CommunitarianismFinal Synthesis In Hegelian Dialectic

What is the Hegelian Dialectic?

There are few political words in the English language that make less sense to American readers than the term “communitarian.” There are few White House advisers whose names remain as unfamiliar to the American people than the founder of the Communitarian Network, Dr. Amitai Etzioni. And there are very few people worldwide who will claim they understand the Hegelian dialectic. (There are even fewer people who want to try.) The problem is, without an understanding of this theoretical triad, there can be no rational or learned discussion of local, national, or international politics.

Most academics are familiar with some or all of these terms, and some people have heard of Etzioni. The basic reasoning behind contrived conflicts have all been part of the political discourse for the past century. Many political science texts teach the student to accept Hegel’s theory of achieving “God’s Idea,” without ever explaining that is what they are teaching. As a result, many educated people cannot recognize when they are being manipulated by a Hegelian motivated political guru.

Dr. Etzioni (who is often called a “guru” by other communitarians) explains where modern communitarianism comes from in the introduction to

The Essential Communitarian Reader

He admits the term communitarian originally meant: “a member of a community formed to put into practice communistic or socialistic theories,” in the 19 th century. But in case that worries us too much, he assures us Webster’s changed the definition in 1909 to mean: ‘of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a community.’ He tells us the editors of his little group called the Responsive Community, “recognized that communitarian ideas can be found throughout history, although the term itself was coined only in 1841 by Barmby, who founded the Universal Communitarian Association.” Wikipedia has just a little more to say about Barmby.

“John Barmby is also known as the person who coined the word “communism” during a visit to Paris in 1840 in conversation with some followers of Gracchus Babeuf 1. He introduced Engels to the French communiste movement 2. They founded the London Communist Propaganda Society in 1841 and, in the same year, the Universal Communitarian Association. Later, the Barmby’s had recast their movement as a church by 1843. Researchers at Rutgers University explain:

Seeking a richer spiritual life than Owenite socialism or Chartism offered, soon after their marriage Catherine and Goodwyn Barmby founded the Communist Church. Although the church expired in 1849, in the mid-1840s it had more than ten congregations.

“Between 1854 and 1858 Barmby was  minister of the Free Christian Church in Lancaster, Lancashire, where he held the title of Revolutionary Pontifarch of the Communist Church.

Communitarianism (What is the Hegelian Dialectic?) was first introduced by a communist who founded the London Communist Propaganda Society in 1841. But, according to the more moral Etzioni, one day the idea to form a Responsive Community jumped up and hit him in the head. It happened after he noticed a bunch of elite Harvard students who expected to receive a fair trial by jury said they would rather not serve on a jury. He found this sort of selfishness troubling. So, because he cares about people so much, the good guru made a lunch date with William Galston, where they realized the “Middle Ground” did not have a platform. So they decided to write one. “It seemed a subject worth exploring.”


Zionist Communitarian control of the anti-Agenda 21 movement

In 2000, we identified Communitarianism as the legal system supporting Agenda 21. We identified the “guru” of the Communitarian Network, whose own writings tell us he was a terrorist, a soldier and now a planner in the Zionist takeover of British Palestine.
I quickly understood why some Christians would never consider these facts, but I’ve been trying to understand why so many of the Americans actively opposing Agenda 21 and claiming to be on our “side” avoided discussing Communitarianism and its root philosophy, Zionism, for 13 years.
I couldn’t understand why the Liberty movement took no interest in the Communitarian philosophy either, especially after Washington Post Columnist E.J. said the last battle would be fought between the Libertarians and the Communitarians. When the leaders of the Libertarian Party REFUSED to acknowledge that challenge, told me the word was “too hard” for Americans, I was confused by that. I waited for Ron Paul to say the word just ONCE during his Liberty campaign, and his silence did nothing to alleviate my suspicions that all was not as it seems in the Liberty corner.
It’s been revealed that Ron Paul’s Homeschooling program is connected directly to  Christian Futurist Dispensationism. This explains to ME why RP, Tom Woods and all the other Von Mises “liberty” economic proponents refused to discuss or debate Communitarianism.
Now it’s been revealed that Rosa Koire, who is the only person out their speaking against Agenda 21 who alludes to the term “communitarian” in her speeches (but never fully explains it), is censoring the most relevant FACT about it. On page 31 of her book, Behind the Green Mask, she does a very tricky thing. In the top half of the page she writes, “calling it a Zionist plot is absurd” and the bottom half of the page encourages her readers to only “Familiarize yourself with communitarianism.”

