An open letter to all members of local Tea Parties
from the co-founder of the Anti Communitarian League
Every policy the Tea Party has protested is based entirely in communitarian ideology. From National Health Care to the Bank Bailout to the Stimulus Package to Stop the IRS and End the Fed, it's all communitarian. Yet the actual word, communitarianism, is missing from your protests and debates. Our entire country is being led down a communitarian path without any idea of how it's happening. So, I'd like to present it to you as a topic for discussion.
This is not an attempt to take-over or co-opt your party. I have zero aspirations for political or leadership positions. Simply bringing the topic of communitarian development before American voters has been the driving force behind everything I've written about it for the past ten years. My primary goal is to make the changeover to communitarian government open to public debates in every affected country.
Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable community development.
Anti communitarianism is the antithesis to communitarianism. That means we think the opposite of communitarians. We disagree with their Big Idea. We oppose forced social evolution. We disrespect their organizations. We object to communitarian programs, policies, and laws being enforced upon nations that have not legally adopted supremacy of communitarian law. We hate what they've done to America.
The Anti Communitarian League began in Seattle, Washington in the spring of 1999. We were renters who became targets in a huge land war between the community planners and our wealthy landlord. I spent three years volunteering my time to help "slumlord" Hugh Sisley resist hostile, "innovative" government land use actions against him and his tenants. (Sisely and the City won; We the Tenants lost.)
The City of Seattle and King County government had established new agencies with new agency rules. These offices were granted expanded power to write and enforce new judicial administrative regulations. Their new laws supposedly completely overruled our 4th and 5th Amendment Rights. When we complained and insisted on a Redress of Grievances, City officials told us our rights had already been balanced against the "rights of the community at large." When they could not provide evidence for this drastic change to U.S. Rule of Law, I began reading everything about it that I could find .
I learned very quickly that this wasn't just an ordinary local land dispute. It was apparent to me that we were on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom.
It took me a full year of reading before I identified the replacement system driving the new actions. American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people. By the time we found out about it, it was, according to our officials, already a "done deal."
In the beginning I was still naive enough to think lots of other Americans would join in our fight. I asked everyone I saw if they knew the Bill of Rights had been replaced with communitarian values. Most of them laughed right in my face. I wrote hundreds of snail mail letters and spent thousands of hours studying, reading, and hoping someone more qualified would take over the resistance. I was shocked to learn we were the only anti communitarians in the United States. I remain horrified by the fact that every university in the country teaches communitarianism yet our original thesis against it is the only one ever written.
A lengthy study of the recently available online documents about your party shows me that your loosely affiliated organizations have not taken an official position on the philosophy that drives the Reinvention of American Government. I've found a few local groups that have posted information about UN Local Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. I haven't found any local Tea Party groups (besides affiliates of Gigi Bowman in NY) who are being asked to discuss or vote on communitarian changes to the U.S. system.
Since my above definition of anti communitarian thinking is based entirely in my own personal research, experience and understanding, it's only fair to provide you with a short synopsis of who I am and how I came to be an anti communitarian thinker.
In the early 80s while I was attending college in Anchorage, Alaska (and bartending nights at Whitekey's Fly By Night Club) I became a registered Libertarian voter. My friend Kenzo and I even attended a fund raiser for Dick Randolf and won a lunch "date" with Ed Clark. Having read Atlas Shrugged in the sixth grade, I thought I knew what the Libertarians stood for.
When I transferred to UMAss, Amherst in 1984, I did deep background research on U.S. policies toward the Sandinistas and found myself opening up to socialism. After writing two extra credit documentaries on U.S. Economic Policy in Central America, I began identifying my politics as Libertarian, Socialist & Feminist, and later added Green to my list. (I never identified with either the Democrats or the Republicans.)
I think I clicked with the Libertarians because I was convinced they represented individual liberty. My freedom to move whenever I want to move on means everything to me. But I also come from German Wisconsin farm stock and have a deep respect for people who work the land. I admired the socialists because I thought they represented land starved Nicaraguans against the arable land gluttony of the ruling Somoza family. I grew up on Steinem and Bella and had always considered myself a feminist. I love camping and being in the woods, so I naturally assumed that's what being a Green was all about.
It was only after I began fighting the new community development policies in 1999 that I did a thorough vetting of all my political beliefs. What I learned was most difficult to swallow.
My first realization was that the Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians. I later realized the party's founders were internationalists promoting free market/free trade communitarianism in the United States.
My second realization was that Bella signed the Communitarian Platform. Feminism, as it turns out, is just another dialectical branch of communitarianism.
My third big realization was the role socialism plays in the phony dialectical evolution into communitarianism. Socialism, like capitalism, exists only to further the communitarian synthesis.
The Green Party ended up being number two on my enemy list, the first place reserved forever for their ideological affiliate Dr. Amitai Etzioni, founder of the Communitarian Network.
