Karl Marx flunks history

In the following column, Olavo de Carvalho alludes to the Hegelian theory of the “historical imperative,” which the early Marxists used as a basis for their ideas.

This Utopian notion of history as a foregone conclusion, is still used by Marxists and their followers. I have shown how the idea of “gay marriage” is based in part on this idea and is seen by activists in the field as an inevitable outcome of all prior history.

Mr. de Carvalho points out the severe philosophical limitations of this Utopian idea. Ironically, its popularity and the virulence of its supporters are symptoms of its inherent lack of validity.

Don Hank

Social Critique and History

Olavo de Carvalho
Jornal da Tarde, October 11, 2001

All social critique is founded upon some idea of the better. It is only in comparison with this idea that any existing society may seem good, tolerable, bad, or unbearable. But the idea of the better does not emerge from nothing: it is conceived of by actual men, members of the same society they criticize. If we consider that the mindset of these men is entirely a “product” of society, then, only one of two alternatives is true: either they themselves fall into the evil they denounce, or society, having given these men the idea of the better, cannot be as evil as they say it is.

Therefore, all social critique that claims to have any foundation at all can only be based upon the premise that in man’s consciousness there is a dimension which somehow transcends any present society and to which he can transport himself in thought in order to judge that society from the outside, or from above.

It is evident, however, that a simple verbal appeal to a legitimating authority is not enough to validate any critique. A critique must not only allege but must also prove its logical affiliation with a superior authority.

Social critiques, therefore, can be hierarchized on a scale of strictly objective validity, in accordance with (a) the intrinsic legitimacy of the authority called upon to legitimize them; (b) the degree of logical consistency of the nexus between the legitimizing authority and the content of the critique. In other words: (a) The authority of the superior authority summoned to legitimize a critique may be false or deficient in itself, as in the case of the critic who condemns society based upon a pure Utopian model of his own invention. (b) If the alleged authority is valid in itself, there is also the risk that the deduction which the critic draws from it in order to validate a specific critique of a specific society is not a logically valid inference.

A history of social critique from antiquity to the present day would easily demonstrate that, over time, the social critiques formulated in the West have been progressively losing their validity as they have grow in virulence and in the number of their adherents. In other words: as time goes on, social critics lose in intrinsic authority what they gain in pretension and audience.

I know that this is a lamentable observation and that some people, without having ever studied the subject, or even become minimally aware of it before reading this article, will reject it in limine and will seek refuge from it behind all sorts of subterfuge. The only thing I have to say to these people is: don’t bother me; go study. As to other people, that is, those for whom the enunciation of a hypothesis arouses curiosity instead of tears, I suggest they compare, for example, the Socratic critique to the Marxist one. The latter has far more adherents and is much more ferocious than the former, but, in declaring that men’s consciousness is a “product” of history, the Marxist critique cannot allege any legitimizing authority other than history itself; however, since history does not provide models for its own judgment, but rather the simple reporting of faits accomplis, the Marxist critic is left with no other alternative than to infer from past history a hypothesis for a future development and to take it at once as the legitimizing authority for the critique of the present. Nothing proves that the predicted development is inevitable, nor that the state of affairs that results from it will have to be better than the present state of affairs; all this is nothing but hypothesis and has no other legitimizing authority than that of a hypothesis. On the other hand, Socrates’ critique, which did not gain many adherents, except in a very limited circle, had a much more solid foundation, since the authorities to which he appealed were the certainty of death and the intrinsic authority of reason, which no man can reject. 

Marxism stands at an even greater disadvantage when compared to the social critique of the Hebrew prophets, who draw their authority from the fulfillment of prophecies. Moses’ critique of the state of affairs in Egypt was founded upon his foreknowledge of the concrete means of leading the Jewish people to a better situation; and the success of his undertaking provided full proof of his claims. This is an argument that no Marxist can allege in support of his criticism of capitalism. Quite to the contrary, the historical achievements of the socialist model in USSR and China were so disappointing that, nowadays, Marxists, after having proclaimed and defended them as the purest and most typical expressions of how Marxism overcomes capitalism, strive to explain them ex post facto as accidental deviations and to purge Marxism of any commitment to such obvious failures.

