search

Franklin Scandal Omaha

comments

sitemap home

 

Trump &

Jewish Cultural Marxism

Timeline

nfu

9/11 Truth, JFK assassination, Holocaust revision & ISIS interactive spreadsheet

9/11, JFK, Holocaust ISIS Timeline

Related pages:

 

Trump home page

Jewish Cultural Marxism and 9/11 Truth

Timeline

 

trump

Trump Blacklists for signing 'Never Trump' letters

History of Cultural Marxism

The Populist / Alt Right / Cultural Marxism backlash aspects of the 2016 election were and are important components of a new Trump era.

Zionist Frankfurt School review Prof Kevin McDonald

 

Cultural Marxism Timeline

 

 

 

Sozhenitsyn: 200 Years Together, Gulag Archipeligo

 

trump

Reject NeoNazis and the use of the swastika. It reinforces the Holocaust lie whose central theme is to blame the German people for an event that never occured and lay an interminable guilt upon them in order to extract hundreds of millions in reparations. ... No Jews died in gas chambers in Auschwitz. Hundreds of thousands of Jews did die from typhus, starvation and disease due to the chaos of war and Allied terror bombing of Germany. 60 million people died due to the Jewish Bolshevik Revoltution, Holodomor ... Zionists are trying to rub out this historical fact by endless Holocaust propaganda. The real story is how Zionists and Nazis conspired to enable mass emigration to Palestine to create Israel, the ultimate aim of Zionists.
Jewish Cultural Marxism, Political Correctness & Multiculturalism .... 9/11 Truth
Reference
  • Aagirfa
  • AngryHarry Cultural Marxism / Feminism McCarthyism
  • Blackbird9's Trading Post A Higher Understanding of 9-11 - Blackbird9 Podcast
  • Corbett Report Maurice Strong who became an international player for the UN global depopulation agenda. Disgraced kleptocrat Maurice Strong died late last year at the age of 86. He was shunned from polite society and forced into a life of exile in Beijing after his decades of business intrigues, crimes against humanity, and environmental destruction unraveled. His savagery culminated with an attempt to profit off of the death of starving Iraqi children. His funeral was a quiet affair, attended only by those few family members who could not find it in their heart to shun him completely. Former friends and business associates like Paul Martin, James Wolfensohn, Kofi Annan, Conrad Black, and Al Gore all avoided calls for comments on their disgraced friend’s passing.”
  • nationalism
  • Cultural Marxism.net Tavistock Clinic
  • Dankoff, Mark Charlie Hebdo funded by Rothschilds
  • Darkmoon, Weil, Rothschild Institute of Social Research ... Satan’s Secret Agents: The Frankfurt School and their Evil Agenda ... Based on an original article (see here) by Timothy Matthews. Abbreviated and adapted with additional material by Lasha Darkmoon.
  • EnglishNews ,..This 20th century strain of Jewish Marxism, Christianity and Talmudic warfare was produced by the Frankfurt School a.k.a. the Institute for Social Research founded by and corrupted by Jewish Supremacists in Frankfurt, and later in New York where it was and still is responsible for all the anti-European psychology advertising approaches, Critical Theory, repressive tolerance, "diversity is our strength," and other insidious tactics, phrases, infiltration attempts, suppression phrases and strategies that are attempting to gradually strip away the cultural traditions, ethnic identity, national sovereignty, and historical memory of the ethnic European races, especially in Northern Europe and our off-continent homelands of Canada, America, Australia, NZ and elsewhere, relying on a bedrock of Christian tolerance and anti-natural philosophy to weaken their prey, allowing for the fundamental susceptibility to further defilement. .
  • FreeBritainSociety..The British Labour Party was organised in 1900 as the Labour Representation Committee (LRC) by Fabian Society leaders Bernard Shaw and Edward Pease, and had Fabian Socialist Ramsay MacDonald as General Secretary. An example of this is the promotion of collapse theology, the worse is better mentality, which effectively neutralises those who adhere to it from having a political influence, as they are manipulated into waiting for ‘shit to hit the fan’, which never occurs, until it is too late. Understanding the Jewish origin of these theories and distractions are essential for attaining a pure perspective. Disposing of the impurities promoted by the Fabian Jewish Supremacists and post-Frankfurt Jewish multi-racialists is essential for the survival of our folk.
  • Trump's greatest 2016 election campaign ad

    trump

  • Intrepid Report The European Union and its goal of a borderless Europe, the euro common currency, a common police force—EUROPOL—benefits only one major and influential group: the pedophile network that dominates the EU and individual member states like the United Kingdom, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Sweden, and others. The Schengen system, which drops intra-European border controls, permits pedophiles, even those with prior criminal records, to travel unchallenged throughout the Schengen group of countries.
  • Irish Savant Shachar Zahavi of disaster relief organization IsraAid spoke with The Times of Israel in a brief conversation from Athens on Wednesday. IsraAid has been working with Syrian refugees in Jordan and Iraq/Kurdistan for several years and is currently setting up operations at a well-traveled entry point in GREECE.
  • Karlstrom, Eric video ... Anglo-American-Zionist criminal syndicate also known as the New World Order. We talk about false flag terrorism, psychological warfare, Allen Dulles, Freemasonry, Satanism, Cultural Marxism and Zionism
  • Makow .
  • McDonald, Kevin thesis Jewish neoconservatism. A deep concern with furthering specific Jewish interests, such as helping Israel or promoting immigration. Issues are framed in a rhetoric of universalism rather than Jewish particularism. Issues are framed in moral terms, and an attitude of moral superiority pervades the movement. Centered around charismatic leaders (Boas, Trotsky, Freud). Jews form a cohesive, mutually reinforcing core. Non-Jews appear in highly visible roles, often as spokespersons for the movement. A pronounced ingroup/outgroup atmosphere within the movement—dissenters are portrayed as the personification of evil and are expunged from the movement. The movement is irrational in the sense that it is fundamentally concerned with using available intellectual resources to advance a political cause. The movement is associated with the most prestigious academic institutions in the society. Access to prestigious and mainstream media sources, partly as a result of Jewish influence on the media. Active involvement of the wider Jewish community in supporting the movement.
  • McDonald, Kevin Prof. on Slezkenerev... A persistent theme among critics of Jews—particularly those on the pre-World War II right—has been that the Bolshevik revolution was a Jewish revolution and that the Soviet Union was dominated by Jews. This theme appears in a wide range of writings, from Henry Ford’s International Jew, to published statements by a long list of British, French, and American political figures in the 1920s (Winston Churchill, Woodrow Wilson, and David Lloyd George)
  • Noicki, Andi Red Ice Radio interview, 9/11 self-revelation..
  • RedefiningGod
  • RedGreenAlliance Cass Sunstein .Victory in the war of ideas often hinges more on the conditions of battle than on the quality of arguments. You know this instinctively if you’ve ever been shouted down, smeared, or ignored when you were simply trying to state a point. Truly civil public discourse becomes much harder when our dialogue is hijacked by thought policing—euphemistically referred to as “political correctness,” or PC
  • RedIce The Frankfurt School and big business
  • Rense
  • Rense The Jewish Century.
  • RobertsCourt Blog. Tavistock Tavistock, a progressive society, was founded in London in 1920; the Tavistock Clinic opened in 1920. It always had secret ties to British Freemasonry. Its aims include social control, information control; and control of the hidden information environment. Practically, his means it has control mechanisms in academia, multimedia, intelligence, and medicine especially pharmaceuticals. Tavistock is part of the global shadow government.
  • Smash Multiculturalism The traditional definition of race and ethnicity is related to biological and sociological factors respectively. Race refers to a person’s physical characteristics, such as bone structure and skin, hair, or eye color. Ethnicity, however, refers to cultural factors, including nationality, int Alex Jones
  • SourceWatch Leo Strauss  "For Strauss, "religion is the glue that holds society together", said Drury, who added that Irving Kristol, among other neo-conservatives, has argued that separating church and state was the biggest mistake made by the founders of the U.S. republic.  "Secular society in their view is the worst possible thing", because it leads to individualism, liberalism and relativism   ...   precisely those traits that might encourage dissent, which in turn could dangerously weaken society's ability to cope with external threats. "You want a crowd that you can manipulate like putty," according to Drury"
  • TruthSeeker Climate of Fear Exposing 9/11
  • VeteransNewsNow ..
  • .ZenGardner 9/11 WTC Nuked
  • ZionistReport t is entirely fitting that the European Central Bank (ECB) chief Mario Draghi has decided to convene the annual meeting of ECB bankers in the Portuguese city of Sintra. Draghi and his fellow bankers are trying to decide how to mitigate the effects of the Brexit vote by Britain to leave the European Union.
  • ZionistReport
  • cultural marxism
  • Stephen Francis' session focused on Cultural Marxism & 9/11 Truth

  • trump
  • Kevin McDonald.net The Frankfurt School of Social Research and the Pathologization of Gentile Group Allegiances THE POLITICAL AGENDA OF THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH Hatred and [the] spirit of sacrifice . . . are nourished by the image of enslaved ancestors rather than that of liberated grandchildren. (Illuminations, Walter Benjamin 1968, 262) To write poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric. (T. W. Adorno 1967, 34) Chapters 2–4 reviewed several strands of theory and research by Jewish social scientists that appear to have been influenced by specifically Jewish political interests. This theme is continued in the present chapter with a review of The Authoritarian Personality. This classic work in social psychology was sponsored by the Department of Scientific Research of the American Jewish Committee (hereafter, AJCommittee) in a series entitled Studies in Prejudice. Studies in Prejudice was closely connected with the so-called Frankfurt School of predominantly Jewish intellectuals associated with the Institute for Social Research originating during the Weimar period in Germany. The first generation of the Frankfurt School were all Jews by ethnic background and the Institute of Social Research itself was funded by a Jewish millionaire, Felix Weil (Wiggershaus 1994, 13).
  • Bollyn With the election of Donald Trump we stand on the brink of a critical transition in American history. After fifteen years of intrigue and deception from the government and media about 9/11 and the fraudulent War on Terror, Americans rejected the naysaying pundits and voted for Donald Trump, who promises real change and reform. Trump prevailed in a valiant and hard-fought campaign in which he was opposed by the most powerful political forces in the United States, the political Establishment and the controlled media, the very institutions behind the deception of 9/11 and the War on Terror.
  • GulagBound on Keith Ellison ... Marxist/Muslim Axis: ‘Enemies Within’ Documentary Exposes Proposed DNC Chair Keith Ellison ... Filmmaker Trevor Loudon’s new documentary The Enemies Within exposes the communist and radical Islamist background of the probable new leader of the Democratic Party. Rep. Keith Ellison, center Rep. Keith Ellison (D}, Minnesota), center Keith Ellison, a Marxist/Muslim Democratic Congressman from Minnesota, could soon become the Democratic National Committee chairman. With the endorsements of Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders and more than 250,000 signatures on an “Ellison for chairman” petition, Representative Ellison is the early favorite for the position. Many writers have focused on Ellison’s Islamic beliefs, but few have examined his extensive Marxist connections. search terms: FBI background check, Communist Party USA, Trevor Loudon, Muslim Brotherhood, Trevor Loudon trevor@enemieswithinmovie.com. MORE

Zxc

Summary
  • The Trump nationalist movement seen taking center stage to the alarm of Jewish oligarchs. The MSM attempts to characterize the movement as White Nationalist or even White Supremacist, but is actually just ordinary white-collar middle America that was totally disenfranchized by Jewish dominated financial, legal and governmental systems. NWO is actually trying to destroy any nationalist movements anywhere and overreached in the US.... thus rise of Trump.
  • A central tenant of Cultural Marxism is accomplishing the breakdown of the existing American culture to 'soften' it up for a Marxist revolution.... but Jewish rooted Marxism has a zero chance of taking hold in the US... so it can be surmised that the whole effort is just a machination of Jewish world control plans. A further softening of the cutlure is being enabled by executing 9/11 and forcing the world to 'believe' another horrific hoax, the Holocaust being the only bigger lie. A final expulsion is needed.
  • See Trump's best campaign ad that fingers Zionist predator media and banksters
  • trump
  • Breitbart (touted as leading Trump supporter site) is a Zionist controlled opposition website. Their negative stance on 9/11 Truth is an important point supporting this statement. see more below all articles related to 9/11 Truth are hit pieces.
  • HenryMakow The eleven steps to Jewish world control ... The Frankfurt School, Satanic Judaism in Action ...The 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. Creating dependency on the state or state benefits 10. Control and dumbing down of media 11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family & attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children. • abolish differences in the education of boys and girls • abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces • declare women to be an 'oppressed class' and men as 'oppressors'
  • Trumps chief strategic advisor Steve Bannon is a principle in the Alt Right movement and characterizes himself as a economic nationalist. He formerly was a principle at Breitbart News... which is run by Jews.
  • Steve Bannon will unfortunately lead the endless effort to suppress 9/11 Truth, JFK assassination and Holocaust inquiries, but the 9/11 Truth movement can gain some legs in Trump era marked by less domination by the Jewish propaganda machine.
  • World-wide anti-Semitism in dramatic climb due to decline of MSM exasperated by unprecedented show of bias against Trump in 2016 presidential election campaign.
  • The alt right segment of the Trump nationalist movement has been effectively smeared with NeoNazism claims by the Jewish propaganda machine. Their are undoubtedly neo Nazis in the group, but are not a majority. The ADL won this round.
  • FAKE NEWS / GULLIBLE? Microspectrum ... Darkmoon.de, TopinfoPost, DailyTrump, International Business Times, According to fake news article, Trump is the only presidential candidate or major public figure who has written the Truther group a custom letter after being sent their DVDs and literature. Trump’s campaign, Gage said, thanked the members of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth for their “continued support.”, upon a querie of AE911.org, nothing was found to back this up. MORE
  • .Donald Trump, exposed Hillary Clinton's connections to UBS terrorist financing, Covington & Burling, Eric Holder, Lanny Bruer. more
  • US Nationalist's Whitelash against Zionist NWO globalists is the 9/11 Truth movement's best chance to advance.
  • Political philosophers and intellectuals: Leo Strauss, Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, Freiderich Hegel, Martin Heidegger, Carl Schmitt, Robert Hutchins, Franz Neumann, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, Otto Kirchheimer, Theodor Adorno, Franz Boas, Gary Schmitt, Antonio Gramsci, Bertrand Russell, Aldoux Huxley, Martin Heidegger, Alexandre Kojeve, Noam Chomsky,
  • Schiller Institute ... Carl Schmitt, the author and philosopher of the Nazis’ legal system, and Martin Heidegger, one of its most influential philosophers, became protected intellectual assets. Schmitt arranged with the Rockefeller Foundation for the emigration of his admirer, Leo Strauss, to London and the United States. Strauss was a devotee of Schmitt, Heidegger, and Alexandre Kojève, who preached the doctrine of “purgative violence
  • Wikipedia paraphrased ... Kojeve, Alexandre ... Russian born French philospher, integrated Hegel into Continental philosophy, instrumental in creation of EU, lifelong friend of Leo Strauss, believed US was right-Hegelianism and Soviet Union was left-Hegelianism, interpreted Hegel through the lens of Marx and Heidegger, Alan Bloom one of his best students, was a Soviet spy, psychopath.
  • Hidden Histories of of War Crimes Trials The OSS investigation was led by Franz Leopold Neumann, a German intellectual and who had fled to New York in the 1930s with other Frankfurt School members Otto Kirchheimer and Herbert Marcuse. His 1944 book Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism served as the blueprint for the US leadership's understanding of the Nazi 'apparatus'.
  • Neumann, Franz ... role of Frankfurt School, Marcuse, Kirchheimer, Neumann and Henry Morgenthau in shaping post WWII Germany...
  • Alternative-Right Blog about this thing called "Cultural Marxism," and whether–or how–it exists or not. The discussion began with an article by Jason Wilson in Britain's premier left-wing broadsheet the Guardian, titled “Cultural Marxism: a uniting theory for right wingers who love to play the victim,” to which Michael Enoch at The Right Stuff responded with “I Acknowledge That Cultural Marxism Exists,” with which alt-right stalwarts Keith Preston and Greg Johnson then seemingly concurred.
  • Amazon Ledeen War Against the Terror Masters
  • ArkansasFreedom Senator John Boozman has aided & abetted these 15 year wars from the first day he entered congress. He voted for the Patriot Acts twice that destroyed the 1st & 4th Amendments. His dossier only shows warmongering, Establishment compliance, & betrayal of middleclass Arkansans. Over the years he has lightly campaigned by claiming he is a “conservative”, would fight against illegal immigration, and would always serve the interests of fellow Arkansans—all lies. Boozman, unfortunately is just another dangerous, self-serving sycophant and a lackey for the Bush II crime family.
  • Beatles2020 Adorno wrote Beatles songs, filtered down through Paul McCartney, who was replaced because original died in 1966.
  • Bolshecaust new word definition: the murder of 60 million people in the Bolshevik revolution by Jews.
  • Breitbart.review Devil's Pleasure Palace.Are there dozens of gender and gay and black studies courses at Yale and only a few on the American founding? Cultural Marxists did that. Can professors be tried before secret Kangaroo courts? Cultural Marxists did that. Are high-powered corporate executives too frightened to refuse a gay rainbow sticker on their office door? Cultural Marxism at work. Are we as a society so unsure of ourselves that we cannot even think, let alone assert, that Western civilization is superior to any and all others? They did that, too. Gays in the military? Boys in dresses peeing in the girl’s room? You get the idea....
  • BlessedQuietness Soros, Clinton Tavistock
  • Breibart
  • CaesarsMessiah Joe Atwill, MK ULTRA, Frankfurt School, Cultural Marxism
  • CigPapers Fabian Society, a wolf in sheep's clothing .The Fabians originally were a faux elite group of pseudo-intellectuals who formed a semi-secret society for the purpose of bringing socialism to the world. Whereas Communists wanted to establish socialism through violence and revolution, the Fabians preferred to do it gradually through propaganda, infiltration and legislation. The word socialism was never to be used. Instead, they would always speak of benefits for the people such as pensions, welfare, medical care, higher wages, and better working conditions.
  • Confessions of the Illuminati.Author Leo Lyon Zagami uses the Illuminati’s internal documents and reveals confidential and top-secret events. His book contends that the presence of numerous Illuminati brotherhoods and secret societies—just as those inside the most prestigious U.S. universities such as Yale or Harvard—have always been guides to the occult. From the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO)’s infiltration of Freemasonry to the real Priory of Sion, this book exposes the hidden structure of the New World Order and the occult practices of the various groups involved with it, including their connections to the intelligence community and the infamous Ur-Lodges..
  • CulturalMarxism.net
  • DailyStormer Cultural Marxism, Conspiracy Theory according to the Guardian. The Authoritarian Personality “invented a set of criteria by which to define personality traits, ranked these traits and their intensity in any given person on what it called the ‘F scale’ (F for fascist).” The personality type Adorno et al. identified can be defined by nine traits that were believed to cluster together as the result of childhood experiences. These traits include conventionalism, authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, anti-intellectualism, anti-intraception, superstition and stereotypy, power and “toughness”, destructiveness and cynicism, projectivity, and exaggerated concerns over sex.
  • EnglishNews. The Jewish Socialist Capitalist Subversive Alliance Both (Fabianism and Cultural Marxism) redirect revolutionary Marxism and instead use and advocate “gradualism”, a step-by-step long-term plan to change the spiritual (Christianity and atheism), ethnic (immigration) and political character (subversion of the political discourse) of European nations through stealth and infiltration of Jews and Jewish ideologies into every level of society, even attempting to infiltrate racially aware circles to bring the down from their own supposed ideological foundations, as with the (anti-thesis) promotion of Christianity in racially aware circles and certain types of pseudo-intellectual ideology and revisionism which actually does nothing more than weaken the resolve and productivity of racially aware folk.
  • European Economics Blog.We need to understand why Western society and its cultural identity have so vastly degenerated and especially why family values have deteriorated so dramatically. A clearer understanding of the historical evolution of this age-old question and its far-reaching implications will provide valuable insights into the intellectual crisis of Western societies and the strategic suppression of dissent and independent thought. It will shed light on the origins on the intellectual bondage that we know today as Political Correctness
  • DailyTrump Trump promises full investigation of 9/11 if elected President.... There is no way that Trump does not know far more about 9/11 than what the rest of us can already gather from investigators such as Chris Bollyn, that it was a Jewish operation with shabbos goys. Trump doesn’t have to get into all that just now. It’s enough to show the obvious, that America was attacked on Bush’s watch.
  • JudeoFascism blog. From crypto-Zionist left-Bolshevism and right-Neoconservatism in the Diaspora, through naked Jewish national socialism in Israel, Judeo supremacist (Zionist) movements have murdered and terrorized millions in pursuit of a messianic, "Chosen Race" agenda. They will continue to kill until the Judeofascists and their agents, allies and accomplices are identified, exposed and isolated.
  • LibertyWritersNews Breitbart
  • Millenium Report.A Mossad unit consisting of six Egyptian and Yemeni-born Jews infiltrated “Al Qaeda” cells in Hamburg (the Atta-Mamoun Darkanzali cell), south Florida, and Sharjah in the United Arab Emirates in the months before 9/11. The Mossad not only infiltrated cells but began to run them.
  • Mises Judaism, Capitalism and Communism, Part 1.
  • Murder by Media Now what really is cultural marxism? Cultural marxism is a term describing a sociopolitical function, a phenomenon were non-political identities are turned political, seeking cultural dominance of the ruling culture. The ruling culture is being criticized, and the total polarization of these conflicting identities in the name of social justice or social equality, will bring corrode and bring down the ruling culture. Basically you could say that Cultural marxism = identity politics + Critical Theory + Social justice.
  • NewsFollowUp False Flag attacks : Ambassador Chris Stevens, Benghazi 'al Qaeda' attack, 'October Surprise'. France Toulouse Jewish murders Iran nuclear scientists murdered by Israelr ... Western mercenaries conducted assassinations and false flag terror attacks in Jan 2013 report Lebanon's police intelligence chief, General Wissam al-Hassan.. .Underwear Bomber Israel security firm ICTS common thread to Shoe Bomber Shoe Bomber Israel security firm ICTS common thread to Underwear Bomber Bali Bombings, by Israel Hariri assassination by Israel 51 Documents Zionist Collaboration with the Zazis more Holocaust Minot Barksdale B-52 (Cheney, nuclear warheads transfer) 9/11 WTC, Pentagon, Flight 93, Building 7, Shanksville SweetLiberty.org Israel False Flag Black Ops..
  • NewEuroMed.Who created Communism? Karl_Marx_001Acc. to Fr. Engels, the Jewish Freemason Karl Marx Marx was hired by the League of Just Men to write the “Communist Manifesto”. This League was based on the League of Outlaws having its Root in the French Revolution Illumininatus, Babeuf. In fact, there was little difference between Babouvism and Bolshevism. The League of Just Men consisted of Rothschilds, Oppenheims and Oppenheimers, Nathan Rothschild financing Marx. The Communist Manifesto was to implement the 6 Commandments of Jesuit Adam Weishaupt and Mayer Amschel Rothschild – primarily to abolish nation state and Christianity. It did widely happen through revolutions and wars worldwide, killing millions of Christians.. new word: Bolshecaust ... giving a name to the Jewish mass murder of 60 million Russians in the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution.
  • PalgraveConnect..
  • Petras, James book The Power of Israel pdf ...9/11 article
  • Project Avalon Alex Honneth
  • RightPedia Frankfurt School The creation of racism offences and hate speech laws. Continual change to create confusion (e,g., in school curricula). Masturbation propaganda in schools, combined with the homosexualization and transsexualism of children and their corruption by exposing them to child porn in the classroom. The systematic undermining of parental and teachers’ authority. Huge immigration to destroy national identity and foment future race wars. The systematic promotion of excessive drinking and recreational drugs. The systematic promotion of sexual deviance in society. An unreliable legal system with bias against the victims of crime. Dependency on state benefits. Control and dumbing down of media. (Six Jewish companies now control 96 percent of the world’s media. LD). Encouraging the breakdown of the family. All all-out attack on Christianity and the emptying of churches.
  • SalvoMag .Marcuse was a key intellectual in the movement, along with Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Erich Fromm, Walter Benjamin, Leo Lowenthal, Wilhelm Reich, Georg Lukacs, and many others. These men were disillusioned with traditional Western society and values. Lukacs, who helped found the school, said that its purpose was to answer this question: "Who shall save us from Western Civilization?" Terror and civilization are inseparable," wrote Adorno and Horkheimer in The Dialectic of Enlightenment. The solution to terror was therefore simple: dismantle civilization. Marcuse expressed their goal like this: "One can rightfully speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed toward the whole cultural establishment, including [the] morality of existing society." Lukacs saw "the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only solution to the cultural contradictions of the epoch," and argued that "such a worldwide overturning of values cannot take place without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by the revolutionaries."
  • Shahak, Israel
  • StarryNews..Why do they let them in? Why DID they let them in. So many years ago! Because the pedofile politicans, blackmailed by Mossad & CIA, are doing the Bankers’ bidding. And what is that? Destroy Europe as national entities to fit better into their One World Disorder! And so Merkel, and Hollande, Cameron, and all the others, supported the official version of 9-11, which was done by the Rockefellers, Mossad, and the CIA, to blame the Arabs, to blame the Muslims, and to take down 5-6 countries that were against Islamic radicals. Why?..
  • TelosPress Marcuse, whose research and philosophy only marginally addressed the “Jewish question,” never denied his Jewish origins, but at the same time he never used this objective fact as an exclusive or decisive argument to affect his views on various issues, not even regarding world-historical matters of particular relevance to the Jews. Even if generally, positively, Marcuse endeavored to constitute the Marxian Realm of Freedom, or at least strove to fathom scientifically why in the course of modern history, an authentic revolution for the liberation of man has failed repeatedly, his major, immediate, intellectual and socio-political concern was the struggle against the reemergence of an oppressive reign of horror, including a struggle against the possible recurrence of a genocide. Marcuse supported the existence of the State of Israel and its right to defend itself. The objective rationale for this was, ultimately, the Holocaust of European Jewry: namely, the perception of the State of Israel as a refuge and a shelter for Jews against persecutions and repression. But this position did not prevent him from strongly criticizing Israeli policy since the end of the Six-Day War (June 1967) for objecting to peace, as well as for its attitude toward the Palestinians in Israel and in the occupied territories as inferior, a policy that he understood an expression of “racist and nationalistic tendencies.” It was the policy of Israel’s governments and its possible consequences that he regarded as the greatest threat to the continued existence of the Jewish state.
  • YouTube CM..
  • Pieczenik.
  • Nationalism Manifesto: Alt Right Manifesto Nationalism does not necessarily incur racism. Family values include pro-feminism. Resent corrupt warmongers/profiteers sanctimoniously pushing multiculturalism. Islamophobia was invented by corrupt warmongers/profiteers. Reject NWO globalism and the income inequality it creates. Bundling anti-Semitism with hate, racism and bigotry is disingenuous trickery. Political Correctness is a Jewish invention to suppress free speech. Cultural Marxism is real and rooted in Jewish Marxist ideology. Purge Marxist Critical Theory from academia. LGBTQ is an insignificant political issue. Tolerate and ignore. New scrutiny of 9/11, JFK and even the Holocaust are warranted. Freedom of speech is an unalienable right.

