Why Biden, Obama & Modern Liberalism Represent a New Cultural Revolution
Understanding Biden’s Debate Rudeness: Marxist Rebels Undermine Manners, Too
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Observing Vice President Joe Biden’s repeated sneering at debate opponent Paul Ryan, some marveled at the voluble politician’s lack of protocol. Was he on pills, booze or just becoming a caricature of his irascible self in old age? In fact, there is a better way to interpret this behavior which is impossible to completely dismiss because it’s rooted in known political beliefs and core values.
After Barack’s strangely flaccid first-debate performance, it’s understandable why Biden felt a need to go on the offensive. After all, the ticket has begun to look as if it’s coming unglued, dropping as many as a dozen popularity points in some polls. Certainly, Biden had the heat turned up on him by the party to deliver a commanding win. Biden’s apparent strategy of trying to unnerve his foe while sitting close by Ryan and repeatedly laughing, scoffing, eye-rolling, interrupting and hectoring appeared tailor made.
Yet a deeper truth was accidentally revealed by the old Democrat partisan. One could argue the Marxist theory of revolution was previewed in miniature during this debate. After all, wasn’t it Obama Administration members who repeatedly referenced Mao as a hero and leading light? We can see a similar notion to Biden’s strategic disrespect in Chairman Mao’s last great feat—his Cultural Revolution. This event, lasting from 1966-1976, also sought to demean, embarrass, disgrace, and undermine respectable people all over China to secure power.
What Biden offered was not just a rejection of Ryan’s ideas, but a wholesale repudiation of his standing as a gentleman, symbolized by Biden’s boorish insults and refusal to even acknowledge his opponent in closing. Such status attacks are well-recognized in Marxist circles as a way of marking out victims for future outlawry or elimination.
I. VP Debate of Biden v. Ryan: Punked
How might one explain what happened on October 11, 2012 when sitting Vice President Joseph Biden debated Paul Ryan? It was nothing short of extraordinary. Regardless the topic at hand, Biden repeatedly laughed, interrupted, and rolled his eyes, openly scoffing at Ryan. As Michael Medved wrote,
Why, then, did Biden decide to snicker, chuckle, grin, smirk and shake his head at the one GOP nominee for national office in the last 50 years that even partisan Democrats acknowledge as a serious, substantive, and formidable guy? The oddest aspect of his patronizing performance involved the complete disconnect between his derisive laughter and anything that Paul Ryan actually said. The debate became queasy, unpleasant, uncomfortable to watch, not because Biden overpowered his opponent on substance (he emphatically did not), but because the normal, reassuring, ritualized sense of congeniality and decorum seemed altogether lacking.
Medved well captures the anti-authority spirit of crazy Joe’s stunt. This posture illuminates the Heart of Darkness at the center of all socialist movements. Leftists do not accept humans as special because people are neither made in the image of God, nor have they souls. Therefore, being rude to a mere animal because of bad behavior is perfectly acceptable.
II. Chairman Mao’s Cultural Revolution
A. Great Leap Forward
Chairman Mao Zedong (1893-1976) took over China after winning the civil war. The Chinese Communist state was officially created on October 1, 1949. The Cultural Revolution resulted after the Great Leap Forward imploded. Mao wanted China to become a first-world nation overnight. His agrarian Great Leap caused the deaths of 30-40 million Chinese (see Who was Chairman Mao, Lionized by Obama’s White House?) Mao launched the Cultural Revolution to recover power in the aftermath of the unmitigated disaster of the Great Leap.
B. Cultural Revolution
What was the Cultural Revolution? Archie Brown in The Rise and Fall of Communism, describes it as a war between Mao and the Chinese Communist Party, waged mostly by youths. Many elites were denounced, removed and humiliated and 3 million killed. The BBC describes it:
The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution was a 10-year political campaign, a social experiment aimed at rekindling revolutionary fervour and purifying the party. Mao Zedong and his wife, Jiang Qing, directed popular anger against other members of the party leadership. While others were removed from office, Mao was named supreme commander of the nation and army. Ideological cleansing began with attacks by young Red Guards on so-called “intellectuals” to remove “bourgeois” influences. Millions were forced into manual labour, and tens of thousands were executed. The result was massive civil unrest, and the army was sent in to control student disorder.
Blood-curdling stories are recounted, often with public shaming rituals involved:
Children stood by as Red Guards beat up their mothers for being “rightists.” Neighbors informed on neighbors. Violinists had their instruments and even fingers smashed by Red Guards. The accused sometimes had their jaws dislocated so they couldn’t speak in their defense and were forced to bow in front of mobs that spit and screamed at them. Children of unpopular party members were gagged and executed; “rich peasants” and “bad elements” were publicly denounced and beheaded; children denounced their parents, and political targets were paraded in stadiums packed with screaming crowds; students at a Beijing girls’ school beat their vice-principal to death with nail-studded planks in 1968.
