Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: An Invisible Government Controls Our Minds with a Thought Prison
Source:
Activist Post/Daily Sheeple
URL Source: https://www.activistpost.com/2017/1 ... rols-minds-thought-prison.html
Published: Dec 19, 2017
Author: Sigmund Fraud
Post Date: 2017-12-20 08:57:17 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1861
Comments: 18
Authored by Edward Bernays and published in 1928, the book Propaganda still holds its position as the gold standard for influencing and manipulating public behavior. Drawing on his expertise in psychology while using the language of manipulation, Bernays pioneered social engineering via mass media, and his work lives on in the distorted, statist, consumer world we have today. But who are the ones behind the curtain telling us what to think by directing our attention onto the things which serve interests? Interestingly, chapter III of Propaganda is titled, “The New Propagandists,” and is devoted to explaining why the controls for mass manipulation are so closely guarded by a relatively tiny elite who sit in the shadows, out of the public eye, choosing what we are to see and to think, even controlling the politicians we elect to represent us. If we set out to make a list of the men and women who, because of their position in public life, might fairly be called the molders of public opinion we could quickly arrive at an extended list of persons mentioned in “Who’s Who…” Such a list would comprise several thousand persons. But it is well known that many of these leaders are themselves led, sometimes by persons whose names are known to few. Such persons typify in the public mind the type of ruler associated with the phrase invisible government. An invisible government of corporate titans and behind the scenes influencers whose mark on culture cannot be understated today. Bernays continues: The invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses. The public relations counsel, then, is the agent who, working with modern media communication and the group formation of society, brings an idea to the consciousness of the public. But he is a great deal more than that. He is concerned with courses of action, doctrines, systems and opinions, and the securing of public support for them. Ultimately, the goal of this type of mass-produced, pop-culture propaganda is to weaken the individual’s ability to think critically, thereby creating an environment where many people look to one another for approval, always second-guessing their own faculties. When this happens, the strength of the collective group begins to take form and multiply, and ideas can be implanted into the popular culture, taking root in the form of widespread conformist behavior. Thinking critically means making reasoned judgments that are logical and well thought out. It is a way of thinking in which one doesn’t simply accept all arguments and conclusions to which one is exposed without questioning the arguments and conclusions. It requires curiosity, skepticism and humility. People who use critical thinking are the ones who say things such as, “How do you know that?” “Is this conclusion based on evidence or gut feelings?” and “Are there alternative possibilities when given new pieces of information?” [Source] The takeaway here is that not much has changed in 100 years of corporate/statist American culture, other than the technical capacity to scale this ever upward. Our lives are still heavily influenced by the likes of the described by Bernays. There is one advantage we do have now, however, as technology has given us greater access to the truth and we are now free to split from the matrix psychologically by understanding what it is and how it influences our lives. If we choose to do so, that is, if we choose to take the red pill. In order to understand your life and your mission here on earth in the short time you have, it is imperative to learn to see the thought prison that has been built around you, and to actively circumnavigate it. Free-thinking is being stamped out by the propagandists, but our human tendency is to crave freedom, and with the aid of truth, we are more powerful than the control matrix and the invisible government. 
“Who are the men who without our realizing it, give us our ideas, tell us whom to admire and whom to despise, what to believe about the ownership of public utilities, about the tariff, about the price of rubber, about the Dawes Plan, about immigration; who tell us how our houses should be designed, what furniture we should put in them, what menus we should serve on our table, what kind of shirts we must wear, what sports we should indulge in, what plays we should see, what charities we should support, what pictures we should admire, what slang we should affect, what jokes we should laugh at?”
~ Edward Bernays, PropagandaFinal Thoughts
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard, all (#0)
If any of you has Netflix, there is an excellent British/Canadian show called, 'Black Mirror'. Here is one critique of the show's "Most powerful moments": (The first is 'White Christmas' -- I recently watch it, and I agree -- it was very eerie....for its future plausibility.) Many episodes are indeed distastefully bizarre, yet...plausible, given where "Science' and its dark technology wants to take us. It's underlying theme is a dystopian-Orwellian future nightmare where society is totally controlled by technology, chips, mind-control, virtual realities and delusions, and psychological/virtual prisons. Same of many 'New Outer Limits' episodes (found on Hulu). Excellent (yet depressing) show.
Thinking critically means making reasoned judgments that are logical and well thought out. It is a way of thinking in which one doesn’t simply accept all arguments and conclusions to which one is exposed without questioning the arguments and conclusions. It requires curiosity, skepticism and humility. People who use critical thinking are the ones who say things such as, “How do you know that?” “Is this conclusion based on evidence or gut feelings?” and “Are there alternative possibilities when given new pieces of information?” And whenever there is a political campaign happening (which in the US is essentially 24/7), prospective voters are accosted by partially true, squishy promises and sometimes vile verbal assaults from candidates who may be sociopaths, protofascists, serial liars or somehow never able to tell the whole truth about themselves, their real agendas or who their corporate paymasters are (whose hidden demands will necessarily be promoted if the bribed candidate is elected). The above portion of this essay is mostly true. -- The 'big lie' is in the title,_-- in fact: --- Capitalism, (and our Republic) Depends on Consumers/Voters Being Able to Think Critically… The Democrats/Progressives in the USA have been using propaganda in this facist/communistic way since WW 1, and have had far too much political success. Trumps e!ection shows that there are still enough 'Capitalistic Critical Thinkers' to slow down our slide into socialism. -- But it is far from being stopped...
The problem is not inherent in Capitalism. All systems of government or economics, whether capitalism, marxism, forms of feudalism, or even religions, rely on manipulation of the low IQ common man to exist. Inevitably, crafty manipulaters rise and take over, calling it leadership. The only people calling the process invisible are people too stupid to recognize it.
The problem is not inherent in Capitalism. All systems of government or economics, whether capitalism, marxism, forms of feudalism, or even religions, rely on manipulation of the low IQ common man to exist. Inevitably, crafty manipulaters rise and take over, calling it leadership. The only people calling the process invisible are people too stupid to recognize it. The Democrats/Progressives in the USA have been using propaganda in this facist/communistic way since WW 1, and have had far too much political success. However, --- Capitalism Depends on Citizens Being Able to Think Critically -- Thus, conservatives must find a way to end the progressive control of our education systems. Progressive agit-prop in our public schools must be stopped...
If you are seriously interested in how this happened, I can give you a complete history of the events. I have great difficulty typing so it will be a day or two.
With practice, employment of modern technology, and study, everything improves, including propaganda and selling corruption. It's been 60 years ago that I had a strained conversation with a Marxist psychology professor who was a researcher in mathematical models of behavior in one of the top departments in the country. He explained to me that the way to get people to accept communism was to convince the people that they wanted it. I am not a political novice. My father was attending communist party recruitment meetings in 1948 with guidance from a friend. My mother was a confrontational pioneer type woman with a right cross that would intimidate Jack Dempsey. She was genetically and instinctively inclined to be a warrior who became one of the finest stand-up free style combat pistol shots in the country at age seventy. She could consistently hit a pack of cigarettes 150 feet away using a revolver. I trained her. I saw a big dog attack her once and she slapped it across the chops whereupon it laid on its back in submission and begged for mercy. She would counter communist party arguments with a furiousness and flawless insight that made sense. That ended communist party recruitment around the house. To sum it up, I've been involved with politics periodically since 1948. I have also inherited some of my mother's capacity for truthful furiousness and wrath that I find difficulty in controlling. Tea Party Meetings are a mutual strain upon me, as well as on guest lecturers brought in. I ask reasonable questions which they can not answer. Tea Partiers start off each meeting with a prayer. God, if he exists, does not bother to intervene in the affairs of humans. The condition of humans is of no consequence to a figure concerned with the supposed creation of billions of planets in millions of galaxies. The days when the entire universe was conceived to revolve around the Earth and its people are over. Hundreds of millions of innocent people have been slaughtered while praying to the heavens for protection. The perpetrators of the suffering are not subject to divine intercession. Usually evil triumphs, rather than suffers for their crimes. Tea Party members like to believe the perpetrators will suffer the punishment of a hypothetical hell for eternity after death while Tea Party members will spend time in heaven. I'm not interested in debating Biblical mythology. My orientation is understanding the problems in this world and their solutions. Jewish culture has immortalized THE holocaust. It has become a socially reinforced art form for Jews. They don’t have a monopoly on Holocausts. In fact, many nations of the world have received holocausts. When the Kahns moved westward in their conquests, they gave assurances that if cities peacefully surrendered, not a drop of blood would be spilled. They were true to their word. They buried the surrenderers alive. When Joe Stalin was the leader of communist Russia he confiscated all the food in the Ukraine, the agricultural breadbasket of the Soviet Union, and redistributed it throughout the Kremlin and other population centers to show how well communism was doing raising food. Seven million Ukrainians died of starvation. That was a holocaust. As a result the Ukrainians welcomed a Nazi invasion as potential salvation and still mistrust Russia to this day. When the Japanese occupied the Philippines, their officers had a sport. They would toss Philippino babies in the air and have contests to see who could cut them up in the smallest pieces with swords before they hit the ground. That was a holocaust. The rape of Nan King was a holocaust. China conducted a holocaust upon it’s own people. During the great Hunan drought, massive amounts of food was sent to the Hunan province as a world humanitarian gesture to keep people alive. Politicians in adjacent provinces confiscated the food as it passed through their provinces and it wasn’t allowed to reach Hunan. In about 1015, general Malmoud invaded India to conduct Islamic jihad. At first he sent the higher class captives back home to be sold as slaves under islam. The others he just killed. As time went on Islam had enough slaves so he sent carts back to his caliph piled high with thousands of heads to show how effective he was in continuing to administer punishment to infidels who had never even heard of Mohammed. Malmoud had a secretary who’s pleasure it was to keep track of and explain what he was doing. Over a period of centuries it cost 88,000,000 Hindu lives to continue the tradition. That’s a real holocaust. Some of it is still continuing in the Indian province of Kasimir. There’s much more, but what has been presented is sufficient. Prayer by the victims were insufficient to protect them. Enough about holocausts. Another ritual Tea Partiers go through at the beginning of each meeting that is typical of what are called conservatives, is the pledge of allegiance to the flag. I hate this country. A once great nation has become a disgusting God damned brainless swill dooming itself to becoming a fragmented third rate nation filled with eternal teenagers, self serving politicians and parasites. This county is being invaded, ruled pilfered, and squandered by evolutionary throwbacks who have done nothing with their home nations but want to import their culture and mentality here licensed by communist phrases and jargon. Using constant repetition and dominance of communist verbal constructions anything can be justified before dumbasses, including suicide. During the ‘60s a life of sex, drugs, and Rock and Roll became an acceptable norm. As this nation has fallen into progressive impulsive degeneracy, greater proportions of jurists and politicians have found it advantageous to support it. On the other hand greater proportions of stunted recent generations are living it and want that support. It promises an easy lifetime in office with power with a secure salary. As I have said many times before, no great nation or empire has survived the softness and stupidity made possible by its previous successes. Tea Partiers and other conservatives believe elaborate rituals will save them. Consequently they march in tight circles saluting and rallying around the Flag or conduct prayer sessions and vigils in a little kid’s fantasy. Get right with God and embrace the flag then the meek shall inherit the Earth. I prefer not to confront such people because their beliefs keep them straight. The idea of a punitive God watching over the and taking notes regarding who has been bad or good keeps them out of trouble and founds a livable society. But, such activity provides no refutation to the realities or history of what they should be facing. Infantile displays of patriotic solidarity let the pillars and strategy of the radical left go unchallenged. In doing so, they have become the left’s major asset. This is part of where I stand. I’m aware that it irritates many people. I’m accustomed to rejection. Herbert Crowly or Crowley in The Promise of America wrote a book early in the twentieth century portraying a glorified conception of socialism/communism. His book was seriously read by President Woodrow Wilson and he was brought into Wilson’s administration. FDR and LBJ also read the book and were very favorably impressed. As of six or seven years ago the book was still in print. The biggest event that ever occurred for the radical left was when about 20 strongly Marxist members of the university of Frankfurt, in Germany formed a school during the teens, the Institute for Social Research (in German), popularly known as The Frankfurt School. They compounded a theory and method of attack in destroying Western Civilization that hasn’t failed once in nearly one hundred years. It was called a long march through the culture. Europe has been lost. The march has been continued in America since about 1933. The Democrats/Progressives in the USA have been using propaganda in this facist/communistic way since WW 1, and have had far too much political success. It aggravates the hell out of me that conservative people don’t know the historical background and intent of what faces them. And don’t want to know because it’s annoying useless history as far as they're concerned. But it's history that's being completed. The march though the culture is being continued. My formal activity and reputation has been in physics, engineering, chemistry and psychology. If you choose to go on with this, I’ll post part of a internet course I gave in political psychology for you that will document it.
At least he was an honest Marxist-Fascist. The PTB has managed to hijack at last the major institutions they've needed to usher in its Marxist utopia. The Academe have managed to convince many basement-dwelling, parasitic, unemployed/unemployable Millenials that Marxism is preferable over capitalism. They've been trained NOT to analyze and think, but conditioned, brainwashed and indoctrinated. Liberals and Democrats are a menace to freedom. And isn't it true that 90% of these Commie-Anarchist pods tend to be ATHEIST? Have you analyzed why THAT is? (I need not a Doctorate in Psychology to know the reason. But do you?) Though I often disagree with your opinion, Robert, I find your it, your analyses and observations fascinating AND amusing. I enjoyed reading about your Annie Oakley mother and her influence in knocking some sense into your father's head when he was tracking to become recruited as a Commie. Tea Partiers and other conservatives believe elaborate rituals will save them. Consequently they march in tight circles saluting and rallying around the Flag or conduct prayer sessions and vigils in a little kid’s fantasy. Get right with God and embrace the flag then the meek shall inherit the Earth. Lol...That made me laugh. It's called "esprit de corps." According to Merriam: It demonstrates "The common spirit existing in the members of a group and inspiring enthusiasm, devotion, and strong regard for the honor of the group." What so unusual about that? All branches of the US Armed Forces have their esprit de corps rituals; So do most organizations who recognize that they all need to be on the same wave-length or frame of mind. Even Congress STILL starts their day off with a prayer. TO God of all things, of ALL people. Have you considered that you might be the Outlier for finding this tradition of "teams" boring or unnecessary? I prefer not to confront such people because their beliefs keep them straight. The idea of a punitive God watching over the and taking notes regarding who has been bad or good keeps them out of trouble and founds a livable society. But, such activity provides no refutation to the realities or history of what they should be facing. Like a parent, AS a parent, God can be either "punitive," "chastising," corrective," encouraging," "inspirational," and/or "rewarding." Nothing strange about that dynamic. The God of the Bible or Jesus Christ have NEVER promised happiness or justice or a pain-free life IN THIS WORLD. Only guidance, guidelines for wisdom for this life, Love and Understanding, AND promises for those who remain faithful and endure IN THE NEXT LIFE (See Genesis, Proverbs, the Gospel, Paul's Romans, and of course, John's vision in Revelation.) We won't engage in The Dance again -- whether God exists or whether the Universe invented itself for no purpose, randomly...and with it, people -- who apparently also have been created randomly as well, with no discernible reason or purpose. NOT going there. What matters is that there IS Justice for ALL and Mercy for SOME, aka The Faithful, on the Last Day. Yes, as well as an end of suffering and New Life beyond the Material World -- FOR SOME, whether you accept it or not. Back to Prayer. I still pray that you and others let The Light in. Prayer may well often be about intercession of survival as well as of personal situations and events. But prayer to God is also a REAL mechanism for spiritual comfort and preparation for a temporary suffering as a result of a very REAL Evil entity let loose in the material world. You may deny it, but BOTH worlds exist. You can not prove the Spirit World does not exist, Robert. Scripture has explained ALL of those dynamics, though I realize you refuse to consider the spiritual dimension exist, discounting it as "fiction." Herbert Crowly or Crowley in The Promise of America wrote a book early in the twentieth century portraying a glorified conception of socialism/communism. His book was seriously read by President Woodrow Wilson and he was brought into Wilson’s administration. FDR and LBJ also read the book and were very favorably impressed. As of six or seven years ago the book was still in print. The biggest event that ever occurred for the radical left was when about 20 strongly Marxist members of the university of Frankfurt, in Germany formed a school during the teens, the Institute for Social Research (in German), popularly known as The Frankfurt School. They compounded a theory and method of attack in destroying Western Civilization that hasn’t failed once in nearly one hundred years. It was called a long march through the culture. Europe has been lost. The march has been continued in America since about 1933. The Democrats/Progressives in the USA have been using propaganda in this facist/communistic way since WW 1, and have had far too much political success. It aggravates the hell out of me that conservative people don’t know the historical background and intent of what faces them. And don’t want to know because it’s annoying useless history. My formal activity and reputation has been in physics, engineering, chemistry and psychology. If you choose to go on with this, I’ll post part of a internet course I gave in political psychology for you. I love this stuff. Bring it on. I wish you'd have a vehicle at Breitbart or anywhere you can educate conservatives on the history and genesis of Marxism and the long-range plan to destroy America (as well as the West from the inside.) It is almost, "Mission Accomplished." You'll note that Stalin considered the quashing of America's "Morality" and "Spiritual life" -- intertwined with Christianity -- essential in destroying us.
I also enjoyed your dissertation on "Holocaust" and concur that the Jewish people own no historical monopoly on the word or act. AND that many have indeed exploit it politically virtually in the same way blacks perpetually exploit and "never forget" a slavery which ended over 150 years go.
By chance are you a subscriber to either Hulu's 'The New outer Limits'? Or Netflix 'Black Mirror'? Excellent shows for the most part. (Anyone else out there watch either?) Both shows' themes echo your very first sentence, "With practice, employment of modern technology, and study, everything improves, including propaganda and selling corruption." In both series, perverted/subverted technology is at the core of a dystopian future in which it is exploited mostly as a mechanism and tool to control the masses, as you note. Technology is and will be used especially mask corruption and improve propaganda methods (disguised as "entertainment" and "high-tech aids.") We are already there, aren't we?
Absolutely true. In many senses "bliss" has become extinct, a primary casualty of technology. We have by no choice of ourselves become acutely aware of the "invisible fences" that now restrict or limit our physical and mental parameters. Money Quotes for sure: Thinking critically means making reasoned judgments that are logical and well thought out. It is a way of thinking in which one doesn’t simply accept all arguments and conclusions to which one is exposed without questioning the arguments and conclusions. It requires curiosity, skepticism and humility. People who use critical thinking are the ones who say things such as, “How do you know that?” “Is this conclusion based on evidence or gut feelings?” and “Are there alternative possibilities when given new pieces of information?” Wait. I've changed my alleged mind. You're a K00K. ;-)
My mother went to New York in the early twenties to become a model and actress. She was five feet seven which was very tall for a woman in those days. The ideal was, as the song said, five foot two with eyes of blue. Men were much shorter than they are today. Volentino, the great lover in movies, was only about five feet four. She would tower over leading men. One night at a party one of the men made an off colour proposal to her. Her reply was to take a swing at him and deck him. The man's name was Florenz Zigfield owner of the Zigfield Follies who ran the New York stage. When he awoke he said they needed someone a little more congenial. That was the end of her stage career.
I don't refuse to consider the spiritual dimensian nearly as much as you suggest. I an a psuchoanalic, logical positivist realist, who believes in Bushido as it was originally formulated. It makes demands upon me that makes the ten commandments seem like childs play. Atheism is adopted for two reasons. There are sincere atheists who try to live a rational better life. On the other hand there are a greater number of atheists who adopt it as a method of declaring there should be no rules governing their interactions with other people or animals. I deplore the second class of atheism or agnosticism.
We're screwed. The reliance on a few hitech communication outlets with fewer alternatives plus the control of the educational system has made the stated job of the Frankfurt School faster and more thorough than it once was. Then too, in the last several years we have had an unseen powerful second government. The Clinton apparatus has collected billions of dollars from subversives around the world to promote countercultural people and propaganda. Their government doesn't need to build bridges or repair roads. It only is responsible for creating and dissiminating political propaganda. It buys and sells people.
Esprit de corps in the armed forces is a method of producing thoughtless automatons and acceptance of suicidal orders from low IQ sergeants and inferior officers. It's the biggest con game in the world. My intetion was to go on living. I don't care who I need to kill to do it. Enemy idiots or our own idiots with mouths full of slogans and empty heads hyped up on esprit. During basic training in the regular army more than sixty five years ago, we had a regimental meeting designed to hype us up. I raised my hand and told them to stick their up their ass. I was respected and made E5 in a year and a half. During WW1 the British marched at high port into roaring German machine guns. They lost four and a half million men repeating it. But it was a magnificent display of esprit de corps.
I'm going to post The Rise and Power of the Radical Left in America. Its 27 pages. I may need to post in in three parts. Originally it was part of the series I did on Viet Nam. It is a dense and thorough read.
