Compassion Con’s End Game: A Bukharian Lesson
by Steve Farrell
Some political victories are through and through, red, white and blue, achievements that merit our applause, praise, and thanks to God.
Others, thanks to slick packaging and a one-sided media campaign appear to be sweet, liberating, even heaven sent, but so did that fabled wolf in sheep’s clothing until it was time for dinner.
As to the late “victory for liberty” in California for-in-behalf of a new sort of minority that deludes itself into believing it liberating, moral, and wise, to impose, by fiat, same-sex marriage on the great majority who believe it enslaving, immoral, and absurd – such a victory, left unchecked, is that unfortunate worst case.
Sometimes the truth hurts, but the predictable, historical, end game of imposing liberty via big brother socialism – and it is the worldwide socialist revolution that has long been homosexuality’s pot stirrer in chief – is one that every, “victim,” victim’s advocacy group, and enter-stage-left holy-cause-of-the-moment, needs to know and remember:
Namely, big brother’s “Uncle Joe” mission to feed, clothe, hire and favor you and yours (same-sex couples, for instance), over them and theirs (families that uphold marriage as the Law of Nature and Nature’s God intended), has a useful idiot’s reward at the end of the trail.
A battered and bruised, beaten and broken, brothers at last! – equality . . . with them and theirs – courtesy of the “forever stomping” jackboot you helped fashion.
Ironic, isn’t it?
And once acquired, dare you object, dare raise so much as a peep about promises made vs. promises kept, then from the heel of the boot to the gulag you go, or else, to the guillotine, the gas chamber, the ten gun salute (sort of), and a fit burial for a “rat” like you, your “pitiful” remains dumped into an unmarked grave, in an unkempt cemetery, with no forwarding address, and no one left behind brave enough to care.
Better dead than red. Somebody should have coined that phrase. It would have been more honest.
Just ask Nikolai Bukharin, one of the leading Bolshevik “theorists” that promised every Russian “victim” heaven on earth in the early 1900s, only to deliver hell, hell, and then more of it – an end game Bukharin knew was in the cards from day one.
It was in 1917, right after he and his fellow communists first came to power, when theorist Bukharin decided to unload the brutal truth buried beneath the theory:
We asked for freedom of the press, thought, and civil liberties in the past because we were in the opposition and needed these liberties to conquer. Now that we have conquered, there is no longer any need for such civil liberties.
That must have turned a few gullible heads … and stomachs.
No big deal for Bukharin. He was one of the “theorists” in charge, and to the victors go the spoils, and the guarantees of security from the wrath of his fellow “theorists” and “liberators.”
Besides, his Communist credentials were impeccable.
Born Oct. 9, 1888, to two primary teachers, 18-year-old smart guy, Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin, knew a path to power when he saw it, hitched a ride on that hot head of steam, the Bolshevik Express, and quickly learned everything he needed to know about communism, including the craft of cloaking a criminal conspiracy as a cure-all for every human ill. So adept was he at learning this craft, that a year later he co-organized the National Youth Conference (the predecessor of the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League or Komsomol), where 14-28-year-olds were indoctrinated in Ccmmunist dogma and politics.
By age 20, he was a member of the Moscow Committee of the Bolshevik Party, and by age twenty-three he was arrested and exiled for putting his “theory” into practice.
This setback didn’t hinder Bukharin’s meteoric rise as a theorist. In exile, he penned several books, edited the newspaper Novy Mir (New World) with Leon Trotsky and Alexandra Kollontai, and during World War I, published a book on imperialism that won Vladimir Lenin’s praise, who incorporated it into his more famous “Imperialism-The Highest Stage of Capitalism.”
With the violent overthrow of the Tsar a done deal (1917), twenty-nine year old Nikolai Bukharin returned home and launched into a decade that would see him “elected” to the Central Committee of the Communist Party, “elected” to the Politburo, made editor of its official newspaper, Pravda (The Truth), during which time he also co-authored the 138 chapter tomb, “The ABC of Communism” (1920), authored “Socialism In One Country” (1924) – a theory that became Stalin’s theme – and, finally, won an appointment as President of the Communist International (Comintern), that is, conspirator in chief of the worldwide communist revolution (1926), at age 38.