Accounts of the attacks against everyday Chinese leaders are absolutely astounding:
During the Cultural Revolution several hundred “counter-revolutionaries” were publicly killed, cooked and eaten in Guangxi province. Red Guards and party workers in one remote area of Guangxi ate the flesh of some 100 victims they had tortured to death, “as a way to demonstrate their “class feelings.’” One Guard said, “What I killed was the enemy. Didn’t Chairman Mao teach us, ‘If we don’t kill them, they’ll kill us?’” Another man led a Red Guard attack on a student who defeated him in a political debate. “His faction trapped the guy and cut off his tongue with scissors.”
Who did Mao single out in his attacks? One site reports:
Mao singled out nine categories of enemies: landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, bad elements, rightists, traitors, foreign agents, capitalist roaders and—the Stinking Ninth—intellectuals. In the fight against “class enemies” and “bourgeois reactionaries,” teachers, people with a college degree or relatives overseas, workers, and members of minority groups such as Tibetans, were all targeted.
Mao announced that the Cultural Revolution would “thoroughly expose the reactionary bourgeois stand of those…who oppose the party and socialism.” Children of landowners were thrown into trash cans. Families who lived in large houses were squeezed into single rooms as their possessions were smashed by Red Guards and poor families moved into the other rooms.
III. Why Biden & Obama’s Liberal Humiliation Represents a New Cultural Revolution
A. Could ol’ Crazy Joe Really be a Crafty Socialist?
Why would anyone claim that the rudeness of an eccentric, elderly politician had anything to do with Marxism? Isn’t that a stretch? In fact, all progressive ideologies tend towards insulting and dismissing their opponents out of hand, exactly as Biden did Ryan. But why? Because modern liberalism is just another name for Marxism which demands a total destruction and recreation of society on socialist lines, including rejecting middle class manners. But as Biden has done Obama’s bidding since day one, he supports all of Barack’s wicked Marxist fantasies.
This type of behavior has been directed against public Conservative figures for decades. For example, any Hollywood actor admitting conservative beliefs is called out and shamed, often by fellow thespians without even a high school degree. At root, such public ritual is foundational to Marxist dreams of overturning the entire society for Revolution. Because, if the old order is acceptable, it makes no sense to denounce it and demand it be utterly broken and remade on a fairer model.
B. Shaming Rituals of Leftism
But could public humiliation really play a part in liberal political theater? According to Mao’s Last Revolution by MacFarquhar and Schoenhals, Red Guards persecuted people deemed “counter-revolutionary” or “bourgeois.” In these so-called “struggle sessions,” abuse was heaped and public humiliation doled out upon those accused of capitalist thoughts—usually targeting educated persons. These sessions often ended violently, with many accused dying or spending years in reeducation camps.
It is a regular characteristic of Marxists to reject manners and treat people they oppose like dung. In fact, progressives believe only those agreeing with them deserve decency or any politeness. An example is refusal to dialogue with opponents, but instead simply claim their foes are too foul to communicate with (think Limbaugh). These misanthropes are deemed “outrageous” and censured for their sins. Yet, Conservatives simply do not approach their political opponents in such a disgraceful manner.
C. Rejection of American Middle Class Values
An attack against “middle class” manners was launched in America’s 1960s. Especially amongst women it is now established that smart, ambitious females are de facto Feminists, a group treating all masculine attempts at deference abominable. Hold a door for a modern American woman and prepare to be ignored or even tongue-lashed. For example, one Marxist writer proclaims it is time for Feminists to stop being polite:
Politeness is a habit that what’s left of the women’s movement needs to grow out of. Most women grow up learning, directly or indirectly, how to be polite, how to defer, how to be good employees, mothers and wives, how to shop sensibly and get a great bikini body. Politeness, however, has bought even the luckiest of us little more than terminal exhaustion, a great shoe collection, and the right to be raped by the state if we need an abortion. If we want real equality, we’re going to have to fight for it.
On another level, the classic leftist refusal to acknowledge opponents as being intelligent, serious or morally fit enough to warrant engagement in dialogue is doxology from the progressive worldview. After all, if people opposing liberalism were smart enough, genuinely good, or educated—they would not be in opposition to Marxism’s self-evident “Truth.”
D. Marxism Equals Revolution
At the heart of Marxism, and all progressive ideologies, is demand for radical change. So Marxists set about tearing society apart from top to bottom by shaming and removing the elites and leaders. This theory of “perpetual revolution” was applied in communist China decades after the country was already communist to persons already practitioners.
Yet, since the standards of leftism are, by definition—subjective—there are always new devils to help prop up the revolutionary spirit for coming generations. It is no accident that youth are the most vociferous targets of Marxist conversion.
E. Cultural Marxism
Cultural Marxism of the Frankfurt School brought to America Political Correctness. The general goal was turning capitalist democracies into communist tyrannies, and its specific goals are:
Essentially destructive criticism of all the main elements of Western culture, including Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, hierarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethnocentrism, convention, and conservatism. Under Critical Theory, anything emanating from the west is to be libeled and attacked over and over again…
Obama himself typifies the careless, indifferent and boorish attitude of the Marxist rebel. The racist words of Obama’s chosen minister who prayed at Barack’s inauguration still burn in the memory of many patriotic Americans…
Lord…we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right.