G. Mathews: Communist principles

Earlier this month, I read with amusement Chellie Pingree’s statement that “she is not a communist, but a very proud progressive."

As Rep. Allen West, R-Florida, recently alluded, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and votes like a duck . . . guess what?

Let's see if she agrees with these communist principles:

— Redistribution of wealth from the haves to the have-nots;

— Infiltrate the press (have your rich husband buy a newspaper);

— Use the term "social justice" to institute class warfare;

— Provide American aid to all countries, even those who advocate your destruction;

— Discredit America’s Founding Fathers as a bunch of white, rich, slave owners;

— Ignore and circumvent the Constitution (32 unelected czars who set policy);

— Promote unrest and anarchy (Occupy Wall Street);

— Ignore and weaken the Constitution (abuse the courts and legislators);

— Criticize the family and religion;

— Create a ruling class that is free from the will of the people (bureaucrats) to govern; and

— Use the public education system to teach that capitalism is wrong and socialism is right.

Does Pingree share any of those communist goals, or is she a "horse of a different color"?

Does a "very proud progressive" and a "communist" have different goals?

George Mathews, Auburn

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



 's picture

Talk about strawmen and irrational idiocy

Who says any of those so-called principles are "communist" principles. Most are just right-wing slogans without any objective reality at all. The list of things wrong with this list could go on for years. But just a few.

" Use the public education system to teach that capitalism is wrong and socialism is right." Maine's public school goals were initially written by the business community and the whole process was lead if I remember by Peter Geiger. Those goals contains nothing about American labor; nothing about the crimes committed by capitalism, nothing about about the unconstitutional suppression of socialist groups or movements. So please explain what part of the curriculm teaches that capitalism is wrong or socialism is right. We know that unfetterred capitalism is a criminal conspiracy; but that doesn't make regulated capitalist a crime any more than the Mafia makes K-Mart a crime.

" Create a ruling class that is free from the will of the people (bureaucrats) to govern". I didn't know that the people were the bureaucrats. But on the assumption George really intended to write that the "ruling class" were the bureaucrats; where's your evidence of anything. We have watched the bureaucrats and elected officals kow towing to America's real ruling class - the 1% who have disembowelled necessary financial regulations which would have prevented their looting the Federal Treasury as they did in 2008-2009. We have seen their budget (the Ryan Budget) that again transfers $4.6 trillion from the have nots to the haves over 10 years pass the house. Delusional if anyone thinks the bureacrats govern this nation. Hell, they (the bureacrats) don't even write their own regulator safety reports; the corporations do and enviromental disasters quickly follow as they did in the Gulf of Mexico. .

RONALD RIML's picture

George Mathews - "Unelected 'Czars?"

And who elected Carl Rove, Scooter Libby, Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Condoleezaa Rice, and all the other completely inept Bush 'Advisors' who got us Azz Deep in Iraq based upon tales of lies, imagination, deception and fraud???

They were more like the Bush Beanie Babies that burst out on the scene - caused folks to waste what will be Trillions of $$$ on absolutely nothing - then caused sorrow and heartbreak with shattered dreams.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

So you should agree with my

So you should agree with my assertion that smaller government is better government since the destruction is caused by both major parties?

RONALD RIML's picture

The destruction by the Bush Administration

The destruction by the Bush Administration

far exceeds any alleged destruction by the Obama.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Don't recall America's credit

Don't recall America's credit rating being dropped below AAA under GWB, do you?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Ronald, At some point that


At some point that assessment comes down to options. Perhaps we should agree there is destruction from both major parties, and work on minimizing the government’s ability to cause such destruction, like shrink the size and scope of government.

BTW, where is you companion, Dan Breton?

Zack Lenhert's picture

Mark, If your interested in

If your interested in shrinking the size of the government perhaps you should consider our current POTUS...

"How many GOVERNMENT jobs have been lost or gained since Obama was inaugurated?

108,000 government jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the time Obama took office until the "trough" of the recession in early 2010.  That's a decrease of  .47%  (about half of a percent). 

Another 477,000 government jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the "trough" of the recession until now, March 2012.  That's a decrease of 2.12%.

In total, 579,000 government jobs (in seasonally adjusted numbers) were LOST from the time Obama took office until now, March 2012.  That's a decrease of 2.56%. 

We have experienced decreases in the number of government jobs in 18 out of the last 22 months, starting in June 2010, when the layoff of 2010 Census workers began. " Molly's middle America

Think about it before you vote for Bush 2.0 in Mitt Romney

RONALD RIML's picture

You oversimplify the issue.

