The Communist Manifesto - The American Way of Life?
"There always comes a time when unpleasant truths must be retold,
even though the retelling disturbs the ease and quiet of a luxurious error.
Today seems to be such a time."
— J. Reuben Clark, Jr.
Because of common beliefs in America about communism, most individuals link communism with outright lying, subtle deception, treason, allegiance to a foreign state, hatred of religion and contempt for the God-given rights of individuals, murder, slave labor, concentration camps, and the despotic control of every phase of human life. But these are only methods to achieve an end and that end is socialism. The following is a quote from President J. Reuben Clark, Jr. which was used in a previous chapter. In consideration of the subject discussed in this chapter it might be well to make the quote again. President Clark was a man well educated in government and the dangers to free agency. He said this about the relationship of communism to socialism:
"The plain and simple issue now facing us in America is freedom or slavery. . . .
"Our real enemies are communism and its running mate, socialism. . . . And never forget for one moment that communism and socialism are state slavery. . . .
". . . the paths we are following, if we move forward thereon, will inevitably lead us to socialism or communism, and these two are as alike as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effect upon our liberty. . . ." (Quoted by Ezra Taft Benson, CR, April 1963, pp. 111-112.)
We will also repeat another statement, this one by the Prophet Joseph Smith, who was aware of this socialistic philosophy. He wrote in his History of the Church: "I attended a second lecture on Socialism, by Mr. Finch [a Socialist, from England]; and after he got through, I made a few remarks. . . . I said I did not believe the doctrine." (HC, 6:33.)
There are two approaches to socialism:
Planks of the Manifesto
The ten points that follow are the ten planks of the manifesto. (Ibid., p. 36-37.) Let’s consider them here and then discuss each in the light of our present-day policy in the United States.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy, progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc.
At another place in the manifesto he also said, "Communism abolishes eternal truths; it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis." But we find the Lord stating,"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad." (Matt. 12:30.) And so it has been. The philosophy of Karl Marx has caused much scattering throughout the world where people, desiring to retain their liberties, have fled to foreign nations for freedom.
It is important to know that Marx did not say that these measures should be put into effect by armed revolt, but, using his own words, by "winning the battle of democracy". Once this has been accomplished by legal and democratic elections, the "political supremacy" was to be used as follows: ". . . to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie;" and "to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State."
Note he said by "degrees" and not by the sudden revolution, but by the slower democratic process. Communism came to Russia by violent revolt and most of us in American thought that the same method would be tried in the United States. Actually, Marx taught only the "slow-decay-from-within" philosophy. In 1903, it was Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Lenin is sometimes known as Nikolai Lenin. His original surname was Ulyanov.) who broke from the Fabian Socialists and used violence as a means of achieving his goal. But most of the thinking of socialistic-communism continues to follow the ideals of Marx. This was and still is the communistic, or socialistic, philosophy towards the developed nations of the world today.
It might be proper at this point to say that the Communist Manifesto could be called the "Socialist Manifesto." This is because, as was discussed earlier, the only difference in the two is the method of implementing total control of people and property. Most people have believed that the goal of communism, which is socialism, was to be achieved by illegal means — such as bullets and a few evil persons — not by legal means such as ballots and the vote of the people. The sad thing is that we have exercised our rights to vote and have used these votes to elect many corrupt representatives.
The Manifesto for Comparison
With these thoughts in mind we may find that we have been choosing the wrong battlefield and the wrong enemy. While we may be trying to fight the communist military thousands of miles away, socialistic-communism is marching steadily forward here at home with the uninformed and uninterested help of the American people.
Communism, as a word, is dying, but the goals and philosophy are coming closer to reality. When Marx’s plan was drawn up, none of his ideas were popular in America. Now, let us see how those ideas have progressed during the past century as set forth in this, the communist or "Socialist Manifesto."
PLANK 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
One of the great principles that this nation was based upon and the intent of our Founding Fathers, was absolute title of land and property in the hands of the private owner. The government is permitted to hold land but on a constitutionally limited basis. The practice now is for government to take as much land as possible from the private owner and the states and to use it for "public purposes."
Most of the current acquisitions are east of the Mississippi River. There isn’t too much left to acquire west of the Mississippi. And the trend is steadily upward. The Federal Government now owns one-third of all the land. How long will it be before it owns one-half, and then all of it?
On top of that, we actually rent the property we think we privately own. The rent money is called property taxes. This tax is used for "public purposes." What happens if we do not pay our property tax or rent? The government confiscates the property.
