Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule Over America

True members of the American intellectual Left number in the thousands but their radical view of the world dominates the print media (led by NYT), the television media, the movie industry, the law schools and the courts, and the educational establishment from kindergarten to the most elite universities. With only the so-called Religious Right offering any resistance, the mainline churches are slowly falling in line as well. Indeed, the intellectual left is winning on all fronts as the family is reeling under the “progressive” onslaughts of abortion, feminism and gay marriage, as Christianity and its beliefs and symbols are relegated to the silent periphery of society, and as the borders are opened wide to illegal aliens who seek only a ride on the Good Ship Lollipop and not a new country to love and cherish. When did we begin to lose our children and how and why have they become more and more like “them” and less and less like “us.” How can it be that such a paltry few blue-state radicals, socialists, and neo-Marxists have managed to insinuate themselves into positions of power and influence so as to neutralize, dominate, and brainwash a once proud and powerful Christian majority that has defined the essence of America since its birth as a nation?

First, it is important to distinguish between the true left- the generals who orchestrate the cultural wars perched high and safe on the mountain- and their suggestible, naive, ill-informed, parent-hating and country-hating masses of foot soldiers. As I have argued elsewhere (MensNewsDaily, September 14, 2004, Part II), the typical rank and file American “liberal” is, in fact, a behavioral “conservative” who pursues life goals of prosperity, happiness, and success just like everyone else. He or she may mouth liberal platitudes, protest the day long, and vote for liberal candidates, but they are not “true” liberals committed to, first, re-defining America from top to bottom, and then replacing traditional Christian America with a Marxist state or some variant thereof. The forefathers of modern true liberals exulted in France being turned upside-down in the French Revolution and they were then inspired to foment revolution in Russia where they succeeded in bringing down the Tsarist monarchy and aristocracy and installing a Communist regime- one that enjoyed a brief moment in the sun before falling into the dustbin of history with a little help from Ronald Reagan. In my view, we are on a similar road to ruin in the United States of America.

We are clearly living within a post-traditional, post-Christian, and, indeed, post-American society where the ideologies of disguised Marxism manifest themselves in craven worship of the First Amendment and the manufacture of “rights” ad infinitum, cultural nihilism as expressed in an obsessive protest and victimization ethic, gender warfare and denigration of the traditional family, the nullification of moral imperative through blanket ideologies of “tolerance,” the marketing of “multiculturalism” as a means of diluting and neutralizing majority rule, the seduction and exploitation of future generations via the music and entertainment industries, the enslavement of the weaker members of society to crass materialism, drug abuse, sexual addiction, pornography, and violent video games, and so on, ad nauseam.

The Marxist says that each American has a “Constitutional right” to all of these depravities, but say a single prayer at a school luncheon or wear your silver cross a little too much in view and see what happens. You think you live in the land of the free…dream on. The Marxists that control education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general decide what freedoms you may enjoy. Moreover, they are now engaged in the process of determining exactly who will populate your country in the next few decades. Who your children and grandchildren will go to school with, who they will marry, and who they will see on a trip to the mall in 2050 is now being determined more by true liberal Marxists than by any other segment of American culture, including the President, the Congress and the American public.

The true Marxist liberal is warrior intellectual who is patient, smart, savvy, and who thinks years ahead. He knows that how people think about themselves, others, and the world will determine how they vote, how they conceptualize issues like abortion, affirmative action, gender roles, the family, religion, freedom, rights, and the like, and how they define themselves as human beings. For 50 years, the Christian majority has been told repeatedly that they are rigid, up-tight, “ultraconservative” boobs such as Archie Bunker or Robert Barone’s in-laws on Everybody Loves Raymond, that they are superstitious religious zealots, intolerant to the core and, basically, just bad people. I call this the “Wagon Train Syndrome.” Go back and watch a few episodes of the Wagon Train series in the 1950s and note how many times “the good people” (read Christian majority) are the villains who hate and discriminate against anyone who is “different” including young girls pregnant out of wedlock, well-meaning Indians, dance hall girls with hearts of gold, and so on.

Indeed, the unremitting assault on the Christian self and soul has been around for quite some time and has been one of the most devastatingly successful ploys the intellectual left has used to gain control of American culture. Sadly, the American people- including conservatives who should know better- seem blissfully unaware as the intellectual termites continue to gnaw away at the traditional American way of life.

In four short decades, the American people have let their culture slowly slip away under the influence of those who detest them for their apathy, stupidity, gullibility, and child-like naivete, and who care nothing about them whatsoever. As a native West Virginian who agonizes over the progressive and unremitting degradation of “my people,” I see first hand with every visit back to my home state the moral and cultural collapse of a once hard-working, God-fearing, family-centered, and America-first people. The people are still warm and outgoing, they still work hard for their little pay, and they still go to church, but there is a crisis of the soul that no government largess or better-paying job can salve.

Blacks have a culture that they exult in, the Jew has 4,000 years of Jewish culture and the state of Israel for comfort, and the various Muslim cultures are hardly suffering from a crisis of self-identity, but take away the deep meaningfulness and orderliness of Christianity from a working class West Virginian- or any Christian of modest social rank- and nothing but a soulless shell of a person is left. Lukewarm or neutralized Christianity is debilitating for any social class, but it is totally devastating for the minimally educated working class person. All he has left now is NASCAR, another Big Mac with double fires, and a pick-up truck that runs most of the time. His health and marriage are all to hell, the kids are on drugs and all they talk about is rock music, the one daughter is pregnant at age 15, and it doesn’t look like any of the kids will graduate from high school. Moreover, there is no God to comfort him, for the Marxists saw that God died in the 1960s. They are saturated in hypothetical “rights” in the Godless abstract, but their lives are, in reality, a living hell.

In all of this, we see the devastating damage that the Marxist trickle down immorality has done to the lower and lower-middle classes, where life in the post-Christian trenches is the humiliating Jerry Springer show writ large. It will not be long before the more privileged classes join the hosts of lost and wandering souls below and the re-definition of America will be complete. The intellectual left speaks in the sonorous tones of “freedom,” “justice,” “rights,” and, most notably, “fairness,” in a manner that easily seduces and seems to guarantee all a heady sense of moral superiority over the evil religious right, those who desperately cling to life-sustaining traditions, those who long for some sense of order and meaning in their lives beyond crass materialism, and those who simply love their country and do not want it transformed into a Marxist utopia or some bastardized version of a dying Europe. Until we realize that minds can be invaded even more easily and deftly than borders, then the future looks dark indeed. Personally, I think it is time to call the Orkin man for some heavy duty treatment long overdue.
Kent Bailey is professor emeritus of clinical psychology at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia. His major focus is on how ancient evolutionary processes affect current human affairs. His major monograph is Human Paleopsychology: Applications to Aggression and Pathological Processes. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1987.

528 views

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/category/blogettes/nobodysopinion/ Joyanna Adams

    Wow! What a punch! An uppercut to the ruling Marxists of our country.
    Brilliant piece Kent…glad to see all that education did not warp your mind…Henry Adams would be proud.

    One more soldier call to arms..

    Now, what do we do about it?

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/category/blogettes/nobodysopinion/ Joyanna Adams

    Wow! What a punch! An uppercut to the ruling Marxists of our country.
    Brilliant piece Kent…glad to see all that education did not warp your mind…Henry Adams would be proud.

    One more soldier call to arms..

    Now, what do we do about it?

  • http://mensnewsdaily.com/category/blogettes/nobodysopinion/ Joyanna Adams

    Wow! What a punch! An uppercut to the ruling Marxists of our country.
    Brilliant piece Kent…glad to see all that education did not warp your mind…Henry Adams would be proud.

    One more soldier call to arms..

    Now, what do we do about it?