By 2002 I decided I would only vote for candidates who defend the U.S. Bill of Rights by openly attacking communitarian policies in the U.S.. Obviously I've never voted since then.
Focusing mainly on The Communitarian Reinvention of American Government under Presidents Clinton and Bush II, some of my ACL research was devoted to minor communitarian Third Way politicans like Senator Evan Bayh. I did make note of Senator Barack Obama's introduction as the Third Way Wonder Boy in 2004. All I needed to know about Obama when he ran for president was the fact that Communitarian Platform signer Professor John McNight also signed Obama's Harvard Law School application.
It was during the 2008 elections that I became acquainted with some people who supported Ron Paul. When I was unable to find Congressman Paul using the word communitarianism once in all his years of published speeches against the U.N. Agenda, and his office never responded to my inquiries, I refused to endorse him on my websites. The ACL has endorsed only a couple of candidates in our entire time online, and one's a Canadian. When the Ron Paul Revolution became the Tea Party protests, I didn't join, but I was happy to see the turnouts. I was relieved that our people were finally showing some gumption.
I am now convinced your smallest local groups are in the position of taking any political direction the members choose to take. Maybe once your members are introduced to their enemies as communitarian thinkers, you can stop everyone else and their brother from defining what it is you stand against.
1. Some people are already calling you communitarians:
3. Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics. Why would Tea Party members discount it as an issue?
Sincerely,
Niki Raapana
Anti Communitarian League
http://nord.twu.net/acl
from the co-founder of the Anti Communitarian League
Every policy the Tea Party has protested is based entirely in communitarian ideology. From National Health Care to the Bank Bailout to the Stimulus Package to Stop the IRS and End the Fed, it's all communitarian. Yet the actual word, communitarianism, is missing from your protests and debates. Our entire country is being led down a communitarian path without any idea of how it's happening. So, I'd like to present it to you as a topic for discussion.
This is not an attempt to take-over or co-opt your party. I have zero aspirations for political or leadership positions. Simply bringing the topic of communitarian development before American voters has been the driving force behind everything I've written about it for the past ten years. My primary goal is to make the changeover to communitarian government open to public debates in every affected country.
Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable community development.
Anti communitarianism is the antithesis to communitarianism. That means we think the opposite of communitarians. We disagree with their Big Idea. We oppose forced social evolution. We disrespect their organizations. We object to communitarian programs, policies, and laws being enforced upon nations that have not legally adopted supremacy of communitarian law. We hate what they've done to America.
The Anti Communitarian League began in Seattle, Washington in the spring of 1999. We were renters who became targets in a huge land war between the community planners and our wealthy landlord. I spent three years volunteering my time to help "slumlord" Hugh Sisley resist hostile, "innovative" government land use actions against him and his tenants. (Sisely and the City won; We the Tenants lost.)
The City of Seattle and King County government had established new agencies with new agency rules. These offices were granted expanded power to write and enforce new judicial administrative regulations. Their new laws supposedly completely overruled our 4th and 5th Amendment Rights. When we complained and insisted on a Redress of Grievances, City officials told us our rights had already been balanced against the "rights of the community at large." When they could not provide evidence for this drastic change to U.S. Rule of Law, I began reading everything about it that I could find .
I learned very quickly that this wasn't just an ordinary local land dispute. It was apparent to me that we were on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom.
It took me a full year of reading before I identified the replacement system driving the new actions. American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people. By the time we found out about it, it was, according to our officials, already a "done deal."
In the beginning I was still naive enough to think lots of other Americans would join in our fight. I asked everyone I saw if they knew the Bill of Rights had been replaced with communitarian values. Most of them laughed right in my face. I wrote hundreds of snail mail letters and spent thousands of hours studying, reading, and hoping someone more qualified would take over the resistance. I was shocked to learn we were the only anti communitarians in the United States. I remain horrified by the fact that every university in the country teaches communitarianism yet our original thesis against it is the only one ever written.
A lengthy study of the recently available online documents about your party shows me that your loosely affiliated organizations have not taken an official position on the philosophy that drives the Reinvention of American Government. I've found a few local groups that have posted information about UN Local Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. I haven't found any local Tea Party groups (besides affiliates of Gigi Bowman in NY) who are being asked to discuss or vote on communitarian changes to the U.S. system.
Since my above definition of anti communitarian thinking is based entirely in my own personal research, experience and understanding, it's only fair to provide you with a short synopsis of who I am and how I came to be an anti communitarian thinker.
In the early 80s while I was attending college in Anchorage, Alaska (and bartending nights at Whitekey's Fly By Night Club) I became a registered Libertarian voter. My friend Kenzo and I even attended a fund raiser for Dick Randolf and won a lunch "date" with Ed Clark. Having read Atlas Shrugged in the sixth grade, I thought I knew what the Libertarians stood for.
