How Obama Revolution Came to America – Can You Say Gramsci, Alinsky, and Soros

How Obama Revolution Came to America


AIM Report  |  By Robert Chandler  |  April 6, 2009


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. 

Four political arenas have been constructed by the progressive-socialist-Marxist Left to “format” or erase America’s collective brain and install a mind-control program into what is to become a robotic America of theological radicalism, socialist unionism, radical community-state politics, and the “Shadow Party” owned and operated by billionaires such as George Soros.


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 United States has shifted its main focus from the worker and his/her needs to progressive-socialist-marxist politics. For union leadership, their efforts are all about power—power for themselves, social power, and political power. Five U.S. labor unions stand out from their efforts of making socialist politics possible at the mass level by applying the imported ideals of Italy’s Marxist Antonio Gramsci: AFL-CIO, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), National Education Association (NEA), and American Federation of Teachers (AFT).

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.


Attacking Corporations


­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 Chicago region in support of the union. Booth, like other Leftists, highlighted General Motors “nastiness.” 

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 America. “A new politics must include a revitalized labor movement; a movement which sees itself, and is regarded by others, as a major leader of the breakthrough to a politics of hope and vision,” explains the 1962 Port Huron statement of the Students for a Democratic Society.  “Labor’s role is no less unique or important in the needs of the potential political strength, its natural interest in the abolition of exploitation, its reach to the grass-roots of American society, combine to make it the best candidate for the synthesis of the civil rights, peace, and economic reform movements.” 

Gramsci understood that a revolutionary undertaking in a bourgeois society like the United States could proceed only from a sound “philosophical base” and an “ongoing political involvement.” According to editor Bernie Horn’s commentary in the “Progressive Agenda for the State 2008,” which was prepared by the radical Left’s Center for Policy Alternatives, “most Americans are progressive on most issues.”

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, America’s founding documents are disposable in what Soros believes is our godless society.

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 U.S. progressive-socialist-Marxist civil society entities. By fastening himself like a leech to the progressive-socialist-movement, Soros’s open society dream sucks the life-giving blood from the Gramsci advances toward America’s cultural transformation. By his infusion of large sums of money, and persuading other plutocrats to contribute as well, Soros is moving toward a “take down” of the United States through control of the Democratic Party and its progressive-socialist-marxist candidate whose hidden payback agenda is foreordained: move forward on the open society initiative.

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 Long Island, and Morton H. Halperin was present. He had been hired by Soros a year earlier to head the Washington office of the Open Society Institute, a part of the global network of institutes and foundations located in fifty countries around the world. Halperin made a name for himself by waging open war against the U.S. national intelligence agencies, while director of the Center for National Security Studies in 1974 and the American Civil Liberties Union from 1984 to 1992.  

The Soros Plan


After licking 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 Scottsdale, Arizona, in the spring of 2005. Seventy well-heeled potential donors listened intently while George Soros laid out a five-year plan to create a network of think tanks, media outlets, and training centers to promote his own special blend of progressive-socialist-marxist politics. Those at the secret meeting, calling themselves the “Phoenix Group,” focused initially on three main goals: creating progressive-socialist-Marxist think tanks, training centers for the young progressives, and media centers.

Political Power


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 U.S. flag in August 2001 depicted in Susan Braudy’s book Family Circle offers clear evidence that Ayers remains very much a vicious and untrustworthy America-hater. 

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 San Francisco.  Addressing the challenges he faced in securing the support of working-class voters, Obama told the well-heeled liberals gathered that “it’s not surprising...that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” 

