One thing have I desired of the LORD, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life (Psalm 27:4)                 Bayith Ministries

Bayith Home  |  Political Cultural and Social Issues  |  Political Correctness: Index of Topics
 

Political Correctness
Cultural Marxism's "Long March Through The Institutions" of Western Civilisation

"I saw the revolutionary destruction of Society as the one and only solution.
A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values
and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries"

[George Lukacs, The Frankfurt School]

"We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks"
[Willi Munzenberg, The Frankfurt School]

Marxism, Communism, Socialism,
Fabian Socialism, National Socialism,
Corporate Socialism, Collectivism,
Fascism, The Third Way

Quotations and Comments

Marxism   |   Communism   |   Socialism   |   Corporate Socialism/Capitalism and Collectivism

National Socialism (Nazism)   |   Fascism   |   Tyranny or Freedom   |   The Real Right-Left Paradigm   |   Identity Politics  

The Frankfurt School   |   Programmes of Treason   |   Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Etc: Articles

See also: Cultural Marxism: Quotes and Comments   |   PC: Index of Articles   |   PC: Index of Quotes and Comments

 


 

Marxism


"Marx defined society in strictly economic terms springing from private or public ownership of the means of production. Derivative from that was class war between the haves and have-nots in a capitalist country, where greedy fat cats own the means of production and the workers starve. That gibberish was nonsensical even at the time it was put forth, in the midst of the Industrial Revolution. Repeating it these days, which most people do, it's frankly idiotic"
[source].


"Marxism is based on a purely materialistic view of man, which doesn't make sense even in a purely secular society. Man, even post-Christian man, has aspirations produced not only by his stomach, but also by other parts of his body, such as head, heart, and well, the other one. Homo is indeed sapiens, not economicus.  Hence freedom - however defined - or lack thereof is a more telling feature of a country than who owns the factories. Whether or not a citizen can read whatever he wants, pray to God in any way he desires or say anything that comes to mind without fear of prosecution says more about society than the size of the public sector, although the two are usually linked"
[source].


"Karl Marx: Never ran a company, never held political office, never oversaw any accounts, never even held a job - any job. Supported throughout his life by his friend Friedrich Engels, the son of a wealthy factory owner. Considered by many to be the greatest social, political, and economic philosopher of all time. All applications of his theories have ended in failure"
[quoted at source].


"The sheer fatuousness of Marx's mantra [from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs] is breathtaking. Who decides what an individual's ability is, and what his needs are? Dictators such as Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, to name just a few of the humanitarian totalitarians that ran amok in the 20th century? The fact that there are supposedly educated people, even now, promoting Marx as 'still having something to say to us' (Jeremy Corbyn quote) is enough to make one shudder. There were pro-soviet academic fools in the 1930s (the ones who weren't full-time spies founded the BBC), and the leftover Marx fanboys of today are twice as objectionable for not having learned the harsh lessons of history"
[comment at source].


"Marxism in a free society is like a cancer. It grows and spreads and infiltrates every facet of society, always demanding more taxes to provide universal health care, a living wage, adequate housing, education and other entitlements, until eventually, there are no more taxes to take"
[source].

 

Communism


"All three - fascists, communists, and socialists - occupy the same left wing of the political spectrum. All are rooted in Marxism to varying degrees. So what's the difference? Communism is pure socialism founded on the principle that the government is invested with absolute power - economic, military, social. The government owns all means of production and distribution; all citizens are wards of the state and work for the government in whatever capacity the government deems suitable. The government decides where people will live, how much they will earn, and what they may have for their personal needs. The government controls family life, education, society, and even religion. Communism id international in scope and design; there are to be no borders except as they may exist between socialist states existing in a common union such as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics once did"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), pp.20-21].