  • http://whatdotermiteslooklike.deletepests.com/2006/06/01/what-do-termites-look-like-termites-in-the-foundation-how-the-intellectual-left-came-to-rule/ What Do Termites Look Like » What Do Termites Look Like – Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule …

    [...] Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule …Men’s News Daily, CA - 2 hours ago… seem blissfully unaware as the intellectual termites continue to … at age 15, and it doesn t look like any of the … who simply love their country and do not want … [...]

  • Obtestor

    Kent, I am proud of you for this article. It is awesome.

  • Obtestor

    Kent, I am proud of you for this article. It is awesome.

  • Obtestor

    Kent, I am proud of you for this article. It is awesome.

  • http://society-and-culture.basedbusinesshome.org/not-such-a-light-unto-the-nations/ Society and Culture » Blog Archive » Not Such A Light Unto The Nations

    [...] Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule …Men’s News Daily, CA - 22 hours ago… and entertainment industries, the enslavement of the weaker members of society to crass … Marxists than by any other segment of American culture, including the … [...]

  • jerrylaury

    It’s no accident that so many of our colleges and other institutions of learning are controlled by Marxists. I believe that they were planted there years ago. Marxist leaders correctly came to the conclusion that it was much easier to change the beliefs and the attitudes of the young then the old. No need to send children to the gulags…just make sure they have the right “teachers”.

  • jerrylaury

    It’s no accident that so many of our colleges and other institutions of learning are controlled by Marxists. I believe that they were planted there years ago. Marxist leaders correctly came to the conclusion that it was much easier to change the beliefs and the attitudes of the young then the old. No need to send children to the gulags…just make sure they have the right “teachers”.

  • jerrylaury

    It’s no accident that so many of our colleges and other institutions of learning are controlled by Marxists. I believe that they were planted there years ago. Marxist leaders correctly came to the conclusion that it was much easier to change the beliefs and the attitudes of the young then the old. No need to send children to the gulags…just make sure they have the right “teachers”.

  • http://whatdotermiteslooklike.deletepests.com/2006/06/03/what-do-termites-look-like-termites-in-the-foundation-how-the-intellectual-left-came-to-rule-2/ What Do Termites Look Like » What Do Termites Look Like – Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule …

    [...] Termites in the Foundation: How the Intellectual Left Came to Rule …Men’s News Daily, CA - Jun 1, 2006… seem blissfully unaware as the intellectual termites continue to … at age 15, and it doesn t look like any of the … who simply love their country and do not want … [...]

  • amosbatto

    This analysis is so intellectually confused that it isn’t worth the time to unravel all its fallacies.

    “We are clearly living within a post-traditional, post-Christian, and, indeed, post-American society where the ideologies of disguised Marxism manifest themselves in craven worship of the First Amendment and the manufacture of “rights” ad infinitum”

    What ever you may think of Marxism, it is a fundamentally ‘modern’ understanding of the world that is diametrically opposed to post-modern interpretations of the world. Marxists generally can’t stand the turn to post-modernism. Foucault, Derrida, (and many of the post-modern theorists whose ideas dominate current intellectual thought) were rebelling against Marxism. All the things that Dr. Bailey mentions are NOT “disguised Marxism” as he claims.

    “the marketing of “multiculturalism” as a means of diluting and neutralizing majority rule”

    Most traditional Marxists have little tolerance for multiculturalism and firmly believed in the concept of majority rule. Stalin believed that nations are based upon the idea of one race, one language, and one people. That is way Stalin decided that Russians must be moved to all parts of the USSR and everyone must learn Russian, so one culture and people will unify the nation. Mao also believed that all Chinese must learn Mandarin and denied a multi-cultural conception of China. Neither Stalin nor Mao had any interest in the rights of minorities. Marxist theory says that race and ethnicity are false ideologies created by the upper classes as a way to divide the lower classes and turn their anger away from their true enemy, the upper classes. So only class is important and race is an illusion which prevents mass mobilization.

