Close Ideological Kinsmen
by Thomas A. Droleskey
As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation at first by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say in 1844 that "communism is naturalized humanism."
This statement turned out not to be entirely senseless. One does see the same stones in the foundations of a despiritualized humanism and of any type of socialism: endless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility, which under communist regimes reach the stage of anti-religious dictatorship; concentration on social structures with a seemingly scientific approach. (This is typical of the Enlightenment in the Eighteenth Century and of Marxism). Not by coincidence all of communism's meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.
The interrelationship is such, too, that the current of materialism which is most to the left always ends up by being stronger, more attractive and victorious, because it is more consistent. Humanism without its Christian heritage cannot resist such competition. We watch this process in the past centuries and especially in the past decades, on a world scale as the situation becomes increasingly dramatic. Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism and socialism could never resist communism. The communist regime in the East could stand and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who felt a kinship and refused to see communism's crimes. When they no longer could do so, they tried to justify them. In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East. (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart. June 8, 1978.)
Those comments, offered by the late Soviet dissident Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, who had been imprisoned in various Soviet gulags from 1945 to 1953 before serving another three years in internal exile in Kazakhstan as a prelude to his deportation from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on February 13, 1974, were made during the height of Cold War tensions. The reigning caesar ignoramus in the United States of America at that time, Jacobus Carterus, had said in his commencement address on May 22, 1977, at the University of Notre Dame that Americans suffered from what he termed an
inordinate fear of communism. Although Carter's role as the world's preeminent appeaser of Communist dictatorships was examined very recently in
Still Preparing the Way for Antichrist, another word or two about the nation's thirty-ninth president is pertinent in order to "frame" the remainder of this article.
The petty, mean-spirited little peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia, enabled Communist revolutionaries in Nicaragua and El Salvador in Central America and in Angola on the continent of Africa. He played the role of an obsequious inferior to Soviet dictator Leonid Brezhnev's domineering superior at the Soviet-American summit in Vienna, Austria, that took place between June 16, 1979, and June 18, 1979, as the decrepit, corrupt, venal old Stalinist, Brezhnev, played the Baptist Jimmy Carter for the fool that he is and remains when he, Brezhnev, an atheist, invoked the name of God in behalf of the alleged necessity of signing the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty II (SALT II). Carter was convinced that he had made inroads on the dictator's atheism:
Inside the U.S. Embassy's cramped and dreary conference room, the leaders arranged themselves and their aides at either side of a gleaming 25-ft. table. Brezhnev brought with him nine aides, including Chernenko, Gromyko, Ogarkov and Ustinov; Carter was accompanied by the same number, including Brown, Brzezinski and Vance. As guest, Brezhnev led off. He put on his rimless spectacles and stolidly read aloud from his sheaf of prepared remarks. He was followed by Carter, who talked from several pages of notes handwritten on yellow legal paper. Among them was a sentence he had noted on hearing Brezhnev utter it the day before: "God will not forgive us if we fail." (Time Magazine, June 25, 1979, page 7.)
Carter's giddy Sovietphilia, an echo of what was exhibited throughout the career of former United States Senator George S. McGovern (D-South Dakota), who was termed--and rightly so--"an apologist for international communism" by the late President of the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations George Meany on the Columbia Broadcasting System's Face the Nation program in 1972, ended six months later when the Red Army invaded Afghanistan on December 27, 1979, prompting the nitwit to say to Barbara Walters in an end-of-the year interview televised on the American Broadcasting Company, "Barbara, I've learned more about the Soviet Union in the last three weeks than I had in the past three years." As my only sibling was wont to say when faced with the startled statements of politicians who had "discovered" something that was obvious for all to see, "Do tell." Yes, do tell, Jimmy. Do tell.
