Cultural Nonsense? A Programmed Denial

Last week I belatedly posted a response by Victor Onrust to an essay by Thai Peter. Below is Peter’s counter-response.

UPDATE: The Catholic Insight article referred to by Peter is here.

Cultural Nonsense? A Programmed Denial

by Peter

That was an interesting response from Victor Onrust. It cuts across something I was working on already concerning Tony Blair and New Labour, but that is for another time. For now, ever since the concept of Cultural Marxism arose, the Left has been unanimous in the vehemence of its denial that it ever existed. At least Victor appears to be prepared to argue the point rather than resort to the usual name-calling and sneering.

There is one point I must refute from the start: I do not see, nor have I ever seen “Cultural Marxism” as a conspiracy theory. It was a conspiracy, pure and simple — a conspiracy to corrupt in order to impose a communist revolution by stealth. That is how I have always seen it, and it is still at work in the here and now. I first came upon the phrase “Cultural Marxism” in Melanie Phillips’ book “Londonistan”, though she attributed it to the work of Antonio Gramsci rather than the Frankfurt School.

Victor states in his opening paragraph “As with most conspiracy ideas, little is said about who the conspirators are.” Not true. The identities of the “conspirators” are well known. Among others, the main players were Georgy Lukacs, Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Leo Lowenthal, Erich Fromm, Max Horkheimer, and Jurgen Habermas — Victor mentions them in his fourth paragraph. As for having a definite plan, that was formulated decades ago and was designed to impose a world-wide Communist revolution by the gradual destruction of Western culture, particularly Judeo-Christianity. It has taken a long time, but it is closer to success today than it has ever been.

Towards the end of 1922, the Comintern (Communist International) began to consider why their 1917 revolution failed to spread into Europe and throughout the West. On Lenin’s initiative, a meeting took place at the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow to “clarify the concept and give concrete effect to a Marxist Cultural Revolution” — presumably as opposed to a proletarian bloody one, which had already failed to take off outside of Russia. Georgy Lukacs was present at the meeting, and I am reminded that, soon after becoming a Communist, sometime in 1917, he wrote, “Who will save us from Western Civilisation?” Maybe he would.

Also at the meeting was one Willi Munzenberg, a German-born Communist propagandist and fundraiser. Munzenberg foresaw a top-down initiative to “mobilise all the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilization stink. Only then, after we have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, will we be able to impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.” It took a lot of time, but that seems to have happened, particularly over the last thirty years or so.

In 1924, after Lenin’s death, Stalin began to view Lukacs and like-minded people as revisionists, so a number of them decamped to Germany, where Lukacs chaired the first meeting of a group of Communist-oriented sociologists, a gathering that was to lead to the foundation of the Frankfurt School. It was from here that the basic principles of Cultural Marxism were formulated. When Hitler’s rise caused the primary members of the group to flee to America, a number of them were put to work by American institutions. For instance, Adorno — an accomplished musician — obtained the post of Head of the Music Section at the Office of Radio Research at the School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University. Popularly known as the “Radio Project,” and funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, it examined how the media could affect the population and increase their susceptibility to mass indoctrination and control techniques.

Continue reading

Mujahideen Sentenced for Attempted Sabotage of a High-Speed Russian Train

As I understand it, “IGIL” is an alternate designation for ISIS, the Islamic State. It may be a transliterated Russian acronym of the name.

Many thanks to D@rLin|{ for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Vladimir Putin: “The Liberal Idea Has Become Obsolete”

There are three topics guaranteed to cause enormous controversy at this site: Jews, abortion, and the Russians. Opinions on those subjects are so strongly and vehemently held that commenters often forget common civility when they hasten to express their two cents’ worth.

It is thus with great trepidation that I post the following interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Before you jump all over me about any lying, brutal, sneaky, conniving, and lethal behavior by Mr. Putin, pay attention to what he says. Read it carefully, and see where you agree or disagree.

