Communist Imperialism and Woke Society

According to historical record, following World War II, seven countries in Europe were seized by “communist imperialism.” Using Bolshevik apparatchiks sent from the Soviet Union, these nations copied the political, economic, and social life of the Soviet Union and became “people’s democracies,” known to the free world as Soviet satellites. Ordinary people, who had been completely deceived, had no idea at the time what these “democracies” would become and how they would fundamentally transform the peoples’ lives for the worse, much worse.

The “communist imperialist” expansion was enabled by the presence of Red Army agents who supported and paid for terrorist and subversive actions carried out by local communists. Well-organized communist cells were led by locals who had spent time in the Soviet Union in Kremlin’s schools between WWI and WWII. The Soviet-trained propagandists were well ensconced in local life like parasitic insects.

Matyas Rakosi, Hungarian communist leader, explained how the communists seized power, by using a two-word descriptor, ‘salami tactics.’ The well-organized communists funded by the Soviets and British and American bankers, “gradually sliced away at other political groups until, finally, all opposition was eliminated.”

Here is a list of communist methods used by local communists with the help of the Red Army operatives, as described by J. Edgar Hoover.

1. Non-communist political parties were forcibly incorporated in coalitions dominated by communists.
2. Non-communist leaders were arrested, imprisoned, refused permission to return from abroad, or were deported.
3. Non-communist press was censored.
4. Non-communist parties were infiltrated and disrupted from within.
5. Communists took control of key ministries such as Interior, Justice, and Communications.
6. Communists gained authority over policing, justice, and the media.
7. All elections were rigged.
8. Making the country ungovernable through civil unrest, riots, strikes, and well-organized protests and demonstrations.

The communist imperialist doctrine is described by three concepts:

1. Communism has a philosophy, and it is materialistic.
2. Communism is based on a method called dialectic.
3. Communism applies materialistic philosophy and this dialectic method to all social developments and to history.

The communist materialistic philosophy is based on the communist belief that only matter exists; there is no spiritual being. There is no Supreme Being, no God who created the universe.

All religions and their moral codes based on spiritual beliefs are thus fantasy, or as Karl Marx said, “religion is the opium of the masses,”

Humans have no spiritual soul which is immortal, and humans are the same as any other form of life. Man is chemistry, physics, and is highly developed when compared to other forms of life. Primitive man, communists say, have invented the supreme being to explain natural phenomenon such as lightning, earthquakes, mud slides, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, acidic lakes, and tsunamis.

All religions and their moral codes based on spiritual beliefs are thus fantasy, or as Karl Marx said, “religion is the opium of the masses,” translated as “religion is the opiate of the masses.”

The dialectic method refers to the art of discourse, reasoning, and debate. Dialectic comes from the Greek word dialektike. Dialectics in antiquity was the art of arriving at truth through the clash of opposing views and arguments. By debating, opponents underlined the contradictions in each other’s arguments to find a conclusion that contained the truth and eliminated the faults in each opinion.

This dialectic method of debate had three parts: the thesis, the antithesis, and the synthesis. The synthesis combined the best elements of the thesis and of the antithesis. Once the synthesis was produced, it became a new thesis. This new thesis was then developed, the antithesis, and then a new synthesis sprung up.

Karl Marx’s theory of dialectical materialism was influenced by the German philosopher Hegel. In his idealism, Hegel believed that the universe was both rational and spiritual. Marx used Hegel’s dialectical method to validate his materialistic philosophy. But Hegel’s philosophy was idealistic.

Hegel used the dialectical method to understand the past and the present. Marx used the dialecticalmethod to explain the past, the present, and the future of society.

Support Canada Free Press

Marx claimed that the value of any commodity is the amount of labor required to produce it - that is called the labor theory of value

Marx and Engels helped the communists develop their three laws:

1. The law of the unity and struggle of opposites – “contradiction in all matter which drives it to further development” (communists used examples such as protons and electrons, cells forming and dying, and opposing classes in society)
2. The law of negation (communists explained that slavery was negated by feudalism, feudalism was negated by capitalism which will be negated by communism – all things obsolete will be negated and replaced by the good in the dialectical process)
3. The law of the sudden leap (communists explained that quantitative changes produce qualitative changes; the emergence of qualitative changes will require a sudden leap; in societal order, the qualitative changes require revolution as a sudden leap)

Communists explained history as a materialistic process driven by the class struggle. The Communist Manifesto stated, “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” This is historical materialism, communists applying their theory of dialectical materialism to the history of mankind. In Marx’ and Engels’ opinion, “the first law of existence is self-preservation.” Since self-preservation involves the “production of the necessities of life, they concluded that the means of production constituted the fundamental force in history.”

