Part 4. They made the Revolution.
Who will free us from the yoke of Western civilization? Georg Lukacs, a Marxist theoretician
A truly efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful political bosses at the head of the army of managers will stand the slaves that do not want freedom, as they like to serve. Aldous Huxley. O brave new world!
Beginning of the revolution that shook the very foundations of American democracy lies not in 1960, but rather in August 1914, when the outbreak of the First World War, in the words of Jacques Barzun, "it is the blow sent our world on a course to self-destruction."
August 4, 1914 the Social Democrats in the German Reichstag, one and all, voted for war credits release of the government, thereby joining the patriotic orgy that occurred with the invasion of the army of the Reich in Belgium. Marxists were, as they say, is overjoyed: so long awaited pan-European war has finally begun. "Workers of all countries, unite!" — Proclaimed by Marx in his "Communist Manifesto." For Marxists, the war was an event that will surely unite the proletarians of the whole of Europe and make them fight against the bourgeoisie, not with fellow proletarians of other countries. However, this did not happen. The largest socialist party in Europe overnight turned into a war party, and the proletarians took up arms and went to defend the hated Marxists national bourgeoisie. As Barbara Tuchman wrote:
"When they announced the call, the same proletarian, which, according to Marx, there was no national identity, in a moment not identified himself with class and with his country. Is bound to be found out that he, like other members of society, belongs to the "national family." Instead of fighting with the capital, he preferred to take up arms for his fellow alien. And the working class went to war willingly, even eagerly, as the class average and the upper class, and all the other people around. "
Yes, the front had all the horrors of the war on the Western Front. But even Ypres, the Somme and Passchendaele, where on tiny plots of land claimed hundreds of thousands of British soldiers who did not make the proletariat to rise up the country's first industrial revolution. Similarly, on the patriotism of French and German proletariat had no impact Verdun. Mutiny in 1917 in the French army was instantly suppressed. The real threat is manifested only at the end of the war.
After the October Revolution in Russia attempts communist rebellions were made in Budapest, Munich and Berlin. German veterans easily crushed Bavarian Republic, Rosa Luxemburg, who led the revolt of "Spartacus," and Karl Liebknecht in Berlin fgeikorrs shot. In Budapest, Bela Kun regime in power lasted several months. It turned out that the proletariat is in no hurry to support the revolution engineered by the vampires on his behalf.
Trotsky agreed that the Russian revolution would spread around the world on the bayonets of the Red Army. He invaded Poland, but was stopped at the Vistula Polish patriots led by Marshal Pilsudski. Time has shown that all the predictions of the Marxists did not survive the verification reality: their time has come — and gone. Western workers, the same mythical proletariat, refused to play for them written by revolutionaries role. What was the mistake of Marx?
Two modern followers of Marx put forward the following theory. Yes, Marx was wrong: capitalism does not lead to the impoverishment of the proletariat. On the contrary, the working class is becoming more prosperous, and did not join the revolution because the souls of the people were poisoned by two thousand years of preaching Christianity, shielded from the Western proletariat his true class interests. As long as the soul of a westerner would "nest" Christianity and Western Culture (collectively constitute the immune system of the capitalist organism) — as long Marxism in the West do not always take root and the revolution will bring those same workers, the benefit of which she was accomplished. If we use the biblical analogies, Marx's word is the seed of the revolution, has fallen on stony ground Christian — and failed to germinate. Arguing about the interests of the proletariat, the Marxists have put on the wrong horse.
The first of these followers of Marx was the Hungarian Gyorgy Lukacs, an agent of the Comintern, the author of the book "History and Class Consciousness," which placed him in a number of Marx. "I thought the revolutionary destruction of society only possible and correct way to proceed — wrote Lukacs. — An universal human values change could not happen without the destruction of the old world values and without creating a new revolutionary values." As Deputy People's Commissar for Culture in the government of Bela Kun Lukacs in practice applied his "demonic" beliefs, and his methods were subsequently nicknamed "cultural terrorism."
Part of that "terrorism" was to introduce into the school curriculum of the course of radical sex education. Children were taught free love and sexual permissiveness, and impress upon them the thought of the withering away of the old norms of behavior and the institution of the monogamous family as such, but also about the "illegality" of religion, which deprives man of all sensual pleasures. And to disobey "sexual prejudices" of the time called for both boys and girls, both boys and girls.
Lukacs proposal on promoting "promiscuity" among women and children has been directed at the destruction of the family — the foundations of Western and Christian cultures. Fifty years after Lukacs fled from Hungary, his ideas were enthusiastically taken up by the baby bummerami era of sexual revolution.