All politicians that rise above the county board of supervisors level are dishonest and insincere to varying degrees. No one attains regional political prominence without compromising the truth and his own principles. It’s simply not possible, given the political realities. All major politicians lie and dissemble — some just a little, others a whole lot. There are no exceptions.

So the issue for me isn’t whether Vladimir Putin is sincere in these things he says — it really doesn’t matter. What matters is whether he acts in accordance with what he says. If he does, then the Russian people will be better off than they might be otherwise. I don’t know about the rest of the world — his job is to take care of his own people, so we in the West will just have to keep a close eye on him. Western political leaders need to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves when they deal with the Russians.

And if he doesn’t act in accordance with what he says, then he will be consigned to the ash heap of history, as so many leaders have been before him when they disregarded the needs and aspirations of their own people.

Many thanks to D@rLin|{ for verifying the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Cyberattack on Iran

President Trump ordered a cyberattack yesterday on Iranian military systems. This is interesting news for three reasons:

1.   It avoids the media frenzy that would have erupted after a missile strike. CNN reporters would have stood next to piles of smoking rubble and interviewed wailing Iranian women about the death of their puir wee bairns. It’s harder to gin up public outrage over the disabling of a puir wee server farm.

In terms of military effectiveness, I don’t know which is preferable, the missile strike or the cyberattack. However, in terms of the Information War — which is largely what this is — the cyberattack is a better move.

2.   This is not the response the military-industrial complex would have preferred. They don’t have much skin in cyberattacks. They want to see expensive physical assets employed so that expensive replacements must be procured by the Pentagon. They want to be able to test their weapons systems under real-life battlefield conditions. This did not meet their needs at all.
3.   A number of years (maybe even more than a decade) ago, it was rumored that the Israelis and the Russians had collaborated to make sure all of Iran’s military computer systems were infected by malware, so that a cyberattack could be launched by either country whenever it became necessary. I don’t remember the source for the story, but it was more credible than DEBKA.

The Russians have been enabling the Iranian nuclear program, which under normal circumstances wouldn’t make any sense, given the proximity of Iran to the southern border of Russia. However, if they’ve ensured that all the Iranian systems are reliably booby-trapped, they can make a lot of money by supplying Iran with technical expertise, and then disable everything if it becomes a threat to them.

Below are excerpts from an article in The Washington Times:

U.S. cyberattack strikes Iran’s military computers

The U.S. launched a sweeping cyberattack against the Iranian military last week in direct response to Iran’s downing of an American surveillance drone, U.S. officials told the Associated Press over the weekend, confirming that President Trump personally approved the retaliatory measures.

The response was aimed at Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of the nation’s military that the White House officially labeled a terrorist organization earlier this year. The cyberattack targeted computer systems that control the Corps’ rocket and missile launchers, administration officials said.

Yahoo News first reported the strike over the weekend.

The cyberattack was presented to the president as one of several options following last week’s incident in which Iran shot down a U.S. drone over the Strait of Hormuz. While no Americans were abroad the aircraft, the shoot-down still added more fuel to growing military tensions between the two sides and brought Mr. Trump to the brink of ordering airstrikes against Iranian targets.

Also, here’s an article about the attack from CBS News, but I haven’t really looked at it yet.

Diana West: “The Victors in America Were the Communists”

In her latest book, The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy, Diana West investigates the Communist influences on various players in the “SpyGate” and “Russian collusion” conspiracies that aimed to take down Donald Trump. The focus on the Red Thread has reopened discussion of the issues discussed in her earlier book, American Betrayal, which caused so much controversy back in 2013 by daring to question the hagiography surrounding Saint FDR.

Concerning the video below, Ms. West says:

There is something so timely about this 2013 interview with Erick Stakelbeck, an excellent interviewer, that I decided to repost it. The topic is my then-new book American Betrayal, but the conversation is all about the introduction of socialism and subversion into the US government, which soon flourished as “the Swamp.”