When I transferred to UMAss, Amherst in 1984, I did deep background research on U.S. policies toward the Sandinistas and found myself opening up to socialism. After writing two extra credit documentaries on U.S. Economic Policy in Central America, I began identifying my politics as Libertarian, Socialist & Feminist, and later added Green to my list. (I never identified with either the Democrats or the Republicans.)
I think I clicked with the Libertarians because I was convinced they represented individual liberty. My freedom to move whenever I want to move on means everything to me. But I also come from German Wisconsin farm stock and have a deep respect for people who work the land. I admired the socialists because I thought they represented land starved Nicaraguans against the arable land gluttony of the ruling Somoza family. I grew up on Steinem and Bella and had always considered myself a feminist. I love camping and being in the woods, so I naturally assumed that's what being a Green was all about.
It was only after I began fighting the new community development policies in 1999 that I did a thorough vetting of all my political beliefs. What I learned was most difficult to swallow.
My first realization was that the Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians. I later realized the party's founders were internationalists promoting free market/free trade communitarianism in the United States.
My second realization was that Bella signed the Communitarian Platform. Feminism, as it turns out, is just another dialectical branch of communitarianism.
My third big realization was the role socialism plays in the phony dialectical evolution into communitarianism. Socialism, like capitalism, exists only to further the communitarian synthesis.
The Green Party ended up being number two on my enemy list, the first place reserved forever for their ideological affiliate Dr. Amitai Etzioni, founder of the Communitarian Network.
By 2002 I decided I would only vote for candidates who defend the U.S. Bill of Rights by openly attacking communitarian policies in the U.S.. Obviously I've never voted since then.
Focusing mainly on The Communitarian Reinvention of American Government under Presidents Clinton and Bush II, some of my ACL research was devoted to minor communitarian Third Way politicans like Senator Evan Bayh. I did make note of Senator Barack Obama's introduction as the Third Way Wonder Boy in 2004. All I needed to know about Obama when he ran for president was the fact that Communitarian Platform signer Professor John McNight also signed Obama's Harvard Law School application.
It was during the 2008 elections that I became acquainted with some people who supported Ron Paul. When I was unable to find Congressman Paul using the word communitarianism once in all his years of published speeches against the U.N. Agenda, and his office never responded to my inquiries, I refused to endorse him on my websites. The ACL has endorsed only a couple of candidates in our entire time online, and one's a Canadian. When the Ron Paul Revolution became the Tea Party protests, I didn't join, but I was happy to see the turnouts. I was relieved that our people were finally showing some gumption.
I am now convinced your smallest local groups are in the position of taking any political direction the members choose to take. Maybe once your members are introduced to their enemies as communitarian thinkers, you can stop everyone else and their brother from defining what it is you stand against.
"Vast forests have already been sacrificed to the public debate about the Tea Party: what it is, what it means, where it's going. But after lengthy study of the phenomenon, I've concluded that the whole miserable narrative boils down to one stark fact: They're full of shit. All of them." http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/210904According to the Communitarians, the U.S. Constitution (and all national government) is "outdated" and poses a barrier to achieving world peace and justice. This appears to be in direct opposition to your principles:
“There already is a universally accepted national tea party statement and a national tea party platform. We've had them for a long time. The national tea party statement is called the Declaration of Independence, and the national tea party platform is the Constitution of the United States. And come to think of it, I can name six or seven national tea party leaders—revered figures who command the movement's loyalties. Their names are among those signed at the bottom of our national tea party statement and our national tea party platform. They are John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, James Madison." Tea Party Declaration of Independence from Political Party Loyalties By Paul Beaird March 23, 2010There are several indications your party is being misled and co-opted by communitarians.
1. Some people are already calling you communitarians:
"They're what I call "molecular," or communitarian, individualists -- that is, individuals cooperating with others to achieve what the politicians promise but can't deliver." http://www.thenews.com.pk/03-10-2010/opinion/7993.htm2. Branches of your movement are tricking you into supporting Right Wing Conservative Communitarians like Palin and Beck:
Sarah Palin, Tea Party darling, targets Democrats backing 'Obamacare' on website 'Take Back the 20' http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/09/24/2010-09-24_sarah_palin_tea_party_darling_targets_democrats_backing_obamacare_on_website_tak.html
3. Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics. Why would Tea Party members discount it as an issue?
