MARXISM AND ITS MARRIAGE TO COERCION AND VIOLENCE

 
Hatred and jealousy are always seeking their justification, anything to make their cause seem righteous, even if violence is its tool. Samuel Gregg has written:

• As a matter of principle, Marxists aren’t troubled by scruples. They will kill, steal, lie, railroad the innocent — whatever it takes to advance the Revolution. Marx himself never shied away from what his program entailed. “When our turn comes,” he wrote in 1849, “we shall not make excuses for the terror.” The actions of his apostles, ranging from Lenin to Stalin, Che Guevara, Mao, and Pol Pot, to the Castro brothers, prove just how “principled” Marxists are willing to be, even if it means gulags, “reeducation” camps, or simple murder.

With such a history, it is surprising that Marxism has been able exercise its considerable influence over the universities and even many churches. But how? It now wears a new face with an updated strategy - the gradual infiltration of culture.

Antonio Gramsci of the Marxist Frankfort School wrote in favor of a Marxist infiltration of culture and the arts. Truth wasn’t their tool but bullying and discrediting of any opposition. Gregg uncovers the new and refined Gramscian strategy against the opposition:

• Such people must be marginalized because of their faith and/or politics, lest they threaten the left’s “hegemony” over the means of “cultural production.” Truth is no longer important, for truth is just a ruling class construct. What matters is the pursuance and maintenance of power, so that millions of media-consumers and thousands of university students can continue being enlightened about the hidden structures of privilege. The most insidious aspect of this mentality is that its logic, on its terms, can’t be refuted. If you question, for instance, the hermeneutics of suspicion, then you must be part of the ruling class’s apparatus of control, whether you realize it or not. At worst, you are evil. At best, you are a dupe. As Joseph Ratzinger once observed, this was a standard retort deployed by Marxist-inclined liberation theologians whenever anyone questioned their positions. https://stream.org/dangerous-marxist/

If truth doesn’t matter, then there is no way to justify Marxism but through brute force, a tool from which Marxists never shied away from using, whether to get power or to maintain power. No wonder that genocide has always found its place in their tool kit, as the vote has found its home in democracies.

Meanwhile, the New Marxist uses a new an improved form of violence. They seek to deconstruct everything of value in the prevailing culture as tools of control and oppression of the ruling class. Even the concepts of truth and justice are tools to clandestinely maintain the power of the “privileged.” Any defense of the prevailing order is shouted down and the guilty “privileged” are told that they have no right to speak.

Evidently, idealistic university students have been convinced by the “logic” of the New Marxist. Consequently, they believe that they are pursuing a righteous cause as they shout down any voice deemed to be speaking for the “oppressors.”

 

HITLER’S GOD

In his new book, “Hitler’s Religion,” historian Richard Weikart attempts to pinpoint the beliefs had been central to Hitler’s worldview and his genocidal rampage. He identifies Pantheism:

·       In Mein Kampf, for instance, he often deifies nature.  This is so obvious that most translators often capitalize the word “Nature” therein.  Indeed Hitler on several occasions referred to nature as eternal, which means that it was not created, but in the same passages he refers to God as a Creator.  This seems rather contradictory at first, but it makes sense if you understand nature itself to be his God.  For this reason Pantheism seems the closest position to Hitler’s views.

But doesn’t Pantheism show respect for nature and living things? Isn’t it antithetical to genocide? If god is the entirety of nature, and nature contains many horrific elements like bubonic plague and the survival-of-the-fittest, then it would seem that this god sanctions genocide, among everything else that nature contains. What then would be the morality of this nature god? Anything that nature contains becomes a moral model. Therefore, anything goes. https://www.mercatornet.com/features/view/hitlers-religion-the-twisted-beliefs-that-drove-the-third-reich/19078

It is therefore easy to understand how the god of Darwinism fits comfortably alongside of Pantheism:

·       Since Hitler thought that nature was God, he believed that morality was defined by conforming to nature’s laws.  One of the natural laws he thought most important was the Darwinian struggle for existence, which produced evolutionary progress.  Since the struggle in nature was vicious and resulted in the strong destroying the weak, Hitler considered it good and right to viciously destroy the weak.  He thought this would bring about a better world with superior humans.  He thought he had divine approval for annihilating the allegedly inferior races and people with disabilities.

