How The Elite are Manipulating the Poor to Start a Socialist Revolution

Socialism sound nice on paper. As a result, it is easy to convince uneducated people that socialism is a good idea. The problem is, Socialism doesn’t work on a large scale. On a small scale, socialism works great. Take for instance, the nuclear family: one spouse is the money maker, and the other spouse handles the home management, and the delegation of duties among the children. Everyone is financially cared for by the money maker, and everyone else does their part to care for the other needs of everyone (including the money maker).

But the elite didn’t like this. It didn’t give them enough power, or enough control over resources.

The elite wanted to enslave us all. But nobody wants to be a slave, so they had to trick us.

What is a Slave

Boulanger_Gustave_Clarence_Rudolphe_The_Slave_MarketLet’s define what a slave is so we are all on the same page here. Most of you will say that a slave is the property of another person. Now that is true, but “property” in this case is an abstract thought. Instead of using property, let’s get down to what slavery really means.

A slave is someone who has a master. A slave is chosen by their master. A slave can not change their master under their own free will. The slave does a job for their master, and in return, the master maintains the slave. (the master provides food, shelter, and medical treatment because a broken slave does less work). If the slave is “broken” the master must replace him at a great loss of investment.

Now let’s compare that slave to a lower income worker. A worker has a Boss. A worker is chosen by their boss. A worker can change their boss, but unless they have already been chosen by another boss, they do so at great peril. A worker does a job for their boss, and in return, the boss compensates the worker. (If the worker is lucky, the compensation is high enough that the worker can pay for food, shelter, and medical treatment). If the worker is “broken” the boss will replace him with minimal loss of investment.

When all of your income goes to paying rent, insurance, car payments, and groceries, then you are nothing more then a slave with multiple masters. And the reality is, you don’t even have multiple masters, you just think you do. The same bankers you pay your car payment to, your landlord pays a mortgage to, and your boss pays a small business loan to. That bank owns the insurance company, and both they grocery store, the trucking company that brings the groceries and the farm are that made your food are paying loans to that same bank. It seems we are all slaves to the banks owned by the elites.

But the upper middle class makes enough money to have a little bit of freedom. They own their homes, they own their businesses, they aren’t indebted to the elite. So the elite started a long plan to change the system to a government socialism.

Why socialism? Historically, socialism never hurts the elite, it only makes them stronger. What socialism does, is it takes from the upper middle class to prop up the bottom rungs. Socialism makes everyone, except the elite, a low income worker… a slave. So how do they turn a democracy into a socialist state?

The Start of the Socialist Takeover

We have all heard of the “Red Scare” in the 1950’s. Unfortunately, the Red Scare was much more real then most of us realized. It has since been marginalized by the socialists so that we don’t see how well they really infiltrated our system. 1950’s America was a great society. It had it’s flaws, but overall it was good. The socialists new that to bring down our democracy, they had to bring down our great system. To do this, they went after our flaws, and manipulated them into a new system of change that would look like small improvements that would eventually make things worse, and call for more change. Time after time, the change would make things worse, and call out for more change until eventually we changed so much from what we were that we asked to be changed into what we never wanted to be.

The First Move

W.H._Shumard_family,_circa_1955First, they convinced the people that the old system was oppressive to women. They convinced some that they had no value if they were just a home maker. Now, to be clear, I am not saying a romans place is in the home. Women can be the money maker just as easily as men can. What I am saying is that the “domestic manager” is a valuable position that should be 1 spouses full time job.

In convincing people that a “domestic manager” is a useless job, this drove a huge spike in the amount of people in the job market. As any economist will tell you, a huge supply of workers lowers wages. The effects of this are still felt today in the “wage gap”. Why pay that man 50k per year to do a job that 10 women, who will take 30k per year, just applied for.

This is why jobs like doctor or scientist (that take 8+ years of college education) pay so much higher then job like retail, or fast food (that anyone can do). The more applicants available for a job, the lower the wage.

Now you have both spouses working, and when you combine their incomes, and subtract the extra expenses they pay for more convenient items (because there is no longer someone at home all day to cook, clean, or take care of the kids, so the spouses are now spending more money on prepared meals, cleaning services {or expensive equipment to cut down cleaning time}, and daycare, not to mention a 2nd car etc), the 2 working spouses now have less disposable income then 1 working spouse had before.

Civil_Rights_March_on_Washington,_D.C._(Dr._Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._and_Mathew_Ahmann_in_a_crowd.)_-_NARA_-_542015_-_RestorationThe Civil Rights movement is another place where socialists took something that needed to be done, and subverted it. Any country that claims to be based on democratic principles, and freedom has no place discriminating against large parts of it’s population for any reason. However, many things that happened as a result of the Civil Rights movement could have been done in a better way. For example, the Voting Rights act of 1965 made literacy test for voter registration illegal. Since I do believe that you should have a bit of intelligence before helping make decisions that effect everyone, wouldn’t it have been better to offer free education to illiterate people, and leave the literacy requirement for voter registration?

It has also been noted that many of the laws aimed at helping the black communities of the time inadvertently decimated the black owned small businesses that catered to those communities. This, in turn, sent many black business owners, and workers back to white bosses(masters).

Many other laws were passed under the guise of “Civil Rights” that has helped the elitists draw more power unto themselves like the ability of the Federal Government to sue regular Americans and small businesses.

Fool the Poor & Destroy the Middle Class

The next trick the socialists use to convert a democratic society to socialism is to fool the poor, and destroy the middle class. One of the easiest ways to do this is with the raising of the minimum wage.

I have never been hired at minimum wage, but I have worked at minimum wage. How is that possible? Minimum wage increased to what I had already been making. You see, most people that promote raising minimum wage fail to see that the people who make above minimum wage don’t get a raise when minimum wage goes up. I was once hired at a company for $7.50 an hour when the minimum wage in that state was $7.00. After a year, I went up to $7.75. After another year, I went up to $8.00. A couple months later, minimum wage went up to $8.00. Two years with a company that had hired me at above minimum wage, and I was making minimum wage. The prices of everything else (groceries, fast food, etc…) went up. My pay didn’t. It was like I had a pay cut.

Only 1% of the population makes minimum wage, and they are the only people to “benefit” from an increase in minimum wage. And I say benefit loosely. Minimum wage is always bad, no matter what minimum wage is. When I first started working, minimum wage was $4.35 an hour. I paid $350.00 a month for a 2 bedroom / 2 bath apartment, (I wanted to buy a 3 bedroom / 2 bathroom house with a 2 car garage, but I couldn’t afford it. It cost $30,000), gas was $0.87 a gallon. A gallon of milk was $0.99, a pack of cigarettes was $1.75, a hamburger at McDonalds was $0.29, and 6 tacos from taco bell was $2.99. A lap dance at a strip club was $5.00, and if you went in to a bar at happy hour they had $0.05 drafts (on Wednesdays).

Raising minimum wage is a trick. the 1% of people who make minimum wage are still only making minimum wage, and it causes the prices to go up for everyone else. If you really want to help wages, make a mandatory “cost of living (inflation) +x%” annual pay increase the law.

The next thing you need to do to hurt the middle class is attack their savings through things like the subprime mortgage scandal, and systematic stock market crashes. You can also convince them not to save at all by promoting the need to have the latest expensive tech gadget, new cars every couple years, top of the line clothes, and any number of other things that cause the middle class to spend themselves out of financial independence.

As you systematically destroy the income and savings of the middle class, they slowly fall in with the poor who are already receiving public assistance. And as the majority of Americans now receive public assistance, the less people there are to pay for that assistance. Yet the calls to increase that assistance will just get louder. Eventually this destroys the savings and income of the upper middle class who is now forced to pay for what the elite has stolen from the poor and lower middle class. Soon there will be no more middle class. Just an elite, and the rest of us poor slaves.

The Killing Blow to Democracy

Black_Lives_Matter_Black_Friday_(15902086996)As you continue to destroy the middle class, you need to start convincing the poor that the middle class is out to get them. (you don’t want them joining sides after all). One way to do this is by pushing thing like the “racist cop” narrative. Even though white people are far more likely to be killed by a cop then black people are, every time a black person is killed by a cop, it turns into a “racist cop” story. Even when the facts usually show that the cop was doing his job properly.

Now let’s go back to that “white people are more likely to be killed by cops then black people are” line. I know a lot of you are saying, sure white people are 43% of people killed by police, and black people are 30% but black people are only 12% of the population. That means black people are far more likely to be killed by police then white people. But there is no question that black people have encounters with police officers at a much higher rate. For example, one study on racial profiling found that In Maryland, a study revealed that 70 percent of those stopped and searched on a stretch of I–95 were African American—despite the fact that they represented only 17 percent of drivers on the road.

