Perceptions are being shaped through a combination of propaganda, disinformation, denial and deceit by the radical left, which has seized control of the Democrat Party.
Editor’s note: This material has been excerpted, edited and
updated from one chapter of Robert Chandler’s important new book, Shadow World,
published by Regnery. Call 1-888-219-4747 to order.
It represents the kind of investigative reporting we desperately need but fail
to get from the major media.
S. Steven Powell wrote in his 1987 book, Covert Cadre, that the revolutionary activity advocated by Marxist Antonio Gramsci involved the need to “infiltrate autonomous institutions—schools, media, churches, public-interest groups—so as radically to transform the culture, which determines the environment in which political and economic policies are played out.” Or, as Carl Boggs, author of Gramsci’s Marxism wrote, “the role of revolutionary theory is to create the foundation of a new socialist order precisely through the negation and transcendence of bourgeois society.” This “transcendence of bourgeois society,” Boggs explains, was the basis for Gramsci’s first priority—“the multi-dimensional transformation of civil society.”
The key to Gramsci’s formula for revolution centered on the idea of breaking what he called the “hegemony” or mind-control exercised by the ruling capitalists over the masses. Bourgeois societies were ruled, Gramsci believed, by educating the citizenry that their accommodation of the moral, political, and cultural values defined by the governing system was in their best interests. Hence, Gramsci designed a “reversal strategy” that would silently challenge the existing culture and value-systems that dominated bourgeois governance. That is to say, his formula was based on an ideological struggle that would transform a whole range of activities in civil society, including Judeo-Christian values, the family, schools, unions, and politics and popular trust in the existing government.
There are ten easy steps toward a progressive-socialist-Marxist civil society: change the popular consensus; destroy Christianity, the traditional family, and existing social mores; transform the culture; install a radical Left mind-control; attain political power; impose strict control of the military and law enforcement; restrict freedom; socialize the economy; erase American sovereignty; and embrace a world without borders.
arenas have been constructed by the progressive-socialist-Marxist Left to
“format” or erase
Subverting The Moral Order
Antonio Gramsci’s formula for
socialist revolution in capitalist countries is focused on “corruption of their
Christian cultural basis,” Malachi Martin writes. Neither political penetration
nor military superiority, Martin says, will bring the capitalist West to its
knees. The Christian cultures of these countries are the ties that bind the
people in all aspects of society. Hence, Gramsci
counsels his followers, Martin says, to join the capitalists in all aspects of
life, from “their profession of ethical and religious goals” to their family
needs and all social issues affecting their lives. But Gramsci
had a catch, Malachi Martin explains: Gramsci
admonished his followers to “let the entire effort be solely by man for man’s
sake... Make sure man never repeats the famous cry of German philosopher Martin
Heidegger: I know that only God can save us.”
Gramsci realized that Christian culture had to be undone quietly, carefully, and over time. Stealth and passivity would serve as key principles of the war on Christian culture and open the door for progressive-socialist-marxist mind-control.
Antonio Gramsci foresaw an increase in the complexity of civil society that would occur over time in the most advanced capitalist countries. Carl Boggs explains Gramsci’s view that this hegemony or “socialization process” extends throughout society and is the means through which people internalize the dominant free market and its democratic values. It follows that the progressive-socialist-Marxist Left’s struggle against the dominant liberal democracy is a “precondition for socialist transformation.”
This requires a confrontation at all levels of society to undermine, weaken, and replace traditional American values in the schools, media, family, and unions with Gramsci’s socialist ideals. “To conduct this universalized hegemony,” Boggs writes, “means to transform repressive consciousness into a liberating one that makes socialist politics at a mass level possible—the central focus of any thorough-going cultural revolution.”
Major elements of American organized labor have imported the alien doctrine of Antonio Gramsci as a guiding light for its socialist ideological struggle against the traditional American way of life. For American progressive-socialist-marxist syndicalists, labor unions are a tool for use in transforming capitalism into a society run by working people who are guided secretly by agents among the leadership.
It should not be surprising, therefore, that organized labor in the
Of these five leading unions, only the members of the AFL-CIO operate primarily in the private sector. The other four are centered more on government employees, insulating themselves from the vagaries of the free market.
