leaders convinced themselves and our nation that our military prowess would prove the exception to centuries of failure to conquer the Afghan people.

Afghan Islamic culture is a male dominated patriarchal culture controlled by Sharia Law and tribal warfare. War lords control rural Afghan villages and regions as well as the lives of tribal Afghan fighters. Under Sharia law, women are totally subservient, westerners would say enslaved, to men. Consequently, the Afghan security forces fighters were taught from their youth to be totally subservient to war lords and village elders many of whom are Taliban. It is not difficult to imagine that this allegiance might be hard to overcome with training conducted by foreign military trainers with good pay as the primary motivation. Although these forces had good fighting capabilities and have suffered around 70,000 dead while fighting the Taliban in previous years when they could usually depend on US air support on the battlefield. With their tribal allegiances and the corruption of Afghan political and military leaders, the dedication of the Afghan security forces to their national leaders and chain of command may have been deteriorating. Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis described the response from Afghan soldiers on the ground as apathetic: I’m not going to die for a government that doesn’t even take care of me, that doesn’t pay me very well, and that doesn’t even give me food, bullets, resupply things, doesn’t give us backup when we need help.

Unfortunately, the United States military trained the Afghan security forces in tactics that ultimately caused our Afghanistan failure. First, for almost two decades the United States military failed to train the Afghan security forces to fight as a totally independent force without US air and intelligence support. Although Afghan forces had US air support for nearly two decades, the US failed to prepare these forces for complete withdrawal of US support. Once support for the Afghan war lost popular support in the US, at least six years ago, the US military training of Afghan security forces should have transitioned to totally independent fighting. Virtually every military commentator, including retired general Jack Keane on Fox News, stated that these forces were trained to fight with US air support. When Bagram Airbase was abandoned to the Taliban and US air support was withdrawn, the Afghan security forces lost the equalizing battlefield force that they had been trained to depend on for victory. Consequently, The Afghan security forces did not know how to fight the Taliban independently and lost the confidence, morale, and esprit de corps needed to win on the battlefield. As a result of this Afghanistan failure, the Afghan security forces simply refused to fight the Taliban and allowed the Taliban to take control of most of the county in a mere eleven days.

The second Afghanistan failure was a combined US political and military failure. US politicians, four different Commanders-in-Chief, two from each political party, failed to establish a consistent mission and exit strategy for the Afghan war. The first mission was to defeat the Taliban, which had provided Al-Quada a base of operation and training sites used to launch the 9/11 attack on the United States, defeat Al-Quada, capture or kill Osama Bin-Laden, and prevent future Al-Quada attacks on US soil. The US has not suffered another significant attack since 9/11. The Taliban and Al-Quada were not able to mount meaningful military operations in Afghanistan after 2002; and Al-Quada was no longer a threat by 2005. Osama Bin Laden, hiding in Pakistan, was not killed until May 2011. This mission was accomplished sometime between 2004 and 2011 when the United States should have conducted an orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. Unfortunately, no exist strategy was delineated for the Afghan war; and a new mission was established for our military forces in Afghanistan.

The second mission, for each successive Commander-in-Chief, became nation building. The US military and Afghan security forces fought annual military campaigns against the Taliban to provide an environment to maintain a western style political and economic system for Afghanistan. This mission included establishing sufficient stability to conduct free democratic elections open to both men and women and allow women to hold elected office. The first national Afghan election was held in October 2004. This mission also included establishing a public education system open to both sexes, allow women to work in all segments of the economy and travel freely in public, and construct electric, water, sewer, transportation, and other infrastructure systems to support internal and external commerce, and improve the standard of living for Afghanis. Unfortunately, both the Afghan political and military systems and leaders have been plagued by corruption. This fact may have played a role in the ultimate Taliban victory if the Afghan leadership lost the support of the security forces due to their corruption. The Afghanistan failure was also a colossal failure of intelligence; or President Biden refused to believe intelligence indicating an imminent and sudden Taliban victory that occurred during the US withdrawal was a possibility.

Two men sitting at a table with microphones.

On Wednesday August 18, 2021, Secretary of Defense, retired General Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley held a joint news conference to update the nation on the fall of Afghanistan and the status of the evacuation mission. General Milley indicated that our intelligence had no indication that the entire Afghan military and government could fall in eleven days. The worst estimate was several weeks while other estimates up to two years were noted. No other meaningful details about our Afghanistan failure were discussed. Apparently, the intelligence failed to determine that Taliban fighters were dispersed throughout Afghanistan ready to move rapidly against the 34 provincial capitals and other major cities and towns as the US military forces withdrew leaving the Afghan security forces to fend for themselves.

From the little that I have read, perhaps the greatest Afghanistan failure occurred at the Department of Defense and Department of State. Simply Googling Afghan security forces reveals numerous open source articles questioning the readiness of these forces including the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). SIGAR reports are provided to both the Department of Defense and the State Department. On Monday, August 16, 2021, John Sopko, stated 

It’s not surprising I mean, we’ve been warning”my little agency”for the last almost 10 years about issues with the [Afghan National Security Forces’] capabilities and sustainment. All the signs have been there. I mean, we’ve been shining a light on it in multiple reports going back to when I started in 2012 about changing metrics, about ghosts, ghost soldiers who didn’t exist, about poor logistics, about the fact that the Afghans couldn’t sustain what we were giving them.

