|
These are a few thoughts I have on the state of the United States and are relative similarities to the 10 points in the Communist Manifesto by Marx. It is scary where we are and even scarier where we are going. If you find yourself agreeing with the points below and thinking they are good things, you better stop watching television all day and start voting most democrats and a lot of republicans out of office, because many of them seem to have this same agenda. The points below are what Marx thought were necessary for a communist government.
Marx points are numbered; my comments follow each point.
These measures will, of course, be different in different countries.
Nevertheless, in most supposedly advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land
to public purposes.
-----What makes this true in the US is the property tax. Abolition of property can take many different forms. The most effective form would be one in which the ruling party can convince the people that they actually own their own property, while in reality they do not. This is the case with this tax. A person in this country can never actually own his or her own property. The government charges what they call a tax on property. So in turn, what we have is a system that allows us to pay huge sums of money to own a plot of land while at the same time we pay an annual "rent" to the government. If this rent is not paid, "our" property is taken away from us. In this sense, the actual true ownership of land does not ever exist individually. The key that makes this work is that the individual does not look at this tax as an infringement on property rights, but just as just another tax, that is until that "rent" cannot be paid or afforded for some reason. Of course, when the rent is not paid, the true owner takes the property back. The point here is that the true owner of all property in this country is the already the ruling class. Thus, the United States meets the first requirement of the manefesto.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
-------This idea is devoutly followed in the US. The whole idea with this is to redistribute wealth so as to force people into certain classes or into one class for the purposes of controlling them. This is very much the steal from the rich and give to the poor mentality. In the US this is taken a step further by way of convincing those who are not well off that they are owed something from those who are well off. This creates almost a class warfare and hatred scenario, which allows the government to easily step in and aggressively apply a progressive tax. One thing about this is that in a fairly free market such as ours, people that work hard and smart will still become rich even with a heavy, progressive income tax. This means that the complete redistribution never really creates a situation such as the one intended by Marx. Marx did not factor in the effects of this tax on a free market because he had no intentions of allowing a free market. Keep in mind that as the markets become more controlled by the government and less controlled by individuals, the widespread acceptance of this tax will facilitate a complete redistribution of wealth without the slightest protest from most people.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
------The abolition of inheritance rights enforces the idea that property ownership is never individual but always communal or governmental. By enacting an inheritance tax, or death tax, such as the US government has done, are rights to inheritance are aborted. If the government has any authority to impose taxes or to take part or all of an inheritance, all rights on inheritance are eliminated. If the government has the power to say that they may take 50% of any inheritance, that means that they have equal power to allow themselves to also take the remaining 50%. In this case, any inheritance realized by descendants is simply the amount the government allowed them to keep which gives the illusion that people actually own property or have control over their inheritance. In reality, the government gives some of the inheritance back to the descendants in order to create this illusion, as this is necessary to keep the peace in this stage of our societal evolution. However, as the government grows larger and more powerful, it will not be much of a transition for the people to lose all inheritance rights once it is commonly accepted progressively more restrictive levels....which has been the trend thus far.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
-----This is done in very obscure ways that the commoner would never notice in the US as far as emigrants, even where most minority groups are concerned. With any rebel factions that develop in this country, they are all crushed immediately while still in very infant stages, and in this way are never looked at as rebellious acts, but maybe as criminal acts or cult problems. The confiscation of property of emigrants is much more imaginative and actually encompasses much more than just the emigrants property for the most part. First off, with the property and death taxes already established, the minorities, like other citizens never really own the property in the first place. Secondly, most emigrants come to this country as poor, lower class people. Our government offers huge monetary and other assistance programs to these people and minorities. As these people become dependant on this assistance, they start to grow comfortable with it. As this comfort grows, these folks borrow against this money, buy houses, and get into dept. The situation that remains is an entire class of people that are completely dependant on the government to take care of them and these people will do whatever it takes, even giving up rights, to obtain the monetary support they need to survive. In essence, property alone is not given up, but the entire persons life is willingly given up to the will of the ruling class. To just take property is something, but to make the people want to give it up...that is true power.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a
national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
------The US government does not have an exclusive banking monopoly, however, the federal reserve has great power when it comes to monetary policy. In our society, I believe the federal reserve is a very necessary agency for keeping money issues from becoming major problems. As long as the federal reserve respects its position and does not start to abuse this position or attempt to create a unified bank, the 5th point of the manifesto will not entirely apply to us.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in he
hands of the state.
-----Public transportation is not to the point yet where it could be related to the manifesto in my opinion. Communication, however, is getting close. As the media becomes more and more powerful and technology improves, I believe this will become the biggest factor in creating a controlled populace. Propaganda communicates all too effectively via the television and newspapers. The great majority of people in the US today form their ideals, opinions, and political allegiances based on the information received over the airwaves. The television form of media especially, has trained our children not to think, but to be told what to think, and this of course plays right into the hand of a controlling government. Complete government control of the media is the key to controlling the people, and steps are already being taken to eliminate free speech and regulate certain political ideas on the television. For example, a bill that is being passed in congress even now will greatly limit free speech television speech during months prior to elections. (since writing this article, this bill has passed in the form of the "Shayes/Meehan Campain Finance Reform Bill) The government is trying to make it illegal for any citizen, accept for those that work in the television media, to present any view or opinion about a candidate in the months before an election. This is the first major and blatant abridgement of one of our most sacred amendments to the constitution (1st amendment, free speech clause). The great fear of course is that this will set a precedent for limiting speech. Of course, that is exactly what Marx wanted.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the
state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the
improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
-------As our government grows and becomes more intrusive into the lives of individuals, this point from Marx becomes more and more realistic. In a way, all factories and farming in this country are owned by the state via strict and endless regulation. The intrusiveness of government into these areas effectively makes all production something owned by the government. My reason for this is that if any company breaks the regulations or ignores demands from the government, they will be forced out of business. This reality actually makes all companies servants to the state and at the mercy of the state. If what the company does does not fit into the plans, guidlines, or the will of the government, the government can quite easily destroy it.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial
armies, especially for agriculture.
------Our government is not to this point yet. Right now, if everyone is working and taking care of themselves, than the people would see that they do not need government hand outs to live. This will come into play when the government decides that the people will blindly follow without the handouts, thus forcing them to take low wage jobs in order to live. When this happens, the government will be able to control the people by threatening to take their job instead of their welfare checks, which will provide the same blind loyalty as before.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual
abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more
equable distribution of the populace over the country.
-------The abolition of the distinction between town and country by redistributing where people live is gradually taking place without being stated or pursued actively. The migration of city folk to the country is becoming alarmingly fast and everything is starting to look the same. Agriculture and industry are so intertwined right now that one would not even know there used to be a difference. By regulating food business and food production, the government holds the keys to completely control the populace by threatening starvation...however I do not see the US government as being to the point where this could be a viable form of power.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of
children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education
with industrial production, etc.
-------The 10th point in the manifesto fits our country absolutely. It is US law that every child be given the opportunity to go to a state funded public school, and mandatory that each child go to some kind of school that meets the same guidelines for education. Obviously, in a situation such as this, the people and students are at the mercy of the government. We can only hope that what we are learning in these schools is true...and very many people blindly and thoughtlessly believe everything taught in these schools. Any socialistic or communistic society knows that a key to power is the control of what things are presented to the young people of the country. Many things are forced down the throats of children in this country and they have no choice but to swallow. Plus, they do not know any better given their age, and most times even the adults that teach them, since they have grown up in the same system, stupidly perpetuate the problem. Issues such as the ever so popular "separation of church and state" idea are now commonplace everywhere because they have been pushed in the schools. "Separation of church and state" is especially notable because this separation and eventual abolition of religion is something Marx wanted. Let's step back and realize that a policy such as "separation of church and state" changes the meaning of the 1st amendment free speech clause. This type of policy must be passed through congress with an overwhelming majority vote. Most people just assume this is what happened, even though the whole idea is enforced because of the outcome of a court case and the ensuing propoganda war that eventually convinced the masses that this is a constitutional fact. A powerful "seperation" like this one would never be imposed by an appointed, unelected court official in a true republic. Since this "belief" never would have passed in congress, and was never even brought to a vote by officials that the masses elected, it was imposed by the courts, was pushed through our school system, and is now a core belief of many Americans. This should give an idea of how powerful a state controlled school system can be. The government no longer needs to try to ammend the constitution with this "Seperation of church and state" idea or other controversial ideas. Over time, it is much easier for the government to get the people to a common belief of the same thing, thus accomplishing the same goal. Marx would be proud of what we have become and the direction we are going.
(addendum to the 10th point: The Houghton Mifflin publishing company supplies the text of much of the public education curricula used nationwide. Recently it's been noticed that indeed, certian religions in the "Social Studies" text books are pushed quite fervently in public schools...such as the Muslim religion...however, when questioned as to why there was little mention of Christianity and no mention of Catholocism in these books, it was pointed out that a "seperation of church and state" must be observed. I guess "seperation of church and state" applies only to whatever specific religions the public (government) school wants to disagree with.)
|
