Commies have a singularity of deception that many liberals ignore. They screamed for years that Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs were innocent. The fact that all the evidence went the other way did not matter. The Commie excuses were a mix of conspiracy, conjecture and wishful thinking. While the far left rails about anti Communism they ignore the history of genuine treason . When one corners them with the facts "well aiding Communism shouldn't have been a crime anyway".
Venona and the KGB files establish what the rest of us have known for years. The Communist Party was subsidized by Moscow and its members commited extensive espionage in the USA. Yet, despite all that we know about what Communist did in the USA there are those who still cry about witch hunts. Witches were never real and did not kill 100,000,000.
Then there are those who rail about theology but see no problem with Grouchomarxism in the classroom. Communism was and always will be more of a religion with its idiotic true believers and imaginary utopia that never materializes. Even today the NYC contingent is in love with the Maoist Nepalese rebels who use child soldiers. The ultimate form of child abuse is the use of child soldiers. However, the only time one reads about child abuse is when a clergyman is the culprit or an attractive woman has a mental defect.
The question today is why are Communists, Greens and Anarchists vastly over represented in higher education ? These same wonks rail about theocracy while espousing their own brand of religion daily. The same crowd often rails about imaginary Jewish conspiracies and ignores its own history of treason.
There are some critics of this blog who claim that we descibe too many people like Duncy as Communists. Communists try to hide their true nature but as one who has battled them for well over twenty years I know the playbook. In fact I can parrot it better then the genuine article. Communism is more of a cult and apostates like David Horowitz and Ronald Radosh are given special scorn. The clueless commies assume I had once been one of them and left the faith. I have always been and will forever be an anticommunist. I am still a social liberal but there is no room for racial supremacy, Commies, Greens and Anarchist. They are mere comic props in the world of rational political thought.
Beamish in 08, Ducky to Gitmo and 167 to the woodshed for a metaphorical beating.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Why are the commies and socialists over-represented in higher education? From the SDS's "Port Huron Statement...
From where else can power and vision be summoned? We believe that the universities are an overlooked seat of influence.
First, the university is located in a permanent position of social influence. It's educational function makes it indispensable and automatically makes it a crucial institution in the formation of social attitudes. Second, in an unbelievably complicated world, it is the central institution for organizing, evaluating and transmitting knowledge. Third, the extent to which academic resources presently are used to buttress immoral social practice is revealed, first, by the extent to which defense contracts make the universities engineers of the arms race. Too, the use of modern social science as a manipulative tool reveals itself in the "human relations" consultants to the modern corporations, who introduce trivial sops to give laborers feelings of "participation" or "belonging," while actually deluding them in order to further exploit their labor. And, of course, the use of motivational research is already infamous as a manipulative aspect of American politics. But these social uses of the universities' resources also demonstrate the unchangeable reliance by men of power on the men and storehouses of knowledge: this makes the university functionally tied to society in new ways, revealing new potentialities, new levers for change. Fourth, the university is the only mainstream institution that is open to participation by individuals of nearly any viewpoint.
These, at least, are facts, no matter how dull the teaching, how paternalistic the rules, how irrelevant the research that goes on. Social relevance, the accessibility to knowledge, and internal openness--these together make the university a potential base and agency in a movement of social change.
Any new left in America must be, in large measure, a left with real intellectual skills, committed to deliberativeness, honesty, reflection as working tools. The university permits the political life to be an adjunct to the academic one, and action to be informed by reason.
A new left must be distributed in significant social roles throughout the country. The universities are distributed in such a manner.
A new left must consist of younger people who matured in the postwar world, and partially be directed to the recruitment of younger people. The university is an obvious beginning point.
A new left must include liberals and socialists, the former for their relevance, the latter for their sense of thoroughgoing reforms in the system. The university is a more sensible place than a political party for these two traditions to begin to discuss their differences and look for political synthesis.
A new left must start controversy across the land, if national policies and national apathy are to be reversed. The ideal university is a community of controversy, within itself and in its effects on communities beyond.