"What is Communism?  Red Russia holds too much which is detestable... I am not ready for a creed which does not care how much it destroys the liberty and security of daily life, which uses deliberately the weapons of persecution, destruction, and international strife. How can I admire a policy which finds a characteristic expression in spending millions to suborn spies in every family and group at home, and to stir up trouble abroad? How can I accept a doctrine which sets up as its bible, above and beyond criticism, an obsolete economic textbook which I know to be not only scientifically erroneous but without interest or application for the modern world? How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts a boorish proletariat above the bourgeois and the intelligentsia who, with whatever faults, are the quality in life and surely carry the seeds of human advancement? Even if we need a religion, how can we find it in the turbid rubbish of the Red bookshops? It is hard for an educated, decent, intelligent son of Western Europe to find his ideals here, unless he has first suffered some strange and horrid process of conversion which has changed all his values. In Western industrial conditions the tactics of Red Revolution would throw the whole population into a pit of poverty and death"
[J. M. Keynes].


"Understand then all of you, especially the young, that to want to impose an imaginary state of government on others by violence is not only a vulgar superstition, but even a criminal work. Understand that this work, far from assuming the well-being of humanity is only a lie, a more or less unconscious hypocrisy, camouflaging the lowest passions we posses"
[Leo Tolstoy, The Law of Love and the Law of Violence, (1917)].


"The phrase that jumped out at me from [Daniel Cooper's] letter was 'in Russia the working class took power'. So the idea that the armed coup led by Lenin which led to a bloody Civil War, the establishment of the USSR, and the dictatorship of Stalin was 'the working class' taking power, still exists. I was astonished, has this student never heard of the Cheka, the Gulags, the Berlin Wall. It's like reading the sort of left wing drivel that I thought had died out after the invasion of Czechoslovakia"  /  "Perhaps we should have a Day of Remembrance for all those millions exterminated  in the twentieth century by communist regimes, armies and guerillas? The millions shot against walls, hanged in prisons after show trials or no trials, sent to gulags, shot trying to climb out East Berlin, slaughtered in the Chinese civil was and the Cultural Revolution, left to starve by dogmatists, massacred in their millions by Pol Pot - how about a wreath for them? Then maybe Daniel Cooper would turn up. Whoops - don't forget to include the homosexuals shot by Che Guevara, they were also victims of communist fervour"
[comments at source].


"From the beginning, [Nelson Mandela's] dream was of a unitary South African dominated by black voters supporting a leftist political party, with a thin crust of whites to fund it and keep it going. South Africa's decline into criminality and chaos is simply these ideas playing out to their logical conclusion"
[Gregory Hood, source].


"[Nelson] Mandela had the luxury of living to an old age and dying of natural causes, the victims of the terrorist acts at the hands of the ANC were not given such privilege. ... Yes Mandela was fighting against apartheid but other movements had used peaceful methods. Ghandi fought by exclusively peaceful means using publicity and awareness, whereas Mandela chose to endorse terrorism"
[source].

 

Socialism


Definition of Capitalism:
  "Economic system based on free markets and the rule of law with legal protections for private ownership"
[quoted at source].

Definition of Socialism:  "Economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and state control of the means of production as well as political theories and movements associated with them" [quoted at source].


"All three - fascists, communists, and socialists - occupy the same left wing of the political spectrum. All are rooted in Marxism to varying degrees. So what's the difference? ... Socialism differs from communism only in that it is not necessarily international. Socialism may be the economic, social, and military system of individual nations. Otherwise, under socialism, like under communism, the government owns all means of production and distribution; all citizens are awards of the state and work for the government in whatever capacity the government deems suitable. The government decides where people will live, how much they will earn, and what they may have for their personal needs. The government controls family life, education, and virtually all aspects of society"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), pp.20-21].


"The antonym of socialism isn't capitalism. It's freedom - or liberty, to be more precise. Socialism, whether democratic, national or international, is defined not by the economy but by the primacy of the state over the individual. That's its immobile hub, and everything else, including the economy, spins around it. Hence socialism entails a drastic diminution of civil liberties and individual freedom - how drastic depends on the type of socialism and its success in putting its foot down. But doing so is its innate desideratum, which is why 'democratic socialism' is another oxymoron"
[source].


