Department of Homeland Security Insider Update: "It Has Begun."

Like we never seen this coming

Remember kiddies, there's no such thing as UFOS, CHEMTRAILS, or the NEW WORLD ORDER

Oh well, if the middle class gets wiped out, we will all be in the same class anyway except a few on top. The top one tenth of a percent will be the only ones that have wealth, the rest of us will return to being surfs, working for peanuts. Life will go on, to resist would be futile as the most wealthy own technology and control all the infrastructure. If you want to eat and survive, then you have to play along.

I guess it won't be so bad, right now everyone is so polarized that things are a mess. I'll go with the flow on this one, in a few generations we will be able to tell if the new system will work.

reply to post by ANOK

Capitalism is the real enemy, not communism/socialism.

Thanks for the laugh and want to explain to me why it is that no other economic model known in world history has lifted billions of people out of poverty, and advanced the world to the current technological progress?

Capitalism is the real enemy!!!!

Oh geez.

Wait. So its the communists and socialists who are engineering the collapse of the world's economy and plan to establish a new global status quo? Yes, yes, pay no attention to the banks and mega-corporations that call all the shots. Never mind the fact that these entities hoard the wealth of the world and practice and espose policies and philosophies that are completely and absolutely antithetical to those of Marx and any other leftist thinker.

Its the communists.

maybe in years to come people will say that Timothy McVeigh called it right...

It sounds like bunker down time to me..

reply to post by kimar


Actually it's the central banks that have sponsor the socialist/communist throughout history. If u control the dictators u control the entire economy. Stalin, Mao, Hitler were all funding by the central banks.

Nothing can transpire until the right to bear arms is abolished. Expect more and more school, mall, and baby killings. It's the only thing that will cause people to emotionally respond with a "demand" that the government "do something". You're right, OP, it HAS begun.

You may not believe it and prefer to stick your head in the sand. But, there are activist agenda-makers that believe to the core that the ends justify the means. (Saul Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals'. Hillary Clinton did her senior thesis on this radical leftist socialist. They don't let morals or conscience get in their way!)

Stand strong and don't be deceived.

The problem with the common man who believes in socialism is, he actually thinks it works.
He thinks the revolutionary is going to actually institute socialism. He is a "usefull idiot".

He sees rich powerful men doing these things to society and blames capitalism, because they are capitalists.
He says no, in socialism/ communism the people own the means of production, collectively.

The Marxist revolutionary uses this as a tool.
While they crush the "workers", they use the "usefull idiot" to rile up the people for revolution.

The Marxist wants you to revolt.
He wants you to kill the rich.
He wants you to destroy everything, so that he can come in and be your savior.
AKA
dictator.

Originally posted by neo96
Thanks for the laugh and want to explain to me why it is that no other economic model known in world history has lifted billions of people out of poverty, and advanced the world to the current technological progress?

Capitalism has put more people into poverty than it has made rich.

You have a twisted perspective of reality because you have been conditioned that way by the lies we are taught, and you in a wealthy country.

What other economic model do you want to compare with? Capitalism has been the dominant economic system since we were forced off the land in the 1700's. It doesn't mean we would not have developed without it. In fact at the end of feudalism the 'commoners' (none-land owners) were doing quite well and their wealth was approaching that of the land owners. This is why the land owners had the enclosure laws enacted, because they felt their power, and control, was being threatened. The enclosure laws forced the commoners off the land, and were forced into factories and mills in order to survive. So instead of autonomy and liberty the commoners became the working class, and exploited to make the land owners incredibly wealthy. We went from working our own plots of land to wage poverty.

Yes capitalism has brought us wealth, but it also bought us global war, poverty, breakdown of society, property crime, the modern state system, wealth for a minority class who control the rest through economic control of politics. If capitalism worked so well then why does the rich poor divide keep getting wider?

There is nothing wrong with money, making money, the problem is in the ownership of the means to produce, and the mass inequality in wealth it causes. Its the mass inequality in wealth that makes the majority slaves, and minority privileged class. In reality we have the infrastructure capable of making us all fat and happy.

reply to post by ANOK


Curious how does this www.abovetopsecret.com... get turned in to "capitalism is evil". ????

reply to post by WP4YT


Saw something that very much disturbed me just recently. It was a black SUV police vehicle with some phrase in smallish letters next to where it said POLICE. Curious I walked closer to see what it said. "To punish and enslave" is what it said, and that is the truth.

WTF is that about? THis has been gnawing at me ever since I seen it. Still feel like I went to sleep and woke up in a different world than the one I grew up in. Crazy times we are living in...

reply to post by neo96


Have I EVER said capitalism is evil?

I fail to understand what you're asking? You link me to a thread about government, when we are talking about economics. Capitalism does not guarantee a none-authoritarian state. Capitalism IS authoritarian, and the only reason workers have rights is because we have a strong labour movement and unions.

Capitalism is not freedom, it is the right by state law, for private property owners to use their property in a economic capacity and hire wage labour. Which makes the property owner an authority over the workers they hire.

It's not only government that can be totalitarian, so can an economic system, and the system of capitalism is an economic dictatorship. The government/state we have is due to capitalism, designed to keep the two worlds of capitalist and worker from clashing.

Originally posted by bjax9er
The problem with the common man who believes in socialism is, he actually thinks it works.

But you have no evidence that it wouldn't work.

Capitalism doesn't work either if you actually pay attention. Capitalism fails someone every day. It fails whole nations.

You are all blind to the realities of what you support.