 

  • Boozman, Arkansas Israel firster cm
  • Black Rose Anarchist Federation mission statement
  • Breitbart News, Jewish run website controlled opposition, strips out all mention of Jewish roots of Cultural Marxism, associates CM with communist Red Scare tactics of Cold War. There is no mention of 9/11 Truth obviously because it implicates Israel in the controlled demolition of the WTC and the subsequent push to pass draconian surveillance laws and launch two illegal wars ... Afghanistan / Iraq Wars.
  • Breitbart Review of Michael Walsh’s Book ‘The Devil’s Pleasure Palace’... excerpt: "The Frankfurt School is named for those who founded or came from the Institute for Social Research started to advance Marxist-oriented propaganda. It included sociologists Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, psychologist Erich Fromm, and philosopher Herbert Marcuse. The Institute actually became affiliated with Columbia University in New York. Another seminal figure connected to this school of thought included the Italian Antonio Gramsci, whose grave in the Protestant cemetery in Rome is even now approached reverently and decorated by his followers". ... no mention of Jewish roots of CM... Breitbart is controlled opposition rag...
  • BreitbartUnmasked
  • Breitbart Steve Bannon ... Bannon also highlighted the diversity of views that were given a platform at Breitbart News, while also making it clear that both he and the site had “zero tolerance” for “racial and anti-Semitic” views. He acknowledges that the site is “edgy” but insists it is “vibrant.” He offers his own definition of the alt-right movement and explains how he sees it fitting into Breitbart. “Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment.” But he says Breitbart is also a platform for “libertarians,” Zionists, “the conservative gay community,” “proponents of restrictions on gay marriage,” “economic nationalism” and “populism” and “the anti-establishment.”
  • CBS News  Vid
  • Columbia.edu Adorno ... The Frankfurt School represents the first major attack on Marxism in the name of "Western Marxism." While Gramsci and Lukacs operate within the framework of Marxism and were even members of the Communist Party, the Frankfurters made no such pretensions.
  • DailyWire. An Actual Conservative's Guide To The Alt-Right: 8 Things You Need To Know
  • DiscovertheNetworks guide to the political left, Soros
  • Freud, Jewish, psychoanalysis nonsense, addition to Cultural Marxism
  • Fabians greater equality of power, wealth and opportunity the value of collective action and public service an accountable, tolerant and active democracy citizenship, liberty and human rights sustainable development multilateral international cooperation (world jewish government control)
  • FreeCongress William Lind
  • Forward .I am not the only one whose refugee-related work has been curtailed by SJP. Last year, they protested an Amnesty International fundraiser because it was to take place at Ben & Jerry’s, which apparently is connected with a company that produces ice cream in Israel. Syrian refugee children, including Palestinians, will not have coats this winter because members of SJP cares more about optics than the lives and health of the Syrian people.
  • ForwardProgressives article: how Allen Baler (operating under the name Frank Bates) has made a lot of money, all from selling survivalist merchandise to mostly right-wing (there’s some on the left as well if you ever frequent Reddit) nutjobs who are firmly convinced that any day now Obama is going to instruct FEMA to round all the “patriots” up and put them in FEMA camps. From the story:
  • Harris, Sam Harris, genius, philosopher, Clinton supporter
  • Institute for Social Research official website.. research Alex Honneth, current administrator
  • Jezebel On most days, the Brooklyn Commons, a cafe and co-working space in Boerum Hill, is a place where the city’s progressives and radical leftists can feel comfortable. It is home, after all, to socialist literary darlings Jacobin magazine, the Marxist Education Project, and the Brooklyn Institute for Social Research ... but Christopher Bolyn was in town... 9/11 and the War on Terror are dual deceptions imposed on our nation by the Israeli/Zionist and Neo-Conservative cabal that controls our government and media
  • Ledeen book War Against the Terror Masters: Ledeen: from his book: War Against the Terror Masters, "Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace and Amazon book description The War Against the Terror Masters is a must-read guide to the terrorist crisis. Michael A. Ledeen explains in startling detail how and why the United States was so unprepared for the September 11th catastrophe; the nature of the terror network we are fighting--including the state sponsors of that network; the role of radical Islam; and the enemy collaboration of some of our traditional Middle Eastern "allies";--and, most convincingly, what we must do to win the war.
  • Ledeen NFU
  • Mises Institute This is an excellent short video explaining the source and nature of Cultural Marxist movements like political correctness, modern feminism, pansexualism, multiculturalism, "whiteness studies," etc. For an in-depth critique of the thinkers whose writings shaped Cultural Marxism, see Fools, Frauds and Firebrands: Thinkers of the New Left by the eminent British philosopher Roger Scruton. Scruton brilliantly exposes the pretensions, obscurities, and inanities of Sartre, Foucault, Galbraith, Marcuse, Lukacs, Habermas, Adorno, Rawls, Dworkin and others of their ilk. The book is not just a philosophical tract but a work in critical political economy and contains one of the most penetrating discussions of the Marxist labor theory of value
  • Netanyahu book Fighting Terrorism
  • Netanyahu  "In America you have religious factions who oppose abortions in hospitals. This religious sentiment can be exploited and channeled into these kinds of operations."
  • Quigley, Mack blog The ‘alt-right’ solution to all these intractable problems is rather simple: bring in the dictator! Their trolling for Donald Trump is aspirational – but obviously not realistic since Trump doesn’t espouse what appears to be the core alt-right philosophy, “it’s all the Jew’s fault.” Trump’s mentor was the Jewish faggot Roy Cohn, Trump’s children have nearly all married Jews, Trump supported Netanyahu, welcomed blacks and Jews as members into his Florida golf club, etc.
  • RealClearPolitics Donald Trump on 9/11: "You Will Find Out Who Really Knocked Down The World Trade Center" ... Trump takes his relitigation of the Bush administration's record on 9/11 and Iraq to the next level, seeming to imply that we don't currently know who "really" committed the 9/11 attacks. ... Trump says if he is elected: "you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center." ... "It wasn't the Iraqis," he explained. "You may find it's the Saudis." "They have papers in there that are very secret," he also said, referencing the 28 still-classified pages of the 9/11 commission report. "But you will find out." ... Is Trump trying to divert attention away from Israel... says he was good friends with Silverstein.
  • TheRightStuff The 4 Major Power Centers Of The Globalist Left ... doesn't mention Jews... but see coments ... CM definitions make much more sense when explained in the context of Jews using it to to stave off anti-semitism. A thorough reading of the Authoritarian Personality, Dialectic of Enlightenment and Dialectical Imagination reveals these underlying themes.
  • Silberman Robb report, Whitehouse, Commission on Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. and TEXT FILEJudge Lawrence Silberman is married to Ricky.  Ricky Silberman and Barbara Ledeen  and Barbara Olson cofounded Independent Women's Forum IWF funding Richard Mellon Scaife, Koch Industries, affiliation with Citizens for a Sound Economy.
  • Soros ...pro immigration organizations
  • SPLCenter the book is an endless parade of classic far-right conspiracy theories and vicious, factually groundless fear mongering. From the idea that “cultural Marxism”is a force hellbent on ruining the world, to attacks on Obama as a “socialist”president, Savage covers the gamut of far-right conspiracy theories in fine fashion.Perhaps most notable among Savage’s claims is that the Obama administration is preparing to wage a “war on white people”that will give the government a pretext for imposing a dictatorship with global players, including the Roman Catholic Church and Pope Francis
  • Straus, Leo Early Writings book.
  • TheVillagesTeaParty ... Quigley's Anglo-American Establishment ... There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the Radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. ... been active in several Patriot groups on a county and state level advocating our Nation's Constitutional founding. Armando has been studying Socialism, Communism and Globalization for a few years and is active at any given opportunity to speak on these subjects. He has recently been active in helping bring awareness on the issue of Cultural Marxism and how much of an impact it has had on American Society. ... they do not mention Jewish roots of Cultural Marxism ... they don't mention the Jewish roots of Cultural Marxism
  • Weil, Felix founder of the Frankfurt School ... Rothschild funding?.
  • Trump list of cabinet nominees: Housing and Urban Development — Ben Carson. Health and Human Services — Tom Price. Education — Betsy DeVos. United Nations — Nikki R. Haley. Attorney General — Jeff Sessions. Treasury — Steven Mnuchin. Transportation — Elaine L. Chao. Commerce — Wilbur Ross.
  • Wikipedia Frankurt School Conpiracy Theory Cultural Marxism The Frankfurt School (German: Frankfurter Schule) is a school of social theory and philosophy associated in part with the Institute for Social Research at the Goethe University Frankfurt. Founded during the interwar period, the School consisted of dissidents who felt at home neither in the existent capitalist, fascist, nor communist systems that had formed at the time. Many of these theorists believed that traditional theory could not adequately explain the turbulent and unexpected development of capitalist societies in the twentieth century. Critical of both capitalism and Soviet socialism, their writings pointed to the possibility of an alternative path to social development
  • notes There are many shared aspects between the Fabian Society and the Frankfurt School: Both claim to promote socialism, the counter-ideology of capitalism Both have been and are funded by extremely wealthy people and groups who attained their affluence as capitalists Both promote the radical transformation of Western civilization through Socialist utopianism Both reject revolutionary Marxism and instead use and advocate "gradualism," a step-by-step long-term plan to change the character of the West through stealth and infiltration sourceEuroCanadian
  • Wikipedia William Lind
  • Wikipedia Maurice Strong.Strong was a longtime Foundation Director of the World Economic Forum, a senior advisor to the president of the World Bank, a member of the International Advisory of Toyota Motor Corporation, the Advisory Council for the Center for International Development at Harvard University, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the World Wildlife Fund, Resources for the Future and the Eisenhower Fellowships. His public service activities were carried out on a pro bono basis made possible by his business activities, which included being chairman of the International Advisory Group of CH2M Hill, Strovest Holdings, Technology Development Inc., Zenon Environmental, and most recently, Cosmos International and the China Carbon Corporation..
  • notes asdf asdf Infrakshun
  • Wikipedia post-structuralism, structuralism, structural Marxism, Althusser, Frankfurt School, Hegel, Kant, Bowman on Kant anti-Semitism, Kant JVL
  • luther
  • Jonathan Haidt

    Brandon Martinez

    Sam Harris

    Wayne Madsen

  • Northwestern University, Weinberg College of Arts & Sciences, Sociology Department Funding Sources: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Federation of American Scientists, RAND Corporation, Chatham House, Stockholm Int'l Peace Institute, Brookings Institution, Center for Security Policy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Henry Stimson Center, US Institute of Peace, Government and International Government: European Union, Library of Congress, World Bank, US State Department, United Nations, US Trade Representative, World Intellectual Property Organization, US Dept of Defense, Grants and Foundations, Mellon Foundation, Asia Foundation, Carnegie Corporation, Ford Foundation, Arca Foundation, Tinker Foundation, IREX (Central and E. Europe/ Former USSR), MacArthur Foundation, National Science Foundation, Soros Foundations Network, Social Science Research Council, Pew Charitable Trusts, Ploughshares Fund, Rockefeller Foundation, Eurasia Foundation, The Foundation Center (database) ... rankings: open society foundations#32..1.6b batelle, memorial inst..1.5b, commonwealth fund kaiser family found Carter center Rand 4, Carnegie 2 ,heritage 8 ,csis 3 ,ppic, aei, brookings 1, cfr 5, aspen 45, woodrow wilson 6, cato 9 pew 7


  • NonAllignedMedia Brandon Martinez ...2017 Mar 15 Geert Wilders is the only candidate in the Dutch elections that wants to halt immigration and keep Holland a country for the White Dutch people, but many who prioritize Middle East issues will dismiss him as a Zionist shill for his pro-Israel and anti-Islam stance. Unfortunately, Israel-Palestine has little play in Holland, and Dutch people have no real reason to put that issue above their own problems with immigration from predominately Muslim countries. ... Wilders is certainly pro-Israel and a cuck for Jewish power, for which he should be criticized. But despite that fault he’s opposing one of the main planks of the globalist plan: the great replacement plot that seeks to erase European identities, abolish “Whiteness” and black out the great history of the continent, all to be replaced by a cultureless Mammonite creed of consumerism, vain materialism and greed.
  • Centaurian2 Liquodating Western Civilization - The Legacy of the Frankfurt School ... The Gramscian tactics of the Frankfurt school were remarkably cunning. On the surface of things, post-war America seemed like the last place that would give their anti-Western philosophy a hearing. After all, this was a time when the entire Western world, and especially America, was acutely conscious of the way fascism had nearly wiped out their civilization. By taking as his paradigm the pre-Christian primitivism of the “noble savage”, Hitler had represented the antithesis of Western values. Moreover, the Nazis had ridden to power on a wave of a fashionable neo-paganism, primordial tribalism and primitive folk culture that had presented itself as a secular alternative to the suffocating culture of the modern West. In a number of different ways, therefore, the defeat of Hitler represented the victory of Western values. In America and England this victory was accompanied with the renewed cultural optimism characteristic of the late 1940’s and 1950’s. Such optimism manifested itself in the birth of the baby boomers, the production of happy films like Singing in the Rain and the music of pop stars like Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra. The genius of the Frankfurt school was their ability to convert this newfound confidence in American society into a force for sabotaging American society. Their strategy involved a clever redefinition of Fascism as having been an extreme right-wing heresy. According to this narrative, Nazism had been the outgrowth of a society entrenched in capitalism. (“Whoever is not prepared to talk about capitalism should also remain silent about fascism” commented Frankfurt sociologist Max Horkheimer). Cultures that attached strong importance to family, religion, patriotism and private ownership, they argued, were virtual seed beds of fascism.
  • Economist The making of a neo-KGB state (in context of Trump's nomination of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State) ON THE evening of August 22nd 1991—16 years ago this week—Alexei Kondaurov, a KGB general, stood by the darkened window of his Moscow office and watched a jubilant crowd moving towards the KGB headquarters in Lubyanka Square. A coup against Mikhail Gorbachev had just been defeated. The head of the KGB who had helped to orchestrate it had been arrested, and Mr Kondaurov was now one of the most senior officers left in the fast-emptying building. For a moment the thronged masses seemed to be heading straight towards him. ... Over the two terms of Mr Putin's presidency, that “group of FSB operatives” has consolidated its political power and built a new sort of corporate state in the process. Men from the FSB and its sister organisations control the Kremlin, the government, the media and large parts of the economy—as well as the military and security forces. According to research by Olga Kryshtanovskaya, a sociologist at the Russian Academy of Sciences, a quarter of the country's senior bureaucrats are siloviki—a Russian word meaning, roughly, “power guys”, which includes members of the armed forces and other security services, not just the FSB. The proportion rises to three-quarters if people simply affiliated to the security services are included. These people represent a psychologically homogeneous group, loyal to roots that go back to the Bolsheviks' first political police, the Cheka. As Mr Putin says repeatedly, “There is no such thing as a former Chekist.” ... whoever succeeds Mr Putin, real power is likely to remain in the organisation. Of all the Soviet institutions, the KGB withstood Russia's transformation to capitalism best and emerged strongest. “Communist ideology has gone ... In fact, the KGB was cut off from the post-Soviet redistribution of assets. Worse still, it was upstaged and outwitted by a tiny group of opportunists, many of them Jews (not a people beloved by the KGB), who became known as the oligarchs. Between them, they grabbed most of the country's natural resources and other privatised assets. KGB officers watched the oligarchs get super-rich while they stayed cash-strapped and sometimes even unpaid. ... The most politically active (Jewish) oligarchs, Mr Berezovsky, who had helped Mr Putin come to power, and Mr Gusinsky, were pushed out of the country, and their television channels were taken back into state hands. Mr Khodorkovsky, Russia's richest man, was more stubborn. Despite several warnings, he continued to support opposition parties and NGOs and refused to leave Russia. In 2003 the FSB arrested him and, after a show trial, helped put him in jail.
  • Wikipedia Stephen Bannon Stephen K. "Steve" Bannon (born November 27, 1953) is an American businessman and media executive. He is the executive chairman of Breitbart News, a politically conservative American news, opinion and commentary website noted for its connection to the alt-right. Bannon will be chief strategist and senior counselor of the upcoming Trump Administration.[He became chief executive officer of the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump in August 2016. He is the co-founder and executive chairman of the Government Accountability Institute and the executive chairman of Breitbart News LLC, the parent company of Breitbart News. He has been involved in the financing and production of a number of films, including Fire from the Heartland: The Awakening of the Conservative Woman, The Undefeated (on Sarah Palin), and Occupy Unmasked. Bannon also hosts a radio show (Breitbart News Daily) on a Sirius XM satellite radio channel.... Bannon married Mary Louise Piccard, his second wife, in April 1995. Their twin daughters were born three days later. Bannon was charged with misdemeanor domestic violence, battery and dissuading a witness in early January 1996, after Piccard accused Bannon of domestic abuse. The charges were later dropped when his now ex-wife did not show up to court. Piccard also claimed that Bannon had made antisemitic remarks, a claim Bannon's spokesperson has denied. Bannon's association with the alt-right movement along with his alleged anti-Semitic remarks have contributed to accusations of white nationalism from the Southern Poverty Law Center and other advocacy groups, commentators, and Senator Harry Reid.
  • Occidental Observer White Nationalism ... To most Westerners today, the words ‘nation’, ‘nationality’ and ‘law’ seem only to mean the state, citizenship and legislation enacted by the state. But there are other meanings to these words, which were their primary and even sole meanings in the past. The nation was once the ethnic group, the tribe at large — nationality being one’s ethnicity. Likewise, in Europe the law was once the customs of the kin-group. So how is it that kinship is not only ignored by Western states as the criterion for citizenship but is even unheard of to most? And is there a future for the original understanding of these words? Historically, nations (in the truest sense of the word) decided personhood and rights-exercising ability based on their being a member of the kin group, not according to whomever the state decided was welcome to citizenship of that nation. Ricardo Duchesne (whose work has often been discussed on TOO) rightly points out that even the rise of Western nation-states, including the US, was not based on civic nationalism, noting their ‘White-only’ immigration policies. He writes, The nations of Europe were not mere “inventions” or functional requirements of modernity, but were factually rooted in the past, in common myths of descent, a shared history, and a distinctive cultural tradition. While the rise of modern industry and modern bureaucracies allowed for the materialization of nation states in Europe, these nations were primordially based on a population with a collective sense of kinship. Aliens have always been granted special rules, notably, being treated according to the law of their own people; this wasn’t because they had the wrong passport, but because they were simply not of one’s nation. Many today will presume this was just ancient tribalism, fueled by irrational xenophobia. However, as Duchesne notes, modern liberal democracy of the West denies the biological impulse to protect one’s own and mistakenly assumes that this denial and even the individualistic, classical liberal ideals of the West, are shared by all the peoples of the world: Humans are social animals with a natural impulse to identify themselves collectively in terms of ethnic, cultural and racial markers. But today Europeans have wrongly attributed their unique inclination for states with liberal constitutions to non-Europeans. They have forgotten that liberal states were created by a particular people with a particular individualist heritage, beliefs, and religious orientations… They don’t want to admit openly that all liberal states were created violently by a people with a sense of peoplehood laying sovereign rights over an exclusive territory against other people competing for the same territory. They don’t want to admit that the members of the competing outgroups are potential enemies rather than abstract individuals seeking a universal state that guarantees happiness and security for all regardless of racial and religious identity. MORE
  • Kevin McDonald.net The Frankfurt School of Social Research and the Pathologization of Gentile Group Allegiances THE POLITICAL AGENDA OF THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH Hatred and [the] spirit of sacrifice . . . are nourished by the image of enslaved ancestors rather than that of liberated grandchildren. (Illuminations, Walter Benjamin 1968, 262) To write poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric. (T. W. Adorno 1967, 34) Chapters 2–4 reviewed several strands of theory and research by Jewish social scientists that appear to have been influenced by specifically Jewish political interests. This theme is continued in the present chapter with a review of The Authoritarian Personality. This classic work in social psychology was sponsored by the Department of Scientific Research of the American Jewish Committee (hereafter, AJCommittee) in a series entitled Studies in Prejudice. Studies in Prejudice was closely connected with the so-called Frankfurt School of predominantly Jewish intellectuals associated with the Institute for Social Research originating during the Weimar period in Germany. The first generation of the Frankfurt School were all Jews by ethnic background and the Institute of Social Research itself was funded by a Jewish millionaire, Felix Weil (Wiggershaus 1994, 13). Weil’s efforts as a “patron of the left” were extraordinarily successful: By the early 1930s the University of Frankfurt had became a bastion of the academic left and “the place where all the thinking of interest in the area of social theory was concentrated” (Wiggershaus 1994, 112). During this period sociology was referred to as a “Jewish science,” and the Nazis came to view Frankfurt itself as a “New Jerusalem on the Franconian Jordan” (Wiggershaus 1994, 112–113). MORE
  • Unaligned Media Brandon Martinez ... Zionist Infighting Over Bannon Appointment ... The “fiercely proud Jew and unapologetic Zionist,” Pamela Gellar, rushed to the defense of Donald Trump’s campaign manager and chief strategist Stephen Bannon, the former chief executive of Breitbart News, a pro-Israel kosher conservative rag that has attempted to hijack right-wing dissent and steer it off-course into a Zionist dead-end. On the Breitbart website where she has been a regular contributor for years, Gellar wrote: As long as I have known Steve [Bannon], he has been an unabashed supporter of Israel, and of those of us who fight against Jew-hatred and racism. Unequivocally. He is whip-smart, courageous, bold, and loyal. Now the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is claiming that he is anti-Semitic? What? He partnered with Andrew Breitbart — a Jew. He partnered with Larry Solov, another Jew, after Breitbart died. He worked with me — a Jew. He gave proud and fierce Zionists such as Aaron Klein a platform to speak and advance the cause of the Jewish people and the Jewish state. Breitbart Jerusalem was launched under Bannon’s tenure with the Breitbart organization. MORE
  • Donald Trump, born 1946, American businessman, real estate mogul, reality television star, president of the US, announced candidacy June 2015, born and raised in New York City, received bachelors degree from Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, built Trump Organization, built office towers, hotels, casinos, golf courses, Miss USA pageant, TV show the Apprentice, sought Reform Party candidacy in 2000, received unprecedented and biased media coverage from CNN, Washington Post, New York Times and other... of 2016 election, was the greatest piling on of establishment MSM and still won the election... campaign ... the Wikipedia Trump page fails to mention anything about the Wikileaks emails of John Podesta that detail collusion between DNC and the main stream media such as CNN, Donna Brazille's giving Hillary Clinton debate questions, the illegal storage of classified emails on an illegal private server in the Clinton home in Chapaqua New York... special access program (SAP) State Dept classified emails on that server, emails stored on Huma Abedin's laptop that Anthony Weiner had access to, or that Weiner's activities exposed a pedophile ring that may have had connections to the Madeline Kahn case. Weiner was known to have sent sexting messages to 20-100 women and stored those messages on a laptop that contained US classified information. The emails also exposed facts about parties John Podesta hosted with members of the DNC, Hillary Clinton lost the election because of smart campaign tactics by Trump, but he would not have prevailed without the American people becoming well-versed in the deep and horrific corruption of the Clinton Crime Family, including Chelsea Clinton and the Clinton Foundation... it was revealed that ISIS was funded by Qatar and Saudi Arabia (...Israel)...but Clinton Foundation still accepted millions in donations from those countries ...
  • Aryanskynet Rob Zombie (stage name of Massachusetts native Robert Cummings) has, since the moonrise of the twenty-first century, made a name for himself as a filmmaker with outings such as his hyper-violent Halloween franchise resuscitations for the Weinstein Company. Zombie’s sadistic diptych House of 1,000 Corpses (2003) and The Devil’s Rejects (2005) constitutes perhaps the quintessential statement of the torture porn philosophy on film. Trivializing and even eroticizing the acts of torture and murder, the films offer what, on the surface, would seem to be a typical Hollywood rendering of that threat to American modernity, the Texas redneck. This should come as no surprise in view of the fact that the films were produced by Madonna’s and U2’s manager Guy Oseary – an Israeli and “hardcore Jew”1. Scurrying under the floorboards of Zombie’s nightmare movie vision are indications of a distinctly un-Texan origin.
  • BlessedQuietness Tavistock Institute is headquartered in London. Its prophet, Sigmond Freud, settled in Maresfield Gardens when he moved to England. He was given a mansion by Princess Bonaparte. Tavistock's pioneer work in behavioral science along Freudian lines of "controlling" humans established it as the world center of foundation ideology. Its network now extends from the University of Sussex to the U.S. through the Stanford Research Institute, Esalen, MIT, Hudson Institute, Heritage Foundation, Center of Strategic and International Studies at Georgetown, where State Dept. personal are trained, US Air Force Intelligence, and the Rand and Mitre corporations. The personnel of the corporations are required to undergo indoctrination at one or more of these Tavistock controlled institutions. A network of secret groups, the Mont Pelerin Society, Trilateral Commission, Ditchley Foundation, and the Club of Rome is conduit for instructions to the Tavistock network.
  • Smash Multiculturalism The goal is clear. Not only in the words of Jews themselves, but in the visual reality we see in European and Western nations every day. If you have ever asked yourself why your country is being destroyed then here is your answer. When we and others say that the engineering of Multicultural, Multiracial and Multifaith societies has been by design and has been no accident then this is why we say it. It isn’t about the economy, it isn’t about diversity, it isn’t about enrichment, it is about the weakening of the once European majority in the interests of one specific group. How do they achieve this? Despite being an extreme minority they achieve this very easily. They influence politicians by lobbying and providing campaign finance and who then proceed to do their bidding. They use academia to indoctrinate our youth into thinking they don’t exist as a group with interests. They use the media to attack and demonise any opposition to their agenda as ‘nazis’ and at the same time use the film industry to portray a narrative of WWII that fits their agenda. What they want is for the public to think that any identification with ones own racial group and the interests specific to them, will lead to the ‘gas chambers.’ ‘a tenacious minority will beat down the resistance of a disorganised majority,’ in other words they use a divide and conquer strategy to weaken us thereby strengthening their own position and dominance. They can operate more freely as a cohesive ethno-religious group when they live in a society with many different ethnic and religious groups and when they don’t stand out so easily as a corrosive force as they have done in the past. Essentially what we have is an alien element within society that uses our institutions against us for their own benefit. Everything that we see as an obvious negative in the West they describe as being progress, but progess for them not us. They are a criminal element, an enemy of our people and are determined to achieve the irreversible ruination of our nations and people.
  • Wikipedia Frankfurt School Academic Speak BS Although sometimes only loosely affiliated, Frankfurt School theorists spoke with a common paradigm in mind; they shared the Marxist Hegelian premises and were preoccupied with similar questions.[2] To fill in the perceived omissions of classical Marxism, they sought to draw answers from other schools of thought, hence using the insights of antipositivist sociology, psychoanalysis, existential philosophy, and other disciplines.[3] The school's main figures sought to learn from and synthesize the works of such varied thinkers as Kant, Hegel, Marx, Freud, Weber, and Lukács.[4] Following Marx, they were concerned with the conditions that allow for social change and the establishment of rational institutions.[5] Their emphasis on the "critical" component of theory was derived significantly from their attempt to overcome the limits of positivism, materialism, and determinism by returning to Kant's critical philosophy and its successors in German idealism, principally Hegel's philosophy, with its emphasis on dialectic and contradiction as inherent properties of human reality. Since the 1960s, Frankfurt School critical theory has increasingly been guided by Jürgen Habermas's work on communicative reason, linguistic intersubjectivity and what Habermas calls "the philosophical discourse of modernity".[6] Critical theorists such as Raymond Geuss and Nikolas Kompridis have voiced opposition to Habermas, claiming that he has undermined the aspirations for social change that originally gave purpose to critical theory's various projects—for example the problem of what reason should mean, the analysis and enlargement of "conditions of possibility" for social emancipation, and the critique of modern capitalism.
  • FreeBritainNow The British Labour Party was organised in 1900 as the Labour Representation Committee (LRC) by Fabian Society leaders Bernard Shaw and Edward Pease, and had Fabian Socialist Ramsay MacDonald as General Secretary (Pugh, p. 67). The LRC was renamed “The Labour Party” in 1906 and, under Fabian guidance and direction, it became the organisation it is today (Ratiu, 2012). By 1918, Labour had become Britain’s second-largest political organisation – replacing the Liberals – and in Pease’s own words, was “virtually, if not formally,” Fabian in its political policy (Pease, p. 73). .... The “Memorandum on War Aims” by Fabian Society co-founder Sidney Webb became the Labour Party’s policy statement. The pamphlet “Labour and the New Social Order,” also by Webb, was adopted as the Labour Party manifesto. “ Fabian Society has 7000 members 80 per cent (5600) of whom are members of the Labour Party, which includes hundreds of Members of Parliament, Prime Ministers, and other members of Labour governments. What is particularly significant is that this makes about 3 per cent in the general Labour Party membership (about 190,000 in 2010) but close to 100 per cent in the Labour leadership. For example, nearly the entire 1997 Labour Cabinet (including Prime Minister Blair) was composed of Fabians (“The Fabian Society: a brief history”). Moreover, all Labour Prime Ministers have been members of the Fabian Society as have all (or nearly all) Labour Party leaders and deputy leaders. This ought to persuade even die-hard sceptics of the obvious fact that the Labour Party is an organisation run by the Fabian Society. As pointed out by the Guardian – a left-wing paper with close links to the Labour Party and the Fabian Society – (Mandelson, 2005). In 2006 Tony Blair (a Fabian Society member) openly admitted that the values the early Fabians stood for would be “very recognisable” in today’s Labour Party (“A piece of Fabian history unveiled at LSE”). Fabians are routinely involved in Labour Party conferences such as in 2009; the current Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband, launched his leadership bid at a Fabian Society conference, etc. What becomes evident from the above facts is that the Labour Party is an organisation created and controlled by the Fabian Society.
  • 9-11
The Birth Of Cultural Marxism: How The "Frankfurt School" Changed America byTyler Durden
  • ZeroHedge The Birth Of Cultural Marxism: How The "Frankfurt School" Changed America Tyler Durden's picture by Tyler Durden Aug 12, 2016 9:00 PM 12 SHARES Submitted by David Galland via GarretGalland.com, The 1950s were a simple, romantic, and golden time in America. California beaches, suburbia, and style. Atlas Shrugged was published, NASA was formed, and Elvis rocked the nation. Every year from 1950–1959 saw over 4 million babies born. The nation stood atop the world in every field. It was an era of great economic prosperity in The Land of the Free. So, what happened to the American traits of confidence, pride, and accountability? The roots of Western cultural decay are very deep, having first sprouted a century ago. It began with a loose clan of ideologues inside Europe’s communist movement. Today, it is known as the Frankfurt School, and its ideals have perverted American society. When Outcomes Fail, Just Change the Theory Before WWI, Marxist theory held that if war broke out in Europe, the working classes would rise up against the bourgeoisie and create a communist revolution. Well, as is the case with much of Marxist theory, things didn’t go too well. When war broke out in 1914, instead of starting a revolution, the proletariat put on their uniforms and went off to war. After the war ended, Marxist theorists were left to ask, “What went wrong?” Two very prominent Marxists thinkers of the day were Antonio Gramsci and Georg Lukács. Each man, on his own, concluded that the working class of Europe had been blinded by the success of Western democracy and capitalism. They reasoned that until both had been destroyed, a communist revolution was not possible. Gramsci and Lukács were both active in the Communist party, but their lives took very different paths. Gramsci was jailed by Mussolini in Italy where he died in 1937 due to poor health. In 1918, Lukács became minister of culture in Bolshevik Hungary. During this time, Lukács realized that if the family unit and sexual morals were eroded, society could be broken down. Lukács implemented a policy he titled “cultural terrorism,” which focused on these two objectives. A major part of the policy was to target children’s minds through lectures that encouraged them to deride and reject Christian ethics. In these lectures, graphic sexual matter was presented to children, and they were taught about loose sexual conduct. Here again, a Marxist theory had failed to take hold in the real world. The people were outraged at Lukács’ program, and he fled Hungary when Romania invaded in 1919. The Birth of Cultural Marxism All was quiet on the Marxist front until 1923 when the cultural terrorist turned up for a “Marxist study week” in Frankfurt, Germany. There, Lukács met a young, wealthy Marxist named Felix Weil. Until Lukács showed up, classical Marxist theory was based solely on the economic changes needed to overthrow class conflict. Weil was enthused by Lukács’ cultural angle on Marxism. Weil’s interest led him to fund a new Marxist think tank—the Institute for Social Research. It would later come to be known as simply The Frankfurt School. In 1930, the school changed course under new director Max Horkheimer. The team began mixing the ideas of Sigmund Freud with those of Marx, and cultural Marxism was born. In classical Marxism, the workers of the world were oppressed by the ruling classes. The new theory was that everyone in society was psychologically oppressed by the institutions of Western culture. The school concluded that this new focus would need new vanguards to spur the change. The workers were not able to rise up on their own. As fate would have it, the National Socialists came to power in Germany in 1933. It was a bad time and place to be a Jewish Marxist, as most of the school’s faculty was. So, the school moved to New York City, the bastion of Western culture at the time. Coming to America In 1934, the school was reborn at Columbia University. Its members began to exert their ideas on American culture. It was at Columbia University that the school honed the tool it would use to destroy Western culture: the printed word. The school published a lot of popular material. The first of these was Critical Theory. Critical Theory is a play on semantics. The theory was simple: criticize every pillar of Western culture—family, democracy, common law, freedom of speech, and others. The hope was that these pillars would crumble under the pressure. Next was a book Theodor Adorno co-authored, The Authoritarian Personality. It redefined traditional American views on gender roles and sexual mores as “prejudice.” Adorno compared them to the traditions that led to the rise of fascism in Europe. Is it just a coincidence that the go-to slur for the politically correct today is “fascist”? The school pushed its shift away from economics and toward Freud by publishing works on psychological repression. Their works split society into two main groups: the oppressors and the victims. They argued that history and reality were shaped by those groups who controlled traditional institutions. At the time, that was code for males of European descent. From there, they argued that the social roles of men and women were due to gender differences defined by the “oppressors.” In other words, gender did not exist in reality but was merely a “social construct.” A Coalition of Victims Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany when WWII ended. Herbert Marcuse, another member of the school, stayed in America. In 1955, he published Eros and Civilization. In the book, Marcuse argued that Western culture was inherently repressive because it gave up happiness for social progress. The book called for “polymorphous perversity,” a concept crafted by Freud. It posed the idea of sexual pleasure outside the traditional norms. Eros and Civilization would become very influential in shaping the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Marcuse would be the one to answer Horkheimer’s question from the 1930s: Who would replace the working class as the new vanguards of the Marxist revolution? Marcuse believed that it would be a victim coalition of minorities—blacks, women, and homosexuals. The social movements of the 1960s—black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual liberation—gave Marcuse a unique vehicle to release cultural Marxist ideas into the mainstream. Railing against all things “establishment,” The Frankfurt School’s ideals caught on like wildfire across American universities. Marcuse then published Repressive Tolerance in 1965 as the various social movements in America were in full swing. In it, he argued that tolerance of all values and ideas meant the repression of “correct” ideas. It was here that Marcuse coined the term “liberating tolerance.” It called for tolerance of any ideas coming from the left but intolerance of those from the right. One of the overarching themes of the Frankfurt School was total intolerance for any viewpoint but its own. That is also a basic trait of today’s political-correctness believers. To quote Max Horkheimer, “Logic is not independent of content.” Recalling the Words of Winston (Not That One) The Frankfurt School’s work has had a deep impact on American culture. It has recast the homogenous America of the 1950s into today’s divided, animosity-filled nation. In turn, this has contributed to the undeniable breakdown of the family unit, as well as identity politics, radical feminism, and racial polarization in America. It’s hard to decide if today’s culture is more like Orwell’s 1984 or Huxley’s Brave New World. Never one to buck a populist trend, the political establishment in America has fully embraced the ideas of the Frankfurt School and has pushed them on American society through public miseducation. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the beacons of progressivism, are both disciples of Saul Alinsky, a devoted cultural Marxist. And so we now live in a hyper-sensitive society in which social memes and feelings have overtaken biological and objective reality as the main determinants of right and wrong. Political correctness is a war on logic and reason. To quote Winston, the protagonist in Orwell’s dystopia, “Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4.” Today, America is not free.
Project Avalon The Frankfurt School
  • The Frankfurt School ...................http://www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/index.htm
    and “Critical Theory”

