Tag Archives: 1848 Communist Manifesto

No, Virginia, Obama is NOT a Fascist like Hitler; he’s a Communist, just like he says he is…..so are the Bushes….so don’t go around insulting the memory of Benito Mussolini, Francisco Franco, Sir Oswald Moseley…..and Senator Huey Pierce Long of Louisiana….

In my writing on this blog, and even in my personal correspondence, I often refer to the current system in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe as “Corporate Communism”.  I realize this sounds oxymoronic to some people—an inherent contradiction in terms, kind of like “Jumbo Shrimp” or “Microsoft Works”—so I thought I should make a clarifying statement.  May people realize that the United States is neither what it used to be in the past nor what it pretends to be at present, although most people would admit that we have gone a long way down the road to socialism, at the very least.  In February of 2009, right after Obama was sworn in as President for his first term, Newsweek Magazine trumpted on its cover “We are all Socialists Now”—-well, let me just clarify that Newsweek was not speaking for me, directly or indirectly, because I never authorized it to do so, and I certainly didn’t vote for Obama….
As for defining “corporate communism”, some people like to call it “Fascism” but I object to the use of that term as historically inaccurate and non-descriptive.  (Compare Aaron Russo’s Movie, “From Freedom to Fascism”). Many people who use this term intend to criticize the current status quo in America, but neither America nor any of the other Western powers are in any sense “Fascist” in the early 20th century sense of that term as used by Mussolini, Franco, Moseley, or even the followers of Huey Long of Louisiana.
Communism was a system envisioned by many 19th Century Philosophers and Economists but made especially famous by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in a pamphlet published in London in February 1848 called “The Communist Manifesto”—  and, up to a point, Fascism was a reaction against Communism and other forms of modern socialism.
The universal features of Communism, as crystalised in the writings of Karl Marx, are the abolition of the family, private property, and the Democratic Republican “Bourgeois” State (“Bourgeois”) basically referring to the “Middle Class” of productive tradesmen and women who live in cities.
“Corporate Communism” is what we have in the United States today: the government imposes an economic system based on consumer credit debt that effectively makes all citizens and residents of the United States slaves.
I call it “communism”, and it seems to me that this is the only appropriate label, because *(for all intents and purposes) individual property ownership has been abolished in the United States by a combination of predatory (high interest, inflationary), government sponsored financing FIRST ENVISIONED IN THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO OF 1848 as a means of abolishing or absorbing all private property by and through Central Banking.
The government has taken a stand against Religion and all the institutions and sacraments of Christianity in particular so that the family can be abolished.  And the judicial and financial attack on and the sociological and psychological subversion of the family and private property, and the destruction of the middle class, guarantee the collapse of all Constitutional and Democratic-Republican forms of limited government, in favor of the kind of Police State Despotism that Americans are slowly but surely becoming all to familiar with and accustomed to and accepting of.
This is actually the opposite of “Fascism” which protected individual and family ownership of real estate and other property above all other civil rights, favored the bourgeois middle class and its “family values”, protected traditional religious faith and traditions against atheism and psychology, and in general was “conservative” and “traditional” in its socio-cultural orientation.  Whether this is a good thing or bad thing, it’s NOT what we have in Modern Europe, America, Australia, China, or Japan (and its seeping all through Latin America and the rest of the world with lightening-like speed, so that “Corporate Communism” based on non-Capitalized Credit, can accurately be described as the current, modern “World System”.
I call the modern European-America-Japanese-Chinese system “Corporate” Communism because the government acts through Corporate Agents to accomplish specialized goals, but all these corporations are effectively part of and one-in-the same with the Federal Government.
In other words, the through a pretense that all property is held privately, just in the name of corporations (or because of, as a derivation or derivative of, corporate financing).
But these corporations (including all banks, all dependent on ONE SINGLE CENTRALIZED SYSTEM known as the Federal Reserve System, which produces the vast majority of “notes” used in every day commerce as “legal tender”) could not possibly exist without the government regulations which shape, organize, and in breathe life into their very CORPORATE being.
Without government contracts and financing and programs of economic stimulus (including the planned distributional and utility infrastructure) these corporations could not exist….
So the American “Corporate System” is in fact neither private and nor capitalistic at all.  It is merely a sophisticated implementation of the Communist Manifesto of 1848 which operates by and through so many veils smoke seen through two way and reflective mirrors that nobody even realizes what is really going on…..

Of Corporations, Communism, and Capitalism—where the boundaries blur…Should We Nationalize Oil and Banking Companies and distribute the proceeds to the people? Would this constitute Communism or a the first step towards the Restoration of Non-Corporate Individual Enterprise Capitalism?