However much Jimmy Cater was a Communist appeaser, he was not, though, a Communist himself. He believed that the government of the United States of America could "dial back" tensions in various hot spots of the world by refusing to engage in a policy of confrontation with the Soviet Union and/or Red China, to whose murderous regime he extended formal diplomatic recognition, effective January 1, 1979, in a
Speech on December 15, 1978, and by supporting what he believed to be "legitimate" "people's revolutions" in Nicaragua and El Salvador against repressive and corrupt rightist/military regimes. Carter was an appeaser in the mold of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's second vice president, Henry Agard Wallace, who served during Roosevelt's third term (January 20, 1941, to January 20, 1945).
Henry Agard Wallace believed that the Cold War was the fault of the United States of America, whose leaders, he believed had misunderstood Soviet intentions after World War II. All Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin wanted was a "security buffer" to protect his country from being invaded from the west again. That's all. It was wrong of western nations, Wallace contended, to interfere with the creation of this "security buffer." Wallace's successor as vice president, Harry S. Truman, who became president upon the death of Franklin Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, fired him as Secretary of Commerce on September 20, 1946, calling him a "pinko" and Soviet appeaser in the process. Truman's characterization was quite apt as Wallace really believed that a "new era of peace" was going to flow into the world. Wallace was so gullibly naive that he called remarked on the wonderful spirit of the "volunteers" who worked in Siberia as he visited there as Vice President of the United States of America in early-June of 1944. It was that spirit of Henry Wallace that still beats in the ever-appeasin' heart of James Earl Carter, Jr., and that provided the context for the late Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn's scathing criticism of him at Harvard University on June 8, 1978.
Unlike Jimmy Carter, however, Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus, is a man possessed of Communist ideals that he learned in his youth at the knees of Frank Marshall Davis and later as he cut his political eye-teeth as a community agitator--excuse me once again, community "organizer"--in Saul Alinsky Industrial Areas Foundation organizations in Chicago (see
When Helen Keller Meets Ray Charles). So are many within his administration, including those who are buried like so many
insects living under the rocks. What? You doubt my word yet again? Have I taught the twelve of you who read these articles nothing? Nothing at all? All right, look at the evidence once again:
In his biography of Barack Obama, David Mendell writes about Obama's life as a "secret smoker" and how he "went to great lengths to conceal the habit." But what about Obama's secret political life? It turns out that Obama's childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.
In his books, Obama admits attending "socialist conferences" and coming into contact with Marxist literature. But he ridicules the charge of being a "hard-core academic Marxist," which was made by his colorful and outspoken 2004 U.S. Senate opponent, Republican Alan Keyes.
However, through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his "poetry" and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just "Frank."
The reason is apparent: Davis was a known communist who belonged to a party subservient to the Soviet Union. In fact, the 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a CPUSA member. What's more, anti-communist congressional committees, including the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), accused Davis of involvement in several communist-front organizations.
Trevor Loudon, a New Zealand-based libertarian activist, researcher and blogger, noted evidence that "Frank" was Frank Marshall Davis in a posting in March of 2007.
Obama's communist connection adds to mounting public concern about a candidate who has come out of virtually nowhere, with a brief U.S. Senate legislative record, to become the Democratic Party frontrunner for the U.S. presidency. In the latest Real Clear Politics poll average, Obama beats Republican John McCain by almost four percentage points.
AIM recently disclosed that Obama has well-documented socialist connections, which help explain why he sponsored a "Global Poverty Act" designed to send hundreds of billions of dollars of U.S. foreign aid to the rest of the world, in order to meet U.N. demands. The bill has passed the House and a Senate committee, and awaits full Senate action.
But the Communist Party connection through Davis is even more ominous. Decades ago, the CPUSA had tens of thousands of members, some of them covert agents who had penetrated the U.S. Government. It received secret subsidies from the old Soviet Union.
You won't find any of this discussed in the David Mendell book, Obama: From Promise to Power. It is typical of the superficial biographies of Obama now on the market. Secret smoking seems to be Obama's most controversial activity. At best, Mendell and the liberal media describe Obama as "left-leaning."
But you will find it briefly discussed, sort of, in Obama's own book, Dreams From My Father. He writes about "a poet named Frank," who visited them in Hawaii, read poetry, and was full of "hard-earned knowledge" and advice. Who was Frank? Obama only says that he had "some modest notoriety once," was "a contemporary of Richard Wright and Langston Hughes during his years in Chicago..." but was now "pushing eighty." He writes about "Frank and his old Black Power dashiki self" giving him advice before he left for Occidental College in 1979 at the age of 18.