"[F]ar from socialism being the answer to all our problems, it is in fact often the cause. Wonderful and worthy as socialist ideas and political correctness may sound, they encourage dependency, they kill free spirit and enterprise, they hide or reverse truth"
[source].


"You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it"
[Adrian Rogers].


"Socialism makes the individual the slave of the state - capitalism frees them"
[source].


"I have never understood why it is 'greed' to want to keep the money you've earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else's money"
[Thomas Sowell, quoted at source].


"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"
[Margaret Thatcher].


"Socialism intervenes between the children and the parents, claiming to support them, protect them, and educate them for its own ampler purposes. Socialism, in fact, is the State family. The old family of the private individual must vanish before it, just as the old water works of private enterprise, or the old gas company. They are incompatible with it"
[George Bernard Shaw].


"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it"
[Thomas Sowell, quoted at source].


"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy"
[Winston Spencer Churchill].


"Socialism will continue to triumph for as long as totalitarian economism does"
[source].


"[W]hy is it that the left seem always to to be treated as occupying the moral high ground? People should be constantly reminded that this high ground is built from a mountain of corpses" 
[comment at source].


"The left have purloined and perverted the moral tenets of Christianity, for example in replacing charity with redistribution. In fact, socialism is driven by hatred and envy, not love. Everything else is a collection of devious simulacra acting as a smoke screen to hide the wicked core. Alas, the English have lost the ability to debunk false philosophies, replacing it with piecemeal debates about details. Even our conservative pundits balk at describing Corbyn as evil and explaining why. They may talk about, say, his economic ideas as disastrous in practical terms, but not as morally wicked and philosophically cannibalistic. This could spring from English pragmatism and distrust of generalities, which certainly has its place - but not at the cost of compromising the underlying philosophy, or even not having one in the first place"
[author's reply to comment (above) at source].

 

Corporate Socialism/Capitalism, Communitarianism, Collectivism


"Big Business is in no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows the more it approximates Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism"
[H.G. Wells, (1920)].


"Communitarianism is a collectivist philosophy that explicitly rejects individualism. It does not merely relegate individualism to a subordinate position, but is openly hostile to it. It is an ideology of 'civic society' which is nothing less than one version of Post-Marxist collectivism which wants privileges for certain wealthy and influential organised groups, and in consequence, a renewed feudalising of society"
[Vaclav Klaus, President Czech Republic, 2003-2013].


"The true goal of the left is to decimate Christianity; they intend to do this by any means, even if the price is Sharia law. Socialism always starts out with noble intentions but ends in tyranny. Collectivism = Communism/Socialism = Totalitarianism (as delineated by Sartre to Marx to Mao to Stalin right on up to Obama). By definition, collectivism degrades the status of the individual and places salvation as an exclusive phenomenon of collective humanity, with the individual having zero status. This is why the collective left is perfectly willing to accept as moral the cold blooded murder of hundreds of millions of individuals under Communist dictators... not to mention the cold blooded murder of the unborn in holocaustic proportion. Collectivism/Socialism decimates the whole concept of a personal relationship with Almighty God; it absolves personal responsibility and degrades the individual to a simply algorithmic sub-process in the overall scheme. Collectivism (Socialism) is indeed the antithesis of Christianity"
[comment at source].

 

National Socialism (Nazism)


"The only doctrine where communism and National Socialism disagreed was on ownership of the means of production: communists felt that 'the people' (newspeak for government) should have ownership; Nazis left ownership in private hands but controlled production. The street fighting between communist and Nazi should not be mistaken for 'opposition'. This was not a battle of opposing views, it was sibling rivalry for the same audience: lower middle class and upper working class Germany"
[source].


