Imagine Living in a Socialist USA

imagineFrancis Goldin, Debby Smith and Michael Steven Smith, eds., Imagine Living in a Socialist USA, (New York: Harper Perennial, 2014) 304 pp., $15.99

This dreadful book has one redeeming quality: it admits candidly what the Left in America really wants when it says that its goal is a socialist country. Meant to be a recruiting tool as well as a morale booster for the Left, this book leads to a very different conclusion than its editors and authors intend.

Karl Marx, who, aside from that one famous sentence that when the communist golden age was finally reached, men would hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon and relax at night, never wrote anything about how the communist future would actually work or what it would look like. The editors of Imagine, on the other hand, have tried for a book that paints an explicit portrait of the utopian future they are sure is just around the corner. They’ve recruited the usual suspects to help them out: including Bill Ayers, Michael Moore, Michael Ratner, Blanche Wiesen Cook, Frances Fox Piven, Mumia Abu-Jumal, Angela Davis, Juan Gonzalez and Leslie Cagan, among many others.

The first thing one notices when looking over the contributors is that there is no longer any differentiation between the Old Communist Left and the New Left. They are now one and the same, united in the hope of creating a revolution, or as Barack Obama once put it, a “fundamental transformation” of the United States. This did not happen, as some of them hoped and expected, in “one step” once Obama got elected. They now realize that whether or not it happens is up to them.  Hence this half-witted blueprint.

I read through as many of the essays as I could stand, until the brain dwarfing unreality became too daunting.  The editors did not take seriously the fundamental principle that boredom is the great enemy of human life.

The first section of Imagine is devoted to a critique of capitalism; the second is meant “to inspire hope”; the third, to imagining what life in a socialist America would be like.

Turning to the last section first, it is immediately apparent that the socialist future imagined here is not a place that anyone in his or her right mind would choose to live.  When you read radical lawyer Michael Ratner’s speculation about what he would do if he became Attorney General of the United States, for instance, you’ll change your mind about Eric Holder being the worst possible person in that post. Ratner would “handcuff the FBI,” parole every “supposed” political prisoner (a list that includes a group of heavy hitters); end the prosecution of “truth-tellers” like Edward Snowden; indict Barack Obama for “murder by targeted assassination,” followed by similar charges against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and others.

Then there is City University of New York historian Clifford D. Conner, who among other things is an editor of a volume titled The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest. As you might expect, he tells his readers “there is no avoiding the word ‘revolution’ to describe the necessary transformation” that lies ahead for America. But despite the grim and probably sanguinary prognosis, Conner is quite optimistic that the pieces are in place for this future. All you need is, first,  a “rebellious mass movement,” that would quickly ignite “a revolutionary situation”; then the old vanguard party to lead the protestors to wrest “control of the state away from the booboisie”; and finally the “conquest of state power.” Piece of cake.  Connor’s solution is old-style Leninism tarted up for modern occasions; thousands of the old Communist Party pamphlets he obviously grew up on given a little cosmetic surgery and then presented as a new face. God help the students who enroll in this man’s courses.

In the second section, “Imagining Socialism,” the highlight is Fred Jerome’s article about how the news media would function in a socialist USA. I have already written about an excerpt that appeared in Salon, and you can read my lengthy discussion of what Jerome says here. The bio in this book tells readers about all the mainstream publications Jerome has written for, and that HUAC subpoenaed him in the 1960s. It leaves out the quaint fact that he was a leader of the American young Communist movement in the 1950s, the son of the Party’s cultural commissar V. J. Jerome, and one of the founding members of the Maoist breakaway from the CPUSA, the so-called Progressive Labor Party. Obviously, Jerome does not want readers to know about the tradition from which he comes, or that rather than being a “new” socialist he is an old Red, the likes of which by now should have been stuffed and put in the Smithsonian.

Proving faithful to his Marxist-Leninist father’s ideology, Jerome’s prescriptions for journalism could be modeled on the Soviet era Pravda and Fidel Castro’s Granma. In his perfect world, the media would function as a mechanism of control by the country’s revolutionary leaders, who would seek to create enthusiasm for the citizens to fulfill what Jerome, in a possible Freudian slip, calls their “production-distribution quotas.”  The press in the society Jerome envisions will lose its freedom overnight, just as it did under the reign of Hugo Chavez, the hero of so many of the contributors to this anthology. But the kept press of capitalism deserves such a fate. As Jerome says, the U.S. media is controlled by “a grand total of six mega-corporations—Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, CBS, and Comcast.” These evil corporate conglomerates are simply “tools used by the 1 percent to rule and fool.” (It might surprise Comrade Jerome to discover that the book in which his essay appears is published by Harper Collins, a firm that as Wikipedia tells us, is owned by — you guessed it — none other than Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation itself, another illustration, presumably, of Lenin’s wise observation that “the capitalists will sell us the rope we’ll use to hang them.”)

This section has some other gems also worth mentioning.  Harriet Fraad and Tess Fraad-Woolf pine for a society in which “we are all basically equal,” which would eliminate shame for those who do not live like “the rich and famous.” Junk food would disappear; everyone would not only have free health care, but soon we would have a health system —-I kid you not—-as good as that of Communist Cuba! (“Imagine,” they write, “how healthy we could be in our rich nation if medicine were socialized like Cuba’s.”) Like Michael Moore, they obviously are completely unaware that only tourists and apparatchiks have any decent medical services, and that the bulk of the Cuban population is lucky to get one rationed aspirin when ill.

Oh, and don’t forget that finally Americans will have good sex under socialism, since like Sweden, sex education will begin in the first grade. In this polymorphous perverse utopia, “all kind of mutual loving” will be celebrated, “gay, straight and trans-gender.” Somehow, Fraad and Fraad-Woolf fail to address the well-known suppression of homosexuals in their beloved revolutionary Cuba.  But while such facts may be stubborn things, there’s always affirmation in the larger picture. Historian Blanche Wiesen Cook, another contributor, explains that in the big picture “progressive and socialist women understood that economic security combined with feminism and sexual freedom were required for individual serenity and community harmony.”

Finally, the former terrorist and Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers gives readers his educational philosophy, which comes down to a one-liner: schools should prepare students to be socialist revolutionaries. His educational summum bonum is indoctrination, and it is indeed frightening to realize that Ayers should be regarded as a distinguished educational theorist; indispensable man in the nation’s education schools.  He wants schools to create the new socialist man; even more he wants the destruction of the educational status quo in which “schools for compliance and conformity” produce citizens who accept the “pigeonhole” into which they were born.

Ayers favors what he calls “teaching toward freedom and democracy,” euphemisms for what he once publicly stated, standing next to the late Hugo Chavez, was the essence of the Venezuelan system of education which sooner or later would have to be adopted in the USA as a model. That is “socialist education” which adopts Marx’s belief that “the fullest development of each is the condition for the full development of all.”

Ayers calls for a “liberating pedagogy” in which “alternative and insurgent classrooms” teach “mind-blowing” ideas.  But you can be sure that students in the socialist future will not have their minds blown by exposure to the strengths of democratic capitalism and that they will experience no remorse or relief from the Marxist views and beliefs of their professors, reading from the gospel according to Howard Zinn, who teach them that the United States is the greatest oppressor in the world and that its past history is one of unmitigated evil.

The idea for this book comes from a woman named Frances Goldin, who is described as an 88-year-old socialist, who has two goals she wants to see before she passes from the earth—“get Mumia Abu-Jamal out of prison and edit a book about what America might be like if it were socialist.” I do not know much about Ms. Goldin, aside from her bio that tells us that when she first heard the word socialist when she was 18, it “sounded like a great idea.” With the publication of Imagine, she has achieved part of her life’s ambition.  We can only hope that she will go to her socialist grave with the other half being unrequited.

What is striking about the book is how the current generation of self-proclaimed socialists writing in this volume have carried on a bankrupt tradition, pouring poisoned old wine into new bottles by adding a veneer of concern for leftist environmentalism, gay and transgender rights and feminism to the old model of socialist revolution. The entire way in which they refer to a new revolutionary future and system is advocacy by other means for exactly the kinds of systems that produced charnel houses in the old Soviet Union and Maoist China, and in Communist Cuba and North Korea today.

One of the blurbs for the book comes from a man who once considered himself part of the early New Left, the writer Paul Buhle. He thinks that this book will have the effect Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward, which converted Eugene V. Debs to socialism, had in the late 19th Century. I think that we already know that Mr. Buhle’s dream is dead on arrival, which is just as well because as the 19th century and its successor showed, it was actually a nightmare in disguise.

I will end with a prediction of my own, quite different than that offered by Buhle. Anyone who innocently picks up and reads this book will forever be turned off by the claim that socialism should be America’s future. Perhaps we conservatives should be handing Imagine out as a sure way to advance our cause.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Make sure to Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Anti sharia

    If you really want to prevent the barbarians from taking over, kill them. Civilization is not preserved through peaceful means. The barbarians win when civilization refuses to fight back.

    • KyraNelson

      I hope your comment doesn’t get deleted. When I suggested putting a spear through self-hating, sleeping-with-the-enemy Jews, they deleted my comment. I’m thinking it didn’t actually offend them as much as they just can’t publicly condone the incitement to violence. I guess leftards could use it against them or something. BUT-not if they’re de*d! :)

      • Disapp

        Why are you condemning all Jews?

        • KyraNelson

          Huh? Did you miss the part about self-hating, sleeping-with-the-enemy Jews??? Like Max Blumenthal, Judith Butler, Medusa Benjamin, Chomsky, Finkelstein, J-Street, Soros, ETC.
          Or we’re you attempting subtlety, implying that all of us were like that??? Now that would be just plain hatin’ on my tribe, yo.

          • Disapp

            Hatred has never occurred to me. However, I think it is wrong to classify a whole group of people as being incapable of independent actions.

          • KyraNelson

            I’m pretty sure that you didn’t understand my original comment at all. I am Jewish, & very capable of independent thought. I love my people, and I see Israel as the only future for the Jewish people. “Jews” like Phillip Weiss & Max Blumenthal are a cancer. They have no connection to the Jewish people. There’s a very interesting film on Netflix called “The Flat,” made by Arnon Goldfinger. It really opens a door into the psyche of the Max Blumenthals of our time. I highly reccommend it.

          • sakovkt

            People who are incapable of independent actions or thought have no alternative to becoming a group under whoever will tell them what to do.

    • Drakken

      That is my exact philosophy and I readily agree and concur. The day is rapidly approaching where these communist will have to be lined up against walls and hanging from lamp posts all across the western world if we are to survive this plague. No matter how many times these communist try communism, it always ends up stacks of dead bodies.