Consequently, Hitler became a faithful servant of his beliefs.

HOW TO ANSWER THE CLAIMS OF MORAL RELATIVISM?

Our deeds are children of our beliefs. In "Mao, The Unknown Story," biographer Jung Chang estimates that Mao had exterminated 70 million of his own people to implement his communist ideal.

Why had he been willing to pay such an horrendous price?

According to his biographer, Mao was a self-centered moral relativist:

* Mao’s attitude to morality consisted of one core, the self, “I,” above everything else: “I do not agree with the view that to be moral, the motive of one’s action has to be benefiting others. Morality does not have to be defined in relation to others … People like me want to … satisfy our hearts to the full, and in doing so we automatically have the most valuable moral codes. Of course there are people and objects in the world, but they are all there only for me.”

* “People like me only have a duty to ourselves; we have no duty to other people.” “I am responsible only for the reality that I know,” he wrote, “and absolutely not responsible for anything else. I don’t know about the past, I don’t know about the future. They have nothing to do with the reality of my own self.” He explicitly rejected any responsibility towards future generations. “Some say one has a responsibility for history. I don’t believe it. I am only concerned about developing myself … I have my desire and act on it. I am responsible to no one.”

His beliefs were a hammer bludgeoning to death millions.

This makes me ponder how we might effectively challenge these all-to-common relativistic, postmodern beliefs of our youth. It is just too tempting and costly to believe that we can create our own morality designed to serve our desires.

We must be able to demonstrate that there exists objective moral laws, which are as real as our laws of physics. These are laws to which we must conform, like gravity, which will punish us if we throw ourselves off a 10-story building. Likewise, moral laws will punish us if we defy them and inflame our conscience.

Perhaps surprisingly, the vast majority of researchers have demonstrated that we are wired for these laws which manifest at specific developmental stages.

However, if this wiring is purely bio-chemical, some will argue, "I need not conform to this wiring. I can override or defy it. I can drop a pill or dull their impact. I will be master of my own ship."

Most will not take moral relativism that far. They will merely pursue their own desires as their suppressed moral voice repeats, "You are doing wrong."

But is it wrong? How can a bio-chemical reaction be wrong? It just is, isn't it?

We would not say this about gravity. Instead, we would have to admit that gravity exists apart from our thoughts about it.

Here's the question I wish to pose -

* "Is it possible that our moral wiring is like our eyesight? Our eyes are not just biochemical. They perceive a very real external reality. Can it also be that our moral sentiments, our conscience, serves as a portal to an external reality - a world of karma?"

If so, then you are ready for another question -

* "If karma represents the imposition of justice and justice requires the weighing of many subtle factors, Who must be doing the weighing?"

ALINSKY: THE MAKING OF AN IDEALIST

Saul Alinsky (1909 – 1972) was a Communist and community organizer who wrote Rules for Radicals. He had also been the mentor to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Alinsky’s final interview, just before his 1972 death, was quoted in the new film about his life, “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”:

·       “If there is an afterlife, and I have anything to say about it, I will unreservedly choose to go to hell,” he tells Playboy magazine.

·       “Hell would be heaven for me,” he explains. “All my life I've been with the have-nots. Over here, if you're a have-not, you're short of dough. If you're a have-not in hell, you're short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I'll start organizing the have-nots over there.”

·       Asked why, Alinsky states, “They're my kind of people.” https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-film-shows-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing-still-a-threat

Why would the “have-nots” be his “kind of people?” And what if they got a good-paying job that enabled them to climb up into the camp of the “haves?” Would they no longer be his “kind of people?” Why would the difference of a few extra dollars turn a friend into an enemy?

I think that there is only one way to understand this rigidity. Alinsky was, as are so many others, driven by jealousy and hatred of the “haves.” The Communists had hated the “haves” so much that they regarded them as “parasites” which had to be eliminated.

However, we are all vulnerable to such feelings and are tempted to hide them behind an idealistic framework such as a concern for the poor. Sadly, when idealism is driven by these repressed emotions, it takes destructive paths. Consequently, we no longer have the welfare of those we are trying to help in mind, but our own disguised agenda. Just look at the 100,000,000 slaughtered by the various Communist regimes seeking to create their “workers’ paradise!”

