Soros funding of Cultural Marxism

An Uncomfortable Past for Gay Rights

Political Correctness (PC) and Cryptos

Jewish Cultural Marxism and the Holocaust Hoax

Why is Cultural Marxism so Offensive...Gilad Atzmon

Yes, Virginia (Dare) There Is a Cultural Marxism–and It’s Taking Over Conservatism Inc.

Power to the Perverts!: Cultural Marxism, Jonathan Yaniv and the Lunacies of Transgenderism

The Jewish Relition: Its Influence Today... excerpts ... Dilling

Soros Funding of Cultural Marxism

An Uncomfortable Past for Gay Rights By Ann-Katrin Müller

In the 1980s, gay rights groups in Germany formed an alliance with pedophiles who advocated the legalization of sex with minors. It’s a dark period few care to talk about now.

In July 1981, the gay interest magazine “Rosa Flieder” published an interview with Olaf Stüben. Stüben was one of the most infamous pedophiles in Germany at the time. As a writer for the leftist newspaper Die Tageszeitung, he openly advocated for people to accept pedophilia as healthy and moral.

In the magazine interview, Stüben is asked why it should be acceptable for adults to have sex with children and youths. He talks of quickies with young boys, and declares it backwards to maintain the taboo around inappropriately touching children. “Childlike innocence is an invention of the bourgeoisie of early capitalism,” Stüben says.

The interview in “Rosa Flieder” was not a one-off lapse. On the contrary — in the 1970s and 80s, numerous gay-oriented magazines brazenly promoted sex with children, even running pictures of naked boys. The magazine “Don” presented five sympathetic reports on the experiences of pedophilic men. The headline read, “We’re not child rapists!”

In recent months, many in Germany have been discussing the extent to which the Green Party in the 1980s allowed itself to be manipulated by pedophiles. The party came under such intense pressure that it hired political scientist Franz Walter to look into its own history relating to the issue.

Yet it’s now clear that the gay movement in Germany must also come to terms with this chapter of its history. Anyone who searches through archives can find ample evidence of the alliance between gay rights organizations and pedophile activists. If pedophiles got into trouble with the law, they could rely on legal advice from a group called “Gay Lawyers.” Many politicians in the Green Party also made sure that calls for legalizing sex with children had an audience.

A Beneficial Alliance

Nowadays it seems puzzling why gays would get themselves mixed up with people whose sexual obsessions were downright illegal. The tolerance for pedophiles was fueled by several different sources. For one, many gays at the time knew all too well what it was like to be discriminated against by the state. Consensual sex between adult men was officially a criminal act up until the end of the 1960s. Only in 1969 did lawmakers in West Germany dismantle the infamous “Paragraph 175” of the German Criminal Code. At the same time, the sexual revolution was breaking out, and many men finally had the courage to come out of the closet, this was about the same time homosexual porn became big but still secretive due to the “criminal side” – now people can find all sorts of adult content of websites such as www.nu-bay.com and more.

Thus many gays didn’t want to be the ones to judge others for their deviant sexual inclinations. In a climate of general tolerance, the movement lost its moral compass. The gay movement did not distance itself from men who acted on their desire for children; rather, it took them under its wing.

Then there was the remarkable idea that underage boys should not be denied the chance to have sexual experiences with grown men. Even today, the Association of Lesbians and Gays in Germany (LSVD) claims on its website that in the 1980s, the only men who spoke up were those who had enjoyed sex with adults in their youth.

For the pedophiles, the alliance with the gay movement was nothing but beneficial. They had a platform from which they could formulate objectives.

The gay movement helped pedophiles in entirely practical ways. In the pamphlet “Justly gay. Legal advice for gays,” there is a one-and-a-half page “argumentation aid.” It’s an instruction on how men who are charged with child sexual abuse can best escape punishment.

Backlash Begins

The reader is spoken to informally: “If your sexual behavior is not contestable, but this behavior is limited to French kissing and mutual masturbation, your defense attorney can request that an expert witness take the stand.” This could serve to negate the claim that such behavior is harmful to the sexual development of a child, the pamphlet continues. But only on one condition: “Suitable expert witnesses must be contacted in due time.”

Beginning in the mid-1980s, the gay movement in Germany began to distance itself from pedophiles. At the Green Party convention of the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia in March 1985, the party approved a document that called for the legalization of “non-violent sexuality” between adults and children. The incident caused such an uproar that the Greens missed out on the chance to enter the state legislature.

The gay rights movement also began to notice how much damage the alliance with pedophiles was causing. Suddenly gays had to fight back against the cliche of the “homosexual child molester.” Their actual goals, like the creation of an effective AIDS policy and the end of societal discrimination, were relegated to the background.

The women’s movement was also partly responsible for raising awareness among leftists of the harm caused by pedophilia. Prominent feminist Alice Schwarzer was active in fighting child abuse when pedophilia was still considered an acceptable form of human sexuality in some circles.

While the now-defunct leftist alternative magazine “Pflasterstrand,” then edited by current Green politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit, justified sex with children, Schwarzer caused a sensation with an interview in her magazine “Emma.” She spoke with sexual educator Günter Amendt, who was considered especially progressive at the time. Still, he criticized that pedophiles always exploited their position of power over children. There could be no discussion of love on an equal standing, he said.

Past Advocates Tight-Lipped on Issue

Of course, Schwarzer says today, pedophilia is not an issue among gays. There are more heterosexual pedophiles than homosexual ones, she says. “But the gay rights movement needed to distance itself more clearly. And a problematization of pederasty, sex between men and young boys, has not yet occurred.”

But there are hardly any gay activists who are willing to talk about the dark days of the past. Volker Beck, who represents Cologne in the German parliament, has made it clear that he has already said all he is going to say about the subject. Beck was for a long time the spokesman for the Greens’ Federal Working Group for Gay Politics.

In the 1980s, he wrote a contribution for a book called “The Pedosexual Complex” in which he advocated for the decriminalization of sex with minors. He later claimed that the passages were later edited into his text. He can’t prove if that is true or not.

The LSVD is also tight-lipped when it comes to clarifying its involvement with pedophilia. In the 1980s, they wrote clear explanations, says Günter Dworek from the board of directors. The paper from 1997 is essentially unapologetic. It says it is abuse “if adults satisfy their sexual needs at the cost of children.” However, there is no word on the former alliance of gays and pedophiles in that text.

If you support what we do, would like to see more articles and want to help us maintain this website then please consider making a donation or purchasing some stickers hereh. All donations over £10 will receive free stickers or a pin badge here

Political Correctness (PC) and Cryptos...by Stephen Francis

So, what is this Politically Incorrect angle on cryptos? The calculated and successful attempt to associate money laundering and illegal transactions with cryptos by the banksters is the most obvious scheme to discredit this revolutionary money. Mainstream banks have been fined hundreds of billions of dollars for just such activities. The selective and hypocritical use of PC is perverse but effective. Its typical of the establishment to accuse their opposition of the same illegal activities they themselves are masters of in order to control the dialogue.

The 'deep state' eternally tries to normalize that idea that the US government is a benevolent entity that is diligently protecting the rights and liberties of its citizens when the exact opposite is the unfortunate reality, thus many criticisms of cryptos are couched in protective-sounding dialogue designed for US citizenry who are probably the most hoodwinked mass of sheeple on the planet. Jimmy Carter was correct in his assessment that democracy is dead in America and anyone publicly espousing this reality or espousing support for a grand list of 'conspiracy theories' (9/11, JFK, Moon landings, Pearl Harbor, USS Liberty and now Cryptos to name just a few) is Politically Incorrect. The support of cryptos is the recognition of a corrupt banking system.

People who need a new avenue to protest (if they choose so) US war policy now have a new vehicle...evading taxes on crypto profits. Embracing cryptos as quasi-legal black/grey markets, that, if they were to garner enough support would compete and eventually undermine the prevailing state financial monopoly. Crypto enthusiasts with such thoughts are immediately branded as conspiracy theorists, but the rise of Donald Trump has shown the establishment that they don't have the control to stop these backlashes. Long live the concept of a P2P digital Silk Road (without the scant drug trafficking and money laundering). Healthy unbiased regulation will help the crypto industry.

Fabian Society logo... a precursor to Socialism, Communism, Cultural Marxism, and Political Correctness...notice the wolf in sheep's clothing...symbolizing deceitful methods in political change...after recognition of failed Communist revolution. There's basically no difference between a Communist Collective and Israeli kibbutz. Rothschilds and British Zionists supported Karl Marx.

Again, it doesn't take long to connect PC to the Khazarian mobsters. PC, along with multiculturalism are Leftist political/academic constructs designed to gradually erode any conservative nationalistic vestige remaining in Western culture, in order to secure its control. It emanates from the 1920's Frankfurt School meme (Cultural Marxism) that has far-reaching effects in American culture and politics. All the originating members of this line of thinking were heebs (Horkheimer, Adorno, Fromm, Pollock, Marcuse...etc). The protagonists and practitioners of this scheme have invaded Western academia, media and the corporate sphere and are at the forefront of the domination drive that encompasses the world. Their use of PC as a weapon against cryptos is a given. It goes hand-in-hand with the world of Tavistock / MK Ultra / Mind Control nightmares foisted on unsuspecting citizens of the world. Multiculturalists and their racism dog-whistling tactics are their compatriots. All major J...sh organizations support open borders except for Israel's. Israel is an apartheid state.

It is considered 'antiSemitic' thus Politically Incorrect to accuse ((them)) of controlling world finances. So, it can be assumed that their use of PC attacks portends their abhorrence to cryptos, but what is the next step? Can they really stop this movement? Probably not, but they can effectively slow it down, which is what seems to be happening. 

Stephen Francis, the author of this article, is the creator of NewsFollowUp.com that was established in 2002. He has been the speaker of a number of conferences on 9/11 Truth and Academic Freedom and was jailed as an in-uniform Army soldier for protesting the Vietnam War in a demonstration at the gates of Ford Ord, CA on Veterans Day, 1969. ...

continued...

Jewish Cultural Marxism and the Holocaust Hoax by Stephen Francis

Although the concept and analyses of the Frankfurt School have been around since the 1920s, the term Cultural Marxism was first coined in 1973 with the appearance of the book "The Critique of Domination: The Origins and Development of Critical Theory ...by Prof Trent Schroyer. But this work comes from the perspective of a Leftist American academic steeped in a layer of discourse that is deeply antithetical to the populist alt right view of Cultural Marxism.

Before a detailed description of Cultural Marxism is made ...some assumptions need to be presented, the first being that all major figures of the Frankfurt School were Jewish. This has major implications on the substance and direction that these revolutionary plotters take. The outward consequences of their theories manifest themselves in actions where traditional logic, norms, and boundaries are selectively and intentionally abandoned as applied in social theory. They have flowed from a Jewish brand of the unfolding of the Enlightenment and a materialistic humanism onto the cultures of the world, but most importantly they seem to emanate from a sinister strategy born out of the dissemination of a strain of postmodernist chaos that tears deeply at the conscience of non-Jewish societies. Jewish contrived social theories emanating from the Frankfurt School are mostly unscientific well-disguised efforts to combat anti-Semitism and further Jewish interests.

There are a number of related themes developed in this video, the first is that:

It is widely believed that Jewish identity is based on three pillars of consideration including religion, nationalism and the supposed Holocaust. The last will emerge as one of the most important and possibly newest concepts in the consideration of Cultural Marxism. The clever creation of the fake Holocaust victim as the quintessential precursor of all theories concerning the weaponization of victimhood, as found in the Frankfurt School theories, is of immense importance and has been a mostly hidden topic for a number of obvious and nefarious reasons.

The Frankfurt School principle figures, the Anti-Defamation League, American Jewish Committee and the World Jewish Congress will play major roles in the development of this so-called Holocaust victim. Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, leading figures of the Frankfurt School, are two of the main sources of research on this topic. Horkheimer will also be shown as one of the most important intellectuals guiding the sinister 'reeducation' and denazification of Germany after WWII. That demonization and exaltation of the guilt of German citizens was and remains a prerequisite for perpetuating the Holocaust victim meme. Germany has been occupied territory ever since its defeat in 1945 in this respect. The Riegner Memo (the first supposed document evidence of the Holocaust) and the War Refugee Board are key research items in this respect along with the Tavistock Institute, US and British intelligence agencies, and the mainstream media.

Max Horkheimer was also deeply involved in the promotion of the Anne Frank diary, arguably, the most important and highly distributed piece of Holocaust propaganda ever produced. It too is a fake. The real author was awarded $50k in civil court proceedings involving this case. Virtually all official accounts of WWII events have to be thoroughly scrutinized for containing lies, omissions, exaggerations, and propaganda. Cultural Marxism thrives in this atmosphere and is just one in a long list of Jewish treachery abominations rolling over the citizens of the world.

This supposed Holocaust victim will be used as a template by Left-wing academics in America to weaponize social minority groups such as LGBTQ, Blacks, Asians, Women ...etc against the nemesis of the Jews, namely white nationalist males. This video goes well beyond Richard Minnicino's first mention of this concept of the Holocaust victim integration with Cultural Marxism.

Was there an epiphany and documented moment when this idea of weaponizing the Holocaust victim occurred? At this point, that particular event has not been discovered, but there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence backing up its validity. It's more a matter of do the facts fit the theory, much like the accusations of Jewish inordinate media control, the domination of Hollywood, the domination of banking, extreme and selfish ethnocentrism, Liberal academic predominance, the Protocols, usury abuse, apartheid Israel, progenitors of Communism, Neocon involvement in the instigation of the Iraq / Afghanistan wars, complicity in 9/11....and on and on. The facts in these cases fit the accusations...just as the facts fit the premise of this work. Later in this video expanded support on these assertions will be presented.

The criterion for judging this comes from a close examination of the Jewish players in the game. Their ultimate aim is to combat anti-Semitism without ever mentioning the real causes of Jew-hatred and then demonizing their perceived oppressors. In the case of the Holocaust myth, the persecuted entity is the fake extermination victim and the supposed perpetrator is the Aryan supremacists led by Hitler. In modern-day America, it is the minority groups oppressed by white nationalist males. Of course, there was discrimination, but do the Social Justice Warriors have the welfare of the persecuted minorities at heart or are they are more interested in the power gained from standing on this propagandized 'high ground'. Some do at the grassroots level but at the top, it's all about power and, in this case, combating anti-Semitism.

There is a direct correlation between the contrived demonization of German citizens beginning in the Nazi era and that same effort against contemporary white Christian nationalists of America. Jewish propaganda skills are front and center of this linkage. The major players in this span a time frame beginning in Weimar Germany to the present. They include Edward Bernays, Nahum Goldmann, Rabbi Stephen Wise, Samuel Untermeyer in the WWII era to CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, Adam Schiff, James Comey, Brennan, Clapper et al...in contemporary America.

It may seem like a distant argument, but in consideration of any discourse concerning Marx and Engels, the authors of the Communist Manifesto, there is a failure to point out that Jews were a significant part of the bourgeoisie, the oppressors of the proletariat and they were mostly white Ashkenazi Jews. It was Jewish capitalist bankers that financed the Bolshevik revolution. How is this connected to Cultural Marxism? It dramatizes the fact that the hidden agenda behind Leftist politics at the top of its leadership structure is the accumulation of power rather than genuine caring for the plight of the worker. Naive Social Justice Warriors, who may actually care about the oppressed are being used as political pawns in a very sinister game.

The first step is to conflate Holocaust victimhood into the list of oppressed minorities, which it obviously does not belong once the consideration that the Holocaust is a hoax is factored in. This is a disingenuous effort and has proven to be well within the envelope of Jewish thought patterns. All Frankfurt School academics are in the business of cloaking these arguments within complex unintelligible theories that put the average person to sleep trying to read and understand them.

Is this accusing all Jews of the crimes of the few...no...but with the Holocaust hoax, virtually all, except a few isolated cases, believe or are coerced to believe in the Holocaust myth and have benefitted from the nearly 100 billion dollars in extorted reparations from Germany. Is it fair to say they are all complicit in the hoax? It seems like an open question. In general, this accusation of collective fault only applies to the Holocaust component and not the academic creation of minority victim weaponization theories. By design, most people don't even know what Cultural Marxism is let alone have any involvement in creating it. Political Correctness is the closest most come to recognize its features.
Although Jews are generally successful in being considered a persecuted minority, one significant piece of evidence of a pushback involves the tribulations the national Women's Movement has had in denying Jewish women inclusion in their protest marches. There are many reasons that Jews don't belong in these groups. The most obvious and recent is the Palestinian issue where they are far more seen as attached to the oppressors than the oppressed, but lurking in the background and unspoken is the possibility that a certain amount of women silently believe the Holocaust is a hoax, or other various reasons, and just can't vocalize their sentiments. Some overcome this while the majority still have succumbed to the threat of being labeled anti-Semitic. But the outcome was clear, Jewish women were not welcome. A definite divide has developed. There was no effort by the non-Jewish rank-and-file to include Jews, who were reduced to whining about their exclusion because of anti-Semitism. Clearly, this is an example of Jews attempting to scheme their way into victimhood status and not entirely being successful in all their attempts.

Before the Holocaust victim can be conflated into the oppressed minority category a significant amount of propaganda had to have time to percolate into the political atmosphere. Remember, the point here is that the contrived Holocaust victim is used as a template, mostly in academia, to create a victim class that includes LGBTQ, blacks, Latinos, women...etc in order to weaponize those groups against nationalistic white Christian conservative males...the nemesis of the Jews.

It is a mirror image of Weimar Germany, where an explosive conflict developed between immigrant Jews and native Germans. Jews infiltrate a host culture and then come to dominate banking and all non-agrarian industries, an occurrence repeated hundreds of times since biblical times, incurring rabid animosity in the process. Molyneax has documented 1030 expulsions (see graphic) rather than the dozen or so Wikipedia would have one believe.

In the case of Weimar Germany, they thrust 'New age' Kabbalistic entertainment forms on unsuspecting conservative citizens in order to sew discord and tear down norms and traditions of White Christian cultures. This would, they believed, would soften them up for further domination and exploitation. It was the crass introduction and provocation of the German culture with homosexual and even incestual media and entertainment content that traumatized the conservative German culture, causing wide-spread hatred of the Jews. This was not all deliberately part of a devious plan, but just the outcome of Jewish norms and beliefs.

This has a direct analog to America, with the introduction of thousands of homosexual-themed sitcoms and violent trashy movies emanating out of Hollywood. Jews dominate the alcohol and gambling industries. This is Cultural Marxism. To the Jews, it's New Age freedom. It was their normal modus operandi, it was avant-garde, postModern expression of the Enlightenment, but what it led to was the deep alienation of the Jews from the general German population. Add this to the belief ...or rather fact, that Jews caused the defeat of Germany in WWI and their general domination of all major banking and industrial production, the stage was set for Hitler to gain power. The Frankfurt School had a substantial investment in this process and it did not go unnoticed by Hitler who kicked them out of the country because of their deep Communist / Marxist ties. Indeed, the German people were terrified of the possibility of a Stalin invasion.

It is becoming increasingly evident and growing in the minds of the world's citizens, that Germany's invasion of Russia, the event that transformed WWII, was a preemptive strike rather than any sort of world domination scheme by Hitler. The Jewish controlled media has spent decades pushing this 'fake news'. History is written by the victors. But all this led to the diabolical fake creation of the Holocaust myth, as the German people turned on the Jews.

The Riegner Memo (see graphic) is recognized by Jewish sympathetic sources as the first mention of the beginnings of the so-called Holocaust. There is a fascinating history connected to it, but for the purposes of this work, the main concern is that it kicked off a now 80-year lie often characterized as the hoax of the 20th century.

It is also very important to mention that the Riegner Memo was never verified in any forensically professional sense of the word. Interestingly, the US State Dept never did attest to its authenticity but was forced to create publications that seemed to endorse it. Jewish-controlled mainstream media plastered stories of supposed Jewish extermination across the USA. Hollywood, and especially a person named Ben Hecht (a Jew) was highly instrumental in spreading the word across America in the form of movies or rather a propaganda extravaganza. A great lie was concocted, that now has to be maintained, not an enviable task. These events represent the elements of classic Cultural Marxism.

But, for the purposes of this video, the Riegner memo also has an interesting connection to the salacious and unverified dossier that the Clinton campaign and Obama intelligence agencies used in an attempt to depose Donald Trump. Both were unverified lies. The first successfully enabled its mission, while the latter failed.

The declaration of war on Germany by the Jews, in the form of a highly effective worldwide boycott of Germany in 1936, sealed the fate of the conflict between Germany's Jews and Christians. Cultural Marxism was born from this acrid atmosphere of hate and revenge. The communist revolution failed to materialize and the Frankfurt School Jews believed that had to develop an alternative nonviolent attempt at world domination. They were forced to move to America, where they took up their new stock in trade on a new target, that being the white nationalist male, but now they have a new weapon, born out the Weimar experience...it's called the weaponization of minorities against the enemy of the Jews. Ultimately, it's about combating anti-Semitism.

Given that the Holocaust is a myth, this whole series of events becomes nothing more than a sinister plot and is consistent with an accusation that Jewish supremacism and megalomania is the driving force in all these circumstances. Mass mind control is their stock in trade. The Tavistock Institute, Leftist American academics, US intelligence agencies, mainstream media, and the corporate sector will greatly expand on this scheme, all dominated in varying degrees by Jewish revolutionaries.

There are absolute parallels between the creation of the Holocaust fake victim, the 2017 Charlottesville psyop and the unverified Steele Dossier used to attempt a soft coup against Donald Trump. All these situations involved the same deep state actors and apparatus that was initially formed in the worldwide power vacuum created immediately following WWI..in the 1920's. The Frankfurt School flourished in this period, as did the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its British sister organization The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) The RIIA, through its subsidiaries, was deeply involved in the creation of the fake Steele Dossier. The main British characters in this were Richard Dearlove, Christopher Steele, and Sir Andrew Wood.

continued...

Why is Cultural Marxism so Offensive...Gilad Atzmon

Earlier this week former Brexit minister Suella Braverman referred to ‘Cultural Marxism’ in a speech. All hell broke loose immediately. The former minister was attacked by the usual Jewish and Zionist pressure groups, ranging from The Board of Deputies (BOD) to Hope not Hate to the usual compromised Labour politicians. However, unlike our caricature of an opposition leader who grovels on demand, Mrs Braverman kept her dignity intact. She didn’t see any point to retract, apologise or promise not to repeat the phrase as the BOD demanded.

One may wonder why ‘Cultural Marxism’ is so offensive to some?

Because ‘Cultural Marxism’ is obviously truthful and precise in its capacity to encapsulate a crucial and disastrous transition in the evolvement of 20th century Left thinking.

As opposed to traditional Marxism that theorizes over the necessary condition toward social change by means of class struggle, ‘Cultural Marxism’ aims to introduce a change by cultural shift. At a certain stage some (neo) marxists and socialists were clever and honest enough to accept that the revolution wasn’t going to happen. The working class couldn’t be bothered and even if they could, they were too busy attending their jobs. The revolution had to be facilitated by different means.

Antonio Gramsci, probably the father figure of cultural Marxist thought, contended that bourgeois hegemony was reproduced in cultural life through the media, academia and religious institutions to ‘manufacture consent’ and legitimacy. The proletarian struggle for control of the means of production, according to Gramsci, could only succeed once an alternative culture replaces the bourgeois cultural hegemony. For Gramsci it was a ‘counter-hegemonic’ struggle – advancing alternatives to dominant ideas of what is normal and legitimate.

Gramsci didn’t see his desired cultural shift materialising. He died prematurely , jailed in Mussolini’s Italy. However, Gramsci’s ideas were adopted and developed by a list of thinkers including Wilhelm Reich and the Frankfurt School’s leading icons: Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, Max Horkheimer, Erich Fromm and others. As it seems, these thinkers who have had a tremendous impact on contemporary Left and progressive thinking have something in common: they were Jews of Germanic origin.

By now the picture starts to become clear. The contemporary Left is dominated by a Jewish-influenced school of thought that preaches a constant struggle against hegemonic discourses such as traditional family values, the church, the male, the ‘white’ and so on. This school of thought also advocates against elementary liberties such as freedom of speech, evidenced by the popularity of no-platforming. It is hardly a secret that the above school of thought is a complete dismissal of every conservative value and Mrs Braverman was both astute and correct in calling a spade a spade: “as Conservatives, we are engaged in a battle against cultural Marxism…”

Mrs Braverman was accused of ‘anti-Semitism,’ despite the fact that she didn’t refer to Jews. By their unwitty actions, once again, Jewish pressure groups actually admitted that ‘Cultural Marxism is indeed a Jewish-influenced school of thought, otherwise it is impossible to conceive what was anti-Semitic in Braverman’s statement. Braverman was also blamed for repeating a ‘phrase used by mass murderer Anders Breivik,” as if referring to a term used by a mass murderer is an approval of a murderous act.

I guess that this is the right point to introduce a twist into this entire saga. It is crucial to mention that the right-wing thinkers who popularised the usage of ‘Cultural Marxism’ were actually Jewish and even ultra-Zionists. The first amongst them is Andrew Breitbart, who was dedicated to the exposing of the Neo-Marxist menace. Not far behind him in his attack is the horrid right wing ultra-Zionist David Horowitz. It is not exactly a secret that in his manifesto Breivik refers to David Horowitz’s Freedom Centre. For those who fail to remember, Breivik also quoted Jewish writer Melanie Philips’ criticism of Neo Marxist’s attitude to immigration: “It (immigration) was a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country (Britain). It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.” (Melanie Phillips, as quoted by mass murderer, Anders Breivik, in his manifesto).

Andrew Breitbart is the man who popularised the phrase ‘cultural marxism.’

I didn’t see Jewish pressure groups, the BOD, Hope not Hate or Labour MPs trying to silence Andrew Breitbart, David Horowitz or Melanie Philips. I guess that Jews and Zionists controlling the opposition and criticising Cultural Marxism must be a kosher adventure.

In Being in Time I argue that it isn’t totally surprising that Jews often dominate the dissent to Jewish cultural and ideological symptoms. If choseness, for instance, is a Jewish political/cultural symptom, it may as well be possible that self-hatred and even universalism are just metaphysical antibodies. If Cultural Marxism is a Jewish-influenced school of thought, it shouldn’t take us by complete surprise that it is also Jewish writers such as Horowitz, Philips and Breitbart who bring the anti antidotes to light.

Yes, Virginia (Dare) There Is a Cultural Marxism–and It’s Taking Over Conservatism Inc. ... Unz.

The most recent of incident of Cultural Marxist commissars refusing to admit that dissidents are to be treated as fellow citizens is the crazed female professor who accosted the NPI’s Richard Spencer while he was exercising at a Alexandria gym. She, recognizing him from coverage of the election campaign, started haranguing him and calling him a “Nazi.”

Instead of having her ejected for this behavior, the gym’s management terminated Spencer’s membership. [Georgetown professor confronts white nationalist Richard Spencer at the gym — which terminates his membership , By Faiz Siddiqui May 21, 2017]

Back in 2011 VDARE posted a commentary of mine on the legitimacy of the “Cultural Marxist” concept. (I reluctantly accepted the term only because I couldn’t think of a better one.)

As I pointed out, this ideology was very far from orthodox Marxism and was viewed by serious Marxists as a kind of bastard child. Yet many of those designated as “Cultural Marxists” still viewed themselves as classical Marxists and some still do.

Exponents of what the Frankfurt School called “critical theory”— like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, and Erich Fromm—were considered by orthodox Marxists to be fake or ersatz Marxists. But they did adopt orthodox Marxist-Leninist theory in key aspects:

Like orthodox Marxists, they viewed the bourgeoisie as a counterrevolutionary class.
Like orthodox Marxists, they viewed the world, arguably simplistically, in terms of interest groups and power relationships.
Like orthodox Marxists—whose break from Victorian classical liberalism in this respect was shocking in a way that is easily overlooked after the totalitarian experience of the twentieth century—they explicitly eschewed debate in favor of reviling and if possible repressing their opponents. (This is fundamental to the Marxist method: although it claims to be “scientific”, it is in fact an a priori value system that rejects debate and its concomitant, “bourgeois science”. Hence Political Correctness—the most prominent product of “cultural Marxism”.)
Like orthodox Marxist, they supported, at least in principle, a socialist i.e. government-controlled economy.
Like orthodox Marxists, they inclined, in varying degrees, toward the Communist side during the Cold War. (Marcuse, who cheered the Soviet suppression of the Hungarian uprising in 1956, was an outright Stalinist—as I can confirm from personal knowledge as his onetime student.)
These disciples of the Frankfurt School, like Marx, were eager to replace what they defined as bourgeois society by a new social order. In this envisaged new order, humankind would experience true equality for the first time. This would be possible because, in a politically and socially reconstructed society, we would no longer be alienated from our real selves, which had been warped by the inequalities that existed until now.

