Updated: More Fun Facts…

…about “great” Marxists/communists and contemporary radicals:

Dead ones:

  • Karl Marx: born into a wealthy Jewish family, his father was the leading lawyer in Trier, Germany – his family owned a number of Moselle vineyards. Marx spent his early college years drinking, gambling and running up debts. Father yanked him out of the University of Bonn and sent him to Berlin to attend university after he participated in a duel. He avoided military service when he turned eighteen due to a condition referred to as a “weak chest.” While living in England, he railed about the conditions of the British factories, yet never actually visited one. Died penniless and stateless – between 9 and 11 people attended his funeral. Atheist.
  • Friedrich Engels: the eldest son of a wealthy German cotton importer/industrialist. After he died, he left an estate worth $4.8 million to Marx’s daughters. Raised a Christian, became an atheist.
  • Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: Born to a wealthy middle-class family in Simbirsk. Baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church, renounced God at 16. Atheist.
  • Josef Stalin: Son of a cobbler and a housemaid. Father was abusive and beat him and his mother. Educated at the Tiflis Spiritual Seminary of the Georgian Orthodox Church, became an atheist.
  • Leon Trotsky: born the fifth child of eight of well-to-do Jewish farmers. Lost battle for control of the Russian communist movement to Lenin and Stalin – Stalin had him assassinated during his exile to Mexico. Atheist.
  • Mao: son of a wealthy farmer. Father grew wealthy via capitalism but was a strict disciplinarian and beat Mao and his siblings. Raised Buddhist, became an atheist.
  • Pol Pot: born into a wealthy upper middle class family in Cambodia. While attending Catholic school, he lived with his cousin, she a member of the Royal Ballet and the mother of a child of the Cambodian king – the Crown Prince – his sister was also concubine of King Monivong. Pot grew up in the palace of the King through his relationships with these women. Traveled to Paris for university where he failed exams three years running but was radicalized there. Atheist.

Live ones:

  • Bill Ayers: born into a wealthy family, attended private schools. Father was Thomas G. Ayers, who was Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison (1973 to 1980), and for whom Northwestern’s Thomas G. Ayers College of Commerce and Industry was named. Ayers is a retired professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, formerly holding the titles of Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar.
  • Bernadine Dohrn: born into an upper middle class family. Dohrn graduated from Whitefish Bay High School where she was a cheerleader,treasurer of the Modern Dance Club, a member of the National Honor Society, and editor of the school newspaper. Bernadine is now Clinical Associate Professor of Law at Northwestern Law School.
  • Kathy Boudin: born into a family with a Muslim mother and a 1/2 Jewish Father, with a long left-wing history, and she was raised in Greenwich Village, New York. She attended kindergarten at the Little Red School House and its high school, the Elisabeth Irwin High School in Manhattan. Although she went to Bryn Mawr College intending to prepare for medical school, her interests quickly turned to politics. 1965, her last year at Bryn Mawr was spent studying in the Soviet Union. She was paid 75 rubles a month by the Soviet government and, according to her résumé, taught on a Soviet collective farm. Her great-uncle was Louis B. Boudin, a Marxist theorist. Her father, Leonard Boudin, grew wealthy as a communist legal defender and member of the National Lawyer’s Guild, he was the law partner of Victor Rabinowitz, himself counsel to numerous left-wing organizations. Kathy’s older brother, Michael Boudin, is currently a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. After serving 22 years in federal prison for her role in a bombing that killed two police officers and an armored car guard, Kathy taught at Columbia and was recently honored by the New York University Law School program as its Rose Scheinberg Scholar in Residence.

Commonalities: Most had wealthy families, or were wealthy themselves – or at least had access to privilege. Most found radicalism in academia, some had violent upbringings. Most grew up in religious families, many Jewish, and yet became atheists.

Out of all the “great” ones, Stalin was the only one who actually experienced a poor upbringing.

Marxism is apparently a disease of prosperity, afflicting the children of privilege…but then that does reveal its origins as an elitist orthodoxy based on the childish idea of revolt and rebellion, doesn’t it? The children of the rich, the academics, presuming that their personal “trials” validate their “struggles” against their own wealth as the same as the hungry in the streets, then using their advantage of family wealth to construct an ideology designed to control others that they deem incapable of making decisions for themselves…

Ayers, Dohrn and Boudin, who are all quite rich and very white, equated their “class struggle” with those who were black and poor and joined forces with the Black Panthers.

I don’t know, it seems all too self-righteous and self-aggrandizing to me…perhaps narcissistic.

Seems to be a touch of mental illness/irrational need for retribution here as well since Stalin killed 7-10 million Ukrainians by starving them to death and them relocating them to Siberia, Mao is estimated to have killed 45 million, Pol Pot had his killing fields where an estimated 3 million died. The glorious revolution of global Marxism is estimated to be responsible for between 100 and 150 million deaths.

And now for the important part…

These “great” Marxists all conspired to overthrow the governments of their counties and eventually initiated violent revolution under the guise of freeing “the people”, only to establish murderous and oppressive totalitarian regimes to retain power.

Compare these murderers and terrorists, all revered by the left, to great Americans like Washington, Jefferson, John and Samuel Adams and Ben Franklin.

The Founders never wanted to split from Britain. They petitioned the British Monarchy for redress, all unheard by King George III,  for years before declaring independence. They didn’t want war because they only had poorly trained militia to go against the greatest army and navy in the world at the time – they only went to war to protect their homes and liberty – and afterwards?