In sum, Nikolai Bukharin is probably the most famous Communist you never heard of.
And here’s why: Consider again Bukharin’s 1917 confession: “We asked for freedom of the press, thought, and civil liberties in the past because we were in the opposition and needed these liberties to conquer. Now that we have conquered, there is no longer any need for such civil liberties.”
In 1928, he turned a deaf ear to his own stark warning, one that applied not only to every exploited fool of a “victim” who thought victory was theirs, but to every victor, even the big shots. For it was in 1928 that his old chum, “liberator” Joseph Stalin proposed to collectivize the economy and put away Lenin’s National Economic Plan, a more fascist/”middle-ground” approach to socialism .
Bukharin believed collectivization would impoverish the peasants, inspire resentment, and lower productivity. He freely pressed his views in the Politburo, the party Congress, and among a small circle of friends. Surely, his objections would be viewed, as they always had been, in defense of the Revolution.
He was wrong. Uncle Joe Stalin accused him of being a capitalist, compelled him to renounce his views, forced him to resign as President of the Comintern, and ordered him to get out of the Politburo. In March of 1838, he was tried in The Trial of The Twenty-One, executed, and had his name and honor expunged from the books of the revolution he helped pen.
This is not the exception, but the rule for the revolution left. It stands as a warning to all who look to butchers, bullies, or socialist-leaning judges, to grant an advantage to you and yours via means that tyrannize them and theirs, to beware the end game.
A victory in California? I think not. I call it an illusion, a fraud, and a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Center for Moral Liberalism, President, Steve Farrell, is a pundit with America’s News Page, Silver Eddy Award Winner, NewsMax.com, associate professor of political economy at George Wythe College, and the editor of the hard-hitting daily, Stiff Right Jab
Hello Progressive Traditionalist:
Actually, you just made my point. They don’t care about gay rights or any other rights, only inasmuch as it is a tool to overthrow the existing order.
Just a reminder, however, a “free sex” society model was tried in the Soviet Union.
It failed, and they went back to the family.
But remember, that’s after they are In control, then they can do whatever they feel best works to keep the revolution going at a particular moment.
Again Marx called for the abolition for the family, and SO much of the whole thing of Communism, and what he taught in his Manifesto is as old as the world, or at least as old as Plato’s Republic, and its pro-homosexual mentality, to the point of sexual abuse permitted for those in the ruling class.
There are also hints that in some of the revolutionary movements Marx has inspired and the Russian Communists have spurred on, have involved forced homosexual activities to break down the moral scruples of the revolutionaries – some would reason if you can get an individual to commit “the crime against nature,” anything else is possible.
This is all complex for some. But here’s another example of what goes on. Communism supports unionism as a tool of the revolution in countries they are trying to overthrow, but bans the unions once the revolution is complete.
Interestingly, NAFTA comes to mind. The leftist unions in this country have always been internationalists, UNTIL NAFTA, as one example, gave the corporations privileged access to the lawmaking process, and banned union participation, and the Unions have ever since been up in arms about NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA, etc.
This is interesting. Unthinking conservatives took it as a sign that the proponents of NAFTA, CAFTA, etc., are the friends of the U.S. Constitution, conservatism, U.S. sovereignty, etc., BECAUSE, say they (as do the talking heads) look at who the opponents are.
But it’s not that simple. Their protest is that they want in, not that they don’t want NAFTA, etc.
Yet, by emerging definitions in the socialist/communist movement, the unions are Old Left, NAFTA is New Left (third way, progressive, futuristic, state-monopoly capitalists, fabians, keynesians, centre left, whatever …., there’s in truth room for compassionate conservatives, centre-right here, as well … being fundamentally identical), and the New Left is moving toward Lenin and away from Stalin, e.g., back to the N.E.P. Read Perestroika, and that is exactly what Gorbachev explains he is doing. And mind you, the N.E.P. model is a more fascist stage of communism, thus the empowerment of industry, and the pushing out of the unions.
