Ron Paul Exposes The Human Suffering Of "Cultural Marxism"

Via Ron Paul's Facebook page,

Are you stunned by what has become of American culture?

Are you confused as to how every moral principle could be turned on its head so quickly?

Well, it's not an accident.

You've probably heard of "Cultural Marxism," but do you know what it means?

Marxists, after the tremendous failure of their *economic* ideas, decided to change their angle of attack. There was no way that people could be convinced that Socialism is economically superior to Capitalism.

Socialism produced tyranny and death in the hundreds of millions, while Capitalist nations were bursting with wealth.

So, Marxists shifted to targeting culture instead of the economy.

If Cultural Marxists could *destroy the culture* of Capitalist nations, *then* they would try to use the opportunity to change the governments and economies to their Socialist utopia.

If the people can't think straight, perhaps then Socialism could be shackled onto them.

Marxists just shifted their targets.

Their original argument of workers being *exploited* by capitalists, didn't sell. It's obviously not the case.

So Marxists just shifted their "exploitation" schtick to culture:

- women exploited by men

- gays exploited by heterosexuals

- The old exploited by the young...and vice-versa

- This list goes on and on.

Anything that is true is to be twisted like a pretzel -- to the point where people can't tell what is true anymore.

How do you think they're doing?

Had enough yet?

Then don't be afraid to stand up for truth, and speak it!

Otherwise, history can most definitely repeat itself.

And the history of Socialism is as nasty and brutish as it gets. Nothing compares to it in terms of human suffering.


Dindu Nuffins ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 12:39 Permalink

Juden Peterstein and his enshrinement of Individualism is just a way to soften white nations for genocide.

Latest "Murdoch Murdoch" parody of Jordan:


Oh, and here's Jordan Peterson's glowing pro-Zionist speech at the Balfour 100 celebration, where they were all celebrating the letter sent to Lord Rothschild.



In reply to by ted41776

Dindu Nuffins ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 12:45 Permalink

Nah, I won't die till my duty is discharged.

I'm not an atomised individual who can contemplate suicide, but a link in a long chain, from my earliest ancestor to my father and onward into the future in the form of my adorable children.

Only a diseased "individual" thinks we don't come from others and that we don't give our lives meaning by watching our children grow to take over our places in society. Such a disconnected person easily contemplates suicide, dying in slow motion because he belongs to nothing. He could kill himself because killing himself is an isolated event with no harm to others.

I am not an individual. I am a loyal and dutiful member of my people. Your diseased ideology and its apathy have no power over me.

In reply to by ted41776

Dindu Nuffins ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 13:08 Permalink

Show me the vat that you spawned from independently, individual.

Show me the grave that you will fall into automatically when you die without family putting you there and weeping for you, individual.

No one is an individual. You will live or die based on supporting your own people against other people.

An individual dies in a land stolen from his ancestors by the Africans that teem around him and thinks "At least I enjoyed it while it lasted." No past, no future, no meaning.

In reply to by ted41776

telemann Ink Pusher Tue, 07/03/2018 - 18:37 Permalink

All-or-nothing political ideologies which express themselves as "isms" are the product of frustrated two-digit IQs.  Who the hell would want to live under pure capitalism, pure Marxism, pure socialism, pure libertarianism or any other pure ism? 

It doesn't work that way.  You can't force living, changing, evolving cultural systems to fit into someone's rigid ideological dictate.  Nature doesn't work along those lines, and we are part of nature.  Anyone who asks you to live out (or under) a pure ideology has already joined a cult, whether or not they know it. 

I respect Ron Paul and was surprised to see an otherwise interesting, perceptive article riddled with a few ignorant statements. 

As for "cultural marxism," am pretty sure it's one of the fallback strategies of corporate globalists who aim to divide and control (subjugate) populaces.  Just another stepping stone on the way to global totalitarianism.  It would wither and die if we could begin to see one another as individual members of the same flawed species and come to terms with the simple fact that we have more in common than we allow ourselves to know and thus need to pull together, not to control one another, but to preserve our rights and freedoms as individuals.

In reply to by Ink Pusher

Curmudgeon49 telemann Wed, 07/04/2018 - 10:46 Permalink

Valid points. However, it would be helpful if Ron Paul actually understood what real socialism is, instead of the American mindset of socialism = communism.

