February 17, 2017
New New Left Ideology Controls the Democratic Party
By E. Jeffrey Ludwig
The left as represented by today’s Democratic Party has failed to be truthful, just, loving, kind, and respectful of our Constitution and Judeo-Christian morality. The Democratic Party has moved by stages from the Old Left, to the New Left, to the New New Left, where it is today. In the New Deal, or Old Left, the socialist ideals of Eugene Debs and the liberal fascism of Woodrow Wilson began to be integrated. Union organizing was legitimized during the New Deal, unemployed workers were given higher priority, and wage and price controls were attempted. Further, federal attempts at control over private enterprise intensified. Later, the hegemony of New Deal thinking was challenged. The Henry Wallace wing of the Democratic Party in the 1940s coalesced with Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s to challenge the New Deal version of the Left that was represented by Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey. That leftist coalition against the Old Left became known as the New Left. It coalesced around opposition to the Vietnam War and support for the more violent Black Power movement led by Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, H. Rap Brown, and Stokely Carmichael.
Gradually, the New Left became ascendant in our institutions of higher learning, but meanwhile a militancy and grassroots antagonism towards capitalism and individualism continued to grow in the body politic and among the students. The New New Left added in homosexuality, feminism (gender equality so-called), and a dogma of America as the "land of exploitation" replacing the prior dogma (which was closer to the truth) of America as "the land of opportunity." The New New Left is more militantly anti-white.
The New New Left has attacked the idea that there is one human nature that makes moral choices, an idea common to religion, which projects a sinful human nature that must be corrected and/or atoned for by intervention of Almighty God. But the idea of one human nature also is held by atheistic Freudianism which describes a dynamic of the conscious and unconscious parts of the mind governed by a series of psychic mechanisms that seek higher and higher levels of integration of the ego, superego, and id. The New New Left instead has a determinism based not only on economics, as with the original Marxists, but also on race and gender, which have been suppressed by a white, male hegemony as well as by bourgeois economic values of private property, family, and corporate forms of organization.
For most of the left today, the history of the U.S. is now considered a history of genocide, racism, and assaults on the poor workers, and those even below the workers like the unemployed and the physically and mentally disabled (all of these formerly called “the lumpen-proletariat” by the original Marxists) by money and status hungry white males. Howard Zinn’s best-selling leftist textbook The Peoples’ History of the United States, used in U.S. History courses in colleges and universities throughout our land, is but an introduction to the more extreme views held by today’s left-wing. To the left, money and status hungry white males have almost enslaved women and people of color within our borders and around the world. Programs like unemployment insurance, welfare, Section 8 housing, Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, Aid to Dependent Children, and WIC are all belittled by the left as stopgap measures that are woefully inadequate and ultimately unable to shore up a failed capitalist system.
It is common today to see the leftist agenda referred to in articles and books as "secular humanism." But the New New Left, with its neo-neo-Marxist/Maoist dogma is more severe and far-reaching in its criticism than “secular humanism.” For one thing, it has a vision that is not humanistic in the classic, post-Renaissance use of that term such as might have been applied to Desiderius Erasmus as a 16th century Christian humanist or Abraham Maslow as a 20th century “secular humanist.” The New New Left dogma presents a clear and present danger to every independent thinking, creative, moral, and decent individual living in our society in that it literally calls for a defiance and destruction of “the system.” It is a species of leftism that is more associated with anarchism such as we saw at the end of the 19th century.
The anarchism that led to the Haymarket Riots and violent strikes in the 19th century USA, and to the Russian Revolution were not ignored by right-thinking leadership of the USA in the early 20th century. They perceived that the violent incidents in the USA might be a prelude to the revolutionary upheaval we saw in Russia. Therefore, in 1921 and 1924, despite the beginnings of the administrative state with its entrenched bureaucracies and the frightening Leviathan of the Federal Reserve System, the country was still sufficiently rational and republican (small "r") to pass immigration laws that curtailed massive immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe because of fears -- legitimate fears -- of the entrance of anarchists, and particularly of communists who would violently try to overthrow our government. But these new immigration laws were not effective in keeping out the leftist ideas that were being promulgated in Europe.
Radical leftists began to understand that violent revolution by the working class (proletariat) was not going to be the basis for anti-capitalist revolutionary change. Rather, revolutionary change (not “reform”) would only come about through a change in the hegemony of certain cliques within the capitalist, individualist system as found in Europe, and especially the USA. Left-wing intellectuals then mobilized themselves to this goal of overthrowing the existing hegemony and replacing it with a new revolutionary neo-Marxist hegemony. Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School of sociologists and psychologists, many of whom emigrated to the U.S. from Europe, thus posited a new “cultural Marxism” for our society. Under the guise of escaping Nazism, many of these brilliant, well-connected individuals were able to gain entrance to the USA. A different species of Marxists emerged in our culture, the "cultural Marxists." The New New Left is culturally Marxist to its core.
What then does the New New Left want? The left does not want our constitutional system. The left does not want federalism. It does not want three branches of government. It does not want checks and balances. The left does not want private enterprise. It wants a one-world government based on Marxist principles as found in various forms of updated (cultural) Marxism. Such a government (you or I might call it a dystopia) is, for them, not fettered with "bourgeois values." The New New Left, as with previous formations of the left, is hypnotized by Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s belief that “Man is born free, but is everywhere in chains.” To the left, our government and socioeconomic system is hopelessly naive and regressive. It is actually exploitative and tends to perpetuate an unjust status quo.
We are facing a cultural tragedy right now. The Democratic Party, one of two great parties of the USA, has been co-opted by the communist ideologues, the power mad neo-neo-Marxists, in our political and intellectual establishment.