This "Frank" is none other than Frank Marshall Davis, the black communist writer now considered by some to be in the same category of prominence as Maya Angelou and Alice Walker. In the summer/fall 2003 issue of African American Review, James A. Miller of George Washington University reviews a book by John Edgar Tidwell, a professor at the University of Kansas, about Davis's career, and notes, "In Davis's case, his political commitments led him to join the American Communist Party during the middle of World War II-even though he never publicly admitted his Party membership." Tidwell is an expert on the life and writings of Davis.
Is it possible that Obama did not know who Davis was when he wrote his book, Dreams From My Father, first published in 1995? That's not plausible since Obama refers to him as a contemporary of Richard Wright and Langston Hughes and says he saw a book of his black poetry.
The communists knew who "Frank" was, and they know who Obama is. In fact, one academic who travels in communist circles understands the significance of the Davis-Obama relationship.
Professor Gerald Horne, a contributing editor of the Communist Party journal Political Affairs, talked about it during a speech last March at the reception of the Communist Party USA archives at the Tamiment Library at New York University. The remarks are posted online under the headline, "Rethinking the History and Future of the Communist Party."
Horne, a history professor at the University of Houston, noted that Davis, who moved to Honolulu from Kansas in 1948 "at the suggestion of his good friend Paul Robeson," came into contact with Barack Obama and his family and became the young man's mentor, influencing Obama's sense of identity and career moves. Robeson, of course, was the well-known black actor and singer who served as a member of the CPUSA and apologist for the old Soviet Union. Davis had known Robeson from his time in Chicago.
As Horne describes it, Davis "befriended" a "Euro-American family" that had "migrated to Honolulu from Kansas and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who retracing the steps of Davis eventually decamped to Chicago."
It was in Chicago that Obama became a "community organizer" and came into contact with more far-left political forces, including the Democratic Socialists of America, which maintains close ties to European socialist groups and parties through the Socialist International (SI), and two former members of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), William Ayers and Carl Davidson.
The SDS laid siege to college campuses across America in the 1960s, mostly in order to protest the Vietnam War, and spawned the terrorist Weather Underground organization. Ayers was a member of the terrorist group and turned himself in to authorities in 1981. He is now a college professor and served with Obama on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago. Davidson is now a figure in the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, an offshoot of the old Moscow-controlled CPUSA, and helped organize the 2002 rally where Obama came out against the Iraq War.
Both communism and socialism trace their roots to Karl Marx, co-author of the Communist Manifesto, who endorsed the first meeting of the Socialist International, then called the "First International." According to Pierre Mauroy, president of the SI from 1992-1996, "It was he [Marx] who formally launched it, gave the inaugural address and devised its structure..."
Apparently unaware that Davis had been publicly named as a CPUSA member, Horne said only that Davis "was certainly in the orbit of the CP [Communist Party]-if not a member..."
In addition to Tidwell's book, Black Moods: Collected Poems of Frank Marshall Davis, confirming Davis's Communist Party membership, another book, The New Red Negro: The Literary Left and African American Poetry, 1930-1946, names Davis as one of several black poets who continued to publish in CPUSA-supported publications after the 1939 Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact. The author, James Edward Smethurst, associate professor of Afro-American studies at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, says that Davis, however, would later claim that he was "deeply troubled" by the pact.
While blacks such as Richard Wright left the CPUSA, it is not clear if or when Davis ever left the party.
However, Obama writes in Dreams From My Father that he saw "Frank" only a few days before he left Hawaii for college, and that Davis seemed just as radical as ever. Davis called college "An advanced degree in compromise" and warned Obama not to forget his "people" and not to "start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that ####." Davis also complained about foot problems, the result of "trying to force African feet into European shoes," Obama wrote.