The move toward embracing Gramsci’s formula is a result of the 1960s radicals having
come of age. The late Michael Harrington gave intellectual and organizational
leadership to labor unions and other societal elements that preserved an
alliance with the remnants of the New Left in the Democrat Party and Democratic
Socialists of America. SDS’s Paul Booth, for
instance, coordinated student support for a United Auto Workers slate and
marshaled some two thousand students in the
One can track members of the 1960s radicals, Students for a Democratic Society, and the New Left into key leadership positions in several labor and teachers union positions. These aging radicals have not given up on remaking
Gramsci understood that a revolutionary undertaking in a bourgeois society like the
But, Mr. Horne adds, “most Americans also support traditional
conservative principles—limited government, lower taxes, free markets, and
personal responsibility.” The way out of this conundrum, he suggests, is to
alter the balance of power by espousing “an attractive progressive philosophy.”
That is a socialist philosophy. Since “progressive” is but a euphemism for
“socialism,” the Left once again promises a full blast of political denial and
deception, propaganda and disinformation in “framing the future.”
Two major influences have helped shape these policies over the years: Antonio Gramsci’s cultural transformation formula and Saul D. Alinsky’s radical community organizing methods.
Several radical Leftist groups are dedicated to bringing the progressive-socialist-marxist message to prepare Americans for socialist governance. One of the most important radical organizations dedicated to peddling socialism to Americans at the community and municipal level is the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), and it has close relations with organized labor. ACORN was founded by Wade Rathke, who organized draft resistance for the Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s.
Barack Obama was a community organizer for the progressive-socialist-Marxist ACORN before becoming a practicing lawyer, entering politics, and running for President.
The Shadow Party
Operating from the impact of Antonio Gramsci’s
revisionist Marxism of cultural transformation as a precondition to achieving
political power, and the radicalism of the New Left’s continuing focus on the
politics of neighborhoods and state legislatures and union political power at
the national level, an infrastructure, or a “solar system of organizations,”
has been created that promises to bring socialist governance to America. These
mind-control efforts have been designed to create a false reality for the American
people. Pounded incessantly by propaganda tricks, false images, and denial of
truth, many Americans understandably see only the contrived negative images of
traditional culture, societal norms, and contrived historical “truths” that
were spoon fed to them so carefully by progressives-socialists-Marxists.
Carl Boggs sees the “ideological-cultural struggle and political action “as part of a long-range political strategy. It is a thorough-going cultural revolution that sets out to transform all dimensions of everyday life and establish the social-psychological underpinnings of socialism before the question of state power is resolved. And that brings up George Soros.
Said to be the world’s thirty-eighth richest man, George Soros possesses about $7 billion in net worth, $11 billion in investments, and his foundations disperse more than $400 million a year for a variety of causes ranging from euthanasia and abortion to legalization of recreational drugs and Left-wing political power building. His political philosophy is drawn from some rather balmy ideas about “open societies” expressed by Karl Popper, under whom Soros studied in 1948 at the notorious left-wing London School of Economics. For Professor Popper, an atheist, nothing was “self-evident.” Drawing on Popper’s teaching, Soros concluded that the U.S. Declaration of Independence, rather than based on so-called “self-evident truths,” is but a statement of “our imperfect understanding” of the world around us. Hence,
Moreover, for Soros, “the state can be an instrument of oppression.” Soros argues for development of an interdependent world based on the principles of open society. This requires fostering “open society within individual countries and international laws, rules of conduct, and institutions to implement these norms.” But, since nation-states contradict a development of international open society, the impulse for change must come from “citizens living in open societies” who “recognize a global open society as something worth sacrifice.”
To create the “Age of Open Society,” Soros’ vision would require terminating U.S. sovereignty, disposing of the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights, or at least significant amendments to make them square with open society norms, and reforming the United Nations to facilitate a world socialist governance with the new social-political institutions to enforce its principles, such as the International Criminal Court.
It should not be surprising that Soros’s Open Society Institute lavishes huge sums of cash on
Soros made his political move to ally himself with these organizations in forming “Shadow Party” as the control-center inside the Democrat Party. A secret meeting was held on July 17, 2003, at Soros’ Southampton beach house on
The Soros Plan
his wounds and completing a damage assessment of what went wrong in 2004, when
his candidate John Kerry lost the presidency, Soros
turned to winning the 2008 presidential election through his clandestine Shadow
Party tucked away inside the Democrat Party. A secret meeting was held in
Perceptions are being shaped through a combination of
propaganda, disinformation, denial and deceit by the radical left, which has
seized control of the Democrat Party. The model is based on Antonio Gramsci’s ideas to first prepare the “masses” for a change
in political power by transforming American culture.
