Saturday, August 1, 2009

The End Game of the Left

Within the world of the far left, individuals have no value. Only the state matters. That is why the modern American statist devalues individual achievement and wealth. If, as in the socialist world of Marx, Engels, and Adolf Hitler (yes, Hitler, as I will explain later), God does not exist and humans have no souls, then the state determines the value of a human life. This philosophy leads to an ominous conclusion.

In my never-ending quest to understand the statist mind, I have attempted to use the principles of objective observation, or phenomenology, to analyze their intentions based on their behavior. Statists, it appears, have two proclivities: One, they are perpetually unhappy and dissatisfied with the current political and social environment, no matter what it happens to be. Two, they are viscerally angry at whoever stands in their way to the next level of progressive utopia. They do not tolerate alternate points of view. An objective individual might classify this behavior as classic immaturity. But there is much more darkness to the statist soul than mere boorish behavior.

The seemingly endless downward spiral into Dante’s seventh level of socialist utopia was made into a movie back in 1968, aptly titled “Wild in the Streets”. It was a pretty cheesy flick, but one particular scene left a lasting impression on me. This was where the radical leftist youths who took control of the government sent the old folks off to national concentration camps and forced them to drink from water coolers filled with Kool-Aid laced with LSD. For some reason, this image keeps popping into my head whenever I hear about ObamaCare. At the end of the movie, there is a foreshadowing that an even younger and more radical regime is about to overthrow the radical leftists in power. On and on it goes, with Dante’s infernal utopia never quite achieved.

Concessions to the fantastic demands of statists lead to more dissatisfaction and anger, and increasingly fantastic demands. This is similar to the strategy of the radical Islamists living in Western countries. In fact, you can phenomenologically observe many attitude similarities between the statist and Islamist. Intolerance of divergent opinions, hatred toward “non-believers”, the obsession to dominate and control every aspect of others’ lives, and a dogmatic attitude guided by emotion rather than logic, are some examples. Of course, Islamists are just statists with a state religion. To the Islamist, the end game for the Infidel is conversion or death.

The statist philosophy, whether Islamic or otherwise, appears to condone and even embrace the concept of eliminating the members of the opposition by murdering them. While the left projects hatred, racism, and evil on the conservative end of the spectrum, it is they who actually exhibit these attributes. As New York University professor George Watson states in his book, “The Lost Literature of Socialism”:

But it was the issue of race, above all, that for half a century has prevented National Socialism (the Nazi party) from being seen as socialist. The assumption that socialism was never racist can now be seen as a misunderstanding.

The proletariat may have no fatherland, as Lenin said. But there were still, in Marx view, races that would have to be exterminated. That is a view he published in January-February 1849 in an article by Engels called “The Hungarian Struggle” in Marx journal the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, and the point was recalled by socialists down to the rise of Hitler. It is now becoming possible to believe that Auschwitz was socialist-inspired. The Marxist theory of history required and demanded genocide for reasons implicit in its claim that feudalism, which in advanced nations was already giving place to capitalism, must in turn be superseded by socialism. Entire races would be left behind after a workers’ revolution, feudal remnants in a socialist age; and since they could not advance two steps at a time, they would have to be killed. They were racial trash, as Engels called them, and fit only for the dung-heap of history.

Watson continues:

Socialism offered a blank check to violence, and its license to kill included genocide. In 1933, in a preface to On the Rocks, for example, Bernard Shaw publicly welcomed the exterminatory which, to his profound satisfaction, the Soviet Union had already adopted. Socialists could now take pride in a state that had at last found the courage to act, though some still felt that such action should be kept a secret. In 1932 Beatrice Webb remarked at a tea-party what “very bad stage management” it had been to allow a party of British visitors in the Ukraine to see cattle-trucks full of starving “enemies of the state” at a local station.

