Monday, 29 June 2009

WHEN YOU HEAR ALL THREE PARTIES PRACTISING 

WHAT IS CULTURAL MARXISM- 

IF YOU’RE NOT A MARXIST-THEN STEER CLEAR!!

What is Cultural Marxism?

By William S. Lind
October 25, 2005

In his columns on the next conservatism, Paul Weyrich has several times referred to “cultural Marxism.” He asked me, as Free Congress Foundation’s resident historian, to write this column explaining what cultural Marxism is and where it came from. In order to understand what something is, you have to know its history.

Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism, different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or, less formally, Political Correctness. From its beginning, the promoters of cultural Marxism have known they could be more effective if they concealed the Marxist nature of their work, hence the use of terms such as “multiculturalism.”

Cultural Marxism began not in the 1960s but in 1919, immediately after World War I. Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a big European war, the working class all over Europe would rise up to overthrow capitalism and create communism. But when war came in 1914, that did not happen. When it finally did happen in Russia in 1917, workers in other European countries did not support it. What had gone wrong?

Independently, two Marxist theorists, Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary, came to the same answer: Western culture and the Christian religion had so blinded the working class to its true, Marxist class interest that Communism was impossible in the West until both could be destroyed. In 1919, Lukacs asked, “Who will save us from Western civilization?” That same year, when he became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun government in Hungary, one of Lukacs’s first acts was to introduce sex education into Hungary’s public schools. He knew that if he could destroy the West’s traditional sexual morals, he would have taken a giant step toward destroying Western culture itself.

In 1923, inspired in part by Lukacs, a group of German Marxists established a think tank at Frankfurt University in Germany called the Institute for Social Research. This institute, soon known simply as the Frankfurt School, would become the creator of cultural Marxism.

To translate Marxism from economic into cultural terms, the members of the Frankfurt School – - Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse, to name the most important – - had to contradict Marx on several points. They argued that culture was not just part of what Marx had called society’s “superstructure,” but an independent and very important variable. They also said that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie.

Who would? In the 1950s, Marcuse answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women and homosexuals.

Fatefully for America, when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt School fled – - and reestablished itself in New York City. There, it shifted its focus from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to destroying it in the United States. To do so, it invented “Critical Theory.” What is the theory? To criticize every traditional institution, starting with the family, brutally and unremittingly, in order to bring them down. It wrote a series of “studies in prejudice,” which said that anyone who believes in traditional Western culture is prejudiced, a “racist” or “sexist” of “fascist” – - and is also mentally ill.

Most importantly, the Frankfurt School crossed Marx with Freud, taking from psychology the technique of psychological conditioning. Today, when the cultural Marxists want to do something like “normalize” homosexuality, they do not argue the point philosophically. They just beam television show after television show into every American home where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual (the Frankfurt School’s key people spent the war years in Hollywood).

After World War II ended, most members of the Frankfurt School went back to Germany. But Herbert Marcuse stayed in America. He took the highly abstract works of other Frankfurt School members and repackaged them in ways college students could read and understand. In his book “Eros and Civilization,” he argued that by freeing sex from any restraints, we could elevate the pleasure principle over the reality principle and create a society with no work, only play (Marcuse coined the phrase, “Make love, not war”). Marcuse also argued for what he called “liberating tolerance,” which he defined as tolerance for all ideas coming from the Left and intolerance for any ideas coming from the Right. In the 1960s, Marcuse became the chief “guru” of the New Left, and he injected the cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School into the baby boom generation, to the point where it is now America’s state ideology.

The next conservatism should unmask multiculturalism and Political Correctness and tell the American people what they really are: cultural Marxism. Its goal remains what Lukacs and Gramsci set in 1919: destroying Western culture and the Christian religion.

It has already made vast strides toward that goal. But if the average American found out that Political Correctness is a form of Marxism, different from the Marxism of the Soviet Union but Marxism nonetheless, it would be in trouble. The next conservatism needs to reveal the man behind the curtain – - old Karl Marx himself.

William S. Lind is Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism of the Free Congress Foundation.

http://www.freecongress.org/commentaries/2005/051025.aspx

(The Free Congress Foundation’s website, www.freecongress.org, includes a short book on the history and nature of cultural Marxism, edited by William S. Lind. It is formatted so you can print it out as a book and share it with your family and friends.)