"This is not a movement based on social issues," Melanie Morgan, a former talk show host who has been active in Tea Party Express, told USA TODAY earlier this year. "Many conservatives are involved only because of the fiscal aspect of smaller government, of lower taxation, of an accountability as far as the debt is concerned, the runaway spending by the liberal Congress." http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-09-20-values20_ST_N.htm4. The Left Wing Communitarian President of the United States is using Right Wing Communitarian Shills and Rolling Stone Magazine to slander you as corporate backed phonies:
RS: What do you think of the Tea Party and the people behind it?5. Obama's and the RS writer's opinion seems to be completely at odds with average people's opinion within the movement:
Obama: I think the Tea Party is an amalgam, a mixed bag of a lot of different strains in American politics that have been there for a long time. There are some strong and sincere libertarians who are in the Tea Party who generally don't believe in government intervention in the market or socially. There are some social conservatives in the Tea Party who are rejecting me the same way they rejected Bill Clinton, the same way they would reject any Democratic president as being too liberal or too progressive. There are strains in the Tea Party that are troubled by what they saw as a series of instances in which the middle-class and working-class people have been abused or hurt by special interests and Washington, but their anger is misdirected.
And then there are probably some aspects of the Tea Party that are a little darker, that have to do with anti-immigrant sentiment or are troubled by what I represent as the president. So I think it's hard to characterize the Tea Party as a whole, and I think it's still defining itself.
RS: Do you think that it's being manipulated?
Obama; There's no doubt that the infrastructure and the financing of the Tea Party come from some very traditional, very powerful, special-interest lobbies. I don't think this is a secret. Dick Armey and FreedomWorks, which was one of the first organizational mechanisms to bring Tea Party folks together, are financed by very conservative industries and forces that are opposed to enforcement of environmental laws, that are opposed to an energy policy that would be different than the fossil-fuel-based approach we've been taking, that don't believe in regulations that protect workers from safety violations in the workplace, that want to make sure that we are not regulating the financial industries in ways that we have.
There's no doubt that there is genuine anger, frustration and anxiety in the public at large about the worst financial crisis we've experienced since the Great Depression. Part of what we have to keep in mind here is this recession is worse than the Ronald Reagan recession of the Eighties, the 1990-91 recession, and the 2001 recession combined. The depths of it have been profound. This body politic took a big hit in the gut, and that always roils up our politics, and can make people angry. But because of the ability of a lot of very well-funded groups to point that anger — I think misdirect that anger — it is translating into a relevant political force in this election. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395
"Obama could not be more wrong — in fact, his thinking shows a lot more about his problems than the tea party’s. If the Tea Party is being run by special interest lobbies, then our special interest lobbies are in a lot of trouble. The convention was held at the Mill Valley community center. There were about 500 people there; it was standing room only. They spent the whole day milling about between different tables that represented various groups, ranging from the NRA to the seller of a cookbook of “conservative recipes.” I didn’t look, but I assume it was full of recipes for meatloaf and mashed potatoes with nary a sprig of endive in sight. There were funny T-shirts, cut-outs where you can get your picture taken next to Lincoln, Reagan, or Palin, and lots of sugary foods from Costco.6. Communitarian Radicals think they are the experts on what you really mean:
It was all very unprofessional, by which I mean that it did not seem the least bit stage managed or fake, in the way that the events put on by professional political operatives usually are. It was all quite spontaneous. Here’s an example. The speakers were unorganized, and had to speak in the hall in competition with all of the tables. So if people were not interested in a speaker, they would just go on buying and selling books and T-shirts or signing up for petitions, and eventually the speaker would be drowned out. If they were interested, the chatter would stop and eventually people would stop and listen. It was, in a charming way, the competition of the free market of ideas at work. http://www.libertycentral.org/president-obama-is-wrong-about-the-tea-party-2010-10
JakeSense, 19 September 2010 12:30AM said, Please stop repeating the lie that Tea Party members are "Conservatives". Numerous polls in the US consistently show that almost half of people who identify with the Tea Party -- myself included -- are Liberal Democrats. The Tea Party has one, and only one goal -- Fiscal Responsibility. Just because some fools (Sarah Palin and Glen Beck) are trying to co-opt the Tea Party does not make any the rest of us Conservative. We can disagree vehemently with Palin and Beck, yet still think the government must learn to balance it's budget, stop piling on so much debt and the Federal government spending is out of control.
http://www.alternet.org/story/148206/this_country_just_can%27t_deal_with_reality_any_more
"When tea party activists say they want to change Washington, what they mean is, they want to get rid of politics." http://perspectives.thirdway.org/?p=874I realize "forests" have already been cut down trying to explain your Tea Party. There appears to be a few solid and agreed upon principles behind it, but every description of what you represent incorporates the writer's personal views and political beliefs into their definition of you. From Obama down to each local group online, the Tea Party is whatever you want it to be. Now that I fully grasp that amazing truth, may I humbly suggest you consider adding anti communitarianism to your local group's discussion list next time you meet up?