 As proof of their belief in individual freedom and liberty, they truly released the governance of the country to the people – something none of the “great Marxists”, people who professed to believe in the “dictatorship of the proletariat”, ever did, proving the lie that is Marxism.

General George Washington, called “the indispensable man”, wanted to go back to his farm, he did not want to be president but felt is was his duty to serve if the people wanted him to lead.

And yet we are supposed to believe that the American Republic is repressive and evil and we should forget out founding principles and throw in with these mentally unbalanced leftist criminals, thugs and charlatans.

Lenin exemplified another trait of all of these leftist thugs – the rejection of moral absolutism. Where the Founders of America trusted and turned to God, these “great” Marxists turned away. Perhaps that is why they rejected God and the church because to do the things they did and believe what they did, they had to reject the idea that there is an absolute standard of good and evil. In the words of Lenin biographer Robert Service, Lenin considered “moral questions” to be “an irrelevance”, rejecting the concept of moral absolutism; instead he judged whether an action was justifiable based upon its chances of success for the revolutionary cause.

The entire ideology of Marxism, including its four supporting pillars: socialism, the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism and class struggle, is built on this relativistic lie; this is the reason that I find the foolish, covetous, infantile and illogical belief in Marxsim the very embodiment of evil and I reject and will oppose to the death the concept of post-modernism.

10 thoughts on “Updated: More Fun Facts…

  1. “Commonalities: Most had wealthy families, or were wealthy themselves – or at least had access to privilege. Most found radicalism in academia,…”

    In his book, “The Founding of the Fabian Society,” the first Secretary of the Society, a man who held the position for some 23 years, openly and repeatedly admits that the society was formed by people of “means and education.” In fact, he states that the socialist ideal cannot be realized by any other than the affluent and educated. He seems to think one must be educated to appreciate the plight of the poor and to see how science can be employed to eliminate the same. He also says that the superior position occupied by these rich college kids gives them a moral obligation to help the poor in spite of themselves. He speaks of the need to organize them, to decide what they want by determining what they should want and then using propaganda to make them want it while thinking it was their idea. The only real break he said the Society had with Marx was that it saw revolution was not the answer, but small, incremental steps of “progress” toward their goals. He trumpeted how they managed this by infiltrating the social institutions that administrated govt. more than by winning elections.

    I’m only half way through the book, but it’s already funny to me how this man — an expert of the parent of ALL modern socialist movements (Yes, Karl, ALL of them — even Lenin came from the Fabians), openly stated everything I have ever tried to tell people the Left believes, and he did it in 1923. Heck, he even bragged about a magazine that ran a cover titled “We’re All Socialists Now.” Does that sound familiar? It should, Time ran the same thing shortly after Obama’s first election. And they want us to think they have changed.

    They haven’t changed; they haven’t learned anything but how better to deceive people into letting them be their new slave masters. But then, that’s what they lust after: a self-deluded notion that they somehow “won” power through their intellectual cunning. Sad people. They are inferior minds who do not realize they are using the same old ways to seize and hold power: convince some other poor fool to go fight for you while you live it up back in the castle…

    • Trotsky also rejected the “violent revolution” ideas of Marx after the Nazi’s used Marxist techniques to take over Germany and believed that the Marxist movement would be more successful in allying with established political parties like Labour in England and the Democrats in the US.

      He was right.

        • Karl redefines on demand in order to avoid the inconvenient facts of his religion. Pinning him down is like trying to shovel sand with a pitchfork.

          It’s not this, it is that…no, no wait, it wasn’t that, it was the other thing…but that other thing isn’t what history says it is, so ignore that part of it. Marxism is based solidly on materialism! No wait, maybe it is based on dialectical materialism which is really the relativistic idea of materialism…

          You can’t call that Marxism because Marx once picked his nose in Paris on June 12, 1844. It’s not socialism because Engels once had a capitalist dream after he ate some bad clams! You are just ignorant of the glories of collectivism! War is Peace! Freedom slavery! Ignorance is strength!

          Parasitic capitalists! Evil bourgeoisie! Freedom is an illusion! Violent revolution! Yeah, that’s it!

          Why don’t you get it! I’m screaming as loud as I can!

          Huh?

  2. Gentlemen,

    I understood from the first time I heard or read their nonsense that their theories do not make any logical sense.

    Then I actually looked to their progeny and see I am correct in my assessment.

    Why have so many gone “all in” with these ridiculous, treacherous, deceitful, & subjugative theories?

    • Pity party for the privileged?

      Atually, this post reminds of that character from the Fountainhead. She grew up privileged, but believed people could make it to the top in a capitalist society by their own will. So she put her theory to the test. I’m pretty sure the character’s name was Dominique.

  3. If socialism worked, then it would be working. If the Fed’s version of capitalism worked, then it would be working. I would argue, that neither work, because neither are working. (my tautology of the day)

  4. One thing to keep in mind is that there is nothing new about all of these ism’s. Even to a certain capitalism because it tends to collectivise resources to serve an alleged “common good” of the investors. In the beginning of this country coporations were only a temporary construct, to meet a immediate, temporary need of bringing people together to solve an emergency need. The prevailing business construct until the progressives was he partnership. The origins of all of these constructs is as old as the word empire. They are built on th eidea of control by one leader, or an elite group of leaders, where even the worst atrosity is acceptable to retain or gain control of others in any form of serfdom or slavery.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.