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for re-uploading this video:

The Entrapment of Heinz-Christian Strache

Until a few days ago Heinz-Christian Strache was the vice chancellor of Austria and the leader of the FPÖ (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, Austrian Freedom Party). Then a video surfaced that appeared to show him cutting a corrupt deal with a Russian investor. The video was recorded before the last general election, but wasn’t used against Mr. Strache during the campaign. It seems to have been held in escrow until now, just before the European parliamentary elections — in which the FPÖ was expected to do well, making it an important ally for Matteo Salvini, Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen, and the other “populist” parties after the new parliament is seated.

The pretend Russian deal was an obvious set-up. As soon as I read the details, they seemed to point to a deep-state operation masterminded by Sebastian “Boy” Kurz, the leader of the ÖVP (Österreichische Volkspartei, Austrian People’s Party) who went on after the election to become chancellor, heading a government in coalition with the FPÖ. With the help of the German and Austrian intelligence services (and the Russians, of course), it looks like Mr. Kurz had planned in advance to create a reason to jettison Mr. Strache and call an election, after which he would be able to lead the government without the help of the FPÖ. I don’t understand his certainty that he can pull it off; but then, he knows the internal political currents in Austria, and I don’t. I assume he is anticipating a new coalition with the Social Democrats.

The following analysis of the entrapment of Heinz-Christian Strache more or less supports my intuition. It was recorded by Oliver Janich, a German author and journalist.

What’s particularly interesting about this video is Mr. Janich’s revelation that the TV comedian Jan Böhmermann was deeply involved in the entrapment scheme, and was at least a passive collaborator with the intelligence services. Long-time readers will remember that Mr. Böhmermann got himself into a spot of bother three years ago by publicly reciting a vulgar but amusing poem about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Please Read This Book!

We’ve discussed the importance of American Betrayal here in the past, but JLH sends this reminder for those who have not yet read the book.

Please Read This Book!

by JLH

It’s the new McCarthyism! It’s a return to McCarthy!

I find this annoying but also amusing when I encounter it in the remarks of a left-leaning writer or politician. When I find it in the remarks of one of the many uninformed or oblivious as a parenthetical characterization, I am disappointed that there are so many of them.

But when I find it in the remarks of Republican members of Congress, or even in an essay in that most effective and informed conservative blog Breitbart, I vacillate between fury and the despair Kierkegaard referred to as “the sickness unto death.” How can it be that informed conservatives and constitutionalists are unaware of the serial vindication of Senator Joseph McCarthy — “Tailgunner Joe,” the presumptive creator of the “Red Scare”? And the REALITY of what he was uncovering when he was smeared and forced into a corner… the most memorable moment of which may have come in the Army-McCarthy hearings, when the army’s attorney Joseph Welch, reproached McCarthy for offering the information that a young man in Welch’s firm’s employ belonged to a suspect organization: “Have you no sense of decency, sir?” This cry of apparent outrage in defense of a member of his own team has become a shibboleth of McCarthy foes ever since, used as though it applied to everything he had done.

How can anyone not know of the work of the distinguished academic, M. Stanton Evans: Stalin’s Secret Agents and Blacklisted by History; or of Vladimir Bukovsky, author of To Build a Castle and co-founder of the Soviet dissident movement, and others. And if they were in fact ignorant of these and other figures who have offered a different perspective, how can they not know of Diana West’s 2013 book: American Betrayal: The Secret Assault On Our Nation’s Character.

Well, of course, it may be that “right-thinking” bookstore owners and librarians do not consider it fit for public display. The profit motive still works, though, as I found out when I ordered it through my local (need I say left-leaning, virtue-signaling) bookstore and, after reading it, donated it to my (ditto) library, because I knew they would not refuse a donation. For heaven’s sake, go find it in a public library, locate it on Amazon, just look it up online. But do not delay in finding and reading this meticulously annotated and devastating analysis of the McCarthy era, of the FDR administration, of everything you have not been told by all those who have an interest in keeping you ignorant and encouraging you to continue saying “McCarthyism” when you should be saying “socialism,” “elitism,” or “just plain damned ignorance.” So no one can say to you, “Have you no intelligence?”

Continue reading

Of Brainwashing and Bathwater

MC weighs in on all the latest trendy socialist initiatives that plague the 21st-century body politic in the West.

Of Brainwashing and Bathwater

by MC

The idea of child abuse is defined by a Christian doctrine based upon the words of Yahushua (Jesus), “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” It goes on to explain that those who meddle with these children of the kingdom will suffer a fate so bad that they should drown themselves.

It is quite graphic and it is inbuilt into the Christian culture.

So, if we step outside the Christian culture we need to beware, for many a baby is thrown out when we vote for either Islam or humanism.

In the period following the Russian revolution in 1917 we have some graphic accounts of child abuse. Maxim Gorky (or maybe Orlando Figes quoting Gorky) describes starving little girls lifting up their skirts and exposing themselves in the hope of attracting the attention of someone who could give them a crust of bread in return for favours. These children were just the useless human rubble left in the street after the purging of the class enemy. They were “useless eaters”, as Adolf called them in his identical revolution two decades later.

The various socialist revolutions discarded (or worse) many children, for Karl Marx wrote no scriptures specifically about protecting children.

I have never understood Ali Bakr (the first Caliph after the prophet) giving his six year old daughter to a man he must have known to be a sexual predator, but then there is no protection for children in Islam either.

When we step away from Judeo-Christianity we leave behind some very profound doctrines.

The French revolution started as a revolt against the abuses of the Aristocracy and Church leaders who had abandoned their calling at the behest of those same Aristos, for they believed that the ten commandments no longer applied to those of the ‘important’ bloodlines; they were only for the peasants.

In the power vacuum that followed the storming of the Bastille, a series of new political religions based upon humanism and the goddess of reason took hold, so the tumbrels rumbled, the drums rolled — as did the heads of the many of the innocent — and children starved.

The Ten Commandments and other Judeo-Christian principles establish a framework that has worked and has produced a working environment which, although not perfect, has created a peak of civilization, and it is only in a civilized state that child abuse can even be defined.

But socialists, of course, think they can do better, and that by demolishing the house built on rock, they can replace it with something more fair and more equal but built on the sands of toleration and moral relativity. And that this time it will not fail like on every other occasion man has experimented with self-godship.

What they cannot seem to understand is that it was Judeo-Christianity that was the real healing and beneficial revolution, and that it is their new socialism that is the same old, same old cruelty and abuse.

Continue reading

Russian Collusion, German Version

The following video discusses a revelation about a member of the Bundestag for the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany). He is alleged to be a (presumably paid) asset for Russia.

This is actually a more substantive hoax than the Russian collusion narrative that has been the major American political obsession for more than two years. The Steele Dossier was a confection of pure gossamer, but the AfD case actually includes a digital smoking gun of sorts.

I’ll have more to say about that, but let’s watch the video first. Many thanks to MissPiggy for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

This affair exudes the stench of dezinformatsiya.

First of all, the Russians already possess a gaggle of compliant servants in the Bundestag. They’re called the Christian Democratic Union, Chancellor Merkel’s party. The German government has been so cooperative with Russia for the last fifteen years that the Russians built a natural special pipeline through the Baltic to serve their needs, bypassing the more rebellious countries of Central Europe.

I assume the SPD, Mrs. Merkel’s coalition partners, are just as friendly towards the Kremlin.

So why would Vladimir Putin need to cultivate an AfD spy in the Bundestag?

Here’s my admittedly uninformed take on the controversy: Chancellor Merkel needed a favor from the Russians, and asked them for help fabricating a damaging story to use against the AfD just before the European Parliamentary elections. It must have been easy enough to do: just have the guy send the email, leak it to someone, and then instruct the sender confirm it. Mission accomplished.

That’s what I think happened. But some of the Russia experts among our readers may want to explain to me how wrong I am…

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Culture-Enriching Kidnapping and Rape in Yakutsk

The following report comes from the autonomous Republic of Sakha, also known as Yakutia, in the Far East of Russia. Its population is 300,000, 47% of which is Yakut and 38% Russian. The Yakuts are a Turkic people, and speak a Turkic language, but they are not Muslims. The Kyrgyz enrichers are also Turkic, but they are Muslims.

Many thanks to RR translating this article from the Rosbalt news site:

In Yakutsk, About a Hundred Buses Out of Service Due to Anti-Migrant Sentiments in the City

Nearly 100 bus drivers of migrant origin were afraid to go to work because of the hostile attitude of citizens to migrants after the kidnapping and rape of a local woman by a labor migrant born in Kyrgyzstan. This was announced to the media by Andrei Sharygin, the director of the United Dispatch Service.

According to him, this halted service for 90 buses, out of 430 working in the city. Sharygin noted that drivers are worried about their safety. All vegetable kiosks [a type of “farmers’ market” entirely controlled by migrants from Central Asia] all over the city of Yakutsk [capital of the autonomous Republic of Sakha] are closed for a second day.

The head of the SoyuzAvto partnership, Andrei Kositsky, said that passengers got into numerous confrontations with migrant bus drivers yesterday, refusing to pay and insulting drivers.

In addition, local media reported yesterday that that there were clashes between citizens and kebab shop owners and staff [again predominantly migrants]. On Monday a video appeared, showing a man with a gun dragging a native of Central Asia to an unknown location.

Yesterday tens of thousands of residents of Yakutsk and the nearest uluses [clan groups] met with the authorities in the city. Officials assured the protesting crowds that they would conduct mass raids to identify illegal migrants and illegal businesses, and then deport violators.

A very brief video of the demonstration is here.

An afterword from the translator:

Continue reading

The Church Militant

Russia has been determined to rebuild its culture after the destructive tyranny of the Soviets.

One way to do that is to restore the martial spirit of its citizens, to drill down to a uniquely Russian esprit de corps. The method chosen here – building a church based on a martial spirit – could be a strong uniting force for ethnic Russians.

Another facet to consider is the pushback against Islam that may flow from the very architecture of this cathedral. It will serve as a large thumb in the eye of every practicing Muslim who gazes upon it, recalling Erdogan’s (in)famous quote regarding Islam:“The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…” Change a few words and voila!, you have Russia’s muscular Christianity.

Remember that Russia is a tertium quid: neither Occident or Orient, it goes its own way. Woebetide those who would interfere. To expect The Bear to act like China or the West is to misunderstand Russia’s worldview.

You Say You Want a Revolution…

A few days ago I was looking through a box of old papers, vintage ca. 1970, and I found a copy of the 1966 Pelican edition of Volume 2 of The Bolshevik Revolution by E.H. Carr. Since the book hasn’t seen the light of day in forty-odd years, it’s in pretty good shape. I bought it in 1968 — for 9s6d, or about 48p, as a matter of interest — when I was studying for A-levels. My history teacher recommended that anyone who was planning to sit special papers (which I was) should read it in preparation for the exam.

E.H. Carr, if not an outright communist, was definitely a communist sympathizer and an apologist for Stalin. But that doesn’t detract from his work as a historian — like many of the comsymp historians, he was from the old school: researching history meant studying the facts and writing them up, with thorough annotation of sources. A historian might color his narrative with his own opinions, but he didn’t scamp the facts.

The same was true of Isaac Deutscher, an actual communist, whose biography of Stalin was also on my reading list back then. I read those books and others, discounted the bias of the writers, and accumulated a vast store of information about the Bolshevik Revolution and Soviet Russia, some of which is still stuck in my head today. Reading history written by commies never improved my opinion of communism — in fact, some of the ghastly truths about Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin contained in those books hardened my attitude even further. A few months ago, when I was arguing with Felix Quigley (who was our resident Marxist commenter for a while), he wanted to know where I got my bogus information about Lenin. My source was in fact the book shown above — I couldn’t remember the author’s name at that point, but I told him it was written by a communist or communist sympathizer.

Facts is facts. And they’re in there.

This book was the second of three volumes on the Bolshevik Revolution, which themselves were part of a series on the history of Soviet Russia. The blurb on the Pelican book says there were eight volumes, but I thought there were about fourteen — maybe Carr wrote more of them after 1966.

Anyway… The font size in the book is microscopic, so I know I’ll never read it again. Oh, for the days when I could read those tiny little black letters!

So here’s my proposal: I’ll put this in a book mailer and send it to anyone in the USA who would be interested in reading it. It’s in good condition; the spine is intact. There’s only a bit of yellowing and that coffee stain from 1968 at the top. I’m restricting it to recipients the USA because book rate is cheap, so I won’t mind paying the postage.

If you’d like it, email me with your address at gatesofvienna (at) chromatism (dot) net. A week from today I’ll compile a list of interested parties (if any), have Dymphna choose one of them at random, and mail it off to the lucky winner.

This book is dense with information. I noticed that there’s a big section on the NEP in the second half of it. That’s one of the more interesting developments in the early history of the Soviet Union.

The Trump-Putin Summit From a German Perspective

JLH has translated a couple of articles that discuss President Trump’s recent meeting with Vladimir Putin from a German viewpoint. These are pro-Trump pieces, so they are very much in the minority in Germany.

The translator includes this introductory note:

The AfD and Henryk Broder — The Dynamic Duo Call Out the World Opinion-Makers on the Trump-Putin Summit

What do thoughtful Germans think of the Trump-Putin summit, and how can they possibly disagree with the CDU-CSU, FDP, Greens, LINKE and SPÖ, as well as 95% of the world press, 100% of the Democrats, 90% of the RINOs and 105% of the Antifa, to say nothing of Google, Facebook and George Soros?

Do none of them recognize in Petr Bystron’s analysis of Trump’s opening remarks a reflection of the “art of the deal”?

The first translated article from Politically Incorrect:

AfD Expresses Satisfaction With Results of Summit Talks

July 18, 2018

(This is how “the summit” looks to the German incitement press: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin masterfully pass the global political ball back and forth. “Bloodymir, is the f****** soccer ball really [not] bugged?”)

With the 3-day “Conference for Security and Cooperation” in Helsinki in the summer of 1975, there began the tradition of holding results-oriented Russian-American summits in Finland: The “spirit of Helsinki” began in the context of the historic meeting of American President Gerald Ford and Soviet State and Party Leader Leonid Brezhnev.

In the initialed final act — supported by the USA and Canada, as well as all of Europe, with the exception of self-isolated Albania — the West and the Eastern Block agreed on rules and principles for a peaceful coexistence, and a strengthened economic exchange. Helsinki 1975 was the first door-opener for a step-by-step rapprochement of the great powers and the fall of the Iron Curtain.

After the more or less renewed “splendid isolation” of EU-Europe from the USA and Russia, hitherto encouraged by the German humanitarian imperative, the disastrous foreign policy of lame-duck Barack Obama and a wobbly EU Commission President Juncker, the summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on July 16, 2018 represents a significant step toward a new peaceful rapprochement of the two populous powers. No matter what kind of howl the manipulation press puts up.

The date of this meeting is not randomly meaningless. Exactly 100 years ago, in the night between July 17th and 18th in 1918, the Czarist family Romanov was liquidated by an ideologically blinded Bolshevik mob. Today they would be called Antifa.

But no matter how the German political-media complex rages and demonizes the approach to Russia of the self-made billionaire Donald Trump, the leading politicians of the “party of reason,” the AfD, welcome this courageous step in the direction of a long overdue international understanding.

AfD chief Petr Bystron: “The rapprochement of Trump and Putin is a good signal for Europe and the world.”

Continue reading