It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cultural Meltdown created by the Marxists

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Cultural Meltdown created by the Marxists


standyourground.com

In 1926, an Italian communist named Antonio Gramsci ended up in Mussolini’s prison after a return from Russia. While there, he wrote his “prison notebooks” and they laid out a plan for destroying Western faith and culture. His plans included ways to undermine and discourage Westerners through the intentional collapse of the existing social structure from within.

Gramsci advocated not only Marxist class warfare, which was economically focused, but also social and cultural warfare at the same time. His theories and the “slow march through the culture” (or institutions) which he
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I do apologize if this is the wrong arena for this subject matter. First time posting ..... long time lurker,etc,etc. I was looking around this morning because a very disturbing thought was occurring to me. We all seek the truth but will either walk only so far to find it OR when we do find it..we may not like it. Everything that is happening in this country HAS BEEN PLANNED! But our culture is what is under attack, not our politics.

Since economic Marxism was a failure, Gramsci reasoned that the only way to topple… Western institutions was by, what he called, a “long march through the culture.” He repackaged Marxism in terms of a… “cultural war”…

“Gramsci hated marriage and the family, the very founding blocks of a civilized society. To him, marriage was a plot, a conspiracy... to perpetuate an evil system that oppressed women and children. It was a dangerous institution, characterized by violence and exploitation, the forerunner of fascism and tyranny. Patriarchy served as the main target of the cultural Marxists. They strove to feminize the family with legions of single and homosexual mothers and ‘fathers’ who would serve to weaken the structure of civilized society.”

I dont know how reputable this link is but would like any input from fellow ATS'ers.

standyourground.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 05:20 AM
link   
I can't see how Gramsci's ideolgy can be blamed for any cultural meltdown? Are you blasming Marxists for the breakdown of american culture?



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by twisteddawg

“Gramsci hated marriage and the family, the very founding blocks of a civilized society. To him, marriage was a plot, a conspiracy... to perpetuate an evil system that oppressed women and children. It was a dangerous institution, characterized by violence and exploitation, the forerunner of fascism and tyranny. Patriarchy served as the main target of the cultural Marxists. They strove to feminize the family with legions of single and homosexual mothers and ‘fathers’ who would serve to weaken the structure of civilized society.”


This is probably true, but I don't think this is a hidden conspiracy by the marxists to destroy civilized society. The conspiracy is what the marxist have been trying to expose and reverse for decades, bring down the patriarchy, give the power and money back to the people, and liberate the individuals beyond the "I can choose between a red and a blue iPod"-choices.

The conspiracy is that many of the liberals who fights for the free market don't understand that the market ain't free, people are fooled into fighting for fake freedoms, forgetting to free their minds.

Peace and love!



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I'm fed up with people from america throwing around complex ideas like socialism and marxism, and somehow failing to understand them so much that they actually believe to be living in such systems.

Please define "marxism" in your own words.



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
I'm fed up with people from america throwing around complex ideas like socialism and marxism, and somehow failing to understand them so much that they actually believe to be living in such systems.

Please define "marxism" in your own words.


Why dont you define it first and allow me the opportunity to pick it apart...



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TheNorthernLight
 


Nikita Krushchev's own quote.

"You Americans are so gullible. No, you won't accept Communism outright; but we'll keep feeding you small doses of Socialism until you will finally wake up and find that you already have Communism. We won't have to fight you; we'll so weaken your economy, until you fall like overripe fruit into our hands."



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 



Well before you call us gullible you should understand to what degree and with what great efforts the Red mechine has been at work here in the US.

And how really good they are at what they do, thier political witchcraft ect.

The are wise evil incarnate. Millions and millions of souls harvested by them in the last century yet their prophets control much of american academia.

They dont call them Red for nothing.



posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


I dont agree with the statement. I find most of the people in my circle arent gullible, just mis-informed.

This is from their point of view. Anyone that is a proponent of the redistribution of anything through the guise of some type of justice ALWAYS have an inflated sense of their own intelligence. To them were all gullible and stupid so they think they can outsmart us. Usually their hubris is their achilles heel.

