Member Login

You are not currently logged in.








» Register
» Lost your Password?
Article Archives

NO FEAR OF THE EVIL EYE: The Brotherhood of Marx, Hitler, and the American Left Today

Ninth Installment: Chapter Nine of Part I: Envy.   Forum comments welcome!

THE BROTHERHOOD OF MARX, HITLER, AND THE AMERICAN LEFT TODAY

marx-hiitler-and-the-left

In October of 1965, Ronald Reagan came to speak at UCLA, where I was a graduating senior. The UCLA Student Union was packed, SRO. There was a buzz that Reagan was considering running for governor against the entrenched Democrat, Pat Brown. My buddy Bill Anthony and I sat expectantly in the audience.

As Reagan began to speak, he filled the room with an energy that was both exciting and soothing, and the thousand-plus students were entranced. Then he caught us by surprise. He said the conventional political spectrum of Left vs. Right made no sense and he rejected it. He explained:

“Rather than Communists and Marxists on the extreme ‘Left’ and Nazis and Fascists on the extreme ‘Right,’ I think the political spectrum should be ‘Up’ and ‘Down’ – Up towards individual freedom and Down towards control of the individual by the State.

 

“The extreme Up would be Anarchy, no government at all, while the extreme Down, at the bottom of the spectrum, would be all forms of totalitarianism: both Fascism and Communism, Nazism and Marxism, which together in common advocate the abolishment of individual freedom.

 

On this spectrum, I place myself on the Up side, far from the extremism of anarchism, but as an advocate of individual liberty in accordance with a constitutional democracy and rule of law.”

I turned to Bill and whispered, “That settles that.” “Settles what?” he whispered back. “That’s my man,” I answered. “I’ve always dreamed of someone publicly saying just that.”

In all the years since, I’ve remained puzzled why our political, media, and academic elites have maintained a perverse insistence on denying the obviousness of Reagan’s Up/Down spectrum, constantly repeating the robotic mantra of Left/Right instead.

The only explanation must be that, as advocates of ever more government control over people’s lives, they can’t handle the bald truth that Hitler – the apotheosis of evil – is one of theirs.

Hitler expressed the essence of all Leftism, of all forms of Totalitarianism thus: Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz, the common good before the individual good.

The individual has no rights and has no worth as an individual human being – his or her only value is as a member of a collective, a tribe:  of an economic class for Marxists, of an ethnicity or race for Nazis, of a State for Fascists.

This, Ronald Reagan understood, is the diametrical moral opposite of the founding principle of America’s Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

That is, the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the individual citizens under its jurisdiction, and no purpose beyond it.  The primary or metaphysical reason is that collective entities do not actually exist – only individual human beings allegedly comprising them do.

“Workers.”  “Aryans.” “The State.”  Such tribal collectives are concepts not actual things.  They are fluid and arbitrary psychological distinctions in people’s minds that may or may not have a basis in reality.  There certainly are common bonds between groups of people – language, culture, religion, values – but take away the specific individuals who speak a language or practice a set of religious beliefs and there’s nothing left over.

Countless thousands of languages, religions, cultures and nations that once flourished at some point in history are now extinct – as are 99% of all the billions of genetic species that have ever lived.  They no longer exist because there are no individuals left who comprised them.

Historically, totalitarians of whatever stripe are Platonists believing imaginary concepts – Form/Forms, eidos/eidoi – to be real, or more real than physical reality to which individual rights and freedoms must be sacrificed. Anti-totalitarians are Aristotelians.

In the final statement of his philosophy, The Laws, Plato (427-347 BC) states Hitler’s ruling principle almost exactly: “Fostering the common (koinon) interest of the State is the object of first importance, to which the private (idiom) interest is secondary.”[1]

Repeatedly in The Laws, Plato insists on the complete subordination of the individual to the State.  In his “Model City” (montelo polis):

“That nobody, male or female, should ever be left without the control of a State officer over him, nor should anyone, either at work or play, gain the mental habit of acting alone and on his own initiative.   Instead, he should always live, both in war and peace, with his eye on his superior officer, and be guided by him in the smallest detail of his actions… In a word, he must train his soul to avoid acting as an individual apart from the rest, so that the life of all shall be lived as one and in common.”[2]

You don’t get more fascist than that, a more thoroughly totalitarian ethical ideal. During the 20th century of totalitarianism under Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, the State that most aspired to it was Communist China.