Apparently, the leaders of both the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and congressional oversight committees have received reports and heard testimony about the lack of readiness and sustainability of the Afghan security forces for nearly a decade. The Secretaries of Defense since 2012 all need to answer four simple questions. First, Did you believe the SIGAR reports or chose to ignore them? Second, Did you even attempt to train Afghan security forces to fight without US air support, both in training exercises and actual combat where emergency backup air support was available to prevent excessive losses if necessary? Third, Did regular Afghan security forces ever win a major battle against the Taliban without US air support; if they did, how many such battles did they win per year; and did the number of such victories decline since 2012? Forth, With the possible exception of Afghan special forces, when, if ever, did you know the Afghan security forces would not be able to win most of their battles without US air support.

The fact that a civilian, like me, with little strategic or tactical knowledge of two decades the political and military situation in Afghanistan is compelled to ask these questions both saddens and sickens me. I fear that the answers will demonstrate that our military and political leaders have either deceived We the People of the United States or they deceived themselves. Either way, the blood and treasure lost since Seal Team 6 killed Osama Bin-Laden in 2011 was, in my opinion, lost in a vain effort to sustain the unsustainable.

Finally, the greatest Afghanistan failure rests solely with President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Biden thought that his 50 years of failed experience gave him the insight to disregard the advice of the entire pentagon, intelligence community, and Department of State. He concluded that we’ll do it my way.  He ordered a rapid draw down of the few troops remaining forcing the field commander to choose between closing Bagram Airbase or the US Embassy in Kabul. The commander chose the Embassy with its civilian personal and classified documents and materials that had to be destroyed. The result was the loss of the two runways at Bagram Airbase leaving one runway at the Kabul airport for evacuation of US Embassy personal and other US civilians, other country’s civilians, and Afghanis who had supported allied operations in Afghanistan.  By that time, all US military personal, less than 1,000, and a few thousand US civilians and Afghanis reached the Kabul airport; and the Taliban controlled most of the country, roads to Kabul, and surrounded the only evacuation site in Afghanistan. As this was occurring, Biden authorized insertion of 5-6,000 prepositioned troops to secure the Kabul airport.

This withdrawal, ordered by Biden, was done unilaterally without coordination with our NATO allies Brittan, France, and Australia that also have military personal and civilians stranded behind enemy lines. The Department of State does not know how many US passport holders are now stranded behind enemy lines but estimates at least 11,000. Between 40,000 and 80,000 Afghanis and NATO citizens eligible to evacuate may also be stranded behind enemy lines. The Department of State told these civilians to make their way to the Kabul airport but stated that the United States could not guarantee safe travel. These civilians could have as many as 500 miles to travel through enemy territory including an untold number of checkpoints and undisciplined Taliban fighters. The final insult to those stranded behind enemy lines came from Secretary of Defense Austin who indicated that no mission to extract stranded groups of civilians or establish evacuation corridors are currently planned. The 50,000 to 90,000 civilians stranded behind enemy lines will have to fend for themselves. Biden is solely responsible for the blood of these civilians that he trapped behind enemy lines because he did it my way!

Several military analysists indicated that our withdrawal plan was totally flawed. US civilians, Afghanis civilian allies, NATO civilians, and other nationality civilians should have been evacuated before our military drawdown so their evacuation could be protected. Second, our significant military equipment should have been removed from Afghanistan prior to our withdrawal of military personal, especially if we suspected that the Afghan military and government would fall to the Taliban. The final step of the withdrawal should have been withdrawal of our military personal. The fact that the order of our withdrawal occurred in reverse of the above sequence is the reason that thousands of US and other civilians are stranded behind enemy lines and the Taliban now owns large numbers of our best military equipment and technology.

Biden’s Afghanistan failure constitutes the most humiliating and significant military and foreign policy defeats in modern US history. Many of our allies including the NATO countries of Brittan, France, and Australia have lost confidence in the United States. This is also a humanitarian tragedy of major proportion that will occur under Taliban rule.

 Join the fray. All of the America s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS MARXIST

 

Evolution of Critical Race Theory

A black background with white text that says " say no to critical race theory ".

Critical race theory is Marxist; and it is not new. Critical race theory originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of American legal scholars. Critical race theory emerged as a serious academic movement by the 1980s. Critical race theory is rooted in critical theory. Critical race theory has two common themes. First, it claims that white supremacy, with its societal or structural racism, maintains power through the law. Second, transforming the relationship between law and racial power and achievement of racial emancipation and anti-subordination is possible. Consequently, critical race theory exchanges the two traditional Marxist classes, oppressive capitalists and oppressed labors for oppressive structural racism and white supremacists and oppressed minorities primarily blacks. This is the classical Marxist strategy of fomenting class, or racial, warfare. In 1997, Judge Richard Posner argued that Critical race theory turns its back on the Western tradition of rational inquiry, forswearing analysis for narrative,” and “by repudiating reasoned argumentation, [critical race theorists] reinforce stereotypes about the intellectual capacities of nonwhites. Former Judge Alex Kozinski criticized critical race theorists in 1997 for raising “insuperable barriers to mutual understanding” eliminating opportunities for “meaningful dialog. Therefore, critical race theory labels all white people with their white privilege as oppressors who use structural racism to suppress minorities, especially blacks. The result is high levels of racial animosity.

Critical Theory (CT) is a Marxist approach to social philosophy that focuses on the critique of society and culture in order to reveal and challenge power structures. CT is foundational to critical race theory. With origins in sociology, psychology, psychiatry, and literary criticism, CT argues that social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors. CT maintains that ideology is the principle obstacle to human liberation.

Critical theory was established as a school of thought In sociology, psychology, psychiatry, and political philosophy primarily by the Frankfurt School theoreticians Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Erich Fromm, and Max Horkheimer. Horkheimer described a theory as critical insofar as it seeks “to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them,” a key tenant of Marxism. Critical Theory means the Western-Marxist philosophy developed in Germany in the 1930s and drawing on the ideas of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Modern CT has also been influenced by Gyrgy Luk¡cs and Antonio Gramsci, as well as second-generation Frankfurt School scholars, notably Jrgen Habermas. In Habermas’s work, CT transcended its theoretical roots in German idealism and progressed closer to American pragmatism. Concern for social “base and superstructure” is one of the remaining Marxist philosophical concepts in much contemporary CT.

Approximately a decade before critical race theory began to emerge in the United states, Herbert Marcuse, considered the Father of the new left, observed that before radical Marxist change could occur in Western Europe and the United states, a propaganda based educational dictatorship would be required. Marcuse described the strategies necessary to establish the educational dictatorship and the groups, embraced by critical race theorists, that would best serve as radical revolutionaries to change western culture.

Critical Race Theory Revolutionaries and Tactics

Marcuse identified anti-capitalists, radical intellectuals, the socially marginalized, exploited, persecuted outcasts and outsiders of ethnic minorities, people of color, the unemployed, and the unemployable as trainable revolutionaries. Ethnic and gender study programs were established in most universities to train the envisioned revolutionaries.” He favored these groups, the new proletarians, or laborers, of modern Marxism because he correctly believed that working class labors were no longer a potentially subversive force capable of bringing about revolutionary change in western society and culture. Critical race theory became the perfect educational dictatorship tool to train a subversive force capable of bringing about revolutionary change. Today, the Marxist critical race theory revolutionaries identified by Marcuse, are our educators from preschool to Ph.D., including National Education Association and American Federation of Teachers union leadership and members, publishers, progressive mainstream news media conglomerates, journalists, pundits, and commentators, corporate and social media executives, and leaders of the military industrial complex.  Antifa affiliate members throughout Western Europe and the United States are the useful unemployed and the unemployable violent minions of progressive intolerance¦ and undemocratic means.

Strategically, Marcuse called for the gradual elimination of conservative faculty, speakers, and student groups, first at our universities, then our high schools, elementary schools, and finally in our kindergartens and preschools. Although Marcuse did not advocate violence, he indicated that the process could involve intolerance¦ and undemocratic means. The political correctness movement and designation of conservative speech as offensive trigger language, safe speech zones, cancel culture, conservative speaker shout downs, demonstrations, and Antifa riots designed to drive conservatives from campuses and our streets are some of the tactics of intolerance¦ and undemocratic means that have evolved to establish the Marcuse educational dictatorship. Currently, the corporate executives of Amazon, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to name the most powerful speech and search platforms on the internet, were educated at universities controlled by the Marxist educational dictatorship and their Marxist curricula. Consequently, these platforms do not hesitate to reduce or eliminate conservative voices by intolerance¦ and undemocratic means.

Marxism, Critical Race Theory, and Black Lives Matter

A statue of karl marx in front of trees.

Since their leaders claim to be trained Marxist, advocates of critical race theory and Black Lives Matter generally support the tenants of Marxism listed below. The section, of The Communist Manifesto titled Proletarians and Communists, outlines strategic details for incremental progressive domestic policy initiatives that gradually eliminate capitalism and private property. Marx wrote,

These measures will of course be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in the most advanced countries [like the United States] the following will be pretty generally applicable:

Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Abolition of all right of inheritance.” [In the United States, inheritance taxes are incrementally moving toward abolition of all right of inheritance.]

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State¦.

Equal liability of all labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

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.

Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children™s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.”

Unfortunately, many of these measures have been enacted. Free education for all children, essential for a flourishing, capitalistic, constitutional republic like the United States of America, has been promoted in our country since colonial days.

Marxism is an atheistic philosophy that is antagonistic to the Judeo-Christian heritage of Western Europe and the United States. Judeo-Christianity, especially Biblical Christianity, has a history of individuals accomplishing great things in service to our God, His Son, and our Savior, Jesus Christ. Individuals must personally accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16, NIV). Within Biblical Christianity, there are two critical institutions, the family and the church. The Judeo-Christian family has consisted of one husband, one wife, and their children (Gen 4:1-2) since creation, For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh (Gen 2:24, NIV). The family and the church are both ordained, Holy institutions set aside to serve God.

Husbands, love your wives [and children, Eph 6:4], just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her [the church] to make her Holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word [scripture], and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, Holy and blameless (Eph 5:25-27, NIV).

Consequently, Marxist disdain the Biblical Christian church and the traditional Christian, patricentric or patriarchal family. All categories of Marxists support same sex marriage, multi-person marriages including bi-sexual partners, other forms of polygamy, single parent families, and un-wed mother families. These families contradict the concept of the traditional Biblical Christian family undermining the impact of Judeo-Christian values on our society and culture. Currently, Marxist advocates of critical race theory and Black Lives Matter vociferously denounce the patricentric or patriarchal family.

Marxist animosity toward the Biblical Christian family and church stems from the role of these two institutions in fostering individualism. This fact is well documented in Marxist writings and rhetoric. These two institutions are where individuals learn about their infinite worth in the kingdom of God when they become followers and servants of Jesus Christ. The reason for this animosity is simple; for Marxism, in all its pragmatic forms, communism, socialism, progressivism, critical race theory, and Black Lives Matter to succeed, the individual must be totally subservient to the good of the collective. For Marxists, the individual is worthless compared to the worth of the collective. In contrast, Biblical Christian individuals have infinite worth to God because God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ [God’s one and only Son, John 3:16] died for us [each individual] (Rom 5:8, NIV). In John 15:13, Jesus said, Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command (NIV).

The individualism fostered by Biblical Christianity is incompatible with Marxism. For any form of Marxism to succeed, Judeo-Christian, Biblical Christian, and the Biblical Christian church and family influence on society and culture must be eliminated or, at least, marginalized. Consequently, the vitriol displayed by Marxists toward Jews, Biblical Christians, and the Christian family and church is understandable from the Marxist, critical race theory, Black Lives Mater perspective.

Marxism, in all its forms, claims that societies will evolve into societies where wealth will be equally redistributed from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Most modern Marxist would add that the benefits and wealth of society would be equally redistributed to all regardless of individual willingness or ability to contribute to the good of society. This includes the idea of reparations supported by proponents of critical race theory and Black Lives Matter. All manifestations and characteristics of individualism must be rejected by Marxists. Of Course, Capitalism, the ultimate expression of individualism, is rejected by Marxists and the proponents of critical race theory and Black Lives Matter. Competition, personal responsibility and accountability, self-discipline, strong individual work ethic, and meritocracy, are also rejected as meaningful characteristics of a Marxist society.

Marxists, Frankfurt School philosophers, and critical theorists in our universities have influenced psychology, psychiatry, and sociology curricula and research since at least the late 1930’s. Their curricula, research, and publications emphasize the detrimental effects of competition, personal responsibility and accountability, self-discipline, strong individual work ethic, meritocracy, Christian morality and ethics, and the traditional patricentric or patriarchal family on individuals and our society. According to these psychologists and sociologists, stressing the elements of individualism in our primary and secondary schools harms some children by causing low self-esteem among low performers potentially causing future neurosis or psychosis for the low performers. Of course, the converse, high self-esteem, occurs among high performers. Research and publications designed to explore the societal benefits of the characteristics of individualism are lacking because such information would promote individualism, innovation, entrepreneurship, and capitalism.

Since most university education programs require courses in sociology and psychology, our teachers are taught that the characteristics of individualism are harmful to student psyches and interpersonal relationships. Preschool, kindergarten, and elementary school teachers are told to avoid teaching and free time activities that praise high performers or correct and discourage low performers. Maintaining positive self-esteem is more important for low performing students than promoting and encouraging the efforts necessary for achievement according to the psychologists and sociologists training our teachers. The same philosophy of esteem building dominates our younger sports and extra-curricular activities programs. Games are played without keeping score. Batters try their best rather than striking out; and every player or participant gets a participation trophy. There are no winners or losers because competition is bad in the Marxist collective where all share equally in the benefits of society.

Today, in critical race theory education, self-esteem has been replaced by equity programs which claim that white supremacy, structural racism, and outright racism is the cause of low performance among most minorities. Asian minorities are an obvious and inconvenient exception to these claims. Consequently, under critical racism ideology, correcting a student who concludes that 3+2=6 no longer causes the student to have lowered self-esteem; it is racist. Setting high standards and requiring effort in academics is structural or systemic racism. This is simply a verbal Marxist bait and switch. Critical race theory educators replaced the misguided ideas of the self-esteem movement for the misguided ideas of racism. The goal is the same, a Marxist educational dictatorship. Racial antagonism replaced class antagonism. Unfortunately, elementary students and younger children are taught the divisive ideas that since they are white, they will grow up to oppress people of color.

There are only two words to adequately characterize critical race theory and Black Lives Matter, Marxist racism.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

FACEBOOK CENSORSHIP IS DIVISIVE

 

Facebook censorship removed comments on my American’s Crossroad,  Facebook page. This is a breach of the spirt of Amendment I and free speech rights. Twitter is even worse because it banned the Washington Post Hunter Biden lap top story calling it Russian disinformation when Hunter was under FBI investigation. Twitter also harasses conservatives. The Facebook censorship is documented in the screen shots below.

