Tag: philosophy

The Crawl toward Communism

Communist ideology should have been sidelined decades ago.

That’s what so many of us thought was going to happen after the Soviet Union collapsed back in 1991.

Instead the malignant ideas and strategies of communism, derived from the twisted mind of Karl Marx, gained a significant academic, institutional, and cultural foothold in the Western world.

Here’s a brief summary of how things played out.

Just about the time when the 1970s counterculture appeared to be fading away, a quiet yet insidious revolution was set in motion here in the United States.

There was no red flag waving in the air bearing a hammer and sickle. Rather, a long march through American universities began to take place.

New Left radicals weren’t storming barricades. Instead they were earning PhDs. Humanities and social science departments became ideological echo chambers.

Drawing from Antonio Gramsci’s theory on how the ruling class maintains power, and also the Frankfurt School’s critical theory that derided capitalism and promised social liberation, communist principles became the blueprint for how to deconstruct a societal framework, with the ultimate goal of supplanting it with a Marxist one.

In order to accomplish this, a battlefield had to be set up. The one chosen was that of “The Oppressors vs. the Oppressed.”

Through the fomenting of class envy and the assigning of victim status, members of society were pitted against one another.

What was already entrenched in the halls of our universities quickly spread to our elementary and high schools. Then like dominoes in a row, our federal and local governments, corporate boardrooms, news agencies, internet platforms, and even our Hollywood studios simply gave way.

Communism has been described by some as progressivism, democratic socialism, etc. But call it what you will, it’s just plain old communism, forever seeking the gradual ideological capture of the systems that comprise our societal pillars.

Which systems? Government, legal, education, economic, business, and media, to name some major ones.

Looking back, it seems that for America communism was custom-tailored to focus on culture and identity, a relatively easy way of conditioning our society to turn against neighbor.

It was then marketed, i.e., propagandized, to an already-primed public in order to reshape institutions from within.

We need look no further than our universities to see how the reshaping from within worked to our country’s immense detriment.

The faculties of almost all of the elite universities in our nation have come to lean decidedly to the far-left politically. In most cases, there are entire departments that are devoid of any dissenters to the dominant ideology.

As would be expected, graduating students of these institutions are highly knowledgeable on the topics of “systemic oppression,” “equity,” and “decolonization.” But they are woefully ignorant with regard to the death toll in the millions, which occurred at the hands of history’s most notorious communist regimes.

Sadly, the same communist-laced curriculum easily made its way into our preschools, elementary, and secondary schools. Consequently, far too many of our youth now find socialism and communism acceptable, and sometimes even preferable, than the representative republic that has secured our freedom for just short of 250 years.

Of course, a sizable portion of our Democrat politicians, major corporations, news media outlets, entertainment industry, and internet platforms have played a major role in the crawl toward communism.

We have heard a whole lot of talk over the last few years about existential threats.

It appears that we are currently facing a potential “Mother of All Existential Threats”; that being that communism could seep into our hearts, minds, and souls under the cover of virtue.

Whether the unthinkable occurs in a single stroke or bit-by-bit, the end result is the same. The America we love and cherish ceases to exist.

This is why we are duty-bound to reverse the trajectory.

A good place to start is to hold accountable the politicians who are already out of the communist closet.

This is an imperative since having avowed communists holding public office is a fairly new occurrence. Even Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders didn’t cozy up to communist candidates until somewhat recently.

Another idea is to join in on the religious revival that’s been going on, if you haven’t already. Nothing like faith, hope, and love to turn your world around.

May God bless America, now and forever.

The Long-term Consequences of Moral Relativism

Moral relativism is a philosophical construct in which there are no objective moral truths. There are only subjective truths that are shaped by a society’s hierarchy of authority, cultural norms, and myriad feelings on the part of its individual members.

In this article, I will attempt to give readers some background knowledge about:

– Moral relativism;

– The manner in which the construct has in a major way supplanted our nation’s long-standing moral framework;

– And the danger that moral relativism continues to pose for our society should we fail to reverse course.

In the United States, the concept of moral relativism first emerged within our universities. Then slowly but steadily it seeped into our governmental structure and our culture at large.

Its origin can be traced to the works of anthropologist Franz Boas and his students at Columbia University. Boas set out to destroy the concept of ranked cultures, i.e., that some cultures can be assigned higher or lower rankings than those of others.

Boaz and company insisted that each culture must be evaluated on its own terms and is never to be judged by external standards.

This cultural relativism quickly metamorphosed into moral relativism, meaning that no culture’s moral system should ever be assigned a higher or lower ranking than that of another.

In the 1930s and 1940s, Boaz’s students (which included cultural anthropologists Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict) turned moral relativism into a popular doctrine. By the 1960s, the construct had handily made its way into the popular culture.

The relativistic views of Mead and Benedict were routinely cited as a means in which to argue that the acceptable standards of the times were, in actuality, just one cultural option among many.

By the 1970s, largely due to the implementation of multicultural education, the idea was put forth that diverse cultures have diverse moral frameworks, and imposing one group’s values on another is, in essence, a form of oppression.

So here is where we find ourselves today.

What started out as an obscure academic theory is currently the predominant operating ideology of many who hold the reins of power in our country.

Moral relativism was pushed upon our society, and it slowly and insidiously demolished a major portion of our shared moral framework.

It promises liberation but delivers anarchy.

It tells each and every individual that it is perfectly acceptable to make up your own personal rules.

It obliterates the lines between right and wrong, allowing for extremism to be justified and enabling those who wish to harm others to rationalize their unthinkable actions.

Is it any wonder that after decades of moral relativism imperatives, our society is no longer able to agree on the basic definitions of right and wrong?

For many of us it is painfully apparent that we are now living through the wretched fallout of relativistic thinking as it pertains to society’s moral code.

As we have seen, moral relativism all too frequently leads to deadly consequences.

Through tear-stained eyes we saw waves of unspeakable violence crash from shore to shore. And even as we watched we knew in our hearts the tempest was in no way over.

When a society accepts the idea that “truth” is whatever feels authentic, objective standards cease to exist. If everything is permissible, nothing is protected.

Without a common moral foundation, there is no debate over the best means to shared ends. There is only a raw power struggle in which violence is acceptable and might makes right.

Western civilization was built on the conviction that certain truths are self-evident; that human beings are created equal in dignity, not outcome; that rights come from God rather than government’s whim; and that marriage and family are society’s cornerstones.

Many have abandoned these shared principles in favor of the shifting sands of “my own truth.” But a society that cannot agree on what is virtue and vice is one that is hurtling toward collapse.

What’s the antidote to moral relativism? Well, for starters, cooler heads, clearer thinking, and caring attitudes.

If our nation is ever to regain its moral footing, it is essential that our society return to the values that carried us through for centuries.

But here’s the catch. In order for this to occur, our people have to really want it.

The question is, Do enough of us?

The answer determines our destiny.