posted December 21, 2005 01:00 PM
It happened a short time ago here that someone was touting the idealism of communists. That's right, the political system of thugs and murderers was presented as idealistic. The thugs and murderers who in the 20th century were reponsible for the murder of as many as 200,000,000 of their own citizens. That's two hundred million...approximately 2/3's of the current US population.Later, someone else chimed in on socialism/communism and opined that those communist governments weren't practicing "true communism". Bullsh*t.
Here is the founder of communist doctrine, Karl Marx...from his own words, eradicate, liquidate all capitalists, all Jews, all Christians from the face of the earth...that's real moral idealism. In practice, communists liquidate all who disagree with them...that's moral idealism too.
Murder, rape, robbery, genocide, starvation and lying...all moral deeds when done in the service of a communist state or the pursuit of a communist workers paradise.
Now I understand the radical left's worship of Bill Clinton. Commander Corruption had a good measure of those communist moral ideals.
Rape
Sexual Assault
Adultery
Murder
Bribery
Treason
Obstruction of Justice
Perjury
Lying
Subornation of Perjury
Genocide...Rwanda
Marx and the Worship of Man
Steve Farrell
Wednesday, Dec. 21, 2005
Missing the Mark With Religion, Part 4
Again I pose the same question, but with slight variation: Do religion and morality have a place in public policy, public law, and public education – or are they to be scorned, shunned, and silenced?
Finding the answer to that question in lieu of the hot battle between 21st Century Compassionate Conservatism on the one hand, and 20th Century Modern Liberalism (and its twin sister on moral and religious issues – Libertarianism) on the other, is a quest worthy of our full attention.
As I've already stated without apology, the unspoken consensus – though few admit it – is: ‘It's right to inject religion and morality into the public sphere just so long as the moral slant parallels my moral view of the universe, and it is dead wrong if it does not!'
It's time to fess up, reality speaks!
So let's get frank with those on the left who keep telling the religious folks on the right to ‘hush up' – even the most devout atheist cannot escape the innate compulsion to moralize.
Communist founder Karl Marx was just such a man. Being one who arrogantly proclaimed "there is no morality," he was, just the same, incapable of restraining himself from endlessly condemning capitalists – in moral terms – such as egotistical, exploitive, greedy, calculating, disgusting, and hypocritical men, who look upon their wives and daughters as "common prostitutes," or their wives and children as "simple articles of commerce and instruments of labor." (1)
Meanwhile, let's not forget Marx's constant references and illusions to the oppressed, the minority, the outcast, and the victim (or collectively the ‘Workers' – apparently no one else works under his generalized lens) who deserve better, who OUGHT to be in control, who he implies, by default, are the only moral ones, the only deserving ones, the ones who – as a result – get all the rewards (the forcibly redistributed booty and benefits), while everyone else is liquidated.
And why not? The previous ruling class – and under Capitalism this refers mostly to the middle class – have committed every moral atrocity against the working class – even though Marx denies the existence of right and wrong – and thus they OUGHT to die. Get it?
Don't be deceived. Marx moralized everything, with good guys and bad guys and rewards and punishments. It's just that he had a different set of rules to interpret, to reward, and to cure moral injustices. Just how can his central dogma "the ends justify the means" be interpreted as anything other than a moral perspective?
It is this high and holy frame of reference of the ends justifying the means that is the moral driving force behind everything communist; a driving force that drags behind it a host of additional moral teachings such as lies may be told, property may be stolen, babies may be aborted, and millions may be strategically starved by order of the state if it so be that the lucky ‘left behind' masses will be benefited at the dinner table with a few more meager morsels of rice, a few more acres of unproductive common property, or to tell the hidden truth behind the propaganda, if it so be that the privileged few of the ruling class might ascend one step higher in prominence and privilege over the toiling, suffering, mindless masses that the communists pretend to defend, but are ever ready to crush with their iron fist.
Such moral ends! Nevertheless, each of these ‘means,' and a million other diabolical variations upon them, are moral, as Marx defines morality.
Such a moral system!
But Marx does not leave off there. The same Marx who arrogantly proclaimed against morality, only to invent his own morality; next arrogantly proclaimed that he had "dethroned God," only to invent his own God – man. "Man is God," he taught. But not willing to leave bad enough alone he had to invent his own theory of how life began and evolved. And when he had finished with it, and arrived at the final product in the equation, religion entered the formula again in an ironically self-serving, ‘masses be damned' way.
For Marx taught, as did Darwin, that man evolved from the lower species, but rather than evolving (taking up enormous periods of time for the slightest changes), Marx concluded evolution from the lower species to the higher came in quantum leaps. That is, yesterday's monkey is today's man. No stuff in the middle. Where the real trouble starts is when Marx decided that some men leaped farther than others, and that he, Marx, had leaped farther than they all!
With such a theology as this, it isn't hard to understand why Marx soon expected to be worshiped, that he made it a practice to crush all competitors in the communist movement, and that communism and socialism re-introduced to the world the worship of the state.
