The Communist History Of Political Correctness

Robo

Verified User
Home Guest Articles The Origins of Political Correctness
The Origins of Political Correctness
February 5, 2000, Bill Lind, 136 Comments




Part One: An Accuracy in Academia Address by Bill Lind

Variations of this speech have been delivered to various AIA conferences including the 2000 Consevative University at American University

Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about this morning – the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say, of what they write, and of what they think. They have to be afraid of using the wrong word, a word denounced as offensive or insensitive, or racist, sexist, or homophobic.

We have seen other countries, particularly in this century, where this has been the case. And we have always regarded them with a mixture of pity, and to be truthful, some amusement, because it has struck us as so strange that people would allow a situation to develop where they would be afraid of what words they used. But we now have this situation in this country. We have it primarily on college campuses, but it is spreading throughout the whole society. Were does it come from? What is it?

We call it “Political Correctness.” The name originated as something of a joke, literally in a comic strip, and we tend still to think of it as only half-serious. In fact, it’s deadly serious. It is the great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, indeed around the world. It is the disease of ideology. PC is not funny. PC is deadly serious.

If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious.

First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses, many of which at this point are small ivy covered North Koreas, where the student or faculty member who dares to cross any of the lines set up by the gender feminist or the homosexual-rights activists, or the local black or Hispanic group, or any of the other sainted “victims” groups that PC revolves around, quickly find themselves in judicial trouble. Within the small legal system of the college, they face formal charges – some star-chamber proceeding – and punishment. That is a little look into the future that Political Correctness intends for the nation as a whole.

Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology (I would note that conservatism correctly understood is not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of this philosophy certain things must be true – such as the whole of the history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women. Since reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must become forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People must be forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant to live a lie, they naturally use their ears and eyes to look out and say, “Wait a minute. This isn’t true. I can see it isn’t true,” the power of the state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.

Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past is about that one thing.

Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, (only feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be “victims,” and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. When the classical Marxists, the communists, took over a country like Russia, they expropriated the bourgeoisie, they took away their property. Similarly, when the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. When a white student with superior qualifications is denied admittance to a college in favor of a black or Hispanic who isn’t as well qualified, the white student is expropriated. And indeed, affirmative action, in our whole society today, is a system of expropriation. White owned companies don’t get a contract because the contract is reserved for a company owned by, say, Hispanics or women. So expropriation is a principle tool for both forms of Marxism.

And finally, both have a method of analysis that automatically gives the answers they want. For the classical Marxist, it’s Marxist economics. For the cultural Marxist, it’s deconstruction. Deconstruction essentially takes any text, removes all meaning from it and re-inserts any meaning desired. So we find, for example, that all of Shakespeare is about the suppression of women, or the Bible is really about race and gender. All of these texts simply become grist for the mill, which proves that “all history is about which groups have power over which other groups.” So the parallels are very evident between the classical Marxism that we’re familiar with in the old Soviet Union and the cultural Marxism that we see today as Political Correctness.
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/
 
the OP is a sociopath who can not compute why compassion has value to mankind


we don't let the sociopaths shame us into not caring
 
“Cultural Marxism” is a conspiracy theory,and nothing but a conspiracy theory. It rates up there with the The Illuminati ,and 911 being an inside job. Like most conspiracy theories, the author has taken actual historical events,and twisted the facts. The whole conspiracy theory is predicated on the idea there is a cabal of Communist hiding under a left wing banner in the Democrat party of the U.S. And their true aim is to restore a Marxist order. Hoo... scary! The notion is completely absurd no matter how much ink you try to lay on it.

If such a secret order existed, and had since the 1960's to pull it off; then they’re doing an astoundingly bad job. Anyone who takes a look at the last three decades of politics will think it bizarre that anyone could interpret what’s happened as the triumph of an all-powerful Marxist/left.
 
How and why did the right wing conservatives become so dumb and so gullible? History for them is made up propaganda in which evil has one source and anything at all can be blamed on their imaginary foe. Meanwhile nothing gets done in America by conservatives as they spend all their time and effort whining about issues that hardly matter. Meanwhile as Billy Batts hints at above, life meanders on and only some are winning while the rest are wasting energy pointing fingers. A bit of the history of PC below for what it's worth.

