The Cloward-Piven Strategy - a blueprint for sedition

ATS member xuenchen recently mentioned the Cloward-Piven strategy in one of their other posts. As usual, xuen was on to something and piqued my own interest in the matter. I began researching this strategy, and discovered numerous interesting facts. Here is a brief overview of the subject:

1) It is a political strategy created in 1966 by two Columbia University School of Social Work professors: Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven;

2) Its goal is to overwhelm the US welfare system through a form of paper-terrorism;

3) They wanted to use it to subvert our existing societal structure and bring about fundamental changes in our society that ultimately leads to a guaranteed income for all people (Paid for by whom? You guessed it... the rest of us)

From the socialist horse's own mouth:

The ultimate objective of this strategy—to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income—will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.

Cloward and Piven intended to engage in a form of "paper terrorism" with the welfare system. They intended to exploit the gap between welfare law and practice – that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy.

Howard Phillips, chairman of The Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because "Great Society programs had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people."

Be aware folks, of their ultimate aims and how they intend to exploit the working class, middle class and the wealthy through wealth-redistribution schemes & plots that would ultimately replace our existing societal norms and structures much to the detriment of the working and wealthy in the United States. Why work when you have free money, and how will the system continue to pay for itself when everybody else decides to quit working and collect their handouts? It won't, their solution would be to simply print more money (easy when it isn't backed by gold) with the effect of devaluing our currency to the point of Venezuela or other countries whose currencies have been devalued thousands and thousands of times over. As far as that goes, why would wealthy people stay here when some grubbers are lining up to hold their hands out and demand you give them something for nothing

I personally do not believe one is entitled to money or anything for that matter merely for existing. You do not get an award just for showing up.... Sure, we guarantee your right to not be deprived of life or liberty without due process, but that is where it ends. Each Citizen is personally responsible for his/her own successes and failures, and the tendency to blame those with money for one's own shortcomings and personal failings can not be overstated.

Again I'd like to thank ATS member Xuenchen for bringing this topic up

If you give ten people each a pile of lumber, hammers, nails, saws, etc and walk away at least two will be homeless and one will have a better house than the others.

a reply to: JBurns

Add to the that the large numbers of Congress who are either bona fide socialists, or have ties to socialist organizations, or take large amounts of money from socialist organizations, and it gets more of a concern where our country could be headed,
Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress
(It is also available on DVD)

And, in case you need some "famous" names to go along with Cloward-Piven:
THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY: ENTER ALINSKY, AYERS, DAVIDSON AND SOROS
BTW, Ayers is the former WeatherUnderground radical who has some sort of relationshhip wit the former POTUS.
Depending on your perspective, the depth of the relationship varies
thehill.com...

Extra bonus points: which recent president promised to fundamentally transform this country???
Cloward, Piven and the Fundamental Transformation of America

The Obama Administration has already tried to overwhelm our society with the foolish 'Affordable' Care Act. We are fortunate that he didn't fully succeed in implementing his destructive agenda as he was a big fan and disciple of Cloward-Piven.

I would say they have been deep into the bureaucracy for sometime now. Keep lowering standards until there are no standards seems to be the ultimate mission.

Somewhere in my mind I see good people overcoming this, but I have a dreadful sense that it will be much chaos before that (returning to post commie intellectual reality - that capitalism is the normal and good state of things) is even marginally acceptable to urban dwellers (for the most part).

a reply to: JBurns

It's how the left will justify nulling the Constitution.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: JBurns

It's how the left will justify nulling the Constitution.

If people did not start raising armies to revolt at that point, they never would. I still think they would. Not in most cities, but other areas for sure.

a reply to: JBurns

"Paper terrorism". That's a new one. How does paper induce fear and terror in the population? I can just see it now; DHS agent in court being asked why they shot someone: "Well, they were carrying concealed toilet paper wrapped around them like a suicide vest. If they detonated that, we could all have been killed"!



... and if the guaranteed income is for "all people", who are these "rest of us" who aren't included? They'd have to only be the non-people, people, wouldn't they?

While I don't think that this particular way of achieving a universal basic income would actually work, I do think that even in the most capitalist of societies, we have to review how we assure the qualities of life that we hold as human rights. A UBI may be one of those options.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: JBurns

It's how the left will justify nulling the Constitution.

Remember that several of Trumps' executive orders have been ruled as unconstitutional and blocked, and all the right-wingers declared the judges involved were, therefore, "leftists".

So, who is upholding the Constitution, and who isn't?

a reply to: JBurns

People welfare bad but corporate welfare is good. Got it.

a reply to: chr0naut

Which ones?

I know Obama had a bunch but I'm unaware that Trump has issued unconstitutional orders.

a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

What a great post DTOM, as usual!

Given that certain former POTUS' tears over Castro and support of revolutionaries who carried out attacks on US soil, I am hardly surprised.. scary to see how far Ayers and his WeatherUnderground terrorists may have actually gotten. The socialist and communist subversion is very real, no matter how much they try to laugh it off. Heck, many of them exist very openly these days

Now I'm not one to advocate for political persecution or anything of the sort, but when you have radical groups with the expressed intent of using violence (sorry "direct action" in their dialect) to "fundamentally transform" our country it makes me stop and think, Hmmmm

Extra bonus points: which recent president promised to fundamentally transform this country???

