Beware the Marxist-industrial complex

2010-01-16
By

Feminism extends across the socioeconomic spectrum and the women’s movement, as such, provides fertile ground for sowing dissent throughout nearly all racial, ethnic and religious factions. “When the state attempts to establish, as the official national creed, a crudely utilitarian ethic based on a distorted notion of freedom as radical individual autonomy, the free economy is in serious trouble. So is the democratic polity,” wrote scholar George Weigel, a Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center. [1]

When Dwight Eisenhower left the White House in the late ‘50s, he warned in a speech of the dangers of a U.S. military-industrial complex, a phrase rehashed with deceit and malice by anti-Western political forces ever since. The real threat, however, has been the establishment of a Marxist-industrial complex, as we see vividly taking shape – and hold – today.

Marxist forces have long sought to undermine all forms of free enterprise and have underwritten many such a nation’s financial ruin, including America’s ongoing debt debacle. “[Vladimir] Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency,” observed British economist John Maynard Keynes in 1919. “… Lenin certainly was right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and it does it in a manner which not one man in a million can diagnose.” [2]

Since 1922, successive Communist International Party Congresses had announced to the world their determination to destroy all capitalistic countries, including America. In the 1950s, Marxists developed a strategy based on “state capitalism,” viewing that period as “the transitional epoch, a period transitional between capitalism and socialism, a period of hybrids and contradictions, wars and revolutions.” [3]

These forces set about creating a dysfunctional socioeconomic climate within the United States, establishing an array of special-interest social groups as major beachheads in the early ‘60s, notably feminism and environmentalism, as presented in Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique and Rachel Carson’s The Silent Spring. Neither author’s Marxist-based political associations received much scrutiny, and neither book received much critical analysis. Instead, the books were promoted beyond all reason and substance by like-minded members in academia and media.

Infiltrating American businesses was not all that difficult. As James Kalb notes in his book, The Tyranny of Liberalism, corporate structures offer Marxists the “hiring, training, management, supervision and promotion … [that] provide the state with a ready-made instrument for reeducation and other forms of social control.” He also notes that Karl Marx believed that a global marketplace would “undermine nationality and establish common class interests leading to union among those playing a common role in the system of production. He was right, but (not surprisingly) it turned out to be the rulers rather than the proletariat … [as] the traumas of globalism tend to push the working class still farther away from the global solidarity enjoyed by the elite.” [4]

For nearly 50 years now, few people have stood up to the massive assault on a system so maligned that even its proponents seemed disposed to apologetic posturing. In his essay, “In Defense of Capitalism,” Vasko Kohlmayer wrote, “Rather than mankind’s scourge, capitalism has been its greatest benefactor. It is, in fact, the only socio-economic system that can provide ordinary people with dignified and prosperous lives. … Today, as if by miracle, we can enjoy greater comforts and ease of life than the kings of the past. … Conversely, those who live in non-capitalist societies invariably experience the opposite.” [5]

As Walter Williams, a nationally syndicated columnist and a professor at George Mason University, stated, “The rise of capitalism has brought about a more humane society … . If you’re a radical feminist, which country do you want to live in? What about Saudi Arabia, China, most countries in Africa? No, you want to live in the United States.” [6]

Marshall Rockford Goodman is the author of Karla Marx: How feminism has seduced the West available through amazon.com.

SOURCES:
1. The End of Democracy? “Questions of Legitimacy,” George Weigel (Spence Publishing 1997), p. 108.
2. What Are We Using for Money, Paul Blackwell, Jr., (D. Van Nostrand 1952), p. 201.
3. Stalinism: Its Origin and Future, Andy Blunden, 1993. http://www.marxists.org/subject/stalinism/origins-future/ch2-1a.htm
4. The Tyranny of Liberalism, James Kalb, (ISI Books 2008), Part 1, Ch. 3, “Institutions,” pp. 58-59.
5. “In Defense of Capitalism,” Vasko Kohlmayer, Sept. 18, 2009, http://www.frontpagemag.com/.
6. “Free Market Economics,” Walter Williams, C-SPAN, Aug. 5, 2008. http://www.cspanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=280293-4&showVid=true