Sincerely,
Niki Raapana
Anti Communitarian League
http://nord.twu.net/acl
Hi Niki,
ReplyDeleteI posted this to our website since we often get contacts from Tea Party groups who appreciate receiving information regarding Agenda 21 and Communitarianism. As I said to someone recently, it's hard to be self-critical when everyone else is so happy to do it for you.
With eyes open,
Rosa
www.DemocratsAgainstUNAgenda21.com
Niki! This has got to be one of the best posts I have read on the net in a long time! You have completely knocked the ball out of the ballpark. I hope you don’t mind but I copied a couple of paragraphs with links included and linked back to your blog. This subject is way too important to ignore! What an excellent piece and you have shed a perfect light on the Tea Party movement! I stand in awe of all the work you have done in the past. This post is the “Crown Jewel” to all your other posts. God Bless You Niki!
ReplyDeleteNiki, I’m not sure if you have visited Shock And Awe graphics but since 2004 I have had a dream that’s quite scary and most people are too afraid to admit that my prediction just might come true. This is a nightmare about California being nuked by our own government on 10/10/10 at 10:10am. I have written numerous articles about this nightmare and I wish to warn others to be prepared. Here is an excerpt from my recent post. What we need to watch is if the Stock Market shows any signs of massive trading and gold prices rising on the 8th. Today, gold raised $24 an ounce.
ReplyDeleteHere is an excerpt from my recent post. I pray to God that this is just a dream instead of a reality but I felt that this information needs to be passed on. It might save a few lives:
The time is approaching quickly toward 10/10/10. Since 2004, I have had repeated nightmares that a nuclear holocaust will occur in California resulting in a nationwide meltdown.
There are only five days left and I pray that my nightmarish prediction does not come true – after all, this is based on nightmares and numerous headlines that seem to give this event some credibility. Lets just hope that all this is a coincidence – but there is something happening. I can feel it - I hear Nuclear Bells ringing and the hairs on my arms are beginning to rise.
http://shockandawegraphics.blogspot.com/2010/10/101010-nuclear-bells.html
I was away from puter for a couple days and just read this. As far as I am concerned you are right up there with Paul Revere.
ReplyDeleteExcellent piece!
ReplyDeleteDr. Ron Paul makes valid arguments for the Austrian School in replacing the private central bank known as the Fed Reserve with the Gold Standard. The problem is that most of the gold in the world's reserves are owned and controlled by the same international banking families that own and control the Fed Reserve.
Paul is ignorant or dishonest. I doubt that he's dishonest. However, he is a 32nd Degree Freemason and is Junior. His wife belongs to the Eastern Star.
There is no national hierarchy with the Tea Party. It's a hodgepodge of ideas that share a basic premise on limited government, restraint on spending and taxation and return to Constitutional policies.
The Tea Party "Express" on the other hand is a derivative of the GOP. They use the name to lure unsuspecting folks into their fold yet make no mention that they're in direct tension with the aforementioned goals of the Tea Party.
Superficially, its about political deception through the mega media.
Spiritually, something else is at play and this is frequently ignored by dissenting writers. The few who do comment on this space are likely disinformation agents. I know the topic and the these people bait you with verifiable facts then take you into a different direction.
In my home state of Massachusetts, the local "leader" or face of the movement is an inarticulate, mumbling-incoherent, know-nothing who rally the herd around stock phrases like "Take our Country back!".
My comment was too big for this box so I blogged you back :)
ReplyDeletehttp://gigibowman.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/and-now-for-my-summation-of-the-tea-party-by-gigi-bowman/
-Gigi Bowman
Communitarian = Neo-liberal
ReplyDeleteGeorge Monbiot wrote:
“A cabal of intellectuals and elitists hijacked the economic debate, and now we are dealing with the catastrophic effects
When the Mont Pelerin Society first met, in 1947, its political project did not have a name. But it knew where it was going. The society's founder, Friedrich von Hayek, remarked that the battle for ideas would take at least a generation to win, but he knew that his intellectual army would attract powerful backers. Its philosophy, which later came to be known as neoliberalism, accorded with the interests of the ultra-rich, so the ultra-rich would pay for it.
Neoliberalism claims that we are best served by maximum market freedom and minimum intervention by the state. The role of government should be confined to creating and defending markets, protecting private property and defending the realm. All other functions are better discharged by private enterprise, which will be prompted by the profit motive to supply essential services. By this means, enterprise is liberated, rational decisions are made and citizens are freed from the dehumanising hand of the state.
But as David Harvey proposes in his book A Brief History of Neoliberalism, wherever the neoliberal programme has been implemented, it has caused a massive shift of wealth not just to the top 1%, but to the top tenth of the top 1%. In the US, for instance, the upper 0.1% has already regained the position it held at the beginning of the 1920s. In practice the philosophy developed at Mont Pelerin is little but an elaborate disguise for a wealth grab.