The Rise and Power of the Radical Left in America RLK By the end of the 19th century Karl Marx, with support and enthusiastic help from Friedrich Engles, had written his treatise on communism and it had grown from obscurity to achieving wider circulation, accessibility, and interest. At the beginning of the 20th century, there was scarcely a man who considered himself intellectually superior and active in America who, repelled by the irritating distraction and degrading vulgarity of having to engage in common labor or concrete economic endeavors that he thought were beneath them, did not have a plan for a socialist society in his vest pocket that was more suitable to his life style preferences and ambition. The perfect communist or socialist society world be one in which he would finally be rightly positioned within a class of the recognized and respected erudite elite, in agreement with his subjective view that he, and those like him, should finally be recognized as Chiefs rather than common Indians. Such people often believed they had been cheated, overlooked, or accidentally denied their proper station in life. They were seeking justice in a sociopolitical revolution that would recognize their superiority and elevate them in stature. In short, there was a useless, alienated, and unwilling intelligentsia scattered around looking for a place. A fantasized communist/socialist society would provide that place --and possibly even position them as leaders or administrators. A man competent and satisfied in his present condition and the opportunities available to him, is a poor candidate for working toward radical change or revolution. It is the incompetent man, the man disinclined to participate in the mundane daily efforts necessary to provide for himself or make society run, the man who believes he has been unfairly stigmatized, or the man self-oppressed with any of a number his personal failures or deficiencies who needs something else to blame, who is a candidate for neurotically displacing and channeling his diffuse dissatisfaction and frustration into a political revolutionary movement. The man who views the present system as unjust or oppressive because it fails to reward him in accordance with his inflated view of himself easily becomes a candidate for working to overthrow the present system. That’s the pool to draw from for personnel necessary to form the basis for violent revolution. (That’s one reason why leftist revolutions don’t function as planned. The pool to be drawn from to fuel the revolution is so poor in quality that it must be purged afterward.) The problems for the American radical left at that time was that it was insufficient in numbers, was fragmented, widely separated, and was without unifying strategy or tactics. It was dismissed as a scattering of neurotic disgruntled angry collection of people seeking a path to avoid real life and realistic self evaluation. So it was in America at the beginning of the 20th century. It turns out that communism, in practice, is never perfect enough to accommodate the moral and intellectual incompetents or frivolous, and often sadistic mentalities, seeking retribution that are often the obsessed work-horses of its revolution. The failure of communist or socialist societies is always attributed to their not being true communism or true socialism. There is true communism, which is a quasi-religious fantasy, as opposed to necessary real communism that eventually must occur beneath the inspiring slogans and rhetoric. The problem is that people blinded into seeking the fantasy true communism or socialism end up with real communism or socialism. True communism or socialism is a license for erudite parasites, often sadistic parasites. Someone once described socialism as a beautified myth that two people could live off each other indefinitely without either of them doing any work. Attempting to get anything accomplished under it is like pushing a string. People are too busy reciting inspirational slogans to work. It comes as a surprise to many of them that the day will come when they will be required to stop marching to the beat of glorious slogans and rhetoric or singing stirring revolutionary anthems, then go back to work doing the same necessary mundane jobs they were doing before the revolution –but with a new boss. Real communism, out of habit and sadistic inclination, confers a license to bust the heads, or kill, anybody showing slight inclination not to conform to it. With a little luck one achieves an unlivable combination of the two systems of personalities –the idealists and the realists. There are few catastrophes on earth worse than parasitic idealists who’s only inclination and mission in life is worship of superficial beautiful sounding inspiring political poetry and concepts dearly held in their rarefied fantasies, who are given permission and position to kill, or persecute, with religious zeal, people who question or reject that idealistic fantasy. They blindly enforce a society that is a product of imposed brutal purification, while thinking and speaking in terms of ecstatic rhetoric avoidant and elevated above the obvious truth of the reality of the slaughter they are committing and the suffering they inflict. They live obliviously behind a wall of euphemistic words that defend them against seeing the seriousness of their corruption and viciousness. THE DEVELOPING STATE OF THE ART IN EUROPE Meanwhile, in Europe, in 1923 a group of about 20 educated wealthy Jews who fancied themselves communist intellectuals created a department at the University of Frankfurt, in Germany, called The Institute for Social Research, which became known in the sociopolitical world as the The Frankfurt School. The department was headed by Georg Lukacs in Frankfurt and was bonded by similarity of thought and identical mission with Antonio Gramsci in Italy. Others among the Frankfurt faculty were Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Wilhelm Reich, Eric Fromm and Herbert Marcuse. Several of these people subsequently became highly influential names in psychiatry and/or social science theory in America. Lukacs was, and still is, considered second to only, and almost beyond, Marx in terms of Marxist theory and definately superior to Marx in terms of strategy and tactics. Marx earned the label of Marxism’s founder, but Lukacs took over as the brains behind continuation and expansion of the ideology. In a thousand years Marxist theory will never be called Lukacs theory because Lukacs, no matter how good he was, didn’t originate the mission that he successfully promoted and expanded far better than Marx could have. Older orthodox Marxist theory had predicted that in the event of a large scale war, the population would rise up, revolt, and demand communism. But when World War One occurred, this did not happen. The question was why? Independently, Gramsci in Italy and Lukacs, then 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 communist or socialist revolution was impossible in the West until both Western culture and Christianity could be destroyed. Together, they melodramatically wailed like innocent children, “Who will save us from Western civilization?” Whether the ‘they’ who constituted ‘us’ were so innocent as to be deserved to be saved, or who would save Western civilization from them, was never a consideration within their narrow boundaries of thought. They had been at their sociopolitical mission so long and were so absorbed by it, that they could not see beyond their, and its, subjective private world. They had become mentally alienated by their exclusive concentration restricted by dedication to ideological acceptability. Their conceptual world had been reduced to automatized rote rigidity within the boundaries imposed by obsessional exclusionary focus channeled into ideology and exclusive reference to tightly woven euphemistic vocabularies. Exclusionary focus becomes typical when people become so dedicated to the pursuing the success of a mission that they leapfrog over questioning the wisdom or purpose in pursuing the mission. They don’t doubt their assumptions. They don’t step back and ask themselves, “Why are we doing this?” The Frankfurt School had thought themselves into a warped and severely psychopathological corner that they were too delighted with to give up. They were being recognized and celebrated as avant guarde intellectuals. They were receiving attention. They had money. They had prestigious academic positions. This formed the basis for, and supported, a type of aristocratic haughtiness that was accompanied by entitlement to ascend to power over the mass of lesser intellects. They had no other life. They wanted no other life. No other life would offer them much more that what they had. Additionally, the Frankfurt Schoolers concluded that the working class would not lead a Marxist revolution, because it was becoming part of the middle class, the hated bourgeoisie. The success of existing economic systems they intended to overthrow was robbing the radical left of fodder to feed its communist revolution and had to be stopped or rendered irrelevant. This leads one into consideration that the Frankfurt Schoolers were not into revolution for the sake of the working class, but to achieve their own personal purposes. (The prospect was looming that the working class, who they were supposed to be serving, would soon reject their services. Predictably, and humorously, the Frankfurters did not cry out, “Who will save us from the success of freed developing non-communist systems?) This is a pattern that is recurrent in revolutionary thinking. In Viet Nam, for example, social and economic progress in daily life was occurring at a rate so fast under the leadership of Diem in the South that it was felt communist revolution there would soon be impossible. North Viet Nam could not offer people the opportunities that were blossoming in the South. It was too busy killing people who were not enthusiastic backers of communist revolution. Guerrilla warfare against economic progress in the South was systematically mounted to reverse it. So they initiated guerrilla warfare against the South. They blew up roads necessary to transport goods and services within the country, killed doctors and nurses in rural clinics, and killed schoolteachers. If Ho Chi Minh and his minions in the North were as concerned with improving the condition of the common people as the North pretended to be, it would have unified with the South and sought Diem to become the leader of the entire area. But the North was more obsessed with purging, killing, conquest, and control under the rigors of communism, than improvement. At the time there were too few people in critical positions in America willing, or ideologically uncontaminated enough, to make that blatant observation and defend it. American thought and analysis had become too subverted, displaced, and dominated by radical leftist indoctrination and propaganda to permit making or expressing such observations. The war was lost because undermining elements within the American government were working to subvert winning it as testimony to the glorious invincibility of communism and to present a deliberately lame pretense of military defense against its supposed inevitability. Each deliberately programmed tactical or strategic failure by subversives in our government was hailed as an indication of the North’s superior spirit and determination. To present the false image of communism’s invincibility and inevitability required the loss of nearly 60,000 American lives. In the minds of those engineering that loss, this would be an acceptable cost to obtain their various heroic sounding agendas –as long as they weren’t the ones who had to pay that cost. The results of prolonged subversion and sabotage on our side were attributed to proof of indomitable strength and commitment on the communist side. Then too, members of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations wanted to demonstrate their brilliance in being capable of carrying off such deception while escaping responsibility for the debacle. To support the radical left had become the mark of touted superior intellect. There seems to be a popular affectation among pseudo intellectuals that if you can convince someone that hell is an icehouse, you need to be damned smart. Many pseudo intellectuals spend a lot of time doing it, and the Kennedy administration was full of them. But, at the time, and under the circumstances, it had to be done with extreme cleverness and deceit. It was an exercise in strutting their infantile sense of superiority by imposing a deceptive destructive creativity. If they pulled it off it would be a real coup in demonstrating how smart they were. They began by assassinating Diem, leaving South Viet Nam leaderless and bewildered. By the time the “best and brightest” were through showing how brilliant they were and turned the situation over to Nixon, it was hopeless and the attempt was made to blame Nixon for it. It is a characteristic of radical leftist thinking that the prospect of the system to be overthrown was/is working to people’s advantage is an ideological blasphemy that must be eliminated by any method. It does not work within the system. It works within destruction of the system. To work within the system and destroy it, Lukacs designed a long term theoretical strategic program of attack called Critical Theory. In application of Critical Theory, all aspects underwriting Western civilization and Christianity were to be systematically criticized as loudly as possible, as often as possible, by any means possible, and as unrelenting as possible. Lukacs implicitly, or as a matter of vague intuition, understood that most humans are herd animals, psychologically, who chase social affectations or frivolous fads indiscriminately, or let perceived group consensus do their thinking for them, although it was never explicitly stated as part of Critical Theory. Most humans are guided by a desire to psychologically conform to those around them and thereby