MAY'S OXFORD MARXIST MAN

From Euro Guido – Sept 2018

Theresa May’s Brexit supremo Olly Robbins is a former Soviet sympathiser who opposed capitalism, praised Soviet leaders and lamented the demise of Communist Russia, Guido can reveal. As a student at Hertford College, Oxford in the nineties, “Red Robbins” wrote an article in praise of Soviet Russia for the Oxford Reform Club magazine. In a rewriting of history that would have made Seumas Milne blush, the PM’s new star Number 10 hire wrote:

“The Russian state has endured more than any other major nation in the twentieth century, and has achieved more too… I would never disagree that some of the deeds done in the name of communism were evil, but it is as well to look at the era’s aims and achievements. First among these were the aims of free and fair education, housing and healthcare. These were also the main planks of the post-war consensus here in Britain, and could hardly be described as evil. What is more, they were achieved. More Russians can read than Britons, there are almost no homeless people in Moscow, unlike London… Another achievement was the making of a state, a world power indeed, and one that its people could be proud of. The Soviet leaders changed Russia from a backward peasant autocracy, despised by the West, into a technological giant at whom the world cowered in fear for half a century.”

Red Robbins then lamented the fall of the Soviet Union as meaning there is no longer an alternative to the real baddie: capitalism.

“The demise of the Soviet experiment means that for those growing up in the world today, especially western Europe, there appears to be no alternative to the mad excesses of modern capitalism. To the thinking man and woman, Soviet Russia may not have been ideal, but it was food for thought in the “greed is good” climate of the 1980’s.”

The article concludes that it is unfair to say communism failed because the ravages of Russia’s Tsarist past meant “the experiment was hardly conducted in fair conditions”.

So the top civil servant in charge of Brexit is a former Soviet fan boy who defended Stalin and implied communism was preferable to capitalism. We knew Olly was a Remainer, but we didn’t think he’d be such a keen supporter of the crowning principles behind Juncker’s democracy-hating EU super-state speech last week.

Marxists today do not learn from today

Perhaps the saddest part of all this is the failure to learn from the reality of Marxism today. It failed everywhere it was tried in the past (as I explain below) and continues to fail today.  You can find out more by looking at the website http://thevenezuelacampaign.org/the-issues/ which explains how Marxist Venezuela  is collapsing, people are starving to death, the murder rate is rocketing and millions are emigrating.

Following policies espoused today by Jeremy Corbyn in Britain, the former Marxist President Chavez nationalised large parts of the Venezuelan economy, including steel mills, cement producers, banks, food producers, farms and shops. This policy has been continued by his successor Maduro. As a result, Venezuela’s GDP has declined by 40% since 2013. The IMF predicts that GDP will fall by a further 15 percent in 2018, marking an almost unprecedented 50% decline in GDP. Simply put, Venezuela’s economy will have halved in size over a 4 to 5 year period. The destabilized economy has led to hyperinflation, an economic depression, shortages of basic goods and drastic increases in unemployment, poverty, disease, child mortality, malnutrition and crime.

The oil industry shows the familiar pattern of Marxist control.  The company’s operating budget was diverted to political patronage and other funds disappeared through corruption, with $500m disappearing into a pyramid scheme run by government-linked financiers. Once one of the world's largest oil exporters, the state-owned oil company PDVSA has ceased to function as an effective oil company, and production dropped even while oil prices remained high. This decline in production was a direct result of political intervention by former President Chavez. When workers at PDVSA went on strike in 2003 he fired 18,000 workers and replaced them with 100,000 political supporters without adequate skills. The rate of workplace-related injuries trebled, and 40 workers were killed when a refinery exploded in 2012, causing US$1.7 billion in damage. Hardly a 'workers' paradise'!

The Oxford Marxist takeover by Norman Taylor, membership secretary, UKIP Ashford

It is significant that Olly Robbins is a graduate of Oxford. This was taken over in the 1920's by Lenin's supporters and has remained fervently so as new generations of lecturers and professors are brainwashed into the same discipline. Incidentally, Lenin despised these "useful idiots", as they were called by economist and philosopher Ludwig van Mises, but was driven by his  fear that unless other countries also went communist, his own revolution would collapse through economic failure.  This drove him to try something new at the time: a special corps of foot soldiers to push his revolution in every country — co-opting and subverting democratic processes, fomenting strikes, installing secret armies and, above all, propagandizing according to Moscow's dictates. Many Oxford students today graduate into journalism where they promote these ideas to the wider public. They've been especially successful at changing the word 'democracy' into 'populism' so they can attack democracy without it being noticed.