  • truebearing

    We could buy this guide to imagining the outcome of communist governance, or we could read 20th Century history and learn what actually happened. Something tells me that “Imagine” doesn’t include the 100 million plus democides committed by previous Marxist utopias.

    When they die, and I hope it’s soon, may they all go to the Sisyphean Communist rung of the netherworld.

    • Drakken

      They will not go quietly, they need to be lined up against walls and hanging from lamp posts if we are to survive the coming troubles.

      • truebearing

        There is going to be a fight. No doubt about it.

  • Hass

    Evil Left want to devolve.

    • Habbgun

      How do you tell when they have devolved? They look pretty awful already.

  • TheOrdinaryMan

    19th Century socialism was a nightmare–from the Haymarket riot, to the shooting of Henry Clay Frick, to the murder of Idaho Gov. Frank Steunenberg; and the American people didn’t want it. But then we had the Great depression of 1929, soon afterwards FDR was elected President–and now, under Obama, the water is boiling–and the frog is comatose, and nearly dead.

    • Harry Black

      “The American people didn’t want [socialism]?” If I recall, it wasn’t socialists and anarchists but the Chicago police who rioted at Haymarket. In 1920, while he was serving a ten year prison sentence for sedition, a million Americans voted for the socialist Eugene Debs for president. The American people also elected the “socialist” FDR president four times. Americans may not want socialism, but poll them and they want the rich to pay their fair share of taxes, they want less income polarization, they want unemployment insurance, they want SNAP, and they want single-payer health care.

      • Drakken

        The problem that you socialist don’t comprehend, is economics and the fact that when you run out of other peoples money for your social programs, you get a lot of people rather upset. Once the tools on the left get their amnesty, you blacks will really be howling about jobs.

        • Harry Black

          Dear me! Mr. Drakken seems to think leftists know nothing about economics. Drakken no doubt gets his (unoriginal) economic views from Margaret Thatcher and Ayn Rand–as if an unfettered free market ever solved the problem of joblessness or poverty. As for his gratuitous “you blacks”–I take it from whence it came.

  • bob smith

    with the increased censorship of late within fpm scrutinizing every word written and countless postings denied by the ‘screening’ team AND all of the new found love of hip hop, imagining is no longer required.

    socialism is HERE! fpm, the new socialist utopia

  • Sgt Maj

    While Nobama robots are salivating over this hunk of garbage, it’s fascinating that only in America could the radical socialist left get it printed.
    Who thinks they would allow a book about capitalism to be read if they actually had their dream come true and took over the USA?

    • tagalog

      Is that CIB accurate as to your experiences? What two wars?

      • Sgt Maj

        You think anyone would put up that symbol if it wasn’t earned?
        You just have to be old.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    All you need is a “rebellious movement”? They’re already creating that, but not necessarily the movement that they hoped for.

    Communists have said, for generations, that to control a nation, it’s necessary to control the streets (and the countryside). They don’t have the numbers to do that. They want revolution, but it may very well come from their enemies … us.

    • tagalog

      It would indeed be a very interesting spectacle to see the leftists engaging in armed revolution. I suspect it would last for no more than a day or two, until the shooters and those with military training got motivated to pop them.

      Then they’d raise a horrible uproar about how they got shot down when all they wanted was rapid -but non-violent- change.

      Remember Kent State!

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        I do remember Kent State. If I were a soldier who had people throwing bricks at me, I would … at the very least … be tempted to shoot them, also.

        Exactly who are the Leftists going to use for this armed revolution? College students? Bangers? Feminists?

        • hrwolfe

          Keep in mind that the Kent State rioters had brandished guns and shots were fired the afternoon and morning before the National Guard fired. I do not think they should have but the incident was not without provocation. People always talk about peaceful demonstrators but who then did all the damage to public property?

          • tagalog

            They burned the ROTC building on campus. They also rioted in downtown Kent. That’s why the National Guard were there.

            I guess they thought they were bringing the war back home. Then it came to them. End of demonstrating and beginning of singing “Find The Cost of Freedom.”

        • tagalog

          You can bet it will be someone whose political stance includes the dislike of firearms and the advocacy of gun control. There’s about a 75-80% chance that the leftists who are talking about armed revolution have little or no experience with firearms.

          As with all other things, they no doubt expect someone else to do it for them.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            This is why gun-owners and enthusiasts … and combat veterans … are so “dangerous”, according to the Left. There’s over 100 million of us, and we won’t allow the Left to define what the Founders meant with the Second Amendment. Witness Connecticut and Vermont, at this very moment.

            For myself, I really like my Barrett. It cost me over six thousand bucks, and each round runs about $4, but it range, accuracy, and penetration is well worth the expense.

            Did you catch that, NSA?

          • tagalog

            Some years ago, I guess I could say MANY years ago, in an anomalous moment of college-student socialist revolutionary fervor, I offered to instruct a couple of my socialist revolutionary comrades in the use of rifles and pistols by going to the range and doing some shooting. The reaction was truly priceless: you might have thought I was asking them to wipe their hands with a snot rag.

            They looked shocked and fell all over themselves with excuses why they couldn’t handle a firearm or even touch one. That was the clearest moment in my youthful journey from delusion to reality when I became viscerally aware of the disjunction between what socialist revolutionaries say, and what they really believe and do.

