_dmp_
Member
- Oct 16, 2003
- 854
- 7
- 16
Socialism, the UN, and World Government
self | 04/09/2004 | William Martel
When I began writing this article, I was tempted not to post it. As a rule, I generally do not enjoy thoughts of imminent threat and danger. Still, at any rate, I wanted to put forward some thought which I have been running through my mind for a while now, in order to tie them together and to get feedback. I apologize if it is off the wall, as I generally try to be as reasonable as possible in this forum.
The Democratic Party of the United States of America is hell bent on asking to get the United Nations involved in the Iraqi conflict. The DNC wants to turn over the effort into UN hands. Democrats have always viewed the War on Terror to be a matter of law enforcement, and they act as though war efforts violate international law, as if such a thing existed. International law does not exist without the existence of an international lawmaking body. Furthermore, Democrats support international treaties that border on international regulations, and they support American participation in the International Court, by which American sovereignty would effectively be turned over to a non-American organization.
International Courts imply international law, which in turn implies the notion of an international lawmaking body. An international lawmaking body would have sovereignty over the United States. The UN is not yet an international lawmaking body, but can one deny that it wishes to be?
The UN is a socialist organization. It supports socialist aims and methods. It is an elitist bureaucracy made up of unelected representatives that would presume to dictate its goals to the world. When Republicans and other conservative, non-socialist groups, with the sole exception of one type which will be mentioned later, attempt to work with it, we are opposed. When Democrats and other socialist groups attempt to work with it, they succeed.
It is not a matter of words or ways of approaching the UN. It is a matter of ideologies and organizational unity. I propose that the Democratic Party, along with other socialist parties throughout the world, is simply a wing of the larger UN organization. They all share the exact same ideology that believes government has an overall role in society to regulate the way people live. The unity that exists between them may or may not be formal. That is irrelevant. It is a unity in ideas, in goals, and in desires.
Socialism promotes world unity as a means to peace. Socialism sees regulations as necessary to the survival of man. Socialism claims to believe in improving the lot of the poor and weak in society. It supposedly rejects racism and environmental destruction. It promotes tolerance, and the advancement of secularism as a means of compromise between the various religions throughout the world, so as to stop conflict. On its face, Socialism seems benign. It is a very easy ideology to accept. Socialism is an ideology handcrafted for the acceptance of the masses, which are easily manipulated by fine sounding words and ideas. Its proponents claim to desire to create an order based on the common good.
There are two types of socialists. There is the type of socialist who actually buys into the ideology outlined above, and then there is the type of socialist who sees the socialist ideology for what it is, a means to an end. The former tends to be the common-man socialist, while the latter tends to be the type whom actually wields power. Socialism, at its higher levels, is about power. It creates a rationalization for the existence of government, along with a rationalization for its active involvement in peoples lives. It is the type of ideology that every dictator, king, and emperor in times past would have dreamt of having within their lands! It turns government from a necessary evil that is only slightly tolerated into a supposedly benign entity that, although it may make occasional mistakes, works towards improving the lot of the people! Results are not necessary, as long as the government is working towards its goals. Socialism is a tyrants dream!
Socialists understand that they must work together if they are to promote socialism. Coexistence is the foundation upon which the rest of the structure is to be built. Peace is the key. Regardless of whether there is an active conspiracy between socialists in the United States and socialists in the United Nations is irrelevant. Socialists, both the honest and dishonest type, understand implicitly that they must work together, especially with organizations that promote their overall aims! Socialists in America, Socialists in Europe, and Socialists in Asia all understand this. Modern socialism is internationalist in scope.
Since the time of its existence, the United Nations has had a hand in education throughout the world. After two world wars, and throughout the Cold War, peace and understanding were seen as instrumental to the survival of man. School kids were indoctrinated with a sort of awe regarding the United Nations. They grew up viewing it as having a sense of legitimacy. It certainly did not hurt the socialist cause that people with socialist aims entered the education system to indoctrinate students into their cause. Throughout their youth, most people are quite malleable. Their views are easily shaped by emotion, and the views they gain in childhood are not easily changed when they become adults.
Professions that require large amounts of education tend to be filled with socialists, whether they are admitted or whether they do not even recognize themselves as socialists. The media in particular is filled with socialists. This is why they place such a large degree of emphasis on the UN and the Democratic Party. It is not merely because they are shills for the DNC it is because they share the socialist ideology that values cooperation between socialists for the sake of the advancement of socialism! They most likely do this in good conscience, and do not really believe that they are doing it. Socialists in America do not realize that they are socialists, firstly, and secondly those infected with the belief of socialism tend to believe that socialism is the greater good. From the modernist worldview they embrace, perhaps it logically follows. However, it reasonably follows that they are going to work for the advancement of socialist aims. Democrats represent that, so they support them, although perhaps it is not the organizational loyalty in which we are inclined to believe. Their loyalty is to international socialism, and they merely support its proponents. This is true in the media throughout the world. In nations without the presence of talk radio and other non-socialist outlets, what the media says is truth. This is why the rest of the world seems to be socialist. They have no real alternative.
