Saturday, February 7, 2009

Chapter 4
Like Two Peas in a Pod
"Never forget for one moment that
Communism and Socialism are state slavery.
World conquest has been,
is now, and ever will be its ultimate goals.
And these two are as alike as
two peas in a pod
in their ultimate effects upon our liberties."
— President J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

In our last chapter we established the fact that secret combinations, or conspiracies, existed from the beginning of man until the present time, and that these conspiracies are even prophesied for the future. In this chapter we are going to zero in on the most popular secret combinations in our own day and time, that of "communism" and "socialism."

Communism is a conspiracy. It is secret, subversive, and attempts to destroy the will and agency of man. Its running mate, socialism, has the same goals. They are basically the same in their overall aims — only the approach to reach the same goals may differ.

In the early 1900's there were a series of revolts brought against the Czar of Russia. Like early France and many other nations before, the wealthy landowners brought extreme measures upon the common people — and of course, these people revolted.

The war of 1917 interrupted these revolts. But after the war, things exploded into a full-blown revolution. A few elite Bolsheviks quickly took control of the revolution from the common people and subjugated them to another form of tyranny with even more extremes. (Note: In 1903, at the second party congress, the Russian Social Democratic party split into two factions; one group representing the majority, under Lenin, which was called the Bolsheviks, and a minority group which was called the Mensheviks.)

The newspapers were taken over by the Communist Party and Lenin immediately exchanged truth with lying propaganda. Lenin outlawed all other political parties, and purged out those who dissented. Through the regimes of both Lenin and Stalin, tens of millions of people were either executed or sent to forced labor camps. These new extremes were known as socialism. Socialism? Yes, socialism!

Communism is the revolutionary approach to socialism instigated by Nikolai Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, to be exact). As we will find out later, real social change is to be gradual; but a radical thrust at it by force was Lenin’s approach. In the Encyclopedia Britannica (1947 edition), speaking of communism, it says:

"Historically the term [communism] was frequently used as identical with socialism, as was done by Karl Marx and Friedrick Engels in their famous Communist Manifesto (1848).
"In recent times the meaning of the word communism has been narrowed down to denote that interpretation of Marxan doctrine proposed by Lenin when he came to power in Russia as a result of the revolution in Nov. 1917, and on the basis of which he and his followers have tried to transform society in Russia.
"While socialism put its faith in an evolutionary development and in democratic means of attaining the liberation of all men from economic servitude, communism regarded revolution and an ensuing dictatorship of the proletariat as a necessary period of transition to the future free and equalitarian society. . . .
"Communism . . . regards dictatorship as a transitional institution, and full democracy as the goal. It believes that true democracy cannot be realized in a capitalistic society on account of the economic exploitation imposed upon the economically weaker elements of society. . . .
"In trying to create a true democracy of free and equal individuals, terror was ruthlessly employed, all humanitarian considerations and individual rights were disregarded. . . ."

We will have more discussion on the fact that socialism and communism are basically the same in their final goal. As the heading quote says: "these two are as like as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effects upon our liberties."

It is also noted that the aim of communistic-socialism is a "true democracy." Now that sounds strange. We have been led to believe that communism and democracy were opposites. That is not so. That has been a gradual "brain-washing" approach to help lead us to accept democracy as the ultimate form of government for the U.S. Studying the chapter that will soon follow entitled, "Our Government - Democracy or Republic?" the reader will get an understanding of what a democracy really is; it is a favorite form of government for dictators.

Now we find that today communism, as a word, is dying; but the goals and philosophies of that social order are coming closer to reality. The development of true socialism is a gradual development over a period of time. It satanically usurps the will of the people through deception and imposes bondage in the place of liberty. The man considered the Father of the Constitution, James Madison, once said, "Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." (Quoted in TRC, pp. 136-137; AEHDT, p. 9.)

As we get into the discussion of socialism, let us refer back to the encyclopedia. It tells us that: "The ‘Communist Manifesto,’ drafted by Karl Marx and Friedrick Engels for the Communist League and issued in the ‘year of revolutions,’ 1848, is generally regarded as the starting point of modern socialism." (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1947, 20:890.)

The concept of socialism went as far back as the Prophet Joseph Smith. In September of 1843, the Prophet met a socialist from England. This is what the Prophet had to say, "I attended a second lecture on socialism by Mr. Finch, and after he got through, I made a few remarks. . . . I said I did not believe the doctrine." (HC, 6:33.)