The second of the above-mentioned followers of Marx was Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Communist who in recent years have increasingly referred to as the largest Marxist strategist of the twentieth century. After Mussolini's march on Rome in 1922, Gramsci fled to Russia. However, in contrast to the "useful idiots" and "infantile left" Lenin Enrolment — for example, the American writer Lincoln Steffens, declares: "I was in the future! All of it! "- Gramsci did not succumb to illusions and almost immediately noticed that the Bolshevik paradise on earth never built. Bolshevik regime could do obedience of citizens only through terror. And Gramsci made a reasonable conclusion: it means that Leninism could not win. Russian is not something that did not accept the new government — they hated her. Earth, faith, family, icons, and the very notion of "Mother Russia" meant to the Russian far more than the international solidarity of the working people. The new government lied to itself. Russian have not changed since the revolution. They obeyed only because disobedience meant a midnight knock on the door and shot in the back in the cellars of the Lubyanka. Even the deposed king summoned the people more sympathy than the Bolsheviks with their ideas.
Gramsci suggested that the reason for that — Christian views, "obstacle" to the Russian people to learn communist ideals. "The civilized world for nearly 2000 years remained under the yoke of Christianity — Gramsci wrote — so that a regime based on Judeo-Christian beliefs, can not be destroyed without rooting out those beliefs." Therefore, if Christianity is the shield of the West, then, to conquer the West, Marxists must first de-Christianize it.
Disillusioned, frightened by Stalin, who led Russia after Lenin's death, and who does not tolerate independent thinkers, Gramsci returned to Italy, intending to stand at the head of the Italian Communist Party. But Mussolini had other plans. He arrested Gramsci and that kept him in prison until 1937, and the prisoner nearly died of tuberculosis;
Soon after the release of Gramsci died at the age of forty-six years. In "Prison Notes" there is a plan known successful Marxist revolution in the West. And inevitably it seems that our cultural revolution was made by "recipe" Gramsci. "In the east — he wrote, referring to Russia, — the state is everything, civil society was in its infancy …
"… In the West, has the proper development of relations between the state and civil society, so when the state loses power, it is immediately visible to the unshakable foundation of civil society. State in the West is no more than the outer ditch, behind which stands surrounded by mighty walls of the fortress. "
Rather than seize power and impose a cultural revolution from above, Gramsci believed, Western Marxists should be the first thing to change the culture — and then the power will just fall into their hands like an overripe fruit. However, the change will require a cultural layer "hard battle" for the acquisition of the media — newspapers, magazines, cinema, radio, as well as theaters, schools, seminaries, as well as the subordination of art. They should gain gradually, almost surreptitiously, and slowly turned into instruments of the revolution. And over time, society will not only understand, but also recognizes the revolutionary ideals.
Gramsci advised fellow Marxists to unite with Western intellectuals who deny Christianity and bourgeois culture, and have an impact on the minds of young people. "It's about culture, fools!" Since it is the Western culture gave birth to capitalism and signs, it is necessary to "transform" — And then society will collapse under its own weight. On the cover of the bestselling 1970 "Greening of America", the manifesto of the counterculture, its author, Charles Reich as if quoting Gramsci:
"Revolution Is Coming! It will be different from all the revolutions of the past. She turned to the man, not the classes, and will affect the culture and the change in the political structure will occur only at the last stage. It does not need violence to his success, and violence to suppress it also fails. It spreads with amazing speed, and already our laws, our institutions and social structure changed under its influence … This is the revolution of the new generation! ".
So, the argument about the possibility of Gramsci revolution in the West proved to be prophetic. Leninist regime kept the world at bay for over seventy years, but from a historical perspective Russian revolution was defeated — and the regime collapsed, and the Communist Party of Lenin and Stalin actually returned to the source: it is again turned into a handful of political adventurers-conspirators, who are hiding behind the Marxist rhetoric claim to absolute power. Leninist regime died and was buried without regrets. But Gramsci revolution is gaining momentum and finds all new adherents.
FRANKFURT SCHOOL COMES TO AMERICA
In 1923, Lukacs and several members of the German Communist Party founded the University of Frankfurt Institute of Marxism, modeled in the image and likeness of the Marx and Engels in Moscow. On reflection they gave their offspring less provocative title — Institute for Social Research. In a short time this institution was to become known as the Frankfurt School.
In 1930, the former marskist fan and the Marquis de Sade, Max Horkheimer became director of the institute. He also came to the conclusion that Marx's theory is wrong. The proletariat is unable to fulfill its role as the vanguard of the revolution. After all, the Western proletariat gradually transformed into a middle class in those most despised bourgeois. They betray the Marxists — which, incidentally, did not surprise the excitement of Wall Street in May 1970, when the radicals and the students who were protesting against the decision of the Nixon administration to invade Cambodia, beat the workers from the construction trade union Pete Brennan (last Nixon appointed soon his advisor on labor).
