Guest Post: The Collectivist War Against Cultural Heritage

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Brandon Smith from Alt-Market

The Collectivist War Against Cultural Heritage

Naturally, every age thinks that all ages before it were prejudiced, and today we think this more than ever and are just as wrong as all previous ages that thought so. How often have we not seen the truth condemned! It is sad but unfortunately true that man learns nothing from history.

-Carl Jung

Two things make man what he is; his soul, and his memory.  Lose one, or both, and he ceases to exist.  He might as well buzz over his own garbage like an insect.  When a society is drawn into the repugnant shadow of totalitarianism and collectivism, it is usually because the masses have abandoned (or been enticed to abandon) a piece of their inner and outer heritage, something which kept the darkness at bay, a lesson from the past, or a principle long honored.  In the wretched and psychotic quest for the “perfect” establishment system, we are even often encouraged by the elitist ilk to slough off the warm remnants of our cultural inheritance like so much skin and “look forward” to a bright and more promising tomorrow, where everything will be different, and certainly, better than today.    

The ideological brand of so-called progress that we call “collectivism” relies heavily on the notion that the values of the past are inadequate to the requirements of the future.  We are taught by the peddlers of collectivist propaganda that our beliefs and our principles must evolve along with the perceived growth of our species as a whole.  They see themselves as visionaries and prophets foretelling a grand reinvention of the world that we laymen are unequipped to imagine or understand.  We cling to the old ways because we are “afraid of change”, or too ignorant to fathom the beauty of their Utopian beyond…

Pretentious bile?  Absolutely.  However, within the rhetoric and strategies of the collectivist agenda there are treasures to behold; reoccurring themes and indicators that can be found in nearly every modern tyranny and most ancient tyrannies that have ever existed.  Words and actions that warn us of the true intent of the elite. 

The fact is, collectivists drive so hard to admonish respect for the past because every lie they tell us now has been told before a thousand times, to build a thousand gruesome empires.   

The Futurists

To gain an insight into the stunted philosophy that underlies collectivism, globalization, centralism, socialism, communism, fascism, etc., it is important to acknowledge the ways in which these systems seduce the public.  Many people find themselves inadequate to the era in which they are born, or, believe their era inadequate to them.  They wish they could live in a more enlightened age.  They wish they could leap ahead in time and know what the next generations will know.  They fear that they will die as obscure beings in an obscure moment of history devoid of discovery or legacy.  People prone to collectivist fantasies seek to escape the struggles of their present life and transport themselves to a place where mankind has triumphed over the adversities of the “mundane” to frolic like gods amongst the stars.

Now, imagine you are one of these desperate men or women, and someone promises you in a rather convincing manner that their system of social structure and governance will bring that sterling-silver-gravity-defying-Star-Trek-future to you.  What would you be willing to trade for even a glimpse into the next epoch?  Some, sadly, are willing to trade everything, including their freedoms.

A movement from the early 1900’s called Futurism is a perfect example of this obsession with progress that sacrifices the lessons of the past.  A quasi-art movement that also included political activism, the Futurists believed that in order for a society to flourish, it had to amputate its past.  For them, all that was old was now useless, and only technological and cultural supremacy over nature could redeem humanity.  In the 1920’s and 1930’s, the Futurists reveled in the rise of Fascism in Italy and Germany and supported it fully until they found their club did not necessarily fit into the social engineering programs of Mussolini and Hitler.  In Russia, the Futurists also embraced Communism, searching for that far off prosperous sci-fi land.  Leon Trotsky even wrote of the Futurists, though he attempted to separate Communist Futurists from the more “vulgar” and “naïve” Fascist Futurists:

"...Futurism is against mysticism, against the passive deification of nature, against the aristocratic and every other kind of laziness, against dreaminess, and against lachrymosity – and stands for technique, for scientific organization, for the machine, for planfulness, for will power, for courage, for speed, for precision, and for the new man, who is armed with all these things. The connection of the aesthetics “revolt” with the moral and social revolt is direct; both enter entirely and fully into the life experience of the active, new, young and untamed section of the intelligentsia of the left, the creative Bohemia. Disgust against the limitations and the vulgarity of the old life produces a new artistic style as a way of escape, and thus the disgust is liquidated. In different combinations, and on different historic bases, we have seen the disgust of the intelligentsia form more than one new style. But that was always the end of it. This time, the proletarian Revolution caught Futurism in a certain stage of its growth and pushed it forward. Futurists became Communists..."

The value of Futurism, for Trotsky, was measured by the extent to which the movement extolled communist virtues (he felt that they were not living up to his standards).  In his mind, of course, the two systems (fascism/communism) were different.  For the Futurists, though, each form of despotism held the same magnetic charm.  They were collectivists at heart, and to them, the two systems were essentially the same.  Both demanded that society cast off large portions of the past that were seen as “archaic” and stifling to progress.  Both systems waged war on values long held by the citizenry.

The Purge

A distaste or hatred of heritage is very common at the onset of any collectivist restructuring.  These restructurings usually target principles of individual liberty and self governance while masquerading as a fight against oppression or corruption.  The old principles are either presented as too outdated and insufficient to deal with the new problems of a culture, or, they are presented as the actual SOURCE of the problems of that culture.  In either case, the elites wielding the collectivist machine inevitably call for a purge of all bygone ideals.

In Communist China, Mao instituted the Cultural Revolution, which encouraged the mindlessly mesmerized collectivists in the Chinese populace to destroy everything which represented the past.  Artwork, buildings, historical artifacts, books; even teachers and proponents of any brand of pre-communist heritage were targeted.  

In Fascist Germany, the Nazis destroyed countless books and manuscripts, rewrote German history, censored and removed thousands of artworks, instituting state designated artforms that depicted the collectivist vision of the new society. 

In Russia, the Communists focused intently not only on liquidating manuscripts extolling the methods of different eras, but also the people who wrote them.  Under Lenin and Stalin, the goal was to annihilate the memory of the world before, even if it meant annihilating the masses along with it.

A complete reformation of educational infrastructure came next.  The children of the collectivist age had to be indoctrinated as if there had never been another way of doing things.

These purges, as numerous examples have shown, are only temporary.  The great conundrum for the elites has not only been the obstacle of memory, but the obstacle of the soul; that inherent quality in human beings that compels us to pursue freedom, balance, and truth, regardless of the constraints of our environment.  The documents and remnants of heritage that oligarchs seek to destroy are ultimately only expressions of our inborn consciences.  Deep down in each person, no matter what they have been conditioned to believe, there is a well-spring of vital ideas that conflict with the mechanizations of collectivism.  Individualism finds a way to surface, and so, the central rulers must start over once again, looking for an insurmountable method of control.

The American Heritage Under Siege

One simple fact remains:  As long as Americans continue to esteem the vision expressed in the U.S. Constitution, Bill Of Right, and Declaration Of Independence, there can be no collectivism in this country.  The Constitutional Republic formed through revolution against despotism by the Founding Fathers is a solid antithesis to outright tyranny.  So, it only follows that the “Futurists” of today and the puppeteers who pull their strings would do absolutely everything in their power to distance the public as far as possible away from the heritage of those documents and that time.                          

Much like the Cultural Revolution in China, though moving at a slower and more subversive pace, our history is being purged and rewritten to accommodate a centralized dream of the new America.  This dream hinges on the suggestion that the Constitutional structure is outdated, and that it must be remodeled to accommodate the burgeoning Globalist paradigm.  Our own sitting president has voiced similar arguments in the past:

"…the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf…"

While the mainstream media reiterates the message of the “antiquated” Constitution with greater regularity:

American Futurists complain that the Constitution is too restrictive on government, and that it prevents the establishment from making changes quickly.  But where they see a lack of adaptation, I see critical checks and balances.  Where they see archaic law, I see timeless principles of conscience that will remain relevant for all eternity.  Where they see progress in globalism, socialism, and collectivism, I see a devolvement into the dark ages of feudalism.  How “new” and progressive is Globalism really?  Is it not more reasonable to say that the idea of a free decentralized and sovereign republic whose first mission is to protect personal rights is much more rare and advanced than yet another elitist stab at centralized domination?

Is the Constitution a "perfect document"?  No.  I don't know that there is such a thing.  What I do know, though, is that there is no one currently in government with the wisdom or intelligence needed to rewrite the document to be more balanced than it already is.  I welcome critics to name any person they think is legitimately qualified.   

The Founders designed the Constitution to limit the powers of federal government for a reason!  Take a look at the stunning array of liberty rending executive orders that Barack Obama has issued in the course of the past four years.  Now imagine that he and Congress had free reign to etch those orders into the Constitution at will.  What possible meaning would the document have then?  The Constitution was never meant to be a tool of government.  It was meant to be a tool (a necessary tool) for the people to restrain government.  The futurists muse like children over this concept but fail tragically to grasp it.

