The Way Society Headed

Post Reply New Topic

It seems to me that what Whathappened has a better grasp of what's going on than the average CCN or Fox News watching couch potato, although I wouldn't say I exactly agree with his interpretation of things, and I can appreciate how vague and disconnected these issues he is discussing must look to most.

Regarding Communism, Zionism and Christianity, consider this...

The US Army could have easily prevented the Communists from taking over Eastern Europe before the Cold War even began, but they were ordered not to. From a frontpagemag article by Roberto Orlando

"In early May 1945, as the Allies shut down the Nazi war machine, Patton stood with his massive 3rd Army on the outskirts of Prague in a potential face off with the Red Army. He pleaded for General Eisenhower’s green light to advance and capture the city for the Allies, which also would have meant containment of the Russians. British Prime Minister Churchill also thought the move a crucial and beneficial one for post-war Europe and insisted upon it, but to no avail. Eisenhower denied Patton’s request, and the Russians took the region, which would pay dearly for years to come."

After the war, in 1949 American military officer George Racey Jordan "testified to the United States Congress about wartime Lend-Lease deliveries to the Soviet Union, in the process implicating Harry Hopkins and other high officials in the transfer of nuclear and other secrets to the USSR." [Wikpedia's words]

In the 1950s, Senator McCarthy made a name for himself with his claims that the US government and other institutions had been heavily infiltrated by Communists and Soviet agents. He has been derided ever since as a paranoid demagogue, even though recently released classified documents, and books discussing these by journalist M Stanton Evans and by politics professor Harver Klehr provide compelling evidence that he was right. You can read an a related article by Harvey Klehr here. The BBC even did a programme a few years back in supporting McCarthy, the details for which are here.

The 1960s saw the Civil Rights movement and Martin Luther King's famous speech. His speechwriter was Stanley Levison, who had been in the leadership of the Communist Party USA in the 1950s. The FBI monitored King for his links to Communists, but that didn't stop him becoming a "national hero".

While the Civil Rights movement has promoted racial integration, "Civil Rights" organizations (such as the ACLU) have managed to ban many Christian symbols from public spaces - although strangely they have not been able to prevent the yearly erecting of the National Menorah in the Ellipse national park near the White House.

Meanwhile, as the United States moves ever further from its racially segregated past, its support for the racial nationalist state of Israel grows ever stronger, a support which provides the US with virtually no benefits whatsoever. As a matter of interest, most of the most prominent pro-Israel neoconservatives in the American establishment are former Trotskyites.

There are masses of books discussing these issues. However, since a significant proportion of them have been written by Christians issuing dire warnings about socialism, I as a somewhat socialist-minded non-Christian can almost sympathize with those who would shrug their shoulders and say 'so what?' To me, the explanation is pretty simple, and it's that the US, which was built by NW European Christians, has come to be dominated by Jews. In other words, the explanation comes down to ethnic competition, which is as old as human history itself.

What the....

I never considered for one minute that he didnt write his own speeches :0

You have almost religious veneration for MLK and Rosa Parks,
then the media pushing a victim narrative for Michael Brown, Trayvon, and Rodney King.

Then you get the unrest in Ferguson MI

Unrest usually results in new laws. So lets see what new laws are created as a result.

I don't know why Eisenhower refused to let Patton take Prague, but to conclude that he was a Commie from that one act is absurd. He may have not wanted to plunge America into another big war at a time when we still had not defeated Japan, a war which promised to be one of the bloodiest battles in human history. Pentagon experts believed that casualties from hitting the beaches at Tokyo might go as high as a million men. Keep in mind that the ENTIRE WAR up to that point had seen only 400k or so dead American soldiers.

Eisenhower knew that the Russians were ferocious fighters. We had just defeated the Nazis, leaving cities in ruins from Brussels to Leningrad, and millions of Europeans starving and without hope. So, America was facing a battle for Japan that might kill twice as many men as the entire war had up to that point, and then Patton wanted to go to war against Stalin, a guy who was crazier than bat poop? Eisenhower had seen the effects of killing off a whole generation of men on Europe. What would be the effects on America, a nation of 125 million, of killing off several million young American men?

I personally don't see anything wrong with being poor. I have lived in RVs with crumbling floors and tarps on the roof to keep the rain out. I have driven old cars that might or might not start in the morning. I have not had much to eat. And you know what, it wasn't that bad, it wasn't great but it wasn't horrible either.

In fact, I'm planning to buy some land in Oregon and live off the land, in what many who have known only material comfort might call shocking poverty. I don't care that my situation will never improve, because I've accepted that it won't. I will simply concern myself in totality with basic needs-food, water, keeping the rain out of my shack, and maybe putting a little gas in the car when I can.

I am a fan of the Unabomber Manifesto (although I don't agree with blowing innocent people up) and Kaczynski states that technological society will destroy itself and that a man should solely be concerned with day to day survival.

And anybody who throws Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs in my face should know that Maslow was part of the Frankfurt School too, and a Communist, whose work was geared towards telling the Elite that they alone had achieved "self-actualization" and thus were justified in oppressing the lesser humans who were below them. There is no hierarchy of needs.