The war against the slippery Etzioni and his Zioni followers takes many shapes and forms.

President Obama’s Communitarian Promise

As if we needed further proof that in some sectors of our society it is REAL, the following quotes prove that some people do know Obama’s real politics and some people do discuss it frequently among themselves. The rest of us common folk can only describe it as change we can believe in.

  • Communitarian Network Letter #8
  • “That’s the promise of America – the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother’s keeper; I am my sister’s keeper… we must also admit that fulfilling America’s promise will require more than just money. It will require a renewed sense of responsibility from each of us to recover what John F. Kennedy called our ‘intellectual and moral strength.’”
  • Barack Obama, Democratic National Convention.

  • Conservatism is Dead: Long Live Liberalism? (Part III)

  • “Obama draws heavily on — and contributes much to — a little known social philosophy known as communitarianism. It is centered around the importance of community, the common good, and service.”

  • Obama the Communitarian
  • “Alan Wolfe is a TNR contributing editor and director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College. His latest book, The Future of Liberalism (Knopf), will be published in early February.“Throughout his campaign for the presidency, Barack Obama’s language mixed liberal themes of hope and purpose with a communitarian emphasis on duty and responsibility. In his inaugural address, the latter language was so loud that the former could barely be heard.”

The Dangers of Obama’s Communitarian Service Program,

“In the coming four years we will witness a growing mobocracy with more of these Wal-Mart moments, if these communitarian service programs and the creeping Marxism behind them aren’t nipped at the root, before they multiply.”

Communitarianism v. Libertarianism

“This is the essence of the social contract, and President Obama’s rhetoric to date indicates that he intuitively grasps the intricate connections between communitarian and libertarian values. It will be exciting to see whether he manages to translate this rhetoric into a workable set of policies that can command broad public support.”Citizens, Not Americans
“Linda Hirshman is a former professor of Philosophy and Women’s Studies at Brandeis University, and the author, most recently, of Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World.“There are two kinds of participants in the American Republic: citizens and Americans. They parallel precisely Isaiah Berlin’s powerful, defining essay, “Two Concepts of Liberty.” Citizens achieve positive liberty, freedom to. Americans enjoy negative liberty, freedom from. Almost nothing Barack Obama says is accidental. He chose “citizens,” not “Americans.”
“Now Barack Obama, no dummy, is offering not just political change, but metaphysical change.

And what’s this from CBS news?

Can Democrats Claim The Alaskan Frontier?
by Charles Wohlforth, The New Republic: Chances Of Obama Breaking The Democrats’ Dry Spell Are Better Than Ever, July 23, 2008

A Man for All Seasons The misunderstood John Maynard Keynes.

What does John Maynard Keynes have in common with Dr. Amitai Etzioni, the founder of Communitarianism and President Obama’s behind-the-scenes guru? Fabian socialism.

“Keynes scorned these “catastrophists” in the Labour Party. He also despised Soviet communism. And he had a low opinion of Marx’s economics. “My feelings about Das Kapital are the same as my feelings about the Koran,” Keynes wrote Bernard Shaw in 1934. But he was sympathetic to the Fabian socialism of Shaw, H. G. Wells, and Sidney and Beatrice Webb, which had influenced the Labour Party.” {ibid}


Agenda 21 and Communitarianism | lisaleaks

Community over individual rights

The communitarian point of view believes giving up some measure of privacy serves the “common good.” That includes the FBI wire tapping your phone conversations, emails, medical records, computer access, videos you’ve rented, your credit card purchases, and personal information about your companion on your trip to Acapulco.

