Connect with us

Everything

Free Speech in ‘The New Socialist Republic of North America’

Published

on

I’m not sure I could put forth a better argument for limited government than a June 12, 2017, article published on the website for the Revolutionary Communist Party has unintentionally put forth. Actually, this group’s views are literally the reason we Americans must stay true to our limited government, federalist values.

For those of you who’ve never ventured over to revcom.us, it’s a glimpse into the “cult of personality” that has characterized so many ill-fated utopian movements; its members falling over in adulation, hanging upon every word blasted from the mouth of their charismatic anti-Christ. The phrase, “They drank the Kool-Aid” comes to mind. It’s pretty creepy… but I digress.

The article is entitled, “Why We Argue For Shutting Down Fascists Like Ann Coulter – And Why We Will Protect Free Speech In Socialist Society.” The free speech hypocrisy of the radical left has always perplexed me… and irritated me, to be completely honest. One minute the members of the Stalanist mob are doing everything wildly imaginable to prevent a college speaker from exercising his/her right to speak freely; the next minute the mob members are proclaiming their Constitutional right of free speech (and due process). Needless to say I was a bit surprised at the honesty which lay in the very title of this “RevCom” article.

What struck me wasn’t so much the author’s (Bob Avakian, the cult’s mysterious and charismatic leader) forthright acknowledgement of the radical movement’s double standard when it comes to free speech. What really struck me was how greatly I misunderstood the socialist concept of free speech.

As I learned, the socialist view of free speech is power, it is who holds the power, and it is who has access to a platform to thus use that power. Therefore, free speech should be applied unequally. It is to be provided differently for everyone in the new socialist society based on certain “concrete situations.”

Thus begins the justifications for limiting speech: (Head’s up! Inventively structured and long, run-on sentences follow.)

“As a basic principle, it is ideas that are in opposition to the powers that be, and the prevailing norms, and which therefore have a hard time finding means and vehicles for expression, and are often the object of direct suppression-it is precisely those ideas whose expression needs to be protected, not those which have the force of governing powers and institutions behind them.”

It is not a level playing field!!-and there is absolutely no need to provide reactionaries, and especially outright fascists, with additional platforms to spread their poison. Indeed, providing such platforms does great harm-it legitimizes and normalizes these views.”

There is no reason to worry, we are assured… Once the United States of America ceases to exist and the socialist autocracy has taken hold, “at that point we [the Revolutionary Communist Party] would hold state power!!” That’s when everything will be okie-dokie, hunky-dory. Then, they’ll allow “even unpopular ideas.” Riiigghhhtttt………

I have to give good, ol’ Bob some credit, though. He goes farther than most of the revolutionaries of this persuasion. Rather than stopping short at hollow justifications for violating free speech rights, he provides the reader with actual excerpts from The Constitution of the New Socialist Republic of North America which specifically address the issue of free speech. Yes, there is actually a “constitution” for after America has been pummeled out of existence. (The “preamble” is quite an interesting read too.)

It is the very text of this new “constitution” for this “New Socialist Republic of North America” that so acutely illuminates and inadvertently thus proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, the absolute superiority of our current Constitution of the United States of America, which enshrines the principles of limited government and individual liberty.

Let’s compare:

America’s First Amendment Free Speech Under the Constitution of the New Socialist Republic of North America (Article 3, Section 2, point 3A)
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” “Freedom of speech, of assembly and association, and of dissent and protest shall not be restricted, except in cases of violation of the law and through die process of the law.”

NSRNA – Doesn’t exactly roll of the tongue, does it?

The United States of America was founded upon federalism, so that a free people would never again be enslaved by the despotic chains of government. For this reason, our 1st Amendment to the Constitution openly declares the limits of which our government may not cross, preventing it from limiting mankind’s right to speak freely. The 1st Amendment lists not one exception. Every time a government makes exceptions, like those found in the NSRNS excerpt above, those exceptions feed the beast within. It was our Founding Fathers’ pure genius that they actually understood this.

The “constitution” of the NSRNA is just another failure in a long line of failures which leads to despotism. There is no limiting of the beast to be found in their hollow prose. There is no absolute protection of liberty for mankind. This socialist “constitution,” even in this singular example regarding free speech, epitomizes intellectual impotence. This is no laughing matter. That same impotence of intellect and putrid moral rot has enslaved masses, including those presently enduring a semi-existence under the despotism in Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, and the like.

It would be both foolish and imprudent of us to fail to consider the creeping despotism that is very much alive and at work against our country and our liberties. What less than 30 years ago had been relegated to the bowels of society has gained enough support and has effectively intimidated enough people into fearful silence, as to effectively vault this cultish fever into a position of power among the mainstream of American society.

