System X = State Capitalism

March 28, 2013

Writer

For the past few weeks Glenn has shifted his focus to an issue he thinks is one of the most important he's ever covered on his program — and he's covered a lot of big issues over the years. The progressive infiltration of the U.S. education system could change the country as you know it, and that's just one part of what Glenn has begun to uncover. Progressives are systematically removing and replacing the free enterprise system.

Last night on TheBlaze TV, Glenn explained how and why schools are data mining, and how the government is in bed with labor and big corporations using that data.

They're creating a system of state capitalism or "System X"

In the 1940's a book called, "The Road We've Traveled," by Stuart Chase — the man who coined the term "The New Deal" — laid out where the country was headed…where we are now. This morning on radio Glenn explained how it's virtually impossible to find an unaltered version of this book, and that people are literally ripping out the pages and replacing them with pages from other books. Why would they do this?

"They are erasing this history because this absolutely tells the entire story of where we are. This says, this book, the whole premise, The Road We're Traveling, this is what we've designed; this is what it's going to look like in the end," Glenn explained.

The book, written right at the end of WWII, talks about a "Managerial Revolution" — basically, technocrats becoming more powerful that the leaders of the government.

"Who is running Europe right now?" Glenn asked. "Are they elected politicians?"

No — it's the EU and the IMF.

"And who is the guy running Italy? A technocrat. He was not elected. And nobody's saying anything. You have unelected technocrats running Europe and nobody's saying anything," Glenn said.

The writer, Stuart Chase, went on to explain:

"The "Managerial Revolution" is just the first part. "The first intelligent attempt to understand what is coming that I have seen," he wrote. "Many more studies will be needed before the mystery is cleared up on what this exactly will look like and what we will call it. But we are going to lay out something called X, which is displacing the system of free enterprise all over the world. If we do not yet know what to call it, we can at least describe its major characteristics. And here is what is replacing free enterprise. And it says "free enterprise into X."
A strong centralized government; an executive arm growing at the expense of the legislative and judicial arms; in some countries power is consolidated into a dictator, issuing decrees. The control of banking, credit, and security exchanges by the government."

Sound like what's going on today?

Glenn continued reading:

"The underwriting of employment by the government — either through armaments or public works. The underwriting of Social Security by the government, old age pensions, mothers pensions, unemployment insurance and the like. The underwriting of food, housing and medical care by the government. The United States is already experimenting with providing these essentials. Other nations are far down this road. The use of deficit spending techniques to finance these under-writings. The annually balanced budget has lost its old‑timey feel. The abandonment of gold in favor of a managed currency. The control of foreign trade by the government with increasing emphasis on bilateral agreements. The control of natural resources and an increasing emphasis on self‑sufficiency. The control of energy sources such as hydroelectric power, coal, petroleum, and natural gas. The control of transportation, railway, highway, airway, waterway. The control of agricultural production. The control of labor organizations. The enlistment of young men and young women in youth corps, devoted to health, discipline, community service, and ideologies consistent with those of the authorities."

The only thing on Stuart's list thats really debatable as having been achieved is "The enlistment of young men and young women in youth corps."

"Everything else is already done," Pat stated.

Glenn quickly reminded Pat and the audience that there already are work corps for the youth. "It's the AmeriCorps."

Glenn continued:

"Heavy taxation with special emphasis on estates, meaning what you leave behind, your will, and incomes of the rich. Not much taking over of properties or industries in the old socialistic sense, but the formula of the future is control without ownership. It's interesting to recall the same formula is used by the management of great corporations in depriving stockholders of power. And finally, the state control of communications and propaganda."

Remember, this was written in the 1940's — the end of WWII — but how much of this is mirroring where the country is today or, at the very least, where it's headed?

"The strong central government, absolutely been done, and we're now getting to the point to where the states have no rights," Glenn explained.

But the danger of this system is how it's tying everything together to control labor, media, education, and banking, all by linking together with big corporations. And it's starting in the schools through data mining, which Glenn explained last night on TV.

Glenn's theory is that big government and big corporations are linking together to achieve their mutual collective goals. Corporations need capital for investments, educated and trained workers, and global markets to be successful. The government needs power to control and plan. When the two join together, they control labor, medical, guns, DHS, banks, education, the media, and food, allowing them to control, limit, train, deceive you, all while building a global marketplace they have control over.