Under the supervision of the Frankfurt School of Horkheimer began to "translate" the Marxist theory in cultural terms. Older benefit of the class struggle were thrown out as useless junk, they were replaced by new ones. For early Marxists enemy was capitalism, for Marxists as new enemy was Western culture. Early Marxists saw the path to power in the violent overthrow of the ruling structure, as happened in Paris in 1789 and in St. Petersburg in 1917. New Marxists hoped to achieve their own, without resorting to violence, through decades of hard work. The victory will be possible only when the soul of Western man will be left and a small bit of Christianity. And this will happen only when the new Marxism possess all the media and public institutions. Sufficient to capture the "mighty fortress with walls" — and the state, "the outer moat," as Gramsci would fall without a fight.
However, even earlier, and the new Marxists share a common view of morality: anything for the revolution — morally and ethically, and all that against thereof — must be eradicated. According to a researcher from the Institute zonovskoy Hood-John Fonte, Gramsci believed:
"… An absolute historicism, that is, that all moral beliefs and values, all measurements, standards, and human nature itself is the product of specific historical eras. There are no absolute standards that would be true for all people outside of any historical society was, morality — the socially constructed concept. "
When Ronald Reagan made his famous statement — that the Board reserves the right to lie, steal and cheat — he revealed the truth, which would argue no honest Marxist, and by the way, at one time the phrase Reagan almost led to a nervous breakdown on the part of employees of the State Department.
Around the same time, the music critic Theodor Adorno, a psychologist and sociologist Erich Fromm, Wilhelm Reich joined the Frankfurt School. However, in 1933 in their work relentlessly intervened story. It came to power in Berlin Adolf Hitler; luminaries as the Frankfurt School were mostly Jews and Marxists in the Third Reich for them no place. Frankfurters "packed their ideology" and fled to America. Together with professors left Europe and is a graduate of Herbert Marcuse. With the assistance of the fugitives settled at Columbia University in New York and began to exert their talents and powers to undermine the culture of the country that gave them shelter.
Among the new weapons, which developed the Frankfurt School, was the so-called critical theory. The name itself sounds quite civilized, but underneath it is hidden activity that has nothing to do with the foundations of our civilization. One of the adherents of this theory has defined it as "a legitimate criticism any and all elements of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, ethnocentrism, conformity and conservatism" .
Using critical theory, for example, Marxists never tire of blaming the West for genocide against all civilizations and cultures, with what we have just experienced throughout history. According to critical theory, Western societies — "swarms" of racism, chauvinism, nationalism, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, Nazism and fascism. According to that theory, the crimes of the West stem from the nature of Western society, formed in the space of Christianity. A modern example — "the policy of attack" when "surrogates" and "doctor" is not engaged in the act of defending their candidate, but the fact that the candidates are attacking opponents. Another example of the use of critical theory — the endless accusations of Pope Pius the Twelfth of aiding and abetting the Holocaust, and it does not matter that dozens of volumes of documentary material refute these accusations!
Critical theory eventually gives rise to a "cultural pessimism", the feeling of foreignness, the hopelessness and despair that people, even if a free and prosperous start to perceive their country as an oppressor, as a society, are not worthy of love and fidelity. New Marxists believe that cultural pessimism is a prerequisite for revolutionary change.
Under the influence of critical theory, many members of the generation of the sixties — the most privileged generation in history — have convinced themselves that they are living in hell. In the book "Greening of America" who charmed (to name only a few) Senator McGovern Judge Douglas and the newspaper "Washington Post", Charles Reich speaks of an "atmosphere of violence" in American schools. It's been said over the thirty years before Columbine, the Reich did not mean knives and guns:
"Examination and test, there are forms of violence, forms of coercion. Gym shell is a form of coercion for the child, ashamed of his body. Require the student, that he went to school with a pass, — a form of violence. Compulsory attendance at lessons, mandatory tutoring — all forms of violence. "
"Escape from Freedom" by Erich Fromm and "Psychology and the fascism" and "Sexual Revolution" by Wilhelm Reich as the essence of the generation of critical theory. However, the most influential of all the books of the Frankfurt School was "authoritarian personality" Ador-no. It's kind of a sacred text of Frankfurt, where the economic determinism of Karl Marx gives way to cultural determinism. If a family is Christian and purely capitalist dominated by authoritarian father, with high probability we can assume that children will grow up racists and fascists. Charles Sykes, a senior researcher at the Wisconsin Center for Political Studies, describes the book as "an uncompromising verdict of bourgeois civilization, while the views previously considered nothing more than old-fashioned now, in this book, is recognized by the fascist and unworthy of a mentally healthy person."
If Marx was criminalized capitalists, the Frankfurt School of criminalizing the middle class. At the same time somehow forgotten that the middle class has created a democratic society that Britain, the country of the middle class, fought against Hitler, when friends of Frankfurt in Moscow flirted with him that America, another country of the middle class, sheltered Adorno and others fleeing Nazis. The truth did not matter, because it does not fit the new Marxist ideology.