Translator: Alessandro Cota; Translation Editor: Don Hank

Author Olavo de Carvalho is a noted correspondent for several major Brazilian newspapers and founder of the Inter-American Institute for Philosophy, Government and Social Thought. He has spoken before the Hudson Institute, the Atlas Foundation and the America’s Future Foundation.

To comment or schedule an appearance, contact Laigle’s Forum at:  zoilandon@msn.com

Is “gay marriage” a historical imperative?

by Don Hank

According to expert testimony before the House in 1963, the 26th of the “Current Communist Goals” was:

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

My recent response to the court decision by a homosexual judge in California supposedly making any ban on “gay marriage” unconstitutional received a deluge of of responses, including some expressing gay rage at my refusal to accept the use of the word “marriage” appied to same-sex relationships. (Check out the comments section under the article “Same-sex marriage? There’s no such thing”).

Some suggested I was a Nazi, others a bigot, still others a hater. It was the same old Gramscian tactics that the Left has used for over 100 years, showing an almost complete lack of reflection and no palpable originality.

In the last comment, a poster, who calls himself a “Christian” and apparently wants to pass as a “conservative,” said:

“Of course, the rest of society has moved on [emphasis added], and we pretty much look at them [anyone opposing ‘gay marriage’] with a mixture of pity and revulsion, but hey, it is their right.”

So the work of a single judge activist is proof that “society has moved on”?

In fact the people of California, arguably the most liberal state in the nation, voted for Proposition 8, which makes “gay marriage” illegal. So what is going on?

Let me try to explain.

This activist is portraying “gay” marriage as a historical imperative.

Hegel’s concept of the historical imperative found its first application in communism by the founders of that ideology. It is an example of the Left’s inversion of all things. If you are an ordinary person, you look at history objectively in logical chronological sequence, from past to present. Not the Leftist. He sees history’s starting point in the future utopia that he imagines. For him, all recorded history must meet one criterion: It must show unequivocally that all of history is marching toward a great egalitarian revolution, where all are equal. It is inevitable and the history books must be revised to reflect this “fact.” “Gay marriage” is an important stepping stone in the quest for this revolutionary “equality” or “social justice.”

But do utopians really ever bring about equality and social justice?

The Soviet Union, Cuba, China, North Korea, all reflect the opposite. There, the leaders pursued lifestyles of great opulence, living in palaces and feasting daily as the masses either starved or lived hand to mouth. In the Ukraine, under Stalin, for example, at least 10 million were killed, mostly by starvation. Still more were starved to death in China under Mao.

The closer any country comes to the dreamed-of “Utopia,” the further from equality it gets.

Of course, the above examples are restricted to the hardline communists, who, thanks to the unlimited power they enjoyed, had no need to use victim groups to get votes. But the same principle applies to soft Marxism of the kind that prevails in Europe and the US, where interest groups (like homosexuals) are seen as crucial to acquiring power. You need only look at Michelle Obama’s taxpayer-funded trip to Spain or Nancy Pelosi’s fabulously expensive taxpayer-funded airliner to see that the Western world is destined for an impoverishment of the middle class that may rival — or even exceed — that of hardline communist nations. You will get even poorer and the politically well-placed will get wealthy beyond measure. Our world financial and economic crises are a result of wealth distribution under “soft” Marxism. Yet our elites continue to borrow for ineffective Keynesian “stimulus” programs that transfer the wealth of the middle class to rich bankers, and will continue to do so as long as we close our eyes to the unconstitutionality of this plundering of our resources. (The elites confuse us by reminding that the “conservative” G.W. Bush also promoted such practices as lending to the insolvent and “stimulus” programs. Recruiting false conservatives into the Marxist game plays a key role in the subterfuge. “Conservative” Prime Minister David Cameron is playing this role in the UK, where he promised voters to hold a referendum on EU membership and then reneged on that promise. And in case you missed it, the “conservative”Ann Coulter has recently taken her place in the ranks of the cultural Marxist campaign, promoting “gay marriage,” thereby ensuring her place in a leftward-evolving GOP).