For Aristotle (387-322 BC), the purpose of a polis, a political city-state, was to enable the flourishing of its individual citizens – their personal eudaimonia, their happiness and well-being.[3]

It is clear, he says, that:

”Nobody would choose to have all possible good things (agatha) on the condition that he must enjoy them alone.  For man is a social being (politikon), and is designed by nature to live with others.  Accordingly, to have personal eudaimonia he must have society.”[4]

But what kind of society or community?  Aristotle answers: A polis should be characterized by concord and mutual respect, omonoia, among its members.

“A polis is not merely the sharing of a common locality for the purpose of preventing mutual injury and exchange of goods… it is a partnership (koinonia) of free people (eleutheron) which exists so its members can lead a good life (eu zen).[5] 

Thus:

“The life of eudaimonia is the chief aim of a polis, both for its members together, and for each of its members individually.”[6]

“A polis should exist for the advantage (sumpherontos) of its members.”[7]

America’s Founding Fathers who wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence read and studied both Plato and Aristotle in the original Greek.[8]  They chose Aristotle.[9]

The American Left of today, however, have chosen Plato and his descendants of Marx and Hitler.

*****

The descendance from Marx is straight-line direct, obvious, and admitted.  Patrisse Cullors, Co-founder of Black Lives Matter, for instance is well-known for stating publicly, “We are trained Marxists.”

What BLM is particularly trained in is suppressing disagreement with them in the name of “peace” and “justice” –  exactly as Lenin and Stalin did establishing their “Marxist-Leninist” Soviet Union dictatorship.  Let me tell you a story about that.

After Reagan’s UCLA speech, I was so impressed that I worked for him as State Chairman of Youth For Reagan during his original campaign for California Governor – and years later when he was President as his unofficial liaison to Anti-Soviet guerilla insurgencies and democracy movements emerging throughout the Soviet Colonial Empire.

The strategy of support for them – known as The Reagan Doctrine – was so successful it resulted in the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan in February, 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989, and the extinction of the Soviet Union itself in December 1991.

As the Soviets were completing their Afghan retreat in late January of 1989, I had an impromptu lunch with Gennadi Gerasimov, personal spokesman for Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev and the official spokesman of the Soviet Foreign Ministry, in Acapulco, Mexico.

We were both speaking at a conference of the Young Presidents Organization, an international group of businessmen. Gerasimov was there at Gorbachev’s bequest to persuade them to invest in the Soviet Union. My speech was entitled, “The Coming Collapse of the Soviet Union,” and in it I said that investing in the U.S.S.R. was an excellent way to lose your money because before very long the Soviet Union would cease to exist.

My prediction at the time seemed so farfetched that those YPO members who already had put money into the Soviet economy got so upset with me that they suggested I had been smoking some Acapulco Gold.

During a luncheon break, my wife Rebel, never the shy one, spotted Gerasimov, swept into the seat next to him, patted the empty chair to her right for me to sit down, gave him a dazzling smile, and asked, “May we join you?”

Gerasimov was gracious, I was dubious. He was a colonel in the KGB, and had to be familiar with my reputation as the founder of the Reagan Doctrine, since the Soviet press had denounced me as an “ideological gangster.”[10]

Nonetheless, he was one of Gorbachev’s closest associates, so I said what the hell to myself, let’s go for it.

Naturally, he soon was talking about “peace.” While others at the table promptly recognized the signal to turn their brains into mush and began nodding their heads sagely over how important “peace” was.[11] I decided to cut the silliness short.

“The trouble, Gennadi, is that ‘peace’ for Soviets and Americans mean very different things. ”

“What do you mean, Jack? Peace is peace.”

“No, the Russian word mir does not correspond to the English word peace. Your government insists that whenever it uses the word mir in its pronouncements and propaganda, it be translated in English as peace. But ‘mir’ is not ‘peace’.”

“What is it, then?”

Order. For Americans, peace means the absence of violence. For you Marxist-Leninists, mir means the absence of disobedience. That’s very different.

For us, peace means freedom: people being left alone without violence so they can conduct their lives and work towards their goals peacefully. For you guys, ‘peace’ means obedience: the ‘vanguard of the proletariat’ ‑‑ your buddies on the Politburo ‑‑ giving the orders, and everybody else obeys. When the ‘masses’ are all good little boys and girls and obey their masters, you have order, and then you have ‘peace’: mir.”[12]

Silence reigned at the table, while Gerasimov stared at me without a trace of expression. By now, I was revved, so I plowed ahead before he could reply.

“Tell you what, let’s talk about real peace. The people I work with in Washington, we’re not interested in peace as an armed truce. America has a real peace with its former enemies against whom we’ve fought real wars, like Japan and Germany, or England and Spain for that matter, all of whom are now our friends and allies. We can have the same kind of real peace with your country as well.”

“And what do we have to do to get this ‘real peace’ of yours, Jack?” he asked, eyeing me warily.

There was no other choice now but to go all the way. I tried to respond matter‑of‑factly and quietly. I wanted my words to be flat, without any argumentative sarcasm.

“The way to real peace, Gennadi, is for your government to stop being a colonial power. Just as England and France and the other Western powers gave up their empires decades ago, now you must give up yours ‑‑ and I don’t just mean freedom for Cuba or Angola in the Third World, or even Poland or Hungary in Eastern Europe. I mean freedom for Ukraine, for Georgia, for Lithuania ‑‑ even for Russia itself.”

With a faint smile of condescension, he smoothly replied, “You mean an invitation to disintegration.”

I did my best to be just as smooth and conversational. “The disintegration is inevitable. The real question,

Gennadi…” I looked straight at him… “is, will it be peaceful?”

The unruffled veneer of the professional diplomat vanished for a brief second as his head snapped back in shock.

No one had ever said anything like that to him ever before. He made no reply and we looked at each other silently. Rebel wisely decided to break the spell. “So, Gennadi…” she broke in, and began engaging him in small talk.

I tell this story (with the footnote on mir below) now because the entire American Left is in solidarity with BLM/Antifa fascist criminals in demanding submission to them as the only way “peace” – order, the absence of disobedience – will be achieved in America.

As a protestor succinctly explained this at a BLM rally in Chicago (August 22, 2020)[13]:

“We have demands and they need to be met … we’re not asking you anything. We’re telling you what’s about to happen with your permission or not… You can listen to us or you can get ran over.”

Yes, I said fascist, which is precisely what hate groups like Antifa are, pretending to be the opposite, “Anti-Fascist,” as classic Orwell double-speak like “freedom is slavery.”

Violent Leftists like Antifa, together with the American Left in general, have adopted Mussolini’s morality to the letter.  They preach moral relativism – that there are no objective moral truths, that what’s true for you is not true for me, that we must have tolerance for all different moral perspectives, and “diversity” because all cultures are of equal moral value, etc.

Yet they practice moral absolutism.  They have no tolerance whatever for any moral view on any issue – say, abortion or transgenderism – other than their own.  To disagree is to be condemned as immoral, a hater, racist, sexist and homophobic, cruel, heartless and mean.  Engaging in moral disagreement with them is to be subjected to a deluge of moral rage.

They preach tolerance and angrily refuse to practice it.  Why?  Because they are Fascists.  Not in the schoolyard taunt you-have-political-cooties sense, but as Mussolini defined it.  When you argue there are no objective moral truths, the only way to settle a moral disagreement is at the point of a gun.  Mussolini understood this, and he had the intellectual honesty to admit it.

Those of BLM, Antifa, or the Radical Left politicians who have tragically taken over the Democrat Party do not, so lie to themselves that they aren’t what they are.  Thus “tolerance” for them means forcing people to believe and act as they demand.  If you don’t, you’ll get death threats, your life and business ruined with their fascist “cancel culture,” or government goons putting you in jail for disobeying their fascist rules once they gain political power.

Might makes right.  The end justifies the means.  That’s the morality of Marxism, Fascism, Communism, Nazism, and the American Left today in a nutshell.

Time for another short story.

*****

When I started leading expeditions to the North Pole in 1978, I got a letter from a group of people in Council Bluffs, Iowa.  They wanted me to fly them, in our ski-equipped Twin Otter bush plane, to the “Northern Aperture,” which they said was located in the High Arctic Ocean somewhere between the Bering Strait and the North Pole.

“Dr. Wheeler,” the letter stated, “you of course cannot be so ignorant or uneducated to believe in outdated theories of a solid Earth.  As every truly educated person knows, the Earth is hollow.”  I was informed that on the inside of our Hollow Earth is a paradisiacal land inhabited by the descendants of Atlantis.  There were two “Apertures” providing access to this land, Northern in the Arctic, Southern in the Antarctic.

I wrote them back, replying that I would fly them anywhere in the High Arctic Ocean they wanted – but they had to pay cash in advance, with no refunds if all they saw were sea-ice and polar bears, and no Aperture or Atlanteans.  I never heard from them ever again.

Human beings are capable of believing anything no matter how absurd, and with impassioned fervor.  Intelligence is no barrier to this.  In fact, very smart folks are the ones clever enough to concoct amazingly intricate rationalizations for nonsense they want to believe in. 

There really are people otherwise functioning normally in society who genuinely believe in something so laughably ludicrous as a Hollow Earth – or a Flat Earth.  The Flat Earth Society has several thousand members and its own website, while Hollow Earthers have a Facebook page.

Yet believing in either is certainly no more looney-tunes than believing in the inevitability of class or racial struggle.  A Marxist – like Patrisse Cullors or an innumerable number of teachers in the US educational system today from Kindergarten to College – is no less an intellectual embarrassment than a hollow or flat earther – or a grown adult who still believes in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

******

The American Left –  from Cullors and BLM/Antifa street rioters to their promoters in the Democrat Party or on CNN – are Marxist Nazis.  They turned Marxist class struggle into a Nazi racial struggle of “identity politics.”  

What does a Marxist Fascist do when the “workers” become prosperous under capitalism, with flat-screen tv’s, smartphones, and abundant food instead of starving to death?  Realizing setting workers against bourgeois is a non-starter as more and more blue collar folk live a middle class lifestyle, they go Nazi, doing their best to make “racism” the issue instead of “exploitation.”

Just as masked fascisti thugs should be laughed at by anyone of common sense for calling themselves anti-fascist, so should be the racists of BLM and the American Left as a whole for having the pathological gall to call themselves anti-racist – when their entire belief system is one of racial hatred.

You get only one guess what “race” based mindlessly on skin color they demonize as evil, exactly like Hitler demonized Jews.

Marx and Hitler are ideological brothers.  Marxism and Nazism are both doctrines of tribal and racist hate fueled by envy.  Hitler raved against Marxists and Communists in Mein Kampf because they were international socialists, tribal and racist with respect to an economic class irrespective of national borders:  “Workers of the world, unite!”

Hitler’s Nazis were national socialists. The word “Nazi” comes from how the first two syllables of “national” is pronounced in German – naht-zee-o-nahl – as the official name of Hitler’s party was Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

Hitler’s crazed Germanic “Aryan” national socialism – people can be driven criminally insane when abjectly humiliated, which is what Britain did to Germany after World War I – made him bitterly opposed to anti-national socialists, such as the Communist Party of Germany (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands) controlled and financed by Stalin in Moscow.  

Yet both Marxists and Nazis called themselves “socialist” as both stood for totalitarian state control of the economy with no economic freedom, i.e. free market capitalism, allowed.[14]  Recall that the official name of the Soviet Union was the USSR – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

What is grotesquely hilarious about all of this is their believing in things that don’t actually exist.

What the hell was an “Aryan” for Hitler?  Members of a master-race of blond blue-eyed Nordics like he was not – or the Japanese whom he designated were “Honorary Aryans”?  Turns out, anyone on his side could be an Aryan, race or ethnicity had nothing to do with it.

What’s a “worker”?  What do a minimum wage hamburger-flipper, a plumber making $40 a hour, a mid-level corporate exec in a struggling company making less, or a “gig” Uber driver have in common?  Much less peasant farmers in Peru.  You could multiply such examples endlessly.  The term “worker” has no meaning – it’s an empty imaginary non-existent abstraction.

Exactly the same goes for what the Left has morphed “workers/the exploited” vs. “bourgeois/the exploiters” into: “people of color” vs. “white.”

What do these terms mean, what in actual real reality do they refer to?  What do everyone of the billions of people all over the earth who are not “white” have in common?  Nothing at all – except they are human beings just like “whites.”

I put “whites” in sarcasm quotes because that means nothing also.  “Caucasian” means Persians, Kurds, Turks, Arabs, and most people of India, not just Europeans.  And how many wars, enslavements, and violent animosities have there been between English, Irish, French, Russian, Polish through the centuries?  Even today in Italy, those in the north call those of the south “Africans,” while those of the south call those of the north “Germans.”

The only purpose of such a Marxist Nazi distinction is to demonize one selected ethnic target at which envy can be directed, then cash in on the hate as the means to gain power.  “Justice” and solving any racial problems has nothing whatever to do with it.  It’s nothing more than an excuse for fascist rule, precisely as Hitler demonized Jews.

Since so many Jews in Germany were wealthy and influential, Hitler engaged in a psychotic frenzy of envy towards them.  Today, America’s Marxist Nazi Left is doing the same towards “whites.”

 


 

[1] . The Laws, 875b.

[2]   Ibid, 942-a-c.

[3]  Aristotle’s eudaimonia is almost always translated in English as “happiness,” but for him it is not a static state of mind, it is an energeia, an activity.  It is living and behaving with rational purpose enabling the individual to achieve genuine flourishing, in the same way all human beings must do to achieve physical health.

[4] . EN 1169b18-20.

[5] . Politics 1252b28-31, 1279a22

[6] . 1278b23-24.

[7] . EN 1160a11-12.

[8]  A “classical education” was normal at America’s founding that began learning Greek and Latin at age 8. Fluency in both was an entry requirement for college, such as for John Adams, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton.  Cf. Carl Richard, The Founders and the Classics. Jefferson wrote: “I was educated at William and Mary college in Williamsburg. I read Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, and English of course.” Jefferson Letter to Joseph Delaplaine, April 12, 1817

[9] Jefferson explained: “Of the Declaration of Independence… All its authority rests then on the harmonizing sentiments of the day, whether expressed in conversation, in letters, printed essays, or in the elementary books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c.” Jefferson Letter to Henry Lee, Monticello, May 8, 1825.

Contrast Jefferson’s ridicule of Plato’s “foggy mind,” his “whimsies, the puerilities, & unintelligible jargon… How could it have been that the world should have so long consented to give reputation to such nonsense as this?…Bringing Plato to the test of reason, take from him his sophisms, futilities, & incomprehensibilities, and what remains?”  Jefferson Letter to John Adams, July 5, 1814.

[10] . Izvestiya (Moscow), March 1, 1985.  Cf, Barricada, the KGB-financed newspaper of the Communist Sandinista government of Nicaragua, January 7, 1986: “The concept of the (Anti-Communist) freedom fighters as an organizational principle started with the work of Jack Wheeler.”

[11] . One exception was Reagan National Security Council member and my good friend, Michael Ledeen.  He just wanted to quietly watch the show – which he told me afterwards he immensely enjoyed.

[12] . In Marxist ideology, mir can be achieved only through the world‑wide liquidation of exploitative capitalism. The Soviet Military Encyclopedia states: “Peace [mir] is impossible without socialism… A truly lasting peace is impossible and cannot be achieved without a proletarian revolution.” (Moscow: USSR Ministry of Defense, 1976‑1980, vol. 5, 1978, p. 316.). In Lenin’s words: “As long as capitalism and socialism exist, we cannot live in peace.  In the end, one or the other will triumph ‑‑ a funeral dirge will be sung either over the Soviet republic or over world capitalism.” V. I. Lenin, “Speech to Moscow Party Nuclei Secretaries, n November 26, 1920. Selected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1943), vol. 8, p. 297.
[13] , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH6My8XHl34

[14] . In a Marxist economy, the government owns every business with everyone in the economy being an employee of the state.  In Hitler’s or Mussolini’s economy, the government controls every business via regulation by bureaucrats, with every decision of a “private” company requiring bureaucratic approval.  This is the distinction between a Communist economy and a Fascist economy – and is why the economy of Communist China is Fascist.