"It's time to get rid of the Marxist worldview if we want to get on with our lives. . ."
Editor's Note: This article was generated by machine translation, so our staff cautions the reader about possible inaccuracies that may have resulted from this. However, it was deemed worthwhile to still publish such a piece because of the intrinsic value of the message - which remains evident even in its translated form.
Karl Marx, formed his thinking under the enormous influence of the philosophy of Hegel. As a young man, having passed through the Young Hegelian movement, Marx was never able to overcome the influence of this German system.
For the young Marx, it was important to reformat Hegelianism into a rational-atheist philosophy and give it practical efficacy.
As he wrote as early as 1844, "Ideas cannot realize anything at all. The realization of ideas requires men who must use practical power." (Marx K. and Engels F. The Holy Family or Critique of Criticism against Bruno Bauer and Company (September-November 1844 // Marx K. and Engels F. Works. Izd. 2-e. Т. 2. С. 132).
Marxism, with its proclamation of the "inevitable" victory of communism in the future, is a philosophical and simultaneously practical system, which through party-building seeks to "create" in practice what it theoretically proclaims as "inevitable".
That is, the Marxist "inevitable" future must be created in modernity by the hands of the Marxist party, which itself is not without ambiguity, to put it mildly. If something is inevitable, it will materialize in this world, and it does not require revolutions and bloodshed. But if a communist future is not inevitable and therefore not the natural course of human development, is it really worth pursuing by "man-made" means with no regard to the amount of human sacrifice? After all, no one has seen this "communist paradise". But many have lived in its extremely inhumane socialist "pre-baths" called the USSR, the PRC, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge Cambodia and some others.
Interestingly, Marx himself emphasized that he was not the inventor of either the concept of classes or the idea of a struggle between them. He was proud of his assertions that class struggle is connected with certain phases of the development of production, that class struggle must lead to the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and that this dictatorship will destroy all classes and lead to a classless society.
This "inevitable," from Marx's point of view, bright future is nevertheless man-made, and must be achieved through revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Marx looked at the world around him in many ways through the eyes of a German. And in this world, the most unloved for him, as for the average German at the time, was the world of Slavs, and among the Slavic peoples the most unloved was Russian. Unloved because it was he who built the Russian Empire, fighting the revolution of Marx and his associates. Marx called the Slavs not historical peoples, peoples counter-revolutionary. The revolution according to Marx would have to finally decide the fate of these Slavic peoples.
Marx as a Russophobe and racist.
The cult of Marx in the Soviet Union was boundless, but even in the collected works of its classics, the Communists did not dare to publish his Russophobic texts. For example, such as Disclosures of the Diplomatic History of the Eighteenth Century, first printed in 1856-1857, were not published in Russian until 1989.
The fourth chapter of this work by Marx gives vivid examples of his Russophobic hatred. Here are a few quotes from the classics of Marxism, albeit long, but for the unbiased, which should be very instructive.
About the Russian state in general: "The cradle of Muscovy was a bloody swamp of Mongol slavery, and not the harsh glory of the Norman era. And modern Russia is none other than a transformed Muscovy" (Reveals of the Diplomatic History of the 18th century. Chapter IV).
About the Russian princes: "It was in this shameful struggle, the Moscow line of princes finally gained the upper hand.
About the Holy Nobleborn Grand Duke John Kalita: "Neither the seductions of glory, nor the pangs of conscience, nor the weight of humiliation could deviate him from the path to his goal. His whole system can be expressed in a few words: the Machiavellianism of the slave, striving to usurp power. He turned his own weakness - his slavery - into the main source of his power.
Particularly befell the Grand Duke John III, the creator of a unified Russian state: "Although the great danger he brought upon himself, could not make him show even a little courage, his amazing victory for one minute did not make his head spin. Acting with extreme caution, he did not dare to annex Kazan to Muscovy, but gave it to the rulers of the family of Mengli-Girei, his Crimean ally, so to speak, to keep it for Muscovy. With the aid of the spoils taken from the defeated Tatars, he entangled the victorious Tatars. But if this deceiver was too prudent to assume the appearance of a conqueror before the witnesses of his humiliation, he fully understood what a stunning impression the collapse of the Tatar empire should make at a distance, what a halo of glory he would be surrounded with, and how this would facilitate his solemn entry into the midst of the European powers. So before the foreign powers he adopted the theatrical pose of the conqueror, and he did manage under the mask of proud resentment and irritable haughtiness to hide the intrusiveness of the Mongol slave, who had not yet forgotten how he kissed the stirrup of the lowliest of the khan's envoys. He imitated, only in a more restrained tone, the voice of his former masters, which thrilled his soul. Some of the expressions constantly used by modern Russian diplomacy, such as magnanimity, and the wounded dignity of the ruler, are borrowed from the diplomatic instructions of Ivan III.
On the "historical" dislike of Russia for the republics: "It is also worth noting the sophisticated efforts that Muscovy, just like modern Russia, constantly made to get rid of the republics. It began with Novgorod and its colonies, then came the turn of the Cossack republics, and ended with Poland. To understand how Russia divided Poland, it is necessary to study the massacre of Novgorod, which lasted from 1478 to 1528.