The “real” Obama is the “chosen one” for the far-Left progressives-socialists-marxists. Disciples of the Gramsci Left supported Obama’s campaign with millions of dollars to fund a massive propaganda and disinformation campaign. In the end, however, Obama was exposed as a puppet of the far Left, an agent of influence for the Gramsci formula of transforming American culture and leading hard-working Americans toward a comfortable embrace with socialism-Marxism.
Obama speaks eloquently of post-racialism but he belonged to a church that embraces Black liberation theology. For twenty years, Obama sat in a pew on Sundays to listen to the vile anti-White, anti-America oratory pouring from the mouth of the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr.
Obama associates William Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn were both high profile Weathermen as a result of their bombing activities. For a time, Bernardine, who called herself a “Communist revolutionary,” was one of the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” fugitives from justice. Neither Ayers nor Dohrn apologized for their destructive tactics. The Weather Underground’s terrorist tactics may have occurred some thirty or forty years ago, as Obama plaintively explained, but a photograph of William Ayers stomping on a
Ayers and Dohrn are members of the string of far-Left, hate-America cultists stretching from Antonio Gramsci and the New Left of the 1960s and 1970s to the present day. They are an aging clan in search of disciples to pass on the “tear down this government” torch. The aging radical Left has anointed Obama to become a leader of the successor generation of progres-sives-socialists-Marxists.
“Social justice,” as defined by the progressive-socialist-Marxist Left, can be achieved only through confrontation with bourgeois society. A monumental piece of who Barack Obama really is was shown in a private meeting with potential donors in
William Kristol quickly recognized the historical and dogmatic roots of Obama’s “cling to...religion” as a reflection of Marx’s famous statement on religion: “Religious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, and the soul of a soulless condition. It is the opium of the people.” Kristol says that Obama let “the mask slip.”
Barack Obama in reality is the progressive-socialist-Marxist soldier hiding inside a Trojan Horse. He is the one who slips out of the wooden horse to open
DEAR FELLOW MEDIA WATCHDOG APRIL-A 2009
RUSH LIMBAUGH ISN’T THE ONLY ONE UNDER ATTACK. AFTER MY remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in February, I came under verbal assault by Rachel Maddow, the host of an MSNBC program, and the
I HAVE NEVER CHARGED OBAMA WITH BEING A COMMUNIST. I HAVE DESCRIBED HIM AS A revolutionary Marxist, and I think that is accurate. That description is based not only on his policies but his long association with Marxists, socialists and communists, ranging from Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis to Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Ronald Reagan was an anti-communist and proved it by fighting them in
THESE CONTROVERSIES DEMONSTRATE SOME LOOPHOLES IN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, which depends on checks and balances and an adversary press. Our media failed to demand (1) an authenticated copy of the birth certificate, showing precisely where he was born and to whom, and (2) a thorough background investigation of the then-candidate, in order to demonstrate that he did not associate with questionable characters that could be considered hostile to the
THE MANUFACTURED CONTROVERSY OVER MY REMARKS SHOWS DESPERATION ON THE part of the pro-Obama media. Maddow has been assigned the role of targeting those perceived to be critics of the Obama Administration. Limbaugh is being attacked for allegedly saying that he hoped Obama would fail. What he said was that he hoped Obama’s socialist policies would fail. In effect, Obama is expanding upon the failed Bush policies of federal intervention in the economy. That is why, in my CPAC remarks, I called Bush a “pseudo-socialist.” I don’t think he intended to go down this road. But he was forced along by the panic caused by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in mid-September. We still don’t know exactly why this occurred and who was behind it. But we do know that it is being exploited by Obama to massively increase the power of government, at the national and global levels, over our lives.