"Now, to hear right-wing pundits ironically appropriated a Communist term to attack left-wingers wouldn’t be all that strange. What is strange is that they didn’t. Left-wingers beat them to it....When “politically correct” first entered common English, it was used almost exclusively by left-wing groups to poke fun at themselves. New Left feminists deployed it to make fun of the old guard who spent too much time worrying about how to define things like a “feminist sexuality.” Progressives used it to mock their trade union–affiliated elders. Others used it as a reminder to avoid becoming like the Russia-sponsored lefties of old."

http://knowledgenuts.com/2015/05/28/the-unlikely-origins-of-the-phrase-politically-correct/

"In the 1970s and early ‘80s, the term was used by the New Left as a form of self-critical satire, this time quite ironically. An example of this is illustrated in Ellen Willis’ essay “Toward a Feminist Revolution”: “In the early eighties, when feminists used the term ‘political correctness,’ it was used to refer sarcastically to the anti-pornography movement’s efforts to define a ‘feminist sexuality.’” Debra Shultz has said that “…the New Left, feminists, and progressives…used their term politically correct ironically, as a guard against their own orthodoxy in social change efforts.” In this context, political correctness was something to be avoided, for it still signified the existence of a party line. In the context of the New Left, “political correctness” was synonymous with political orthodoxy, and was to be avoided."

http://www.brownpoliticalreview.org/2015/02/the-political-relevancy-of-political-correctness/
 
The Communist History Of Political Correctness Part Two

PART TWO: But the parallels are not accidents. The parallels did not come from nothing. The fact of the matter is that Political Correctness has a history, a history that is much longer than many people are aware of outside a small group of academics who have studied this. And the history goes back, as I said, to World War I, as do so many of the pathologies that are today bringing our society, and indeed our culture, down.

Marxist theory said that when the general European war came (as it did come in Europe in 1914), the working class throughout Europe would rise up and overthrow their governments – the bourgeois governments – because the workers had more in common with each other across the national boundaries than they had in common with the bourgeoisie and the ruling class in their own country. Well, 1914 came and it didn’t happen. Throughout Europe, workers rallied to their flag and happily marched off to fight each other. The Kaiser shook hands with the leaders of the Marxist Social Democratic Party in Germany and said there are no parties now, there are only Germans. And this happened in every country in Europe. So something was wrong.

Marxists knew by definition it couldn’t be the theory. In 1917, they finally got a Marxist coup in Russia and it looked like the theory was working, but it stalled again. It didn’t spread and when attempts were made to spread immediately after the war, with the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, with the Bela Kun government in Hungary, with the Munich Soviet, the workers didn’t support them.
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/
 
How and why did the right wing conservatives become so dumb and so gullible? History for them is made up propaganda in which evil has one source and anything at all can be blamed on their imaginary foe. Meanwhile nothing gets done in America by conservatives as they spend all their time and effort whining about issues that hardly matter. Meanwhile as Billy Batts hints at above, life meanders on and only some are winning while the rest are wasting energy pointing fingers. A bit of the history of PC below for what it's worth.

"Now, to hear right-wing pundits ironically appropriated a Communist term to attack left-wingers wouldn’t be all that strange. What is strange is that they didn’t. Left-wingers beat them to it....When “politically correct” first entered common English, it was used almost exclusively by left-wing groups to poke fun at themselves. New Left feminists deployed it to make fun of the old guard who spent too much time worrying about how to define things like a “feminist sexuality.” Progressives used it to mock their trade union–affiliated elders. Others used it as a reminder to avoid becoming like the Russia-sponsored lefties of old."

http://knowledgenuts.com/2015/05/28/the-unlikely-origins-of-the-phrase-politically-correct/

"In the 1970s and early ‘80s, the term was used by the New Left as a form of self-critical satire, this time quite ironically. An example of this is illustrated in Ellen Willis’ essay “Toward a Feminist Revolution”: “In the early eighties, when feminists used the term ‘political correctness,’ it was used to refer sarcastically to the anti-pornography movement’s efforts to define a ‘feminist sexuality.’” Debra Shultz has said that “…the New Left, feminists, and progressives…used their term politically correct ironically, as a guard against their own orthodoxy in social change efforts.” In this context, political correctness was something to be avoided, for it still signified the existence of a party line. In the context of the New Left, “political correctness” was synonymous with political orthodoxy, and was to be avoided."

http://www.brownpoliticalreview.org/2015/02/the-political-relevancy-of-political-correctness/

Interesting observation, although the piece is titled "Articles The Origins of Political Correctness". As you read through the piece, it becomes clear; Lind (the author and lesser-known culture warriors of the early 90's), has taken all the boogie men feared by the Tea party (Baggers) and bundled them under a single term “Cultural Marxism”.

The phrase includes not only political correctness as used by baggers, but includes: feminist, multiculturalism, gay rights activists, atheist, etc. And this, apparently, is where “Cultural Marxism” derives its base.

The conspiracy (according to theorists like Lind), rolls out like this: The 1960s counterculture along with their fellow travelers infiltrated important cultural institutions. Institutions such as: High schools, Universities, Hollywood studios, Black/other minority organizations, and Labor Unions.

There, the conspiracy says, they promoted and even enforced ideas which were intended to destroy traditional Christian values and overthrow free enterprise, and Western Culture. This would return Communism to the world through the existing political structure, instead of through blood shed.

The “Cultural Marxism” conspiracy theory found fertile ground within the Tea Party (Baggers) movement in 2009, with contributions published in the American Thinker and WorldNetDaily highlighted by various Bagger websites. All of this along with the rise of the internet, ginned up the uninformed,and freightend base. This led to a footing in the GOP.

It is little more than Politicians like Ted Cruz taking a page from the Joe McCarthy hand book, from the Red Scare of the 1950’s.
 
How and why did the right wing conservatives become so dumb and so gullible? History for them is made up propaganda in which evil has one source and anything at all can be blamed on their imaginary foe.

Pretty-much the reason Barack Obama overrode Lil' Dumbya's efforts to hide what (actually) happened, in the past.....while he was in-office!!


bushpapers.jpg

"Uhhhhhhhh.....what records?"


Executive Order 13489 VAPORIZES Executive Order 13233


presidentbushholdsnewsconferenceeahj12phxg9l.jpg


*
obama-deal-with-it.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Communist History Of Political Correctness Part Two

PART TWO: But the parallels are not accidents... http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

I followed the link to read the rest of the conspiracy theory of “Cultural Marxism”.:

First off, the Frankfurt School were not a homogeneous group, they disagreed on most topics (so reading about them as a coherent social force is kind of pointless and open to cherry picking). I'd suggest if you want to learn about The Frankfurt School you read what they said in context rather than reading second hand descriptions.

Secondly, Lind makes all the classical claims of the far right, that Feminism, civil rights, and atheism were all somehow derived from "Cultural Marxism", when in fact all of these movements existed prior to the Frankfurt School, and have merit on their own; they also existed before Communism was in place in the Soviet Union.
 
Last edited:
I followed the link to read the rest of the conspiracy theory of “Cultural Marxism”.:

First off, the Frankfurt School were not a homogeneous group, they disagreed on most topics (so reading about them as a coherent social force is kind of pointless and open to cherry picking). I'd suggest if you want to learn about The Frankfurt School you read what they said in context rather than reading second hand descriptions.

Secondly, Lind makes all the classical claims of the far right, that Feminism, civil rights, and atheism were all somehow derived from "Cultural Marxism", when in fact all of these movements existed prior to the Frankfurt School, and have merit on their own; they also existed before Communism was in place in the Soviet Union.


bullshit-bs-smiley-emoticon.gif

avatar3875_2.gif
528.gif
 
The Communist History Of Political Correctness, Part Three

PART THREE: So the Marxists’ had a problem. And two Marxist theorists went to work on it: Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary. Gramsci said the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said in 1919, “Who will save us from Western Civilization?” He also theorized that the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise was the culture: Western civilization itself.

Lukacs gets a chance to put his ideas into practice, because when the home grown Bolshevik Bela Kun government is established in Hungary in 1919, he becomes deputy commissar for culture, and the first thing he did was introduce sex education into the Hungarian schools. This ensured that the workers would not support the Bela Kun government, because the Hungarian people looked at this aghast, workers as well as everyone else. But he had already made the connection that today many of us are still surprised by, that we would consider the “latest thing.”

In 1923 in Germany, a think-tank is established that takes on the role of translating Marxism from economic into cultural terms, that creates Political Correctness as we know it today, and essentially it has created the basis for it by the end of the 1930s. This comes about because the very wealthy young son of a millionaire German trader by the name of Felix Weil has become a Marxist and has lots of money to spend. He is disturbed by the divisions among the Marxists, so he sponsors something called the First Marxist Work Week, where he brings Lukacs and many of the key German thinkers together for a week, working on the differences of Marxism.
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/
 
Back
Top