The property is further controlled by zoning laws which dictate how the property, or land, is to be used. Is this what our Founding Fathers had in mind? No, it is not. It is also not what the Lord had in mind either. The right to property was one of the things that made ancient Israel a peculiar people. Ezra Taft Benson once wrote:
"The right to property is again based on scriptural precept. It recognizes that the earth belongs to the Lord, that He created it for man’s blessing and benefit. Thus man’s desire to own property, his own home and goods, his own business, is desirable and good. Utopian and communitarian schemes that eliminate property rights are not only unworkable, they also deny to man his inherent desire to improve his station. They are therefore contrary to the pursuit of happiness.
"No property rights! Man’s incentive would be diminished to satisfying only his barest necessities such as food and clothing.
"No property rights! No incentive to enter individual enterprise, to risk one’s own capital, because the fruits of one’s labor could not be enjoyed.
"No property rights! No contractual relationships to buy or sell since title to possession of goods could not be granted.
"No property rights! No recognition of divine law that prohibits man from stealing and coveting others’ possessions. One cannot steal that which belongs to everyone, nor can he covet that which is not another’s!
"No property rights! No possibility of the sanctity of one’s own home and the joy that comes from creation, production, and ownership.
"A free-market philosophy recognizes property rights as sacred. Because the individual is entitled to ownership of goods and property that he has earned, he is sovereign, so far as human law is concerned, over his own goods. He may retain possession of his goods. He may pass his wealth on to family or to charitable causes.
"Charity, that greatest of godly virtues, would never be possible without property rights, for one cannot give what one does not own.
"No liberty is possible unless a man is protected in his title to his legal holdings and property. . . . Remove this right and man is reduced to serfdom. Former United States Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland said it this way: ‘To give [man] liberty but take from him the property which is the fruit and badge of his liberty, is to still leave him a slave.’" (This Nation Shall Endure, pp. 84-85.)
PLANK 2. A heavy, progressive or graduated income tax.
The Constitution provided for duties, imposts, and excise taxes to help finance our government, not "progressive or graduated income tax." That iniquity was first imposed on Americans in 1913 with the supposed ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment; in 1933 with the adoption of Title 26 (Internal Revenue Code), with the incorporation in Delaware of the Internal Revenue Tax and Audit Service; and in 1936 with the instigation of the Social Security. The sole purpose of these measures, they said, was to produce revenue. However, it is being used, as originally intended by Marx, as a punitive measure to achieve equalization of status; to take from the thrifty by force, if necessary, in order to give to the thriftless; to act as a powerful deterrent to the formation of private capital, thus making it easier for government to step in with public capital.
To this income tax can be added the state income taxes. This process of progressive confiscation of income is, of course, in complete accord with the communist plan of "wresting, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie [owners of private property]." Ezra Taft Benson once said, "the Sixteenth Amendment introduced the Marxist graduated income tax," and at another time he commented on the graduated income tax:
"I deem it a violation of the right of private property guaranteed under the Constitution for the federal government to forcibly deprive the citizens of this nation of their property through taxation or otherwise, and make a gift thereof to foreign governments or their citizens. (The Proper Role of Government, p. 23; AEHDT, p. 146.)
". . . the elementary principles of justice set forth in the Constitution demand that all taxes imposed be uniform; and that each person’s property or income be taxed at the same rate.
"I consider it a violation of the Constitution for the federal government to levy taxes for the support of state or local government; that no state or local government can accept funds from the federal government and remain independent in performing its functions, nor can the citizens exercise their rights of self-government under such conditions." (TETB, p. 618.)
PLANK 3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
Another tax, the estate or inheritance tax of 1916, is a most effective way of removing capital from private ownership and placing it in the hands of the government. The Lord’s way is perfect inheritance and possession of property.
In the case of very large estates, some may disregard this action, saying, "Oh! Well, there is plenty left." But there is a basic moral principle, the right to retain private property, which applies to all of us, regardless of the amount involved. Those who wish merely to "soak the rich" should know that the history of the inheritance and income tax, in our country as elsewhere, shows clearly that once it is established, the tax collector quickly moves into the lower income brackets. His appetite for more revenue is insatiable.
To this inheritance tax we can add the gift tax and also the state requirement for marriage licenses. These latter two Marx apparently overlooked, but our astute politicians didn’t. So now, what occurs when a spouse dies? The state tries to move in and control the distribution of the property. Unless some protection is afforded the property owners, the state takes a large portion of the inheritance. In like manner, children born of marriages, legalized by a marriage licenses, become subject to state control instead of being an inheritance of the Lord.