When government has total control over your privacy then they can “better protect you” and society by knowing everything there is to know about your personal life.

AGENDA 21 This is the biggest public relation scam in the world  – lisaleaks

UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.

UN Goals & Objectives

‘Youth represent a top priority for the United Nations and a new generation of support. An estimated half a million students, from primary school to university, have already participated worldwide in conducting Model UN simulations.

States, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector have partnered to raise awareness of the crucial role played by education in the development and stability acknowledging that the primary responsibility to provide education lies with the government.

Who Funds U.N. Agenda 21? | Lisa Elkins Goodman –

The two-decade-old United Nations program known as Agenda 21 is relatively unknown to most Americans. But the global scheme has the potential to wipe out freedoms of all U.S. citizens.

“Sustainable Development” was created and defined by the United Nations in 1987, and the action plan to implement it was signed onto in 1992 by President Bush and 178 other nations.  Clinton began to implement it in the US in 1993 by giving the American Planning Association a multi-million dollar grant to write a land use legislative blueprint for every municipality in the US.

Communitarian Education Agenda | lisaleaks

The most important part of the UN Education Agenda is the inclusion of indoctrination programs in U.S. government schools.  Agenda 21 will indoctrinate the very young to accept the outcome of its programs.

Common Core Curriculum and Agenda 21 | lisaleaks

This battle is between the collusion of corporate greed and political muscle versus the  individual voter.

It’s a battle between the individual student, teacher, or parent– versus huge public/private partnerships.

Common Core Curriculum | lisaleaks

Common Core is the ‘new’ inventory and control system adopted by nearly every state in the US to fully implement Skinnerian Training.  This system creates people who will go along to get along, who will be ‘good obedient citizens’. RESIST!  TELL YOUR SCHOOL BOARD THAT YOU WANT OUT OF COMMON CORE.  This is a top down federal/global system for pseudo-education and is a tremendous threat to our independence as individuals and as a nation.

Public School Students – Prisoners of the State | lisaleaks

Kids have no voice. Everyone pretends to care, but it is never true, and it’s the children who are being blamed for all the failings in the education system. People do not learn when they are in such an autocracy environment. Public schools are an under the government control with unrestricted authority, even over the parent, so you’re basically handing over the care and well-being of your child to that authority.

Education Without Representation | lisaleaks

Your child has been sentenced from 12-16 years to a re-education camp. No, we are not talking about a FEMA camp, but we may as well be.

Hegelian DialecticWeapons of the Elite | lisaleaks

One of the most important weapons the Elite use to enslave humanity is the Hegelian Dialectic. The Hegelian Dialectic is a framework to guide our thoughts and actions to a predetermined solution. Understanding how the Elite manipulate us into their clutches is vital if we are going to be free. When you are aware of how the Elite use this Dialectic to steer societies, you have a pretty powerful tool in staying ahead of not only them but the crowd also.

Word Governance ThroughClimate Change” | lisaleaks

Many companies realize that “green” is good for their bottom lines. Grantees: The Evangelical Environmental Network, National Wildlife Federation. Governors and mayors have proved to be very effective advocates for climate change solutions nationally and internationally. The Fund has convened this group several times to explore strategies for the coordination and cooperation – and to manipulate them.

John Goodwyn Barmby

Universal Communitarian Association  in 1841

William A. Galston

William A. Galston holds the Ezra Zilkha Chair in the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies Program, where he serves as a senior fellow. A former policy advisor to President Clinton and presidential candidates, Galston is an expert on domestic policy, political campaigns, and elections. His current research focuses on designing a new social contract and the implications of political polarization.

A face-off between polarities that yield no ground: an interview with E.J. Dionne

E.J. Dionne, Washington Post columnist and author of the recently released Our Divided Political Heart: The Battle for the American Idea in an Age of Discontent (Bloomsbury).

