POLITICS

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 7, 2020 at 11:03 pm

Paul Plante says:

Having studied this subject for some time now, all I can say is that these Marxists are peddling some real weird **** with respect to families, and here I am relying on “Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State” by Frederick Engels, which tome was written by Engels after the death of Marx.

According to the Introduction, after Marx’s death, in rummaging through Marx’s manuscripts, Engels came upon Marx’s precis of “Ancient Society” – a book by progressive US scholar Lewis Henry Morgan and published in London 1877.

The precis was written between 1880-81 and contained Marx’s numerous remarks on Morgan as well as passages from other sources.

After reading the precis, Engels set out to write a special treatise – which he saw as fulfilling Marx’s will.

Working on the book, he used Marx’s precis, and some of Morgan’s factual material and conclusions.

He also made use of many and diverse data gleaned in his own studies of the history of Greece, Rome, Old Ireland, and the Ancient Germans.

It would, of course, become “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” – the first edition of which was published October 1884 in Hottingen-Zurich.

It focuses on early human history, following the disintegration of the primitive community and the emergence of a class society based on private property.

Engels looks into the origin and essence of the state, and concludes it is bound to wither away leaving a classless society.

Engels: “Along with [the classes] the state will inevitably fall.”

“Society, which will reorganise production on the basis of a free and equal association of the producers, will put the whole machinery of state where it will then belong: into the museum of antiquity, by the side of the spinning-wheel and the bronze axe.”

end quotes

This of course is the mindless belief system that BLACK LIVES MATTER is based on.

But since we are focused on disrupting the so-called “nuclear” family, let’s go back to the Introduction to see what further we can glean, to wit:

In 1890, having gathered new material on the history of primitive society, Engels set about preparing a new edition of his book.

He studied the latest books on the subject – including those of Russian historian Maxim Kovalevsky.

In 1894, Engels’s book appeared in Russian translation.

Lenin would later describe it as “one of the fundamental works of modern socialism.”

end quotes

And Lenin, of course, is Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (22 April 1870 – 21 January 1924), better known by his alias Lenin, who was a Russian revolutionary, politician, and political theorist who is today a hero figure to the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER who are ideologues of his.

Lenin served as head of government of Soviet Russia from 1917 to 1924 and of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1924.

Under his administration, Russia, and later the wider Soviet Union, became a one-party Marxist–Leninist state governed by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Ideologically a communist, he developed a variant of Marxism known as Leninism.

Born to a moderately prosperous middle-class family in Simbirsk (now Ulyanovsk), Lenin embraced revolutionary socialist politics following his brother’s 1887 execution.

He moved to Saint Petersburg in 1893 and became a senior Marxist activist.

In 1897, he was arrested for sedition and exiled to Shushenskoye for three years, where he married Nadezhda Krupskaya.

After his exile, he moved to Western Europe, where he became a prominent theorist in the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP).

In 1903, he took a key role in the RSDLP ideological split, leading the Bolshevik faction against Julius Martov’s Mensheviks.

Following Russia’s failed Revolution of 1905, he campaigned for the First World War to be transformed into a Europe-wide proletarian revolution, which as a Marxist he believed would cause the overthrow of capitalism and its replacement with socialism.

end quotes

This is the **** that fills the heads of these BLACK LIVES MATTER founders who want to disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families.

Getting back to BLACK LIVES MATTER hero, Lenin, we have further, as follows:

After the 1917 February Revolution ousted the Tsar and established a Provisional Government, he returned to Russia to play a leading role in the October Revolution in which the Bolsheviks overthrew the new regime.

Lenin’s Bolshevik government initially shared power with the Left Socialist Revolutionaries, elected soviets, and a multi-party Constituent Assembly, although by 1918 it had centralised power in the new Communist Party.

Lenin’s administration redistributed land among the peasantry and nationalised banks and large-scale industry.

It withdrew from the First World War by signing a treaty conceding territory to the Central Powers, and promoted world revolution through the Communist International.

Opponents were suppressed in the Red Terror, a violent campaign administered by the state security services; tens of thousands were killed or interned in concentration camps.

end quotes

Ah, yes, the RED TERROR and the suppression of opponents!

When BLACK LIVES MATTER are advocating for the end of “white supremacy” forever, what ill does that bode for us in this country with white skin who don’t truckle to BLACK LIVES MATTER nor bend the knee to them in submission?

Something to think about, anyway.

Getting back to Lenin:

Widely considered one of the most significant and influential figures of the 20th century, Lenin was the posthumous subject of a pervasive personality cult within the Soviet Union until its dissolution in 1991.

He became an ideological figurehead behind Marxism–Leninism and thus a prominent influence over the international communist movement.

A controversial and highly divisive historical figure, Lenin is viewed by supporters as a champion of socialism and the working class, while critics on both the left and right emphasise his role as founder and leader of an authoritarian regime responsible for political repression and mass killings.

end quotes

And that is the dude who would describe “Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State” by Frederick Engels as “one of the fundamental works of modern socialism.”

So there is some necessary background to understanding where this BLACK LIVES MATTER crowd are drawing their ideas from with respect to our stable, law-abiding nuclear families that they want to disrupt, for as Engels said in the book, “(F)or man’s development beyond the level of the animals, for the achievement of the greatest advance nature can show, something more was needed: the power of defense lacking to the individual had to be made good by the united strength and co-operation of the herd,” and “(T)he jealousy of the males prevents the herd, the higher social form, from coming into existence, or weakens its cohesion, or breaks it up during the mating period; at best, it attests its development.”

So what is the cure?

Group marriage, the form of family in which whole groups of men and whole groups of women mutually possess one another, and which leaves little room for jealousy.

But stay tuned, because it doesn’t end there; it only begins!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-289776

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:40 p

MARKETWATCH

"U.S. jobless claims — aka layoffs — fall slightly in early October but still very high"


By Jeffry Bartash

Published: Oct. 8, 2020 at 10:25 a.m. ET

The numbers:

The number of Americans who applied for jobless benefits fell slightly in early October to a fresh pandemic low, but they are declining more slowly in a sign the labor market could be experiencing a setback amid another wave of corporate layoffs.

