Libya: Soros behind "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) as a form of Global Governance, from Peter Myers

Interesting to see that Peter Myers includes articles from World Net Daily in his latest forward. This is the first I've heard of the R2P. Haven't been keeping up and things change so quickly, new terms are introduced almost every day now.

From Peter Myers' elist:

Libya: Soros behind "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) as a form of Global Governance
http://mailstar.net/Soros-Chomsky-R2P.html (full updated post here)

(1) Petras vs Chomsky on "Oil" motive in the Libya war; neither notices Soros' role
(2) Libya: Soros behind "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) as a form of Global Governance
(3) Obama says R2P (Responsibility to Protect) is basis of Libya intervention
(4) Hillary says she'll institutionalize R2P (Responsibility to Protect) in the State Dep't
(5) Soros: Sovereignty is an anachronistic concept. It stands in the way of outside intervention
(6) The Responsibility to Protect, by Gareth Evans and Mohamed Sahnoun - Foreign Affairs
(7) Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty - Evans & Sahnoun
(8) CIGI (Centre for International Governance Innovation) welcomes Ramesh Thakur
(9) Ramesh Thakur: UN was urged to allow "R2P war" on Burma to force the delivery of aid
(10) CIGI and Soros' Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) form a Partnership
(11) Soros' Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) "to Remake Entire Global Economy"
(12) Chomsky: Libya is about Oil. True, Western companies already had the Oil, but Gaddafi was unreliable
(13) Petras: Intervention not about Oil; multinationals already had Libyan oil. Goal is military, not economic
(14) Juan Cole defends bombing
(15) German Greens agitate for war
(16) Spain's "reformed Leninist" Government joins war on Rebel side
(17) Saudi King detests Gaddafi; Gaddafi tried to assassinate him
(18) Arab leaders long hated Gaddafi. Bernard-Henri Lévy met rebels & persuaded Sarkozy
(19) Western intervention into Libya not sanctioned by UN: Russian Foreign Minister
(20) Nobel Committee asked to Strip Obama of Peace Prize
(21) Libya rebels make oil deal with Qatar (home of Al Jazeera)
(22) Gaddafi says Ben-Gurion ordered the killing of Kennedy, because he insisted on monitoring Dimona
(23) Vanunu: Peres ordered my kidnapping; AND was the father of the Israeli nuke
(24) Divided Libya (oil-rich East / poor West) as the new Vietnam - Pepe Escobar

(1) Petras vs Chomsky on "Oil" motive in the Libya war; neither notices Soros' role

- Peter Myers, April 3, 2011

"Whereas the Iraq and Afghan wars were brought about through agitation by Israel and the Zionist lobby in the US, this is not the case with the Libya war. It's more similar to the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, with the US siding with Islamists (Kosovo, the Saudi monarchy, and a would-be Emirate in Benghazi) against Socialists of the neo-Stalinist camp (ie critics of Stalin who nevertheless somewhat followed his path).

"Chomsky, in his analysis of world events, emphasises the role of Empire but ridicules claims of a significant role for the Zionist lobby. Petras depicts the Empire often tweaked by the Zionist lobby, like a henpecked spouse. But on occasions like this, the spouse is quiet and the Emperor acts of his own accord. Whereas in his writings over the last decade, Petras portrayed a major role played by the Zionist lobby, this is not so in his analysis of the Libya war.

"During the Iraq and Afghan wars, Chomsky's reputation declined. The ongoing agitation of the Zionist lobby, culminating in intervention, was plain for all to see, yet Chomsky "wrote it out" of his account.

"The Left's leading expert on the US media had not noticed its Jewish ownership and management. Nor commented on Mordecai Vanunu's capture by Mossad (with the complicity of Western agencies) and incarceration for revealing Israel's nuclear program, despite its relevance for the Iran nuclear debate. Nor made any mention of Norman Finkelstein's book The Holocaust Industry, despite praising Finkelstein's earlier anti-Imperial writings.

"But now that we see the Empire acting without Zionist prompting, Chomsky's writings have regained some of their cogency (item 6 below).

"But lest a Jewish role be written out prematurely, it shoud be noted that George Soros is a major backer of "Democracy" movements, and he does this in the name of "the Open Society", recalling H. G. Wells' book The Open Conspiracy (for World Government). Karl Popper was Soros' mentor, and the Russian Jewish refusniks were aligned with Sakharov, who espoused Convergence to World Government: http://mailstar.net/convergence.html.

"This was also Gorbachev's policy; it was who who let the refusniks leave Russia. He pardoned Sakharov, yet he never pardoned Solzhenitsyn. David ben-Gurion also advocated Convergence to World Government: http://mailstar.net/bengur62.jpg

"At Gorbachev's 80th birthday party in London, he was shown posing with Simon Peres and Sharon Stone. Peres' face was beaming; he certainly was not thinking of Mordecai Vanunu. Yet Vanunu accused him or ordering his capture: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/vanunu-if-peres-got-a-nobel-i-don-t-want-one-1.266270

'The Soviet Union was created by communist Jews, but Stalin overthrew them. In response most moved, over time, to the Trotskyist camp and, via the Frankfurt School, anti-Authoritarian forms of Marxism bordering on Anarchism. Despite Trotsky's book justifying the Red Terror (when he was in power), the Trotskyist movement today has ties with the Anarchists who organize Black Blocs. Both groups oppose Stalin, but the Anarchists also blame the earlier (Jewish) phase of Communism for paving the way to his regime.

"Soros represents not Zionism but Libertarian Socialism - the same cause as Chomsky. But Soros backs intervention in Libya, whereas Chomsky opposes it. On closer inspection, however, Chomsky endorses R2P (Responsibility to Protect) IN PRINCIPLE. His objection is that it being used for ulterior motives.

"In item 12 (below), he writes, "There are two cases to consider: (1) UN intervention and (2) intervention without UN authorization. Unless we believe that states are sacrosanct in the form that has been established in the modern world (typically by extreme violence), with rights that override all other imaginable considerations, then the answer is the same in both cases: Yes, in principle at least."

'As for Soros' proclasimed loyalty to the Empire, he has in the past called for Regime Change in the United States, and item 11 (below) is about INET, his initiative for a new world economic system, forcing rich countries (and classes) to consume less so that poor ones can consume more (and to save the planet).

'Not so different from Chomsky, after all. Almost the same, in fact.

'Even where there are differences between them, both Soros and Chomsky can be seen as part of a single (but fractured) movement.

"The anti-Stalinist Left falls onto both sides of the Intervention debate.

"AGAINST Intervention are the WSWS Trots as well as the "Trotskyoid" Green Left Weekly; but FOR intervention are their Green comrades, Juan Cole, and the PSOE (Socialist Workers Party) Government of Spain."

(2) Libya: Soros behind "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) as a form of Global Governance

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=278685

Soros fingerprints on Libya bombing

Leftist mastermind puts up big bucks to erase borders

Posted: March 23, 2011

By Aaron Klein © 2011 WorldNetDaily

Philanthropist billionaire George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the global organization that promotes the military doctrine used by the Obama administration to justify the recent airstrikes targeting the regime of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya.

The activist who founded and coined the name of the doctrine, "Responsibility to Protect," sits on several key organizations alongside Soros.

Also, the Soros-funded global group that promotes Responsibility to Protect is closely tied to Samantha Power, the National Security Council special adviser to Obama on human rights.

Power has been a champion of the doctrine and is, herself, deeply tied to the doctrine's founder.

According to reports, Power, who is married to Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, was instrumental in convincing Obama to act against Libya.

The Responsibility to Protect doctrine has been described by its founders and proponents, including Soros, as promoting global governance while allowing the international community to penetrate a nation state's borders under certain conditions.

Libya regarded as test of global doctrine

The joint U.S. and international air strikes targeting Libya are widely regarded as a test of Responsibility to Protect – which is a set of principles, now backed by the United Nations, based on the idea that sovereignty is not a privilege, but a responsibility.

According to the principle, any state's sovereignty can be overrun, including with the use of military force, if the international community decides it must act to halt what it determines to be genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.

The term "war crimes" has at times been indiscriminately used by various U.N.-backed international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, or ICC, which applied it to Israeli anti-terror operations in the Gaza Strip. There has been fear the ICC could be used to prosecute U.S. troops.

An organization calling itself the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect is the world's leading champion of the doctrine.

Activist Gareth Evans, who sits on the global group's advisory board, is widely regarded as the founder of the Responsibility to Protect principle.

Soros' Open Society Institute is one of only three nongovernmental funders of the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Government sponsors include Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Rwanda and the U.K.

Board members of the group include former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, former Ireland President Mary Robinson and South African activist Desmond Tutu. Robinson and Tutu have recently made solidarity visits to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip as members of a group called The Elders, which includes former President Jimmy Carter.

Annan once famously stated, "State sovereignty, in its most basic sense, is being redefined – not least by the forces of globalization and international co-operation. States are ... instruments at the service of their peoples and not vice versa."

During his tenure as Australia's foreign minister, Evans served as co-chair of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which invented the term "responsibility to protect."

In his capacity as co-chair, Evans also played a pivotal role in initiating the fundamental shift from sovereignty as a right to "sovereignty as responsibility."

Evans presented Responsibility to Protect at the July 23, 2009, United Nations General Assembly, which was convened to consider the principle.

Soros: Right to 'penetrate nation-states' borders'

Soros himself outlined the fundamentals of Responsibility to Protect in a 2004 Foreign Policy magazine article entitled "The People's Sovereignty: How a New Twist on an Old Idea Can Protect the World's Most Vulnerable Populations."

In the article, Soros said "true sovereignty belongs to the people, who in turn delegate it to their governments."

"If governments abuse the authority entrusted to them and citizens have no opportunity to correct such abuses, outside interference is justified," Soros wrote. "By specifying that sovereignty is based on the people, the international community can penetrate nation-states' borders to protect the rights of citizens.

"In particular, the principle of the people's sovereignty can help solve two modern challenges: the obstacles to delivering aid effectively to sovereign states, and the obstacles to global collective action dealing with states experiencing internal conflict."

Evans sits on multiple boards with Soros, including the Clinton Global Initiative.

Soros is on the executive board of the International Crisis Group, a "crisis management organization" for which Evans serves as president-emeritus.

WND previously reported how the group has been petitioning for the U.S. to normalize ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, the main opposition in Egypt, where longtime U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak was recently toppled.

Aside from Evans and Soros, the group includes on its board Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, as well as other personalities who champion dialogue with Hamas, a violent offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

WND also reported the crisis group has also petitioned for the Algerian government to cease "excessive" military activities against al-Qaida-linked groups and to allow organizations seeking to create an Islamic state to participate in the Algerian government.

Soros' own Open Society Institute has funded opposition groups across the Middle East and North Africa, including organizations involved in the current chaos.

Power pushes doctrine

Doctrine founder Evans, meanwhile, is closely tied to Obama aide Samantha Power, who reportedly heavily influenced Obama in consultations leading to the U.S. president's decision to bomb Libya.

Evans and Power have been joint keynote speakers at events in which they have championed the Responsibility to Protect principle together, such as the 2008 Global Philanthropy Forum, also attended by Tutu.

In November, at the International Symposium on Preventing Genocide and Mass Atrocities, Power, attending as a representative of the White House, argued for the use of Responsibility to Protect alongside Evans.

With research by Brenda J. Elliott

(3) Obama says R2P (Responsibility to Protect) is basis of Libya intervention

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=281345

White House fellow founded Soros-funded military scheme

Doctrine cited by Obama as justification for bombing Libya

Posted: March 31, 2011

By Aaron Klein © 2011 WorldNetDaily

TEL AVIV – A White House fellow served on the advisory board to the commission that founded the military doctrine "Responsibility to Protect," used by President Obama as the main justification for U.S. and international airstrikes against Libya.

As WND was first to report, billionaire philanthropist George Soros is a primary funder and key proponent of the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect, the world's leading organization pushing the military doctrine.

Also, several of the doctrine's main founders sit on boards with Soros. ...

Annan once famously stated, "State sovereignty, in its most basic sense, is being redefined – not least by the forces of globalization and international co-operation. States are ... instruments at the service of their peoples and not vice versa."

Obama cited doctrine multiple times

In his speech Monday, aside from his direct citation of the "responsibility" doctrine, Obama alluded to the doctrine four more times.

The following are relevant excerpts from his address:

• In this effort, the United States has not acted alone. Instead, we have been joined by a strong and growing coalition. This includes our closest allies – nations like the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Italy, Spain, Greece, and Turkey – all of whom have fought by our side for decades. And it includes Arab partners like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, who have chosen to meet their responsibility to defend the Libyan people.

• Last night, NATO decided to take on the additional responsibility of protecting Libyan civilians.

• To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are.

• The task that I assigned our forces – to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger, and to establish a No Fly Zone – carries with it a UN mandate and international support. So would the costs, and our share of the responsibility for what comes next. ...

(4) Hillary says she'll institutionalize R2P (Responsibility to Protect) in the State Dep't

http://globalsolutions.org/08orbust/pcq/clinton

2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire

Response From: HILARY CLINTON

Our 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire, or PCQ as we call it in-house, is part education material and part questionnaire for the candidates. ...

16. Will you work to operationalize the "Responsibility to Protect," an emerging international norm, in response to humanitarian crises around the world? How?:

ANSWER

Yes. In adopting the principle of the responsibility to protect, the United Nations accepted the principle that mass atrocities that take place in one state are the concern of all states. It is essential that the new Secretary General of the United Nations begin to bridge the gap between these words and the institution's deeds through a series of reforms intended to operationalize this concept. I am also committed to seeing that the United States and other economic and militarily capable states and organization take steps to bolster UN action.

As President I will adopt a policy that recognizes the prevention of mass atrocities as an important national security interest of the United States, not just a humanitarian goal. I will develop a government-wide strategy to support this policy, including a strategy for working with other leading democracies, the United Nations, and regional organizations. I will authorize my Secretary of State to institutionalize atrocity prevention into the work of the State Department, and I will direct my Secretary of State to strongly support the mission and activities of the office of reconstruction and stabilization, which plays an increasingly critical role.

"A win for our country" - CNN

In an email on 2/26/10 from Organizing for America:

Niki -- President Obama gathered with congressional leaders of both parties yesterday for an open, honest, and productive discussion on health reform. It was a strong success, focused on substance -- as CNN put it, "a win for our country."While disagreements remain, the meeting uncovered considerable areas of overlap, including many Republican ideas that were already in the President's proposal. And with all the best ideas now on the table, the President made it clear that no excuses remain: Congress must put aside partisan divides and swiftly complete a final bill.This is a message the whole country needs to hear, but most people weren't able to watch all seven hours of today's summit -- and we can't let the special interest spin machine drown us out.
That's where you come in.Check out a few of the best moments from yesterday's historic event. Then, help spread the word using our brand new "On the Air" tool to speak out on talk radio.