We must stay true to the principles of Federalism: limited government and maximum individual liberty. We must remained unchained. We have to be our own movement and hold our virtues and freedoms dear. As such, I find it most appropriate to end with a brilliant quote from John Adams: “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

What the far-Left radical socialists do not understand: They are now a small political minority

Published

on

By

What the far-Left radical socialists do not understand They are now a small political minority

Studies have shown that the far-Left radical socialists are an ever-shrinking but excessively vocal political minority.

This is one of those columns that’s been in composition for weeks, being a number of ideas that floated about in their own eco-sphere until they attained enough weight to gel together. Oddly enough, the spark was a piece on journalist Andy Ngo in Buzzfeed ‘News’. Apparently being attacked by a mob of the fascist Left that put him in hospital was the best thing for his career, never mind the neurological aftereffects.

Much like the stopped clock being right twice a day, the Far-Left media does get things correct on occasion. They have begun to label anyone not of their ilk to be on the ‘center-right’ or Conservative as in this case.

The Hidden tribes study showed this to be a stark situation for the far-Left radical socialists, with only 8% of the country self-identifying as such. These are what the study termed to be ‘Progressive’ activists [ a misnomer in itself since they want to go back to the failed ideas of socialism of the past – but we digress]. However, they do have it correct in that most who are not of their collectivist cadres are on the Pro-Liberty Right, the country’s political majority.

The political minority that is the far-Left radical socialists: The Totalitarian Ten Percent

We’ve rounded this up to 10% for generosity and alliteration to be the Totalitarian Ten Percent as an accurate and handy moniker for those who want to ‘Rule the population’. This is the ever shrinking true believers in socialism, that dismiss the stark evidence of it’s 400 years of failure as ‘not really being socialism’ or some such nonsense. Many on the Conservative-Right have eviscerated this mythology numerous times:

The study showed the rest of the population as being the opposite of the ‘Totalitarian Ten Percent’. The people in the 90% fall into the defined categories of the rational political spectrum as being on the Pro-Liberty Right moving from the political center with ‘Traditional and passive’ Liberals, those politically disengaged, moderates and Conservatives.

Studies on ‘Political correctness’ the culture and Liberty destroying scourge of our day also show a decreasing tendency for ‘concern’ on this issue. As has been the case throughout our history, we have fixed the problems that have plagued us. The issue is that while the political majority on the right has righted these wrongs. The political minority on the socialist Far-Left has taken credit for these actions and then come up with new issues no one else care about, such as the labeling of underground cable access points as ‘manholes’. The rest of us on the Pro-Liberty political majority right don’t care, we’re too busy living our lives..

The problem of the Totalitarian Ten Percent annoying everyone else.

The problem for the political majority is that Totalitarian Ten Percent holds the attention or is part of the nation’s socialist media. While their ratings and audience are shrinking at an alarming rate for them, they have an unfortunate tendency to lash out at the rest of us. Their desperation has driven them to want to burn it all down, causing havoc and chaos, so they can step in and offer their ‘solution’. These are, of course, the usual concepts of an ‘Ideal state’ born in the Socratic dialogues of Plato’s Republic from 2,400 years ago, ideas that have failed for centuries but are now supposedly ‘new’.

This is why they want the insanity of open borders, free health care for the world, gun confiscation and strict controls on the Liberty of free speech. This is their ‘Hail Mary’ play to avoid ignominious defeat of their precious cult of collectivism. Encourage as many illegal invaders from around the world, in addition to murderous criminal gang members and drugs, to stream over the border to be newly minted citizens that can vote for all kinds of goodies with other people’s money.

Their socialist national agenda is clear to all that are listening, offer free healthcare, free college, free housing, free food, free childcare, free money and anything else they can think of. To everyone and anyone willing to pay thousands to hop a flight to Brazil and cross the Southern border.

All of this ‘paid’ for by simply – and insanely – inflating the money supply.  The funds for this extreme largess eventually being other peoples’ money. Never mind that their ‘Flat Earth’ socialist ideology has never worked in 4 Centuries, or that one way or another, it will destroy the economy. That’s a feature, not a bug for them, because in their minds, when the whole thing inevitably implodes, they will run in and offer their ‘solution’. In much the same way that they are offering the same solution to Obamacare imploding.

In the case of the inspiration for writing this, the piece from Buzzfeed ‘News’ was essentially another case of the overly vocal socialist far-Left blaming the victim. The piece also expended a number of electrons describing virtually anyone not of their collectivist mindset as Conservative or on the right, hardly attributable to some media personalities who ‘rightfully’ [pardon the pun] consider themselves to be Liberal or moderate. Thus was the inspiration for this essay.

It’s time for the rational 90% to stand up for sanity.

There are obvious problems with a small political minority of ‘neo Bolsheviks’ wanting to run everyone’s life, beginning with their complete hypocrisy [what else is new] in making demands for democracy. But then again, these are people who disdain Liberty while pretending to be ‘Liberal’ or want to go back to failed ancient ideas while being ‘progressive’. Of course, Leftists have explained that apparently ‘Liberty’ and ‘freedom’ are imaginary constructs – along with the concept of money. Illustrating just how far they have gone in losing the plot.