achieve acceptance or psychological safety/comfort in herd membership. (The definitive experimental work documenting this was done years later under initiation by the famous Yale Studies on Attitude Formation and manipulation during the nineteen fifties, discussed elsewhere in this series.) (Dr. Goebbels also understood this phenomenon very well, and used it to mass-inculcate Nazi philosophy and control over the German population for Hitler.) Most people feel uncomfortable in the defense of contrary ideas against the pressure of the group or crowd, even if the crowd is obviously wrong. Disagreeing with a unified crowd intensifies latent doubt and promotes fear. We are taught to look at the people around us for confirmation and authority instead of standing on our own two feet to make independent evaluations. The undeveloped person craves crowd reassurance and membership more than observable truth. Perception is everything and can be altered by words used to describe anything or by social conformity or acquiescence. By constant loud and forceful repetition, Lukacs realized radical leftists could fabricate a perceptive illusion that their Critical Theory attack represented large scale consensual validation by the general population. Through engineering and synthesizing the of perception of an illusion of mass support, they would synthesize and maintain a long term psychological fad that people would conform to, and that would attack and weaken the foundations of Western civilization bit by bit, over a period of decades, producing an increasing atmosphere of widespread doubt and confusion, until it would crumble, making their revolution possible, if not probable. The strategy became not so much the direct selling of communism, but a constant attack on all satisfying or productive aspects of the culture with a final offering of belief in communism/socialism as escape from the rubble. I can hear the counter-arguments now. If the Frankfurt Schoolers were surrounded with a culture, why did that culture not produce conformity pressures upon them? The answer is: They existed within an immediate group of their same mentality that reinforced their ideas and functioned as a buffer against outside cultural disagreement. They also won the debate because nobody showed up to answer them until it was too late. Their opponents were too unstudied and wavering, to the point of being comical, to mount a defense against Frankfurt arguments. I also suspect that the Frankfurt Schoolers also were high in what was once known as psychopathic deviance, now renamed sociopathy, which renders people proudly immune to social conformity influences. It has been my observation over the years that among a certain class of primitive mentalities, that infantile defiance, and the attention received from it, is more important to them than group membership. Not all people who are immune to crowd/herd influence are destructive psychopathic deviants. Some people, by force of reason, investigation, and sane creativity, create their own crowd in their head that they follow. They are among those who advance civilization and thought. Others, by isolation and pathological development of mind, create a crowd in their head that is oblivious to anything but itself, and dangerous to others or the world. If people of the second type gain influence, they become the world’s tyrants and amoral conquering monsters. Much of human history consists of a list of names of people of the second type. Additionally, the Frankfurt School had machined out a system of interpretation which interpreted crowd disapproval into a subjectively uncontestable indication that the Frankfurt School thinking and mission was correct. Crowd disapproval, thus, became converted into a welcomed positive event that conferred confidence in their mission. Again, the strategy became not so much the direct selling of communism, but a constant attack on all satisfying or productive aspects of the culture with a final offering of belief in communism/socialism as escape from the rubble. 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.” (From a series of writings and lectures by William S. Lind) Such was the means of applying critical theory when authority or coercion were possible e.g. under a Commissar. Today, Defense of Western civilization has become displaced into an arcane foreign language that even advocates need to struggle to re-famiarlize themselves with in order to express themselves. Those who control the predominance of language, control the ease or reflexive accessibility to language expressing thought and eventually control human thought. There is a hierarchy of common usage coupled with accessibility. There is something known in psychology as free response hierarchy that is determined by common usage. If you use or hear accurate analysis, it becomes easy to repeat with familiarity. If it is never heard, easy familiarity and usage becomes a solitary struggle to recapitulate positions from historical beginnings or unknowns, and it slowly dies. Pool of easy access must be maintained. If it is displaced by a constant predominance of word salad, then refutation of word salad becomes a strain and the equivalent of searching through ancient Greek to individually derive and express concepts that would, or should, be used commonly or reflexively in a serious adult society. Individual recapitulation and derivation of defensive refutation is strange unprepared territory. One can’t remember or utilize what, through non presentation or non usage, practically, never existed. The prominence and dominance of Critical Theory has displaced defense of, or even knowledge of, Western civilization to the point where it is losing accessibility to the average human mind. Criticism, no matter how inane, becomes acceptable and repeatable if that’s all that is heard. Defense against criticism, even completely erroneous criticism, becomes less acceptable or less accessible to the mind if it is not, or is seldom, heard. Certainly, the creation of Western civilization has been spotted with numerous errors during its historical development. The term applied here is “historical.” Western civilization has been, and is, a slowly evolving continuing process. We are still making some terrible mistakes today. But there is a little known Golden Rule: If you don’t try to do anything, or improve anything, you will never make any mistakes. You won’t make any mistakes, but you also won’t produce any progress. The rule applies equally to personal endeavors or to civilizational endeavors. Western civilization has continued to advance, in jerks and spurts, over thousands of years culminating in the American revolution and Constitution. Adjustments still had to be made. A civil war was required to overturn a system of entrenched feudalism in the South. In recent years in America support of civilization has entered into a disastrous relapse. This leads to a statement of a Second Golden Rule: No great nation or empire has long survived the softness enabled by the previous successes which made it great. Some mistakes are hard to correct because the people who benefit from them tend to perpetuate and expand them by force. European Western civilization was not always a paradise. It was not historically or institutionally blameless. The pertinent term is “historically.” It was in the hands of oppressive impulsive Kings and nobles who would not let civilization further develop lest they lose their divine right to rule. It required many hundreds of years to extract the capacity for civilization to progress by prying it out of the hands of these self-absorbed and self-perpetuating degenerates and childish fops. In America we've reversed the progressive process. We have established a new system of effete lords or barons we call U. S. Senators and new dynasties of feeble-minded self-absorbed kings we call presidents. Additionally we have allowed to be built additional systems of authoritarian junior monarchies under a system of guild socialistic authoritarianism as gatekeepers in education and elsewhere. The system now controls our educational system, and secondarily our media. Law has been taken over by a system of entrenched self-serving prestigious lords who’s primary interest is to deliberately erect complex barriers to the obvious that are impossible for the average non-corrupt intelligent mind to negotiate and therefore lawyers create a need for themselves. Anything can be litigated under yet another group of noble authoritarians recognized by each other and feared by a helpless society that they have tied up in knots and must march to their tune. Our new rulers and monarchs are intent on becoming just as oppressive as the old monarchs it took centuries to get rid of. The principle difference between the two is the old monarchs ruled on the basis of divine right of kings while our new monarchs rule by deceptive words and through certification by sympathetic barons in the media that also consider themselves superior to, and antagonistic to, society. We are now ruled by a complex interactive system of aristocracy dedicated to perpetuating itself while parasitizing upon the people. We are being hit from all sides. From one side, one aspect of the system is enthroned politicians who are masters at evasion, masters of manipulation, masters of antagonism, master actors and posturers, and now, as often as not, masters of subversion. The radical political left and Critical Theory do not quarrel with this new system of manipulation and oppression. The radical left intends to permanently position themselves within this structure to impose ideological uniformity, direction, and conformity within the population. They are bribing and buying entire socially powerful occupational areas with certificates bestowing superiority and deserving ruling aristocracy. The process is one of politicalization of segmented occupational areas then making those areas into sub-monarchies serving the chief ideological monarchy. We have feudal fiefs of law, of politics, of the media, all directed toward imposing a socialist ideology under fief socialism. By doing this, a new the feudal system can be reestablished in a way that supports or imposes the supervisory ideological radical leftist monarchy at the top. People within society-controlling occupations become individual or group ideological occupational barons prepared and certified as instruments of enforcing ideological compliance to subversion within the population. Years ago, I took a course from a psychology professor who was some kind of communist or socialist and who also did research on mathematical models of behavior. He said the technique for establishing communism/socialism was to convince people they wanted it. The technique for producing this is a system of comprehensive psychological warfare or terrorism: 1) to apply Critical Theory as much as possible so it is predominant and displaces other views. 2) to make leftist interpretation of events predominant. Revision of history is a propaganda and teaching tool within leftist ideology. 3) to inculcate and evasive or prejudicial systems of language containing leftist presuppositions. Invent and use euphemisms as a cloak of deception. e. g. Leftists are termed progressives. People who are not leftists must be the conceptual alternative, anti-progressives and deplorables. A wholesale invasion by lawless primitives across our Southern border is called cultural inclusiveness. Homosexuality is blandly described as an alternative life style not to be questioned and necessitates additional inclusiveness. People who are politically conservative are called rigid. People on the radical left are referred to as intensely committed, to social justice. People who reject complying with any of this, or who ask embarrassing questions, are summarily labeled extreme, divisive, or more recently, possible domestic terrorists. 4) to censor or restrict opposing views. 5) to encourage or impose behavior that makes people incompetent to live responsibly in a free society and therefore dependent upon a socialist society that will take care of them. Taking from the haves and giving to the have nots means iron-clad authority, and absolute rule over both those who are confiscated from, and those administratively appointed to receive the benefits of oppressive confiscation. 6) labeling people who contest or refuse to conform to any of this as dangerous radicals or domestic terrorists. Elements one through four are part of a pattern of systematic linguistic manipulation in which views supporting revolution displace those supporting Western civilization. What has been developed and inserted into American sociopolitical culture is a foreign language designed to skate over issues superficially while obscuring discussion of deeper realities. It is superficial propaganda-speak that produces superficial propaganda-speak quality of thought. Defense against Citical Theory and the political left is hamstrung in two areas. 