The President was crystal clear about his commitment to pass reform that puts Americans in charge of their own health care, reduces costs, and expands coverage for tens of millions without insurance. We've come too far to scrap a year's worth of work and start over. And the millions of Americans that are suffering can't afford another year-long debate. There's simply too much at stake.Yesterday's bipartisan meeting was a huge step forward toward passing reform. And today, you can help make sure we go the rest of the way: http://my.barackobama.com/page/m/55c106ed/6c70180c/f3e5efda/11886fc0/3353284617/VEsF/ Thanks for making it possible,

Mitch Stewart

Director Organizing for America

Nothing in my inbox from the Democratic National Party on this bipartisan effort sent to Obama the day before... guess it's just not as important to Americans as national health care:

With no modification and little debate, Democrats send Patriot Act extension to Obama
http://rawstory.com/2010/02/modification-debate-democrats-send-patriot-act-extension-obama/

I think the Patriot Act is an indicator of how far gone America is, because Dennis Kuchinich, the Third Way middle of the road global communitarian is the main one who opposes it. duh. Oh I almost forgot the gothic champion of American motherhood and apple pie who's recently called for Rham Emanuel's resignation, because he said Dems opposed to National Health Care are "F**king retarded"! Knowing these are the people who speak for my views is beyond my endurance. How much longer can I claim to honor and value my US state citizenship?

Back to CNN's big "win for our country." Remember Ezekial Emanuel (versus Sarah Palin)? Obama's Health Czar... brother of Rham... fellow Israeli.. son of former Israeli terrorist? Well these powerful men owe their alliegiance to a little known thing called communitarian change, and it includes making us assume new rights AND new responsibilities. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs explains our US model for compulsory national health care:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1998/7/National%20Health%20Insurance

National Health Insurance
Israel has a well-developed infrastructure of medical and paramedical services, as well as research and bioengineering capacities. The health-care system provides extensive medical coverage through a network comprising hospitals, clinics and mother-and-child care centers. The high quality of medical care is reflected in the life expectancy of 79.1 for women and 75.3 for men, and an infant mortality rate of 7.5 per 1000 live births.

The National Health Insurance Law, in effect since January 1995, sets forth the state's responsibility to provide health services for all residents of the country (not including tourists). Until the introduction of this law, the majority of residents had been insured by one of four
comprehensive health-care organizations; the law stipulates that a standardized basket of medical services (including hospitalization), will continue to be supplied by those health-care organizations.

Provisions of the law
Every resident must register as a member with one of the health-care organizations.
Israeli citizens who have been living abroad for more than five years and have not spent more than 90 days in Israel must renew registration with a health-care organization upon their return to Israel.
New immigrants must register with a health-care organization upon arrival in the country. They will be exempt from payment during their first year in Israel.

Funding
The sources for funding include:
Health insurance premiums paid by each resident
Parallel-tax payments by employers and self-employed persons
National Insurance Institute funds
Funds from the Ministry of Health budget
Consumer participation payments

Collection
Payment of health insurance premiums is compulsory. The National Insurance Institute collects health insurance premiums in the same way it collects national insurance premiums.

Of course there are a few areas we're not supposed to discuss.. because it's anti-Semitic. And just in case we do discuss it, they have already made sure the discussion moves their primary goal forward.. which is compulsory acceptance of supreme international communitarian law.

Focus on Israel: Harvesting Haitian Organs Disdain for International Law is Breathtaking by Stephen Lendman http://baltimorechronicle.com/2010/012610Lendman.shtml
Tuesday, 26 January 2010

Israeli organ harvesting is a longstanding practice, well known by "most if not all the Israeli medical establishment...." In Haiti, publicity about their providing humanitarian aid is cover for this illicit operation, another crime against humanity.

"The Israel Defense Forces' aid mission to Haiti left Israel overnight (January 14) with equipment for setting up an emergency field hospital. Around 220 soldiers and officers (were) in the delegation, including 120 medical staff (to) operate the hospital in the Haitian capital, Port-au-Prince

"This is the reason, as President Obama claimed, most democratic societies guarantee the right to health care services. This is why for me the public option is actually a no brainer. Without it, one of the most basic human rights, as recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is denied." Health Care Lessons from Israel by Dani Filc, guest blogger at the Washington Post http://voices.washingtonpost.com/shortstack/2009/09/health_care_lessons_from_israe.html

Everything elite, enlightened America does now is leading everyone on the planet into submission to a one world government based in international communitarian law and communitarian "rights." As long as common Americans refuse to see the bottom line, they cannot see past the phony left v right debates as part of the trick. And then the fact that the bipartisan politicians (like Senator Evan Bayh, Obama, both Clintons and the Senate Third Party) are ALL 3rd Way communitarians offering purely communitarian solutions is the final trick... because partisan Americans cannot see that the communitarians are not only the ones driving every divide, they're also the final solution to all our immature conflicts.

Come on... the morality of the people pushing for national health care is evidently not what Etzioni would like us to believe. Do we really need a compulsory health care system modeled on a agressive military kibbutz system that treats everyone as expendable and harvests body parts of the unchosen and sells them? And hmm... can the Patriot Act be used to determine which Americans refuse to register for global citizenship? I wonder what country CNN is talking about.

The Quiet Revolution - New Republic

Every US communitarian law I've studied started in an administrative agency. Violations of these new community codes were "tried" in administrative courts. Seattle's Administrative Hearng and Review Boards had what's called "quasi-judicial" authority over city residents, but somehow we kept getting charged and fined under their newly expanded full judicial authority.

Our experiences with Seattle's new regulatory powers, powers the City claimed "balanced" our Fourth and Fifth Amendment Rights, were the motivator for all my early ACL research. Over the years my research naturally expanded to these progressive agency workers' belief in their being "more enlightened" than me and my podunk neighbors. It took ten years before I finally researched what they mean by enlightenment in Enlightened Rule by scientists and experts. I am completely convinced there is nothing "disinterested" about these trained individuals.

The success of the regulatory agencies, he wrote, depended upon “a sufficient popular confidence in the ability of enlightened and trained individuals … and the actual existence for their use of a body of sufficiently authentic social knowledge.” John B. Judis, Senior Editor, The New Republic

Last March I wrote an article called Join the Quiet Revolution, about the global-to-local policing revolution. I gave a summary of the history of community oriented policing and the ideology used to implement the global program. A month prior I wrote an article called How Communitarians Change the US Legal System with Federal Regulators, about the advance of Administrative Law and it's role in creating a more communitarian nation.

In both the above mentioned articles I based much of my slant on our ACL Manifesto, which includes the possibility that President William McKinley was saved from an assassination attempt and then murdered by attorneys working for Harriman Brothers (From dialectic2.html: "McKinley was moved to the home of Expo Board Director John G. Milburn, where he died a week later. Milburn was one of the attorneys for HARRIMAN v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, 211 U.S. 407 (1908). More here.")

So how interesting is this Feb 1, 2010 article in The New Republic, which tells us the "three great reform periods" began right after McKinley was killed and Harvard's own Teddy Roosevelt was crowned First King of the British American Colonies. The New Republic, like every other expert source, curiously leaves out the part about McKinley's murder as part of how all this progressive reform started. Look in most any book that claims to "tell all" about the FED, the banker's schemes to control America, and "real" American history and you'll find few (if any) references to President William McKinley. If there are references to him, they usually claim that McKinley was responsible for the expansion of the American Imperialist designs. Yet even a quick study of McKinley proves that to be blatantly false. And it should come as no suprise to learn that VP Roosevelt eventually took credit for McKinley's trustbusting efforts. That McKinley died under very mysterious circumstances in the home of one of the attorneys defending the Harriman's monopoly of the railroads doesn't seem to bother anyone besides me.

The regulatory agencies, most of which date from one of the three great reform periods (1901–1914, 1932–1938, and 1961–1972) of the last century, were intended to smooth out the rough edges (the “externalities,” in economic jargon) of modern capitalism--from dirty air to dangerous workplaces to defective merchandise to financial corruption. With wide latitude in writing and enforcing regulations, they have been described as a “fourth branch of government.”

That wide latitude could invite abuses of power, but the old-time progressives who fashioned the regulatory state rested their hopes on what could be called “scientific administration.” Louis Brandeis and Herbert Croly--to name two of the foremost turn-of-the-century progressives--believed that the agencies, staffed by experts schooled in social and natural science and employing the scientific method in their decision-making, could rise above partisanship and interest-group pressure. Brandeis’s famous concept of states as “laboratories of democracy” comes out of his defense of state regulation of industry and was meant to conjure an image of states basing their regulatory activities on the scientific method. For his part, Croly often made the progressive case for disinterested expertise. The success of the regulatory agencies, he wrote, depended upon “a sufficient popular confidence in the ability of enlightened and trained individuals … and the actual existence for their use of a body of sufficiently authentic social knowledge.” The Quiet Revolution, Obama has reinvented the state in more ways than you can imagine, by John B. Judis, Senior Editor, The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-quiet-revolution?page=0,0

Can the EPA really become the substitute for Climate Change legislation? http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-substitute

Obama establishes communitarian supremacy of law

I agree with Pete who sent this, it doesn't look good to me either.

"In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama's Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans' 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves."http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/

Communitarian policing was introduced to the world in the mid 1990s. One of the first "triggers" for me, the thing that pushed my involvement into high gear and led to Dawson v. Seattle, was when Community Policing Officer Hope Bauer told the Dawson hostages to shut up about their "rights" because, "You people have too many rights in this country as it is."

I spent years looking for the answer to why she said that. Starting with the new concept for community policing naturally led me to the new concept of international community justice. Now I finally understand WHY Americans could not be told about this new legal system, and still can't be told, even when they're being told.

It drove me bonkers when the term "communitarian law" was discounted as unverifiable. I've since posted hundreds of links to case law, universities and seminars openly teaching communitarian principles for international justice. At some point the Americans have GOT to start studying the actual LAW, don't they?

Now our fellow citizens (my son included?) can be arrested on US soil for communitarian crimes by international communitarian police and tried in an international communitarian court practicing international communitarian law. But don't worry everybody, we can rest assured they will be well defended by local communitarian lawyers.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-amending-executive-order-12425

Obama trumpets Asia trip as boost to US economy

"Repeating a theme he used abroad, Obama told the U.S. audience that the discussions directly affect U.S. national security."

Here's another one from Consuelo, and it's even more interesting now that angrycheese has identified the role Communitarian authority Henry Tam from Singapore plays in the emerging global synthesis. It's also relevant to what my sister Susan was telling me yesterday what she's observing in Boise, Idaho where she lives. She told me the layoffs keep coming and people are scared. We talked about how many have already or will resort to underhandedness on the job to keep their positions. She guesses Boise's unemployment has reached 20% because she includes all the people not officially on unemployment. She works for a major corporation that a year ago supported over 200,000 people; now that number has swiftly decreased, with something like 130,000 jobs left (I forget the exact numbers).

It was the communist leaders who lamented on the equilibrium between industry and agriculture that kept America so strong. Lenin insisted American manufacturing had to suffer severe blows before global communism could become a reality. And so it has. Modern Americans are to depend on communist China to bring back American jobs.... how's that for a communitarian synthesis between communism and capitalism?

The Chinese government is the United States' biggest foreign creditor with $800 billion of federal U.S. debt, which gives it extraordinary power in the relationship. And Beijing feels the global recession, sparked by U.S. financial industry excesses, vindicates its authoritarian leadership.

Obama told Americans that there can be no solutions to climate change or energy without the cooperation of Asian and Pacific nations. Repeating a theme he used abroad, Obama told the U.S. audience that the discussions directly affect U.S. national security.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091121/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_jobs

Obama's NOT lying when he says his trips directly affect American security. What he doesn't say is his trade plans with China, Russia, Israel, South America and the widely accepted "model" Communitarian EU will help the Communitarian globalists to eliminate our national sovereignty, which most definitely affects our national security. Obama's not saying he's going to help restore America's manufacturing and agricultural base, nor does he promise to restore small businesses to their proper place in a free society. He calls for greater cooperation with communists... says if we buy more slave made goods our economy can recover.

Years ago Nordica opined that the real NWO leaders were Chinese women playing ma jong (sp?). We both agreed that it makes perfect sense that the power behind communitarianism would be content to remain unseen. We decided anyone we could identify was not at the top, because the real top is content to let the negative attention fall on their most obvious agents (like the Rothschilds, Bilderbergs, Rockefellers etc) and all their most visable authoritarian programs.

Added a video of Henry Tam cheese sent me, can't watch it on my dialup, but it's a perfect example of the Communitarians ability to LIE. This video, titled

Innovations in Participation: Citizen Engagement in Deliberative Democracy

allows no citizen comments, no citizen ratings, and no citizen video responses. That's Deliberative Democracy in a nutshell. Community Empowerment does not actually mean empowering the indviduals who reside and do business in the community. It empowers the Community Developers, who are Harvardly endowed with great unreported powers over individuals.

AshInstitute
Democratic governance depends on citizen participation to mitigate corruption, harness public energy, and remain responsive to community needs. Citizen activism can be a productive check on the expansion of special interests as the public determines where its government's priorities should lie. Both in developing and developed countries, innovators continue to explore a range of strategies engaging communities to deliver social services, defuse conflict, improve public sector accountability, and raise public opinion about quality of governance. This panel examined several such innovations to consider new ways to engage citizens in building fair and effective government.
* Professor Archon Fung, Harvard Kennedy School
* Mr. Richard Dobson, Founder of Asiye Etafuleni, South Africa
* Mr. Robert Miller, Director of the Minneapolis Neighborhood Revitalization Program, USA
* Dr. Henry Tam, Deputy Director of Community Empowerment Delivery, UK

The common good and other mythology

Here's one response to the last article that went to my email, from Jim G. civilfeedback@gmail.com. I haven't responded yet, and probably won't besides here. It's obvious from what he writes that he's never studied any actual communitarian programs nor has he any education in EU and global communitarian law. He also stoops to assuming he knows my definition of real community, and it's pretty funny that he thinks I don't care about the homeless people in Anchorage and around the world. This is fairly representative of the best arguments communitarians can make against my thesis... they all follow the same routine. Communitarians ignore my published thesis and simply attack me for being unenlightened, wrong, and in case that doesn't convince me, some throw in a personal attack against my lifestyle, this one says I sound "egocentric."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the word "communitarian" is not anywhere in the US Constitution and the only people who EVER call the US Constitution a communitarian contract are communitarians. The exact words are "provide for the common defense and general welfare"... it says nothing about the phony communitarian phrase "the common good." US law is in direct opposition to communitarian law... so how can the US Constitution be communitarian?

If there is such a thing as the "collective unconsious" it is surely negative, since that is what's being called upon to help evil communitarians enslave the people of the world. My lifelong experience with people is they are not all basically good (and on this point I agree with the Christians that we are all born sinners). In my opinion it is always the ones who claim loudest to be good who turn out to be the most evil people.