 

Communism in America Today

Cultural Marxism

 

Multiculturalism & Political Correctness

What is “Political Correctness?”

The following book “Political Correctness:” A Short History of an Ideology, answers that question. Because Free Congress Foundation believes every American Needs to Know the Answer, we are here posting the entire book on our website. Any visitor to the website is welcome to print the book for himself, his family and his friends; there are no limits to the number of copies you make.

“Political Correctness: A Short History of an Ideology”

http://www.freecongress.org/centers/cc/index.aspx

Introduction

http://www.freecongress.org/centers/cc/pcessay.aspx

Chapter 1 – “Political Correctness:” A Short History of an Ideology

Chapter 2 – The Historical Roots of “Political Correctness”

Chapter 3 – Political Correctness in Higher Education

http://www.freecongress.org/centers/cc/pcessay1-3.aspx

Chapter 4 – Political Correctness: Deconstruction and Literature

Chapter 5 – Radical Feminism and Political Correctness

Chapter 6 – Further Reading on the Frankfurt School

http://www.kelticklankirk.com/What-is-Cultural-Marxism.htm 

Yes, the School was Frankfurt Germany, for a reason! Later was moved to NY.

“The headquarters of the great conspiracy in the late 1700’s was in Frankfurt, Germany where the House of Rothschild had been established by Mayar (or Mayer) Amschel who adopted the Rothschild name and linked together other international financiers who had literally sold their souls to the devil. After the Bavarian government’s exposure in 1786; the conspirators moved their headquarters to Switzerland then to London. Since World War II (after Jacob Schiff, the Rothschild’s boy in America died); the headquarters of the American branch has been in the Harold Pratt Building in New York City and the Rockefellers, originally proteges of Schiff, have taken over the manipulation of finances in America for the Illuminati.

A lot of people believe the British Fabian society founded the Frankfurt school, I’ll list some connections, and the power players.

I dont have time to do this much justice today, but very briefly, there was a lot of workings and connections to the rothschilds power structure. Here’s  some data which may promt your creation of a full picture.

Lets look who created the Fabian Society

Israel Zangwill, George Bernard Shaw, and a Jewish writer named Israel Cohen were the ones who created the Fabian Society in England and had worked closely with a Frankfurt Jew named Mordicai who had changed his name to Karl Marx; but remember, at that time both Marxism and Communism were just emerging and nobody paid much attention to either and nobody suspected the propaganda in the writings of those three really brilliant writers. http://www.freedomfiles.org/Illuminati/cfr-article.htm CFR INFO.

I have a lot more data on the fabian society of Britain, but lets look at a main power player, to get more of an idea where the heart is:

Look into Lord Robert Cecil, was 3 times prime minister, a jew who controlled Lenin and Trostsky during the Bolshevik Revolution.

“… Robert Cecil of the Jewish Cecil family that had controlled the British monarchy since a Cecil became the private secretary and lover of Queen Elizabeth I, …” (Conspirators’ Hierarchy, p. 201).

AHA! I’m seeing more why some think he’s more powerful than the Rothschild family, but how more powerful can you get if you control half of the world’s finances like the Rothschilds? Either way they are still the same edomite-jewish-family I’ve been saying all along. Even much of the Catholic Bishops are a part of this same Edomite family.

this continues on page 201: Robert cecil of the jewish cecil family that controlled the British monarchy, … was private secretary of ….. Leo Amery, Halford Mackinder of MI6 and later head of the London School of Economics, whose pupil Bruce Lockhart would become MI6 controller of Lenin and Trotsky during the Bolshevik Revolution, and even the great man himself, Lord Alfred Milner. (as we know 66 Million white russian christians were massacred by the Bolshevik revolution) This wasn’t a gentile conspiracy against jews, these are facts that jews massacred 66 Million Christians in this event.

