Mediaboss Marketing

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall! announced President Ronald Reagan at the Berlin Wall, June 12, 1987.

Begun after Lenins Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, the Soviet Union existed from 1922 to 1991. With its motto Workers of the World, Unite! the Soviet tactic was to train agitators, community organizers, labor organizers, and agent provocateurs provoking agents. These would organize people with grievances and stir up riots to subvert and tear down the existing government. When social chaos caused major domestic disruptions, the public would then willingly accept a new order. Unfortunately, rather than a wonderful utopian society of equality, the efforts of these naive useful idiots simply paved the way for martial law and a military communist dictatorship.

Franklin Roosevelt addressed Delegates of the American Youth Congress, Feb. 10, 1940: Some of you are Communists. You have no American right, by act or deed of any kind, to subvert the government and the Constitution of this Nation.

Instead of setting up a workers paradise, power was usurped by communist dictators who exercised totalitarian life and death control over some 293 million people across 11 time zones.

Addressing naive students that thought communism would redistribute wealth equally, President Franklin Roosevelt told the American Youth Congress, Feb. 10, 1940: The Soviet Union is run by a dictatorship as absolute as any other dictatorship in the world.

Under the Soviet dictatorship:

Vladimir Lenin stated: The goal of socialism is communism.

Roosevelt stated Feb. 10, 1940: I disliked the regimentation under Communism. I abhorred the indiscriminate killings of thousands of innocent victims. I heartily deprecated the banishment of religion, though I knew that some day Russia would return to religion for the simple reason that four or five thousand years of recorded history have proven that mankind has always believed in God in spite of many abortive attempts to exile God.

President Harry S Truman stated Jan. 20, 1949: Communism is based on the belief that man is so weak and inadequate that he is unable to govern himself, and therefore requires the rule of strong masters. Democracy is based on the conviction that man has the moral and intellectual capacity, as well as the inalienable right, to govern himself with reason and justice.

Truman continued: Communism subjects the individual to arrest without lawful cause, punishment without trial, and forced labor as a chattel of the state. It decrees what information he shall receive, what art he shall produce, what leaders he shall follow, and what thoughts he shall think. Democracy maintains that government is established for the benefit of the individual, and is charged with the responsibility of protecting the rights of the individual and his freedom. These differences between Communism and Democracy do not concern the United States alone. People everywhere are coming to realize that what is involved is material well-being, human dignity, and the right to believe in and worship God.

President Ronald Reagan began his address at Berlins Brandenburg Gate, June 12, 1987: Twenty-four years ago, President John F. Kennedy visited Berlin, speaking to the people of this city and the world. Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic, south, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash. There remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state.

Reagan continued: Just as truth can flourish only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic freedom. There stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

Reagan added: Perhaps this gets to the root of the matter, to the most fundamental distinction of all between East and West. The totalitarian world produces backwardness because it does such violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to enjoy, to worship. The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love and of worship an affront.

Reagan concluded: Years ago the East Germans erected a secular structure: the television tower at Alexander Platz. Virtually ever since, the authorities have been working to correct what they view as the towers one major flaw, treating the glass sphere at the top with paints and chemicals of every kind. Yet even today when the sun strikes that sphere that sphere that towers over all Berlin the light makes the sign of the cross. There in Berlin, like the city itself, symbols of love, symbols of worship, cannot be suppressed.

Ronald Reagans vice president was George H.W. Bush, born June 12, 1924. Early in his career, George H.W. Bush served as the head of the U.S. Liaison Office in Beijing. Bush told Amish and Mennonite leaders in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, March 22, 1989: Barbara and I went to China as your emissary in 1974, and we had wondered about the family in China Communist country, totalitarian. We knew that there had been almost entire banning on practicing and teaching Christianity. This was right after the Cultural Revolution.

Though as president, George H.W. Bush advocated an internationalist foreign policy, as indicated in his cryptic dream of a new world order speech, Sept. 11, 1990, he nevertheless acknowledged role of religion in Americas founding.

President George H.W. Bush stated in his inaugural address, Jan. 20, 1989: I have just repeated word for word the oath taken by George Washington 200 years ago, and the Bible on which I place my hand is the Bible on which he placed his. And my first act as President is a prayer. I ask you to bow your heads.

On Feb. 22, 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed Joint Resolution 164 declaring 1990 the International Year of Bible Reading: Among the great books produced throughout the history of mankind, the Bible has been prized above all others. The Bible has had a critical impact upon the development of Western civilization. It was a biblical view of man one affirming the dignity and worth of the human person, made in the image of our Creator that inspired the principles upon which the United States is founded. The historic speeches of Abraham Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., provide compelling evidence of the role Scripture played in shaping the struggle against slavery and discrimination. We recall the words of the prophet Isaiah, who declared, The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; but the word of our God shall stand forever. When you have read the Bible you will know that it is the Word of God. Now, therefore, I, George Bush, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim the year 1990 as the International Year of Bible Reading. I invite all Americans to discover the great inspiration and knowledge that can be obtained through thoughtful reading of the Bible.