Having discovered the germ of fascism in the patriarchal family, Adorno and then found the dwelling place of the embryo — the traditional culture: "It is well known that the exposure of Nazi ideas is most common in middle-class that it is rooted in culture, therefore, those who are most committed to this culture, are most vulnerable … ".
Edmund Burke once wrote: "I have never'll be able to bring charges against a whole people." Adorno and others Frankfurters have not experienced probably the feelings that made the English philosopher to write such words. They postulated that people are brought up in families where the father was the chief ("stubborn patriot and supporter of the old-fashioned religion"), and may be considered as potential racists and fascists. And as a conservative Christian culture, as demonstrated generates fascism, then it is followed by a close watch — for; timely intervention.
The ideas of Frankfurt were picked up and replicated by the left. In the mid-1960s the nickname "fascist" bestows upon all who dared to object, or at least carefully argued against the University of the revolution. Baby bummery, without knowing it, followed the line of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, stated in Moscow in 1943:
"Party members and candidate members of the party must constantly fight with our critics, compromising their statements and actions. When enemies become too pushy, you should condemn them as fascists, Nazis and anti-Semites … In multiple repetition of such charges will inevitably put aside in the minds of the masses. "
Since the 1960s, the enemy charged in dementia and other unpleasant things became the most effective weapon of the left. Here is the "secret formula" for success set out by Thomas Shash psychologist: "If you want to divert public attention from the activities of the enemy, call him mentally retarded." Behind all is a bad policy … Our society needs a therapy that healed him from prejudice. Assessing prepared Frankfurt School "Research prejudice" — of which the most famous, of course, "Authoritarian Personality" — Christopher Lasch wrote:
"The articles in this collection leads the reader to the mistaken belief that prejudice — a mental disorder rooted in the structure of the" authoritarian "personality — can be eliminated only through the passage of the Americans something like a collective psychotherapy, that is, treating them as patients to hospitals the insane. "
This is the "therapeutic state" — a society in which the disease called sin, a crime is becoming anti-social behavior, and the analyst becomes more popular priest. If fascism, as Adorno argued, rooted in the culture, then we are all brought up in the 1940s and 1950s in this country, the need for a treatment that will open our eyes to all the prejudices and deceptions surrounding us from birth.
Another achievement of Horkheimer and Adorno was the idea that the road to cultural hegemony is through psychological treatment, not a philosophical debate. American children should be taught in school to think that their parents are — racists, chauvinists and go-mofoby and that they need a new morality. Frankfurt School itself remains almost unknown to most Americans, but its ideas were widely distributed in pedagogical colleges in the 1940s and 1950s.
The school has openly stated: it does not matter what knowledge children possess, and what they will learn the "correct" attitude to life. Allan Bloom wrote in the "dimming of the American consciousness," that American high school graduates — the uneducated graduates in the world: they have almost the lowest in the world in examinations, but a heightened attitude to social problems — for example, to the protection of the environment. These words confirm once again that the ideas of the Frankfurt School grafted onto our soil. Parents believe the modern school classes a waste of time and money, but for those of Frankfurt School — "beacons of culture" as the children come from are not burdened with unnecessary knowledge, but having the "right" attitude. Enrolling in college, these children will receive an additional "orientation", finally inculcate new values, so to speak, to stick with them.
How successful was the Cultural Revolution in the eradication of the old values and new planting? After Pearl Harbor, many young people lined up at the recruiting office, and stood next to the students and the children of farmers. However, after the tragic events of the World Trade Center — before even one American soldier came into the bout before the terrorists were released at least one missile — on college campuses began an anti-war speech.
However, the importance of schools in the processing of new generation quickly went to "no" because of the media, particularly television and cinema. Here is what William Lind, director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the foundation of the "Free Congress":
"The entertainment industry … completely swallowed the ideology of Marxist culture and preaches it, not only directly, but also allegories: strong women win the weak men are wiser than the children of parents who are honest parishioners expose thieving priests, aristocrats black cope with violence in the poor areas of white, gay men are taking the best houses … It's all fairy tales, distortion of reality, but the media make profit from fairy tales and turn them into reality is more explicit than the world outside … ".
To assess whether the cultural revolution has changed our thinking, beliefs and social values, let's compare the film of the 1930s — such as "On the waterfront", "Noon" and "Shane" — with any modern film. The difference is noticeable to the naked eye! At the awards ceremony, the Academy Award best movies in 2000 were considered "American Beauty" and "The Cider House Rules."
"American Beauty" with Kevin Spacey in the title role, is a deadly boring life in the American suburbs. The villain — a former Marine, an overwhelming homosexual desires who collects Nazi insignia and gradually turning into a serial killer … In the "Rules of winemakers', Michael Caine plays a pious abortionist, which is opposed to mired in lies the American heartland. The media have turned America into siege weapons in the war of cultures and most reliable means of duping the young.
In the 1950s, the Frankfurt School was lacking someone who can popularize ideas, enclosed in a leisurely discourse Horkheimer and Adorno. And then came in very handy Herbert Marcuse, a retired military officer, professor of philosophy, who sought the words of a man to become a man of the revolutionary cause. Marcuse's Comments on Horkheimer, who will play the role of the proletariat in the coming cultural revolution.
According to Marcuse, a few candidates: the radical youth groups, feminist, black, gay men, the marginalized, the revolutionaries from third world countries and other "victims" of the West. This is the new proletariat, which is to overthrow the Western culture. I remember Gramsci already included marginalized groups in the number of potential participants in the revolution, "we mean not only the oppressed economically, but also women, ethnic minorities and many criminals." Charles Reich echoes Gramsci and Herbert Marcuse: "One way to feel like a stranger in the old society — is to side with the black for the poor, to Bonnie and Clyde, to all the losers of this world." By coincidence of circumstances, in 1968 for "Oscar" was nominated film "Bonnie and Clyde" — romanticized story of two assassins, "losers" in the terminology of the Reich — and Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Jones gained immortality via assassination of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King.
In the past, the words undermined the social fabric and books, but Marcuse believed that sex and drugs — a much more effective weapon. In his book "Eros and Civilization", he put forward the famous "pleasure principle." Cast us off the old order and the old culture, offered Marcuse (the so-called "great negation") — and then we can create a world of "polymorphous perversity." When campuses poured millions of baby bummerov, Marcuse hour has come. Students literally swallowed his book, he has turned into a cult figure. During the Paris uprising of 1968 students carried banners that read: "Marx, Mao and Marcuse."
"Make love, not war" — this slogan put forward precisely Marcuse. In the "one-dimensional man," he defends educational dictatorship. In "oppress tolerance" calls for "liberal tolerance", which means "the intolerance of the right-wing movements and tolerance to the movements of the left." Having read Marcuse, students booed sixties apologists of the American military presence in Vietnam and welcomed radicals vetkongovskimi flags. Some campuses even those whose hands are stained with blood, greeted welcoming than the Conservatives. The double standard against which were right and which called for the right to punish sins, venial left, was, in fact, the visible embodiment of "the oppressor of tolerance." Marcuse did not conceal their true aims, as in the "flesh-eating society," he wrote:
"We can and must speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed against the cultural establishment as a whole … It is obvious and needs no proof. The traditional idea of revolution and the traditional revolutionary strategy in the past. They are out of date … We have to make unmounting the existing system. "
Under the "unmount" razumelos destruction of America we have known it, no more and no less. Like Gramsci, Marcuse "outgrown" Marx. The old idea of the proletariat to rise up against capitalism, was dropped as unnecessary. Herbert Marcuse and his cronies were going to put an end to the rotten Western civilization, capturing its cultural institutions and turning in the last bastions of the Cultural Revolution. Roger Kimball, editor of the "New Kraytirion" wrote:
"In the context of Western societies march against the establishment is — in the terminology of Herbert Marcuse -" subversive activities in their workplaces. " It is by these means — no open opposition, but the conspiracy and subversion — must prevail and dreams come true counterculture radicals like Marcuse. "
For new Marxists do not have a purpose more important than the destruction of the family, which they considered as a typical example of dictatorship and as an incubator of chauvinism and social injustice.
However, hostility to the institution of the family was not completely new to Marxism. By Marx in "The German Ideology", wrote that in the patriarchal way men perceive women and children as their property. In "The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State," Engels expressed the typical feminist point of view: the patriarchal family from time immemorial has led to discrimination against women. Erich Fromm argued that the differences between the sexes were not included in human nature, they are a fiction, a typical Western culture. Incidentally, Fromm is considered the father of modern feminism. For Wilhelm Reich's "authoritarian family is the authoritarian state in miniature … Family imperialism imperialism reproduces itself in the state." For Adorno, the patriarchal family — the cradle of fascism.
In order to "decapitate" the patriarchal family, that is to deprive the father of the family of his primacy, the Frankfurt School proposed the introduction of a matriarchy — when the head of household is a woman, and came out with "androgynous theory", in which the position of men and women in the family is based on the principle of interchangeability. Women's boxing, women soldiers, women rabbis and women bishops, God-woman. "GI Jane" with Demi Moore, Sigourney Weaver, consoling the frightened Marine in "Aliens", all the other movies and shows depicting strong and aggressive women, and men — weak and vulnerable — all this proves the success of the theories of the Frankfurt School and the evidence of victory it provoked another feminist revolution.