A new left must transform modern complexity into issues that can be understood and felt close up by every human being. It must give form to the feelings of helplessness and indifference, so that people may see the political, social, and economic sources of their private troubles, and organize to change society. In a time of supposed prosperity, moral complacency, and political manipulation, a new left cannot rely on only aching stomachs to be the engine force of social reform. The case for change, for alternatives that will involve uncomfortable personal efforts, must be argued as never before. The university is a relevant place for all of these activities.
But we need not indulge in illusions: the university system cannot complete a movement of ordinary people making demands for a better life. From its schools and colleges across the nation, a militant left might awaken its allies, and by beginning the process towards peace, civil rights, and labor struggles, reinsert theory and idealism where too often reign confusion and political barter. The power of students and faculty united is not only potential; it has shown its actuality in the South, and in the reform movements of the North.
The bridge to political power, though, will be build through genuine cooperation, locally, nationally, and internationally, between a new left of young people and an awakening community of allies. In each community we must look within the university and act with confidence that we can be powerful, but we must look outwards to the less exotic but more lasting struggles for justice.
To turn these mythic possibilities into realities will involve national efforts at university reform by an alliance of students and faculty. They must wrest control of the educational process from the administrative bureaucracy. They must make fraternal and functional contact with allies in labor, civil rights, and other liberal forces outside the campus. They must import major public issues into the curriculum--research and teaching on problems of war and peace is an outstanding example. They must make debate and controversy, not dull pedantic cant, the common style for educational life. They must consciously build a base for their assault upon the loci of power.
As students for a democratic society, we are committed to stimulating this kind of social movement, this kind of vision and program in campus and community across the country. If we appear to seek the unattainable, as it has been said, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable.
-FJ
FJ
The far left is a religion that guises itself as political thought.
Failures and body counts should have moved coherent people away years ago. There are people who keep trying to reinvent bad ideas. Bad ideas remain as true believers rationalze failure upon failure.
People will never accept what they have. They're always looking for something better. In this case "easier" (social safety net) always sounds better on paper than "you're on your own, get to work".
These people need to grow up and leave home. Mommy and Daddy won't always be around to take care of them. Besides, the last thing Mom and Dad need is a bunch of unemployed forty-somethings laying about the house sucking up their hard-earned savings.
-FJ
Of course, Beak, you’ll hear from those who claim you’re beating a dead horse or other animal. However, this proves that the old Commie spirit is still alive and kicking in academia.
I agree with Kyle on this.
With the collapse of The USSR and realization, in China, that Marxist controlled states inevitable collapse from inefficiency and uncorrected corruption, most of our little home-grown commies were forced into a state of denial. They seek a form of Commie-Lite government and rename themselves.
Instead of Bolsheviks, Marxists, Stalinists and Trotskyites; we have Greens, Progressives, Anarchists and the occasional Socialist. Of course there are a few die hard dimwits as proud of the label Communist, as some inbred moron is of his twelve fingers.
I find the so-called, "Anarchists", to be the most psychologically disturbed of the bunch. They want the Communist "utopia", (that will never happen), right now! If they don't get it, they will burn down your house. (And I will use them for target practice). You can find these losers working as rent-a-cops or holding down a job working at McDonald's, sweeping the parking lot.
When "the Revolution come", they will never have to compete with illegal aliens for minimum wage jobs again. The whole world will recognize the value of their "Liberal Arts" degree", (which they failed to complete), and they will take their place as our rightful... ummm...er... whatever it is. They will live off the land, shoplifting from Walmart for their necessities and sharing the bounty that magically appears on store shelves across the nation.
Can someone please explain to me how an anarchist can make common cause with communists or socialists? A true anarchist should be diametrically opposed to the goals of socialism and government control.
For the past few years, I've noticed quite a few of them masquerading as libertarians. You can tell the difference. A few things: they don't understand the difference between libertine and libertarian. They rail against free markets and do not respect personal property rights.
Post a Comment