1) People apt to confront Critical Theory are sensitive to accusations of any kind and are apt to fold their tent in introspection or pain when accusations of any kind are directed against them. The personalities of the radical left are higher in conscienceless psychopathic deviance and consequently, much more immune to accusations, be they true or not. 2) The left speaks an entirely different language that must be translated during debate. Each grandiose sentence by the left is filled with words that must be translated out of propaganda terminology into representation of reality for confrontation or refutation, which is an overwhelming task. Before there is a chance for one sentence to be translated, three more sentences are piled on at a fast rate that must be translated and rederived at the end of a debate segment. There’s no way to keep up with it. The radical left is too well drilled and reflexively fluent in alternate language systems. It can be refuted, but refutation requires more time than is allowed either in debate or in normal conversation. Refutation requires a long word by word written analysis. Over a period of time, if this approach from six directions is applied, people will want social or political imprisonment because they need it, or think there is no alternative. The over-all objective is displacement or deletion of language and thought systems contrary to Critical Theory with substitution of Critical Theory supportive material to the point of its being reflexive in the general population. To control use, and access, to language is to control thought. This analysis is getting a little ahead of itself at this point. We’ll return to it in more detail later. BACK IN THE UNITED STATES In 1933 the members of the Frankfurt School left Germany with Hitler and his thugs chasing about two steps behind them with intent to crack their skulls. (Hitler would not tolerate a bunch of Jewish academic communist revolutionaries contesting him for his plans to create a new Germany with himself, and only himself, leading it.) From there, many members of the Frankfurt School immigrated to America where some of them reformed their school in New York City. Others were rapidly, even ecstatically, welcomed and assimilated into professorial positions as intellectuals at prestigious universities such as Brandeis, Columbia, and Berkeley. It happens that probably 75 % of college professors are a rather childish and untalented lot living in an artificial world dedicated to perpetuate and insulate their egotistic false sense of superiority and the belief, or wish, that they have an absolute monopoly on brains. They don’t have a monopoly on anything. The are not gods. They are not learned saints. The average college professor has a slightly above average IQ with a good memory who is subject to the same self-serving crass temptations and tendencies toward corruption or dishonesty as ordinary people that you will meet on the street. The difference is they are able to wrap themselves and posture in intimidating titles and hide it better. They are verbally hyper fluent because all they do is manipulate words all day. They perpetuate a system of academic imperialism inhabited by the supposedly intellectually superior. This is particularly true in the so-called humanities. Again, were are confronted by a group of people who assert themselves to be the mental cream of society and of the belief that they were/are unfairly, even criminally, oppressed and disregarded. They are always looking for something to ridicule, criticize, or beat down in a “God is dead ” phenomenon in which something widely accepted is given a vigorous thrashing to make the point that their self declared brilliance is beyond contamination by mere cultural superstition or happenstance, and to draw attention to themselves. They are reminiscent of the Lilliputians from Swift’s ‘Gulliver’s Travels’ who were a very tiny people who cultivated stature by jumping over strings with cleverness, or parading similar meaningless acrobatics. Too many people in academia are small people jumping over strings of words and performing exhibitionist childish intellectual acrobatics within their culturally isolated status system. Consequently, the defiant aggressiveness, and well organized thoroughness of Frankfurt School Critical Theory was welcomed by the extensive culture of academically entrenched Lilliputians that were alienated and hostile due to supposed ignorant disinterest in their hobbies presented as obligatory academic course material and their rejection by outside society. The dismissal of the academic mind by employment of the common phrase “it’s all academic” to belittle irrelevant intricacies of an argument was infuriating to academics who believed they should be taken seriously. There is also the tantalizing assumption that the critic is so superior and scientifically detached from that which he is criticizing that he is far above conventional reservations about seeing its supposed defects clearly. Academics long to be acknowledged as superior –and superior in their detachment from conventional influences. Their motives are not understood by outside society, or frequently even by themselves. They are supported by an inbred isolated social structure and status system more rigid than anything seen in the military. You don’t need to grow up, in the sense of entering maturity, when in academia. All you need to do is jump through hoops imposed by superiors who have never grown up and have jumped through the same hoops, themselves, to obtain certification from an artificial world. The longer and more taxing the period of initiation, the more committed and unquestioning of the subculture students, and later as academics, become after having gone through it. Academics are often verbal grammatically correct slot machines pulling their own handle to spew out words and incapable or unwilling to believe the words they are spewing contradict reality. Academia has always been a world of words in which anything can be justified on a verbal level. The answer to word assertions dealing with fundamentals is not found in alternate verbal compositions, but is found in the real world from which academics are determined to remain aloof. Critical Theory suited such academic personalities perfectly. Consequently, the Frankfurt School found massive acceptance in the American academic world immediately. The Frankfurt School had the correct confrontive negative attitude that appealed to the academically diffusely hostile and alienated from society. They had the weight of impressive positions in prestigious institutions behind them. This made them academically attractive, certified, authoritative academic role models. Some colleges, such as Bennington Woman’s College were even founded on a mission of inculcating Critical Theory and proudly graduating radical leftist converts in a spirit of celebration and triumph. Additionally, Frankfurt Schoolers had the implicit counterpoise argument that people who disagreed with them disagreed with them because they were Jews. As Jews who had escaped Hitler they presumably had superior first hand knowledge of political instrumentality and attitudes related to anti-Semitism, this provided them with the argumentative luxury of asserting those who disagreed with them were Nazis. (Adorno went on to concoct something called the California F Scale personality inventory which ostensibly measured dangerous Fascist tendencies to make the argument for him in a pseudo-scientific milieu. His inventory postulated a psychological illness he termed Conventionalism--a rigid adherence to conventional middle-class values. It was Critical Theory repackaged in the guise of a psychological diagnostic test. When I was in graduate school in the ‘60s there was great emphasis on Adorno’s work, but no mention of his background or intentions. His personality inventory was accepted and is still in use today without reservation.) As a result of all these elements, Critical Theory quickly spread through the academic world like a highly communicable disease. It was acceptance of this kind of thinking that negotiated its acceptance. (The radical left is a master of creating and using counterpoise arguments. The process of employing counterpoise advocacy is to assert two, and only, or primarily two, mentioned categories in an argument, then assert all opposition to your position primarily is due to a malignant category portrayed in restricted example by ludicrous and often fictitiously exaggerated figures. The thrust of their argument then becomes, “If you’re not one of us, then you’re one of them. Hang your head in shame.”) (P. S. To my knowledge there has been no personality inventory ever developed to measure obsessive antagonism toward middle-class values or Western Civilization. Neither is there any such thing acknowledged as rigid adherence to conventional leftist values. Such would summarily now be stigmatized as a politically motivated and a ludicrous intellectual atrocity. Such a personality inventory should have been developed and cross-correlated with various psychiatric/psychological complaints or aberrations years ago.) In the 1950s, imposition of Critical Theory upon naive students in the college classroom was called “shaking students out of their middle class complacency.” Shaking professors out of their comfortable complacency, however, was not an option. It was interpreted as an intolerable insult to an assumption of intellectual superiority or certified supremacy. It would result in failing grades, being thrown out of class, or being expelled from the college. (And stll is.) Challenging an authority-based system of bloated professorial self evaluation could be lethal in the sense of depriving someone of university certification to pursue their later goals. On the other hand, students who bought into Critical Theory were told, and believed, they were learning something. They were told they were entering the intellectual big leagues by learning that something. They were. They were learning self doubt, self hatred, and hatred of the culture that enabled them to go to college and get brainwashed. Production of students who returned home as confused scrambled eggs with expanded arcane vocabularies and convoluted self referencing reasoning systems to defend their condition after their stern social(ist) classroom psychotherapy that awakened them to the total oppression inherent in the cultural/economic system was testimony that something important was going on there. Naive parents were discomforted by positions their children were arguing, but were influenced by a misguided faith in education and the reputation of its higher institutions, as well as by their children’s sudden intimidating verbal erudition, into believing good would eventually come of it. It would not. Many of their kids would become permanent de facto guerillas conducting a war against their parents as well as Western civilization. In the 1980s Critical Theory became relabeled and sold as “political correctness.” Arbitrarily relabeling it as “politically correct” allowed it to be imposed with open defiance and authority, in the word-influenced primitive mind, not only on students, but upon selection of faculty members, and upon society in general. That which disagreed with it was summarily labeled incorrect and subject to be censored from the classroom and elsewhere. (When Justice Robert Bork, who was viewed as a national treasure in some quarters, applied for consideration to the faculty of a major law school, he was rejected because it was argued that the presence of two conservative members on the faculty of forty-one would unbalance the faculty. It supposedly would require only two people on a faculty with 40 contrary opinions to unbalance it. (Someone must have some rather impressive and influential ideas if it requires an academic ratio of more than 40 to one to outweigh and smother them.) They already had one faculty member who was marginally conservative and constitutionally originalist.) Ideas which contradict the radical left were being sentenced to academic obscurity. The political left imposes censorship by a sequence of two arguments. The first argument declares that the left should be accorded equal representation in all things in the name of fairness. They keep hammering away until, bit by bit, they get what they want. When this fairness is achieved, the argument suddenly becomes that those who disagree with the left should be excluded because they do not fit in with the developing mainstream, with correctness, or with the increasing tide of leftist opinion and moderation. Arbitrary use of words, such as political correctness, if one believed them, licensed a system of persecution evolving in a subculture and society that placed too much entirely too much faith in words and labels, and too much faith in the status and position of those able to manipulate them. Supporting Western civilization, or such things as the original intent of the United States Constitution was declared incorrect, obsolete, extremist, and to be obliterated. What had evolved was a diffuse agreement on a politically-based doubtful amateurish concept or labeling of mental illness being treated in the college classroom on unknowing student patients by amateurish group psychotherapy disguised as course content, administered by hostile tyrannical self anointed geniuses who were certified by a system of other self anointed geniuses. The entire system was impregnably positioned, highly authoritarian, inbred, self serving, and politically dominated/oriented. Questioning it would be summarily labeled incorrect –and eventually even a domestic terrorist. Academic leftist imperialism was defiantly flexing its muscles without being contested. When members of the Frankfurt School came to America, it is as if they had died and gone to heaven. 1) Their leaders had the protective influence of being established in top grade American educational institutions where they had a bunch of self-impressed fops on the faculties eager to embrace them as esteemed colleagues. 2) They had access to naive easily influenced students who then went out into the world highly indoctrinated to carry on their mission. Those students, now highly credentialed, subsequently became positioned in key positions in the media, in entertainment, in government, and elsewhere who were subsequently referenced and boosted by each other as uncontestable sole authorities in all things. Indoctrinated students who subsequently go into education at the elementary or high school level indoctrinate their students. What takes place at colleges and universities eventually pours down into influence throughout the culture. 3) Very importantly, the Frankfurt School had the effect of consolidating and unifying the fragmented radical left in America. The radical left was given a direction and strategy to support instead of only wandering around whining and bumping its head into rejection in aimless discontent. 