Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

Communist icon lets cat out of bag on U.S. 'refugees'

davis-angela
Angela Davis
University professor and former Communist Party USA leader Angela Davis said in an interview that the refugee movement “is the movement of the 21st century” for radicals such as herself.

The 1960s’ queen of counter-culture activism was filmed walking through the streets of Berlin, Germany, during a May 14-15 visit listening to the problems encountered by African refugees living in the city. Many have been squatting in a former school since December 2012, but Davis was not allowed in, so she talked with refugee activists outside the front gate.

International Women Space, a left-of-center group, posted the video on Vimeo, showing the refugees voicing concerns about the German government with regard to their “demands for a school to be transformed into a community center for refugees,” Davis said.

The refugee activists told Davis of their demands for better health care, housing and food.

They complained of having to sleep 15 to a room in cramped quarters.

“Even German animals are living better than we refugees,” one man told Davis. “The dogs and cats that German people have, they have special food for them. They have …”

“Thank you so much, for telling us about your experiences here, and about the struggle around the school here,” Davis said.

“We know that the demands were to create a community center, a cultural center, that would be available to refugees, and of course the demands of the refugee movement are far vaster, because human beings deserve to be treated as human beings. All human beings deserve jobs, and housing and health care. So I want you to know that we are with you in your struggle,” David told the group. “And that we will take this information back to the United States and encourage people to support you as you move forward.

“As I was saying in the other meeting, the refugee movement is the movement of the 21st century. It’s the movement that is challenging the effects of global capitalism. It’s the movement that is calling for civil rights for all human beings, so thank you very much and good luck with your work.”

Watch video clip of Angela Davis speaking to African refugees in Berlin, Germany last week:

Davis, 71, headed the feminist studies program at the University of California, Santa Cruz, following her time as a leader in the Communist Party USA.

Davis, who came out as a lesbian in 1997, has also lectured as a visiting professor at Agnes Scott College in Atlanta, San Francisco State, Stanford University, Brown University and several other colleges. Earlier this year, she came to speak at Kennesaw State University in Kennesaw, a conservative suburban community just north of Atlanta. The university paid her $20,000 to speak and encountered a backlash from local Republicans.

Davis left the Communist Party in the 1990s to help found the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, which broke from the Communist Party USA because of the latter’s support of the Soviet coup attempt of 1991, according to Amy Lind’s 2008 book, “Battleground: Women, Gender and Sexuality.”

angela-davis-in-19602
Davis encouraged the refugees in Germany to cultivate “a culture of resistance” focused on community organizing.

Since the fall of dictator Moammar Gadhafi in Libya and the resulting struggle for power there, Muslim refugees have been flooding from north Africa into Europe. Recently they have been arriving in boats at a rate of several thousand per week, overwhelming Italy especially.

Italy has taken in the boat people, offering food and temporary shelter while aiming to get fellow European countries to help with placement into permanent communities. Native-born populations have been divided in how to deal with the explosion in migrants coming into Europe but, like in the United States, any movement to block the entry of the refugees is met with accusations of racism and bigotry.

The U.S. takes in more United Nations refugees than any other country at about 70,000 per year.

But refugees are increasingly becoming politically active, as evidenced by their meeting with a professional Marxist organizer like Davis.

And it’s not only happening in Germany. Similar demands have been made among Somali refugees in Minnesota, where late last year a group of Somali women demanded that the county commissioners of Hennepin County stock the local food pantry with halal meat in accordance with Islamic dietary laws. Somali refugees in Seattle demanded better access to government-subsidized housing.

Passing the torch to a new generation

“The movements get recreated every generation,” Davis told the refugees in Germany. “Those today, they are the grandchildren of the activists back then, through organization, through music, the desire to resist, to speak out against the racism. Also the organizers. The organizers like you.”

She then issued more advice: Be tolerant of differing opinions and priorities among activists and avoid in-fighting against each other.

“There are always going to be contradictions. You have to work with those contradictions. … You don’t want everyone to think the same. You figure out how to work with those contradictions and make them productive.”

Davis was arrested, charged, tried and acquitted of conspiracy in the 1970 armed take-over of a Marin County courtroom, in which four people died.

Davis was closely tied to the Black Panther Party through her involvement in the civil rights movement in the late 1960s. She visited Cuba after her release from prison in the early 1970s and declared it a racism-free society.

“Only under socialism could the fight against racism be successfully executed,” she said, according to Mark Sawyer’s 2006 book, “Racial Politics in Post-Revolutionary Cuba.”

Her interests have included prisoner rights, Palestinian rights and now refugee rights. She is a retired professor and distinguished professor emerita with the History of Consciousness Department at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She was a distinguished visiting professor at Syracuse University in spring of 1992 and again in October 2010.

‘Excited’ to be teaching Marxism to young minds

Her research interests are feminism, African-American studies, critical theory, Marxism, popular music, social consciousness and the philosophy and history of punishment and prisons. Her membership in the Communist Party led to Ronald Reagan’s request in 1969 to have her barred from teaching at any university in the state of California. She was twice a candidate for vice president on the Communist Party USA ticket during the 1980s.

In a 1989 interview recorded for Washington University Libraries, Davis talked about her early days as a community organizer with the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee in Los Angeles.

“And I was very excited about the work that we were able to do in the community,” she said. “Within a very short period of time we had hundreds of active members of the organization. I was the head of the Liberation School which I found extremely exciting, because I had always felt somewhat uncomfortable in the purely academic environment there I was able to teach Marx to community people, to young people.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/communist-icon-lets-cat-out-of-bag-on-u-s-refugees/#OET7wH3pGjCHdXyL.99

New York mayor's secret past comes to light

NY Mayor de Blasio Makes Anti-Police Judicial Appointment

bill-de-blasioThe rift between New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is bound to widen to chasm size after his latest move.

When de Blasio was running for the office of mayor, he was critical of the New York Police Department. He has never really supported them. Then after the death of Eric Garner at the hands of NYPD, de Blasio demonstrated his disdain for the police when he said that he has been training his bi-racial son to be polite and respectful to police because he does not want the cops to shoot and kill his son. He never said anything about teaching his bi-racial son to respect the law and obey the law, just to be careful not to get shot and killed by the NYPD.
Many in the NYPD took great offense to the mayor’s comments. When he showed up at the hospital after the murder of Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu, many officers turned their backs to the mayor in a public show of disdain for de Blasio.
The Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association posted a form letter for officers to sign requesting that de Blasio not attend their funeral if they are killed in the line of duty.
With relationships between de Blasio and the NYPD separated by a hurtful rift, the liberal mayor took another step towards widening that rift into a huge chasm. Last Tuesday, the mayor made a gesture to mend the rift by meeting with the leaders of five police unions. However, the very next day, he re-appointed interim Brooklyn Criminal Court Judge Laura Johnson to her position on the criminal court. The re-appointment of Johnson only added gasoline to the fires of hatred within the ranks of the NYPD.
Why did this outrage the NYPD? Two men had been arrested for making online death threats against police after the death of Eric Garner. Within a couple days of the assassination of Ramos and Liu, Johnson released the two men from jail without having them post any bail. One of the two men is a gang member who has already missed his first scheduled court appearance and now has a warrant out for his arrest.
According to the NY Post:
“After The Post exposed Coley’s no-bail release in the NYPD threat case, Johnson was informally admonished by an official with the Office of Court Administration, sources have said. The court administrator told Johnson she ‘should be setting an example to the public that threatening or assaulting police officers isn’t an acceptable thing,’ one source said.”

“But instead of following the advice, Johnson doubled down later that same day and freed a man charged with attacking a cop outside a Chinese restaurant in Brooklyn.”
Ed Mullins, Chief of the Sergeant’s Union commented about de Blasio’s re-appointment of Judge Johnson, saying:
“The mayor’s actions of reappointing this judge are completely hypocritical to his argument that he’s pro-police and counterproductive to what he claims to be an effort to open dialogue going forward.”
“He had the opportunity to demonstrate good will and support for the police, and he once again has demonstrated the opposite.”
Dennis Quirk, head of the State Court Officer’s Union, also commented on de Blasio’s actions calling it a disgrace. He went on to say:
“It sends a strong message to every police officer and everyone in the law enforcement community that it’s OK to threaten the lives of cops.”
de Blasio’s disdain for the police should not be any great surprise. He’s a liberal Democrat and a supporter of Barack Obama who also has no respect for the law. If the Democrat occupying the White House disrespects the law and law enforcement and the Democrat who served as the Attorney General of the United States also disrespected the law and law enforcement, then why shouldn’t the Democrat holding the mayor’s office in the largest city in the country? He’s only following the leadership of his political party.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/19561/ny-mayor-de-blasio-makes-anti-police-judicial-appointment/#kYyrB8zhRIyM0u0z.99

Who is Paying for the Protests? Look Close!

Take a close look at this picture:
Mail Attachment
Notice at the bottom of their signs it says revcom.us
Lets take a look at who that is:

http://www.revcom.us/

Well isn’t that interesting…
Does anyone REALLY wonder what is behind this all now??

revolution-banner-en

The Hillary Letters

Published by Washington Free Beacon

1-ae3b08d8d5

2-87913fb337

UN Declares Arms Trade Treaty to Go Into Effect Dec. 24

un-att-300x180
On its official website, the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (yes, that’s really a thing and yes, it is housed right here in the United States) announced that the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) “will enter into force on 24 December 2014.”

Merry Christmas!

It is ironical that on the day before the world’s 2.18 billion Christians commemorate the coming of Jesus Christ to the Earth, the United Nations will officially put into motion a plan to deny them of a right given to them by the very God whose birth they celebrate.

For those unfamiliar with the text of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty, here’s a brief sketch of the most noxious provisions:

• Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.

• Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.

• Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.

• Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.” This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”

• Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.

• Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.” In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens.

Arguably, the Arms Trade Treaty would become the law of the United States if the Senate were to ratify the treaty.

Read more at http://minutemennews.com/2014/11/merry-christmas-un-declares-arms-trade-treaty-go-effect-dec-24/

MEET TRAVIS MORALES, ANOTHER COMMUNIST REVOLUTIONARY AGITATING IN #FERGUSON

THE MAN WITH THE MISDIRECTED AND SUPERFLUOUS MONEY

Climate-Hero-590-AEA-2

The Trouble Isn't Liberals. It's Progressives.

Unknown

Social conservatives. Libertarians. Country-club conservatives. Tea party conservatives. Everybody in politics knows that those sets of people who usually vote Republican cannot be arrayed in a continuum from moderately conservative to extremely conservative. They are on different political planes. They usually have just enough in common to vote for the same candidate.
Why then do we still talk about the left in terms of a continuum from moderately liberal to extremely liberal? Divisions have been occurring on the left that mirror the divisions on the right. Different segments of the left are now on different planes.
A few weeks ago, I was thrown into a situation where I shared drinks and dinner with two men who have held high positions in Democratic administrations. Both men are lifelong liberals. There’s nothing “moderate” about their liberalism. But as the pleasant evening wore on (we knew that there was no point in trying to change anyone’s opinion on anything), I was struck by how little their politics have to do with other elements of the left.
Their liberalism has nothing in common with the political mind-set that wants right-of-center speakers kept off college campuses, rationalizes the forced resignation of a CEO who opposes gay marriage, or thinks George F. Will should be fired for writing a column disagreeable to that mind-set. It has nothing to do with executive orders unilaterally disregarding large chunks of legislation signed into law or with using the IRS as a political weapon. My companions are on a different political plane from those on the left with that outlook—the progressive mind-set.
Wait, doesn’t “progressive” today reflect the spirit of the Progressive Era a century ago, when the country benefited from the righteous efforts of muckrakers and others who fought big-city political bosses, attacked business monopolies and promoted Good Government The era was partly about that. But philosophically, the progressive movement at the turn of the 20th century had roots in German philosophy ( Hegel and Nietzsche were big favorites) and German public administration ( Woodrow Wilson’s open reverence for Bismarck was typical among progressives). To simplify, progressive intellectuals were passionate advocates of rule by disinterested experts led by a strong unifying leader. They were in favor of using the state to mold social institutions in the interests of the collective. They thought that individualism and the Constitution were both outmoded.
That’s not a description that Woodrow Wilson or the other leading progressive intellectuals would have argued with. They openly said it themselves.
It is that core philosophy extolling the urge to mold society that still animates progressives today—a mind-set that produces the shutdown of debate and growing intolerance that we are witnessing in today’s America. Such thinking on the left also is behind the rationales for indulging President Obama in his anti-Constitutional use of executive power. If you want substantiation for what I’m saying, read Jonah Goldberg’s 2008 book “Liberal Fascism,” an erudite and closely argued exposition of American progressivism and its subsequent effects on liberalism. The title is all too accurate.
Here, I want to make a simple point about millions of people—like my liberal-minded dinner companions—who regularly vote Democratic and who are caught between a rock and a hard place.
Along with its intellectual legacy, the Progressive Era had a political legacy that corresponds to the liberalism of these millions of Democrats. They think that an activist federal government is a force for good, approve of the growing welfare state and hate the idea of publicly agreeing with a Republican about anything. But they also don’t like the idea of shouting down anyone who disagrees with them.
They gave money to the ACLU in 1978 when the organization’s absolutism on free speech led it to defend the right of neo-Nazis to march in Skokie, Ill. They still believe that the individual should not be sacrificed to the collective and that people who achieve honest success should be celebrated for what they have built. I’m not happy that they like the idea of a “living Constitution”—one that can be subjected to interpretations according to changing times—but they still believe in the separation of powers, checks and balances, and the president’s duty to execute the laws faithfully.
These Democrats should get exclusive possession of the word “liberal.”
As a libertarian, I am reluctant to give up the word “liberal.” It used to refer to laissez-faire economics and limited government. But since libertarians aren’t ever going to be able to retrieve its original meaning, we should start using “liberal” to designate the good guys on the left, reserving “progressive” for those who are enthusiastic about an unrestrained regulatory state, who think it’s just fine to subordinate the interests of individuals to large social projects, who cheer the president’s abuse of executive power and who have no problem rationalizing the stifling of dissent.
Making a clear distinction between liberals and progressives will help break down a Manichaean view of politics that afflicts the nation. Too many of us see those on the other side as not just misguided but evil. The solution is not a generalized “Can’t we all just get along” non-judgmentalism. Some political differences are too great for that.
But liberalism as I want to use the term encompasses a set of views that can be held by people who care as much about America’s exceptional heritage as I do. Conservatives’ philosophical separation from that kind of liberalism is not much wider than the philosophical separation among the various elements of the right. If people from different political planes on the right can talk to each other, as they do all the time, so should they be able to talk to people on the liberal left, if we start making a distinction between liberalism and progressivism. To make that distinction is not semantic, but a way of realistically segmenting the alterations to the political landscape that the past half-century has brought us.
Mr. Murray is the W.H. Brady BRC +2.04% Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Dinesh D’Souza & Bill Ayers Battle During Contentious Debate- AYERS- ‘I’m Not Proud to Be an American’

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
SEO Powered By SEOPressor