The Authoritarian Socialist Left would like to run everyone’s life for various reasons, social justice, global cooling, or just because they somehow are more intelligent than the rest of us [Just as them]. We of the rational 90% would just like to be ‘left’ alone, we do not care about their ever changing sensibilities over language. We do not care about their repetition of the dangers of global cooling, global warming, Climate change, climate emergency, climate crisis, or whatever it is this week. We don’t care that someone else is making a dollar more than us, the economy is humming along nicely.

Were they truly interested in democracy, Liberty or Progress, the far-Left radical socialists would advocate what works in the real world: Economic freedom. The fact that they want to impose by force a system that has never worked by undemocratic means to the detriment of Liberty should tell us everything we need to know about why they should be rejected and opposed at every turn.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Justin Amash exposed as only grandstanding on Trump impeachment

Published

on

Justin Amash exposed as only grandstanding on Trump impeachment

Earlier this week, the House of Representatives voted to kill a resolution to pursue impeachment against President Trump. The vote followed a resolution to condemn Trump following his tweets that enraged the left. The House got to vote on impeachment and this time 95 members all voted against killing the resolution, all 95 members in this 322-95 vote were Democrats. Not among them was Justin Amash who actually called for impeachment back in May in a 13 tweet thread.

“In fact, there were many crimes revealed by the investigation, some of which were charged, and some of which were not but are nonetheless described in Mueller’s report.” Justin Amash May 20th

If you recall these tweet came weeks before he decided to name a single of the several instances of impeachable activity, instead reverting to vague tweets about the nature of impeachment. Yet since May 18th, it has become increasingly obvious Justin Amash has no intentions on following through on his calls to impeachment. As a Representative in the US Congress, he has the power only 435 people in the country have. If he feels that it is his duty to pursue impeachment, which is a view he pontificated on Twitter, then anything short of bringing forward impeachment on the specific charges he eventually laid out is grandstanding. With so few Congressmen having read the Mueller Report, his words, Democrats would defer to him on this issue if he would only do what he said he would do. But Justin Amash was only grandstanding on impeachment. Otherwise why would he have voted to kill a resolution on pursuing impeachment, the very thing he called for?

What has Justin Amash done since May 18th?

He voted for a resolution condemning Trump, but the real answer is, he’s taken some time to brand himself. After support in his own district plummeted, on July 4th, he declared his independence from the Republican Party in an op ed in the Washington Post. Seeing as Independence Day is about America’s history not a day for politicians to politicize for their own endgame, this is perhaps the most egotistical way do just that. Maybe doing it on 9/11 is worse. As he all but comes out of the closet on a 2020 Libertarian or Independent Presidential Run, Justin Amash looks to rebrand Libertarianism, removing the populism Rand Paul embraced. Daniel McCarthy at Spectator wrote a really good piece on Amash illustrating this point.

What Ron Paul did was to counteract neoconservatism in the Republican party with libertarianism and populism. Populism proved to be more potent, but libertarianism itself contributed important elements to populism, including an articulate anti-interventionist foreign policy and a sense of class warfare as about power, not just wealth. Amash was never comfortable with populism, but libertarianism without it has no market at all. The Washington Post and the NeverTrump neocons share Amash’s animosity toward Trump and the populist right, but they share even fewer of his professed principles than Trump does. Ron Paul won despite losing; Amash teaches libertarians simply how to lose by losing.

In not even fighting for the very thing he parted from the Republicans over, Trump, he has already lost. His district has likely turned on him and his best political prospect is being a below average 3rd party candidate. All he’s left with politically are his principles which his grandstanding calls into question.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Two weeks after Benghazi attack, Ilhan Omar Tweeted ‘Allahu Akbar’

Published

on

Two weeks after Benghazi attack Ilhan Omar Tweeted Allahu Akbar

This is old news, of course, but bears repeating at this time. Representative Ilhan Omar has been doing everything she can over the last couple of weeks to paint herself as the victim of bigotry and someone who loves our country. And while there’s definitely some substance to the notion that crowds of Republicans shouldn’t be chanting “send her back,” it’s also understandable why so many Americans are opposed to her presence on Capitol Hill.

Even if we dismiss reports that she married her brother, called for CBP to be eliminated, said this is “not going to be the country of white people,” referred to 9/11 as “some people did something,” and is regularly praised by former KKK leader David Duke, it’s difficult to dismiss her reaction to the Benghazi attacks that took the lives of four American heroes in 2012.

I’m not going to dignify her Tweet with an opinion. She’s the one who needs to explain it. But despite her celebration, life isn’t good for the four men who lost there’s in Benghazi. Remember this, folks, as Democrats embrace her wholeheartedly.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending