Wealth Redistribution: the original "American Dream"

When James Truslow Adams invented the phrase "American Dream" in 1931, did he have in mind some nebulous tabula rasa that you or I could put anything you or I wanted to put onto it? Or did Adams have something specific in mind?

What was James Truslow Adams' dream? When Adams invented the phrase, here is what he wrote: (the most widely quoted paragraph, seen everywhere around the internet)

If, as I have said, the things already listed were all we had had to contribute, America would have made no distinctive and unique gift to mankind. But there has been also the American dream, that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for every man, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.

I blogged about this recently, but what I highlighted originally was Adams use of the phrase "social order", because of how obvious of a catch phrase that it is. That is important, as it gives an ideological clue about Adams' belief system. More importantly however, Adams is specific about this; specific about what the "American Dream" is and is not. This is a problem for anybody who currently thinks what they think about the "American Dream". According to Adams, the "American Dream" IS NOT:
(1)a new house.
(2)It is not a new car.
(3)It is not material things.
(4)It is not success.
(5)It is not a better job or career.
(6)It is not a greener lawn than your next door neighbor.
(7)It is not any other fortuitous circumstance.

James Truslow Adams specifically went out of his way to shoot this idea down, despite the fact that today the "American Dream" is used interchangeably for any or all of them, and hundreds of thousands of other things. This is how progressives work. They need shadows to hide in, and they need lies to thrive. Adams uses the word "merely", which makes it quite clear: to boil down the "American Dream" to any of these items(or any others) is to cheapen it, is to make the "American Dream" into nothing but an empty suit. That is very important. All of these things are nice, they are good dreams and Adams is not completely canceling these things out, but they are ultimately distractions from what the dream really is all about. They're sideshows, not the main event.

As the person who invented of the phrase, Adams has the right and the ability to decide who plays first fiddle. He has the right to decide what's what. Now having detailed what Adams stated that the "American Dream" was not, what did he say that it really was? This is what the "American Dream" is:

If the American dream is to come true and to abide with us, it will, at bottom, depend on the people themselves. If we are to achieve a richer and fuller life for all, they have got to know what such an achievement implies. In a modern industrial State, an economic base is essential for all. We point with pride to our "national income," but the nation is only an aggregate of individual men and women, and when we turn from the single figure of total income to the incomes of individuals, we find there was a very marked injustice in its distribution. There is no reason why wealth, which is a social product, should not be more equitably controlled and distributed in the interests of society.

People everywhere need to know what the "American Dream" actually implies, and Adams outright states it. Wealth needs to be "more equitably controlled and distributed in the interests of society", because citizens aren't smart enough to do it themselves. This is that elitism that we all are used to seeing from progressives. The "American Dream" SPECIFICALLY IS:
(1) Wealth redistribution
(2) A new social order
(3) Big government

I can't say this enough to enough people on this topic. Please read the original sources for yourself. You probably won't like what you read, but you need to know this.

Here is why this is important and I want to tie this together: For Adams and other progressives who constantly obsess about the "social order", that's the priority. That is why he does not totally wipe material things off of the table while he reduces them in importance with his use of the word "merely". Once progressives achieve their utopia where government distributes all wealth and makes - to borrow a phrase from Al Sharpton: "Everything Equal in Everybody's House", then and only then can you have your greener lawn. Your new house. Your faster car. Your career. Etc, etc, etc. The phrase "The American Dream" does have room to be tabula rasa in which you can put anything on it that you wish, if and only if the perfect utopian social order with optimum wealth redistribution has been achieved. Understanding progressivism is easy to do once they themselves explain it.

When radical communist Van Jones held his "Take Back the American Dream" conference, and announced the Rebuild the Dream website, did that offend you? I know it offended me. But after reading the original words of James Truslow Adams, it won't offend me anymore. Do I think James Truslow Adams was a communist? No. He could have been, but I haven't researched that. It honestly doesn't matter; he was a progressive. What does matter, is that both Jones and Adams are obsessed with the "social order", and both see the "American Dream" in the same way. Here is the mission statement of communist Van Jones's Rebuild the Dream:

Rebuild The Dream is fighting for an economy that works for everyone, and an America that delivers on its promise of opportunity for all.

James Truslow Adams himself could have written that phrase. You can see the clear indication that the "social order" is the problem, and that "opportunity for all" doesn't yet exist - wealth redistribution may be happening, but it isn't happening enough. Jones, unlike Adams, has no choice but to be overly nebulous. He's a communist. He can't come out as honestly in the effort as a salesman for wealth redistribution, as Adams was more able to do in 1931.

