- The Communitarian Third Way
- A. Constitutional Republic - The United States of America
- Government of the people - American's Individual Freedom (1775 - ): power
inherent in the people; individual rights of the common born man: life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (God given, unalienable, constitutional
rights that are national law)
- B. Communist government - The former Soviet Union - government
of the State - Marx's theory of world communism (1847 - ), power inherent
in the state. "For The Common Good of the Party", sacrificing
the individual for the good of the state. Frederick Engels revised Hegel's
theory to suit his needs, and then passed them on to Karl Marx, who rewrote
them and published The Communist Manifesto in 1848.
- C. The coming New World Order / Global Governance / Communitarianism
/ Third Way, etc. - Government of the Community. The Communitarian Third
Way (2002 - ) power inherent in the global community: enforced through
mandated duties and responsibilities versus individual freedoms. The Third
Way: Elitist social justice enacted by sacrificing individual rights. It
will institute communitarian laws (by way of facilitators and agents of
change), launching state and corporate interventions in private matters;
easing the way for confiscation and redistribution of individual wealth
in the United States of America. Its elements includes: faith-based initiatives,
community governments, community policing, limiting individual's privacy,
and the total elimination of individual's right to bear arms.
- The Third Way / NWO / Global Governance
/ Communitarianism, etc., irrespective of what it's being called, is being
brought to fruition by means of George W.F. Hegel the nineteenth century
- Hegel turned the concept of Socratic reasoning (the
Socratic method) upside down by equalizing Thesis and Antithesis. This
made all intellectual positions relative by means of the Hegelian Dialectic
and through the abolition of absolute truth. "Truth" was now
found in Synthesis alone (in the compromise of Thesis and Antithesis).
It was no longer a beginning point in the cognitive reasoning process,
as it related to the actions contemplated by forces for social change,
their motives, or factual claims.
- It was Hegel's view that all things unfold in a continuing
evolutionary process, whereby each idea or quality (the thesis) inevitably
brings forth its opposite (the antithesis). From that interaction, a third
state emerges in which the opposites are integrated, overcome, and fulfilled
in a richer and higher synthesis. This synthesis then becomes the basis
for another dialectical process of opposition and synthesis. Hegel believed
that the creative stress of opposing positions was essential for developing
higher states of consciousness.
- In the moment of synthesis, Hegel held, opposites
are both "preserved and transcended, negated and fulfilled." The
new theory was dialectical, as well as materialist. It envisaged change,
constant and inherent. And in that never-ending flux the ideas emanating
from one period, would be found the embryonic ideas to help shape the next.
- Thus, Hegel's premise was not a proposition whose
benefits went unnoticed by the forces for global change; forces like those
at the United Nations.
- Through the UN (and their desire for global unity)
leaders there knew that sovereignty had to cease. They knew they had to
convince people that borders prevented us from developing relationships
based on consensus. They had to convince us of the commonality of our "human
- If a person lives in the middle of a country they
are patriarchal for the most part. It's the people who live on the border;
they develop relationships with people across the border. Yet they
know that if their country goes to war with this other nation that they're
on the periphery. They understand that it's they, and their friends, who
are going to face the wrath of this foreign state. Therefore, these folks
develop this "border-less language". Which is a "synthesis"
- That's what globalization desires to do - produce
a "synthesized border-less language" that can be used globally. As
if you live on the border but there's no longer any sovereignty.
- It's the relationship with those who are different
than you that becomes important. Important enough that you will be willing
to compromise your principles, your sovereignty, and the principles of
your nation for the sake of continuing a relationship with people who are
different than you.
- Here again the Hegelian Dialectic enters the scene
and proves most useful. Educating the children using transformational outcome-based
education in the schools, while at the same time reeducating their parents
in the workplace using Total Quality Management.
- Total Quality Management teaches the worker how to
not be concerned with sovereignty and borders, but rather relationships
across those borders. That's why NAFTA and GATT and all these transnational
agreements were developed. To destroy our sovereignty and to weaken our
borders, thereby allowing relationships to developed across national divides.