            Now, over forty years later, I find it humorous. Whenever I hear some lefty talking about revolution, I think of what they would say if they ever had the opportunity to talk to an actual leftist revolutionary who actually bore arms in an actual revolution, and laugh out loud.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            Good story, and one that is worth remembering …

            The ONLY thing preventing an immediate crackdown on the Second Amendment, today, is the fact that the people would rise up, in arms. That, after all, is the purpose of the Second Amendment … the final sanction against tyranny. Don’t tread on me …

            Instead, the Feds will allow their toadies in state and local governments to do their job, for them, in driblets … the proverbial boiling frog. Only when it’s too late will the Feds begin their assault upon the American people.

            We even have many people in the Army … like Muslims and homosexuals … who have no love for conservatives, and would be willing to fire on the American people. We need to be willing to pay the ultimate price for our freedoms.

            And note that our freedoms cannot be protected … and will not be … by the Federal government. They can only be protected by us.

          • Drakken

            Try the .416 by Barrett, very expensive rounds but a nail driver at 2,000 meters.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            It is, indeed. But I picked the .50-cal because the round will be widely available, if needed …

          • Drakken

            As much as I really hate to say this, the time is rapidly approaching where you just might need to use it.

  • Chiron_Venizelos

    What troubles me most is that we’re almost there now. The foundation for socialism has been laid. The first stone was laid by Woodrow Wilson.

    • CapitalistPig

      The rollout of the ACA should be a case study–get em hooked on the cocaine of subsidies which builds the “dependency constituency” that provides the uber reliable voting base.
      Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Social Security all follow the same model–along the way continuing building separate yet united voting bases & Voila!
      A free society frog has been successfully boiled into dependent sheeple.
      Yeah….it troubles me too—we’re just about there. “The government should do it” is pretty much the default politics of a majority of Americans.

  • hrwolfe

    Sort of like William Z. Foster’s “Toward a Soviet America.” That book is a chilling read when you consider what has been accomplished by the left. Control of Education and getting religion out of schools is precisely laid out on pg. 316 including the formation of a National Department of Education though it was published in 1932, I have an edition published in 1961 by anti-Communists looking to expose it. They told us their plan as we ignored it, that is the real folly!

    • Harry Black

      Getting religion out of public schools is a great idea. You might check the Constitution which stipulates not only freedom of religion but from state-imposed religion. But I forgot. The American right reads only those parts of the Constitution that suit their theocratic agenda.

      • truebearing

        Then getting Marxism and Environmentalism out of public schools is a great idea, since they are both religions. And the same goes for Islam, which is being given access by the leftists running our schools as indoctrination camps. By I forgot. The Left only whines about separation of church and state when it isn’t their atheocratic propaganda being taught to their future victims.

        Where did the constitution stipulate freedom from religion? You don’t know what you are babbling about. Furthermore, religion isn’t being “imposed” unless children are being forced to join…like the Muslims do to anyone who isn’t Muslim, that is that they don’t kill.

        Marxists and Muslims shouldn’t be allowed to hold office in the US, elected or otherwise. They believe in ideologies that are inherently hostile and intent on overthrowing and destroying representative nations. Any Muslim government is essentially a theocracy and any Marxist government an atheocracy. Both are antithetical to our constitution. Of course, you don’t believe in the constitution anyway. It is just a leverage point for a false argument.

        • Harry Black

          Spoken like a true authoritarian. Freedom from religion means not being excluded from public office because of your religion and not being forced to sit through a prayer or other religious ceremony in a public school or other public space. Clearly you haven’t read article one of the Bill of Rights.

          • truebearing

            No, spoken like someone who understands Marxism and Islam, and who recognizes that the constitution also provided solutions for traitors and enemies.

            “Freedom from religion means not being excluded from public office because of your religion and not being forced to sit through a prayer or other religious ceremony in a public school or other public space.”

            If a religion seeks to destroy the constitution, then your religion doesn’t deserve constitutional protection. It is a seditious religion and the survival of the republic necessitates that adherents to that religion be dealt with appropriately. The constitution can’t be held as a weapon against itself. That was never the framer’s intent.

            Secondly, your whining about being forced to sit through a prayer is pathetic. That isn’t forcing you to join anything, nor is it creating state religion. Marxism is religion and state in one. Islam is a theocracy.

            When a religion expressly states that overthrowing all countries in a lust for world domination, a nation has not only a right but a duty to label that religion/ideology hostile and an existential threat. Only a complete moron would argue that a criminal, political or otherwise, that openly admits to planning to commit a crime, deserves to be allowed to do so. You are that complete moron, apparently.

          • Harry Black

            Apparently my post has your knickers in a twist Truebearing. Untwist them by asking yourself who decides which religion is ipso facto seditious? For centuries, anti-Semites unfailingly described Judaism as seditious. Perhaps you are aware of where that prejudice led.

          • truebearing

            Stupidity combined with dishonesty always irritates me, so of course any of your drivel is bound to annoy me.

            A religion that makes world domination its ultimate goal is ipso facto seditious. Both marxism and Islam are transnationalist religions that seek totalitarian control of the world. They are both in stark opposition to our constitution and democratic republic. They are both by nature and design insurgent religions that seek to destroy the economic system and dominant religion in any country. Neither is shy about their goals, and since you are a commie, you already know that. Don’t play your childish games with me.

            We aren’t talking about what happened in past centuries. We are talking about what is happening right now. I know you aren’t intellectually capable of thinking outside of false, and lame, equivalencies, but you will have to try to now, or expose yourself as the intellectual fraud that you truly are. Oooops. Too late.