The end result comes close to China, where the state can take kids and train them for certain jobs, has control and oversight over the media, censors the internet, and heavily regulates every aspect of the lives of the people.

Sound crazy? Glenn went on to explain how involved GE and Microsoft are involved in Common Core, currently marching its way into schools across the country.

"I find it interesting that NBC, the arm of this government, is what network? MSNBC. MSNBC was owned by what energy corporation? GE. What does the "MS" in MSNBC stand for? Microsoft. Now, neither GE, nor Microsoft have anything to do with MSNBC anymore, but isn't it fascinating that GE and Microsoft got together, that now they were the ones who started the propaganda machine. And they are the ones that are now behind Common Core," Glenn said.

Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images

I think we can all agree, both on the Left and the Right, that children who have been caught up in illegal immigration is an awful situation. But apparently what no one can agree on is when it matters to them. This past weekend, it suddenly — and even a little magically — began to matter to the Left. Seemingly out of nowhere, they all collectively realized this was a problem and all rushed to blame the Trump administration.

Here's Rachel Maddow yesterday:

Rachel Maddow chokes up and cries on air as she struggles to deliver news that migrant babies and toddlers have been sent to "tender age" shelters pic.twitter.com/O6crm8cvyR
— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) June 20, 2018

I seem to remember getting mocked by the Left for showing emotion on TV, but I'll give her a pass here. This is an emotional situation. But this is what I can't give her a pass on: where the heck was this outrage and emotion back in 2014? Because the same situation going on today — that stuff Maddow and the rest of the Left have only just now woken up to — was going on back in July 2014! And it was arguably worse back then.

I practically begged and pleaded for people to wake up to what was going on. We had to shed light on how our immigration system was being manipulated by people breaking our laws, and they were using kids as pawns to get it done. But unlike the gusto the Left is using now to report this story, let's take a look at what Rachel Maddow thought was more important back in 2014.

On July 1, 2014, Maddow opened her show with a riveting monologue on how President Obama was hosting a World Cup viewing party. That's hard-hitting stuff right there.

On July 2, 2014, Maddow actually acknowledged kids were at the border, but she referenced Health and Human Services only briefly and completely rushed through what was actually happening to these kids. She made a vague statement about a "policy" stating where kids were being taken after their arrival. She also blamed Congress for not acting.

See any difference in reporting there from today? That "policy" she referenced has suddenly become Trump's "new" policy, and it isn't Congress's fault… it's all on the President.

She goes on throughout the week.

On July 7, 2014, her top story was something on the Koch brothers. Immigration was only briefly mentioned at the end of the show. This trend continued all the way through the week. I went to the border on July 19. Did she cover it? Nope. In fact, she didn't mention kids at the border for the rest of the month. NOT AT ALL.

Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not?

Make up your minds. Is this an important issue or not? Do you care about immigrant kids who have been caught in the middle of a broken immigration system or not? Do you even care to fix it, or is this what it looks like — just another phony, addicted-to-outrage political stunt?

UPDATE: Here's how this discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Glenn gives Rachel Maddow the benefit of the doubt

Rachel Maddow broke down in tears live on her MSNBC show over border crisis.

Obama's tribute center in Chicago will cost taxpayers $200 million

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Progressives think the Obamas are a gift to the world. But their gift is apparently more of the metaphorical kind. It doesn't extend to helpful, tangible things like saving taxpayers money. Illinois has approved $224 million to pay for street and transportation upgrades around the planned site of the Obama Presidential Center. The catch is that Illinois taxpayers will have to cover $200 million of that cost. For a presidential museum.

Eight years of multiplying the national debt wasn't enough for Barack Obama. Old fleecing habits die hard. What's another $200 million here and there, especially for something as important as an Obama tribute center?

That's all well and good except Illinois can't even fund its pension system. The state has a $137 billion funding shortfall. That means every person in Illinois owes $11,000 for pensions, and there is no plan to fix the mess. Unless Illinois progressives have discovered a new kind of math, this doesn't really add up. You can't fund pensions, but you're going to figure out a way to milk the public for another $200 million to help cover the cost of a library?