So that eventually, the methods used in solving work related problems would
be the same in Canada, Mexico and throughout the world.
- Typically, these type schemes, as well as other UN
directives, come down to the individual communities through the local Chamber
of Commerce or groups like them. The Chamber gets its direction from the
International Chamber of Commerce, which has special recognition at the
UN. Unfortunately, the Chamber presidents don't know this - most of them
being good local folks who want to help their community.
- Moreover, the dialectical school-to-work kinds of
reforms that have come into being, have come through a lot of different
industry, trade, and social alliances like the Chamber of Commerce and
Better Business Bureau. At these organizations the businessmen meet without
realizing they are fully involved in a "dialoging to consensus"
- In point of fact, the schools may be the most important
players in this globalist dialectic. Because in the schools, administrators
are used as facilitators who indoctrinated both teachers and parents. The
theory being once you have the schools, you can then move on to the community
- Certain private schools in America, like the Glasser
Schools, even go so far as to talk about the stations of the mind, where
the tenth station is like Zen. Except, in Zen you focus on one thing. Where
as, what Glasser Schools claim to do, is focus on nothing and simply listen
to the motor run...
- This is the kind of insanity that is developing the
next generation of minds within our education system.
- Richard Bandler in a book on further human education,
Changing with Families, has a poem in the middle of it by a sorcerer. He
says the sorcerer must "silence the voice," (those who don't
agree with the agenda) and he, the sorcerer, must silence the dialogue.
- Now, the dialogue is when you show up at
a meeting with your principles. And how does the facilitator get you to
put your principles aside to work with the group? He has to silence the
voice; "the dialogue" you're having with your conscience. Because,
when you're sitting there thinking: "No, I don't agree... This is
not what I believe to be right." You're dialoguing with yourself;
with what you can or cannot do based upon the standards you walked in the
room with. So the sorcerer, once he silences the dialogue you're having
with your conscience, can then move you into the dialectic process.
- School-to-work, then, can be thought of as the political
end of this whole thing. Its the schools that develop the dialectic mind
in the transformational outcome-based education classroom; while in the
work place the dialectic process is being propagated through ISOs (International
Standards Organizations), or Total Quality Management.
- Total Quality Management was the brainchild of Kurt
Lewin who went to M.I.T. when Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany. He
conducted research involving group dynamics that laid the foundation for
Total Quality Management; which can be summarized as a method of belief
and behavior modification using dialectic-reasoning skills in a group setting.
- It utilizes the inherent fear an individual person
has of being alienated from the group. By use of a change agent, or "facilitator,"
individuals are herded toward "consensus" by compromising their
position for the sake of "social harmony."
- According to Lewin, "A successful change includes
three aspects: UNFREEZING the present level, MOVING to the new level, and
FREEZING group life on the new level."
- In group dynamics the pain is not physical, it's
emotional, and is caused by long periods in isolation from the group.
- 1. A Diverse Group ("Diversity" needed for
- 2. Dialoging to Consensus (Dialectic process unshackled
from the constraints of truth)
- 3. Over a Social Issue (Problem / Crisis)
- 4. In a Facilitated Meeting (Using a facilitator or change
- 5. Herding Group Views Toward a Predetermined Consensus
- (Paradigm shift: problem, reaction, solution)
- A prime example of Total Quality Management is "community
- Dr. Trojanowicz, formerly the director of the National
Center for Community Policing at the University of Michigan, considered
the father of Community Oriented Policing, ponders the dilemma of the current
state of affairs in his paper Community Policing and the Challenge of Diversity.
- He states: "The community of interest generated
by crime, disorder and fear of crime becomes the goal to allow the community
policing officer an enter into the geographic community."
- Let me repeat that. Trojanowicz says: Social
chaos is the GOAL and that the crisis of crime and disorder is the door
for the police officer (as facilitator/change agent) to enter the community.
- Formerly, the police administrators were accountable
to the elected officials who were accountable to the voters (representative
- This new paradigm describes exactly what Marxist,
George Lukacs, termed "participatory democracy" and is nothing
more than the Soviet style council.
- The United States Constitution was the law of the
land (absolute authority) restraining government intrusion into the rights
of the individual. The framers designed it to insulate the private realm
(the individual) from the public realm ( the government).
- By practicing the dialectic, we are removing the
only barrier between a tyrannical government and the private citizen.
- Again, according to George Lukacs, a Soviet is when
the public and the private sector are in a facilitated meeting; versus
in the private sector, where you tell your workers they had better do the
job your way, or you won't get a paycheck.
- When you go into a public sector you get into the
partnership arrangement, which means you have just given up the private
sector structure. In essence, what you've really done is you've gone into
a politburo, the Soviet structure, which is dialoguing to consensus with
a diverse group of people. Meaning, you find what a diverse group of people
has in common, usually through dissatisfaction over social issues, and
begin a facilitated dialogue towards a predetermined outcome. An outcome
that's almost always concealed.
- Consequently, when you have your laws being developed,
promoted, implemented and enforced by The Environmental Protection Agency,
The Departments of Health, Education and Welfare and The Department of
Labor, which have instituted the same Soviet structure - a diverse group
dialoguing to consensus - you've entered a "Politburo structure".
- In effect, the whole thinking (the whole
mindset of communism) is based on the dialectic process; and that process
has been introduced into America, to the extent that it is being used on
every wavelength possible. As a result America's whole social being has
been furtively Sovietized. We have basically become a communist republic
and we haven't woken up to the fact that we are now a communist style state.
- However, for the dialectic process to be completely
successful the media had to be controlled first. Paul Lazarsfeld from Columbia
University worked on radio communications. He worked to make sure that
no radio or TV station would produce one ideal. While you could find a
position that supported the patriarchal way of thinking, it was never broadcast
alone but always surrounded by diversity. That was because the patriarchal
position was Thesis, and diversity the Antithesis. This forced you
to dialogue, to try to find consensus (Synthesis as truth) in that relationship.
- From journalism you learn the dialectic process.
The news does not come on without a diverse group of people (the journalists)
getting together, dialoguing to consensus over social issues in a facilitated
meeting. On Sunday's you can turn on the television and watch the process
in action on programs like "The McLaughlin Group" or "Inside
Washington." You see, what the social psychologists knew when they
started was that they had to produce dialectic hegemony.
- Now, we use to have patriarchal hegemony. In other
words, if your child went and played with the neighbor's kids and they
misbehaved, those parents would come out and say "I know how your
parents would want you to behave" and then they would do some disciplining;
because there was this common patriarchal relationship within the community.
- Today, however, we've gone to hegemony in a dialectic
world. Which means your child, who you believe should behave a particular
way, can misbehave with another child whose parents are in the dialectic
process. This is because those parents believe that the misbehaved behavior
is normal; owing to the fact that in a transformational way deviancy is
- Americans, therefore, have been caught up in this
process. Our churches have been watered down. Our kids are being programmed;
and our government now looks at people who support the American flag, and
those people who are patriots, as the criminal. They are extremists. They
are over reacting. They are not tolerant for the sake of social harmony.
They are deviant because they resist the group.
- There's a difference between Dialectic Materialism
and Historical Materialism, however, and both are at odds with one another.
- The Tiennamen Square issue, which we thought was
a struggle between democracy versus communism, was actually a struggle
between Traditional Marxism versus Transformational Marxism. The ongoing
fighting in the Soviet Union is not a struggle between democracy versus
communism. It's a struggle to make the world safe for Transformational
Marxism, (which is a "Diverse group of people dialoguing to consensus
over social issues in a facilitated meeting"), versus Traditional
Marxism. Which says, "you do it my way or bang you're dead."
- The Transformational Marxist agenda is to take Marxism
around the world, never allowing it to become rigid and tied to any one
nation or organization. All nations are to be interconnected. And what
interconnects us is what we find in common, the human agenda. The "human
agenda" is the purpose for our interconnectedness.