    “The Marxist says that each American has a “Constitutional right” to all of these depravities,”

    Marxists in principal aren’t concerned with constitutions or legalisms. According to Marxist theory, the law is primarily a creation of the upper classes used as a means to suppress the lower classes. So a Marxist has no problem with smashing existing laws. While a Marxist may be concerned with the “rights” of the individual, those rights are almost always overweighed by the needs of the collective.

    “the nullification of moral imperative through blanket ideologies of “tolerance”"

    Whatever you can say about Marxism, it certainly didn’t believe in “tolerance” or many of the other things that Bailey attacks. Witness how Castro tried to forcibly reeducate the homosexuals in Cuba. Marxism definitely believed that there was a right and a wrong way to do things and people need to be coerced into doing things the right way.

    “The true Marxist liberal…”
    “they are not “true” liberals committed to, first, re-defining America from top to bottom, and then replacing traditional Christian America with a Marxist state or some variant thereof.”

    No Marxist or Liberal would ever join the words “Marxist” and “Liberal” together in this way because these ideologies have radically conflicting agendas and worldviews. Dr. Bailey seems to just throw everyone on the left together without any understanding of the differences. Liberals and Marxists are diametrically opposed on the ways to organize an economy and even how the world ought to work. Conflating Keynes with Marx is pure ignorance. There was a small number of New Deal Liberals who had formerly been Marxists, and there were a few 1960s Marxists who turned into Liberal Democrats in the 1980s, but that doesn’t mean that Liberalism is Marxism in disguise. People do change their minds over time. This idea that there is a secret cabal of Marxists mascarading as Liberals is pure fantasy and conservative paranoia. Marxists hate Clinton, Palosi, Reid, and all the other major leaders of the Democratic party. I personally know quite a few people who sympathize with Marxism, but everyone of them votes for the Greens or some other marginalized party which has no influence. Frankly, in the US, Marxism is considered a dead ideology even among the radical left. I know a lot of leftist activists and very few of them espouse Marxism. Read radical left publications like Z-Magazine, New Left Review, In the Times, and Mother Jones–very few of the articles advocate traditional Marxism. Most advocate for a vague anti-globalizationist, big-tent coalition on the left.

    “The forefathers of modern true liberals exulted in France being turned upside-down in the French Revolution and they were then inspired to foment revolution in Russia where they succeeded in bringing down the Tsarist monarchy and aristocracy and installing a Communist regime

    Liberalism originated as a political ideology among middle-class entrepreneurs and other people who were challenging the traditional rights of the Monarchy and the Church. They wanted to establish a clear system of laws, a modern government adminstration, and wanted social advancement to be predicated upon individual ability rather than birth or class. They were horrified by the French Revolution, and had no sympathy for the Jacobins. Liberals in the early 20th century were similarly dismayed by the Russian Revolution of 1917. It was the liberal governments of Woodrow Wilson and David Lloyd George of the Liberal Party in the UK who decided to send troops to Russian to aid the Whites fighting against the Reds in 1918-1920. Who are these “forefathers of the modern true liberals” that Dr. Bailey refers to? If they existed, they certainly weren’t called “liberals”.

    “The Marxists that control education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general decide what freedoms you may enjoy.”

    I don’t know of a single Marxist in America that has a significant position in education, media, publishing, and the flow of information. Howard Zinn is probably the most influential Marxist in America today and he hardly has any power beyond the pen in his hand. The most influential leftist in America is reputed to be Noam Chomsky and he’s an anarchist, not a Marxist. The biggest leftist publishing house in America is probably the South End Press in Boston and they believe in parecon, not Marxism. The only major political leader who espouses Marxism in America is Bernie Sanders of Vermont who says that he is a socialist but runs as an “independent”. If Sanders is a Socialist, he is a pretty tepid one not too different from your average European Social Democrat.

    Have you ever gone to a Marxist meeting? The idea that these guys could control anything is a joke–they can’t even get 10 people to come to a meeting, much less control “education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general.” My friends who are Marxists could only wish that they have the kind of power that you describe.

