In his exclusive report to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government, Judge John H. Wilson (ret.) concludes his examination of how Marxists insist they have the moral high ground despite their unconscionable record.
The philosophical concepts of moral realism and moral relativism are probably way over the heads of people who may support the philosophy, including Rep. Ocasio Cortez and most of the people involved in the recent anti-police protests and riots. But there is a political philosophy that makes extensive use of moral relativism which had many adherents, including the Congresswoman from New York.
Retired Professor Ted Keller writes that “I agree with…identifying relativism as consistent with Marxism…unless Marx’s axioms are interpreted relativistically they don’t constitute a theory…” Further, according to the German philosopher Friedrich Engles, the long time collaborator with Karl Marx, “the three classes of modern society, the feudal aristocracy, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, each have a morality of their own… we can only draw the one conclusion: that men, consciously or unconsciously, derive their ethical ideas in the last resort from the practical relations on which their class position is based… We therefore reject every attempt to impose on us any moral dogma whatsoever as an eternal, ultimate and forever immutable ethical law on the pretext that the moral world, too, has its permanent principles which stand above history and the differences between nations.”
Besides making a clear statement of the morally relative posture of communism, Engles also wrote that “(c)ontradictions in thought are…to be removed by replacing the thought-structure with the superior Marxist alternative, which is supposedly free from such debilitating consequences.”
Therefore, not only are ethics and morals dependent upon which class you are a member, but any doubt you may have about the truth of your beliefs regarding those ethics and morals can be removed by strict adherence to Marxist thought. You can believe that even if your tax proposal does not fund the initiatives you support, you are using the collection of taxes to redistribute the wealth from the rich to the poor. You also can believe that even though a police officer is justified in defending himself against a dangerous criminal, the larger system of policing is nothing more than a product of systemic racism.
The brain is viagra india prices the core organ in the body. These users are now successfully enjoying the bliss of the sexual happiness. cialis pills The online order viagra unfortunate thing here is that many men suffer from it. Effect: Astragalus see description viagra pfizer prix sweet nature, there are qi and yang, harmonize stomach, lungs and fluid, expectorant effect, attending the spleen and stomach weakness, spontaneous sweating, inflated, ulcer does not collapse, swelling back detoxification and so on.There is a word for allowing contradictions in your views to be replaced with a Marxist alternative – doublethink.
The term “doublethink” comes from 1984, the novel by George Orwell published in 1949. “Orwell defines doublethink as, ‘To know and to not know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy is impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy. To forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself.'”
Sound familiar? “According to research of the Soviet Union, the process of doublethink is also present…people are made to believe in the ideals of Communism when they are younger. But as they get older, they realize the faults in the system and believe the opposite of what they’ve been taught. However, they keep their beliefs to themselves because of their fear of getting in trouble with the government.”
If we are to understand the seemingly meaningless ramblings of Ocasio Cortez, and to derive any sense from the slogans chanted by the protestors and rioters that besiege cities like Portland and Seattle, we need to know the communist underpinnings of their positions. Once we learn that these people are engaged in morally relativistic doublethink, we can see the real dangers they pose to our free society.
Illustration: Pixabay