The size and scope of government is immaterial compared to the governed's lack of will to institute the sweeping changes required to make this a Government of the People and not the Corporations.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Hopefully, the governed will

Hopefully, the governed will find the will to institute the sweeping changes required to make this a government of the people. Electing us a new president and giving obama free access to the late night show circuit would be a great start.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Ronald, I’m still intrigued


I’m still intrigued with your belief that government is the solution, especially when we repeatedly see political favors come out of Washington form both major parties at the taxpayers’ expense.

Corporations are not greed, government is not greedy, but humans are greedy. How can we expect different behavior from humans depending on their affiliation with corporations or government?

I would assert that the size of government does matter since like moths are attracted to flame; greedy people are attached to where the money is distributed
How do you come to your conclusion?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

That will ever happen. There

That will ever happen. There is just as much greed in government as in private corporations.

The better alternative is to minimize federal government’s impact. Perhaps state and local government is a better laboratory for your point of view since you have better accountability at that level.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Chellie Pingree is no more a

Chellie Pingree is no more a communist than Veritas or the Pirate.
But, she is a flaming liberal (progressive) and that is not against the law.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Less government is better!

Less government is better!

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

'That'll teach them women to

'That'll teach them women to wanna vote!!", bellowed the chauvinist parrot.
Actually, that was probably family weekend at Camp Suxalot.

RONALD RIML's picture

Wrong Camp

That was Camp Suxaliddle

Suxalot was for People of Color......

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Not counting the guy bending

Not counting the guy bending over, did the 3rd guy from the left and the sixth guy from the right now that.?



The words communist and socialist are so misused by the right-wing that they have lost their meaning. Anyone who believes in community is now labeled as such. This country, and especially here in New England, has had a long history of community enterprises. In fact everything we have accomplished from the electrical grid to roads to industry to winning WWII was done by collective enterprise through taxation. Starting with the Mayflower Compact and going through the American Revolution to the Civil War people in this country have pooled their resources in towns, states and nationally to better their communities. To compare that with Marxism is just plain stupid. The problem these days is the redistribution of wealth from the poor and middle classes to the wealthy. Take another look at the statistics. As for manipulating the media. Maine Media pales in comparison with Murdoch and Clear Channel. And as for disrespecting religion, it is hard to beat your beloved Ayn Rand who not only ridiculed religion but claimed there was no such thing as a moral code. For creating a ruling class free of the will of the people, it is hard to beat the latest Supreme court ruling turning our elections into billionaire contests. Social justice is part and parcel of democracy. Otherwise we might as well have kept the king.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

A clear line between

A clear line between communism or socialist only exist in textbooks. In real life, it is a sliding scale of gray. There are some things, such as road and basic education and sanitation, for which communities pool recourse to provide with pretty much 100% agreement.

In between the ostensible benefits to the community, such as those mentioned about, and the classical textbook definition of communism or socialism are many shades of gray. That is where we are today in the US, and it is propagated under the guise of “good for the community”.

There is a clear point at which your version of good and my version of good depart. It is at that point people start to lose freedoms.

For example, we could say that a given diet and exercise program is good for the community, so we require all to participate. While it may be good for the community, we have taken away freedoms. At what point do we say enough is enough?

Lastly, the best chance of having a ruling class free of influence is to make it as small as possible. I find broad agreement that bigger government is more susceptible to graft and corruption, but yet people immediately turn to government looking for solutions, such as you, that is perplexing.

RONALD RIML's picture

People turn to Govt

People turn to Govt for 'solutions' as Govt most effectively coerces behavior.

Greed is a great motivator - but Bernie Madoff didn't stop swindling folks out of remorse.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Ronald, So please tell me how

So please tell me how the government (i.e. SEC) protected these investors? By the way, was it not greed from both parties that motivated them? Where not these people motivated with promises of above average returns?

The government was not effective in protecting these investors. They only prosecuted after the fact, so all that money wasted on preventing this behavior failed. Perhaps as the SEC were surfing pornography, yet another example of government being part of the problem. Perhaps people let down their guard thinking the government will watch out for them, yet another example of an idiot.


The good of the community

I don't believe there has ever been 100% agreement on anything that has ever occurred politically in this country. That would include the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as well as every war we have ever fought in. The system is written to provide for majority rule and minority dissent. If the majority is wrong in their assessment of what is good for the community then the minority will have the opportunity convince them to change their minds and to become the majority at the polls. No one will get their way all the time. If you hate having your tax money going to welfare , I hate having mine going for oil wars and corporate subsidies. The fact that we can discuss it and vote on it means that at least part of the time we have a chance to change things and even though there is always the sacrifice of some freedoms the other way is tyranny. You cannot live in a society without sacrificing some freedoms unless you are a tantrum throwing toddler. Adults who do whatever they please ignoring the rights and the safety of others end up in jail. The alternative is to live alone in an ice cave in Antartica. You could have all the freedom in the world there.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Claire, Freedom does not mean

Freedom does not mean you can injure others. In a similar context, freedom does mean you are free to injure yourself, and doing so does not mean others have to pay for your mistakes.
“The alternative
is to live alone in an ice cave in Antartica. You could have all the freedom
in the world there.”