The idealist and revolutionary, Mao Tze Tung, is reported to have exterminated 45 million of his own people in order to create his ideal society. How is it that this self-sacrificial idealist could have been the inspiration for such horrors? I think it is because he was unable to confront his dark-side, which, as a result took control of his vision.

Marvin Olasky, editor-in-chief of World Magazine, reported that, in 1957, Mao stated:

·       I’m not afraid of nuclear war. There are 2.7 billion people in the world; it doesn’t matter if some are killed. China has a population of 600 million; even if half of them are killed, there are still 300 million people left. I am not afraid of anyone.

What can explain such callousness and blindness? Clearly, it was not a concern for others that had been speaking, but his own hatred and jealousy.

How can we guard ourselves against this fate? How can we face our underlying darkness? We need courage. It was only the assurances of the love and forgiveness of the Savior that enabled me to confront the truth about myself.

CIVILIZATION WEARS A DECEPTIVE SMILE

In The Jew Today, Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel described his arrival at Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1944:

·       I remember the midnight arrival at Birkenau. Shouts, Dogs barking. Families, together for the last time, families about to be torn asunder. A young Jewish boy walks at his father’s side in the convoy of men; they walk and they walk and night walks with them toward a place spewing monstrous fames, flames devouring the sky. Suddenly an inmate crosses the ranks and explains to the men what they are seeing, the truth of the night: the future, the absence of future; the key to the secret, the power of evil. As he speaks, the young boy touches his father’s arm as though to reassure him and whispers, “This is impossible, isn’t it? Don’t listen to what he is telling us, he only wants to frighten us. What he says is impossible, unthinkable, it is all part of another age, the Middle Ages, not the twentieth century, not modern history. The world, Father, the civilized world would not allow such things to happen.”

Yet it still does, and its educated elites even abet the darkness of night, hiding the onslaught of evil. Robert Spencer calls it the “Global Outbreak of Mental Illness”:

·       On Tuesday, a Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” and “Infidel, you must die” stabbed four people, killing one, at a train station near Munich. Nonetheless, Bavarian security officials immediately denied that he “had an Islamic extremist motive.” Then what caused the attack? Bavaria’s state interior minister Joachim Herrmann said that the attacker had “mental disorders.”

·       France: Muslim driver ramming pedestrians while screaming “Allahu akbar” was “absolutely not an act of terrorism”: “‘This is absolutely not an act of terrorism,’ Prosecutor Marie-Christine Tarrare told reporters during a press conference, adding that the man had a ‘long-lasting and severe psychological disorder’ and had been hospitalised over 150 times since 2002.”

·       UK: Imam accused of recruiting for jihad group doesn’t have to wear electronic tag — it breaches his human rights: “A terror suspect last night won a human rights case to have his tag removed – because he thinks MI5 has put a bomb inside it. A judge said the dangerous preacher of hate has mental health problems, and wearing the electronic monitoring device was making him ‘delusional’.”

·       Muslim NYPD cop killer told passers-by to watch: “The gunman who fatally ambushed two New York City police officers in their squad car had a long criminal record, a hatred for police and the government and an apparent history of mental instability that included an attempt to hang himself a year ago, police said Sunday.”

·       France: Muslim who stabbed rabbi gets four years: “Haddouche was deemed unfit to stand trial because of mental issues following a psychiatric evaluation…”

·       Toronto Muslim charged with carrying concealed meat cleaver into Parliament: “RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson told reporters that Ali is known to authorities, but ‘not in the sort of counter-terrorism context.’ In fact, Paulson does not believe that the man’s actions were politically motivated or an act of terror. ‘I understand it is less a concern around so-called national security considerations as it is a mental health issue,’ he said. ‘There is a history of behaviours that are odd.’”

·       Austria: Muslim drives car into crowd, killing 3, then gets out and stabs passersby: “Police are not currently investigating terrorism as a motive and the man is believed to be suffering from mental illness.”

·       Canada: Police shoot Muslim wearing apparent suicide vest and holding triggering device: “In the aftermath of the shooting, police downplayed the incident saying only that the call involved ‘an emotionally disturbed person.’”

