Progressivism –the face lift of Communism

For well over 100 years, big and central Government fans have railed against freedom, states rights and human rights. Many of us middle-aged types remember growing up with the fear of a nuclear exchange between us and the dreaded Communist Russia.

In fact, they have only gotten more funded, more organized, sneakier and changed their name many times while you weren’t looking. The term Communism has the ring now of ‘a fossil’ museum piece. You almost sound paranoid and fringe to even talk about the dangers of communism. Certainly to talk about the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism renders you mentally ill. You are an Islamaphobe for noticing the unending, international murders and push for a caliphate.

Progressivism is the name now that represents big Government, societal, business and personal controls, It is communism and thinks ‘the people’ are stupid and must be controlled. Progressivism sounds so ‘forward thinking’ and open to progress and people, doesn’t it? The truth is, when going back and unfolding its cancerous core you see it everywhere and backed by big name people in our history and currently in the White House.

.....Today, we have the Executive Branch, much of congress, media and Hollywood enraptured with the Big Government progressive push and controls. The working class masses are thought to be too stupid to have much power and real freedom. Just give them enough bones and rewards for compliance so they think they have freedom

....What does the push for progressivism (communism) mean today? It means we cannot be exceptional and lead in business, military and freedom. We must be squeezed down, made to submit through the back door by endless regulations, taxation and litigation. While seducing and manipulating the nation to submit to Obama’s controls, we must be entertained and distracted by contrived crises, enemies and causes.

"Bellamy’s cousin was a Pastor who preached a sermon “Jesus, the Socialist.”"

I'm surprised she didn't delve a little more into the cousin. His name was Francis Bellamy. You may not know the name, but you know his creation. He is the author of the Pledge of Allegiance. It's why I've always felt that the more important "pledge" is the American's Creed by William Tyler Page. It represents far better what it is to be an American than the Pledge of Allegiance:

"I believe in the United States of America, as a government of the people, by the people, for the people;
whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed;
a democracy in a republic;
a sovereign Nation of many sovereign States;
a perfect union, one and inseparable;
established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes.
I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies"

“Progressives” are people who are totally out of touch with reality. The more out of touch, the more “progressive” they are.
Just consider who falls for and who propels the “progressive” scam. (I write “progressive” in quotation marks because it is in actuality regressive. Going back to a more primitive tribal order. Force, violence, tribal collectivism.)
Folks from Hollywood are all enthusiastic backers in time and money. These people who live fantasy lives and work in a fantasy industry as totally divorced from reality as possible and still live on this earth.
Rock stars and rappers. Actually even farther from reality than actors.
Students who live some sort of pretend existence, suspended between adolescence and adulthood. Pretending to be independent adults while living off of parents or government- subsidized loans.
Their professors and others of the intelligentsia who measure intelligence as how far one can depart from reality while making look as though one used reason and logic to get there.
People who are down-and-out or close to it. In other words people who are failures at interfacing satisfactorily with reality.
And of course “progressives” are most eager to give prisoners and ex-convicts voter status knowing that these people who are prone to cheating reality in order to survive will eagerly vote the “progressive” way.

I often wondered which society would be worse to live in, an anarchy or a utopia. Frankly, while I’m not eager to live in either, if I had to make the choice, I’d choose the former.

Judges 21, especially verse 25, sort of describes that sort of state, where every man did what was right in his own eyes. And yet, God looked with displeasure on the idea of a king for Israel

1 Samuel 12 12-25

12And when ye saw that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, ye said unto me, Nay; but a king shall reign over us: when the LORD your God was your king.

13Now therefore behold the king whom ye have chosen, and whom ye have desired! and, behold, the LORD hath set a king over you.

14If ye will fear the LORD, and serve him, and obey his voice, and not rebel against the commandment of the LORD, then shall both ye and also the king that reigneth over you continue following the LORD your God:

15But if ye will not obey the voice of the LORD, but rebel against the commandment of the LORD, then shall the hand of the LORD be against you, as it was against your fathers.