Again you are presenting a false dichotomy. The decision for what is best for a community is best determined by the community in which you reside (i.e. state or local government) rather than a centralized government. Citizens can then be free to pursue those communities that best represent their values, which is a far cry then living in an ice cave.

The best ideas will win public acceptance, and transparency will allow these best ides to propagate from community to community (i.e. state-to-sate). This is in contrast to a centralized government saying what is best for everyone. If not given the freedom to explore, experiment, and measure results from ideas, how do we know what the centralized government prescribes is best?

That is not to say there is not a role for centralized government, but it should not be the dominate decision maker.

For example, the majority in Maine wish to pursue a progressive social agenda that I don’t agree with, I can pick up my belongings and move to a state that is more in line with my values.

Doesn’t that better model the constitution (i.e. pursue of happiness) than forcing the minority to live under tyranny of the majority? This applies to a plurality of topics from same sex marriage, healthcare, welfare, etc...


the community

I agree with you that community decisions made at a local level are way more palatable and much more likely to please a greater number of citizens. I think if you look at it closely most federal programs begin as state and local programs. Public schools, libraries, and the latest health care law all began in a state and worked well enough to be adapted at the national level. They were adapted nationally only because the problems they dealt with were national in scope. There are some things that towns and states are just not able to do alone. Take the interstate highway system, the air travel corridors, national defense, desegregation, protection of civil and employee rights, water and electrical projects, and lately disaster relief. Individual states could not do it and private enterprise would not take the risk. I heard this week about a private company that is in the business of space travel. They are sending a space ship to dock at the space station this year. Apparently there are other companies getting involved with this. I believe this would not have happened if we had not had a national space program first. The same goes for the auto industry who needed roads, the air and train industry who needed aiports and rails and the silicon valley industries and Las Vegas which needed the water and electricity provided by the dams out West. No individual state or town or private company could have accomplished this. It's true the federal government leaves a lot to be desired but it is still the best system around to get things done. Whatever is wrong can and will be fixed and more problems will also arise but I'm not seeing an alternative source of power that can get things done. And if we want to play an important role in the future we need to be able to get things done and to speak with a national voice..

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

We've just elected one. But,

We've just elected one. But, he is a benevolent King.

RONALD RIML's picture

He's the....

He's the 'Mouth that Roared!'

RONALD RIML's picture

Who declared War????

And just who was it that started this "Class Warfare, George?"

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Don’t you think it is

Don’t you think it is disingenuous to hold up a few bad seeds and imply anyone who earns money from providing goods and services to others are all dishonest?

RONALD RIML's picture

Don't you think it's amazing what graphics

Don't you think it's amazing what graphics appear when one googles "Robber Barons"

Try it for yourself.....

Robber Baron Images

MARK GRAVEL's picture

“Robbing you idiots is like

“Robbing you idiots is like shooting fish in a barrel?”

Would not be true if we had no idiots? How many idiots wastes dollars on iPhones , iPads, snowmobiles, RVs, ...., rather than save and invest. Why should I be responsible for these idiots? We cannot have one without the other.

“Thanks for bailing us out you peasants.” - That was our trustful government that you put so much faith in to provide single payer healthcare. Perhaps you know why I’m so skeptical about governments’ ability to execute. My government does not have my best intrest in mind. Thinking so, makes me an idiot ripe for the picking.

I’ll reserve my comment about the guy in the back row who resembles a younger Ronald proclaiming he is not wearing any pants.

I think where you and I differ in opinion the most is that you look to government for a solution, while I think government is part of the problem. If it were not for the government, we would not have corporate bailouts and many corpoarate subsidies. If business cannot stand on its own two feet, then it should close its doors; this also applies to auto manufactures as well.

RONALD RIML's picture

Look at the solutions Corporate America has provided.

Bain Capital.


Picking Bones Dry.

No wonder the bulk of my rare book sales are outside of the U.S.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Is it not the government, the

Is it not the government, the same institution you look to for salvation, that enables outsourcing?

Again, this is another example where government is part of the problem. I still wonder why you continue look at government with faithful eyes.

RONALD RIML's picture

Enables, or Allows???

You whine like a Baby every time Govt regulates anything.

If it weren't to regulate something - you'd whine that it was enabling it.... God, do you have permanent PMS????


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...