    Index to the biographies and writings of members of the “Frankfurt School”, or Institute for Social Research, set up by a group of Marxist intellectuals in Germany in 1923, affiliated to the University of Frankfurt and independently of the Communist Party, which has been influential in the development of Marxist theory ever since.

    The founding of the Institut marked the beginning of a current of “Marxism” divorced from the organised working class and Communist Parties, which over the decades merged with bourgeois ideology in academia.

    **************************************
    The Institut für Sozialforschung (Institut) was the creation of Felix Weil, who was able to use money from his father's grain business to finance the Institut. Weil was a young Marxist who had written his PhD on the practical problems of implementing socialism and was published by Karl Korsch.

    With the hope of bringing different trends of Marxism together, Weil organised a week-long symposium (the Erste Marxistische Arbeitswoche) in 1922 attended by Georg Lukacs, Karl Korsch, Karl August Wittfogel, Friedrich Pollock and others. The event was so successful that Weil set about erecting a building and funding salaries for a permanent institute. Weil negotiated with the Ministry of Education that the Director of the Institut would be a full professor from the state system, so that the Institut would have the status of a University.
    Weil himself was an orthodox Marxist, who saw Marxism as scientific; the role of the Institut would be social and historical research mainly on the workers' movement. Indeed, in its early years, the Institut did fairly orthodox historical research. However, one of Weil's central objectives was also cross-disciplinary research, something which the German University system made impossible.

    Although Georg Lukacs and Karl Korsch both attended the Arbeitswoche which had included a study of Korsch's Marxism and Philosophy, both were too committed to political activity and Party membership to join the Institut, although Korsch participated in publishing ventures for a number of years.

    The way Lukacs was obliged to repudiate his History and Class Consciousness, published in 1923 and probably a major inspiration for the work of the Frankfurt School, was an indicator for others that independence from the Communist Party was necessary for genuine theoretical work.

    Friedrich Pollock was one of those who had been involved with the Institut from the beginning, and took over the role of Director on the death of Carl Grünberg. Pollock was content to concern himself with administrative matters, but he was also a life-long friend and associate of Max Horkheimer, who is probably the figure most identified as the leading representative of the Frankfurt School.

    Max Horkheimer [Archive] later himself became Director of the Institut, and it was Horkheimer who guided the Institut into its innovative exploration of cultural aspects of the development of capitalism.
    See Horkheimer’s opening address on becoming Director.

    Karl August Wittfogel was a participant from the beginning, but was a Party member and had a more orthodox, “scientific” view of Marxism. It is Wittfogel who established the classic Marxist analysis of “Asiatic Despotism.”

    Richard Sorge worked at the Instiut, but as it turned out was only there in his role as a Soviet spy.

    David Ryazanov [Archive] was assigned to Germany to compile the writings of Marx and Engels and publish the Marx-Engels Gesamtausgabe, and worked closely with the Institut.

    In 1931/32 a number of psychoanalysts from the Frankfurt Institute of Psychoanalysis and others who were acquainted with members of the Institut began to work systematically with the Institut. These included Franz Borkenau, Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich, Karl Landauer and Heinrich Meng.

    In joining what was predominantly a “Hegelian-materialist” current of Marxists, these psychologists gave the development of Marxist theory an entirely new direction, which has left its imprint on social theory ever since.

    Erich Fromm [Archive] dealt with psychological aspects of social control, delusion and conformity and became one of the founders of “socialist humanism”.

    Wilhelm Reich developed his own doctrine of sexual liberalism as an antidote to political conformism and social psychosis.

    Other young German Communist intellectuals who were associated with the Institut, but after the Nazi takeover, wound up in the United States, were Kurt Lewin and Adolph Löwe.

    They all went on to make significant contributions to social theory, though only distantly related to their initial Communist inspirations. Kurt Lewin for instance contributed to the emergence of group-dynamics and social action theory as specialised disciplines. Adolph Lowe made important contributions to the development of political economy.

    Raymond Aron was a French journalist and sociologist.


    Leo Lowenthal [Archive] was one of the early workers at the Institut
    whose principal interest was in the sociology of literature.

    Later he was joined by the Hegelian philosopher Herbert Marcuse [Archive] who was probably the only member of the Institut who achieved wide influence among political activists, in the 1960s.

    When Hitler came to power, the Institut was closed down, and by various routes, most of the participants in the Institut regrouped themselves in New York, with a new Institute affiliated to Columbia University. They continued to publish in German, even though very few people would have been reading their work in that language. However, after the War, the Institut returned to Frankfurt.
    Perhaps two of the most famous figures who were in the central core of the Institut were Theodor Adorno [Archive] and Walter Benjamin, both renowned for their studies of literature and mass culture which would become so influential from the 1960s on.

    After the Institut re-established itself in Germany after the War, the main figure of the younger generation was Jürgen Habermas [Archive] who continued to develop the “critical theory” in the Hegelian tradition of Adorno and Marcuse. Habermas was instrumental in the 1960s in developing the theory of “networks,” but in later years Habermas has focussed on communicative ethics in the tradition of Immanuel Kant, and departed not only from the Marxist, but even the Hegelian tradition.

    ( A BRANCH established in NYC is extant and draws from students
    from across the globe.

    Its name is "The New School for Social Justice " and many of Folliewoods 
    brightest and outspoken stars were students there . To become a 
    successful therapist in NYC one MUST have a few courses from 'TNS' 
    in ones resume and the connections that go with that. 

    It shouldnt need to be pointed out the ONE connection among all the founders and administrators relative to the Marxist Theory and the New School. 

    At NYC Marxist School many teachers are also famous ones from 'TNS' 
    and do travel to many colleges and Universities giving lectures to
    seduce people into the Marxist philosophy. I write from personal experience. 

    For any who really want to understand what is happening in 
    OUR world today and what more is planned it is a good start to
    read comparisons of Marxist Socailism to National Socialism. 
    The differences are that between slavery and freedom . Progress and stagnation. )
    Currently Axel Honneth represents the third generation, continuing the work of Jürgen Habermas, but with a partial return to Hegel, still quite remote from any reading of Karl Marx.
    After the isolation and Stalinisation of the Soviet Union, and the consequent decline of the Communist Parties in the “West,” the possibilities for the fruitful development of Marxism as a revolutionary-critical theory in close connection with the practical-critical activity of the workers movement, became extremely restricted.
    The current generation of Critical Theorists, unlike previous generations, is led by women, such as Nancy Fraser, Seyla Benhabib and Agnes Heller: 
    The intellectuals who founded the Frankfurt Institut deliberatively cut out a space for the development of Marxist theory, inside the “academy” and independently of all kinds of political party.
    The result was a process in which Marxism merged with bourgeois ideology. A parallel process took place in post-World War Two France, also involving a merging with Freudian ideas. One of the results was undoubtedly an enrichment of bourgeois ideology. In this connection Paul Mattick's Marcuse: One Dimensional Man In Class Society (1972) is worth reading. But also, despite everything, the Frankfurt School makes an important critique of orthodox Marxism, and their work should be taken seriously.
 
  • Mark Dankof on the Charlie Hebdo Affair for the Rasa News Agency of Iran

    Mark Dankof on Charlie Hebdo: It’s a Zionist Instrument Dedicated to Blasphemy and Subversion of Christian and Islamic Faiths Alike.

    Seyed Muhammad Javad Mousavi of the Rasa News Agency of Iran interviewed Mark Dankof for his perspective on the Charlie Hebdo Affair.  The Persian language version of the discussion may be accessed here.  

    1 – What do you think is the main purpose of continuously insulting the Prophet of Islam? 

    Mark Dankof:  It is important to remember what Pat Buchanan told us all last week:  The Charlie Hebdopublication in France was also insulting and blaspheming every version of orthodox Christianity when it depicted the God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, as being involved in an incestuous sexual relationship.  Who has a vested interest in blaspheming both Christianity and Islam as part of a world-wide ideological and political game plan? Clearly, it is the global Zionist network which desires to assert the Talmudic doctrine of Jewish racial supremacy on a global basis, and to convince comatose Westerners that their primary enemy in the world is Islam, and not the Zionist hijacking of their own banking system, culture, government, media, and educational establishments.  The Frankfurt School and its Institute of Social Research which destroyed the older Christian civilizations in the West in partnership with the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith (ADL) by subverting Europe and the United States with pornography, sexual perversion including the LGBT (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transsexual) agenda, and the abortion/euthanasia industries, is working its demonic magic through all kinds of Jewish-funded media outlets and NGOs to solidify its hold on the Western world, even as it also seeks the subversion of the Islamic societies and Vladimir Putin’s Russia.  Eric Margolis concedes that the Charlie Hebdo publication is financed by Rothschild banking interests in France.  Simply follow the trail of the money.

    Pat Buchanan and Mark Dankof: Charlie Hebdo Depicts God the Father and God the Son, Jesus Christ, in an Incestuous Relationship.

    Charlie Hebdo’s financiers and handlers clearly seek to falsely equate mainstream Sunni and Shia Islam with the Wahhabi and Takfiri fanatics comprising the ISIS and al-Qaeda organizations, and to discredit Islam generally in the West, even as orthodox Christianity is also lampooned.  Both Islamic and Christian movements must be infiltrated from within with sexual decadence, paid intelligence assets, and internal disorder. The final strategy in the quest for Zionist global supremacy and the final victory of the so-called New World Order will involve the realization of the dream of launching the War of Civilizations envisioned by the Project for the New American Century and its bedfellows.  This will necessitate pitting Sunni Islam and Shia Islam against one another as adversaries, and pitting what remains of a Christian remnant in the West against both Islam and Putin’s Russia.  Divide and Conquer is the age-old methodology used by this evil monolith.  

    2 – Some analysts believe that the role of the western intelligence services such as MI6 and Mossad is undeniable regarding the Charlie Hebdo attacks. What’s your take on that? If there is a role, what are the possible reasons behind that? 

    Mark Dankof:  While I cannot absolutely prove it, I agree with Ron Paul and Paul Craig Roberts that theCharlie Hebdo affair has all the earmarks of a False Flag operation conducted by the Israeli Mossad, the British MI6, and the American CIA.  It is ludicrous to believe that the national security police states erected in Europe and the United States would be providing money, political, and logistical support to ISIS in a clear attempt to overthrow President Assad in Syria (a clear Zionist objective as a prelude to attacking Iran), and then would subsequently fail to effectively monitor the comings and goings of hundreds of these Wahhabic terror elements traveling with apparent impunity between Syria and both Europe and the United States. These travels are being allowed for a purpose, which is to deliberately enact incidents of this kind, diverting Western public attention from the Hidden Hand financing and directing these operations, as well as diverting public attention from ongoing Israeli atrocities in Palestine, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. Additionally, I believe France was being punished for its public deviations as of late from the wholesale support of the Zionist agenda demanded by the power elite in the West.  I refer to the French Parliament’s recent pro-Palestinian vote (s) in public session, and President Hollande’s urging of a reassessment of the wisdom and utility of the economic sanctions being imposed on Putin’s Russia.  

    I believe there are additional cracks in the canvas being painted by the real perpetrators of this incident, including the convenient leaving behind of an Identification Card in a getaway car by the alleged assailants, and the equally convenient killing of the accused by the French police.  Dead Men Tell No Tales.  . . . Just ask Lee Harvey Oswald.

    3 – In your opinion, what might be the possible reasons behind the Israeli Prime Minister’s attendance in Charlie Hebdo’s post-attack rally? 

    Mark Dankof: Netanyahu is a war criminal and murderer simply taking advantage of the Zionist controlled media in France specifically and the West generally. He obviously wants to justify his regime’s criminal policies in Palestine and Gaza by posing as a defender of human rights and freedom of expression in the West against “Islamic Jihadists“.  It is the established Zionist strategy to make the aggressor and the criminal perpetrator appear as the aggrieved victim.  This is especially outlandish, given the legal persecution and economic marginalization of scholars and political activists in the West who have criticized Israel, or who have questioned aspects of the establishment Zionist narrative on what happened in World War II and during the runup to the establishment of the Zionist state in 1948. What Dr. E. Michael Jones ofCulture Wars refers to as the “Jewish control of narrative” has served Netanyahu and his predecessors quite well, especially in the United States.  How many Americans know about the Zionist bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946?  The Lavon Affair in 1954?  The dispute between JFK and Ben Gurion in 1963 over the Israeli nuclear weapons plant at Dimona in the Negev? The Meyer Lansky Jewish Crime Syndicate connection to the anti-Castro Cubans, to James Jesus Angleton of the CIA, and the Giancana-Trafficante-Marcello-Roselli led crime syndicates in the United States who were all provably involved in the JFK assassination?  The NUMEC nuclear raw materials thefts in Pennsylvania in the United States for Israel’s weapons program?  The Pollard-AIPAC-Ben Ami spy cases?  And the Arnon Milchan financing of Oliver Stone’s JFK movie which diverted public attention from the Israeli connection to the events in Dallas in November of 1963?  What about the Israeli role in 9-11 and the subsequent coverup of this fact by the Israeli citizens assigned to direct the official American governmental investigation of the event?

    The Hidden Hand Behind the Mask of the Truth.

    The Zionist-controlled Western media has perfected the Orwellian inversion of truth and falsehood, victim and perpetrator ongoingly.  Look at Syria, where the existence of “Jihadic extremists” being decried in France and the West for involvement in the Charlie Hebdo affair are being simultaneously financed, trained, and introduced into that country by the United States, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, Turkey, and Jordan for the express purpose of overthrowing the Alawite regime of President Assad. Look at the criminals installed by coup d’etat last February by the United States, Israel, and the EU in the Ukrainian regime headquartered in Kiev, with all of the atrocities committed by this regime in the eastern part of that country since, including the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 falsely attributed by Western media to Vladimir Putin or Russian ethnics under his control, and the horrific Odessa Trade Union building burning.

    It is noteworthy that the mastermind of these crimes, Petro Poroshenko, joined Netanyahu in Paris for theCharlie Hebdo protests.

    The Odessa Trade Union Fire: The Work of the Latest American-Installed “Government.”

    These illegal actions continue the NATO encirclement of Putin’s Russia in complete contravention of George H. W. Bush’s explicit promises to Gorbachev and Shevardnadze after the end of the old Soviet Union.  This coup d’etat is also another way of punishing Putin for effectively stymying (for now) American and Israeli plans to employ overt military force against Assad, even as Jewish and CIA financed NGOs in Russia are attempting to subvert Putin and Russian Orthodox Christian resurgence from within by employing the Frankfurt School types like Pussy Riot and Elton John to attack nationalistic culture and morality in that country.  It is all a part of the playbook of the New World Order, as is the False Flag Charlie Hebdo incident and the Orwellian inversion of truth and falsehood, victim and perpetrator, that has predictably followed.

    Vladimir Putin: Opposing the Subversion of Christian Culture in Russia and the Target of the Apostles of the Zionist New World Order.

    4 – There is a campaign going on throughout Muslim countries named #WeLoveMuhammad. How effective do you see this campaign, especially regarding its reflection in western and US media outlets? 

    It will have no appreciable effect in the Western world and in the United States, where the Zionists have a lock on the control of narrative.  Simply look at the way they have marginalized Christian anti-Zionist media critics and activists like me in America.  Having successfully achieved that, what makes anyone believe an Islamic media and political movement will be any more effective in changing the political and media neighborhood in the West?

 
  • Timothy Mathews / Darkmoon Satan’s Secret Agents: The Frankfurt School and their Evil Agenda Admin February 3, 2013 Other Writers, Recommended Reading Based on an original article (see here) by Timothy Matthews. Abbreviated and adapted with additional material by Lasha Darkmoon. “GOD IS DEAD! . . . BEHOLD, I GIVE YOU THE SUPERMAN!” — Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra Let’s begin by considering the corrosive work of the Frankfurt School: a group of German-American scholars, mostly Jewish, who developed highly provocative and original perspectives on contemporary society and culture, drawing on Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, and Weber. Their idea of a “cultural revolution” was not particularly new. Joseph, Comte de Maistre (1753-1821), who for fifteen years had been a Freemason, had this to say: “Until now, nations were killed by conquest, that is by invasion. But here an important question arises: can a nation not die on its own soil, without resettlement or invasion, by allowing the flies of decomposition to corrupt to the very core those original and constituent principles which make it what it is?” What was the Frankfurt School? Well, in the days following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, it was believed that a Workers’ Revolution would sweep into Europe and, eventually, into the United States. It failed to do so. Towards the end of 1922, the Communist International (Comintern) began to consider the reasons for this failure. On Lenin’s initiative, a meeting was organized at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow. The aim of the meeting was to throw light on the meaning of Marx’s Cultural Revolution. What did “cultural revolution” entail? What was it all about? First, among those present, was Georg Lukács, a Jewish Hungarian aristocrat and son of a banker. He had become a Communist during World War I. A good Marxist theoretician, he had developed the idea of “Revolution and Eros” — sexual instinct used as an instrument of destruction. Then there was Willi Münzenberg, another revolutionary Jew whose proposed solution to the problems besetting society was “to organize the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.” “It was”, said Ralph de Toledano (1916-2007), the conservative author and co-founder of the National Review, “a meeting more harmful to Western civilization than the Bolshevik Revolution itself.” Lenin died in 1924, but by that time Stalin had risen to power and was beginning to look on Willi Munzenberg, George Lukács and other Jewish revolutionaries (like Trotsky) as dangerous Marxist “revisionists”, introducing concepts into Marxism that were alien to Marxism and which served only a Jewish agenda. In June 1940, on Stalin’s orders, Münzenberg was hunted down to the south of France by a NKVD assassination squad and hanged from a tree. In the summer of 1924, after being attacked for his writings by the Fifth Comintern Congress, Lukács moved to Germany. Here he chaired the first meeting of a group of Communist oriented sociologists. This gathering was to lead to the foundation of the Frankfurt School. This “School”, designed to put flesh on their revolutionary program, was started at the University of Frankfurt in the Institut für Sozialforschung. To begin with, school and institute were indistinguishable. In 1923, the Institute had been officially established, and funded by Felix Weil (1898-1975). Weil, born in Argentina into a wealthy Jewish family, was sent to attend school in Germany at the age of nine. He attended the universities in Tübingen and Frankfurt, where he graduated with a doctoral degree in political science. While at these universities he became increasingly interested in socialism and Marxism. Carl Grünberg, the Institute’s Jewish director from 1923-1929, was an avowed Marxist, although the Institute did not have any official party affiliations. But in 1930 Max Horkheimer (also Jewish) assumed control. He believed that Marx’s theory should be the basis of the Institute’s research. When Hitler came to power, the Institute was closed and its members, by various routes, fled to the United States and ended up as academics at major US universities: Columbia, Princeton, Brandeis, and California at Berkeley. LD: The fact that they spoke very poor English was no disqualification. They were Jewish, and so they managed to obtain prestigious academic appointments through Jewish influence, i.e., through networking — a system that works exceptionally well even today and which accounts for the huge and unfair preponderance of Jews in academia. The School included among its members the 1960s guru of the New Left Herbert Marcuse — denounced by Pope Paul VI for his theory of liberation which “opens the way for [sexual] licence cloaked as liberty” — Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, the popular writer Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Jurgen Habermas. All these individuals except Habermas were of Jewish origin. Basically, the Frankfurt School believed that as long as an individual had the belief — or even the hope of belief — that his divine gift of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary to provoke a socialist revolution. Their task, therefore, was as swiftly as possible to undermine the “Judaeo-Christian legacy.” LD: “Judeo-Christian” is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, given that Judaism and Christianity are at opposite ends of the religious spectrum. Since most Jews are actively hostile to Christianity, and since Talmudic Jews actually take pleasure in the thought of Christ being boiled in excrement in hell, to speak of the “Judeo-Christian legacy” is clearly nonsensical. To undermine Western civilization, the Frankfurt School Jews called for the most negative and destructive criticism possible of every sphere of life. To de-stabilize society and bring it to its knees, to engineer collapse, to produce crisis and catastrophe — this became the aim of these maladjusted and mentally sick Jewish revolutionaries masquerading as high-powered intellectuals. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a virus — “continuing the work of the Western Marxists by other means”, as one of their members noted. To further the advance of their “quiet” cultural revolution, the Frankfurt School made the following twelve recommendations — all of them calculated to undermine the foundations of society and create the dystopia we now see all around us: 1. The creation of racism offences and hate speech laws. 2. Continual change to create confusion (e,g., in school curricula). 3. Masturbation propaganda in schools, combined with the homosexualization of children and their corruption by exposing them to child porn in the classroom. 4. The systematic undermining of parental and teachers’ authority. 5. Huge immigration to destroy national identity and foment future race wars. 6. The systematic promotion of excessive drinking and recreational drugs. 7. The systematic promotion of sexual deviance in society. 8. An unreliable legal system with bias against the victims of crime. 9. Dependency on state benefits. 10. Control and dumbing down of media. (Six Jewish companies now control 96 percent of the world’s media. LD). 11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family. 12. All all-out attack on Christianity and the emptying of churches. LD: In the Soviet Union, under Stalin and his Communist Jews, the emptying of churches was accomplished by the simple expedient of burning the churches down—thousands of them. (See here, here, here, here and here for more details on the systematic destruction of Christian churches and the persecution of Russian Christians under the Jewish leaders of the Russian Revolution. See also extended endnote.) Coincidentally, most of the 12 aims and objectives mentioned above were set out prominently in the pages of that alleged “forgery”, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The Jewish philosophers of the Frankfurt School, it seems, had been heavily influenced by the Protocols. They were clearly impressed by what they read there and decided to implement its recommendations in their own sinister agenda. One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud’s idea of “pansexualism”: the search for indiscriminate sexual pleasure, the promotion of “unisex”, the blurring of distinctions between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women, and, finally, the undermining of heterosexuality at the expense of homosexuality — as, for example, in the idea of “same-sex marriage” and the adoption of children by homosexual couples. Willi Münzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School’s long-term operation thus: “We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.” WILLI MUNZENBERG, JEWISH REVOLUTIONARY OF THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL “We must organise the intellectuals and use them TO MAKE WESTERN CIVILIZATION STINK! Only then, after they have CORRUPTED ALL ITS VALUES AND MADE LIFE IMPOSSIBLE, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.” (Emphasis added) LD: According to Sean McMeekin’s The Red Millionaire: A political biography of Willi Münzenberg, Münzenberg was “the perpetrator of some of the most colossal lies of the modern age…. He helped unleash a plague of moral blindness upon the world from which we have still not recovered.” The Frankfurt School believed there were two types of revolution: (a) Political revolution and (b) Cultural revolution. They were more concerned with cultural revolution, the demolition of the established order from within. “Modern forms of subjection are marked by mildness”, they taught. So-called “reforms” were to be made so slowly and subtly that these changes for the worse were barely perceptible. The School saw the undermining of the social order as a long-term project. LD: The systematic erosion of Christian moral values and the promotion of sexual perversion is known as cultural Marxism. Today, thanks to the efforts of organized Jewry which controls 96 percent of the world’s media, cultural Marxism has largely triumphed and Christianity lies in ruins. To many dispassionate observers, society has now reached its rockbottom moral nadir — as Jewish Marxists such as Willi Munzenberg (see quote above) would have been only too happy to witness — had he been around today. These iconoclasts kept their sights firmly fixed on the family, education, media, sex and popular culture. Each of these would be their target. If things did not go from bad to worse, year after year, they were not succeeding. To these revolutionary Jewish thinkers, bad was good — and worse was better. The Destruction of the Family and the Promotion of Feminism The School’s Critical Theory preached that the “authoritarian personality” was a product of the patriarchal family — an idea directly linked to Engels’ Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, which promoted matriarchy. Already Karl Marx had written, in the Communist Manifesto (1848), about the radical notion of a “community of women”. In The German Ideology (1845), he had written disparagingly about the idea of the family as the basic unit of society. This was one of the basic tenets of the Critical Theory: the need to break down the family unit. LD: All families were essentially evil, these thinkers believed — even happy families — so they had to be destroyed. It was better if children had no parents, or did not know who their parents were. Or if they were orphans of the state. It was better if romantic love between the sexes, leading to stable long-term marriages, were destroyed in favor of short-term, unstable, promiscuous relationships. After all, the former might lead to happiness for all concerned, and that was clearly impermissible — for the whole point of the Cultural Revolution was “to create a culture of pessimism” (Lukács) and “to make life impossible for everyone.” (Münzenberg). Georg Lukács (1885–1971): “I want a culture of pessimism … a world abandoned by God” The Institute scholars therefore preached that “Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change.” LD: These neo-Freudian Marxist philosophers of the Frankfurt School were clearly out to create trouble: to drive a wedge between parent and child and sow division in the family. Whatever was good in human relationships simply had to be destroyed. If people didn’t have problems, then problems would have to be manufactured “to make life impossible.” (Munzenberg). All this prepared the way for the warfare against the masculine gender promoted by Marcuse under the guise of “Women’s liberation” and by the New Left movement in the 1960s. They proposed transforming our culture into a female-dominated one. LD: The idea that women should run society and wear the trousers, telling men what to do, had an enormous appeal to certain bossy types of women with a surplus of testosterone, particularly to butch lesbians and man-hating matriarchs. Many of these misguided females were to become evangelists for radical Feminism, some even proposing to cut themselves off from the male sex completely and live in communes of their own. Curiously enough, the number of Jewish feminists is huge—out of all proportion to their percentage in the population. In 1933, Wilhelm Reich, an honored and adulated member of the Frankfurt School, wrote in The Mass Psychology of Fascism that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of “natural society.” He was, as such, to be an inspiration to the feminists. LD: Reich, incidentally, a compulsive masturbator and sexual pervert, had entertained incestuous longings for his own mother and practiced bestiality with horses while still a child. (See here). This versatile sexual deviant, now a cult figure on the left, along with the equally sex-obsessed Herbert Marcuse—popularizer of the slogan MAKE LOVE, NOT WAR—were to be godfathers of the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s as well as the patron saints of the Feminist movement. The Indoctrination of Children through Education Bertrand Russell was to join the Frankfurt School in their efforts at mass social engineering. He spilled the beans in his 1951 book, The Impact of Science on Society. He wrote: The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. But I anticipate. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray. When the technique has been perfected, every government that has been in charge of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen. LD: The irony is unmistakable, but that is beside the point. Russell was all for turning the world upside down and ushering in Brave New World: atheism, feminism, and “sexual liberation” i.e., the green light to promiscuity, perversion, and abortion on demand. The devaluation of values so sought after by the luminaries of the Frankfurt School has now largely been achieved through sex education and media propaganda: in particular, by the promotion of masturbation, pornography, and the systematic high pressure salesmanship of homosexuality in schools. POSTER ON A CLASSROOM WALL LD: This, then, is the secret agenda of organized Jewry as represented by the Cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School: the destruction of traditional values, the destruction of the moral order, the destruction of the family unit, the destruction of religion, the destruction of meaning and purpose, and, finally, the destruction of happiness itself. These are the people who now rule over us. They are in control. They create new wars with the same rapidity that a stage magician pulls rabbits from a hat. And they make sure that the people they rule over, their subject populations, are either demoralized debt slaves in insecure jobs or unemployed bums living on state benefits and a diet of junk food and sleazy junk entertainment laid on by the Jews. Satan’s Secret Agents have been only too successful in creating a New World Order that bears a remarkable resemblance to hell. * * * Endnote by Lasha Darkmoon American historian Edwin Schoonmaker writes: Fifteen years after the Bolshevist Revolution was launched to carry out the Marxist program, the editor of the American Hebrew could write: “According to such information that the writer could secure while in Russia a few weeks ago, not one Jewish synagogue has been torn down, as have hundreds—perhaps thousands of the Greek Catholic Churches… In Moscow and other large cities one can see Christian churches in the process of destruction… the Government needs the location for a large building,” (American Hebrew, Nov. 18, 1932, p. 12) Apostate Jews, leading a revolution that was to destroy religion as the “opiate of the people” had somehow spared the synagogues of Russia.” (“Democracy and World Dominion,” 1939, p.211). Wikipedia tells us that the Communist state after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution was “committed to the destruction of religion”, and destroyed churches, mosques and temples — no mention of synagogues being destroyed — and that it “ridiculed, harassed and executed [Christian] religious leaders, flood[ing] the schools and media with atheistic propaganda.” Since the Russian Revolution was essentially a Jewish revolution, with an overwhelmingly high percentage of its leaders being Jewish, one can understand why synagogues were NOT destroyed. The animosity of the Jewish leadership was directed almost exclusively toward the Christian clergy and their churches. Monks, nuns and priests were put to death in large numbers, often after being cruelly tortured in the process, their eyes gouged out and in some instances being boiled alive. (For graphic details of the systematic torture of Christians under the Bolsheviks, see here and section 7, “Fiendish tortures devised by the Jewish cheka”, here). According to the Atlantic, September 1991, p.14, “In 1919, three-quarters of the Cheka staff in Kiev were Jews, who were careful to spare fellow Jews. (See footnote 21, here) For more on the specifically Jewish character of the Russian Revolution, see here and here. Russian-born Jewish writer Sonya Margolina goes so far as to call the Jewish role in supporting the Bolshevik regime the “historic sin of the Jews.” She points, for example, to the prominent role of Jews as commandants of Soviet Gulag concentration and labor camps, and the role of Jewish Communists in the systematic destruction of Russian churches. Moreover, she goes on, “The Jews of the entire world supported Soviet power, and remained silent in the face of any criticism from the opposition.” In light of this record, Margolina offers a grim prediction: “The exaggeratedly enthusiastic participation of the Jewish Bolsheviks in the subjugation and destruction of Russia is a sin that will be avenged. Soviet power will be equated with Jewish power, and the furious hatred against the Bolsheviks will become hatred against Jews.” (Cited here)
 
  • ExoHuman “THE JEWISH PEOPLE as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of Monarchy, and by the establishing of a World Republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship. In this New World Order the Children of Israel will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. “The governments of the different peoples forming the World Republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish leaders to abolish private property, and everywhere to make use of the resources of The State. Thus will the promise of theTalmud be fulfilled. In which it is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands.” —Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx, La Review de Paris, p574, June 1st. 1928
Zero Hedge
  • The Birth Of Cultural Marxism: How The "Frankfurt School" Changed America

    Aug 12, 2016 9:00 PM
    12
    SHARES

    Submitted by David Galland via GarretGalland.com,

    The 1950s were a simple, romantic, and golden time in America.

    California beaches, suburbia, and style. Atlas Shrugged was published, NASA was formed, and Elvis rocked the nation. Every year from 1950–1959 saw over 4 million babies born. The nation stood atop the world in every field.

    It was an era of great economic prosperity in The Land of the Free.

     

    So, what happened to the American traits of confidence, pride, and accountability?

    The roots of Western cultural decay are very deep, having first sprouted a century ago. It began with a loose clan of ideologues inside Europe’s communist movement. Today, it is known as the Frankfurt School, and its ideals have perverted American society.

    When Outcomes Fail, Just Change the Theory

    Before WWI, Marxist theory held that if war broke out in Europe, the working classes would rise up against the bourgeoisie and create a communist revolution.

    Well, as is the case with much of Marxist theory, things didn’t go too well. When war broke out in 1914, instead of starting a revolution, the proletariat put on their uniforms and went off to war.

    After the war ended, Marxist theorists were left to ask, “What went wrong?”

    Two very prominent Marxists thinkers of the day were Antonio Gramsci and Georg Lukács. Each man, on his own, concluded that the working class of Europe had been blinded by the success of Western democracy and capitalism. They reasoned that until both had been destroyed, a communist revolution was not possible.

    Gramsci and Lukács were both active in the Communist party, but their lives took very different paths.

    Gramsci was jailed by Mussolini in Italy where he died in 1937 due to poor health. 

    In 1918, Lukács became minister of culture in Bolshevik Hungary. During this time, Lukács realized that if the family unit and sexual morals were eroded, society could be broken down.

    Lukács implemented a policy he titled “cultural terrorism,” which focused on these two objectives. A major part of the policy was to target children’s minds through lectures that encouraged them to deride and reject Christian ethics.

    In these lectures, graphic sexual matter was presented to children, and they were taught about loose sexual conduct.

    Here again, a Marxist theory had failed to take hold in the real world. The people were outraged at Lukács’ program, and he fled Hungary when Romania invaded in 1919.

    The Birth of Cultural Marxism

    All was quiet on the Marxist front until 1923 when the cultural terrorist turned up for a “Marxist study week” in Frankfurt, Germany. There, Lukács met a young, wealthy Marxist named Felix Weil.

    Until Lukács showed up, classical Marxist theory was based solely on the economic changes needed to overthrow class conflict. Weil was enthused by Lukács’ cultural angle on Marxism.

    Weil’s interest led him to fund a new Marxist think tank—the Institute for Social Research. It would later come to be known as simply The Frankfurt School.

    In 1930, the school changed course under new director Max Horkheimer. The team began mixing the ideas of Sigmund Freud with those of Marx, and cultural Marxism was born.

    In classical Marxism, the workers of the world were oppressed by the ruling classes. The new theory was that everyone in society was psychologically oppressed by the institutions of Western culture. The school concluded that this new focus would need new vanguards to spur the change. The workers were not able to rise up on their own.

    As fate would have it, the National Socialists came to power in Germany in 1933. It was a bad time and place to be a Jewish Marxist, as most of the school’s faculty was. So, the school moved to New York City, the bastion of Western culture at the time.

    Coming to America

    In 1934, the school was reborn at Columbia University. Its members began to exert their ideas on American culture.

    It was at Columbia University that the school honed the tool it would use to destroy Western culture: the printed word.

    The school published a lot of popular material. The first of these was Critical Theory.

    Critical Theory is a play on semantics. The theory was simple: criticize every pillar of Western culture—family, democracy, common law, freedom of speech, and others. The hope was that these pillars would crumble under the pressure.

    Next was a book Theodor Adorno co-authored, The Authoritarian Personality. It redefined traditional American views on gender roles and sexual mores as “prejudice.” Adorno compared them to the traditions that led to the rise of fascism in Europe.

    Is it just a coincidence that the go-to slur for the politically correct today is “fascist”?

    The school pushed its shift away from economics and toward Freud by publishing works on psychological repression.

    Their works split society into two main groups: the oppressors and the victims. They argued that history and reality were shaped by those groups who controlled traditional institutions. At the time, that was code for males of European descent.

    From there, they argued that the social roles of men and women were due to gender differences defined by the “oppressors.” In other words, gender did not exist in reality but was merely a “social construct.”

    A Coalition of Victims

    Adorno and Horkheimer returned to Germany when WWII ended. Herbert Marcuse, another member of the school, stayed in America. In 1955, he published Eros and Civilization.

    In the book, Marcuse argued that Western culture was inherently repressive because it gave up happiness for social progress.

    The book called for “polymorphous perversity,” a concept crafted by Freud. It posed the idea of sexual pleasure outside the traditional norms. Eros and Civilization would become very influential in shaping the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

    Marcuse would be the one to answer Horkheimer’s question from the 1930s: Who would replace the working class as the new vanguards of the Marxist revolution?

    Marcuse believed that it would be a victim coalition of minorities—blacks, women, and homosexuals.

    The social movements of the 1960s—black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual liberation—gave Marcuse a unique vehicle to release cultural Marxist ideas into the mainstream. Railing against all things “establishment,” The Frankfurt School’s ideals caught on like wildfire across American universities.

    Marcuse then published Repressive Tolerance in 1965 as the various social movements in America were in full swing. In it, he argued that tolerance of all values and ideas meant the repression of “correct” ideas.

    It was here that Marcuse coined the term “liberating tolerance.” It called for tolerance of any ideas coming from the left but intolerance of those from the right. One of the overarching themes of the Frankfurt School was total intolerance for any viewpoint but its own. That is also a basic trait of today’s political-correctness believers.

    To quote Max Horkheimer, “Logic is not independent of content.”

    Recalling the Words of Winston (Not That One)

    The Frankfurt School’s work has had a deep impact on American culture. It has recast the homogenous America of the 1950s into today’s divided, animosity-filled nation.

    In turn, this has contributed to the undeniable breakdown of the family unit, as well as identity politics, radical feminism, and racial polarization in America.

    It’s hard to decide if today’s culture is more like Orwell’s 1984 or Huxley’s Brave New World.

    Never one to buck a populist trend, the political establishment in America has fully embraced the ideas of the Frankfurt School and has pushed them on American society through public miseducation.

    Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the beacons of progressivism, are both disciples of Saul Alinsky, a devoted cultural Marxist.

    And so we now live in a hyper-sensitive society in which social memes and feelings have overtaken biological and objective reality as the main determinants of right and wrong.

    Political correctness is a war on logic and reason.

    To quote Winston, the protagonist in Orwell’s dystopia, “Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4.”

    Today, America is not free.

Black Rose Anarchist Federation Mission Statement ... solidarity with Black Students for Justice and Students for Justice in Palestine... Cultural Marxism on steroids, Jewish plan for NWO
  • Mission Statement We are an organization of revolutionaries who share common visions of a new world – a world where people collectively control their own workplaces, communities and land and where all basic needs are met. A world where power and participation flow from the bottom upwards and society is organized for peoples’ aspirations, passions, and needs rather than profit, racial prejudice, patriarchy, or imperialism; and where we live sustainably with the planet. We believe that this vision can only be brought about through the revolutionary power of the working class organized in the workplaces, community, schools, and streets to overthrow the state and capitalism and build a new world from the bottom up. As those actively seeking to construct this vision we are inspired by the traditions of anarchist-communism, anarcho-syndicalism, especifismo, platformism, feminism, queer liberation, black liberation, abolitionism, anti-racism and their history of global struggle for liberation. We believe in the need for a political home from which to organize ourselves and put forward our vision. We believe in the need to create spaces for the development of new revolutionaries that allow the grouping together of similarly minded militants. We see the need to build a specifically anarchist organization united around a common set of ideas, strategy, and practice. We believe that political organization should speak to the needs of our time, and act as a catalyst in struggles to expand their revolutionary potential. Political organization should be a vehicle to build, contribute to, and learn from social struggles.

 

A Brief History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness Jefrey D. Breshears
A Brief History of
Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness
Jefrey D. Breshears
PART 2
The Frankfurt School
The Founding Agenda
In 1923 Georg Lukacs helped establish a Marxist research center at the
University of Frankfurt under the sponsorship of Felix Weil. Like Marx’s
benefactor, Friedrich Engels, Weil was the son of a wealthy capitalist and
an ardent Marxist who had earned a Ph.D. in political science from
Frankfurt University. The Institute’s first director, Carl Grunberg, was a
professor of law and political science at the University of Vienna and an
avowed Marxist. (In fact, Grunberg was the first openly-Marxist professor
to hold a chair in a German university.) The original name for the center
was the Institute for Marxism (Institut fur Marxismus), but Weil and
Grunberg decided for public relations purposes to give it a more generic
name, The Institute of Social Research (Institut fur Sozialforschung). Since
then, it has usually been referred to as simply “the Frankfurt School.”
From the outset the founders were clear about
the school’s mission. Their model was the MarxEngels
Institute in Moscow, and according to
Weil, “I wanted the institute to become known...
due to its contributions to Marxism as a scientific
discipline.” However, there was always a
contradiction between the Institute’s stated
philosophy and reality. Although theoretically a
Marxist institution, the governing structure of the
Frankfurt School was anything but classless and
egalitarian. In fact, it was even more hierarchical
and less collegial than most academic institutions
with a single director who was empowered with
dictatorial control over the Institute’s policies,
programs, faculty and administration. That
inconsistency aside, as Martin Jay records in his
book, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the
Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research
(1973, 1996), “Carl Grunberg concluded his
opening address by clearly stating his personal
allegiance to Marxism as a scientific
methodology, [and declared that] Marxism would
be the ruling principle of the Institute.”
Weil and Grunberg were orthodox Marxists,
but from the beginning they encouraged a broad
interdisciplinary approach to scholarship. As a
result, the Institute attracted gifted scholars not
only in economics but also in philosophy, history,
psychology, sociology and other academic areas.
Although generically Marxist, there were some
philosophical variations and different emphases as
various scholars applied Marxist principles to
their particular field of study. As an independent
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 2
Marxist think-tank, the Institute was a center for
theoretical discourse but not revolutionary
activism. Although some of its faculty and staff
were avowed Communists, the Institute was
never officially affiliated with either the
Communist Party of Germany (KPD) or the more
moderate Socialist Party of Germany (SPD).
Furthermore, although the Frankfurt scholars
praised Lenin and the Bolshevik regime in the
early Twenties, support for the USSR was more
tempered after Lenin died in 1924. Interestingly,
Grunberg and his colleagues were careful not to
criticize Stalin overtly, but they circumspectly
kept their distance.
Grunberg suffered a stroke in 1927 and retired
as director of the Institute of Social Research a
couple of years later. In 1930 Max Horkheimer
became the director of the Institute, and at that
point a new philosophy took hold in the Institute.
Horkheimer’s view of Marxism was more
expansive and dialectical rather than rigid and
mechanical, and like Gramsci and Lukacs before
him, he was convinced that the major impediment
to the spread of Marxism was Western culture. In
particular, he despised traditional
Judeo/Christian ethics and morality, which he
believed prevented the widespread acceptance of
Marxism.
Under Horkheimer’s directorship, the
Frankfurt scholars synthesized Marxism, Social
Darwinism and Freudian psychology, and in the
process they created an ingenious cultural
ideology that had the potential to radically
transform German (and Western) culture.
Horkheimer was convinced that human values
and actions were psychological as well as
ideological, and he was adamant that the Institute
integrate psychology into its philosophy. The
result, as Martin Jay observes, was that in the
early years “the Institute concerned itself
primarily with an analysis of bourgeois society’s
socio-economic substructure” in keeping with
classical Marxism, while “in the years after 1930
its prime interest lay in its cultural superstructure”
as developed by Neo-Marxist theoreticians.
Under Horkheimer, the Frankfurt School
propagated a revisionistic Neo-Marxist
interpretation of Western culture called Critical
Theory. In essence, Critical Theory was a
comprehensive and unrelenting assault on the
values and institutions of Western civilization.
Based on utopian social and political ideals,
Critical Theory offered no realistic alternatives,
but it was nonetheless a devastating critique of the
history, philosophy, politics, social and economic
structures, major institutions, and religious
foundations of Western civilization. As a result,
despite the individual personalities and the
respective differences and emphases of the various
Frankfurt scholars, there was a basic
philosophical coherence in their cumulative work.
Ultimately, what united these scholars was the
application of a Neo-Marxist dialectic in their
unrelenting criticism of contemporary Western
society and culture.
An important point to consider is that the
driving force behind the Frankfurt School’s
research was never impartial scholarship but the
aggressive promotion of a radical left-wing
socio/political agenda. Even Martin Jay, who is
generally sympathetic toward the Frankfurt
School and Critical Theory, concedes that “the
true object of Marxism... was not the uncovering
of immutable truths, but the fostering of social
change.” The conservative research scholar,
William S. Lind, is more blunt:
The goal of Critical Theory was not truth
but praxis, or revolutionary action: bringing
the current society and culture down through
unremitting, destructive criticism. [William S.
Lind, “Further Readings in the Frankfurt School,”
in Political Correctness: A Short History of an
Ideology. www.freecongress.org.]
Horkheimer and his associates did not regard
truth and reason (including Marxist dogmas) as
immutable and transcendent realities, but neither
did they consider themselves to be relativists –
either epistemically or ethically. Instead, they
argued that truth exists, but only within history. In
this sense, they regarded the dichotomy between
absolutism and relativism to be false because it
was merely a theoretical construct divorced from
real life situations. As Martin Jay explains, “Each
period of time has its own truth, Horkheimer
argued.... [and] what is true is whatever fosters
social change in the direction of a rational
society.” He goes on to note...
Dialectics was superb at attacking other
systems’ pretensions of truth, but when it
came to articulating the ground of its own
assumption and values, it fared less well....
Critical Theory had a basically insubstantial
concept of reason and truth, rooted in social
conditions and yet outside them... If Critical
Theory can be said to have had a theory of
truth, it appeared in its immanent critique of
bourgeois society, which compared the
pretensions of bourgeois ideology with the
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 3
(L-R): Felix Weil, Walter Benjamin,
Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno
reality of its social conditions. Truth was not
outside the society, but contained in its own
claims. Men had an emancipatory interest
in actualizing the ideology. [Martin Jay, The
Dialectical Imagination, p. 62.]
This is, to say the least, an unconvincing
argument. The claim that truth is only a product
of one’s historical circumstance would itself be a
product of one’s historical circumstance, which is
of course self-refuting. Although denying they
were epistemic relativists, the Frankfurt scholars
were certain that truth is found only within
historical circumstances, yet they claimed
personal exemption from the restrictions of their
own historical circumstance and assumed a
transcendent truth perspective. In logic, this is the
“self-excepting” fallacy – but they conveniently
resolved this contradiction by simply dismissing
formal logic as bourgeois thinking. Besides, it
imposed unwanted restrictions on their theoretical
assertions.
Under Horkheimer’s leadership the Frankfurt
School attracted some brilliant scholars and
intellectuals such as Theodor Adorno, Eric
Fromm, Wilhelm Reich, Walter Benjamin, Leo
Lowenthal and Herbert Marcuse. Like Trotsky,
Luxemburg, Lukacs, Bela Kun and other notable
European Marxists in the early 1900s, many of
the Frankfurt scholars were secular Jews, a fact
that the Nazis successfully exploited in their
propaganda regarding a “Jewish conspiracy” of
Communist intellectuals who were perverting
German society.
Although independent scholars in their own
right, the Critical Theorists held a common
commitment to Neo-Marxism and the belief that
Western civilization has
been an imperialistic and
repressive force in human
history – especially,
Western Christianity. In
their view, Western
civilization was built on
aggression, oppression,
racism, slavery, classism
and sexual repression.
Decades later, this
ideology became the
philosophical basis for the
founding of the various
“critical studies” programs
and departments in
universities such as
African-American Studies, Ethnic Studies,
Feminist Studies, Peace Studies, and LGBT
(Lesbian/Gay/Bi-sexual/Transgender) Studies.
Particularly significant in this regard was
Wilhelm Reich’s book, The Mass Psychology of
Fascism (1933), which offered up an intriguing
revision of the Marxist dialectic. Unlike classical
Marxism, which was fundamentally economicsbased
and reductionistically simplistic in terms of
setting the bourgeoisie against the proletariat,
Reich contended that the conflict in the 20th
century was between “reactionaries” and
“revolutionaries.” In other words, the culture war
was not exclusively a class-based conflict but one
between those who held incompatible socio/
political ideologies. This allowed some among the
elite classes in society, including some who were
rich and highly-educated, to join in the struggle
against oppression along with the poor and the
exploited. Of course, it also opened up the
opportunity for Marxist intellectuals such as
Reich and his Frankfurt School colleagues to take
leadership in the culture war on behalf of the
downtrodden and the victims of Western
capitalism and Christian oppression. Nonetheless,
as members of the intellectual elite, they retained
a certain distance from the unwashed masses. As
Martin Jay notes, “the Institute’s members may
have been relentless in their hostility towards the
capitalist system, but they never abandoned the
life-style of the haute bourgeoisie.”
In retrospect, the Frankfurt School had a
significant influence on the evolution of the
American left over the past 70 years, particularly
the kind of cultural Marxism that generated the
New Left movement in the 1960s. Since then, the
left has launched an
unremitting culture war of
attrition that has largely
succeeded in terms of
secularizing American culture
and undermining traditional
values and institutions, and
much of its ideology,
inspiration and tactics were
gleaned from the Frankfurt
School’s Institute of Social
Research.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 4
Wilhelm Reich
The ‘X’ Factor
From the outset, the founding fathers of
Communism understood that traditional family
values and male/female relationships could be
exploited in order to destabilize Western culture.
In fact, throughout most of history, in both
Western and non-Western societies, women had
been oppressed and denied basic civil rights, so
this was an issue that could easily be used by
Critical Theorists in their critique of Western
culture.
In Karl Marx’s The German Ideology (1845) and
Friedrich Engels’ The Origin of the Family, Private
Property and the State (1884), both men argued that
traditional male patriarchy oppressed females by
holding them as property of their fathers and
husbands, and both advocated the abolition of the
traditional family. But neither Marx nor Engels
wanted to see women truly liberated; they simply
wanted a sexual revolution in which women were
released from marital contracts so they could be
held in common by men.
A key component of Critical Theory was its
integration of Marxism with Darwinism and
Freudianism. Factoring Freud into the equation
was a controversial notion because he was
generally held in low esteem by traditional
Marxists who understood human psychology in
terms of Pavlovian behaviorism. Philosophically,
Freudianism was inherently counter-revolutionary
in that it discounted the primacy of economics in
human social evolution in favor of liberation
through psychoanalysis. Rather than a violent
external revolution that immediately liberated the
masses, the Freudian revolution was peaceful,
deliberative, internal and individual. In traditional
Marxist circles, Freudianism was viewed as an
unwelcome complication that disrupted the
sublime simplicity of the whole Marxist dialectic
of history.
But as proud and independent Marxist
revisionists, the Frankfurt scholars saw great
potential in utilizing Freud as a useful ally in their
efforts to undermine traditional Western values
and culture. Like Freud, they considered sexual
repression to be a hindrance to societal evolution.
According to Horkheimer and others, bourgeois
society is inherently sexually repressed, which is a
major factor in neurosis and other forms of mental
illness. They believed that a revolutionary, postcapitalist
and post-Christian society could liberate
humanity from this repression, so sexual
liberation from the restrictions of a patriarchal
society was a major theme in their ideology.
In this regard, the social psychologists Eric
Fromm and Wilhelm Reich played key roles in
the integration of Marx and Freud. Fromm
contended that sexual orientation is merely a
social construct, there are no innate differences
between men and women, and that sexuality and
gender roles are socially determined.
Furthermore, he argued that sexually-repressed
societies discourage sexual experimentation and
practices such as homosexuality due to manmade
legal codes and moralistic taboos that are
psychologically inhibiting and counter-productive.
All this does is increase the angst-level in society
and keep people in a perpetual state of frustration.
The psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich was one of
the originators of “sexual politics” and, like
Fromm, an outspoken sex propagandist. Based on
a Darwinian evolutionary view of humanity,
Reich argued that human beings are
fundamentally sexual animals. For Reich,
sexuality is an innate impulse that should not be
inhibited by artificial and manmade moral
restrictions. In his book, The Sexual Revolution, he
argued that sexual repression was an underlying
cause of many psycho/social pathologies, and he
laid much of the blame on “familial imperialism”
that is perpetuated through the authoritarian
structure of the traditional family. In fact,
according to Reich, “familial imperialism” is the
root cause of “national imperialism.”
The authoritarian
family is the
authoritarian state in
miniature. Man’s
authoritarian character
structure is basically
produced by the
embedding of sexual
inhibitions and fear in
the living substance
of sexual impulses.
Familial imperialism is
ideologically reproduced
in national imperialism....
The authoritarian family...
is a factory where reactionary ideology and
reactionary structures are produced. [Quoted
by Raymond V. Raehn in “The Historical Roots
of ‘Political Correctness,”in William S. Lind,
Political Correctness: A Short History of an
Ideology. Www.freecongress.org.]
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 5
Reich’s solution, as he argued in The Mass
Psychology of Fascism (1933), was to replace the
traditional patriarchal family with a matriarchal
model, which he regarded as the only truly
“natural” order of things. This was part of a
comprehensive sexual revolution, which
according to Reich should include the legalization
of homosexuality and abortion, in order to foster
a more “natural” and “healthy” society. Of
course, all this sounds suspiciously similar to the
sexual propaganda later spouted by the likes of
Alfred Kinsey and Hugh Hefner, who themselves
were influenced by Reich and Fromm, among
others. The great attraction, of course – other than
the obvious fact that it appeals to our base
instincts – is the pseudo-scientific basis for it.
[NOTE: Reich’s aggressive advocacy of sexual
politics was too extreme even for most of his
fellow- radicals at the time. In the early 1930s he
was expelled from both the Communist Party and
the International Psychoanalytical Association,
and in 1939 he emigrated to America. In 1942 he
founded the Orgone Society, which advocated
free sex and mental health through “the power of
the orgasm.” Years later, the Food & Drug
Administration sued Reich for fraud, and he died
in prison in 1957.]
In terms of long-range influence, the most
significant Frankfurt School sex propagandist was
Herbert Marcuse. Like his colleagues, Fromm and
Reich, Marcuse understood that a true cultural
revolution would include sexual liberation along
with political and economic transformation. In
this regard, he called for the casting off of all
traditional values and sexual restraints, to be
replaced by what he termed “polymorphous
perversity.” Even the concept of marital love and
fidelity was counter-revolutionary, according to
Marcuse. Although cultural change was the
ultimate goal, what seemed to primary stimulate
him was the pleasure principle. Like the radical
French Jacobins a century-and-a-half earlier,
Marcuse questioned, “What good is a revolution
without general copulation?”
Neo-Marxism and Popular Culture
Political Protest Music
In Martin Jay’s book, The Dialectical
Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School, his
chapter on “Aesthetic Theory and the Critique of
Mass Culture” is particularly insightful given the
enormous influence of popular culture in our
society. Of course, much of popular culture –
including most music, movies, television, etc. – is
merely crass entertainment, and as such much of
it is trivial, banal and inconsequential (except for
the fact that reflects the feelings and the shallow
thinking of so many people). Nonetheless, some
popular entertainment is truly significant and its
cumulative effect is substantial. Although the
following comments refer primarily to popular
music, many of these observations generally apply
to other forms of mass entertainment, too.
Social observers have long recognized the
power of song. Reportedly, Plato commented that
if he could write the popular songs of his culture,
he cared not who wrote the laws. In other words,
like the Neo-Marxists of the Frankfurt School,
Plato understood that culture drives politics, not
vice-versa. As novelist John Steinbeck once noted,
popular music expresses the most fundamental
values and beliefs of a people and constitutes the
“sharpest statement” about who and what they
are. According to Steinbeck, we can learn more
about a society by listening to its songs than by
any other means of observation, since “into the
songs go all their hopes and hurts, the anger,
fears, the wants and aspirations.” Leo Lowenthal,
a leading theorist in the Frankfurt School,
expressed the same idea when he wrote that
“mass culture is psychoanalysis in reverse.”
Popular culture, including music, has always
functioned as a kind of social barometer, and
throughout history the significant issues and
events of the day have often been expressed
through the medium of popular music. From the
broadside ballads of the Revolutionary era to the
campfire sing-alongs of the Civil War, from Joe
Hill’s radical labor anthems of the early 20th
century to the Depression-era Dust Bowl ballads
of Woody Guthrie, from the folk and rock
socio/political commentaries of the 1960s to the
nihilistic rantings of contemporary punk and rap,
popular music has often expressed the Zeitgeist –
the spirit of the times. Throughout the 20th century
hundreds of popular songs functioned as
socio/political musical editorials, and although
most were quickly forgotten and left little lasting
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 6
impression, some were quite profound and
undeniably influential.
[NOTE: Before the advent of the phonograph
and the radio, popular music was
indistinguishable from folk music in that one
generation’s popular songs became the folk songs
of succeeding generations. It wasn’t until the early
20th century, with the evolution of a commercial
music industry, that popular music became a
distinct category from folk music.]
Prior to the 20th century social protest songs
often disguised their messages, such as in the
Mother Goose rhymes. However, with the
coalescence of several different reform movements
in the early 1900s, socio/political protest music
became more open and explicit. In particular, the
radical left-wing of the labor movement, as
characterized by the Marxist-oriented Industrial
Workers of the World (IWW), utilized music very
effectively to rally the troops and promote its
agenda. Labor anthems, such as those composed
by songwriters such as Joe Hill (see below),
contained sharp and explicit lyrics and were sung
with revivalistic fervor by the union faithful.
Since popular music echoes the spirit of the
times, socio/political message songs tend to
proliferate during times of crisis and turmoil.
This was certainly the case during World War I
when Tin Pan Alley songwriters churned out
scores of topical songs related to the war –
everything from the anti-war “I Didn’t Raise My
Boy To Be a Soldier” to flag-waving anthems
such as “Over There”
and social
commentaries like
“How Ya Gonna
Keep ‘em Down on the
Farm (After They’ve
Seen Paree)?” During
the raucous and
prosperous Roaring
Twenties very few serious socio/ political
commentaries were written and recorded, but
following the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the
onset of the Great Depression there was once
again a flurry of socio/political musical
commentaries. Many of these songs, such as
“Happy Days Are Here Again” and “There’s No
Depression In Love,” were slick and jazzy
productions designed to revive the flagging spirits
of the American people, while others dealt more
seriously with social realities such as “Brother,
Can You Spare a Dime?” “Hobo’s Lullaby,” and
many of Woody Guthrie’s songs.
Likewise, World War II inspired scores of
songs that echoed the times – e.g., Irving Berlin’s
“God Bless America,” “Remember Pearl
Harbor,” Johnny Mercer’s “G.I. Jive,” The
Andrews Sisters’ “Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy,”
“Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition,”
“Coming In On a Wing and a Prayer,” Peggy
Lee’s “Waiting For the Train To Come In,” and
many others. In the relatively placid Fifties few
songs dealt with themes other than romance (e.g.,
Elvis Presley’s “Love Me, Tender,” Pat Boone’s
“Love Letters In the Sand,” etc.) or the pursuit of
pleasure (Bill Haley & the Comets’ “Rock Around
the Clock,” Chuck Berry’s “Sweet Little Sixteen,”
etc.). Then, the turbulent 1960s once again
produced a great outpouring of socio/ political
topical songs. But unlike the past, this time
counter-cultural themes dominated the music, and
the lyrics tended to be overwhelmingly critical of
mainstream American lifestyles and values.
Since the Sixties popular music in general has
gotten even more cynical and jaded. Much of it
has become a celebration of decadence, and the
glorification of sex, drugs, violence, irresponsible
hedonism and mindless materialism is certainly
cause for alarm. If Britney Spears, Madonna,
Eminem, the hip-hoppers and the gangsta rappers
speak for a critical mass of young people today,
this is truly disturbing. And although most of this
music is not overtly political, the very fact that
these people are pop culture icons is a damning
indictment of the state of our culture.
Many people wonder why so much popular
music is so ugly, so degenerate, so sexualized, so
obscene, and so fixated on drugs and violence.
Since all art is an expression of philosophy and
moral values, much of this is due to the insidious
influence of Nihilism and Postmodernism on
contemporary American culture. But some of it
directly reflects a Neo-Marxist political ideology
as well. To radical left-wing social critics, the
reason why so much modern art expresses such
rage and dissatisfaction is because it reflects the
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 7
realities of living in a repressive and oppressive
society under the heavy yoke of capitalist
exploitation and traditional Christian-influenced
moral values.
Cultural Marxists argue that all of life is a
struggle against the forces of oppression and
repression. Originally, classical Marxism focused
rather narrowly on economic oppression and class
conflict, but by the 1930s Neo-Marxists began to
widen the scope of their cultural critique to
include a broader range of social issues and even
psychological factors – in particular, issues related
to sexual repression. In their condemnation of
Western culture, they emphasized social injustice
and the plight of marginalized minorities – those
victims of the bourgeois social order that included
the working classes, racial minorities, radical
feminists, homosexuals, and non-Christians in
general. Therefore, it was within the context of
their Neo-Marxist Critical Theory that they
encouraged the politicization of the arts as part of
a full-scale assault on Western culture.
Among cultural Marxists there have been two
competing theories regarding the proper role of
revolutionary art. The first approach, which Lenin
sanctioned and has always been the most
common, focuses on content. In this approach art
is an expression of agitprop (agitation/
propaganda), and it emphasizes overtly social and
political messages. However, these messages may
be either relatively mild and suggestive or harsh
and confrontational. Examples of the former
would include many of the socio/political protest
songs of the early Sixties such as Bob Dylan’s
“Blowin’ in the Wind” and Pete Seeger’s “If I
Had a Hammer” and “Where Have All the
Flowers Gone.” By the mid-Sixties much of the
protest music became more explicit and
aggressive, as characterized by songs such as
Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-changin’,” Barry
McGuire’s “Eve of Destruction,” The Beatles’
“Revolution,” or “I Feel Like I’m-Fixin’-To-Die
Rag” by Country Joe & the Fish.
The alternative
theory of revolutionary
art emphasizes form
rather than content.
As such, its messages
are often more stylistic
than overtly
propagandistic. This
approach has been
incorporated into
various types of avant-garde music such as atonal
free form jazz (most notably, the music of John
Cage), the extended guitar “freak-outs” that were
popular among some rock bands in the Sixties,
and in recordings such as John Lennon’s bizarre
“Revolution No. 9" on The Beatles’ White Album.
More recently, much of rap, hip-hop and heavy
metal music emphasize form over content. In
much of this music the lyrics and the messages are
vague, inarticulate or even unintelligible, but the
mood is obviously angry, aggressive and antisocial.
In such music, form trumps content and, to
borrow Marshall McLuhan’s famous dictum, the
medium is the message. Despite the lack of any
clearly articulated or intelligible message, such
music can function as a potent expression of
socio/political protest.
Theodor Adorno, the Frankfurt School’s most
prominent cultural analyst, was a staunch
advocate of the form over content approach.
Adorno began his academic career as a music
critic, and as a doctrinaire Marxist he had a
peculiar take on music as a political statement. He
was contemptuous of popular culture in general,
which he regarded as bourgeois, frivolous and
counter-revolutionary, and as a musicologist he
was particularly scornful of popular music, which
he considered trivial, insipid and banal – which of
course most of it was (and always has been).
But Adorno was more than just a cultural
elitist, and he held a radical view of art and
culture that few would accept. According to him,
since modern bourgeois culture is intrinsically
“repressive,” art could only be “authentic” if it
were non-commercial, dissonant and alienating.
In other words, any art form, such as music, that
conveyed joy or contentment or harmony was at
best an expression of ignorance or at worst an
affirmation of the authoritarian status quo.
Declaring that “defiance of society includes
defiance of its language,” Adorno might also have
added that defiance of society includes not only
defiance of its traditional values but its art forms
as well. As he stated, “We interpret [art] as a kind
of code language for processes taking place within
society, which must be deciphered by means of
critical analysis.”
[NOTE Marxism has long been recognized as
a kind of surrogate religion. As such, it shares
some common perspectives with Christianity,
such as a deep longing for transcendence beyond
present realities. Also, like Christians, Marxists
rejected the popular notion that art is merely an
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 8
expression of the individual creativity of artists
themselves. Art is not values-free or valuesneutral.
Wittingly or not, all art expresses the
beliefs and ideals of its creators, and the concept
of artistic creative freedom is in many respects
illusory. Unlike Christians, however, Marxists
were strict determinists who believed that
sociological factors alone determine people’s
values. Christians don’t deny that society and
culture can influence (or condition) our values, but
human beings still have a measure of free choice
as a result of being created in the imago Dei – the
image of God. Still, like Marxists, Christians
believe that the ultimate goal of art is not merely
individual expression but a reflection of truth and
reality.]
According to Adorno, until current social and
political alienation and contradictions were
reconciled in reality, the utopian harmony of art
must always reflect the current dissonance. For
him, everything was political, and since bourgeois
capitalistic society was innately discordant and
repressive, the only legitimately authentic music
was that which avoided commercialism and
“spurious harmony” and expressed the
“contradictions” of modern life. Furthermore, he
reasoned, just as true artistic creativity was
determined by social factors, so too was people’s
subjective appreciation of art. This is why popular
culture, including virtually all popular music, was
so deplorably vacuous: it expressed bourgeois
values and the unsophisticated tastes of the
masses, who were the psychologically oppressed
products of a bourgeois capitalistic system and its
propaganda. The People needed to be liberated
from such constraints, and Adorno believed this
could be accomplished in part through true art
and true music, which was innately revolutionary
and counter-cultural. As he expressed it...
A successful work [of art]... is not one
which resolves objective contradictions in
a spurious harmony, but one which
expresses the idea of harmony negatively
by embodying the contradictions, pure and
uncompromised, in its innermost structure....
Art... always was, and is, a force of
protest of the humane against the pressure
of domineering institutions, religious and
otherwise....” [Quoted in Martin Jay, The
Dialectical Imagination, p. 179]
For Adorno, even modern jazz, which many
conservatives feared was promoting sensuality
and undermining traditional morality, should be
rejected as just another commercial commodity.
Observing that it served primarily as dance or
ambient background music, he challenged the
claim that jazz was sexually liberating. In fact, he
contended, rather than transcending alienation,
jazz music actually strengthened it by reconciling
the alienated individual with mainstream culture.
Prior to Adorno, most criticism of popular
culture came from social conservatives. Now,
however, it was attacked as a tool of the status
quo that pacified the masses and diverted their
attention away from all the oppression, repression
and social injustice inherent in American culture.
As such, it was part of a massive bourgeois
capitalist conspiracy. Martin Jay explains:
The Frankfurt School disliked mass
culture, not because it was democratic, but
precisely because it was not.... The culture
industry administered a nonspontaneous
[and] phony culture rather than the real
thing. The old distinction between high and
low culture had all but vanished in the
‘stylized barbarism’ of mass culture.... The
subliminal message of almost all that
passed for art was conformity and
resignation.
Increasingly, the Institute came to feel
that the culture industry enslaved men in
far more subtle and effective ways than the
crude methods of domination practiced in
earlier eras. The false harmony [promoted
in popular culture] was in some ways more
sinister than the clash of social
contradictions, because of its ability to lull
its victims into passive acceptance....
Moreover, the spread of technology served
the culture industry in America just as it
helped tighten the control of authoritarian
governments in Europe. Radio, Horkheimer
and Adorno argued, was to fascism as the
printing press had been to the Reformation
.... [Ibid, pp. 216-17]
In his study of the Frankfurt School, Jay
concludes that the Institute’s greatest impact on
American intellectual life was its critique of mass
culture along with its analysis of American
authoritarianism (see below, “Fascist Amerika”).
But Adorno’s philosophy of culture and music
was too extreme even for many of his NeoMarxist
colleagues, some of whom challenged his
basic assumptions. Walter Benjamin, a notable
philosopher and essayist, expressed the more
orthodox Marxist view that came to prevail
among most left-wing social critics and activists.
Unlike Adorno, Benjamin recognized the
immense potential of agitprop commercial
