The Submission of the Cultural Marxists

One of the sad ironies of the 21st century is that the European countries that were ruled by Marxists for forty-five years are now a refuge from the Cultural Marxism that rules in Western Europe and North America.

The following essay examines the death-grip that Cultural Marxism has on Western Europe. It was written by the Hungarian engineer and economist Károly Lóránt (see also his previous article) for the Hungarian daily Magyar Hírlap. Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation:

The submission of the Cultural Marxists

by Károly Lóránt
October 31, 2016

The population of Africa will increase by one billion in two decades, and the region can’t sustain such masses…

Hungary was the target of a huge number of attacks for building a fence and not accepting migrants. In addition to refuting this criticism, we should think about what motivates our critics, and what is our point of view.

Let’s look at the facts first. We know that immigration to Western Europe started in the 1960s in the form of guest workers who received permanent residence permits, and later their numbers multiplied with family reunifications. From the ‘90s onward increasingly large numbers arrived illegally from Middle Eastern and African countries. What happened to the migrants? Did they integrate into Western society as the politicians who invited them hoped, or their current descendants are hoping? The answer is a definite NO! While those Central European migrants from a similar culture (European, Christian) have been integrated, the mostly Muslim migrants from the Middle East or Africa ended up in ghettos. We can argue about whether no-go zones exist or not, but segregated ghettoization is a fact, so much so that the Danes have already worked out a concrete definition of it. According to the Danish government, a ghetto is a place where at least three of the following five criteria are fulfilled:

1.   At least 2.7% of the population has already been convicted of a crime;
2.   The income of the population is less than 55% of the average income of the region;
3.   For those between the ages of 30 and 59, more than 50% have no more than an elementary school education;
4.   More than 50% of the population is not from Western European countries;
5.   Between the ages of 18 and 64, more than 40% are not working and not going to school.

Based on the above criteria, in Denmark there are 34 ghettos, six of them in the Copenhagen area. Migrants living in these ghettos — mostly Muslims — do not wish to live by their host country’s laws, but by their own cultures and traditions, which means the teachings of Islam. According to a survey conducted by the WZB Social Science Center at the behest of the German Parliament, two-thirds of Turkish and Moroccan migrants state than Shariah is more important for them than the law of the host country. This attitude was supported by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who stated that Shariah should gain official status in the United Kingdom. Despite the wishes and statements of some Western leaders, we have proof that in Western Europe parallel societies have formed enclaves that are increasing in size and in time may join up, and in the long term will lead to the full Islamisation of Western Europe.

Another fact contained in the demographic forecasts asserts that the population of Africa will increase by one billion in two decades, which population — taking into account climate change — cannot be sustained there. It’s not hard to imagine what will happen if these people march en masse into Europe.

We must ask the question: do we want our countries to stay ours, or do we gradually submit to Islamic culture — maybe in the form described so vividly in the book by the French writer Michel Houellebecq, Submission? If the answer is NO, then it is clear what we must do: we must defend our country from illegal migrants and repeal the forced settlement attempts by the European Union based on their overbearing policies.

Is this a viewpoint that can be argued? Of course, and many argue it, too. The leaders of the EU still live under the illusion that large masses of migrants and their previously-arrived counterparts can be integrated successfully into European society. The latest proof of this delusion a publication called
Action Plan on the integration of third country nationals” [pdf], which was released by the European Commission in June of this year. The material emphasizes that the main methods for integration are pre-selection, education and employment, and also the provision of basic services and active involvement into the local community. The publication does not even attempt to discuss any of the experiences of the previous decades. The politicians can’t say anything except to repeat Merkel’s mantra: “We can do it”! (Wir schaffen das) or what Sarkozy says: “The migrants must accept that their ancestors are the Gauls” or the resigned version: “We thought that… if you walked the streets of Copenhagen and drank the municipal water and rode the municipal bus, you’d soon become a Dane. It was so obvious to us, and therefore we thought that it must also be obvious for those who settled and lived here. It wasn’t.” (Queen Margrethe II of Denmark).

What is obvious for the migrants is much more visible from a Daily Express article from last year where a medical student who left the UK to join ISIS in Syria called for Shariah in his Twitter message. The journalist Leo McKinstry stated that in a healthy society such fanaticism would be treated with utter contempt. But he adds, “…sadly in recent decades, the moral self-confidence of the West has been shattered by the malignant doctrine of political correctness, which holds that it is racist to challenge any cultural practices brought by immigrants.”

Political correctness is a Marxist ideology, with roots going back to the period after the First World War, when the Marxists (György Lukács, Antonio Gramsci, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse) — disenchanted with the working class — created the Frankfurt School, which also used Freudian methods. Using Freud’s teachings they built new bases for Marxism, and placed cultural questions at the center instead of income distribution. This political school of thought was then called Cultural Marxism. Their method was Critical Theory, which in practice questioned the traditional Western values and institutions. Its methods were: sexual liberation, gender theory and support of all kind of minorities against the majority. People with a fondness for traditional values were called unstable, extremists and fascists. The representatives of this philosophy followed the tactics — as suggested by the German student leader Rudi Dutschke — of the “long march”: they occupied the institutional systems of the Western world, and their views became exclusive in all mainstream parties (both left and right), government and other offices, and finally the institutions of the European Union. Opposing voices were silenced by traditional communist methods: blacklisting, isolation, financial punishment, prison. A good example of this is the case of Ákos of Hungarian Telecom for defending the traditional model of the family.

