Tangential note: Prior to 2019, the Democratic [Socialist] Party of New York State “just” controlled one of the two chambers in the Legislature (the House), and the Governorship, and the Courts. Now, in 2019, on top of that, they also control the other chamber in the Legislature (the Senate). Now, day-by-day, in just the past few weeks, New York State has been moving even more aggressively, putting more laws in place to further implement their socialist, “Californication” utopia agenda. Go to Empire Report New York
(empirereportnewyork [dot] com) for the fast-moving, daily coverage. (See also “presscalifornia [dot] com”).
On to New York City. We have this from ZeroHedge (1/12/2019): “New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio took to the stage on Thursday to deliver his State of the City address – the sixth such one he has delivered since being in office. The theme was clear: money in the city is in the wrong hands and needs to be redistributed to others.”
On that note, let’s take a little trip down memory lane, taking a look again at De Blasio’s rhetoric and how socialism leaves the creative individual producers (the people) in the lurch…
The mayor of New York embraces Karl Marx
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”(Karl Marx, 1875)
At infowars [dot] com, Kelen McBreen has unearthed a stunning statement NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio made to New York Magazine:
De Blasio: “What’s been hardest is the way our legal system is structured to favor private property. I think people all over this city, of every background, would like to have the city government be able to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be. I think there’s a socialistic impulse, which I hear every day, in every kind of community, that they would like things to be planned in accordance to their needs. And I would, too. Unfortunately, what stands in the way of that is hundreds of years of history that have elevated property rights and wealth to the point that that’s the reality that calls the tune on a lot of development… Look, if I had my druthers, the city government would determine every single plot of land, how development would proceed. And there would be very stringent requirements around income levels and rents. That’s a world I’d love to see, and I think what we have, in this city at least, are people who would love to have the New Deal back, on one level. They’d love to have a very, very powerful government, including a federal government, involved in directly addressing their day-to-day reality.”
The elimination of private property rights is one of the primary tenets of extreme socialism/Communism.
And of course, the disposition of private property—the takeover—would be achieved by government.
So for those people who think the rising tide of socialism is just a myth, you now have the mayor of the world’s most powerful city advocating it publicly and openly.
And the response of the mainstream press? A yawn, and silence.
Or to put it another way, bland acceptance.
Private property was one of the basic issues Ayn Rand, the most reviled and adored novelist of the 20th century, explored in depth. Here are several statements she uncompromisingly offered:
“Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”
“The doctrine that ‘human rights’ are superior to ‘property rights’ simply means that some human beings have the right to make property out of others; since the competent have nothing to gain from the incompetent, it means the right of the incompetent to own their betters and to use them as productive cattle. Whoever regards this as human and right, has no right to the title of ‘human’.”
“You cannot force intelligence to work: those who’re able to think, will not work under compulsion; those who will, won’t produce much more than the price of the whip needed to keep them enslaved. You cannot obtain the products of a mind except on the owner’s terms, by trade and by volitional consent. Any other policy of men toward man’s property is the policy of criminals, no matter what their numbers.”
In a half-sane society, private property rights would be debated in depth at every college, without interference. But that is no longer possible, owing to censorship of speech.
Beyond this restriction, students aren’t equipped with tools of analysis to approach the subject. Instead, they’re indoctrinated with vapid generalities.
As I’ve detailed in several recent articles, the rank promotion of socialism has nothing to do with “power to the people.” Socialism is an elite strategy, boosted by Globalists as a way of gaining control of governments and populations.
Their pretense of “share and care” is a mask behind which they are instituting a worldwide management system. They, not the people, will own the means of production, and they will determine the distribution of goods and services.
Instead of solving the problem of predatory mega-corporations, “socialism” will elevate those corporations to even greater heights of power.
As just one example—what president of the US stood for, and promoted, the greatest degree of socialism? That would be Franklin Roosevelt, who presided over the New Deal and World War 2. How did he rein in corporations and prosecute their crimes? Are you kidding?
Consider Charles Higham’s classic, Trading with the Enemy:
“What would have happened if millions of American and British people, struggling with coupons and lines at the gas stations, had learned that in 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey [part of the Rockefeller empire] managers shipped the enemy’s [Germany’s] fuel through neutral Switzerland and that the enemy was shipping Allied fuel? Suppose the public had discovered that the Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied Paris after Pearl Harbor was doing millions of dollars’ worth of business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the head office in Manhattan [the Rockefeller family among others?] Or that Ford trucks were being built for the German occupation troops in France with authorization from Dearborn, Michigan? Or that Colonel Sosthenes Behn, the head of the international American telephone conglomerate ITT, flew from New York to Madrid to Berne during the war to help improve Hitler’s communications systems and improve the robot bombs that devastated London? Or that ITT built the FockeWulfs that dropped bombs on British and American troops? Or that crucial ball bearings were shipped to Nazi-associated customers in Latin America with the collusion of the vice-chairman of the U.S. War Production Board in partnership with Goering’s cousin in Philadelphia when American forces were desperately short of them? Or that such arrangements were known about in Washington and either sanctioned or deliberately ignored?”
If you want a modern example of “socialism” at work, consider another soft promoter of this philosophy, President Barack Obama, and his response to one of the most predatory of corporations, Monsanto, and other food giants.
From Scott Creighton, “Obama Pitches India Model of GM Genocide to Africa”:
“At the G8 Summit held two weeks ago at Camp David, President Obama met with private industry and African heads of state to launch the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a euphemism for monocultured, genetically modified crops and toxic agrochemicals aimed at making poor farmers debt slaves to corporations, while destroying the ecosphere for profit.”
“But African civil society wants no part of this latest Monsanto aligned ‘public private partnership.’ Whatever will the progressives do now that their flawless hero has teamed up with their most hated nemesis [Monsanto] to exploit an entire continent like they did to India not that long ago?…”
“With a commitment of $3 billion, Obama plans to ‘partner up’ with mega-multinationals like Monsanto, Diageo, Dupont, Cargill, Vodafone, Walmart, Pepsico, Prudential, Syngenta International, and Swiss Re because, as one USAID representative says ‘There are things that only companies can do, like building silos for storage and developing seeds and fertilizers.’
“Of course, that’s an outrageous lie. Private citizens have been building their own silos for centuries. But it’s true that only the biowreck engineers will foist patented seeds and toxic chemicals on Africa.”
Obama? A socialist warrior against corporations on behalf of the people? It’s long past the time for ripping that false mask away.
Socialism? Power to the people? Share and care? Special concern for the downtrodden?
Socialism is a means for government to gain ironclad control of the means of production by colluding with mega-corporations.
That collusion, that tight partnership has been called fascism. And that’s what socialism turns out to be.
To the degree that governments are socialist, in England, the US, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, China, Canada, Australia and other countries, that’s the pattern.
It would evolve into the same pattern in New York, where Mayor Bill De Blasio is blowing smoke up everybody’s backside, with his remarks about people-power and strong government taking over private property.
If the mayor wants to prove otherwise, let’s see him go after the most mighty anti-people corporation in his city: Goldman Sachs. Let’s see him lead a no-holds-barred prosecution of that outfit’s crimes.
Let’s see him attack the company that is running a significant chunk of Donald Trump’s presidency.