Fulfilling W. Z. Foster’s Strategy: Roe and Riots in the Streets. An Analysis of ‘The American Road to Socialism’
W. Z. Foster was the protagonist leading the early strategies that has brought us almost a decade of riots in the streets. This week I take you into the rhetoric of Foster which gave 1st Amendment credence to justify the U. S. Supreme Court to allow socialism and communism to secure its place as the change agent of governance, social, economic and political policy in these United States.
Initially I was going to write this as a separate article in connection to the recent Roe decision but time gets away when having many tasks on the schedule. Therefore you get the gist of the meat in the program instead.
With that, the riots over the reversal of Roe and the true insurrection by pro-abortion dupes, Antifa and other groups in various cities across the nation are the defenders of ‘peoples democracy’ against the restoration of Federalism. These protests and riots have been absolutely predictable. For several decades, I have been discussing as well as predicting the actions of the abortion activists and all those associated with what is called the ‘left.’ My point of this commentary on W. Z. Foster is not to add to the plethora of explanations respecting a Constitutional Republic and the true workings of Federalism but to again answer all those still asking ‘what happened and why?’
The reality is that the general public as well as the conservative movement do not want to admit that all the information leading up to the present riots in the streets has been in our faces for decades. I want you to think about what should have been a serious warning from William Z. Foster in his work ‘The American Road to Socialism:
‘The Preamble to the Constitution of the Party states this policy as follows: “The Communist Party upholds the achievements of American democracy and defends the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights against its reactionary enemies who would destroy democracy and popular liberties. It seeks to safeguard the welfare of the people and the nation, recognizing that the working class, through its trade unions and by its independent political action, is the most consistent fighter for democracy, national freedom, and social progress.”
That was written in 1952. Look hard at how ‘democracy’ is used. Do you hear the same usage of ‘democracy’ in the rhetoric of the modern ‘left?’ The last clause is the most telling of all. Now, read the strategy that Foster claims that Marx wrote (with my bold emphasis added):
‘Thus, Karl Marx, three generations ago, before the advent of imperialism, with its highly centralized, heavily armed, and bureaucratic state, said that “If, for example, the working class in England and the United States should win a majority in Parliament, in Congress, it could legally abolish those laws and institutions which obstruct its development.”
The strategy of getting the ‘progressives / communists’ elected to Congress and appointed to bureaucracies is also well delineated in the work of Jan Kozak that I talk about often. Although, as many have heard me speak and write, Kozak showed how the elected are the ‘pressure from above,’ while the ‘organized interest groups, unions and modern educated minions,’ are the ‘pressure from below.’
Thomas R. Eddlem, who is a ‘classical libertarian’ writer, in his introduction to Kozak’s work for making a country socialist and communist, describes the concepts Kozak promotes regarding ‘Pressure from above and Pressure from below’ in this way:
‘A socialist or fascist economic policy is necessary for dictatorial revolution in an elective government — and not simply because socialism or fascism concentrates the physical power of the state in the few who run the executive branch of government. While these policies certainly enable the state to acquire power (and to shift power away from the legislature) their chief role as necessary ingredients for revolution is that they give the state hegemonic control (leadership) over the various non-governmental cultural institutions — institutions which may have enough strength to resist and overthrow a political coup d’etat.’
‘…As the preceding example illustrates, Kozak outlined the main thesis of a giant pincer’s strategy for transforming a parliamentary system of government into a totalitarian dictatorship — the strategy of combining “pressure from above” with “pressure from below” to effect revolutionary change. In essence, under this plan, the Communist minority in parliament (in coalition with socialist parties) serves the revolution by initiating policies and legislation which strengthen the hand of grassroots revolutionaries and punish threats to the coup (i.e., the Right). Meanwhile, grassroots revolutionaries whip up the appearance of popular support for the legislative program to advance the revolution through strikes, rallies, petitions, threats, and – sometimes — sabotage. The “pressure from below” by the small number of revolutionaries and their larger number of dupes is then used to “justify” the centralization of power in the hands of the executive branch of the state. Wishy-washy politicians are intimidated, and the “pressure from above” intensifies. Each legislative victory results in new demands (the “pressure from below”) for even stronger legislation, which is relentlessly pursued by communists and their dupes in parliament — who claim, of course, that they are acting in the name of the popular will. The cycle continues until opposition is completely powerless, intimidated, or liquidated — and the revolution is a fait accompli.’
‘The theory for using “pressure from above” and “pressure from below” in order to acquire power, explained in this manual by Kozak, first emerged in the writings of an obscure Italian Communist thinker named Antonio Gramsci.’
Taking into account the work of Gramsci and that of the Communist Party USA, anyone who could read and comprehend would be able to predict the actions of the modern democrat party and those of the various leftist groups in the streets. Who should have been leading in seeing and addressing these issues? A Biblical Church with a complete Biblical Reformation Worldview could have.
But for decades the churches have been compromised by those with anti-God agendas. Yes, they were and are ‘wolves in sheep clothing.’ This fits completely with Gramsci’s methodology of revolution that is cultural, religious, family and institutional. Eddlem summarizes this as, ‘Gramsci argued that without a successful “war of position” for “cultural hegemony” (cultural leadership) within these institutions, a revolutionary power grab — even by a well- organized conspiracy — is impossible.’
Keeping it Simple
Well, I’ve exceeded the 800 word limits for a blog. Nothing new for me. At this point, I suggest you explore the references and pleas do listen to my comments on the podcast or video. I do present a couple action items in the third segment of the program. Tune in if you will.
– First segment: Introduction with quick insights on Schneiderman v. United States, 320 U.S. 118 (1943) from JUSTIA US Supreme Court
– Second Segment: Who is William Z. Foster and what was his strategy?
– Third segment: Foster Continued and Action Items
From: THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF MASSACHUSETTS TO DENNYS DE BERDT. JANUARY 12, 1768.
[Massachusetts State Papers, pp. 124-133; a text is in Prior Documents pp. 167-175, and in the Boston Gazette, April 4, 1768.]
‘And if property is necessary for the support of savage life, It is by no means less so in civil society. The Utopian schemes of levelling, and a community of goods, are as visionary and impracticable, as those which vest all property in the Crown, are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government unconstitutional. Now, what property can the colonists be conceived to have, if their money may be granted away by others, without their consent?’
1. Not A Shot Fired.
5. Profintern defined
8. Doug Wilson on overturning Roe and the coming civil war. Roe Reversal Rainbow Month | Doug Wilson
10. Tucker Carlson: This is a manufactured disaster – June 28,2022
11. Schneiderman v. United States, 320 U.S. 118 (1943) from JUSTIA US Supreme Court
12. Schneiderman v. United States from Wikipedia