entertainment, and he contended that popular
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 9
Charlie Chaplin
Joe Hill
music could be a potent political weapon in the
culture war in terms of undermining traditional
values, radicalizing the masses and transforming
culture. Adorno was unconvinced, and argued
that any such attempts to integrate “socialist
realism” into commercial popular music only
succeeded in promoting the kind of “premature
harmony” that was in fact counter-revolutionary.
Most left-wing artists took Benjamin’s view
because Adorno’s more radical critique essentially
eliminated any audience for their art. In this
regard the playwright Bertolt Brecht was
particularly significant in his utilization of the
theater as a political forum to explore what he
called “the critical aesthetics of dialectical
materialism.” Brecht inspired a whole new
generation of Marxist artists and entertainers, and
his influence was particularly significant in films
and the theater. Meanwhile,
in America, perhaps the most
successful and influential
propagandist for the Marxist
cause was the actor and
movie producer, Charlie
Chaplin, whose comic genius
in films such as Modern Times
and The Great Dictator
skillfully and subtly promoted
the left-wing agenda.
Adorno’s eccentric views
aside, many Marxists
understood intuitively the
power of politicized music as
a social and
cultural force. As noted
earlier, the IWW was a
radical Marxist labor union in
the early 1900s that included a fragile and volatile
coalition of Communists, socialists and
anarchists. According to its Manifesto, the union
was founded on “the class struggle” and “the
irrepressible conflict between the capitalist class
and the working class,” and its motto proclaimed,
“The final aim is revolution.” IWW rallies often
resembled religious revivals with stirring,
emotional speeches and a lot of group singing.
Songwriters such as Joe Hill converted scores of
well-known church hymns into labor anthems,
and the IWW even published its own hymnal of
sorts, the Little Red Songbook, featuring songs such
as “Solidarity Forever,” sung to the tune of
“Battle Hymn of the Republic.”
They [the bourgeois capitalists] have taken
untold millions
That they never toiled to earn
But without our brain and muscle
Not a single wheel can turn
We can break their haughty power
Gain our freedom when we learn
That the union makes us strong.
(CHORUS)
Solidarity forever!
Solidarity forever!
Solidarity forever!
For the union makes us strong!
[NOTE: Like most other left-wing groups, the
IWW was constantly racked by internal sectarian
disputes and power struggles. During World War
I it lost most of its members, and many of its
leaders were charged with treason and sent to
prison. “Big Bill” Haywood, the public face of the
union, evaded prison by fleeing to the USSR,
where he was treated as a celebrity by Lenin’s
regime. When he died in 1928, Haywood was
buried in the Kremlin – one of only two
Americans so honored. In its short but colorful
history, the IWW produced quite a few
memorable characters including the firebrand
agitator, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, and Joe Hill,
America’s first left-wing protest singer/
songwriter.]
In 1914, on the eve before he was scheduled to
be hanged, Joe Hill explained his rationale for
writing political protest songs:
A pamphlet, no matter how good, is
never read more than once, but a song is
learned by heart and repeated over and over.
I maintain that if a
person can put a
few cold, common
sense facts into a
song, and dress
them up in a cloak of
humor to take
the dryness off of
them, he will
succeed in
reaching a great
number of workers
who are too
unintelligent or too
indifferent to read a
pamphlet or an
editorial.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 10
Woody Guthrie
Pete Seeger
[NOTE: Joe Hill was a Swedish immigrant
and a professional provocateur who, according to
American left-wing lore, was hanged by local
authorities for his courageous stand against
injustice on behalf of the downtrodden working
class. From point of fact, he was executed for
murdering two men. At the 1969 Woodstock
music festival, folk balladeer Joan Baez
momentarily resurrected the dormant memory of
this early working class hero with her lilting
rendition of “Joe Hill,” but few in the crowd had
a clue who she was singing about.]
Left-wing protest music was not a factor in
American popular music during the Roaring
Twenties, but with the coming of the Great
Depression dozens of topical songs related to the
times were played on the radio and became hits.
Some American leftists, along with their
European counterparts such as Theodor Adorno,
considered all commercial popular music to be
bourgeois and counter-revolutionary, but others
saw great potential in exploiting the medium for
propaganda purposes. Still, American
Communists generally looked at popular music
with suspicion if not outright contempt. Popular
music was mostly Broadway show tunes,
formulaic Tin Pan Alley love songs, and hyperkinetic
jazz, and most doctrinaire Marxists
dismissed the commercial music industry as just
another capitalistic scam operation.
Instead, the American left preferred the
socio/political folk-style music of performers such
as Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, and the Almanac
Singers. In their minds, folk music was the music
of “The People” and therefore an “authentic” art
form, and operating outside the commercial music
industry, it was itself a protest against capitalism.
Furthermore,
politicized
folk music
avoided the
kind of
“spurious
harmony” –
both
thematically
and musically
– that
Marxists
like Adorno
detested. Unlike slick commercial jazz and
sentimentalistic love ballads sung by professional
crooners, folk-style music was plain and
unadorned. It featured simple instrumentation,
and songs were sung (or in many cases, croaked,
howled, wheezed, whined, growled or rasped) in
a down-home style by singers with gloriously
untrained voices. The “beauty” of the song was in
its message rather than the melody, the
instrumentation or the vocals. Therefore, a
warbler like Woody Guthrie could be hailed as a
great singer and musician when in fact he could
not have sounded worse if he’d been born without
vocal cords. (Nor would his guitar playing have
suffered much had his fingers been webbed.)
The folksong genre
remained the officially
sanctioned and preferred
medium for left-wing music
into the 1960s. As a young
music phenom, Bob Dylan
mastered the genre and wrote
some of the defining protest
songs of the early Sixties such
as “Blowin’ in the Wind,”
“Masters of War” and “The
Times They Are A-changin’.”
But he soon grew tired of
acoustic folk music because it
was too restrictive, and when
he formed a rock band and
went electric, folk purists such
as Pete Seeger went ballistic.
For Seeger and other left-wing
ideologues, authentic political
music was folk music, and they
regarded Dylan as a
commercial sell-out to the capitalistic music
industry. This opinion didn’t last long, however,
as other gifted songwriters such as Paul Simon
and Phil Ochs converted to rock.
By the late 1960s, left-wing themes and
influences had thoroughly infiltrated American
pop culture in music, movies, the theater and even
TV. In the end, the elitism of a Theodore
Adorno was discarded for very practical reasons:
a Marxist agenda could very effectively be
communicated to mass audiences through mass
marketing and new technologies. If the ultimate
goal was cultural infiltration and social change,
concessions had to be made to the realities of
modern life. In fact, being almost entirely
consumer-driven and virtually devoid of any
quality control, there was not a medium more
open and susceptible to left-wing propaganda than
popular culture.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 11
American Neo-Marxism
The Columbia Connection
When Hitler and the Nazi Party came to
power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt Institute
of Social Research was shut down “for tendencies
hostile to the state” and most of its library
confiscated. Horkheimer was one of the first
scholars to be dismissed from Frankfurt
University along with luminaries such as the
theologian Paul Tillich and the psychologist Karl
Mannheim. Seeing the proverbial handwriting on
the wall, most of the Institute’s faculty and staff
fled Germany, and the trustees considered
reestablishing the school in Geneva, London or
Paris. Significantly, they never considered seeking
sanctuary in Stalin’s Russia.
In previous years the Institute had developed
contacts with prominent Americans such as the
Marxist historian Charles Beard, the sociologist
Robert MacIver, and the theologian Reinhold
Niebuhr, all of whom were associated with
Columbia University in New York City. When
Horkheimer visited the U.S. in May, 1934, he was
received by Columbia’s president, Nicholas
Murray Butler. Much to Horkheimer’s surprise,
Butler offered the Institute of Social Research
affiliation with the university, including offices
and classrooms in one of the university’s
buildings. As Martin Jay recounts the story...
Horkheimer, fearing he had
misunderstood Butler because of his limited
command of English, wrote a four-page
letter asking him to confirm and clarify his
offer. Butler’s response was a laconic “You
have understood me perfectly!” And so the
International Institute for Social Research,
as revolutionary and Marxist as it had
appeared in Frankfurt in the 1920s, came
to settle in the center of the capitalist world,
New York City. [Martin Jay, The Dialectical
Imagination (1973, 1993), p. 39.]
With that, the Institute of Social Research was
reestablished at Columbia University and became
a haven for Frankfurt School scholars throughout
the 1930s and until the end of World War II. In
the foreword of the first issue of the Institute’s
Studies in Philosophy and Social Science published in
America, Horkheimer acknowledged his and his
colleagues’ good fortune, and the peace and
security that the United States offered. In his
words...
Philosophy, art, and science have lost
their home in most of Europe. England is
now fighting desperately against the
domination of the totalitarian states.
America, especially the United States, is the
only continent in which the continuation of
scientific life is possible. Within the
framework of this country’s democratic
institutions, culture still enjoys the freedom
without which, we believe, it is unable to
exist. [Quoted in Martin Jay, p. 167.]
The great irony, of course, was that while
America was providing sanctuary to
Horkheimer’s group, they were working to
undermine the very traditions and “democratic
institutions” that accorded them safety and
security. Although Horkheimer portrayed the
Institute as a non-political “scientific” think-tank,
he and his associates applied the same principles
of Critical Theory they had developed in
Germany to American society and culture as they
focused on two priorities:
(1)A critique of German National Socialism
(Nazism), which they disingenuously caricatured,
along with Italian Fascism, as “right-wing”
totalitarian ideologies. In the process, they linked
Nazism and capitalism to the extent that
Horkheimer declared that those who refrained
from criticizing capitalism forfeited the right to
criticize Nazism.
(2)A critique of American authoritarianism,
including a withering attack on the evils such as
racism in American society and culture. Just as
classism had been the greatest vulnerability in
European society and culture, racism has been
America’s most persistent problem. In the early
1920s Trotsky predicted that just as the oppressed
proletariat constituted the revolutionary vanguard
in classical Marxist thought, oppressed blacks
could be formed into a revolutionary vanguard in
America. This was a form of Marxist revisionism
that Lenin (and later Stalin) would condemn as
heretical and “counter-revolutionary,” but
Horkheimer and his colleagues regarded it not
only as a concession to reality but an opportunity.
In classical Marxism the proletariat class was
the designated catalyst for bringing down the old
order and ushering in the new. But in the 1930s
labor unions had entered into collective
bargaining agreements with management, and the
material conditions in modern industrial societies
such as the U.S. were such that the working
classes had been co-opted by the allure of
materialism and the promise of a rising standards
of living. As such, they were no longer suited for
the revolutionary role, and Neo-Marxist
theoreticians no longer felt bound exclusively to
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 12
the interests of the proletariat. Instead, they were
willing to ally with any and all “progressive”
forces that were dedicated to the revolution.
As Horkheimer and his colleagues settled into
America in the 1930s, racial bigotry and
discrimination were pervasive and blatant. The
Frankfurt scholars viewed this situation as a
golden opportunity, and they effectively exploited
the situation in their efforts to forge a new
revolutionary alliance of victims – i.e., blacks,
Jews, and the traditional proletariat classes of
factory workers, farmers and menial laborers –
along with their sympathizers in academia, the
media, and in the Communist Party of the United
States of America (CPUSA). A standing joke
among Greenwich Village Communists in the
1930s was this exchange between two Party
members discussing an upcoming cell meeting:
“You bring the Negro, and I’ll bring the
folksinger.” They could have added, “And we’ll
ask another comrade to bring the Jewish
intellectual.”
All social and political systems are flawed, and
all are deserving of serious examination and
criticism. But there were two fundamental
problems with Neo-Marxist Critical Theory: First,
it is based on a seriously defective naturalistic
worldview that, among other things, provides no
philosophical basis for judging the morality or
goodness of anything; and second, Critical Theory
was exclusively a one-way street. While subjecting
America and Western Europe to intense and
withering criticism, Horkheimer and his
colleagues were incredibly naive (or simply
cowardly) when it came to the Soviet Union. In
this respect they were guilty of employing a
deplorable double-standard. While expressing
outrage over racial bigotry in the United States,
for instance, they found it excruciatingly difficult
to criticize Stalin’s totalitarian dictatorship. Even
in the late 1930s, after Stalin had murdered
millions of Soviet citizens in the Ukrainian Terror
Famine and the various Purges, they remained
almost totally silent, and in 1946 Horkheimer
declared that “at present the only country where
there does not seem to be any kind of antiSemitism
is Russia.” Almost as if on-cue, when
asked about Communist atrocities and Soviet
gulags, their typical response was, “But what
about the Negroes in the South?” – as if there was
a moral equivalency between the two.
When the Institute of Social Research
relocated in America, it lost much of its funding.
The costs associated with resettling and
employing more than a dozen refugee scholars,
along with poor investments in the stock market
and disastrous real estate transactions severely
strained the Institute’s economic resources. [Yes,
you read that right: the Neo-Marxist and anticapitalist
ISR invested heavily in the capitalistic
system.] In fact, had it not been for the financial
support of the American Jewish Committee and
the Jewish Labor Committee, the Institute might
have ceased to exist.
With the coming of World War II, several
associates of the ISR, including Herbert Marcuse,
found employment in Washington, D.C. in
government agencies such as the Board of
Economic Warfare, the Office of War
Information, and the Office of Strategic Services
(OSS – the forerunner of the CIA). During the
war most of the Institute’s members became
American citizens. A small staff, headed by Leo
Lowenthal and Friedrich Pollock, continued to
operate out of the Institute’s New York office
until June, 1944 when the building was turned
over to the U.S. Navy. At that point the ISR was
relocated in smaller offices in Columbia’s Low
Memorial Library, and by 1949 the Institute was
no longer associated with the university.
In 1941 Horkheimer and Adorno relocated to
Pacific Palisades near Santa Monica, California,
where they joined other German leftists such as
the playwright Bertolt Brecht. Unfortunately, no
substantive histories have been written that
explore their Hollywood connections during these
years or their influence in the movie and TV
industries. But in 1947, during the height of the
post-war “Red Scare,” the House Un-American
Activities Committee (HUAC) was sufficiently
concerned about Communist influence in the
Hollywood entertainment industry that it held
extensive hearings and subpoenaed more than 40
writers, directors, actors and producers. Ten of
those called before the committee – the infamous
“Hollywood Ten” – refused to testify and were
cited for contempt. Many of the others were
blacklisted by TV and movie studio bosses,
including the singer/songwriter, Pete Seeger, who
was kept off television for 20 years until he was
finally invited to appear on The Smothers Brothers
Comedy Hour in 1967. With characteristic
defiance, he sang an anti-war song, “Waist Deep
in the Big Muddy,” dedicated to President
Johnson.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 13
The Sixties
After World War II Horkheimer and Adorno
returned to Germany and reestablished the
Institute of Social Research in Frankfurt. Over the
next several years, approximately 50 scholars who
had been associated with the Institute obtained
faculty positions in American universities. Of
these, Herbert Marcuse emerged as the most
notable. Through his teaching and writings, he
became the key link between the Neo-Marxists of
the Frankfurt School and the American New Left
movement of the 1960s.
The New Left incorporated the seminal ideas
of Critical Theory in its critique of America as a
fascist and repressive state. For left-wing activists
in the Sixties, Critical Theory was far more
appealing than classical Marxism for 3 reasons:
(1)It provided a comprehensive deconstruction
of American culture as innately racist, sexist,
imperialistic, and consumer-obsessed;
(2)It incorporated the arts and popular culture
into the cultural revolution; and
(3)It celebrated sexual liberation and a
rejection of traditional moral values.
The single most
significant influence on
the ideology of the New
Left was Marcuse’s Eros
and Civilization,
published in 1955. In
the book, Marcuse
argued that most of the
angst and hang-ups and
neuroses that young
people feel are the result
of sexual repression.
The solution was “nonrepressive
society” in
which libertarian socialistic values prevailed – i.e,
an egalitarian society in which individuals were
free to pursue their own hedonistic instincts.
Marcuse coined the phrase, “Make love, not
war,” and his call for
sexual liberation is sometimes cited as the
inspiration behind popular Sixties’ slogans such as
“Do your own thing” and “If it feels good, do it.”
Such was his influence, both in America and
Europe, that during the student uprisings in
France in May of 1968, activists carried signs that
read, “Marx/Mao/Marcuse.”
The 1960s was one of the most turbulent
periods in American history. As Richard
Bernstein, a reporter for the New York Times, later
noted in Dictatorship of Virtue: Multiculturalism and
the Battle for America’s Future (1993), “Thirty years
ago, something shifted in the national mind.”
Bernstein might have added that thirty years
earlier something also shifted in the rational mind
that set the stage for the chaos to come. Beginning
in 1960 with the formation of the premier New
Left student activist group of the Sixties, the
Students for a Democratic Society (SDS),
continuing through the Berkeley Free Speech
Movement in 1964 and the massive campus
disruptions of the late Sixties, and culminating
with the Kent State killings in the spring of 1970,
American society and culture went through
convulsions – the aftershocks of which are
still felt today.
Throughout
the ordeal, the
left gradually
gained strength
and expanded
its influence
through the
steady
infiltration of higher education, the media,
American Christianity, and other key areas of
influence in American public life. (In the
Frankfurt School, this strategy of infiltration and
cultural subversion was referred to as “the long
march through the institutions” – a reference to
Mao Zedong’s Long March to eventual victory in
the Chinese Civil War.) Throughout the 1960s,
with the escalation of the Vietnam War, many
college and university graduates enrolled in
master’s programs in hopes
of evading the draft, and some of the most radical
eventually earned Ph.D.’s with the intention of
transforming American society through the
education system. (Of all the Ph.D. degrees
granted by American universities from 1860-1970,
half were granted in the 1960s.)
By the mid-to-late 1970s many of these former
student radicals were moving into positions as
junior faculty and administrators, and by the early
1980s they were firmly entrenched in most
universities and attaining tenure. Gradually,
liberal arts faculties became more radical as NeoMarxists
began replacing older New Deal liberals
who retired, and over time a rigid left-wing
ideology prevailed in many departments. As
Martin Jay has written, “it cannot be doubted that
Critical Theory has achieved... a secure – perhaps
ironically even a canonical – status as a central
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 14
theoretical impulse in contemporary academic
life.”
Likewise, in radio, television and print media,
just as former Sixties activists came to dominate
in higher education, they moved into positions of
influence in the mainstream media. As their
power increased, they grew bolder and more
aggressive. Borrowing a key tactic from Lenin and
the cultural Marxists of an earlier period, liberals
and radical leftists began labeling conservative
ideas “politically incorrect.” The implication was
that only liberal elitists truly understood the
parameters of political orthodoxy, and that any
ideas outside those boundaries were ignorant,
unrealistic, and/or immoral.
Fascist Amerika
A basic premise of Neo-Marxist ideology is
that traditional America is innately Fascist –
hence, the spelling of “Amerika” with a ‘k’ in leftwing
propaganda. According to this theory, there
is a latent Fascism in the American soul as a
result of America’s heritage of capitalism, racism,
sexism, imperialism and Christianity. Several
prominent Frankfurt School scholars put forth this
idea, including Wilhelm Reich in The Mass
Psychology of Fascism (1933) and Eric Fromm in
Studies on Authority and the Family (1936), which
concluded that sado-masochism was the core
characteristic of the authoritarian/Fascist
personality. (Fromm later disavowed this thesis.)
Max Horkheimer also weighed in on the issue in a
1950 essay entitled “The Lessons of Fascism,” in
which he associated the authoritarian personality
with a set of generalized character traits that
included an acceptance of conventional values,
respect for authority, stereotypical thinking, “a
penchant for superstition” (i.e., religion), and
prejudice toward one’s opponents.
The most extensive study of the subject was
Theodor Adorno’s The Authoritarian Personality
(1950), in which he sought to verify statistically a
theory of the prototypical Fascist personality as
linked to a particular set of conventional moral
and cultural values. According to Adorno, these
authoritarian traits, which are reinforced and
nurtured through the traditional patriarchal
family, contribute to certain character traits that
condition many Americans to accept Fascism and
socio/political repression.
The Authoritarian Personality promoted a view of
psycho-politics based on Freud’s dubious theory
of the unconscious. Despite such a scientificallyquestionable
foundation, Adorno argued
passionately and with an air of authority. He was
scathing in his contempt for conservatives and
traditionalists, whom he argued were not merely
wrong-headed but mentally disturbed. According
to Adorno, the only mentally healthy person is the
“genuine liberal” – fiercely independent, tolerant
(except, of course, toward traditionalists), and
committed to egalitarianism and “social justice”
(as defined, of course, by the radical left).
From a marketing standpoint, a major
attraction of the book was Adorno’s construction
of an “F-Scale” (Fascist-Scale) rating system
based on nine personality variables incorporating
several terms that are currently associated with
Political Correctness. According to Adorno, the
Fascist character type strongly identifies with the
following traits:
• Conventionalism. Rigid adherence to
conventional middle-class values.
• Authoritarian submission. A submissive and
uncritical attitude toward authority figures.
• Authoritarian aggression. The inclination to
apply or enforce conventional values on
others.
• Anti-intraception. Opposition to the
subjective, the imaginative, or the intuitive.
• Superstition and stereotypy. The belief in
the supernatural or mystical determinism,
and the disposition to think in rigid
categories (i.e., racial, ethnic and gender
prejudice).
• Power and “toughness.” A preoccupation
with dominance-submission, strong-weak,
leader-follower; identification with power
figures; exaggerated assertion of strength
and toughness.
• Destructiveness and cynicism. Generalized
hostility and the tendency to vilify others.
• Projectivity. “The disposition to believe that
wild and dangerous things go on in the
world” (i.e., a conspiratorial mindset).
• Sex. An exaggerated concern with
conventional sexual morality and a
preoccupation with other people’s sexual
practices. [Source: Martin Jay, p. 243.]
Borrowing from Freud and Fromm, Adorno
contended that the breeding ground for the
“authoritarian syndrome” was the patriarchal
family headed by a “stern and distant” father. In
such scenarios, he argued, children repress their
innate hostility while becoming passive/
aggressive, which produces serious mental
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 15
disorders such as sado-masochism. By contrast,
the families of mentally healthy children were
more matriarchal, less conventional, less statusconscious,
and less demanding. In such families
the parents were loving and affectionate, but the
mother, who was nurturing but also strong and
independent, was clearly dominant.
According to Adorno, this explained why the
Fascist personality lacked empathy and
compassion for others. Originally, he identified
the antithesis of the authoritarian Fascist as the
principled and mentally-healthy “revolutionary,”
but when he finally published his study he referred
to this alternative character type as a “liberal” or a
“democrat” – terms that were considerably less
controversial. The prototypical liberal was an
independent thinker who was committed to
“progressive social change” and who,
coincidentally, held the same values and bore the
same characteristics as Adorno and his
Neo-Marxist colleagues. Adorno had found
himself in his own research, which must have
come as a most pleasant surprise.
[NOTE: Many have pointed out the subjective
and problematical nature of Adorno’s research as
well as his simplistic caricature of conservatives.
For substantive critiques see Paul Gottfried, After
Liberalism: Mass Democracy in the Managerial State
(Princeton University Press, 2001), and the notes
accompanying Martin Jay’s The Dialetical
Imagination. Particularly noteworthy are those
who criticized Adorno’s political bias in the study.
Edward Shils, for example, questioned why
authoritarianism was associated with Fascism
alone and not Communism, and why was the F
Scale not a ‘C Scale’ or a ‘T Scale’ (for
Totalitarian)? Obviously, despite all their rhetoric
about “toleration,” leftists such as Adorno were
every bit as biased and intolerant as the
conservatives whom they despised. See Martin
Jay, pp. 244-48.]
Adorno’s thesis that America is innately
Fascist is transparently self-refuting. The very fact
that radical leftists like him were free to propagate
their views contradicted his argument. If America
is so racist, xenophobic and repressive, why does
it continue to attract hordes of immigrants, and
why do virtually all those who come here (legally)
also choose to stay? The facts tend to speak for
themselves, and in fact there is no country in the
world where citizens in general, and racial and
ethnic minorities in particular, enjoy more civil
liberties, more opportunities, and a higher
standard of living than in the United States.
Rather than support the Neo-Marxist thesis of
Fascist Amerika, the evidence indicates that
Fascism and authoritarianism – such as the
McCarthy witch-hunt of the early 1950s, are
anomalies in American history. As the former
Sixties radicals Peter Collier and David Horowitz
point out in Destructive Generation: Second Thoughts
on the Sixties, the McCarthy phenomenon and the
Red Scare were merely a blip on the radar screen
of American history.
The history of McCarthyism shows how
alien the witch-hunt mentality is to the
American spirit and how superficial its hold
on the American psyche. Appearing in the
extraordinary circumstances of the postwar
period, McCarthyism was brief in its moment
and limited in its consequences. And it was
complete in the way it was purged from the
body politic. The Wisconsin senator’s strut
on the stage ended in a crushing repudiation
by his colleagues. [Peter Colier and David
Horowitz, Destructive Generation: Second
Thoughts on the Sixties, p. 196]
From point of fact, as even the Neo-Marxist
M.I.T. professor, Noam Chomsky, has admitted,
the whole Fascist Amerika line is a fabrication. As
Chomsky concedes, the United States is “the
greatest” and “the freest country in the world.”
I don’t just mean in terms of limits on
state coercion, though that’s true, too, but
also in terms of individual relations. The
United States comes closest to
classlessness in terms of interpersonal
relations than virtually any society. [“Interview
with Noam Chomsky and Bill Bennett,” American
Morning with Paula Zahn. CNN (May 30, 2002).
Tim Adams, “Noam Chomsky: Thorn in America’s
Side.” The Observer (10/30/2003).]
A post-script: One obvious problem with
Critical Theory is that it is entirely an open-ended
strategy with no fixed point or realistic destination
or standard of measurement. At what point does
one find respite in the pursuit of utopian
perfectionism? All human systems are flawed, and
those seeking socio/political salvation in this
world will never find satisfaction. Even the
proponents of Critical Theory admitted that its
truths could not be assessed or critiqued, verified
or falsified, by reference to the present order for
the simple reason that the present order is
hopelessly flawed. This requires a leap of faith
that even Kierkegaard would have found foolishly
presumptuous.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 16
Eric Fromm
At times, even the Frankfurt School itself has
been victimized by its own radical ideology. Early
in 1969 Frankfurt University was temporarily shut
down when student demonstrators called a
general strike and seized control of several
buildings. When students moved in to occupy the
facility of the Frankfurt School, the Institute’s
directors, Ludwig von Friedeburg and Theodor
Adorno, responded like contemptible bourgeois
administrators had done elsewhere in Europe and
America: they called for the police to expel the
barbarians. Then, a couple of months later,
several female protesters burst into a classroom
where Adorno was lecturing and staged a
symbolic protest, baring their breasts and
fulminating about sexist oppression. Adorno was
neither amused nor impressed, but for a brief
moment he was subjected to the kind of incivility,
harassment and street theater (or in this case,
stage theater) that Neo-Marxists have sponsored
and encouraged for decades.
The legacy of the Frankfurt School is a mixed
bag. While conservatives are unanimous in their
condemnation of the Institute and Critical Theory
for undermining traditional American values and
institutions, liberals and leftists are more
ambivalent. On the one hand, the Institute’s
brand of Marxist revisionism abandoned many of
the revered dogmas of Marxist theory, including
the revolutionary potential of the working class,
class struggle as the dynamic engine of history,
and the economic substructure as the basis of
social analysis. Perhaps most significantly, the
Institute, consisting primarily of leisured
intellectuals and tenured academics, severed the
connection between revolutionary theory and
praxis (or action). Yet in the 1950s more than 50
scholars associated with the Institute gained
positions in American colleges and universities,
and their influence helped spark the student
uprisings of the 1960s and the radicalization of
American higher education. And in light of
present political realities, it remains to be seen just
how far-reaching their impact will be.
For Martin Jay, the primary contribution of the
Frankfurt School was its preservation of the
“integrity” of the Marxist ideal at a time when
Stalinism threatened to delegitimize it. Most
Christians and conservatives would consider that
accomplishment alone to be the most damning
indictment of the Frankfurt School.
The Apostles of PC
A Left-wing Rogues’ Gallery
In conclusion, I have provided the following
brief biographical sketches of six of the most
significant and influential theorists in the history
of American cultural Marxism: Eric Fromm,
Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, C. Wright
Mills, Paul Goodman and Noam Chomsky. The
first three were Germans with direct connections
to the Frankfurt School, while the last three were
Americans whose works influenced the New Left
and the counterculture in the 1960s and provided
the philosophical basis for contemporary Political
Correctness.
Eric Fromm
Eric Fromm (1900-80) was a psychologist,
psychoanalyst, and humanistic philosopher who
was raised in an orthodox Jewish family. One of
his grandfathers and two great grandfathers were
rabbis, and an uncle was a Talmudic scholar.
Nonetheless, Fromm rejected orthodox Judaism
in his mid-twenties and became a committed
secularist.
As a student at the
University of Heidelberg,
Fromm studied sociology
under two renowned
scholars, Karl Jaspers and
Alfred Weber (a brother