Tags:

565 views

  • Jerry Fino

    America has been lulled into a kind of numb, naive belief that, gee, everything will work out ok ‘in the end,’ right? Meanwhile the leftists redistribute to the many who think they’re about to get a better deal. The reality is that the true producers (who have earned their way into having more) will be bled and beaten down and the rest will have a slight up-tick of ‘something for nothing’ at the expense of everyone’s future. In exchange, the lemmings have/are/will vote for their pied piper, their Democrat candidates. The social engineering goes on with the help of a media that is wholly activist and in the liberal camp, and an electorate that seems to be accept that America’s best days are over (and “it serves us right for being the scourge of the planet for all these years.”)

    Where are the voices that can stop this madness?

    Where are Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and other captains of industry? Are they so whored-out to their own bottom lines that they feel no obligation to throw the penalty flag and say, as anyone with a brain knows, that the king has no clothes? Perhaps they have been bought off by Obie One at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Or is it the other way around?

    Consider that Microsoft is hard at work to undermine Google in the regulatory, legal and public-relations arenas. It also has a pending partnership deal in the works with Yahoo in Internet search and advertising for which is needs the Obama Justice Department to approve.
    If Gates ran Microsoft the way Obama is running the economy, Microsoft would be doomed. Fortunately for Microsoft, that is a non-factor, but Gates NEEDS Obama so he’s in full see/hear/speak no evil mode.

    Warren Buffet built a 150 billion dollar company by buying out-of-favor stocks and businesses whose management he deemed superior. Were the Obama administration a business, would Buffet invest nickel-one in how they are running the country? Hell no. Why, then, does the Oracle of Omaha back this charlatan? Simple. Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway slumped 32pc last year, the worst performance in more than three decades, as the U.S. recession forced down the value of the firm’s equity holdings and derivative bets. Buffet’s precious holdings and firm, in large part, rise and fall with the public confidence to invest in the stock market.

    So I have answered my own question. Yes, they’ve whored themselves out for their own corporate bottom lines.

    It is up to We The People to turn back the cataclysmic event that we are now witnessing.
    Are we up to it? I mean, are there enough of us to do this? One-third of America is poised and ready to ‘vote out the bums’; one-third of America is, in anticipation of largess that they didn’t earn, solidly behind this Marxist president; and one-third of America is more interested in the next season of “Survivor” on CBS.
    Little do they know that this is also the tag line for the fate of the United States with an equally uncertain outcome.

  • Ray

    Marxism is the opiate of: communists, socialists, feminists, democrats, and many “educators.”

  • Marshall Goodman

    Jerry — many of your questions/observations have been mine as well and much could be written. I’ll just mention Buffett and Gates.

    Buffett has always been in the tank for socialism, Marxism, et al. He supports Hillarious Clinton for president. Buffett buys small companies that make shoes or candy; he’s really not an investor but he plays one on TV for Democrats who promote and enrich him in return for giving the masses “sage financial advice” while ridiculing which ever companies or executives (or countries) his socialist backers want undermined. Think of him as someone who is funded by the mob and who does their bidding in return for riches and fame. Oprah is the same type of fraud.

    As to Gates, remember how Bill Clinton used the Justice Department and wacko Janet Reno to sue Microsoft for billions of dollars? Gates never had much of a legal department but had to hire hundreds of lobbyists and lawyers to protect he and his company from the government assault in the late ’90s. Gates had often said, “I’m from the other Washington,” as he wanted to avoid political games. So now we have Microsoft NBC (MSNBC). Likely, this was part of the strong-arm backroom deal forced on Gates and company. Imagine if GM decided just to back a network. Well, Microsoft has access to all our computers (nearly) and yet there’s no uproar over the violation of privacy that could and is likely occurring. So Gates may well be asking where was the public while Clinton vilified him and plundered his treasury?






Search