Initial jobless claims filed through state programs slid to 840,000 in the week ended Oct. 3 from a revised 849,000 in the prior week, the Labor Department said Thursday.

Economists polled by MarketWatch had forecast new claims to fall to 820,000.

An unadjusted 464,437 people also filed new claims under the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance Act, the federal law that temporarily made self-employed workers eligible for benefits for the first time.

That put the number of actual or unadjusted new claims at 1.27 million, also a pandemic low.

New applications for unemployment benefits have gradually receded from a pandemic peak of 6.9 million in late March, but the weekly total has fallen by less than 100,000 in the past month.

New jobless claims are still quadruple the pre-crisis average and are higher than any point during the severe 2007-2009 recession.

A small but growing number of high-profile corporations in industries such as airlines and entertainment that have been hardest hit by the pandemic have announced they will cut more jobs permanently unless the government provides extra financial help.

Many economists worry the economic recovery will falter without another federal relief package.

What happened:

New jobless claims rose the most in the states of Florida, Ilinois and Virginia.

They declined the most in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

For the second week in a row, the number of new claims in California was frozen at the same level as they were on Sept. 19.

The state stopped accepting claims for two weeks to process a large backlog and to install fraud-detection measures after widespread problems in its system.

It’s possible the claims figures in California have inflated the national total, but it won’t be known until the state resumes reporting its data.

California will start accepting applications again next Monday.

Continuing jobless claims filed through state programs, meanwhile, sank by a large 1 million to a seasonally adjusted 10.98 million in the week ended Sept. 26.

That’s also the lowest level since late March, when the virus shut down much of the U.S. economy.

Altogether, the number of people reportedly getting benefits through eight state and federal programs fell by 1 million to an unadjusted 25.5 million as of Sept. 19, the latest data available.

Some economists question the accuracy of the estimate given that other government data shows the pool of unemployed is about half that size.

Big picture:

The economy is still growing, but not as rapidly as it was earlier in the summer.

The big worry now is that another wave of layoffs could crash over the economy and stunt the recovery.

Disney, American Airlines, United Airlines and MGM Resorts are among a coterie of large companies that say they plan to cut more jobs in light of ongoing difficulties.

Yet consumer confidence surged in September to the highest level since the pandemic and the economy is still adding more jobs than it’s losing.

Other economists say the recovery appears durable enough to keep growing even without another massive dose of federal aid.

Right now it looks like the economy is largely on its own.

Democrats and Republicans in Congress have been deadlocked for months over another round of financial aid and it’s unclear if any more help is coming before the election in early November.

What they are saying?

“The decline in continuing claims is welcome, but initial claims offer a better read on the real-time state of the labor market, and the downward trend has stalled, more or less,” said chief economist Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics.

Market reaction:

The Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500 rose in Thursday trades.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-jo ... latestnews

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:40 p

MARKETWATCH

"Federal budget deficit hit record $3.1 trillion in just-ended fiscal 2020, CBO says"


By Jonathan Nicholson

Published: Oct. 8, 2020 at 3:14 p.m. ET

The U.S. budget deficit hit a record $3.1 trillion in the recently concluded 2020 budget year, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected Thursday.

“Relative to the size of the economy, the deficit — at an estimated 15.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) — was the largest since 1945, and 2020 was the fifth consecutive year in which the deficit increased as a percentage of GDP,” the CBO said in its monthly forecast.

The Treasury Department and the Office of Management and Budget will release actual figures later in the month, if the agencies hold with past practice.

Notably, the CBO figure, based on daily Treasury data, was $180 billion less than it had projected only a few weeks ago, as revenues came in $123 billion above those projections and spending came in slightly below — by $56 billion — forecasts.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/feder ... re_twitter

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:40 p

BARRON'S

"Opinion: Trump’s Regeneron Treatment Is a Tangled Ethical Mess"


Alison Bateman-House, M. Sage Gustafson, and Arthur Caplan

Published: Oct. 8, 2020 at 4:28 p.m. ET

President Donald Trump is illustrating the ethical perils of the “compassionate use” of unapproved medical products in real time.

The president’s use of an experimental drug outside of a clinical trial, and the company’s offer of the product to the president’s political rival, raise questions about special treatment for certain VIPs.


Furthermore, the presidential hawking of yet another unproven Covid-19 “cure” may undermine evidence-based decision-making while raising fears about the U.S. Food & Drug Administration’s independence from the White House.

Following Trump’s Covid-19 diagnosis, a New York State-based biotech company, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, granted his doctor’s request for nontrial, preapproval “compassionate use” access to REGN-COV2, its investigational cocktail of two monoclonal antibodies.

The company also divulged that it had reached out to former vice president Joe Biden ’s team.

Yesterday, Trump declared this unapproved treatment “a cure,” saying “it made me better.”

Today, Regeneron said it applied for an emergency use authorization for REGN-COV2, a temporary approval by the FDA that would allow wide nontrial access to the drug, potentially endangering the completion of ongoing trials for the product.

The FDA has not acted on that request, so any patients inspired by the president’s messages to seek nontrial access to the drug will need their physicians to request it through expanded access, as did the president’s doctors.

Regeneron does not appear to have sought to unlawfully promote its experimental Covid-19 therapeutic by giving it to the president.

But the president, who has the authority to overrule the FDA, has raved about REGN-COV2, much like he did with hydroxychloroquine just months ago.

In that case, White House pressure resulted in the FDA temporarily approving hydroxycholoroquine for use in treating Covid-19 in hospitalized patients, only to end that emergency authorization when clinical trials demonstrated that the drug did not offer sufficient benefit against Covid-19 to justify its risk.

Hydroxychloroquine had been previously granted full approval by the FDA as a treatment for lupus and other conditions, and it was available — and legal — for clinicians to prescribe to patients for any reason.

REGN-COV2, by contrast, remains an unapproved, experimental product.

Until and unless REGN-COV2 receives full or temporary approval from the FDA, it is likely that Regeneron will face a crush of requests for expanded access, not all of which it will be able to fulfill, even if it wants to do so.