"Many books have been written about the differences and similarities between the Bolsheviks and the Nazis. Yet most of them overlook the most important feature of fascism, clearly visible in both regimes. This is understandable, for the authors tend to analyse the political ends pursued by fascists and the means of achieving such ends. Yet the essence of fascism isn't political. It's ontological. Neither the Nazis nor the Soviets wanted to create a new political system or a new world order. They wanted to create the new man. Both were teleological materialists with an occult dimension who accepted unequivocally the false notion of evolutionary progress. Both believed that state action could accelerate the evolution, directing it towards creating an Olympus of demigods. Within that paragraph you can glean a definition of fascism that's both broader and more precise than the one based on politics. Both the Nazis and the Soviets realised this, which is why they stated that their explicit desiderata, German nationalism and Soviet dictatorship of the proletariat, were not the destinations but the vehicles. Once the destinations were reached, the vehicles would be tossed away"
[source].


"Nazism is ... a National Socialist ideology ... based on purity of Nordic blood and Germanic supremacy. It is not, as many falsely believe, an ideology of white supremacy, but Aryan supremacy. The Nazis claimed supremacy over all non-Aryan races including non-Nordic white races, especially the Slavic races"
[source].


"Nazism is an abbreviation for Nationalist Socialist German Workers' Party and they knew exactly what they were. They weren't some kind of right-wing democratic capitalists trying to fool people into believing they were socialists, and their ideology is firmly rooted in Marxist doctrine"
[source].


"One cannot understand either Nazism or Fascism without understanding Marxism along with how and why it evolved during the twentieth century"
[source].


"Core to Marxism is for the socialist state to either own or control the means of production. Hitler's Nazis controlled all means of production via the Reich Ministry of Economic who specified quota, distribution, wages, prices, and so on"
[source].


"Nazism is a collectivist ideology with the individual existing only to serve the state"
[source].


"Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao - and other socialist dictators such as Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot - are all red emperors who wear the same blood-soaked robes. All share the same socialist beliefs rooted in the ideology of Karl Marx and far from being right-wing ideologies, both Fascism and Nazism are socialist ideologies and belong firmly on the left slightly to the right of communism"
[source].


"Neither [Nazism nor Fascism] are right-wing ideologies because they reject democracy, free market economies and individualism"
[source].


"Looking at the flag of Nazi Germany reveals why Nazism is rooted in Marxism. The predominant red symbolizes socialism, just as it does on the flags of the mass murdering socialist dystopias of the USSR and the People's Republic of China. The white symbolizes the purity of the German nation and the swastika symbolizes the struggle for Aryan victory over world Jewry"
[source].


"According to the best academic estimates, Communism killed between 80 and 100 million people in the 20th century. Hitler only killed fewer because he was stopped in history's most violent war. And, as I see the history of oppression between the great and terrible psychopathic totalitarian systems, the Nazi holocaust was the worst and most degraded single crime of the modern era, while Communism was the greatest criminal system"
[source].

 

Fascism

Definition of Fascism "All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State" [Benito Mussolini].


"The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the State, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the State is absolute, individuals and groups relative"
[Benito Mussolini, quoted at source].


"Many books have been written about the differences and similarities between the Bolsheviks and the Nazis. Yet most of them overlook the most important feature of fascism, clearly visible in both regimes. This is understandable, for the authors tend to analyse the political ends pursued by fascists and the means of achieving such ends. Yet the essence of fascism isn't political. It's ontological. Neither the Nazis nor the Soviets wanted to create a new political system or a new world order. They wanted to create the new man. Both were teleological materialists with an occult dimension who accepted unequivocally the false notion of evolutionary progress. Both believed that state action could accelerate the evolution, directing it towards creating an Olympus of demigods. Within that paragraph you can glean a definition of fascism that's both broader and more precise than the one based on politics. Both the Nazis and the Soviets realised this, which is why they stated that their explicit desiderata, German nationalism and Soviet dictatorship of the proletariat, were not the destinations but the vehicles. Once the destinations were reached, the vehicles would be tossed away"
[source].


