STOP the Stimulus Package! STOP the Coup d’etat of Obama and the Democrats In Congress from Invoking Cloward-Piven Strategy to Change America From Capitalism to Socialism!

First we know Obama was instructed in the Cloward-Piven strategy to engage in a coup d’etat to invoke the revolution against Capitalism to force Socialism in America.

1. Read the Cloward-Piven strategy

2. Then read the article AT THE END OF THIS BLOG!

For those unfamiliar with the Cloward-Piven strategy:

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky

as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one.

The authors noted that the number of Americans subsisting on welfare — about 8 million, at the time — probably represented less than half the number who were technically eligible for full benefits. They proposed a “massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls.” 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Cloward and Piven calculated that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand their entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, they predicted, would be “a profound financial and political crisis” that would unleash “powerful forces … for major economic reform at the national level.”

 

Their article called for “cadres of aggressive organizers” to use “demonstrations to create a climate of militancy.” Intimidated by threats of black violence, politicians would appeal to the federal government for help. Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of “a federal program of income redistribution,” in the form of a guaranteed living income for all — working and non-working people alike.

 Local officials would clutch at this idea like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it.

With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act. This was an example of what are commonly called Trojan Horse movements — mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet.

 

The flood of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down.

Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown — providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That was the theory.

Cloward and Piven recruited a militant black organizer named George Wiley to lead their new movement. In the summer of 1967, Wiley founded the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO). His tactics closely followed the recommendations set out in Cloward and Piven’s article.

His followers invaded welfare offices across the United States — often violently — bullying social workers and loudly demanding every penny to which the law “entitled” them.

By 1969, NWRO claimed a dues-paying membership of 22,500 families, with 523 chapters across the nation.

Regarding Wiley’s tactics, The New York Times commented on September 27, 1970, “There have been sit-ins in legislative chambers, including a United States Senate committee hearing, mass demonstrations of several thousand welfare recipients, school boycotts, picket lines, mounted police, tear gas, arrests – and, on occasion, rock-throwing, smashed glass doors, overturned desks, scattered papers and ripped-out phones.”These methods proved effective.

 ”The flooding succeeded beyond Wiley’s wildest dreams,” writes Sol Stern in the City Journal.  ”From 1965 to 1974, the number of single-parent households on welfare soared from 4.3 million to 10.8 million, despite mostly flush economic times. By the early 1970s, one person was on the welfare rolls in New York City for every two working in the city’s private economy.

“As a direct result of its massive welfare spending, New York City was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1975. The entire state of New York nearly went down with it. The Cloward-Piven strategy had proved its effectiveness.

The Cloward-Piven strategy depended on surprise. Once society recovered from the initial shock, the backlash began. New York’s welfare crisis horrified America, giving rise to a reform movement which culminated in “the end of welfare as we know it” — the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which imposed time limits on federal welfare, along with strict eligibility and work requirements. 

Both Cloward and Piven attended the White House signing of the bill as guests of President Clinton

Most Americans to this day have never heard of Cloward and Piven. But New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani attempted to expose them in the late 1990s. As his drive for welfare reform gained momentum, Giuliani accused the militant scholars by name, citing their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in deliberate economic sabotage.

“This wasn’t an accident,” Giuliani charged in a 1997 speech. “It wasn’t an atmospheric thing, it wasn’t supernatural. This is the result of policies and programs designed to have the maximum number of people get on welfare.”

Cloward and Piven never again revealed their intentions as candidly as they had in their 1966 article. Even so, their activism in subsequent years continued to rely on the tactic of overloading the system.

When the public caught on to their welfare scheme, Cloward and Piven simply moved on, applying pressure to other sectors of the bureaucracy, wherever they detected weakness.

In 1982, partisans of the Cloward-Piven strategy founded a new “voting rights movement,” which purported to take up the unfinished work of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Like ACORN, the organization that spear-headed this campaign, the new “voting rights” movement was led by veterans of George Wiley’s welfare rights crusade. Its flagship organizations were Project Vote

and Human SERVE, both founded in 1982.

Project Vote is an ACORN front group, launched by former NWRO organizer and ACORN co-founder Zach Polett. Human SERVE was founded by Richard A. Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, along with a former NWRO organizer named Hulbert James.

All three of these organizations — ACORN, Project Vote and Human SERVE — set to work lobbying energetically for the so-called Motor-Voter law, which Bill Clinton ultimately signed in 1993.

The Motor-Voter bill is largely responsible for swamping the voter rolls with “dead  wood” — invalid registrations signed in the name of deceased, ineligible or non-existent people -- thus opening the door to the unprecedented  levels of voter fraud and “voter disenfranchisement” claims that followed in subsequent elections.