- When it came to transnational organizations, the
Globalist said they could help with human relationships there too. We bought
into it not knowing (without reading the small print) that it included
communism in the bargain. As traditional Americans we really weren't prepared
- Today, organizations like the Army Corps of Engineers
are directly involved in local environmental issues, as well as with water
rights... and when you get into water rights you get into Maritime Law. The
Globalist know that natural resources are the key, which is why they always
put their emphasis on controlling natural resources and prevent people
from consuming them.
- Parenthetically, Americans should also be aware that
the law is changing too. Which means you are now guilty until proven
innocent. That's because of the way legal problems are identified and solved
today. Legal matters are no longer viewed through the traditional prism
of "unalienable rights" based on the Constitution. Rather, your
God given constitutionally based (unalienable) rights, have morphed into
government given (inalienable) civil rights.
- You don't need a counselor, social psychologist,
or a Marxist to help you to clarify what's really going on. "Change",
including President Obama's "change you can believe in", means
that constitutional rights, civil rights and human rights are all being
changed (harmonized downward) as the times change.
- Private property rights are in jeopardy too. Eventually
there is going to be a global tax on the environment, which will deliberately
destroy the basis for owning private property. You will not have rights
to your property. You'll have a title, which is what you're paying for
today. The agenda is to take the property away by consensus.
- You see, they don't have to take your property away.
They don't have to take your children away. They don't have to take your
money away. They don't have to take your parks away either. All they have
to do is get you into consensus... and now they possess your property,
your children, your money and your parks.
- Remember, when you have a government come in to protect
your children, your property, your parks and your money... eventually that
government will come in and protect your children, your land, your parks
and your money... from YOU.
- In Maryland the government passed two bills in 1997
called "Smart Growth" and "Rural Legacy". This
plan is basically a United Nations biodiversity agenda where people will
be told where they can live and where they can't live.
- In getting people to accept this agenda many different
ploys are being used. Racine, Wisconsin was recently named a "Sustainable
City." As such, in order to get the people to participate, the powers
that orchestrated this movement set up "visioning meetings";
in which they got a diverse group of people together from all walks of
life: community leaders, school teachers, factor workers, businessmen,
etc., to talk about what they didn't like and what they wanted to change.
- This is the dialectic process, i.e. the Soviet process;
which is to get folks to come to a point where they give up their individuality
liberty and unalienable rights.
- They, the globalist forces of the communitarian third
way, look for hot button issues. The type of issues that offers a common
level of dissatisfaction to everyone, say the environment. Once they find
that common dissatisfaction they can then almost guarantee consensus.
- That's the experience, then, of the Third Way. Wanting
people to feel good about the dialectic process. They solve a crisis, very
often contrived - a common dissatisfaction, but always with a predetermined
outcome. Bearing in mind, that to those facilitating this process, all
truth is relative. Which means that the truthfulness of the issue being
presented, as well as the veracity underlying the presenter's rational,
including their facts and figures, ARE ALL IRRELEVANT to them. It's
the ends, which justify the means.
- Look at the oil crisis we had in the early 70s. Artificially
produced, it was an illusion. We have followed that illusion and have had
crisis after crisis (the antithesis - creating the problem); from the ozone
and fluorocarbon illusion, to the carbon tax and the climate change illusion.
- This is the Hegelian Dialectic in its essence: contrived
problem - facilitated reaction - predetermined solution.
- The Communitarian Third Way, then, is a process whose
foundation was laid upon the work of a 19th century philosopher named George
W.F. Hegel. Like a cancer upon the world, Hegel's philosophy was designed
to metastasize globally via government, business, education and even our
- In the end, what we are dealing with is a dialectic.
It is the very same structure that Satan used on Eve in the Garden; that
presidents Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama used on America;
and that Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is using in the United Nations.
- It can be called "secularized Satanism" or
"intellectualized witchcraft". Whatever you call it, though,
you had better believe that it's REAL and working against the best interests
of you and your nation...
- ~ Anonymous ~