In the last few years, many have been crying foul when it comes to the Western world’s political and economic actions. A growing number of people around the globe, including political leaders, have been voicing concerns that a “Great Reset” is being crafted, and done so in a way that would make Machiavelli proud.
In the 1960’s, a group of sociologists and political activists designed a scenario through which such a “reset” could be done. Let’s take a look at what is called the Cloward-Piven Strategy.
What is The Cloward-Piven Strategy
The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by Americansociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy aims to utilize “militant anti-poverty groups” to facilitate a “political crisis” by overloading the welfare system via an increase in welfare claims, forcing the creation of a system of guaranteed minimum income and “redistributing income through the federal government”.[1][2][3]
Cloward and Piven’s article is focused on subversively compelling the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of the United States Congress, to “redistribute income” to help the poor. They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare “would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments” that would: “…deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.”[5]
They further wrote:
The ultimate objective of this strategy – to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income – will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.[5] 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.”[6]
Focus on Democrats[edit]
The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party:
“Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition…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.”[7]
- Wikipedia
Do We See Signs of This Strategy in Action
How Does this Affect the Average American
If the Cloward-Piven Strategy were deliberately, or otherwise, employed in the United States, it would likely have significant repercussions on the lives of average Americans. Since the strategy aims to overload the welfare system by encouraging large numbers of people to enroll in government assistance programs, thereby creating financial strain and potentially leading to system collapse, such a strategy might be perfect for a “reset” agenda. This could result in increased taxes to fund social programs, reduced quality of services due to overcrowding and underfunding, and potentially even economic and political instability as government resources are stretched too thin. Additionally, there could be social and political unrest as citizens struggle with the consequences of such a strategy.
Overall, the average American would certainly experience significant financial and social pressures if the Cloward-Piven Strategy were actively pursued, perhaps even devastating ones.
Should We Care, and if So, What Now
Whether we, as individuals, can do anything about the employment, or deployment, of a strategy like that proposed by Cloward-Piven is a matter of varying opinion. There is always voting, writing your congressman, etc. but I suspect that that wouldn’t really amount to much in the way of change. It seems to me that we really have no control over the flow of this particular river and the best that we can hope for is to try to find a semblance of control over our individual journeys to wherever it is that this river is going.
Whether it’s things like prepping, homesteading, joining a time banking community or other mutual aid group, staying well informed about current events or just praying for mercy and guidance, one thing is for certain – those that choose to remain willfully oblivious will likely not fare well in whatever this is that is going on.
So, stay informed, be proactive so that you don’t later have to be reactive, and pray. Wherever it is that this river goes, it is certainly going to be a bumpy ride.