|
OBAMUNISM, The Party,
Still think "It can't happen here"?
|
| “
|
 'We are
now seeing
the Obama regime, growing bolder every day, begin to more aggressively
demonize "the rich" (which they currently define as anyone making over
$125k, as opposed to the wealthy Hollywood-types and others who support
the regime and are never demonized).
Is this so
different from the way the Soviets demonized the kulaks? The word means
"tight-fisted", and was loosely defined as any farmer who had more land
or more cows than his neighbors. Such farmers were "enemies of the
state" because they resisted the agenda of collectivization.
...
the Cossacks as such were exterminated, the men
shot, the women,
children, and the elderly deported, and the villages razed or handed
over to new, non-Cossack occupants.
I'm sure that
one of Obama's heroes, Robert Mugabe, had this definition in mind in
his "redistribution" plan for Zimbabwe, in which the former Rhodesia,
once "the breadbasket of Africa", was transformed into a basket-case.
(See my AT piece, "Why Not Zimbabwe?", http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/why_not_zimbabwe.html)
But
for our current Marxist/Leninist (and every day more Stalinist) regime,
the definition of kulak can expand from its agricultural origin to
encompass anyone who has more than his neighbor; anyone who presents
too glaring an example of "income inequality". What would merely be
"upper middle class" now becomes "rich", and is vilified.
As you read the material below, substitute "the rich" (as referred to
by Obama & Co.) for "kulaks". And see what the future may hold if
our Communist regime follows the strategy and tactics of so many other
Communist regimes.
Here are some excerpts from the following: http://tinyurl.com/lu2tk33 (The
Black Book of Communism)
I have re-paragraphed it to make it easier to read. And I've added
emphasis in red.
ST (Stu Tarlowe via
Skoonj)
|
Scroll
'Still
think "It can't happen here"?
Andre Frossard
[…] believes that “it is a crime against humanity when someone is put
to death purely by virtue of his or her birth.” And in his short
but magnificent novel Forever Flowing, Vasily Grossman says of his
hero, Ivan Grigorevich, who has returned from the camps, “he
had remained exactly what he had been from his birth: a human
being.”
That, of
course, was precisely why he was singled out in the first place.
The French definition helps remind us that genocide comes in many
shapes and sizes – it can be racial (as in the case of the Jews), but
it can also target social groups.
In The Red
Terror in Russia, published in Berlin in 1924, the Russian historian
and socialist Sergei Melgunov cited Martin Latsis, one of the
first leaders of the Cheka (the Soviet political police), as giving the
following order on 1 November 1918 to his henchmen:
“We don’t
make war against any people in particular. We are exterminating the bourgeoisie
as a class. In your investigations don’t look for
documents and pieces of evidence about what the defendant has
done, whether in deed or in speaking or acting against Soviet
authority. The first question you should ask him is what class he
comes from, what are his roots, his education, his training, and his
occupation.”
Lenin and his comrades initially
found themselves embroiled in a merciless “class war,” in which
political and ideological adversaries, as well as the more
recalcitrant members of the general public, were branded as enemies and
marked for destruction. The Bolsheviks had decided to eliminate,
by legal and physical means, any challenge or resistance, even if
passive, to their absolute power. 
This strategy applied not only
to groups with opposing political views, but also to such social
groups as the nobility, the middle class, the intelligentsia, and the
clergy, as well as professional groups such as military officers
and the police. Sometimes the Bolsheviks subjected these people
to genocide. The policy of “de-Cossackization” begun in 1920
corresponds largely to our definition of genocide: a population group
firmly established in a particular territory, the Cossacks as such
were exterminated, the men shot, the women, children, and the elderly
deported, and the villages razed or handed over to new,
non-Cossack occupants.
Lenin compared
the Cossacks to the Vendee during the French Revolution and gladly
subjected them to a program of what Gracchus Babeuf, the
“inventor” of modern Communism, characterized in 1795 as “populicide.”
The
“dekulakization” of 1930-1932 repeated the policy of
“de-Cossackization” but on a much grander scale. Its primary objective,
in accordance with the official order issued for this operation
(and the regime’s propaganda), was “to exterminate the kulaks as a
class.”
The kulaks who
resisted collectivization were shot, and the others were deported
with their wives, children, and elderly family members. Although not
all kulaks were exterminated directly, sentences of forced labor
in wilderness areas of Siberia or the far north left them with
scant chance of survival. Several tens of thousands perished there; the
exact number of victims remains unknown. As for the great famine
in Ukraine in 1932-33, which resulted from the rural population’s
resistance to forced collectivization, 6 million died in a period
of several months.
Here, the
genocide of a “class” may well be tantamount to the genocide of a
“race” – the deliberate starvation of a child of a Ukrainian kulak as
a result of the famine caused by Stalin’s regime “is equal to” the
starvation of a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto as a result of the
famine caused by the Nazi regime.
Such arguments
in no way detract from the unique nature of Auschwitz – the
mobilization of leading-edge technological resources and their use
in an “industrial process” involving the construction of an
“extermination factory,” the use of gas, and cremation. However,
this argument highlights one particular feature of many Communist
regimes – their systematic use of famine as a weapon. The
regime aimed to control the total available food supply and, with
immense ingenuity, to distribute food purely on the basis of “merits”
and “demerits” earned by individuals.
This policy was
a recipe for creating famine on a massive scale. Remember that in the
period after 1918, only Communist countries experienced such
famines, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and in some
cases millions, of people. And again in the 1980s, two African
countries that claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, Ethiopia and Mozambique,
were the only such countries to suffer these deadly famines.
|
” |
|
|