What Is Socialism?
We now come to a brief discussion of what socialism is and how it works. To do this we will be referring to many quotes from, not only experts who have studied the subject, but from socialist leaders themselves. We will start our search into this subject with reference from the book, Title of Liberty, by Ezra Taft Benson:

"Dr. V. Orval Watts, noted political economist, has described this socialist system which I fear — and I have but suggested a very few evidences. Here are his words:
"‘Socialism . . . is the theory and practice of coercive collectivism. It is the evil fruit of greed for other men’s possessions and greed for control over other men’s labor.
"‘This greed for goods and power is as old as man and as widespread as the human race. It goes by many names, disguised in many forms, as men think up many excuses for robbing and ruling their fellows.
"‘Socialist theory is a modern excuse, an elaborate rationalization for this greed and for the organized looting and despotism it seeks to achieve. But its materialism, its collectivist point of view, its reliance on violence and coercion, even most of its economics, are as old and as common as sin.
"‘It holds out to men the hope that they may reap where they have not sown. It teaches that man is the creature of his environment, and that he may be happy and good if he gets enough wealth, regardless of how or where. All that is needed, says the socialist tempter, is to bow down and worship the socialist state, turning over to it authority and power to take wealth where it finds it and to direct labor as it wills. Just a little class hatred, a little lying propaganda, a little violence on the picket lines, a little suppression of adverse critics, and a few generations of compulsory education in socialistic thought, then surely we shall see the bright new day of equality, peace, brotherhood, and freedom! So say the socialists.’" (TL, pp. 63-64.)

George Bernard Shaw, the noted author and playwrite, was a steadfast socialist. He not only believed the evil doctrine but preached it and was an authority on its principles. There are two quotes from him that follow. One is from Marion G. Romney, given in general conference, and the other is from Ezra Taft Benson’s book just previously quoted:
"George Bernard Shaw, the noted Fabian socialist, said that: ‘Socialism, reduced to its simplest legal and practical expression, means the complete discarding of the institution of private property by transforming it into public property and the division of the resultant income equally and indiscriminately among the entire population.’" (CR, April 1966, p. 95, quoting from the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946, 20:895.)
"But compulsion was nothing new in the thinking of social democrats. One of their original founders emphasized this when he said:
"I also made it quite clear that under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well." (TL, p. 172, from Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, p. 470.)

Does this sound like the kind of government you want for your country? It sounds much like the old plan from the pre-earth life, doesn’t it?

The Workings of Socialism
Let’s turn again to The Red Carpet, by Ezra Taft Benson. He has studied, preached, and written so much on the subject that he is certainly worth quoting often. So let’s read some more from this authority:

"When socialism is understood, we will realize that many programs advocated, and some of those already adopted in the United States fall clearly within the category of socialism. What is socialism? It is simply governmental ownership and management of the essential means for production and distribution of goods.
"Now supposing a person came along and said, ‘I am in favor of doing away with competitive markets and private property, of setting up communes in each locality, and taking all the land away from the farmers, of taking over all the steel mills, all the electric power plants, all the automotive industry, the banks, the railroads, the newspapers, the television and radio stations, all the mines, and so forth.’
"I am sure that such a proposal would meet with immediate and united resistance by the vast majority of the American people.
"But, supposing the same person came and said, ‘It is in the public interest and to the benefit of each citizen if we make industry, the farms, and all means of production and distribution operate for the benefit of all the people and not just for the profit of a few stockholders.’ Immediately this line of deception receives a wave of support. It is occurring today here in the United States. It occurred in England, France and Eastern Europe as well as the Scandinavian countries. It occurred in Russia.
"Now obviously, the worst thing that can happen to a socialist is to have himself openly identified with the work of the communists who are generally feared and despised. The socialists know they cannot seize property and power by ‘due process of law’ unless they are politically popular, therefore, they try desperately to avoid the taint of the communists and present their program so that it appears ‘moral,’ ‘democratic,’ ‘peaceful,’ and so gradual that the people will not resist it.
"These are the exact words used by the social Democrats in England in 1889 when they were preparing to lay the foundation for the seizure of power which finally took place after World War I and again after World War II. They prepared a book called ‘Fabian Essays on Socialism.’ In the preface they said the book was being written by seven members of the executive council of the Fabian Society. They then said, ‘The writers are all Social Democrats.’ Nevertheless, they adopted the name of ‘Fabians’ after the Roman General Fabius, who won his battles by capturing or defeating the enemy a few at a time. This is what the Social Democrats call ‘gradualism.’ It is their intention to use this method in conquering their enemies which in this case happens to be free men.
"Freedom is not always lost on the battlefront." (TRC, pp. 66, 69-70, 134.)