    If Dr. Bailey wants to claim that Marxism is secretly sweeping America, he should first take some time to investigate what Marxism is. While he is at it, he should read some Liberal theorists as well, so he won’t waste his time writing these asinine diatribes.

  • amosbatto

    This analysis is so intellectually confused that it isn’t worth the time to unravel all its fallacies.

    “We are clearly living within a post-traditional, post-Christian, and, indeed, post-American society where the ideologies of disguised Marxism manifest themselves in craven worship of the First Amendment and the manufacture of “rights” ad infinitum”

    What ever you may think of Marxism, it is a fundamentally ‘modern’ understanding of the world that is diametrically opposed to post-modern interpretations of the world. Marxists generally can’t stand the turn to post-modernism. Foucault, Derrida, (and many of the post-modern theorists whose ideas dominate current intellectual thought) were rebelling against Marxism. All the things that Dr. Bailey mentions are NOT “disguised Marxism” as he claims.

    “the marketing of “multiculturalism” as a means of diluting and neutralizing majority rule”

    Most traditional Marxists have little tolerance for multiculturalism and firmly believed in the concept of majority rule. Stalin believed that nations are based upon the idea of one race, one language, and one people. That is way Stalin decided that Russians must be moved to all parts of the USSR and everyone must learn Russian, so one culture and people will unify the nation. Mao also believed that all Chinese must learn Mandarin and denied a multi-cultural conception of China. Neither Stalin nor Mao had any interest in the rights of minorities. Marxist theory says that race and ethnicity are false ideologies created by the upper classes as a way to divide the lower classes and turn their anger away from their true enemy, the upper classes. So only class is important and race is an illusion which prevents mass mobilization.

    “The Marxist says that each American has a “Constitutional right” to all of these depravities,”

    Marxists in principal aren’t concerned with constitutions or legalisms. According to Marxist theory, the law is primarily a creation of the upper classes used as a means to suppress the lower classes. So a Marxist has no problem with smashing existing laws. While a Marxist may be concerned with the “rights” of the individual, those rights are almost always overweighed by the needs of the collective.

    “the nullification of moral imperative through blanket ideologies of “tolerance”"

    Whatever you can say about Marxism, it certainly didn’t believe in “tolerance” or many of the other things that Bailey attacks. Witness how Castro tried to forcibly reeducate the homosexuals in Cuba. Marxism definitely believed that there was a right and a wrong way to do things and people need to be coerced into doing things the right way.

    “The true Marxist liberal…”
    “they are not “true” liberals committed to, first, re-defining America from top to bottom, and then replacing traditional Christian America with a Marxist state or some variant thereof.”

    No Marxist or Liberal would ever join the words “Marxist” and “Liberal” together in this way because these ideologies have radically conflicting agendas and worldviews. Dr. Bailey seems to just throw everyone on the left together without any understanding of the differences. Liberals and Marxists are diametrically opposed on the ways to organize an economy and even how the world ought to work. Conflating Keynes with Marx is pure ignorance. There was a small number of New Deal Liberals who had formerly been Marxists, and there were a few 1960s Marxists who turned into Liberal Democrats in the 1980s, but that doesn’t mean that Liberalism is Marxism in disguise. People do change their minds over time. This idea that there is a secret cabal of Marxists mascarading as Liberals is pure fantasy and conservative paranoia. Marxists hate Clinton, Palosi, Reid, and all the other major leaders of the Democratic party. I personally know quite a few people who sympathize with Marxism, but everyone of them votes for the Greens or some other marginalized party which has no influence. Frankly, in the US, Marxism is considered a dead ideology even among the radical left. I know a lot of leftist activists and very few of them espouse Marxism. Read radical left publications like Z-Magazine, New Left Review, In the Times, and Mother Jones–very few of the articles advocate traditional Marxism. Most advocate for a vague anti-globalizationist, big-tent coalition on the left.

