Posted on 06/25/2005 6:19:52 PM PDT by CHARLITE
In a recent Supreme Court decision, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote, "If the peasants sow the fields poorly, they should be helped – and this particularly applies to the poor peasants – by means of collective cultivation of the large estates. There is no other way of helping the poor peasants." Therefore, "the landed estates must be confiscated immediately."
Actually, that was Vladimir Lenin writing in an issue of the Communist publication Pravda on June 2, 1917. I've compiled a small list of quotes for use in this article, but at times it can be hard to remember who used which ones. It doesn't help that Lenin and Justice Stevens – the oldest member on the court – are roughly the same age. Rest assured that while quotes may be at times confused, no one's beliefs will be misrepresented.
What the Supreme Court ruled on this week is as pertinent to America today as it was to Russia in 1917: the distribution of land. Connecticut statutes express a legislative determination that the taking of land as part of an economic development project is a "public use" and in the "public interest." The point of debate was the constitutionality of a Connecticut city's confiscation of land to that end.
Stevens defended the city, writing in the majority opinion: "The city has carefully formulated an economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including -- but by no means limited to -- new jobs and increased tax revenue." In other words, individual rights take a backseat to economic planning. If the poor peasants aren't using their land as well as others might be able to use it, it can be taken away.
Those who take as permissible the idea of a "public interest" capable of obliterating individual rights are not unheard of. Maybe the justices simply looked to international law as a justifying precedent. In Zimbabwe, thousands of white farmers have had their land dispossessed in recent years. But President Robert Mugabe was only giving farmers a 45-day eviction notice, instead of the legally mandated 90 days. When this complaint was brought before the Zimbabwean Supreme Court, its justices ruled that the "public interest" overrode the "private interests of individual landowners."
And then there's Asia. Official estimates place the number of Chinese who have lost their land in recent years to the construction of roads, dams, housing projects and factories at around 70 million. Last November, government troops opened fire and killed a number of protesters in the Sichuan province, where thousands of residents were protesting the seizure of their land for construction of a hydroelectric dam project.
Of course, agents of the American government would do the same thing. Anyone who resists the confiscation of his or her property will be imprisoned. If someone resists imprisonment, that person, too, will be shot and killed. The only difference between the Chinese and the Americans is that Americans are being more amenable to the demands of their government.
On June 23, America took a step toward better emulating the admirable ways of the "international community" in Kelo et al. v. City of New London. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and Kennedy won out over Justices Rehnquist, Thomas, Scalia and O'Connor in determining that private property could be taken away for the purpose of giving it to other people.
O'Connor, writing in dissent, said, "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."
Resident Bill Von Winkle, who faces sacrifice by government on the altar of the "public interest," said, "I won't be going anywhere. Not my house. This is definitely not the last word." If Americans are truly concerned with freedom, they'll offer to join Von Winkle. It'll be a pitiful day when the Chinese are more willing to die for freedom than Americans.
The senile trash who believe they've been endowed with a divine right to singularly mold the course of the world have driven another nail into the coffin of American freedom. My congratulations go out to Justices Stevens, Bader, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer. You've proven that rights don't proceed from God. They proceed from you.
Rudy Takala is 16 years old. His articles have appeared on more than 20 websites across the Internet, and he also maintains a blog.
WND has some nasty stuff. Great anger at SCOTUS is justified here, as so often. But calling them Leninists is over the top. The kind of wigged-out wackery we saw from "DurbinLaden," et al. We need to be better than that, folks.
Count me in!
Our property taxes are $7000 per year.
I might live better than you.
I rent an extremely nice two bedroom, two bath 1100 square ft apartment,with a fireplace, balcony,appropriately tiled and carpeted, central air conditioned, with garbage disposal, icemaker and dishwasher. I have a pool, gas grill, exercise room, electronic security system,video library, private security guards, water and trash included and no maintenance fees, for $8400.00 a year.
