Communism: A Failed Idea

Communism was a specific philosophy of government ownership of the means of production.

The democratic welfare state was never a variety of communism. Marx, the most famous communist, despised democracy. He despised all attempts at economic amelioration through legislation. He wanted a proletarian revolution. He preached — the correct verb — a religion of revolution.

He was silent about how the state would allocate resources under his system. He published nothing about the actual operations of the post-revolutionary society, socialism, and its final successor, communism. Late in his career, in his final major publication, little more than a pamphlet, he wrote this: “Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.” (Critique of the Gotha Program, Pt. IV, 1875) This was a purely political focus. He was silent throughout his career about how the state should or will or can run the economy.

He provided some famous slogans. He offered rhetoric about the inevitable triumph of the proletarian class. But he offered no guidelines for the leaders of the victorious proletarians.

Socialists in the nineteenth century were equally silent about how the state can allocate production so as to create the good society. In the twentieth century, there was no major detailed theoretical treatise on the economics of communism that went into detail about the actual operations of central planning agencies in a world where the state owned the means of production.

In retrospect, this seems incredible. Here was a movement that captured the Soviet Union and China. Yet there was not a single book, let alone a shelf of books, available to Lenin in 1917 and Mao in 1949 that could serve as a guide to the kind of economic organization that they should impose. There was no treatise that could serve as a blueprint for the socialist New World Order, whether non-revolutionary socialism or Marxist communism. Yet Marx said that his was scientific socialism — not utopian socialism, like the works of his critics.

Utopia meant “nowhere.” They were all utopian socialists, including Marx.

Socialism has always been a movement based mostly on rhetoric. There was never any logic to it. There were endless promises about how politics or class revolution could bring in a socialist paradise, but there was nothing written about how this paradise would operate.

Marx offered his famous ten steps in The Communist Manifesto (1848), but they were mere slogans. The fact that he included a central bank (#5) is indicative of how confused he was about the transition from capitalism to socialism to communism. He never went into any further detail. He had plenty of time to offer details. He died in 1883.

Here is what defenders of communism refuse to face: there is no theory of communist economic planning. Communist economic theory has always been missing in action. There is also no practical treatise that has served as a guide for communist economic planners after their national revolutions. Socialist economic planning has been chaotic. No theory of communist planning ever emerged from this chaos.

When we look at the history of communism, meaning the state ownership of the means of production, there are few examples. The USSR and Communist China did come close, but the black markets always operated in both societies. There have been tiny Communist states: Albania, Cuba, and North Korea. None have produced a theory of communist planning.

The Labor government of Great Britain from 1945 to 1951 nationalized coal mining and much of medical care, but it did not extend control over the capital markets of The City, the separate legal jurisdiction of the bankers in the center of London. The Bank of England maintained most of its sovereignty. Labor nationalized it in 1946, but then failed to exercise control. It remained Keynesian.

In short, there are no working models of communism. This is fitting because there are no theoretical models of communism. It has always been based on rhetoric, not logic. It has never been based on any system of economic causation. It has no theory of economic sanctions comparable to the sanctions in the free market of monetary profit and loss.

Gary North

2000 Year-Old Lead Tablets Speak of Jesus-Osho News

These have been around for a while. AT first the usual religious “experts” condemned them as fake. Not in this article, but another source, seems as if the copper sheets might have been faked, but the lead tablets have been authenticated as being made of lead from that time period, that lead could not be made today with the same composition, because of lack of radiation in the lead tablets.

I am sure there was a Jesus. Am just as sure there is very little in the bible which resembles, or tells the true story of Jesus.

As Jesus did not come to found an new religion, Christianity based on Jesus as a blood sacrifice, the son of a Male God, disagrees with the evidence of the tablets, which remember, is older than the writings the bible are based on. Closer to the time of Jesus. Closer to the bone.

Organized religion is used to herd the sheep for the benefit of governments.

Don’t be a sheep.

John C Carleton

2000 Year-Old Lead Tablets Speak of Jesus

If You Want to Understand the Next Ten Years, Study Spain-Liberty Blitzkrieg

As a Texan, who’s Republic, has been occupied for 152 years, am ready to shake off the evil of Washington DC, and try to clean up the shit hole USA has made of Texas. Now, most Texans, even real texans who’s ancestors tamed the land, so ball-less people could then come and tell real Texans how they should do everything, do not understand that they are occupied. Therefore easier to talk secession with them.

Am personally satisfied theres no stopping whats coming, and believe now, the sooner the better.

However, know Texans are not ready yet, so am not preaching it, trying to convince people. The people have to ready themselves. When it is time, they will. Can lead a horse to water, can not make him drink, until he wants to. Same with the sheep. They will not be ready until they are ready. In the mean time, there will be plenty to keep every one hopping.

John C Carleton.

If You Want to Understand the Next 10 Years, Study Spain

They Profit, We Die: Toxic Agriculture and the Poisoning of Soils, Human Health and the Environment-Global Research

My Mother, a lady her age i knew all my life, both died of old age without having breast cancer

Two of my sisters have had breast cancer, and the other ladies daughter died of breast cancer.

Not hard to figure out why.

John C Carleton

https://www.globalresearch.ca/they-profit-we-die-toxic-agriculture-and-the-poisoning-of-soils-human-health-and-the-environment/5483932

Are Republicans Libertarians?

Our two-party system makes it almost impossible for libertarians to get elected to office, especially on the national level. In order for libertarians to get elected to Congress, their best bet is to run as a Republican. Ron Paul is a perfect example of this. But libertarians should have no illusions about the Republican Party. And they shouldn’t make the Republican Party out to be something it is not.

A former member of the Libertarian Party who is now running for office as a Republican recently said about the Republican Party:

At its core, the Republican Party is supposed to be a liberty party—that’s why it was the party of Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. For a Republican, so long as you are not violating the lives and liberties of other human beings—and that includes the lives of human beings in the womb—the government should give you the freedom to do as you see fit. The party strives to put the trust and the power back in the hands of the people instead of handing it over to unelected bureaucrats.

This almost makes Republicans sound like libertarians. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Let’s first look at some principles of libertarianism followed by an analysis of the above statement.

Libertarianism is the philosophy that says that people should be free from individual, societal, or government interference to live their lives any way they desire, pursue their own happiness, accumulate as much wealth as they can, assess their own risks, make their own choices, engage in commerce with anyone who is willing to reciprocate, participate in any economic activity for their profit, and spend the fruits of their labor as they see fit as long as their actions are peaceful, their associations are voluntary, their interactions are consensual, and they don’t violate the personal or property rights of others.

Libertarianism is the philosophy of nonaggression, whether that aggression be theft, fraud, the initiation of non-consensual violence against person or property, or the threat of non-consensual violence. The initiation or threat of aggression against the person or property of others is always wrong, even when done by government. Aggression is justified only in defense of one’s person or property or in retaliation in response to aggression against them, but is neither essential nor required.

Libertarianism respects personal privacy, financial privacy, free thought, individual responsibility, freedom of conscience, free exchange, free markets, and private property.

Libertarianism celebrates individual liberty, personal freedom, peaceful activity, voluntary interaction, laissez faire, free enterprise, free assembly, free association, free speech, and free expression.

Libertarianism opposes the welfare state, the warfare state, the national security state, the deep state, the nanny state, the regulatory state, the administrative state, and the police state because they are inimical to human flourishing and the free society.

Libertarianism seeks to limit the intervention of government in the economy and society, the government regulation of business and commerce, and the control of government over private, consensual peaceful activity.

Are Republicans libertarians? Don’t make me laugh.

I have five things to say about the aforementioned statement.