I read that statement and have visions ( fantasies really ) of me and this fat bastard put in a pit in the ground. Only one leaves alive.


[edit on 20-4-2010 by Thirty_Foot_Smurf]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Now, now, I asked first...

Please, indulge me. What makes you believe that you are living in a marxist society ?

And please don't say "the health care reform"... That would be eliminatory.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by Ismail]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 



Think maybe we had a misunderstanding.

Anyway yea I know such that are just full of condisention and self. Cognitive dissonance in the old classic meaning which was a person so bent that thier cognitive functions shut out reality or the truth of other facts. Now days it has something to do with inner conflict created by holding contrary ideas.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
reply to post by Thirty_Foot_Smurf
 


Now, now, I asked first...

Please, indulge me. What makes you believe that you are living in a marxist society ?

And please don't say "the health care reform"... That would be eliminatory.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by Ismail]


Oh hey, I can answer that one for the Smurf. Were not. We have one at the . of the executive branch though.

Now answer why you think were not creeping towards a socialistic system with social programs being implemented; most notably the recent health-care reform.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Alot of alleged Marxist philosophy is taken out of context by association.

I recommend reading: Socialism & Man in Cuba, by Ernesto Che Guevara and Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein as a foundation for further understanding.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ghostsoldier
 


Ernesto Che Guevara? He was a dirty filthy Communist!

Albert Einstein? A sneaky elitist Jew!

I'm being sarcastic, of course. But in my experience, you can't simply hand reading material to someone who is still 'stuck in the Red Scare' and expect them to snap out of it.

These people simply aren't capable of making up their own minds about things. Their reactionary attitudes towards the words 'Socialism', 'Communism' and 'Marxism' are hammered into their brains from a young age, and they simply never seize the opportunity to discover what they mean for themselves.

Hence why so many people in America think the three terms mean the exact same thing. It's sad, really.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 

lol - its worth a try, and maybe a few lurkers might be tempted.


Also, I have no idea why you are on my foe list - I made a whole bunch of people foes in some thread about Cuba. *shrugs* maybe I misinterpreted sarcasm. Meh, friended just for not being brainwashed by the remnants of the Red Scare, all that and more
.

PeAcE

[edit on 22/4/10 by ghostsoldier]



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Longview
 


Ah... The dreaded health care reform. I assume you have read it. So basically, the state is pushing for preferential contracts with private insurance companies, for the poor. I would argue that this is the antithesis of a marxist system. In a marxist system, the state would nationalize all of your private insurance companies, and create a unique health cover for all. Your reform just gives more power to private corporations, because in a way, it assures them a fixed revenue. You appear to be confusing state interventionism, which historically has taken many forms, such as the monarchic and facist forms, which ideologically are the direct antithesis of "marxism".

The assumption that Obama could possibly be affiliated in any way to the marxist ideology is laughable. I live in europe. You percieve Obama as a leftist individual. From my perspective, he is more right wing than most of our right wing politicians.

At the moment, you are seeing more state interventionnism. Which is kind of logical, because in times of crisis, states tend to become more protectionnist. This implies the necessity of more organisation, and therefore, more centralised decisions.

Here's a funny anecdote. America didn't have the money to produce all the armamament and equipement it used during the second world war, but you guys did have the ressources. So, you distributed received ration tickets. Strangely enough, no one back then was screaming marxism, although this means of fuctionning was extremly marxist. A centralised govenment, rationing and distributing ressources. Today, when you think of WW2, you picture triumphant GI's chewing gum and drinking coke, exporting freedom and capitalism to the world. Which is kind of weird, really because at that time, you people were actually closer to marxism and further from capitalism than you have ever been.

I wouldn't worry to much about the progression of marxism in your country, if I were you. You will see more state interventionnism in the years to come, as this financial crisis takes it's toll. Your leaders have the choice between more centralisation, or letting individual states go bankrupt, which in essence, would dislocate your country, both economically and politically.