That may seem strange, but once communism comes full swing, unions have to go, because unions are considered a form of democracy in the work place, something more than the safer feedback mechanisms communists sometimes call democracy.
We have to think Dialectically here, and frankly, Lenin’s N.E.P. permits the greater flexibility, or if you will, progressive approach of one step forward two steps back or visa versa according to necessity.
So we are back to homosexuality, and Marx’s statement in the Manifesto that we “embrace all revolutions” against the existing order – or, that which is moral advances the revolution. A true Communist, a criminal conspirator in other words, could care less about theory, or prior history, or rights, or gays, or minorities, or capitalism, or collectivism, or anything else, he only cares about what works best at the moment, and as Orwell put it, the underlings of the thug in charge better know this, and convert instantly overnight to the theory of the moment if he hopes to survive till the next sunset.
The attack on the family, and homosexuality is a big part of that attack, is when strategically correct, vital, because of Marx’s understanding that the Judeo-Christian Church, the Judeo-Christian value system, and especially the Family, represent the great transmission belt of the values of the existing capitalist order from one generation to the next – and so this must be stopped – but also, the family and the values they pass down give civilization the backbone to resist the revolution he is proposing … and so again.
He’d (and I mean the Communist Revolutionary in general) rather a moral vacuum he can fill with moral relativism (e.g. humanism), effeminate weakness, and ruthless ambition and greed (even Capitalism without a conscience … enter stage left, libertarianism, especially of the Ayn Rand variety).
This makes a society ripe and spineless.
The warning to homosexuals is that they are but one more minority to exploit.
Finally, there is a bit of the pincer strategy here as well. Pressure from below … a growing corruption of morals (homosexuality as but part of a longer list) … mixed with pressure from above (state solutions to the growing list of crimes, diseases, and social problems being caused by the growing problem of immorality).
This is fundamental stuff … and educated revolutionaries know the game. Even Samuel Adams warned that the British were playing the same trick on the Americans once upon a time.
It’s wrong to suppose that I meant that Communism is pro-gay. I meant that Communism is pro-power. Whatever aids that road to power best, at any given moment, is the road the true communist will take. Whether that road be a blood bath one moment, a sudden conversion to Christianity the next, capitalism one moment, communism the next, fascism the next, and on and on.
As Lenin warned (these are not his exact words), and Swartz summarized, if you judge us by our current direction you obviously don’t know what’s going on.
Hello, Mr Farrell.
You started out pretty good, and ended up pretty stupid.
You took a wrong turn by dragging the Russians into it. Homosexuals were sent to Siberia in those days.
Not everything is due to the evils of communism. And no, in this case, it really isn’t liberalism either.
This is a case of hyper-diaspora politics meets the indiscriminate feel-good movement.
It’s not liberalism. I can tell you that from this John Rawls I’ve got sitting on my bookshelf.
It’s some weird derivitive.
The ideology seems to be based on the idea of Europeanizing the US, so that America might fit neatly into the EU, and this is based on some idealized view of Europe.
The anti-discrimination movement has evolved into an anti-discernment movement. Makes me wonder what these people will do when they find out that gloves are sold as a pair, left and right.
The Proverbs tell us that the prudent man foresees the danger and hides himself, while the simple pass on and are punished.
In these strange times, simplicity is set as a higher virtue than prudence.
Steve,
Great piece. It is well to keep in mind that Communism (Marxism-Leninism and its numerous variants) is both an ideology that men believe and also a conspiracy in which men participate. The ideology is useful for recruitment, a semblance of order, and stability. But because Communism is also a conspiracy, ideology must necessarily be changed and adapted to suit ever changing conditions. All wrapped up in a shiny new package labeled scientific Marxism, of course.
Anciently there was a group of people called Lamanites who were deceived and used by a conspiratorial group through the use of ideology (see Mosiah 10:12, 15; 2 Nephi 5:1-3; Alma 54:17, 24; 3 Nephi 3:10) to gain control of and capture the government of a group of people called Nephites. Similarly, in our day there exists a conspiracy or secret combination which also uses ideology in an effort to “overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries” (see Ether 8:25). It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.