In other words, the “historical imperative” that the above-quoted homosexual activist alludes to, and his disdain for counter-revolutionary traditionalists like me (regarding conservatives with “pity and revulsion”), are a sign of a great inequality that is to come, one that is cynically expected to be a utopia.

Let me further clarify: The homosexual agenda we see proceeding apace before us is not, on the surface, the kind of economic Marxism we saw (or see) in Russia, China, North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba, etc. It is something more subtle and insidious but with the same intent – namely, Fabian Marxism, which is a stealth revolution that is intended to eventually usher in economic Marxism later on once power is consolidated in the hands of the Left. Now if this “historical imperative” – the inevitability of the Marxist revolution – were possible, then the question is: why did it not happen a long time ago?

The first known Utopian screed appeared almost 2,500 years ago. It was written by none less than Plato. The first Utopian experiment was in 4th Century Persia and it failed ignominiously for the same reason all such experiments fail: no one wanted to work.

There were utopian movements from the 13th Century on in the Dark Ages and on through the Renaissance and beyond. They played crucial roles in the great wars of the time. All of them failed.

The French Revolution touted égalité, among other things. It follows that today’s France is very accepting of same-sex “marriage.” Yet today, there is scarcely a more economically skewed society, with government employees receiving vastly  more income and perks than workers in the private economy. And, of course, as in all “egalitarian” Utopias, there is a vanishing trend in work performed by this privileged class, while the less-fortunate private-economy workers earn less and less in terms of real wages, corrected for cost of living.

It is quite possible that eventually, the masses will be dumbed-down and propagandized to the point of no return, relinquishing the little freedom that remains, and learn to accept the unacceptable. A quick look at the sociocultural reality of Europe is a glimpse of our future, barring unforeseen circumstances.

But if past revolutions are a viable indicator, then the activists themselves will be the main recipients of the unintended consequences of their own actions.

Already, the first “gay” divorces have been examples of wealth redistribution, with the richer of the 2 being forced to relinquish a significant proportion of their income and property to the other.

It is to be expected that some of these “beneficiaries” of the homosexual revolution will eventually look back longingly at the days of traditional marriage and its defenders.

I for one will be looking at them not with revulsion, but with pity.

It’s official: Obama puts race over Constitution

DOJ official resigns over Obama’s racism

Don Hank

The below-linked is one of the most important reports I have read because it indicts Barack Obama as the racist he is and always will be. It shows what many suspect: For Obama, devotee of Black Liberation theology, there is no such thing as a criminal black man.

Remember Governor Spencer attacking Tea Party attendee Nathan Tabor? Spencer may get off and Tabor, who did not hit anyone, was also charged. The courts are in the hands of red revolutionaries of the Bolshevik type. We could be in Mao’s China or any of such brutal dictatorships now. BTW, Mao advocated using the “ruffian” class to help reach communist goals. It doesn’t get any worse than Maoism, and this is it, right now, in the USA. The psychology is dangerous and assaults our liberty at every turn. Worse, too many Americans – lacking any meaningful background in history – are ignoring these blatant symptoms of out and out tyranny.

A Department of Justice official has just quit because of Obama’s undisguised racism in dismissing a case against a criminal group of new Black Panthers.

Quote:

“Based on my firsthand experiences, I believe the dismissal of the Black Panther case was motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law. Others still within the department share my assessment. The department abetted wrongdoers and abandoned law-abiding citizens victimized by the New Black Panthers. The dismissal raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.” J. Christian Adams

Read more here

Please help John Wayne Tucker help America

I’ve said it before: If the Tea Party only succeeds in electing Republican lap dogs of the kind we populate our Congress with, America is doomed (that is why the Arizona Senatorial elections are so important. If John McCain gets re-elected, that is the worst possible barometer reading for American conservatism).

Friends, some of you may recall that Dave Levine is a radio host who personally contacts people like myself who need to be educated about candidates. Dave goes to a lot of trouble to get to know candidates personally and is particularly sensitive to the difference between real conservatives and RINOs or weak-kneed candidates.

