I decided to go back and review the original post’s link. Like many things, the more you read or watch something, the more you get out of it. Particularly, on watching the video, I saw something I somehow missed before. At :43 seconds into the video, you see who’s a significant part of this organized (WELL organized) protest: RevCom, the Revolutionary Communist Party, mentioned above in a previous post (even though I at least consciously missed that when I originally reviewed the link Freedom posted in the top contribution).
Listen to the chants – it’s highly rehearsed. They know the responses. Listen to the carbon-copy comments, the key words (for example, “privilege” – spoken by a white woman – I had to laugh out loud at that one), etc. For those on liberal college campuses in the 60s, this is 50 year old stuff – not being resurrected, but still being used, and having been further perfected.
Reading the comments below the article, I was struck by how many people really do “get” it. No, Bill Ayers – this is NOT fire from below. This is highly funded, highly organized, from the top down, by very powerful people, very dark-hearted people, in the most evil sense of that word. Anyone that cannot see it is blind. My signature line, used much longer than just here in the SHTF Forum, refers exactly to this phenomenon. This is not just misguided people, or legitimate political difference. It’s not even about politics – that’s just the outward excuse it uses to appear legitimate. Read it for yourself below.
Following is the first half of the final chapter (or as Marx calls it, “Section”) of the Manifesto. Note how they really do not care WHAT organization or group they infiltrate. The seeming alliances were not that at all – joining with the groups mentioned was for the purpose of using them to further the cause described by Marx (not the group’s cause). Amazingly they will even work with and seemingly for the bourgeoisie when it suits their purposes. Read the following slowly, noticing that that’s exactly what Marx is explaining: infiltrate and USE whatever group is most useful for furthering their purpose, regardless of whether it’s own aims are really in line with what the “communists” are trying to achieve. (Marx called them communists as part of the deception. More on that below.) Today it’s the Democrat Party, and more particularly the candidate (Sanders) running under its banner in order to gain legitimacy for the term “socialist.” They’ve been doing it from within the Republican Party as well, and we can now see the evidence after many decades, as we realize “there’s not a dime’s worth of difference” in the outcome regardless of who’s in charge. So here it is (the bold print emphasis is mine in order to flag the seeming absurdity of the alliance Marx used for illustration):
Section II has made clear the relations of the Communists to the existing working-class parties, such as the Chartists in England and the Agrarian Reformers in America.
The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement. In France, the Communists ally with the Social-Democrats(1) against the conservative and radical bourgeoisie, reserving, however, the right to take up a critical position in regard to phases and illusions traditionally handed down from the great Revolution.
In Switzerland, they support the Radicals, without losing sight of the fact that this party consists of antagonistic elements, partly of Democratic Socialists, in the French sense, partly of radical bourgeois.
In Poland, they support the party that insists on an agrarian revolution as the prime condition for national emancipation, that party which fomented the insurrection of Cracow in 1846.
In Germany, they fight with the bourgeoisie whenever it acts in a revolutionary way, against the absolute monarchy, the feudal squirearchy, and the petty bourgeoisie.
But they never cease, for a single instant, to instill into the working class the clearest possible recognition of the hostile antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat, in order that the German workers may straightway use, as so many weapons against the bourgeoisie, the social and political conditions that the bourgeoisie must necessarily introduce along with its supremacy, and in order that, after the fall of the reactionary classes in Germany, the fight against the bourgeoisie itself may immediately begin.
The Communists turn their attention chiefly to Germany, because that country is on the eve of a bourgeois revolution that is bound to be carried out under more advanced conditions of European civilisation and with a much more developed proletariat than that of England was in the seventeenth, and France in the eighteenth century, and because the bourgeois revolution in Germany will be but the prelude to an immediately following proletarian revolution.
In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things.
Note that he’s not saying they support “every revolutionary movement [that is] against the existing social and political order.” Read his final sentence again – they support anything they can use so THEY can achieve the destruction of the social and political order. Surely no one can accuse the bourgeoisie of being communist – yet they used them when it was a way of disrupting (destroying) the existing order. Watch what’s happening now through that lens. The picture will become much more clear.
Through that lens one can better understand how a John Boehner can get to his position of almost absolute power within the Republican Party, and accomplish the destruction he accomplished. Or how about Mitch McConnell, married to his ChiCom-connected wife Elaine Chao, who got into her top level position as Bush II’s Secretary of Labor, with no opposition even from that supposed great anti-communist Senator Jesse Helms. That confirmation hearing was one of the biggest bad jokes in the history of Congress. How do people like that wield so much power in what was supposed to be the anti-communist party? (That’s a rhetorical question.) And through that lens one also better understands how the education system has become so skillfully and widely corrupted, and how the media has become the tool to shape the attitudes of acceptance for all this, at least in part by diverting attention from things or in come cases not covering them at all.
Forget the words “communist” and “communism.” Marx used even (or especially) those as a diversion in order to create an argument that keeps us looking at the wrong shell in the game. It was never about communism – that term was a red herring from the start. Watch the process over time, notice the identical works of the 60s (and even earlier with other “protests” in previous decades). It’s a multi-generational process, with a commitment level that few people outside that “order” understand. And it’s pure evil. People can call that paranoia, lunacy, or whatever – but they can’t deal with the facts and the history when confronted with them. They have to resort to Alinsky’s brilliant “Rules” for dealing with reality, in order to avoid dealing with reality, thereby creating a false one.