Socialists in the House

In Washington D.C. there is powerful and popular lobby called the Congressional Progressive Caucus which, at one time, openly espoused the principles of socialism and publicly signed onto the agenda of the Democratic Socialists of America.

According to their statement of purpose,

"The Progressive Caucus is organized around the principles of social and economic justice, a non-discriminatory society and national priorities which represent the interests of all people, not just the wealthy and the powerful.

Our purpose is to present thoughtful, practical solutions to the economic and social problems facing America. Our people-based agenda extends from job creation to job training, to economic conversion, to single payer healthcare reform, to adequate funding for the AIDS crisis, to environmental reform, and to women's rights.

Now that the cold war is over, this nation's budget and overall priorities must reflect that reality. We support further cuts in outdated and unnecessary military spending, a more progressive tax system in which wealthy taxpayers and corporations contribute their fair share, and a substantial increase in social programs designed to meet the needs of low-and-middle-income American families. We believe that these goals fit within an overall commitment to deficit reduction."

In more recent years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus has gone underground in respect to their connection to the Democratic Socialists of America. Their roster is no longer published on the DSA website and they no longer publicly acknowledge their loyalty to the socialist organization. In the DSA document, "Electoral Politics As Tactic — Elections Statement 2000," it states:

"DSA recognizes that some insurgent politicians representing labor, environmentalists, gays and lesbians, and communities of color may choose to run under Democratic auspices... and the 59 Democratic members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, one-half of whom are Black and Latino and all of whom possess strong labor backing and operative social democratic politics."

Liberal, Socialist, Progressive, Collectivist...
What's the Difference?

Hillary Clinton I thought it interesting that during the Democratic YouTube debate, when asked if Hillary was a liberal, she preferred to refer to herself as a "progressive".

“Progressive” is one of those words that certainly sounds like it should be a good thing, right? I mean, who doesn’t want progress! The issue is, however, what are we “Progressing” toward?

Make no mistake about it - Hillary Clinton is every bit the Socialist that her husband is. One has to only scan through a few of Clinton's policies in economic, spending, and tax strategy to see that sovereignty and personal freedoms are the items actually targeted for reduction.

Democratic-Socialist Reform

Many on the left today call themselves “progressive,” and they do so not just because it’s a nicer way of saying “liberal,” but also because they very much intend to revive the political principles of America’s original Progressives, from the Progressive Era of the 1880s through World War I. [R.J. Pestritto, American Progressivism]

We are told that we can have Socialist reform and still be a Democratic nation. Deceptive and misguided politicians in both the Republican and Democratic parties, and the International Bankers, tell us that Democratic-Socialism is in the middle of the road between Communism and Fascism, and that we need a Democratic-Socialist state in the 21st. Century with its global economies.

Truth About Money

Nothing could be further from the truth. Socialist reform is a means to consolidate and control wealth. Why do you suppose that bankers and the super-rich promote it? Most Americans do not know the history of our money in America and have ceded all control over their financial futures to an elite International cabal of bankers with another agenda.

Socialism is a share-the-wealth program - a confidence game to get the people to surrender their freedom to an all-powerful collective. As a result, through the legislative process, like sheep going to slaughter, Americans are willingly and slowly sacrificing their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness in exchange for the false promises of an increasingly powerful Socialist State.

Socialism Defined

Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or social outlook, that stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, rather than the importance of separate individuals. Collectivists focus on community and society, and seek to give priority to group goals over individual goals.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract is considered an example of collectivist political philosophy, which maintains that human society is organized along the lines of an implicit contract between members of society, and that the terms of this contract (e.g. the powers of government, the rights and responsibilities of individual citizens, etc.) are rightfully decided by the "general will" - that is, the will of the people. This idea inspired the early socialist and communist philosophers such as Karl Marx.