PLANK 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
In America, this is usually done only under the emotional stress of war. When the war is over, the property may or may not be returned to its rightful owner. American citizens of the Japanese race, during World War II, were deprived of their property and placed in concentration camps. The Government compensated these people for the loss of their property by a contemptible small percentage of its real value. Speculators and political favorites got the rest.
One such recent law is the RICO Act (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) established in 1970. Another is Public Law 99-570 of 1986, ("war on drugs") and the confiscation of drug-merchant property. Those found to be in question can have their property confiscated before they are found guilty, and if not convicted, they may loose part of what was taken unlawfully.
It is common knowledge that those who object and resist the unlawful and unconstitutionality of the IRS and other governmental or pseudo-governmental agencies, have their property confiscated without due process of law. Such rebels today are much like those who rebelled against King George III. Though just in their feelings and actions, they are singled out as anti-American by the grossly apathetic and those who choose to remain ignorant of truth and righteous principles.
PLANK 5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
The trends, since the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, of our centralized-government controls in banking, credit, and interest rates would appear to be exactly what Karl Marx had in mind. This monopolistic banking practice and the issuance of printing press money, instead of gold and silver that the Constitution mandates, recalls the dictum, attributed to Lenin, that the surest way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch its currency. This philosophy prompted the late Lord Keynes, high-priest of the "easy money" cult, to state: "Lenin was certainly right. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose." (Quoted in Ben Moreell’s, To Communism. . .via Majority Vote, p. 11.)
Speaking of this gross practice of our government, Ezra Taft Benson states, "The creation of the Federal Reserve Board made it possible for the first time in America for men arbitrarily to change the value of our money." (AEHDT, p. 214.) Many a quote from our Founding Fathers can be found on their disapproval of this type of monetary system. Among other things, Thomas Jefferson said about this practice of governmental control of banking and money:
"The incorporation of a bank, and the powers assumed by this bill, have not, in my opinion, been delegated to the United States by the Constitution. (The Real Thomas Jefferson, p. 354.)
"He [Adam Smith] admits . . . that ‘the commerce and industry of a country cannot be so secure when suspended on the Daedalian wings of paper money as on the solid ground of gold and silver’." (Ibid., p. 551.)
The establishment of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) of 1933 also expanded government’s monopoly in the banking industry. Current indicators show that the FDIC is headed for a more serious tragedy than the Savings and Loan debacle.
It may be pertinent to state here again, as stated elsewhere, that the Federal Reserve’s monopoly on the banking system has helped to create a U.S. debt more than four trillion dollars ($4,411,500,000,000) with the currency in circulation at only three-hundred and sixteen billion dollars ($316,400,000,000). That leaves an impossible debt of almost four trillion dollars ($4,095,100,000,000) with no means to pay for it but to give up our property and/or go into bondage. (Federal Reserve Bulletin, December 1993, pp. A14, A30.)
PLANK 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
We have come far in the achievement of this objective. The Interstate Commerce Commission of 1887 has been granted vast powers. At various times the federal government, through its departments involved in transportation and commerce, takes over and operates some of the differing modes of transportation, and at other times it merely controls them. They can control what travels on the roads, what is being transported, who transports it, where it goes, and how it is to be received.
Federal loans and subsidies for highways, bridges, steamship lines, truck lines, airlines, airports, etc., (with strings attached), are added evidences of the encroachment of government on this area of private enterprise. The establishment of the U.S. Civil Aeronautics in 1938 and the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) of 1958 gives added power and control to the Federal Government.
What about the centralization of communication by way of the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) regulation and control on programming, advertising, etc., on all forms of radio and television broadcasting? Has Marx’s plan for the "centralization of the means of communication" been accomplished? Yes, it has, and it is a blatant disregard of the First Amendment to the Constitution which states, in part: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . . ." Now it didn’t say anything about radio or television because they were not heard of, or possibly not even dreamed of, by our Founding Fathers. If they had been, they also may have been included in this First Article of Amendments. What does Elder Benson have to say about this one?
"By 1962 some American liberals had almost completely neutralized the resurgence of American patriotism. They had frightened uninformed citizens away from study groups and patriotic rallies. They had made it popular to call patriotism a ‘controversial’ subject which should not be discussed in school assemblies or churches.