Now, the higher percentage of black people being stopped by police may be something that needs to be looked into, but the fact remains, taking into account the percentage of incidents with police officer, you are just as likely, if not more so, to be killed if you are white then if you are black.

However, the blatant attempt by the media, and our current administration, to push a division between the black community and the middle class working men of law enforcement by pushing this “racist cop” narrative is directly responsible for things like the sniper attack that left 5 Dallas Police officers dead earlier this week.

In return, the Dallas shooting makes both police, and suburban non black people, more wary… and in some ways more prejudice, against black people. This, and other incidents like it where the black community is instigated into violence by racist narratives that turn out to be false, are creating a growing divide between the black community and the rest of the country that could take generations to heal.

But this is what the socialists want. They want the people to be fighting amongst themselves so we are turning a blind eye to the elites who are robbing all of us blind. The y want the people scared of their neighbors so that we will demand the government do more to keep us safe at the cost of our own freedoms.

Already happening is the call to disarm us. The right to keep and bear arms is the only right we have that really matters, because it is the right that allows us to defend every other right. Without the 2nd amendment, the rest of them are useless.

But when you are trying to take over a country, trying to change the very essence of that country, trying to usurp power from the people and collect it into the hands of the elite, you don’t want the people to be able to fight back.

The socialist plan is to create a place where things are so bad that the people revolt. The people rise up to demand socialism. This is a very dangerous plan when the people are armed. This is why gun control is so important of an issue to the elite. You just can’t let your slaves have guns.

The elite want to make us slaves through socialism. Socialism is the abandonment of individual rights for the “good of society”. However in every case that it has been implemented, it turned into the abandonment of individuals rights for the good of the elite.

  1. replace the word socialist with the oligarchy and you might have a point

  2. ‘Domestic managers’ are also dependent for their livelihood on the man of the house – their master; they do work for their man of the house (ironing his shirts, cleaning his house, cooking his dinner and raising his children), and are chosen by the man of the house. They may leave the man of the house at their peril unless they first find another man of the house.

    Ergo, according to the logic of this article, they are slaves.

    Sufficient jobs are not returning no matter how you shape society. Technological advancements mean that soon all but service jobs in hospitality, health care, aged care and perhaps retail will disappear or be cut to a bare minimum.

    The objective of private companies is not to provide jobs – a common myth – but to maximise profits. Technology is now better able to maximise profits and cut costs for pretty much all industries.

    Society needs to adjust to this and find ways to fairly distribute the gains derived from the increase in productivity through technology, so that no-one falls through the cracks. Isn’t this what human society is for? Who would value a person merely for his or her capacity to help enrich another? What about children, the elderly, the sick or disabled?

    The functions of ‘society’ include:
    – Ensuring the basic needs of its people are met;
    – socialisation of children – i.e. learning that society’s cultural norms;
    – society constitutes an interdependent web that binds all of its people via rights and obligations;
    – exertion of social control – i.e. in the case of violations of the norms (crimes);
    – collective efforts towards the production/provision of goods and services;
    – etc.

    Given that private enterprise is driven by profit only, it would appear naive to rely on it to deliver the cohesion and wellbeing of a whole society. Limited government is needed for this (not the overblown, fascist variety the West is suffocating under at present).


    • It seems a little sexist that you assume a domestic manager is a woman relying on a man. If a woman has a better career, she can be the woman of the house and the domestic manager can be the man.
      That is not slavery but is an example of socialism working correctly (although I can see how socialism can be mistaken for slavery because it is just that when it doesn’t work correctly).
      Sufficient jobs have returned. Unemployment is at the lowest rate in decades in the US, and the ratio of jobs to job seekers is driving up incomes.
      The objective of private companies is to provide a good or service to people while making a profit for the companies owner/investors. The only way a company can be profitable is if it provides a good service or product, and people are willing to buy it. If the consumer decides that the company is not acting appropriately, the consumer can choose to not support the company. This will reduce profits forcing the company to comply with the wants of the consumer to get their profits back. No company can exist without a customer. So in essence, the customer controls the morality of the company.

Leave a reply

The Truth Hunter
Shopping cart