According to Encyclopædia Britannica, "collectivism has found varying degrees of expression in the 20th century in such movements as socialism, communism, and fascism. The least collectivist of these is social democracy, which seeks to reduce the inequities of unrestrained capitalism by government regulation, redistribution of income, and varying degrees of planning and public ownership. In socialist systems collectivist economics are carried to their furthest extreme, with a minimum of private ownership and a maximum of planned economy."

Simply put, socialism is defined as "a theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor." [Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)] It is an economic system based on state ownership of capital. It is the antithesis of what America is ... it is contrary to our capitalistic society.

What socialism amounts to is government ownership and/or control over the basic means of production and distribution of services and goods. This means the government controls everything, including you.

Socialists advocate controlled elections, controlled media, controlled education, the elimination of free speech, disarmament of the population, fiat money, a cartelized health-care system, military imperialism, and global government.

Following the attack on 9/11, Socialists in our government gleefully began invading the privacy and exerting massive control on the movement and freedom of ALL Americans. Sadly, many American believed the lies.

In Socialism everything is regulated by the government and everything you do is monitored by the government. While we may not have yet reached the point where the state tells you what color you can paint your house, how many children you may have, etc., instead the government tells you where you can build your homes, your businesses, and even how much food storage you are entitled to. In recent years, we've also witnessed the dismantling of the 5th Amendment as the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the govenment may seize a home, small business, or other private property of one citizen and transfer it to another private citizen - if the transfer would boost the community's economic development or increase its tax base.

Government Control of the Internet

One of the biggest enemies to collectivists everywhere is the free flow of information. Totalitarians have always sought to control the media and use it to disseminate it's propaganda. The mainstream media in America is already owned and controlled by collectivists, but what's new for them is the flow of information over the Internet. Their real concern is not pornography or terrorism as they claim, but the free flow of information that exposes their agendas.

In their bid to limit the 1st Amendment, Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced a bill to establish the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor—an arm of the executive branch that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure. The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

Senator Joe Lieberman, co-author of a bill that would give President Obama a ‘kill switch’ to shut down parts of the Internet, citing China, a country that censors all online dissent against the state, as the model to which American should compare itself. “Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” Lieberman said. Chinese Internet censorship is imposed via a centralized government blacklist of any websites that contain criticism of the state, porn, or any other content deemed unsuitable by the authorities. Every time you attempt to visit a website, you are re-routed through the government firewall, often making for long delays and crippling speeds. During the anti-government riots which occurred in July 2009, the Chinese government completely shut down the Internet across the entire northwestern region of Xinjiang for days. Similarly, Internet access in parts of Tibet is routinely restricted as part of government efforts to pre-empt and neutralize unrest. Major websites like Twitter, Google and You Tube have also been shut down either temporarily or permanently by Chinese authorities.

The real agenda behind government control of the Internet has always been to strangle and suffocate independent media outlets who are now competing with and even displacing establishment press organs, with websites like the Drudge Report now attracting more traffic than many large newspapers combined. As part of this war against independent media, the FTC recently proposing a “Drudge Tax” that would force independent media organizations to pay fees that would be used to fund mainstream newspapers. In addition, the FCC has rolled a censorship plan into its Net Neutrality scheme in a stealth attempt to impose Internet regulation. Under the FCC’s regulatory control consumers would be forced to buy an Internet/TV/Phone connectivity box that the government approves. “Everyone will pay rates for service that the government sets. And everything passing through your Internet, TV, or phone would become subject to the FCC’s consistent regulatory whim,” writes Americans for Tax Reform’s Kelly William Cobb.

Americas Slide Toward Socialism

America's gravitation toward socialism has been long-term as we have witnessed over the past 100 years an increasingly dramatic swing from capitalism to socialism in many areas of our economy.

