When discussing The General Will during the late 1700s, French political philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau said The General Will is a will of the people the people do not recognize, and is only identified by the ruling elite. Failure to abide by The General Will must result in the person being restrained by the body politic, and that "Man must be forced to be free."
Samuel Adams, an American Revolutionary that supported the principles of limited government as prescribed by the United States Constitution, recognized the dangers of collectivism. Though socialism was not technically a concept unleashed upon the world, it did exist under different names, such as "Utopianism." Schemes of Utopianism were present during the dawn of the New World, and the founding of America. The notion of the redistribution of wealth, a socialist tactic used to diminish the standing of the wealthy in a society by taking riches away from the producers by way of heavy taxation, or inflation, and distributing those funds by way of entitlement and welfare programs, or price controls, to the "less fortunate," was not a strategy unknown to the Founding Fathers. In a quote, Samuel Adams spoke of the action, calling it Schemes of Leveling. He said, "The Utopian schemes of leveling, and a community of goods (what we now call "Socialism"), are as visionary and impracticable as those which vest all property in the Crown. [These ideas] are arbitrary, despotic, and, in our government, unconstitutional."
Be it Utopianism, Collectivism, Socialism, Communism, Statism, Progressivism, or Liberalism, the idea behind the political ideology of a big government is to give more power to the government in the name of the good of the community, beginning with government obtaining all of the means of production in a system, and ultimately for government to control the populace through regulations, laws and taxes, leaving two classes: The rulers, and those that are ruled over.
A government seeking this kind of control "permits" all of the citizens to live, but that right to life is a privilege. . . a privilege granted only so long as the government feels that the life is worth all the trouble. Should the government feel that the individual's value has decreased, it is then a legitimate action for the government to terminate the individual's life in a "kindly manner" for the good of the community. The community, in these types of government schemes, is more important than the individual. It is this concept that makes health care such an important addition to governmental functions for the Socialists, for if the government is paying for your health care, for the good of the people and the taxpayers, they can micro-manage every portion of your life. And if your life becomes one that fails to lend worth to the system, or you are too expensive for the taxpayer to provide all of the medical services you require, a panel of government bureaucrats would be justified in ordering the end of your life. One term for such a group of people having this kind of power would be, "Death Panel."
In order to survive, any system requires human labor, for that labor is essential to the production of goods. In a socialist system where the government controls the means of production, those who do not produce have no right to life.
In the collective model individualism is not acceptable, and in fact is considered "selfish," or "greedy." If individualism is a negative concept, then so is freedom. The individual is not to be free. Therefore, labor is not a liberty, but an obligation. Government, in such a system, is the employer, and labor is no longer a choice. Jobs are assigned, and changing one's career under such a system would no longer be a choice. Failure to absent oneself from his job without proper excuse would then become an action punishable by imprisonment.
Such a system, on the surface, is not popular with the working class. Those who desire that government controls the means of production, then, must hide the true nature of their schemes from the working class, and in fact actually turn it around through the use of propaganda and indoctrination schemes so that the working class is taught to desire the governmental control of the production of all goods, and services. The strategy must be to deceive the worker, convincing the worker that the result of socialists coming to power is different than the reality of what the worker would experience should the Socialists come to power.
The problem for the Socialists was how to conceal the truth from the worker.
Norman Thomas, a presidential candidate for the Socialist Party before, and during, World War II, said, "The American People will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under the name of Liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened."
The true nature of Socialism has been concealed from the American People. The Americans have been lied to. The deception has been described as, "One way they look, another way they steer."
A. Ralph Epperson wrote, "The strategy is to promise the American people one thing and to deliver another. Never make it appear that you, the candidate, are supporting socialism or are a Socialist, even though the platforms you will support after your election are indeed socialist in nature. And you must never deliver so much socialism that the American people will discover the exact nature of the game and remove you from office."
Arthur Schlesinger Jr., a noted historian, outlined the program of giving the American people their socialism in gradual doses: "If socialism is to preserve democracy, it must be brought about step by step in a way which will not disrupt the fabric of custom, law and mutual confidence. . . . There seems no inherent obstacle in the gradual advance of socialism in the United States though a series of new deals."
The reason the socialists must deceive the unsuspecting citizen was made clear by the "London, England Times" which stated that Socialism was defined as: "Competition without prizes, boredom without hope, war without victory, and statistics without end."
In other words, most people don't want Socialism and they don't wish to live under the Socialist economy, so the Socialists must resort to trickery and deception, by a series of lies offered to the people by lying politicians, educators, and media.
President Lyndon Johnson, the author of "The Great Society," explained that there is no difference between Socialism and Communism (and I might add Utopianism, Collectivism, Progressivism, Statism, or Liberalism). They are all names of the same system - public control of the means of production, where the government owns, and controls, everything, including the efforts of the people.
In the eyes of President Johnson, Socialism in America will be a government that exists to divide surplus goods...to take all of the money being unnecessarily spent and taking from the 'haves' and giving it to the 'have-nots' that they believe needs it so much.
The Socialists, like Johnson, and our current President, Barack Obama, all of them have the same goal: Redistribute wealth from the wealth to the poor. Like Karl Marx, their aim is to use government to divide wealth.
The socialist machine in America has been slowly climbing the ladder to total control of the market place, and to ultimately become the final employer of all workmen. A national ID is a part of this strategy, so that in the issuance of the identification, the government can say who shall have the privilege of working. As Leon Trotsky, famed communist, once said, "Who does not obey shall not eat." This is yet another reason why the Liberal Democrats support an uninhibited flow of illegal aliens into this nation. It supports their goal of making America a Socialist country. The problem of illegal workers will encourage the passing of a national ID card, so that the privilege to work can fall under federal control. The permission to work will be granted by the National ID Card.
The Ford Foundation in 1969 published a "think piece" entitled "Planning and Participation," in which it declared, "The world is too complex for an abatement of government powers. If anything, the role of government must be strengthened."
Debt, the deflation of the currency, and the destruction of an economic system is also a part of the design to make America a Socialist country. The liberal left in America supports the Keynesian Economic Theory, an economic strategy devised by famous economist John Maynard Keynes, who wrote that the Russian Communist, Vladimir Lenin, was right. "The best way to destroy capitalism is to debauch the currency. By the continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens." If you despise capitalism, and wish to replace the system with another that you prefer, it becomes imperative to find a way to destroy it. One of the most effective methods is inflation, the "debauching of the currency." The purpose is to destroy the free enterprise system.
Each and every policy by the Obama administration is geared toward the final push to bring the United States into a system of socialism. The means of production, and the control of the people, falling under the watchful eye of government, is the aim behind each and every move the liberal left makes. They believe we have "jumped the shark," that there is no turning back, and that they are "winning." It is at this crucial time that we must not let down our guard, but instead increase our fight, and do all we can to turn the tide. We are weary of the battle, and the liberal left is expecting apathy on our part because of that weariness. Like a raft floating down the Niagra River, the river current of liberalism is leading us to their victory, destruction over the great falls. Freedom is a fragile thing that must be fought for. Preserving liberty takes great effort.
I would rather fight on my feet, than live on my knees. It is time to grab an oar and begin rowing against the strengthening current that is leading us to socialism. The question is, do we have enough people willing to row, and keep rowing. And more important, are we teaching our children the importance of that fight, as well?
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Hamilton's Curse, New York: Three Rivers Press, 2008