I have been doing a lot of reading lately. ALOT of reading. I have found great value in old books, many of which are out of print. I recently raided my fathers bookshelf, and came away with W. Cleon Skousen’s THE NAKED COMMUNIST. Dad told me that in the 1960′s and 1970s that this was a required textbook for high school seniors and college freshmen. My interest in the book stemmed from the realization that I knew little of the nuts and bolts of communism. I graduated high school in 1997. I was ten when the Berlin Wall fell. For my generation, there was no perceived need to really scratch the surface on Communism, since the Cold War was over.
I am currently reading “Voices of Revolution, 1917″ by Mark Steinberg. While I have only gotten through a few chapters so far, I feel compelled to write about some obvious parallels between Russia (between February and October 1917) and the USA RIGHT NOW.
One example is the recent campaign against Fox News by Obama and his faithful minions Anita Dunn and David Axelrod. Obama and his ilk are the leftist progressives in Russia in the fall months of 1917 calling for closure of “Borgeois” newspapers for “foul lies and slander” directed at them.
The book says that these leftist progressives “Evidently believed that true freedom necessitated silencing the voices who opposed the struggles and demands of workers, soldiers, & peasants” and thus threatened the “freedoms won through revolution”.
In my opinion, to Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the other progressives that currently control the United States government, the Obama victory in the 2008 election was the Revolution, and they truly believe that their big government will bring freedom to the workers (SEIU), soldiers (via apology, diplomacy, and nuclear disarmament), and peasants (illegal immigrants, minorities, the poor – and interest groups like ACORN who purport to work in the interest of them)
The liberal progressives in control view their worker/soldier/peasant base as those oppressed by the bourgeoise (conservatives and the upper and middle class). The Bourgeoise is the oppressor, and Fox news represents their voice.
I have a feeling that this may just be part one of a series of commentary on the parallels of the current situation in the US and 1917 Russia.
Steve Maley
Neil Stevens
Daniel Horowitz
I haven't read these yet
TxTess (Diary) Wednesday, October 21st at 5:16PM EST (link)but it sounds like I need to. While you are reading older books, look into G.K. Chesterton. He wrote during the early 1900′s. It is amazing how much he wrote then is applicable today.
Because I walk softly and carry a big Lipstick – Lori_Z at Red State
I will have to check it out...
cowgirl_from_hell (Diary) Wednesday, October 21st at 5:48PM EST (link)You also might want to check out the book “Patriots” by James Wesley Rawles. It is not an old book, but it is one of my favorites
Reading will set you free.
mosander Thursday, October 22nd at 6:01AM EST (link)Or common sense. Using basis logic about the HUGE spending spree must be designed to cause economic collapse. It can not logically be to “create Jobs” because it hasn’t created any jobs except for Marxist czars. Unite and educate the poor before they die of starvation, which is what will happen. The rest of us will be shot, our property stolen and our grandchildren of the corn will toil and never reach success. What the Democrats don’t understand is that they will be eliminated as well, once there usefulness is at an end.
But they are right that Fox isn't a true news organization
bk (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 6:13AM EST (link)Their definition of a newspaper is one that doesn’t investigate or question anything – they just report as news whatever the White House press releases contain.
Their definition of a news network is one that has fawning liberal hosts who kiss the feet of their WH-approved guests and have idle chat with the people (let’s call them correspondents rather than reporters) who are sent out to suck up to Robert Gibbs and company in person.
So under their definition, Fox isn’t really a news organization at all.
Seriously though, this WH has unlimited power with no checks and balances and is not afraid to use it. As I said in another thread, you can only wonder whether the next steps are to punish execs of companies who advertise on Fox and to punish any “news” organizations that cooperate with Fox in any way. How long before Fox is denied press access to Obama events? How long before the pay czar decides executive pay based on where the company spends its advertising dollars? Nothing is too far-fetched to imagine with this crew.
I don't think they'll try that.
The_Gadfly (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 7:20AM EST (link)I’m sure they’d LIKE to try that, but I really don’t think they are stupid enough to do it from the White House. A freedom of information request there, an ambush video here, and oh yeah, a lawsuit against The Big 0 for violating the First Amendment. Because actions taken by the government to silence someone based on point of view are one of the few things the court has been consistent about. And they actually seem to man up and take offense when that one is broken. In some ways I’d almost like to see them try that from the White House.
Why not?
bk (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 7:55AM EST (link)They can choose to issue press credentials to whomever they wish. If they claim Fox isn’t a news channel, then why should they get press passes any more than the Weekly World News or whatever?
And the pay czar can make arbitrary cuts for any arbitrary reason to the companies he oversees. He can always lie about the reason why.
Sure, judges are likely to be on the press’s side. But Obama could tie them up in knots.
lets play pretend for a minute
cowgirl_from_hell (Diary) Thursday, October 22nd at 5:37PM EST (link)That implies that you still believe that they have our country’s best interest at heart because they are in congress or in the whitehouse. Just for a minute……PRETEND THEY DON’T
When you do that, all of the things they are doing make more sense and seem to serve a glaringly obvious purpose.