US oligarchs and their foundations - Coors, Olin, Scaife, Pew and others - have poured hundreds of millions into setting up thinktanks, founding business schools and transforming university economics departments into bastions of almost totalitarian neoliberal thinking. The Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institute, the American Enterprise Institute and many others in the US, the Institute of Economic Affairs, the Centre for Policy Studies and the Adam Smith Institute in the UK, were all established to promote this project. Their purpose was to develop the ideas and the language which would mask the real intent of the programme - the restoration of the power of the elite - and package it as a proposal for the betterment of humankind.
But the most powerful promoter of this programme was the media. Most of it is owned by multimillionaires who use it to project the ideas that support their interests. Those ideas which threaten their interests are either ignored or ridiculed. It is through the newspapers and TV channels that the socially destructive notions of a small group of extremists have come to look like common sense. Nowadays I hear even my progressive friends using terms like wealth creators, tax relief, big government, consumer democracy, red tape, compensation culture, job seekers and benefit cheats. These terms, all invented or promoted by neoliberals, have become so commonplace that they now seem almost neutral.
Neoliberalism, if unchecked, will catalyse crisis after crisis, all of which can be solved only by greater intervention on the part of the state. In confronting it, we must recognise that we will never be able to mobilise the resources its exponents have been given. But as the disasters they have caused unfold, the public will need ever less persuading that it has been misled.”
Nothing makes me feel better than having such positive feedback on this. I struggled with it for over a week and wasn't quite satisfied with the final edit (but mainly because of the word count).
ReplyDeleteBesides feeling relief that some people like it, I hope it means there will be more people willing to discuss it now.
I've learned very useful things from your comments and I think you've all added to the contents of this. Thank you!
Of course I'm still willing to print anyone's negative views and/or feedback... although I retain the right to not publish too. :)
Actually there is one thing that makes me feel better, and that's my NEW CHAINSAW from my sister Kathy! I won't be worrying about freezing and starving to death this winter. I love my sister and I know she loves me, no matter what. Going out on such a far limb has put a strain on all my family relations, but not everyone gets sucked into dialectical conflicts at every level. My sister's love, like positive feedback, gives me hope. And according to John Milton that means I'm not living in Hell.
ReplyDeleteAn excellent piece and it really solidifies with label, definition and process what many out there are already aware of.
ReplyDeleteI'm thouroughly convinced that any time an organization reaches the mainstream of societal conscience, it is already sabotaged from without and within. The level of deception all nations and governmental entities (including religions) are operating under demands that the falsehoods be universally participated in. This leaves little hope of massing a group of any size to counter the deceivers.
This means that we all have to tackle our own lives with faith in something else besides some megalithic org. My latest exhortation is that if we put middlemen between ourselves and our security, ourselves and our freedom, and ourselves and God then the middlemen will profit and we will have no security, freedom or God.
Great piece Nikki. I discovered your blog a few weeks ago and have spent time reading through your blog, links and the ACL website. It is a lot to absorb. But the reason I did it was because the extensive research you have done defined what I have seen and felt as an organized effort these past years in directing our society towards some uncomfortable endgame- communitarianism. Now that I have sufficiently educated myself via your website and blog communitarianism has emerged as a force that controls every aspect of our lives. I consider myself fairly well informed but you can imagine that I was blown away coming the the realization that this idea of communitarianism even existed. If this is the case for me, then how few citizens understand what is happening? Thank you for the work you have done. I will do my best to pass the message on. p.s. i sent you a reference to Wm Engdahl and GMO a few weeks ago. Bill Gates just gave $1.5 m to ABC to help fund a documentary on how his foundation is "assisting" 3rd world countries health issues. And the foundation is donating $60 Bil for health and education
ReplyDelete...what is amazing is people do not realize that the elites fund and control both sides of all push/pull 'media worthy' factions and issues. Funding both sides affords a fairly accurate mechanism by which to steer society in a preferred direction.
ReplyDeleteIt is equally amazing that people do not realize that during the great depression the United States was virtually bankrupted by the elites (via their 'international' privately owned Federal Reserve). The Federal Reserve bailed us out. The cost: Our monetary and economic sovereignty. Our gold backed currency, of form and substance, was replaced by a fiat (debt to the Federal Reserve) currency of form and no substance. Under the current system, we are relegated to own debt without substance, forever. The government our forefathers had intended was lost in 1933. The act(ions) of our government have been pure stagecraft ever since. Ironic that we are alarmed at how easily our rights and sovereignty have been eroded, as we move steadily to take our place in the new realm of communitarian global governance.
Since our currency is now an internationally traded Federal Reserve Product, Admiralty/commerce law can and does supersede common law when the Federal Reserve currency is involved. Since each of us was born with the potential to pay on the debt, we are all theoretically (for the time being) commercial subjects of the Federal Reserve. This reality is closely linked to the communitarian agenda.