I found some other sources,

Coleman writes in his article King Makers, King Breakers: The Cecils (1985, © Dr John Coleman, W.I.R., 2533 N. Carson St., Suite J-118 Carson City, NV 89706):

{p. 25} The records at Hatfield House show that the Unity of Science Conferences was the brain child of Robert Cecil, as confirmed by the Dutch Jew, Mandell Huis alias Colonel House, who was the controller of Woodrow Wilson and Wilson’s personal representative at the Paris peace Conference; and the special representative of the United States Government at the Inter-Allied Conference of Premiers and Foreign Ministers in 1917; U. S. representative at the Armistice in 1918 and a member of the Commission on Mandates in 1919. Mandell Huis, like the Cecils, professed to be a Christian, but was a Jew by birth and conviction. He was a firm friend of the Cecil clan, and it was Huis who forced Wilson to agree to the July, 1915 {should be 2 November 1917} arrangement made by Arthur Balfour which gave Palestine to the zionists and brouqht America into the first world war. Americans should be taught these things in schools and universities, but so great is the power of the Black Nobility, the RIIA, the CFR and the Eastern Liberal Establishment gang of traitors, that the majority
{p. 26} of Americans will probably never hear the name of the Cecil family, as one of the names which shaped the destiny of our once free great republican America. Before leaving tlle subject of “Colonel House” (Huis is the Dutch word for house), let me say that in spite of the many important tasks he was given to carry out, “Colonel House” was never a member of the United States government, nor was he elected to hold any of these important offices by the sovereign people of the United States. Therefore I say to you; “Of what use is our present system? We call ourselves a republic and a democracy, yet, no matter who we elect to the White House, the secret government of America continues to enact its policies, without the slightest regard for our wishes. Of what use then, is our electoral system?” … {end}

from the book “Road to Slavery” by Coleman
Another overstatement is that Lord Robert Cecil, when Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, had Bruce Lockhart installed as British agent in Russia, and used him to “run” the Bolshevik Revolution (p. 6), but later turned against Trotsky, and conspired with Stalin to have him murdered (pp. 7-9).

Coleman says that the Cecils encouraged General Karl Haushofer to favour Hitler and help him write Mein Kampf. This doesn’t make sense to me, because Haushofer advocated German-Russian co-operation to counter Mackinder’s Atlanticist ideas, whereas Hitler was a Slavophobe.

Then, Coleman says, the Cecils dumped Hitler when he turned against the Jews. The Cecils pressed Edward XVIII to give up his support for Hiler, and created the Simpson Affair as a constitutional crisis to force him out when he refused (pp. 12-13).

The Fabians

Fabians from: http://christiansbiblestudy.org/williemartin/ILLU-3.htm

It was at this juncture that the Fabian Society and Lenin’s Bolshevik Jews made their entrance on the world scene and began to make real headway in achieving the goals outlined by Weishaupt, Roosevelt, Marx and Pike.

The only real difference between these two groups were the methods they employed in working towards the same overall goal ‑ the creation of a classless, socialistic one‑world society as envisioned by Marx (A Manifesto, Fabian Tract No. 2, 1884). Since that time, the Bolsheviks {Communist ‑ Jews} have been working to bring it about by violent, revolutionary means.

Of the Fabians, The Encyclopedia Britannica (1973 edition, article on Fabian Socialism, tells us; “…the name is derived from that of the Roman General…Fabius, the Delayer, because of his deliberate, long‑range strategy.” [304]

As a result, from the very outset, the Fabians worked for a “New World Order”through indoctrination of young scholars in the belief that eventually these intellectual revolutionaries could gain power and influence in the various opinion making and power wielding agencies of the world and so achieve their aims. Their tactics became known as the “doctrine of the inevitability of gradualism.”

It must be noted that these were just two of the many “front” organizations through which the International Conspiracy was working. The Real Power has always been held by the International Jewish Bankers! Professor Quigley tells us that during the last part of the nineteenth century, the International Bankers and their American counterparts moved into “commercial banking and insurance on one side and into railroading and heavy industry on the other” and “were able to mobilize enormous wealth and wield enormous economic, political and social power. Popularly known as ‘Society’ of the ‘400,’ they lived a life of dazzling splendor. Sailing the ocean in great private yachts or traveling on land by private train, they moved in a ceremonious round between their spectacular estates and town houses in Palm Beach, Long Island, the Berkshires, Newport, and Bar Harbor, assembling from their fortress‑like New York residences to attend the Metropolitan Opera under the critical eye of Mrs. Astor; or gathering for business meetings at the highest strategic level in the awesome presence of J.P. Morgan himself.”

     “The structure of financial controls created by the tycoons of ‘Big Banking’ and ‘Big Business’…was of extraordinary complexity, one business being built upon another, both being allied with semi‑ independent associates, the whole rearing upward into two pinnacles of economic and political power, of which one, centered in New York, was headed by J.P. Morgan and Co., and the other, in Ohio, was headed by the Rockefeller family.