Various government officials have created, or supported, a variety of crises in America to condition people to the importance of government controls and interventions such as oil shortages, high taxes, economic turmoil, moral degeneration, drugs, educational regression and a host of other conditions. These government sponsored disasters are to condition the people for "The New World Order," an order of total control of the people and their property by an elite ruling class.

To do this, they use a three-step principle, which is: Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis. Thesis comes first; that is — create a problem. The next step is antithesis — create opposition to the problem, such as prejudice, fear, threats, panic, etc. And then the final phase: synthesis — the crowning achievement of government, where they intervene with the solution to the problem, which they created, or encouraged, in the first place to create chaos whereby a solution is needed.

When the people are in fear and out of control, they will agree to most any remedy, including giving up their rights of freedom and protection, for a quick fix. In this way, the government can impose on the people any scheme they wish without the people becoming aware of what has happened to them: social security, government education, socialized medicine, the United Nations, a national or international police force, a one-world monetary system and international banking, the New World Order, etc.

Ralph Epperson, in his book The Unseen Hand, writes of Jan Kozak, a member of the Secretariat of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, who wrote a book entitled: And Not a Shot is Fired, the Communist Strategy for Subverting a Representative Government. Mr. Epperson explains what Jan Kozak spelled out about the Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis concept, although Epperson did not use these terms:

"Mr. Kozak describes what has been called the ‘Pincers Movement,’ the method by which the conspirators can use the parliament, the ‘Pressure from Above,’ and the mob, the ‘Pressure from Below,’ to convert a democracy into a dictatorship.
"What Mr. Kozak proposed was a five-part program to seize control of a government.
"The first step consisted of having the conspiracy’s own people infiltrate the government (the ‘pressure from above.’)
"The second step was to create a real or alleged grievance, usually through either an action of government or through some situation where the government should have acted and didn’t.
"The third step consisted in having a mob created by the real or alleged grievance that the government or the conspiracy caused demand that the problem be solved by a governmental action (the ‘pressure from below.’)
"The fourth step consisted in having the conspirators in the government remedy the real or alleged situation with some oppressive legislation.
"The fifth step is a repeat of the last three. The legislation that the government passes does not solve the problem and the mob demands more and more legislation until the government becomes totalitarian in nature by possessing all of the power." (Quoted in The Unseen Hand, p. 36-37, from And Not a Shot is Fired, 1957, p. 16.)

And so we have some of the plans on leading sleepy America, step-by-step, down the road to socialistic slavery without their awareness. Nephi was speaking of this type of wickedness when he said, "And there are also secret combinations, even as in times of old, according to the combinations of the devil, for he is the founder of all these things; yea, the founder of murder, and works of darkness; yea, and he leadeth them by the neck with a flaxen cord, until he bindeth them with his strong cords forever." (2 Ne. 26:22.)

From the foregoing we can pretty well see what the long-term goals of the socialists are and how they plan to implement some of their programs for enslaving the American people. Some of their aims, as Ezra Taft Benson writes, are as follows:

"Here is what these Fabians or social democrats said they were going to do:
"With reference to private property they said, ‘. . . private property in land and capital will inevitably go the way of feudalism which is superseded.’
"The social democrats also said they were going to work for ‘the ultimate and gradual extinction of the (property owning) class.’
"They said they were going to nationalize or collectivize the land . . . set up collectivized farms . . . organize communes in each locality . . . get clothes from a community store, eat at a community table . . . nationalize the major industries and develop industrial communes. . . .
"They pointed out that ‘the perfect fitting development of each individual is not necessarily the utmost and highest cultivation of his own personality, but the filling, in the best possible way, of his humble function in the great social machines.’
"At this point some of you may wonder whether I am talking about communism of Russia rather than the social democrats in England. But I have mentioned these things so that you can see that in their final form the two are identical." (TL, pp. 171-72.)

As long ago as general conference, October 1960, he was warning us of this evil secret combination and their satanic attitudes of murder, much like the Gadianton Robbers. In that conference he said,

"Those who subscribe to this philosophy [socialistic communism] stop at nothing to achieve their ends. They do not hesitate to destroy — if they are strong enough — whatever stands in their way. Our own generation has witnessed the Russian communists liquidate millions of their fellow countrymen. Even more recently we have seen the Chinese communists wipe out millions of their fellow countrymen — no one knows the exact number.
"To the true communist [socialist], nothing is evil if it is expedient. Being without conscience or honor, he feels completely justified in using whatever means are necessary to achieve his goal: force, trickery, lies, broken promises, mayhem, and individual and mass murder." (CR, October 1960, p. 101.)