Actually socialism does work, is working, and works better than capitalism. You are only afraid of it because you really don't know what it is.

It may not be the revolution’s dawn, but it’s certainly a glint in the darkness. On Monday, this country’s largest industrial labor union teamed up with the world’s largest worker-cooperative to present a plan that would put people to work in labor-driven enterprises that build worker power and communities, too.

Worker Ownership For the 21st Century?

For Richmond, a city in which more than 17 percent of its 120,000 residents face unemployment, the strengthening of a cooperative-based economy could mean employment, job security and improved livelihoods for many. While the four members of the Liberty Ship Café are currently among that 17 percent, worker ownership in this co-op offers employment and autonomy. For sisters Gloria and Rosa Menjivar, this ownership is key.

www.cooperationworks.coop...

Employee ownership is the fastest growing organizational trend in American business.

www.sunypress.edu...

You need to embrace change, we won't have much of a future if you keep clinging to old outdated systems.

reply to post by ANOK

This is a load of nonsense. A communist economy would be one whereby the workers owned and controlled industry, and that is not happening.

Is it nonsense?

Have the DHS and Federal agencies not been stockpiling thousands of full auto machine guns, Billions of rounds of deadly hollow point ammunition, and almost 3000 huge, armoured vehicles then?

Have they not been using range targets of typical American familes, including pregnant women, small children and old folks...to desensitize those behind the trigger? And all while attempting to demonize public weapons ownership?

That's not nonsense, that's fact.

As for a 'Communist economy' being owned and controlled by the workers...Is that the way things are done in the worlds fastest growing economy...China? No, it isn't.

And i fear losing against China economically, has sown the seeds in Western elites minds.

If you can't beat them, join them..or more accurately, copy them.

The writing's on the wall mate...a tyranny is a tyranny, whether the head honchos seizing control of the place calls it Communist, Marxist or Capitalist. A turd by any other name smells just as rank.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
I would like to publically state that I think Obama is greater than Lincoln, Washington and Richard Nixon. I love the NSA and the CIA. Drones are my favorite bird and lesbians are the best thing since sliced bagels. U.S.A.! U.S.A.! A.S.U! U.S.S.R.! Ach.....enough already.

There's never been a real American hero until Obama. He single handedly won World War Two.

reply to post by MysterX


Even Communists don't like socialists. They're like the lost stepchildren of the third world planet.

reply to post by MysterX


China was not communist. They did not have a worker owned economy.

Again communism is an economic system not a form of government.

Just like the USSR they used the term communism for political reasons, not because they had an economic system of worker ownership.

China, USSR etc., had state capitalist economies. Private ownership of the means of production by the state.

Communism is the workers common ownership of the means of production. Go read a book, or two.

A totalitarian government is totalitarianism. Don't be fooled by names. for example, the DDR, the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) was neither a republic nor democratic, the National Socialist Workers Party was not socialist, or a workers party.

It's just really convenient to use Russia etc., to demonise socialism/communism, a plan that worked well for both sides, and you are all pawns in this charade.

DOOM

DOOOM DOOOOOOOMMMMMMM

DODDOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMM

Yawn

Originally posted by coltcall
Even Communists don't like socialists. They're like the lost stepchildren of the third world planet.

The only reason for that though is they disagree in their methods of change. Socialists, communists, anarchists, all want the same final goal, free association of producers.

Marx and Engels used the terms Communism and Socialism to mean precisely the same thing. They used “Communism” in the early years up to about 1875, and after that date mainly used the term “Socialism.” There was a reason for this. In the early days, about 1847-1850, Marx and Engels chose the name “Communism” in order to distinguish their ideas from Utopian, reactionary or disreputable movements then in existence, which called themselves “Socialist.” Later on, when these movements disappeared or went into obscurity, and when, from 1870 onwards, parties were being formed in many countries under the name Social-Democratic Party or Socialist Party, Marx and Engels reverted to the words Socialist and Socialism. Thus when Marx in 1875 (as mentioned by Lenin) wanted to make the distinction referred to by the Daily Worker, he spoke of the “first phase of Communist society” and “a higher phase of Communist society.” Engels, writing in the same year, used the term Socialism, not Communism, and habitually did so afterwards. Marx also fell, more or less closely, into line with this change of names and terms, using sometimes the one, sometimes the other, without any distinction of meaning.

The Terms “Socialism” and “Communism”

Free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, a community of freely associated individuals) is a relationship among individuals where there is no state, social class or authority and private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production enabling them to freely associate (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their individual and creative needs and desires. The term is used by anarchists and Marxists and is often one considered a defining feature of a fully developed communist society.

Free association (communism and anarchism)

"[A]ll the affairs of men should be managed by individuals or voluntary associations, and . . . the State should be abolished." — Benjamin Tucker, Anarchist socialist.

reply to post by ANOK


Socialism is not meant to work, nor has it ever worked.

It is a tool used by tyrants to gain TOTAL CONTROL.


Capitalism in America was usurped 100 years ago by progressives.
AKA
Communists.
No they didn't get their workers revolution. Not yet.
They did set the wheels in motion with their cronyism.

Have you paid your Marxist "fair share" ?

I do not intend to insult you, but you are a "usefull idiot".
You are being used.

You may think iam being used.
But I would rather have a choice as to whom I trade my labor with.
Rather than my labor belonging to the collective.

By the way, the "usefull idiot" is always first to be murdered when he figures out that what he advocated for is not what he got.

The people look to the useful idiot for inspiration, and when he speaks out against the tyranny, he must be silenced.