    “The forefathers of modern true liberals exulted in France being turned upside-down in the French Revolution and they were then inspired to foment revolution in Russia where they succeeded in bringing down the Tsarist monarchy and aristocracy and installing a Communist regime

    Liberalism originated as a political ideology among middle-class entrepreneurs and other people who were challenging the traditional rights of the Monarchy and the Church. They wanted to establish a clear system of laws, a modern government adminstration, and wanted social advancement to be predicated upon individual ability rather than birth or class. They were horrified by the French Revolution, and had no sympathy for the Jacobins. Liberals in the early 20th century were similarly dismayed by the Russian Revolution of 1917. It was the liberal governments of Woodrow Wilson and David Lloyd George of the Liberal Party in the UK who decided to send troops to Russian to aid the Whites fighting against the Reds in 1918-1920. Who are these “forefathers of the modern true liberals” that Dr. Bailey refers to? If they existed, they certainly weren’t called “liberals”.

    “The Marxists that control education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general decide what freedoms you may enjoy.”

    I don’t know of a single Marxist in America that has a significant position in education, media, publishing, and the flow of information. Howard Zinn is probably the most influential Marxist in America today and he hardly has any power beyond the pen in his hand. The most influential leftist in America is reputed to be Noam Chomsky and he’s an anarchist, not a Marxist. The biggest leftist publishing house in America is probably the South End Press in Boston and they believe in parecon, not Marxism. The only major political leader who espouses Marxism in America is Bernie Sanders of Vermont who says that he is a socialist but runs as an “independent”. If Sanders is a Socialist, he is a pretty tepid one not too different from your average European Social Democrat.

    Have you ever gone to a Marxist meeting? The idea that these guys could control anything is a joke–they can’t even get 10 people to come to a meeting, much less control “education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general.” My friends who are Marxists could only wish that they have the kind of power that you describe.

    If Dr. Bailey wants to claim that Marxism is secretly sweeping America, he should first take some time to investigate what Marxism is. While he is at it, he should read some Liberal theorists as well, so he won’t waste his time writing these asinine diatribes.

  • http://www.ciber-runa/ab amosbatto

    This analysis is so intellectually confused that it isn’t worth the time to unravel all its fallacies.

    “We are clearly living within a post-traditional, post-Christian, and, indeed, post-American society where the ideologies of disguised Marxism manifest themselves in craven worship of the First Amendment and the manufacture of “rights” ad infinitum”

    What ever you may think of Marxism, it is a fundamentally ‘modern’ understanding of the world that is diametrically opposed to post-modern interpretations of the world. Marxists generally can’t stand the turn to post-modernism. Foucault, Derrida, (and many of the post-modern theorists whose ideas dominate current intellectual thought) were rebelling against Marxism. All the things that Dr. Bailey mentions are NOT “disguised Marxism” as he claims.

    “the marketing of “multiculturalism” as a means of diluting and neutralizing majority rule”

    Most traditional Marxists have little tolerance for multiculturalism and firmly believed in the concept of majority rule. Stalin believed that nations are based upon the idea of one race, one language, and one people. That is way Stalin decided that Russians must be moved to all parts of the USSR and everyone must learn Russian, so one culture and people will unify the nation. Mao also believed that all Chinese must learn Mandarin and denied a multi-cultural conception of China. Neither Stalin nor Mao had any interest in the rights of minorities. Marxist theory says that race and ethnicity are false ideologies created by the upper classes as a way to divide the lower classes and turn their anger away from their true enemy, the upper classes. So only class is important and race is an illusion which prevents mass mobilization.

    “The Marxist says that each American has a “Constitutional right” to all of these depravities,”

    Marxists in principal aren’t concerned with constitutions or legalisms. According to Marxist theory, the law is primarily a creation of the upper classes used as a means to suppress the lower classes. So a Marxist has no problem with smashing existing laws. While a Marxist may be concerned with the “rights” of the individual, those rights are almost always overweighed by the needs of the collective.

    “the nullification of moral imperative through blanket ideologies of “tolerance”"

    Whatever you can say about Marxism, it certainly didn’t believe in “tolerance” or many of the other things that Bailey attacks. Witness how Castro tried to forcibly reeducate the homosexuals in Cuba. Marxism definitely believed that there was a right and a wrong way to do things and people need to be coerced into doing things the right way.

    “The true Marxist liberal…”
    “they are not “true” liberals committed to, first, re-defining America from top to bottom, and then replacing traditional Christian America with a Marxist state or some variant thereof.”

    No Marxist or Liberal would ever join the words “Marxist” and “Liberal” together in this way because these ideologies have radically conflicting agendas and worldviews. Dr. Bailey seems to just throw everyone on the left together without any understanding of the differences. Liberals and Marxists are diametrically opposed on the ways to organize an economy and even how the world ought to work. Conflating Keynes with Marx is pure ignorance. There was a small number of New Deal Liberals who had formerly been Marxists, and there were a few 1960s Marxists who turned into Liberal Democrats in the 1980s, but that doesn’t mean that Liberalism is Marxism in disguise. People do change their minds over time. This idea that there is a secret cabal of Marxists mascarading as Liberals is pure fantasy and conservative paranoia. Marxists hate Clinton, Palosi, Reid, and all the other major leaders of the Democratic party. I personally know quite a few people who sympathize with Marxism, but everyone of them votes for the Greens or some other marginalized party which has no influence. Frankly, in the US, Marxism is considered a dead ideology even among the radical left. I know a lot of leftist activists and very few of them espouse Marxism. Read radical left publications like Z-Magazine, New Left Review, In the Times, and Mother Jones–very few of the articles advocate traditional Marxism. Most advocate for a vague anti-globalizationist, big-tent coalition on the left.

    “The forefathers of modern true liberals exulted in France being turned upside-down in the French Revolution and they were then inspired to foment revolution in Russia where they succeeded in bringing down the Tsarist monarchy and aristocracy and installing a Communist regime

    Liberalism originated as a political ideology among middle-class entrepreneurs and other people who were challenging the traditional rights of the Monarchy and the Church. They wanted to establish a clear system of laws, a modern government adminstration, and wanted social advancement to be predicated upon individual ability rather than birth or class. They were horrified by the French Revolution, and had no sympathy for the Jacobins. Liberals in the early 20th century were similarly dismayed by the Russian Revolution of 1917. It was the liberal governments of Woodrow Wilson and David Lloyd George of the Liberal Party in the UK who decided to send troops to Russian to aid the Whites fighting against the Reds in 1918-1920. Who are these “forefathers of the modern true liberals” that Dr. Bailey refers to? If they existed, they certainly weren’t called “liberals”.

    “The Marxists that control education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general decide what freedoms you may enjoy.”

    I don’t know of a single Marxist in America that has a significant position in education, media, publishing, and the flow of information. Howard Zinn is probably the most influential Marxist in America today and he hardly has any power beyond the pen in his hand. The most influential leftist in America is reputed to be Noam Chomsky and he’s an anarchist, not a Marxist. The biggest leftist publishing house in America is probably the South End Press in Boston and they believe in parecon, not Marxism. The only major political leader who espouses Marxism in America is Bernie Sanders of Vermont who says that he is a socialist but runs as an “independent”. If Sanders is a Socialist, he is a pretty tepid one not too different from your average European Social Democrat.

    Have you ever gone to a Marxist meeting? The idea that these guys could control anything is a joke–they can’t even get 10 people to come to a meeting, much less control “education, the media, the publishing industry, and the flow of information in general.” My friends who are Marxists could only wish that they have the kind of power that you describe.

    If Dr. Bailey wants to claim that Marxism is secretly sweeping America, he should first take some time to investigate what Marxism is. While he is at it, he should read some Liberal theorists as well, so he won’t waste his time writing these asinine diatribes.






Search