Our current reality is one of pure illusion. Together, we have been lead far astray from our true identity of peace, compassion, love and the intelligence to discern that which is grossly misguided.
Keep a firm hand on the rail; the process is intended to be slow and chaotic, as they indoctrinate, pound and mold us into passively accepting our slave status.
All form passes..., as it should. When you need to hear the truth, listen closely to the small wren calling from the snow laden fir bough. There is no truer reality.
Namaste Nikki
Alan
I agree, Niki, brilliant piece.
ReplyDeleteGlad you got a new chainsaw.
John
Yes, we don't know how America is falling apart. There are just too many 'experts' & lawyers in the system and not enough citizens in the decision making process.
ReplyDeleteWhy call these psychopaths "communitarian"? It seems to me they're anything but, and that kind of tag is just a hold-over from the desire of reactionary libertarians to win an imaginary arm-wrestling match with "liberals" and non-objectivist death-meriting collectivist scum. The fascists you call communitarian must greatly appreciate your help in spreading misapprehension. Meanwhile, som of us are actually capable of living in communities without mysteriously becoming dystopic bolshevik robots with buttons on our eyelids.
ReplyDeleteIt is mind blowing Stanley, that's what makes it so unbelievable. It's such a massive topic, so all pervasive that it's the hardest thing to get our heads around. For 2 years I refused to look at anything beyond State legislation!
ReplyDeleteAs you've seen I get flak when I post anything about Population Reduction and all the ways the comms are killing us. But I don't care what I sound like anymore. I'm going to post more about the health/death benefits soon.
Alan, I've never studied Admiralty or maritime laws and many people think I should. I'm sure they're right, but communitarian law was so over my head it hurt. Can you recommend a good source for my readers? Ho mitakoyashin. :)
Thanks John, we're putting your pdf in the new version of 2020. I am heading home today to cut wood!
Summer, I used to believe professional politicians were somehow more qualified to lead than us common people.. now I think just the opposite is true.
Why call them communitarians? Because they call themselves and US communitarians. See the direct quotes at the ACL homepage if you think I made this term up. I didn't, it's completely and easily verifiable. Look it up yourself. Google "libertarian communitarian." Now be anonymously embarrassed.
If we are to wear their new label and follow their new regulations for our new livable communities, then should we not, at the very least, know what it is we've all so miraculously evolved into?
And Chewybees, you sure summed it all up with "label, definition and process." I like your close too.
ReplyDeleteNiki,
ReplyDeleteI’ve been reading your material for years. You opened my eyes to the real con-game in America--the communitarian dialectic. I’m still ever-amazed at what you understand. This is excellent.
Thank you very much for your insightful piece. I had no idea this was what was happening. I knew something was wrong and have joined the tea party movement in spirit if not full practice but after reading your fantastic article I have a whole new set of perameters I need to read and understand. This article felt right from the jump and by the end I felt much more enlightened to the issues and realities we are now facing as a nation. Thank you very much once again! I know this has to be very difficult, but keep up the good work! Would you mind if I reposted this to my blog and to my facebook page?
ReplyDeleteTake care and stay warm, stay full!
Christine
Clallam Bay WA
Wow, and please ignore my mispelling of parameter. Sheesh! LOL. That would be what one gets for not proof reading more than once. I May have to resort to harsh measures...like drink a cup of coffee at 7:30 pm.
ReplyDeleteI saw you have facebook links, so I will link this article there. I will also just do blogger as I see it's in there as well.
Yeah, more coffee. That is the ticket.
Thanks again, Christine
Thanks Kevin, you're one of the main reasons I'm still trying to keep 2020 on our shelf!
ReplyDeleteChristine and everyone who asked, please feel free to re post anything I've written, it's pretty much what happens with or without my permission anyway (like the full reproduction of this letter at infowars.com). It's one of those things I've allowed all along, and I hardly concern myself with plagiarism anymore either, which can only be easily corrected if the writer made a valid mistake and didn't do it on purpose. This particular blog was actually meant to be re posted and I probably should have put that right into the text.
Thank you for taking the time to respond and for sharing what you got out of it. Comments like yours are what keep me plugging away. I hear a lot of bizarre and wrong things about me after people only read one article or blog post. There are a few people making wild accusations about me and my motives based on their take on this one letter. I like it that you see that all this was meant to do was help you to see there are other aspects to the changes worthy of our consideration.
The thing about research is it's not as if you find one thing and then you're done... each new piece leads to something else and it may or may not change your initial reaction. I've changed my opinion many times during this "quest" and reserve the right to keep changing it too. It's become easier to let go of something I used to believe was true.. but that doesn't mean it's not still very, very hard.
I look forward to visiting your blog as well as all the rest of the commentors who have one.