For his part, Horne says that Obama's giving of credit to Davis will be important in history. "At some point in the future, a teacher will add to her syllabus Barack's memoir and instruct her students to read it alongside Frank Marshall Davis' equally affecting memoir, Living the Blues and when that day comes, I'm sure a future student will not only examine critically the Frankenstein monsters that US imperialism created in order to subdue Communist parties but will also be moved to come to this historic and wonderful archive in order to gain insight on what has befallen this complex and intriguing planet on which we reside," he said.
Dr. Kathryn Takara, a professor of Interdisciplinary Studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa who also confirms that Davis is the "Frank" in Obama's book, did her dissertation on Davis and spent much time with him between 1972 until he passed away in 1987.
In an analysis posted online, she notes that Davis, who was a columnist for the Honolulu Record, brought "an acute sense of race relations and class struggle throughout America and the world" and that he openly discussed subjects such as American imperialism, colonialism and exploitation. She described him as a "socialist realist" who attacked the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Davis, in his own writings, had said that Robeson and Harry Bridges, the head of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and a secret member of the CPUSA, had suggested that he take a job as a columnist with the Honolulu Record "and see if I could do something for them." The ILWU was organizing workers there and Robeson's contacts were "passed on" to Davis, Takara writes.
Takara says that Davis "espoused freedom, radicalism, solidarity, labor unions, due process, peace, affirmative action, civil rights, Negro History week, and true Democracy to fight imperialism, colonialism, and white supremacy. He urged coalition politics."
Is "coalition politics" at work in Obama's rise to power?
Trevor Loudon, the New Zealand-based blogger who has been analyzing the political forces behind Obama and specializes in studying the impact of Marxist and leftist political organizations, notes that Frank Chapman, a CPUSA supporter, has written a letter to the party newspaper hailing the Illinois senator's victory in the Iowa caucuses.
"Obama's victory was more than a progressive move; it was a dialectical leap ushering in a qualitatively new era of struggle," Chapman wrote. "Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,' not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through."
Let's challenge the liberal media to report on this. Will they have the honesty and integrity to do so? (Obama's Communist Mentor)
Obama's Communist state-of-mind was on full display when he was running for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party in 2008:
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then 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. (Barack Hussein Obama, Obama: No Surprise That Hard-Pressed Pennsylvanians Cling to Guns and Religion.)
It should come as no surprise at all, therefore, that the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama is entirely mute when it comes to the repressive policies of Fidel Castro-wannabees such as Hugh Chavez in Venezuela and Daniel Ortega, that darling of "liberation theology" Catholics in the conciliar structures here in the United States of America, in Nicaragua who is busy re-Communizing the country that he first Communized between the time his Sandinistas seized power on July 18, 1979, and the time that he lost the first truly free election for his country's presidency thereafter on February 25, 1990. (It should be noted that former President Jimmy Carter, serving in Nicaragua as an election observer for himself and not for the administration of then President George Herbert Walker Bush, openly wept when the results of elections were announced, embracing Ortega to console him).
Much like Carter himself, who ignored centrist parties in both Nicaragua and El Salvador as he favored Soviet and Cuban backed, financed and armed Communist insurgents, Barack Hussein Obama is ignoring the pleas of centrists in Venezuela and Nicaragua and Bolivia, were a former conciliar "bishop," the earth-worshiping Evo Morales, is president and has presided over his own policy of repression as he favors perversity and earth-worship (see
Another Country Kicks Out Christ the King and an article by a "centrist" "think-tank," INTO THE ABYSS: BOLIVIA UNDER EVO MORALES, that discusses Evo Morales's ideological and strategic ties with Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Iran). Obama is content to let his fellow leftists rule without any kind of American criticism, no less intervention by means of economic sanctions, as he is one of mind and heart with them. He wishes that he could rule in such a manner, having to content himself with issuing executive orders and presiding over the issuance of rules and regulations that are designed to be end-runs around the law-making process outlined in Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America (see
Hush, Hush! Don't Tell the People).