I commented on Timmothy Lemoine Price’s comment on a Post of mine starting with Yes, when.  as follows:

A facebook post with an image of a person 's face.

After I completed the comment, the Most Relevant Facebook censorship line showed up above my comment and the comment did not show up in subsequent comments as shown below.

A facebook post with an image of a person 's face.

Apparently, according to Facebook censorship guidelines, a discussion of the antithetical nature of the principles of Marxism and both Christianity and Judaism is not relevant.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!!

This Facebook censorship occurred immediately indicating that their algorithm is written to prevent such discussions. Of course, we understand that progressive algorithms are written by, hold your breath, progressives. Why is Facebook afraid? Does Facebook know that Marxism is bankrupt in the face of Biblical Christianity and Judaism?

In my opinion, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google, to name the worst, have become venues for Marxist or progressive propaganda and the Democrat Party like our schools and progressive news media. They claim to be forums for the free open and honest discussion of ideas; but they act with impunity when they censor, cancel, and restrict conservative speech but allow offensive Posts by the Chinese Communist Party, Iran’s Ayatollah, and racist progressives to call Senator Tim Scott hashtag Uncle Tim” for over 11 hours. These social media hide behind hidden, undiscernible, and often illogical, rules with no reasonable and accessible appeals process. Many say conservatives should start their own platforms which is possible; but that would defeat the purpose of platforms for free, open, and honest discussion of ideas. Maybe progressives are afraid of truly open discussion platforms. Maybe progressives know their ideas are losers. Are progressives even afraid to debate that question? Based on the facts, I think they are.  Let’s start the discussion with this fact. America’s Crossroad was the victim of Facebook censorship.

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

US EDUCATION IS MARXIST PROPAGANDA

 

Marxist propaganda dominates the education system in the United States from preschool to Ph.D., Marxism PP. Around 1970, Herbert Marcuse stated that an educational dictatorship was required before the people of Western Europe and the United States would accept radical progressive Marxist thought necessary for radicle change. From the 1950’s through 1970, Marcuse taught Marxist critical theory at Columbia, Harvard, Brandeis and the University of California, San Diego. He supported the world-wide Viet Nam anti-war movement in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. During an anti-war symposium discussion period in Berlin, summarized in The Frankfurt School Its History, Theories, and Political Significance. 1994, a student asked him this question, What material and intellectual forces are required for radical change? In his response, Marcuse admitted his helplessness, as follows:

“In order for new demands to develop, the mechanisms that reproduced the old demands would first have to be abolished; while, on the other hand, in order to abolish those mechanisms, the demand for them to be abolished would first have to be created. The only solution he could envisage [to cause radicle change] was an ‘educational dictatorship.‘”

A group of graduates in caps and gowns posing for the camera.

Unfortunately, the Republican Party, conservatives, and Biblical Christians failed to understand the goal of the Marxist plan for an educational dictatorship. The goal of their Marxist propaganda was to abolish those mechanisms hindering radicle change by abolishing teaching of everything positive about the United States. The sad and frightening result of our failure to understand the left’s goal for our education system is that the Marxist propaganda taught to our youth has succeeded in undermining our belief that the United States and our heritage has been an overwhelming force for good in the world. Marxist propaganda taught in our schools has succeeded in creating the demand to eliminate the influence of our Judeo-Christian heritage, support for our capitalist economy, and the positive influence of our national power and influence in geo-politics.

In the United States, progressives were working toward an educational dictatorship with curricula dominated by Marxist propaganda long before Marcuse verbalized the reality of their efforts. Calls for the left’s educational dictatorship were clearly outlined in The Communist Manifesto and subsequent Marxist rhetoric. Around 1990, they controlled higher education and had trained preschool through high school teachers. By the start of the twenty-first century, progressive Marxist ideology was taught from preschool to Ph.D., and the 2008 election probably saw the first group of voters indoctrinated throughout their educational experience by Marxist propaganda.

In his 2017 publication, The End of the Experiment: The Rise of Cultural Elites and the Decline of America’s Civic Culture, Stanley Rothman called Herbert Marcuse “the Father of the New Left.” Marcuse was a member of The Frankfurt School, a group of Marxist philosophers who called themselves Critical Theorists to avoid close association with Russian communist revolutionaries. They were Marxist philosophers and social scientists with the Institute for Social Research, founded in the early twentieth century, at Germany’s Frankfurt University. Before the Nazis gained total control of Germany, most members of The Frankfurt School escaped, with their extensive library, to Columbia University via Switzerland. After WWII, many members of The Frankfurt School returned to Germany, but Marcuse and several other Critical Theorists remained in the United States.

Marcuse, through his writing, teaching, and rhetoric pioneered the mechanisms used to institutionalize the progressive left’s educational dictatorship and its curricula of Marxist propaganda. Since Marxism is “a body of rational norms” that has been largely assimilated into modern social sciences, the applicable principles of Marxist philosophy are now taught in each liberal art and social science discipline. Therefore, Marxist propaganda is incorporated in the curricula of philosophy, sociology, psychology, psychiatry, journalism, geography, the arts, and literature, to name a few. His progressive ideology regarding the role of art and man’s erotic nature in the true liberation of humanity and emancipation from bourgeoisie, capitalistic, society have also been incorporated into curricula at every level resulting in a major impact our society, culture, heritage.