No, marxism just isn't the american way. If you are going anywhere, it is towards facism. You have the perfect ingredients for that. Exacerbated patriotism, a fanatical love for all things military, a "master race" dogma ("america number one f**$ yeah !"), an extremely active and influential bunch of religious extremists, an economy going down the drain, a pathological fear of "communism", a fascination for charismatic political individuals instead of politics and ideas in themselves, and a dumbed down population of sheeple who are ready to buy any war if the propaganda (sorry MSN) says it's cool.

Hitler was a facist, not a marxist. He sent the marxists and communists to the deathcamps, make no mistake. It is estimated that in France, 90% of the resistance movement was affiliated to the communist party (and on a side note, towards the end of the war, when the allies knew they were going to win, the De Gaulle governement, which was resolutely right wing, started leaking info to the nazis so that they could take out the communists before De Gaulle came to power. Many marxist freedom fighters died this way near the end of the war, betrayed by a country they had fought and bled for, because they were considered too dangerous by the conservatives).

Of course, we all know that the Nazis had a centralised governement, but don't mix that up with marxism. Two very different things. Marxists are internationalists, not patriots. Facists, on the other hand, are die-hard patriots. Amercica will transform into a regime akin to facism, not marxism, because you guys are just so obsessed with your great country. You will remain capitalist though. Facist governements never give up capitalism. They tend to control things a little bit more, but don't worry, no one will come to "collectivise" your house.

Here's a bonus. I am not a marxist. But I do freely admit that marxism as such has never existed as a state policy anywhere on this planet, ever. Russia, China, Cuba... all those were "State Capitalist" systems. And due to there very nature, they had nothing to do with marxism. Check it out.


[edit on 22-4-2010 by Ismail]



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
reply to post by ghostsoldier
 




These people simply aren't capable of making up their own minds about things. Their reactionary attitudes towards the words 'Socialism', 'Communism' and 'Marxism' are hammered into their brains from a young age, and they simply never seize the opportunity to discover what they mean for themselves.

Hence why so many people in America think the three terms mean the exact same thing. It's sad, really.


"Seize" the opportunity? Now who likes to throw that word around?



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
reply to post by Longview
 


The assumption that Obama could possibly be affiliated in any way to the marxist ideology is laughable. I live in europe. You percieve Obama as a leftist individual. From my perspective, he is more right wing than most of our right wing politicians.


Apparently you know nothing of this man. Look into the racist Marxist church he attended for over 20 years. The religion he was and in all probability is still a part of is black liberation theology. Look it up and educate yourself.

You think that just because you take the time to write a book stating your position it will somehow make you right? FAIL.

So you live in Europe and are a dirty communist. Fine. Cling bitterly to your ideology as you go the way of Greece. I'm sure we'll e bailing your but out again soon too.

You Europeans haven't got a clue. You tinker around with these communist marxist fascist socialist ideologies and wind up getting your butts in trouble when dictators come to power as a result. And you STILL seem to think it is the superior system? didnt the 20th century teach you anything?

Utopian Fools.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
reply to post by Longview
 



Here's a bonus. I am not a marxist. But I do freely admit that marxism as such has never existed as a state policy anywhere on this planet, ever. Russia, China, Cuba... all those were "State Capitalist" systems. And due to there very nature, they had nothing to do with marxism. Check it out.


[edit on 22-4-2010 by Ismail]



The Marxist dialectic is such that it breeds applicable hybrids and associations. In state capitalist situations we simply have the state takeover over things in order to insure the "economic justice" in a real workable way rather than kill the golden goose completely.

Giving industry back to the "people" and making it otherwise serve the state is simply a modification of Marx. Any of these systems you have mentioned cannot escape the basic economic realities that capitalism addresses so they change the definition around a bit, reajust ownership and oversight for any number of reasons but in the main to make them "serve" progress toward utopia.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Ismail
 


Hitlers National Socialist ideology was based on Marxism. There was essentially no difference between National Socialism and Communism but the racist fervor against the Jews.

Other than that I couldn't have said it better than you did Longview.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join