But, really, the best part of this letter is his accusing a homeless person who's gone homeless for years in order to research and publish exposes about communitarianism of not caring about the homeless! Yeah, okay, I've never done one thing to help the homeless or anybody else, ever.

Why do you keep distorting the definition of “Communitarianism” and demonizing the term?

Communitarianism is nothing more, and very simply, a balance between individual freedom and social responsibility for the common good.

In Buddhism it would be the “Golden Mean” or comparable to the Yin Yang philosophy in China. In
Christianity, it defines a Christian community – Christian Communitarianism - as Christians who have a
brotherly commitment to one another, who share their lives, and who live interdependently as
members of a body.

Communitarianism is not communism.

You seem like an intelligent person, and I would hate to think that you are a person that takes a good word and makes it evil.

What do you mean by “real community?” Is the “real community” your home and your immediate neighbors, your town, your state, your country or just the “online” kind like My Space, Facebook or LinkedIn? Does your real community care about the homeless in Anchorage, Los Angeles, New York or Bangladesh? Or the sick in Chicago, New Orleans or Calcutta? It sounds to me that your “real community” is the egocentric “me” kind.

Maybe you should read Carl Jung. You may want to read “Carl G. Jung: Archetype of the collective unconscious” (http://www.helium.com/items/221986-carl-g-jung-archetypes-of-the-collective-unconscious) The collective unconscious according to Jung is an inborn instinct which all of humanity shares. "Personal unconscious rests upon a deeper layer, which does not derive from personal experience and is not a personal acquisition but is inborn. I call this the collective unconscious. I have chosen the term "collective" because this part of the unconscious is not individual but universal; in contrast to the personal psyche, it has contents and modes of behavior that are more or less the same everywhere and in all individuals. It is, in other words, identical in all men and thus constitutes a common psychic substrate of a suprapersonal nature which is present in every one of us." Jung.

The point is that we are all connected and related. Yes, a human family, a community as a whole.

In conclusion, your perception of “Communitarianism” is incorrect. So, please don’t demonize efforts meant for the “common good” as stated in our Constitution.

Sorry, that this was so long.

Regards,

Here's a perfect example of communitarian's working both sides for the "common good:"
World Socialist's report on AIG bonuses
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/aug2009/aig-a20.shtml

Looked up American homelessness and found this. Right on Clyde! http://www.homelessamerican.com/

City Mayor's website on homelessness and hunger in the US:
http://www.citymayors.com/features/uscity_poverty.html

Community Service to the World Masters of Deception

Thanks to Bobby Garner at congregator.net:

This is outrageous of course, but not at all surprising. Recognizing someone as a "master" of anything in this context is overtly communicating the message to all knowledgeable people that this is a "World Server" of "The Plan", and in that capacity as a "communicator", a bearer of messages from "God" as well. The story in which the message is told is only window dressing for shoppers and a distraction to mislead the consumer of such news.

So, the statement attributed to Obama, "We are God's partners in matters of life and death...", should be of special interest to everyone. The clear message is, "We have decided who lives and who dies, and this healthcare system we are proposing will implement that decision."

This man is speaking for "God", but not the one we are expected to believe. As a Master World Server, an equal to Marice Strong and other extremely powerful people, he is speaking for the hierarchy repeating the messages of Lucifer, the "bringer of light".

It's a fatal mistake to turn this into political leverage against the left. Obama is the foremost "water-carrier", "Third Way", "middle of the road", New Age Communitarian in the world today. All political persuasions are locked in a dialectical debate which will finally inflict death to all True Believer's. Politics like religion is one of the Quintessential world wide self destructive Mass Movements.

Read it in the Washington Jewish Week.

Thanks to Linda Kimball for the link.

Bobby Garner
congregator.net
use it if you can

Here's the full post:

21st August,2009
Obama, We are “‘God’s partners in matters of life and death”
FILED: Uncategorized
No Comments

by Adam Kredo
http://washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=57&SubSectionID=76&ArticleID=11291
President Barack Obama needs some outside help pushing health care reform, and he’s turning to rabbis to get it.

In a morning conference call with about 1000 rabbis from across the nation, Obama asked for aid: “I am going to need your help in accomplishing necessary reform,” the President told the group, according to Rabbi Jack Moline, who tweeted his way through the phoner.

“We are God’s partners in matters of life and death,” Obama went on to say, according to Moline’s real-time stream.

The 15-minute morning briefing was sponsored by the Religion Action Center of Reform Judaism, and included rabbis of all persuasions. Although the RAC hosts the call each year, participants had never before heard from a sitting president.

What stood out about the call is that Obama “is a master communicator,” Moline, the rabbi of the Conservative Agudas Achim Congregation in Alexandria, said in an interview after the call ended.

“This was clearly a message that was tailored to us,” and not merely a generic stump speech, he added.

Moline noted that in the lead up to the president’s address, as the rabbis waited on hold, “there was a lot of chatter” among some participants who felt that the call should be seen as an opportunity “to instruct the President about [Presidential Medal of Freedom selection] Mary Robinson” and about the peace process in the Middle East.

“It was the subject of a good deal of conversation whether anyone was going to challenge him on that,” in particular Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the president of the Union of Reform Judaism, whose has publicly chided Obama for his administration’s stance on settlements.

When the issues failed to come up during the health care call, Moline pithily tweeted: “Yoffie praises President and does not raise any other issue. Good for him.”

“Rabbi Yoffie stuck to the subject” of health care reform, Moline said in the interview, “I think it was a good thing.”

Eyebrows were also raised by the choice of hold music that played to rabbis before the call began.

“First mistake,” Moline tweeted, as he waited for the call to begin. “Music on hold is ‘Deutschland uber Alles,’ ” a classical German anthem, the lyrics to which in part say, “Preserve and protect our Kaiser, our land.”

(The music was chosen by the company carrying the conference call, not the White House or the RAC.)

A questioned submitted by Moline also was asked to the President, the rabbi proudly noted on Twitter, writing, “WOW! My question was asked of the President!!!!!”

The question, he later explained, was about how rabbis can address issue of health care reform “in a non partisan” way when they’re behind the pulpit.

Obama responded by noting that the massive “human toll” of a broken health care system is a non partisan issue, and simply is unacceptable, Moline recalled.

The call, which was closed to the media, precedes another Obama phoner that is to take place at 5 p.m. this evening (Wednesday).
This entry was posted on Friday, August 21st, 2009 at 8:09 am. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Palin Sidetracks Scrutiny of Obama's Communitarian Plan

Palin Sidetracks Scrutiny of Obama's Communitarian Plan
by Niki Raapana
Anti Communitarian League
August 17, 2009

Yes, President Obama is a socialist. He's a free trade communist. He's a free trade capitalist, too. He's Christian, he's Muslim, he cares about people and he has lots of hope. Obama is all of this, and much, much more. Obama knows that all opposing economic, religious and social theories were finally resolved in one perfect solution, called communitarianism.

"Fortunately, many, including many liberals, have come to view as mistaken a liberalism with such a strong principle of neutrality and avoidance of public discussion of the good. Some think the change a result of the critique provided by communitarianism; others see it as a clarification of basic liberal philosophy. Regardless, a refined view has emerged that begins to create an overlap between liberalism and communitarianism." http://defsi.typepad.com/deafening_silence/2009/08/under-the-skin-of-health-care-reform-dr-ezekiel-emanuel-in-his-own-words-pt-2.html

The communitarian theory of Community Rights is shared by every appointee in Obama's administration. From his Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske (who created the COMPASS database when he was a Grants Director at COPS) to his new Health care advisor (Zeke Emanuel, who advises we withhold medical care from citizens unable to "participate"), the Obama administration follows the Clinton and Bush leadership into merging the former United States under a global justice system rejecting US constitutional supremacy in favor of the supremacy of Communitarian Law.

