Make no mistake; Progressives will do anything to keep their POWER…..
From Mother Jones:
Revealed: The Massive New Liberal Plan to Remake American Politics
A month after President Obama won reelection, America’s most powerful liberal groups met to plan their next moves. Here’s what they talked about.
By Andy Kroll
| Wed Jan. 9, 2013
It was the kind of meeting that conspiratorial conservative bloggers dream about.
A month after President Barack Obama won reelection, top brass from three dozen of the most powerful groups in liberal politics met at the headquarters of the National Education Association (NEA), a few blocks north of the White House. Brought together by the Sierra Club, Greenpeace,Communication Workers of America (CWA), and the NAACP, the meeting was invite-only (<<==) and off-the-record (<<==). [*Emphasis added**] Despite all the Democratic wins in November, a sense of outrage (<<==) filled the room as labor officials, environmentalists, civil rights activists, immigration reformers, and a panoply of other progressive leaders discussed the challenges facing the left and what to do to beat back the deep-pocketed conservative movement.
At the end of the day, many of the attendees closed with a pledge of money and staff resources to build a national, coordinated campaign around three goals: getting big money out of politics, expanding the voting rolls while fighting voter ID laws, and rewriting Senate rules to curb the use of the filibuster to block legislation. The groups in attendance pledged a total of millions of dollars and dozens of organizers to form a united front on these issues—potentially, a coalition of a kind rarely seen in liberal politics, where squabbling is common and a stay-in-your-lane attitude often prevails. “It was so exciting,” says Michael Brune, the Sierra Club’s executive director. “We weren’t just wringing our hands about the Koch brothers. We were saying, ‘I’ll put in this amount of dollars and this many organizers.'”
The liberal activists have dubbed this effort the Democracy Initiative. The campaign, Brune says, has since been attracting other members—and also interest from foundations looking to give money—because many groups on the left believe they can’t accomplish their own goals without winning reforms on the Initiative’s three issues. “This isn’t an optional activity for us,” Brune tells me. “It is mission critical.”
Liberal groups have joined forces around issues—and elections—before. Health Care for America Now(HCAN) was a megagroup formed to support Obama’s health care reform bill in 2009. And in 2003, leaders from EMILY’s List, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), AFL-CIO, and Sierra Club formed America Coming Together, the most sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation in the history of Democratic politics, to help elect presidential candidate John Kerry. Indeed, progressives have collaborated specifically on voting rights or campaign finance before, too. But the Democracy Initiative may be the first time so many groups teamed up to work on multiple issues not tied to an election. “This is really the first time that a broad spectrum of groups have come together around a big agenda that impacts the state and national level,” says Kim Anderson, who runs the NEA’s center for advocacy and outreach and attended the December meeting.
The Democracy Initiative grew out of conversations in recent years among Radford, Brune, CWA president Larry Cohen, and NAACP president Ben Jealous. (“We all have a knitting class together,” Brune jokes.) Brune says the four men bemoaned how the dysfunctional political process was making it impossible for their groups to achieve their goals. “We’re not going to have a clean-energy economy,” he says, “if the same companies that are polluting our rivers and oceans are also polluting our elections.”
Greenpeace’s Phil Radford notes that for decades conservatives have aimed to shrink local, state, and federal governments by reforming the rules so they could install like-minded politicians, bureaucrats, and judges. Radford calls it “a 40-plus-year strategy by the Scaifes, Exxons, Coors, and Kochs of the world…to take over the country.”
So last spring Brune, Cohen, Jealous, and Radford called up their friends on the left and, in June, convened the Democracy Initiative’s first meeting. A handful of groups attended, and they began to focus on the triad of money in politics, voting rights, and dysfunction in the Senate.
By December, the Democracy Initiative’s ranks had swelled to 30 to 35 groups, Brune says. (He expects it to be 50 by the end of the winter.) Other attendees at the December meeting included top officials from the League of Conservation Voters, Friends of the Earth, Public Campaign, the AFL-CIO, SEIU, Common Cause, Voto Latino, the Demos think tank, Piper Fund, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, People for the American Way, National People’s Action, National Wildlife Federation, the Center for American Progress, the United Auto Workers, and Color of Change. (A non-editorial employee of Mother Jones also attended.)