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 America’s gates to a horde of socialists-Marxists intent on swarming the federal government and carrying out a family-destroying, religion-busting, freedom-infringing cultural revolution and an extended political dominance over the entire country. 
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 George Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP). In fact, I may have that backward. CAP released a video attacking me, and that led Maddow, who openly advertises being in a lesbian relationship, to join the assault on the air. I am sorry that my “bias” in favor of traditional morality offends her. Their big gripe was that, during my introduction of Rep. Mike Pence, I mentioned how I had been going to CPAC during the 1980s, when we had a President, Ronald Reagan, who was anti-communist and born in the United States. The comments drew applause from the crowd of several hundred people. Almost immediately, a left-wing blog charged that I had said that Obama was a foreign communist. 
            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 Hollywood. It might be fair to describe Obama as an anti anti-communist. That is, he opposes those who want to root out communists. When I mentioned that we knew Reagan was born in the United States, I meant just that. There was never any controversy over where Reagan was born. As an investigative journalist myself, I cannot say with confidence that I am satisfied that the “evidence” proves that Obama was born in Hawaii. I was always suspicious, especially after a copy of his alleged birth certificate first surfaced on the website of the far-left Daily Kos. That is the site that falsely claimed that Sarah Palin had faked her last pregnancy. A group calling itself claimed to have seen Obama’s real birth certificate, but I don’t know why we should trust them. This defended Obama’s misleading campaign ads about his upbringing. Those ads claimed that he was raised mostly by his grandparents, when we know that Frank Marshall Davis was his mentor for 10 years of his young life. Davis, who was black, had been picked by his grandfather, who was white, to be a father-figure. 
            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 United States. It is incredible that Obama, once he was elected, demanded that his nominees for government jobs fill out lengthy forms about their histories, when he escaped that same kind of process. I’m glad he did that because we found out several were tax cheats. But it was a double-standard. To cite another example, Obama never disclosed any of his medical records. Instead, a doctor issued a one-page release claiming he was fit. That was good enough for the press, which forced Republican presidential candidate John McCain to release over 1,000 pages of his medical records. The rationale was that McCain was older and once had cancer. But Obama had used illegal drugs, including marijuana and cocaine, was (and may still be) a smoker, and his mother died from cancer.
            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 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 America

7/18/2008 8:30:00 AM
By Gary L. Morella


Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), the godfather of Italian Communism, and author of the modern Communist playbook for destroying Christian democracies.

CCI NOTES: 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 one, many." America's melting pot has become a witch's brew with the forced isolation of individual ethnic cultures in the name of their supposed glorification. Check out most colleges today and you will see some type of reference to this multicultural isolation as a part of official policy, a policy that by osmosis filters down into our secondary and elementary school systems. Instead of making incoming students feel that they are a part of a unified consensus working toward the common good for society by seeking the truth in an uncompromising fashion, thereby learning in the process to become good citizens, they are marginalized via created multicultural factions that emphasize a disparity that would not exist otherwise via the "celebration of a diversity" that encompasses the most unnatural behavior imaginable. What is happening is the extreme in Aristotle's Politics that is to be avoided at all costs. Class warfare and chaos is the inevitable result in the name of "enlightened" Gramscian thinkers that populate the academy and the Fourth Estate with totalitarianism the panacea. Not the Stalinist version to be sure, but rather a subtler Americanized version whose modern gulags are the public demonization of any who would dare criticize the "political correctness" that is necessary to subvert entire cultures for the greater socialist scheme - let us call it a "new world order."


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 America, equal justice under the law. They would have us believe that if our son or daughter wasn't in one of the approved protected hate crime categories, the perpetrators of their deaths somehow deserve lesser punishment than those committed against the protected group. They perpetuate multiculturalism and diversity on a political level by insuring that class conflicts will be given all the oxygen necessary to keep the anarchical flames burning with the totalitarian state being the only fire extinguisher available as a result of society's fatigue with living in constant chaos. And last but not least, in the religious realm to include mainstream Protestantism, liberal Judaism and Catholicism, the clerical spindoctors sadly reinforce all of the above through inter-faith alliances that con the public into believing that they are adhering to the tenets of their faith while concurrently doing everything within their power to subvert the teachings of their faith through its progressive reinvention to be in tune with the times.


In short, what we are seeing in America today is the democratized version of a totalitarian state where Gramsci promoters have learned their lessons well. We no longer have to wait for the barbarians to knock down the gate; they have been in the city for a long time at our invitation because of our apathy to do anything to prevent the confusion of authentic freedom with license. It is this apathy that tyrants depend on, more than anything else, for existence. It is the final consequence of Aristotle's three goals of tyrannical repression.


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 Clintons who make no pretext about being honorable?