Who is Trotsky and
Who are His Followers?
And what do they have to do with education?
And what do they have to do with education?
Why do I refer to
Trotskyites (otherwise known as “Trotskyists”) on this blog? The term is
interchangeable with the word “Neoconservative,” or “Neocon” for short.
These individuals are active in America, working on the so-called “Conservative”
agenda in Washington, and having great influence as the establishment
Power Elite.
Take a look at an
article by Paul Mulshine, used to write for the Newark, New Jersey Star-Ledger titled “Good
piece on the Trotskyite roots of the National Review and ‘neo’ conservatism,” April 11, 2012. In
this article, Mulshine refers to a LewRockwell.com article, “Springtime
for Trotsky,” by Daniel McCarthy, which spells out the details:
By calling Stalin a
fascist, Trotsky and his followers could claim that “real” socialism is
not a murderous ideology. They could further claim that all true
threats to human dignity and freedom really come from the right. Although
Trotsky himself had a rather fateful encounter with an icepick in 1940, Trotkyists today continue his fight
on behalf of international social democracy. These days however, Trotskyists
prefer to call themselves “neoconservatives.”…
The Trotskyist pedigree
of neoconservatism is no secret; the original neocon, Irving Kristol, acknowledges it
with relish: “I regard myself to have been a young Trostkyite and I have not a
single bitter memory.” Nor
is there any doubt about the influence — one might almost say hegemony — of
“former Communists” on the post-war conservative movement.
Just read the words of one neocon, Seymour Martin Lipset:
From the
anti-Stalinists who became conservatives — including James Burnham, Whittaker
Chambers, and Irving Kristol — the Right gained a political education
and, in some cases, an injection of passion. The ex-radicals brought with
them the knowledge that ideological movements must have journals and magazines
to articulate their perspectives. In 1955, for example, William F. Buckley, Jr.,
launched National Review
at the urging of Willi Schlamm, a former German Communist. In its early years, National Review was
largely written and edited by the Buckley family and a handful of former Communists, Trotskyists,
and socialists, such as Burnham and Chambers. It played a major role in creating
the Goldwaterite and Reaganite New Right and in stimulating an
anti-Soviet foreign policy.
Worthy of note is
that while ex-Stalinists tended to denounce their Communist roots vehemently,
neoconservatives
like Kristol and Schwartz remain at least wistfully fond of Trotsky.
It’s also worth noting that the neoconservative
preoccupation with exporting social democracy abroad through war and mercantilism
reflects the original split between Trotsky and Stalin. Trotsky
argued that there could not be “socialism in one country” but rather that the revolution had to be truly
international. And so the neoconservatives push for
“human rights” and social democratic governments to be imposed on Serbia,
for example, by force of arms.… [links removed, emphases added]
Be informed! Become
historically literate! Read the entire article HERE. Also read this definition of Trotskyism
HERE, where it explains:
Trotsky agreed that
a new socialist state and economy in a country like Russia would not be
able to hold out against the pressures of a hostile capitalist world, as
well as the internal pressures of its backward economy. The revolution, Trotsky argued,
must quickly spread to capitalist countries, bringing about a socialist
revolution which must spread worldwide. In this way the revolution
is “permanent”, moving out of necessity first, from the bourgeois revolution
to the workers’ revolution, and from there uninterruptedly to European
and worldwide revolutions. [bold added]
We included a super
article by Paul Mulshine (referenced above) in my book the deliberate dumbing
down of america
titled “COMING SOON TO A SCHOOL
NEAR YOU: FORCED
LABOR” published in the November 29, 1998 issue of the Star-Ledger. Mulshine
understood that the School-to-Work agenda in New Jersey was connected with
the “old Soviet Union” and Communist China agenda for “compliant workers
trained to behave” in a “lifelong decision” made by the government that
determined their career:
Imagine a state that uses its school system
not to produce independent-minded, broadly educated citizens, but compliant workers trained to behave.
A state where, in their early teens, children
are forced to make a lifelong decision from government-sanctioned career possibilities
with such depressing titles as “waste management,” “administrative services”
and “manufacturing, installation and repair.” A state where students in
the government schools are forced to spend one day a week toiling in menial
labor.
The old Soviet Union? China? Nope. New Jersey.
I wish I were making
this up. But I’m not. This is a fair summation—minus the jargon—of the School-to-Work program
that the state is planning to impose on us next year.…
Related Posts
-
http://agenda21news.com/2014/11/common-core-trotskyites/#more-3671
No comments:
Post a Comment