Like Lukacs, Wilhelm Reich believed that the traditional family can be destroyed through early sex education and sexual revolutionary politics. Introduction to American schools, sex education course — a direct result of Lukacs, Reich and the Frankfurt School.
Speaking about the death of the West, we must consider the Frankfurt School as the main accused in the crime. Propaganda attacks on the traditional family eventually led to the actual death of this public institution. Traditional families in the U.S. today are no more than a quarter of the total number of people living together. A women's liberation from traditional roles of wife and mistress, the release for which advocated as early as elementary school, has led to the degradation of these roles, these types of behavior in American society.
Millions of Western women now share the feminist hostility toward Marriage motherhood. Millions have taken feminist theory and has no plans to marry or have children. Following markuzianskomu "pleasure principle" and other ideals of the sexual revolution means a complete disregard for marriage. As the divorce rate and birth rate, even prisoners marriages today are less stable and less "fertile" than before. In the endangered European nations, even in countries with a strong Catholic tradition, almost all women are using contraception. Contraception, sterilization, abortion, euthanasia — these are the four horsemen, the harbingers of "Apocalypse Culture", which is opposed to God I: Eve of Judgment. Pills and condoms were the hammer and sickle of the Cultural Revolution.
In 1950, Khrushchev threatened to bury America — but we survived and was buried themselves. But if Westerners do not find a way to stop the decline in the birth rate, the cultural Marxism succeed where the failed Soviet Marxism. In a report in 1998 on the depopulation of the Pontifical Council of Europe family links to the whole cultural pessimism and declining birth rate:
"Return to the previous high birth rate in those countries where it falls today, is only possible if the" mood swings "in the transition from the" nation-wide pessimism "to a state of consciousness, which was typical for the era of the baby boomers, that is, during the recovery society after the Second World War. "
While in the Old World, there is no hint of such a "change of mood". And that, again, the merit of the Frankfurt School theorists, whose work is undermined respect for the family and contributed to the spread of cultural pessimism.
Thus, a handful of Marxist revisionists managed to "distort" the American culture and helped to get the deconstruction of our society. On the tomb of the architect Christopher Wren says, "Lestor, si monumenta requires, sirsumsrise" (Reader, if you seek a monument, look around — lat.). The same can be said of Lukacs, Gramsci, Adorno and Marcuse — four of those who organized a cultural revolution.
For the third of a century, during which the counterculture became the dominant culture and dominant, in the words of Gertrude Himmelfarb, has become a "dissident culture," America has become a nation ideologically, in a "soft tyranny," the implanted principles of the new orthodoxy, not by the army and police, and by the inquisitors of mass culture. Manifestations of this we see in the passage of the mandatory requirement of "sympathy course" for the military, businessmen and government officials. Turn on the TV — and you'll see that the revolutionary values trampled under the care of all the stuff that reigns in the country of political correctness that opposition to the Cultural Revolution are regarded as "hate speech", and disrespect to the new dogma is a sign of mental illness. A few years ago, someone described the American universities as "totalitarianism of the island in a sea of liberty." Today to talk about the sea of liberty is ridiculous. Emily Dickinson once said — about your time and our too:
The crowd does not like deviations Among actions or opinions, and does not forgive those madmen who bother her with doubts.
Political correctness is the embodiment of the principles of cultural Marxism, she chastises the disobedient, as once the Inquisition punished religious heretics and heretics praises social. Enrolling yuih opponents in the "hardness of heart" and even the mentally ill, "wrote journalist Peter Hitchens in his book" The destruction of Britain ", the new regime uses the methods infamous Institute of the Serbian in the USSR: the experts of the Institute declared the Soviet dissidents like Natan Sharansky's insane that gave rise authorities shut the unwanted in psychiatric hospitals. What the Americans call an impersonal word "political correctness", in fact, Hitchens argues, is the most intolerant system of views in the British Isles since the Reformation. " The same is true of the United States.
Anyone who dares to break the political correctness, declared racist. Anyone who believes that there is no female professions, such as the pilot of Naval Aviation, is declared chauvinist. If a person believes that the current level of immigration into the United States is too high, he was immediately branded as a nationalist or xenophobic. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association was accused of discrimination against sexual minorities, as it has made homosexuality in the list of diseases. And today, the one who would claim such, threatens diagnosis of "homophobia."
"The homosexual attraction unnatural" — said Pope John Paul II, when thousands marched in Rome members of the international gay parade. "The Church can not remain silent, for how else we distinguish good from evil?" This is the statement of the Vatican classifies it and everyone who listens to him, by the homophobes. Cleric Paul Gottfried calls such classification "dehumanization of society."
Words — a weapon, said Orwell. Traditionalists have yet to find an effective countermeasure said. After all, when your opponent called a racist or fascist, there is no need to refute his arguments. He finds himself in the position of the accused and must defend themselves. In court, the presumption of innocence, and in society when it comes to racism, chauvinism and homophobia, there is a presumption of guilt. It should prove that you are innocent of the charges brought against you.
Orwell so often heard the word "fascist", has even suggested that if John Smith calls a fascist, he just wants to say "I hate Smith." However, Jones utter the phrase out loud, it is not peculiar to reproach truly Christian intolerance. And calling Smith a fascist, he does not have to explain what hates Smith, or try to outdo the last in the dispute, in his own words, he makes excuses Smith is that he is not a secret admirer of Adolf Hitler. Yes, Huey Long was right: fascism comes to America under the guise of anti-fascism.
It is undeniable that Lukacs, Gramsci, Adorno, Marcuse and the Frankfurt School have had a huge impact on the cultural and intellectual history of America. Unlike the Bolsheviks, they did not take by storm the Winter Palace, not embedded in the society their ideas of violence and terror and were intellectual giants, like Marx, to cause ordinary people a sense of reverence. Very few Americans know their names. None of them even Marcuse was neither St. Paul nor Luther or Wesley Cardinal. Former Marxists who underwent revision teachings of Marx, they remained "flesh of the flesh of Marxism" and being in the West, talked about how to organize and perform anti-Western revolution. Their ideas have triumphed. The American elite, hardly imagine who the Frankfurters, accepted the theory of the Frankfurt School on "Cheers."
Today's Americans are unaware that they, ideas and theories have been fostered in Weimar Germany or Mussolini's Italy, and what that implies the desire to undermine our culture and destroy our civilization. And inevitably the question arises: why America of the 1960s, as a country with a rich Judeo-Christian heritage, history, traditions, beliefs, adopted this "quiet revolution"?
Yes, a small part of the American elite, even before the Great Depression, and even more so — in those difficult years, was subject to a phenomenon that French researcher Julien Benda dubbed "the betrayal of the intellectuals." They despised capitalist and Christian America in which they lived. But why is the idea of these "traitors" have taken root in the American heartland? What they brought the golden generation of children who defeated Hitler? And the young people are attracted to so far? Do Sixties America so desperately needed a new faith, a new way of life? Is the rafters of the old house completely rotted away? Was the Revolution inevitable? Or young, like most of them teachers, are simply tired of the old morality, and were looking for a replacement, and so jumped on the bandwagon of the very first train passing by?
Of course, the Frankfurt School is not the only dream of social revolution and contributed to its rapid fulfillment. In the 1930s, many intellectuals thought about doing the same and similar conclusions. Here is a quote from the yearbook of the National Education Association, 1937:
"The current capitalist, nationalist school system is abolished in a single country — Russia, due to the revolution took place there. Therefore, the verdict of history is clear: any any significant changes in society are possible only as a result of the revolution. "
Margaret Sanger, founder of the Society "Family Planning", his radicalism was far superior to all members of the Frankfurt School, taken together, it is to some extent anticipated the idea of "birth control radicals are most welcome, as it could undermine the influence of the Christian church. I look forward to the day when mankind will be freed from the yoke of Christianity and capitalism. "
A revolution has swept America 1960, Gramsci did not write his "Prison Notes" do not leave Adorno and Marcuse Germany? Is it only in Lukacs, Gramsci, Adorno and Marcuse root of all evil, all our troubles? Of course unlikely, but these four have developed a strategy and tactics of successful Marxist revolution in the West, the culture they sought to undermine, is no longer the dominant or in America, or the West in general. The four began his American career exiles, and will complete her posthumously, perhaps, the winners.
Why did they succeed? In the sixties there was a connection of four elements, resulting in a critical mass exploded as a device of Dr. Oppenheimer in Alamogordo, New Mexico.
The first factor — the "message in a bottle" as they called their theory of the Frankfurt School. Their ideas gradually be spread simultaneously with the views of those Americans who have moved away from Christianity and capitalist culture and worked on the theory of the overthrow of the old culture and the destruction of America. Pestuemye for decades, these ideas began to "bear fruit" is in the sixties of the twentieth century.
The second factor — the emergence of a U.S. college campuses in 1964, a huge number of young people who did not know the hardships of poverty and war. Thus there was receptive audience for the "sprouting" seeds of the Cultural Revolution. Carefree, self-confident, bored idleness, unaccustomed to work, these young people were ready to revolt. And sops like cash rewards they were not calm.
As recalled by Robert Nisbet, boredom — "one of the most influential states" defining and shaping human behavior. Treatments boredom there are so many, among them the distinguished sex, drugs — and revolution. In the 1960s, those students that Arnold Toynbee referred to "internal proletariat" bored of studying, together with teachers, tired of learning — and there was a flammable mixture.
