Karl Marx's view of the world was that which came to be called “historical materialism” is that matter should take precedence over ideas and that any ideas relating to religion or “spirit” obscured the reality of humanity which he saw as a class struggle between “the proletariat” and the bourgeoisie. Marx’s belief was that it was the “here and now” that mattered and that actions should be taken to increase the material outcomes for humanity; the proletariat. Marx said "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
In Das Kapital, Marx defined his idea of how Marxist change occurs; thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Thesis is the prevailing situation in society. Antithesis is a polar opposite that is presented as part of a movement, resulting in synthesis which is the intended consequence.
In 1848 Karl Marx released the Communist Manifesto, and a number of years later his philosophies of equality were embraced in law in the Soviet Union which revolted in favour of Marxism, and these philosophies were more subtly adopted into the thinking and politics of Western nations. In the 1930’s, both Stalin and Hitler perfected the language rules of political correctness. People literally risked their lives when they spoke.
In the late 19th century the ideas of feminism swept through Britain calling for gender equality, and this was later followed by demands for wealth equality (through the welfare state), the “classless society”, racial equality, age equality, sexual equality etc.
While Stalin used brute force in his totalitarian regime to bring about his Marxist vision in Russia, Marxists knew that this was not possible in the West, therefore they opened schools to establish Marxism in the West.
“A lie told often enough becomes truth.”
Dr. Gerald L. Atkinson writes that “History identifies a small group of German Jewish intellectuals who devised concepts, processes, and action plans which conform very closely to what Americans presently observe every day in their culture. Observations, such as those made in this series of essays, can be directly traced to the work of this core group of intellectuals. They were members of the Frankfurt School, formed in Germany in 1923. They were the forebears of what some proclaim as 'cultural Marxism,' a radical social movement that has transformed American culture. It is more commonly known today as 'political correctness.' By promoting the dialectic of 'negative' criticism, that is, pointing out the rational contradictions in a society's belief system, the Frankfurt School 'revolutionaries' dreamed of a utopia where their rules governed. Their Critical Theory had to contain a strongly imaginative, even utopian strain, which transcends the limits of reality. Its tenets would never be subject to experimental evidence. The pure logic of their thoughts would be incontrovertible.”
In 1933 a highly authoritarian and deadly German leader called Adolf Hitler came to power bringing the ideology of “National Socialism” or “Nazism” which was a unique variety of fascism based on the German national identity, race and dislike of Jews and communism. The Frankfurt School was largely Jewish and Hitler regarded it as communist and therefore he expelled the members of the Frankfurt School from Germany and the school moved to New York eventually to return to Germany in the early 1950s. The “New York Intellectual” movement came from the New York Frankfurt School.
Ironically while the Nazi ideology was ideologically opposed to the Frankfurt School, there were a number of similarities between the ideology of the Frankfurt School and the Nazi ideology. For example:
• The idea that there were “Politically Correct” ideas that should not be challenged
• That the espoused truths were incontrovertible and empirical validation was therefore not required
• A “Critical Theory” that is selective about what it evaluates.
• A belief that it would bring about universal truth and justice.
The Nazi regime enforced “harmonisation” which meant ensuring that individuals and organisation existed in accordance with the doctrine of the date i.e. existed in harmony. For example in May 1933, Hitler took control of the German Trade Unions and froze their bank accounts to make sure that they supported the State line. The 1960s left radicals often talked about living “in harmony” and in Britain today the government has “harmonised” the police, the legal system and the education system in line with “political correctness”.
In 1936, Nazi Culture Minister Josef Goebbels, on orders from Adolf Hitler, formed a committee of academics to edit the complete works of Frederich Nietzsche. Martin Heidegger was placed on that committee; in preparation, Heidegger prepared a series of lectures on Nietzsche's work. Heidegger concluded that the most important thing that he shared with Nietzsche was the commitment to extinguish the last traces in Western civilization of what he called 'metaphysical humanism.' This commitment was also shared by the Frankfurt School.
Adolf Hitler’s an ardent fan of Political Correctness, said on the subject that “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly–it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. The Frankfurt School studied in depth the propaganda techniques used by both Soviet Russia and the Nazi regime in order that it would be able to put those techniques to use for its own ends.
The following photograph which was taken recently shows a notice board of the Frankfurt School’s 'Institut für Sozialforschung' (Institute for Social Research).
To further the advance of their ‘quiet’ cultural revolution - but giving us no ideas about their plans for the future - the School recommended (among other things):
1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
I believe that Liberalism once had a legitimate place in politics for example to oppose slavery or some of the cruelties carried out by the various European Empires, however today Liberalism seems to have become a disorder which is simply destroying nations. During the second world war, the horrors of the Nazi regime represented some of the most total forms of discrimination. Subsequently, after the second world war a form of liberalism formed as a reaction to the total discrimination of the Nazi’s and this liberalism contained in it’s ideology that all people of the world are the same and that to discriminate is the ultimate sin and is comparable to the Nazis. That is what we teach in our schools and our universities. This is part of the social contract which forms part of the belief system of ordinary people and also Members of Parliament, Judges, Policemen, bankers, business men and civil servants. The problem with this ideology is all of the people in the world are not the same and even nature itself discriminates. Such an ideology does not fit practical reality; one will discriminate when one sells a house, according to who has the money to buy it. One may discriminate when choosing a partner according to looks, personality or social status. One may discriminate when choosing a builder according to whether he is known to oneself, friends or family in order to protect against bad work or fraud. The list of scenarios where is not only optional but mandatory to discriminate is countless. Therefore the ideology of liberalism created 2 realities; the actual reality, and the false reality where the “sins” of discrimination are not committed.
(Original post by Norton1)
I immediately discounted your argument on the basis of your inability to spell the simple word 'hypocrite'. If it's the cornerstone of your philosophy do take the trouble to check a dictionary.
Also, I did find it quite funny you'd not do that before going to the effort of making a weird little poster thing.
So overall, 2/10 for effort and 0/10 for execution.
Thanks for pointing out the spelling error. I have corrected it now.
I think your right wing 'la la I'm a dumb-dumb' logic gives you a weak foundation for your argument, since it's led you to the conclusion that the foreign occupation of Tibet is analogous to controlled immigration
(Original post by between_the_lies)
Is that because you don't have a rational defence for lies and double standards?
The fact is your argument is incredibly weak.
The single secondary source you've used - Gerald L. Atkinson -is an absolute nobody. That's just the objection I can come up with using 10 seconds and google. I think we should all be wary of wasting time and energy on your idiocy.
(Original post by + polarity -)
Is the existence of white people and children in any way insecure?
Yes. Only 8% of the worlds population is white and demographics predict that they will end up as a minority in their own countries, out bred, out immigrated and replaced in the labour market. Part of the problem is that they have been brainwashed to disregard the white race, think of it as evil and think of anyone who refers to it as evil.