The Cloward–Piven strategy was an idea put forth by American sociologists in 1966. It outlines a coordinated strategy that on the surface sounds appealing, being that they wanted to help and subsidize the poor in the U.S. However, as with most socialist ideas, it’s ultimate goal was much more sinister. And as we have found out, that goal was not to genuinely help the poor, but it was to collapse the U.S. and implement a form of UBI (Universal basic income) which they called, and I quote; “guaranteed annual income”, i.e., communism.
We can see parallels between this, the current state of the U.S., their economy, and our own financial and political situation here in Australia. Where house prices and inflation are astronomical, making it incredibly difficult not only to buy a house, but also just to make enough money to afford rent.
Both of these problems can be solved by our government simply reducing the amount of migrants coming into the country, which would drop house prices due to less demand, and printing less money, which would reduce inflation due to less money supply. These come with their own problems aswell of course, but it would be the right move, as understood by the vast majority of people, towards a more stable economy and a more financially stable populace.
So then why doesn’t the government do this? why are more social programs, more taxes, and more government control in general like race based voting and race based treaties with non-entity, non-nations being pursued?
Well, take a look at this…
Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote that Cloward and Piven “proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system – by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice – that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy.”
“…Whites – both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class – would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few… would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.”
The aim of the Cloward–Piven strategy was to destabilize the nation financially through social programs, forcing the taxpayer to subsidize the homeless, thus leading to a poorer lower and middle class, which in turn meant more people became homeless. On top of this, the incentives for people to get out of homelessness where not there.
John McWhorter wrote about the Cloward–Piven strategy negatively, stating that;
” (the Cloward–Piven strategy) created generations of black people for whom working for a living is an abstraction”
Where have we seen this before?
Migrants are incentivized to come to the west on mass because they know the government will financially subsidize them. They are paid an income and given free housing. This is exactly the same as Cloward and Piven’s strategy. The end goal? Universal basic income. Where everyone is given the same amount of pay per week regardless of their role in society and how much effort they put into improving themselves and the nation.
This is communism. Where everyone is equal, except those in power. A massive slave state. A new world order.
And the more we look to history the more we can understand the present. Nothing is new under the sun. Even if terminologies have changed.
Alex James.