Conservation and Eugenics - The environmental movement's dirty secret

Excerpt reproduced with permission

by Charles Wohlforth

THE RAIN HAD JUST STOPPED in the little eastern Kansas town of Osawatomie when thirty thousand people, gathered in an atmosphere not unlike that of a country fair, fell quiet. Their hero, former president Teddy Roosevelt, climbed atop a kitchen table and began to speak in a high, almost falsetto voice, orating amid cheering for ninety minutes. When finished, he had delivered the most controversial and influential address of his career, in which he described a radical new program that was both denounced and celebrated in newspapers across the country. The date was August 31, 1910.

The New Nationalism Speech, as it came to be known, emphasized conservation, as did most of Roosevelt’s speeches written by his friend Gifford Pinchot, who had been his conservation chief for the two terms of his presidency. But it also newly placed the “moral issue” and “patriotic duty” of conservation into the context of a racial conversation, as well as a much broadened concept of progressivism.

Read the rest at Orion

Mom, Dad? I May Be Your Child, But I Know More Than You Do.

Just when you thought that the progressive movement couldn't stoop any lower. It's bad enough that they are intellectually raping the minds of children in our nation's schools, but, to brainwash them into believing that they wiser than than their parents is about as low as they can get. If you are a parent and are being schooled by your kids about politics, that's your fault as a parent for being apathetic about it.

Recently a video was aired on televisions throughout the country called Generation We. Watch the video below and ask yourself if this is reprehensible:


Perusing the 257 page e-book, it becomes evident that these progressive reprobates are literally teaching young children that they are smarter than their parents. Because they are the "Millennials". What is that? It apparently means that because they were born into the high tech world and know how to use the Internet, they are smarter and wiser than than their parents. The Baby Boomers need to step aside and let them teach their parents how things are done.

Despicable? Most definitely.

To teach and encourage children that they know better than their parents is nothing more than a blatant attempt to rewrite this countries history, brainwashing them when they are young is how they are trying to do it. Howard Zinn, disgusting as he was, was doing the same thing and was blatant about it, this Generation We movement uses a bit more sophistry in its approach. Despite his recent death, it didn't stop with him. Bill Bigelow is continuing the crusade to indoctrinate our children and until they are exposed, it will continue.

Besides indoctrinating our children, these people are teaching them to be disrespectful to their parents.

I don't know about you, but, if any of my children talked to me with this attitude, they would know what it meant to be schooled by wisdom.

Modern Day Progressivism - My Point Of View

Merriam-Webster defines a progressive as, "one believing in moderate political change and especially social improvement by governmental action." This definition is wrong based on three words: "moderate political change". Modern progressives want nothing to do with moderation, they want radical political change and they want it now and although it's been around since about the mid to late 1800's, it didn't actually gain momentum until Herbert Croly came on the scene in 1909 with his book, The Promise of American Life.

Progressives do not believe in individual autonomy, they have no tolerance and respect for private property, responsibility and religion. They want to take from the haves and give to the have nots. According to the progressive, Michael Schwalbe, a professor of sociology at North Carolina State University, you might be a progressive if:

* You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

* You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

* You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

* You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

* You think political leaders who engage in "preemptive war" and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

* You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

* You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

* You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

* You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

* You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

* You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

* You think that regulating big corporations isn't enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

* You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

* You think it's wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

* You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

* You think it's crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

* You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

* You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

* You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

* You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

* You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

* You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

* You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

* You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

* You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what's unrealistic.

It comes across as more Marxism than anything else. At any rate, looking down this list of progressive tenets you begin to see that progressives want no part of individuality, religious beliefs and responsibility.

One tactic they use to fundamentally transform this country, or any country for that matter, is to rewrite its history. This tactic was championed by Herbert Croly when he wrote, “To achieve a better future, Americans had to be emancipated from their past.” They achieve this by targeting the young in our schools and the ignorant Hollywood elite, such as Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, who recently embarked on a television project titled, The People Speak. If you have ever watched ten minutes of this show, you can definitely see ignorance at its worst, most of it being willful ignorance.