Wow. Thank you for the support! Where were all you guys while I was getting ripped a new one for my views and ideas!? Lol. I realize it can look disjointed to someone not familiar with all the facts and that's probably why people didn't understand or it seemed like the whole picture was vague/disjointed... But this stuff Is happening. It's right in front of our faces. It's hard to get to the real truths of things.

Thank you for Rollo for the props, btw - that 911 comment was due to the fact we were discussing it via private messages, so that's where that came from.

In my honest opinion.....this country hasn't been truly American since 1913..and probably even before that, when it was taken over by private banking interests (the establishment of the Federal Reserve) and we lost control of our government. Woodrow Wilson even commented in 1919, after his presidency, to what a dire mistake it was and that America had been lost; to the control of a dominating few and not the interests of the American public.

And as to my comments on Patton, which I've researched quite a bit, it is quite obvious to see what happened there. The Patton papers are online for anyone who wants to read them; mostly letters home to his wife about the deteriorating situation. Most people don't realize the depth and scope of the propaganda we have been infiltrated with since that time. It's immense and it will change your whole world view once you are exposed to it. Patton saw the Red Army and was frightened by what he saw. He saw things that were foreshadowed to come and that's why he was concerned. Eisenhower, in my honest opinion - was in lock step with interests that were not American interests, and that's how the decisions in retrospect form a clearer picture of what actually happened.
I don't believe Patton had a car "accident" either - it was no accident, there is a lot written about this too. He then went to the hospital where he was paralyzed, and died in the hospital due to "pulmonary edema"....yeah right. How convenient, top US general who was responsible for our victory there in Germany conveniently dies, as the White House sees him as a threat to the general dictates and direction they want to move. He was killed, just like anyone in a position of power who defies our government is taken care of. O'Reilly has a book out about this, which covers it historically in more depth and with accurate citations and historical evidence.

Interesting note* Patton was not "anti-semitic" until and after the period of the war, in which he liberated the camps and had first hand interactions with Jews there. He writes about his experiences and general feelings in his letters home. Historians and politicians with a socialistic/it can be argued Zionist agenda have used this to smear him - our greatest wartime general in that war, and responsible for the victory of WW2 - and defile his character; which they are very good at. It's sick and shameful and subversive. They are good at defiling and smearing anyone they don't like. It is sickening.

History is a totally different story than most are acquainted with.

I am starting to see a clear picture here - anyone who opposes the elite/communist influence in this country is derided, character-assasinated, smeared, attacked and vilified. You can now look all back through history and see people you thought were bad, were actually 'good'. It's truly upside down and twisted up and there is a tremendous force of evil going on, here.

I am just confused as to why you think the problems in this country are associated with communism....You say private banks are taking over along with the other disproportionately wealthy 'elite' then you turn around and call this communism? Then again lots of Americans have a skewed view as to what communism is, but basically it cannot exist with totalitarianism or its not communism. you can't have it both ways. And pretty sure people like Hitler and Stalin were not actually good....and those are the types of people I think of as 'bad'.

I think your post can fairly be reduced to four points:

1) The US (and perhaps their Western allies) should have declared war on the Soviet Union in 1945. - this has been dealt with by another user
2) There actually were some Soviet spies in the US in the 50s - surely nobody is surprised? There were US spies in Russia too. I think people mock McCarthy for the hundreds he persecuted for no good reason (such as Arthur Miller himself), not for the few he got right. (Side note: that BBC documentary was made by a Jewish journalist, raised by far-left parents, who supported the Iraq war. Kinda undermines the "Jews and Commies are running the show" thing if they go exposing each other, right?)
3) The USA supports Israel despite not receiving much in exchange - it receives a fair bit more than it would from Palestine, and the US has a record of supporting causes for no real benefit to itself (see: Libya, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Guatemala...)
4) Jews run the US - this is definitely true. The US is run by Jews such as Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, the Bushes, the Clintons, the Pauls, Newt Gingrich, Nixon, Reagan, Carter, the Kennedys... (note: none of these people are Jews)

The Commies, ....AND.... the rich bankers, are taking over?

Whatever dude.

And...the Blacks, and the KKK are both in cahoots with the Zionists Nazi Islamists!

Or is it with the Atheist Christian Fundies? I forget which.

That's pretty much the opposite of what actually happened... Please, learn the history. Hundreds of innocent people were persecuted by McCarthy because he had an ungrounded fear of left wing politics. You only fear left wing politics because of people like McCarthy smearing it. It's completely fair to say that the hysteria which led to thousands of people being persecuted for homosexuality or having foreign sounding names. Stop "seeing patterns" and look at the actual evidence.

Again, there is no "communist influence" in the USA. You are one of the most right-wing countries in the world, and you have a population that thinks "socialism" is a dirty word! You have users in this thread seriously calling Barack Obama, a right wing politician, a communist.

Please, name an American communist politician. You will only get fringe figures. You'd struggle even with a British communist.

