______________________________________________

______________________________________________


"We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box." - Congressman Larry McDonald M.D.
(1 April, 1935 - 1 Sept., 1983)


_________________________


God Save The Republic







25 June 2010

More History Lessens



That good looking fella, in the photo above, is former Soviet Premier, Nikita Khrushchev. Way back on 18 Nov. 1956, he was addressing Western ambassadors at a reception at the Polish embassy in Moscow when he made the statement "My vas pokhoronim!" Generally, this is translated into English as "We will bury you!" However, that translation is somewhat distorted. The actual quote reads: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will dig you in!"

This was during the stupidly named period of time known as the "Cold War." It may have been "cold" in that neither the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. were actively engaged in a conventionally understood means of warfare, but it was a very hot war of wills and psychological browbeating. There was a recurring rattling of sabers and the very real threat of a possible all out nuclear exchange between the two countries. So, of course, that four word statement certainly seemed to be a serious threat suggesting the U.S. would surely fall, if or when, the nukes started dropping.

English musician Sting in his song "Russians" written in 1985 said:

Mr. Khrushchev said we will bury you

I don't subscribe to his point of view

It would be such an ignorant thing to do

If the Russians love their children too.

Some six years later, 24 Aug. 1963, Khrushchev remarked during his speech in Yugoslavia, "I once said 'We will bury you,' and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you." This statement is understood to be a reference to the Marxist saying, "The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism." (Proletariat: the social class who does unskilled manual labor)

To expand on this a bit further; written in chapter 1 of the Communist Manifesto: "What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are it's own gravediggers. It's fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable." (Bourgeoisie: the social class between the lower and upper classes)

To understand this thinking requires an understanding of the events that led to the Russian Revolutions, of which there were several in 1917. In my best attempt at a nutshell synopsis: Prior to and into World War I, the Russian people were increasingly ignored by the Russian Empire of Tsar Nicholas II. Living conditions were and continued to become more deplorable, especially as the Russian economy was depleted as a result of funding the war effort.

Russian soldiers were being sent to fight without uniforms or proper clothing for the conditions, food and, without firearms. Only five months into the war, some 390,000 Russian men had lost their lives and nearly 1,000,000 were injured. Soldiers didn't feel they were being treated as human beings, or even as valued soldiers, but rather as a raw material to be squandered for the purposes of the rich and powerful.

Back home, the main problems were food shortages and rising prices. Inflation pushed real incomes down at an alarmingly rapid rate and shortages made it difficult to buy even what one could afford. Strikes increased and so did crime; but, for the most part, people suffered and endured, scouring for food. Working class women in St. Petersburg spent up to forty hours per week standing in food lines. Many were forced to begging or turning to prostitution or crime and grumbling about the rich, and wondering when and how this would all come to an end.

Nicholas was blamed for all of the crises, and what little support he had left began to crumble. In November 1916, he was warned that a terrible disaster would grip the country unless a constitutional form of government was put in place. In typical fashion, Nicholas ignored the warnings and his regime collapsed a few months later during the February Revolution of 1917.

(For my own convenience and in an effort to keep this nutshelled, I am going to go hyper-simple)

Understanding that the masses of the time were poorly educated and unskilled, they were easily taken to the idea that the rich and powerful were bad and a government run by the working class would result in a better deal for the working masses. A government geared to social policies to benefit all of the people, and in a manner that put everyone into one social class. A class wherein the words of Karl Marx would be realized; "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." In short... the redistribution of wealth.

Leon Trotsky said that the goal of socialism in Russia would not be fully realized without the success of the world revolution. And a revolutionary wave caused by the Russian Revolution lasted until 1923. Despite initial hopes for success in the German Revolution, in the short lived Hungarian Soviet Republic and others like it, no other Marxist movement succeeded in keeping power in it's hands.

Joseph Stalin later rejected this idea, stating that socialism was possible in one country. However, in 1924, Stalin reversed his position and used the argument that success of socialism does require the workers of other countries in order to make it happen. The thinking boiled down to, the more countries under communist rule, the less chance the masses might see and be swayed by that nasty old capitalism.

The number one country in the world, where one can bask in the warm rays of capitalism, is the United States. And for more than half a century, the U.S. has been the number one target of the communist's efforts to trash capitalism and bring about communist rule. And the entire time the cold war sabers were rattling, drawing all attention to bear on possible attacks by conventional means, the communists were busy with a far more unconventional plan. The infiltration of every segment of American society, including American politics, by American home grown communists.

So, that's it, in a nutshell. Everything wrong that is going on in America today is pretty much a direct result of communist influence, working to transform or destroy us from within. And they go by different names to baffle and befuddle us, like "progressives." And they use any means necessary to drive us apart and keep us a fragmented society, like race, religion and their old favorite, social status (class warfare). And if the Communist Manifesto and Nikita Khrushchev have the final say, it will be the highly disgruntled proletariat in America who will be digging the grave to bury capitalism.

I encourage you to do your own research into the Russian Revolution and get into the heads of the communists so that you can explain to others the whys and the hows that are conveniently being left out of history classes in schools throughout our country. It is the deliberate dumbing down and re-education of our younger generations; the ones undereducated and unskilled who will eagerly accept socialism.

MikeH.

5 comments:

  1. This ideological battle is still going on. George Bush's "Ownership Society" was all about people having an ownership stake in some of their retirement, rather than being dependent on government largess.

    In Marxist terms, he was trying to convert some pf the proletariat into bourgeoisie.

    And you saw the reaction from the Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "And you saw the reaction from the Democrats."

    Yes Sir, I did. Those people have become quite proficient at "plying their wares."

    McCarthy wasn't a crack-pot after all.

    MikeH.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Understanding that the masses of the time were poorly educated and unskilled, they were easily taken to the idea that the rich and powerful were bad and a government run by the working class would result in a better deal for the working masses.

    It is EXACTLY the situation with which we find ourselves today in America. Compulsory government education which fails to educate. Pump their heads full of "rich is bad", "keepin' it real" and blaming business for the ills of society and you are fairly begging for a socialist/communist revolution.

    Only this time around, the rich are considered to be anyone with any assets - middle class America and up. We won't stand idly by as they attempt to "liberate" our personal assets.

    ReplyDelete
  4. All that is necessary for the forces of evil to succeed is for enough good men to do nothing. Do something on Nov 2nd.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon,

    If you are talking about an armed revolution, on Nov. 2nd., I kinda think it maybe too late. But, at least it would be far better to die trying than to go out with a whimper.

    MikeH.

    ReplyDelete