"It was the struggle between the Nazis and the Communist Party in Germany that established the false impression that fascism is a right-wing extreme political element in opposition to the left-wing communists. In the middle, ostensibly, are the socialists. All three - fascists, communists, and socialists - occupy the same left wing of the political spectrum. All are rooted in Marxism to varying degrees. So what's the difference? ... Fascism differs from socialism only in that the government does not own all means of production and distribution of goods and services. Rather, it controls all these through draconian bureaucratic regulations. The government tells people how they are to conduct their businesses - who may own businesses, to whom they must sell, what they may and/or may not sell, what the consequences are if they don't do business as required by the government, etc"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), pp.20-21].


"After seeing the European working class almost annihilate each other [during The Great War, Mussolini] realised international socialism would never work, mainly because he knew Marx's claim of an 'international working class' identity was mere fiction. Mussolini knew working class people identified themselves by nationality. So he asserted that socialism could only work within the framework of the nation state. His theories are an evolution of Marxism, taking socialism from an international to a national concept"
[source].


Mussolini defined Fascism "as a merger of socialist state and corporate power - often referred to as 'The Third Way'.  Advocates include F.D. Roosevelt, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Tony Blair, and as the economic crisis of 2008 proved with state bailouts of failed corporations, the European Union"
[source].


"Under Fascism, Italy would be a single party, totalitarian socialist state as directed in Marxian theory. There's no democracy in Marxism because opposition is not allowed and both Fascists and Nazis established what is termed in Marxism as a 'dictatorship of the proletariat'. In the new Italy, all disparate groups - peasantry, church, workers, farmers, military and even industrialists would have a seat at the table and cooperate to build a new, united Italy under Fascist - Italian national socialist - rule. The logo of fascism shows how this works - sticks bound together by an axe, symbolizing strength through unity"
[source].


"As is the case with all socialist totalitarian regimes, the individual [in a Fascist state] must be totally subservient to the state. Fascism is a collectivist ideology whereby individuals sacrifice themselves for the 'greater good' again in full accordance with Marxian theory"
[source].


"One cannot understand either Nazism or Fascism without understanding Marxism along with how and why it evolved during the twentieth century"
[source].


"Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao - and other socialist dictators such as Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot - are all red emperors who wear the same blood-soaked robes. All share the same socialist beliefs rooted in the ideology of Karl Marx and far from being right-wing ideologies, both Fascism and Nazism are socialist ideologies and belong firmly on the left slightly to the right of communism"
[source].


"Neither [Fascism nor Nazism] are right-wing ideologies because they reject democracy, free market economies and individualism"
[source].


"President Trump 'drain-the-swamp' agenda ... is trying to lessen the government's stranglehold on enterprise and allow the free market economy to flourish again. He is also in favor of freedom of conscience, individual liberty, and secure borders. These policies alone make the claims against him being 'fascist' ridiculous. A fascist would try to make the government even more controlling over the economy and society at large"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), p.21].


"What those who protest against the 'fascist' Trump don't realise is that what they really want is a return to the constitutional republic that allows freedom and free markets to flourish, but with a strong enough hand to protect the weak against they tyranny of others, from individual bullies to government tyrants"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), p.21].


"The vast majority of antifa (anti-fascist) protestors cannot even define what fascism is, let alone what socialism is, even as they demand it for the nation. They are largely ignorant dupes of a vast internationalist cabal founded on multi-national corporate capitalism that seeks to place the vast majority of the world's wealth into the hands of a few. By God's grace, the election of Donald Trump has put a kink in the globalists' plans for world domination. This is the real reason why there is such blind hatred for him spewed forth by the globalists' lackeys in the mainstream media, the government (both major parties), most billionaires, and the Hollywood elite - all of whom are blindly following the behind-the-scene dictates of their puppet masters"
[Al Dager, 'Fascism vs Socialism - Do You Know the Difference?', in Media Spotlight, Vol. 40, No. 4, (Winter 2017), p.21]. 