Marcuse also formulated the strategies now being utilized by far-left progressive Marxist radicle revolutionaries seeking to transform the United States into a nation governed by the principles and philosophy of Karl Marx, socialism. He was one of the early radicle elites to use language from the critique of Soviet or Nazi regimes to characterize developments in the advanced industrial world. Today, this language is commonly used by progressive educators at every level, news anchors and commentators, and pundits as they characterize Republicans, conservatives, and capitalists who are not woke enough.

In his 1965 publication: Repressive Tolerance, Marcuse described how to establish his educational dictatorship and influence public discourse as follows:

Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left. [If movements from the left are blocked], their reopening may require apparently undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements [from the right].

In classrooms and campuses from preschool to Ph.D., as well as society in general, toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements [from the right] has been withdrawn by undemocratic means, the Political Correctness movement and Cancel Culture.

Marcuse also described the groups of revolutionaries that the educational dictatorship could teach to become the radicle intellectuals needed to transform the nation our Founders envisioned into a socialist nation. A 1997 review of social and political theorist writings indicated that Marcuse believed the working class was no longer a potentially subversive force capable of bringing about revolutionary change in the United States. Instead, Marcuse put his faith in an alliance between radical intellectuals, the socially marginalized, the substratum of the outcasts and outsiders, the exploited and persecuted of other ethnicities and other colors, the unemployed, and the unemployable. Accordingly, these groups could be molded into the revolutionaries needed to affect radicle change in the United States. Subsequently, numerous curricula have been developed for groups that Marcuse thought could become a subversive force capable of bringing about revolutionary change in the United States. Departments and curricula for marginalized ethnicities and other colors and the socially marginalized were subsequently developed including Black, Native American, Hispanic, Women’s, and Gender Studies. New curricula, programs, and groups were developed by the radicle progressive Marxist faculty and graduates of these disciplines including Critical Race Theory, Black Lives Matter, the Lincoln Project, and the 1619 Project. ANTIFA, the useful puppet minions of the radicle, progressive, Marxist left, appears to be a movement made up of the marginalized outcasts and outsiders of our society.

Since one of the major goals of Marxism is equity of outcomes and distribution of the benefits of society, leaders of the educational dictatorship promote equity programs that reduce opportunities for gifted and exceptional students to advance their education at their own pace. These students are held back as long as possible to minimize their potential advantage over their peers. Critical Race Theory has a similar objective. The Marxist educational dictatorship has incrementally abolished support for teaching the critical role of our Judeo-Christian heritage, Christianity, the Christian Church, and Christian Family with a father, mother, and their children, and Judeo-Christian morality and ethics. This heritage was essential to our national success and history as the United States became the greatest nation in history.

Marxist educators slowly decreased support for the ideals of The Declaration of Independence that all men’s freedom is endowed by their Creator and that our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and all Amendments were ordained as documents set apart for the service of God. The Marxist propaganda disseminated in the educational dictatorship also began a methodical campaign to defame our Founders as racists because many Founders owned slaves who had been sold into slavery by their fellow black Africans. Conservatives of all stripes failed to understand that the Marxist educational dictatorship would also abolish support for our capitalistic economy, the rule of law and law enforcement, and a military strong enough to defend our nation against Marxist and former Marxist regimes and other dictatorships. Marxists throughout the world always support each other. These regimes include China, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and other South and Central American Marxist regimes, Islamist dictatorships like Turkey, Iran, and Syria, as well as the Islamic terror groups throughout the world.

Obviously, the Republican Party, Conservatives, and Biblical Christians fail We the People when we did not understand the goals of objectives of the left’s educational dictatorship. Additionally, we failed to understand that the attitude of our people toward their Judeo-Christian heritage, our constitution, the rule of law and law enforcement, capitalistic economy, and way of life could be changed through an incremental Marxist propaganda campaign in our schools. Consequently, over half of our youngest generation now favor socialism over capitalism according to one national poll; and the leaders of many of our largest corporations and Big Tech support the progressive socialist agenda and policies. Marxist progressives dominate our mainstream news outlets, commentators, and pundits. Recent news articles indicate that many corporate executives support and promote many progressive, Marxist initiatives currently dominating our public discourse. In addition, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google now actively practice intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left, political correctness and cancel culture, using undemocratic means as Marcuse suggested. Although these corporations are not government agencies, they have failed in their patriotic duty to uphold the spirit of Amendment I of the Constitution by abridging the freedom of speech [and] of the press. In my opinion, since these public forums are licensed, sanctioned, and protected by congress, they should not be exempted from the requirements of the Constitution regarding freedom of speech [and] the press!

Three critical issues face the Republican Party, Conservatives, and Biblical Christians. Solving these issues will be a daunting task because we will have to reverse over fifty years of Marxist propaganda spread throughout our population by the left’s educational dictatorship. First, we must challenge the Marxist educational dictatorship that has been established in the United States of America before it is too late. Secondly, Conservatives must counter the Marxist left’s stranglehold on our education system by promoting conservative faculty and administrative participation in our universities. Thirdly, we must develop curricula that promotes all the positive facts of our national heritage. These facts include our Judeo-Christian heritage, our Founders and Founding Documents, the rule of law, our military as a force for freedom throughout the history of our world, and the progress we have made to fulfill the hope of The Declaration of Independence, our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the rest of the Amendments. For the sake of the United States of America, failure is not an option. Our freedom is at stake!