To close, the aggressive way that progressives employ the language to achieve their goals is something that must be credibly challenged. We can't mount an effective challenge if we are willing to them get away with it when we simply don't have to let them get away with it. If there is a specific meaning attached to one of their nebulous phrases, we have got to prevent them from using it as a hammer to destroy our society. As Jones has currently been doing. The phrase "American Dream" is, unfortunately, language pollution.

The better phrase is "American Exceptionalism", which can't be boiled down to petty material things and isn't a euphemism for a better "social order" or wealth redistribution. It accurately conveys the uniqueness and significance of our country.

It drives progressives out of their minds when someone uses the phrase "American Exceptionalism", doesn't it? That should let you know you're on the right track.

http://tinyurl.com/h5rvl68

Philip Dru turns 6000

It's been quite a long time since I completed the audiobook version of Philip Dru: Administrator. Since then, the archive page has been accessed 6000+ times.

There are several ways to download the audio: directly from librivox, librivox has an app you can download to your phone, plus mp3 files can be shuffled about in a multitude of ways - so this metric is not entirely accurate. But its the only one I've got.

Over the course of several years, I've helped drive forth the education about progressivism to over 6000 people, just with this one thing. I could clearly do worse. In regard to progressivism, the novel Philip Dru is a good place to start. For example, the intense reliance upon bureaucracies and experts, which is arguably the most central aspect of progressive ideology, (the author)House's close relationship with Woodrow Wilson, plus Dru's policies which are all familiar policies for those of us who keep an eye on progressives. The book was designed to show off House's dreams, and all of these dreams amount to a big massive state lording over all of the people. From House's standpoint, the book is an utopia. But to most normal people, this would be a nightmare.

Philip Dru was my first audiobook; so considering the learning curve at the time and other things, it's not my best work. Add to it that House was an awful writer, so it could have been my very best work and it would still have come out terribly. Still, I'm very pleased with how it came out after all things are considered, and I'm glad that going forward I can continue to make it easier to pick progressivism apart and study every aspect of it.

We have a lot of work to do.

http://tinyurl.com/jndztev

Progressivism and the scam of "The American Dream"

If you only read the title of the blog entry, you're wasting your time and missing the important details.

I know I just jammed a big huge red button, but this really needs to be written. It's very important for understanding progressive ideology. First, who invented the phrase "American Dream"? It was James Truslow Adams.

What, exactly, did he write? See, what the progressives don't want you and I to do is to actually go and pick up some of these books and commit the heinous act of actually reading them. In The Epic of America, Page 404, he writes:

If, as I have said, the things already listed were all we had had to contribute, America would have made no distinctive and unique gift to mankind. But there has been also the American dream, that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for every man, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. It is a difficult dream for the European upper classes to interpret adequately, and too many of us ourselves have grown weary and mistrustful of it. It is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and be recognized by others for what they are, regardless of the fortuitous circumstances of birth or position.

That's what's most commonly quoted from Adams' book. I bolded the phrase a dream of social order, because this phrase - this is a tip off that a scam is being perpetrated. It's a huge red flag. Conservatives don't talk this way. Moderates don't talk this way either. It's radicals and ideologues who are endlessly obsessed with the "social order" - the "social this" and "social that" and the more equitable.... Here. See for yourself.

James Truslow Adams, The Epic of America, page 410: (Yes, this link goes to the original 1931 edition, though in snippet form. Alt link so you can read it.)

If the American dream is to come true and to abide with us, it will, at bottom, depend on the people themselves. If we are to achieve a richer and fuller life for all, they have got to know what such an achievement implies. In a modern industrial State, an economic base is essential for all. We point with pride to our "national income," but the nation is only an aggregate of individual men and women, and when we turn from the single figure of total income to the incomes of individuals, we find there was a very marked injustice in its distribution. There is no reason why wealth, which is a social product, should not be more equitably controlled and distributed in the interests of society.

There's your "American Dream" as originally constituted. It's wealth redistribution and big government. No, really, I don't want you to believe me. Click the link and open the book. See it for yourself. Know it, because you've read what was actually written. With progressives, with any one of their undertakings it almost always comes back to wealth redistribution. Without fail.

