Is this why we keep spending trillions we don’t have?

NOTE: At some point, before bed, I read through 50+ news sources and share my findings here. If you like it, share it. If you don’t, share it. Follow my blog now to support my work or to find new reasons to complain about it. My opinions are my own. All tips are welcome as well as comments on my video series - The Jim Stroud Show.

If you live in California, I strongly suggest you consider voting for Larry Elder and Amy Phan West. They are two patriots with a passion for America. I highly endorse them both. Please check them out.

And thanks to all for your kind words and financial support. It is always appreciated. Okay, time for my latest rant. Enjoy. (I hope.)

Is this why we keep spending trillions we don’t have?

Have you seen the U.S. National Debt Clock? It is a sobering image if you realize the burden we are putting on future generations. Does anyone believe in budgets anymore? It would seem that they do not in Washington. Consider this headline from CNBC – “House Democrats clear path toward passing $3.5 trillion budget bill and infrastructure plan after breaking stalemate.” Here’s a quote…

House Democrats forged ahead with President Joe Biden’s economic plans Tuesday after they broke a stalemate that threatened to unravel the party’s sprawling agenda.

In a 220-212 party-line vote, the chamber passed a $3.5 trillion budget resolution and advanced a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill. The vote allows Democrats to write and approve a massive spending package without Republicans and puts the Senate-passed infrastructure plan on a path to final passage in the House.

The measure includes a nonbinding commitment to vote on the infrastructure bill by Sept. 27, which aims to appease nine centrist Democrats who pushed the House to consider the bipartisan plan before it took up the Democratic budget resolution.  

So, if you’re like me, you have to ask what is in the $3.5 trillion budget resolution? Nation World News analyzed Bernie Sanders arguments on why the bill should be promoted. Key takeaways were that the government would be awarding citizenship to illegal immigrants, tuition-free college and the formation of a new bureaucracy – Civilian Climate Corps. To be more specific on that last point…  

Sanders also proposed that Democrats create a “civilian climate corps,” which he said would give young people the opportunity to “get a fair salary and roll up their sleeves … in order to combat climate change.” ” Sanders implied that this “climate core” would help in an “extremely aggressive” transition away from fossil fuels, but he did not elaborate on what the group would help achieve this.

An interesting plan to say the least. What’s the bottom line? 

With such an expensive price tag, and new tax rules notwithstanding, the national debt and deficit will climb as a result of the budget. As projected in the bill, the deficit will increase from $1.3 billion in 2022 to $1.8 trillion in 2031. Due to this deficit, the national debt will rise to $45 trillion by 2031.

As aggressive as this ambition is, there is much of it that can be debated as useful. However, consider the $1.2 trillion dollar infrastructure bill that is paired with it. It is the poster child of how to spend tax dollars wastefully. I talked about this in greater detail earlier this month. Here is just one example that I pointed out, a tweet citing how the infrastructure bill included upgrading the Amtrak train service in Canada. Canada. Sigh.

Where does spending end and cost-cutting begin?  Why do we keep fueling a highly potential economic disaster? I have two theories and neither is very appealing. One supposition is that politicians only care about maintaining power so they will promise and spend anything to remain there, regardless of the long-term consequences. The other thought is that we are spending trillions of dollars in order to destroy America and replace it with a communist state. Sound far-fetched? Hear me out before deciding. 

Have you heard of the Cloward-Piven strategy? In a nutshell, it is a political strategy to overload the American public welfare system to the point that it creates a crisis and bankrupts the nation, leaving the country no choice but to adopt a communist agenda. 

The blog Far Left Facts goes into much detail about the origins of the strategy and its socialist overtones. Here are some quotes. 

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. 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, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system. The authors also asserted that: (a) the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the country; (b) poor people would rise in revolt; and (c) only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands (sound familiar?). 

Further down in the article it reads…

The Cloward-Piven article called for “cadres of aggressive organizers” to use “demonstrations to create a climate of militancy.” Then, the authors predicted, the following would happen:

  • Politicians, intimidated by threats of black violence, would appeal to the federal government for help.
  • Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of “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 was an example of what are commonly called Trojan Horse initiatives — mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse in an effort to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. Cloward and Piven calculated that the flood of demands which they were recommending would break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown — providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change. That was the theory.

In case you are curious, you can read the full article “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” online here. But, I digress. The article I referenced was from the 60’s. Let’s fast forward to the Presidency of Barack Obama. When Obama ran in 2008 on a platform to ‘fundamentally change America,’ nobody really knew what he meant or what such an idea would mean for certain freedoms. Yet many people believed in him and took that phrase as a positive thing. His detractors saw the opposite. They saw a strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis and quite often, referred to it as a Cloward-Piven strategy. Here are a couple of examples. 

Glenn Beck rants about Obama’s policies as a Cloward-Piven Strategy.

And another detractor on the Maegan Kelly show, citing the influx of immigrants at the border. (Hmm…)  

Another instance of a Cloward-Piven strategy is the financial collapse of 2008, which can be traced back to government decisions. To quote The Blaze…

The Community Reinvestment Act of 1979 required banks to make loans in poor neighborhoods. Under pressure from the Clinton White House in 1999, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lowered their credit standards on mortgages. Proposals by the Bush Administration to put Fannie and Freddie under closer supervision were opposed by Democrats in Congress.

Just in case I lost you in all that, this is the Cloward-Pevin strategy in a nutshell:

  • Overload and break the system
  • Have chaos ensue
  • Take control in chaos
  • Enact some sort of socialism/communism solution

Once you recognize this strategy, some things begin to make sense. A few examples. 

Covid Pandemic

Immigration Crisis

  • Overload and break the system: No longer deporting illegal aliens
  • Have chaos ensue: Major surge at the southern border that cannot be contained
  • Take control in chaos:  Fly illegal aliens to Republican areas in order to affect the vote.
  • Enact some sort of socialism/communism solution: One party rule, forever, thanks to the grateful votes of illegals granted amnesty. 

Afghanistan

  • Overload and break the system: Erratic withdrawal from Afghanistan
  • Have chaos ensue: Americans abandoned in a terrorist state.
  • Take control in chaos: More spending needed to rescue our people and secure the area
  • Enact some sort of socialism/communism solution: Obscenely high taxes for patriotic reasons; extended stay in a country we were leaving after 20 years which financially benefits those in power.  

Am I saying that the Cloward-Piven strategy was in full effect during the Obama-Biden administration? No. 

Am I saying that the Cloward-Piven strategy was in full effect during the Biden-Harris administration? No. 

I am only suggesting that if the goal of both administrations was to fundamentally change America into a socialist country then, following a Cloward-Pevin strategy would explain actions many find questionable. It most certainly would validate a popular expression repeated by Democratic leadership, “Don’t let a good crisis go to waste.” 

THANK YOU!

Thanks for reading (and subscribing)! $$$ All tips are welcome. By the way, click here to check the archives and discover what you’ve missed. More content tomorrow.

Follow me on Social Media: