Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  Oohhh Jwhop (Page 2)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Oohhh Jwhop
Rogue Guru
Knowflake

Posts: 154
From: Pleasantville, State of Euphoria, USA
Registered: Jan 2011

posted April 22, 2011 01:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Rogue Guru     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yeah, AD, but in his case it doesn't count for much; he obviously didn't get anything out of the book.

I, on the other hand, am a true admirer of Frank Herbert's mind.

Just out of curiosity, would you agree or disagree wih me that his son's and son's buddy's writing style is CRAPOLA? I would describe it as trite and redundant.

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Knowflake

Posts: 2298
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted April 22, 2011 02:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Rogue Guru:
Just out of curiosity, would you agree or disagree wih me that his son's and son's buddy's writing style is CRAPOLA? I would describe it as trite and redundant.

OMG I cannot read the one's not written by son, and son's buddy.

They make me want to pull out my hair!!!

Kinda like after Marion Zimmer Bradley died, and they tried to write more books on the Mists of Avalon.

I haz a sad about that too.

ok back later. Must eat ze lunchies.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 3315
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 22, 2011 02:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What is it you don't understand about Dune being "Fiction" paras? Enjoyable "Fiction" but "Fiction" nevertheless.

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Knowflake

Posts: 2298
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted April 24, 2011 04:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY...

I am not trying to do anything more than get to understand you better, so I won't be debating you or trying to 'change your mind' with MY personal opinions.

That being said:

I did some research.

It seems to me, the gist was that they were hoping to eliminate poverty, for all people.

A noble idea, yes? No one hungry, no one having any need for clothing, shelter, etc.

A tad over idealistic maybe. HOwever, considering the times in which they were thinking these things up, not unsurprising. 1966.

Was this the best way to go about it? I dont' know.

I did find this study from the late 70's
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1953984
Abstract
Frances Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward (1971, 1977) have argued that mass insurgency in the United States, occurring especially between 1964 and 1969, produced a series of responses by government, one of the most significant being massive expansion of welfare rolls. Using data on which they base their claim, this study examines the hypothesis that there is a positive association between social disorders and welfare caseload increases. The conclusion is that associations specified by Piven and Cloward are not supported by the data and a plausible rival hypothesis is offered to explain the massive increases in welfare caseloads.

Then there is this bit from a book too:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YS69fMlIUX0C&pg=PA616&dq=%22cloward-piven+strategy%22&client=firefox-a#v=onepage&q=%22cloward-piven%20strategy%22&f=false

I can see WHY they might have thought that was a good way to eliminate poverty. Especially considering the rise in youth/young adults breaking away from the religious institutions that previously were the mainstay against fighting poverty. I suppose they felt that something must fill that void, nature abhors a vacuum and all that.

Perhaps it is a case of good intentions pave the way to hades and all of that.

------------------
We justify ourselves each time we take a breath...

Me

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Knowflake

Posts: 2298
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted April 24, 2011 04:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jwhop:
Those you call fringe left political varietals ARE the current demoscat party congressional members and their leftist group sycophants.

Perhaps you recall this, or perhaps you never saw it before.

Eli Pariser, Justin Ruben and the Move On team...
Now it's our Party: we bought it, we own it, and we're going to take it back.

One of the last Liberals, if not THE last Liberal in the US Senate, Joe Leiberman has announced he's serving his last term in office and is retiring.


I recall Move On et all. I guess I take that quote to mean they are tired of entrenched and career politicians, perhaps similar to the Tea Party people.

Though if history is any teacher, due to human nature, that which you opposed is what you quickly become.

Power is such a sly corruptor, yes?

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6283
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 24, 2011 08:57 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"Though if history is any teacher, due to human nature, that which you opposed is what you quickly become."

yes. also

what you resist persists.

most of jwhop's Leftists are basically people who would like to see the wealth spread around, and have noticed how wealth accumulated and passed down the generations generate a class of "aristocrats" whether you call them that or not.... smart or stupid? noble or controlling? partly depends how you look at it..and that goes for the other side of the coin too.

fortunately countries are not coins and there are more than two sides to every story!

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 7935
From: The Goober Galaxy
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 24, 2011 09:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
And that's why the far left is synonymous with socialism. Redistribution of wealth means taking what someone earned and spreading it to people who didn't. In this country, anyone can be a success--whether it means going to college or starting a business--it just takes good old-fashioned hard work.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6283
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 24, 2011 11:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
yes well that was badly put! and i knew someone would jump on it ...but what i meant was

rather than redistributing the wealth, spreading it around, or "levelling the playing field" ...

to find a way to prevent those who accumulate wealth from calling ALL the shots. that is just another form of monarchy or feudalism when they do.

it might surprise some people to find that not everyone even WANTS to be wealthy, however they DO want freedom of choice between being one of the hot honchos and being a serf...some just want the dignity of doing a job that produces value and earning enough to enjoy their "castle" (maybe a two bedroom flat somewhere) and their choices.

very few people want to be just a cog.

my take on the early "leftists" was that they felt government was already too big and too much in the hands of the wealthy few many years ago. thus the revolutionary RHETORIC, which for most was just a frame for saying that the "people" as a whole had lost the ability to make their voices heard and their choices viable..

many would have no problem with the rockefellers and windsors of the world if they were happy to just enjoy their wealth, but the way they use it is to buy political clout and influence the entire landscape to their liking. this is what people are trying to describe when they talk about oligarchs..

in that sense jwhop is right in saying those earning $250K are not THE RICH. that doesn't mean that they aren't rich, when you look at what more than half the country lives on.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6283
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 24, 2011 11:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
and if the rich continue to buy politics and politicians the idea that "anyone can get rich" fades into the sunset and acquires myth status.

grandad koch found this out and i wouldn't be surprised if his descendants DO have a bit of a revenge consciousness, in becoming what got in his way. but personally i don't see that as revenge but just perpetuation of the "closed door" syndrome that forced him to go to russia and sell his processes to the enemy...in itself a pretty cold act making "getting there" and money the only important goals -- hang right or wrong.

i don't much care for moveon.org myself. but i do think that when they say "we" bought it, they mean a lot of common people clubbed together to make their voices heard. that is much the same as what voters do, BUT the implication is that we the people can make our voices as important as those with more money IF we get together.

unfortunately whenever enough people get together someone ends up having to organize things...isn't the constitution an attempt to organize people having a voice? wasn't the declaration of independence a few coherent people speaking (hopefully) for the many? it doesn't HAVE to be a case of commies fooling the simpleminded (or the wealthy few doing the same). most groups do fall to the power hungry. to a lot of people it looks like this is what has happened to the US.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 3315
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 25, 2011 09:06 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"It seems to me, the gist was that they were hoping to eliminate poverty, for all people.

A noble idea, yes? No one hungry, no one having any need for clothing, shelter, etc.

A tad over idealistic maybe. HOwever, considering the times in which they were thinking these things up, not unsurprising. 1966."

AD, I'm getting the idea you don't have sufficient time to devote to this study.

The truth about Cloward/Piven and Saul Alinisi is stark and subversive... intentionally so.

The "Plan" was and is...to drive the US economy into bankruptcy, deliberately. Then, claim Capitalism had failed, making way for their little Socialist utopia. Which isn't utopia at all but rather a shared misery except for the string pullers at the top; who they think will be themselves.

"Cloward-Piven is a strategy for forcing political change through orchestrated crisis.

The strategy was first proposed in 1966 by Columbia University political scientists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven as a plan to bankrupt the welfare system and produce radical change. Sometimes known as the "crisis strategy" or the the "flood-the-rolls, bankrupt-the-cities strategy," the Cloward-Piven approach called for swamping the welfare rolls with new applicants - more than the system could bear. It was hoped that the resulting economic collapse would lead to political turmoil and ultimately socialism.

The National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO), founded by African-American militant George Alvin Wiley, put the Cloward-Piven strategy to work in the streets. Its activities led directly to the welfare crisis that bankrupted New York City in 1975.

Veterans of NWRO went on to found the Living Wage Movement and the Voting Rights Movement, both of which rely on the Cloward-Piven strategy and both of which are spear-headed by the radical cult ACORN.

Both the Living Wage and Voting Rights movements depend heavily on financial support from George Soros's Open Society Institute.

On August 11, 1965, the black district of Watts in Los Angeles exploded into violence, after police used batons to subdue a man suspected of drunk driving. Riots raged for six days, spilling over into other parts of the city, and leaving 34 dead. Two Columbia University sociologists, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven were inspired by the riots to develop a new strategy for social change. In November 1965 - barely three months after the fires of Watts had subsided - Cloward and Piven began privately circulating copies of an article they had written called "Mobilizing the Poor: How it Could Be Done." Six months later (on May 2, 1966), it was published in The Nation, under the title, "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty."

The article electrified the Left. Following its May 2, 1966 publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called "crisis strategy" or "Cloward-Piven strategy," as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

Richard A. Cloward was then a professor of social work at Columbia University. He died in 2001. His co-author Frances Fox Piven was a research associate at Columbia's School of Social Work. She now holds a Distinguished Professorship of Political Science and Sociology at the City University of New York.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor. By providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Cloward and Piven wanted to fan those flames. Poor people can advance only when "the rest of society is afraid of them," Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system. The collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation. Poor people would rise in revolt. Only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands. So wrote Cloward and Piven in 1966.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. This Cloward and Piven proposed to do, in classic Alinsky fashion, by forcing welfare bureaucrats to live up to their own book of rules.

The authors noted that the number of Americans subsisting on welfare - about 8 million, at the time - probably represented less than half the number who were technically eligible for full benefits. They proposed a "massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls." Cloward and Piven calculated that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand their entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, they predicted, would be "a profound financial and political crisis" that would unleash "powerful forces… for major economic reform at the national level."

Their article called for "cadres of aggressive organizers" to use "demonstrations to create a climate of militancy." Intimidated by black violence, politicians would appeal to the federal government for help. Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of a "a federal program of income redistribution," in the form of a guaranteed living income for all; working and non-working people alike. Local officials would clutch at this idea like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it. With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act.