A Few Deceptions
We are purposely being deceived by the so-called freedom which is being presented to us by the Soviet leadership. Up front it looks and sounds good. But as we examine their motives we find their nature hasn’t changed from the beginning. It was stated earlier that, "Communism as a word is dying, but the goals and philosophies of that social order is coming closer to reality." Even Mikhail Gorbachev (Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev), admits this in his book, Perestroika, which was published in this country. The Nobel Peace Prize winner confesses:

"To put an end to all the rumors and speculations that abound in the West about this, I would like to point out once again that we are conducting all our reforms in accordance with the socialist choice. We are looking within socialism, rather than outside it, for the answers to all the questions that arise . . . those who hope that we shall move away from the socialist path will be greatly disappointed." (Perestroika, pp. 22-23.)

Does this sound like the man that the Western World has been praising for his reforms. It does if we know the workings of the deceptive mind. He is nothing more nor less than a "wolf in sheep’s clothing."

By feigning freedom for their people, the Soviets are duping the West into a hypnotic euphoria. And while they do they will bilk the American people for billions of dollars — continuing to build arms while American disarms — and they will come back on us with a vengeance as they have done before.

In his book, New Lies for Old, Anatoliy Golitsyn, an ex-KGB officer, warns us about how the communist deception threatens the survival of the west in their strategy of deception and disinformation. The book was published in 1984, five years before the "democratization" and "liberalization" of Eastern Europe, showing that what has recently happened over there was planned, and that turning the communist-block countries into a "Democracy" is actually a deceptive plot:

"The suggested European option would be promoted by a revival of controlled ‘democratization’ on the Czechoslovak pattern in Eastern Europe. . . .
"The ‘liberalization’ would be spectacular and impressive. Formal pronouncements might be made about a reduction in the communist party’s role; its monopoly would be apparently curtailed. . . . The supreme Soviet would be given greater apparent power and the president and deputies greater apparent independence . . . there would be greater freedom for Soviet citizens to travel. Western and United Nations observers would be invited to the Soviet Union to witness the reforms in action.
"But, as in the Czechoslovak case, the ‘liberalization’ would be calculated and deceptive in that it would be introduced from above. It would be carried out by the party through its cells and individual members of government, the Supreme Soviet, the courts, and the electoral machinery and by the KGB through its agents among the intellectuals and scientists. . . . It would contribute to the stabilization of the regime at home and to the achievement of its goals abroad.
"Western acceptance of the new ‘liberalization’ as genuine would create favorable conditions for the fulfillment of communist strategy for the United States, Western Europe, and even, perhaps, Japan." (New Lies for Old. pp. 338-40.)

So the mind of the Soviet still clicks away at its timetable for world domination. They have made peace overtures before, which were short lived. The Americans bought into them then; should things be any different now? Our gullible nature hasn’t changed any more than their deceitful nature has changed. This fact was pointed out in the Encyclopedia Britannica, when it tells of such peace overtures made in 1936 — but what happened later, history tells:
"During the period of the co-operation of the Soviet Union with the democratic nations, a new democratic constitution was introduced on Nov. 25, 1936, which stressed the principles of democracy without abandoning the firm grip of the dictatorship upon the country." (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1947, 6:136.)

Dimitry Manuilsky made a statement at the Lenin School of Political Warfare in Moscow, as far back as 1931. He is quoted in Cleon Skousen’s book, The Naked Communist, as he discloses the true nature of the Soviet leadership, even today:

"War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today, of course, we are not strong enough to attack. . . . To win we shall need the element of surprise. The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movements on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard-of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist!" (Quoted in, The Naked Communist. pp. 208, 235.)

To sum-up this little discussion on their deception let’s turn once again to Ezra Taft Benson: "Yet some gullible, fuzzy heads are trying to tell us that the communists are changing — becoming more cooperative. They might change their strategy but their objective is still to ‘bury’ us. Their deadly conspiracy remains the same." (PPNS, p. 271.)

We are now hearing that all is well in the world and that peace is coming. But should we trust what looks good? Of what do the scriptures warn us? "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape." (1 Thes. 5:3.)