·       Muslim bangs on cockpit door, threatens to down plane, “wanted to see Allah”: “After being held back from the cabin door, which could not have been opened anyway, the man, who fellow passengers said appeared to have mental health issues, was then guarded by staff and the sports stars in business class.”

·       Muslima who beheaded toddler recently became religious, started wearing hijab: “One theory is that the woman is mentally ill and that she may have been exploited by a man or men she knew.”

·       Canada: Ottawa shooter’s father waged jihad in Libya in 2011; shooter not a recent convert but a longtime Muslim: “Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, the slain 32-year-old suspected killer of a Canadian Forces soldier near Parliament Hill, was a labourer and small-time criminal – a man who had had a religious awakening and seemed to have become mentally unstable.”

·       Canada: Muslim acting “in the name of Allah” runs down two soldiers, flips car after chase, charges officers with long knife, is shot: “‘We are at the beginning of an investigation. Several hypotheses are being looked at,’ said Sgt. Michel Brunet, adding that investigators would study various angles, including mental illness and terrorism.”Philly cop shooter: “I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State. That is why I did what I did.”: “Archer’s mother has indicated that he is mentally ill and Ross said investigators do not know yet if the suspect was indeed radicalized or tied to terrorism.”

·       Oklahoma: School evacuated after “Middle Eastern” woman says she came there to “take the kids to heaven”: “During the news conference, police also said that the woman had been having mental health concerns recently.”

·       Chattanooga jihad murderer viewed Awlaki material online, spoke of Islamic martyrdom as long ago as 2013: “As the F.B.I. sent more investigators into this city Monday to explore dozens of possible leads, a picture took shape of a deeply troubled young man who struggled with mental illness and drug abuse at the same time he found himself alienated from United States policies in the Arab world, according to the authorities, friends and the family representative.”

·       Colorado Muslim stabs cop, drops Qur’an during struggle: “At about 2 p.m. Saturday, the suspect’s family told law enforcement that they were worried because Clark left his residence in Penrose and said he wasn’t going to return. They also said Clark was mentally disturbed, had been working out a great deal during the last two months and recently had broken up with his girlfriend.”

·       NYC police commissioner: Hatchet attack by convert to Islam was terror: “Authorities also are trying to determine if Thompson had any history of mental illness.”

·       UK Muslim who admitted sharing jihad videos rants about “enemy of Islam court”: “Ahmed, who has a history of mental health problems, pleaded guilty to two counts of dissemination of a terrorist publication.”

·       France: Muslim screaming “Allahu akbar” tries to strangle police officer: “Other police officers saw the events on the video surveillance system and rushed to save their colleague, who had been thrown to the ground. His assailant was said to have a history of psychiatric problems.”

·       Spain: Violent Muslim screaming “Allahu Akbar, all you Christians will die!” gets arrested: “Later, he was administered comprehensive tests to ascertain if he was under the influence of drugs or suffered from a mental illness.”

·       UK Muslim gets 20 years for trying to set up jihad training camp in Oregon: “Haroon Aswat, who has been treated for mental illness in the UK, had pleaded guilty to the charges in March after being extradited from Britain to the US last year.”

·       France: Knife-wielding Muslim teen screams “Allahu akbar,” shoots teacher with BB gun: “A psychiatric examination was scheduled for 13 October, with the teenager is likely to be brought before a judge.”

·       Colorado Muslima pleads guilty to conspiring to aid Islamic State: “Moore set sentencing for Jan. 23, saying he wanted time for Conley to undergo more complete psychiatric testing. ‘I desire more information’ on her mental state, he said, asking for both a psychological and personality evaluation.”

Of course, none of this has anything to do with Islam, in the same way that Auschwitz had nothing to do with Nazism. Of course, they were all simply deranged. Evidently, the same mental illness is afflicting Al Qaeda, ISIS, Islamic Jihad, Al Nusra, Boko Haram, and hundreds of other Islamic groups. Besides, the genocide happening in North Africa and the Middle East will have nothing to do with Islamic refugees coming to the West. After all, they are all mentally healthy.

• Even now, children are being led to their death, reassuring their families, “The world, Father, the civilized world would not allow such things to happen.”