If there ever was a reason to home school your kids, or start a new school charter, then look no further.
Continued...
When the Constitution was ratified, it became the envy of the world. It was a legal document that set forth the limited role of the federal government and its power was given to it by the states, not the other way around. The Constitution, among other things, steps out of the way and allows its citizens to succeed or fail on their own merits. It also leaves room for citizens to pick themselves up and try it again until they get it right and succeed.

Progressives would have you believe that the Constitution is a "living document', meaning that it's supposed to change as society changes, when it's nothing of the sort. For instance, progressives believe that the government is supposed to provide universal health care based on a single payer system. Yet, nowhere in the Constitution can it be found where the federal government is supposed to take on that role. Oh, they'll try to point out the General Welfare clause in the preamble even though that's not what it means. Issues, like universal health care, are left to the individual states; all you have to do is look to Massachusetts and its dismal failure.

So, why isn't universal health care pushed by these progressives in each state? Because they know that the majority of its citizens would reject it, so they push it on a federal scale when the majority of politicians are on their side.

Progressives also believe that the Constitution is flawed because it sets forth a negative Bill of Rights. This is patently preposterous and absurd when you consider, just for a moment, that the Bill of Rights protects citizen's rights and limits the federal government's involvement in individuals states. What progressives are actually saying is that it's negative based on its lack of individual "rights" of owning a home, a car, a job...

Remember that FDR tried to institute a "Second Bill of Rights" that would have done just that. Yet, people don't realize that they do have a right to own a home, but, they must be qualified, they have a right to own a car, but, it's a privilege to drive it, they have a right to a job, but, they must be qualified for that job. These rights are up to the individual states to deal with, not the federal government, but, again, progressives know that attacking these issues on the federal level is much easier.

When it comes to religion, progressives hatred for it is much like the Christian persecutions during the 3rd century that forced them underground in catacombs, progressives have a feral hate of any sort of religion that look upon a divine entity for comfort. In their perverted minds, religion breeds contempt and hate towards others who don't share their beliefs. Yes, it is true that many a war was started in the name of religion, such as the Crusades, but what religion hasn't done this? What they fail to see, or just don't want to, is that people instigated campaigns of destruction by misusing religion. In short, the ends justified the means.

Yet, progressives do what they can to erase the fact that this country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs that started on the Mayflower.

In Defense of Eupraxophy, written by a disgruntled and sallow man by the name of Paul Kurtz, he states that, "Marx was no doubt the greatest humanist thinker of the nineteenth century..." and then bemoans that it was unfortunate that the Soviet Union couldn't erase the belief of God after 70 years. Why? Because tyrannical leaders, when they gain power, take firearms and religion away from the people. They first take the weapons from the people, so they don't have a means to fight back and then they take religion to extinguish hope. History always shows this to be true.

Do progressives have a religion? That depends. I have met some that worship the planet, or what is known as the Gaia religion and I have met others that are devout atheists, even though, by definition, atheism is a religion unto itself because it's based on a core set of principles.

Another characteristic of progressivism is its elitist attitude. They are of the belief that only the educated and erudite should be in any position of political power, because you, the lowly wage earner and commoner are too stupid. The Constitution lays out the prerequisites of who can become a senator, representative and to become president. Nowhere is it stated that the requirement of obtaining any of these political positions require a Harvard degree or being wealthy.

This is a tenet of the philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "It is the best and most natural arrangement that the wisest should govern the many, when it is assured that they will govern for its profit, and not for their own. There is no need to multiply instruments, or get twenty thousand men to do what a hundred picked men can do even better."

A vast majority of these upper/middle class spoiled brats never had a job or never owned a business, but, think they are intelligent enough to tell you what's good for you and what's not. These so-called erudites stopped teaching Constitutional law and started teaching case law in the early 20th century, thus, the progressive movement began to infiltrate deeper into politics and started to change it from the inside like a cancerous tumor. Recall what Woodrow Wilson said about the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble of the Constitution.

Progressives are somewhat like drug addicts and Karl Marx is their drug, or their opiate. They engorge themselves by taking from others, like a parasite does to its host. It doesn't matter if they have an R or a D attached to their name, it doesn't discriminate.

To combat this parasitic infestation called progressivism, you MUST remember who you are and this countries history. How it all started with occupants of the Mayflower and ended after the blood spilled by our ancestors, which allowed our Founding Fathers during the Revolution to give birth to a country envied for its Constitutional freedoms and a limited government.

I end this missive with a quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent, or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press."

Do you want this taken from you? At this moment our country is being transformed and if you don't wake up...it will be.

The Roots Of Progressivism Didn't Start With Woodrow Wilson

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

- Sun Tzu

Meet Herbert Croly, or as his detractors called him "Crolier than thou." If you really want to know where modern day progressivism gets its roots, then look no further. In 1909, he published a book that was practically required reading in many colleges and universities during the 1960's titled The Promise of American Life. This book, as well as his 1915 book, Progressive Democracy, is to modern day liberal progressivism as the Constitution is to liberty of this country.

In Promise, Croly argues that America can achieve progressivism if it couples "Hamiltonian" means with "Jeffersonion" ends; Hamilton believed in a strong, central government and Jefferson believed in individual freedom. Once you think about that for a moment, you soon begin to realize that these two beliefs can't quite coexist once put into practice.

He stated that, "To achieve a better future, Americans had to be emancipated from their past." Essentially, this means to free ones self from the history of our country and of the blood and sacrifice of our Founding Fathers who created America, in other words to rewrite American history. His mantra was to refound this country and it's Judeo-Christian roots into a French type democracy, based on the Comtean philosophy of worshiping society through Rousseuauean means, which is the belief that those of enlightenment should rule.

I guess one could put the full blame on bad parenting that caused this man to have such perverse and despicable beliefs. Born to successful journalists, David and Jane Cunningham, each had strong beliefs on the nuclear family and society. David Croly was a sexual reformer who held the belief that sexual repression was the cause of social disorder and Jane, "Jennie June" Cunningham was a staunch critic of marriage and a feminist through and through.

Croly had nothing but contempt for English liberalism and preferred the German version. He felt that America's inequality in regards to the economy was caused by capitalist individualism, who's only concern was the bottom line and needed to be fixed by nothing short of state intervention.

Why his detractors referred to him as "Crolier than thou" was due to having a God like attitude that he could lead America into this Utopian society. By giving all manner of trust to the enlightened and educated class he stated, " Democracy must stand or fall on a platform of possible human perfectibility." These are the words of a Marxist radical.

Croly extolled the virtues of the educated and artisan class and was hostile to those Americans who didn't share his view. He also believed that the collective power should be laid at the feet of these enlightened and erudite people in order to reshape the country, because they were the only class of Americans that could do it; the common man was too stupid to lead themselves.

In his other book, Progressive Democracy, which was so intertwined with The Promise he said he should have wrote them collectively, he set his sights on the Constitution. In this book, he believed that the Constitution and those who lived by it, had spawned the "monarchy of the Word." Because of the way in which the Founding Fathers framed the Constitution, it limited government's role in American's day to day lives and was designed to set the conditions and environment to allow citizens to fail or succeed on their own merits.

And Herbert Croly argued that it stymied his version of Democracy, which he felt should be more positive to the industrial workers of the world or what is referred to as syndicalism, or better known as "Workers of the world unite..." Croly's vision of America was to dissolve the federal government and give authority to the individual states, then to organize them into classes from educated elite at the top to the lowly wage earner at the bottom. If you think about it for a moment, California could be one example of this idea when you look at their financial problems. Environmentalist zealots, racial interest groups, illegal aliens and unions have caused that states economic strife.

Liberal progressivism is a mental attitude that takes away individual freedoms and liberty and gives them to the elite class. Time and time again, history has proven that it doesn't work, yet these people continue to push this country in that direction.

Patrick Henry said, "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."

Although not a Founding Father, he knew all too well that the value placed on liberty should be cause enough to use force, if necessary, to preserve it and over two hundred years later another man knew it as well, when he said,

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."

References cited -

The Promise of American Life


Progressive Democracy