Historic America or "Communism lite"

Eco-Logic ^ | Sept 1, 2005 | Jan Michael Jacobson

[rsmoot]

America is the greatest success story of any known society. Yet, nearly one man in two recently voted to destroy America. Some 47 percent of voters, and well over 90 percent of all educators, and virtually all bureaucrats, want to replace the historically proven success of America with the catastrophic failures of Socialism. Think about your neighbor – the "environmentalist" next door. Think about the multiplying swarms of agency employees, which you labor over five months of every year to support, with your taxes. They are working every day, using your money, to replace historic America with "Communism Lite."

They call Communism Lite many things, except what it really is. They call it "Green Space," the "Wildlands Project," and "Wildlife Corridors." They talk of "state-wide land-use planning," and they deceptively prattle about "sustainable development."

The state of Florida is, perhaps, the best example of where such anti-American ideas lead. In just one decade, over 1,243,000 acres of land changed from historic, private ownership, to socailized, government ownership.

If we assume a large lot of half-an-acre per home, about 100' X 200', in one year, 2,486,000 families were denied land on which they could have built a home. That is some 10,000,000 people. That is slightly more people than the total population of Michigan. Such are the results of the socialization of America.

As there isn't space enough to cover socialism's deleterious impacts on America's industrial base, mining, food production, manufacturing, and energy production in one article, I shall deal with them in other articles.

But a special "thanks" is due to Dr. Reed Noss, who schemed up the "Wild Lands Project." For his role in the destruction of private ownership of land, and private management of those private lands, in America, he has earned the dubious honor of having given us a new word – "Noss-ea." For the results of his work are truly "Nossiating."

Putatively, the socialization of America is justified on the grounds of helping the "endangered critter de jure." But Noss, and the "Nossiating" swarms of bureaucrats, bureau-scientists, educrats, and NGO fellow travelers, failed to tell the citizens about a crucial aspect of extinction.

They conveniently failed to tell the citizens that extinction is a natural process, and that perhaps 99 percent of all species that have ever been, are now extinct. Attempting to outlaw extinction is like outlawing the incoming tide, the setting of the sun, or the onset of winter.

And, you can safely bet your life, that neither Noss, nor his minions, ever even mentioned the fact that habitats are exceeding tough, durable, and resilient. They evolve over immense stretches of time.

It is civilizations that are fragile; not habitats, not species. The American civilization is but a few hundred years old, and it is under attack from without, and being eroded from within, by Noss's minions, bureaucrats, educrats, and NGO opportunists conspiring to replace individualism with socialism.

The Nossiating fact is that agency-persons and educrats have flourished, as America has been socialized. Since the 1960s, government has grown 70 percent in size. And, it is our descendants who will have to pay for the folly of socializing America. They will be burdened with a lifetime of harsh taxes, and a severe loss of freedom.

It is our children who will have fewer homes, who will have to live in "urban enclaves," stacked up in vast apartment complexes, or shoe-horned into zero-lot line houses, jammed alongside each other, with roof gutters only a few feet apart. All that is mandated by urban planners, thanks to the "Wildlands Project," and the other rationalizations for socializing America.

It will be our children, and our children's children, who will suffer the vastly higher crime rate of urban areas, the higher abortion and divorce rates found in urban areas, and the general social and family degradation all-too-prominent in urban areas.

Science has shown, beyond reasonable doubt, that man is a territorial being. The hard data, and the scientific evidence of this have become clear and unambiguous, within the last thirty years. Far earlier, some 6,000 years earlier, Judeo-Christianity said "Man is happiest sitting in the shade of his own vineyard," or his own "orchard," depending on the translation from the original scrolls.

"His," as in "his own" - not some Kings's, not some state agency's, not some federal agency's – "his." That three letter word, "his," is the underlying reason why America has been the greatest success in the entire history of mankind's 2.5 million-year-long hike upward from the Olduvai Gorge.

America harnessed man's territorial nature when it gave property rights central importance, and great legal protection.

Man takes better care of that which is his. Should anyone doubt that, ask yourself which is better cared for: a rental car, or a private car. Better still, ask any rental car agency. But, be prepared for a long list of horror stories about what happens to a rental car.

Science and religion have the same message. But 47 percent of voters and over 90 percent of educrats, and nearly all bureaucrats didn't understand the message. Or, they are denying it.

Government ownership of land, and even government control of land management, is a proven path to failure of that government, and eventually to famine. Ask any Russian, North Korean, or Cuban.

People work longest, hardest, and most productively for what is theirs, for their wife/husband, their children, for their home, their car or truck, for their children's education, for their retirement, and so on. Likewise, for the daily things of life like food, the power bill, fuel, insurance, etc.

The unique claim of America has been that the individual is sovereign, and has Unalienable Rights endowed to him by his Creator. Chief among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. These Unalienable Rights are given to each individual by God.

For those who do not believe in God, the scientific evidence of man's behavioral predispositions, and the history of the American experiment, has a clear and unambiguous message; man's nature as a territorial organism is best harnessed in the original American system of small, limited government, strictly limited by the Constitution.