"Emanuel's thesis adviser at Harvard was Prof. Michael Sandel, a noted communitarian who has argued that our political debates bracket gut-level values to our detriment. Emanuel writes in the tradition of a communaritan who believes that procedural liberalism -- the reigning philosophy of government today -- does not allow for priorities among health care services because it "cannot appeal to a conception of the good." Emanuel writes: "But without appealing to a conception of the good, it is argued, we can never establish priorities among health care services and define basic medical services." Emanuel sketches out a "civic Republicanism" telos -- that is -- our health care decisions as a society should be yoked to a system that "promote[s] the continuation of the polity-those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations-are to be socially guaranteed as basic." He notes that such a system would deny "services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens." " http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/08/the_death_panel.php

The "change" Obama promised to bring to America is entirely based in his expert, high level training in communitarian thinking. Communitarianism, like communism, socialism and capitalism, has a history and a philosophy that can be verified by a second grader. A simple google search for the word "communitarian" produces millions of returns. With more mainstream and credible sources describing the Obama administration as communitarian every day now, you'd think the Americans would be all over it and wanting to know more. Every day I do see a few more who are interested and studying it, but, (and especially since Palin jumped in) for the most part, Americans are not even considering it. They ignore it at their national peril.

This isn't the International Jewish Banker's theory or the Illuminatti and Alien agendas, although many would hope that you think it is, just so that they can easily discount you and laugh at your racism, ignorance and gullibility. The Communitarian Philosophy is well documented in upper academia and insider news reports since 1990, it's the topic of numerous grad school programs and international legal seminars; it's just not often discussed in view of the "unwashed masses." They have a Communitarian Network at George Washington University in D.C. They have extremely well connected leaders and mentors, like Dr. Amitai Etzioni, MaryAnn Glendon and Dr. John McNight, as well as an entire active network of Community activists (including Michelle and Barack Obama). The Communitarian Network published a Platform, it's signed by real people (some of the names you may even recognize) and they've published thousands of documents about their agenda. Dr. Etzioni isn't called a "guru" and the "everything expert" because he wrote one or two unread, obscure books. His latest book, "Security First" is quoted as an expert source in daily Pentagon briefings (and I still think I should get daily Pentagon briefings too, since I am the one who alerted a Pentagon intelligence analyst to Etzioni's Palmach terrorist ties to the Israeli Defense Force. As of June 2008, Etzioni was not even in the US Army's database of known international terrorists operating inside the USA!).

It should come as no surprise that the Communitarian Update #36 begins thus:

"The first ever workshop on bioethics from a communitarian perspective will take place at George Washington University on 6/5/2001. Papers by Ezekiel Emmanuel (A Communitarian Perspective on Research), Mark Kuczewski (Organ Donation and the Common Good), Leonard Fleck (A Communitarian Perspective on Health Resource Allocation), and Eric Meslin (Human Cloning). Participation is by invitation only. Send nominations to Joanna Cohn at comnet@gwu.edu with "bioethics" in the subject line." http://www.gwu.edu/~ccps/communitarian_update_n36.html

In Europe, the terms for communitarian legal supremacy over national courts and political systems exists in thousands of EU documents, national integration departmental procedures and established free trade (WTO) case law. To say there is no evidence for communitarianism or that the theory is benign or ineffective is a lie of epic proportions. The reason the Anti Communitarian League website grew to become such a huge research site is because there's more evidence for communitarianism than one person has time to gather in one lifetime. How much longer can it remain so neglected and unimportant? How many communitarian accompanying laws must be passed before the American people are allowed to examine the principles it upholds?

Obama's communitarian mentors came to the USA from the 1850s to the 1990s to "shore up the moral, social and political environment." They continue to come here from the UK, Europe, Israel, the Soviet Union, the Vatican, the City of London, Brussels, the Hague and Communist China, advising US officials to make significant illegal changes to our political system. Communitarians open doors formerly locked and guarded by We the People under state and federal constitutional law. They help formerly free state citizens to advance harmoniously into a new specific idea of responsible global citizenship (aka slavery). They guide our leaders to foster interdepartmentalized privacy and property invasions. They advise our elected officials which people should be allowed to live, and ominously predict which people need to die for the "good of the community."

"Emanuel, however, believes that "communitarianism" should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia" (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. '96). " (Betsy McCaughey, founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former New York lieutenant governor writing in "Deadly Doctors" about Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama's health policy advisor and brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel)

An ever changing target is difficult to identify or to launch an counter-attack against. That's why adept communitarians continuously shift their focus and hide their true ideology behind whatever ideology upsets you the most. When the American "right" accuses Obama of being a socialist or a communist, they play directly into the "capitalist-libertarian versus socialist" debate. The final outcome of the debate is not allowed into the debate itself. The left owns an ample arsenal of dis missives (red-baiting, McCarthyist, etc.) that keeps the controlled "right" exactly where the communitarians need them -- stuck in the outdated (and over) capitalist v communist divide. For example, Sarah Palin's right wing introduction of leftist communitarian policing to her hometown of Wassilla was never an issue in the last presidential campaign. Palin's recent facebook attack on Emanuel may be designed to take the focus OFF communitarianism (http://neveryetmelted.com/2009/08/16/dowd-palin-strafing-ezekiel-emanuel/). Here's a place where the 103 comments show where the attention's been diverted to: http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/08/dr-death-panel-ezekial-emanuel-lashes.html.

The true nature of the current debate cannot be exposed to the average American, as it appears close to 91% will be most likely to object to eliminating the US Constitution in favor of Communitarian Values (see ACL homepage poll: http://nord.twu.net/acl).

As for Obama's new advisor on health care,

"His views aren’t limited to this one [the Lancet ] article. In 1996, he wrote a short article for the Hastings Center, in which he expounded upon the role that communitarianism might play in healthcare. Dr Emanuel’s bio-ethical views are heavily fueled by adherence to this philosophy of communitarianism. Briefly put, communitarianism is a fairly new political philosophy that emphasizes the role of the community in defining and shaping individuals. Communitarianism focuses on the need to balance individual rights and interests with that of the community as a whole, and that individual people (or citizens) are shaped by the cultures and values of their communities." http://www.politicalevidence.com/2009/08/obamas-ration-man-ezekiel-emanuel.html

What happens when Americans are actually introduced to the term communitarianism, and why is is always placed inside special quotes?

"Finally (really), because this is a blog about discrimination, I need to relate Dr.Emanuel’s health care “communitarianism,” i.e., his subordination of individual rights to the needs of the community, to the “communitarianism” that is at the root of much racial preference theory. Mickey Kaus noted, in the first of his posts linked above, that civic republican communitarianism is a version of modern liberalism popularized (to a degree) by the Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel. As some of you with long memories may recall, we have encountered Sandel and his theory here a couple of times, way back in 2003, in discussing how preferentialists have abandoned individual rights in favor of group rights (discriminating against individual whites and Asians isn’t discrimination because whites and Asians as a group suffer no undue hardship)" http://www.aarp.org/community/groups/displayTopic.bt?pageNum=1&groupId=1162&topicId=3474092

There's no doubt what-so-ever that Obama's (and Hillary's) National Health Care program is based entirely in communitarian principles. Nobody's ever explained it better than the writers for the natural health site Mercola.com did almost five years ago:

"A communitarian ethic increasingly governs health care in the U.S. It places a greater value on the health of the community, on society as a whole, than on the health of particular individuals. Public health officials have put together a vaccination schedule designed to eliminate infectious diseases to which the population is prey.