No doubt, Marxist supporters would deny they were brainwashed at university.  Of course they would; you can't be brainwashed if you are aware of it!

Paul Dacre, former editor of The Daily Mail has noted that "Britain is dominated by a "subsidariat", those newspapers whose "journalism and values—invariably liberal, metropolitan and politically correct, and include the pinkish Times —don't connect with sufficient readers to be commercially viable and make a profit."

Dacre also attacked the BBC as a "monolith" pursuing "cultural Marxism" which has a singular world view and is contemptuous of "ordinary people". According to Dacre:

“The right to disagree was axiomatic to classical liberalism, but the BBC's political correctness is, in fact, an ideology of rigid self-righteousness in which those who do not conform are ignored, silenced, or vilified as sexist, racist, fascist or judgmental. Thus, with this assault on reason, are whole areas of legitimate debate—in education, health, race relations and law and order—shut down, and the corporation, which glories in being open-minded, has become a closed-thought system operating a kind of Orwellian Newspeak."

Dacre has since been replaced at The Mail by Geordie Greig, an Eton and Oxford man of impeccable social connections. The paper is now transforming rapidly into a vehicle for Cultural Marxism. No surprise there, then.

PS

I wonder if Robbins has read The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, a 1997 book by Stéphane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Andrzej Paczkowski and several other European academics^, documenting a history of political repressions by Communist states, including genocides, extrajudicial executions, deportations, killing population in labour camps and artificially created famines.

According to Wikipedia, the book claims that the number of people killed by Communist governments amounts to more than 94 million. The statistics of victims include deaths through executions, man-made hunger, famine, war, deportations, and forced labor. The breakdown of the number of deaths is given as follows:

• 65 million in the People's Republic of China

• 20 million in the Soviet Union

• 2 million in Cambodia

• 2 million in North Korea

• 1.7 million in Ethiopia

• 1.5 million in Afghanistan

• 1 million in the Eastern Bloc

• 1 million in Vietnam

• 150,000 in Latin America

• 10,000 deaths "resulting from actions of the international Communist movement and Communist parties not in power"

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

WHY MARXISM DOESN'T WORK

by Norman Taylor, membership secretary, UKIP Ashford

Whenever Marxism fails in practice, which is always, its defendants explain that the theory is correct only it was ‘wrongly implemented’. They also claim,  like Olly Robbins above,  that “the Russian experiment was hardly conducted under fair conditions because of the extremes experienced during Russia's Tsarist past” (see The Red Terror below).

They often claim that Marxism's basis is ‘scientific’ and so must be right.

This last argument shows a profound ignorance of how science works. Let’s take as an example the Standard Model of Elementary Particles. This is a table of what are considered by scientists to be the fundamental particles of matter. They are presumed to be indivisible and not composed of other particles. Starting in the 1970s, the theory has evolved through experiment to identify 24 fundamental fermions (12 particles and their associated anti-particles), which are the constituents of all matter. The theory has been very successful. For example, it predicted the existence of a new type of boson known as the Higgs boson which seems now to have been found by physicists working on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN.

But there are clouds on the horizon.  The Standard Model does not explain gravity or dark matter so is incomplete, or even wrong.  Recent work at the LHC has revealed hints of more particles and some ‘inexplicable’ interactions. Instead of declaring that the experiments are ‘wrongly implemented’, leading scientists accept that there might be fundamental problems with the theory and it may need to be changed.  They know the fundamental rule of science:  if an idea conflicts with experiment then it is wrong. They’re working on that now. 

Lesser scientists sometimes find it hard to give up their cherished ideas, even in the face of conflicting experimental evidence. So it is with the Marxists who, despite extensive evidence of its failures, cannot accept any flaws in their theory. Marxism is thus faith or religion rather than science.

The basic flaws in Marxism have been well-explained by philosophers and economists such as John Locke, Adam Smith, Ludwig van Mises and F.A. Hayek. Although taking different approaches, they agree that the real basis of development is action based on human nature including: self-preservation, family, individual freedom, cooperation, competition, cultural evolution, justice, the rule of law, the acceptance of property, religious tolerance, tradition and morality.  It is clear that human beings are far more complicated than a simple division into ruling class or proletariat. Marxists respond by denying or disliking these fundamental expressions of human nature.