The rest of the world will never do anything other than oppose American efforts as long as our agenda is not socialist. The more we act in a manner contrary to the international socialism that they accept, the more likely it is that they will oppose us. It is a sad fact that they most likely will accept us, in fact, will only accept us, if we give the Democrats control of the country. This is not an option.
I mentioned earlier that there is one conservative group that socialists are not likely to oppose: the Islamist fanatics. I do not believe that this is because they truly fear the Islamists, for if they did they would certainly be working against them. I believe that the socialists see Islamic fanaticism as a means to an end, and thus they tolerate it and protect Islamists for this reason and this reason alone. Terrorism, by its very nature, breeds fear. Islamist terrorism is a cause that everyone wishes to crush, even those who do not support our War on Terror. Is it possible that socialists see in terrorism the purpose for the United Nations as it enters the 21st Century? Terrorism is certainly internationalist in scope, and it definitely requires an international response. If terrorism is to be handled, as socialists believe, as a matter of law enforcement, then it reasonably follows that there is a need for an international organization with lawmaking and law enforcement capabilities, as well as with judicial abilities to interpret those laws. Terrorism has all the potential to give the United Nations the world government status which it has always desired.
The United States threatens that plan. We have shown that individual nations, working together outside of the UN framework, are perfectly capable of dealing with such threats without kowtowing to notions of international law. We do not need to kneel at the altar of the United Nations to protect our country and its citizens. We, apart from much of the rest of the world, do not, as a rule, wish to embrace socialism. Despite the complaints one may have against the Bush Administration, it has actively worked to set back the socialist agenda in this country, and it is for that reason that they seek to destroy the president at every opportunity. It is the reason much of the rest of the world vilifies us as fascists. Socialists are convinced that any who oppose the advancement of socialism are fascists, despite the fact that fascists were oftentimes socialist in their views and goals.
To pave the way for a Democrat win is to pave the way to UN dominance over this country, along with the rest of the world. It is to set the stage for even greater promotion of the materialistic secularist view upon which socialism is based. We must prevail in the War on Terror not only to protect ourselves from fanatic Islamists, but also to prove to the world that the United Nations is not necessary to deal with such threats. In the process, we must continue to remember that our greater battle is with socialism itself, and that to allow it to prevail is to allow for the eventual demise of our freedom.
self | 04/09/2004 | William Martel
When I began writing this article, I was tempted not to post it. As a rule, I generally do not enjoy thoughts of imminent threat and danger. Still, at any rate, I wanted to put forward some thought which I have been running through my mind for a while now, in order to tie them together and to get feedback. I apologize if it is off the wall, as I generally try to be as reasonable as possible in this forum.
The Democratic Party of the United States of America is hell bent on asking to get the United Nations involved in the Iraqi conflict. The DNC wants to turn over the effort into UN hands. Democrats have always viewed the War on Terror to be a matter of law enforcement, and they act as though war efforts violate international law, as if such a thing existed. International law does not exist without the existence of an international lawmaking body. Furthermore, Democrats support international treaties that border on international regulations, and they support American participation in the International Court, by which American sovereignty would effectively be turned over to a non-American organization.
International Courts imply international law, which in turn implies the notion of an international lawmaking body. An international lawmaking body would have sovereignty over the United States. The UN is not yet an international lawmaking body, but can one deny that it wishes to be?
The UN is a socialist organization. It supports socialist aims and methods. It is an elitist bureaucracy made up of unelected representatives that would presume to dictate its goals to the world. When Republicans and other conservative, non-socialist groups, with the sole exception of one type which will be mentioned later, attempt to work with it, we are opposed. When Democrats and other socialist groups attempt to work with it, they succeed.
It is not a matter of words or ways of approaching the UN. It is a matter of ideologies and organizational unity. I propose that the Democratic Party, along with other socialist parties throughout the world, is simply a wing of the larger UN organization. They all share the exact same ideology that believes government has an overall role in society to regulate the way people live. The unity that exists between them may or may not be formal. That is irrelevant. It is a unity in ideas, in goals, and in desires.
Socialism promotes world unity as a means to peace. Socialism sees regulations as necessary to the survival of man. Socialism claims to believe in improving the lot of the poor and weak in society. It supposedly rejects racism and environmental destruction. It promotes tolerance, and the advancement of secularism as a means of compromise between the various religions throughout the world, so as to stop conflict. On its face, Socialism seems benign. It is a very easy ideology to accept. Socialism is an ideology handcrafted for the acceptance of the masses, which are easily manipulated by fine sounding words and ideas. Its proponents claim to desire to create an order based on the common good.