As for capitalism, I suggest that the US founding fathers were not capitalists. Capitalism requires capital, which means control of credit, which in tun leads to fractional reserve banking. Capitalism and communism are 2 sides of the same coin, because both seek to concentrate wealth and control of industry (the means of production) in the hands of a few. In both cases, the few control the political process. That is why Wall Street funded the Red takeover of Russia.

That the NSDAP (the photo of Hiltler) would be included with Mao and Stalin is a fine demonstration of how cultural Marxism and political correctness has infiltrated Ron Paul's mind. WWII, like every other war was an economic war prosecuted by the international banking cartel. Churchill was calling for war on Germany in 1936/37, because Germany was circumventing the international banking system by trading commodity for commodity e.g. iron ore for coal. The bankers were unable to make money. This is why Venezuela (no paradigm of virtue to be sure) has been under attack. The Bolivarian Revolution has the same goal: trade commodity for commodity and eliminate the banks in the process. 

Libertarians are no enemy of banks.

In reply to by telemann

devnickle Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 14:53 Permalink

How quickly you forget, (or is that conveniently ignore?) The brown Kenyan leader of your Democratic Socialist party is responsible for the bulk of that. Welfare for banks, ie: monetary Socialism is responsible for that disaster. He is the figurehead. Bush is one too. Oh, I AM an individual. You can fuck yourself with your collectivism. 

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Spaced Out Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 16:27 Permalink

"But, but... "True capitalism has never been tried yet"....

You really are a dumb fuck. The US hasn't had capitalism since 1913. You never even noticed.

There's no point trying to educate someone like you, who can't differentiate between individual (sovereign) and the literal, dictionary definition of 'individual' (one). Born stupid, pass on stupid, die stupid :)

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Dindu Nuffins ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 13:03 Permalink

Chant that until you run out of breath. It changes nothing, since you're the only one in this conversation with no reason to live. Family is a good collective to protect and support. 

I won't apologise for not being a loony individualist with no connection to his own blood, or to the past and the future, who thinks everyone springs out of a vat with no responsibilities or need to serve others.


In reply to by ted41776

Dindu Nuffins ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 13:19 Permalink

No, my collective is my family, not some internet random with a hard-on for Jewish "philosophers" like Ayn Rand. I support my family and have a role in society.

As an individual without ties or obligations, you can be spared more than I could. You serve no purpose but fulfillng your own pleasures, and pleasures themselves become unfulfilling in time.

In reply to by ted41776

Blurb Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 13:58 Permalink

You're not fooling me. You, like many others, have done the math, sized your own puny work ethic up against the teeming hoards', and are now in denial when faced with the realization that you'll never get anywhere. You don't have the tools. So you've adopted some woolly brand of leftist malarkey which, in some dim and mysterious way, you feel might redeem you. 

It won't. Things got out of reach, and you missed the bus. Go ahead and tell yourself whatever you have to to soften that blow. But don't think everyone who has the unfortunate experience of listening to you and nodding politely believes you for a second. Some, probably most, are cringing inside, and thanking their lucky stars that they're not you. 

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Dindu Nuffins Blurb Tue, 07/03/2018 - 14:48 Permalink

I'm a country boy with a job in the country that supports my family well enough. That's success. You sound like some kind of city-dweller. It's always the people who live in hives that are so worried about getting a cubicle job at the right multi-national corporation in order to make your childless friends at Starbucks envious.

In reply to by Blurb

ebear Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 16:02 Permalink

You've constructed a false dichotomy.  Clearly we are all interdependent - part of something larger than ourselves called civilization. 

Civilization, which not only allows us the freedom to express our individuality, but which depends on it in order to advance.

You only have to compare the various historic attempts at civilization to see the importance of individuality.  The most prosperous societies were, and are, those which allow the greatest latitude for individual thought and expression.

Where were all the advances in science, medicine and philosophy made in the last 300 years?   Who made those advances?  Not collectivists or theocrats, that's for sure.

It's really quite simple.  The more people you have actively engaged in pursuing individual choice, the greater the benefit to the society at large.


In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Dindu Nuffins ebear Tue, 07/03/2018 - 16:50 Permalink

Britain and France were aristocratic monarchies when the Scientific and Industrial Revolutions were getting into full swing.

Individualism is a fairly new philosophy, largely pushed by Jews, that was by no means the operating philosophy of the West in the time frame you suggest.