4) Members of the Frankfurt School were positioned in America, which was becoming the functional apex and demonstration of vitality of all they were sworn to bring down. America was the perfect place to be for their efforts to have maximum effect. If America would cave in and surrender, it would be a model for, and exert pressure upon, the rest of the world to do so also. Currently, America is in a surrendering mode. Immigration of the Frankfurt School into America is the most fortuitous and important thing that ever happened to the radical left in America–and eventually, the world.. Ironically enough, most people in America have never heard of it, don’t know what it was, didn’t/don’t know its intentions, and don’t know of its massive successes. Some of them only know something has gone progressively and seriously wrong with the country. After WW II some of the Frankfurt School who has been less fortunate, or less adept, at receiving academic positions, accolades, and recognition returned to Europe to continue their mission –which they did very successfully. “Who will save us from Western civilization?” In the 1950s, Marcuse, who had remained in America, later answered the question: a coalition of blacks, students, feminist women, and homosexuals. (Now helped by an unimpeded invasion of voracious primitive illegal invaders over our border with intent on feeding on the decaying corpse of an America too weakened by successful dominance of leftist propaganda and too ill-led to defend itself.) Marcuse as a tenured professor at Columbia, wrote a book titled ‘Eros and Civilization’ advocating free sexuality that affected the baby boom generation and earned him the title of “father of the new left.” In the days when the Frankfurt School created their original Critical Theory formulation, psychiatry/psychology was primitive and centered on the works of Sigmund Freud. I took a course from a distinguished clinical psychologist, some years ago, which accented the conflict between pursuit of immediate impulse gratification versus long term gain, well-being, or satisfaction in life. I have since become increasingly convinced that a principle function of civilized culture (Western civilization) is to guide people away from immediate impulse gratification and toward important long term considerations. The Frankfurt School Critical Theory formulation, if successful, would do just the opposite, removing that cultural guide, resulting in increased personal conflict between unleashed short term temptation and weakened concern about long term benefits or consequences –or no conflict at all –just immediate gratification–called the pleasure principle. In circles which recognize it for what it is, and are familiar with its history, it is known as establishment of the counterculture or cultural Marxism. It has become the national religion. Marcuse advocated a life style in which immediate impulse gratification and immediate pleasure should be sought with little or no realistic consideration of long term consequences. Theoretically, emotional repression could be theoretically eliminated and the psychological deformities resulting from such repression would also be eliminated. His books were read, and his ideas widely accepted by interpretive intermediaries, along with strong doses of supportive existential writers and theoreticians, by a morbid intellectually recipient subculture known as the beatniks of the late 1950s who paraded their neuroses and suffering as a badge of rejection of typical repressive culture, a mark of getting lost in intense intellectual exploration and achievement, and supposed personal depth. Within the beat subculture, convoluted expression of mental illness became an art form. From there, his ideas eventually sifted down from college undergraduates to high school students who liked the idea of engaging in immediate temptations and impulses in an atmosphere of nonjudgementality without ever having to read his books. They began to imitate the beatniks in dress and style and became known as hippies. Critical Theory had been, and was at the time, attacking the cultural basis for judgementality. Marcuse’s assertions flowed like a tidal wave among the preponderance of a generation of baby boomers who had been raised to become attractive teenagers instead of serious adults. They had been raised by TV’s Howdy Doody and Clarabell the Clown, and comparable presentations that offered little in the way of guidance toward adulthood, instead of being mentored toward serious adulthood. In many cases their only passing brush with primary serious responsibility had been to familiarize themselves with their TV channel selector. The existence of such personalities was not entirely a novelty. Coddled offspring of the wealthy upper classes had often showed such immature tendencies and become rich bums or aimless dilettantes, as did offspring of hereditary monarchs and nobles. The roaring twenties in America was marked by an explosion of immaturity, although for most people the twenties didn’t have much roar and they were too busy with day to day efforts to participate in it. They were physically and psychologically distant from the big cities where the roaring twenties was being juvenilely celebrated within a new surge of urban economic wealth enabling an opportunity to engage in childish fads and nonsense. Any tendency of the childish subculture presented as characterizing the twenties to become a consistent expansive cultural trend was terminated by the seriousness imposed by the sobering effects of the great depression and World War II. The baby boom generation represented restricted influence or guidance from adults and adulthood. Baby boomers were entering adolescence for its own sake, not as serious preparation for adulthood or as a transition to adulthood. Adolescence offered many of the amusements of adulthood without responsibility–particularly under the guidance of Marcuse’s concepts. (And so, in 1969 more than 400,000 of them were able to come from all over the country to attend the Woodstock music festival to participate in everything Marcuse advocated. Woodstock is still extolled as symbolizing the character and expression of a generation.) Many Baby Boomers would cling to adolescence, and its transient amusements, for the remainder of their lives. They, in turn, would raise their own children in accordance with their own childish values. And so, the childish radicalism of the sixties and seventies would be continued or expanded. The influence of the Frankfurt School and massive acceptance of Marcuse’s additional contributions, combined with the oblivious softness of the Baby Boom generation, to produce the worst catastrophe to ever befall the American nation. When Marcuse’s extention to Critical Theory combined with the prevailing reality-distanced mentality of the Baby Boomers, the mission of the Frankfurt School fell into place within a generation. The baby boom generation, on the average, is the worst, and most persistent, plague ever to befall America along with the politicians that represent and appeal to them. Not only have they been a curse upon the nation, they have been a curse upon each other. Their legacy has been one of living by the pleasure principle with little concern or preparation for the future, generalized incompetence, incurable immaturity, a frightening shallowness and lack of introspection, deficient socialization on an interpersonal level, lack of interpersonal empathy on an interpersonal level, a consequent 50+ percent divorce rate, a 40+ percent out of wedlock birth rate, a nation full of fatherless and semi-abandoned parentless children in those who are not aborted, widespread use of debilitating recreational drugs that bestow a chemically induced subjective feeling of unconditional approval between themselves and what they are doing to the people around them, and an enormous array of arguments externally furnished and constantly updated.to rationalize it all. The result has been that a preponderance of a generation squandered their own lives and mangled the lives of those around them while shouting FREEDOM! It was freedom for a night but with no regard for inevitable future consequences. It established behavioral patterns and deficiencies that would be transmitted to successive generations as acceptable. America is falling to pieces because so many people who call themselves adults, and are of adult age, have never been required to develop beyond early adolescence. The 40% out of wedlock children and legions of women deserted by playboy men/husbands require public welfare, assuming they are not Hollywood stars making a million dollars a movie that are exhibiting themselves as glamorous flagrant role models for this life style. The typical woman, with or without children, who gets caught up in these conditions wants socialism to help her through the decisions she was role-modeled and sold into making earlier with little consideration of the long term seriousness of life. The result, along with Marcuse’s live for the moment philosophy, was to produce a widespread population who were failures in their personal lives but living in a land of plenty that was the economic envy of the world. Ironically, they blamed their personal failure on the values they had been talked into rejecting under Critical Theory instead of upon the system of immediate impulse values they adopted. In this sense they were much like Playboy magazine’s Hugh Hefner who attributed opposition to his Playboy Philosophy to vestiges of Victorian antisexuality. Recognition of his continual calloused use of stupid, confused, but beautiful-looking women in photogenic relationships in which they were disposable and interchangeable was swept aside by continual talk about the alternative being Victorian antisexuality. The life style imposed upon his endless series of women demanded a degree of emotional repression and separation of those women from their selves that was life-wrecking. Hefner once described them as selfless. Hefner was basically a misogynist who paraded a series of beautiful ditzes as disposable masturbation machines in his vaunted total environment bed to the applause of perpetual worshipping teenagers. It looked good and became a role model to be emulated, but it was psychologically crippling. I doubt that anyone, and certainly not any woman, ever had a close relationship with Hefner. There was nothing inside him to get close to. He was, and is, too hollow and empty. Women were simply paraded by him as a succession of photogenic transient sexually active showpieces, not treated as human beings. To value another person as a human being, you need to be human yourself. Hefner never developed as far as that in his life. No woman of any depth or intelligence would want him around her. His TV show flopped because it, and he, was boring. He surrounded himself with photogenic airheaded women wiggling their behinds, and with various chrome plated trinkets, to divert people from noticing he was boring and a dud. While technically not the same age to qualify as a baby boomer, Hefner exhibited the same mental qualifications to be a baby boomer. He also championed the same life patterns as Lukacs and Marcuse sold, independently of Lukacs or Marcuse, and for different reasons. The reasons were different but the consequences were the same. Again, the counterpoised argument The process of employing counterpoise advocacy is to assert two, and only two, categories in an argument, then assert all opposition to your position primarily is due to a malignant category portrayed in restricted example by ludicrous and often fictitiously exaggerated figures –in this case an exaggerated view of Victorian antisexuality around which he created a crusade and fabricated a superficial personality for himself.. People employing a counterpoise typically argue from a position of what they ARE NOT, rather from what they ARE. Hefner was/is NOT a prisoner of Victorian antisexuality. What WAS he, or IS he? If anyone manages to get through his constant one-note monologue it is found that there is nothing there except a little kid –a playboy. A man of any seriousness and integrity would spot him coming 10 miles down the road, immediately recognize him for what he was, then turn his back on him. So would any woman of quality. But Hefner, with his photo magazine of enticing looking naked women, was training millions of young men to be just like him. He helped create the deterioration in male female relationships that the Frankfurt School originally intended. Hefner advanced what has become a popular ploy that has become a well-used tool of modern conscienceless psychopaths –fabrication of adherence to a conjectured high-minded fictitious cause or crusade which happens to incorporate destructive, hostile, predatory, or irresponsible acts that others must suffer for pay for that is declared to take unquestionable importance or precedence over other elements aspects of human life. Guilt over the cold crassness involved is not a issue or problem. It is dispelled from consideration by a loud declaration of incessant chest-puffing facade of self-righteousness by dedication to a supposedly higher asserted system of values or conjectured moral crusade. If the crusade is repeated often enough and with indignation at attempts to contest it, the person using it and the people embracing it, or even injured by it, may come to believe it. One abstract pseudo-moral crusade that is often being misused is the righteous invocation of “The Rule of Law.” The gods don’t make laws. Men do. And they are not above making laws to the detriment of others while benefiting themselves. Nor are they above overextending the concept of the rule of law in places or ways that it was never intended to have application. In recent periods America has been subject to a developing wave of clumsy, wanton, police brutality under the authority supposedly given to them under the rule of law. Their department supervisors back them up. The people in the nation are becoming the objects of low intelligence level bullies with guns and clubs. There is an alternate system of legality designed to impose accountability in such instances, but it is seldom