29 Mar “Commonism” Replaces Communism New Name, but Same Subversion
Washington, DC – The new buzzwords in vogue include global commons, global village, environmentalism, interconnectiveness and other terms designed to suggest that the earth must be seen as a single unit in need of a global government.
In reality, says Tom DeWeese in the November issue of The DeWeese Report, published by the American Policy Center, “Commonism” is the new name of Communism. “Commonism advances the idea that problems cross national and local boundaries. In that way, natural and political boundaries are conveniently overcome through treaties, legislation and policy statements, all explained as necessary for improvement of the common good.”
DeWeese, president of the Center, a grassroots, activist think tank, issues a warning in a lengthy expose of the new face of Communism. Citing the President’s Council on Sustainable Development as just one example, DeWeese quotes its own statement of purpose that binds together more environmental protection with greater opportunity for the poor and disadvantaged. The program, “mysteriously transforms itself to engage in racial, economic and equality issues.”
The Council and the programs it advocates, says DeWeese, are “nothing more than a methodology to render local or state elected officials incapable of making development and other decisions for their communities and constituencies.”
Reviewing the recent history of the fall of the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall, DeWeese warns that the so-called “death” of Soviet-style Communism “allowed the movement to free itself from its negative baggage. As long as the title ‘Communist’ was not hung around their neck to raise Western fears, the ideas of International Socialism could move forward unhindered.”
The chosen instrument for this is the United Nations whose September Millennium Summit signaled its transformation from “an international organization of sovereign nations to that of a global government.” This is the true face of “Commonism” as the UN seeks to assert control over the “global commons.” Other examples cited include the effort to meld European nations into an organization that supercedes their individual sovereignty.
Citing NAFTA and GATT documents, DeWeese notes that they are “literally indistinguishable from the agenda” set by a series of 1980’s international commissions headed by dedicated Socialists to establish common regulations, common currency, and a common Socialist agenda. The U.S. has agreed to be a party to these economic policies.
Commonism, the New Face of Communism
“The double-speak of Commonism has lulled too many” says DeWeese, but he holds forth the prospect that, just as Soviet-style Communism was defeated, re-emerging as Commonism, so shall this new manifestation. “Commonism’s greatest weakness is that Socialism doesn’t work.”
Calling for a renewed effort to confront the new face of Communism, DeWeese says Americans must fight on four distinct fronts; education, the right to privacy, private property rights, and the protection of our national sovereignty.
“Today the drive to get the United States out of the United Nations is beginning to take hold,” says DeWeese. “End U.S. involvement in the UN and the Socialists will lose their center of power. Stop them on those four fronts and Commonism, too, will find its way to the ash-heap of history.