Going forward, the prognosis for the West under the delusion of Individualism is complete eradication. (Every African is an individual the same as you, after all. )

In reply to by ebear

Is-Be Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 23:03 Permalink

Individualism is a fairly new philosophy, largely pushed by Jews, 

Bingo. Got it.

The Jews fear nationalism. They require everyone but themselves to be put through the blender in order to feel safe.

Socialism can work, but first we must define it. To me, no man is an island. I know. I am trying to isolate myself from the common weal in order to survive the coming financial crisis.

I'm here to tell you straight. It's not possible. It's a fantasy. Rub your eyes. It ain't gonna happen.

A human body can only produce 200 watts, under ideal conditions. And your conditions are not going to be ideal. To survive you would have to do the calculus of whether every task would consume more energy than it produced. And your female will need even more calories to breed.

These days we don't bother. We just burn petroleum.

Adolph Hitler showed the world how to run an economy without borrowing money from the Banksters.

For this alone he was crushed between hammer and anvil of the Banksters.

And here we are 78 years later wondering how we got into so much debt? Figure it out for yourself.

Central planning is GOING to work. But only if humans aren't doing the planning. AI can handle the resolution needed with ease.

It will know how many pieces of toast you ate for breakfast, and adjust the economy accordingly.


In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Skip Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 18:13 Permalink

Ron Paul KNOWS the score:
Madlad Ron Paul Tweets A. Wyatt Mann Cartoon Blasting Jew “Cultural Marxism”

You make sense as does this gentleman:
Richard B June 30, 2018 at 8:53 pm
Just because the other person is bad doesn’t make you good. But, is the other person bad? Maybe, maybe not. Let’s talk about it and find out, using all of the available intellectual and social resources at our disposal while exercising our rights to free speech and assembly in the process. Oh, wait, we can’t do that. And who’s responsible, the Puritans? They’re long gone.

In any event, when a group is condemned as morally bankrupt and another set up as morally superior one has to consider the source. Judaism passing itself off as morally superior is laughable. It’s literally a religion of projection. It’s guilty of every accusation it hurls at Whites, ie; Ethno-Supremacy; It’s bad to say Master Race but Ok to say Chosen People (and did the Germans really say they were the Master Race, or is that itself a projection?). It’s exclusive, not inclusive, it’s racist and bullying (Palestine! Hello!).

The irony is that you can’t imagine the Jewish people feeling guilt not because they’re innocent, but because of their Myth of Innocence, which actually says in effect, “We never do anything wrong. Things are done to us.” When you live like that you become incapable of learning, change, and growth. Essential qualities today for any people with the pretention of wanting to be global leaders (or, to put it more baldly, to rule the world).

Which is why, though they’re certainly good at shame, blame, denial, projection, infiltration and subversion, they’re no damn good at social-management. Just look at the places they rule over. The sun never sets on their dysfunction. It’s literally everywhere. And they’re calling US morally bankrupt?!

It’s this amazing lack of self-awareness (another important quality needed to lead anything today, let alone an entire civilization) and incredible inability to admit when they’re wrong, about anything, that keeps them from seeing those moments when in fact they are wrong, ie; Whites are capable of feeling guilt exactly because they HAVE a conscience which Jews and many other non-White groups simply lack, as if they all have a morality chip missing in their DNA. In short, having a conscience that the other groups in general and Jews in particular lack makes Whites morally superior, not inferior.

And if Jews aren’t morally superior but insist on saying they are, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, then what are they? Well aside from being inauthentic and dishonest, it makes them Psychopaths, of course!

Any one individual or group walking around acting as if they’re morally superior when they’re actually criminal psychopaths are DANGEROUS!
And this is why so many times throughout history they’ve had to be stopped. And it’s happening again now ON A GLOBAL SCALE!

No one’s saying Whites are perfect. Kevin’s article makes it clear just how imperfect they are, though there’s certainly lots of other evidence. Evidence we know about because Whites Don’t Hide Their Imperfections! They actually make it a matter of public discourse so they can learn, change, and grow!
No, we’re not saying Whites are perfect. But we are saying that Jews are dangerous and not just to Whites. But Whites have to think about themselves. The West is a towering human acheivement and Whites have nothing to apologize for. Only a people poisoned by envy and a lust for power would suggest otherwise. And such a people can’t be morally superior to anyone.

Sure, Whites have made mistakes and given the accidents of history, it’s understanable we’ve made them. But we are the ONLY people in the history of the world who believe in and practice the idea of a Developing Conscience. Whereas the many peoples judging us aren’t even aware that that’s possible or, to the extent they’re aware, desirable.