A few days before leaving (while monitoring hurricane reports) to cover the Republican National Convention, Dionne spoke with NCR about his book and the state of U.S. politics during an hour-long interview in his office at the Brookings Institution, where he is a senior fellow.

The division and stalemate we’re witnessing today stems from an imbalance, Dionne believes, in “the ongoing tension between two core values: our love of individualism and our reverence for community” that have defined American history and American political instincts since the beginning.

He says the balance today tilts heavily, in manifestations like the tea party and the more extreme corners of the Libertarian movement and the Republican Party, toward a degree of individualism that is unprecedented in our modern politics. One of the results, he writes, is that “We are not very skilled at balance anymore. That is why we have lost our gift for reasoning together.” In today’s politics, he writes, too often the belief is that an answer lies only in one instinct or the other.

At the same time, and in an important sense, Our Divided Political Heart is not a book of balance in the “on the one hand, and on the other hand” approach to being fair. Dionne states quite early in the book that he is unabashedly “liberal, in the American sense of that word. It is a label I have embraced in recent years in part because too many liberals, after looking at the opinion polls, have fled from any association with the honorable history that word embodies.”

The label is modified, however. He’s not one of the screamers in today’s highly charged public square. He is a public intellectual, educated early by Benedictines, later at Harvard and as a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, and who currently also teaches at Georgetown University.

Former President Bill Clinton recently dubbed Dionne “one of our most thoughtful public philosophers.” Toward the end of a nearly hourlong question-and-answer session in July at the London School of Economics and Political Science, Clinton was asked what he was reading these days. Our Divided Political Heart was the first he mentioned and he judged it “the best” Dionne had written since his 1991 Why Americans Hate Politics. Dionne has published four others between them, dealing with themes of community, religion and making the case for why liberalism and progressive thought aren’t dead.

Complex realities

The 60-year-old columnist is also a quite public Catholic, a point of biography important to what he’s become. “I grew up a kid conservative,” he said in the interview. The irony, he jokes, is that “I became a liberal because I’m Catholic. It was really reflecting on Catholic social thought and poverty” that turned his head. “That was a big piece of why in my teenage years I began to move the other way.”

The most recent book, while acutely descriptive of the current state of affairs, derives its persuasive power from a deep reading of the two strains that so fascinate Dionne — individualism and community — as they have struggled with and complemented each other throughout our history. One might also find some relief from stale categories in the replacement of “left” and “right” with words that suggest more complex realities.

One high-profile review of the book, however, made the case that the circles the writer inhabits — Brookings, appearances on MSNBC and “Meet the Press,” Post columnist — and his very credentials scuttle the project’s ultimate ambition to find some way to talk over the divides.

What’s a commentator to do? Are we too divided to even talk about the divisions in a civil way?

“I’ve been blessed three ways in all of this,” Dionne said in the interview. “I grew up in a very argumentative extended family. I always say I grew up believing that you could argue fiercely with someone you actually, truly loved. And in particular, my dad and I loved to argue about politics. It wasn’t hostile, we just loved doing it. It was almost a game with us. I joke that my dad trained me to do what I ended up doing for a living.”

He also covered politics as a reporter before becoming an opinion writer. In that earlier role he covered a lot of Republicans and conservatives “and we got along quite well, and we could have a great time talking about a campaign.”

The third blessing, he said, was that “before this polarization occurred, I got to know a lot of conservative friends. We knew we disagreed and we sat down and argued about stuff, but we were friends. I don’t think they thought I was evil, and I certainly didn’t think they were evil.”

Given all of that, he said, “for me, hating someone you disagree with — unless they’re truly evil, like a Nazi — is not natural.”

Dionne, of course, could not have known while writing the book what would result from the Republican Party nominating process. But the two tickets now competing for the presidency are perhaps the most graphic endorsement for the prescience of his arguments.

Former Gov. Mitt Romney and Congressman Paul Ryan (who notably claims his views were fashioned in large measure by author Ayn Rand) embody what Dionne describes as a growing “radical form of individualism that simultaneously denigrates the role of government and the importance most Americans attach to the quest for community.” The name “tea party” itself suggests, Dionne writes, “that the current elected government in Washington is as illegitimate as a distant unelected monarchy was two and a half centuries ago. And it hints that methods outside the normal political channels are justified in confronting such oppression.”