Communists indoctrinated us in schools with their surplus value theory to demonstrate how superior the communist economy was when compared to capitalism. Marx claimed that the value of any commodity is the amount of labor required to produce it - that is called the labor theory of value.

The fallacy of the labor theory of value is that in reality, the value of a good depends not just on labor but on other variables such as the economic value and actual cost of the inputs used to produce a good, how much the industry can produce at any given time, how much can be distributed, how much is actually demanded, the scarcity of a good, and how much consumers are willing to pay for any good or service.

There is nothing scientific about communism, including their ineffective and often terrible economic five-year central planning

Marx’s theory also did not take into account investment in capital, management’s ability, technology used in the production process which was derived from the talent and skills of a few. Marx would be unable to explain why producing a Ferrari, which requires many months to build and a lot of labor, sells for much less than the most expensive painting auctioned off, a painting that perhaps required less man-hours to produce.

Labor alone does not produce value. Marx believed that “those who labor do not receive full payment for the value of the goods their labor produces, and the capitalists keep the ‘surplus value’ for themselves as profit.” Marx went as far as saying that the ‘surplus value’ was “stolen from the workers.”

Any student graduating from a communist school would have sat many hours in class, year after year, with eyes glazed over, listening to lessons on Scientific Socialism and Scientific Communism. Communists claim that their ideology is scientific, a “science of history.” But that is not true. There is nothing scientific about communism, including their ineffective and often terrible economic five-year central planning.

The concocted theory of historical materialism was made during the Industrial Revolution when there “were great social inequities with marked differences in economic classes.”

Other societies would invalidate Marx and Engels’ theory of historical materialism and its five stages of societal development: primitive-communal society, slavery, feudalism, capitalism, communism. For example, in Asian societies the despotic state owned the means of production. There was no private ownership of the means of production. An Asian despotic society had two classes, the all-powerful state, and the masses. The masses had no power, yet the Asian society did not go through feudalism, nor did it go through a class revolution.

Communists suppressed references to Asian cultures because they did not fit neatly into the narrative of the five stages of historical materialistic development. If they had, the masses would have realized that their communist societal order was very much like the Asian despotic society – the bureaucratic state in power (the communists) and the masses (the proletariat).

Communists said that when society is no longer divided into adversarial classes, the dialectic materialism will no longer occupy man’s social development

In their simplistic theory, communists have failed to acknowledge the inconvenient reality that history is influenced by many factors. Economic development is not the sole influencer of history.

Communists failed to recognize the influence of famous and infamous people, patriotism, justice, public service, personal power, religious beliefs, the Crusades, love, ideals, traditions, the search for truth and justice, as important factors in shaping history. History is not just a string of economic developments. There are natural disasters that have influenced history, epidemics like the Black Plague, minor incidents and even chance, like the violent storm that destroyed the Spanish Armada.

As J. Edgar Hoover wrote, “Despite communist claims, the laws of natural science cannot be applied to social science. History and sociology can never be exact sciences like chemistry and physics. Scientific laws must have universal application. Historical materialism falls far short of this requirement.”

Someone attempted to relate Hegelian dialectic to today’s history. The elites and politicians create a problem, expecting a reaction from the public and conditioning the public to ask for change before the problem becomes a crisis. Now that the public is asking for change to solve the problem the elites caused, the elites propose their agenda as a solution to the problem.

When the solution does not fix the problem, it becomes the basis for a new problem because the situation has gotten worse. When this reaches the boiling point, people demand change again. The process repeats over and over until society is moved to whatever end point the elites had in mind.

Communists said that when society is no longer divided into adversarial classes, the dialectic materialism will no longer occupy man’s social development; in other words, man will be satisfied, and his struggles will be over.

But where will man work, who will work to produce anything, and what will satisfy man’s needs? Will each person alive be allowed to determine his/her own abilities and needs in life according to the communist mantra, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs?” That should be interesting as humans tend to be selfish and greedy. What a pie in the sky woke dream when everything will be free and provided for, and, as Danish MP Ida Auken wrote in her 2016 essay, you’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy.”

VIEW Comments