There are two types of socialists. There is the type of socialist who actually buys into the ideology outlined above, and then there is the type of socialist who sees the socialist ideology for what it is, a means to an end. The former tends to be the common-man socialist, while the latter tends to be the type whom actually wields power. Socialism, at its higher levels, is about power. It creates a rationalization for the existence of government, along with a rationalization for its active involvement in peoples lives. It is the type of ideology that every dictator, king, and emperor in times past would have dreamt of having within their lands! It turns government from a necessary evil that is only slightly tolerated into a supposedly benign entity that, although it may make occasional mistakes, works towards improving the lot of the people! Results are not necessary, as long as the government is working towards its goals. Socialism is a tyrants dream!
Socialists understand that they must work together if they are to promote socialism. Coexistence is the foundation upon which the rest of the structure is to be built. Peace is the key. Regardless of whether there is an active conspiracy between socialists in the United States and socialists in the United Nations is irrelevant. Socialists, both the honest and dishonest type, understand implicitly that they must work together, especially with organizations that promote their overall aims! Socialists in America, Socialists in Europe, and Socialists in Asia all understand this. Modern socialism is internationalist in scope.
Since the time of its existence, the United Nations has had a hand in education throughout the world. After two world wars, and throughout the Cold War, peace and understanding were seen as instrumental to the survival of man. School kids were indoctrinated with a sort of awe regarding the United Nations. They grew up viewing it as having a sense of legitimacy. It certainly did not hurt the socialist cause that people with socialist aims entered the education system to indoctrinate students into their cause. Throughout their youth, most people are quite malleable. Their views are easily shaped by emotion, and the views they gain in childhood are not easily changed when they become adults.
Professions that require large amounts of education tend to be filled with socialists, whether they are admitted or whether they do not even recognize themselves as socialists. The media in particular is filled with socialists. This is why they place such a large degree of emphasis on the UN and the Democratic Party. It is not merely because they are shills for the DNC it is because they share the socialist ideology that values cooperation between socialists for the sake of the advancement of socialism! They most likely do this in good conscience, and do not really believe that they are doing it. Socialists in America do not realize that they are socialists, firstly, and secondly those infected with the belief of socialism tend to believe that socialism is the greater good. From the modernist worldview they embrace, perhaps it logically follows. However, it reasonably follows that they are going to work for the advancement of socialist aims. Democrats represent that, so they support them, although perhaps it is not the organizational loyalty in which we are inclined to believe. Their loyalty is to international socialism, and they merely support its proponents. This is true in the media throughout the world. In nations without the presence of talk radio and other non-socialist outlets, what the media says is truth. This is why the rest of the world seems to be socialist. They have no real alternative.
The rest of the world will never do anything other than oppose American efforts as long as our agenda is not socialist. The more we act in a manner contrary to the international socialism that they accept, the more likely it is that they will oppose us. It is a sad fact that they most likely will accept us, in fact, will only accept us, if we give the Democrats control of the country. This is not an option.
I mentioned earlier that there is one conservative group that socialists are not likely to oppose: the Islamist fanatics. I do not believe that this is because they truly fear the Islamists, for if they did they would certainly be working against them. I believe that the socialists see Islamic fanaticism as a means to an end, and thus they tolerate it and protect Islamists for this reason and this reason alone. Terrorism, by its very nature, breeds fear. Islamist terrorism is a cause that everyone wishes to crush, even those who do not support our War on Terror. Is it possible that socialists see in terrorism the purpose for the United Nations as it enters the 21st Century? Terrorism is certainly internationalist in scope, and it definitely requires an international response. If terrorism is to be handled, as socialists believe, as a matter of law enforcement, then it reasonably follows that there is a need for an international organization with lawmaking and law enforcement capabilities, as well as with judicial abilities to interpret those laws. Terrorism has all the potential to give the United Nations the world government status which it has always desired.
The United States threatens that plan. We have shown that individual nations, working together outside of the UN framework, are perfectly capable of dealing with such threats without kowtowing to notions of international law. We do not need to kneel at the altar of the United Nations to protect our country and its citizens. We, apart from much of the rest of the world, do not, as a rule, wish to embrace socialism. Despite the complaints one may have against the Bush Administration, it has actively worked to set back the socialist agenda in this country, and it is for that reason that they seek to destroy the president at every opportunity. It is the reason much of the rest of the world vilifies us as fascists. Socialists are convinced that any who oppose the advancement of socialism are fascists, despite the fact that fascists were oftentimes socialist in their views and goals.
To pave the way for a Democrat win is to pave the way to UN dominance over this country, along with the rest of the world. It is to set the stage for even greater promotion of the materialistic secularist view upon which socialism is based. We must prevail in the War on Terror not only to protect ourselves from fanatic Islamists, but also to prove to the world that the United Nations is not necessary to deal with such threats. In the process, we must continue to remember that our greater battle is with socialism itself, and that to allow it to prevail is to allow for the eventual demise of our freedom.
:
