Marxist theory is a dismal subject and a major turn off. Why would
anyone want to take this drivel seriously? Because it has proved to be
horribly dangerous. It still is a huge danger, far more than people
realise. Universities and the main stream media are still actively
involved. People in these industries are pushing it or even believe it.
employers who make them push it. A life style depends on having wages
and a job. Money is a very potent weapon. Marxist Takeover Of The Ruling Classes
is about the evil done to us.
Here is my effort to shed a little light on the matter. In fact Marx failed to destroy civilization because he was trying to do it from the bottom up; Workers of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains sounded well. His efforts were followed by Antonio Gramsci's approach. Destroying the West by working from the top down is his legacy and it is working well. If you ever wonder why feminism, political correctness and other horrors are being inflicted on us the answer is Antonio's. The master stroke is immigration. Flooding the whole of Christendom with foreigners in order to destroy our unity is deadly effective. Edward Abboud explains in his book, Invisible Enemy. He explains them. This is about their techniques and their jargon.
The rich are the enemy of the poor - therefore they should be exterminated. That is the theory. The reality led to the murder of 85 million people, who were mainly poor - see The Black Book of Communism
Is about inflicting Marxism on the world, rather than being part of the theory; the means rather than the the end.
In Marxist theory, commodity fetishism is a state of social relations, said to arise in capitalist market based societies, in which social relationships are transformed into apparently objective relationships between commodities or money. The term is introduced in the opening chapter of Karl Marx's main work of political economy, Capital, of 1867.
As it relates to commodities specifically, commodity fetishism is the belief that value inheres in commodities instead of being added to them through labour. This is the root of Marx's critique relating to conditions surrounding fetishism--that capitalists "fetishize" commodities, believing that they contain value, and the effects of labour are misunderstood.
Commodity fetishism means being too keen on consumer goods. That is the obvious interpretation to a plain man but that does not fit Marx or any of the half mad crowd that believe him.
Is an honest term for something evil. That is why communists and the BBC do not use it in public. They just mean it and practice it.
Cultural imperialism is the practice of promoting, distinguishing, separating, or artificially injecting the culture or language of one nation into another. It is usually the case that the former is a large, economically or militarily powerful nation and the latter is a smaller, less affluent one. Cultural imperialism can take the form of an active, formal policy or a general attitude.
Explanations of Marxism are prone to be long winded waffle. Getting to the point is the counter. The term is clear enough. Culture is being imposed on us by the BBC, the main stream media generally and the education industry NOW. They have been at it for years. The Archers was a tale of ordinary country folk. Now it has homosexuals, ethnics and townies who know nothing about the country and care less. Add in the rest of their output designed to promote ignorance of our achievements and makes us ashamed while promoting foreign undesirables. That is just one example. The objective is Cultural Genocide
Is a term used by Marxist propagandists.
Cultural pessimism is a variety of pessimism, as formulated by what is nowadays called a cultural critic.
Towards the end of the 20th century, cultural pessimism surfaced in a prominent way. The very title of Jacques Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life, 1500 to the Present (2000) challenges the reader to be hopeful. On Matthew Arnold, a major cultural critic of the Victorian era, Barzun writes
According to Arnold, the behaviour of the English social classes was touched neither by spiritual nor by intellectual forces; the upper orders were barbarians, the middle classes philistines. (op. cit. p.573) [ He does not tell us that the lower orders are also barbarians - Editor ]
The end of the millennium saw in the USA concerns rather specific to the conservative view on the culture wars and university education.[clarification needed]
Western Europe, on the other hand, struggled towards self-definition in the face of limiting demography, and postmodernism as at least journalistically predominant � the difference primarily lying in the political prominence of the issues.
It has been significant presence in the general outlook of many historical cultures: things are going to the dogs, the Golden age is in the past, and the current generation is fit only for dumbing down and cultural careerism. Some significant formulations have gone beyond this, proposing a universally-applicable cyclic model of history � notably in the writings of Giambattista Vico.
The pessimistic element was available in Schopenhauer's philosophy and Matthew Arnold's cultural criticism. The tide of Whiggish optimism (exemplified by Macaulay) receded somewhat in the middle of the reign of Queen Victoria.