16Now therefore stand and see this great thing, which the LORD will do before your eyes.

17Is it not wheat harvest to day? I will call unto the LORD, and he shall send thunder and rain; that ye may perceive and see that your wickedness is great, which ye have done in the sight of the LORD, in asking you a king.

18So Samuel called unto the LORD; and the LORD sent thunder and rain that day: and all the people greatly feared the LORD and Samuel.

19And all the people said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the LORD thy God, that we die not: for we have added unto all our sins this evil, to ask us a king.

20And Samuel said unto the people, Fear not: ye have done all this wickedness: yet turn not aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart;

21And turn ye not aside: for then should ye go after vain things, which cannot profit nor deliver; for they are vain.

22For the LORD will not forsake his people for his great name’s sake: because it hath pleased the LORD to make you his people.

23Moreover as for me, God forbid that I should sin against the LORD in ceasing to pray for you: but I will teach you the good and the right way:

24Only fear the LORD, and serve him in truth with all your heart: for consider how great things he hath done for you.

25But if ye shall still do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your king.

Marxism, liberalism, Socialism, leftism, progressivism, are all the rotten eggs of tyranny and big government.

These days progressive best describes “so called” moderate Republicans who slip bigger government in through agencies, policies, regulations while they claim to be conservative. Nixon is the greatest example, but every establishment Republican is equally corrupt and conniving.

Democrats are so far left, and sold out to big government, they don’t need to hide behind the term progressive, but a lot of them do, so they will come off as moderate or mainstream.

A few of the 1960 Communist goals from your link

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. Skousen claimed that an American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers.
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture—education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

I would call it “fascist socialism”.

You can see this in the two “great progressives” at the start of the 20th Century, Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt.

Wilson’s philosophy sounds tragically familiar. Enamored with the English parliamentary system, his philosophy could be described as:

“The United States Constitution is pre-modern, cumbersome, and open to corruption. It prevents the government from meeting the country’s needs by enumerating rights that the government may not infringe.”

In other words, a man both convinced of his own brilliance, and the utter lack of intelligence of those who have lived before him. Sound familiar?

And, for his part, though it was not widely known, Teddy Roosevelt was completely enamored by the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche.

The acerbic wit H.L. Mencken did not care for Roosevelt’s brand of aggressive populism, but did not dare to openly challenge him. So he published a vanity press book for some friends, which simply had some excerpts of speeches by Roosevelt on one page, and the plagiarized writings of Nietzsche on the next page. Page after page of them, since Roosevelt borrowed heavily without attribution.

Importantly, in context, both of these men, like the rest of the western world, still lived in the shadow of the year 1848, the “year of revolutions” in Europe, which, after counterrevolutions, resulted in both the rise of the socialist-communist and the anarchist movements.

The latter reached its high point at the 1907 International Anarchist Congress of Amsterdam, and America was very frightened of “anarchist foreigners”, because of several violent attacks they had committed in the US.

Especially the assassination of President McKinley by anarchist Leon Czolgosz, which propelled Teddy Roosevelt into the presidency.

So here is a “progressive”, who is an elitist socialist Anglophile, and a pseudo-fascist, before fascism had a bad name, and was in fact, all the rage as a new form of government, well into the 1930s.

After these two presidents concocted four constitutional amendments in the name of progressivism, two of which still haunt us today, the Income Tax and the Direct Election of Senators, America then had a pleasant respite with two non-ideologues as president until Franklin Roosevelt came along.

The man who truly breathed life into the “fascist-socialism” that we endure to this day.

Rush covered an interview Obama gave in 2001, similar talk :

(Obama)... the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
RUSH: "But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and the more basic issues such as political and economic justice in this society." He went on to say, "To that extent..." Well, here. He went on. Rather than me read it to you, let me let you hear this in his own words.
OBAMA: As radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical.
It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted --and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you.
But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.
2001 Audio: Obama Shows His Disdain for the US Constitution .

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.