of Max Weber). He took
his Ph.D. in sociology in
1922 and later trained in
psychoanalysis.
In 1930 Fromm joined
the Frankfurt Institute of
Social Research, and after the Nazi seizure of
power in 1933 he emigrated to America and
taught at Columbia University. In 1943 he cofounded
the Washington School of Psychiatry,
and 3 years later he co-founded the William
Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry,
Psychoanalysis, and Psychology. Fromm also
taught at Bennington College (1941-50), Michigan
State University (1957-61), NYU (1962-74), and
at the University of Mexico in Mexico City.
Fromm’s psychology was a mix of Marxism
and Freudianism. While Marx emphasized
economic determinism, Freud theorized that
human behavior is mostly the product of
biological drives and culture-based repression.
To this, Fromm added a third component: the
innate yearning for freedom – or as Abraham
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 17
Theodor Adorno
Maslow would later term it, “self-actualization.”
In 1941 Fromm published Escape from Freedom,
a seminal work in political psychology in which
he theorized that due to the insecurities of life, we
tend to gravitate toward authoritarian fascism
unless we “master society and subordinate the
economic machine to the purposes of human
happiness.” Escape from Freedom was a favorite
among left-wing ideologues and Existentialists
alike, and it was often required reading at colleges
and universities in the 1960s.
By the time Fromm published Escape from
Freedom, he had parted company with his
Frankfurt School colleagues over philosophical
differences. Thereafter, he devoted himself
exclusively to his clinical work and his subsequent
writings. He followed Escape from Freedom with
Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of
Ethics (1947) and The Art of Loving (1956), which
are essentially Existentialist in nature. No longer a
doctrinaire Marxist, he had come to believe that
individual self-fulfillment is the greatest good. He
defined a “true revolutionary” as an individualist
who has “emancipated himself” from loyalty to
his familial heritage, his nation-state, his race, his
party and his religion.
From Fromm’s perspective, classical Marxist
theory was psychologically naive, and he believed
psychoanalysis could provide the missing link
between a society’s socio/economic substructure
and its ideological superstructure. Nonetheless, he
always maintained that the greatest influence on
his thinking was Marx, not Freud, whom he
regarded as too bourgeois and patriarchal. When
Fromm wrote his autobiography in 1962 he
declared emphatically that “Marx is a figure of
world historical significance with whom Freud
cannot even be compared.” He also confirmed
that “I have always upheld the... point that man’s
capacity for freedom, for love, etc. depends almost
entirely on [his] socio-economic conditions.”
In The Sane Society (1955) Fromm called for a
“humanistic communitarian socialism.” He
spurned Western capitalism and Soviet
communism, both of which he considered to be
bureaucratic, dehumanizing, and alienating, and
argued that the “sane society” would be one in
which human freedom and the communal good
were the ultimate goals.
After severing his connections to the Institute
of Social Research, Fromm’s subsequent work
focused less on political and psycho-sexual issues
and more on the interpersonal components of
neurosis. He also emphasized the integration of
ethics and psychology, and in later years even
developed a fascination with Zen Buddhism.
Although no longer a Neo-Marxist
theoretician, Fromm didn’t totally divorce himself
from politics. In the mid-1950s he joined the
American Socialist Party, and he was a staunch
supporter of SANE, the disarmament group
aligned with the international peace movement.
In 1968 he supported Eugene McCarthy for
president, but gradually lost interest in politics
after the 1968 election.
Theodor Adorno
Theodor Adorno (1903-69) was one of the 20th
century’s premier Neo-Marxist social
philosophers. He grew up in a cultured family in
which his mother, a Catholic, was a gifted
musician, and his father,
a Protestant convert from
Judaism, was a wealthy
wine merchant.
Adorno studied both
music composition and
philosophy at the
University of Frankfurt,
writing his dissertation
on Kierkegaardian
aesthetics under the
direction of the Christian
socialist and liberal
theologian Paul Tillich.
In 1933 the Nazi government expelled him from
the university due to his non-Aryan ancestry and
Marxist ideology. The following year he sought
refuge in England and then came to America in
1937, where he worked closely with Max
Horkheimer at the Institute of Social Research at
Columbia University and as the head of the music
study division of the Office of Radio Research at
Princeton University.
In 1941 Adorno became co-director of the
Research Project on Social Discrimination at the
University of California at Berkeley, and after the
war he returned to Germany and taught at the
University of Frankfurt from 1949-69.
Adorno was a doctrinaire Neo-Marxist who
attributed the Holocaust to the influence of
Enlightenment rationalism, which he considered
to be the philosophical basis for modern
totalitarianism. Yet conversely, he was also a
gifted composer and a romantic at heart who
considered the arts to the be the key to human
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 18
Herbert Marcuse
liberation. But ultimately, ideology prevailed over
aesthetics, and he explained his disenchantment
with the arts with the comment, “To still write a
poem after Auschwitz is barbaric.”
As mentioned earlier, Adorno’s book, The
Authoritarian Personality (1950), was a seminal and
influential work in Neo-Marxist psycho-politics.
His “F-Scale” and strategy of associating
conventional middle-class values with fascism and
mental illness was as brilliant as it was dishonest.
In many respects it defined the rules of
engagement in the culture war, and succeeded in
putting conservatives (and most Christians)
clearly on the defensive.
Anticipating the rise of postmodernism,
Adorno put forth the theory that language and
dominant thought-forms are tools of political
power that the ruling class uses to control social
orthodoxy. As part of its control strategy, the
ruling class uses commercial popular culture to
pacify the masses, reinforce the dominant values,
and control “deviants” – i.e., social and political
dissidents. According to Adorno, all of this is
driven by the insatiable demands of a capitalist
economy that exploits people’s greed for more
material goods. That aside, his was not the radical
postmodernism of later theorists such as JeanFrancois
Lyotard and Jacques Derrida.
Throughout his career he remained a utopian
idealist who envisioned a political system and a
culture in keeping with his concept of social
justice.
As a musicologist, Adorno understood the
cultural and propaganda value of the arts –
particularly, music and movies. As mentioned
earlier, he was a scathing critic of commercial
popular culture which regards art as little more
than a marketable commodity, and he questioned
whether true art could survive in a capitalistic
world in which everything is driven by the profit
motive. Seeing art as a primary front in the
culture war, he believed that the only legitimate
art and music were those that challenged the
commercially-defined sensibilities of the middle
class.
Herbert Marcuse
Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979) was a
philosopher, social theorist, and political activist.
In terms of promoting cultural Marxism, Marcuse
was the key figure as he linked the Neo-Marxism
of the Frankfurt School with the New Left
movement of the 1960s. His influence was such
that the media dubbed him “the father of the New
Left.”
Marcuse, like most
of the early Frankfurt
School scholars, was
born into an affluent
family of assimilated
Jews. After serving in
the German army in
World War I he was
briefly involved in
politics with the Social
Democratic Party, but
he quit in protest when
the party renounced
revolutionary politics
and began cooperating
with the moderate
Weimar government. Marcuse studied philosophy
at the universities of Berlin and Freiburg, and
received a Ph.D. in literature in 1923. He later
studied under Martin Heidegger, and although the
two differed politically, Marcuse always
acknowledged Heidegger as the greatest thinker
and teacher he ever encountered. In 1933 he
joined the faculty of the Frankfurt School’s
Institute of Social Research, and the following
year he fled Nazi Germany and worked along
with Horkheimer and others at the Institute of
Social Research at Columbia University.
During the Second World War Marcuse
worked for the Office of Secret Services (OSS), the
forerunner of the CIA, and he later served in the
State Department as the head of the Central
European Office for Intelligence Research in the
immediate post-war period. In 1950 he returned to
academia as a lecturer in sociology at Columbia
University and a senior fellow at the Russian
Institute, and four years later he joined the faculty
of Brandeis University. Brandeis was a hotbed of
left-wing politics, and Marcuse became a popular
and influential professor. But he was also a
lightning rod for controversy, and when Brandeis
refused to renew his contract in 1962 he accepted
a position at the University of California at La
Jolla.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 19
In 1955 Marcuse published his first major
academic work, Eros and Civilization: A
Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. The book was a
bold attempt to synthesize Marxism and
Freudianism, and it became the essential
connection between the cultural Marxism of the
Frankfurt School and the New Left of the 1960s.
Eros and Civilization was a wholesale repudiation
of Western civilization and a clarion call for a
cultural revolution, and it provided a pseudointellectual
basis for the sexual revolution of the
1960s. The book quickly became a favorite among
free-thinkers, Beatniks and bohemian hedonists,
and a few years later it inspired a generation of
young counterculture radicals in the Sixties.
Eros and Civilization is anything but
a practical guide for revolution, but it
set forth a libertarian and hedonistic social
philosophy that held great appeal to affluent Baby
Boomers in post-war America. Marcuse called for
a democratic socialist society based on the
principles of “non-alienating labor,” freedom, and
the pursuit of happiness – including sexual
liberation. As such, he rejected a central tenet of
Freud’s theory of social psychology. According to
Freud, civilized society operates according to the
“performance principle,” and therefore it must
necessarily be repressive by forcing its people to
spend most of their time and energy working
rather than gratifying their desires. Freud believed
that if human beings were freed from the
constraints of labor and traditional social and
moral taboos, civilization itself would collapse.
In contrast, Marcuse called for the
actualization of a “reality beyond the performance
principle,” and asserted that mankind could find
fulfillment “not through dominion and
exploitation [i.e., the tyranny of labor and the
“performance principle”] but through the release
of inherent libidinal forces.” His socialist utopia
would operate according to “the erotic
reconciliation (or union) of man and nature in the
aesthetic attitude, where order is beauty and work
is play.”
[NOTE: I’m reminded of a dialogue that took
place within a radical group in the late 1960s. The
leader had just proclaimed that henceforth the
group would abolish all social conventions,
including work. From now on, all they would do
is eat, sleep, have sex, and protest the war. That
sounded perfectly groovy until one of the
neophyte radicals thought to ask, “But who’ll
make the signs?”]
Marcuse called for sexual liberation,
“polymorphous perversity” and the abolition of
the monogamous and “patriarchal” family, and at
times he seemed perfectly enraptured by his own
psycho-sexual fantasies:
No longer used as a full-time instrument
of labor, the body would be resexualized,
(which) would first manifest itself in a
reactivation of all erotogenic zones and,
consequently, in a resurgence of pre-genital
polymorphous sexuality and in a decline of
genital supremacy. The body in its entirety
would become an object of cathexis, a thing
to be enjoyed – an instrument of pleasure.
This change in the value and scope of
libidinal relations would lead to a
disintegration of the institutions in which the
private interpersonal relations have been
reorganized, particularly the monogamic
and patriarchal family.
A “resexualized” body in which “all erotogenic
zones” would be “reactivated” along with a
“resurgence of pre-genital polymorphous
sexuality” and “a decline of genital supremacy,”
culminating in the “disintegration” of all cultural
institutions? Marcuse apparently enjoyed himself
immensely, but it’s hard to take all of this
seriously. Perhaps that is why many Sixties’
radicals preferred reading Eros and Civilization
while stoned. Yet the strangest part was that he
dedicated the book to Sophie Marcuse, his wife of
50 years.
Predictably, Eros and Civilization elicited strong
reactions even among those on the left side of the
culture war. Eric Fromm called the book
“nihilistic,” accused Marcuse of misrepresenting
Freud, and pointed out that his former colleague
lacked any practical experience with
psychoanalysis. More seriously, he charged that
the book promoted irresponsible hedonism. Like
Freud, Fromm was convinced that the tension
between hedonism and civilization was necessary
to curb the worst excesses of human behavior. It
was absurd, he argued, to think that widespread
“polymorphous perversity” was compatible with a
well-ordered society and culture. Certain practices
that Marcuse tolerated, such as sadism and
coprophilia, should never be socially sanctioned.
Furthermore, the loss of restraint and the
obsession with immediate gratification that
Marcuse advocated would break down all selfdiscipline
and render humanity easily
manipulated, as in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New
World.
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 20
Yet despite its radical and irresponsible
hedonism, Eros and Civilization was one of the
landmark books of the 20th century in terms of
igniting the sexual/cultural revolution of the
1960s. As William Lind observes...
Marcuse understood what most of the
rest of his Frankfurt School colleagues did
not; that the way to destroy Western
civilization... was not through abstruse
theory, but through sex, drugs and rock ‘n’
roll. Marcuse wrote other works for the new
generation that spawned the New Left...
but Eros and Civilization was the key work,
the one that put the match to the tender.
[William S. Lind, “Further Readings in the
Frankfurt School,” in Political Correctness: A
Short History of an Ideology.
Www.freecongress.org.]
In 1958 Marcuse published Soviet Marxism,
one of the first substantive critiques of Soviet
Communism by a left-wing intellectual. Using a
line of argument that would later become
standard fare in Neo-Marxist circles, Marcuse
charged that Stalin’s regime had perverted
orthodox Marxism and betrayed Lenin’s
revolution by the imposition of a totalitarian and
bureaucratic state. Like many Neo-Marxist
Western intellectuals, Marcuse departed from
rigid Marxist orthodoxy whenever it suited his
purposes, so he rejected the glorification of the
state that relegated the individual to
insignificance.
In his next major work, One -Dimensional Man
(1964), Marcuse criticized both capitalism and
Soviet-style communism. In place of classical
Marxism, he advocated a form of “libertarian
socialism” that glorified individualism and
humanistic values. Nonetheless, the final aim was
a radical cultural revolution that would transform
man’s basic existence. According to Marcuse,
man actualizes his potential in history through
revolution.
In his critique of capitalism, Marcuse argued
that, whereas early capitalist societies had used
human beings as units of production, advanced
capitalist societies thrive on over-production and
over-consumption. He contended that modern
capitalism is an unholy alliance and a tangled web
of exploitation involving capital investments,
industrial management, technology, mass
production, advertising, and mass consumption.
In such a mutually-exploitative matrix, human
beings become mindless consumers of
unnecessary products – consumption addicts and
pawns of modern advertising. As a result, the
working classes – those who ought to have a
revolutionary consciousness – are co-opted by the
seduction of mass consumption.
Marcuse argued that the end result is that
human freedom is sacrificed as people live to
work more so they can buy and consume more.
He considered production and consumption to be
an integral part of a “conformist society” that
suppresses individualism, but his primary concern
seemed to be that such mundane matters
interfered with more important things in life such
as the perfection of “polymorphous perversity.”
According to Marcuse, the solution to escaping
the robotic routine of modern society comes
through “the Great Refusal” – an intentional
rejection of capitalism, technology, and the cult of
consumption. Rather than being a mindless slave
addicted to production and consumption,
Marcuse called for liberation... through erotic
sexuality. As a leading advocate of sexual politics,
he contended that sexual liberation was an
essential aspect in the social and political
transition from capitalism to socialism.
However, since the traditional proletariat class
is innately conservative and religious, and because
it has been co-opted by consumerism, the
vanguard for any cultural revolution must come
from disenfranchised minorities, social rebels, the
liberal elite, and a radicalized intelligentsia.
Unlike most academicians who spurned
popular culture, Marcuse recognized its potential
impact on society and understood that a political
revolution is inextricably linked to a cultural
revolution. His theories influenced subsequent
generations of scholars who specialized in popular
culture as well as radical activists such as Abbie
Hoffman, co-founder of the Youth International
Party (YIPPIEs), and Angela Davis, a black
Communist whom Marcuse called “my best
student.” [NOTE: Davis also studied in Frankfurt
under Theodor Adorno.]
Marcuse’s 1965 essay on “Repressive
Tolerance” essentially defined what is now
considered Political Correctness. He declared that
capitalist democracies are innately totalitarian,
and therefore a selective or “discriminatory form”
of tolerance should be applied to ensure that the
opinions of marginalized minorities are
recognized. It is perfectly proper, he contended, to
silence “repressive” intolerance (i.e., conservative
opinions) in order to protect the rights of
minorities. Freedom of speech and freedom of
expression should be regulated in order to
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 21
C. Wright Mills
suppress intolerant conservative views and
behavior, and to promote a more fair and
equitable society. In Marcuse’s words, “Liberating
tolerance would mean intolerance against
movements from the Right, and toleration of
movements from the Left.” In the essay he
criticized mainstream liberals for failing to
confront conservative values and other “evils,” a
theme that New Left singer/songwriter Phil Ochs
incorporated into in his scathing satire of liberal
hypocrisy in “Love Me, I’m a Liberal.”
In 1969 Marcuse wrote An Essay on Liberation
in which he called for a systematic approach to
cultural subversion, including a linguistic
revolution to alter (and confuse) the meaning of
key words and terms. Sensing that the times were
indeed a-changin’, he celebrated all the liberation
movements of the Sixties from Civil Rights to the
counterculture, student rebellions, women’s
liberation, gay liberation, and even the Vietcong.
Skillfully exploiting racial politics, he demonized
white males as the source of America’s problems,
and called on blacks to rise up and become the
vanguard in a comprehensive social and political
revolution. Emphasizing the theme that Charles
Reich would incorporate into The Greening of
America, Marcuse called for a radically new
approach to the concept of revolution:
One can rightfully speak of a cultural
revolution, since the protest is directed
toward the whole cultural establishment,
including the morality of existing society....
There is one thing we can say with
complete assurance: the traditional idea of
revolution and the traditional strategy of
revolution has ended. These ideas are oldfashioned.
[Quoted by Raymond V. Raehn in
“The Historical Roots of ‘Political Correctness,”
in William S. Lind, Political Correctness: A Short
History of an Ideology. www.freecongress.org.]
Unlike Adorno, Marcuse didn’t buy into the
emerging postmodern consciousness in the 1970s.
As a hard-headed rationalist, he put forth a
revised version of the classical Marxist
metanarrative and promoted a kind of cultural
Marxism that was more comprehensive than
merely the economic component.
C. Wright Mills
C. Wright Mills (1916-62) was an American
sociologist who taught at Columbia University
from 1946 until his death in 1962. Like Marcuse
and Paul Goodman (see below), Mills was more
of a libertarian socialist than a doctrinaire
Marxist, but his contributions to New Left
thought and Political Correctness were
nonetheless considerable.
Mills shared the
same jaundiced view
of traditionalists and
conservatives as
Adorno and
Marcuse, but he
aimed most of his
criticism at the
American liberal
elite. In the process
he articulated many
of the themes that
later characterized
the ideology of the
New Left –
specifically, that an
undemocratic “power elite” dominated American
society, and that mainstream liberalism had lost
its social consciousness and now represented the
status quo. As an ardent opponent of post-war
U.S. foreign policy and the Cold War, he charged
that a small group of Washington politicians,
Pentagon officials and corporate barons controlled
the government. (Interestingly, President
Eisenhower would later warn of the dangers of an
unchecked “military/industrial complex that was
unresponsive to the interests of the American
people.) To show his disdain for the governing
elite, Mills traveled to Cuba in the early 1960s and
wrote a book praising Fidel Castro’s “social
experiments.”
Mills began his critique of American society in
1948 with The New Men of Power: America’s Labor
Leaders. Like most leftist intellectuals who bought
into Marxist conflict theory, Mills was troubled by
the fact that American labor leaders had lost their
radical edge and were willing to compromise with
the capitalist business establishment for the sake
of better pay, employment benefits and job
security. To Mills, this was tantamount to selling
out, and he considered it a tragic betrayal of the
union ideal. In his mind, they had become part of
the Establishment, and were therefore part of the
problem in terms of moving American society
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 22
Paul Goodman
farther toward socialism. In a follow-up book,
White Collar: The American Middle Classes (1951),
he applied the same analysis and critique to
mainstream white collar employees and the
corporate managerial class.
The Power Elite (1956) was Mills’ most
influential work, and it established his reputation
as a major social critic. Although based on some
dubious premises, it resonated with many
Americans in a time when Cold War tensions
were steadily escalating. It also provided fodder
for disaffected leftists who believed American
society was innately fascistic and oppressive.
Mills refused to call himself a Marxist, and if
pressed, he probably would have preferred to
describe himself as an independent libertarian
socialist. Nonetheless, his view of American
society and culture was certainly compatible with
the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School, and
his basic philosophy incorporated traditional
Marxist dialectical themes regarding social and
political power relationships, alienation and
manipulation. Like Politically Correct leftists
today, his orientation was to politicize everything
in life, as he wrote in The Sociological Imagination
(1959): “It is the political task of the social
scientist – as of any liberal educator – continually
to translate personal troubles into public issues....”
Paul Goodman
Like Marcuse and Mills, Paul Goodman (1911-
72) provided intellectual inspiration for the New
Left, primarily in his enormously popular and
influential book, Growing Up Absurd: Problems of
Youth in the Organized System (1960). Goodman
was a sociologist and a co-founder of Gestalt
Therapy, but he is remembered primarily as an
influential New Left theoretician and activist.
Goodman attended Hebrew schools as a
youth, graduated from
the City College of New
York (CCNY) in 1932,
and then pursued a
doctorate degree in
sociology at the
University of Chicago.
He was a regular
contributor for several
years to Dwight
Macdonald’s left-wing
journal, Politics,
although he freely
admitted that he was
more of an anarchist than a socialist.
Goodman was a romantic and an idealist at
heart. In an interview of Studs Terkel, he
explained that his greatest challenge in life was
“to grow up as a human being into a culture
without losing nature.” As a bisexual, he was
involved in the gay liberation movement of the
late Sixties and early Seventies – his “out of the
closet” announcement coming in an essay
entitled, “Being Queer.” He argued that
homosexual relationships between males were
natural and healthy, and commented that “what is
really obscene is the way our society makes us feel
shameful and like criminals for doing human
things that we really need.”
As an anarchist, Goodman argued that even
liberal institutions were repressive forces in
American society. As an example, he contended
that schools stifle children’s healthy natural
instincts and subtly indoctrinate them with the
values of a materialistic and unhealthy society. He
charged that order, conventionality and
predictability took precedence over spontaneity
and creativity, memorization of trivial facts
trumped critical thinking, and the interests of
teachers and administrators took priority over the
needs of students. Similarly, he argued, all of
American society was governed by the same
perverse values. Large bureaucratic institutions –
both governmental and private – were run by
technocratic “experts” whose agendas ran counter
to the needs and interests of their employees and
the public in general. Centralized institutions were
inefficient, wasteful and predatory, and constantly
expanded their power at the expense of individual
liberty and the general welfare.
Goodman’s solution to the problems of
bureaucratization and centralization resonated
not only with the New Left but the Sixties
counter-culture as well. In opposition to the
conventional Establishment and the status quo, he
proposed intentional decentralization and a return
to small communities – a theme that Joni Mitchell
later expressed in her popular song,
“Woodstock.”
We are stardust, we are golden
We are caught in the Devil’s bargain
And we got to get ourselves
Back to the Garden.
[Joni Mitchell, “Woodstock.” Copyright 1969,
Siquomb Music.]
A History of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness: Part 2 23
Noam Chomsky
Goodman had little hope that the older
generations would rebel against the established
order, but he was optimistic that young people
could change the culture through radical reforms
or by starting their own counter-cultural
institutions. Throughout most of the Sixties he
supported the Students for a Democratic Society
(SDS) and the New Left agenda in general, but
eventually he disengaged from the movement as it
became increasingly erratic, strident and violent.
After a campus appearance in 1967 in which he
was heckled by a group of radical students, he
realized that an entirely new worldview was being
forged – but it was anything but the dawning of
the Age of Aquarius:
Suddenly I realized that [these students]
did not believe there was a nature of things.
[To them] there was no knowledge but only
the sociology of knowledge. They had
learned so well that physical and sociological
research is subsidized and conducted for the
benefit of the ruling class that they were
doubtful that there was such a thing as
simple truth.... I had imagined that the
worldwide student protest had to do with
changing political and moral institutions, and
I was sympathetic to this. But I now saw that
we had to do with a religious crisis. Not only
all institutions but all learning had been
corrupted by the Whore of Babylon, and
there was no longer any salvation to be got
from Works.
What Goodman was experiencing, of course,
was the dawning of the age of postmodernism –
a worldview devoid of morality that he and others
such as Marcuse and Mills had inadvertently
birthed through their systematic deconstruction of
Western culture and values. Revolutions often
end up devouring their own, and now it was
Goodman who was being dispatched to the
guillotine by the very radicals he had inspired just
a few years earlier.
Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky (1928- ) has been the foremost
propagator of Frankfurt School-style Neo
Marxism for the past 50 years. Chomsky is a
philosopher and a political activist, and as a
professor at M.I.T. he taught in the Department of
Linguistics and Philosophy from 1955 to the
present. Chomsky was born and raised in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and his father was a
Hebrew scholar as well as a member of the radical
Marxist labor union, the I.W.W.
A self-described anarchist and “libertarian
socialist” (a term he borrowed from Marcuse’s
One Dimensional Man), Chomsky has also been an
outspoken critic fo U.S. foreign policy since the
1960s. He condemned the American involvement
in Vietnam and wrote that the U.S. should have
been prosecuted for war crimes. Other than the
United States, his
favorite target has been
Israel. Although an
ethnic Jew, he has been
a harsh critic of Israel
and an ardent supporter
of radical Palestinian
groups such as the PLO.
Following Nine-Eleven,
he wrote that “the U.S.
itself is a leading
terrorist state.” In his
book, The End of Faith,
the atheist apologist Sam
Harris chides Chomsky for drawing absurd
“moral equivalencies” between the U.S. and Iraq,
or between Osama ben Laden and Saddam
Hussein and George Bush and Tony Blair.
Paradoxically, in recent years Chomsky has
conceded that the United States is “the greatest”
and “the freest country in the world.” In a 2002
interview on CNN with Paul Zahn, Chomsky
declared...
I don’t just mean in terms of limits on
state coercion, though that’s true, too, but
also in terms of individual relations. The
United States comes closest to
classlessness in terms of interpersonal
relations than virtually any society.
[“Interview with Noam Chomsky and Bill
Bennett,” American Morning with Paula Zahn.
CNN (May 30, 2002). Tim Adams, “Noam
Chomsky: Thorn in America’s Side.” The
Observer (10/30/2003).]
24
Bibliography
Origins of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness
Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom (Farrar & Rinehart, 1941).
Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality (Harper, 1950).
Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization (Beacon Press, 1955).
Paul Goodman, Growing Up Absurd: Problems of Youth in the Organized System (Random
House, 1960).
C. Wright Mills, Xxxxxx (19- -).
Herbert Marcuse, One Dimensional Man (Routeledge and Kegan Paul, 1964).
Herbert Marcuse, “Repressive Tolerance” (1965).
Herbert Marcuse, An Essay on Liberation (Beacon, 1969).
Theodore Roszak, The Making of a Counter Culture (Anchor Books/Doubleday & Company,
1968).
Charles A. Reich, The Greening of America (Bantam Books, 1970).
Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute for
Social Research, 1932-1950 (University of California Press, 1973, 1996).
Susan Buck-Morss, The Origin of Negative Dialectics: Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin and
the Frankfurt Institute (Free Press, 1977).
David Held, Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas (University of California
Press, 1980).
Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories and Political Significance (MIT
Press, 1995).
Angela Davis, An Autobiography of Angela Davis (Random House, 1974).
Lorenz Jager, Adorno: A Political Biography (Yale University Press, 2004).
Contemporary Political Correctness
Dinesh D’Souza, Illiberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus (The Free Press,
1991).
James Davison Hunter, Culture Wars: The Struggle To Define America (Basic Books, 1991).
Diane Ravitch, The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn
(Knopf, 1994).
Richard Bernstein, Dictatorship of Virtue: Multiculturalism and the Battle for America’s Future
(Knopf, 1995).
Daniel A. Farber and Suzanna Sherry, Beyond All Reason: The Radical Assault on Truth in
American Law (Oxford, 1997).
Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate, The Shadow University: The Betrayal of Liberty
on America’s Campuses (HarperCollins, 1998).
John Leo, Incorrect Thoughts: Notes on Our Wayward Culture (Transaction, 2000).
William S. Lind, “The Origins of Political Correctness.” Accuracy in Academia (2000).
Patrick J. Buchanan, The Death of the West (St. Martin’s Press, 2002).
David E. Bernstein, “You Can’t Say That! The Growing Threat to Civil Liberties from Anti-
discrimination Laws.” Cato Institute (2003).
25
William McGowan, Coloring the News: How Political Correctness Has Corrupted American
Journalism (Encounter Books, 2003).
Miriam Grossman, Unprotected (Sentinel, 2007).
Satirical Critiques
Saul Jerushalmy and Rens Zbignieuw X, Politically Correct Manifesto (1992).
Henry Beard and Christopher Cerf, The Official Politically Correct Dictionary and Handbook
(1992).
James Finn Garner, Politically Correct Bedtime Stories (1994).
A Defense of Political Correctness
Jung Min Choi and John W. Murphy, The Politics and Philosophy of Political Correctness
(Praeger, 1992).
Jeffrey Williams (ed.), PC Wars: Politics and Correctness in the Academy (Taylor & Francis,
1994).
John Wilson, The Myth of Political Correctness: The Conservative Attack on Higher Education
WMR Israeli co-option of Europe's far-right political parties

August 1-3, 2011 -- Israeli co-option of Europe's far-right political parties

Norwegian terrorist killer Anders Behring Breivik has been regaling Norwegian law enforcement investigators with greater plans for conducting terrorist attacks and even a coup d'etat against the Norwegian government. However, when it comes to like-minded cells operating in Europe and elsewhere, Behring has been closed-mouth. Breivik resistance to spilling the beans on colleagues in countries he has previously visited -- from Belarus and Malta and the United States to Mexico -- coincides with a number of dubious statements from European law enforcement officials that insist that Breivik is a crazed "lone wolf."

Breivik's terrorist connections to groups like the English Defense League (EDL) in Britain and Knights Templar organizations in Malta and Mexico suggest that Breivik is one cog in a larger operation that has re-adopted the past terrorist tactics of CIA "stay-behind" fascist cells in Europe, generically known as "Gladio" networks, that, during the 1970s and 80s, carried out terrorist attacks that were blamed on leftist groups.

Although various media outlets, known to bend and succumb to the pressure applied by Israel and its global sympathizers, tried to downplay the connections between Breivik and his allies in Zionist circles in Israel and Europe, no less than the Jerusalem Post, an echo chamber for Zionist and neo-conservative interests, reported that Breivik was "motivated by Zionism" in carrying out his deadly attack in Norway. 

In fact, Breivik had a keen interest in one such stay-behind network in Turkey, a network that transformed itself into the Israeli Mossad-linked Ergenekon network, which may still be active against the Justice and Development (AK) Party of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The recent en masse resignation of Turkey's top military commanders and the past involvement of Ergenekon in military coups, attempted coups, and false flag terrorist attacks suggest that the events in Oslo and Ankara may be linked to a wider destabilization effort conducted by Brievik and his allied neo-Nazi colleagues, all of whom have been linked to Israeli far-right wing groups and extreme Zionist factions inside the Israeli government.

Law enforcement officials across Europe have been downplaying Breivik international connections, preferring to describe him as a "lone wolf." However, the connections of Israeli intelligence, security "consultants," and security system manufacturers to European law enforcement agencies is very apparent and many law enforcement agencies would have no interest in pursuing Breivik international network lest Israel's own connections to it are also revealed. In fact, former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas, in a new book, has charged that Israel controls the French intelligence agencies.

In 2007, Israeli police arrested a number of Jewish neo-Nazis in Israel, most of whom were emigrants from the former Soviet Union. The neo-Nazis had launched attacks on non-whites, gays, and religious Jews.

In recent years, European far-right political parties have made common cause with such right-wing Israeli parties as Likud led by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Yisrael Beiteinu led by the Jewish racist Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman. The German magazine Spiegel has highlighted the growing relationship between heretofore anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi far-right European political parties and Israel's right-wing parties. Spiegel's report focused on particularly close ties between Israelis and the Freedom Party of Austria, the National Front of France, the Flemish Vlaams Belang, the National Democratic Party of Germany, the German Freedom Party, True Finns Party of Finland, and te Northern League of Italy.

The English Defense League (EDL), which had links to Breivik and the Norwegian Defense League, also has a Jewish Division, both of which have found warm welcomes in Israel. The EDL has also made common cause with Dutch politician Geert Wilders's anti-Islamic Freedom Party and hosted Wilders at a public rally in London last year. Wilders spent his teenage years on a kibbutz in Israel. Breivik also maintained links with the far-right Irish Defense League.

Breivik has been linked to Malta-based Paul Ray, aka "Lionheart" and Paul Sonato, a leader of the resurgent Knights Templar (Pauperes Commilitones Christi Templique Solomonici (PCCTS)) group of ultra-right and anti-Muslim extremists. Ray fled Britain in 2008 after an arrest warrant was issued for his hate-filled Internet postings. According to the Daily Telegraph, Ray is associated with a German ex-neo-Nazi named Nick Greger, aka "Nazi Nick" and "Mad Nick," who has operated out of Liberia with a group of neo-Nazis called "Order 777," comprised of ex-Serbian security service SF Red Beret commandos, Ulster Freedom Fighters and Ulster Defense Association from Northern Ireland, Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging fascists from South Africa, and mercenary veterans from civil wars in Congo and Liberia.

Ray is also linked to the EDL, particularly its chief finance officer Alan Lake who is reported to have met Breivik in 2002 in London. INTERPOL has requested the Maltese police to investigate Ray's ties to Breivik. The presence of a far-right and racist network in Malta is noteworthy. Malta has served as an important base of operations for the Libyan National Transition Council, headquartered in Benghazi, but which has been responsible for carrying out systematic murders of black Libyans and black African guest workers. In fact, there is a strong racist element among many of the white Arab members of the National Transition Council.

The attitudes of some members of the far-right network seems to be at odds with the blanket racism associated with many of the component political parties. The goals of the global fascist network appear connected more to ousting socialist and left-wing governments and fighting Muslims with non-white bed fellows than in practicing across-the-board racism. For example. Breivik was full of praise for India's right-wing Hindu nationalists, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), as well as Chinese Buddhists who oppose Chinese Muslims in Xinjiang in western China.

The resurgent Knights Templar has been connected by CNN to a similar organization in Mexico, where Breivik reportedly visited. The Knights Templar in Mexico was referred to as a "cartel" by CNN. The CNN report also cited the Mexican Knights Templar to the violent terrorist-religious cult called "La Familia," which has been responsible for a series of gruesome mass murders, including beheading of its victims. The main branch of La Familia is active in the state of Michoacan, where it id known as La Familia Michoacana.

The La Familia drug cartel has been fighting a war against the Los Zetas cartel, which has received weapons courtesy of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) as part of "Operation Fast and Furious." An all-out war has broken out in Mexico between rival drug cartels and the Knights Templar link to La Familia suggests that right-wing interests in Europe and the United States are playing both sides in the Mexican conflict. The Drug Enforcement Administration and FBI were reportedly knowledgeable about Fast and Furious and the U.S. government gun-running to Mexico.

The ATF has a sordid history of employing a number of agents who are racists in the same mold as Breivik colleagues in Europe. In the 1980s and 90s, ATF agents, as well as Justice and Treasury Department officials, were discovered to be attending racist "Good O' Boy Roundups in eastern Tennessee. The outings were notorious for signs that read "Nigger check point" and T-shirts that bore an image of Martin Luther King, Jr. in gun sight cross hairs. In 1995, then-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin vowed to investigate the ATF agents but initial interest in the scandal receded after several media outlets brought light to the annual racist event.

It was not merely the far-right violent political movements that were linked to Breivik political goals but members of some "main stream" xenophobic right-wing political parties in Europe associated themselves with Breivik's extremist ideology. For example, Italian Member of the European Parliament Mario Borghezio of the Northern League, part of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's governing coalition, voiced support for Breivik "ideas." Francesco Speroni, the leader of the Northern League, defended Borghezio's remarks. French National Front politician Jacques Coutela compared Brievik to the French seventh century leader Charles Martel who defeated the invading Moors in battle. Erik Hellsborn, a member of the Sweden Democrats, a far-right anti-immigration party represented in the Swedish Parliament, also said he understood why Breivik resorted to taking such actions in opposition to "multiculturalism."

Breivik has told Norwegian police that he planned to blow up the Royal Palace, the Norwegian Parliament, and the headquarters of the Norwegian Labor Party. Ergenekon's Operation Sledgehammer in 2006 saw "false flag" terrorist attacks carried out in Istanbul. The headquarters of the newspaper Cumhuriyet in Istanbul was bombed and a gunman opened fire in the State Council in Ankara, killing one judge and wounding four others. The similarities between the Ergenekon attacks in Turkey and Breivik's actual and planned attacks in Norway are striking. Breivik's "Phase 3" of his manifesto called for pan-European coups d'etat and the expulsion of Muslims and execution of European "traitors."

Far from being a "lone wolf," Breivik's world travels indicate that he was part of a wdie-reaching fascist network. Breivik has visited Sweden, Denmark, United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, Belarus, France, Austria, Hungary, Austria, Croatia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Spain, Cyprus, Malta, Switzerland, the United States, Turkey, Mexico, China, Nigeria, Cote d'Ivoire, and Liberia. Breivik allegedly received paramilitary training in Belarus, where local security officials referred to him by the code name "Viking," and made contact with far-right political parties in Croatia. He also allegedly received plastic surgery in the United States to make himself appear more "Aryan" looking.

The neo-fascist network that threatens European stability (Most of the parties have scrapped previous anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial planks) :

 
it therefore follows that David Lloyd George's famous quotation that the British Empire had made a deal with Zionist Jews to bring the United States into the war on Britain's side may have a basis in fact. No one at the time of the Paris Peace Conference doubted that Jewish power was real. Indeed, it was phenomenal. All the delegates could see the murderous Jewish power then raging in Bolshevik Russia. The ethnic identity of the commissars was known to all. The same Jewish terror raged in Poland, Germany and Hungary even as the Peace Conference was sitting. Bela Kun, Kurt Eisner and Rosa Luxemburg were front page news of the time. The great League of Nations which was to establish justice on earth failed to destroy the Jewish terror in Russia. The embryonic communist state in Russia survived, just like the embryonic Zionist State. A half-hearted Allied Expeditionary Force was sent to Siberia but it proved just as ineffectual as later United Nations resolutions on Palestine. The great Jewish scheme launched at Paris in 1919 had succeeded. The British, French and Germans lay exhausted, drained of their blood by the war. The Jewish schemes of world government, communism and Zionism camouflaged as a peace treaty sat on the ruins of Europe, waiting only for the inevitable second war to advance their scheme.
 
 

Trump Blacklist for signing 'Never Trump' letters

The letters are below
  • Adelman, Ken
  • Adesnik, David
  • Auslin, Michael
  • Baker, Mike
  • Barton, Christopher
  • Billings, Kevin
  • Blackwill, Robert
  • Blumenthal, Daniel
  • Boot, Max
  • Borshchevskaya, Anna
  • Bosco, Joseph
  • Chapman, Jana
  • Chertoff, Michael
  • Chovanec, Patrick
  • Clad, James
  • Cohen, Eliot A.
  • Coldebella, Gus
  • Cordero, Carrie
  • Coulter, Michael
  • Crocker, Chester
  • Cronin, Patrick
  • Cropsey, Seth
  • Donnelly, Tom
  • Drezner, Daniel
  • Dueck, Colin
  • Edelman, Eric
  • Edelman, Eric
  • Edson, Gary
  • Esposito, Joseph
  • Fairbanks, Charles
  • Falkenrath, Richard
  • Feaver, Peter
  • Ferguson, Niall
  • Fly, Jamie
  • Fontaine, Richard
  • Frazer, Jendayi
  • Friedberg, Aaron
  • Gabriel, Dan
  • Garcia, Greg
  • Gerecht, Marc
  • Glassman, James K.
  • Gordon, David
  • Green, Michael
  • Griffin, Christopher J.
  • Gunderwon, Brian
  • Habeck, Mary R.
  • Haenle, Paul
  • Haring, Melinda
  • Hastings, Robert
  • Hayden, Michael
  • Heinrichs, Rebeccah
  • Hillen John
  • Hills, Carla A.
  • Hoang, Francis Q.
  • Hoff, Rachel
  • Hornung, Jeffrey W.
  • Inboden, William C.
  • Jaffer, Jamil N.
  • Jain, Ash
  • Jeffrey, Gates
  • Jeffrey, Reuben
  • Johnson, Marc C.
  • Jordan, Myriah
  • Joseph, Robert G.
  • Kagan, Robert
  • Kane, Tim
  • Kassinger, Ted
  • Kidder, Kate
  • Kolbe, Jim Rep.
  • Kramer, David
  • Krasner, Stephen
  • Kroenig, Matthew
  • Langdon, James
  • Lavin, Frank
  • Levy, Philip I.
  • Lichtenbaum, Peter
  • Lohaus, Philip
  • Long, Mary Beth
  • Lowery, Clay
  • Mansoor, Peter
  • Maurer, John
  • McCabe, Matthew
  • McCallum, Robert
  • McGrath, Bryan
  • Miles, Richard G.
  • Miller, Paul D.
  • Morrison, Charles
  • Mukasey, Michael B.
  • Muller, Scott W.
  • Munson, Lester
  • Natsios, Andrew S.
  • Negroponte, John
  • Nichols, Tom
  • Noonan, John
  • Noonan, Michael
  • Noriega, Roger E.
  • Ockenden, Stephen E.
  • Osborn, John
  • Osterhaler, Robert T.
  • O'Sullivan, Meghan
  • Owens, Mackubin T.
  • Pipes, Daniel
  • Pyatt, Everett
  • Rainville, Martha T.
  • Reuel, Gedmin
  • Ridge, Thomas
  • Rodriguez, Stephen
  • Ross, Marc A.
  • Rostow, Nicholas
  • Rubin, Michael
  • Runde, Daniel F.
  • Runkle, Benjamin
  • Russell, Richard L.
  • Sagor, Andrew
  • Schake, Kori
  • Scheunemann, Randy
  • Schmitt, Gary J.
  • Schoenfeld, Gabriel
  • Seitz, Russell
  • Sepp, Kalev I.
  • Serchuk, Vance
  • Shedd, David R.
  • Shiffman, Gary
  • Silverber, Kristen
  • Singh, Michael
  • Slick, Stephen
  • Taft, William H.
  • Tahir-Kheli, Shirin
  • Takeyh, Ray
  • Teigen, Jeremy
  • Thompson, Larry D.
  • Tobey, William H.
  • Townsend, Frances F.
  • Vajdich, Daniel
  • Van Tol, Jan
  • Veroneau, John
  • Wainstein, Kenneth
  • Waxman, Matthew
  • Wedgwood, Ruth
  • Wolf, Albert
  • Wood, Julie
  • Zakheim, Dov S.
  • Zakheim, Roger
  • Zega, Sam Zelikow, Philip
  • Zelikow, Philip
  • Zoellick, Robert B.
  • Zuriff, Laurence
  • War On the Rocks We the undersigned, members of the Republican national security community, represent a broad spectrum of opinion on America’s role in the world and what is necessary to keep us safe and prosperous. We have disagreed with one another on many issues, including the Iraq war and intervention in Syria. But we are united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency. Recognizing as we do, the conditions in American politics that have contributed to his popularity, we nonetheless are obligated to state our core objections clearly: His vision of American influence and power in the world is wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle. He swings from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence. His advocacy for aggressively waging trade wars is a recipe for economic disaster in a globally connected world. His embrace of the expansive use of torture is inexcusable. His hateful, anti-Muslim rhetoric undercuts the seriousness of combating Islamic radicalism by alienating partners in the Islamic world making significant contributions to the effort. Furthermore, it endangers the safety and Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of American Muslims. Controlling our border and preventing illegal immigration is a serious issue, but his insistence that Mexico will fund a wall on the southern border inflames unhelpful passions, and rests on an utter misreading of, and contempt for, our southern neighbor. Similarly, his insistence that close allies such as Japan must pay vast sums for protection is the sentiment of a racketeer, not the leader of the alliances that have served us so well since World War II. His admiration for foreign dictators such as Vladimir Putin is unacceptable for the leader of the world’s greatest democracy. He is fundamentally dishonest. Evidence of this includes his attempts to deny positions he has unquestionably taken in the past, including on the 2003 Iraq war and the 2011 Libyan conflict. We accept that views evolve over time, but this is simply misrepresentation. His equation of business acumen with foreign policy experience is false. Not all lethal conflicts can be resolved as a real estate deal might, and there is no recourse to bankruptcy court in international affairs. Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States. Therefore, as committed and loyal Republicans, we are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head. We commit ourselves to working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted to the office.
  • USDefenseWatch The undersigned individuals have all served in senior national security and/or foreign policy positions in Republican Administrations, from Richard Nixon to George W. Bush. We have worked directly on national security issues with these Republican Presidents and/or their principal advisers during wartime and other periods of crisis, through successes and failures. We know the personal qualities required of a President of the United States. Many of the undersigned worked in the George W. Bush administration and were influential in policy-making decisions that led to the disastrous US invasion of Iraq in 2003, a military operation predicated on lies, a war that played upon the fears of the American people after 9/11. None of us will vote for Donald Trump. Delightful, then you will be casting your vote for Mrs. Clinton, an incompetent, delusional liar with apparent and serious health issues; Gary Johnson, a libertarian whose only goals are to be a lifelong marijuana clinic client; Jill Stein, a left winger running on the Green Party ticket and some nameless guy from Utah who worked for the CIA. From a foreign policy perspective, Donald Trump is not qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief. But, Mrs. Clinton surely is. Please list any accomplishments of Mrs. Clinton’s during her tenure in the Senate and as Secretary of State. I will put on some Jeopardy music and give you a couple years to come up with something. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being. Most fundamentally, Mr. Trump lacks the character, values, and experience to be President. Undoubtedly, Mrs. Clinton has the character, values and experience to be President. Frankly, Mrs. Clinton has the character of an alley cat, the values of Ma Barker and experience laced with a trail of incompetence, deceit and criminality as the First Lady, as a US Senator from New York and as Secretary of State. He weakens U.S. moral authority as the leader of the free world. Yet, Mrs. Clinton strengthens US moral authority by the list of felonies and misdemeanors she committed as Secretary of State. He appears to lack basic knowledge about and belief in the U.S. Constitution, U.S. laws, and U.S. institutions, including religious tolerance, freedom of the press, and an independent judiciary. Mr. Trump does not wish to temporarily ban every Muslim from entering this country, only those from nations currently supporting terrorism. I find it ironic that so called national security experts are willing to jeopardize US internal security by allowing an open door immigration policy. In addition, Mr. Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he has little understanding of America’s vital national interests, its complex diplomatic challenges, its indispensable alliances, and the democratic values on which U.S. foreign policy must be based. At the same time, he persistently compliments our adversaries and threatens our allies and friends. Mr. Trump clearly understands America’s vital national interests, the most vital being the security of this nation over all issues. Mr. Trump, unlike Barack Obama, is clearly aware that the first constitutional duty of the President is to protect this nation from all enemies, foreign and domestic. While Mr. Putin clearly seeks a rebirth of Russian military prowess in Eastern Europe, is it not possible to converse with the man? A new Cold War, sought by so many of the signatories of this abomination, makes no sense and only benefits one group, the military-industrial complex and its servants in the US national security establishment. Unlike previous Presidents who had limited experience in foreign affairs, Mr. Trump has shown no interest in educating himself. This is an interesting statement. Are these so called national security officials living and travelling with Mr. Trump? Do they have an itemized inventory of his library at home or his digital collection on his Kindle? What books has Mrs. Clinton read lately to educate herself – Saul Alinsky’s Guide to Destroying America through Political Revolution? Das Kapital? He continues to display an alarming ignorance of basic facts of contemporary international politics. Despite his lack of knowledge, Mr. Trump claims that he understands foreign affairs and “knows more about ISIS than the generals do.” Whether Mr. Trump knows more about ISIS than the generals is unknown. What is known is that Mr. Trump has more intestinal fortitude than the current crop of JCS moral cowards and sycophants. Mr. Trump lacks the temperament to be President. In our experience, a President must be willing to listen to his advisers and department heads; must encourage consideration of conflicting views; and must acknowledge errors and learn from them. A President must be disciplined, control emotions, and act only after reflection and careful deliberation. Apparently, the national security GOP cronies who wrote this letter have never read the myriad of accounts about Hillary’s erratic temper and her fits of violence. Nor, have they apparently read about Hillary’s foul mouth and complete disrespect for the US military and the US Secret Service. A President must maintain cordial relationships with leaders of countries of different backgrounds and must have their respect and trust. In our judgment, Mr. Trump has none of these critical qualities. He is unable or unwilling to separate truth from falsehood. He does not encourage conflicting views. He lacks self-control and acts impetuously. He cannot tolerate personal criticism. Mrs. Clinton is a compulsive, delusional liar whose disregard for the truth is only exceeded by her complete abhorrence of US national security protocol. He has alarmed our closest allies with his erratic behavior. All of these are dangerous qualities in an individual who aspires to be President and Commander in-Chief, with command of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Hillary Clinton’s erratic behavior as Secretary of State has endangered us all. Her use of a personal server to store and send classified information at the Top Secret/SCI/SAP level has most certainly allowed hostile foreign governments to obtain US intelligence information, causing grave damage to US national security. Her erratic behavior has possibly led to the execution of a US intelligence asset and Iranian scientist, Shahram Amiri, yesterday. Hillary Clinton cares about one thing, the greater good of Hillary and nothing and no one else. We understand that many Americans are profoundly frustrated with the federal government and its inability to solve pressing domestic and international problems. We also know that many have doubts about Hillary Clinton, as do many of us. But Donald Trump is not the answer to America’s daunting challenges and to this crucial election. We are convinced that in the Oval Office, he would be the most reckless President in American history.

 

 

Interactive 9/11, JFK & Holocaust Spreadsheet

Google Custom Search Engine ... Link 9/11 Truth, JFK assassination, Holocaust hoax & ISIS ...... home

No main stream media sites including Wikipedia are searched on this custom search page .... only websites dedicated to exposing the truth about 9/11, JFK assassination and the Holocaust hoax. This may include 'gatekeeper' sites such as 911Truth.org, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.org, Chomsky etc....by 'gatekeeper' we mean websites who never mention Israel, UK or Saudi Arabia as complicit in the 'inside job' attack. The roots of 9/11 go back to the Jewish Bolshevik revolution, Zionist/Nazi Germany (chronology below), the Holocaust hoax (treachery to spur emigration to Palestine) ... Google restricts results to 10 pages (100 items)

MS Excel Sort & Filter 2000 rows, 12 columns

Yes to 'no planes', Israel nuked the WTC, the Holocaust(timeline below) is a hoax, the Mossad / LBJ assassinated John Kennedy & ISIS=Hitler.

Interactive Spreadsheet - 9/11 Truth, JFK assassination, Holocaust revision & ISIS

 

Cultural Marxism Timeline

Comments

 
NewsFollowUp.com Comments  
 

 

 

   

 

 

free hit counter javascript

 

Google Analytics