He has long been supporting John Wayne Tucker, a popular candidate for Congress in Missouri who is running on the GOP ticket but is being opposed by the treacherous GOP establishment. They are supporting the more malleable Ed Martin, who can be expected to compromise with the “other side of the aisle” when called upon to do so by the treacherous GOP.

This is spiritual warfare and we must win.

The GOP is why Obama won. They ran the weakest, most tarnished most leftwing candidate they could find, a man who most of us knew would keep the border open and wanted to amnesty millions of invaders.

John Wayne Tucker will definitely fight for our border. How do I know? Dave Levine said so and I trust Dave’s judgment.

In addition, he is authentically pro-life, which is a sometimes hard to find among anti-invasion candidates – probably because all “mainstream” churches officially support amnesty schemes.

If you click on the first link below and take the poll (vote for John Wayne Tucker), you will see that John has an amazing lead: 71.9% to Martin’s anemic 19.9%.

It may look like a wrap, but John needs $3,000 for yard signs and radio ads.

Don Hank

PS: Someone tell Sheriff Joe he got behind the wrong man. Schlafly is a Republican establishment hack so it won’t do any good to talk to her.

Dave’s email to me:

Don,

I know I’ve asked you this many times but unfortunately, they [my readers] haven’t come thru. I need to ask you one more time, for my friend JWT. He needs $3,000 to run radio ads and to buy yard signs to beat Martin. I spoke with Zac Bauer tonight, John’s Campaign Maganer. They have so many requests for signs but no money to buy them! The Primary is 32 days away.

Martin’s a wuss. He left Sunday’s Freedom Fights before the debate part began. While he has Sheriff Joe’s and Schlafly’s endorsements, he’s taking way too much for granted and John believes he’s beatable. That unscientific Missouri Sovereignty Project online poll was pretty amazing

http://www.missourisovereigntyproject.com/3rd-congressional-dist.html

John had a 70% to 20% District Vote advantage.

If you can send this out to your Conservative friends, perhaps some of them will send John a donation. His site is http://johnwaynetucker.com.

Thanks,

Dave

SUBSCRIBE TO LAIGLE’S FORUM:

http://laiglesforum.com/mailing/?p=subscribe&id=1

Book/DVD list for your April 15 Tea Party

Book/DVD list for your April 15 tea party

 

By Donald Hank

The local tea party in Lancaster PA seems to have been organized by 2 fine ladies who, on the tea party web site, also recommend a book list for invitees. Good for them. Much of the list, apparently originating with Ron Paul, is made up of the True Liberals, or libertarians, like Ludwig van Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Ayn Rand and many others.

I emailed these ladies and thanked them for doing this and then said there were a few other books that Americans ought to read.

I wrote:

For today’s world, the most important information – most of which your school and/or college probably made sure you missed – is the story of the socialist dictators of the 20th century.

An invaluable contribution to your list would be “Harvest of Sorrow” by Robert Conquest, describing the slaughter of millions of Ukrainian farmers, “Son of the Revolution” by Liang Heng and Judith Shapiro, an eye-witness account of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, and the 3 disk DVD set China, a Century of Revolution, directed by Sue Williams (one of the co-producers was Karma Hinton, my first Chinese teacher). You will immediately see the unmistakable similarity between the Red Guard and ACORN.

Further DVDs: Repentance, a top-notch surrealistic Russian film (RU title: Pokayanie) about a Stalin like figure, Est-Oueste (East-West), an excellent film about a French family that visits the Soviet Union in the early post-WW II years and is trapped there. The Chinese film To Live is also an artistic masterpiece but at the same time, a realistic portrayal of the tragedy of Mao’s Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution.

Others: A somewhat tedious but trail blazing book “The Black Book of Communism” was written by a group of French communists under Stéphane Courtois who decided to come clean about the death toll of the 20th century, namely, almost 100 million innocents slaughtered throughout the world in the name of “social justice.”