Join the fray. All of the America’s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.

OUR UNITED STATES “WITHERS AWAY” UNDER DEMOCRAT CONTROL

 

Our United States withers away under Democrat control. In my opinion, this will occur due to the progressive information and entertainment industries, and the socialist, progressive wing of the Democrat Party, the philosophically Marxist left cabal. The combination of globalism and multi-national corporations will also be a factor as our United States withers away.  For a thorough discussion of globalism and free trade, consider the GLOBALISM articles listed in the BLOG CONTENTS tab of AMERICA’S CROSSROAD. The left also controls our education system where Marxist philosophy is taught to our children from preschool to Ph.D. (Marxism PP). This educational dictatorship now includes curricula developed by The Lincoln Project, Critical Race Theorists, and Black Lives Matter which may be the subject of later articles from America’s Crossroad. Consequently, most of our younger citizens now prefer socialism over capitalism. Since the left controls entertainment, pop culture and music, the advertisement industry, literature and the publishing industry, and social media, the left controls the sights, sounds, and language of our culture. Most of the messages portrayed by this cabal are anti-Christian and anti-religion, anti-traditional family, anti-capitalist, anti-law enforcement, anti-military, and reject the idea that We the People have been a largely positive force in the history of our nation and the world. Consequently, the left rejects the positive nature of our heritage as citizens of the United States of America.

The phrase, the state withers away, was coined by Friedrich Engels in the 1892 English translation publication, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific:

The interference of the state power in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then ceases of itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the processes of production. The state is not “abolished”, it withers away.

Some claim that Engels was not referring to states as nations but as the system of laws that subjugated and exploited the laboring class, proletarians, to the will of those who determined labor wages and owned and controlled the other two means of production, land and capital, capitalist or the bourgeoisie. Engels and Marx envisioned an inevitable evolutionary process leading to classless socialist states where the means of production are controlled by all the people sharing equally in the benefits of production.

However, in the section of The Communist Manifesto titled Proletarians and Communists Marx and Engels unambiguously pronounce that the phrase the state withers away refers to countries and nations as follows:

A picture of karl marx with the caption " karl marx ( 1 8 1 8-1 9 0 6 ). "

The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality.

Working men have no country.

National differences and antagonisms between peoples are daily more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie [upper ruling class, landowners, and capitalists], to freedom of commerce, to the world market.

The supremacy of the proletariat [working class] will cause them [countries] to vanish still faster.

In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another is put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end.  

According to Marx and Engels, when competition between states is eliminated, the state, as individual nations, withers away. By the early twentieth century, the idea that the state withers away took an ominous turn for the worst as revolutionary Marxists sought world domination under dictatorial communism. However, in twenty first century western civilization, our laws  give significant power to workers and labor unions creating a tenuous balance between the rights of capitalists and laborers. Some would say that capitalists still have an advantage in these laws. Others disagree, saying the balance is determined by supply and demand. That is the subject of much debate.

For this discussion, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary definitions of state, nation, country, border, nationality, and character. are appropriate. State is defined as

a politically organized body of people especially; the political organization of such a body of people; a government or politically organized society having a particular character usually occupying a definite territory.

Nation is defined as follows:

A community of people composed of one or more nationalities and possessing a more or less defined territory and government; a territorial division containing a body of people of one or more nationalities and usually characterized by relatively large size and independent status.

Country is defined as an indefinite usually extended expanse of land;the land of a person’s birth, residence, or citizenship; a political state or nation or its territory. Border is defined as a boundary especially of a country or state.

Nationality is defined as follows:

A legal relationship involving allegiance on the part of an individual and usually protection on the part of the state; membership in a particular nation; political independence or existence as a separate nation; a people having a common origin, tradition, (songs, stories, and chronicles) and language capable of forming or constituting a nation-state.

Character is defined as follows:  

A feature used to separate distinguishable things into categories, a group or kind so separated; the complex of mental and ethical traits marking and often individualizing a person, group, or nation; main or essential nature especially as strongly marked and serving to distinguish.

The above definitions will provide a framework for discussion of the way Democrat control will ensure that our United States withers away.

First, it is critical to understand the collective nationality and character of the United States of America. Until the mid-twentieth century, we were a people having a common origin, tradition, (songs, stories, and chronicles) and language [English] constituting a nation-state sharing a complex of mental and ethical traits serving to distinguish the United States from other nations. We the People shared a Judeo-Christian heritage. Our laws and values are based on British Common Law with its Judeo-Christian based code of morality and ethics as is our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. This sentiment was eloquently stated by John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, in The Federalist No. 2 where he wrote,

Providence [God] has blessed it [ America] for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants.  Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion [Christianity with all its orders and denominations], attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, have nobly established their general Liberty and Independence.