According to a schedule of the meeting, the attendees focused on opportunities for 2013. On money in politics, Nick Nyhart of Public Campaign, a pro-campaign-finance-reform advocacy group, singled out Kentucky, New York, and North Carolina as potential targets for campaign finance fights. In a recent interview, Nyhart said the Kentucky battle would likely involve trying to oust Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Public Enemy No. 1 for campaign finance reform, who faces reelection in 2014. In New York, Nyhart said, activists are pressuring state lawmakers, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo, to pass a statewide public financing bill in 2013. And in North Carolina, the fight is more about countering the influence of a single powerful donor, the conservative millionaire Art Pope, whose largesse helped install a Republican governor and turn the state legislature entirely red.
On voting rights, a presentation by a Brennan Center for Justice staffer identified California, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, and Minnesota as states where efforts to modernize the voter registration system and implement same-day registration could succeed.
But the most pressing issue right now for Democracy Initiative members is Senate rules reform. At the December meeting, attendees heard from Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Tom Udall (D-N.M.) on rule changes to curb the spiraling use of filibusters to block legislation. The use of the filibuster has exploded in recent years, and Republicans now block up-or-down votes on nearly everything in the Senate, requiring Democrats to muster 60 votes to conduct even the most routine business. Liberal groups in the Democracy Initiative want to fix that, and they used the December meeting to plan a coordinated push to urge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to rewrite the rules. Democrats have until January 22, when the window closes on easy rules changes, to get the reforms they want.
Other potential targets for Democracy Initiative action include Chevron, which gave $2.5 million to a super-PAC backing House Republican candidates in 2012. Google was mentioned as another target for its continued membership with the generally pro-Republican US Chamber of Commerce. And a 16-member coalition targeting the American Legislative Exchange Council, the conservative “bill mill” behind many voter ID, school choice, and anti-union laws, wants to use the Democracy Initiative to recruit members and so expand its efforts identifying lawmakers and corporations who are ALEC members and urging them to cut ties with the group. “We’re going to put the pressure on ALEC even more” in 2013, says Greenpeace’s Radford.
**Emphasis, enlargement of type and arrows added**
Michelle: New Obama outfit to create ‘world as it should be’
The nation’s most famous community organizer is back at it. President Obama today announced a new group, Organizing for Action, to push his agenda like gun control.
It was announced in an Obama email and in a video by first lady Michelle Obama, sporting her new bangs. It is a successor to Obama’s campaign operation, Organizing for America.
In the video, Michelle Obama said that the Obama campaign group will help create a society in her husband’s eyes. “The work you’ve done has brought us so much closer to the world as it should be.”
Today, a new grassroots organization is being launched: Organizing for Action.
Following in the footsteps of the campaign you built, Organizing for Action will be an unparalleled force in American politics. It will work to turn our shared values into legislative action — and it’ll empower the next generation of leaders in our movement.
Michelle recorded a video to tell you more about the new organization — take a look and let OFA know you’re in:
We may have started this as a long shot presidential primary campaign in 2007, but it’s always been about more than just winning an election. Together, we’ve made our communities stronger, we’ve fought for historic legislation, and we’ve brought more people than ever before into the political process.
We have the power to do even more to change our politics and our country for the better. With Organizing for Action, you’ll have every resource you need to do it.
“World as it should be”……straight out of Saul Alinsky’s mouth.
From “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky
“Obama learned his lesson well. I am proud to see that my father’s model for organizing is being applied successfully beyond local community organizing to affect the Democratic campaign in 2008. It is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky as we approach his 100th birthday.” –Letter from L. DAVID ALINSKY, son of Neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky
Obama helped fund ‘Alinsky Academy‘: “The Woods Fund, a nonprofit on which Obama served as paid director from 1999 to December 2002, provided startup funding and later capital to the Midwest Academy…. Obama sat on the Woods Fund board alongside William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization….
‘Midwest describes itself as ‘one of the nation’s oldest and best-known schools for community organizations, citizen organizations and individuals committed to progressive social change.’… Midwest teaches Alinsky tactics of community organizing.”
Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky: “True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within. Alinsky viewed revolution as a slow, patient process. The trick was to penetrate existing institutions such as churches, unions and political parties…. Many leftists view Hillary as a sell-out because she claims to hold moderate views on some issues. However, Hillary is simply following Alinsky’s counsel to do and say whatever it takes to gain power.
“Obama is also an Alinskyite…. Obama spent years teaching workshops on the Alinsky method. In 1985 he began a four-year stint as a community organizer in Chicago, working for an Alinskyite group called the Developing Communities Project…. Camouflage is key to Alinsky-style organizing. While trying to build coalitions of black churches in Chicago, Obama caught flak for not attending church himself. He became an instant churchgoer.” (By Richard Poe, 11-27-07)
Notes on Saul Alinsky and Neo-Marxism:
Alinsky’s tactics were based, not on Stalin’s revolutionary violence, but on the Neo-Marxist strategies of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Communist. Relying on gradualism, infiltration and the dialectic process rather than a bloody revolution, Gramsci’s transformational Marxism was so subtle that few even noticed the deliberate changes.