"From Washington, D.C., the Federal Communications Commission issued an edict to radio and television stations that if they allowed the controversial subjects of ‘Americanism,’ ‘Anti-communism,’ or ‘States rights,’ to be discussed on their stations they would be required to give equal time, free of charge, to anyone wishing to present an opposite view." (The Title of Liberty, p. 32.)
By having government control the means of communication, they can control some of our rights and introduce philosophies foreign to our Constitutional guarantees. The government could teach anything it wanted to and our news media would only present to the American people what government wanted them to present and the way it was to be presented. This also holds true to the newspaper industry when they are controlled by special interest groups who want to slant news in a specific way, hiding the truth from the unsuspecting public.
The sad thing in America is that we have all come to depend on and trust in these forms of mass communication. We have not availed ourselves of the other forms of education to learn if there are other opinions or options to consider. We have become as sheep, trusting in the wolf who wears sheep’s clothing.
PLANK 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
Most people are aware of the many factories and other instruments of production now owned by the federal government; for example, the production of electric power by atomic energy is now a complete government monopoly. Our government’s planning and controls for the "improvements" of swamps, deserts, river valleys, and national forest would make Marx smile.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Occupational, Safety, and Health Act (OSHA), Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Anti-trust Acts, Department of Labor, Department of Agriculture, Department of Interior, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and a host of other regulatory agencies, control businesses and the farming industry.
One way they control our private business is through the requirement of a license or permit. When a permit or license is obtained, the business then becomes an extension of the government body issuing the privilege. We must realize that whoever gives privileges can take them away unless the business complies. Thomas Jefferson understood this power of government when he said, "Agriculture, manufacture, commerce, and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise." (PPNS,, p. 177, from Thomas Jefferson’s First Annual Message.)
PLANK 8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
"Equal liability of all to labor." In simple terms it means every person is at a liability to work if the state tells him to work. It means "all" are, or can be, required to work, regardless of their ability or desire to do so. It is a forced-labor program more popularly know as "slavery."
It also means government control over labor. The Works Progress Administration (WPA) and the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) of the early New Deal years of President Franklin D. Roosevelt made a good beginning on this plank. The recent recommendations by government agencies for the institution of compulsory unionism also contain the nucleus of this Marxist philosophy. Again, what does Ezra Taft Benson, a man of experience and inspiration, say?
"Do you borrow money from a bank that is in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation system or the Federal Reserve system? Have you an FHA or VA loan? Have you a Small Business Administration loan? Are you interested in schools and colleges? Are you a farmer who has anything to do with the Farm Credit Administration, Commodity Credit Corporation, Soil Conservation Service, Federal Crop Insurance, REA, Agriculture Research?
"If you are any of these, or participate in any of these, then under this Act the Federal Fair Employment Practices Commission will dictate to you whom you may hire, whom you may fire, whom you promote, whom you demote, and how you may handle your employees.
"Not only that, but it brings in almost every profession and every business — lawyers, realtors, doctors, small establishments, restaurants, gasoline stations, theaters, hotels, motels, and lodging houses, — and the Federal control will never end. . . ." (TL, pp. 76-77, from John C. Satterfield, past president of the American Bar Association, over the Manion Forum, weekly broadcast No. 468, September 15, 1963.)
The establishment of the Socialist Unions in 1869, and the International Workers of the World in 1905, helped pave the way for the "affirmative action" approach of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This 1964 act is more encompassing and far-reaching than most realize. It can control and tie the hands of businesses if they do not comply with the dictates of the government.
It is pertinent to note that we now have federal laws regulating the wages and hours of labor and other conditions of employment. Such a condition is the requirement of a Social Security number before employment can be obtained. Is this the free government for the "pursuit of Happiness" that was mandated by the Declaration of Independence? What happens when a free citizen does not comply with the regulations as prescribed by one of the multitude of agencies, as mentioned above? These agencies come to enforce, arrest, and confiscate with weapons. It might be stretching it a little, but could this be what Marx meant by "industrial armies?"
PLANK 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of population over the country.
Governmental aid to both farmers and consumers is a vicious scheme to lock a large segment of agricultural production in the vise of bureaucratic controls. The entire scheme of agricultural subsidies based on "parity," or a percentage thereof, thus linking farm prices to industrial wages, is certainly part and parcel of that "combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries" intended by this plank of the manifesto.