Despite the obvious faulty logic within the “outdated” argument, the propaganda has hit full steam in recent years.  In federally funded schools around the country, American history before the Civil War is no longer taught, and Constitutional studies are almost unheard of:,2933,584758,00.html?mep

The space in curriculum created by the removal of the American Revolution and everything else important to the birth of the country has been filled with what teachers now refer to as “Global Studies”.  What do global studies entail?  Why not ask the organizations that write the study guidelines, like ‘Facing The Future’:

"I use Facing the Future [lessons] to complement many other materials. I have all of the kids read Global Issues and Sustainable Solutions, as an introductory overview. Then students break into groups to research some of the topics, like governance, climate change, or world view. They have different ways of looking at the future after reading this…”

"We use United Nations materials. I bring in a lot of guest speakers, even someone that was a defense attorney in the World Court. I've brought in scientists who are experts on climate change, we use Al Gore’s film [An Inconvenient Truth], lots of websites that I just let kids dig into…”

Or, we could ask children in Seattle private schools, who are being taught the “evils” of property rights, and how individual ownership hurts the collective:

"…the students had been building an elaborate "Legotown," but it was accidentally demolished. The teachers decided its destruction was an opportunity to explore "the inequities of private ownership." According to the teachers, "Our intention was to promote a contrasting set of values: collectivity, collaboration, resource-sharing, and full democratic participation."

The children were allegedly incorporating into Legotown "their assumptions about ownership and the social power it conveys." These assumptions "mirrored those of a class-based, capitalist society -- a society that we teachers believe to be unjust and oppressive...."

This eradication of original American values is taking place on every level of our society, even in law enforcement, which is now infamously illustrated by the FEMA indoctrination of police officers in the video below to consider the Founding Fathers “terrorists”

If attacks on foundational heritage are a warning sign of centralized oligarchy and collectivism as this article outlines, then America is in imminent peril.  These changes never go quietly, and are invariably surrounded by economic depression, collapse, war, and death.  From the ashes of confusion and decay inspired by collectivists, the next elitist experiment is born.  The mad science of the Futurists must not be allowed to prevail here…


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SemperFord's picture

FEMA guy in the video would quiver and piss himself at the sight of the founding Fathers of America

hedgeless_horseman's picture



Freedom Fighter = Terrorist

It is all about perspective and empathy.


strannick's picture

Excellent topic Zerohedge. Keep it up Tylers.

old naughty's picture

Two in 20C, Hitler and Mao burned books. Do you like them?

Just in case we see another in 21C...I am improving my speed reading.

The Gooch's picture

When Kindles (and everything else) goes dark and the rest of the book stores / libraries have shut their doors...

Kindle = book burning in "progress".

AldousHuxley's picture

you no longer need books for information transfer.


internet is designed to withstand any book burning by governments via military force.


these days libraries and book stores just have pop culture junk books recommended by Oprah.


Truth, is hard to find as it always has been.

The Gooch's picture

My Leonardo DaVinci (book), Salvador Dali (book), and Machinery's Handbook beg to differ.

Also, We're pretty lucky to have an outstanding library, here. I don't believe Atlas Shrugged is on Oprah's list. 

The municipality however, just taxed my ELECTRIC bill to help pay for it.

Oh the irony.

Ezra Pound's picture

you don't need to burn books when nobody reads them anyway

Bananamerican's picture

"collectivists drive so hard to admonish respect for the past because every lie they tell us now has been told before a thousand times, to build a thousand gruesome empires"

Partisan BULLSHIT....

W. was no collectivist....neither was slick Willy, Nixon, Raygun or Obamney....

They all served or serve the Siphon of State™. Governments are instituted among facilitate the LOOTING of the populace.... with an EBT gratuity tossed to the Eloi (like those jewelry heist movies where they always bring a bone for the Doberman)


"admonish respect for the past"?

Shit, that's all this bullshit country does is coast on the fumes of its former glory with its "Greeeeeatest Nation In the history of Mankind"™ Bullshit.

In summation:

Bullshit kleptocracy

Bullshit country

Bullshit partisan POST

ATM's picture

Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow,

You dumb ass.

Bananamerican's picture

that doesn't even make any sense, you stupid partisan cocksucker!

Don't stop sucking Romney's dick

andrewp111's picture

Forget burning mere books. Egypt's new Islamic collectivists are calling for the pyramids to be blown up.

dexter_morgan's picture

Interesting that you say that - I've thought the same thing. Just like the internet, the electronic kindle could be erased, eradicated, shut down, kill switched, and no doubt already is used to see just what it is all those folks are reading out there.......and is it subversive..........

How many bills have there been in the US to limit internet usage, availability, content, etc. and countries like China flat our censor everything. Very mixed blessing the internet and electronic libraries are.


The Gooch's picture

Or at the "primordial" level... THE FUCKING GRID GOES DOWN.

Simon Endean's picture

Hitler's followers may have burned books, but the Nazis weren't futurists - their goal was a return to an agrarian past with Aryan supermen ruling over Slavic serfs.  They were collectivists of a sort, but they were a one-off variety.

Waffen's picture

I am no fan of socialism, however I believe it can work in a highly homogenous society that has honor and believes in hard work, Germany under hitler 1930s was a miracle turn around of a country.

Btw the real evil of the 20th century were the Bolsheviks. Hitler wasn't anti Slav, he was anti communism on a level we would find hard to comprehend.

TaxSlave's picture

Go ahead and be an ant.  But don't let me catch you away from your hive.

Monedas's picture

Waffen Wurfer .... Communism and Fascist National Socialism were identical sick systems competing for supremacy !   Communism you lose .... National Socialism you lose !  That's all there was for dinner !          Hitler wasn't anti-communist because it conflicted with his Libertarian free market principles .... it merely was the system that ruled over the lebensraum he wanted !   Enough of this stupid liberal mantra that Hitler was anti-communist therefore he was a Republican !          He was a socialist of the first order !     An iconic big government type !         Monedas      1929        Comedy Jihad Hubris In Defense Of Heritage Is Not A Vice

Waffen's picture

Look I am perfectly aware of the communism, national socialism are the same meme.

They are not the same however at least as practiced by the Bolsheviks and Nazis respectively.

again I am no fan of socialism as a libetatian it's just another tyrrany, however as I said before it can work in a certain society and it did indeed work as a miracle for Germany.

Implying that nazism and communism as practiced were even remotely the same is disingenuous, one worked to better its volk and the other worked to destroy and sow terror.

JOYFUL's picture

For a guy who [correctly] posits that Whitey has been 'brainwashed' into a self-hating spiral of cultural destruction, yu shure do seem confused...

the nazism[national socialism] which yu seem to adore was a creation and operation of mischlingers...half caste german&jewish mix whose self-identification issues were manipulated by the Frankist\Sabbateans to create an orc-like monster phylum which would do their bidding...

the "miracle" to which yu refer was not the product of nazism, but of the German people themselves, banded together in recognition of their COLLECTIVE interests against the tyrannical forces which yu[again correctly] identified as áskenazi.

yur narration here on this thread seems to underline the truth of that old adage - a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing...

please stop passing off Khazrian propaganda here as dialogue supportive of Whitey's struggle for survival against the Kultural is not.

dexter_morgan's picture

Well, thats the popular narrative. Yeah, totally different than banksters and their politicos ruling over a bunch of distracted wage slaves......

So....about the agrarian society stuff.........if we implement all the policies of the climate change crowd..........we'd be pretty much going in that direction too wouldn't we? Or, at least we'd have some person group determining our allowable energy use or some such thing? Oh yeah, forgot about that solar and wind stuff being able to replace all of the power demand out there.........

Technically, the 'Nazi's' got that name as a shortened version of their ' Nationalsozialismus'  or  National Socialist name. Interesting name there..........

Not sure about futurists, but they led the world in scientists and scientific study  at the time of their ascendancy. Ever wonder where all their scientists went after the war?

zuuma's picture

Ever wonder where all their scientists went after the war?

They were sought out (hunted down) by the USA & USSR to exploit thir knowledge - particularly in rocket science & Jet aircraft.  Real - life James Bond stuff. Kidnappings, forced labor, shootouts.  There was a pretty good book out in the 70s called, ironically, "The Hunt For German Scientists", which detailed this.

Despite NAZI party  & SS membership, lots of 'em were granted US citizenship and given prestigeous research jobs. (Operation Paperclip)

One very famous Scientist was named Wernher von Braun. He was (officially) both a NAZI and a member of the SS. Also, he was the main technical leader of the V2 rocket program.

Went on to be one of the most important US scientists in the development of the Saturn V rockets and Apollo Moon missions.

... so it would seem that mad skills can coften trump politics.

Randall Cabot's picture

"In Fascist Germany, the Nazis destroyed countless books and manuscripts, rewrote German history, censored and removed thousands of artworks, instituting state designated artforms that depicted the collectivist vision of the new society."

The author of this article needs to do some research: the Nazis did the above (except I don't know where they rewrote German histrory) in an effort to save German heritage and culture-the complete opposite of the point that this dimwit is trying to make.

Waffen's picture

Does anyone wonder what books the Germans were burning and perhaps why they felt so adamant about purging it from their society? Is it possibly a certain group of people were using their control of media to push a certain very anti German and pro collectivism ideology?

It reminds me of all the anti liberty, anti American, anti white pro collectivism garbage taught in our schools and pushed on the public at every oppurtunity.

What is similar to our society that was so under pre nazi Germany? Who was pushing such ideas, who owned the media pushing it?

Randall Cabot's picture

"Does anyone wonder what books the Germans were burning and perhaps why they felt so adamant about purging it from their society?"

Exactly. They were burning books that were ruining German culture-books written by evil-doers like Marx, Freud and the Frankfurt School-the same gang behind the destruction of American culture!!!

This Brandon Smith article is one of the most amateurish, ill-informed pieces ever posted on ZH.

verum quod lies's picture

In his defense, he’s at least trying to bridge the gap between fact and fiction. Yes, it would be more straightforward and intellectually honest to call a spade a spade and write about the European experience and European American experience with private mass media domination and attempts to both rewrite history (e.g., the “Constitution is just an outdated document written by hateful white guys … that needs to be ‘reinterpreted’ by your betters …”) and effectively brainwash people into effectively committing group suicide for their media, financial, and academic overlords. Alright, ‘futurists’ may not be the most accurate name for a group that wants to essentially kill most of us, but it does at least capture a large part of the more recent thrust of cultural Marxism. My reading is that he just can’t, or won’t, mentally trace the roots of this mysterious ‘futurism’ to its roots and current financial and media backers without some degree of cognitive dissonance. This is standard fare for most in society; but he seems to get the basic idea of destroying the past and eliminating those that stand in your way by whatever means. In fact, I suspect there are some “futurists” high on cognitive dissonance trolling this very site that will ad hominem attack in three, two, one …


Whiner's picture

Nice neckless. Crummy lecture.

The Gooch's picture

Don't forget the depelted Uranium.


FreedomGuy's picture

What a total colossal complete moron. There is a place for empathy  in terms of trying to understand the other side, but his analysis is idiotic with no respect for truth. I can tell you his politics. It is consistent with the now age old moral relativism. There is no right, wrong or judgement. This is breathtaking but I am seeing more of it on many fronts from global environmentalism to this empathy for Islamic terrorists. The common key is that capitalism is exploitative. All things are owned by the collective. Wealth is always stolen or made by the strong exploiting the poor. This is simplie socialist-collectivist ideology dressed up as sociology. Could we guess his politics from his "sociology" presentation?

Let's see, how rich, prosperous and happy were muslims in the Middle East before oil and after oil? Do we actually PAY for their oil? Do we bring the technology they enjoy from cars to iPods to the machinery that provides what wealth they have? Willl they be happier and more prosperous if we discover fusion energy and oil becomes worthless? Do we or their tribal leaders and kings decide who gets paid for the wealth? Do you think Genghis Khan was kinder and more empathetic that the West? He almost eradicated Islam. As far as other religions and the "truth" as the general stated: are Muslims inherently stupid and unable to hear other ideas and compare  their ideas or should we protect them from other ideas and religions? Do they not kill, jail and exhile all different religions? Are they empathetic to the few Jews and Christians left in their countries? Did the West do that? If we leave will they be happier and more prosperous if Al Qaeda, the Taliban or Hamas take over? If we were gone would the Sunni's, Shiites and other factions of Islam stop blowing each other up? Should we bring Sadam back?

History is collision of cultures, religions, philosophies and ideas in general. When Saladin was conquering the West he was not terribly empathetic. In the end, stronger cultures and those based more on truth will win out. It is why socialism will always fail. It is based on lies and untruths about humanity, in general. It is also fundamentally immoral. These "nice" guys like Richards leave people in darkness and ignorance and claim to be doing a good thing. When the Taliban return to power in Afghanistan and begin beating their women and throwing them out of school under their tenants of Islam and culture...well, Richards would empathize, I guess. At least the terrible Americans who believe you should not shoot your women, cut their noses off and educate them will be gone.

You know, this is the kind of shallow thinking and analysis I would expect of elementary school kids...but better graphics.

View From Germany's picture

The difference between "Freedom Fighter" and "Terrorist" in the long run is the question: Did they WIN...or LOSE?

The Founding Fathers are "Freedom Fighters" because they WON - had they lost, they would have gone into written British History as rebellious Settlers, who received their just punishment on the hands of the glorious britisch Army for rebellion against their rightful king.

FreedomGuy's picture

History is written by the victors. Not all victors are the same, though.

Waffen's picture

The Ashkenazi wholly own the media. Since the mass producion of the television the media directs the culture. Collectivism, Bolshevism is a Jewish creation.


The Congressional Dodd report in 1953 showed that tax free foundations were intentionally trying to destroy The premicy of American individualism.

MillionDollarBogus_'s picture

Waffen,  nice avatar......


dark pools of soros's picture

The collectivism in his avatar would be deemed very kosher

Michael's picture

Indeed Waffen. Even the movie and entertainment industry, virtually wholly owned by Ashkenazi's, use it in accordance with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to achieve their goals.

Norman Dodd On Tax Exempt Foundations

Let's have a national survey and hold all Americans to their answers. Let's find out who the real enemies of the USA are and get names.

1: Do you support the enforcement of the US Constitution? Yes/No

2: Do you reject the US Constitution? Yes/No

lincolnsteffens's picture

Michael, If you don't behave yourself I will have to sick the Elders of Zion on your children to drink their blood.

How can such a smart fellow be such a fool?  I embrace the US Constitution which gives people like you

the right to attempt to poison the minds of the gullable through hate speech.  You are no different than

the rabid collectivists who want to decide who is evil in thought or deed and purge them by what ever method your favorite authoritarian view can dream up.

Max Hunter's picture

Are you fucking kidding me?  Please quote the part of Michael's comment that you consider hate. I'll be waiting and coming back to see it..

Michael's picture

Thanks Max. Some people are completely incapable of assembling rational thought within their gray matter.

FreedomGuy's picture

Collectivism and Bolshevism are no more Jewish creations than phyics and Einstein. You have noticed how well Jews fared under socialism whether Soviet or German, right? Marx may have been Jewish but his ideas are not specific to the religion or created for some religious advantage. His pal, Engels was not.  It's hard to reconcile traditional Judaism with "Religion is the opiate of the masses.", right?

This crap is practiced by asians, caucasians, hispanics, etc and it generally comes with atheism or a religion of the State and worship of  the current fearless leader is, eg.' Castro, Kim Jong Un, Stalin, Mao, etc.

Iwanttoknow's picture

Read about early history of bolsheviks and how they overcame mensheviks.Also read who was Trotsky and Beria.

Waffen's picture

sorry, but you are wrong, bolshevism was jewish run in order to destroy the orthodox christian tsarist russia and they intended to use it to take down Western europe as well


bolshevism was a tool.. zionist jews are not communists they are anti human psychophants who want world government and will use any tool to get it

Stuck on Zero's picture

+10  Brandon, you are awesome!



nmewn's picture

Agreed, that was outstanding.

NotApplicable's picture

Yet somehow, it seems there's a couple of collectivists here who don't get it.

Because, for some reason, they just feel the need to be ruled.

nmewn's picture

Another case of savemedaddy_dot

I really need to lock in a profit on that little diddy ;-)

Hmm...'s picture

Hogwash.  This is one of the dumbest articles of all time.  I love how we continually combine communism and socialism (very different things) with fascism and futurism. 

But my favorite line was this:  "One simple fact remains:  As long as Americans continue to esteem the vision expressed in the U.S. Constitution, Bill Of Right, and Declaration Of Independence, there can be no collectivism in this country"

let's just start with the Constitution.  I've read it.  Have you?  Did you understand it?  Clearly not.  Let's begin:

We the People  of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Nothing collectivist there.  Nope.  Nada.  Just ignore "WE the PEOPLE". ignore UNION, ignore COMMON, and ignore GENERAL. 

I guess the Constitution starts like this:

"Individuals who happen to live within the borders of the United State, rise up individually and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, in order to ordain and establish this Constitution for the Individual States of America!"


I'm tired of people twisting the Constitution into something it was not.  And it most definitely is NOT a document espousing Ayn Randian Free Market Ideology and Individualism.

Colonel's picture

Tower of Babel redux. Because its different this time!