The Cloward-Piven strategy never achieved its goal of system breakdown and a Marxist utopia. But it provided a blueprint for some of the Left's most destructive campaigns of the next three decades. It will likely haunt America for years to come since George Soros' Shadow Party has now adopted the strategy, honing it into a far more efficient weapon than any of its Sixties-era promoters could have foreseen.

Cloward and Piven recruited a militant black organizer named George Wiley to lead their new movement. For more information on Wiley and his welfare rights movement. In the summer of 1967, Wiley founded the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO), with headquarters in Washington, DC. Wiley's tactics closely followed the recommendations set out in Cloward and Piven's article. His followers invaded welfare offices across the nation - often violently - bullying social workers and loudly demanding every penny to which the law "entitled" them. By 1969, NWRO claimed a dues-paying membership of 22,500 families, with 523 chapters across the nation.

Regarding Wiley's tactics, The New York Times commented on September 27, 1970, "There have been sit-ins in legislative chambers, including a United States Senate committee hearing, mass demonstrations of several thousand welfare recipients, school boycotts, picket lines, mounted police, tear gas, arrests - and, on occasion, rock-throwing, smashed glass doors, overturned desks, scattered papers and ripped-out phones."

These methods proved effective. "The flooding succeeded beyond Wiley's wildest dreams," writes Sol Stern in the Manhattan Institute's City Journal. "From 1965 to 1974, the number of single-parent households on welfare soared from 4.3 million to 10.8 million, despite mostly flush economic times. By the early 1970s, one person was on the welfare rolls in New York City for every two working in the city's private economy."

As a direct result of its reckless welfare spending, New York City - the financial capital of the world - was forced to declare bankruptcy in 1975. The entire state of New York nearly went down with it. Leftist agitators swooned in triumph. The Cloward-Piven strategy had proved its effectiveness.

The Backlash

The Cloward-Piven strategy depended on surprise. Once society recovered from the initial shock, the backlash began. New York's welfare crisis horrified the nation, giving rise to a reform movement which culminated in "the end of welfare as we know it" -- the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which imposed time limits on federal welfare, along with strict eligibility and work requirements. Both Cloward and Piven attended the White House signing of the bill as guests of President Clinton.

Most Americans to this day have never heard of Cloward and Piven. But Mayor Rudolph Giuliani attempted to expose them in the late 1990's. As his drive for welfare reform heated up, Giuliani accused the militant scholars by name, citing their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in deliberate economic sabotage. "This wasn't an accident," Giuliani charged in a 1997 speech. "It wasn't an atmospheric thing, it wasn't supernatural. This is the result of policies and programs designed to have the maximum number of people get on welfare."

Cloward and Piven never again revealed their intentions as candidly as they had in their 1966 article. They learned to cover their tracks. Even so, their activism in subsequent years continued to rely on the tactic of overloading the system. When the public caught on to their welfare scheme, Cloward and Piven simply moved on, applying pressure to other sectors of the bureaucracy, wherever they detected weakness.

The Cloward-Piven strategy - first proposed in 1966 - seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse. Application of this strategy contributed greatly to the turmoil of the late Sixties. Cloward-Piven failed to usher in socialism, but it succeeded in generating an economic crisis and in escalating the level of political violence in America - two cherished goals of hard-Left strategists.

Radical organizers today continue tinkering with variations on the Cloward-Piven theme, in the perennial hope of reproducing '60s-style chaos. The thuggish behavior of leftwing unions such as SEIU and of certain elements of George Soros' Shadow Party can be traced, in a direct line of descent, from the early practitioners of Cloward-Piven.

Cloward-Piven's early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. "Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his "1989" (??)

book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every jot and tittle of every law and statute; every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet; and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one."

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Knowflake

Posts: 2298
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted April 25, 2011 12:39 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You were probably right, I don't have much time for extended research, so with that I say:

Thanks for posting all of that Jwhop. Appreciate it. Do you have a link where you got that from?

Yes, Ok, I see where you're coming from here, with this bit. How many in congress do you think have ever heard of Cloward/Priven, or subscribe to those philosophies?

As your article pointed out, most in America have probably never heard of them. I hadn't.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 3315
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 25, 2011 01:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
http://cloward-piven.com/
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2183968/posts
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/clowardpiven_government.html
http://www.infowars.com/obama-the-cloward-piven-strategy-and-the-new-world-order/
http://biggovernment.com/tag/cloward-piven-strategy/
http://www.basicsproject.org/american_fifth_column/goals/goals.htm

and....many, many more!

IP: Logged

AbsintheDragonfly
Knowflake

Posts: 2298
From: Gaia
Registered: Apr 2010

posted April 25, 2011 01:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AbsintheDragonfly     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks!

I will read through when I have some time.

IP: Logged

katatonic
Knowflake

Posts: 6283
From:
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 27, 2011 07:16 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for katatonic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
oh, and randall? this

In this country, anyone can be a success--whether it means going to college or starting a business--it just takes good old-fashioned hard work

may well be true - though those born with a few hundred million are more likely to be rich than those born on welfare - but it is not exclusive to america. THAT is a myth debunked by the many rags to riches stories from around the globe.

IP: Logged


This topic is 2 pages long:   1  2 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a