But that was not all. Communism introduced the diabolic belief that genocide was a highly moral act. Marx taught that emerging communist states should conduct swift and brutal purges of capitalist and/or religious people in society to speed up the transition from capitalism to full-blown communism. This murderous intervention tactic by communist masters, which would occur during the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Marx described as "compassionate" because it would be less costly in blood than if capitalism died a slower, more natural death.
And so this exposes another fiction: the mass murdering campaigns of Stalin and Mao and other communist dictators were and are Marxist, not a gross departure from Marx as the historical revisionists many claim. Indeed, there is a bloodbath to be found wherever Communism has set up camp and conquered, and the root to this violence is found in nearly every political pamphlet Marx ever wrote, beginning with his Manifesto which blatantly proclaims: "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing conditions. Let the ruling class tremble at the Communist revolution." (2)
The ruling class trembled all right. To the tune of nearly 200 million dead in the 20th Century, (3) and countless billions more robbed, raped, and enslaved – and the count goes on.
Fascism fits right into this discussion as well, for it seems the question leftist historians and political scientists habitually refuse to address is whether or not the root gospel that produced Hitler's belief in the superiority of the Aryan race and his hatred for Jews was not Christian and Capitalist (as the revisionists also claim), but a race-oriented twist on Communist Marx's ‘man as God' theology. Rarely mentioned when one hears the word Nazi is that the Nazi Party's official name was the National Socialist German Workers' Party (4); that Hitler, a student of Marx, was one of its founders; that German socialism had infected Germany with a hatred for the Jews long before Hitler was born (Marx even identified Germany in the Communist Manifesto as the place "The Communists turn their attention chiefly to,") and that the beginning of all this modern Jew hating dates at least as far back as Marx's own call for "the species ... [to be] abolished." (5)
It would be more honest, therefore, to state that Fascism is but one form of socialism, and that Hitler's racist Holocaust was motivated by the morality of the atheistic, hate-God-left, not the believing, love-God-right.
This is no light matter. One of the loudest and emotionally charged arguments used against the involvement of conservative Christians in the public debate is this supposed link of Christianity to the Holocaust, as if to warn that Christian fundamentalism was made in Hitler's image. But the link to Christianity doesn't wash. In fact, Communist Founder Karl Marx's made it clear that his resolve to have the species abolished (which Hitler would be one to initiate in Europe) needed to be extended to Christianity as well. Wrote Marx: "Christianity sprang from Judaism. It has merged again in Judaism. From the outset, the Christian was the theorizing Jew, the Jew is, therefore, the practical Christian, and the practical Christian has become a Jew again." (6)
All of this being vital to both Marx and Hitler because it was the spirit of Judaism which was, according to both of them, at the root of the love of property, and it was this Jewish inspired love of property that was the enemy of both the fascist and the communist state, or if you will, the socialist state.
Again from Marx:
What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time. An organization of society which would abolish the preconditions for huckstering, and therefore the possibility of huckstering, would make the Jew impossible. ... Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. (7) This is the real Marx, the moral philosopher, the great ‘emancipator of our time,' who first made the modern moral case for the genocide of entire classes and races and religions (particularly Judaism and Christianity) in search of that emancipation; and when initially impossible (in the more advanced capitalist nations), of their step by step removal from public life and public influence.
And again, this is the real Marx, the creator of a ‘new' religion, Communism, which outlaws the Judeo-Christian God only to make Marx and his successors the Gods that MUST be worshipped.
Yes, Communists moralize. Yes, Communists set up religions and Gods and mix their morality and their religion in the hands of the state. It's inescapable. That's what humans do – because humans are moral beings – and so their laws reflect morality of one sort or another.
Little surprise then, as we have seen, laws sponsored by liberals or libertarians, compassionate conservatives or communists, have at their foundation one moral view of the universe or another, some correct, some flawed, some applied in ways which enhance human liberty, others which crush it. However, one thing is for certain, never has there been an approach to the role of religion and morality in public life which missed the mark with more deadly, more dreadful, more crushing results than that inspired by the atheist Karl Marx, who haughtily denied the existence of the true God, banished His worship and attending system of morality and truth from the earth, only to put man in His place – the Marxist Man, that is.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/12/20/202519.shtml
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted December 21, 2005 01:00 PM
posted December 21, 2005 01:14 PM
posted December 21, 2005 07:36 PM
, I am a judgmental and close-minded religious fanatic. And yet, even in my ultra-orthodox stupor, I am able to acknowledge that those holding religious power have historically used that power against the poor and the powerless. This might explain, at least in part, Marx's aversion to religion in general. As for the anti-Semitism, of course it is indefensible. It also ran rampant across Europe at that time, with a fever not seen since the Middle Ages, crossing all boundries of political creed and nationality. Marx was certainly not alone.
posted December 21, 2005 10:16 PM
You have now twice accused me of calling you a red commie babe, 
posted December 23, 2005 09:34 PM