Further, the Russian film Nest of Noblefolk (RU: Dvorjanskoe Gnezdo), an adaptation of the Turgenev story, shows the remarkable similarity between the mid 1800s and our 60s, with the elite classes talking about the same ideas that threw our society into moral and social turmoil. Shot in the Russian countryside, it is a cinema buff’s delight, with gorgeous photography, period-correctness in all aspects, soulful Russian gypsy music, a gripping love story with 2 intertwined love triangles and a surprise ending.

Note, however, that Turgenev’s best description of the early revolutionaries is given in his novel “Fathers and Sons,” which reflects the ideas that we considered revolutionary in our 1960s. In reality, we were a century later than the Russians in introducing ordered chaos, which is why freedom survived so long here. Nothing stands in the way of totalitarianism now – except you. And you know what? I believe in you.

Best,

Don Hank

TEA PARTIES AROUND THE NATION (find yours here):

http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34348

Shifting the blame from Left to greed

Blaming greed for failed leftist policies

Donald Hank

The Pope has said, over the Christmas holiday, that the world must overcome greed to get through the current economic crisis.

With all due respect for the Pope, whose stance on social issues are to be applauded, both Protestantism and Catholicism, while blaming greed, have failed to grasp the nature of the Left and its role in crises such as the financial and economic crises gripping the world.

The CRA (Community Reinvestment Act, passed under Jimmy Carter) and the way it was enforced, including the role of ACORN, played a major role in bringing down the banks. Generally, the trend to lend money, particularly mortgages, to people with no down payment and even without proof of employment, goes against all common sense and good banking practice, which has been in place since the beginning of time and throughout the world, and has proved disastrous. And yet so many are in denial, even to the utterly absurd point of casting all the blame on conservative policies and seeing the Democrats as being more economically astute and hence capable of pulling us out of the current crisis of their own making — sort of like Clinton “reforming” the failed welfare created by his party. Anyone paying attention in the years since 1995, when Clinton ordered the banks to lend a trillion dollars to “underserved communities,” would have been able to foresee this collapse. Some actually did, including a New York Times writer in 1999.

I suppose it could be argued that the Left, in its own way, represents greed, but it is probably more appropriate to call it ideologically motivated rather than greedy. Ideological motivation, rather than common sense, has caused the greatest destruction known to man — under Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

None of these men’s political actions were greed-motivated in the accepted sense of the word. In their decisions that led to the murder and starvation of millions, they were, however, blinded by leftist utopian (revolutionary) ideology — a desire for a better world, for change, and ironically, for a world with less greed.

Ideology killed 100 million innocent people in the last century (see “The Black Book of Communism by Stephane Courtois). No other factor, including greed, has ever done anywhere near that much harm.

The visual generation — the death of discernment

 

The Visual Generation – The Death of Discernment

 

When Chairman Mao of China wanted to reach an entire generation, many who were illiterate, he produced his communist message in “comic book” style. It resulted in an entire generation of youth jumping onboard Mao’s red wagon and subsequently tearing down the culture and traditions and the very structures of one of the oldest societies in the world.

 

In America it is mindless, Godless and feckless TV programming, You Tube and Hollywood’s latest offering of films that pour images on an entire generation. The result is exactly the same as it was in China but on a much larger scale and with so much more to lose.

 

If you asked anyone who is considering voting for Barack Obama or any liberal why they chose that candidate, the answer you will most likely hear is, “I like him.” or “he looks good to me.”

 

If he, she or it looks good that’s good enough for the “media generation.” No discernment needed, wisdom is too hard to acquire and who has more than a few seconds of time in this world of screen shots, blips and spot messages to look any deeper. A new language and a new media has developed that thrives on abbreviated communications; OMG could I be talking about texting?

 

People who read entire books and articles to learn something or to see an authors point are becoming rare. Just getting to this sentence means you probably are one of those people. You may have read some Hemingway, Joyce, even Shakespeare or at the very least the morning paper. You may be one of the rare breed of people that actually forms opinions and conclusions based on a careful weighing of all the facts.

 

In the Bible (1 Cor 12:10) there is mention of a “spiritual gift” known as “discerning of spirits.” Unfortunately that gift is often placed in a list of charismatic type gifts that end up being thought of as something only practiced by a few Pentecostal people. In fact the language of 1:Cor 12:10 connotes the idea of a “judging through” of any and all matters not a fleeting spiritual thought dropping out of the ether.