My dearly departed grandmother Helen always said that the reason the United States of America would prevail over Soviet Russia in the Cold War was that the United States had perfected Communism whereas Russia had failed: the United States perfected Communism by inventing “McDonald’s”, “Walmart” (and/or its smaller predecessors), and Red Russia had nothing remotely comparable….  McDonalds in particular seemed the epitome of Communism to my grandparents who raised me and, as a consequence, to me: everyone equal, no tradition of anything, cheap food to sustain the human body available everywhere, distributed nationally, no local or regional development allowed in the franchise. I think it was this “Worker’s Paradise Worldwide Global Homogenizing” aspect of McDonald’s (and Walmart) that my grandparents, born respectively of French-Louisiana and English-Texas backgrounds in the 1890s, found most repulsive.  McDonald’s IS repulsive and the global uniformity it (and every other trans-national trademark, from Archers-Daniel-Midland, AT&T Avon to Ford to Hilton to Mitsubishi and Nissan and Beyond) imposes is particularly oppressive.

One of the great signs of the collapse of the Soviet Union was, of course, when McDonald’s opened its first Moscow franchise on Red Square—it was as if the American Flag had been planted on Lenin’s & Stalin’s graves…. I think many felt exactly the same way in Mexico when a sacrilegious Yankee Imperialist Walmart opened beside the ancient pre-Aztec ruins of Teotihuacan, just north of Mexico City—a site whose name means “where the gods go.”  “La Reconquista de México aquí se llevó a cabo.”  In both cases, it seemed to some Americans: “We Won.”

Or did we?  1848 was the year of the publication of the Communist Manifesto.

In 1848, there was no such thing as a transnational corporation, pure and simple, much less international banks—the various members of the Rothschild Family who acted as predecessor-antecedents to international B  Even within the United States, the largest corporations were the interstate railroads, there were no such as interstate banks.

In the 1850s the railroads were growing, and with them the demand for steel and coal (and eventually…oil).   In 1860, Abraham Lincoln (lawyer for the Illinois Central Railroad, one of the largest corporations of the day) was elected President as the First (successful) Communist Revolution was about to take place as one half of the American Population, out of envy and spite, destroyed the other half over the question of slavery, which was resolved peacefully in every other country in the world except the seemingly eternally accursed island of French Haiti.

Thomas DiLorenzo and Donald Kennedy have, over the past 10 or more years, written brilliantly concerning the nascent alliance of communist ideology and corporate-government in the America of the 1860s and forward.   It was ultimately the corporate economy of the North which triumphed over the individual agrarian (Marx and other disparagingly, and inaccurately, called in “Feudal”) socio-economic organization of the South.   The Corporate Union over the Confederacy of Individuals (“Individual” or in Greek “Ho Idios“, giving us the word “idiot”—a person who is “off by himself” or wants to have it “his way”, or in the ancient Greek papyri of Hellenized Egypt “idiotiki ge” the phrase denominating “private property”—the Marxists and Corporate Statists  still use accusations of mental illness and anti-social behavior to describe advocates of individual autonomy or capitalism).

The period of 1860-1920 is often taught in our schools as the heyday of Capitalism—but was it?  No—it was the time when individuals were increasingly subjected to the power or faceless, nameless, organizations called “corporations”—except in the early days the “names” of many of these corporations were in fact individual or family names, or else they were associated with their founders/majority shareholders, who became known as the “Robber Barons”.   Was this process antithetical to communism or was this the true birth of true communism?

The largest “companies” of the past (prior to 1860) had mainly been colonial enterprises from Hudson’s Bay, Louisiana, and Massachusetts Bay, to India.  The British South Africa Company was one of the last of these, founded in the late 19th Century by Cecil Rhodes—but it was the one of the two last significant private imperialist enterprises that was contemporaneous with the development of large national corporations in North America and Europe (the other being King Leopold’s private “plantation” known as “the Belgian Congo.”)

When I think of real solutions to the modern American crisis, I think of how to restore individual private property and individual enterprise, and the enemies I see are the corporate-governmental complexes (what Dwight Eisenhower referred to as the “Military-Industrial” Complex—not quite recognizing how subversive of democracy and communistic this complex really was, and has increasingly become).

I propose that the renaissance of the individual can only come when we recognize the enemy and name the Mega-Corporate-Mega-Governmental synergy by its earliest formal name: Communism.  To destroy communism, then, we must destroy the mega-corporations and the gigantic government together.

Nationalizing the Oil and Banking Industries would be a disaster if these industries were left in the governmental hands which effectively maintain the “private corporate” fiction at the present time, but if the purpose of nationalization were to restore the wealth to the people, and the ways and means we used were the technologies and common law procedures of trust formation and fiduciary duties to achieve nationalization, these nationalizations would ultimately serve to restore both wealth and power to the people.

One year ago I wrote several pieces about the massive fraud of the Social Security Trust Fund—which was never a trust and was never funded by Social Security taxes, which were stolen and embezzled from the American People by the government’s false pretenses and fraud of creating something CALLED the Social Security Trust Fund.   Regular political “panics” are created when politicians announce that the Social Security Trust Fund is about to go bankrupt—but how can a Trust go bankrupt which was never actually funded?   The ONLY “corpus” of the Social Security Trust fund are “non-negotiable securities” which translates into English as “the hermeneutically concealed true source of the government’s inflated fiat currency.”