John Jay summarized the Founders’ view of the importance of Christianity to the successful future of the United States as follows:

No human society has ever been able to maintain both order and freedom, both cohesiveness and liberty apart from the moral precepts of the Christian religion. Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance this great experiment will then be surely doomed.

The Father of our Country, George Washington, expressed similar sentiments in his Farewell Address to the Nation:

“With slight shades of difference, you have the same Religion, Manners, Habits and Political Principles.  The Independence and Liberty you possess are the work of joint councils, and joint efforts “ of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion, and Morality are indispensable supports. “ In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

The Father of our Country clearly stated our shared Judeo-Christian religion, morality and values were central to the collective nationality and character of We the People of the United States. In my opinion, most of the current societal, cultural, political, and legal problems in our nation are the consequence of our abandonment of Washington’s admonition concerning Religion and Morality.”

Secondly, our state and nation, the United States of America, has an internationally recognized border which constitutes the boundary separating our nation from the other nations of the world. Without defended or secure borders, independent nations would not exist. Since the actions and rhetoric of progressives and the Democrat Party demonstrate that they favor open borders, their policies will ensure that United States, as we know it, withers away. Military border defense is only an issue when nations are at war, but border security is critical when formulating a nation’s immigration policy. The progressive, Democrat, vision of immigration policy for the United States is to make our nation into a microcosm of the world demographically, culturally, economically, and politically. During the 2020 Presidential campaign and the first week of the Biden Administration, President Biden announced that the borders of the United States would be open to all commers with little actual restrictions related to their legal status. The administration claims that the border is closed; but the reality of over 100,000 documented illegal border crossings each month, which does not include an untold number who get away, tells the truth. The southern border of the United states is open to all. When they arrive, these illegal immigrants get promised free food, medical attention, eventually a hotel room, transportation to a location of their choice, and all the social services given to legal immigrants and citizens. Most, but not all, seeking asylum get a court date a few years in the future, but most never appear hoping for a future path to citizenship. At least 10% of these illegals also get to spread Covid-19 to our population. This transformative vision is a radicle change to the character, the complex of mental and ethical traits marking a nation, of the United States. Therefore, the character of our nation withers away.

Conservatives have a different vision. The Constitution of the United States begins by stating; We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Our Constitution does not say we the people of the world. Conservatives understand that if immigration policy turns our nation’s character into that of the world, the United States will cease to be the beacon of freedom and hope for the world. Conservatives know, unfortunately, that progressives and the Democrat Party misrepresented the impacts of the 1965 Immigration Act on the character and texture of [our] people. In a 2015 article evaluating the 50-year impacts of the 1965 Immigration Act, Theodore White evaluated the potential impacts of progressive immigration policy in the United States as follows:

A shadow of people and an american flag

‘Only one other great republic has ever experienced such a change in the texture of its people ” the Roman Republic.’ He then observed that ‘Rome could not pass on the heritage of its past to the people of its future’ and ultimately unraveled so badly that it could no longer govern itself. ‘

Rome failed, and conservatives believe that the United States could fail if we do not change the transformative nature of our immigration policies. Put a different way, the United States of America, that existed for the first 185 years of our history, withers away.

The actions of progressives and the Democrat Party are making the United States into a socialist nation by their actions and policies related to Covid-19 recovery. Current actions and policies of the new administration and the current actions of progressives, Democrat governors and big city mayors, will create a class of citizens dependent on governmental assistance and support, socialism. Progressive, Democrat governors and mayors continue to lock down their citizens and shut down their economies, small businesses, bars and restaurants, and schools. The result is permanent small business failures and record unemployment.  The longer the shutdowns last, the greater the adverse impact will be on our economy and unemployment.  Many small business owners invested their entire life’s savings in their businesses and may not recover financially. Some of these entrepreneurs could go from employers to employees or the unemployed. They could even lose their homes and become renters, or in the worst cases, homeless. The result is that these citizens could require governmental assistance and support caused by the progressive response to the pandemic.

This is the beginning of socialism, wealth sharing and governance based on the philosophy of Karl Marx and his followers. The philosophy of Marx can be summarized as wealth redistribution from each according to their ability to each according to their need regardless of their willingness or ability to contribute to the good of society. Of course, those unable to contribute to the good of society due to physical or mental incapacity deserve our compassion and care. Consequently, as progressives and the Democrat Party lead us down this ever-increasing pace toward socialism, the character and essence of the United States withers away.

The racist, bigoted, woke progressives of our news media, social media, cancel culture, pop culture, and the Democrat Party will call conservatives like me the racists, white supremacists, white nationalists, fascists, and Nazis because our opinions are not woke enough. Conservatives are simply nationalists who want the United States of America to succeed as it did for the first 185 years of our history. It was the United States that fought a Civil War to end slavery in our country and eventually most of the rest of the world, won freedom during WWI and WWII, ended the Cold War with the Soviet Union, and built the strongest economy in the history of the world. If conservatives allow them, progressives and the Democrat Party will ensure the United States of America, as we know it, withers away.

Join the fray. All of the America s Crossroad Posts are listed by categories in the  BLOG CONTENTS tab.  If you decide to read a few, please leave comments about your Patriot Visions, start or join the conversation, and share the Posts with friends and political frienimies.