So you have an extra bedroom?
:::packing my suitcase here:::
Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin
The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.- Karl Marx
I hate it when the word democracy is used.. most have no clue the difference between what some democracy and "A" democracy, "IS"... actually its the democrats greatest secret weapon.. Today being against "A" democracy would be looked on as silly.. When "A" democracy is Mob Rule.. America is NO democracy..
Thats why the U.S. Constitution has three words ABSENT,,,
1) democracy..
2) democratic...
3) democrat.. ON PURPOSE
If it is a hoax, then why did all the communists have a big celebration for its 150th birthday? Many of them.......
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=communist+manifesto&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wg
The Communist Manifesto is in #17, good chance to remind yourself what you are fighting.
I agree 100%. Good for WND or NewsMax though.
Bump
Thanks for your input. /s
One thing the kid missed: Stevens and the city are operating under a belief in economic planning, the state religion in other words. God help us.
Rudy has it all backwards and upside-down. He writes:
"If the peasants sow the fields poorly, they should be helped – and this particularly applies to the poor peasants – by means of collective cultivation of the large estates. There is no other way of helping the poor peasants." Therefore, "the landed estates must be confiscated immediately."
But actually, in New Haven, didn't the opposite occur?
"If the LANDED ESTATES COVET the fields, they should be helped – and this particularly applies to the RICH GUYS – by means of collective cultivation of the SMALL estates. There is no other way of helping the RICH GUYS." Therefore, "the SMALL estates must be confiscated immediately."
"Maybe its time to change our approach to things. Maybe the criteria for the politicians should be their faith."
It's ironic that the following quote was made by the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers and it is the duty as well as the privilege of our Christian Nation to select and prefer Christians as their rulers."
John Jay (First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court)
For anyone believing that the 45 communist goals are a hoax...here is where you may look to see for yourself.
Microfilm: California State University at San Jose Clark Library, Government Floor Phone (408)924-2770 Microfilm Call Number: J 11.R5 Congressional Record, Vol. 109 88th Congress, 1st Session Appendix Pages A1-A2842 Jan. 9-May 7, 1963 Reel 12 On January 10, 1963, the House of Representative and later the Senate began reviewing a document entitled "Communist Goals for Taking Over America." It contained an agenda of 45 separate issues that, in hindsight was quite shocking back then and equally shocking today.
Rich and landed estates will not be exempt. Property now goes to the highest bidder -to the government.
How can there be private enterprise without protection of private property? If the government controls and can redistribute property at will then there is not private property, ergo no private enterprise. Why invest in that? The bulk of economic development in the last 20 years has been from small businesses and start up companies. How are they to thrive if their property is subject to confiscation by politically-connected, big money interests?
Watch the stock market and housing markets for the full affect of this ruling (clue=down). Without private property private enterprise is smothered.
bump!!
[O'Connor, writing in dissent, said, "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."]
Gun rights are next; never thought I'd see the day America became a communist nation.
It both infuriates and saddens me.
Check out this petition site:
http://www.petitiononline.com/5amend/petition-sign.html
An email correspondent's comment:
"FOLKS: This past week, SCOTUS (Supreme Court OF The United States) once again, has attempted to rewrite OUR Constitution to totally change the original intent as written by the Founders.
Eminent Domain was NEVER intended to be used by government EXCEPT to obtain property for roads, public buildings, schools, military bases and other necessary government usage.
This past week, the Supreme Court rewrote the Constitution, stating that it was legal for cities to condemn private property under Eminent Domain, to purchase and then resell to developers and other special interests, supposedly to benefit the community and the city by increasing tax revenues.
THIS IS TOTALLY BOGUS!
Please click on the link below and add your signature to the petition for a Constitutional Amendment to put a stop to this invitation to even more corruption within government and the theft of private homes and property for the financial benefit of a few.
http://www.petitiononline.com/5amend/petition-sign.html"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.