Fabian Socialism was organized in England in 1884 to spread socialistic principles gradually without violent agitation. "The Fabian Society proposes then to conquer by delay; to carry its programme, not by a hasty rush, but through the slower, but, as it thinks, surer methods of patient discussion, exposition, and political action." [William Clarke]

In 1913, the Federal Reserve was created in a coup d’état that resulted in rewriting the Constitution of the United States and left the American people with a progressively declining dollar. Today, thanks to the actions of this central bank, the American dollar is worth about 4 cents.
America took large steps toward Socialism in 1929 following the Stock Market Crash, when America suddenly needed a "New Deal" in the form of social welfare. The national debt began to skyrocket and is now on a exponential growth trend to bankruptcy within a matter of years.
In 1968, Congress removes the silver backing of the dollar, and in 1971, President Nixon repudiates redemption of Federal Reserve Notes in gold, thus turning the FRNs into a fiat currency internationally for the first time.
Consider for example the massive transfer of wealth from tobacco growers and cigarette manufacturers into state and federal coffers.

In the pockets of the drug manufacturing cartel, representatives from both sides of the isle forced through a stealth vote, passing a Prescription Drug bill called, "Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act" that essentially guaranteed huge profits for Big Pharma at the expense of the American people.

A key point of this bill prohibits the Federal government from negotiating discounts with drug companies. This Medicare drug plan fiasco enriches pharmaceutical companies, fleeces taxpayers, and forces millions of older Americans to accept inferior drug coverage. Many representatives who voted in favor of this drug scam were later offered million dollar jobs from the pharmaceutical industry.

In 2008, the Bush administration, along with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and U.S. Treasury Secretary Paulson launched their attack on the free market system in America with their socialist takeover of the financial systems. The so-called Paulson Plan transfers $700 billion or more of taxpayer money into the hands of international bankers. Further, the U.S. Federal government forced the nations largest banks to sell an equity stake in their businesses to the government. Make no mistake about it… this economic crisis was planned by the same International bankers that have planned previous economic crisis that brought about a central bank and unconstitutional taxes in the U.S.

Economist Milton Friedman recently observed that "in 1950, total government spending, federal, state, and local, amounted to less than 30 percent of national income; in 1992, to nearly 45. In addition, government-mandated expenditures by individuals and businesses have multiplied manifold ... The U.S. is today more than half socialist, compared to perhaps a third in 1950." [Rush Limbaugh, See, I Told You So, pg. 267.]

The rate of the transformation has been increased in recent years by the United Nations, whose entire purpose is to implement a Socialist New World Order. We have crossed Bill Clinton's "Bridge into the 21st Century" built on the crumbled moorings of the past. It is the same bridge built by the "New Deal" of FDR and the "Great Society" of LBJ. These bridges led us in the past to the abyss of unprecedented big government. Our American toll was a loss of freedom and dignity, and our destination decades of encroaching bureaucracy and generations addicted to the hand of government.

There are the social and political voices talking about the unfair distribution of wealth and resources - that a global system of sharing and redistribution could remedy the social problems of cross-national envy, and that if this were addressed, a major component of international strife and war would be removed forever.

Traditionally, Democrats have stood for big government, far-reaching federally controlled and federally funded programs and taxation at levels to match, and Barack Obama promises the same. He called for Americans to "spread the wealth around" in his socialist vision for America.

Originally created to defend and protect, our government is now being asked to provide. In short, many Americans today think the government must be the answer to all societal problems. And as the problems grow, so must the government.

In the simplest of terms, Socialists at every level of government are calling for the federal government takeover of the management of American business, health care, education and the American family. They envision much more than mere renewal or reform; they want to create an entirely new society controlled by a massive Socialist government.

Ludwig von Mises wrote: "On the other hand the application of the basic ideas of collectivism cannot result in anything but social disintegration and the perpetuation of armed conflict. It is true that every variety of collectivism promises eternal peace starting with the day of its own decisive victory and the final overthrow and extermination of all other ideologies and their supporters. ... As soon as a faction has succeeded in winning the support of the majority of citizens and thereby attained control of the government machine, it is free to deny to the minority all those democratic rights by means of which it itself has previously carried on its own struggle for supremacy." [The Fallacy of Collectivism]