We allowed the government out of its chains, so carefully-forged by the Founders when they wrote the Constitution. Now, our children and grandchildren will pay the price for this foolish and egregiously un-Constitutional socialization of America.

Central to America's success has been the historic emphasis on family values and private ownership. In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles, for certain principles are essential to liberty. Private ownership is a principle essential to liberty

Conversion of private land to government land is one such principle that is antithetical to America. Because of this fact, the Reed Noss types, the educrats, the bureaucrats, and the environmentalists are all profoundly anti-American.

And, certain principles are antithetical to liberty. Social ownership (Communism Lite) is a principle which is antithetical to liberty.

To attempt to change America from a land of private-ownership of land, to a socialized nation of government-owned land is an attempt to destroy the Constitution and America. To attempt to sneak such a change under public awareness, without calling for a Constitutional Convention, is arguably, treason.

Comment on this article

The Westerner

This weblog is maintained by Frank DuBois, former NM Secretary of Agriculture. Up-to-the-moment info on property rights and resourse use issues.

Your ad here!

Click this link to place your ad automatically. Only $15 gets you nearly 100,000 page views.

National Campaign

Internet Service

Become a member? | Table of Contents

Copyright © 2005 Freedom.org, All rights reserved

[Nateman]

Unfortunately it is constitutional. The income tax amendment gives unlimited access to all our wealth. It essentially voids out the rest of the constitution. A balanced budget amendment that continuously cuts spending over a long period that ends with the income tax abolished is the only way I see to save the system.

[perfect stranger]

If we assume

Don't ever assume.

This is a pile of ripe cow droppings pretending to be significant.

I have found 2 errors of general common sense in it just from my initial curiousity.

I'd be curious of your opinion.

[GladesGuru]

"I have found 2 errors of general common sense"

What might the two errors be?

[sam_whiskey]

"Some 47 percent of voters, and well over 90 percent of all educators, and virtually all bureaucrats, want to replace the historically proven success of America with the catastrophic failures of Socialism."

I think this is an exaggeration. It's bad---but it's not THAT bad...

[GladesGuru]

Would you have any sources for the party affiliations of the education and agency populations?

[tertiary01]

Welcome to Free Republic

[sam_whiskey]

Does anybody?? Where can I find those figures? I just think something north of 90% in favor of socialism sounds high...

[perfect stranger]

If we assume a large lot of half-an-acre per home, about 100' X 200', in one year, 2,486,000 families were denied land on which they could have built a home. That is some 10,000,000 people. That is slightly more people than the total population of Michigan. Such are the results of the socialization of America.

The fact that the author has to 'assume' would concede the fact that he is only guessing based on the data that he finds convient.

Florida's population is 15 million right now. Who in their right mind wants to add another 10 million to that total?

[Sun Soldier]

Sorry, cities breed socialism. Whether it's 500,000 or 5 million people, there has to be someone managing how the real estate is utilized. Those managers are voted into their positions by the people. That qualifies as democracy. If you don't like the managers and their decisions you can move to the country... that qualifies as freedom.

[GladesGuru]

The use of 'assume' seems like a way to make clear the premise for the argument. It also appears to be a literary mechanism designed to soften some of the impact to long held (but faulty) premises held by all too many.

As for the accuracy, drive around and look. Better yet, check with the Property Appraiser's office in your town.

All of the above is separate from the unavoidable fact those the author called "Communism Lite" did work diligently for, and succeeded in passing, the laws and regs that resulted in the takings of all that land.

And that land can't now be used for homes, so the increasing population of Florida MUST be crowded into those urban enclaves described by the author.

I don't understand your seeming unhappiness with the article as it seems to pose an interesting premise and is difficult to refute on either its premise or the basic facts.

Whether you or I want more people in Florida is hardly the issue. Want 'em or not, they are coming.

The author seems to be discussing the wisdom of departing from the historically proven American private home on private land in favor of the "urban enclaves" so beloved by Communism Lite advocates

[rsmoot]

Part of it is how you define socialism. Look at the history
and social studies texts you get now. History gets very
simplified and politically correct. Talk to recent High
School graduates and see what they don't know.
Look up educational theorists and see how many of them where members of various Soviet controlled Socialist or Communist
parties.

[thomaswest]

Ah geez. They're under every bed again? !

[GladesGuru]

"Ah geez. They're under every bed again? !"

Actually, the John's Committee, right here in Florida, summed it up in a short line. "Florida's schools are full of Commies and Queers."

That was decades ago, and since then things have gotten more decadent. Take thee to the nearest jr. college, college, or university. Sit in on a course in history, "social science" or best of all, treat yourself to the real thing and listen to a class in "creative writing" or best of all - "Women's Studies".

If you opt for the latter, bring one of those waterproof bags like the airlines so thoughtfully keep under each seat.

Then, once you have lost your 'innocence', so to speak, try tracking the speeches and voting records of the Liberal Caucus & the Black Caucus in DC.