  1. The Republican Party is only a liberty party in the mind of those who are suckered by the conservative mantra of the Constitution, limited government, individual freedom, private property, traditional values, free enterprise, and a strong national defense. Republicans, even the “conservative” ones, don’t follow the Constitution in many areas. They prefer a government limited to one controlled by Republicans. They don’t accept the freedom of individuals to do anything that’s peaceful. They don’t believe in the inviolability of private property. They think traditional values should be legislated by government. They don’t yearn for free enterprise in everything. And they confound the idea of national defense with national offense.
  2. The Republican Party is the party of Abraham Lincoln. But that is a terrible thing. Lincoln was one of the worst U.S. presidents. His legacy is one of mercantilism, income taxation, crony capitalism, protectionism, militarism, authoritarianism, and centralized government. Just spend a few minutes in Tom DiLorenzo’s LRC article archive.
  3. The Republican Party is the party of Ronald Reagan. But even this is a bad thing. Sure, Reagan was a tax cutter, but he was also a tax raiser. He increased Social Security taxes, corporate income taxes, Medicare taxes, and capital gains taxes. He instituted taxation of Social Security benefits, required the self-employed to pay the full payroll tax rate, and broadened the tax base. But that’s not all. Reagan was an incorrigible drug warrior, signing legislation reinstating civil asset-forfeiture laws and mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related crimes. He also signed legislation forcing states to raise their drinking age to 21. During his tenure as president, federal expenditures increased by more than 60 percent, spending on education increased by 68 percent, and health-care spending increased by 71 percent. He added over $1 trillion to the national debt by the end of his presidency. He increased import barriers and quotas and expanded the agricultural subsidies. And as Reagan’s budget director David Stockman tells us: “Reagan tripled the size of the U.S. defense budget based on a totally phony neocon claim that the Soviet Union was on the verge of military superiority and nuclear first-strike capacity.”
  4. The Republican Party certainly does not believe that the government should give you the freedom to do as you see fit as long as you are not violating the lives and liberties of other human beings. Republicans want to lock people in cages for possessing too much of a plant that the government doesn’t approve of. Need I say anything more?
  5. The Republican Party certainly does not strive to put the trust and the power back in the hands of the people instead of handing it over to unelected bureaucrats. The federal government is full of hundreds of thousands of unelected bureaucrats in the EPA, FDA, SBA, TVA, DEA, ATF, NEA, NEH, GSA, NSF, SSA, USAID, SEC, FCC, EEOC, FEC, FTC, CFTC, CPSC; the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Homeland Security, Energy, the Interior, Commerce, State, Justice, Labor, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Treasury, Defense, and Agriculture; and the National Council on Disability. What have Republicans ever done about eliminating the federal government’s agencies, bureaus, commissions, departments, administrations, corporations, authorities, foundations, and services? The silence is deafening.

Republicans represent everything that libertarians are opposed to. How could a Republican ever be mistaken for a libertarian?

Laurence M. Vance

Iraq’s Shia Milita ‘Must Go Home’, Says Tillerson-Information Clearing House

Up front i will say, my cousin endorsed Tillerson for Secretary of State.

I believe Tillerson is the only one in the White House with a lick of sense.

However, i think a more appropriate action, would be for the War Criminal USA inc., which destroyed Iraq in an illegal war of aggression for power and profit to go home, get the fuck out of Iraq.

Tillerson would probably be much happier if he disassociated himself from the pedophile criminal zionist yankees in Washington DC, and came home to Texas.

I know some of the shit they make him say, turns his stomach, and ruins his appetite.

So! Yankee scum go home, and Tillerson, i would suggest a resignation and a fast plane to Texas.

John C Carleton

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48061.htm

Iraq Rejects US demands to expel Iranian military advisors from the country-The Duran

Want to talk about huge brass balls.

USA, a criminal for profit International Corporation, incorporated under British Empire Law, against all international law, common honor and decency, illegally attacked, occupied, destroyed Iraq, and raped/murdered perhaps a million or more innocent souls.

It is well know to the Iraqi government, that the USA intends to steal some of Iraq for the little crime cabal, (British Empire out post in the middle East), occupying Palestine, and Holocusting the Palestinian people.

It is well known to the Iraqi government and people, USA inc, is running ISIS in both Syria and Iraq.

Now Iran comes along, starts helping Syria and Iraq to defend themselves from the Evil of Israhell and Washington DC.

So the Evil Empire, USA inc., demanded that the Iraqi people kick out the people who are helping the Iraqi people defend themselves and country from the Evil of Israhell, USA inc.

The Iraqi people, told the two pedophilic crime cabals to go pound sand.

Wise decision.

This is how Empires die.

John C Carleton

Iraq REJECTS US demands to expel Iranian military advisers from the country

A soft Landing in the Middle East-The Unz Review

My family line seems to stay as far away from the seats as power as possible.

Am not an insider, so i can not give you numbers and names, but there are those in Washington who realize that to save America, the Empire, (USA inc.) must die.

Don’t think they are freedom fighters, just realize that like Rome in the end, trying to keep the Empire afloat, caused Rome to be sacked, if the USA inc Empire is not killed off, Washington DC will be. These people do not want Washington DC to become a land fill. They want to rule Washington DC. Their thinking is, Ruling Washington DC and the occupied States, is better than ruling a land fill.

America, will not be a good place to live, raise families, until Americans are worth a shit. At the present time, most Americans would leave the world a better place if the all got raptured to that war zionist god heaven all the Christian zionist droll over.

John C Carleton

http://www.unz.com/ishamir/a-soft-landing-in-the-middle-east/