PDA

View Full Version : Communist Party Goals from 1963, they're doing well so far...



Legacy 6
03-06-2009, 09:32 PM
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm
Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35
January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, January 10, 1963

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist [political?] domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use "united force" to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

YardleyLabs
03-07-2009, 05:24 AM
I see that now we're digging into the archives of Joe McCarthy's red baiters, except that Cleon Skousen made McCarthy look like a liberal. In case you think this piece has anything to do with Communism, you're wrong. It only has to do with the paranoid ramblings of a man who found it easier to attack things he disliked by trying to link them to a hated group. The goals were never anything except Skousen's own fiction.

subroc
03-07-2009, 06:14 AM
I have read that list in the past. Whether it is a real or stated goal of the/a/or any communist party, who knows.

But, in the United States today, communism is a valued part of left. The left in the United States actually embrace their ideals and in many cases their positions and beliefs are mainstream democrat thought. They are prominent at virtually all rallies that the left organizes for their “causes.”

So remember, in the United States today democrats view republicans with distain and embrace the communist party as soul mates.

JDogger
03-07-2009, 08:14 AM
I have read that list in the past. Whether it is a real or stated goal of the/a/or any communist party, who knows.

But, in the United States today, communism is a valued part of left. The left in the United States actually embrace their ideals and in many cases their positions and beliefs are mainstream democrat thought. They are prominent at virtually all rallies that the left organizes for their “causes.”

So remember, in the United States today democrats view republicans with distain and embrace the communist party as soul mates.

Go back to bed. You're still dreaming.

Martin
03-07-2009, 08:23 AM
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, flies like a duck.....IT IS A DUCK!

YOu Know why Jesus likened us to sheep? Because sheep are dirty, they smell, they bit eachother and they get lost all the time and are mislead very easily!

subroc
03-07-2009, 08:29 AM
I have read that list in the past. Whether it is a real or stated goal of the/a/or any communist party, who knows.


But, in the United States today, communism is a valued part of left. The left in the United States actually embrace their ideals and in many cases their positions and beliefs are mainstream democrat thought. They are prominent at virtually all rallies that the left organizes for their “causes.”

So remember, in the United States today democrats view republicans with distain and embrace the communist party as soul mates.



Go back to bed. You're still dreaming.

In what way do you disagree with the proposition that the democrats are closer to communists than republicans, philosophically and view republicans with disdain while embracing communists as soul mates?

Think Hugo Chaves, he is fully embraced by the left. It is a right of passage for the spokes persons of the left especially the mouthpieces in Hollywood to have their picture taken with him. He is taking over industries like oil and now food. obama is leaning towards taking over banks and the auto industry.

Where is the appreciable difference in their positions? One is a communist elected dictator, the other is a socialist elected by the democrat party.

An article calling on obama the join the socialist movement. In case chavez isn't paying attention, he already is.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aB6yw1ihGZ2k

K G
03-07-2009, 09:11 AM
Think Hugo Chaves, he is fully embraced by the left. It is a right of passage for the spokes persons of the left especially the mouthpieces in Hollywood to have their picture taken with him. He is taking over industries like oil and now food. obama is leaning towards taking over banks and the auto industry.

Where is the appreciable difference in their positions? One is a communist elected dictator, the other is a socialist elected by the democrat party.





Do you believe that the reasons for Chaves' and Obama's actions are the same? I'm talking both motivation AND end result.

If BHO doesn't lead the way in getting the economy back on track, he's not going to have a country to lead anymore....

kg

subroc
03-07-2009, 09:22 AM
Do you believe that the reasons for Chaves' and Obama's actions are the same? I'm talking both motivation AND end result.

If BHO doesn't lead the way in getting the economy back on track, he's not going to have a country to lead anymore....

kg

kg



No, I don’t. One is trying to take over and be a ruling dictator. The other is attempting to impart a socialist agenda under the guise of saving industry. But, they are both taking industry or imparting onerous control over industry using socialist reasoning for their taking. They are gearing that reasoning to their audience (How do you sell Coca-Cola in the United States and Venezuela?). The result is or will be the same; Government control of industries that were previously free market enterprises.

Bob Gutermuth
03-07-2009, 09:31 AM
"Those who forget the lessons of histroy are condemned to repeat them "

YardleyLabs
03-07-2009, 05:00 PM
In what way do you disagree with the proposition that the democrats are closer to communists than republicans, philosophically and view republicans with disdain while embracing communists as soul mates?

