Takeover, Part 4:  Paris Commune, Bolshevism, Academics, Wokeness. What?

(L) Stamp commemorating the Paris Commune of 1871 (C) Professor Noam Chomsky, Photo: NYTimes.com, Uli Deck/picture-alliance/AP (R) Susan Bro, mother of woke Heather Heyer who was killed at rally in Charlottesville, Photo: cjr.org/Jason Lappa

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

When I started this series, I did not know what I would find.  Now, at Part 4, I have figured it out. In fact it was all contained in Part 1. “What you see [in government] is not what you get.”

Today’s topic is Leftism.  And guess what?  All is really have to say about it is that leftism, like many other isms, is part of the Big Takeover.  Always was.

Sure, you may have read in college that Karl Marx viewed history as being divided into chronological segments in which we went from feudalism (the owner of the land owns you along with it — droit de signeur type thing), to capitalism-industrialism (Charles Dickens child labor), to the final awakening when they realize that the workers can be boss (really?) in a dictatorship of the proletariat.

A little while later, all laws of human nature fade away and there comes to be a — don’t laugh — withering away of the state.

Marxist theory was dishonest crap from the start. Maybe you should demand a refund of your college tuition, if they taught you Marxism as though it were a genuine intellectual inquiry into society.

Granted, humans practice altruism.  We can be kind to the disadvantaged or the sick or the elderly. We also can construct, by enlightened self-interest, a community with rules about each person taking her fair share of the burdens and the benefits. No big deal.

And yes, Karl Marx was right that we can also be mean. Who needs a college course to see that? Just read Moses’ ten commandments.  If a behavior appears there as a “thou shalt not” it means you are secretly wanting to do that behavior.

The Paris Commune of 1871

Remember Adrian Ding — a fictional character in Part 1 of this Takeover series? He was born in 1728. Let’s give him a great-grandson, Harry Ding. Assuming a new generation is born every 30 years, Harry is born in 1818. The Paris Commune occurred in 1871 when Harry was 53. I am unable to discern if the Paris Commune was in the style of other revolutions where a hidden hand is the real mover. At face value it looks to me that it was real grassroots.

An odd aspect is that the people turned against officials and put themselves into authority. They killed two army generals and an archbishop. The provoking force may have been France’s defeat in war (with Germany) and the men were angry with the officers.  In Vietnam many soldiers fragged officers fatally. This was typically when their captain put their lives in danger for a very small gain in battle or so that he, the officer, could win points for promotion.

After two months, the national government of France put an end to the Commune and punished the communards, by imprisonment, death, or transportation to New Caledonia. Nonetheless, many people are proud of what happened there in 1871.

Just today I heard that the Ottawa police hacked a list of donors to the Freedom convoy and found names of local police on it.  “They will be dealt with,” says the boss. That boss looks silly saying that, as everyone knows the convoy was joyful and a real plus for Canada.

Bolshevism Was a Planned Evil

The Paris Commune is not to be confused with the Russian revolution of October 1917, also known as the Bolshevik revolution. This was on no way a native upset. It was a warlike move against the royal government, Tsar Nicolai, and the nation. Under the pretext of wanting to establish economic equality for everyone — which could be good idea — the Bolsheviks used terror, as was discussed in Part 3 regarding Robespierre.

A far as I can gauge (and who am I to have an opinion, anyway, on an event far removed from my life?), Lenin’s entry to Russia was accomplished by Germans and Americans. I think that Lenin, and his successor, Josef Stalin — who reigned from 1922-1953 — had an agenda unrelated to communism.  I think the agenda was world takeover.

So, to continue with my little fantasy about the Dings, I now offer that Harry, born 1818, had a son Larry Ding born 1948.  Hence, at the time of the Bolshevik revolution, Larry was age 69. To make the story simple we can assume that the behavior of trying to take over the world got passed down the family line. Larry was gung ho Lenin, gung ho the Cheka secret police, gung ho famine, gung ho the Moscow show trials — etc.

My half-baked cynicism had caused me to think the Reds were not rally intending to be the world hegemon. Much has come out, especially from the work of Antony Sutton, to show that the US, a capitalist nation, was feeding technology and equipment to the Soviet Union even while claiming to be in a Cold War with her. Didn’t that mean that Communist international outreach was fake?  I guess not.  Let’s ask Larry Ding.

Mary: “Hello Larry, in your secret heart of hearts, you must be aware of capitalism’s covert support of communism, so what’s the deal? Pardon me while I adjust the waterboarding, so we be sure to get truthful answers from you.”

Larry: “Glug, glug. The US capitalists and the Russian and Chinese communists are all in the same game.  They all work for my family. The hope is that they can eliminate national sovereignty everywhere. They want to have no governments to which the citizen can turn. They want large businesses to run the world.”

Mary: Son of a gun! You mean there really is going to be a withering away of the state!

Larry: Yes, but not to be like Marx said, with the workers owning everything and making all the choices of policy. Ha ha. Workers won’t own nuthin’. And there will be no middle class, and no private wealth — unless you happen to be in what Gorbachev labelled “the nomenclatura.”

Mary: Although I’m embarrassed for myself, Larry, for being a dope, I’m also embarrassed for your family for being such — pardon me — cruds. Can it really have been worth your while, for five generations, to chase after a rainbow that isn’t worth catching? Can you look in the mirror? Do you realize how many wars have been fought for no cause? And how many people have lived in painful fear from your stupid intimidation of them?

Larry: Different strokes for different folks, Ma’am.

Mary: Oh yeah?  Well, here’s a nice little stroke for you (pouring a cup of water on the “detainee”).

Interruption

Dear Reader, as you can see, this series of articles is being written on the run. I want to include that which is relevant to our choice-making today. We are in a desperate condition. Listen to this, written in 1976, by a former prince of Romania, Michel Sturdza:

“When the US has progressed to the point reached by Romania in 1948 there will be no place on earth to which American can flee, and there will be no one to hear their screams.”

That being the case, we need to get smart and act smart and be quick. So, in this “Takeover, Part 4” article, I have been trying to show that even the violent takeover in Russia in 1917, on an alleged basis of a “proletariat dictatorship,” was never in any way inspired by altruism. It reflected base animal instinct by persons who wanted to secure power for themselves. This is normal in our species. We shouldn’t be shy about discussing it.

Now, in 2022, we oddly find ourselves again being told that socialism is the way to go, it’s “moral, excellent, just, etc.” Why believe it?  We do know that it is widely financed by George Soros, a Hungarian American of untold wealth. Has he any track record of caring for workers? I don’t think so. Has he any track record of harming nations via his currency manipulation? Ya wohl.

I have been startled to see the rise of left-ism in the US since returning here a few years ago. Before I departed for Australia in 1980, the word “left” was not used here. I subscribed to publications such as “The Nation” which were critical of government-based injustices, but these were called Liberal. Today they are called Progressive, a throwback to the movement of the 1920s that included muckraking (or, as I now think, pseudo-muckraking).

On settling in to Australia I realized it was a leftist country, like Scandinavia, which took for granted that benefits such as medical care and college education would be free to all. And it did not have an overbearing police power — proof that a leveling of wealth does not have to entail brutality towards dissenters.

By the way, I’m not saying that universal college and “doctoring” is necessarily a blessing — strategically those things give the state more control over private lives. (Hey, remember “private lives,” anyone?)

For the rest of this article, I will ask why socialism was fashionable in academic circles and how it is that intellectuals today could possibly fall for the ludicrous propaganda about wokeness. Or, more importantly, why they aren’t falling all over themselves to study the things that really harm the less well-off, such as child trafficking, geo-engineering, and war baiting.

Note: While I do not think it is malice on the part of academics, to have followed so many poor leads, I do not rule it out. “The malicious we have always with us.” Furthermore, many scholars may be operating unwittingly under mind control. I know of two whose intellect is constrained by mind control, and at least one academic who is blackmailed into silence. And all of us must be responding to some degree to intimidation. Present company included.

Very likely all newscasters are reading their scripts under mind control. They cannot think. I also suspect every parish priest is intellectually controlled; certainly every chaplain in the military is bound to lie, fulltime. How about Legal Aid lawyers?  Let’s just say they know their P’s and Q’s.

As for judges, I have often stated what I think is present in their rulings (in America and Australia): deep wickedness. Given the honor of responsibility for maintaining society’s good laws, they refuse to even step up to the plate. They are jailable and perhaps hangable.  Think about it.

Propagating Woke-ism and Socialism

In the last hundred years, since the suffragettes started to “demonstrate,” much got written about various unfair practices that made life hard for the female of the species. Women were not allowed to shine in politics, in the arts, or in much of anything outside of motherhood and wifehood. That seems to have improved — as a result of its being noticed and discussed.

Much got written also about racism.  I suppose racism is a secondary effect of inter-national injustice. Weak Nation A gets kicked around by Strong Nation B. When individuals of A get dropped into B’s society, by immigration or kidnap, the existing population of B treats them as second-class citizens or as subhuman. This needed to be noticed and discussed, and to a large extent, owing to the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s it did get its day in court.

Is there lingering prejudice in America between blacks and whites? Sure, and there always will be, although it could be attacked at primary school level by showing all kids how racism works. Racism should be laughed at. It is a human weakness unto itself.  It is our innate defend-our-group-against-the-enemy routine. Thus it is irrational when practiced in daily life.

The kids could watch cartoons of racists making fools of themselves. I’ll bet that would work wonders. I sometimes have racist feelings, yet I know I’m being a jerk. That is, I know that my stupid instincts are manifesting themselves. It would have saved me about 40 years of figuring this all out, if we had had smart cartoons to watch as kids.

I also think that in Australia today, we need cartoons that celebrate the wonders of Chinese civilization. The demographic statistics, 26 million Aussies, 1.5 billion Chinks (Oh my God, did she say Chinks?) imply that Asian people will soon be in the majority. It is bound to happen. Why not find out what we two social groups can do as a team? The alternative to that is that we pretend to be unaffected, whilst really feeling suspicious and worried.

Suspicion and worry are normal. They are irrational but can easily be brought to rational awareness. Whoever is already here on the planet deserves to have a go at a nice life. We shouldn’t add to our woes, which are real, by group-to-group snarking. It is pathetic.

The new excitement about woke-ism, as against racism and sexism, strikes me as essentially racist and sexist. Given that we now understand it to be stimulated by George Soros, who could not conceivably be in it for the purpose of healthy relationships, we ought to dump it. Surely it is adding to social strain all around.

Yes, we should get woken up about our racist and sexist inclinations, but not by the Soros crowd, thank you. We need to think about this:  If “racist incidents” like Charleston, SC and Charlottesville, VA are of the Soros variety, were they really racist incidents?  Weren’t they plain old play acting?  If they included deaths, is old man Soros the murderer?

By the way, I also hold that differences are good. Do we all want to look alike and behave the same? Yuck. Do we want to have identical music? And should all religions merge? Oh please.

Finally, a word about socialism. Mainstream media are pushing it. You can tell by the way they give upbeat coverage to any member of Congress who speaks for it. At the moment, the Democrat Party is almost united behind a socialist banner. Again, look back at the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917. Its lingo was the lingo of worker dignity and bourgeois unworthiness.

Its reality was the reality that is being analyzed in this series: Takeover.