mentioned in law schools and not applied in our court systems. There is a verbal pseudo-moral crusade that can be fabricated to justify any destructive, hostile, predatory, or irresponsible act that others must pay for. If you can’t fabricate one yourself, hire a lawyer or public relations team to do it for you. If there are enough of you doing it, hire a politician to legalize it. We’re becoming a nation influenced and directed by hyperverbal psychopaths fabricating elaborate facades of righteousness. The result of adoption of Marcuse’s assertions was psychologically crippling and demanded emotional repression on the part of the people it was victimizing. People have lost personal identity and meaning in life as they have found themselves becoming nothing but unloved interchangeable masturbation appliances in manic, but empty, lives. If a person’s personal life is empty, then everything else becomes empty. The result was/is an eventual diffuse discontent with life similar to that described in the first two paragraphs of this analysis that made people who bought into it candidates suitable for displacing their disgust into radical leftist movements. Economic affluence became irrelevant. They became so disappointed, disruptive, and filled with turmoil in their personal lives that personal affluence, the state of the economy, and the presence of opportunity became irrelevant. They were losers who didn’t know how to live, or didn’t want to know how to live, and were easily directed into displacing their diffuse dissatisfaction with life into an anger focused upon the economic system. Never has a nation been so prosperous and turned their back in anger and disgust on the economic system that made their prosperity possible because they didn’t know how to live meaningful or reasonable lives in it. They had been talked into not wanting to lead reasonable lives in it. The guidance of the culture, Western Civilization, was replaced with the guidance of a counterculture in which people danced to the uninhibited exuberance of childhood and adolescence in the absence, or rejection, of adult serious mentoring or supervision to advance into their adult years with a severe learning and maturity deficit which was permanent. They crippled each other with their insensitive egocentric immaturity. They crippled the country. In their anger and mindlessness they now hysterically follow the lead of destructive psychopathic politicians who run around in infantile defiant circles angrily stomping their feet on anything remaining that is a sign of moral health based upon prudent consideration for the future, or upon economic resurgence in the country in a defiant childish temper tantrum and destroying everything for amusement, but in so doing appeal to the incompetence and anger of constituents. (I’m tempted to use the term hebephrenia here, but it is too arcane.) The infantile rebellious personality is now in vogue and being applauded for its slapstick showmanship. We now elect haughty psychopathic rulers instead of representatives. They are destructive for their own defiant amusement in a form of grotesque sadistic vaudeville that evokes amusement and applause from generations of infantile hostile incompetents. It seems as though the ability to do it is hailed as an intellectual achievement. America is now in the throes of committing suicide to the psychotic accompaniment of encouragement, laughter, and celebration. The Frankfurt Schoolers knew that is what would happen. There seems to be a primitive preconscious or subconscious layer of destructiveness or borderline sadism in many people which, if you can tap into it, will reward you with enormous political or other power. The sadistic march of islamic jihad is a good example. Islam is not so much a religion, as it is an excuse to express this streak of sadism. Islam has no regard for human life. It is primarily concerned with flying into a blind rage which is communicable and in which muslims try to out-do each other resulting in taking human life over failure to conform to islam. In fourteen hundred years billions of people have continued in islam in an expression of this madness and have killed hundreds of millions of people. It still is on the march for more conquest and to inflict oppression. Mohammed unknowingly exploited this aspect of inherent viciousness in a way that it still has a hold on people many centuries after his death. People watch boxing matches, automobile races, or football games to see if (or hope) someone gets injured or killed. People watch politicians running in circles stomping, laughing, and crushing everything decent in the country and find them perversely satisfying and likable for a similar reason. They are admired, and reelected, for their portrayal of childish impudent provocative spunkiness. Marcuse’s book advocated a cultural inversion change. He argued that by freeing sex from any restraints, an immediate pleasure principle mode of living could be spearheaded to take precedence over the reality principle with the further development of the pleasure principle to everything else. In so doing, he executed a master stroke in radical leftist ideological accomplishment before he died. The strategy became not so much the direct selling of communism, but a constant attack on all satisfying or productive aspects of the culture with a final offering of belief in communism/socialism as escape from the rubble. I recall from late ‘50s and early ‘60s that one of the “existential outs” in dealing with the meaninglessness of life was to adopt a cause or crusade and identify with its struggle. Perfect communism/socialism was an interminable cause or crusade that was readily adoptable. One of the other mental “outs” was suicide, immediate or delayed. The destructive conditions inherent in the political left also was in alliance with that “out.” If nothing else, some people beg to be killed by their systematic provocations. Both patterns of maladjustment are commonly seen together, or separately, in psychiatric, or psychological clinical practice. (People don’t seek clinical help if they inhabit subcultures in which the maladies represent social or intellectual art forms.) The left garnered exploitation of both “out” remedies while encouraging a life style that generated a need for them. Marcuse came at the right time to insert the precise final key that opened the destructive ideological lock that was designed by Lukacs and Gramsci many years earlier while he laughed at the stupidity of the self-absorbed brats that bought into it. Communism/socialism promises economic sustenance for incompetence. The greater the predominance of incompetence and deficiency of integrity in a population, the more it will gravitate toward socialism. To a generation unequipped or unwilling to enter adulthood it has both appeal and necessity. Radical left wing politics also promises economic sustenance for incompetence. Occupying national political office has become entrance into a pretentious government that is sustaining a socialistic subculture of incompetents furnishing sustenance in Washington who make their living by promising sustenance to incompetents electing them. There is a synergistic relationship between incompetents at the top striving to create a lifetime, without term limits, of living off a healthy socialist dole from the government for holding political office by to massive incompetence at the bottom. The incompetents at the bottom less prestigious levels now demand entitlements regardless of their behavior, lack of effort, or disregard for the most elementary considerations of prudence, while politicians base lifetime careers upon rationalizing it for them, or getting it for them. One of the biggest major industries in America is the distribution of entitlements to what has become an entrenched subculture vacant of any prudent controls on their self-indulgent behavior. The result is an impending collapse of the entire nation into a morass of self-absorbed incompetence which it is incapable of supporting or surviving. This is the destructive strategy and intention advocated by modern descendents of the Frankfurt School, Cloward and Piven. The political left is a home for two things: 1) self-infatuated orators, not realists and 2) hysterical easily influenced incompetent followers of self-infatuated orators. American politics has become an arena for vacant-minded self-infatuated orators representing and protecting incompetency --their own and everybody else’s. The original members of the Frankfurt School have all died. But the Frankfurt School is now firmly established in America with a faculty of tens of millions due to its highly successful proselytization and training of surrogates to carry on its mission. The biggest and most influential voices in the leftist movement such as Saul Alinsky and Cloward and Piven are direct ideological descendents of the Frankfurt School. Schools at all levels under the common core curriculum are substituting left wing engineered cacophony for serious skills nececessary to enter and maintain society. By subversive education and poor childhood training we’re losing people with capacity to maintain a productive economy. Nobody wants to do it. They’re too busy involving themselves with glamorous sounding socialist rhetoric and if they do that, they are under the mistaken belief they are doing something. We are producing a solid mass of people incapable of entering adult society or continuing to maintain a healthy economy. They can talk, and recite a memorized list of exaggerated social and economic accusations under Critical Theory, but they won’t, or can’t do, anything competently on a day to day concrete level. Our television news is infiltrated with evasive left wing bias and interpretation that has been hired on by senior leftists. Playboy and Cosmopolitan type magazines openly administer the equivalent of Lukacs’ sex education courses. We have presidents who openly espouse leftist ideology in skillfully euphemistic terms. Foundations of logic have been replaced by human verbal slot machines spouting psychobabble. The vocabulary and verbal concepts used to describe and analyze things realistically have been relegated to inaccessability by disuse and lack of appearance in politics and the media, and have been replaced by attractive but evasive abstractions and generalities. Our entire pattern of language has changed so as to make rigorous thought or analysis far less probable. The communist revolution planned by the Frankfurt School is winning without needing to fire a shot. Coincidentally, we are graduating hundreds of thousands of young people from high school with inflated high grades and expectations to go to college, then become successful and welcomed by the outside world by receiving big paychecks and imposing job titles. It requires two years of remedial work at the jr. high school level before they can take useless pap simplified college courses. They either graduate as incompetents, or fail to graduate, with the result they become the next generation’s angry sociopolitical warriors against an oppressive culture. There is nothing left for them after their fantasy life they have been encouraged to believe in collapses, and they have effective role models leading them to be countercultural warriors. The following is a quote from Hobart Mowrer who became chairman of the American Psychological Association in the early fifties. As a psychoanalytic (in the broad sense) Logical Positivist-Realist who believes in a form of modernized Bushido, I do not believe in Christianity, Judaism, or sin. I find no evidence to support the belief that there is a God who concerns himself with intrusion into the affairs of mankind. Such mistaken belief is an assertion by men to create an illusion of their own central importance, instead of being a small insignificant speck within the infinite vastness of the universe. I believe when humans are born, it is up to them to take their best hold on life, and run with it with dignity and integrity. It is my observation that people can do things that are unnecessarily destructive and painful to themselves or to other people. The recognition of that fact, and the avoidance of such behavior is a prominent factor in humaneness and integrity. Refusal to abide by that may be arbitrarily termed sin in the religious sense. Mowrer used the term sin because that’s where he was at that time in his life and all he had to work with. Rather than using the term sinful I would substitute the concept of squalidly and obliviously self indulgent, impulsive, obliviously destructive to themselves or others, often filled with poorly understood rage or antagonism that is masked by abstract evasion, and immature. Beyond that, his words were wise. Hobart Mowrer: “For several decades we psychologists looked upon the whole matter of sin and moral accountability as a great incubus and acclaimed our liberation from it as epoch making. But at length we have discovered that to be free in this sense, that is, to have the excuse of being sick rather than sinful, is to court the danger of also becoming lost… In becoming amoral, ethically neutral and free, we have cut the very roots of our being, lost our deepest sense of selfhood and identity, and with neurotics, themselves, we find ourselves asking: Who am I, what is my deepest destiny, what does living mean?” (Sin, the Lesser of Two Evils,” American Psychologist, 15 (1960): 301-304) ------------------------------------ As best as can be recalled from memory, somewhere around about 1948 Mowrer also made the observation that normal people tended to desire someone with whom they shared values, interests, and goals in the opposite sex as a basis for marriage with companionship. It’s my observation that people who seek and find someone in a relationship such as this form marriages that last and have satisfying home lives. People who are primarily concerned about chasing and satisfying fleeting impulses are poor prospects for an enduring marriage. The destructive cultural environment has been has been producing people without the basic decency or qualifications to either want, or offer, the substance underwriting a fulfilling marriage. ------------------------------------- The unfortunate thing is that a predominance of psychotherapists who have bought into the concepts that they have been told are epoch making have been inculcating the politically correct psychopathic personality in patients as well as in class teaching and authoritative writing. They, at best, have been treating one category of mental misfunction by replacing it with something much individually and socially worse. Competent psychotherapists began privately complaining that they were getting patients since the 1980s who were not characterized by trauma or inappropriate guilt. They were getting more and more patients who were overgrown spoiled babies with large vocabularies and endless convoluted arguments they’d kick back at the therapist. They had to be psychotherapeutically raised from early childhood while they squalled, kicked, and had temper tantrums at each valid interpretation. It would require years of strenuous work to raise them from early childhood, if they had the fortitude to continue the process. Most such people don’t want to improve themselves. They want a socialist system that will change their diapers, clean up their messes, and make excuses for them. More from Mowrer: THE DISASTEROUS 1920's ATTACK OF THE COMMUNISTS UPON THE FAMILY UNIT. Extracts from O. Hobart Mowrer's book "The New Group Therapy" pp. 40-43 (Van Nostrand 1964 paperback) ................................................... “A few weeks ago I came across an unusually clear, succinct, and (so far as I can judge) objective account of the efforts which the Old Bolsheviks made, following the Russian revolution of 1917, to put into practice the teachings of that other great would-be emancipator, Karl Marx, and his collaborator, Frederick Engels. In his "Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State" published in 1902 Engels declared that money was just another vestige of the iniquitous capitalist system and would disappear with the "transformation of the means of production into collective property". In traditional marriage, women, he held, are in effect property, and their emancipation would follow as a matter of course with the abolition of private ownership. "We are now approaching," he wrote, "a social revolution in which the old economic foundation of monogamy will disappear just as surely as those of its complement, prostitution." And his culminating argument for the dissolution of marriage and the conventional type of family was "If marriage founded on love is alone moral, then it follows that marriage is moral only as long as love lasts." Since Engel's book was law with the Bolsheviks, as far as the institution of marriage was concerned, it is not surprising that, with the success of the revolution of 1917 assured, efforts were quickly and systematically made to put his teachings into effect. For detailed documentation of the way in which this was carried out, I refer the reader to Nicholas S. Timasheff's 1946 book, "The Great Retreat" but the salient facts of the case are these. Divorce, which had previously been difficult to obtain in Russia, became extremely easy; a postal card notifying the other partner that the relationship was ended would suffice. "Incest, bigamy, and adultery were dropped from the list of official crimes [and] abortion was explicitly permitted by the decree of November 20 1920." No distinction was made between the status of children born legitimately and illegitimately, nonregistered co-habitation was given the same legal status as registered co-habitation, parental authority over children was systematically weakened, and additional measures were taken "to uproot the traditional structure of the family". Here, surely, was an effort to eliminate "the unnecessary restrictions on instinctual gratification" which was about as radical and thorough-going as anything that the psychoanalyst cited earlier in this paper, or anyone else, could ask for. Short of sanctioning homosexuality and the other perversions, the government had gone as far as it could, it would seem, in guaranteeing complete sexual liberty. But American advocates of this expedient are careful not to tell us - or perhaps do not even know - what the outcome of the Russian experiment was. Neither has any other authority dared to mention the disasterous results of such a policy. By 1935, roughly 18 years after the introduction of Engel's ideas on sex and the family, Soviet policy makers were in full retreat from their original aims and aspirations in this area. Says Timasheff: "Dissolution of family ties, especially of the parent-child relations, threatened to produce a wholesale dissolution of community ties, with rapidly increasing juvenile delinquency as the main symptom. In 1935, the Soviet papers were full of information and indignation about the rise of hooliganism, i.e., of crimes in which the sadistic joy of inflicting pain on somebody or destroying something of value was paramount. Everywhere, wrote the papers, gangs invaded workingmen's dwellings, ransacked them, and destroyed or spoiled what they did not take away; if somebody dared to resist, he was mercilessly killed. In trains, the hooligans sang obscene songs; to prolong the fun, they did not permit travelers to alight at their destinations if they had not finished singing. Sometimes the schools were beseiged by neglected children; other times gangs beat the teachers and attacked women, or regularly fought against one another. Finally, the magnificent slogans of the liberation of sex and the emancipation of women proved to have worked in favor of the strong and reckless, and against the weak and shy. Millions of girls saw their lives ruined by Don Juans in Communist garb, and millions of children had never known parental homes. The disintegration of the family did not disturb the Communists, since this was precisely what they wanted to achieve, but they were disturbed by quite a few collateral effects of the disorganization". By way of describing the reforms which Soviet leaders eventually instigated, Timasheff reports that freedom of divorce was first curtailed and then almost abolished. Abortion was made illegal, and marriage was once again idealized. Also; "The peculiar parent-child relationship which had obtained under the Communist experiment, and which granted superiority to the children, was reversed to one which is considered normal in the world; once more, children have to recognize the authority of their parents". And in 1939, the official journal of the (Soviet) Union Prosecutor declared: "Sound moral ideas must be inculcated into the minds of young persons. 'They must know that lack of care for their parents is found only among savages and that in every civilized society such conduct is considered dishonest and base" (quoted by Timasheff, p. 62 ). ......In any case, the fact stands that they were compelled to beat an undignified retreat from the brave new sexual ethic which they inaugurated during the first decade of the Communist regime. In the front of his monumental "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", William L. Shirer quotes Santayana to the effect that those who do not know history "are condemned to relive it". The moral of this observation applies, surely, not only to our need to know and never forget the ghastly ideological and human errors of National Socialism, but also to the experiences of the Russians in their ill-fated repudiation of "bourgeois" sexual morality, with consequences so destructive that it will take decades, if not generations, to undo them completely.” ........................................ Nicholas Sergeyevitch Timasheff (November 9, 1886–March 9, 1970) was a Russian sociologist, professor of jurisprudence and writer. Timasheff "came from an old family of Russian nobility"; his father was Minister of Trade and Industry under Nicholas II. In St. Petersburg, where he was born, he attended a classical high school; he went on to attend the Tsarskoye Selo Lyceum, the University of Strasbourg, and the Saint Petersburg State University (MA 1910, LLD 1914). At the latter university he met the Polish-Russian jurist Leon Petrazycki, who was a significant influence on him throughout his life. Two years later he began teaching sociological jurisprudence at the University of Petrograd. He emigrated to the United States following an alleged involvement with the Tagantsev Conspiracy in 1920. He took up a similar position at Fordham University, and was one of the original developers of the discipline of sociology of law. Timasheff was the author of various works, including The Great Retreat: The Growth and Decline of Communism in Russia (New York, 1946), in which he argued that the Bolsheviks made a conscious retreat from socialist values during the 1930s, instead returning to traditional ones like patriotism and the family. Historian Terry Martin considers this a misnomer, because "in the political and economic spheres, the period after 1933 marked a consolidation, rather than a repudiation, of the most important goals of Stalin's socialist offensive: forced industrialization, collectivization, nationalization, abolition of the market, political dictatorship." (But in order to do that, Stalin had to put the quietus on the runamok morality that was knocking the legs out from the strength of his country.) Nicholas Sergeyevitch Timasheff, buried: Oakland Cemetery (Yonkers, New York) Westchester County, USA. ----------------------- It can be seen that the social principles advocated by the Frankfurt School were not new, but had been previously advocated by Engles in a glamorized grandiose propagandized form years earlier. The Frankfurt School was perhaps unaware of it. The Frankfurter Schoolers were in Germany and then in America distant from the catastrophic consequences of the ideological experiment The Soviet union was later collapsing because of it. Now those same principles and behavior are being adopted in America with the same result. For more information on the Frankfurt School, I suggest a goggle on “William Lind, the Frankfurt School”, or Linda Kimball. Also, anything by Pamela Geller or Michelle Malkin is highly worth while. ........................................ ----------------------------------------------
Well... It transferred to this site somewhat decently. I'm going to bed.
This sounds like the direction our illegal immigrants, minorities, and leftist brainwashed university students are heading with increasing defiance. It's a earlier version of the knockout game.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
Capitalism Depends on Consumers NOT Being Able to Think Critically…
#3. To: tpaine (#2)
(Edited)
Capitalism Depends on Consumers NOT Being Able to Think Critically
#4. To: rlk (#3)
Capitalism Depends on Consumers NOT Being Able to Think Critically
#5. To: tpaine (#2)
The Democrats/Progressives in the USA have been using propaganda in this facist/communistic way since WW 1, and have had far too much political success.
#6. To: tpaine (#4)
(Edited)
#7. To: rlk (#6)
With practice, employment of modern technology, and study, everything improves, including propaganda and selling corruption. It's been 60 years ago that I had a strained conversation with a Marxist psychology professor who was a researcher in mathematical models of behavior in one of the top departments in the country. He explained to me that the way to get people to accept communism was to convince the people that they wanted it.
#8. To: rlk (#6)
#9. To: rlk, ALL (#6)
#10. To: Deckard (#0)
In order to understand your life and your mission here on earth in the short time you have, it is imperative to learn to see the thought prison that has been built around you, and to actively circumnavigate it. Free-thinking is being stamped out by the propagandists, but our human tendency is to crave freedom, and with the aid of truth, we are more powerful than the control matrix and the invisible government
#11. To: Liberator (#7)
I enjoyed reading about your Annie Oakley mother and her influence in knocking some sense into your father's head when he was tracking to become recruited as a Commie.
#12. To: Liberator (#7)
You can not prove the Spirit World does not exist, Robert. Scripture has explained ALL of those dynamics, though I realize you refuse to consider the spiritual dimension exist, discounting it as "fiction."
#13. To: Liberator (#9)
(Edited)
In both series, perverted/subverted technology is at the core of a dystopian future in which it is exploited mostly as a mechanism and tool to control the masses, as you note. Technology is and will be used especially mask corruption and improve propaganda methods (disguised as "entertainment" and "high-tech aids.") We are already there, aren't we?
#14. To: Liberator (#7)
(Edited)
All branches of the US Armed Forces have their espirit de corps rituals
#15. To: Liberator, tpaine (#7)
#16. To: Liberator, tpaine (#7)
#17. To: All (#16)
#18. To: All (#16)
(Edited)
"Dissolution of family ties, especially of the parent-child relations, threatened to produce a wholesale dissolution of community ties, with rapidly increasing juvenile delinquency as the main symptom. In 1935, the Soviet papers were full of information and indignation about the rise of hooliganism, i.e., of crimes in which the sadistic joy of inflicting pain on somebody or destroying something of value was paramount. Everywhere, wrote the papers, gangs invaded workingmen's dwellings, ransacked them, and destroyed or spoiled what they did not take away; if somebody dared to resist, he was mercilessly killed. In trains, the hooligans sang obscene songs; to prolong the fun, they did not permit travelers to alight at their destinations if they had not finished singing. Sometimes the schools were beseiged by neglected children; other times gangs beat the teachers and attacked women, or regularly fought against one another.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]