On the Orthodox dominance of Moscow: "The Orthodox faith in general served as one of the strongest tools in his actions. But whom did Ivan choose to lay claim to the heritage of Byzantium, to hide under the mantle of porphyrogenitism the stigma of Mongol slavery, to establish continuity between the throne of Muscovite upstart and the glorious empire of Saint Vladimir, to give in his own person to the Orthodox Church a new secular head? A Roman pope. The last Byzantine princess lived at the papal court. Ivan lured her away from the pope by swearing an oath to renounce his faith, an oath from which he ordered his own primate to free himself."
On "Mongol slavery," on Russia and the West: "Muscovy was brought up and grew up in the awful and vile school of Mongol slavery. It strengthened itself only by becoming virtuosa in the art of slavery. Even after its liberation, Muscovy continued to play its traditional role of slave turned master. Subsequently, Peter the Great combined the political art of the Mongol slave with the proud aspirations of the Mongol ruler to whom Genghis Khan bequeathed his plan to conquer the world... Just as it did with the Golden Horde, Russia now deals with the West. To become lord over the Mongols, Muscovy had to be Tartarized. To become lord over the West, it must civilize itself... Remaining a Slave, i.e., giving the Russians that external patina of civilization, which would prepare them to perceive the techniques of Western nations, without infecting them with the ideas of the latter".
The whole Russian history is characterized as "slavery", the cradle of which was, according to Marx, "the bloody swamp of Mongolian slavery", the princes and tsars are called "Mongolian slaves", the country in Polish style is called nothing other than "Moskovia".
How does this Marxist Russophobia and revolutionary racism differ from the views of the ideologues of National Socialism? Nothing, a common European view of the Nazis, the Marxists, the Russophobes of any other ideological isms.
Here is a quote from Hitler's book "My Struggle": "It was not the gifts of the Slavs that gave strength and fortress to the Russian state. All this Russia owed to the Germanic elements - the finest example of the formidable state role which the Germanic elements are capable of playing, acting within an inferior race..."
Change the phrase "Germanic element" to "Mongolian" and "inferior race" to "slave" and you get Marx's text. The same hatred and the same racial neglect, almost pan-European...
In 1865 Marx proposed at the London Conference an outline of the program for the Geneva Congress of the International, where in the section "International Politics" he pedaled only one question: "On the need to destroy Muscovite influence in Europe by exercising the right of nations to self-determination and the restoration of Poland on democratic and social grounds" (See: Marx K. and Engels F. Works, Vol. 26, p. 409).
On January 22, 1867, Marx, speaking at a Polish rally in London, asked: "I ask you, what has changed? Has the danger from Russia diminished? No! Only the mental blindness of the ruling classes of Europe has reached its limit ... The guiding star of this policy, world domination, remains unchanged. Only a dodgy government, dominating the masses of barbarians, can now conceive such plans ... So, for Europe there is only one alternative: either the Muscovite-led Asian barbarism will collapse, like an avalanche, on her head, or she must rebuild Poland, fending herself thus from Asia with twenty million heroes.
The danger from Russia, "Asian barbarism," accusations of striving for "world domination" - what sort of Russophobic insinuations Karl Marx made about our country.
The fighter against capitalism got along quite well with the most serious "sharks" of this world. His wife's aristocratic connections were exploited to the full.
The half-brother of the wife of the "subversive of the old order," by the way, was Baron Ferdinand von Westphalen, who served as Minister of the Interior of Prussia in 1850-1858 and was a trustee of many German banking houses.
Throughout Marx's life the income from several Westphalen family estates was at his disposal.
In this connection, the version of the famous American economist Anthony Sutton (1925-2002) about the purpose of Marx's financing is interesting: "The purpose of financing Marx was one - to bring down the middle class with all the power of the Marxist philosophical cannonade and thereby achieve elite domination. Marxism is a means to consolidate the power of the elite. It is not intended to alleviate the suffering of the poor or to promote human progress. It is merely the plan of the elite, like that utopia, 'naive and unsophisticated.
The enormous aid provided by Western countries to the USSR under Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev fits well with these reflections and is well proven by Sutton in his three-volume study, Western Technology and the Development of the Soviet Economy (1917-1965) (1968, 1971, 1973).
It's time to get rid of the Marxist worldview if we want to get on with our lives
Marx argued in the "Manifesto of the Communist Party" (1848) that "Communists can express their theory in one clause: the destruction of private property. This desire for the universal forcible communalization of property in the hands of the Communist Party is further strengthened in the Manifesto... by advocating the "abolition of the right of inheritance.
Both "destruction of private property" and "abolition of the right of inheritance" took place, as we saw in 20th century Russia, by bloody dictatorial methods, without any consent from the repressed population.
The horror of Marxism and its revolutionary practices is that they take place in societies that the West has no pity for. All Marxist bloody experiments have taken place outside the West. In Russia, in China, in Indochina, in those countries which with the help of Marxism had to be completely disposed of, written off the world historical scene.
The class terrorists never got to the real financial centers of Great Britain and the United States and for some reason always eliminated those who got in the way of these countries.
The Marxist Westernist ideological mindset is hard to eradicate. It gives rise to all sorts of side-syncretic poisonings with varieties of National Bolshevism, with unimaginable "potions" like Orthodox Stalinism, or with other variants of political potions based on left-right ideological "pale white suds".
Source: rusorel.info (Russian)
Take action! Resist the assault from the rainbow mafia:Russian Faith Website Attacked by Pro-LGBT Megacorporation - Help Us Fight Back! Who works for Russian Faith? Click to see our photos:Meet the Team - Russian Faith Now in Seven Languages!