          • Harry Black

            Oh yawn. And since you are such a fan of democracy, what are you doing to stop the Koch Brothers from turning the US into an oligarchy or securing for minorities and the residents of Washington, DC, the right to vote?

          • hrwolfe

            Forced to sit through a prayer, Oh my Gosh!!! the humanities but forced to sit through ad nausea Greening and Solar and Eco this n that but mention God and your ears are burning to the point of intolerance. All I can say is that it did not harm the Country for the first 175 years and where the heck has it gone since, not that well. It is indisputable part of American heritage and nobody ever made you participate. Who was excluded from public office because of their lack of religion?

          • Harry Black

            The first amendment forbids the imposition of religious belief. Violating the Constitution for 175 years does not justify continuing to violate it. Or perhaps like so many Tea Party zombies, you believe the Constitution applies only when it suits you.

          • cjleete

            You are obviously in a match of wits armed only with a can of spray paint and a bucket of manure, while the other side has actual history on their side. You continuously use ad-hominem attacks which is a sign of a losing argument.

          • Harry Black

            “. . . while the other side has actual history on their side.” I think you mean “its side.” No need for an “ad hominem attack”–your own words demonstrate the weakness of your argument. The Constitution is not on your side.

          • truebearing

            “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any
            other.”
            - John Adams

            If you don’t like what Adams said, get out.

          • Harry Black

            Being religious and moral and having the state force religion down your throat are two different things. The Founding Fathers were Episcopalians (Washington), Congregationalists (Adams), Deists (Jefferson), etc. They abhorred the idea of a state religion and promoted religious freedom, which is more than can be said of the wingnut Islamophobes omnipresent on this list.

          • Hass

            Why do you call people “Wingnut Islamophobes”?

            Do you really think they dislike Islam for no reason?
            Remember, they dislike Islam, not Muslims.

          • Guess

            How many times do you need to be told? Pathetic Righties.

            Because you all need a “Bogey Man”!

          • 1Indioviejo1

            The “Bogey Man” is in the White House while his wife “Sasquatch” is in China.

          • Harry Black

            Typical FP racist comment. It should remind you of the root of the conservative demonization of Obama.

          • truebearing

            The only ones trying to shove their religion down anyone’s throats are the Marxists and the Muslims. I didn’t say we should have a state religion, but I sure don’t accept your idiotic definition.

            Jefferson changed his tune radically once he was elected as president. He sent troops to attack the Barbary Pirates without notifying Congress he was so intent on ending Muslim attacks and kidnappings.

            I guess you support Muslims stoning women or beheading homosexuals. You should move to Iran.

          • Harry Black

            Jefferson attacked the Barbary Pirates not because of their religion but because they were attacking US shipping. That he failed to notify Congress of his actions simply demonstrates that like so many politicians before and since he was an opportunist and probably a sociopath. As far as my supporting Muslims stoning women, etc. I support nothing of the kind. I also don’t support Christians staging Auto-da-fes or practicing bigamy or forced conversion.

          • truebearing

            The Muslims were attacking our ships, and those of European nations, and enslaving those on the ships. Estimates are that they kidnapped and enslaved a million people. They committing these acts in accordance with the teachings of Islam, so indirectly, Jefferson was attacking them because of they were following their religion.

            “I also don’t support Christians staging Auto-da-fes or practicing bigamy or forced conversion.”

            Find me the verse in the Gospel that supports any of those things. The Inquistion wasn’t a manifestation of Christian teachings. Kidnapping and enslaving the infidel is encouraged in the Koran.

          • Harry Black

            The Gospels have been used to justify all kinds of atrocities. Ditto the Koran. But please cite the verses in the Koran that justify kidnapping and slavery.

          • Guess

            Well said!

          • Drakken

            I can see your going to be one of the first leftist lined against that wall in the near future, and you on the left will richly deserve it.

          • Harry Black

            Rather unamerican of you, don’t you think–to kill someone because their opinions differ from yours. That’s the good old fascist way–and your two supporters (so far) suggest how many would-be Hitler Youth lurk FP and on the US right generally.

          • truebearing

            Your Dear Leader, Hussein Obama is a fascist, not that you actually know the definition of the term.

          • Harry Black

            Since you know “the definition of the term,” explain precisely how President Obama “is a fascist.” He is, as far as I can tell, a centrist. It was, after all, that leftist Richard Nixon, who wanted to give the US single-payer health care. Not a bad idea come to think of it.

          • truebearing

            When Obama first took office, he usurped control over private enterprises, GM and Chrysler, and stole money from secured bondholders, which was illegal. He gave Chrysler to Fiat, though he didn’t own it. he gave the union’s an ewuity position in GM though he didn’t have the authority. That was textbook fascism.

            Obama’s failed “Venture Socialism” in the solar industry is another example of the government trying to create an industry with tax revenues and compete with other energy producers, like coal, which he is driving out of business. Fascism 101.

            That is just two of many examples.

            Obama is a centrist? That is laughable. Maybe to a Maoist.

            What’s wrong Harry? Wasn’t the abject failure of Marxism in the 20th Century enough for you? Weren’t the 100,000,000 plus democides by “utopian” leftist regimes enough killing for you? China had to implement crony capitalism to save the communist rule. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of Marxist idiocy. The Castros finally were forced to allow some capitalism “to save the revolution.” Yet here you are, still trying to prove that the square wheel is superior to the round. Typical half-wit leftist that can’t learn from past mistakes.

          • Harry Black

            Hi there “truebearing.” I’m growing tired correcting your illiterate rants. It was George W. Bush who initiated the GM and Chrysler bailouts. Moreover, Obama had nothing to do with the Fiat-Chrysler merger. takeover. But please don’t let the facts interrupt your paranoid fantasies.

          • Drakken

            The time for niceties and pleasantries with the left has now come and gone. Our country and our feckless leadership has brought this great country to its knees and you think it can continue. The left has moved the goal posts so far left that anything right of Lenin is now considered to be racist, fascist and right wing, well reap what you have sowed Sparky because you goddamned leftist have brought this upon yourselves. We will no longer give into you leftist because you shout a naughty word at us.

          • Harry Black

            “Our country and our feckless leadership has brought this great country to its knees.” Nothing like the logic of the right!

          • Drakken

            We are beyond a war of words boy, logic and leftist in the same sentence is an oxymoron.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            I think he is implying killing traitors not people who’s opinion differs from others you f*cking tool.

          • Harry Black

            For folks like you, anyone who disagrees with you is a traitor. That is, as I say, the fascist way.

          • truebearing

            You don’t know the definition of fascist.

            You Commies killed over 100,000,000 people who lived in Marxist “utopias” in the 20th Century, all for disagreeing with the abject stupidity of marxism.

          • Harry Black

            Puhlease. Anyone who disagrees with you is a “commie.” You don’t know the meaning of that word either.

          • Drakken

            History is never kind to traitors and the weak.

          • Harry Black

            You’re such a big strong patriot Drakken! I can see it now: ecstatic crowds acknowledging your strength, hailing your wisdom, admiring your unparalleled love of country. You’re a hero Drakken! History will be so kind to you! And to think, those crowds are celebrating a narrow-minded little man with an angry red face hunched over his computer dashing off barely literate screeds trying to stem the barbarian horde of leftist “traitors,” who voted for Obama and who somehow fail to acknowledge the wisdom of your carefully thought out conservative beliefs.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            You really read things wrong bud. Not anyone who disagrees with me is a traitor. A traitor is someone who betrays their own natio and/or their own people which is exactly what the left is doing to the majority of tpeople in the western world if not the whole world. And furthermore neither of the two scenarios have ANYTHING to with fascism you crazy leftard!! The left is trying to force a system upon people which not only failed many many times already and is a system nobody wants. That is traitorous.

          • Harry Black

            Before you claim the left is foisting a system “nobody wants,” check the polls. The majority of Americans want social security, want less income polarization, want everyone to have access to healthcare, etc. That’s why a majority of Americans voted for Obama rather than his clueless opponent. What was his name again?

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Wrong again leftard. The polls don’t reflect whether or not people want America to be socialist or not. Ask anybody but a leftard studying fine art or political science at the University of Whatever if they want a socialist America and they’ll unanimously so NO!! GET A JOB LEFTARD!!

          • Harry Black

            You conservatives along with J. Edgar Hoover and Rush Limbaugh have taught the American people to hate socialism in the abstract, but when polled, the American people like piecemeal socialism which consists of such measures as unemployment insurance, SNAP, Social Security, Medicare, etc. When the Ayn and Paul Randian dog-eat-dog capitalism you conservatives espouse rears its very ugly head, the American people think it an abomination. So conservatives try to hide their longing for the good old days of President McKinley when life expectancy was under 50 and children toiled 12 or more hours a day in cotton mills. On a more personal note: I’ve been gainfully employed since the age of 17. I doubt you could say the same.

          • Harry Black

            So the American left is traitorous because it is betraying “the majority of the people of the in the western world if not the whole world.” Somehow that doesn’t compute. Pressing for “a system nobody wants” is traitorous. So if I’m say a socialist and I belong to the Democratic Socialists of American (DSA) I’m ipso facto a traitor and should be shot for my beliefs? Perhaps you have in mind all those Americans who voted for Obama–that would be the majority btw. I beginning to have the impression you really do think like a fascist Mr. Mental Illness.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            Wrong again leftard. Again. Belonging to the DSA or voting for Obama doesn’t make you a traitor. Betraying your nation and/or people is traitorous. Get it straight!! I’m glad I’m not a leftard. Oh and again nothing I said has anything to do with fascism.

          • Harry Black

            So why exactly am I going to be shot for being a traitor? I’ve done nothing more than express my political views. I voted for Obama. I espouse socialism (as does the DSA). Isn’t that what leftists do? And doesn’t that add up to betraying their country in your view? Or to put it differently (so that perhaps you will finally understand): you say the American left is betraying the country if not the world, but when confronted with the sort of things leftists like myself do (espouse socialism, join socialist organizations, etc.), you say I’m not a traitor. Please explain. Can I look forward to being shot by your fascist vigilantes or not?

          • Guest

            That’s not what truebearing said. Read his post again. Btw, “who’s” should be whose.

          • truebearing

            You read it again, moron. Maybe you’ll learn something, as unlikely as that is.

          • Drakken

            When you leftards run the country into the ground, it isn’t going to matter what name you call me, for you are too weak and stupid for your own good, let Darwin have his due.

          • Harry Black

            You’re on a roll Drakken. So smart, so incisive! Darwin did not believe human society should follow the law of the jungle. That was left to the Social Darwinists, apologists for the Robber Barons and today’s neo-Robber Barons like the Koch Bros. It’s not the left that will run the country into the ground, but the Koch Bros. and their ilk who are right now using their fortune to turn a democracy into an oligarchy. You’re doing their work Drakken. I hope they pay you for your exemplary literary effort.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            You sure that it’s not Katy Perry and/or Taylor Swift who is/are running the show? I’d love it if Katy Perry were president!! At least she’s a real pop star not like Obama.

          • liberalism is a mental illness

            He didn’t say he was going to put you up against a wall but rather you are going to end up against a wall as a consequence for your actions. Just like a dog running out onto a road it will get run over by a car!! It’s not fascist. It is what is it is.

          • Harry Black

            In other words, if you or your pals shoot me for my beliefs, it’s not because you’re fascists, it’s because my belief in a better future for all Americans makes me a traitor..

        • chuckr

          truebearing …..VERY well said….bravo

      • Judahlevi

        Conservatives do not have a “theocratic agenda.”

        That is a leftist canard which demonstrates clearly your bias and lack of an objective argument.

        • Harry Black

          Uh, you might take a closer look at the conservative movement. And while you’re at it check out the implicit, and often explicit, anti-Semitism of the religious right.

          • Judahlevi

            Frankly, I find much more explicit and implicit anti-Semitism from the left.

            As for the right taking over the country to establish a theocracy, this is almost as conspiratorial as those who believed that George W. Bush took down the World Trade Centers himself on 9-11.

            One last fact, the “religious right”are some of Israel’s most enthusiastic supporters. How is this “anti-Semitic?”

            You may want to look at the left more closely. If you do, you won’t like what you see.

          • Harry Black

            Yeah, the religious right LOVES Jews. Of course. But check out “Anti-Semitism: Its prevalence within the Christian right” by Skipp Porteous. Google Skipp Porteous and anti-semitism.

          • truebearing

            Uh, who supports Israel, dullard? Conservatives. Who supports the Palestinians who want to kill all Israelis? The Left.

            Who mass murdered millions of Jews in WWII? Hitler, a socialist fan of Marx.

            Who protests Israel and attacks Jews on college campuses all over America? Leftists. No conservatives in sight.

            You’re completely full of toro caca.

          • Harry Black

            As I recall, Hitler’s big enemy was Bolshevism. Marx never figured in his writing. But go ahead and call those who know more than you “dullards.” Abuse is the method of the fearful and ignorant.. And you are ignorant of the extent of conservative anti-Semitism.

          • cjleete

            Anti-Semitism is a platform of Black Liberation theology, which is subscribed to by… (a cookie if you get it right the first time)

      • Disapp

        Amendment number 1:

        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

        • Harry Black

          Bravo! You actually figured out how to find the text on the web.

          • cjleete

            I suppose the part “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” made you uncomfortable and defensive.

          • Harry Black

            “Free exercise thereof” is different from forcing your religion on me in public school or the public square.

        • tagalog

          Note the “Congress” part…

      • liberalism is a mental illness

        “Theocratic agenda” What you been smokin buddy??

  • snit3

    It seems that all the contributors to this delusional tome are benefiting handsomely from their life-long efforts to incite violent revolution. I’m afraid they’d be terribly disappointed if their “imaginings” were ever to materialize, and they found themselves harvesting beets.

    • tagalog

      It would be interesting to see, if the socialist revolution they seem to be pining for ever came about, how many of them would escape being placed in prison or some labor camp for being counterrevolutionaries.

      Oh wait, of course none of them would, because the revolution they want would free all the political prisoners, so of course they would never lose their freedom just for being enemies of the state.

  • KyraNelson

    I think Ms Goldin should invite Mumia Abu Jamal over to her house. Then she’ll begin to understand him better.

  • Sniper’s Oath

    Book shows end game for “The Progressive Virus” and why we need to stand HARD KNOW, or not ever! #pvfighters Communism has returned.

  • tagalog

    I find it interesting that they use the H.L. Mencken term “booboisie” for the bourgeoisie, which is, of course, the most revolutionary class in history and a heck of a lot smarter than they give it credit for being. I think they mistake “Victorian” for “bourgeois.” And of course, Victorianism wasn’t anywhere near as dumb as they would like to think either.

  • tagalog

    Rather than live in a world the entire conception for which involves hunting in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, having relations with feminists a lot, getting universal health care after that experience, and teaching the kids “mind-blowing” ideas that will lead them to revolution, I’d fight.
    Wouldn’t you? In fact, I bet there a lot of socialists who would fight for the status quo over that.

  • wileyvet

    This is precisely why the left is obsessed about gun control. The intelligentsia of the left will not want to get their hands dirty themselves, but incite the ignorant Occupy types to wreak havoc, while they watch from their university offices as the Glorious Revolution unfolds. They have seemingly been unstoppable over the last 100 years when it has been an intellectual and cultural war. However if they choose an actual physical confrontation with the American people, they will finally get their comeuppance in the ensuing bloodbath of their making. Then the leaders themselves can be hunted down and summarily executed like their hero Che used to do, but not before being told what vile traitorous scum they are. A taste of their own medicine is exactly what they deserve, no quarter given, that they’ll actually long for the days of Senator Joe McCarthy.

  • CapitalistPig

    Maybe this will become socialism’s book version of “Reefer Madness”. A serious 1930s movie that was made to promote the idea of pot prohibition but was so preposterously over the top untrue that it was later screened as an anti-prohibition film in the 60s & 70s.

  • http://geoffreybritain.wordpress.com/ Geoffrey_Britain

    All ‘isms’ of the left, to one degree or another, reject fundamental aspects of reality.

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    Ron Radosh observes that Old and New Left have now merged. Didn’t that happen long ago with Popular Front politics, and already existent isolationism/anti-imperialism among some among the US Protestant elite? See http://clarespark.com/2012/07/19/communist-ideas-go-mainstream/. “Communists ideas go mainstream.” I do agree that the current administration has not gone whole-hog communist, at least not yet.

    • tagalog

      The New Left claimed to have rejected the Old Left in the 1960s.

      Although the abjuration was exaggerated to make leftism palatable to the general public. It seems to have worked. I can’t believe how many people find leftism desirable in the 21st Century in the USA.

  • iluvisrael

    Socialism is like those people you had dinner with in a restaurant. They ate and drank much more than everyone else, then insist on splitting the check equally.

  • Drakken

    You forgot one very important thing in your letter above. It is in our European DNA to Conquer and Kill, we have become weak, decadent and self loathing in the west, but as true of all things, nature always finds a way, and that way will burst its way to the fore front soon enough as things go from bad to worse. Every one thought the Serbs were/are ruthless blood thirsty creatures and everyone feared them. The tipping point has been reached, it will now take someone to push the whole rotten mess over to kick off the Balkans on steroids, that will without question, start with a brutal vengeance. Every muslim and immigrant from the 3rd world will soon be fleeing in absolute terror as to what is coming. The inner city ghetto’s will burn and a long repressed hatred will be unleashed. So don’t throw the Europeans under the bus quite yet, for the stories will soon be told around a 10,000 campfires for a 1,000 years.

  • Fudge

    Psstt. We already are.

  • IssacAdamBurke

    It is time to give the socialist totalitarians what they want: a socialist country of their own in North America they can loot and despoil to their heart’s content. I’m serious. America is being ruled by traitors, criminals and the socialists’ useful fools.
    It is time to get them from among us conservatives and libertarians. More and more people recognize we need a separation, hopefully a peaceful one. They are not us and we are not them. We conservatives and libertarians have had enough. We have wasted enough time and money fighting one another.
    Here’s a logical, workable new alignment of US states and Canadian provinces to form 2 new North American countries, one socialist, one conservative:
    The Socialist Country – Ontario eastward in Canada. Plus, ME NH VT MA CT RI NY NJ PA DE MD DC MI WI MN IA and southern IL IN and OH in the USA. 135 million citizens.
    The Conservative Country – Western Canada with the rest of western and southern America. 235 million citizens.
    The immediate advantage for conservatives is it removes the bulk of socialist voters and the socialist heartland off to the new country – so that conservatives and libertarians will be a definite majority in The Conservative Country. This will end the vicious struggle for control that has plagued the USA for 100 years now. For socialists the happy benefit is no effective opposition to creating their new Utopia on Earth. Let the two visions compete and let’s see what happens.
    If you agree with this premise, start contacting the state officials and influencers in the states that would be in the new Conservative Country and encourage them to begin taking steps to make our separation a reality.
    As we prepare for separation, we can begin drafting a New Constitution that will help The Conservative Country to end the great majority of the ills now crippling the USA. For example, maybe it would be best for the federal government not to interfere with the economy. Doing so corrupts and cripples the country.

  • Rosasolis

    Can you remember that not so long ago the people of East-European
    countries had
    more than enough of their Socialist-Communist governments, and they
    tore down the Berlin Wall, and got rid of ALL those corrupt governments….
    Most of these East-European countries have since become dedicated members of the European Union.
    And now the president of one of the greatest so-called ” Free-countries” –America–
    wants to force your country to exist under this very backward 19th C.
    way of life! Socialism means stagnation and forcing a country to become
    weak and dependant. When this goal is achieved, then it will lead to Communism
    and a dictator to lead it! Look at what has happened to Venezuela!
    If you are worried about the future of America, you could help and support
    American Spring MAY 16th 2014. Thousands of Americans are expected to
    take part in this great demonstration in Washington. I wish I could be there.
    But I wish you lots of success with your plans. For more information contact:
    Patriots for America – Ning
    Stand up America Maj.Gen. Paul Lallevy

  • KyraNelson

    Guys like him love to beat and rape elderly white women. It’s like caviar to them

    • CapitalistPig

      And those same libs who defend these idiots are against crony socialism government unless it’s for green scams, want high priced wind energy but don’t want windmills in sight of their homes–or public housing built near their neighborhoods–”Do as I say–not as I do” should be the motto of the modern day liberal.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    Ismail, I appreciate greatly what you’ve said, and the solutions to this problem that you’ve given. About five years ago, I would have said that what you said was extreme, and would not have supported it. Today, I am the extremist.

    I am reminded of what Barry Goldwater said in his acceptance speech, at the 1964 Republican Convention (I was there with my father, who was a delegate):

    “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
    vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
    justice is no virtue!”

    These principles can easily be applied to the current situation, in our once-great nation.

  • Shibes Meadow

    The only solution that works is the Franco Solution.

  • pupsncats

    Know thy enemy.

    Another book about the glories of Socialism? Nothing new under the sun. Its proponents rehash the same garbage. Its a stuck record.

    Fools are born every day. Unfortunately, the world has more of them with more power, money, and thus influence than at other times in history. Or not.

  • Dallas25305

    A Socialist U.S.A. Your living in it. Everything President Hussein Obama has done is Socialism and the worst is yet to come.

  • http://socialistparty-usa.net/ Actual Socialist

    Just wait until an actual Socialist runs for public office…