The header above is my (hopefully) provocative way of steering you to a portion of a post I found on Little Green Footballs last week, but only now have time to address. I was startled with its clarity in connecting stealth Marxist candidate Barack Obama to the great Commie chain of being via the theories of Antonio Gramsci, whose nefarious work I've detailed here in HazZzMat many times before.
Gramsci, as you may (or may not) know was the Italian Marxist theorist who evolved what we in America knew as the "Popular Front" approach to Marxist revolution--burrowing within organizations rather than attacking capitalism head on--and evolving it into a fine art of infiltration and cultural destruction. The end result: to completely alter the political message to one defending capitalism, religion, the middle class, family, and Western cultural traditions--including government, academia, media, and jurisprudence--to a new message that dwelt upon the evils of tradition, the oppressiveness of the West, etc. Gramsci believed that by changing the cultural message--for current usage, substitute the word "narrative"--to one espousing socialism and class struggle, you could eviscerate Western culture from within.
And now the posted lengthy excerpt from Little Green Footballs that connects some dots from Gramsci to his witting operatives in the U.S., a brilliant model of concision that I wish I could follow a little better myself:
In her game-changing convention speech, Sarah Palin took a swipe at Obama for having been nothing more in his life than a ‘community organiser’.
This prompted the Obama campaign to issue a pained defence of community organisation as a way of promoting social change ‘from the bottom up’. The impression is that community organising is a worthy if woolly and ultimately ineffectual grassroots activity. This is to miss something of the greatest importance: that in the world of Barack Obama, community organisers are a key strategy in a different game altogether; and the name of that game is revolutionary Marxism.
The seditious role of the community organiser was developed by an extreme left intellectual called Saul Alinsky. He was a radical Chicago activist who, by the time he died in 1972, had had a profound influence on the highest levels of the Democratic party. Alinsky was a ‘transformational Marxist’ in the mould of Antonio Gramsci, who promoted the strategy of a ‘long march through the institutions’ by capturing the culture and turning it inside out as the most effective means of overturning western society. In similar vein, Alinsky condemned the New Left for alienating the general public by its demonstrations and outlandish appearance. The revolution had to be carried out through stealth and deception. Its proponents had to cultivate an image of centrism and pragmatism. A master of infiltration, Alinsky wooed Chicago mobsters and Wall Street financiers alike. And successive Democratic politicians fell under his spell.
His creed was set out in his book ‘Rules for Radicals’ – a book he dedicated to Lucifer, whom he called the ‘first radical’. It was Alinsky for whom ‘change’ was his mantra. And by ‘change’, he meant a Marxist revolution achieved by slow, incremental, Machiavellian means which turned society inside out. This had to be done through systematic deception, winning the trust of the naively idealistic middle class by using the language of morality to conceal an agenda designed to destroy it. And the way to do this, he said, was through ‘people’s organisations’.
Following the link to its source in the (U.K) Spectator, you can read the entire article which was penned by the highly astute Melanie Phillips.
I should note that Hillary Clinton, another Chigagoan, has read from the same Alinsky playbook, although Obama's Gramsci-Alinsky connection is far more obvious if anyone would ever take a look.
Phillips' piece goes on to point out what I've been attempting to outline here for a couple of years now from time to time. Namely that, since the initial false start of the "Popular Front" in the 1930s, and with a brief intermission for the Second World War, either the CPUSA or the numerous Communist front organizations that budded from the initial organism in the '50s, '60s, 70s, and '80s have steadily yet stealthily taken over academia (entirely), government (mostly, and largely through infiltrating government unions like AFSCME), the judiciary (50-70%), culture and the arts (nearly 100%), the mainstream media (nearly 100%), much of the legal profession (particularly via the trial lawyers), the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association (which provides Freudian excuses for the innocence of violent criminals and deviant behaviors), and lately, the once-objective science community as evidenced by the now quasi-religious dogma of "global warming."
Phillips sums it up this way at the conclusion of her article:
Alinsky was a radical straight out of the Gramsci playbook. In both America and Britain, Gramsci’s acolytes have been conducting a decades-long march through the institutions. In Britain, they have substantially achieved their aim of subverting western morality and changing the face of British society. No political party stands against this. In the US, they have made huge inroads but haven’t yet won. With Palin on one side and Obama on the other, it is now clear that this US presidential election has taken the culture war to the gates of the White House itself.
"March through the institutions." That pretty well describes what's been going on and I couldn't agree more.
In succeeding posts, I'll try to relate this to the ferocious Democrat assault on Sarah Palin; to its relation to the now-re-heating culture wars; to the current economic melt-down whose flames are being stoked by the most astonishing, Gramsci-inspired fiscal disinformation campaign I've ever seen. All three of these threads need to be exposed and defeated prior to the November elections, or 1929 will soon look like a huckleberry party.