After that, check your own elected officials activities against the Goals of the American Communist Party which is available at Google.com. That list has been in the Congressional Record for generations.

Socialists aren't just under every bed, they are diligently screwing you every time you pay taxes so that one they can further the replacement of America with Communism Lite.

In closing, remember the "- sent swarms of officials to eat out our substance." which is one of the original complaints against King George, right in the Declaration of Independence.

Now we have enacted laws enabling the same swarm of officials (now called bureaucrats) and they are eating 5.5 months of every year's worth of our labors. Even your labors.

Still think there are no socialists?

[GladesGuru]

Dear Sun Soldier,

Have you considered the example which Texas set regarding the putative essentiality of zoning?

One major city has essentially no zoning. That city had a thriving economy when most of the rest of America was doing rather less well. If zoning was as essential, if central planning was as essential as I think you are saying, then I have a hard time hearing what you are saying for what they were doing.

Zoning, along with the rest of the tools of socialism like "Sustainable Development" ad nauseam, are not as essential as those whose cash flow is derived from those mechanisms would have us believe.

Zoning, in its present form, is nothing but central planning.

If central planning were able to be perfected, Europe and the old, now extinct, Union Of Soviet Socialist Republics, would have succeeded. They failed at a cost of some 100,000,000 people being killed.

Here in America, socialism is still Communism Lite, so far. But as President Reagan said, "Being a little socialist is like being a little bit pregnant."

Check the history of places like New York,Boston, New Orleans, Chicago, and San Fransisco prior to the establishment of de facto socialism.

There was quite a mix of usages. And quite a bit of growth and prosperity.

[sam_whiskey]

Don't get me wrong. I think a majority of people involved in education are socialists. 90%??? I don't think it's that pervasive. 60%? I think that's a little more realistic...

[pelosi_is_a_dope]

You are correct 90 percent is a socialistic wish and dream .The real number of hardcore is about 20 percent but
they are loud and work very hard to convince !

[GladesGuru]

I do wish i could agree with you, but I wrote and implemented curriculum for both teacher education programs and student education programs in the fourth largest public school system in America.

A real walking, talking non-Liberal teacher was a rarity in those schools.

A colleague of mine is on faculty in one of Florida's state universities and says he is the only non-Marxist in his department.

My college mentor, Dr. Earl R. Rich only coauthored papers with me five years after he had retired, AND after he decided to close his consulting firm, AND after his friends also retired. He was very clear that if he had crossed the prevailing socialist weltanschaung of his university, his funding would have been at risk, his department funding would also have been at risk (he had been Chairman of that Department), and even his university's funding would have been at some risk.

I suggest reading Dr. Alston Chase's classic and definitive book "Playing God In Yellowstone". It is essential if you are not a member of the soi dissant "educational community", and wish to understand the interplay of Marxism in education and the "environmental movement".

A hint can be found in an Audubon President (Peter Berle) which blatantly said "We reject the idea of private property." That was quite recent.

Gus Hall said rather earlier "The future of Communism in America is in the environmental movement."

And back in 1932, William Z. Foster said "The establishment of an American Soviet government will require the confiscation of large landed estates in both town and country, and the entirety of lakes, rivers, forests and mineral deposits."

Between the Democrats, the enviros, and dumbed down voters have actualized Foster's dream. But Foster was Chairman, Communist Party, USA and the head of the Fosterite division of Communism.

Edu-crats are actualizing the goals of Communism in a school near you, as I type this post.

Time to prune the 'Grove of the Academe', as the Greeks called it.

Unfortunately, to muck out that stall will require Herculean efforts.

[GladesGuru]

Dear pelosi_is_a_dope,

First, I like your screen name.

Second, I found that of all biology teachers, and there were also some history teachers, who took the teacher education component of my curriculum, some 70% were able to integrate the material into their teaching and into their general perspective.

The others were usually easy to identify even before the Teacher Education Component began. They were the environmental activists, and the Green Peace members were the most closed minded of all.

My experience was that most teachers were not really at all familiar with the Founding Documents or the issues surrounding either the founding of the America republic or the classic debate between Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian views of what the Federal government should be.

My conclusion from those years was that the problem lies not in the fact that education departments are populated with the shallower end of the gene pool, as no teacher I have ever encountered was not capable of understanding the above mentioned ideas.

The problem lies with the citizens who have not demanded real history, real science, and real math courses be taught. And they have not demanded that the Marxist/Liberal/enviro slant be removed.

When they do decide to go to the school boards and demand these things, the boards will make the changes. And it isn't the board's fault. For too many decades, only the Marxism impaired regularly appeared and made their demands.

The school boards are responsive - that's their business, but the conservatives were busy.

And now, socialism is Federally funded, and the entire education community is de facto socialist.

Lots of work ahead, so break out that shovel and start mucking out the schools!

[mpop]

What I don't get is that the liberals, want to teach their religion of evolution, and that says the survival of the strongest, yet they want to teach their other religion environmentalism, and that contradicts evolution, which is it you stupid liberals, survival of the strongest, or survival of the weakest (endangered species)