[Ákos is a popular Hungarian pop star who holds conservative views. He had a sponsor contract with the Hungarian Telecom. When he gave an interview where answering a question he stated, he would love to see a society where women were not forced to have both a career and marriage, juggling all kind of responsibilities, which is next to impossible and responsible for the low birthrate and broken marriages, but instead were given the appropriate financial and societal appreciation for raising kids and providing a home. The liberals started screaming, and as punishment for stepping out of line, the company cancelled his sponsor contract, forcing him to abandon his national tour and causing him significant financial damage. Perhaps coincidentally, this was the very same company that later sold 200,000 SIM cards to terrorists! — Translator]

Central Europe has been freed up from traditional communist ideology, and outside of a liberal minority, is still free of Cultural Marxism, and that is why it strongly opposes the Establishment in the European Union and other Western countries. This explains the constant barrage of criticism received by Hungary from Western politicians and the Western media.

In the meantime the Cultural Marxists’ principles and political correctness will not able to solve the problems caused by mass immigration or integrate those already arrived. For this reason sooner or later in one form or another — for example, by strengthening non-establishment parties — a more sober assessment of the situation will come into view. In that case the value system of the eastern part of the EU — including Hungary — may be accepted by the new leadership of the Western countries, just as it is already accepted by the Western societies, as proven by the comments written under Hungary-bashing articles.

Looking at the facts concerning migration and the expected future pressure from migration, the way to protect Hungarian interests is to continue to defend our views and wait for a change. We must also think about how to help to defuse the problems in the countries where the migration pressure is coming from.

12 thoughts on “The Submission of the Cultural Marxists

  1. Young men from a masculine culture are never going to integrate into a feminine culture.
    What is the advantage of integration to such men? None from their perspective. Currently they get what they want and are allowed to behave how they want. They’re even allowed to impose their own values on the people of the society they’ve been allowed to join.
    Why would they want to integrate into what they perceive as a weak culture?

  2. In the Indian state of W. Bengal, which borders Islamic Bangladesh, the uncontrolled illegal migration of muslim Bangladeshis has created 3 districts that are now muslim majority, Hindu minority.

    Here is a report on imposition of Sharia law on the hapless Hindus in one of these districts.

    Please remember, where ever muslim populations become significant (as is, greater than 20%), the other communities are subject to such impositions.

    You need to stop all further Islamic entry into the US.

    • Indeed. And there is some small chance that Donald Trump will find a way to do that. It may be that entry into the U.S. will require a signed agreement to live by the laws of America with sharia law subordinate to our Constitution.

      He will have to stand firm on that as the cultural Marxists will be screaming like stuck pigs at the idea of demanding observance of the laws of the land.

  3. I read the comments on many publications (with some great exceptions (GoV, Breitbart, infowars etc) mostly bashing us). So much support and agreement with the direction Viktor Orbán is taking the country. It is a great feeling to see all this. But let’s not forget: Hungary is a small country. It is only around 320 miles long and 155 miles wide. Population only 10 million. We will not be able to free Europe (as some asked – begged for it). Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary can keep the flame alive, show an example, bring hope to the others but we are not a strong enough force to deal with the Islamic invasion. We need the others, we need a strong nationalist UK, France, Holland, Italy and Germany (I would love to see a strong Sweden as well!) as allies. Most important we need a strong nationalist United States lead by President Trump to get rid of the white collar criminal globalists gang.

    • Ironically, your situation could be compared to Israel. The latter is a small beacon in a desert of retarded, virulent hatreds. Knowing that one is right gives energy to the project.

      • Singapore, though internally flawed in some repressive ways, has similar characteristics as well when the broader picture is taken into account.

        More importantly, they have survived and greatly influenced the broader region, albeit not their immediate surroundings so much.

        • Lee Kuan Yew showed great foresight when just two years after Singapore and Malaya became independent of the UK as part of Muslim Malaysia he arranged for Singapore act in its own interests and thus be expelled from the federation.

    • Well in the company of sensible people obviously one would need to argue such nonsense the Cultural Marxists (Liberals, SJW) represents.

    • A viewpoint that is not allowed to be openly expressed cannot be argued, so the issues fester and become bloated and stinky as they are left lying in the street, untouched, like corpses after a revolution…..

  4. It is important to have large, public, reasoned, dispassionate discussions in suitable fora. Firing Line-type debates come to mind. Ridicule and satire help too, I think. Bill Maher is part-way there. Vocal and influential conservative minority and women’s voices help. Good presidents and leaders are critical. We need iconoclasts. I wish Trump was more shrewd, and not so crude and clumsy, but he may help. A great economy and employment market will help us in our minds as well as pockets. A few national distractions like space adventures might help. A strong military will make us less worried. More fun too will wash our souls.

  5. Excellent precise of the impact of Frankfurt School methods and ideology on the world order after 1968.
    Posterity, if there are any left alive, will look with horror on this era and those who were holding the handle of the handbasket as they merrily skipped down the road to hell.
    The West has raised a nest of vipers in Marcuse, Lukacs et. al. and then exposed its progeny to vicious pests. The result is whole nations filled with self-doubting, self-hating ‘individuals’ (that execrable word) incapable of becoming parents, striving for the good life in a social economic system utterly inimical to stable family life or even fertility. Unless we build a new society and economy based on communal values of our Christian ancestors Westerners will soon be extinct.

Comments are closed.