|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Tom Licata
Why does the Vermont and national Democrat Party continually call-through their actions-for open borders, which effectively means the erasure of borders?
And why does the Vermont and national Democrat Party continually call-through their actions-for open voting, which effectively means the erasure of even voter registration and integrity?
Science, technology, organization and knowledge have immensely changed over time… Human nature, has not.
The same motivations driving the Vermont and national Democrat Party are the same motivations and goals of the likes of James Roosevelt and others of his ilk. Roosevelt-the oldest son of President Franklin Roosevelt- edited “The Liberal Papers,” in 1962, which included the following passage:
“Liberal foreign policy must assume that liberalism and democracy can only flourish or indeed survive in a suitable environment, that such an environment under present conditions can be no less extensive than the entire world, and that, therefore, liberal foreign policy must look at the world as a whole. Any form of isolationism and regionalism is obsolete. The nation that would save itself must subordinate its immediate interest to the maintenance of a peaceful, stable, and just world. That is the assumption that the United States and other nations made in establishing the United Nations.”
Others of this ilk include former Vice President Hubert Humphrey, former President Franklin D. Roosevelt, former first lady Eleanor Roosevelt, and Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., all were among the prominent Kennedy-Johnson administration officials who were founding members of the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA).
ADA was founded to be a lobbying organization for progressive policies born out of FDR’s New Deal, and their leadership of today includes recent members of Congress. Today’s ADA is operationally run primarily by progressive, postmodern social justice activists.
ADA’s platform declared that “support of the principles of the United Nations is the cornerstone of our foreign policy.” And in its official program, ADA describes itself as “dedicated to the achievement of freedom and economic security for all people, everywhere”
ADA’s 1947 charter declared: “The establishment of a world government with powers adequate to prevent war must be an objective of the United States foreign policy to be achieved at the earliest possible dates.”
This urge for a kind of classless, stateless society goes back not only to Marx, but much further back in time. It is utopian — meaning “no place” — and extremely dangerous. But this urge lives on, with the exception that today’s utopians have the immense power of science, technology, organization and knowledge that past utopians lacked.
In Vermont, the ilk that only dares whisper such ideas as “the establishment of a world government…” includes the likes of Sen. Phil Baruth, Rep. Jill Krowinski, Rep. Emile Kornheiser, Rep. Tiff Bluemle, Rep. Barbara Rachaelson, Sen. Ann Cummings, Sen. Ginny Lyons, Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale, and Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky. These are but a small listing of Vermont’s senators and representatives whose goals are nothing short of world communism, aided by the disparate likes of the United Nations, “Climate Change”, “Equity”, DEI, CRT, Defund the Police, etc….
The difference between 20th and 21st century Democrats or Progressives lies only in their honesty and deception, respectively, for identical ends.
“No place” will be no place any sane individual would want to be, as “no place” increasingly resembles our increasing nihilism.
A world outside of God is a world of chaos.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Opinion
WOW Tom!! So ……. well said!
Many of us who are observing and interacting in the political realm in Vermont can agree with what you have said. It has become very clear that many of our Vermont Elected Representatives do not believe in our US and/or State Constitutions or intend to uphold them or seek to keep their Oaths of Office.
Their actions show they do not intend to serve the Vermonters in their districts. Instead, they function as activists with agendas other than the purpose they have been elected to fulfill.
Our question is: They are very good at deceiving and appealing to the voters as “nice people.” How can we work to expose them and their destructive agenda?
Mr. Licata references “our increasing nihilism.” Does anyone know what that means?
Typically, when ‘nihilism’ is cited, it’s meant to be a derogatory term – a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless.
But citing the term ‘nihilism’ is a crafty diversion. It’s not that anyone thinks one way or another that’s important. What’s important are the social tenants that determine who decides what those values and beliefs are in the first place.
So… what ‘are’ the alternatives?
Well, if we go back to square one, the alternative is getting back to the U.S. and Vermont Constitutions, both having been designed to support and protect our individual freedom and liberty to choose for ourselves what values and beliefs we follow… as long as we don’t harm others in the process.
Basically, we’re talking about ‘free enterprise’. And that’s the direction we should follow. As Milton Friedman said:
“Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion – the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary co-operation of individuals – the technique of the marketplace.”
And,
“By relying primarily on voluntary co-operation and private enterprise, in both economic and other activities, we can insure that the private sector is a check on the powers of the governmental sector and an effective protection of freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought.”
“Exchange is truly voluntary only when nearly equivalent alternatives exist. Monopoly implies the absence of alternatives and thereby inhibits effective freedom of exchange.”
“The key insight of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations is misleadingly simple: if an exchange between two parties is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic fallacies derive from the neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.”
The governing mantra that should always lead the way to discussions of any social construct is, again, Article 9 of Vermont’s Constitution – that for “any law being made to raise a tax, the purpose for which it is to be raised ought to appear evident to the Legislature to be of more service to community than the money would be if not collected.”
Without this discussion, voluntary agreements cannot take place. Again, I differ to Friedman.
“The great virtue of a free-market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another.”
Again, I ‘defer’ to Friedman.
Great article Tom and so true.
Tom Licata wrote,
“This urge for a kind of classless, stateless society goes back not only to Marx, but much further back in time. It is utopian — meaning “no place” — and extremely dangerous. But this urge lives on, with the exception that today’s utopians have the immense power of science, technology, organization and knowledge that past utopians lacked.”
The Tower of Babel is what comes to mind.
It didn’t turn out well for those who thought they could pull it off. And according to everything I read, that will continue to be the case.
“Why are the nations so angry? Why do they waste their time with futile plans? The kings of the earth prepare for battle; the rulers plot together against the Lord and against His Anointed one. ‘Let us break their chains,’ they cry, ‘and free ourselves from slavery to God.’ But the One who rules in heaven laughs. The Lord scoffs at them. Then in anger He rebukes them, terrifying them with His fierce fury. For the Lord declares, ‘I have placed My chosen King on the throne in Jerusalem, on My holy mountain.’”
Psalms 2:1-6 NLT
Nice Martin. I think this applies as well:
“And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.” – Romans 1:28
Great article, Mr. LICATA. And, as is typical, insightful comment, Mr. Eshelman.
Tom, I also thank you for writing an excellent article. It’s refreshing and heartening to read the truth these days.