Discover more of Bill Federers eye-opening books and videos in the WND Superstore!

On May 3, 1990, President George H.W. Bush declared a national day of prayer: The great faith that led our Nations Founding Fathers to pursue this bold experience in self-government has sustained us in uncertain and perilous times. Like them, we do very well to recall our firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, and to pray for continued help and guidance from our wise and loving Creator.

In his 1992 national day of prayer proclamation, President George H.W. Bush stated: Whatever our individual religious convictions may be, each of us is invited to join in this National Day of Prayer. Each of us can echo this timeless prayer of Solomon, the ancient king who prayed for, and received, the gift of wisdom: The Lord our God be with us, as He was with our fathers; may He not leave us or forsake us; so that He may incline our hearts to Him, to walk in all His waysthat all the peoples of the earth may know that the Lord is God; there is no other.'

President George H.W. Bush stated in his Christmas message, Dec. 8, 1992: As we celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, whose life offers us a model of dignity, compassion, and justice, we renew our commitment to peace. Christ made clear the redemptive value of giving of oneself for others. The heroic actions of our veterans, the lifesaving work of our scientists and physicians, and generosity of countless individuals who voluntarily give of their time, talents, and energy to help others all have enriched humankind and affirmed the importance of our Judeo-Christian heritage in shaping our government and values.

Brought to you by AmericanMinute.com.

Discover more of Bill Federers eye-opening books and videos in the WND Superstore!

See the original post:
True goal of socialism from the horse's mouth - WND - WND.com

The Liberty Conservative

Study Indicates Weak Men Prefer Socialism The Liberty Conservative The Liberty Conservative is an online political magazine devoted to the vision of less government and more liberty in achieving true prosperity for all. We intend to accomplish this by informing and educating our readers on our core principles of free ...

Read the original here:
Study Indicates Weak Men Prefer Socialism - The Liberty Conservative

Unlike its failed predecessor, this new, greener socialism seeks not to weaken, but rather to preserve, the emerging class structure. Brown and his acolytes have slowed upward mobility by environment restrictions that have cramped home production of all kinds, particularly the building of moderate-cost single-family homes on the periphery. All of this, at a time when millennials nationwide, contrary to the assertion of Browns smart growth allies, are beginning to buy cars, homes and move to the suburbs.

In contrast, many in Sacramento appear to have disdain for expanding the California dream of property ownership. The states planners are creating policies that will ultimately lead to the effective socialization of the regulated housing market, as more people are unable to afford housing without subsidies. Increasingly, these efforts are being imposed with little or no public input by increasingly opaque regional agencies.

To these burdens, there are now growing calls for a single-payer health care system which, in principle, is not a terrible idea, but it will include the undocumented, essentially inviting the poor to bring their sick relatives here. The state Senate passed the bill without identifying a funding source to pay the estimated $400 billion annual cost, leading even former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to describe it as snake oil. It may be more like hemlock for Californias middle-income earners, who, even with the cost of private health care removed, would have to fork over an estimated $50 billion to $100 billion a year in new taxes to pay for it.

In the end, we are witnessing the continuation of an evolving class war, pitting the oligarchs and their political allies against the states diminished middle and working classes.

Go here to read the rest:
California's descent to socialism - Hot Air

Can pro wrestling, a medium with a history of bare-faced antagonism towards leftist politics, exist under socialism?

I think its contingent on the degree to which wrestlers and others in the business identify with the working class.

Its a spectrum. On one end, you have Zack Sabre Jr, who speaks out against neoliberalism and recently raised money for the ACLU. On the other, you have Matt Striker, who was, as I was writing this, using Twitter to mock the reporter assaulted by Greg Gianforte, a Montana Republican who was subsequently elected to Congress, and speak against a living wage for fast food workers.

Where there isnt wrestling, people will create their own. Ive seen enough lips busted on trampoline frames to know this. Whether or not we can develop a class consciousness within this industry will determine whether we have to start from scratch or if that knowledge, training and character that we identify with pro wrestling now will be preserved in this new iteration.

This isnt to downplay the irrevocable influences on wrestling that socialism would have. They are substantial, perhaps even drastic. Still, I think theyre necessary to ensure that the compassionate, sustainable future we advocate for is extended to wrestling (a thing many leftists love, often despite ourselves).