Two Peas in a Pod
The communist nation of Russia was called the United Soviet Socialist Republic (U.S.S.R.). As stated before, communism and socialism are basically the same, only the methods of achieving goals may be different.

Because we hear so much about "social" government programs in this country of "free" America we have a tendency not to relate it to socialistic communism, when in fact there is a very strong corollary.

Socialistic programs are supposedly designed to control the property of the individual and distribute it to all people equally. This can be a very worthy goal when sponsored under the proper direction. But that direction must come from the Lord. And the people must be willing to part with their substance by choice, instead of force. Without such direction and volunteerism, the system becomes slavery for both the giver and the receiver: for the giver because he is not really giving but is being forced to give — stolen from; and for the receiver because, to receive in a socialistic system, he must submit to the worldly-whims of the elite, — bondage. Socialism and communism are not the "united order," as some would suppose. There is a section in the appendix on this difference.

As socialism is not the United Order, neither is democracy a desirable form of government, or Karl Marx would not have said, in his Communist Manifesto, that "the first step in the revolution" was to "win the battle of democracy."

We have spoken of both communism and socialism as being the same in principle, if not in approach. To cement this into the minds of the reader we will read the following thoughts. From the United Press International, in September 1991, we read that "China will remain a socialist nation . . . under the leadership of the Communist Party." Here is the entire quote:

"China’s Premier Li Peng voiced in a National Day address today that China will remain a socialist nation . . . despite ‘drastic and profound changes.’ Li described the world today as ‘chaotic’ following the collapse of Soviet and eastern-bloc communism. Li pledged China would resist the trend . . . saying quote ‘no tempest will shake (our) determination to move along the path of building socialism under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.’" (United Press International, September 30, 1991).

And in a recent National Geographic magazine with a special article on communist Cuba and Fidel Castro, it says, "Last year, 1990, Fidel Castro, who admits that he is a Marxist-Leninist, said, ‘Socialism will be the society of the future . . . Cuba must change but not at the cost of socialism.’" (As reported in, National Geographic, August 1991, p. 96.)

Of all the LDS General Authorities, J. Reuben Clark, Jr., of the First Presidency, before his death in 1961, was perhaps the Church’s leading authority on communism, socialism, the United Nations, and those threats to the American people. From this great Church leader and patriot we read:

"Socialism, reduced to its lowest terms, aims at a revolution, by force if necessary, against our whole social and industrial order and existence, in matters pertaining to the production of the necessaries and luxuries of life, which production, in the new order, is to be wholly taken over by the State.
"Communism aims at a revolutionary overturning, seemingly also by force if necessary, of our present systems of distribution of products, the new system to be a completely equalized consumption and distribution, every man, speaking in general terms, to have the same as every other man, no more, no less, the amount any man gets to be wholly independent of how much he does for it, or whether or not he has done anything at all for it. . . . Do not mistake the foregoing for an attempted rhetorical outburst; it is not. It is a short statement of the actual facts.
"Neither socialism nor communism has always taught the same principles nor advocated the same measures; these have varied as have the time and as have the people proselyted. These systems have never aimed at consistency in their proselyting, for in this they have always been opportunistic, advancing from time to time the principles that promised converts.
"One method that has been framed is this: they will gradually secure control of the regular State governmental machinery through the exercise of the elective franchise in the prescribed constitutional manner, but by corrupt methods. . . . Then, having so secured control, they will overturn the regular governmental order and set up the revolutionary forms.
"Still another method that has been proposed is thoroughly to bureaucratize the regular governmental machinery; then to make government so intricate and complex that the normal machinery cannot manage it; following this to usurp and lodge all governmental operations in the executive department [executive orders]; then through and by the administrative bureaucrats that shall have been trained in the functions of the regular governmental legislative and judicial agencies, they will, finally, when the critical moment comes, openly take over, by a planned peaceful revolution, the whole government, abolish the Constitution, and rob us of our free institutions and liberties. (Quoted in PPNS, pp. 223-25, from CN-6/16/45.)
"The paths we are following, if we move forward thereon will inevitably lead us to socialism or communism, and these two are as like as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effects upon our liberties.
"And never forget for one moment that communism and socialism are state slavery. World conquest has been, is now, and ever will be its ultimate goals." (Quoted in the TL, p. 74.)

Socialism, and its running mate communism, is not the last word in secret combinations. There still exists a deeper and more sinister conspiracy at hand (if that is possible). In the next chapter we will delve into it a little.

No comments: