► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Karl Marx’

Guess Who’s In Hell?

by Deplorable Macker ( 5 Comments › )
Filed under Balkans, Christianity, Communism, Europe, Headlines at February 2nd, 2014 - 5:38 pm

Thus saith a fresco in Montenegro!

Podgorica (Montenegro) (AFP) – A church fresco showing Yugoslav communist leader Tito and German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in a fiery scene from Hell has sparked controversy in Montenegro.
Apparently swimming in a sea of fire as a diabolical beast nearby swallows people whole, Tito is depicted in his military uniform alongside the heads of Marx and Engels — whose works were required reading in the former Communist state of Yugoslavia.
The work appears in the newly built “Church of Resurrection” in Podgorica, capital of the tiny Adriatic republic of Montenegro, which has already attracted criticism for its lavish design and frescoes depicting local politicians.
“Marx, Engels and Josip Broz Tito personify Communist evil in the Balkans and globally,” church leader Dragan told AFP.
While the fresco painter, who remains anonymous, “is allowed the freedom to see things as he wishes,” Dragan voiced criticism of the setting of the trio in Hell.
“He cannot judge, in the name of the Church, who belongs in Hell or Heaven,” he said.

Read the rest. I guess I wasn’t that far off when I began to depict Communists in Hell!

Betrayed Illusions: The Left and the Jews

by Mojambo ( 57 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, Cold War, Communism, History, Judaism, Socialism at August 22nd, 2013 - 11:00 am

The author references the notorious Slansky Trial in Prague of November 1952. There is an excellent film (you can find it here on youtube) which came out in 1970 called “L’Aveu” (The Confession)  which dealt with that purge and it is based on the book by Artur London who was sentenced to life imprisonment (and freed a few years later) after Stalin’s death. The trial was filled with anti-Semitism even though the Jewish defendants had all turned their backs on their Judaism.

by Vladimir Tismaneanu

Almost sixty-one years ago, in November 1952, in Prague, the former secretary general of the Czechoslovak Communist Party, a diehard, fanatic Stalinist, Rudolf Slansky, and 13 other prominent communists, mostly Jewish, were sentenced to death for alleged treason and Zionist conspiracy.  At the same time, Stalin’s terminal paranoia led to the execution of the leaders of the Jewish Antifascist Committee, including celebrated Yiddish-language poet Peretz Markish, and the imprisonment of famous physicians accused of trying to poison Soviet leaders. Soviet Bloc media were filled with venomous anti-Semitic harangues. Had Stalin not died in March 1953, the doctors would have been executed, hundreds of thousands arrested, millions forcibly resettled. The likelihood of a gigantic pogrom, a Soviet-style Kristallnacht,  was looming large. The official terms for Jews was “rootless cosmopolitans.” Like in the National Socialist demonology, they were stigmatized as the driving force of the execrated capitalism, carriers of decadent values, agents of treason and dissolution. Even after Stalin’s demise, his successor Nikita Khrushchev continued to encourage anti-Semitic portrayals of Jews as mercenary individuals, speculators and “genetically” un-patriotic.

How was it possible for Bolshevik internationalism to degenerate into vicious anti-Semitism, similar to the worst propaganda excesses of the Black Hundreds in czarist Russia? Where did the promises of Marxist humanism, the dream of proletarian solidarity, irrespective of language and origin, vanish?  […….]

There is a genealogy of this depressing story, a line of ideas that sends us back to the origins of modern socialism and its hostility to money, banks, profit, and capitalism in general. Not only Marxism found its roots in that search for a pure, unpolluted natural community, but also the neo-romantic movements that were to lead to Fascism. A scrupulous and immensely erudite historian of modern political passions, including socialism, Zionism, and their counterparts at the extreme right end of the ideological continuum, Robert Wistrich (who teaches at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem), wrote a real treatise on the enduring anti-Semitic propensities among left-wing revolutionary movements. Published in 2012 by University of Nebraska Press,  ”From Ambivalence to Betrayal: The Left, the Jews, and Israel” is must reading for those who want to understand the apparent paradox of the Left’s espousal of far-right conspiratorial, xenophobic delusions.

He shows how resentful ideas shaped the original socialist vision of Jews as promoters of capitalist instincts and vices. Even before the French Revolution, major Enlightenment figures expressed staunch Judeophobic attitudes. In France, Voltaire lambasted Jews as irretrievably tribalistic, whereas in Germany Hegel’s disciples regarded Judaism as a fundamentally reactionary religion, an obstacle to human emancipation.  [……..]From Fichte to Richard Wagner and to the genocidal prophets Alfred Rosenberg and Adolf Hitler, there was a line of morbid fixation on the Jews as a pathogenic factor, comparable to harmful insects whose liquidation could ensure the health of the popular community (Volksgemeinschaft).

One of the most adamant anti-Semites was Bruno Bauer, initially a close friend of Karl Marx, later his philosophical and political enemy. Marx himself maintained an ambivalent, often embarrassed and hostile, attitude to his Jewish origins. As a matter of fact, his early text on “The Jewish Question” portrayed Jews in most unflattering colors, seeing them as the embodiment of everything romantics loved to hate: selfishness, mercantilism, soullessness.  […….] Its ugly anti-Semitic stances notwithstanding, Marx’s early article became a sacred text for left-wingers who tried to address the issue of Jewish emancipation and assimilation. They all borrowed from the founding father the conviction that Jews were the incarnation of capitalist injustice, identified them with soulless plutocracy, and called for an ultimate de-Judaization of society via the ultimate revolutionary apocalypse. For Marx, a classless society meant a society without Jews as Jews. His musings on the Jewish question were philosophically preposterous, morally reprehensible, and sociologically groundless.

The same fixation functioned in non-Marxist leftist circles, from Proudhon to Bakunin and other anarchists. Wistrich explores convincingly the affinities between the far left and the far right in terms of their shared opposition to a perceived Judeo-plutocratic conspiracy. The Nazis would further exacerbate this myth, incorporating it in a broader Weltanschauung that insisted on the need to oppose both Jewish capitalism and Jewish Communism. [……..] By the end of his life, Joseph Stalin was as convinced as Hitler that the house of Rothschild (or Wall Street as its latter day metamorphosis) is behind all world-historical events.

The demonization of the Jew as the symbol of the abhorred bourgeoisie coincided, within the Left, with the efforts by Jewish luminaries and rank-and-file members alike, to deny their roots. Think of such luminaries as Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Yakov Sverdlov, Rosa Luxemburg, Ruth Fischer, and the list is endless. Both “Red Rosa” and Lev Trotsky were born to traditional Jewish families, both did their utmost to overcome that heredity and convert to a supra-national, truly universalistic identity. [……..] After all, Marx and Engels claimed in the “Communist Manifesto” that proletarians do not have a motherland. Why would they, Rosa and Leon, have one? They did not conceal their origin, but saw it as irrelevant for the much larger, more grandiose agenda of their revolutionary dreams. Did they really succeed?

Obviously, Jewish revolutionary internationalism failed. Both German and Russian socialists continued to see Jewish revolutionaries as tolerated individuals, rather than full-fledged members of the national parties. Veteran Social Democrats such as August Bebel and Frantz Mehring saw Rosa as an exalted, almost quixotic figure. In his struggle for Lenin’s mantle, Stalin did not hesitate to resort to anti-Semitic innuendo against his arch-rival Trotsky (whom he dubbed Judas) and other Jewish members of the Bolshevik Old Guard.  Publicly, at least in the 1930s, the vozhd (Leader) condemned anti-Semitism which he defined as a modern version of cannibalism. Privately, he unabashedly indulged in scurrilous anti-Semitic jokes.

The Romanian Stalinist Ana Pauker, the country’s Foreign Minister between 1947 and 1952, was first and foremost a soldier of the global communist movement. She remained loyal to the Bolshevik creed in spite of many terrible experiences, including the execution of her husband in the USSR, during the Great Purge, as a renegade and a spy. Ana Pauker was herself arrested for a few months in early 1953. When she found out that Stalin had died in March, she started to cry.

The rise of Zionism contributed the radicalization of leftist anti-Semitic prejudice. Furthermore, unable to predict the Holocaust (Trotsky was the sole notable exception), the Left remained attached to its outworn dogmas. […….] Instead of the traditional identification with the underdog, the radical Left has decided that Israel represents capitalism at its worst, a new form of colonialism and even racism.

Echoing previous follies, some of those who champion these stances happen to be themselves Jewish. In some respects, it is as if people refuse to learn from history. Perhaps instead of people I should say intellectuals: a species made up of individuals more often than not seduced (and eager to be seduced) by the siren songs of utopianism.

In recent years, leftist biases, stereotypes and delusions regarding Jews, Judaism, and the state of Israel have grown and proliferated. Ironically, most of those who promote and advocate such bigoted, conspiratorial views have no idea that they are merely recycling Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin’s murderous visions of a world without Jews.

Read the rest – Betrayed Illusions: The Left and the Jews

Karl Marx supported Free Trade

by Phantom Ace Comments Off on Karl Marx supported Free Trade
Filed under Communism, Progressives, Socialism, Special Report, Tranzis at May 1st, 2011 - 6:56 pm

Yesterday I did a thread showing that Free Trade and Globalization is Progressive in origins. The debate was civil and everyone brought their A game. Well Guggi brought this little nugget. Karl Marx supported Free Trade. His reasoning was because it would destroy the Nation State and create  brotherhood of workers.

We have shown what sort of brotherhood free trade begets between the different classes of one and the same nation. The brotherhood which free trade would establish between the nations of the Earth would hardly be more fraternal. To call cosmopolitan exploitation universal brotherhood is an idea that could only be engendered in the brain of the bourgeoisie. All the destructive phenomena which unlimited competition gives rise to within one country are reproduced in more gigantic proportions on the world market. We need not dwell any longer upon free trade sophisms on this subject, which are worth just as much as the arguments of our prize-winners Messrs. Hope, Morse, and Greg.

{….]

But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.

That great Free Trader Karl Marx! Amazing, many Conservative support a Marxist-Progressive idea. This is because many Conservative have bought the Progressive worldview without realizing. Free Trade is not a Conservative idea and to silence those who oppose it as not being Conservative is ridiculous. In reality Free Trade skeptics are taking the true Conservative position. Blind support of any idea is not good for any movement. Especially if evidence has shown that that idea has failed.  Why defend an idea supported on Karl Marx.

 

It’s for the children!

by Kafir ( 125 Comments › )
Filed under Academia, Education, History, Liberal Fascism, Politics, Progressives at June 29th, 2010 - 9:00 am

A reminder/refresher/primer from Mens News Daily ~ Rescuing Our Kids and Country From Karl Marx

by Steve Farrell

It bears repeating: If we hope to halt, reverse and permanently alter America’s descent into the gutter of debauchery and that political tyranny that is forever its companion — “education is the key.” (1)

And if so, it must be, it can only be that that education is initiated, financed, and controlled by parents, not by Karl Marx and the Almighty State; no, nor by anyone far removed from our home, our values, our input, and our right to say, “You’re fired!”

Of course, Marx, and every godless statist there ever was and is, knew the road to their Godless tyranny was lined with schools, colleges, and universities created, funded, and controlled by the state … and the more centralized that control the better.

He also recognized the absolute necessity of an ongoing propaganda and legal campaign against parent controlled models like home schools, church schools, private schools, and small locally funded-locally controlled public schools; and this too: against any and all curricula that defends or promotes God, eternal truth, moral responsibility, the traditional family, limited government, the United States Constitution, the Free Enterprise System, and of course, private property. In short, an ongoing war against the very foundation, tools, weapons, and inspiration of free men.

A Brief Review From the Mouth of Marx and Co.

In 1932 Communist Party USA founder, William Z. Foster, outline in his book Toward Soviet America “the elementary measures the American Soviet government will adopt to further the cultural revolution.” His target was America’s schools. His strategy:

[S]tudies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeois ideology. The students will be taught on the basis of Marxian dialectical materialism, internationalism and the general ethics of the new Socialist society. Present obsolete methods of teaching will be superseded by a scientific pedagogy. (2)

There is much to behold in that 1932 statement; and it has all come to pass. Religion and patriotism has been replaced with materialism, internationalism, the ethics of socialism, and the scientific pedagogy. Can anyone doubt it? Certainly John Dewey would concur.

But Foster didn’t stop there. As to those “other features of the bourgeois ideology” that were to be ‘cleansed’ the traditional family topped the list. Recall, if you will, communism founder Karl Marx bragging that he and his comrades would “Abolish the family!” Why? Because the traditional family was the transmission belt of christian and capitalist values. Plain and simple. The traditional family had to go; and with it home schools, private schools, and old-styled public schools where parents were the employers, the curriculum chiefs, the bosses over the neighborhood school. (3)

Read the whole thing.