"'[F]ascist' is a modern word for 'heretic', branding an individual worthy of excommunication from the body politic. The left uses other words - 'racist', 'sexist', 'homophobe', 'christianist' - for similar purposes, but these words have less elastic meanings. Fascism, however, is the gift that keeps on giving. George Orwell noted this tendency as early as 1946 in his famous essay 'Politics and the English Language': 'The word Fascism now has no meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not desirable".'"
[Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the Left From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, p.4].


"Today, a better working definition of a fascist might simply be a conservative who's winning an argument"
[Jonah Goldberg, Daily Mail, 04 January 2009].


"Hollywood writers use the words 'fascist', 'Brownshirt', and 'Nazi' as if they mean no more and no less than 'anything liberals don't like'. On NBC's West Wing support for school choice was deemed 'fascist' (even though school choice is arguably the most un-fascist public policy ever conceived, after home-schooling)"
[Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the Left From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, p.4].


"The most important priority for the left is ... to maintain Orwell's definition of fascism as anything not desirable, thus excluding their own fascistic proclivities from inquiring eyes. ... the response [to inquiries] is usually more instinctive, visceral, or dismissively mocking than rational or principled. Their logic seems to be that multiculturalism ... and such are good things - things that liberals approve of - and good things can't be fascist by simple virtue of the fact that liberals approve of them. Indeed, this seems to be the irreducible argument of countless writers who glibly use the word 'fascist' to describe the 'bad guys' based on no other criteria than that liberals think they are bad. Fidel Castro, one could argue, is a textbook fascist. But because the left approves of his resistance to U.S. 'imperialism' - and because he uses the abracadabra words of Marxism - it's not just wrong but objectively stupid to call him a fascist. Meanwhile, calling Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Rudy Giuliani, and other conservatives fascists is simply what right-thinking, sophisticated people do. The major flaw in all of this is that fascism, properly understood, is not a phenomenon of the right at all. Instead, it is, and always has been, a phenomenon of the left. This fact - an inconvenient truth if ever there was one - is obscured in our time by the equally mistaken belief that fascism and communism are opposites. In reality, they are closely related, historical competitors for the same constituents, seeking to dominate and control the same social space. The fact that they appear as polar opposites is a trick of intellectual history and (more to the point) the result of a concerted propaganda effort on the part of the 'Reds' to make the 'Browns' appear objectively evil and 'other' (ironically, demonization of the 'other' is counted as a definitional trait of fascism). But in terms of their theory and practice, the differences are minimal"
[Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the Left From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, pp.6-7].


"When someone uses the word 'Fascist' in any context other than the Second World War, you can safely ignore their opinion"   /   "It has become nothing more than a shock factor word. All meaning and context has been lost"
[comments at source].

 

Tyranny or Freedom

The following is an extract from the article:  Young Americans for Tyranny

"[A] recent YouGov poll ... asked American 'millennials' what kind of country they'd rather live in, capitalist, socialist, communist, or fascist. ... socialism outscored capitalism 44% to 42%, with the rest of the vote evenly divided between fascism and communism. In other words, 58% of young Americans choose various types and degrees of tyranny over freedom. ...

"To the American youngsters' credit, their choices were motivated not so much by congenital stupidity or a lust for tyranny, as by simple ignorance. When given the definitions of the four systems, they had problems identifying which was which. ... I haven't got the slightest doubt that a similar poll in any Western European country, including Britain, would yield similar or worse results. ...

"That today's young people aren't taught the proper basics of politics, as related to philosophy, morality and civic virtue is fairly obvious - as is their inability to think such things through for themselves. Hence, if I had to compile a similar questionnaire, I'd keep it simple. Instead of expecting the youths to find their way through the thicket of recondite and largely meaningless terminology, I'd ask just one question:

How much control over the individual should the state have, on the scale of 100 (total control) to 1 (only as much as is strictly necessary)?

 

The Left-Right Paradigm

The following is an extract from the article: The Left-Right Paradigm and the New World Order

"On the Right:  we have faux-Conservatives - nothing more than Crony Capitalists/Corporatists.  The 'Conservatives' represent big business, especially Globalist interests; the military industrial complex; the finance industry; aristocratic and old wealth (eg the Rothschilds); and foreign billionaires.

"They represent controlling and subjugating the masses, and preserving power in the hands of a small corrupt supranational elite.

"On the Left:  we have faux-Liberals - nothing more than Cultural Marxists who have long since destroyed Classical Liberalism.  The 'Liberals' represent all totalitarian and unelected bodies of power and sources of wealth and micro-management and control of people through the Unions; the EUSSR; ever-enlarging NGOs, Charities, and Voluntary sector; and ever-increasing Government at every level.

"They represent controlling and subjugating the masses, and preserving power in the hands of a small corrupt supranational elite.

"The Left-Right paradigm makes less and less sense ... It is controlled and given to us by academia, which has been almost completely controlled for generations by Leftist leaning academics, who give us a spectrum which they say has on the Far Right: monarchies, oligarchies, crony capitalists, radical Islam, Christian Fundamentalists, Neo-Nazis, and Fascists of all stripes... but on the Far Left: Communism...  It seems somewhat unbalanced.  All those listed as 'Far Right' seem very different to one another.

"A better way to understand it is that it is not simply a Left-Right scale, but ... also an Up-Down scale: It is Collectivism verses Individualism.  Or, Big State verses Small Government.  It can mean believing that the State knows best and has a right to tell you what to do and interfere in your life verses believing that the ultimate way of determining how successful a country is is by how small the Government can be whilst still maintaining or increasing the same standard of living.  See here"

 

 

The Real Left-Right Paradigm

Far-Left  <--  Left  <--  Less Freedom  <--  Government Power   |   Individual Liberty  -->  More Freedom  -->  Right  -->  Far-Right

Communism/Nazism/Fascism/Marxism <-- Socialism <-- Liberalism/Progressivism <-- Centrism --> Conservativism --> Libertarianism --> Anarchism

 

 

Identity Politics

The following extended extract is from the article: The Origin of 'Identity Politics' & 'Political Correctness'

"Identity politics (sometimes dubbed 'political correctness') is the result of a political-Left major backlash against the mass of ordinary people (in Europe and 'the West'), beginning in the 1920s/30s, in the wake of the persistent failure of Marxist theory to be realised in European 'revolution' or any real change through democracy. In shifting the blame away from Marxist theory and those gullible enough to adhere to it, and on to those the theory had prescribed and predicted would have been the beneficiaries, if only they had responded accordingly ('the [white, male] workers'); then the cognitive-dissonance within the political-left mindset caused by this crisis to an extent was salved"

"As with any fervent ideology, a hallmark of the political-Left is interpreting anything and everything in its own ideological terms to claim as a manifestation of the ideology and its prophecy - jumping on a bandwagon, so to speak; though here only to hijack it. The bandwagon here was, of course, the American civil rights movement, which though enjoying ubiquitous support within black communities - to the point often of various forms of extremism - featured virtually nil endorsement of socialism ... It is from the time of this co-option that 'identity politics' dates; many considering that the movement was incorporated into the Left in the wake of King's assassination in 1968 - the major turning-point year in political-Left politics generally"

"'Civil rights', as the first great 'single-issue' campaign, served not least to provide an acceptable cloak for the Left to avoid provoking a resurgence of McCarthysim. The major social upheaval of 'civil rights' with its large-scale and widespread rioting was easily the nearest thing in then recent US history to look like the promised Marxist 'revolution', and obviously was just the practical application the 'theory' was seeking. Moreover, the protagonists (black Americans) were eminently separable form the now despised 'workers' per se, in being presentable as a new 'group; from outside of the former fray of 'boss' versus 'worker'.