Think Hugo Chaves, he is fully embraced by the left. It is a right of passage for the spokes persons of the left especially the mouthpieces in Hollywood to have their picture taken with him. He is taking over industries like oil and now food. obama is leaning towards taking over banks and the auto industry.

Where is the appreciable difference in their positions? One is a communist elected dictator, the other is a socialist elected by the democrat party.

An article calling on obama the join the socialist movement. In case chavez isn't paying attention, he already is.


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aB6yw1ihGZ2k

Your logic is comparable to my saying that Republicans have embraced the KKK as an inherent component of their Southern Strategy since Reagan and that therefore Republicans are leading us towards a KKK dominated country where slavery will once again be allowed. Mind you, I would never say this because it is idiotic. However, it is at least as rational and as fact based as the hysterical claims that Democrats are embracing socialism and communism and seeking to turn our country into a new communist dictatorship which seems to be the gist of your concerns.

Personally, I believe our country can live with both the bigotry of the extreme left and the bigotry of the extreme right as long as neither is put in charge. I believe that Republicans have already given too much power to the extreme right and it cost them the election. If Democrats do the same with the extreme left, they will lose the next election.

Bob Gutermuth
03-07-2009, 05:04 PM
Historically the KKK has been associated with the Democrats as they were in charge in the South from the end of the war of the Northern Aggression up until RMN and the GOP began to win elections in the South. In fact the senior Dem Senator is a former member. George Wallace, Lester Maddox and Orville Faubus were all Democrats.

YardleyLabs
03-07-2009, 05:26 PM
Historically the KKK has been associated with the Democrats as they were in charge in the South from the end of the war of the Northern Aggression up until RMN and the GOP began to win elections in the South. In fact the senior Dem Senator is a former member. George Wallace, Lester Maddox and Orville Faubus were all Democrats.

You are absolutely right. And when the Democrats began to distance themselves from the racial policies that had previously been tolerated in the interests of party unity, the southern strategy was developed to peel those interests away and bring them into the Republican tent.

That was the heart of the Southern Strategy and it successfully moved those interests to the Republican side of the vote. That is a matter of historical fact. To leap from that fact to accusations that the Republican Party is trying to lead us to a KKK dominated country is ridiculous, as I stated. However, it makes as much sense as saying that the Democrats are trying to lead us to a socialist/communist dominated state, which was the point of my comment.

For what little it's worth, you can also count my grandfather, who died in 1933, among those who previously belonged to the KKK. That was the impetus for my father's becoming a civil rights activist in the 1940's and 1950's.

subroc
03-07-2009, 06:53 PM
Your logic is comparable to my saying that Republicans have embraced the KKK as an inherent component of their Southern Strategy since Reagan and that therefore Republicans are leading us towards a KKK dominated country where slavery will once again be allowed. Mind you, I would never say this because it is idiotic. However, it is at least as rational and as fact based as the hysterical claims that Democrats are embracing socialism and communism and seeking to turn our country into a new communist dictatorship which seems to be the gist of your concerns.

Personally, I believe our country can live with both the bigotry of the extreme left and the bigotry of the extreme right as long as neither is put in charge. I believe that Republicans have already given too much power to the extreme right and it cost them the election. If Democrats do the same with the extreme left, they will lose the next election.

I would say your comparison of communists on the left to the KKK on the right is specious at best but that would give it any credence at all.

The KKK in the United States is a pariah everywhere they go. They and their beliefs are rejected by the right. Communists on the other hand are embraced by the left. Both communists and democrats call themselves progressives and the meanings and goals are the same.

I expect I could provide links and the like but why bother, you know, it is true. European style socialism in not outright communism is the goal of the democrat party.

I expect your bigotry comment was directed at me. It’s OK. If rejecting communism and embracing capitalism makes me a bigot, so be it.

Marvin S
03-07-2009, 07:06 PM
However, it is at least as rational and as fact based as the hysterical claims that Democrats are embracing socialism and communism and seeking to turn our country into a new communist dictatorship which seems to be the gist of your concerns.

Do you believe what we are seeing is a free market & sensible approach to the problems that were presented to us by the ruling class?


Personally, I believe our country can live with both the bigotry of the extreme left and the bigotry of the extreme right as long as neither is put in charge. I believe that Republicans have already given too much power to the extreme right and it cost them the election. If Democrats do the same with the extreme left, they will lose the next election.

Bigotry is never acceptable - but we find it in very strange places which are neither extreme nor associated with politics.

I need an explanation of what you consider extreme right as I see none of those in power.