New New Left Ideology Controls the Democratic Party
By E. Jeffrey Ludwig
The left as represented by today’s Democratic Party has failed to be truthful, just, loving, kind, and respectful of our Constitution and Judeo-Christian morality. The Democratic Party has moved by stages from the Old Left, to the New Left, to the New New Left, where it is today. In the New Deal, or Old Left, the socialist ideals of Eugene Debs and the liberal fascism of Woodrow Wilson began to be integrated. Union organizing was legitimized during the New Deal, unemployed workers were given higher priority, and wage and price controls were attempted. Further, federal attempts at control over private enterprise intensified. Later, the hegemony of New Deal thinking was challenged. The Henry Wallace wing of the Democratic Party in the 1940s coalesced with Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s to challenge the New Deal version of the Left that was represented by Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey. That leftist coalition against the Old Left became known as the New Left. It coalesced around opposition to the Vietnam War and support for the more violent Black Power movement led by Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, H. Rap Brown, and Stokely Carmichael.
Gradually, the New Left became ascendant in our institutions of higher learning, but meanwhile a militancy and grassroots antagonism towards capitalism and individualism continued to grow in the body politic and among the students. The New New Left added in homosexuality, feminism (gender equality so-called), and a dogma of America as the "land of exploitation" replacing the prior dogma (which was closer to the truth) of America as "the land of opportunity." The New New Left is more militantly anti-white.
The New New Left has attacked the idea that there is one human nature that makes moral choices, an idea common to religion, which projects a sinful human nature that must be corrected and/or atoned for by intervention of Almighty God. But the idea of one human nature also is held by atheistic Freudianism which describes a dynamic of the conscious and unconscious parts of the mind governed by a series of psychic mechanisms that seek higher and higher levels of integration of the ego, superego, and id. The New New Left instead has a determinism based not only on economics, as with the original Marxists, but also on race and gender, which have been suppressed by a white, male hegemony as well as by bourgeois economic values of private property, family, and corporate forms of organization.
For most of the left today, the history of the U.S. is now considered a history of genocide, racism, and assaults on the poor workers, and those even below the workers like the unemployed and the physically and mentally disabled (all of these formerly called “the lumpen-proletariat” by the original Marxists) by money and status hungry white males. Howard Zinn’s best-selling leftist textbook The Peoples’ History of the United States, used in U.S. History courses in colleges and universities throughout our land, is but an introduction to the more extreme views held by today’s left-wing. To the left, money and status hungry white males have almost enslaved women and people of color within our borders and around the world. Programs like unemployment insurance, welfare, Section 8 housing, Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, Aid to Dependent Children, and WIC are all belittled by the left as stopgap measures that are woefully inadequate and ultimately unable to shore up a failed capitalist system.
It is common today to see the leftist agenda referred to in articles and books as "secular humanism." But the New New Left, with its neo-neo-Marxist/Maoist dogma is more severe and far-reaching in its criticism than “secular humanism.” For one thing, it has a vision that is not humanistic in the classic, post-Renaissance use of that term such as might have been applied to Desiderius Erasmus as a 16th century Christian humanist or Abraham Maslow as a 20th century “secular humanist.” The New New Left dogma presents a clear and present danger to every independent thinking, creative, moral, and decent individual living in our society in that it literally calls for a defiance and destruction of “the system.” It is a species of leftism that is more associated with anarchism such as we saw at the end of the 19th century.
The anarchism that led to the Haymarket Riots and violent strikes in the 19th century USA, and to the Russian Revolution were not ignored by right-thinking leadership of the USA in the early 20th century. They perceived that the violent incidents in the USA might be a prelude to the revolutionary upheaval we saw in Russia. Therefore, in 1921 and 1924, despite the beginnings of the administrative state with its entrenched bureaucracies and the frightening Leviathan of the Federal Reserve System, the country was still sufficiently rational and republican (small "r") to pass immigration laws that curtailed massive immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe because of fears -- legitimate fears -- of the entrance of anarchists, and particularly of communists who would violently try to overthrow our government. But these new immigration laws were not effective in keeping out the leftist ideas that were being promulgated in Europe.
Radical leftists began to understand that violent revolution by the working class (proletariat) was not going to be the basis for anti-capitalist revolutionary change. Rather, revolutionary change (not “reform”) would only come about through a change in the hegemony of certain cliques within the capitalist, individualist system as found in Europe, and especially the USA. Left-wing intellectuals then mobilized themselves to this goal of overthrowing the existing hegemony and replacing it with a new revolutionary neo-Marxist hegemony. Antonio Gramsci and the Frankfurt School of sociologists and psychologists, many of whom emigrated to the U.S. from Europe, thus posited a new “cultural Marxism” for our society. Under the guise of escaping Nazism, many of these brilliant, well-connected individuals were able to gain entrance to the USA. A different species of Marxists emerged in our culture, the "cultural Marxists." The New New Left is culturally Marxist to its core.
What then does the New New Left want? The left does not want our constitutional system. The left does not want federalism. It does not want three branches of government. It does not want checks and balances. The left does not want private enterprise. It wants a one-world government based on Marxist principles as found in various forms of updated (cultural) Marxism. Such a government (you or I might call it a dystopia) is, for them, not fettered with "bourgeois values." The New New Left, as with previous formations of the left, is hypnotized by Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s belief that “Man is born free, but is everywhere in chains.” To the left, our government and socioeconomic system is hopelessly naive and regressive. It is actually exploitative and tends to perpetuate an unjust status quo.
We are facing a cultural tragedy right now. The Democratic Party, one of two great parties of the USA, has been co-opted by the communist ideologues, the power mad neo-neo-Marxists, in our political and intellectual establishment.