Obama's refusal to criticize the repressive policies of his fellow leftists has caught the attention of some secular commentators, one of whom noted that Obama's silence extends also to the repressive policies being employed by the autocrats in Bahrain, a Persian Gulf state, who would still be on their camels looking for parts in motion pictures such as Laurel and Hardy's Beau Hunks if western companies had not discovered large deposits of crude oil buried under their sand:
In a speech to the U.N. General Assembly last September Barack Obama suggested that his administration's notoriously weak defense of human rights around the world would be invigorated. "We will call out those who suppress ideas and serve as a voice for those who are voiceless," he said. He went on to urge other democracies: "Don't stand idly by, don't be silent, when dissidents elsewhere are imprisoned and protestors are beaten."
Just over two months later, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton visited Bahrain, an important Persian Gulf ally that hosts the U.S. Fifth Fleet. The emirate was in the midst of a major crackdown on its opposition. Two dozen dissidents, including intellectuals, clerics and a prominent blogger, had been rounded up, charged under anti-terrorism laws and allegedly tortured. A human rights group that had received U.S. funding was taken over by the government. Human Rights Watch had concluded that "what we are seeing in Bahrain these days is a return to full-blown authoritarianism."
Clinton's response? Extravagant and virtually unqualified praise for Bahrain's ruling al-Khalifa family. "I am very impressed by the progress that Bahrain is making on all fronts - economically, politically, socially," she declared as she opened a town hall meeting. Her paeans to Bahrain's "commitment to democracy" continued until a member of parliament managed to gain access to the microphone and asked for a response to the fact that "many people are arrested, lawyers and human rights activists."
Clinton's condescending reply was a pure apology for the regime. "It's easy to be focused internally and see the glass as half empty. I see the glass as half full," she said. "Yes, I mean people are arrested and people should have due process . . . but on the other hand the election was widely validated. . . . So you have to look at the entire picture."
So much for a fresh start on human rights. Clinton's Bahrain visit reflected what seems to be an intractable piece of the Obama administration's character: a deeply ingrained resistance to the notion that the United States should publicly shame authoritarian regimes or stand up for the dissidents they persecute.
Yes, Obama made a public statement the day an empty chair represented Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo at the Nobel peace prize ceremony, and both he and Clinton issued statements last week when Russia's best-known political prisoner, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was convicted on blatantly trumped-up charges. But in all sorts of less prominent places and cases, the U.S. voice remains positively timid - or not heard at all.
After Egypt's terrible elections in November, in which ballot boxes were blatantly stuffed and the opposition brutally suppressed, the administration's commentary was limited to bland statements issued by "the office of the press secretary" at State and the spokesman of the National Security Council. Three weeks earlier, at a widely watched joint press conference in Washington with Egypt's foreign minister, Clinton made no mention of the elections, the crackdown or anything else related to human rights.
In Latin America, friends of the United States marvel at its passivity as Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega systematically crush civil society organizations and independent media. "I don't see a clear policy," Venezuelan opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez - a good example of the sort of dissident Obama promised to defend - told me.
When the administration touts its record it often focuses on the declarations it has engineered by multilateral forums, such as the U.N. Human Rights Council. The ideology behind this is that the United States is better off working through such bodies than acting on its own. The problem is that, in practice, this is not true. Set aside for the moment the fact that the U.N. council is dominated by human rights abusers who devote most of the agenda to condemnations of Israel. Who has heard what the council said about, say, the recent events in Belarus? The obvious answer: far fewer people than would have noticed if the same critique came from Obama or Clinton.
Back to Bahrain for a moment. The "entire picture" Clinton referred to is that virtually no one, outside the Bahraini royal family and the State Department, shared her judgment that the parliamentary election was "free and fair." The dissidents are still on trial; their defense lawyers resigned en masse last month because of the court's refusal to consider any of their motions.
Recently, Human Rights Watch spoke up again on behalf of Nabeel Rajab, the president of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, who has been repeatedly harassed by security forces, prevented from traveling and called a terrorist by the state news agency.
Has the Obama administration spoken up for this relatively obscure and "voiceless" dissident? Of course not. (U.S. Dangerously Silent on Human Rights.)