With the enactment of Title 17, the "zoning" laws, and the establishment of large corporate farms, the private farmers started losing land to the suburb encroachment, the manufacturing industry, and the perverted corporate-farm philosophy.
Not only does the government attempt to control manufacturing and agriculture, but there are multiples of thousands of farm foreclosures each year, due to bank failures, the bankers claim. The larger and controlling banks then finance large corporate farms which control production and prices while many of the smaller farmers have to relocate to the cities to work in other industries. With so many farm foreclosures each year, a warning from Thomas Jefferson may come true: "Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread." (Quoted in PPNS, p. 177.)
PLANK 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc.
John Dewey, 1870-1910, was a strong advocate for socialized and progressive education, and his influence has reached far into this twentieth century. With the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1937 there has been an abolition of private apprenticeships and the creation of state-controlled programs. The state now has tight restrictions in regard to child labor. With the sway of men like John Dewey, and government controls over children, the way was set for government intervention into the vocational affairs and minds of our children. In a booklet called The Soviet Art of Brain Washing, which was used since 1936 to train members of the American Communist Party, it mentions the plans to control child labor by government and by what they call psychopolitical operators. The operators, or agents, are not only to be in government but also in other key positions such as education. Among other revealing things the book says:
"To destroy loyalty to the State all manner of forbidding for youth must be put into effect so as to disenfranchise them as members of the Capitalist state and, by promises of a better lot under Communism [Socialism], to gain their loyalty to a Communist [Socialist] movement.
"Denying a Capitalist country easy access to courts, bringing about and supporting propaganda to destroy the home, creating a continuous juvenile delinquency, forcing upon the state all manner of practices to divorce the child from it will in the end create the chaos necessary to Communism [Socialism].
"Under the saccharine guise of assistance to them, rigorous child labor laws are the best means to deny the child any right in the society. By refusing to let him earn, by forcing him into unwanted dependence upon a grudging parent, by making certain in other channels that the parent is never in other than economic stress, the child can be driven in his teens into revolt. Delinquency will ensue.
"By making readily available drugs of various kinds, by giving the teen-ager alcohol, by praising his wildness, by stimulating him with sex literature and advertising to him or her practices as taught as the Sexpol, the psychopolitical operator can create the necessary attitude of chaos, idleness and worthlessness into which can then be cast the solution which will give the teen-ager complete freedom everywhere — Communism [Socialism].
"The role of the psychopolitical operator in this is very strong. . . . He can teach the lack of control of this child at home. He can instruct, in an optimum situation, the entire nation in how to handle children — and instruct them so that the child, given no control, given no real home, can run wildly about with no responsibility for their nation or themselves.
"The mis-alignment of the loyalty of youth to a Capitalistic nation sets the proper stage for a realignment of their loyalties with Communism. Creating a greed for drugs, sexual misbehavior and uncontrolled freedom and presenting this to them as benefits of Communism will with ease bring about our alignment." (The Soviet Art of Brain Washing, pp. 26-27.)
As we can surmise from the foregoing, all of the problems with drugs, sex, crime, and teen-age indolence, may not just be the result of fads but of a long established plan. We must remember that the Soviets are the worlds greatest chess players. They know how to plan six or more moves far in advance of the average people.
Now we come to governmental ownership or control of schools, with compulsory attendance, compulsory curriculum, and compulsory support. It is quite clear that Marx intended that government ownership of schools should be exclusive; the government-monopoly control of minds and bodies of our children. Many teachers can testify of the fact that they were not permitted to use text-books of their choosing to teach the truth about history or to teach moral principles because it conflicted with the philosophy of the school district or the state.
Not only has the federal government moved into this area by means of its federal aid to education programs (with states bending to the wishes of the federal government to qualify for such funds) but most states require a license or permit to operate a private or home school. The history of totalitarian governments indicates clearly that when government moves into education there is great danger to freedom of opinion and true liberal education for our children. The late J. Edgar Hoover once wrote:
"There can be no doubt that the great majority of American teachers are loyal citizens, yet a witness who formerly held a high position in the Communist Party recently testified that the Party has members at work in every kind of educational institution, from nursery schools to the universities.
"For example, Communist teachers or fellow travelers are subtly persuading children ages 2 to 5 not to believe in religion, and are poisoning their minds with contempt or dislike for other ‘Capitalistic institutions’. . . .
"Being good tacticians, the Communists realize that one concealed Party member in education may be worth a dozen in less strategic fields, and some of their more successful propagandists in this area have influenced and are influencing the ideas of thousands of impressionable young people." (PPNS, p. 182, from American Magazine, October 1954.)
We are all well acquainted with the moral degeneration of our youth due, in part, to the godless educational standards advanced in our nation’s school systems. A recent example is that of the state legislature of Michigan that passed a law that mandated all school teachers, effective April 28, 1991, to teach the youth, from the sixth through the twelfth grades, how to get an abortion without notifying their parents.
In light of the foregoing thoughts, imagine what could happen because of the proposed federal daycare bills:
"1) All day care and babysitting of preschool children will be done only by government trained personnel in government licensed and regulated centers, regardless of the wishes of the parents.
"2) Families get no benefits at all, but must pay higher taxes to subsidize public day care slots for other people’s children, and these taxes will be heavy until parents will be forced to put their children in public day care.
"3) Discrimination against mothers who stay at home, against religious day care centers, and against all unlicensed and informal babysitting by relatives and neighbors. This is partly accomplished by a $1,000 tax credit for every preschool child ‘without discriminating against mothers who stay at home.’"
Will all mothers who stay at home get a tax credit? No! Only those who put their child in federal day care. The other mothers will have to pay higher taxes to support the day care centers for other children and to pay the $1,000 tax credit paid to those mothers. It’s wondered if Marx, himself, could have planned it so well.
Our Critical Situation
We have been warned, encouraged, and commanded to educate ourselves and resist all involvement in these threats to our God-given liberties. Our great patriots and Prophets, David O. McKay and Ezra Taft Benson, have counseled us in these ways:
(David O. McKay) . . . "Latter-day Saints should have nothing to do with the secret combinations and groups antagonistic to the constitutional law of the land, which the Lord ‘suffered to be established,’ and which ‘should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh according to just and holy principles.’" (Gospel Ideals, p. 306; The American Heritage of Freedom - A Plan of God, p. 12.)
(Ezra Taft Benson) ". . . we should accept the command of the Lord and treat socialistic communism as the tool of Satan . . . wherever they are found — in the schools, in the churches, in government, in unions, in businesses, in agriculture." (TL,, pp. 190-193.)
We, as citizens, must recognize what was proposed by the opponents of God and how these objectives have been foisted upon the American people, to a large extent, by deception. To promise security, conveyance, and affluence, while at the same time planning insecurity, hardship, and bondage is Satan’s way of government. Marion G. Romney, in a conference report, has made this point:
"Free agency is the principle against which Satan waged his war in heaven. It is still the front on which he makes his most furious, devious, and persistent attacks. That this would be the case was foreshadowed by the Lord . . . (Moses 4:1-4.)
"You see, at the time he was cast out of heaven, his objective was (and still is) ‘to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will.’ This he effectively does to as many as will not hearken unto the voice of God. His main attack is still on free agency. When he can get men to yield their agency, he has them well on the way to captivity. . . . We must be careful that we are not led to accept or support in any way any organization, cause or measure which, in its remotest effect, would jeopardize free agency, whether it be in politics, government, religion, employment, education, or in any other field. It is not enough for us to be sincere in what we support. We must be right!" (CR, October 1960, pp. 74-75.)
Another of our great patriots, and one whom we have quoted previously, has a warning and some very sobering words to speak to us today. Hear again, and consider, the words of J. Reuben Clark, Jr., in the spirit in which he gave them:
". . . I say unto you with all the soberness I can, that we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back; and once lost, we . . . have more sacrifices to make and more persecutions to endure than we have yet known, heavy as our sacrifices and grievous as our persecutions of the past have been.
"We face a war to the death, a gigantic worldwide struggle. We must face it, enter it, take part in it. In fact, we are all taking part in the struggle, whether we will or not. Upon its final issue, liberty lives or dies. (Quoted by Ezra Taft Benson, CR, October 1966, p. 124, from The Improvement Era, May 1944.)
"There always comes a time when unpleasant truths must be retold, even though the retelling disturbs the ease and quiet of a luxurious error. Today seems to be such a time. On such occasions, the criticism, slander, misrepresentation that one gets, are of no consequence." (Quoted by Ezra Taft Benson, CR, April 1963, p. 111.)
The ten planks of the Communist Manifesto, or the "Socialist Manifesto," we have just discussed, could be covered in greater detail. However, the facts cannot be denied by the interested and studious individual that: since Marx announced his social philosophy about 150 years ago, we Americans have adopted, with varying degrees, his entire program. Surely, Karl Marx would be pleased.