I propose that we should indeed nationalize the oil companies and the banks, but with the purpose of abolishing both.  The world’s dependence on oil technology and “means of production” should be radically reduced and ultimately eliminated.  No industry is more destructive of world health and the environment than the petroleum products industries.  But the wealth of the oil companies should be carefully collected, accounted for, and then invested and  administered as a true trust, operated by the government as fiduciary with FULL fiduciary liability and supervised by Congress under the debt clause of the 14th Amendment.  Likewise, the banks should be nationalized and abolished.  The real estate now held by the banks should be distributed to the people in fee simple absolute, restoring “allodial” title to all true U.S. Citizens—and yes, there needs to be a finite definition of that category, and immigration probably needs to stop, especially immigration by and through foreign investors buying up U.S. property.

Much to my pleasure and surprise I see that these ideas are not unique or individual “ho idios” to me, although I am resigned to the notion that many of my peers already think I’m crazy.  But nationalizing the banks and the oil companies is obviously, already, a concept with some support….  I am merely adding that we must not maintain them as part of the government, which is what the government is effectively doing right now—especially the banks since 2008.  What we MUST DO NOW is to nationalize the massive wealth represented and administer it as one or more fully responsible trusts to repair the damage done to the people by the lies of the past 80 years since Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected, the past 99 years since the creation of the Federal Reserve, and the past 132 years since the election of Lincoln and America’s First Communist Revolution, erected by Republicans as the supporters of Corporate-Government Plutocracy against Individual land ownership and Democracy.

See:  http://www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/ajax.html?t=11388172#page:showThread,11388172

 Population to US: Nationalize the Oil CompaniesDo it now!

by: Anonymous replies 126 03/10/2012 @ 12:41PM
Reply 1 – 20 of 126 first | prev | 1234567 | next | last
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

If any candidate proposed that (and won), they’d end up like the guy in Iran in the 1950s. Democratically-elected president, overthrown by the CIA to put in a puppet regime.

by: Anonymous reply 1 03/10/2012 @ 12:47PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

Do it anyway.

by: Anonymous reply 2 03/11/2012 @ 12:11PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

I don’t necessarily want to say nationalize but take away the subsidies and tax the fuck out of them.

And then nationalize higher education and health care and you’ve got a deal.

by: LuciferTheLightBringer(authenticated) reply 3 03/11/2012 @ 12:37PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

Oil Companies own Congress. You would have to first ban all Corporate Political Contributions.

by: Anonymous reply 4 03/11/2012 @ 02:38PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

The top 0.1 percent are way too powerful to let any of this happen.

I think we should nationalize the banks as well, personally.

Disolve the Fed and bring the currency back into the hands of the people instead of keeping it in the hands of private bankers.

But none of this will ever happen, so wishing for it is completely unproductive.

by: Anonymous reply 5 03/11/2012 @ 02:42PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

Last person who tried to end the Fed was JFK. We all saw what happened to him.

by: Anonymous reply 6 03/11/2012 @ 02:45PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]


Nationalize higher education?

Think what that would accomplish for wealth distribution (over time) and class mobility.

Make every college serve a geographical area — you live here, you go to that college. That would eliminate the rich buying their way into Harvard at five million a pop, which was the going rate a couple years ago.

Then you could also make all education free starting with forgiving student loans. That would amount to confiscating a significant chunk of the banking system which now finances college education.

Think of how much it would help ordinary people and the economy of main street if we took student loan payments out of bank vaults and put it into the pockets of consumers.

by: Anonymous reply 7 03/11/2012 @ 04:40PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

That’s true…since the oil companies own our CIA, if oil companies were nationalized as they should be…our president would be slaughtered.

by: Anonymous reply 8 03/11/2012 @ 04:56PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

We should tax the hell out of them…instead the working people have to pay all the taxes and the oil companies keep all the profits. Why doesn’t our congress protect us against them?

I think every CEO of every American owned oil company should be put in prison, until things change.

by: Anonymous reply 9 03/11/2012 @ 04:59PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

We have done it here in Norway, and it works out well for us.. we get tons of money in, which some of it we spend now, but most of it we save for future generation, after the oil is gone.. it ultimately goes to the people, not to greedy oil companies, Statoil was made for the Norwegian people first and foremost. Statoil is the reason we have free higher education, free health care, paid maternity leave for a year etc… I doubt we would have had all of that without our oil, and I don’t think we would have had all that without Statoil.

by: Anonymous reply 10 03/11/2012 @ 05:05PM
flag: [ww] [ff] [troll-dar]

The thing about oil companies is that most of them worldwide are nationalized already, so private companies are inherently at a disadvantage.

by: Anonymous reply 11 03/11/2012 @ 05:11PM