"Officials recognize that these vaccines will harm a small percentage of (genetically susceptible) individuals, but it is for the common good. The communitarian code posits that it is morally acceptable, if necessary, to sacrifice a few for the good of the many. Or as one observer more bluntly puts it, "Individual sheep can be sheared and slaughtered if it is for the welfare of their flock." This information is provided by Mercola.com, the world's most visited and trusted natural health website.

Communitarianism, by Obama's mentor's definition, is supposed to be the final synthesis of all conflicting political, racial, and religious ideologies. It's based entirely on Georg Hegel's interpretation of "God's Idea." Hegel said men will only be free when they make themselves total slaves to the state. He also said only a very enlightened few can comprehend how this works out for mankind. Hegelians helped force the world into social evolution by promoting violent conflicts between opposites. Now they brilliantly offer us their preplanned and more "moral" solutions to their own staged conflicts. The real conflict, the one between us and them, has barely surfaced as a possibly yet. That's the one they know they'd lose.

The only thing the communitarians have not been prepared to debate is an anticommunitarian argument. Since they claim their final synthesis is so perfect it gives rise to no antithesis, they can never acknowledge the existence of any credible counter-theory, no matter how well presented it is or how well backed up it is with published documents. All American colleges teach communitarian programs and policy, but most are savy enough to disguise it with vague terms like sustainable community development and rebuilding faith-based communities. On the rare occassion that our anti thesis is introduced to a class as an assignment or under "further reading," the result is always the same -- dead silence.

When a communitarian uses the word "community" in a public program, they're quietly imposing Community Rights on unsuspecting people holding legal claim to the protection of their natural born Individual Rights. The term "community" can be used to define anything from the global merchant community to the local community's Neighborhood Watch program. The emerging global communitarian system is a data driven experiment in micro-managing all aspects of human life. It's no accident that the US Census expanded into the invasive American Community Survey, just as it's not an accident that rural college programs like the Natural Resources and Community Development Program offered by the University of Alaska, Fairbanks primarily teaches "Workshops using GPS for navigation and mapping." How can they make us all "participate" if they don't know who we are, where we live and how many guns we own?

Communitarianism is the global change ideology of the 21st century. It's the foundation for global COPS, US-UK peacekeeping invasions and UN-NATO wars of liberation. It's the purpose for intrusive international efforts to achieve sustainable community development. It's the foundation for the European Union (and CAFTA/NAU/SPP/Wildlife & Trade Corridors, et.al.) and the primary reason for the failure of the Lisbon Treaty. Considering the recent anticommunitarian developments in Germany, Ireland, Portugul and the Czech Republic, now might be a very good time for Americans to get up to speed on Obama's real agenda and join their allies in what's left of the free thinking world.

"In essence, the court has ruled that by passing the so-called "accompanying law" to the Lisbon Treaty, which determines the rights of the German parliament to participate in European legislation, Germany had relinquished significant monitoring rights to the "Brussels EU". According to the judges, this unconstitutionally subjects the German people to the whims of a bureaucracy that lacks sufficient democratic legitimacy." (www.eu-facts.org)

The EU constitution and the Lisbon Treaty are being soundly rejected by the voters and judges (?!?!?) in several European countries. Nothing bothers the communitarian promoters of global peace and democracy more than people's insistance on peaceful, fully informed democratic voting. The Responsive Communitarians feel they have zero obligation to respond to legitimate questions and requests for their insider planning documents. If the communitarians have their way, Americans in the US will never get the chance to vote on communitarian integration. Obama and the fully committed communitarian US Congress will just slip it down our throats like we're all special guests at Jim Jones' cocktail party.

Their superior community morality knows no limits and has no organized opposition in the USA. The communitarians don't even worry about public scrutiny... the left v right divide works wonders at keeping people confused and way off target. How did the American press miss the fact that Obama appointed a communitarian to the US Supreme Court (Sonia Sotomayor)?

"Anyone who, without preconception, examines the life of Norman Thomas emerges with the sense of a deeply moral and morally subtle man who called himself a Socialist - even while he was repudiated by myriad Socialists - because he believed that a communitarian philosophy is truer to democracy than the everyone-for-himself libertarianism that represents the opposite pole in American politics." ("So, Who the Hell is Norman Thomas?")

Today I think anyone who still calls communitarianism a conspiracy theory or too difficult to pronounce or understand is purposefully diverting your attention from the only thing you may need to know about Obama. If you understand communitarianism, you understand it all. If you know just a piece of it, like the communist piece or the socialist agenda, you may not be able to see how capitalism and libertarianism play a role to further the overall communitarian agenda. Each "side" had a role in the final solution, so yes, they must all be studied and understood. But why stop midway in the dialectical drama? We're already into the final act where everything balances into one perfect theory of achieving world peace and harmony.

Etzioni assumed that once Obama won the presidency, all Americans would learn the actual terms for the new American system of injustice. Apparently Americans still need be kept in the dark regarding the purpose and objectives of the Obama administration. References to communitarianism continue to be short and appear benignly insignificant. It's so not. As Marc Ambender at the Atlantic assures us,

"Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich aren't debating the moral philosophy of John Rawls, whose formulations Emanuel borrows." (Zeke Emanuel, The Death Panels, And Illogic In Politics)

There's a very short window of opportunity being presented on the global stage.. who will speak for the Americans before the final curtain falls? The Irish? One can only hope.

Stop Communitarian Laws. The country you save may be your own.

Further reading:

Volume 10, Number 4, December 2000
E-ISSN: 1086-3249 Print ISSN: 1054-6863
DOI: 10.1353/ken.2000.0025
Gauthier, Candace Cummins.
Moral Responsibility and Respect for Autonomy: Meeting the Communitarian Challenge
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal - Volume 10, Number 4, December 2000, pp. 337-352
The Johns Hopkins University Press

"The principle of respect for autonomy has come under increasing attack both within health care ethics, specifically, and as part of the more general communitarian challenge to predominantly liberal values. This paper will demonstrate the importance of respect for autonomy for the social practice of assigning moral responsibility and for the development of moral responsibility as a virtue. Guided by this virtue, the responsible exercise of autonomy may provide a much-needed connection between the individual and the community."

About -- Niki Raapana is the co-founder of the Anti Communitarian League, http://nord.twu.net/acl, a tiny, unfunded private research tentsitute that studies communitarianism from a commoner's perspective. Her blog is Living Outside the Dialectic, and with her email box so spammed by right and left wing propagandists lately, she now prefers all online comments about her articles be presented there. Niki is also the author of "2020: Our Common Destiny" (an introduction to communitarian law and the corresponding global political system) and co-author of "The Anti Communitarian Manifesto," presented in 2 parts, "Part One: What is the Hegelian Dialectic?" and "Part Two: The Historical Evolution of Communitarian Thinking."

Obama annoints another communitarian to GAG the Internet

Do a google search for Cass Sunstein Communitarianism. If there's a shread of doubt left in your mind about Obama's rise to power coming from the Communitarians, this newest appointment should eliminate that shread once and for all. As Kyle Smith writes, "Sunstein is President Obama's choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs." And in case you still think nice, bland sounding communitarian phrases and titles are non threatening to human existance, Kyle also writes, "It's the bland titles that should scare you the most."