THAT BRINGS ME TO THE SUBSTANCE OF MY REMARKS AT CPAC. I HAD THE HONOR OF introducing Rep. Mike Pence. I noted in my introduction that he was the only top Republican in the House to oppose the Bush/Paulson $700-billion Wall Street bailout. I also noted that Pence has been a supporter of the First Amendment right of free speech through his sponsorship of the Broadcaster Freedom Act. You may recall that Pence wrote the introduction to our book, The Death of Talk Radio?, about the effort to restrict and ultimately silence conservative media voices, especially on talk radio. Please use one of the enclosed postcards to order this book, if you haven’t already done so. At the same time, please send Rachel Maddow the enclosed postcard, asking why she repeats propaganda from the far-left without giving her target a chance to comment or respond. It is a tragedy that a once-great company, MSNBC parent General Electric, puts this trashy material on the air. GE, I should remind you, is getting Wall Street bailout money. But don’t expect Maddow to do a story about that. The company subsidiary, GE Healthcare, stands to benefit from Obama’s national socialist health care plan, while columnist Tim Carney reports that GE has a subsidiary, Greenhouse Gas Services, which could make money from Obama’s “climate change” policies. Maddow ignores all of this, demonstrating that she is a corporate mouthpiece as well as being unfair and dishonest. We need some straight reporting from Maddow.
WE GAVE OUT TWO REED IRVINE AWARDS AT CPAC, IN HONOR OF OUR FOUNDER, AND THEY went to M. Stanton Evans, author of the authoritative book about Senator Joe McCarthy, and Karl Denninger of Market-ticker.org. Send us the enclosed postcard if you would like a printed copy of Denninger’s powerful remarks, which are too detailed to summarize here. His basic message was that the American people deserve the truth about what is happening, and that too many lies are being told about the financial mess. This is a speech you must read for yourself.
THIS AIM REPORT TRIES TO ANSWER A QUESTION THAT IS ON THE MINDS OF SO MANY people—how did we come to this precipice. The problem, of course, is not just economic, but moral and social. This piece by Bob Chandler examines how the far-left has taken over key institutions in American society, including the media and academia. This is why Reed Irvine followed his establishment of Accuracy in Media with our sister organization, Accuracy in Academia, headed by Mal Kline. Bob has done the kind of investigative journalism that we should be getting from the “mainstream” media. We will continue to provide articles like this, complemented of course by our own investigative reporting. Our next AIM report will discuss the absolutely horrifying spectacle of representatives of foreign interests taking over our intelligence agencies. Your financial support enables us to continue this kind of serious journalism.
Antonio Gramsci Is Alive And Well In The
Academy And The Fourth Estate In
By Gary L. Morella
Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), the godfather of Italian Communism, and author of the modern Communist playbook for destroying Christian democracies.
Antonio Gramsci is the godfather of Italian
Communism. Realizing that Christian culture could not be defeated by a system so obviously oppressive and inferior as Marxism, Gramsci recommended that Communists do whatever they could
to gain control of the pillars of society and alter them from the inside out in
order to covertly bring about global socialism. These pillars are education,
the media, organized religion and government. Looking back over the last 75
years, it is easy to see Gramsci's fingerprints in
the US State Dept of the 1940's and 1950's, which was infested with Communist
agents and sympathizers. His presence is obvious the universities, newspapers, and
even the US Congress of today. As for the Catholic Church, the destruction of
the last 40 years since Vatican II as it relates to the Sacraments and the
collapse of discipline is an "inside job" right out of Gramsci's playbook. CCI readers are encouraged to better
understand Gramsci because of the success of his
ideas: socialism and de-Christianization have seeped in and become dominant in
Western nations without any shots being fired. Fixing this requires a better
understanding of how it happened in the first place.
[Note: The term Fourth Estate refers to the press, both in its explicit capacity of advocacy and in its implicit ability to frame political issues.]
In Book V, chapter 11 of the Politics Aristotle describes two ways of preserving tyrannies. One way is the traditional tyrant's policy of repression, which is analogous with the policy of extreme democracy. Its three main goals are to break the spirit of subjects, to sow distrust among them, and to make them incapable of action. The other way is assimilating tyranny to a monarchical form of government - a kingship, by a good administration and the exercise of personal restraint. The wise tyrant must take care to "adorn his city, pay heed to public worship, honor the good, keep his own passions in check, and enlist in his favor as large a measure of social support as he possibly can." Aristotle says that by doing this, the clever tyrant may prolong his days, and attain a state of "half-goodness." We will take a closer look at the goals of tyrannical repression and the actions of contemporary "wise tyrants" by examining in detail the tools that they use to enslave those entrusted to their care in the name of specious reasons of freedom confused with license.