Like Alinsky, Mikhail Gorbachev followed Gramsci, not Lenin. In fact, Gramsci aroused Stalins’s wrath by suggesting that Lenin’s revolutionary plan wouldn’t work in the West. Instead the primary assault would be onBiblical absolutes and Christian values, which must be crushed as a social force before the new face of Communism could rise and flourish. Malachi Martin gave us a progress report:
“By 1985, the influence of traditional Christian philosophy in the West was weak and negligible…. Gramsci’s master strategy was now feasible. Humanly speaking, it was no longer too tall an order to strip large majorities of men and women in the West of those last vestiges that remained to them of Christianity’s transcendent God.”
2. Of Means and Ends
[Forget moral or ethical considerations]
“The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. … The real arena is corrupt and bloody.” p.24
“The means-and-ends moralists, constantly obsessed with the ethics of the means used by the Have-Nots against the Haves, should search themselves as to their real political position. In fact, they are passive — but real — allies of the Haves…. The most unethical of all means is the non-use of any means… The standards of judgment must be rooted in the whys and wherefores of life as it is lived, the world as it is, not our wished-for fantasy of the world as it should be….” pp.25-26 <<===***Note words in italics here**
“The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war the end justifies almost any means….” p.29
“The seventh rule… is that generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics….” p.34
“The tenth rule… is you do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.… It involves sifting the multiple factors which combine in creating the circumstances at any given time… Who, and how many will support the action?… If weapons are needed, then are appropriate d weapons available? Availability of means determines whether you will be underground or above ground; whether you will move quickly or slowly…” p.36
Notes: Apparently, Michelle Obama referred to these words during her Democratic National Convention speech:
Do you wonder who — or whose values — should determine what “the world… should be?”
Deception by Dialectic Process and ENABLED by the Liberal Biased/lap dog MSM’s:
From Twisting Truth through Group Consensus: “Tension, created by diversity, is essential to the dialectic process. It energizes members and — when manipulated by well-trained facilitators — produces synergy. You can’t guide people toward synthesis (compromise) unless there are opposing views — both “thesis and antithesis.”
From Small Groups and the Dialectic Process: Today’s facilitated small groups or teams are not like the old Bible studies many of us attended years ago. Back then, we discussed the Bible and its wonderful truths; now people dialogue until they reach an emotional form of unity based on “empathy” for diverse views and values. Dr. Robert Klench describes the process:
“Total Quality Management [TQM] is based upon the Hegelian dialectic, invented by Georg Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel, a transformational Marxist social psychologist. Briefly, the Hegelian dialectic process works like this: a diverse group of people (in the church, this is a mixture of believers (thesis) and unbelievers (antithesis), gather in a facilitated meeting (with a trained facilitator/teacher/group leader/change agent), using group dynamics (peer pressure), to discuss a social issue (or dialogue the Word of God), and reach a pre-determined outcome (consensus, compromise, or synthesis).
Like Karl Marx, today’s globalist leaders seek ways to undermine Biblical truth. They know that the main obstacle to global solidarity, is God’s uncompromising Word. They cannot build “a single world culture” without first undermining absolute Truth. After all, that’s why Christians were persecuted in the Soviet Union and other Communist countries!
Webster’s dictionary defines the word dialectic as “(Hegelian philosophy) a logical subjective development in thought, from a THESIS through an ANTITHESIS to a SYNTHESIS, or … a continuous unification of opposites.”
In the dialectic process, there must be two or more sides to everything. Nothing is absolute; everything is changing in a preplanned direction. As Ismail Serageldin, former vice president of The World Bank, said at the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul (Habitat II), “Let’s just make sure that social change and transformation are going in the right direction.”
From Legalizing Mind Control: “Would the American people allow government control and collectivism to replace freedom and individualism? You bet! So would the rest of the world. This social transformation is well under way, and the masses simply flow with the change. Planned over a century ago, the framework for managing and monitoring this worldwide revolution was in place by 1945.
From Justifying Mind Control: “Chisholm’s friend, Alger Hiss, agreed. In 1948, the infamous Soviet spy published Chisholm’s message on mental health in his socialist journal, International Conciliation. Hiss, then president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, added his own Preface which showed the involvement of the Rockefeller Foundation in the mental health movement.