They fail to understand that the characteristics which define us as human beings exist whatever structures we create. So Marxist leaders still ask themselves the universal question: What's in it for me?

Any new proposals for improving mankind's lot are subject to the same question by those in charge - whether they know it or not. Which helps to explain why Marxist leaders live in exotic surroundings while  their people do not. It also explains why unelected  EU leaders live a life of luxury while condemning millions of Europeans to the dole queue. This tendency was memorably explained by the historian, politician and writer Lord Acton (1834-902) who wrote: ""Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Democracy (the ability to choose our leaders) has been found to be the only effective defence against this universal tendency - which is why the 'elite' oppose it so fervently.

As human thoughts and actions are a barrier to Marxist theorists; they work actively to denigrate or destroy fundamentals such as family loyalty, patriotism, tradition and morality.  But human instincts are innate and cannot be eliminated by attacks from ‘outside’. When alien Marxist ideologies are forced on them, people react with passivity or active non-cooperation which gradually destroys the system from within.

Marxists have problems with this. They cannot understand that people do not see the good in Marxism which they do. They ignore the old proverb that: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

So Marxists justify 'collateral damage' in the belief they do a greater good in the long run. Twenty million murders can be accepted as the price of getting on the right road. 

In case you find it impossible to believe that any human being could think this way, consider what the famous British Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawn said in a 1994 interview with Michael Ignatieff:

Ignatieff: In 1934, millions of people are dying in the Soviet experiment. If you had known that, would it have made a difference to you at that time? To your commitment? To being a Communist?

Hobsbawm: …’Probably not.’

Ignatieff: Why?

Hobsbawm: Because in a period in which, as you might imagine, mass murder and mass suffering are absolutely universal, the chance of a new world being born in great suffering would still have been worth backing… The sacrifices were enormous; they were excessive by almost any standard and excessively great. But I’m looking back at it now and I’m saying that because it turns out that the Soviet Union was not the beginning of the world revolution. Had it been, I’m not sure.

Ignatieff: What that comes down to is saying that had the radiant tomorrow actually been created, the loss of fifteen, twenty million people might have been justified?

Hobsbawm: Yes.

It's clear that Marxists never consider how the victims feel about this.

So, with little sympathy or understanding of why people act as they do, Marxist theories are always doomed to failure in practice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS Murder continues to be a favoured tactic of socialists today. Ken Livingstone, for example, thinks that Marxism would have succeeded in Venezuela if they had killed off the ruling elite.  Livingstone told Talk Radio: “One of the things that Chávez did when he came to power, he didn’t kill all the oligarchs. There were about 200 families who controlled about 80% of the wealth in Venezuela.”

He was joking ...wasn't he?

Further Reading

“Treatise of Government” – John Locke

“The Wealth of Nations” – Adam Smith

“Human Action” – Ludwig von Mises

“The Fatal Conceit” – F.A. Hayek

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CULTURAL MARXISM

by David Kurten, UKIP Education spokesman, Sept 26 2018

There is something very wrong with society today. On the surface things seem to be ticking along OK, yet under the veneer, the foundations of Western civilisation are rotting away. Have you ever wondered why police are so inefficient today, unless it comes to investigating ‘hate crime’? How our taxes increase for fewer services? Our over-burdened, and strangely inefficient NHS? Why beautiful old buildings are replaced with monstrous carbuncles? Why our children are taught strange and ridiculous things at school, yet their standard of education is falling, together with the examination standards? This is an introduction to the ideology that is behind it all, and why this is happening.

Karl Marx (1818 – 1883)

Marxism derives its name from Karl Marx, who was born in 1818 in Trier, Germany and died 1883 in London and was buried in Highgate cemetery. His two best-known works are the 1848 pamphlet The Communist Manifesto, co-authored with Engels and the three-volume Das Kapital. His work has since influenced subsequent intellectual, economic and political history.

Marx theorised that capitalist societies are inherently oppressive and unjust: There is conflict between the ruling classes, (the bourgeoisie) and the working classes (the proletariat). The bourgeoisie control all of the Capital (property and the means of production) and are oppressors of the proletariat whom they exploit. In order to create a perfect society, the proletariat need to achieve class consciousness, rise up in revolution, seize the Capital and collectivise it. When this happens in every country of the world, the workers of the world would unite and form a global Utopia.

His theories have been tried and tested under Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Castro and are being implemented today in Venezuela. They do not work. Marxism leads to hellish conditions which are the exact opposite of the promised Utopia.

