George Orwell: The Damnable Heresy of Tuesday
Every communist is in fact liable at any moment to alter his most fundamental convictions, or leave the party. The unquestionable dogma of Monday may become the damnable heresy of Tuesday, and so on.
- George Orwell, quoted in “Orwell and Catholicism”
Liberty Letters Comment: The Bush Administration, as it did with China, now hopes to open up the Capitalist floodgates of ‘free trade’ advantages to Vietnam, because of Capitalist styled reforms that strike against the old dogma or Communism. This is deception. There never was any dogma to Communism other than this, “It’s all about power.” Thus the unquestionable dogma of Monday is the damnable heresy of Tuesday, and so on, until, by the way, it is the unquestionable dogma again by Saturday. Anyone who does not understand this, and come clean with Americans about on so serious an issue, is either an ignoramus or a liar, or both.
Liberty Letters editor Steve Farrell is a pundit with America's Newspage, Newsmax.com, associate professor of political economy at George Wythe College, and the author of the highly praised inspirational novel, "Dark Rose." | More from Steve Farrell
Stumble It!
November 23rd, 2006 at 8:28 am
Steve,
I agree with you that the real dogma of Communism (Marxism, in all its varieties) is “all about power,” but through their ideology they are able to get others to believe in them, or at least to rationalize away their actions. Key to their ideology is a belief in the “Marxist Dialectic,” which makes it possible to take tactical retreats or advances depending upon conditions. Thus, China, while claiming to be run as a Marxist government (and Marxism abhors capitalists and capitalism) can temporarily embrace Capitalism. China thus biding its time while it builds up its political and military infrastructure to the point where they will then once again be militarily aggressive on the world scene
November 24th, 2006 at 7:07 pm
Yes, there ideology is for others, for revolutionary purposes in nations or groups they are trying to subvert or use. But, as you know, after they have come and conquered, so to speak, the first to go are those who actually “believe” in the doctrine, rather than the party and its dialect, that includes a willingness to resort to every form of violence and treachery in the book – as I know you already understand. We are in agreement. Those who are not willing to do that, or who are even suspected even for the most ridiculous and unfair reasons of not being a real party player, forget it, see ya later buddy. I think that is what Orwell is talking about.
As always, thanks for your insights. Steve Montgomery is one of the best students on the subject.