The third factor — the television, which is already in the sixties could convey the mood of the radicals on campuses and other potential revolutionaries to theorists of public outrage. By the time the TV has had time to recover, "childishness" of the fifties with their Matt Dillon, it is not only tied the revolutionaries and theorists among themselves, but also to introduce into the public consciousness of new ideas through different visual reality.
Finally, the fourth factor, of course, was Vietnam. Woodstock generation did not want to have anything to do with the war, which meant sacrifice, bloodshed, perhaps, death. Marcuse suggested that young intellectual cover for cowardice, indecision excuse, a way to avoid the draft, "without compromising principles" and feeling superior to the ones who still enlisted. The true heroes of this war, as stated by Senator Fullbright and New York City Mayor John Lindsay, lived in Canada. This statement was heard and extended members of the Ivy League — and, of course, they are not alone.
Former U.S. establishment was destroyed by the Vietnam War — a war that began liberalism, and in which he could not win — and in the eyes of young people ruined by this colossus has lost all credibility. Counterculture opened the road to the summit of power, hence the McGovern campaign in 1972. Among the most ardent enthusiasts of that time was the young Bill Clinton, the pride and joy of the Woodstock generation …
Based on all the above'd like to ask a question of the global properties: is the death of religion-based culture is imminent, barely reaches the society of abundance? When a nation overcome the hardships of childhood, adolescence, and throwing the torment of maturity and begins to lead a life of luxury and luxury, does it inevitably becomes infected with a "disease of the soul," which leads to decadence, decay and death? "America — the only country to have stepped from barbarism to decadence without going through civilization" — Oscar Wilde dropped. Is this paradox is true?
Jacques Barzun suggests that the generation of the sixties simply followed in the footsteps generation twenties. The era of sex, booze and jazz transformed. in the era of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll. Decline slightly delayed "outside interference" — the Great Depression, World War II and the Cold War. When the boundary of the 1950s had been overcome, a new generation has started from the very place where the generation stopped the "Roaring Twenties", destroyed the market crisis of 1929.
However, even if the hedonism of the sixties is a legacy of the era of hedonism bootlegging, you can not ignore what's features: Generation twenties do not hate for America. Few writers of the "lost generation" have left the country, but most of the rebels were not revolutionaries. In the end, they supported the Republican Party at the peak of success, choosing Harding, Coolidge and Hoover. The intellectuals of the sixties strikingly different from their predecessors. As Eric Hoffer wrote: "Nowhere else does not find such an all-consuming hatred for his country among educated people as in America."
After the fall of the Soviet Empire magazine "Times" wondered whether now and do well right? The magazine quoted a statement by one of the conservative politician: "The sign of our grand victory — the lack of any incentive had reason to be conservative."
"Nothing could be further from the truth — said James Cooper, editor of" Emerick Arts Quarterly. "- The main motivation for the Conservatives, and the Americans on the whole thing … it was mentioned by President Reagan in his farewell speech … It the need to win from the left culture … ".
Most conservatives fought in the battles of the Cold War, and a relatively small force held a "second front" — that is guided cultural war. Cooper pleaded with conservatives to continue the war and remembered the lost territories:
"Seventy years ago the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) said that the most important task of socialists is to" capture the culture. " By the end of the Second World War, the liberal left took over not only the art, theater, literature, music and ballet, but also cinema, photography, education and the media.
Through the management of the public culture of the Left to impose their morality. Moreover, they now own "cosmological machine" through which most Americans are forced to view the events in the world and in the country.
Cosmology left rests on two axioms: the first — in the universe there are no absolute values, there are no uniform standards of beauty and ugliness, good and evil, the second — in the God of the universe devoid of the left are the sole judge of human affairs. "
The Conservatives have not paid attention to the call Cooper. They fought against government support for health, for NAFTA and the WTO. "The right to vote with their feet" — said Samuel Lipman, editor of the magazine "New Kraytirion." And Cooper added: "The Conservatives returned to the obtaining of money and the strategy of the Cold War, trimmed portraits of the" hawks "of the past on the walls of their offices — and conveniently forgot about the war of cultures. They talked about this: when there is money, how important the culture? '.
"Where a man purse, there is his heart." Hearts set of right — in the fight for marginal tax rates and the abolition of income tax. No one disputes this important cause. But to win if the person who found the whole world, but lost his own country? Is the issue of increasing GDP by 2, 3, and 4 percent more important than survive or not Western civilization remain whether we Americans are one nation before God and Lyudmila? With falling birth rates, open borders and multiculturalism for the triumph of anti-Western agenda today raises the question of the survival of the U.S. as a state and the survival of Western civilization as a whole … Too many, too many conservatives, unfortunately, has gone to another world …
Let's try to find out what promises the funeral march of the West — not a few centuries, and in this century, not only our children's children, and the generation growing up before our eyes.
To be continued
Part 1. Endangered species
Part 2. Where are the children?
Part 3. The Revolutionary Catechism