Again, we have nothing to apologize for and everything to be proud of. We’re going to see more and more Whites express their justifiable irritation, and not just irritation, at constantly being judged by a people who we all know will never judge themselves, thereby revealing their hypocrisy and moral inferiority. When this happens their worst nightmare is going to turn into a daymare as they realize that the usual accusations don’t work anymore.

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

DeeDee ted41776 Tue, 07/03/2018 - 15:16 Permalink

Nuffins is raising legitimate counter-arguments, and your response is "kill yourself." You're clearly having trouble with this attack on individualism. I was once hostile to these attacks, too. But Nuffins is correct. Peterson's condemnations of collectivism are bankrupt as he's kowtowed to the most collectivist group on the planet, who have power and wealth far in excess of their proportion of the population. All of these individualists are helpless in the face of it. Individualism sounds nice, but will not stand a real-world challenge.

I didn't like the idea of collectivism. I also don't like having to sleep nine hours a day to function at my highest level. At some point, you have to accept the requirements of surviving and thriving in the world. Not to mention collectivism is fun once you get the hang of it.

In reply to by ted41776

Scanderbeg DeeDee Tue, 07/03/2018 - 15:46 Permalink

I agree with Nuffins as well. Most of us here love Ron Paul but it's time to face facts and admit that classical conservatism and Libertarianism have utterly failed.

The truth is "Conservatism" hasn't conserved anything and is simply not a strong enough posture against this tide of left wing collectivism. The real "suicide" is worshiping capitalism, materialism and individualism as if they are some kind of holy trinity that will ultimately save us when in fact the opposite is true. This is not to say we shouldn't favor a mostly private economy since it has proven to be infinitely more conducive to prosperity and liberty.

It is simply to point out that markets should not be revered as scripture in of themselves and to acknowledge that pure Libertarianism is ultimately just as Utopian and deluded as the fantasies of the left. Some of the worst push back and convergence  we're seeing today is from left leaning mega corporations and technocrats so clearly just "Letting them do what they want" isn't a very effective strategy.

And if whites refuse to organize around identity they will eventually be crushed by the groups that do. It's a story as old as time itself and the group will always be stronger than the individual. 

Regarding Peterson he is clearly controlled opposition. The left wouldn't be legitimizing him in these mainstream forums if he wasn't and from what I can tell his politics are pretty left leaning. 

In reply to by DeeDee

metachron Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 13:15 Permalink

Peterson is not ideological. You and others may take it that way, but he is trained as a social scientist (as I am) and is making targeted arguments. He's not presenting an ideology about individualism, he's providing scientific and cultural support for strengthening the ability to make claims against collectivist ideology - which is an ideology. I think its clear he's very much trying to bolster Western culture, which has always been individualist since the Enlightenment. Western culture is not collectivist, so cultural Marxism will never work anyway. 

In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Ink Pusher Dindu Nuffins Tue, 07/03/2018 - 15:41 Permalink

FYI : Peterson is a Christian and he is in no way a "Zionist". 

Peterson emphasized his conceptualization of Christianity is probably not what it is generally understood, stating that the ethical responsibility of a Christian is to imitate Christ, for him meaning "something like you need to take responsibility for the evil in the world as if you were responsible for it ... to understand that you determine the direction of the world, whether it's toward heaven or hell". 

When asked if he believes in God, Peterson responded: "I think the proper response to that is No, but I'm afraid He might exist". 



In reply to by Dindu Nuffins

Dindu Nuffins Ink Pusher Tue, 07/03/2018 - 17:00 Permalink

Strictly speaking, he is only a Zionist in the sense that he announces his support for Israel while speaking to a crowd of confirmed Zionists at a conference celebrating the mega-wealthy banker who created the state of Israel, Lord Rothschild. Other than those small details, maybe he isn't a Zionist?

Doesn't sound like a Christian, either.

Christians don't take responsibility for all the evil in the world. Jesus didn't want them to do that, because he did it for them. He as God took that responsibility, and Christians are not gods themselves.

Actually, that sounds like Jewish "Tikkun Olam" to me. You know, where you belong to an ethnicity that is a living god and beacon unto other nations, responsible for "Repair of the world"

Maybe he's secretly Jewish? 

If so, he moves in the correct circles.

In reply to by Ink Pusher