Looking at tyrannical repression, breaking the spirits of subjects is accomplished through fear and terror, humiliation, and the forced dependence of subjects on tyrannical authority to the point of complete submission. Distrust is sowed among the subjects by destroying friendships first and foremost. This is accomplished by isolating them, making them strangers, and ultimately enemies with associations undermined in the process. Finally, the tyrant must make the subjects incapable of action, i.e., they must have no power to initiate action being nothing more than slaves. The tyrant in this case is properly called a despot. Inactivity results when the subjects are ignorant, passive, and lack the means, e.g., private property, to have any hope of influence politically. These three goals are indicative of a policy that rules by silence, coercion, and violence.
What is the
relationship among the three goals of tyrannical repression? Simply put, sowing
distrust among the subjects has as its natural consequences making the subjects
incapable of action, which leads to the total breakdown of their spirit. What
better example to see this than Marxist socialism with the disciples of Gramsci today making it their top priority to isolate
individuals via wonderfully sounding buzzwords such as multiculturalism where
our national motto "out of many, one" is replaced with "out of
What is the consequence of these American gulags? The subjects are made incapable of action, i.e., they are left with no power to initiate action because they have been reduced to being nothing more than slaves as a direct result of the ridicule that they receive when they attempt to articulate an opposing point of view. They are branded as ignorant and, as a direct result of intimidation, they become passive "sheople", afraid to do anything that might bring bad publicity to them or their families. Their political influence as a result of conceding the field to the Gramscian intimidators is rendered null and void.
What we're left with is a total breakdown of spirit, the final phase of tyrannical repression where the subjects are paralyzed through a fear, terror, and humiliation induced apathy into complete submission to the will of tyrannical authority.
We now concentrate on the survival of "wise" tyrants by their giving the impression that they are something very different than they really are. Aristotle in his discussion of this second way of preserving tyrannies used tyranny tending to a kingship for his example with the tyrant giving the impression that he was a benevolent protector through the appearances of a good administration and the exercise of personal restraint. Aristotle's requirements for this public perception of a "good tyrant" was that the tyrant must, at least on occasion, go through the motions of honoring the good, keeping his passions in check, and gaining as much social support as possible for his agenda.
How is this
portrayal of the "good tyrant" achieved today? It is achieved through
a unique class of individuals who are the products of indoctrination masking as
education from kindergarten to post-doctoral fellowships - "the spindoctors," who have carried lying to extremes not
thought possible. These individuals predominate in "politically
correct", pseudo-democratic Gramscian societies;
moreover, they are an absolute requirement in order to mollify the masses into
believing that by participating in their own destruction, they are gaining a
political nirvana. They are found not only in the secular establishment but
more importantly in the clergy for it is religion that
must be suppressed above everything else if the god of materialism is to be
enthroned by the new world order. What do these spindoctors
tell us regarding life and death issues? They tell us that killing innocents in
what should be their safest place of refuge, their mothers' wombs, is justified
because women have something called "reproductive rights," rights that
conveniently ignore the right of their babies to existence. Which begs the
question of where would the minions of Planned Parenthood be if their mothers
felt that they were nothing but a "choice" to be discarded at will?
They tell us that being inclined to unnatural sexually perverse acts is a cause
for affirmative action in a civil rights sense, celebrating homosexuality as a
cause celebre with demanded special rights masked as
civil rights that are already enjoyed by those suffering from developmental
disorders. They tell us that hate crime legislation is needed to give special
punishment to the thought and not only the crime in total ignorance of a
founding tenet of
In short, what
we are seeing in
Tyranny marks the real limit or destruction of the polis and a
decent human life. The irony is that modern tyrants give the impression that
they abhor slavery in all its forms while concurrently making their subjects
slaves to their own passions for specious reasons of unlimited free speech for
the autonomous unencumbered self, which has never existed. What we now see,
however, is that that the modern tyrants have become so brazen that there is no
longer the perceived need for recourse to attempt to give the impression that
they are honorable men. Their subjects have been dumbed
down through generations of indoctrination masked as education that they can no
longer distinguish fantasy from reality. Recall that ignorance is an important
condition for the preservation of tyrants. How else can one explain the
popularity of demagogues like the