Perhaps the most interesting development of all is the open, blatant return of Soviet rule in the Russian Federation. Soviet, I mean, Russian Prime Minister and de facto dictator Vladimir Putin the man who pulls the strings on his puppet president,
Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev much in the same manner as Leonid Brezhnev pulled the strings on his own puppet Prime Minister, Alexi Kosgyin, and puppet president, Nikolai Podgorny, between the time they engineered the overthrow of Soviet Premier and dictator Nikita
Sergeyevich Khrushchev on October 14, 1964, is consolidating power and repressing dissent to usher in a new period of Stalinism spiced up with a bit of old-fashioned Russian-style Mafioso self-aggrandizement and personal monetary enrichment. The arrest and imprisonment of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, mentioned briefly in the above-cited article, is just one of the signs that point to Putin's imposing that new period of Stalinism a la Putin (see Putin Doubles Down on Khordokovsky.) Anyone who asserts that Russia has been "converted" to anything is steeped in willful self-delusion.
Our Lady told us quite directly that the errors of Russia would continue to be spread unless Russia was consecrated to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Alas, just as King Louis XIV and the coterie of bishops who served as his willing enablers refused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's direct request of them, made through His chosen soul, Sister Margaret Mary Alacoque, to consecrate the entirety of France to His Most Sacred Heart and brought upon France catastrophic consequences as a result, so is it the case that the world today is suffering because neither Pope Pius XI or Pope Pius XII saw fit to fulfill Our Lady's request, made in its final and most specific form to Sister Lucia dos Santos in 1929, to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart with all of the world's bishops (see
Our Lady Does Not Act on Her Own). Behold the spread of the errors of Russia right in our very midst as a man trained in the ways of Marxism keeps a studied peace as his like-minded brethren in other countries repress dissent in order to further fashion their respective socialist utopias.
This did not happen overnight. Not at all. The proximate seeds for the triumph of the Marxist spirit of statism were planted a long time ago, coming to fruition during the presidential administrations of Thomas Woodrow Wilson (March 4, 1913-March 4, 1921) and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (March 4, 1933-April 12, 1945). The Franklin Roosevelt administration was filled to the rafters with Communist sympathizers such as Henry Wallace and actual Communist agents such as Alger Hiss. The social engineering of Marxism played a large hand in President Lyndon Baines Johnson's (November 22, 1963-January 20, 1969) War on Poverty and Great Society. Central economic planning was a key element of President Richard Nixon's wage and price controls over the course of a ninety day period beginning on August 15, 1971. (I won't even mention President Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr's absurd public relations scheme, "Whip Inflation Now," that was launched on October 8, 1974, as this was an exercise in pure stupidity, not Marxism).
The current occupant of the White House, Barack Hussein Obama, had his election made possible by the near-Trotskyite policies of his predecessor, George Walker Bush. Like Trotsky, Bush the Lesser and his band of neoconservative war hawks believed in constant war as the means to provide national security and to keep control of the levers of power. The financial cost of Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with his own massive domestic spending, help to pave the way for the election of out-of-closet leftists in 2006 and ultimately helped to create the economic conditions that made possible the election of the Marxist-trained elitist named Barack Hussein Obama (see Socialism, Straight From Your "Pro-Life" Conservative), who has filled his administration to the rafters with senior and junior level advisers who are pinker in their ideological complexion than Henry Agard Wallace ever dreamed of being. Some of them are simply red.
Although more and more indigenous Mohammedans, especially those between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine, are indeed being radicalized to commit acts of homegrown terror against us, and while Mohammedans from elsewhere will always pose a threat to national security, do not discount the evil intentions of the Communist oligarchs in Red China and the former head of the old Soviet KGB, Vladimir Putin, in the Russian Federation. We owe God quite a substantial bill for the slaughter of the preborn, both by chemical and surgical means, and for the other crimes that have been committed within in this country under the cover of the civil law and in the name of the so-called "Global War on Terror." That debt might very well be paid in the form of some unexpected visits from the Red Chinese and the Russians, presaged perhaps by terrorists trained in Venezuela and Nicaragua and Bolivia who just happen to "slip" through the porous border between the United States of America and the United Mexican States. Given Barack Hussein Obama's common ideological with his fellow leftists, it is my belief--and only that, my belief--that he would be slow to use military force to defend the people of the United States of America in such possible scenarios.
Although an article,
Not your father's Cold War, by a non-Catholic named Toby Westerman concludes with a call for a trust in some generic "Creator" without referencing the true God of Divine Revelation as He has revealed Himself to us through His Catholic Church and without reference His Most Blessed Mother and her Fatima Message, it does contain useful information about the cyber-attacks that the Soviets, I mean, Russians and Red Chinese are planning to mount on our infrastructure, attacks that might make any military attacks unnecessary as they would bring this country to its knees in such a way that the obsequious Obama might surrender rather than put up any kind of resistance. This is not an impossible scenario. Indeed, any such scenario is possible as long as Our Lady's Fatima Message is not fulfilled, and that cannot be done until God Himself restores a true Catholic on the Throne of Saint Peter to replace the apostates who occupy the Vatican at this time. We need to pray and sacrifice, sacrifice and pray, knowing that Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will indeed triumph in the end! (A related article by Mr. Westerman,
The China nightmare, comments on the threat posed by Red China that was noted in the preceding paragraph.)
Obviously, the very few people who remain as readers of this website know that this is all the result, proximately speaking, of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and institutionalized by the organized forces of naturalism that can be referred to as Judeo-Masonry. Nations that do not recognize the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by the Catholic Church will fall sway sooner or later to the forces of naturalism that are the most consistent and hence the strongest, namely, those of leftism. The only end result can be the rise of the totalitarian state, something that we are very much on the way to realizing in our own midst as we consist of a nation of slowly
boiled frogs who are diverted by an endless array of bread and circuses.
We must keep in mind at all times that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Have I mentioned that on this site lately, perhaps in Another Year of the Same Conciliar Apostasy, part one? It is Catholicism alone that built the glories of Western civilization in the Middle Ages of Christendom, as Pope Leo XIII noted in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:
There was once a time when States were governed by the philosophy of the Gospel. Then it was that the power and divine virtue of Christian wisdom had diffused itself throughout the laws, institutions, and morals of the people, permeating all ranks and relations of civil society. Then, too, the religion instituted by Jesus Christ, established firmly in befitting dignity, flourished everywhere, by the favor of princes and the legitimate protection of magistrates; and Church and State were happily united in concord and friendly interchange of good offices. The State, constituted in this wise, bore fruits important beyond all expectation, whose remembrance is still, and always will be, in renown, witnessed to as they are by countless proofs which can never be blotted out or ever obscured by any craft of any enemies. Christian Europe has subdued barbarous nations, and changed them from a savage to a civilized condition, from superstition to true worship. It victoriously rolled back the tide of Mohammedan conquest; retained the headship of civilization; stood forth in the front rank as the leader and teacher of all, in every branch of national culture; bestowed on the world the gift of true and many-sided liberty; and most wisely founded very numerous institutions for the solace of human suffering. And if we inquire how it was able to bring about so altered a condition of things, the answer is -- beyond all question, in large measure, through religion, under whose auspices so many great undertakings were set on foot, through whose aid they were brought to completion.
A similar state of things would certainly have continued had the agreement of the two powers been lasting. More important results even might have been justly looked for, had obedience waited upon the authority, teaching, and counsels of the Church, and had this submission been specially marked by greater and more unswerving loyalty. For that should be regarded in the light of an ever-changeless law which Ivo of Chartres wrote to Pope Paschal II: "When kingdom and priesthood are at one, in complete accord, the world is well ruled, and the Church flourishes, and brings forth abundant fruit. But when they are at variance, not only smaller interests prosper not, but even things of greatest moment fall into deplorable decay."
But that harmful and deplorable passion for innovation which was aroused in the sixteenth century threw first of all into confusion the Christian religion, and next, by natural sequence, invaded the precincts of philosophy, whence it spread amongst all classes of society. From this source, as from a fountain-head, burst forth all those later tenets of unbridled license which, in the midst of the terrible upheavals of the last century, were wildly conceived and boldly proclaimed as the principles and foundation of that new conception of law which was not merely previously unknown, but was at variance on many points with not only the Christian, but even the natural law.
Our goal must be to realize the restoration of Christendom, as Pope Saint Pius X noted in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:
This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.
No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
How do we restore this Catholic City? By using the weapon provided to Saint Dominic de Guzman, the founder of the Order of Preachers. That weapon is the Most Holy Rosary, as Pope Saint Pius V noted in Consueverunt Romani, September 17, 1569:
The Roman Pontiffs, and the other Holy Fathers, our predecessors, when they were pressed in upon by temporal or spiritual wars, or troubled by other trials, in order that they might more easily escape from these, and having achieved tranquillity, might quietly and fervently be free to devote themselves to God, were wont to implore the divine assistance, through supplications or Litanies to call forth the support of the saints, and with David to lift up their eyes unto the Mountains, trusting with firm hope that thence would they receive aid.
1. Prompted by their example, and, as is piously believed, by the Holy Ghost, the inspired Blessed founder of the Order of Friars Preachers, (whose institutes and rule we ourselves expressly professed when we were in minor orders), in circumstances similar to those in which we now find ourselves, when parts of France and of Italy were unhappily troubled by the heresy of the Albegenses, which blinded so many of the worldly that they were raging most savagely against the priests of the Lord and the clergy, raised his eyes up unto heaven, unto that mountain of the Glorious Virgin Mary, loving Mother of God. For she by her seed has crushed the head of the twisted serpent, and has alone destroyed all heresies, and by the blessed fruit of her womb has saved a world condemned by the fall of our first parent. From her, without human hand, was that stone cut, which, struck by wood, poured forth the abundantly flowing waters of graces. And so Dominic looked to that simple way of praying and beseeching God, accessible to all and wholly pious, which is called the
which is called the Rosary, or Psalter of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in which the same most Blessed Virgin is venerated by the angelic greeting repeated one hundred and fifty times, that is, according to the number of the Davidic Psalter, and by the Lord's Prayer with each decade.
Interposed with these prayers are certain meditations showing forth the entire life of Our Lord Jesus Christ, thus completing the method of prayer devised by the by the Fathers of the Holy Roman Church. This same method St. Dominic propagated, and it was, spread by the Friars of Blessed Dominic, namely, of the aforementioned Order, and accepted by not a few of the people. Christ's faithful, inflamed by these prayers, began immediately to be changed into new men. The darkness of heresy began to be dispelled, and the light of the Catholic Faith to be revealed. Sodalities for this form of prayer began to be instituted in many places by the Friars of the same Order, legitimately deputed to this work by their Superiors, and confreres began to be enrolled together.
2. Following the example of our predecessors, seeing that the Church militant, which God has placed in our hands, in these our times is tossed this way and that by so many heresies, and is grievously troubled troubled and afflicted by so many wars, and by the depraved morals of men, we also raise our eyes, weeping but full of hope, unto that same mountain, whence every aid comes forth, and we encourage and admonish each member of Christ's faithful to do likewise in the Lord.
We must not live in fear of the those in this country who share a close ideological kinship with out-and-out Marxist dictators elsewhere. We must surrender ourselves to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as we try to fulfill Our Lady's Fatima Message in our own lives, consecrated as they must be to these twin Hearts of Love, and in our own homes, enthroned as they must be to these twin Hearts of Love. And we must keep in mind that there is nothing that we can suffer in this passing, mortal vale of tears that is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and that caused Seven Swords of Sorrow to be thrust through and through the Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother.
May Our Lady continue to assist us during this Christmastide as we approach the Feast of the Epiphany of her Divine Son, Christ the King, tomorrow, Thursday, January 6, 2011. May we use the merits won for us by the shedding of her Divine Son's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow through her own loving hands as the Mediatrix of All Graces to plant a few seeds for the day when all men in all nations will be truly wise, enlightened by the Catholic faith and strengthened by the supernatural helps she alone dispenses, as all men exclaim with joy:
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