It's hard to imagine who in their right mind would think this will be money well spent. Well, except for maybe Chicago Mayor and former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel who said, "The state's… investment in infrastructure improvements near the Obama Center on the South Side of Chicago is money well spent."

Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

The spending has already been signed into law, even though the Obama library has not received construction approval yet. Part of the holdup is that the proposed site is on public land in historic Jackson Park. That doesn't seem very progressive of the Obamas, but, you know, for certain presidents, you go above and beyond. It's just what you do. Some presidential overreach lasts longer than others.

Here's the thing about taxing the peasants so the king can build a fancy monument to himself – it's wrong. And completely unnecessary. The Obamas have the richest friends on the planet who could fund this project in their sleep. If the world simply must have a tricked-out Obama museum, then let private citizens take out their wallets voluntarily.

As the Mercury Museum proved this weekend, it is possible to build an exhibit with amazing artifacts that attracts a ton of visitors – and it cost taxpayers approximately zero dollars.

'The fool builds walls': China blasts Trump over tariffs

NICOLAS ASFOURI/AFP/Getty Images

I can picture it now: Thousands of years ago, Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor of China, standing before hordes of his followers, in the Qin Dynasty, with a bright red bamboo hat on, and chanting, "Build that wall!"

It took a couple centuries to build the thing, but it got built. And it has been carefully maintained over the last 2,000 years, but, today, the Great Wall of China is so massive that astronauts can see it during good weather conditions from the lower part of low Earth orbit. The wall boasts over 3,000 miles of towers and brick embankments, with over 1,200 miles of natural defensive barriers. It's worth mentioning that the Chinese government is also exceptionally good at imposing digital walls, so much so that China ranks worst in the world for internet freedom.

So it's a little strange to hear an editorial run by a major news network in China criticized President Trump for his proposal to build a large wall along the southern border of America.

"Following the path of expanding and opening up is China's best response to the trade dispute between China and the United States, and is also the responsibility that major countries should have to the world," the author wrote. "The wise man builds bridges, the fool builds walls."

Similarly, the Pope told reporters in 2016, "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel."

Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

If you've been to the Vatican, you know that it is surrounded by enormous walls. The same goes for all the celebrities who live in heavily walled compounds—a safety measure—but who have also vehemently criticized President Trump's plans to build a wall.

You know the adage: "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones at other people's glass houses." Perhaps the phrase needs an update: Don't throw stones at people who want to build walls when you live in place surrounded by walls.

Pope Francis compares abortion for birth defects to Nazi eugenics

TIZIANA FABI/AFP/Getty Images

An immaculate Nazi doctor hovers over newborn. He probes and sneers at it. "Take it away," he says. This is the very real process that Nazi doctors undertook during the era of Nazi Germany: Nazi eugenics, the studious, sterile search to find children who would define a pure breed for the German lineage. The Übermensch.

During a speech to a delegation of Italy's Family Association in Rome on Saturday, Pope Francis referred to this cruel Nazi practice, which he used as a comparison to the increasingly popular process throughout Europe of "ending" birth defects, by offering abortions to women who have babies with chromosomal defects.

Here are two passages from the Pope's remarks:

I have heard that it's fashionable, or at least usual, that when in the first months of pregnancy they do studies to see if the child is healthy or has something, the first offer is: let's send it away.

And:

I say this with pain. In the last century the whole world was scandalized about what the Nazis did to purify the race. Today we do the same, but now with white gloves.

When CNN got the quote, and it shocked them so much that they had to verify the quote with the Vatican—in other words, it didn't fit the usual narrative.

It didn't fit the usual narrative.

The Pope also addressed claims that he has dedicated himself to LGBTQ causes:

Today, it is hard to say this, we speak of "diversified" families: different types of families. It is true that the word "family" is an analogical word, because we speak of the "family" of stars, family" of trees, "family" of animals ... it is an analogical word. But the human family in the image of God, man and woman, is the only one. It is the only one. A man and woman can be non-believers: but if they love each other and unite in marriage, they are in the image of God even if they don't believe.

The media have largely seen Pope Francis as the cool Pope, as the Obama of Catholicism. It'll be interesting to see how abruptly and severely that perspective changes.

Glenn's Show Prep