But after all, nothing like this could happen in America, right? Obama’s building up of ACORN “community organizers” and the AmeriCorps civilian army with billions of dollars from the Stimulus couldn’t be used against its own citizens, could it? His statement that "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded (as the military)” doesn’t scare you, does it? Read the following transcript from the testimony of Larry Grathwohl, an FBI informant who infiltrated a 1970 meeting conducted by Obama’s close friend (and probable ghost-writer) William Ayers and included the leadership of the socialist Weather Underground.

I brought up the subject of what’s going to happen after we take over the government. You know, we become responsible for administrating, you know, 250 million people. And there was no answer. No one had given any thought to economics. How are you going to clothe and feed these people? The only thing that I could get was that they expected that the Cubans, the North Vietnamese, the Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States. They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. And they felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education in the Southwest where we would take all of the people who needed to be re educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, “Well, what is going to happen to those people that we can’t re educate, that are die-hard capitalists?” And the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated and when I pursued this further, they estimated that they’d have to eliminate 25 million people in these re education centers. And when I say eliminate, I mean kill 25 million people. I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of whom have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people and they were dead serious.

The end game of the left is the abortion and eugenic elimination of the “undesirables”, the euthanasia of the old and infirm, and the genocide of those who disagree. Its objective is the purity of socialist thought. And it is pure evil.

Andrew Thomas aka Angel Artiste
As published in American Thinker

1 comment:

  1. We share a mutual admiration of Big Fur Hat, and a recognition that the statists of the 19th & 20th centuries including luminaries such as Huxley, Shaw, Wells, et al were deeply involved in eugenics.

    I applaud your analysis of National Socialism as a left wing ideology. The form of govt on the right side of my paradigm is a Constitutional Republic.

    I have a theory that there's something extremely interesting and counterintuitive going on with the Left, which most people would write off as "oh right, sure, uh-huh. Lunatic Fringe clean-up on Aisle 3, please." It is just possibly possible that they have been, will be, and are currently fully engaged in the implementation of a "scientific dictatorship" based on the goal of an occult theocracy which was launched in the 19th century and has blossomed nicely to date.

    Every major player in elite and pop culture such as Huxley, Shaw, Wells, the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Nicholas Roerich, Tim Leary, Marilyn Manson and Madonna; and in politics such as Churchill, FDR & his VP Wallace, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Barack Obama and so many others all share a common anchor in the ideology of Theosophy. Barack is linked to it through his mentor, Saul Alinsky, who allegedly became an "ascended master" after being inspired by Theosophical Society founder "spiritualist" H.P. Blavatsky in the 19th Century. Margaret Sanger was a Theosophist, and her eugenic policies and birth control programs were products of her occult beliefs. The goal, the "great work" is the transformation of "lead" (the profane masses) into "gold" (perfected men).

    Hitler was said to have kept a copy of Madame Blavatsky's "The Secret Doctrine" by his bedside for nightly reading, and Winston Churchill reportedly insisted that the black magic of the Nazi party not be revealed to the general public after the war...

    If you sense evil, and it's true that our cultural and leadership icons are neither atheists, Christians nor agnostics - and instead adhere to a cult that openly worships Lucifer, Drinking-with-Bob says, "What's Next"?

    I don't plan on blogging about this until my research is bulletproof. One wishes to tread responsibly in these areas which are so potentially disturbing (not to mention sound completely ludicrous to most normal people), but you've edged to close to it in this article that I just had to share.

    I'll leave you with a tantalizing clue: pick up copies of "The Aquarian Conspiracy" by Marilyn Ferguson and "The Externalization of the Hierarchy" by Alice Bailey. Bailey founded the Lucis Trust (formerly called Lucifer Trust, I kid you not). Lucis prints and distributes all the U.N. "spiritual" literature and was very instrumental in the hideous U.N. "Meditation Room". Check out the Lucis website for starters. Good luck, and keep up the great work of uncovering what may discover to be the Left's "Alchemical Great Work" which has survived from a very ancient past to thrive in the present.