These events raise myriad red flags.

First, by law, the only patients eligible for experimental drugs through the expanded access pathway are those who cannot join an ongoing trial.


In the case of Trump, it is unclear what effort was made to determine if he was eligible for Regeneron’s trial.

This should be publicly and immediately clarified, so that we know whether the president met the legal criteria for expanded access.

The same would apply to Biden, if he were to receive the investigational drug.

(Biden has tested negative for Covid-19.)

Ensuring both men participate in clinical trials, were they eligible, would be important for two reasons.

First, regulations should be applied uniformly to all.

Second, allowing important people access to an investigational product outside of a clinical trial when they are eligible for the study makes trials appear as something to be avoided, if possible.

Trump’s actions have reinforced that message, missing a major opportunity to affirm the societal importance of trials.

This case demonstrates the U.S. cultural tendency — shared in spades by Trump — to overstate the therapeutic potential of investigational products.

The vast majority of drugs-in-development fail and never receive approval from the FDA for sale or use.

Data from early trials frequently look good, but very often, that early hope fails to translate into reliable, robust evidence of clinical effectiveness.

It is for that reason that investigational drugs go through a development process in which they are tested in increasingly larger number of patients, and, in some cases, compared to a placebo.

The sequence of events with Regeneron’s product has reinforced the fallacy that treatment with an experimental drug is inherently better care.

Inarguably, the presidential candidates are being treated differently from others who have a diagnosed Covid-19 infection or potential exposure to the Sars-CoV-2 virus.


Before granting even a single request for nontrial access, a company must decide how it will allocate its limited supply in a situation of numerous requests.

This is a difficult decision, but there are publicly available models of how companies have allocated scarce investigational products.

None of these models state, as a principle, “prioritize important people.”

Rather, they endorse such strategies as picking at random from all requests or selecting patients who seem the most likely to benefit from the product.

Are presidential candidates more deserving than others to access a drug in limited supply that might provide medical benefit?

Some would argue yes.

But it is worth emphasizing again that all drugs pose potentially dangerous side effects and, even with initial favorable data, there is no determinative evidence that an unapproved drug is medically advantageous.

Is it important to shield presidential candidates from the unknowns of unproven treatments, especially when used in untested combinations with other interventions?

Maybe.

These are questions that should be discussed and answered by companies before decisions about who gets access are made.

Regeneron’s decision to reach out to the Biden team, even if it was merely sharing information, raises the ethical questions of why and how should companies make public their access policies.

The company had already posted its policy on its website.

Why, then, reach out directly to Biden?


Companies post public policies to even the playing field, to make all patients equally aware of the availability of expanded access.

Direct contact does the exact opposite.

Covid-19 has starkly demonstrated the disparities in the U.S. with regard to who gets sick, who gets prompt testing, who gets ventilators, and even who gets safe housing during an infectious pandemic.

The Regeneron case has now revealed further disparities in how patients learn about and access investigational medical products.

It should prompt companies to think seriously about how, if they chose to permit nontrial access, they will allocate scarce investigational drugs, and how they will publicize and defend their actions.

Do their policies align with common conceptions of justice, which treat those in need alike?

Or do they afford heads of state, potentates, and presidential candidates easier access than you or me?

Alison Bateman-House is assistant professor in the Division of Medical Ethics at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine in New York Cityand co-chair of the NYU Working Group on Compassionate Use and Preapproval Access.

M. Sage Gustafson is a research associate in the Division of Medical Ethics at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine and the project manager of the NYU Working Group on Compassionate Use and Preapproval Access.

Arthur Caplan is the Drs. William F. and Virginia Connolly Mitty Professor and founding head of the Division of Medical Ethics at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine.

https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/tr ... latestnews

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 08, 2020 1:40 p

MARKETWATCH

"The U.S.’s trade deficit hasn’t been this wide in a decade and a half"


By Associated Press

Published: Oct. 8, 2020 at 5:59 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. trade deficit rose in August to the highest level in 14 years.

The Commerce Department reported Tuesday that the gap between the goods and services the United States sells and what it buys abroad climbed 5.9% in August to $67.1 billion, highest since August 2006.


Exports rose 2.2% to $171.9 billion on a surge in shipments of soybeans, but imports rose more — up 3.2% to $239 billion — led by purchases of crude oil, cars and auto parts.

The U.S. deficit with the rest of the world in the trade of goods such as airplanes and appliances set a record $83.9 billion in August.

The United States ran a surplus of $16.8 billion in the trade of services such as banking and education, lowest since January 2012.

The politically sensitive deficit in the trade of goods with China fell 6.7% to $26.4 billion.

So far this year, the United States has recorded a trade gap of $421.8 billion, up 5.7% from January-August 2019.

Hammered by the coronavirus and its fallout on the world economy, total U.S. trade — exports plus imports — is down 15.1% so far this year to $3.2 trillion.

“Overall, trade flows remain subdued and the outlook is uncertain given a muted global growth and demand backdrop,” said Rubeela Farooqi, chief U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics.

President Donald Trump campaigned on a pledge to bring down America’s persistent trade deficits.

He imposed taxes on imports of steel, aluminum and most products from China, among other things; and renegotiated a North American trade pact in an effort to encourage more production in the United States.

But the trade deficit won’t yield easily to changes in trade policy.

As the U.S. economy recovers from springtime shutdowns, Americans are buying more imported goods while foreign demand for U.S. products remains weak.

In an unusual move, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer issued a statement on the monthly trade deficit report Tuesday, defending the president’s record.

Lighthizer noted that the U.S. deficit in the trade of goods is down 2.4% so far this year and would have fallen more if it weren’t for a surge in gold imports by investors using the precious metal to hedge against risks at a time of considerable uncertainty.

He also said: “The trade deficit increased in August because America’s economy has recovered more quickly than our trade partners.’’

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-u ... latestnews

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 9, 2020 at 9:20 pm

Paul Plante says:

So who is Frederick Engels, then, and what relationship does he have with Karl Marx, the spiritual father along with Lenin of the BLACK LIVES MATTER movement that wants to disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families and ultimately do away with the concept of marriage, itself?