As for misspellings, heh, if you read any of the stuff I wrote back in 2003-4-5- you'll find hundreds of typos and misspelled words.. I was racing through topics and always forgot to spell check. To this day I forget to check blogs before I post them. Plus, I must have drunk 1000 pots of coffee while building the ACL and now I just make espressos! :)
There is something very important that most folks have not considered here. The John Birch Society (which is run by Masons, Mormons, and Catholics) has been telling US for years that “Communism” is our enemy but they have NEVER explained what “Communism” IS: “To commune or become ONE as in One World Government.” And it’s no wonder, why they refuse to go back in time (The Tower of Babel) and give proper dates to the main conspiracy at hand, even when they quickly talk about the Illuminati. Well speaking of “Commune,” Niki Raapana has beautifully described the “outward” fruit of Communism and the future world to come. Its called Communitarianism and the JBS has never exposed this along with many other organizations that give credence to left wing and right – what Mason would? This is one SUBJECT that Communitarian’s would not want exposed. The JBS constantly told US that communists loved to control both sides of every issue but the reality is that Freemasonry has dumbed US down for years with the hopes that we would never figure out Communitarianism until it was an accepted way of life for the masses.
ReplyDeleteThank you Niki for all the hard years of work you have done. You have awakened many to this New World Order called “Communitarianism.” And NONE dare call it a Freemasonry conspiracy under communitarian principals. That just might disturb that Masonic cyst that rests between their shoulders.
As a newcomer here...
ReplyDeleteDo you define a difference between "communitarianism" and "communism"? If so...what differences?
I found your article interesting yet I have to disagree.You along with 99% of americans do not understand the context in which the Constitution was written. After the Revolutionary War, England bean to economically divide the states pitting one against the other for the sake of each states finacial lives. James Madison and others realized quickly without a strong centralized goverment England would split the union apart without even firing a shot, realize that trade with England and the rest of the world was the driving force in the states economic devolopment. The Bill of Rights was composed to convince the states that they would be protected from a central goverment and at that time the intent with which the bill of rights was written applies to the late 18th century not 2010.
ReplyDeleteSo anonymous, are you saying that the Bill of Rights does not apply since it is the 21st century. And if so, what are we to substitute it with? A new Communitarian bill of something "new"?
ReplyDeleteMany of the links in the article appear to be broken (result in 404 errors). Most seem to point to pages located at http://nord.twu.net/acl/
ReplyDeleteCan you fix?
Thanks!
The ACL website is under total reconstruction so none of the referenced links in the article to nord.twu.net/acl work right now. They will be the first ones we reformat and put back, but it's a very time consuming process and there are only 2 of us in the ACL... the term "league" was never a good descriptor of our private grassroots research institute. If it were up to Nordica she'd have changed the name a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteMy apologies and sincerest regrets because those links are important to understanding communitarianism. Maybe someday we'll have a staff or even just one assistant to help us with what turned out to be a massive website with over 10,000 exit links. But right now it's just us. We're in the middle of revising 2020 and TACM, and our books are the only thing that brings us any money in this huge 'volunteer" project, so, out of basic life necessity that is what we're finishing first.
suek, the difference between communism and communitarianism is communitarianism is a synthesis between communism and capitalism.
ReplyDeleteIt includes BOTH the right and left wing ideals (along with many other ideologies and religions, which makes it a very confusing study). Communitarians are the bipartisan middle, the radical centrists who easily flip-flop back and forth from one opposite side to the other. The big surprise will be when both "sides" of the dialectic realize their ideas have merged with the other, and anyone clinging to "pure" socialism or "pure" capitalism will be told they are outdated and if they refuse to adapt.. immoral.
I've written several papers that attempted to explain this merger of ideologies and I'll re post one of the better ones here since the ACL is down and I can't send you there for clarification. :(
Let me guess:
ReplyDeleteThe mix being the worst parts of communism and capitalism, with none of the traditional benefits of either.
ie: forced community without the economic safety net of communism, and forced capitalism without the nationalistic (social) benefits associated with "freedom" traditionally used to justify a capitalist economy.
So, in the end, people are socially (family, religious, and even racial values) and economically disenfranchised. Every movement (monarchy, communism, nationalist capitalism, nationalist socialism) the world has seen up until now provided some benefit to the people. This movements sounds like it removes all benefits, to the population, in the zero sum game between the have's and have nots.
You won't be allowed any type of community identity, but will be forced to live in a community (ala communism). At the same time, you won't have an economic safety net.
Am I close?
"Liberal democracy" will continue to be used to remove all social identity and keep nationalistic groups weak, while strife between newly introduced competing groups will be used to justify communist social values (for which people are being trained to not recognize as communism - social values being the primary driver of a communist society).
The stigma against communism will be used to justify not providing an economic safety net. This new hybrid of communist social values and economic capitalist values being 'globalism' or 'communitarianism'.