Marxism in America through Gradualism and Dialectic Process Ideology of Antonio Gramsci (Italian Communist). Saul Alinsky Tactics based on Gramsci.
Antonio Gramsci was a transformational Marxist. As laid out in the above linked article, what Gramsci advocated was the transformation of a society to the communist state via gradualism — the gradual erosion of old ideals, replacing them with the new. As opposed to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini, Gramsci advocated the quiet revolution.
The Hegelian Dialectic of thesis (and idea), antithesis (the opposite), and synthesis (the bringing together of opposites) to form a new thesis, ever evolving, plays a heavy role in the gradualism Gramsci proposed. Today, in America, the Hegelian Dialectic is played out in meetings at every level, all across America, under the name of consensus building using facilitators heavily trained in group dynamics.
The key to Gramsci’s formula for revolution centered on the idea of breaking what he called the “hegemony” or mind-control exercised by the ruling capitalists over the masses. Bourgeois societies were ruled, Gramsci believed, by educating the citizenry that their accommodation of the moral, political, and cultural values defined by the governing system was in their best interests. Hence, Gramsci designed a “reversal strategy” that would silently challenge the existing culture and value-systems that dominated bourgeois governance. That is to say, his formula was based on an ideological struggle that would transform a whole range of activities in civil society, including Judeo-Christian values, the family, schools, unions, and politics and popular trust in the existing government.
There are ten easy steps toward a progressive-socialist-Marxist civil society: change the popular consensus; destroy Christianity, the traditional family, and existing social mores; transform the culture; install a radical Left mind-control; attain political power; impose strict control of the military and law enforcement; restrict freedom; socialize the economy; erase American sovereignty; and embrace a world without borders.
Four political arenas have been constructed by the progressive-socialist-Marxist Left to “format” or erase America’s collective brain and install a mind-control program into what is to become a robotic America of theological radicalism, socialist unionism, radical community-state politics, and the “Shadow Party” owned and operated by billionaires such as George Soros.
Gramsci realized that Christian culture had to be undone quietly, carefully, and over time. Stealth and passivity would serve as key principles of the war on Christian culture and open the door for progressive-socialist-marxist mind-control.
This requires a confrontation at all levels of society to undermine, weaken, and replace traditional American values in the schools, media, family, and unions with Gramsci’s socialist ideals. “To conduct this universalized hegemony,” Boggs writes, “means to transform repressive consciousness into a liberating one that makes socialist politics at a mass level possible—the central focus of any thorough-going cultural revolution.”
Major elements of American organized labor have imported the alien doctrine of Antonio Gramsci as a guiding light for its socialist ideological struggle against the traditional American way of life. For American progressive-socialist-marxist syndicalists, labor unions are a tool for use in transforming capitalism into a society run by working people who are guided secretly by agents among the leadership.
It should not be surprising, therefore, that organized labor in the United States has shifted its main focus from the worker and his/her needs to progressive-socialist-marxist politics. For union leadership, their efforts are all about power—power for themselves, social power, and political power. Five U.S. labor unions stand out from their efforts of making socialist politics possible at the mass level by applying the imported ideals of Italy’s Marxist Antonio Gramsci: AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), National Education Association (NEA), and American Federation of Teachers (AFT).
That is a socialist philosophy. Since “progressive” is but a euphemism for “socialism,” the Left once again promises a full blast of political denial and deception, propaganda and disinformation in “framing the future.”
Two major influences have helped shape these policies over the years: Antonio Gramsci’s cultural transformation formula and Saul D. Alinsky’s radical community organizing methods.
According to editor Bernie Horn’s commentary in the “Progressive Agenda for the State 2008,” which was prepared by the radical Left’s Center for Policy Alternatives, “most Americans are progressive on most issues.” But, Mr. Horne adds, “most Americans also support traditional conservative principles—limited government, lower taxes, free markets, and personal responsibility.” The way out of this conundrum, he suggests, is to alter the balance of power by espousing “an attractive progressive philosophy.”That is a socialist philosophy. Since “progressive” is but a euphemism for “socialism,” the Left once again promises a full blast of political denial and deception, propaganda and disinformation in “framing the future.”
Two major influences have helped shape these policies over the years: Antonio Gramsci’s cultural transformation formula and Saul D. Alinsky’s radical community organizing methods.
Barack Obama was a community organizer for the progressive-socialist-Marxist ACORN before becoming a practicing lawyer, entering politics, and running for President.