The new “voting rights” coalition combines mass voter registration drives -- typically featuring high levels of fraud -- with systematic intimidation of election officials in the form of frivolous lawsuits, unfounded charges of “racism” and “disenfranchisement,” and “direct action” (street protests, violent or otherwise).

Just as they swamped America’s welfare offices in the 1960s, Cloward-Piven devotees now seek to overwhelm the nation’s understaffed and poorly policed electoral system. Their tactics set the stage for the Florida recount crisis of 2000, and have introduced a level of fear, tension and foreboding to U.S. elections heretofore encountered mainly in Third World countries. 

Both the Living Wage and Voting Rights movements depend heavily on financial support from George Soros‘s Open Society Institute and his “Shadow Party,” through whose support the Cloward-Piven strategy continues to provide a blueprint for some of the Left’s most ambitious campaigns. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967

NOW IN AN ARTICLE DATED FEBRUARY 2, 2009:

The Coming Liberal Welfare State: Public Spending Cradle to Grave

Economists and pundits are beginning to sound alarms that the U.S. economy is perilously close to a “tipping point,” where so many voters will be on the public payroll it will be politically impossible to reign in entitlement programs.

The trillion-plus Obama stimulus program, they warn, could push the economy over the brink.

Already, 40 percent of Americans don’t pay taxes. Obama’s stimulus gives non-taxpayers up to $1,600 – money they did not pay – in the form of a tax credit.

Putting millions more workers on the entitlement roles, either through universal health insurance or the expanded SCHIP health program, will further diminish support for future free-market reforms to make the U.S., economy more competitive, conservative economists warn.

Free-market economists point to failed welfare-state experiments in England, France, and Germany, and now openly say America could be headed down the same rocky road.

“The economic tides will not stand still while Washington experiments with European-type social democracy, even though the dollar’s role as the global reserve currency will buy some time. Our trademark competitive advantage will be lost, and once lost, it will be hard to regain,” Carnegie-Mellon professor of economics Adam Lerrick warned in The Wall Street Journal.

And that Lerrick’s warning was written before the election and the whopping $1.2 trillion stimulus proposal.

Lerrick added ominously, “Tomorrow’s children may come to question why their parents sold their birthright for a mess of ‘fairness’ — whatever that will signify when jobs are scarce and American opportunity is no longer the envy of the world.”

Columnist and economist Thomas Sowell is voicing similar concerns, stating in a recent column: “This administration and Congress are now in a position to do what Franklin D. Roosevelt did during the Great Depression of the 1930s — use a crisis of the times to create new institutions that will last for generations.

“To this day, we are still subsidizing millionaires in agriculture because farmers were having a tough time in the 1930s. We have the Federal National Mortgage Association (‘Fannie Mae’) taking reckless chances in the housing market that have blown up in our faces today, because FDR decided to create a new federal housing agency in 1938.

“Who knows what bright ideas this administration will turn into permanent institutions for our children and grandchildren to try to cope with?” he added.

Is the economy approaching a point where Americans will look to the nanny state for protection? Consider:

The stimulus plan is expected to expand the federal workforce by up to 600,000 employees. Many of those jobs would be located in northern Virginia, which could easily shove the Old Dominion out of GOP hands and into the blue column for the foreseeable future.  

The stimulus would send hundreds of billions of dollars flowing into state coffers, swelling state workforces as well. While jobs are desperately needed, many economists say it’s important to maintain a balance between public and private sectors.  

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the recent expansion of SCHIP, which will now cover families earning up to $65,000 per year, will induce 2.4 million people to drop their private insurance coverage and hop on the government insurance roles.  

The CBO also estimates that the stimulus money for Medicaid will bring 1.2 million more persons under the Medicaid umbrella this year.  

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley A. Strassel reports Democratic “stealth care” will also pay 65 percent of COBRA premiums for seven million Americans. Democrats may move 10 million more Americans under the federal health umbrella — in just four weeks!” she writes. “Good luck ever cutting off that money. Meanwhile, the Democratic majority is gearing up for a Medicare fight, where it may broach plans to lower the eligibility age to 55. Whatever costs accrue, they’ll pay for by slashing the private Medicare Advantage option.”  

After the stimulus deal — which involves so many programs that House Minority whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., insists on calling it “a spending bill” rather than a stimulus package – Obama plans to introduce universal health care. Some believe it will grow to become one of the largest government programs in U.S. history.  “Guiding all of this,” Strassel writes, “is the left’s hope that by the time America wakes up to what’s happening, it’ll be too late. Democrats might be on to something.”

Or as Sowell puts it: “All that money is just a gift to the Democrats to spend in whatever ways will advance the interests of their constituents and of the Democratic Party.”

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_welfare_state/2009/02/02/177711.html