Longer Careers, Shorter Title Reigns

Whatever shape the political apparatus of a socialist America takes, its safe to say that industries and business will be run as worker co-ops, directed and managed democratically by the workers. Theres no reason wrestling would be the exception.

With the abolition of rent and wage labor, the incentive to grind your knees down on multiple house shows a week will be low. And everyone will be involved in local committee projects anyway; theyll need those knees to build houses and plant arugula.

How would you book yourself if you were focused on longevity? More tag matches, triple threats, battle royals. More chances to do spots and wow crowds while getting a few breathers in the corner.

Those add up to a longer, if less illustrious, career. Legacies like Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair and Kazuchika Okada are the result of a singular vision focused on capital. Titles, if they exist, could become a means of collective recognition of labor and talent.

In theory, at least. If you, say, had a habit of defecating in your co-workers gym bags in the previous regime, youre probably gonna be voted to lose. A lot.

The Tag Title Will Become The Top Title

The structures of wrestling reflect our values. The great man babyface perceives that being himself, by himself, reflects American ideals of individualism, distrust of teamwork, and frustration at the weak-willed, ineffectual governing apparatus that exists only to fetter their attempts to win custody of their adopted son.

A collectivist wrestling company living in a collectivist society will reflect that in its booking. An example of this would be CHIKARAs Campeonatas de Parajas, a tag title that preceded its equivalent of a world title by 5 years; I see a correlation in the increasing prestige of a top singles title with the CHIKARA brands transition from that of a local, community-supported indie fed to a destination for indie talent from all over the world.

Its possible this will extend beyond tag teams, and that wrestling promotions will break out into rival factions of varying alignments, like NJPW has right now. For one, it accurately reflects political discourse in a multi-tendency, big tent organization like the DSA.

On that note, it never fails to crack me up to see Bullet Club, a faction formed to antagonize a homogenous, xenophobic society with multiculturalism, in the Twitter avatars of white nationalists.

A Return To Rasslin

Wrestling has long run on a particular cycle of acquisition. The big companies see a trend in the smaller that they want to appropriate, and then buy up all the wrestlers they can who fit that trend, incorporating it into the mainstream style and forcing the remaining indies to find something new. CCK subtly references to this occurring to the new British style in their recent promo for PROGRESS.

Without this engine of imposition, the need for a rapidly developed diversity of hyper-specialized wrestling styles will be low. And some wrestlers, a demographic that leans hard to the right, will just quit the sport entirely. Less knowledge to be passed on to wrestlers who work less matches and travel less.

That will facilitate a return to basics. More rasslin, more catch-as-catch-can, more literal amateur hour.

I think this can be good. Part of what makes Lucha Underground, Hoodslam and Party World Rasslin beautiful is their ability to reach people who dont necessarily identify as wrestling fans by focusing on crafting their own narratives and culture instead of maintaining a certain fluency in current wrestling trends. Another part: they make Jim Cornette mad.

The Revolution At Ringside

What does it mean to distribute wealth? A capitalist might say Its whenever I have $2 and you have $0, you take $1 from me to make it even. Which isnt inaccurate.

A more fleshed out realization of it (in the simplest terms) would be if, whenever you have $2 and I have $0, I take that $1 while we work to abolish the things that require money (rent, lack of food access, etc) and then the money, now evenly distributed, is worthless.

So, in an economy that is in the process of, or has even completed the destruction of currency, who gets the best seats in the house? Maybe its the workers. Maybe its the syndicate or commune that collectively own the stadium.

I like to think that, if we use the Marxist axiom of from each according to their ability to each according to their need, we could start giving those ringside seats to the people who need them mostkids, seniors, disabled people.

Whatever we decide, it means some tall asshole in an nWo shirt who refuses to sit down cant block your view and ruin the show. We call that improving material conditions.

In Soviet America, Ref Bumps You

Pro wrestling referees are the definition of failing upward. Theyre prized for their incompetence, cowardice and impotent biases.They largely exist to prevent the face from achieving their goals or enact justice on heels.

This is what people like Vince McMahon and your neighbor who watches too much Fox News thinks about institutions who want to hold people to playing by the rules: weak-willed, easily circumvented, and unable to do whats necessary to bring the ill-willed to heel.

The process by which we achieve socialism in America would fundamentally change this systemic perception of justice. A bloodless grassroots revolution could lead to referees being heroic mediators who desperately try to keep carnage from all sides from boiling over.

An authoritarian vanguard could mean referees who impose order through force. A multi-tendency revolution could lead to sectarian refs endlessly feuding over slight variations of ideology.

Not all of these outcomes would necessarily make the product compelling. Thats the bad news.