But unlike authentic Marxists, Cultural Marxists have been principally opposed to the culture of bourgeois societies–and only secondarily to their material arrangements. Homophobia, nationalism, Christianity, masculinity, and anti-Semitism have been the prime villains in the Cultural Marxist script.

This is especially true as one moves from the philosophy of the interwar German founders of the Frankfurt school, like Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse, to the second generation. This second generation is represented by Jürgen Habermas and most of the multicultural theorists ensconced in Western universities.

For these more advanced Cultural Marxists, the crusade against capitalism has been increasingly subordinated to the war against “prejudice” and “discrimination.” They justify the need for a centralized bureaucratic state commanding material resources not because it will bring the working class to power, but to fight “racism,” “fascism,” and the other residues of the Western past.

If they can’t accomplish such radical change, Cultural Marxists are happy to work toward revolutionizing our consciousness with the help of Leftist moneybags– hedge fund managers, Mark Zuckerberg etc. Ironically, nationalizing productive forces and the creation of a workers’ state, i.e. the leftovers from classical Marxism, turn out to be the most expendable part of their revolutionary program, perhaps because of the collapse of the embarrassing collapse of command economies in the Soviet bloc. Instead, what is essential to Cultural Marxism is the rooting-out of bourgeois national structures, the obliteration of gender roles and the utter devastation of “the patriarchal family.”

Not only does Cultural Marxism exist, but it now appears to be taking over Conservatism Inc. Thus even with Paris burning, National Review was still attacking the Right. In the second round of the French election, Tom Rogan urged a vote for Emmanuel Macron on the grounds Marine Le Pen is insufficiently hostile to Vladimir Putin and is a “socialist” because she “supports protectionism.” Macron’s actual onetime membership in the Socialist Party, and his view that there was no such thing as French culture, apparently was not a problem [French election: American Conservatives Should Support Macron, April 24, 2017].

Conservatism Inc. goes along because these goals are partially achieved through corporate capitalists, who actively push Leftist social agendas and punish entire communities if they’re insufficiently enthusiastic about gay marriage, gay scout leaders, transgendered rest rooms, sanctuary cities etc.. Wedded as it is to a clichéd defense of the “free market,” the Beltway Right not only won’t oppose this plutocratic agenda, but instead offers tax cuts to the wealthiest and most malevolent actors.

continued...

Power to the Perverts!: Cultural Marxism, Jonathan Yaniv and the Lunacies of Transgenderism ... Occidental Observer

In the cult of minority worship, the British feminist Linda Bellos (born 1950) is the highest of high priestesses, an intersectional ipsissima who stands at the top of the victimhood hierarchy. She’s a Black-Jewish lesbian who has spent many years celebrating diversity, immigration and multiculturalism, opposing racism, sexism and homophobia, battling to overthrow patriarchy, capitalism and Eurocentrism. Surely she leaves all White men on the planet choking in her dust as her intersectional chariot sweeps past them towards the golden progressive future.

Bounding above Bellos

But in fact, no: she isn’t superior to all stale pale males. Some of them are armed with a superpower that allows them to bound above Bellos in the victimhood hierarchy. Astonishingly, they’ve managed to brand Bellos as a hater from whom they need protection. Just let that sink in: some stale pale males have successfully claimed to be the victims of an elderly Black-Jewish lesbian. In 2017 they got Bellos banned from making a speech to a feminist society at Cambridge University, one of England’s biggest cult-centres of minority worship. Even more impressively, they set the police on her the following year: she was “interviewed under caution” after being accused of committing a hate-crime against them.

High Priestess of Hate: Linda Bellos, OBE, TERF

What on earth is going on? Well, I can explain it in a single short acronym: TERF. That stands for “Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist” and for many modern progressives it’s a very bad thing to be. Linda Bellos is a TERF (or terf, now a word in its own right). Like many other old-school feminists, she doesn’t accept the lunatic claims and megalomaniac demands of the highly aggressive and self-righteous “transgender community.” Quite rightly, she denies that men can become real women and that lesbians can have penises. But she doesn’t accept something else: her own role in the lunacy and megalomania of the trannies. Bellos has been a cultural Marxist since the 1970s. She has fed the beast for decades and now the beast has turned on her.

Lunacies of her own

After all, as a radical feminist and anti-racist, Bellos believes in lunacies of her own. For example, she denies the existence of race and blames the failure of non-Whites on White racism, not on non-White genetics. Similarly, she thinks that men’s and women’s brains are effectively the same. It is sexism, not biology, that explains why women don’t match men’s achievements in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.

For a cultural Marxist like Bellos, inequality arises from corrupt ideology, not from any differences of biology and evolution. And corrupt ideology, of course, arises from corrupt will. Therefore the White male malevolence that causes inequality can be countered by the non-White and female benevolence of anti-racist feminists like Linda Bellos. Nietzsche proclaimed the will to power; Marx proclaimed the will to progress.

Forcing one’s will upon the majority

But once an ideology accepts “progress” as a goal and “will” as the means to that goal, one very big question immediately arises. As Lenin put it: Кто кого? Kto kogo? ― “Who whom?” Whose will is to prevail? Who is to crush whom? Lenin had no time for democratic consensus or objective standards, as you can see in this passage quoted by the Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski from Lenin’s Collected Works: “in time of revolution it is not enough to ascertain the ‘will of the majority’ — you must prove to be stronger at the decisive moment and at the decisive place; you must win. … We have seen innumerable examples of the better-organized, more politically conscious and better-armed minority forcing its will upon the majority and defeating it.” Which is exactly what made the Bolshevik Revolution successful, thereby paving the way for many millions of murders.

Minority worship requires minority warriors, that is, minorities that have the will, aggression and self-belief to fight for progress, which means, of course, power over the majority. Lenin achieved that power: his small Bolshevik party, staffed with disproportionate numbers of racial minorities like Jews, Latvians and Georgians, eventually won control of the vast Russian empire. Lenin himself had German, Mongol and Jewish ancestry, and his most important lieutenant was the Jew Leon Trotsky (né Lev Bronshtein). Together Lenin and Trotsky seized power, fought and won a vicious civil war, and created a giant communist state. It was a triumph of the totalitarian will that has blazed as a beacon for megalomaniacs right to the present day.

Victims and oppressors

Lenin, Stalin, Mao and many others proved that Marxism is not an objective science bound by logic and the limits of physical reality, but an instruction manual for megalomaniacs and egomaniacs. They are told to win power by identifying a victim-class and an oppressor-class, then inciting the former against the latter. In classic Marxism, victims and oppressors are defined economically; in cultural Marxism, as the name suggests, they are defined culturally. Linda Bellos was part of an earlier wave of cultural Marxism that defined women, non-Whites and homosexuals as victims of men, Whites and heterosexuals. A new wave of cultural Marxism has found a new victim-class, the transgendered, and a new oppressor-class, the TERFs, trans-exclusionary radical feminists like Bellos.

But the subjectivity and power-hunger of cultural Marxism have not changed in the slightest: they have simply been adopted by a new set of egomaniacs. The lunacies of transgenderism are therefore the logical culmination of Linda Bellos’s own ideology. Indeed, the Jewish libertarian Murray Rothbard (1926-95) prophesied those lunacies way back in 1973:

The egalitarian revolt against biological reality, as significant as it is, is only a subset of a deeper revolt: against the ontological structure of reality itself, against the “very organization of nature”; against the universe as such. At the heart of the egalitarian left is the pathological belief that there is no structure of reality; that all the world is a tabula rasa that can be changed at any moment in any desired direction by the mere exercise of human will — in short, that reality can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings. (Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, Modern Age, Fall 1973)

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today ..excerpts....Elizabith Dilling

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today...excerpts ....Elizabeth Dilling

Marxism, Socialism, or Communism in practice are nothing but state-capitalism and rule by a privileged minority, exercising despotic and total control over a majority having virtually no property or legal rights. As is discussed elsewhere herein, Talmudic Judaism is the progenitor of modem Communism and Marxist collectivism as it is now applied to a billion or more of the world’s population.
Only through thorough understanding of the ideology from which this collectivism originates, and those who dominate and propagate it, can the rest of the world hope to escape the same fate. Communism — Socialism was originated by Jews and has been dominated by them from the beginning.

There is no moral, philosophical or ethical conflict whatsoever between Judaism and Marxist collectivism as they exist in actual practice. Marxism, to which all branches of Socialism necessarily adhere, was originated by a Jew, Karl Marx, himself of Rabbinical descent. Every Jewish source today boasts of his rabbinical ancestry, and his “keen dialectical ability” (as presumably manifested by his abstruse, hairsplitting, Das Kapital) being due to his Talmudic inheritance.

Marx did not actually originate anything, but merely “streamlined” Talmudism for Gentile consumption. The Socialist” system he conceived merely brings about a practical means for a state dominated and controlled through a Jewish minority to rule by absolute dictatorship over everything and everyone, a concept which has been carried out very successfully in those countries of the World brought thus far under Marxist dictatorship.

Socialism is indeed merely the clover held in front of the cow’s nose to get her into the barn under the milking machine. It is a mechanism whereby a “human” can lead a whole non-human herd into the Jewish controlled barn.

The next time when some Christian dupe tells you: “Socialism is not Jewish!,” for one thing, pull out the pamphlet “Jew and Non-Jew,” put out by the Reform Jewish “Union of American Hebrew Congregations” and their “Central Conference of American Rabbis” and read:

Socialism was originated by Jews; and today Jews play a leading role in its spread and interpretation.”