Lv 5
1947 asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago



Posted: October 11, 2009

6:43 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

TEL AVIV – Economic crises can be used to usher socialism into the U.S., argued President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

In his 2004 book "The Second Bill of Rights," Sunstein used the precedent of the Great Depression to point out that historic economic crises "provided the most promising conditions for the emergence of socialism in the U.S."

"With a little nudge or a slight change in emphasis, our culture could have gone, and could still go, in many different directions," wrote Sunstein in his book, which was reviewed by WND.

Last week, WND reported Sunstein wrote in the same book the U.S. should move in the direction of socialism but the country's "white majority" opposes welfare, since such programs largely would benefit minorities, especially blacks and Hispanics.

"The absence of a European-style social welfare state is certainly connected with the widespread perception among the white majority that the relevant programs would disproportionately benefit African Americans (and more recently Hispanics)," wrote Sunstein.

In Sunstein's book, the Obama appointee openly argues for bringing socialism to the U.S. and even lends support to communism.

"During the Cold War, the debate about [social welfare] guarantees took the form of pervasive disagreement between the United States and its communist adversaries. Americans emphasized the importance of civil and political liberties, above all free speech and freedom of religion, while communist nations stressed the right to a job, health care and a social minimum."

Continued Sunstein: "I think this debate was unhelpful; it is most plausible to see the two sets of rights as mutually reinforcing, not antagonistic

Sunstein claims the "socialist movement" did not take hold in the U.S. in part because of a "smaller and weaker political left or lack of enthusiasm for redistributive programs."

He laments, "In a variety of ways, subtle and less subtle, public and private actions have made it most difficult for socialism to have any traction in the United States."

Sunstein wants to spread America's wealth

WND first reported Sunstein penned a 2007 University of Chicago Law School paper in which he debated whether America should pay "justice" to the world by entering into a compensation agreement that would be a net financial loss for the U.S. He argues it is "desirable" to redistribute America's wealth to poorer nations.

A prominent theme throughout Sunstein's 39-page paper, entitled "Climate Change Justice" and reviewed by WND, maintains U.S. wealth should be redistributed to poorer nations. He uses terms such as "distributive justice" several times. The paper was written with fellow attorney Eric A. Posner.

"It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy than otherwise, or to be accomplished more effectively through climate policy than through direct foreign aid," wrote Sunstein.

He posited: "We agree that if the United States does spend a great deal on emissions reductions as part of an international agreement, and if the agreement does give particular help to disadvantaged people, considerations of distributive justice support its action, even if better redistributive mechanisms are imaginable.

"If the United States agrees to participate in a climate change agreement on terms that are not in the nation's interest, but that help the world as a whole, there would be no reason for complaint, certainly if such participation is more helpful to poor nations than conventional foreign-aid alternatives," he wrote.

Sunstein maintains: "If we care about social welfare, we should approve of a situation in which a wealthy nation is willing to engage in a degree of self-sacrifice when the world benefits more than that nation loses."

Proposed 'socialist' bill of rights

In "The Second Bill of Rights," WND also reported, Sunstein proposed a new "bill of rights" in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. Among his mandates:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, acc

13 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    You can't be surprised. Obama in his book said he sought out the Marxist professors and radicals in college. He studied Alinski and said Frank Marshall Davis, the well known American Communist, was his mentor. The complacency of the left is appalling. They believe that he is going to save the U.S. when in fact he wishes for it's demise and is doing everything necessary to destroy our economy. Here he states in an radio interview that "The Constitution is full of negative liberties"


    Youtube thumbnail

    Since his election the attack on American industry and it's economy is unprecedented. The oil companies are evil. Then Wall Street was evil. Then the Banks and Bankers were evil. Then the car companies were evil and now the insurance companies are evil. He intends to take over these industries like he did the banks and car companies.

    His own words are that he "wants to fundamentally change America" Foundation is the root word of fundamentally.

  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    Your question is a bit disjointed, but I understand where you're going with this. Here's the thing: It's happening now and we have no control over it; our current living standards are irrelevant (at the moment). A country doesn't merely become a Marxist model overnight... it is achieved slowly and methodically. What we're seeing now in the government is a prime example of the starting phases. The groundwork was laid decades ago, but it's jetting along at an incredible pace now that the Democrats have the majority. The fact that some of your high school students are pro-communist (idealism taught by your professors no doubt) is the problem. The more we spend on government education, the less informed or ill informed students become. The latest election has only fueled the fires of ignorance.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago


    NO! It's very obvious that every Communist and Socialist cockroach running around in the U.S and around the world is as of right now trying to exploit and cease the moment in trying to turn the American people on to Socialism as the answer to the United States weak economic position as of right now. What people like Bernie Madoff did also didn't help matters either for our Capitalist system.

    I have faith we will get through all of this without Socialism or anything except Capitalism as it has served the U.S well for over 200 years.

    Name me one nation with a "full and true" Socialist system with a population of over 50 million people where Socialism has worked where they didn't resort to Totalitarianism?

  • 1 decade ago

    america has been socialist for over fifty years now , hasn't anyone noticed? there is a point of no return where going back becomes impossible and we are nearly there. COuld any government dismantle social security ? obviously not so it's socialism and more socialism from now on. even the tax system is socialist but americans haven't noticed - the more you earn the more you pay ? that's socialism, when did you get charged more in the supermarket because you earned more? there aren't a list of prices depending on your earnings. so you pay more in your taxes for EXACTLY the same rights and facilities as someone who pays half as much. then of course they give your money away to someone else, socialism!

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The communists have used the unions to promote their agenda. They promise a job and higher pay, bankrupt the company (like GM and the airlines and many others), then they move into the government for takeover and monopoly. We need to kick the unions out of America. They are anti american now

  • 1 decade ago

    The people who seem to WANT communism in our country are the SAME people who are driving around with "Free Tibet" bumper stickers on the backs of their oil-splurping Volkswagens. I don't get it.

  • 1 decade ago

    Err a link to the source be nice right? Also summarizing things isn't a bad thing.

  • Socialism is not Communism. And, this country is not headed in that direction unless you define government that helps corporations and wall street before it helps the people as a communist state for corporations and Wall Street, then I might agree with you.

  • 1 decade ago

    This question is longer than the health care bill.

  • Dok
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I do not.

    For the record, Obama isn't a communist. Nor is he a socialist; he's not even a liberal.

    @Tecolote: Wait, you actually support Chinese oppression of Tibet?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.