This is why I keep trying to provide the original sources, the actual links to the hard copy - and urge conservatives to pick up these books, and read them. We're being lied to on a massive scale, and it only takes about 10 minutes or so to come up with the truth. This is actually really simple and easy. The time consuming part is the reading of the books and discussing, educating others about the realities of progressivism. And, we'll all be so much better off for it.

If a progressive is crowing about something, about how great something is, chances are that if you go back to the original source it won't take you very long to put the lie to everything they're promoting. Everything about progressives is a house of cards. Can we please knock the cards over now?

http://tinyurl.com/zpgb2sf

Who was the first President to issue over 1000 executive orders?

Answer: Theodore Roosevelt, President #26.

It has been said that Obama has racked up more debt than all previous presidents combined, and the same can nearly be said of Theodore Roosevelt with respect to executive orders.

The first 112 years of America : 25 Presidents.

The first 25 Presidents : 1262 executive orders.

Theodore Roosevelt : 1081 executive orders.

Keep in mind, Roosevelt didn't even serve two full terms, he was in for 7.5 years. And yes, many of these executive orders were explicitly to do an end-run around congressional authority, just like Obama does. Just like Obama.

In which term did Roosevelt issue more executive orders?

First term: 251 - just two shy of being more than any other president before him.(Grover Cleveland issued 253 - in 8 years. Roosevelt did 251 in 3.5 years)

Second term: 830 - more than 5 times any other president in any single term.

Most of those executive orders were issued in his second term, after he would have no longer been up for re-election - a classic scheme that progressives do. They assault us when they can't be held accountable anymore. Sound familiar?

Here is a table for illustrative purposes.

http://tinyurl.com/hcrqrv7

Saul Alinsky's 1972 interview with Playboy Magazine

Originally published in The Progress Report in 13 pieces, here it is in full, easy access.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 8

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11

Part 12

Part 13

Due to probable copyright issues, I probably should not simply cut and paste from the archive.(That's what I would prefer most to do) But I thought many of you would find this to be a useful resource.

http://tinyurl.com/h54zjnt

Theodore Roosevelt's Pen and Phone

On Jaunary 14th, 2014, President Obama declared:

"We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone."

Who was the first president armed with a pen and a phone? Who was the first president to issue over 1000 executive orders? Of course, it was America's first dictator. America's first progressive president:

Theodore Roosevelt. Who else did you expect? It's nearly always TR at the root of modern executive malfeasance.

Now, in addition to issuing over 1000 executive orders, there is the general insight as to what these executive orders were for. In his book "Take Up Your Pen" (See page 196) the author explains that TR regularly used unilateral directives for major policy purposes, often times as an end-run-around Congress,(much like Obama does today) which was a stark contrast to all of his predecessors. TR used his executive orders to create chaos and havok, earlier presidents only moved slowly and on uncontroversial matters.

It has been said that Obama has racked up more debt than all previous presidents combined, and the same can nearly be said of Theodore Roosevelt with respect to executive orders.

In the first 112 years of America, American presidents racked up over 1200 executive orders. For those keeping count, that's 25 presidents. Only one president other than Theodore Roosevelt reached over 300 - Grover Cleveland. Every other president issued less.

King Teddy the First issued nearly 1100. It only took him 7.5 years to duplicate what it took 112 years to accomplish in the first. That's an average of 145 executive orders per year. The nearest average prior to TR is 41 per year, from William McKinley.

So, you say you don't like King Barry the First's Pen and Phone? Obama's Pen and Phone Power begins with King Theodore Roosevelt. Progressives have always been bad for this country. Always.

Here is a table for illustrative purposes.

http://tinyurl.com/gnldlun

Should America eject the communist country known as Hawaii? How about HaBye!

In all the chatter about Brexit, Texit, Texodus, and others, why are we surrendering America to the left? For those of you who have watched D'Souza's 2012 documentary 2016: Obama's America, you know what I'm talking about.

Their universities are practically soviet satellites. It's a communist country. The culture of Hawaii is utter filth, in the context of a free country like America. I never knew about it until D'Souza spent some time on it. Ask yourself this question: Why did Frank Marshall Davis re-locate to Hawaii? Think: Fellow Travelers.

Why are we letting Hawaiian Reds hold America down?

Oh, and about the quandry of 50 state stars? Let's make Jefferson a state.

How about this, instead of us giving up the ship, let's eject the statists and let them have their utopia out in the middle of the Pacific.

Surrendering all 49 seems utterly stupid when ejecting just one would fix so many problems. Just think about it.

http://tinyurl.com/zxjj6lx