President Barack Obama, of course, is a former community organizer and Vice President Joe Biden is famously the one who harkens back to the days of robust labor unions, neighborhood Catholicism and a blue collar, lunch-pail America that has largely disappeared.

The ‘Long Consensus’

No one is footnoting their remarks, but the commentariat from moderate to left is certainly echoing the central theme of Our Divided Political Heart from campaign speeches to Lawrence O’Donnell promos for MSNBC. Suddenly, everyone is noticing that the election choice is between, as Clinton put it in his convention speech, “the Republican narrative,” which holds that “all of us who amount to anything are completely self-made,” and the Democrats’ view of everyone and the government “working together to promote growth and broadly shared prosperity. We think ‘We’re all in this together’ is a better philosophy than ‘You’re on your own.’ ”

The larger point of Dionne’s book, however, is that the country rarely works well (civil rights and its purely communitarian demands would be one exception) when one or the other of those strains is out of balance. What is at risk today is what he terms the “Long Consensus,” a 100-year period, he writes, beginning with the 1901 presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, during which “the United States became the most powerful nation on earth, its influence enhanced not only (or even primarily) by its advanced weaponry and the martial courage of its men and women in uniform, but also by its economic might, its democratic norms, its cultural creativity, and a moral and intellectual vibrancy that is the product of our constant struggle to preserve liberty while building and rebuilding community.”

“It seems to me the fight in this election,” he said in the interview, “is a fight between one ticket that stands pretty clearly for individualism — and many parts of the Republican Party for what I call in the book ‘radical individualism’ — versus a party that still honors the old balance. I’m especially upset in the book with conservatives precisely because, in the past, conservatives were very alive to the issue of community.”

One of the people he admires (and a name that surfaced several times in the conversation) is William F. Buckley Jr., founder of the modern conservative movement in the United States. “Some years before he died,” Dionne said, “Buckley wrote a book called Gratitude in which he argued that we all owe something back to the society that had protected us and nurtured us. And I swear that the founder of modern conservatism would probably lose a Republican primary right now if he ran on what he wrote in that book.”

If a political/historical treatise can have a twist at the end, Dionne provides it in the idea that the current standoff will give way to a demographic resolution.

His hope is in the balance — and liberal instincts — found in the millennial generation, defined here as those born 1981 or later.

It is a generation with an increasing number of Latinos in the mix and one that is more comfortable than any before it with differences of gender, race, ethnicity and the whole range of sexual orientations.

It is also a generation that has consistently polled high in its interest in helping others, a “sense of communal obligation,” he writes, “made manifest in their exceptional devotion to service — as volunteers in tutoring programs, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, environmental initiatives and community organizing.”

Dionne said he first became aware of the information being gathered about millennials in the early 1990s, especially of their interest in service. Some cynics say the polls reflect that young people were required in high school and college to do service projects. That may be the case, Dionne said, “but service transforms people. When you’re in contact with people who are not like you or who have been in trouble in a way you haven’t been in trouble, it makes you look at the world differently. I think that’s true of a large number of people in this generation.”

He also believes there is a residual good effect for a generation that’s fought two wars in the last 10 years. “More of them have given service to their country in the military, which also transforms you. … There’s something very different about this generation.”

On the brink of spending two weeks amid the sharp elbows — not to mention the blizzard of tweets and Facebook postings — of modern presidential conventions, how does it feel to bear the mantle of “public philosopher”?

“I first heard that Clinton had said this from a friend who was actually in the audience at the London School of Economics and sent me a text. … I was torn between a deep, yet false, pride, and laughter. Obviously I was touched by it and would love to believe that it’s true, but I hope I have enough self-knowledge,” he said with a laugh, “to have qualms about it.”

Resource: CommunitarianismFinal Synthesis In Hegelian Dialectic – Rense