"This accident of history served to add 'black' to 'woman' as 'the new oppressed' ... 'The worker' in effect was retrospectively stereotyped as both 'man' and 'white'. With the inverse of this stereotype of 'white' being not just 'black American' but 'black' - that is, ethnic-minority generically ... so it was that the new 'agents of social change' / 'disadvantaged' / 'oppressed' were extended from women to also include all ethnic minorities"

"It is only with the knowledge of how this developed that sense can be made of why ethnicity is held above the myriad other possible differences that could be utilised as in-group markers, when in fact there is nothing inherent in ethnicity as an in-group marker to produce inter-group prejudice that is particularly more pernicious"

"Indeed, the worst inter-communal conflicts nominally between different ethnicities usually are between different cultural heritages with no discernible 'racial' differences of any kind - and what (non-ethnic) differences there are can be minimal; the lack of contrast actually fuelling the intensity of conflict, such is the need for groups to feel distinguished from each other"

"Furthermore, ethnic prejudice is anything but restricted to or even predominantly 'white' on 'black': inter-ethnic (eg, 'black' on Asian) and ethnic-on-'white' 'racism' can be, often is and may usually be the greater problem; and a negative attitude to a certain ethnicity does not imply a similar attitude to other ethnicities"

"The specific US experience, given the highly divisive politics in the wake of the American Civil War over the basis of the Southern US economy in African slavery, does not translate to elsewhere; notably not to Europe - as was starkly evidenced in the experience of World War II 'black' American GIs stationed in England in how they were favourably received by locals, who sided with them when discriminated against"

"'Racial divides' in European 'white' host countries are the result not of mutual antipathy but affiliative forces, principally within migrant enclaves and secondarily within the 'host' community; in both cases being through in-group 'love', not out-group 'hate'" [EMcD: though the latter part of this observation is indeed true in normal circumstances, this does not, of course, take account of the Islamic/Koranic doctrines of Al-Hijra (Immigration), Taqiyya (Lying and Deceit), and Razzia/Ghazwa (Rape and Slavery), Dawa (Cultural and Stealth Jihad), and Terrorist and Violent Jihad, carried out by fundamentalist Muslims as they settle in increasing numbers in Western countries with the sole and deliberate purpose of making every remaining Dar al-Harb ('House of War': i.e. any non-Muslim country) into a Dar al-Islam ('House of Submission': i.e all Muslim countries) until Islam finally achieves its longed-for global Caliphate.]

[End of Extract]

 

The Frankfurt School

"The Frankfurt School believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary to provoke socialist revolution.

Their task, therefore, was as swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do this they called for the most negative destructive criticism possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the 'oppressive' order. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a virus - 'continuing the work of Western Marxists by other means' as one of their members noted.

To further the advance of their 'quiet' cultural revolution ... the [Frankfurt] School recommended (among other things):

(1) the creation of racism offences,
(2) continual change to create confusion,
(3) the teaching of sex and homosexuality to children,
(4) the undermining of schools' and teachers' authority,
(5) huge immigration to destroy identity,
(6) the promotion of excessive drinking,
(7) emptying of churches,
(8) an unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime,
(9) dependency on the state or state benefits,
(10) control and dumbing down of media,
(11) encouraging the breakdown of the family.

One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of 'pansexualism' - the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:

(a) attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children,
(b) abolish differences in the education of boys and girls,
(c) abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces,
(d) declare women to be an 'oppressed class' and men as 'oppressors'."

 

Programmes of Treason

"There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state:

  • Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the people;

  • Poverty - Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live;

  • Debt - Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That wa6y you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty;

  • Gun Control - Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state;

  • Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income);

  • Education - Take control of that people read and listen to - take control of what children learn in school;

  • Religion - Remove the belief in God from the Government and schools;

  • Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor" [source].

 

 

 

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
(Isaiah 5:20-21)

 

 

 

Please note that the inclusion of any quotation or item on this page does not imply we would necessarily endorse the source from which the extract is taken; neither can we necessarily vouch for any other materials by the same authors, or any groups or ministries or websites with which they may be associated, or any periodicals to which they may contribute, or the beliefs of whatever kind they may hold, or any other aspect of their work or ministry or position.

Elizabeth McDonald     https://www.bayith.org     bayith@blueyonder.co.uk