 

Discerning of spirits is a God given enterprise that does not work unless God is brought into the equation. He unveils, reveals or shows the deepest meaning of things to the deepest people. They are a peculiar people who weigh everything and refuse to make prejudiced and extraneous judgments based only on what they see or have heard from the grape vine, the media or God knows where!

It is the rarity of such people that serves as only one of a few reasons that can be found for the wholesale blindness that seems to be accompanying the decisions made by the American public about their presidential candidates.

 

The biblically based reason is far more obvious and it reads like this, “In whom the god of this world (Satan) hath blinded the minds of them which believe not” (2 Cor 4:4a) It is what allows people to assent to what late night talk show hosts say about candidates instead of listening to the candidates themselves and comparing that to all that has gone before. It is almost perverse, because it is a “spirit” that drives the average person to use no “spiritual” discernment at all.

 

It is what causes thousands to think Rick Warren is actually helping the American public to choose a better candidate by bringing John McCain and Barack Obama to “Saddleback” so they can smooth out their differences.  The program or show (side show) is partly sponsored by Meg Riley who formerly headed up her denomination’s homosexual advocacy office.  It raises the serious question of whose purpose is the author of “The Purpose Driven Life” fulfilling? It’s a show, a visual, and a media attraction with or without knowing exactly what is really driving Rick Warren’s purpose. What Evangelist Bill Keller told his over two million subscribers on his daily devotional July 26, 2008, was that Warrens sideshow is a “load of garbage.”

 

Has Keller crossed the sacred PC line and sinned against society? No, what he has really done is used God given discernment based on sound scriptural teachings and mustered the guts to say it out loud to a You Tube generation that would rather watch hours of delightful nonsense and tripe  rather than discern anything that matters. Kudos to Bill Keller, shame on Rick Warren!

 

Sadly, what is really happening is what the Apostle James and other biblical authors predicted would become commonplace as we approach the second coming of Christ. James said,”Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?” (James 2:4) King James Version or not this is exactly the meaning of “choosing between the lesser of two evils.” Not much discernment needed to know what that means. This is America today.

 

The greatest loss from the abandoning of discernment is that America has lost the connection. We are no longer able to discern the “connection” between our morality and all the other issues. The truth is that the economy, our security, and all the other matters of our national life depend on and are inextricably linked to our morality. We have mistakenly allocated morality to an aspect of our religious life and have thereby disconnected it from our own larger national welfare and security.

 

Political candidates, the news media and pundits rant about the economy, the war, taxes, crime and all the so called “critical issues” while ignoring the gross immorality of homosexuality, abortion, media filth, evolutionary dogma that passes itself of as academic freedom and general sensory driven visual tripe from Hollywood and similar sources. Morality is relegated to the churches and a few PC deficient fundamentalist Bible thumping diehards who just won’t seem to go away.

 

The result of all this distraction derived from the lack of discernment is in a word: judgment. But is it inevitable? Does the sun Rise? Does the sun set? It is God’s judgment that follows the refusal to use our own better judgment.

 

Using judgment is not a luxury that is reserved for a few and can be ignored by all others. In fact it is a biblical imperative that if ignored will have an immediate and devastating effect on everyone in our nation “The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.”(Isa 59:8)

 

The simplest rule for using good judgment turns out to be just the opposite of what is being done in America’s visual generation. Here it is; “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” Jesus, John 7:24.

 

If you have any discernment left and you must if you’ve gotten this far into this article then let me suggest that you pray for America to once again make decisions based on sound wisdom and spiritual discernment.

 

Rev Bresciani is an author and columnist for several online and print publications. With over two million readers worldwide and growing you will enjoy the articles, movie reviews, commentary and much more visit www.americanprophet.org

 

 

Keywords:

 

Judgment,bill keller,rick warren,meg riley,john McCain,Barack Obama,Jesus,Satan,Mao,Saddleback,America,politics,You Tube,morality,issues,taxes,pundits,purpose driven,Pentecostal,church,Hollywood,films,texting,