Heh our one and only weak on crime, chronic America apologizer B.H.O.!

...and in true DTOM classiness:

(It is also available on DVD)

That made my evening, Thanks for dropping in

a reply to: dfnj2015

It isn't bad when used as intended. It is a threat to our way of life when - like other things intended for good - it is weaponized by unscrupulous actors who would use it to harm America. Sorry, I mean... "fundamentally transform" America into something none of us will recognize

Thing is, I'm not interested in any sort of fundamental transformations whatsoever. I can't speak for anybody else here, but that sounds like a pretty raw deal to me. What possible reason could anyone give an average Joe like me to stand for that?

In fact I think our welfare system can be beneficial when used as intended vs. weaponized and exploited for (wait for it) political reasons. I don't want to see Americans starving in the streets or walking around like bone yards. Now as to whether those bone yards are healthier than fat guys like me is certainly a valid point of debate....

a reply to: Fools

Give it time. Have some faith. I have no doubt we will get back to our roots as Americans when the majority of Citizens realize where their place has been all along (Citizens>Government), in a time when Citizens kept government in a perpetual state of Check-Mate and BS like this didn't happen. The time when they wouldn't dare to skirt the line between Constitutional and unconstitutional as a matter of policy

Our Declaration of Independence is very specific that most folks are predisposed to tolerate what are essentially "lesser evils" incrementally over time vs. a large sudden tyrannical act that would draw a clear line in the sand. It is 100% not a coincidence that such waters are continually muddied.

a reply to: chr0naut

It is a strange term. Those so called "sovereign citizens" like to use it. Paper terrorism, also known as frivolous legal filings, intend only to sow chaos and take advantage of a strained and bloated bureaucracy that is unable to process/handle the filings. Think of it in PC terms, it is like a denial of service attack for public institutions. Another way to look at it is to think of our court systems, and a severe overabundance of laws that creates the necessity of resolving over 99% of cases with plea bargains

Now, if every defendant charged with a crime were to reject all plea bargains and not waive their right to a speedy trial during their arraignment (something lawyers do by default) then our courts would quickly grind to a halt as the backlog of cases grew to the point they'd never be adjudicated

Another example is when tax protesters (as much as I may agree with them) file what the IRS deems "frivolous tax protester arguments" in place of requested information/documentation/forms, filing false liens or initiating other proceedings. In the cases of liens, a property owner doesn't even know it has been filed until they go to sell the property. Regardless, these are all considered forms of paper terrorism

By advocating for mass influx of welfare claims, these people (as they state) intentionally want to bind the system up until it becomes non-functional at which point they believe will magically be replaced by a universal basic income, etc. The obvious question is "Where will that money come from?" and of course there is no good answer. Simply printing more money does nothing but decrease the value of money already in circulation (such as Venezuela). Anyhow, their plans are flawed and poorly thought out... but like many other such plans has done little to stop those trying to implement their ideals

Socialism, communism, and the policies of these ideologies were dreamed up by zealots who are heavy on ideology/fluff but lacking in actual solutions, workable ideas or valid logistics

I have a bunch of contacts that went to Columbia school of social work, one a friend. Maybe with one exception the biggest group of sjws ever lol. Now days social work schools teach straight social justice, intersectionality, critical race theory, feminism, and identity politics.

To the point I think it detracts from the real goals of community and poverty work.

To the op, even though I work on relevant issues I agree that such large scale political strategies and social experiments, using in this case the poor as a foil, are dangerous, arrogant, and represent megalomania. It’s not even clear it would work but possibly still cause the short term goals such as overwhelming local and regional governments. This obviously could be detrimental.

a reply to: JBurns

Can I get my share of the corporate welfare back, too?

I'm really tired of working extra to pay rent for people who choose not to work.

Yes, I know- lots of people do use welfare the correct way.
At least, that's what I'm told. And I could even see it happening... but I've known dozens in the former and not a single in the latter... Where and how do we draw the line?

a reply to: chr0naut

One extreme example would be like what American Democrats are doing lately.

Like passing Bills that have extensive language, but laws already exist.

😎

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

To the point I think it detracts from the real goals of community and poverty work.

Which are very worthwhile goals Quetzalcoatl14, no doubt about it!

To the op, even though I work on relevant issues I agree that such large scale political strategies and social experiments, using in this case the poor as a foil, are dangerous, arrogant, and represent megalomania. It’s not even clear it would work but possibly still cause the short term goals such as overwhelming local and regional governments. This obviously could be detrimental.

First let me thank you for the work you do in those areas, it is good to know some of our best people are on the job

To me, it is the whole notion behind exploiting a weakness in a system designed to do good and help the most vulnerable among us is no different than kicking us when we are down if that makes any sense

I hope folks will not let things like this influence their opinion on the work you all do as a whole, because there are plenty of people out there who are not abusing or gaming the system, or trying to use it to affect any sort of "radical political changes" and instead use it merely to stay alive, provide for their families and make it through the work week. Those are the people I will go to bat for

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: chr0naut

Which ones?

I know Obama had a bunch but I'm unaware that Trump has issued unconstitutional orders.

Obama was knocked back on 13 EO's during his Presidency but only one was actually for unconstitutionality. Obama and Executive Overreach - Fact Check.org

On the other hand, Trump had two within his first year (although there is disagreement over the second one):

Executive Order 13768 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Executive Order 13769 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia