20-11-2010, 04:15 PM
14-01-2011, 02:09 AM
Quote
Socialism was funded into the existence as the antithesis to capitalism in the dialectic,creating a synthesis that is neither fully capitalist or socialist, but rather is defined as the 'Third Way' which is sometimes also referred to as Communitarianism. Quote.
If you look for the meaning of Communitarianism in an old 1970s dictionary the nearest you can get is communitarian which says '1. a member of a communistic community.2. an advocate of such a community.' Here we are looking at an idea focussing solely on Communism.(Hands off the NHS though)
However as the quote says 'Socialism was funded into existence as the antithesis to Capitalism'
It almost seems that the whole thing was manufactured artificially to satisfy the theory of the dialectic. The synthesis provides the vehicle for pitting one against the other( Communist V Capitalist) to satisfy communist theory which is encapsulated by the dialectic which is the process of logical argumentation. One can imagine that there must have been a lot of intellectual diarrhoea around.
The end result was one of creating natural enemies between capitalists and socialists thus manufacturing division. (not to say that there was not already a division between the capitalist boss and the exploited worker) but here is an ideological and political vehicle for conflict
In practical terms if we look at both ends of the time scale we can see that in the early years there is the example of the Webb's who were socialists happily meeting together with the Astor's who represented the capitalist world and together they were scheming. It was also the Bankers that funded the Bolshevik Revolution and later Hitler who was the leader of right wing Fascists (National Socialists).
In the between years there was the distrust of Hitler towards the Soviets(but they cooperated and then fought each other) and likewise the Soviets became our ally but after WW2 became our enemy thus the Cold War.
In the present day people have become aware that there is little to choose between left and right parties and when there is a change the status quo is maintained amid fake opposition.
It is interesting that Cameron is in touch with the Astor's and the Bankers are Stiffing the world left right and centre.
In a way we are witnessing the synthesis of the thesis and antithesis which I see as the merging of Communism and capitalism, left and right into one. This is what I perceived as being the third way with communitarianism being the end result. This is what the various videos convey.
Takealook
Socialism was funded into the existence as the antithesis to capitalism in the dialectic,creating a synthesis that is neither fully capitalist or socialist, but rather is defined as the 'Third Way' which is sometimes also referred to as Communitarianism. Quote.
If you look for the meaning of Communitarianism in an old 1970s dictionary the nearest you can get is communitarian which says '1. a member of a communistic community.2. an advocate of such a community.' Here we are looking at an idea focussing solely on Communism.(Hands off the NHS though)
However as the quote says 'Socialism was funded into existence as the antithesis to Capitalism'
It almost seems that the whole thing was manufactured artificially to satisfy the theory of the dialectic. The synthesis provides the vehicle for pitting one against the other( Communist V Capitalist) to satisfy communist theory which is encapsulated by the dialectic which is the process of logical argumentation. One can imagine that there must have been a lot of intellectual diarrhoea around.
The end result was one of creating natural enemies between capitalists and socialists thus manufacturing division. (not to say that there was not already a division between the capitalist boss and the exploited worker) but here is an ideological and political vehicle for conflict
In practical terms if we look at both ends of the time scale we can see that in the early years there is the example of the Webb's who were socialists happily meeting together with the Astor's who represented the capitalist world and together they were scheming. It was also the Bankers that funded the Bolshevik Revolution and later Hitler who was the leader of right wing Fascists (National Socialists).
In the between years there was the distrust of Hitler towards the Soviets(but they cooperated and then fought each other) and likewise the Soviets became our ally but after WW2 became our enemy thus the Cold War.
In the present day people have become aware that there is little to choose between left and right parties and when there is a change the status quo is maintained amid fake opposition.
It is interesting that Cameron is in touch with the Astor's and the Bankers are Stiffing the world left right and centre.
In a way we are witnessing the synthesis of the thesis and antithesis which I see as the merging of Communism and capitalism, left and right into one. This is what I perceived as being the third way with communitarianism being the end result. This is what the various videos convey.
Takealook
15-01-2011, 03:43 AM
The word, I think, is 'expediency'.
It explains it all.
It explains it all.
15-01-2011, 11:09 PM
In't olden days there used to be these geezers known as 'left-wingers' and they used to say things like "down we capitalism, down wit banksters, nationalise everythink". People with similar views to comrade Scargill ya. But then, its seems like they largely disappeared, or thinned out.
Happen they re-located ya!, Dont think they left a forwarding address though-but no matter ,'cos I've reckoned it up where they went.
They didn't seem to give their selves a new name an all, but yer can spot 'em by the language they use. Key 'spotter' phrase -'civil society' ya.Thing is though they ain't attacking capitalism no more, and they ain't sayin down wit banksters. Counter intuitive eh!?.How can they be commies if they ain't attackin capitalism etc.
Yeah, some geezer rang Galloways show a bit back and was 'avin a go at the banksters. So galloway ses "you aint attackin banksters here, cos their jews". Yeah right -well that dont stop Galloway attackin Israel do it, and they've got a few Jews there- right!.But really this was just a pretext to avert an attack on those 'ever so nice' banksters. a left- winger defending banksters!?-counter intuitive ya.
Ok; so whats goin off - well, what I fink is goin off is Gramscian Marxism.
Yeah , this Italian Marxist called gramsci had a cunning plan -most of 'em do.
He reckoned it up that the private sector should be reduced by stealth to a small number of huge corporations who would then sort of merge with the government- thus making the implementation of a Marxist tyrany easy........CUSHDY.
Why is it, that though government agencies are created to stop/curb monopolies, cartels, and anti- competitive activities they seem to achieve the diametrical opposite of what they were ostensibly created to do.Why is it that corporations and governments collude together to create regulations, on the pretext usually, of 'protecting the public' which nevertheless have the effect of putting their smaller competitors out of business. Well, it aint an accident, its deliberate- it has the purpose of creating monopolies and cartels. John D Rockerfeller said 'Competition is a sin'.
Another name for a similar thing would be 'corporate fascism' as exhibited in Hitlers Germany. but whereas in Germany Hitler called the shots, now in the NWO its the 'internatuonal banksters' that will rule the roost.
Nah then, that 'ever so nice' Lennin geezer reckoned it up when he referred to something he called 'useful idiots'. That means the NWO have got two population classes. A small one who are the elites and a large one who are the 'useful idiots'-aside from all the peasants a course.
Yeah, the useful idiots are the geezers who actually believe in this Marxism jive, and the elite groups are the ones that are merely using them to achieve their goal of absolute power. Eight hundred years ago the elite exercised near absolute power through Feudalism. Since then they've lost some of it ,and now theres gettin to be too many peasants to keep proper control of.Thats why they want to restore their absolute power with a return to Feudalism through the NWO.
Cushdy,ya.
Happen they re-located ya!, Dont think they left a forwarding address though-but no matter ,'cos I've reckoned it up where they went.
They didn't seem to give their selves a new name an all, but yer can spot 'em by the language they use. Key 'spotter' phrase -'civil society' ya.Thing is though they ain't attacking capitalism no more, and they ain't sayin down wit banksters. Counter intuitive eh!?.How can they be commies if they ain't attackin capitalism etc.
Yeah, some geezer rang Galloways show a bit back and was 'avin a go at the banksters. So galloway ses "you aint attackin banksters here, cos their jews". Yeah right -well that dont stop Galloway attackin Israel do it, and they've got a few Jews there- right!.But really this was just a pretext to avert an attack on those 'ever so nice' banksters. a left- winger defending banksters!?-counter intuitive ya.
Ok; so whats goin off - well, what I fink is goin off is Gramscian Marxism.
Yeah , this Italian Marxist called gramsci had a cunning plan -most of 'em do.
He reckoned it up that the private sector should be reduced by stealth to a small number of huge corporations who would then sort of merge with the government- thus making the implementation of a Marxist tyrany easy........CUSHDY.
Why is it, that though government agencies are created to stop/curb monopolies, cartels, and anti- competitive activities they seem to achieve the diametrical opposite of what they were ostensibly created to do.Why is it that corporations and governments collude together to create regulations, on the pretext usually, of 'protecting the public' which nevertheless have the effect of putting their smaller competitors out of business. Well, it aint an accident, its deliberate- it has the purpose of creating monopolies and cartels. John D Rockerfeller said 'Competition is a sin'.
Another name for a similar thing would be 'corporate fascism' as exhibited in Hitlers Germany. but whereas in Germany Hitler called the shots, now in the NWO its the 'internatuonal banksters' that will rule the roost.
Nah then, that 'ever so nice' Lennin geezer reckoned it up when he referred to something he called 'useful idiots'. That means the NWO have got two population classes. A small one who are the elites and a large one who are the 'useful idiots'-aside from all the peasants a course.
Yeah, the useful idiots are the geezers who actually believe in this Marxism jive, and the elite groups are the ones that are merely using them to achieve their goal of absolute power. Eight hundred years ago the elite exercised near absolute power through Feudalism. Since then they've lost some of it ,and now theres gettin to be too many peasants to keep proper control of.Thats why they want to restore their absolute power with a return to Feudalism through the NWO.
Cushdy,ya.
19-01-2011, 02:16 AM
Excellent.
Believe me, how many times have I typed it? It's here on the record...
..."Corporation, government and media are one". They are the same thing.
Think, please just think about it; And don't be afraid. There are many of us who can see. It's only the hype that would make you think you are on your own.
You are not alone.
Believe me, how many times have I typed it? It's here on the record...
..."Corporation, government and media are one". They are the same thing.
Think, please just think about it; And don't be afraid. There are many of us who can see. It's only the hype that would make you think you are on your own.
You are not alone.
23-04-2011, 01:21 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ciety.html
By Melanie Phillips
Last updated at 1:55 PM on 17th January 2011
Tuesday, Feb 15 2011
Civil war: Even David Cameron's promise to support and promote marriage is reportedly opposed today by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg
The answer is surely yes. For when you look a bit harder, Glasman’s ‘small-c conservatism’ turns out to be anything but.
It’s not just that many of his views obviously belong very firmly on the Left, such as his animosity towards the financial power of the City of London.
The real giveaway is that he is an open disciple of Saul Alinsky, the revolutionary American far-Left thinker who invented ‘community organisers’ as a way of creating a kind of citizens’ army to subvert Western values.
These ‘community organisers’ would ‘rub raw the resentments of the people’ and ‘agitate to the point of conflict’ — all camouflaged by language designed to win the trust of the middle classes.
And Alinsky’s handbook of such community organisation, Rules For Radicals, was actually dedicated to ‘the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment . . . Lucifer’.
Yet the new Lord Glasman has talked admiringly of Alinsky’s ‘tactics of urban guerrilla politics’. So, far from taking his party on to the middle ground, ‘Red Ed’ Miliband would seem to be once again living up to his reputation.
But we can hardly look to the Conservative Party to defend British society against such subversive ideas.
For, incredible as it may seem, Mr Cameron himself said last spring that his ‘Big Society’ would be built on the model of America’s ‘community organisers’ — and in a background briefing to that speech, the Conservative party actually paid homage to Saul Alinsky himself.
Of course, the Tories’ enthusiasm for Alinsky is most likely based on ignorance rather than a desire to subvert society. But the astounding fact remains that the Cameroons have endorsed a Marxist radical whose agenda was the covert destruction of the West.
And they have done so for the same shallow reasons that lead them to damn those who stand for the true defence of ‘faith, family and flag’ as the ‘extreme Right’ of their party, to be bullied, vilified and ignored.
Mr Miliband’s promotion of such values may be wholly opportunist and cynical. But at least he seems to grasp that there is a hole at the heart of British politics where the very things that the British people hold most dear should be.
By Melanie Phillips
Last updated at 1:55 PM on 17th January 2011
Tuesday, Feb 15 2011
Civil war: Even David Cameron's promise to support and promote marriage is reportedly opposed today by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg
The answer is surely yes. For when you look a bit harder, Glasman’s ‘small-c conservatism’ turns out to be anything but.
It’s not just that many of his views obviously belong very firmly on the Left, such as his animosity towards the financial power of the City of London.
The real giveaway is that he is an open disciple of Saul Alinsky, the revolutionary American far-Left thinker who invented ‘community organisers’ as a way of creating a kind of citizens’ army to subvert Western values.
These ‘community organisers’ would ‘rub raw the resentments of the people’ and ‘agitate to the point of conflict’ — all camouflaged by language designed to win the trust of the middle classes.
And Alinsky’s handbook of such community organisation, Rules For Radicals, was actually dedicated to ‘the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment . . . Lucifer’.
Yet the new Lord Glasman has talked admiringly of Alinsky’s ‘tactics of urban guerrilla politics’. So, far from taking his party on to the middle ground, ‘Red Ed’ Miliband would seem to be once again living up to his reputation.
But we can hardly look to the Conservative Party to defend British society against such subversive ideas.
For, incredible as it may seem, Mr Cameron himself said last spring that his ‘Big Society’ would be built on the model of America’s ‘community organisers’ — and in a background briefing to that speech, the Conservative party actually paid homage to Saul Alinsky himself.
Of course, the Tories’ enthusiasm for Alinsky is most likely based on ignorance rather than a desire to subvert society. But the astounding fact remains that the Cameroons have endorsed a Marxist radical whose agenda was the covert destruction of the West.
And they have done so for the same shallow reasons that lead them to damn those who stand for the true defence of ‘faith, family and flag’ as the ‘extreme Right’ of their party, to be bullied, vilified and ignored.
Mr Miliband’s promotion of such values may be wholly opportunist and cynical. But at least he seems to grasp that there is a hole at the heart of British politics where the very things that the British people hold most dear should be.
23-04-2011, 02:07 PM
Although I agree that there is a lot wrong with society and 'nothing works' - in the public sector particularly, and that the EU have made far too many encroachments on our lives, with overburdensome regulations, I am not so convinced that the full-on communitarian agenda strictly run along socialist Fabian lines - individualism subordinated to civil society - is really in the pipeline that would amount to a post-democratic society and the inevitable erosion of private property - a sort of Soviet Britain where everything is state owned and state run by the EU. What about free trade? What about private property and our ability to generate enough wealth to make and spend individually to keep the economy going and to pay taxes to the government, which help to prop up the EU budget? Surely no big business, who are already led by very powerful private interests, have the ear of the government ministers, and prop up their political campaigns during election time, and deal in global manufacturing of consumer goods, which we all need money to purchase these goods to keep these businesses profitable, would tolerate the demise of their shareholders' livelihoods by buying into a global political concept that would result in us being nothing more than an impoverished EU province of surveillance supervised dummed down automotons with no life, no money and no future and forever fearful of the big brother state run effectively and exclusively by the EU autocrats via Julia Middleton and Tavistock, Demos and her other communitarian aspiring cronies.
I do think that there is a conscious effort to dumb down society though and to destroy our national identity to accommodate a 'diversity' led civic-only culture based on volunteering as an embedded civic duty rather than an individual choice. But I'd stop short of believing that a state economy model based Soviet Britain, and along Marxist lines, with the erosion of private property is the EU's aspiring end-goal. This would only amount to the eventual destruction of such a model through civic and politically based uprisings - just like the fall of the Berlin Wall - and the fervent re-emergence of efforts to re-establish long held but now severely challenged national identities, possibly along more extremist lines than ever before - enough to make the BNP look like Mother Theresa. That would result in an abrupt end of the EU and would amount to little more than the EU/Bilderberger elites effectively sanctioning the end of the golden goose that lays the golden egg that they need from all of us 'useful idiots' to feather their over privileged nests.
Just a thought.
I do think that there is a conscious effort to dumb down society though and to destroy our national identity to accommodate a 'diversity' led civic-only culture based on volunteering as an embedded civic duty rather than an individual choice. But I'd stop short of believing that a state economy model based Soviet Britain, and along Marxist lines, with the erosion of private property is the EU's aspiring end-goal. This would only amount to the eventual destruction of such a model through civic and politically based uprisings - just like the fall of the Berlin Wall - and the fervent re-emergence of efforts to re-establish long held but now severely challenged national identities, possibly along more extremist lines than ever before - enough to make the BNP look like Mother Theresa. That would result in an abrupt end of the EU and would amount to little more than the EU/Bilderberger elites effectively sanctioning the end of the golden goose that lays the golden egg that they need from all of us 'useful idiots' to feather their over privileged nests.
Just a thought.
24-04-2011, 03:54 PM
Denny1602 "....I am not so convinced that the full-on communitarian agenda strictly run along socialist Fabian lines - individualism subordinated to civil society - is really in the pipeline that would amount to a post-democratic society and the inevitable erosion of private property - a sort of Soviet Britain where everything is state owned and state run by the EU.... "
Well, it is the historic fact that our Common Law has come down the centuries from its Christian basis - all men are loved by God and are equal in his sight, all men are equal in law and have individual rights.
Clearly, TPTB have decided this principle has to go! THIS MUST STOP!
So now Human Rights and the introduction of Community Rights, are going to gradually replace Individual Rights.
Common Law is under attack, Communitarian Law - Community Law of the EU will replace it.
The Church is being undermined at every opportunity.
Civil Society is taking over from the Public Sector - but Civil Society has no structured accountabilty such as the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which applies only to the rapidly shrinking Public Sector. Civil Society or the Third Way or Third Sector or Big Society, incorporates charities and non-profit organisations.
Norman Dodd talks about the tax exempt foundations online - well worth listening to
Well, it is the historic fact that our Common Law has come down the centuries from its Christian basis - all men are loved by God and are equal in his sight, all men are equal in law and have individual rights.
Clearly, TPTB have decided this principle has to go! THIS MUST STOP!
So now Human Rights and the introduction of Community Rights, are going to gradually replace Individual Rights.
Common Law is under attack, Communitarian Law - Community Law of the EU will replace it.
The Church is being undermined at every opportunity.
Civil Society is taking over from the Public Sector - but Civil Society has no structured accountabilty such as the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which applies only to the rapidly shrinking Public Sector. Civil Society or the Third Way or Third Sector or Big Society, incorporates charities and non-profit organisations.
Norman Dodd talks about the tax exempt foundations online - well worth listening to
25-04-2011, 10:42 AM
Nicely put lerustique
From a link provided by major hitch http://www.policestateplanning.com/id19.htm
Perhaps this is a clarification of the process we are now enduring under ''Austerity cuts''
Takealook
From a link provided by major hitch http://www.policestateplanning.com/id19.htm
Quote:Chapter 7
First published January 2004
Last updated March 2005
THE ECONOMY
'Money is power'. Well, to be precise, it's the gap between the rich and poor that counts. The objective of the elite is to maintain the capitalist structure as it is with one vital difference. There will be no middle class in the New World Order. Under public-private partnership, the middle class, free markets, and consumer choice will be replaced with a neo-feudal society in which the Money Trust dictates to an impoverished populace through a supranational technocracy.
This is international socialism, run for the benefit of the financial elite who own the economy and control the emerging continental Politburos. The polite name for it is 'The Third Way', but less deferential commentators call it 'corporate fascism'. The corporations need government to restrict consumer choice in the market place, allowing the cartel to determine what we can buy, sell, or even do in our own homes.
The 'Third Way' is the path to utopia for our self-appointed philosopher kings, advocated by the likes of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and Gerhard Schroder - their senior political puppets.
There is no difference between ostensibly right and left wing political parties about the eventual destination, even if they appear to be travelling at different speeds towards it.
Real power, then, is achieved when the ruling class controls the material essentials of life, granting and withholding them as if they were privileges, as George Orwell reflected:
Perhaps this is a clarification of the process we are now enduring under ''Austerity cuts''
Takealook
01-05-2011, 09:37 AM
Whats the difference between Communitarianism and Socialism?.
Does Communitarianism mean corporatism/fascism on the economic side, with cultural marxism on the social side-as the social control mechanism?.
Does Communitarianism mean corporatism/fascism on the economic side, with cultural marxism on the social side-as the social control mechanism?.