Category: Windows Into Worldviews

Socialists are forever carping about “social justice.” What I contend though is that this whole idea of “social justice” is not really the goal or driving force for these Marxists, though the mindless useful idiots drink it up like water, but rather Social justice as an aspirational appeal is only a means to achieve the real goal of the Marxist, to wit, total control.

This is easily seen in countries where the Marxists have taken control. Where did they ever relieve the social injustices they carped about before they came into power? No, in point of fact the Marxists, who whined the loudest about the needs of social justice, when finally coming to power created a social environment that was characterized by the social injustice they moaned about prior to seizing power growing to gargantuan proportions.

And you can take it to the bank that with the passing of Obama care, propelled in America for the past century by cries of “social justice,” will give us a health care system that will breed illness, injury, and death in measures that we have never seen in this country. But, as total control is achieved by the Marxists, all this social injustice will be quite insignificant.

Look at the former Rhodesia and the current South Africa. The issue of social justice was the order of the day when these countries functioned as civilized societies. The Marxists had their way in those countries and now the inadequacies of the past are envisioned, if they could but exist again, as a social order Oasis. These peoples, who fell for the siren song of social justice, have gone from the frying pan to the fire of Marxist social order.

The Marxists are experts at using issues of justice only as issues of agitation among people. They care no more for justice then Lady Gaga cares for purity. The only thing the Marxist wants out of social justice is the ability to agitate and to cause division, with a view of conquering so that they can control and enslave.

The fact that those Marxist who are epistemologically self conscious (vis-a-vis the useful idiots) don’t really care about the travails of people is seen in their own writings. Marxist Chernyshevsky explained his antipathy to the Russian land reform in 1861 by asserting that a certain improvement in the peasents’ lot might turn them from the revolutionary path. Somewhat later Nechayev writes,

“The government itself might at any moment come upon the idea of reducing taxes or instituting similar benefits. That would be a real misfortune, because even under the present terrible conditions the folk are slow to rise. But give them a little more pocket change, set things up even one cow better, and everything will be delayed ten years. And all our work will be lost. On the contrary, you should use any opportunity to oppress the people, the way the contractors do, for example.”

Bakuin could write of the French,

“They should have suffered greater misery and disturbances. Circumstances are coming together in such a way that there will be no shortage of that. Perhaps the Devil will awaken them.”

At at time when “bourgeois philanthropists” such as Charles Dickens and Thomas Carlyle were fighting against child labor, the Geneva Congress of the First International adopted a resolution composed by Marx:

“The Congress regards the tendency of contemporary industry to draw on the labor of children and juveniles of both sexes in the great task of social production as a progressive, sound, and lawful tendency, though under capitalism it turns into a terrible evil. In a rationally organized society, each child from the age of nine ought to be a productive worker.”

In a letter from Marx to Engels, Marx comments about a improved market and then says, “may this be damned.” Elsewhere Marx writes to Engels, “Here, only two or three very bad years could help…”

It is only the useful idiots (very often church leadership and rank and file who have been infected with sentimental pietism) who really believe that the wringing of their hands over social justice will accomplish anything. The Marxist / Socialist leadership knows that such phraseology is merely a means at a power grab, and indeed desires social injustice only so they can agitate.

Whenever, I hear the phrase, “social justice” I reach for my revolver because I know someone is really trying to kill me.

Proof that Marxism has ALWAYS been about eliminating peoples,

This from Igor Shafareivich’s “Socialist Phenomenon”

“But with almost perverse consistency, most of the projections of Marxism have been proven incorrect. A better percentage of correct predictions could probably have by making random guesses…. we limit ourselves to three (examples) in order to underscore the typical and in most cases fundamental nature of the errors: the truth proved to be not merely different but in fact the opposite to that which had been predicted.

a.) The national question: ‘National differences and antagonistic interests among various peoples are already vanishing more and more and more thanks to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the corresponding conditions of life. The supremacy of the proletariat will accelerate the disappearances of differences.’

(BLMc commentary — So, we see the Marxists have always believed that due to their scientific Marxism Nationalities would be eclipsed. Marxist theory anticipates the end of ethnic and racial distinctions. As the worker (proletariat) comes to the fore National differences disappear. It is difficult to comprehend that in the Marxist believing of this, they would not have done all they could to bring this consequence about.)

b.) In particular, the Jewish question, which was to disappear as soon as financial operations and petty trade became impossible. ‘The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of a merchant, in general of a man who deals with money.’ ‘An organized society which could remove the preconditions of petty trade, and therefore the possibility of petty trade, would make Jewry impossible.

(BLMc commentary — Note that the Jew nationality here is directly connected with money. The thesis is … “no money dealing, no Jew.” Can you say “Bankster class?”)

c.) The role of the state: ‘The first act in which the state truly comes forward as a representative of the whole society — the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society — is, at the same time, its last independent act as a state. Interference of the state in social relations becomes superfluous in one sphere after another, and then ceases itself. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of the process of production. That is not ‘abolished;’ it withers away.’

With the disappearance of classes the state inevitably disappears. A society which organizes its production in a new fashion based on the free and equal association of producers will send the machine of the state to the place where it belongs: the museum of antiquity next to the spinning wheel and the bronze ax.

(BLMc commentary — This reveals that Marxism was NEVER a theory of Government, governing or social order. Marxism was only a theory of how Government will come to an end. This explain why Marxists have no clue how to govern. Nothing in their theory offers any insight into governing since governing was to “wither away.”)