According to his bio, Friedrich Engels, sometimes anglicised as Frederick Engels (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895), was a German philosopher, historian, political scientist and revolutionary socialist who was also a businessman, journalist and political activist, whose father was an owner of large textile factories in Salford (Greater Manchester, England) and Barmen, Prussia (now Wuppertal, Germany).

Engels developed what is now known as Marxism together with Karl Marx.

In 1848, Engels co-authored The Communist Manifesto with Marx and also authored and co-authored (primarily with Marx) many other works.

Later, Engels supported Marx financially, allowing him to do research and write Das Kapital.

Marx needed Engels to support him because Marx himself was a loser who couldn’t hold a job because of his radicalism that made him a liability in the workplace, not as asset.

As to Engels meeting Marx, that occurred in Paris at the Café de la Régence on the Place du Palais, 28 August 1844 and the two quickly became close friends and remained so their entire lives.

Marx had read and was impressed by Engels’s articles on “The Condition of the Working Class in England” in which he had written that “[a] class which bears all the disadvantages of the social order without enjoying its advantages, […] Who can demand that such a class respect this social order?”

Marx adopted Engels’s idea that the working class would lead the revolution against the bourgeoisie as society advanced toward socialism, and incorporated this as part of his own philosophy.

So we can see that Engels is actually the source for some of the Marxist ideology subsequently adopted by the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER who among other things want to disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families as necessary on the path to socialism, and then communism, where women are expected to be promiscuous as opposed to monogamous.

Getting back to Engels, we have as follows:

During this time in Paris, both Marx and Engels began their association with and then joined the secret revolutionary society called the League of the Just.

The League of the Just had been formed in 1837 in France to promote an egalitarian society through the overthrow of the existing governments.

In 1839, the League of the Just participated in the 1839 rebellion fomented by the French utopian revolutionary socialist, Louis Auguste Blanqui.

As to the League of the Just, or League of Justice, it was a Christian communist international revolutionary organization founded in 1836 by branching off from its ancestor, the League of Outlaws, which had formed in Paris in 1834.

Theodore Schuster founded the League of Outlaws in Paris in 1834.

He modeled the organization closely after Philippe Buonarroti’s vision of the “Universal Democratic Carbonari” as an egalitarian international revolutionary fellowship organization, perhaps the first of its kind.

Schuster’s 1834 pamphlet, Confession of faith of an outlaw has been suggested as the first vision of marginalized people joining together in a coming revolution.

So when BLACK LIVES MATTER co-founder Patrisse Cullors, a protégé of Eric Mann, a former member of the Weather Underground domestic terror organization, which bombed government buildings and police stations in the 1960s and 1970s, who spent years absorbing the Marxist-Leninist ideology tells us “The first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame; myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers, we are trained Marxists, we are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories,” this is the kind of horse**** she is referring to, all these secret socieites that are going to usher in the brave new world promised to us all by world communism.

Getting back to that history, at its peak, the League of Outlaws had about 100 members in Paris and 80 in Frankfurt am Main.

At this time, Schuster focused his efforts on advocating for the unification of Germany and organized middle-class republicans into the League of Germans.

As Schuster’s and other key members’ attention was focused on this work, the working class members of the Outlaws rallied around the leadership of Wilhelm Weitling, and this group formed the League of the Just in Paris in 1836 as an offshoot from the League of Outlaws, which league dissipated in 1838 as their members prioritized other associations.

Members of the League of the Just were German journeymen artisans, primarily tailors and woodworkers, and their stated goal was “the establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth, based on the ideals of love of one’s neighbor, equality and justice”.

This was also referred to by the League as the “new Jerusalem”.

The motto of the League of the Just was “All men are brothers”.

They have been described as followers of François-Noël Babeuf and as “utopian-communist”.

Communism, in its turn, is a philosophical, social, political, economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state.

As to the ideologies (a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy) embraced by the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER, Communism includes a variety of schools of thought which broadly include Marxism and anarcho-communism as well as the political ideologies grouped around both, all of which share the analysis that the current order of society stems from capitalism, its economic system and mode of production, namely that in this system there are two major social classes, conflict between these two classes is the root of all problems in society and this situation can only ultimately be resolved through a social revolution.

The two classes are the proletariat (the working class), who make up the majority of the population within society and must work to survive; and the bourgeoisie (the capitalist class), a small minority who derives profit from employing the working class through private ownership of the means of production.

According to this analysis, revolution would put the working class in power and in turn establish social ownership of the means of production which is the primary element in the transformation of society towards communism.

Along with social democracy, communism became the dominant political tendency within the international socialist movement by the 1920s.

Getting back to history, in 1847, the League of the Just merged with the Communist Correspondence Committee, an organization led by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, creating the Communist League.

The new group tasked Marx and Engels with writing a political platform for itself and the resulting document was “The Communist Manifesto.”

As to the Communist Manifesto, originally the Manifesto of the Communist Party, it is an 1848 political document by German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels that was commissioned by the Communist League and originally published in London just as the Revolutions of 1848 began to erupt.

The Manifesto was later recognised as one of the world’s most influential political documents and it presents an analytical approach to the class struggle (historical and then-present) and the conflicts of capitalism and the capitalist mode of production, rather than a prediction of communism’s potential future forms.

The Communist Manifesto summarises Marx and Engels’ theories concerning the nature of society and politics, namely that in their own words “(t)he history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”.

It also briefly features their ideas for how the capitalist society of the time would eventually be replaced by socialism.

In the last paragraph of the Manifesto, the authors call for a “forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions”, which served as a call for communist revolutions around the world.

Which brings us up to today and the Marxist-inspired BLACK LIVES MATTER movement.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-290359

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Sun Oct 11, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 10, 2020 at 6:33 pm

Paul Plante says:

It is of note, but not surprising, being considered the typical behavior to be expected from a dogma (a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true)-spouting ideologue (an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic) of Marxist-Leninist ideology (a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy) when their dogma and political slogans are being challenged, that the following was reported by POLITIFACT article entitled “Is Black Lives Matter a Marxist movement?” by Tom Kertscher on July 21, 2020, to wit:

Included on its list of beliefs is one that has drawn criticism as being consistent with Marxism:

“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

A spokesperson for Black Lives Matter; Kailee Scales, managing director at Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation; and the three co-founders did not reply to our requests for information.

end quotes

Did not reply to the requests of POLITIFACT for information?

Seriously. people, is anybody surprised by that?

How can they supply any further information, given that what they are spouting is Marxist dogma?

And dogma is dogma!

It is not to be questioned, and it doesn’t need to be explained!

Just believed!

And that thought takes us back to 1919, when the nascent Soviet Government established the Communist Academy and the Marx–Engels–Lenin Institute for doctrinal Marxist study as well as to publish official ideological and research documents for the Russian Communist Party, which is where this Marxist horse**** being spouted by the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER has its origins.

As to the Communist Academy, it was an educational establishment based in Moscow which was intended to allow Marxists to research problems independent of, and implicitly in rivalry with, the Academy of Sciences, which long pre-existed the October Revolution and the subsequent formation of the Soviet Union.

If that sounds weird, which to a rational person it does, we have to keep in mind that we are not studying how rational people think; we are studying how Marxist ideologues think, which is to say, they don’t.

They are like sponges, there to soak up the dogma and regurgitate it when squeezed.

For many years, the Communist Academy was a leading center in the social sciences and played a leading role in the promulgation of the Marxist-Leninist ideology that the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER are adherents of.

The Academy’s library was preserved as the Fundamental Library of the Social Sciences, which itself became an important part of the still-extant library of the Institute of Scientific Information of the Social Sciences.

As to the Marx–Engels–Lenin Institute, it was first established in Moscow in 1919 as the Marx–Engels Institute as a Soviet library and archive attached to the Communist Academy.

The Institute was later attached to the governing Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and served as a research center and publishing house for officially published works of Marxist doctrine.

To trained Marxists like the dogma-spouting founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER, doctrine, i.e., the set of beliefs held and taught by the Communist party, are all important and are not be be embellished or deviated from.

Getting back to the Marx–Engels Institute, it gathered unpublished manuscripts by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin and other leading Marxist theoreticians as well as collecting books, pamphlets and periodicals related to the socialist and organized labor movements in order to produce the ideologues we have today in the persons of the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER.

By 1930, the facility’s holdings included more than 400,000 books and journals and more than 55,000 original and photocopy documents by Marx and Engels alone, making it one of the largest holdings of socialist-related material in the world.

In November of 1931, the Marx–Engels Institute was merged with the larger and less scholarly Lenin Institute (established in 1923) to form the Marx–Engels–Lenin Institute.

The Institute was the coordinating authority for the systematic organization of documents released in the multi-volume editions of the Collected Works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and numerous other official publications.

The Institute assembled and maintained a research library devoted to socialist-related theme, amassing in a little over 10 years a collection of some 400,000 books, pamphlets, and journals, 15,000 manuscripts and 175,000 photocopies of original documents held elsewhere.

Among these were 55,000 manuscripts by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels alone — far and away the single most important accumulation of such material.

The Institute included an academic staff which engaged in research on historical and topical themes of interest to the regime.

The Institute included sections devoted to the history of the First and Second Internationals, the history of Germany, the history of France, the history of Great Britain, the history of the United States, the history of the countries of Southern Europe and the history of international relations.

Also included were sections working in philosophy, economics, political science and the history of socialism in Slavic countries.

So when we hear BLACK LIVES MATTER co-founder Patrisse Cullors, a protégé of Eric Mann, a former member of the Weather Underground domestic terror organization, which bombed government buildings and police stations in the 1960s and 1970s, who spent years absorbing the Marxist-Leninist ideology telling us “The first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame; myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers, we are trained Marxists, we are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories,” we can see that the well she draws that horse**** from is really quite deep.

But in the end, it all comes back to it being nothing more than a pocketful of mumbles, because it is all based on memorized slogans, not substance, which is why when asked by POLITIFACT to explain why on their list of beliefs was one that has drawn criticism as being consistent with Marxism, that being “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable,” POLITIFACT was met by silence from BLACK LIVES MATTER spokesperson Kailee Scales, the managing director at Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation; and the three co-founders who did not reply to their requests for information.

Outside of spouting even more dogma and slogans, there really wasn’t anything any of them could really say!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-290579

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Sun Oct 11, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 11, 2020 at 6:00 pm

Paul Plante says:

Going back to the mindless drivel you have to absorb to be a good Marxist-Leninist like the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER, who are unable to rationally explain what they mean to the rest of us who don’t bend the knee in submission to them as does Kathy Sheehan, the Democrat mayor of the sanctuary city of Albany, New York, when they state on their list of beliefs one that is consistent with Marxism, that being “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable,” a request for information by POLITIFACT that was met by silence from BLACK LIVES MATTER spokesperson Kailee Scales, the managing director at Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation and the three co-founders because being doctrine and dogma spouters, they really have nothing rational they can say in explanation, because Marxists are indoctrinated, which means they can’t think for themselves, let’s go back for the moment to this statement with respect to the Communist Academy, which would be the source of the dogma spouted by the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER, where we had as follows:

As to the Communist Academy, it was an educational establishment based in Moscow which was intended to allow Marxists to research problems independent of, and implicitly in rivalry with, the Academy of Sciences, which long pre-existed the October Revolution and the subsequent formation of the Soviet Union.

end quotes

Said another way as an American who can think for himself would say it, the Marxists have their own variety of “science” which exists to prove that Marxism is right.

In support of that statement, consider the scholarly article “Marxism and the Philosophy of Science” posted Aug 07, 2019 originally published as “Socialist Alternative” by George Martin Fell Brown (August 1, 2019), where we are informed as follows:

Marxists are primarily known for their concern with the development of human society and political struggle.

end quotes

And there is where we always end up going back to with these Marxists – the STRUGGLE, because for them, the STRUGGLE is what it is always all about.

The STRUGGLE for BLACK LIVES MATTER is at least two-fold, to wit:

1) End white supremacy forever; and

2) Disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families.

Getting back to Marxist science which underlies the dogma the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER are spouting, we have:

As materialists, however, Marxists necessarily look to developments in science and new ways of understanding the material world.

The Marxist interest in science entails both a search for a scientific understanding of the material forces that shape society, as well as the ways social forces shape our scientific understanding itself.

Under capitalism, however, the Marxist interest in science hasn’t been accompanied by an embrace of Marxism by scientists.

Capitalism portrays science as a purely objective phenomenon and considers any attempt at understanding the political implications of science to be an intrusion of ideology into the sphere of objective, scientific neutrality.

end quotes

And as a graduate level engineer who is not a capitalist, nonetheless, I too would say science is, and should be, a purely objective phenomenon, so that any attempt at understanding the political implications of science is an intrusion of ideology into the sphere of objective, scientific neutrality.

Said another way, Marxists cannot be objective, because the purpose of their “science” is to validate the dogma they believe in as trained Marxists.

Getting back to the Marxist view of “science,” we have further as follows:

This distrustful attitude of scientists towards Marxism has been exacerbated by the legacy of Stalinism.

In addition to waging a campaign of bureaucratic counter-revolutionary terror, Stalinism cracked down on significant scientific developments, dismissing genetics, modern physics, and important breakthroughs in psychology, while promoting pseudo-scientific ideas like Lysenkoism.

All of this was done in the name of Marxism, which made it all the easier for capitalists to hold it up as a warning of the danger of letting politics interfere with science.

end quotes

Actually, anybody with a brain in their head who is not blinded by doctrine, dogma and ideology as are the Marxists know that when politics interferes with science, then science becomes pure BULL****, and that doesn’t even require a high school diploma to discern, let alone some kind of advanced degree in the psuedo-science of “sociology,” which takes us back to that paper, as follows:

Through this the forces of both Stalinism and capitalism served to bury a vibrant legacy of genuine Marxist thought concerning questions of science and the philosophy of science.

With this in mind, the recent republication of Helena Sheehan’s “Marxism and the Philosophy of Science” can only be welcomed.

Originally written in 1985, but reprinted at the end of 2017, Sheehan’s book recounts a wide history of serious Marxist thought on science starting with Marx and Engels themselves, and going up to the mass workers’ movements of the 1930s and 1940s.

In keeping with a dialectical conception of science, Marxist ideas aren’t presented as static but evolving through debate and experiment in the face of new scientific and political challenges.

This is a history of revolutionaries grappling with the scientific revolutions of their day, of a flourishing of scientific development in post-revolutionary Russia, of the strangling of that development under Stalinist degeneration, and of a new wave of politicized scientists in the west coming to terms with the political implications of their work.

Sheehan reveals the philosophical outlook of Marxism, often termed “dialectical materialism” to be infinitely more vibrant than the Stalinist caricature that persists in the popular imagination.

More importantly she reveals it to be far more vibrant than the views on science that dominate the capitalist world.

Western, non-Marxist philosophy of science, has created its own historical lineage of figures like Mach, Carnap, Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, and Feyerabend.

This lineage often featured philosophers dramatically overturning the over-simplistic conceptions of their predecessors, only to replace them with new over-simplistic conceptions of their own.

As Sheehan points out “The trajectory of this tradition, from positivism to the current variety of postpositivist philosophies of science, has reflected the pressure of a complex reality upon conceptions too restricted to give an adequate account of it.”

end quotes

And if that last sentence about “(T)he trajectory of this tradition, from positivism to the current variety of postpositivist philosophies of science, has reflected the pressure of a complex reality upon conceptions too restricted to give an adequate account of it” sounds like more ignorant Marxist horse **** based on more slogans and soundbites intended to confuse the reader, that is because it is.

That is why when confronted with a request from POLITIFACT to explain what they mean by the statement “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable,” that request for information by POLITIFACT was met by silence from BLACK LIVES MATTER spokesperson Kailee Scales, the managing director at Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation and the three co-founders because being doctrine and dogma spouters, they really have nothing rational they can say in explanation, because Marxists are indoctrinated, which means they can’t think for themselves.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-290806

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Mon Oct 12, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 12, 2020 at 5:57 pm

Paul Plante says:

And while we are on this subject of the purpose of Marxist science being to justify Marxism, which means that any and all data that does not justify the thesis is discarded, let’s for the moment go to number 3, titled “The Pairing Family,” in section II, “The Family,” of “Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State” by Frederick Engels, where we have as follows:

The communistic household, in which most or all of the women belong to one and the same gens, while the men come from various gentes, is the material foundation of that supremacy of the women which was general in primitive times, and which it is Bachofen’s third great merit to have discovered.

end quotes

There is what the science of Marxism is all about – proving that communism is a natural and superior state of being to the lifestyles we live in the United States today, with our stable, law-abiding nuclear families that are deemed a threat to the Communistic “herd,” which takes us back to Engels, and through Engels forward in time to BLACK LIVES MATTER and its goal to disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families as a way of ending what they call “white supremacy” forever, to wit:

The reports of travelers and missionaries, I may add, to the effect that women among savages and barbarians are overburdened with work in no way contradict what has been said.

The division of labor between the two sexes is determined by quite other causes than by the position of woman in society.

Among peoples where the women have to work far harder than we think suitable, there is often much more real respect for women than among our Europeans.

The lady of civilization, surrounded by false homage and estranged from all real work, has an infinitely lower social position than the hard-working woman of barbarism, who was regarded among her people as a real lady (lady, frowa, Frau – mistress) and who was also a lady in character.

Whether pairing marriage has completely supplanted group marriage in America today is a question to be decided by closer investigation among the peoples still at the upper stage of savagery in the northwest, and particularly in South America.

Among the latter, so many instances of sexual license are related that one can hardly assume the old group marriage to have been completely overcome here.

At any rate, all traces of it have not yet disappeared.

In at least forty North American tribes the man who marries an eldest sister has the right to take all her other sisters as his wives as soon as they are old enough – a relic of the time when a whole line of sisters had husbands in common.

And Bancroft reports of the Indians of the California peninsula (upper stage of savagery) that they have certain festivals when several “tribes” come together for the purpose of promiscuous sexual intercourse.

These “tribes” are clearly gentes, who preserve in these feasts a dim memory of the time when the women of one gens had all the men of the other as their common husbands, and conversely.

The same custom still prevails in Australia.

We find among some peoples that the older men, the chieftains and the magician-priests, exploit the community of wives and monopolize most of the women for themselves; at certain festivals and great assemblies of the people, however, they have to restore the old community of women and allow their wives to enjoy themselves with the young men.

Westermarck (History of Human Marriage, 1891, pp. 28, 29) quotes a whole series of instances of such periodic Saturnalian feasts, when for a short time the old freedom of sexual intercourse is again restored: examples are given among the Hos, the Santals, the Punjas and Kotars in India, among some African peoples, and so forth.

Curiously enough, Westermarck draws the conclusion that these are survivals, not of the group marriage, which he totally rejects, but of the mating season which primitive man had in common with the other animals.

Here we come to Bachofen’s fourth great discovery – the widespread transitional form between group marriage and pairing.

What Bachofen represents as a penance for the transgression of the old divine laws – the penance by which the woman purchases the right of chastity – is in fact only a mystical expression of the penance by which the woman buys herself out of the old community of husbands and acquires the right to give herself to one man only.

This penance consists in a limited surrender: the Babylonian women had to give themselves once a year in the temple of Mylitta; other peoples of Asia Minor sent their girls for years to the temple of Anaitis, where they had to practice free love with favorites of their own choosing before they were allowed to marry.

Similar customs in religious disguise are common to almost all Asiatic peoples between the Mediterranean and the Ganges.

The sacrifice of atonement by which the woman purchases her freedom becomes increasingly lighter in course of time, as Bachofen already noted:

Instead of being repeated annually, the offering is made once only; the hetaerism of the matrons is succeeded by the hetaerism of the maidens; hetaerism during marriage by hetaerism before marriage; surrender to all without choice by surrender to some.
(Mutterrecht, p. xix.)

Among other peoples the religious disguise is absent.

In some cases – among the Thracians, Celts, and others, in classical times, many of the original inhabitants of India, and to this day among the Malayan peoples, the South Sea Islanders and many American Indians – the girls enjoy the greatest sexual freedom up to the time of their marriage.

This is especially the case almost everywhere in South America, as everyone who has gone any distance into the interior can testify.

Thus Agassiz (A Journey in Brazil, Boston and New York, 1868, p. 266) tells this story of a rich family of Indian extraction: when he was introduced to the daughter, he asked after her father, presuming him to be her mother’s husband, who was fighting as an officer in the war against Paraguay; but the mother answered with a smile: “Nao tem pai, e filha da fortuna” (She has no father. She is a child of chance):

It is the way the Indian or half-breed women here always speak of their illegitimate children . . . without an intonation of sadness or of blame….

So far is this from being an unusual case, that… the opposite seems the exception.

Children are frequently quite ignorant of their parentage.

They know about their mother, for all the care and responsibility falls upon her, but they have no knowledge of their father; nor does it seem to occur to the woman that she or her children have any claim upon him.

What seems strange here to civilized people is simply the rule according to mother-right and in group marriage.

end quotes

That is a candid look at the world the Communists want to recreate for all of us alive today.

To go forward into the Communist future, we really are going far back in our past to a much more primitive time when women were deemed common property and paired marriages, and thus, nuclear families, did not exist.

And that is going to make us all real happy and there will be no more wars as a result.

How do I know?

Marxist science says it is so!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-291030

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 29272
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICS

Post by thelivyjr » Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:40 p

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 14, 2020 at 8:23 pm

Paul Plante says:

“I ‘bear no ill-will’ (as Heine says) and nor for that matter does Engels.”

“Neither of us cares a straw for popularity.”

“Let me cite one proof of this: such was my aversion to the personality cult that at the time of the International, when plagued by numerous moves — originating from various countries — to accord me public honour, I never allowed one of these to enter the domain of publicity, nor did I ever reply to them, save with an occasional snub.”

“When Engels and I first joined the secret communist society, we did so only on condition that anything conducive to a superstitious belief in authority be eliminated from the Rules.”

That is an extract of a letter from modern-day cult hero Karl Marx, spiritual father of the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER, to Wilhelm Blos in Hamburg dated 10 November 1877, London, 41 Maitland Park Road, N. W., and it is quite relevant to this discussion of BLACK LIVES MATTER because history clearly demonstrates that subsequent to Marx penning those words, a superstitious belief in authority by the Marxists, who properly be called for what they are – cultists – was not only not eliminated from the Rules, but to the contrary, became enshrined in them, so that while Marx spoke of aversion to the personality cult building around him, the fact is that despite his aversion to being made the cult figure he is today, he is in fact a cult figure and to be a Marxist, you have to become a true believer in Karl Marx as your savior and source of your deliverance.

Thus, you cannot question!

You can only accept!

To question makes you suspect!

If you are suspect, you cannot be a member of the cult.

As to what you cannot question, the Marxist conception of philosophy of science began with Marx and Engels themselves, which it would logically follow it had to, given that the cult is about them.

With respect to Marxist science, which exists to prove that everything Karl Marx said is true and uncontrovertible, the previous century before Marx and Engels in the 1800’s saw the enlightenment promise to do away with religious and idealist ideas once and for all with a thorough-going materialist worldview.

As to a “materialist” worldview, that is an artificial construct, and so, has no concrete meaning, but if you are a Marxist, a true believer, which you have to be to be a Marxist, you treat it as if it were really something concrete, which it isn’t and can never be, being highly subjective as it is, as opposed to objective.

Getting back to the philosophy, “Idealism,” in the philosophical sense, refers to the approach that sees ideas or the spirit as the basis of reality, while “materialism” sees the natural universe as the basis.

By the nineteenth century, materialism had run into hurdles, seeing a resurgence of idealist thought in the form of Hegel, who challenged the rigid, mechanical formulations of the enlightenment ideas.

Hegel, of course, is 19th Century German philosopher, G.W.F. Hegel, and the term “Hegel’s dialectics” refers to the particular dialectical method of argument employed by Hegel, and subsequently by Marx and Engels, which, like other “dialectical” methods, relies on a contradictory process between opposing sides.

Hegel’s claim in both the Phenomenology and the Science of Logic that his philosophy relies on a process of “determinate negation [bestimmte Negation]” has sometimes led scholars to describe his dialectics as a method or doctrine of “determinate negation.”

There are several features of this account that Hegel thought would raise his dialectical method to the level of a genuine science, which it certainly is not, and thus was born the science of Karl Marx that is practiced today by indoctrinated Marxists like the founders of BLACK LIVES MATTER to prove that they are right to disrupt our stable, law-abiding nuclear families.

As to the relationship between Marx and Engels, and Hegel, they came out of the Young Hegelian movement, which tried to more extensively engage in political struggle.

And engaging in these struggles brought Marx and Engels back to materialism, but of a different kind than during the enlightenment.

As to the Young or Left Hegelians, according to Encyclopedia.com, they were the radical disciples of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who formed a rather amorphous school in Germany between the late 1830s and the mid-1840s, which itself was actually another cult, these Germans being big on personality cults, which would give us Adolph Hitler in the 1930s as a counter-force to the Marxist Communists, who in turn have given us BLACK LIVES MATTER here in the United States of America, today.

They flourished in the middle of the period between the Revolution of 1830 in France, when the reactionary Charles X (r. 1824–1830) was deposed, and the wave of revolutions that swept Europe in 1848.

The Young Hegelians were thus both the product and the producers of the potent mixture of religion, philosophy, and politics that fermented in Germany during that seminal period.

Their leading members were David Friedrich Strauss, Arnold Ruge, Bruno and Edgar Bauer, August Cieszkowski, Ludwig Feuerbach, Max Stirner (Johann Kaspar Schmidt), Moses Hess, Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engels.

That potent mixture of religion, philosophy, and politics that fermented in Germany during that seminal period underlies and underpins the BLACK LIVES MATTER movement today, and we should not kid ourselves that it is otherwise.

The focal point of the Young Hegelians was the University of Berlin.

Almost all of them—Bruno and Edgar Bauer, Cieszkowski, Feuerbach, Stirner, Marx, and Engels—had studied philosophy in Berlin.

Apart from Hess and Engels—both to some extent autodidacts in philosophy since their fathers wished them to go into the family business—all the Young Hegelians wished to go on to teach in some form or another, most of them in universities, though Stirner taught in a high school.

Their misfortune was that, owing to their unorthodox ideas, the universities were gradually closed to them and they found themselves without jobs and cut off from society.

Such is the fate of radicals in society when the goal of those radicals is to dismantle or disrupt that society that rejects them for their radical ideas.

And here let me make reference to Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951), which was a United States Supreme Court case relating to Eugene Dennis, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA.

In that case, the Court ruled that Dennis did not have the right under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to exercise free speech, publication and assembly, if the exercise involved the creation of a plot to overthrow the government.

So, yes, people, pretty much all my life, especially when young, I have been hearing these Marxists like the BLACK LIVES MATTER founders talking about the overthrow of our government in this country, which is to say, the Marxists talking about making war on those of us who aren’t Marxists to accomplish their goal, which is why I take very seriously this stated goal of BLACK LIVES MATTER to end white supremacy forever, which with the Marxists involves violent means, as we see by going back to Dennis, to wit:

In 1948, eleven Communist Party leaders were convicted of advocating the violent overthrow of the US government and for the violation of several points of the Smith Act.

The party members who had been petitioning for socialist reforms claimed that the act violated their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and that they served no clear and present danger to the nation.

The trial was held in the Foley Square federal courthouse in New York City, and opened on November 1, 1948; preliminary proceedings and jury selection lasted until January 17, 1949; the defendants first appeared in court on March 7; and the trial concluded on October 14, 1949.

Prosecutor John McGohey did not assert that the defendants had a specific plan to violently overthrow the US government, but rather alleged that the CPUSA’s philosophy generally advocated the violent overthrow of governments.

To prove this, the prosecution proffered articles, pamphlets and books (such as The Communist Manifesto) written by authors such as Karl Marx.

The prosecution argued that the texts advocated violent revolution, and that by adopting the texts as their political foundation, the defendants were also personally guilty of advocating violent overthrow of the government.

The five attorneys who volunteered to defend the communists were familiar with leftist causes and personally supported the defendants’ rights to espouse communist views.

The defense employed a three-pronged strategy: First, portraying the CPUSA as a conventional political party, which promoted socialism by peaceful means; second, employing the “labor defense” tactic to attack the trial as a capitalist venture which could never provide a fair outcome to proletarian defendants; and third, using the trial as an opportunity to publicize CPUSA policies.

The defense deliberately antagonized the judge by making a large number of objections and motions, which led to numerous bitter engagements between the attorneys and Judge Medina.

Out of the chaos, an atmosphere of “mutual hostility” arose between the judge and attorneys.

Medina came to believe that the defense attorneys were using the trial as an opportunity to publicize communist propaganda, and that they deliberately disrupted the trial using any means they could.

Judge Medina attempted to maintain order by removing defendants who were out of order.

In the course of the trial, Medina sent five of the defendants to jail for outbursts.

Several times in July and August, the judge held defense attorneys in contempt of court, and told them their punishment would be meted out upon conclusion of the trial.

On October 14, 1949, after the defense rested their case, the judge gave the jury instructions to guide them in reaching a verdict.

After deliberating for seven and a half hours, the jury returned guilty verdicts against all eleven defendants.

The judge sentenced ten defendants to five years’ imprisonment and a $10,000 fine each.

So, are the Marxists of today like BLACK LIVES MATTER any different?

A question for our times!

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/b ... ent-291677

Post Reply