Classical culture, based on traditional classical scholarship in Latin and Greek literature, had itself been under attack externally for two generations or more by 1900, and had produced in Nietzsche, a model pessimistic thinker. The increasing availability of information of world events during this period, led to increased despondence and consultants such as Marcus Buckle vocalised this as a general feeling of doom.
Cato Institute report [ is likely to be sensible or, at least written in plain English - Editor ]
Marxist waffle is turgid. It is a way of hiding the truth.
Dominant ideology ex Wiki
The dominant ideology, in Marxist or marxian theory, is the set of common values and beliefs shared by most people in a given society, framing how the majority think about a range of topics, from art and science to politics and economics. It precedes and overlaps with the idea of a paradigm. Compare with Gramsci's cultural hegemony
Make sense of that if you can. Clarity of thought is not something that Marxists like. They are all in favour of a dominant ideology as long as it is theirs. Political correctness is one of their more dangerous impositions.
Entryism is the preferred technique for taking over and perverting a country. It is being used throughout Christendom to great effect.
False consciousness is the Marxist thesis that material and institutional processes in capitalist society are misleading to the proletariat, and to other classes. These processes betray the true relations of forces between those classes, and the real state of affairs regarding the development of pre-socialist society (relative to the secular development of human society in general).
This is essentially a result of ideological control which the proletariat either do not know they are under or disregard with a view to their own POUM (probability/possibility of upward mobility). POUM (not to be confused with the Workers' Party of Marxist Unification, POUM) or something like it is required in economics with its presumption of rational agency; otherwise wage labourers would be the conscious supporters of social relations antithetical to their own interests, violating that presumption.... The concept flows from the theory of commodity fetishism
How does anyone take this drivel seriously? They must want to believe it.
Hegemony.. is a concept that has been used to describe the existence of dominance of one social group over another, such that the ruling group -- referred to as a hegemon -- acquires some degree of consent from the subordinate, as opposed to dominance purely by force.
Theories of hegemony attempt to explain how dominant groups or individuals can maintain their power..... Antonio Gramsci [ the chief theoretician of the communist party - Editor ] devised one of the best-known accounts of hegemony...... According to Gramsci, hegemony consists of socio-political power that flows from enabling the "spontaneous consent" of the populace through intellectual and moral leadership or authority as employed by the subalterns of the State. The power of the hegemony is thus primarily through coercion and consent rather than armed force. Such conceptions are sometimes referred to as "cultural hegemony."
What it means in plain English taking control of the education industry, particularly universities and the media, newspapers, magazines, wireless, film and above all television. If you wonder why we all hate racism so sincerely and why we all admire homosexuals it is television. Propaganda starts in Kindergarten if not at the breast. Infiltrating business, law, publishing and politics in order to make bad law is all part of it.
Making us ignorant of our history, except the less creditable bits is being to destroy our pride in our achievements. They are considerable. Virtually all progress in science and engineering came from us while others would still be swinging in the trees. Telling us that other cultures are equal is done for the same reason. They promote modern art to make us disgusted and willing to believe that primitives do better.
Permanent Revolution is a term within Marxist theory, which was first used by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels between 1845 and 1850, but has since become most closely associated with Leon Trotsky. The use of the term by different theorists is not identical. Marx used it to describe the strategy of a revolutionary class to continue to pursue its class interests independently and without compromise, despite overtures for political alliances, and despite the political dominance of opposing sections of society.
Trotsky put forward his conception of 'permanent revolution' as an explanation of how socialist revolutions could occur in societies that had not achieved advanced capitalism. Part of his theory is the impossibility of 'socialism in one country' - a view also held by Marx, but not integrated into his conception of permanent revolution. Trotsky's theory also argues, first, that the bourgeoisie in late-developing capitalist countries are incapable of developing the productive forces in such a manner as to achieve the sort of advanced capitalism which will fully develop an industrial proletariat. Second, that the proletariat can and must, therefore, seize social, economic and political power, leading an alliance with the peasantry.
This is one of Marx's madder ideas. Talking without stopping to think can cause that.
Is the idea that the idea of hegemony is out of date but it is badly described.
Is Marx's term for the working class.
In Marxist theory, the proletariat is that class of society which does not have ownership of the means of production and whose only worth is their labour in exchange for a wage(s) . Proletarians are wage-workers, while some refer to those who receive salaries as the salariat. For Marx, however, wage labour may involve getting a salary rather than a wage per se.
His word has passed into the language as a term of contempt, just like peasant.
Lumpenproletariat (a German word meaning "raggedy proletariat") is a term first defined by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The German Ideology (1845) and later elaborated on in works by Marx. In The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon (1852), Marx refers to the lumpenproletariat as the 'refuse of all classes,' including 'swindlers, confidence tricksters, brothel-keepers, rag-and-bone merchants, beggars, and other flotsam of society.' In the Eighteenth Brumaire, Marx describes the lumpenproletariat as a 'class fraction' that constituted the political power base for Louis Bonaparte of France in 1848. In this sense, Marx argued that Bonaparte was able to place himself above the two main classes, the proletariat and bourgeoisie, by resorting to the 'lumpenproletariat' as an apparently independent base of power, while in fact advancing the material interests of the bourgeoisie.
Adolf would have been more direct. He would have said Untermenschen to include Jews, Slavs, Gypsies or Africans, and asocial elements, as well as people with a mental or physical disability, homosexuals, criminals, prostitutes, beggars, tramps, political dissidents, Jehovah's Witnesses and so-called morally degenerates were subhuman. Actually his usage was rather broader.
Is us not at so much part of Marxism as a tool his followers use to brow beat honest men and impose a flood of Third World immigrants on us. The desired result is Cultural Genocide
Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere
Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society by Jürgen Habermas, was Habermas' first major work,.... It is an account of the development of a bourgeois public sphere in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, and its subsequent decline...........
Habermas focuses on the pernicious effects of commercialization and consumerization on the public sphere through the rise of mass media, "public relations," and consumer culture. He also lays out the problematic effects of mass party politics on deliberative parliamentarian politics and rational-critical debate in the public sphere. The book has been enormously influential, especially since its translation into English, for scholars of political science, media studies, and rhetoric. It is also an important work for historians of philosophy and intellectual historians, now that Habermas is recognized as an important philosopher of the twentieth century.
It might have made more sense in the original German. It does not seem to cover the pernicious effects of mass murder and collectivazation in the Soviet Union. Being killed can spoil your day even if it is the will of the people.
Useful Idiots is a pungent phrase usually attributed to Lenin. His useful idiots were going to help him conquer the world but illness and death caught up with him first. In the event Joe Stalin carried on where he left off. Uncle Joe was not an idiot but he was very useful in the mass murder line.
The phrase has virtue. It reveals a truth in two words.
Here are some of the Wikipedia's offerings on the subject:-
Das Kapital: Kritik der politischen �konomie (Capital, in the English translation) is an extensive treatise on political economy written in German by Karl Marx and edited in part by Friedrich Engels. The book is a critical analysis of capitalism. Its first volume was published in 1867, and it has seen a resurgence in popularity during the current economic crisis.
The central driving force of capitalism, according to Marx, was in the exploitation and alienation of labour. The ultimate source of capitalist profits and surplus was the unpaid labour of wage labourers. Employers could appropriate the new output value because of their ownership of the productive capital assets�protected by the state. By producing output as capital for the employers, the workers constantly reproduced the condition of capitalism by their labour.
If a man can't explain something clearly it is worth asking if he understands it himself. Marx is turgid.
The Communist Manifesto
Manifesto of the Communist Party (German: Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei), often referred to as The Communist Manifesto, was first published on February 21, 1848, and is one of the world's most influential political manuscripts. Commissioned by the Communist League and written by communist theorists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it laid out the League's purposes and program..........
The introduction begins with the notable comparison of communism to a "spectre," claiming that across Europe communism is feared, but not understood, and thus communists ought to make their views known with a manifesto:.............
The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.
Promising mass murder is not a way to win friends and influence people, or is it? Adolf did something of the sort with Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler and he still gets abused.
Errors & omissions, broken links,
cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if
you find any I am open to comment.
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP Key. Home Page
Updated on 12/01/2018 20:32