But if you are saying the extreme left is not in charge in our nations capital, I would have to say you need to clean your glasses. It's as extreme as I believe the nation has ever seen. I consider cheating on the census & a payoff to your constituency as a blatant attempt to cement power for whatever reasons.

YardleyLabs
03-07-2009, 07:17 PM
I would say your comparison of communists on the left to the KKK on the right is specious at best but that would give it any credence at all.

The KKK in the United States is a pariah everywhere they go. They and their beliefs are rejected by the right. Communists on the other hand are embraced by the left. Both communists and democrats call themselves progressives and the meanings and goals are the same.

I expect I could provide links and the like but why bother, you know, it is true. European style socialism in not outright communism is the goal of the democrat party.

I expect your bigotry comment was directed at me. It’s OK. If rejecting communism and embracing capitalism makes me a bigot, so be it.

I actually don't know any members of what you routinely call the "left" (most that you describe, including me, are pretty moderate) that has any interest in communism at all as a viable philosophy for our government. The continuous efforts of what I would call the radical right -- which I believe by my definition would include you -- to label everyone to the left of Reagan as a communist is simply a name-calling tactic appealing to knee jerk emotions when facts and logic fail. The fact is that communism as an economic strategy has almost no significant adherents left in the world.

If you choose to classify as socialism any efforts to share economic burdens across economic groups to provide some form of social safety net, then it is equally true that there is no significant government in the world that has not adopted some form of such socialism. Pure, unadulterated capitalism is as unworkable as pure communism. For that matter, most "isms" fail miserably when measured against the complexities of life.

zeus3925
03-07-2009, 08:05 PM
I do not wish to see a one party state as envisioned by Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Sadam Hussein, Carl Rove or anyone else. As messy as it is, the country needs both parties to keep each other honest.

But Democrats = Communists, Subroc? I hardly think so. They are doing something a more than a bit risky right now in an attempt to bring the country around. Will it work? I dunno. At least they are doing something. But most Democrats believe in the greatness that is ours in this country as much as most Republicans. Because the Dems are attempting something counter to your personal belief does not make them communists.

But, in the end we shall know whether they are dunces or geniuses. It will be the people who will decide that in the electorial process.

tpaschal30
03-07-2009, 08:46 PM
I do not wish to see a one party state as envisioned by Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Sadam Hussein, Carl Rove or anyone else. As messy as it is, the country needs both parties to keep each other honest.

But Democrats = Communists, Subroc? I hardly think so. They are doing something a more than a bit risky right now in an attempt to bring the country around. Will it work? I dunno. At least they are doing something. But most Democrats believe in the greatness that is ours in this country as much as most Republicans. Because the Dems are attempting something counter to your personal belief does not make them communists.

But, in the end we shall know whether they are dunces or geniuses. It will be the people who will decide that in the electorial process.

You are absolutely right. They are socialists. Socialists are just communists that haven't gotten it right.

JDogger
03-07-2009, 09:12 PM
You are absolutely right. They are socialists. Socialists are just communists that haven't gotten it right.

zzzzzzzzzzz.........somebody else is still dreaming.

JD

Pete
03-07-2009, 10:10 PM
Jeff
Have you ever thought about going on Jeopordy. Your a walking encyclopedia.
Did you study history in college?
Your knowledge about different subjects is incredable. Or do you google or this stuff.

Always impressed regaurds.
Pete

Hew
03-08-2009, 03:56 AM
I believe that Republicans have already given too much power to the extreme right and it cost them the election.
LOL. Well, you also believe that you're a moderate.

George W. Bush, John McCain, Michael Steele....a triumvirate of exterme right wingers, they. Go sell crazy somewhere else...we're all full up here. :)

BrianW
03-08-2009, 10:46 AM
Did anyone else catch the Glenn Beck Show the other day when he interviewed Sam Webb, National Chair of the Communist Party USA?

This guy gave a speech delivered at a Peoples Weekly World forum in Cleveland, Ohio, January 31, 2009, "A New Era Begins" on how the Communist agenda is being fulfilled by Obama, how the President & Congress represents "something quite different" and calling him "the people's advocate".

"That said, the opportunities ... are extraordinary. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity.
In any case, we have our work cut out for us. But I think we can confidently say that change is coming. And we will build a more perfect union.
Yes, we can."


http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/1015/1/27/

Patrick Johndrow
03-10-2009, 11:29 AM
You are absolutely right. They are socialists. Socialists are just communists that haven't gotten it right.

From where most of us sit as born bred citizens of the United States the difference between communism and socialism is merely semantics. So I think for most of us this is a true statment.

code3retrievers
03-10-2009, 01:18 PM
You might be a radical if you use these names in the same sentence "Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Sadam Hussein, Carl Rove ".

Come on Carl Rove lumped in with these guys? You forgot to throw Bush and Reagan in there also.

If you can't beat them, demonize them.

Exaggeration regards,

John

zeus3925
03-10-2009, 09:29 PM
You might be a radical if you use these names in the same sentence "Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Sadam Hussein, Carl Rove ".

Come on Carl Rove lumped in with these guys? You forgot to throw Bush and Reagan in there also.

If you can't beat them, demonize them.

Exaggeration regards,

John

Carl Rove wanted a permanent Republican majority. That is a one party state any way you slice it. Poland under Communist rule allowed other parties but kept them from rising to power by political arrests, harassment and manipulating elections. So does Robert Mugabe. Permanent majority parties and one party states are corrupted by absolute power and need to be periodically replaced.

Reagan did not promote one party permanent majority.

Henry V
03-11-2009, 09:05 AM
If you can't beat them, demonize them.

Exaggeration regards,

John

No truer words recently spoken here.

Now, go review the titles of the threads and the content here the past few weeks. Notice anything?

code3retrievers
03-12-2009, 01:52 PM
Carl Rove wanted a permanent Republican majority. That is a one party state any way you slice it. Poland under Communist rule allowed other parties but kept them from rising to power by political arrests, harassment and manipulating elections. So does Robert Mugabe. Permanent majority parties and one party states are corrupted by absolute power and need to be periodically replaced.

Reagan did not promote one party permanent majority.

So are we going to lump Obama and the Dems in this group also. Does that mean we are currently under a one party system?

The Dems ruled congress for around 40 years, so by your reasoning was that a one party system?

Did the Republicans harass, manipulate or arrest a bunch of dems that I am not aware of?

The only true manipulation of elections has traditionally been done by the Dems. Can you say the Chicago Machine, Acorn and I can go on and on.

Seems to me that every party wants to rule or there would be not reason for a party.

I don't believe Rove wanted a one party system, he did want his party to win a majority.

Like I said, you may want to stop exaggerating.

zeus3925
03-12-2009, 08:01 PM
So are we going to lump Obama and the Dems in this group also. Does that mean we are currently under a one party system?

The Dems ruled congress for around 40 years, so by your reasoning was that a one party system?

Did the Republicans harass, manipulate or arrest a bunch of dems that I am not aware of?

The only true manipulation of elections has traditionally been done by the Dems. Can you say the Chicago Machine, Acorn and I can go on and on.

Seems to me that every party wants to rule or there would be not reason for a party.

I don't believe Rove wanted a one party system, he did want his party to win a majority.

Like I said, you may want to stop exaggerating.

What I said was I don't want to live in a one party state regardless of the author.

The end of the 40 year democrat rule proves exactly my point. We need a strong bi- party or multi- party system. The dem rule had become corrupt and I was very happy to vote my democrat congressman out. The dude was one of the most corrupt. Without another party the corruption would have been much prolonged.

Dems do not have a lock on chicanery. Remember Watergate and the enemies list?

I haven't seen it written in stone anywhere that Republicans are by nature more virtuous or better examples of the good than the rest of mankind. They put their pants on like the rest of us--They are subject to the same blandishments.

JDogger
03-12-2009, 09:00 PM
What I said was I don't want to live in a one party state regardless of the author.

The end of the 40 year democrat rule proves exactly my point. We need a strong bi- party or multi- party system. The dem rule had become corrupt and I was very happy to vote my democrat congressman out. The dude was one of the most corrupt. Without another party the corruption would have been much prolonged.

Dems do not have a lock on chicanery. Remember Watergate and the enemies list?

I haven't seen it written in stone anywhere that Republicans are by nature more virtuous or better examples of the good than the rest of mankind. They put their pants like the rest of us--They are subject to the same blandishments.

"Blandishments", A good word Sarge. One hears it infrequently. I'm sure though that the persuasive flattery, or cajolery, is more self-inflicted, whether one be R or D, than from without.

JD

zeus3925
03-12-2009, 09:05 PM
"Blandishments", A good word Sarge. One hears it infrequently. I'm sure though that the persuasive flattery, or cajolery, is more self-inflicted, whether one be R or D, than from without.

JD

I'll buy that!