You admit yourself that this is upsetting you. Maybe you could try enrolling on a critical thinking course, or even CBT? We can't offer you much support because you believe things which are clearly not true, and until you fix that, you'll continue to be distressed by these ungrounded conspiracy theories. It is demonstrably and obviously false that communists rule America and that they demolished WTC7, there isn't even a good a priori reason to believe it. Until you learn to stop falling for these lies and believing ridiculous things, you will keep getting upset by lies. Please, don't let conspiracy theorists ruin your life.

You are just trying to make sense of a chaotic world, and you're on the right track in the sense that ideas shape the world, but I don't think Obama is a Marxist.

We're forgetting that both of these groups are false fronts for the Reptillians. Whichever group takes over, the lizardmen win.

Of course!

Now...which way is it?

Are the Rothchilds behind the Reptioids? Or is it the Reptoids who are behind the Rothchilds?

I can't keep it straight which way it goes.

Until I come upon or discover valid and verifiable evidence to the contrary, I will hold fast my views. I don't know where you got the idea Barack Obama is a "right wing politician." He is from the Democratic Party, which most assuredly is not "right wing." The USA is not England, and the two countries have different systems, histories and situations. As far as calling us one of the most right wing countries in the world- that assertion used to be true, but it cannot be said to be true now. How can we be considered right wing (limited government/small government) without pure capitalism, and how can true, pure capitalism exist with the Federal Reserve - it cannot. What we have is more accurately described as a socialist/capitalist mix, which is not capitalism at all, but more accurately described as 'corporatism'.

Every conflict we get into lately is because of our close ties to Israel, it is not in American interest, but there are many that can't tell the two apart. There are countries that are assuredly more right wing than America - countries with pure capitalistic economies, for instance.

There is a definite association between communism and the elite private interests which are involved in our Fed, and our politics. No politician will call himself a "communist" because that won't fly in America, even now. Americans won't have it, so that interest goes about subversion into infiltrating this country via the media, press, the politics and education, to name a few. This has been well covered and these aims stated openly by many civil rights groups' organizers are available in writing on the internet and elsewhere. This countries government is so corrupt it needs a complete and total overhaul as organizations such as the CIA are, and have been implicit in its duplicitous workings for decades.

One poster seems adamant about the point that 'true Communism' is equal, egalitarian, and not totalitarian. I would like for them to provide one instance in history in the many times communism has been tried and applied, where this is the case. Communism has been used by ideologues and left wing totalitarian governments all throughout history, as a method and means to government control - using the premise of "equality and freedom" for subversive purposes of control. (Forward comrade!/Hope and Change). If you give someone power and that person is government - would you really trust them with it? Do you think they won't abuse it and it won't become corrupt?
Our founding fathers understood this and weren't this stupid, for it is idiocy to hold such a naive belief. America used to be loved by all, until it's interests became not that of the American people.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... al+marxism

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism

With pure capitalism there would be no job safety regulations, no protections against employer abuse/mistreatment of employees, no social safety network, no public services...that's all the socialist bit of the mix...The federal reserve is more a creation to ensure wealth inequality, people behind that continue to profit while more an more people struggle financially. I do agree corporatism is a good term for the current set up...but corporatism cannot be traced to communism or socialism in any way, corporatism is closer to fascism....we just don't have a openly totalitarian government yet. Also yes the Democratic party is supposedly on the left, though realistically they seem more slightly right of center which is further left than the Republicans but still not much, the democrats are just as much bought out by the corporate lobbyists as the Republicans, both parties are doing a kind of crap job.


Also I am beginning to think you really don't know what communism is, and are hell-bent on refusing to open your mind to the possibility that the Soviet Union and other totalitarian systems might not be proper examples of communism. Given a communism at its final stage different people of course have various methods of how to get there....Marx's way was a violent revolution and it failed to ever become true communism...but his end goal was still true communism, which is a classless society...how on earth do disportionatley wealthy elitists who lobby the government to make policies in their favor and want to keep it that way have anything to do with a classless society where economic inequality would be a thing of the past....if a successful communist society was achieved.

Also the one poster who is adamant about the actual definition of communism has a name, Sweetleaf...Also I never claimed a successful communist society has ever been created, the historic examples where it was attempted failed....one example is the Soviet Union. So there is yet to be a proper communist society, just because there has not been one does not mean the definition automatically changes to a totalitarian system...more like communism has not succeeded. And yes Totalitarian leaders have claimed to be communist, do you think they cannot lie and mislead their citizens? Using the premise of equality and freedom for government control is an example of corruption not communism.

Also I'd say the government needs less power over the citizens, to grow a pair of balls and actually enforce laws/policies that are important rather than just let any lobbyist with tons of money sway them to to make law/policy in their favor regardless of it it really benefits the over-all population. The purpose should be to uphold individual freedom, provide nessisary public services/help to citizens and ensure the big buisinesses abide by needed regulations and don't become too powerful to where they essentially have the government in their back pocket due to filling their pockets.

I think the people should not be afraid of the government, the government should be afraid of the people....of course I don't trust the government with unchecked power, that is ridiculous, but with this corporatism that is getting more and more difficult....either way corporatism would be impossible in a communist system.