     When these two co‑operated, as they generally did, they could influence the economic life of the country to a large degree and could almost control its political life, at least at the Federal level.’ They caused the ‘panic of 1907′ and the collapse of two railroads, one in 1914 and the other in 1925.” [305]

MORE:

The Fabians

In 1881, Frank Podmore, who had joined the early Sidgwick group, met Edward Pease at one of the Spiritualist séances that were the vogue in London, at which time they became close friends. The next year he invited Pease to attend a meeting of this group in which the S.P.R. was formed. Norman and Jeanne MacKenzie record this meeting in their history of The Fabians:

“In this same period a group of young dons from Trinity College, Cambridge, were also turning to psychic research as a substitute for their lost Evangelical faith. In February 1882, Podmore took Pease to a meeting at which this group founded the Society for Psychical Research . . . Among those who founded the SPR were Henry Sidgwick, Arthur Balfour — later a conservative Prime Minister — and his brother, Gerald.” Norman and Jeanne MacKenzie, The Fabians, Simon & Schuster, 1977, p. 18.

Edward Pease spent one year in the S.P.R. as secretary of its haunted-houses committee, but then turned to politics with the conviction that a social revolution was necessary. For a time he worked with an associate of Karl Marx, Henry Hyndman who founded the radical Social Democratic Federation. However, Pease was of the opinion that social revolution must begin with educating the intellectual and wealthy classes rather than fomenting agitation among the working class. He organized a Progressive Association which was joined by Podmore and other young fallen away Evangelicals.

The Association split into the Fellowship of the New Life, a commune with utopian illusions, and a research/debating group which Podmore named the Fabian Society, after the Roman general who defeated Hannibal. Fabius Cunctator’s strategy which was to guide the Fabians was summarized in Podmore’s words: “For the right moment you must wait…when the time comes you must strike hard.”

The Fabians soon attracted intellectuals from various other dissident organizations. Of these, Sidney Webb, Bernard Shaw and Annie Besant were members of the Dialectical Society influenced by the liberal millenarian aspirations of John Stuart Mill. As of 1886, the Fabian executive committee was comprised of Pease, Podmore, Besant, Shaw and Webb. However, in 1889, Annie Besant was converted to the cult of Theosophy by Madame Blavatsky, whom she succeeded in 1891 as president of the Theosophical Society.

Upon this revolutionary base, Sidney Webb, his wife Beatrice and playwright George Bernard Shaw built an organization which educated the intellectuals, bohemians and disillusioned clergy of England in the art of “permeating” and using the machinery of government for their own socialist ends. The MacKenzie’s observed, “There was, indeed, no clear dividing line between spiritual discontent and political radicalism in the netherworld of dissent.” Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb argued that “socialism could be proposed without forfeiture of moral credit by a bishop as well as a desperado.” 92. The formation of the Christian Socialists and Christian Social Union, of which B.F. Westcott was the first president, created the vehicle by which socialist doctrine would permeate the Anglican Church.

“…the first Fabians…had almost all been lapsed Anglicans from Evangelical homes. There was a Christian fringe to the London socialism of the eighties, but this too was Anglican. The Christian Socialists came together in Stewart Headlam’s Guild of St. Matthew and the Land Reform Union; and the more respectable Christian Social Union, formed in 1889 — seeking in Fabian style to permeate the Anglican Church — soon attracted more than two thousand clerical members. Dissenting clergymen too began to find a place in the Fabian Society and the London Progressives, while Unitarian churches and centres like Stanton Coit’s Ethical Church provided a meeting place for believers and idealist agnostics . . . Socialism was for all of them, the new Evangelism.” Mackenzie, pp. 183-84.

In 1894, the Fabian Society designated a large bequest to found the London School of Economics and Political Science. Philosopher Bertrand Russell served on the Administration Committee while Arthur Balfour contributed £2000 and also collaborated with Sidney Webb to introduce legislation in Parliament which would give the school university status. H.G. Wells, who had recently joined the Fabians, was “branching out into speculations about a new social order which naturally interested the Webbs.” p. 283

 https://anu.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=310&PN=2

THE GREATEST THREAT TO OUR FREEDOMS- 

ISN’T FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS- 

IT’S FROM OUR OWN….