The good news is the abolition of wages means thered be no one to sell contraband t-shirts to, so Earl Hebner can have his job back.

In a capitalist system, projects and institutions exist according to their capacity to generate (and/or extract) capital. If socialism is enacted in the United States, it will fundamentally change the social contract and conditions by which industries and institutions function. Anything you want to preserve amidst such a sea change needs a plan of adaptation.

If the thought of adjusting pro wrestling to accommodate a socialist society fills you with disgust or rage, I think its worth interrogating whether your attachment is actually to wrestling or to the society it reflects (before you answer: remember, we are revolting against that society).

Whatcha gonna do, comrade, when the proletariat dismantles the systems of exploitation running wild on you?

Jetta Rae is a writer and organizer based in Oakland. She runs the leftist food blog FRY HAVOC and can be found on Twitter.

Read more from the original source:
What Pro Wrestling Would Look Like Under Socialism - Paste Magazine

John Stossel 10:00 a.m. ET June 9, 2017

20/20 - JOHN STOSSEL(Photo: STEVE FENN, ABC)

Lovers of socialism didnt like my column last week. I wrote that Venezuelas collapse shows the cluelessness of celebrities like Michael Moore, Oliver Stone and Noam Chomsky, whod praised Venezuelas leader.

Chomsky called me an utter coward for mocking him and said he expected an abject apology.

He wont get one. As Venezuelan-born filmmaker Thor Halvorssen puts it, Chomsky provided cover for a regime where 11,500 infants died from lack of medical care.

But assigning blame matters less than what should be done now. After the regime collapses, what comes next?

How about trying capitalism?

Thats what Erick Brimen suggests. Brimen grew up in Venezuela, then moved to America, where he started NeWAY Capital, a firm dedicated to creating what he calls prosperity cities, small places that create the environment for success.

Venezuela desperately needs that. Last week I helped my mother escape, Brimen writes. The violence is getting too intense, and, in one of the most agriculturally rich countries in the world, it is increasingly difficult to find food.

Capitalists like Brimen arent just motivated by greed. They want to rescue others from the tragedy of centrally planned economies.

Living in Venezuela made me realize the traditional approach to politics is too often ineffective, explains Brimen. If successful countries, like Venezuela and Greece, can be turned into basket cases by demagogues promising things they cant deliver, we have a systemic problem. (W)e must find a new approach.

His plan: Because its usually impossible to convince central planners to give up power, just get them to give up a little bit of power, in one small location at a time, as an experiment.

Similar ideas have been pushed with different names free trade zones, empowerment zones, charter cities but I like Brimens term: prosperity cities.

These are small places where government leaves people mostly free to pursue their own interests. Government keeps the peace, protects peoples bodies and property, but doesnt impose high taxes or burdensome rules.

Hong Kong is a prosperity city. It was once little more than a rock in the sea near China, but because the island was ruled by the British when Communists took over the rest of China, Hong Kong became a haven for freedom-seeking people.

The British enforced rule of law they punished people who stole or killed. But then they did something unusual, something wonderful, something politicians rarely do: They left people alone.

By doing that, the British allowed Chinese entrepreneurs to try new things. Free people created astounding wealth. By the end of the 20th century, Hong Kong had a higher per capita income than Great Britain itself.

So we know what works: rule of law, plus economic freedom. Yet billions remain in poverty because politicians wont allow them that freedom.

In poor countries, bureaucrats micromanage almost everything. Writes Brimen, Resolving a dispute in Sub-Saharan Africa takes 655 days. It is no surprise Sub-Saharan Africa has remained mired in poverty.

Today Dubai could be called a prosperity city. Dubai is not free in all the ways I would like, but because the Dubai International Financial Centre is mostly free, it became rich in a decade.

Even the Communist Chinese experiment with free zones. Shenzhen, for example, grew from a small fishing village to a metropolitan area with 16 million people largely because of the creation of a special economic zone.

Now Brimen wants to replicate that. We target uninhabited areas near major population centers and infrastructure and collaborate with the host government to enact the necessary reforms for economic growth. Instead of riots, there would be festivals. Instead of empty supermarkets, there would be feasts.

Puerto Rico could host a prosperity city. Instead of wallowing in debt and begging the mainland for handouts, the people of Puerto Rico would teach the rest of us lessons.

Likewise, the United States could turn Guantanamo Bay into a prosperity city, showing the Cuban people the power of freedom.

If freedom and markets worked well for Hong Kong, and a poor country once called colonial America, then why not liberate the whole world?

You can contact John Stossel at info@creators.com.

Read or Share this story: http://press.sn/2s4dpNk

Excerpt from:
Chip away at socialism with prosperity cities - Press & Sun-Bulletin