The working classes in the Western world mostly rejected Marxist ideology. Later Marxist intellectuals translated his theories from economic to cultural terms. This is known as neo-Marxism or Cultural Marxism, and is the main driver of ‘political correctness’.

Antonio Gramsci (1891 – 1937)

He was an Italian Marxist philosopher and politician. He wrote on political theory, sociology and linguistics. He attempted to break from the economic determinism of traditional Marxist thought and so is considered a key neo-Marxist. He was a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party of Italy and was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini’s Fascist regime. Gramsci questioned why Marxist revolutions failed in the West, unlike the successful Bolshevik Revolutions in the East. His answer was that ‘civil society’ was much stronger in the West, and the ‘cultural superstructure’ in the West acted as a bulwark against revolution. Rudi Dutschke later encapsulated his ideas by coining the phrase: ‘A long march through the institutions’. In order to undermine civil society in the west, Marxists would have to infiltrate established institutions and undermine Judaeo-Christian principles and rational thinking, beginning with the Universities before spreading elsewhere.

Wilhem ‘Willie’ Munzenberg (1889 – 1940)

Munzenberg was a communist political activist and was the first head of the Young Communist International in 1919–20 and established the famine relief and propaganda organization Workers International Relief in 1921. He was a leading propagandist for the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) during the Weimar Era, but later grew disenchanted with Communism due to Joseph Stalin’s Great Purge of the 1930s.

According to Ralph Toledano, Munzenburg wrote: We must organise the intellectuals and use them to make Western civilisation stink. Only then, after they have corrupted all its values and made life impossible, can we impose the dictatorship of the proletariat.

The Frankfurt School

The Institut für Sozialforschung (Institute for Social Research) was the creation of Felix Weil, who was able to use money from his father’s grain business to finance the Institut.

Weil was a young Marxist who had written his PhD on the practical problems of implementing socialism and was published by Karl Korsch.

Felix Weil himself was an orthodox Marxist, who saw Marxism as scientific; the role of the Institut would be social and historical research mainly on the workers’ movement. Indeed, in its early years, the Institut did fairly orthodox historical research. However, one of Weil’s central objectives was also cross-disciplinary research, something which the German University system made impossible.

Max Horkheimer was the director of the Institut from 1930 – 1960. He devised ‘Critical Theory’, the purpose of which is to destructively and relentlessly criticise Western civilisation and everything associated with it. When Hitler came to power, the Institut was closed down, and by various routes, most of its participants regrouped in New York, with a new Institute affiliated to Columbia University and spread their ideas in the USA.  However, after the War, the Institut members returned to Frankfurt to continue their work.

Some Institut members researched why communist ideology had not proved popular in the Western World and they concluded that the barriers were Christianity and the traditional family (as correctly identified by Antonio Gramsci).

One of these members was the Hegelian philosopher Herbert Marcuse, who was probably the only member of the Institut who achieved wide influence among political activists in the 1960s. Marcuse is attributed to coining the phrase “Make Love, Not War”. In his 1956 book Eros and Civilisation, he advocated creating a society which was “polymorphous-perverse” to replace ‘repressive’ JudaeoChristian bourgeoisie society, which he labelled “monogamic patriarchal”.

“Our research has failed to show that any of these theoretical Marxists mentioned in this publication ever experienced life in a communist state. They blindly followed the Marxist writings and tried to impose their own dystopia on the wider World. This struggle continues today.”

Saul D. Alinksy (1909 – 1972)

Born in Chicago, Alinski studied Philosophy and Archaeology at the University of Chicago, before working as a criminologist and learning the skills required for organising.

In his book “Rules for Radicals” published in 1971, a year before his death, he addressed the 1960s generation of radicals in the New Left outlining his views on organizing for mass power. The opening paragraph clearly identifies who he is writing to:

“What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe is should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold [onto] power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”

There is evidence that Alinsky’s writings have had a profound influence on some left-inclined modern day politicians, such as Hillary Clinton, who wrote her college thesis on Alinsky’s work and Barack Obama, who reportedly attended Alinsky training.

“True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.” – Alinsky”

Common Purpose

This World-wide, yet shadowy organisation was formed in the UK during 1989. They boast a 70,000 Alumni. Many key senior leaders in the private, public and NGO sectors are graduates of the Common Purpose Meridian or Matrix programme.

Common Purpose selects people to become trainees who have the ‘correct’ viewpoints. It provides networking opportunities for its graduates, and its meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, whereby one may use information gained, but never divulge the source and Freedom of Information requests about the organisation are often rebuffed. Reportedly, they train graduates using neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) which employs language as a tool to manipulate thought and engineer consensus.

Common Purpose training claims to remove prejudice and empowers graduates to work across boundaries and to lead ‘beyond authority.’

The Bilderberg Group

So named, since their first meeting was held in the Bilderberg Hotel in Oosterbeek, in the Netherlands, in 1954. This secretive gathering consists of politicians, royal family members, bankers, global business leaders and their ilk. Its very existence was denied until 2010 and  it operates under strict Chatham House Rules, like Common Purpose. It appears to be a powerful global steering group, which at best exerts a high level of influence and control over global organisations such as the UN, World Bank, and the EU. At worst it is preparing the way to impose an undemocratic One-World Government.

Further Reading

‘That Hideous Strength: How The West Was Lost’ – Melvin Tinker

‘The Death of the West’ – Pat Buchanan

‘The Abolition of Britain’ – Peter Hitchens

‘The Strange Death of Europe’ – Douglas Murray

‘The World Turned Upside Down’ – Melanie Phillips

‘What Are They Teaching The Children’ – Lynda Rose

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RED TERROR IN RUSSIA

I've just finished reading  "The Red Terror in Russia  1918 – 1923" by S. P. Melgunov (Berlin, 1924).

I recommend it to all students of Politics and Philosophy, especially those currently being brainwashed by Marxist adherents in our 'elite' universities. I can also recommend it to Olly Robbins, Theresa May’s Brexit supremo, whose philosophy is explained above under May's Marxist Man. Like many modern politicians, Robbins studied Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE) at Oxford. But, unable to think for himself, he swallowed his Marxist lecturers'  'politically correct' doctrine wholesale and is, I fear, beyond redemption. That is very sad.

Many of us ask why the crimes of Nazism are condemned by all right-thinking people but the crimes of Communism are largely ignored.  It may be because we have permanent reminders of the horrors of Nazism in memorials such as Dachau and Auschwitz but Marxists have airbrushed the crimes of Communism from the land, from history and from any collective memory. The Red Terror in Russia is one reminder that all extreme ideologies lead to the same place - the grave.

The book itself requires a strong stomach. Before studying it, it's also worth reading these extracts from a 'modern' Translator's Preface by Terri Fabre (Kuznetsoff) (Paris 2014):

"Was communist practice materially different from Nazism?

Suspension of rights? Check.

Imprisonment in concentration camps? Check.

(Well, outside of prisoners of war, Nazis targeted only one category with small exceptions, while the Communists dispatched everybody in sight without distinction – does it matter?

Mass executions? Check.

Torture? Check.

Not sure about institutionalized rape – were the Nazis accused of that? Well, let us just put another check mark for the sake of balance – the communists are ways ahead anyway.

Denial of medical treatment? Check.

Forced labour? Check.

Starvation? Check.

Unprovoked occupational wars? Check.

Oh, Good Lord, they are exactly the same! Only the head count is different, and not in Nazis’ favour. Add to that grotesque methods of execution, displacement of entire nationalities or segments of population, keeping prisoners in anti-sanitary conditions, and the Nazis would be sounding almost tame in comparison. So why is throwing a Nazi salute illegal in a good half of present day Europe, but flying a red flag with hammer and sickle is not? Is it because Russia was our ally during WWII? Well, it managed to outdo not yet existing Nazi Germany by a factor of 5 – 10 by that time."

"The communists did not just allow millions to die of typhus and be starved to death – they actively tortured to death about three times more people in the same time span as died in WWII. Keep in mind that was not the end of it – communist rule lasted for 70 straight years, 14 times longer than Nazis ruled Germany. So why is the civilized world banning and prosecuting the holocaust deniers and Nazi sympathizers, but at the same time giving a free pass to the communist parties?"

"The US were defeated by joint efforts of USSR, Communist China and Vietcong. Not only did the Vietnamese nationals pay for that with their lives ruined in the concentration camps – the Americans did too. Have they learned a lesson? No. Communist wannabes Khmer Rouge emerged and promptly slaughtered 3 million Cambodians. Has the world learned a lesson? Not again.

"I keep the count. It is at 14 now. The latest one was very recent – Venezuela. The communist government they elected confiscated property of the foreign companies, mostly American, suppressed human rights, plunged the country into poverty and committed other atrocities, but it is still all Okay."

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________