While Obama surely had his share of dialectical Communist teachers, his career as a community activist and his Harvard Law School attendance were entirely set-up for him by members of the Communitarian Network. Why are so many writers who claim to "expose" the New World Order STILL leaving out any mention of the Communitarians? I think it's because they don't want you to look at the actual way the New World Order is coming to pass. They want you to be able to choose to believe the Pope (who's openly calling for redistribution of wealth) and Obama discussed the way Jesus lives in their hearts and how they want to help people.

To understand communitarianism is to understand the lie, and we're not supposed to understand anything. We're just supposed to allow our (cloned?) guru president and his blind followers to use their government power to "gently force" us to become "better human beings." Good thing I know exactly what my role in this government is. Do you?

Communitarianism is not just a political theory, it's most important aspect is the law which criminalizes BEHAVIORS and eliminates the very foundation of U.S. Law which is PROPERTY DAMAGES. Under real U.S. law, we the government protects us the people from the bad guys in our midst. Under Communitarian Law, the bad guys have the power to control how we behave. The ONLY reason the comms have been able to successfully change our system to a communitarian system is because most people in most nations haven't got the FIRST CLUE what it is. It's not only a Communitarian EU: http://www.rense.com/general85/global.htm

We should be bombarded with exposes of the actual system, instead we're bombarded with articles still calling (or reverting back to calling) it communism. Is there anyone left on the side of legitimate national and state LAW? Has the entire world given up their freedom for a pack of liars and thieves? How many Americans does it take to change the world into a communitarian torture chamber? Thanks to Chris Bieber for forwarding this article:

"Sunstein was appointed, no doubt, off the success of "Nudge," his previous book, which suggests that government ought to gently force people to be better human beings."GAG THE INTERNET! AN OBAMA OFFICIAL'S FRIGHTENING BOOK ABOUT CURBING FREE SPEECH ONLINE, by Kyle Smith, New York Post

Book excerpt from Macmillan Reference USA:

implicit constitutional status to a RIGHT OF PRIVACY, asthe Supreme Court did in ROE V. WADE (1973) and subsequent cases protecting a woman's right to choose ABORTION. The same purported right of privacy is at stake in cases involving state regulation of SEXUAL ORIENTATION and assisted suicide (or the RIGHT TO DIE). The problem communitarians have with the privacy cases is not necessarily with the results reached but with the legal reasoning that insists constitutional analysis must bracket or put aside any substantive moral discussion of the public good at stake when individuals make private choices. In regard to abortion in particular, communitarians thus would prefer to reframe the issue along lines suggested by Justice RUTH BADER GINSBURG, who has argued that abortion regulations should be analyzed in reference to legal principles prohibiting SEX DISCRIMINATION as a violation of democracy's commitment to equal respect for all persons.

Communitarians also distinguish between two senses of citizenship implicit in the Constitution. One is the liberal view of citizens as individuals who enjoy the protection of legal rights against the state. The other is a stronger, republican vision of citizens who enjoy the legal status of participating in democratic self-governance and the rights and responsibilities of public service. This participatory notion of citizenship stands behind the constitutional status of TRIAL BY JURY of Article III and the Sixth Amendment's stipulation that criminal juries must be chosen from the district within a state where the crime occurred. The battle to amend the Constitution to protect the so-called jury of the "vicinage" or community affected by the crime, communitarians point out, was waged along civic republican lines and shows a continuing commitment among many in the Founding era to preserve opportunities for local communities, through the jury system, to participate in shaping governing principles of law. Likewise, the SECOND AMENDMENT embodies a philosophy of localism insofar as it protects state militias and the right to bear arms in them against the dangers of a single, standing national army. Historically, communitarians have also defended the constitutionality of the military draft (as in the SELECTIVE SERVICE ACTS) by stressing the Framers' commitment to the civic duty and public service obligations of democratic citizens.

When it comes to issues involving the state and religion, communitarians more readily accept the liberal view that RELIGIOUS LIBERTY should be the same everywhere in the United States, protected by federal courts against local, majoritarian preferences. For instance, communitarians' view of open and egalitarian communities premised on participatory opportunities for all leads them to accept the leading Supreme Court cases prohibiting public SCHOOL PRAYERS, which rest on the principle that public schools best educate children to be democratic citizens when they teach children both to respect RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY and to share civic ties despite those religious divisions.

Finally, communitarians balk at the increasing judicialization of politics, a process whereby resolution of core issues about justice and liberty is removed from the power of the people and entrusted to unelected federal judges. The result is dimunition of democracy and the disempowerment of citizens and their representatives. Communitarians concede that individual rights sometimes trump majority power in our constitutional government and that courts therefore need to enforce constitutional guarantees even against the contrary will of political majorities. But communitarians believe that a better balance can be struck between the rights-based liberalism that controls constitutional interpretation currently and the older, civic republican ideals of the Framers, ideals that stressed public duty as well as private rights and that praised participation in self-governing communities, rather than the protection of individual against community, as the key to political liberty.

JEFFREY ABRAMSON
(2000)

Bibliography

ABRAMSON, JEFFREY 1994 We, the Jury: The Jury System and the Ideal of Democracy. New York: Basic Books.

ETZIONI, AMITAI, ed. 1995 New Communitarian Thinking: Persons, Virtues, Institutions, and Communities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

——, ed. 1998 The Essential Communitarian Reader. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefeld.

GLENDON, MARY ANN 1991 Rights Talk: The Impoverishment of Political Discourse. New York: Free Press.

SANDEL, MICHAEL J. 1996 Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

SMITH, ROGERS M. 1997 Civic Ideals: Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S. History. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

SUNSTEIN, CASS R. 1999 One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism and the Supreme Court. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

TAM, HENRY BENEDICT 1998 Communitarianism: A New Agenda for Politics and Citizenship. New York: New York University Press.

TUSHNET, MARK V. 1999 Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Start

prev

70 of 440

next

End

Communitarianism
Copyright © 2000 by Macmillan Reference USA

Rebuilding communities with buldozers instead of bombs

Attention all Intl Communitarian Carpetbaggers!

American cities left wide open for razing and rebuilding!
The "Broken Window Theory" goes full throttle!

"US cities may have to be bulldozed in order to survive"

"Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic "shrink to survive" proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5516536/US-cities-may-have-to-be-bulldozed-in-order-to-survive.html

Use of dialectical reasoning is absolutely essential to your success:
"The real question is not whether these cities shrink – we're all shrinking – but whether we let it happen in a destructive or sustainable way," said Mr Kildee. "Decline is a fact of life in Flint. Resisting it is like resisting gravity."

The Communitarian Theme Song
by Niki Raapana
dedicated to the memory of Michael Jackson

%.. and it's one, two, three,
what are we working for?
don't ask me I don't give a hoot,
next stop is filled with loot!
five, six, seven,
open up your city gates!
ain't no time to wonder why
cause WHOOPEE we all gonna buy!

Come on developers,
don't be slow,
let's shrink wrap America agogo.
Plenty green Ameros to be made
supplying sustainable principles
in the shade,
so put away your pride
and scrawl up your deal,
it's gonna be one heck of a steal!

Be the first one on your block
to have your home replaced by a rock!%

Thanks for sending this Bobby. Does anyone have the list of all 50 cities designated by Brookings?

Hugh Sisley-- no doubt about it, THIS is what will happen to Hugh Sisley's properties in Northeast Seattle! Of course the land is only "returned to nature" in these plans for a VERY short time. As with the little "park" they made out of Edna Stoughten's property on the corner of NE 50th and Brooklyn, within a few years her property was part of the block size building that replaced the Ford Dealership (and I do believe it was the Johnson Partnership that found Edna's demands that she had the right to keep her house for UW grad students a barrier to community development.)